to pay obedience to them upon this pretence that he is to be guided only by his own Reason I appeal to this Author himself whether he would be satisfied with this answer or whether he would not if it lay in his power turn such a refractory Fellow out of his society unless he did conform himself to the Orders and Statutes of it If not it would be impossible for him to maintain the Society if he would expel him he clearly proves that the Principle on which he seems to build his whole Book is not to be allowed to any person that is subject to the Laws of any Society If he shall say that therefore he added those limitations if it take such directions as it ought and may do c. I would fain know in any Society who shall be Judge whether or no every Member of it doth rightly limit his Reason shall the Person himself or the Governour of the Society If the Person himself then the limitations signifie nothing and the Society would soon signifie as little if the Governour must be so far Judge as to punish those Actions that are done contrary to the Statutes and Orders of the place then why should not the Governours of the Church be allowed the same power I cannot see any Reason at all unless we are arrived at that madness to think it indifferent whether the Church be dissolved or up held or whether we have any Religion in our Nation or none at all I would not be one of that number who should dispute against the power and priviledges of Humane Reason for no man loves Reason better then my self nor would I assert any such Priviledge to exempt men from Laws or from the publick exercise of Religion For I think nothing can be more unreasonable and yet I am deceived if I have not proved that this Assertion which is the whole sum of our Authors Book is of that nature But he hath one killing Argument that like a two-edged Sword doth execution both ways with which he strikes all dead that dare oppose him And this it is page 3. They that dispute most against Reason do it because their own Reason perswades them to that belief c. This is just such a mortal Argument as the Papists use to prove that the Church is the onely Rule of Faith For say they whoso denies this and asserts the Scripture to be the Rule of Faith can have no Authority nor Ground for their belief of the Scripture but the Authority of the Church and therefore we ought to believe as the Church teacheth us and not as the Scripture But the Answer is not very hard to be made to the Romanists It is true indeed the reason why we believe the four Gospels and the Epistles to be the Writings of those Divinely-inspired persons whose Names they bear must be this because they have been so received by the Church in all Ages and the reason why we believe those Miracles were done as they are related in Scripture must be from the constant Testimony of the Universal Church and from these Miracles we are sure they were written by persons inspired by God and consequently that they are the Rule by which we are to walk Thus the Authority of the Church onely leads us to the Scriptures as an infallible Rule and leaves us there to be guided by them and not by the Church any further then her Commands are agreeable to the Commands of God contained in the Scriptures Neither is the Answer much different nor much more difficult to our Authors dead-doing Demonstration for though Reason must direct us to a Rule by which we are to act yet when we have once found out such a Rule as our Reason assures us is Infallible we then ought to govern our selves no longer by our bare Reason but by our Reason guided by that Rule and to act those things not that Reason onely doth direct us but such things as our Infallible Rule commands us So that we see Reason is so far from being our onely Guide that it directly leads us to the Scriptures and leaves us to be directed by them by which it confesseth that it self ought to be guided If the Author shall now say that I have mistaken his Notion and that his intention in this Book was onely to bring Men into their right wits and make Men consider the reasonableness of the Religion of the Church of England and consequently conform themselves to it I shall say no more then this to him that I wish he had made this Design more apparent that our Dissenters might not have joyn'd in the mistake of his Book and have construed it to the countenancing all Divisions and that he had not given by the whole contrivance of his Book so just cause of this scandal to them For the Book hath in most parts a double face that like Janus his looks two directly contrary ways at once and therefore we may justly suspect a double mind and some double dealings in the Author but this I must needs say for him that he hath ingeniously contrived it for like an armed Amazonian beauty it casts a pleasing look and seems to smile upon every one that looks on it and yet it bears about it the instruments of death I onely make this my request to him if he writes again that he would shew the World more of his honesty though less of his ingenuity by speaking plain truth but not Oracles that may be interpreted to comply with contradictions and lest he should mistake my Design I will deal plainly and tell him what it is viz. to do the duty of an honest English Gentleman and a good Christian by doing my endeavours according to my small abilities to preserve the Unity of the Church of England into which I was baptized I shall therefore endeavour to free the minds of all impartial Readers from those mistakes that might arise from this Book I am now examining To which end because some may perhaps be drawn into a maze by reading it as the Author was in writing it I shall endeavour to shew them the way out of it by walking along with them step by step and so letting them see the way back again by the same steps as they were at first led into it And now to my Task The Gentleman foreseeing as well he might that many Objections would be raised against him in the first place applies himself to ward them off Pag. 3. 4. Object 1. He thus proposeth That many of the greatest Wits have by following their own Opinions encreased the Catalogue of Heresies To this he answers That these men either followed not their own Reason but their Wills or first hood-winkt their Reason by interest and prejudice or passion c. All this I easily grant is truth but now I appeal to this Author himself whether he doth not believe that the number of those that follow their Wills more then their
