Synod in its definitions where he will hear of no such Toyes as New Revelations but directly the contrary Every Session where Faith was defin'd professing to build on Tradition Teaching and Preaching that is Oral Tradition ever alwayes from the beginning c. that is not new but the old-and ever-Faith If you would combat our Church here you have her fall to work But you find some Schoolmen opining also Infallibility in some other means besides Tradition and judging this Tenet easilier confuted you level your blowes at it because the other is out of your reach and would make this Tenet the Sence of the Catholick Church and so seem to oppose the Church her self You would disgrace this Way of Tradition as maintain'd but by a few and those blemisht persons How far are you wide of the Truth 'T is the way every Catholick in the whole Church none excepted holds and follows For my part I disavow the maintaining any Point or affecting any way which is not assented to by all and this not as Opinion but deeply rooted in their hearts as Infallibly Certain Schoolmen at Liberty question Personal Infallibility of the Pope some grant it not to him and his Roman Clergy some question that of a Provincial Synod nay some whose Books are extant and yet uncensur'd maintain even a General Council may possibly err but not one I have heard or read of affirms that Tradition or the Living voice of the Church Essential could err For in doing so he call'd all his Faith in question and so ceast to be a Christian. 9. This then being held by all held firmly and that it is absolutely Infallible so that in no case it can err the others only by some faintly in comparison as appears by the Faithful's permitting them â—o be question'd nay not held at all Infallible but upon Supposal of certain Conditions to be observ'd in which also Divines differ Mr. Stillingfleet and other Protestant Writers may see what they have to do if they will candidly impugn the Catholick Church and not trifle away time in wrangling with some private Opinators I have set them a fair mark in my Discourses if they will speak to the Point and the end of my Preface has told them how to do it If they overthrow this all the other Infallibilities now spoken of will fall with It If not not onely This of Universal Tradition will stand but also all the other Infallibilities will in Virtue of it be establisht on a firmer basis than any who begins not with and settles the First Principle in Controversy could ever give them This Foundation then they must either subvert or they may fear the Papists will build such superstructures on it as will reach to Heaven It rises apace and has advanc't many Stories in a small time 10. By this Discourse all Mr. Stillingfleet's If 's which follow have their Answer and he will see the knot easily loos'd in distinguishing the word other by which if he means disparate unconnected or unimply'd Points of Faith No Divines of any number or account hold they can be de novo much less our Church If involv'd or imply'd in the main Point he must show 't is absolutely Another and not rather a piece or part of the Implying one as Homo est Animal is a part of Homo est Animal rationale In the mean time let him consider what Logick tells us that The Conclusion is in the Premises which reflexion will much unblunder his Thoughts and withall that 't is most unreasonable to deny the Church the Liberty to take asunder her own Thoughts and clear them upon occasion by representing their Parts distinctly or in many Propositions which were invol'd before in some one A priviledge Nature grants all Mankind as a necessary Conseqent to their working by abstracted Notions this being no more than to regard or view the same thing`now on one side then on the other 11. His Second Chief Demand is What security is there that in no Age of the Church any Practices should come in which were not in the Precedent I answer Our Practices spring from our Tenets If then he means Ecclesiastical Practices that is such as spring from Ecclesiastical Constitutions there is no security at all for these are to come in anew as oft as the necessity of Disciplin or Government requires it If he mean such Practices as spring from Points of Faith taught by Christ there is the same security no such new Practices can be introduct as there is that no new Christian Tenets can come in Now these later Practices are those we make use of in Tradition as making Faith visible being as it were its Body He must mean then of These Practices to do his Discourse any service and so of these he questions whether the Descendents held themselves bound unalterably to observe what their Forefathers did otherwise to know barely what they did was not enough to make them follow it He argues well To smooth as many rubs as I can that so we may have no difficulty but our main one I would reflect on the signification of the word unalterably For to introduce new Practices consequent to the former is to propagate enlarge extend and so strengthen them not to alter them in the same manner as to discourse consequently to a Principle or Tenet is so far from altering it that by the contexture of other Truths with it it corroborates and establishes it more unalterably its self They must then be Practices not of a subordinate but an opposit Nature to Christian ones which can be fear'd to alter Christian Practices The Question then is whether Children or the Succeeding Age held themselves still bound not to bring in Practices and Tenets contrary to the Doctrin and Practice of the Precedent Age. And the Affirmative is most Evident in case they held those Tenets which Principled those Actions True taught by Christ and commanded by him as the Way to bring them to Heaven and those Practices Consequent If then they held the deliverâ—d Doctrin Christ's they could not but hold themselves oblig'd not to alter it nor consequently its Practices So that our Question is restrain'd to to a narrower compass and the onely Difficulty now is whether they held the Doctrin of Forefathers to be the Doctrin of Christ or no. 12. I am heartily glad so acute an Adversary as Mr. Stillingfleet and one chosen out if I am inform'd right as a person conceiv'd the ablest to write against Catholicks has so candidly confest here p. 629. That the onely thing to be prov'd in this case is That every Age in the Church and all persons in it looked upon themselves as oblig'd not to vary in any thing from the Doctrin and Practice of the Precedent Age. He offers me my choice of three wayes to prove it I accept of the way of Reason He presses for a demonstrative medium to prove it yet seems to dislike our pretence