men though he cannot be so much a fool to follow it himself viz. the relying on our naked reason so far as to exclude other more necessary helps especially in such matters as these of History concerning which Reason alone can be no competent Judge But yet this Gentleman is so confident positively to affirm pag. 26. that They that build their Faith upon past or present Ages are in much greater danger of being drawn from the Christian Faith then those who remit the judgment of these things wholly to their own Reason Whereas if he had considered things aright he must needs have seen that the main cause why our Reason will dictate to us that Christianity is the true Religion must be from the constant Tradition of the former Ages of the Church For from hence it is that we believe the Gospel to be the Writings of the Apostles from hence it is that we believe the Historical part of it and by consequence from hence it must proceed that we believe the Doctrines contained in it But let us hear his Reason for this bold Assertion it is nothing else but this that There hath been the Authority of an hundred to one against Christianity and that backed with the Universal Agreement of three thousand years before Certainly it is not possible for him to believe that this is any thing of a satisfactory Argument For did ever any body reckon the Tradition of the Heathens and Jews for the ground of the Christian Faith Does he not know that by Tradition every Christian that knows what he saith means the Tradition of the Church of Christ Can this then be any Reason against it that the Heathens and Jews did not assert it I am altogether of his Opinion that Reason will demonstrate the Christian above any other Riligion but still the Authority of the Christian Church together with the Gospel must acquaint us what Christianity is otherwise meer Reason could never know it So that let Reason alone though it be never so well followed with constancy diligence and sobriety it can demonstrate nothing of Christianity if it is not backed with the Authority of the Church Now I appeal to the Author himself to know how it is possible that the Universal Tradition of the Christian Church should lead us into such Errours as should cause us to deny Christ Was there ever any Age of Christians which did generally fall into the denial of Christ How could they then be called Christians who renounced the very essence of Christianity Now because this Author hath not told us what Helps and Directions a Christian must make use of to inform his Reason in matters of Religion I shall lay him down such a Rule as can never fail him in his main end his future happiness unless he be false to his Rule The Rule in general is this The Scriptures rightly interpreted To the interpretation of which is necessary a due meditation and apprehension of the scope and coherence of the words with a knowledge of the Original Languages and the peculiar Idioms of them together with the knowledge of the Customs of those times and places in which those things were done spoken and written which makes all Judaick and Ecclesiastical Authors especially Historians to be very requisite especially as to the understanding the New Testament For many things are but cursorily mentioned in the Gospel and therefore are best explained by the Writings of those that were conversant with the Apostles and their Successors who did converse with them and so on which calls in the assistance of all Antiquity especially the ancient Fathers of the three first Centuries and the four first General Councils and after all a sound rational Soul as necessary to lay these together where they agree and to judge which is most to be relied on where they differ and to draw well grounded consequences from them together with the Divine assistance concurring with all these means so that the common people that have not these advantages though they may have as good and sound rational Faculties as the greatest Scholars and can exercise them as judiciously in other things in which they have had convenience rightly to inform themselves are no more fit to interpret Scripture then they are to Comment on Euclid or Archimedes For that they have not those helps which are necessary for such a Work But what then must they do they must use the best means that God hath given them i. e. the Directions of the Church and of those Persons whom the Church hath by Gods Commission ordained over them to be their Guides and Instructers And though perhaps by their Guides unskilfulness or the corruption of the Church they are members of though this last cannot be supposed in the Church of England because it is free from all corruption in Doctrine they may be led into Errours yet since they have made use of the best means God hath given them he doth not require impossibilities at their hands and therefore will not impute those Errours to their Faults which he hath never given them power to help Whereas on the contrary if every one of the common people must be left wholly to the guidance of his own Reason they must necessarily run into as many Religions as there are men and worship a several Deity not onely every day of the week but every hour of the day and by thinking themselves as wise as their Teachers come to despise and contemn them and to trample under foot all Order and Decency to scorn the Laws of their Magistrates and in a word to run themselves into all confusion danger and wickedness This some men see well enough to be the natural consequence of this Opinion and therefore they who have a mind to make divisions amongst us do nothing else but cry up Conscience and every mans own Reason For if they can but thus separate the Sheep from the Shepherds they will soon make them stray so far till they get them into their own Pound These are the mighty advantages that the most of men would obtain by following no other Guide but their own Reason The next advantage of his Opinion is the great charitableness of it viz. That It sets the Gate of Heaven so wide open that all persons whatsoever may enter This is Charity indeed with a Witness to fill Heaven like Noab's Ark with all sorts of Beasts both clean and unclear But I am afraid there 's something else in the case besides altogether Charity that prompts the Author to this opinion he tells us so himself and therefore we may believe him that the humble consideration of his own weakness was another strong motive to him It seems the Gentleman begins to think that if there be no entrance into Heaven for Jews Turks Heathens and Atheists he himself shall scarce ever come there As for his Opinion that all these are in an equal possibility of salvation with the unerring Christian certainly