Erroneous Opinions can never gain any solid footing in the Church For since Disc. 5. § 15. Corol. 11. the Church is a Body of men relying on Tradition or the Authority of attesting Forefathers not on the Authority of Opinators these Opinions can never have any firmness in her by means of Authority and on the other side being Erroneous they can never gain any depth of adhesion by being demonstrably true nor Errour being necessarily opposit to Truth can they even maintain their quiet posture by being evidently not opposit to Faith It follows that neither upon the score of Reason nor Authority can they sink deep into the minds of the Faithful at least the intelligent party of them or gain any solid footing in the Church but are subject to be contradicted or have their verity disputed by the searching and unsatisfy'd wits of Opposers 35. The Prudence requisit in Church-Government is one Cause why Erroneous Opinions are not immediately but after some long time perhaps to be declared against by the Authority of the whole Church For since a Church is a most vast and sacred Common-wealth and so of the greatest gravity and Authority imaginable she is not in prudence to engage it trivially in sleight occasions nor rashly when the point is unevident Wherefore seeing an Erroneous Opinion while held but by few is of sleight concern and so onely fit to be taken notice of by inferiour Officers when universally held is of great Authority amongst the multitude she is in Prudence to suspend till its Opposition to Faith be clear'd by the Science of Divinity and this satisfactorily to a great part of the Opinatours lest either she should in stead of tares pluck up wheat or use her Authority more to destruction than edification by a too hasty decision 36. No Erroneous Opinion in Divinity if Vniversal and Practical can be very long permitted in the Church For since Corol. 31. a meer Opinion can never gain the Authority of a Traditionary point 't is manifest it can never subsist when it is shown to clash with any of the said Points Wherefore since it is liable to discussion and men are naturally of different Judgments and Interests and the variety and Nature of worldly Interest is such that if any thing makes for the Interest of some 't is for that very reason against the Interest of another it will excite them to discussion and sifting its Conformity or Disconformity to Christian Principles which is the way to clear the Terms and make it appear But especially seeing absurd or irrational Practices are the proper Effects of Erroneous Principles and that our natural Corruption inclines men to follow such Practices till they be checkt by regard to something held Sacred that is by being shown opposit to Faith it follows that till this opposition be shown they will infallibly grow on still more and more till they come to such an height of absurdity that they need now no skill to discover them Experience teaching us that the most palpable and evident method to try the Truth of any Speculation is to put it into matter and bring it into Practice Those irrational Practices therefore must needs after some time discover themselves opposit to Christian behaviour and consequently confess the Principle which begot them opposit to Christian Faith which done it presently loses its credit and is quasht by the incomparably more powerful force and all over-bearing Authority of Tradition 37. Erroneous Opinions and the irrational Practices issuing from them though suppos'd Vniversal and of long continuance can never corrupt substantially the Iudgments or Wills of the Faithful For since Corol. 31. nothing not held ever or not coming from Christ can possibly be accepted as held ever or coming from Christ 't is evident no Erroneous Opinion can come to gain the sacredness and repute of a Traditionary point nor their proper practices the Esteem of Christian Practice Wherefore Traditionary Points being the Principles which absolutely possess the Judgmenrs and govern the lives of the Faithful as Christians it follows that no Opinion can ever be held by them but in a conciev'd subordination to Traditionary points or points of Faith nor practicâ—t by them but with a conceivd subordination and conformity to those Practices which spring from undoubtedly-known Christian Tenets or Traditionary points Seeing then what is not held and practicâ—t but as conceivd subordinate to other Tenets and Practices must needs be less held than those others nay not held at all otherwise than conditionally or upon supposal of such a subordination â—tis clearly consequent that Traditions Certainty is so powerful an Antidote that bad Opinions and Practices can never corrupt substantially and absolutely the Judgments or wills of the Faithfull 38. No Erroneous Opinion or its proper Practice is imputable to the Church properly and formally taken For since the Church formally as such proceeds on Christian Tradition no such Opinion nor consequently Practice is imputable to the Church properly and formally taken but onely to some men in the Church materially consider'd as left to the contingent force of their private Discourses that is indeed to the Schools not the Church 39. 'T is exceedingly weak and senceless to think to impugn the Church by objecting to her such Opinions and Practices For since they concern her not nor are imputable to her as Church or to her Members as Faithful the wise Objection can onely signify thus much that the Church has men in her who are fallible in their private Discourses or School-disputes that is she has men in her who are men A heavy imputation 40. The Knowledge of Tradition's Certainty is the first Knowledge or Principle in Controversial Divinity that is without which nothing is known or knowable in that Science For since Controversy or the Science which establishes the Certainty of Faith depends on these two Propositions Whatever God said is true and God said this the former of which is out of Controversy as we now handle it with our modern Dissenters and onely the later is the subject of our debate Seeing also as hath been largely and manifoldly evident nothing can ascertain us of this but Tradition nor It unless its Certainty be known it follows that the Knowledge of Tradition's Certainty is the first Knowledge or Principle in Controversial Divinity 41. Christ's promise to his Church however comfortable to the Faithful can bear no part in the notion of the Rule of Faith nor be the first Principle of a Controversial Divine For since Christ's promise to his Church is held as a point of Faith that is receiv'd upon the Rule of Faith that is subsequent to that Rule 't is manifest that it can be no part of that Rule nor first Principle in Controversy Again the Rule of Faith Disc. 1. § 4 and 9. must be so evident as to its Existence that no other Knowledge must intervene between the natural power of Understanding and It and this in the meanest vulgar
believing Ancestours That they who do not so stand upon a precipice seeking what 's beyond their power that is to hammer a certain Faith out of Scripture's Letter by their private Wit Which reflected on a little reason enlightned by so plain and manifold Experiences will easily tell them that 't is the shallowness of their Grounds unable to satisfy Rational Nature which makes so many of theirs take upon them to seek for Faith and so leave them and the solid secureness connaturalness and satisfactoriness of ours which makes few or none leave us and those who do 't is easie to discover the motives of their revolting 11. Yet one more from this Illustrious Father as one whom by reason of his Famous Contrasts with the impious Arians it concern'd to be more express in inculcating and sticking to the true Rule of Faith He writing to Epictetus Bishop of Corinth 'T is to be answer'd saith he to those things which alone of it self suffices that those are uot of the Orthodox Church and that our Ancestours never held so So that the living Voice of the Church Tradition or belief of Ancestours is held by him a sole-sufficient Rule of Faith and the onely Answer to be given why we reject points from Faith or admit them into It that is an Evident Reason for such a carriage for otherwise another Answer would be requisit 12. We will be shorter in the rest Clemens Alexandrinus Stromatôn 7o. As if one of a man becomes a beast like those infected by Circes poyson so he hath forfeited his being a man-of-God and Faithful to our Lord who spurns against the Churches Tradition and leaps into Opinions of human Elections Basil against Eunomius Wouldst thou have us all perswaded by thee prefer your Conceits before the Tradition of Faith which perpetually hath conquer'd under so many holy men And speaking against two other Hereticks Sabellius and Arius Let TRADITION bridle thee Our Lord taught thus the Apostles preach't it the Fathers conserv'd it our Ancestours confirm'd it be content to say as thou art taught We have it clear then that the Renouncer of Tradition is none of the Faithful that is cut off from the Root of Faith see Corol. 4. that all is men's Conceits and Arbitrary Opinions which the word Heresie imports that is opposit to Tradition We have lastly the whole course of our Faith's descent from Christ to us yet not a word of descending by Scripture or Letters in Books but by the way of Preaching and Teaching that is Oral delivery and Sence writ in men's hearts 13. I omit many other Fathers but I must not S. Austin Ea potius credam c. I will rather believe saith he contra Epistolam Fundamenti those things which are celebrated now by the consent of learned and unlearned and are confirmed throughout all Nations by most grave Authority And again 'T is manifest that the Authority of the Catholick Church is of force to cause Faith and Assurance Which Authority from the best establisht Seats of the Apostles even to this very day is strengthened by the Series of Bishops succeeding them and by the Assertion of so many Nations In both places he he makes the consent of Learned and Vnlearned Bishops and conspiring people continu'd down to these dayes that is the living voice of the Church Essential or Tradition the most grave Authority apt to ascertain us and cause Faith that is he makes Tradition the Rule of Faith and builds its strength as we also do on the multitude and consent of the Asserters or Testifiers of its descent Also in his 58. Epistle The Faithful saith he do possess perseveringly a RVLE OF FAITH common to little and great in the Church Where every word is Emphatical That the Churches voice is the Rule of Faith That this Rule is common to Learued and Vnlearned that is able to satisfie the acutest Discoursers and yet understandable by the rudest vulgar Lastly that they hold it and that perseveringly or unshakenly which shews it self-evident else both the unlearned at least might come to doubt of it See Disc. 5. § 8 9 10 11. 14. Thus much for the credit of Tradition it s being the Rule of Faith Certain and Uninterrupted But how shall we know who enjoyes this Tradition or what points have been handed down by it from the beginning Must we not run to Private Expositions of Scripture to be assur'd of this or at least to Libraries of Books writ in all former Ages to see if perhaps their Authours mightâ—have dream'd of our now difficulties and then prophesi'd us a satisfaction so express and ample that no cavil can avoid it No we have manifest Certainty of it other wayes if we may trust the Fathers We will onely alledge two both very Antient and great Masters of Controversy against the Hereticks of their times S. Ireneus lib. 1. cap. 3. All those who will hear Truth may at present perfectly discern adest perspicere in the Church the Tradition of the Apostles manifest in the whole World That is the Doctrin of the present Church proceeding upon or adhering to Tradition is a manifest Argument that what it teaches now was delivered by the Apostles And Tertullian contra Marcionem That is manifestly True which is First that First which is from the beginning that from the beginning which is from the Apostles In like manner that will manifestly appear to have been delivered by the Apostles which shall be establisht as Sacred in the Churches of the Apostles Where first he ascends and confounds Novelty or Heresie by shewing that the Priority of what they left argues it to have been ever or from the Apostles and so True and then proves and manifestly too that that was delivered from the Apostles which is found establisht that is held to be receiv'd as all his former Doctrine runs as sacred in the Churches at present which were founded by the Apostles But he is yet more express in his first Book against the same Heretick nothing is to be acknowledg'd a Tradition of the Apostles but what is at this present day profest for such in their Churches So that he sends us not to Volumes of Histories and other Writers which if Tradition can'fail are of no Authority to find what was the Antient or Primitive Traditions or what the Apostles taught or delivered but onely to the living Voice of the present Churches which had been but a weak procedure in case their holding now a thing deliver'd were not argumentative that it was deliver'd ever which is the substance of my proof a posteriori for the Indefectiveness of Tradition And least it should be imagin'd that this Argument loses its force by tract of time or the long-continuance of the Church Peter Chrysologus in his 85. Sermon secures us from that danger A Christian mind knows not how to bring into dispute those things which are strengthen'd by Tradition of the Fathers and even ipsis temporibus by Time
of Gods Nature as if I mistake not Iacob Bemen does and then secundum hanc partum of illam will do the work and gives a true sence to both sides of the contradiction You should do any thing which could by any means make it seem possible rather than question a plain Divine Revelation Nay perhaps you do not think you can demonstrate the contrary to the solution I have helpt you out with at least that your Demonstration is but a seeming one and then I challenge your candour to own your sayings and demand why you are not bound to use this shift and a thousand others rather than violate your avow'd Rule of Faith and deny and hold against the clear Letter of Scripture If you alledge you have perfect Science of the contrary by Metaphysicks then though I expect not this from you your Science rules your Rule of Faith glossing or rather violently wresting the plain Letter and so is so absolutely your Rule of Faith that it controls and even baffles the other though clearly revealing Or if to be in express terms in Scripture be not to be clearly revealed I would fain know what those words clearly revealed in Scripture signifie 12. Perhaps you I say that notwithstanding your new Rule Reason must be your GVID still even in Faith though not your Rule But I ask if your Reason must guide you sometimes so as to deny the clear Letter of Scripture since a Guid in any thing must be regulated by some Knowledges in that Affair by what Principles or Knowledges Reason is to regulate it self while it guides you in that particular now in question By Principles of Faith How can that be in your Grounds antecedently to the known Sence of the Scripture By Principles of Human Science Then those Principles of Human Science give you the certain Sence of the Written Word when it self is insufficient and therefore are still truly your Rule of Faith and so you are forc't to fly back for refuge to the old Rule Human Reason which you seemingly renounc't when you had found your new Rule of the Scripture 'T is Evident then that some Maxims of your Reason are your Rule and not Scripture's Letter And this is what we reprehend in the Socinian and you too that chusing a wrong Rule of Faith so to avoid the Church you both gloss it as seems best to your Reason regulating her self by her own and those fallible Maxims They by certain acute and ingenious Sophistries proper to themselves you by the more school-boy way of Grammar and Dictionary Learning and so both of you make your Rule the thing Ruled Nor think to retort any part of this Discourse upon our Rule of Faith For this being the living voice of the Church delivers us a Determinate Sence of the Points we are to profess whereas Yours needs skils and helps of studious Reason to tell you what it would say Ours is alive and in the Breast and Actions of the Faithful yours is dead characters waxen-natur'd and pliable to the Dedalean fancies of the ingenious molders of new Opinions and so alone can satisfie no man as you handle it 13. No wonder now if having no certainer a Ground or Rule of Faith for her self your Church is shamefast of obliging others to believe her Man's nature could scarce own or permit so irrational a tyrannie Yet whether she does or does not we must not know from your words which run so backwards and forwards that none can tell which is the true face of the Ianus First p. 99. you seem to deny it stoutly from the carriage of your Convocations and Bishops and from your own Tenets Yet afterwards you seem to grant they do require a positive assent somtimes and justifie them as not doing it upon pretence of any Infallibility but because the thing determin'd is so Evident in Scripture that all denying it must be wilful A rare Discourse and worthy a deep consideration Pray who must be Judge it is so Evident in Scripture as to render the Dissenters guilty of flat Wilfulness The Bishops or your Church Nothing less In the beginning of this Discourse p. 93. you plainly deny'd them to be Judges of Faith Now in your sence to be clearly reveal'd or evident in Scripture and to be of Faith is all one so that they must not be Judges of what is evident in Scripture lest by necessary consequence they become Judges of Faith and yet without having power to judge what is evident in Scripture they must have power to require assent to Points as evident in Scripture nay and punish the dissenters too For 't is a madness for Governours to require any thing of their Subjects without having Rewards and Punishments in their hands to make what they require to be duely observâ—d Nay p. 93. you absolutely refus'd to admit them as Guides of your Faith A moderate word and less than to be a Iudge Which signifies they may have power to require our Assents in matters in which they have no power to guide us that is they may have power to require us to go wrong for any thing we or they know An excellent honour for the Church of England that her Champions profess in Print her Supreme Pastors have no power at all to guide their Flock in their Faith or to it when they are out of it Again I would ask whether the Trinity be not Evident in Scripture and the Socinians wilful for denying it Why are they then so kindly dealt with Or what could be reply'd to a Socinian answering when his Assent to the Trinity were required that he humbly submitted to Scripture that he us'd all the means he could but discover'd it not so evident there and thereupon complain'd that you obtruded upon his equally-learned party your own conceit or opinion for Scripture-Evidences What therefore you alledge here as in your Churches behalf that she requires not a positive assent upon pretence of any Infallibility more condemns Her seeing t is most absurd and irrational that one should require any man to assent to any point or proposition whatever as evident in Scripture without Infallible Certainty at least imagin'd and pretended that it is thus evident there for should it happen to be otherwise how ridiculous were his Authority how damnable and diabolical his Tyrannie to oblige men to the hazard of falshoods in matters of Faith that is in matters belonging to his eternal Salvation and in the mean time profess himself Ignorant whether they be false or no. 14. Now our Church goes another way which ere I declare I would let your party see that Interiour Assent may be required by Governours lawfully and rationally which your Principles can never make sence of Suppose a thousand witnesses from several places each of them held alwayes men of good consciences should swear in open Court that they had seen such and such actions done by such a man or that they had seen spoken or converst
the most vulgar that every Man has a Principle in him impelling him to Act which we agree to call a Will Such likewise are all Propositions of this Nature which the Church uses upon occasion of some emergent Heresie to explain her self and put the point of Faith out of danger of being equivocated Examples of the later sort are Theological Conclusions in which a Natural Truth is one of the Premises joyning with the Supernatural one to infer them To omit this as little to our purpose at present Of the former sort the Church is necessitated to make use upon occasion that is when any Heretick questions Those and eâdem operâ the whole point of Faith it self of which they were a part Upon occasion I say For what concern'd its the Faithful or who ever heard much noise of this Proposition Christ has two Wills thus singled out and exprest apart till the Monothelite granting him but one forc't the Church that she might preserve the main Tenet of Christ's having two Natures or being God and Man to maintain publish and define that other 6. To apply this then since none can have Obligation to believe what they have not obligation to think of and that in some Age the Generality of the Faithful have no Occasion nor consequently Obligation to minde reflect or think on those Propositions involvd in the main stock of Faith and truly parts of it that is indeed It It follows that a Thing may be de fide or obligatory to be believ'd in one Age and not in another Perhaps Mr. Stillingfleet may ask how the Church can have Power to oblige the Generality to Belief of such a point I answer she obliges them to believe the main Point of Faith by virtue of Tradition's being a Self-evident Rule and these Imply'd Points by virtue of their being self-evidently-connected with those main and perpetually-us'd Points so that the vulgar can be rationally and connaturally made capable of this their Obligation Whence the Government of our Church is still justify'd to be sweet and according to right Nature and yet forcible and Efficacious to hold her Subjects in a strict Union Not to mention how these Points also descended by a kind of Tradition for I doubt not but the Apostles had occasion in explaining Faith to speak of These however the no Necessity brought them not so much into play but left them unreflected on by the Generality 7. But to return to Mr. Stillingfleet who acts here like a Politician and would conquer us by first dividing us and making odious Comparisons between two parties of Divines But he may please to reflect how we all hold firmly the same divinely-constituted Church-Government and the same self-evident Rule of Faith to give our understandings the same principles as Christians and so our wills the same Actions And those are firmly rooted in all our hearts to have been recommended to us by the wisdom of the Eternal Father Whence 't is Impossible for all the Wit of Man or even Malice of Hell to disunite us as we are Faithful As private Discoursers our different Natures and Circumstances must needs distinguish us Every one believes the same but coming to explicate this Belief they vary according to the several degrees of perfection in their understanding Powers And yet M. Stillingfleet is not aware how little we differ even as Divines For though some Speculaters attribute to the Church a power of defining things not held before yet few will say she has New Revelations or New Articles of Faith those only some Lawyers who talk ultra crepidam no Divines that I know of and none that Christ was not a perfect Law-giver which are necessary Consequents or rather in a manner Identical to the other And when it comes to the point those men explain themselves that all was deliver'd Faith either Explicitly or Implicitly which I have shown to bear a very good Sence in my Explication of de fide He tells us Popes and Councils challenge a power to make things de fide in one Age which was not in another he speaks onely in common and proves it not Had he brought Instances it might have been better clear'd In the mean time I have shown him how take them right this is both perfectly innocent and unavoidably necessary to a Church What would avail him is if a Pope and Council should define a new Thing and declare they ground themselves on new Lights as did their first Reformers in England But he will finde no such fopperies in Faith-definitions made by the Catholick Church He tells us that this is the common Doctrin maintain'd By which I perceive he is at an end of his Argument against our Church there being no evidenter signe of it than to leave off assaulting Her confound her with the Schools or some private Opinaters and then carp at these mens Tenets Whereas M. Stillingfleet wants not Wit to know that no sober Catholick holds Human deductions the Rule of our Faith Schoolmen Definers of it nor the Schools the Tribunal whence to propose it authoritatively and obligingly to the Generality of the Faithful much less a few Divines which are far from reaching the Authority of the Schools Yet how much of his Book would need no Answer were this Impertinent Topick laid aside But well Let Schools and Church be all one that is let every master of divinity be a Bishop what means he to conclude from the words common Doctrin Does he make account every School-Doctrin must be equally in vogue or that an Opinion's being Common defines it Faith and condemns the other for Heretical Where 's his Reason The direct contrary follows from its being Common and that 't is not Faith which others though not so many may contradict and he is but meanly vers't in our Schools if he sees not very many publikely maintain that there are no new Revelations without dreading Excommunication or being held Heretical and seditious So they grant the Church power as they ought by new Propositions and new but expressive Words yet both the same in sence and so not new in substance to meet with the new blundering Cavils of Innovators 8. Yet all this while M. Stillingfleet cannot see how to satisfie himself of the Sence of our Church as to this particular Nor ever will while he wilfully looks the wrong way that is towards some particular Schoolmen or Divines not towards the Universality of the Faithful or Church What need he counterfeit this puzzle Did he never hear of such a thing as the Council of Trent Or is it so hard to finde it Again does not he know all the Catholick Church allow more a thousand times to It than to all the Schoolmen in the World Yes very well How comes it then that he runs to some Schoolmen and neglects the Church speaking in her Representative Because he may finde there a clear Solution of his doubt by the constant procedure of that most grave
to salvation so that to vary from it or hold or practise the contrary is the way to eternal misery are all oblig'd to believe and act as their Forefathers did and not introduce Contrary Doctrins and practices to those they had receiv'd Had it been I say thus propos'd there had been no such cause of wonderment But all these that is indeed all of weight in the point is quite left out Such poor shifts even the best Wits must be driven to when they would maintain a false Cause 25. One word to M. Stillingfleet He hath challeng'd us to make out this Obligation to Belief as the onely Thing we are to prove in the Traditionary way he hath offer'd us the choice of our Weapon either Reason particular Testimony or Vniversal Tradition I have accepted his offer chosen my weapon and given here the first blow I hope he will not now run the Field but return an Answer to my Discourse in the way of Reason which I have chosen by his Offer I am sorry for his sake my reflexions here are not more elaborate being sent to the Press in loose quarters of sheets as soon as writ more time not being allow'd me nor I hope needful to answer such mistakes Onely I request him when he replies to take along with him the nature of the subjecta materia the Doctrins and Practises we speak of the Nature of the Manner of delivering it and the necessary Circumstances which give weight to both as I have declar'd above and I promise him God assisting me a very serious Reply 26. Ere I quite leave this matter I desire to take the Reader along with me in my quest for a Reason or proper Cause why so judicious a person as Mr. Stillingfleet could come to doubt of such an Obligation in posterity to beleeve their Ancestours in a matter of fact or a matter deliver'd to have been not deem'd or thought but done or which is equivalent being it's necessary effect seen or known by Sense For I make account there is not a man in the world or ever was such is the Goodness of rational Nature given us by God who in his natural thoughts could ever raise such a doubt or think he could possibly frame his thoughts to a disbelief of the contrary no more than any man in England whom Speculative Scepticism has not besotted and unmann'd can doubt of William the Conquerors Harry the Eighths or Mahomets Existence much less judge the contrary And it appears at first sight to be a strange distorsion or rather destruction of human Nature which can so alter it Now looking into Things I find it to be a proper and natural Effect of the Protestant's temper and indeed of all who have left the Church For their humour being to chuse every one his Faith by his private Judgment or Wit working upon disputable words They wonder and judge it very unreasonable their Posterity thus imbu'd should be oblig'd to beleeve and act as Ancestours do and so should I too For while they can never deliver it to their Children as received ever by the way of Infallible Sense or Witnessing but must say the former Church de facto err'd and consequently that themselves might do so too so that they can only deliver it as depending or built on their own fallible Opinion in interpreting Scripture all which is imply'd in their making Scriptur's Letter the Rule of Faith and allowing no Living Interpreter able to give infallibly the Sence of it 't is natural their posterity should 〈◊〉 hold themselves oblig'd to beleeve Immediate Ancestors but use their own Judgments and chuse their own Faith when they come at Age as well as They did and Experience tells us they have done so in England till they have chosen fairly And this horrid Unreasonableness is the venomous source the First defective Principle or indeed the very nature of all Heresie imported also in the very word which signifies Choice or chusing one's Religion mention'd by Clemens Alexandrinus cited above p. 135. and counterpos'd by him to Tradition as also by S. Athanasius cited p. 133. 134. where 't is most excellently describ'd and homely apply'd to the Protestants and such others as the Reader may see I am a bad Transcriber 27. I have done my main task and so shall only touch at his next paragraph It begins thus It is to no purpose to prove the Impossibility of motion when I see men move no more it is to prove no Age of the Church could vary from the foregoing when we can evidently prove they have done it You argue well But two things are requir'd ere you can see our Faith varies from the former First To see what our Church holds now and then to see what the former Church held before and if I see any thing you see neither well For while you cannot distinguish between Faith and its Explication some School-men and Church I have no hopes you should see candidly what our Church holds now and if you cannot at present see what our Church holds now how and by what method will you assure us you see what She held formerly The thing to be prov'd is a plain matter of Fact and you have renounc't all living Attestation the common and secure way to bring it down and consequently Fathers too For Fathers speaking of them as such being Evident Witnessers Transmitters or Propagates of the Faith received to Immediate Posterity if you question Delivery or Tradition which you do while you doubt Obligation in Posterity to believe Ancestours you question whether there be any Doctrin deliver'd and so any Fathers and I wonder how you can imagin any man oblig'd to believe Fathers Historians or any that writ or testify'd things long ago and yet think the next age not oblig'd to believe the former in a matter of Fact done in their own dayes How far short then are your Evidences of the former Churches Doctrin like to prove of being parallell to our seeing a man move with our corporeal Eyes But you may say any thing or rather indeed forc't by your bad Cause you must do so 28. You call this Way of ours a Superficial Subtilty I beseech you consider what you say Is that which is wholly builds on the Nature of the Things as you see ours does Superficial or Yours which is meerly an aiery Descant upon dead Words What do you think Controversy is I deal plainly with you you may take it to be an Art of Talking and I think you do so though you will not profess it but I take it to be a noble Science I hold its Object to be rationem reddere fidei or to maintain question'd Faith which is chiefly done by showing the Authority on which Faith depends quoad nos Certain Hence all other Authority depending on Tradition's I hold Knowledge of its Certainty the First Principle in Controversy And this being quoad nos necessarily antecedent to Authority it can onely be
the Knowledge of such things that is to all Mankind who use common Reason This is evident from the former For first Principles are to be Self-evident to all those who are to use them and proceed upon them which in our case is the most ordinary vulgar 26. The Certainty of Tradition being establisht the whole Body of the Faithful by which I mean Catholicks or the Church Essential is by relying on it infallibly certain that it is in possession of Christ's true doctrin For since Tradition is Self-evidently a Certain way if followd Disc. 5. § 8. 13. and both best Nature and best Grace in this world are engaged that it hath been and shall be ever followed Disc. 6. and 9. Again since the Certainty of what Faith was formerly taught must needs descend to us as matter of Fact formerly past that is whose Certainty depends on Authority and Tradition is the first Principle in way of Authority as it engages for matters of Fact formerly past Corol. 24. and Self-evident to the proceeders on it Corol. 25. that is to the Body of Catholicks Lastly since Christian Tradition rightly understood is nothing but the living voice of the Catholick Church Essential as delivering 't is manifestly and manifoldly evident that that Body which relies on It that is the Catholick Church or Corol. 6. 11. the whole Church Essential is infallibly Certain that she is in secure possession of Christs true Doctrin 27. Tradition once establisht General Councils and even Provincial ones nay particular Churches are Infallible by proceeding upon It. For the same reason in regard that proceeding on it they proceed upon a Certain and Self-evident Principle Corol. 24. 25. that is such a one as neither they can mistake nor it mislead them 28. The Roman See with its Head are particularly Infallible by the same means For in regard a more vigorous Cause put at first is apt to produce a greater Effect and the Coresidence Joynt-endeavours Preaching Miracles and lastly Martyrdome of the two Chief Apostles working upon that City which commanded the greatest part of the world were more vigorous Causes to imprint Christs Doctrin at first and recommend it to the next age than was found any where else it follows that the stream of Tradition in its source and first putting into motion was more particularly vigorous here than in any other See Again since uninterrupted publicity of professing Faith makes a greater visibility of Faith which is a manifest advantage to Tradition and no Patriarchal See but the Roman hath continued ever from the Primitive times in a publick Profession of Christs Faith being held under by Barbarians hence the Roman See and inclusively their Pastours and most their chief Pastour have a particular title to Infallibility built on Tradition above any other See or Pastour whatsoever Not to mention and dilate on the particular Assistances to the Clergy of that See and most particular to its Bishop springing out of their divinely constituted office in regard 't is a position unacknowledged by Adversaries against whom I am discoursing 29. Tradition establisht the Church is provided of a certain and Infallible Rule to preserve a Copy of the Scripture's Letter truly significative of Christs sence as far as it is coincident with the main Body of Christian doctrin preacht at first For since â—tis certain the Apostles taught the same Doctrin they writ â—tis manifest the Scriptureâ—s Letter was at first for what of it was intended to signify Points of Faith significative of Faith or Sence writ by miracles preaching and practice in the hearts of the first Faithful Wherefore since the same sence that was preacht at first was preserv'd all along unalterably by Tradition Disc. 6. 8. and the same sence in mens hearts can easily guide them to correct the alteration of the outward Letter so as to preserve it significative of the sence first delivered Therefore Tradition establisht the Church is provided of a certain and Infallible Rule to preserve a Copy of the Scripture's Letter truly significative of Christ's sence as far as Scripture is coincident with the main body of Christian Doctrin preacht at first 30. Tradition establisht the Church is provided of a certain and Infallible Rule to interpret Scripture's Letter by so as to arrive certainly at Christ's Sence as far as that Letter concerns the Body of Christian Doctrin preacht at first or points requisit to Salvation For since Disc. 6. 8. Tradition preserves the first deliver'd sence alive in mens hearts sent down by way of living voice and Christian practice and these were in the beginning evidently a most certain way of knowing the Sence of the Letter â—tis evident that they are still such Wherefore Tradition establisht the Church is provided c. 31. Tradition establish't nothing can be received by the Church as hâ—ld from the first or ever unless held ever For since Disc. 5. § 13. Disc. 6. 8. Corol. 24 25. Tradition is self-evidently a certain method of conveying down matters of Fact as they were found it follows that Tradition establish't points not held ever must be convey'd down such as they were found that is as not held ever and consequently not as held from the first or ever 32. Tradition establish't 't is impossible any Errour against Christâ— s Faith should bee received by the Church that is no Errour contradicting Faith can be received as of Faith For since to be received as of Faith is Disc. 6. 8. to Traditionary Christians the same as to be received as held ever or from Christs time and Corol. 31. no point at all though disparate or indifferent not-held-ever can be received as held-ever 't is evident that much less can an erroneous point contradicting what was held ever be received as held-ever 33. Notwithstanding Tradition Erroneous Opinions and their proper Effects absurd Practices may creep into the Church and spread there for a while For since notwithstanding the Certainty of Tradition the Church is still according to our Saviour a Congregation made up of good and bad and the Bad will do like themselves that is be glad to invent and propagate such Principles as shall make for their own Ends or for Vices that is Erroneous ones Again since it cannot be expected but that multitudes even of good men in the Church should in using their private reasons be liable to Errour in divers particular points or Cases and that the remoteness of Christian Principles or Points of Faith from the Principles of particular Actions or Cases is apt to make the opposition between them not easily nor clearly discoverable at first nay the ambiguity in wording them may make them appear at first sight fairly reconcilable till the Terms be distinguisht and clear'd from equivocation 't is very evident that Tradition's Certainty hinders not but Erroneous Opinions and their proper Effects absurd Practices may creep into the Church and spread there for a while 34.