to be excused for his contempt of authority because the different Ceremonies which he used in God's Worship did agree and consent in God's Glory For what he saith p. 53. viz. That as well may different thoughts represent the Worship of God and his Son Jesus Christ as different words can represent the same thought I cannot tell what he would have by it But this I know take it in the litteral sence of it it is as extravagant an assertion as one can easily meet withall For different words may signifie the same things because neither the things nor mens notions of things do alter by the various words or languages in which they are expressed But it is impossible it should be so in the Worship of God For the Worship of God being essentially placed in the thoughts different thoughts must make different Worships But perhaps this is to be typically or anagogically interpreted As for that lash he gives the Roman Church p. 53. The old Gentleman of the infallible Chair may well pardon him for it since he makes him amends very speedily after p. 56. by drawing in Henry the Eighth by the head and shoulders first to be lashed for his Adultery and then for deserting his good old friend the Pope The last Object He answers from p. 54. to p. 62. Is that by which some would prove him guilty of the Error of the Greeks by several Texts of Scripture The Error of the Greeks I suppose was this Their following vain and Heathen Philosophy or meer Humane Reason against the Divine Revelation of the Christian Religion by the Miracles and Preaching of Christ and his Apostles For from hence was it that the Doctrine of the Resurrection was derided amongst them that the Apostles Preaching was thought foolishness and the Cross a stumbling-block Now I appeal to any judicious and impartial Reader whether this Author hath not driven on this same or a worse design in no small part of his Book For he hath endeavoured to prove that a man may be excusable though he follows his Humane Reason to the denial of Christianity i. e. in a direct opposition to the Divine Revelation Nay he hath endeavoured to prove that Jews Heathens and Atheists are in an equal possibility of salvation with the unerring Christian. Now I desire this Author to prove that ever the Heathen Greeks had amongst them any question which they did defend more directly contrary to the Christian Religion then His is Which if he cannot do he must acknowledge that he hath out-done them all at the wisdom of enticing words to draw others from Christianity and that he doth not come far short of them at the wisdom of the flesh and the wisdom of the Princes of this World will appear in that he hath so much busied himself to prove that Humane Reason may tolerate Atheism it self and consequently all kind of lusts and wickedness whatsoever Away with you dull Greeks for a company of old fools that could not improve your reason further then to the denial of Christ meer Gregory-grey-beards are you all in comparison of our Author who can tell you presently how to deny the Being of a God by Humane Reason and to excuse your selves when you have done so exquisitely hath he found out a guide to happiness and so gentilely hath he followed the directions of his own Reason The Gentleman in the next place proceeds to establish his Doctrine by positive Arguments And his first Argument is from the safety of it which he endeavours to prove by comparing his guide viz. every mans own Reason with others that stand in competition with it As first with the apprehension of a Vision or Revelation extrinsecally coming into the Soul p. 62. If he means nothing but Enthusiasme hereby I shall onely leave it to be disputed betwixt him and his gratefull friends the Quakers For I know no Christian that will follow or expect new lights since God hath given us the Gospel a positive law to govern our lives and actions and since the Apostle tells us Gal. 1. 8. That if he or an Angel from heaven should preach any other Gospel he ought to be held accursed If he means all revelation in general even that of the Gospel not excepted as what may not a man venture at who is indued with his Humane Reason which hath already taught him to excuse Infidelity and Atheism I desire him to consider that since he himself hath proved in the latter end of his Book that we have Reason enough to believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God What strange kind of blasphemous aspersion he must cast upon the divine Wisdom if he dares to assert that every mans own Reason is a safer rule to walk by then that rule which God hath particularly revealed to us from heaven for that purpose Unless therefore he can think our own Reason more infallible then the Reason of God himself he must conclude if he believes the Gospel to be Gods Word as he professeth to do that it is much safer to follow that law which God hath been pleased to give us then the law of our own Reason For otherwise the Divine Revelation had been altogether vain and useless Secondly The next guide he endeavours to prove less safe then Humane Reason is Authority Pag. 63. By which he hath not explained what he means so that by this Discourse since he hath no ways limited the signification of the word we may justly judge he intended to set up every mans Reason as a safer guide then all Authority His reason is this For if that Anthority prescribe truth we have good fortune and meerly good fortune in our obedience But I pray you Sir Are there not many truths that can be no ways made evident or at least not so evident as is convenient but by the suffrage of Authority as the distinction of persons in the sacred Trinity the Deity of the Son and of the Holy Ghost For if the universal consent of the Church in these points did not clearly prove that those Texts of Scripture which are urged for them were to be so interpreted it would not perhaps be so easie a matter to stop a subtile Socinians mouth by meer Scripture and much less by meer Reason If we take Authority in the other common acceptation of the word for lawful power the Authors assertion is still worse and much more false For in all indifferent things and doubtful matters the Authority of the Magistrate is to prescribe to us not our own Reason only it being much safer for us to follow authority in those cases then to be guided onely by our selves So that Sir you see by this time that in most actions of our lives for most of them do concern indifferent things we have not only good fortune but good reason in our obedience to authority Nay in some cases and those not a few authority is the onely reason of our assent as in all
rib-roasted by his Master for searching for the Hare at the top of the House because he did not look for her in the proper place to find her The third Reason p. 68. Because we ought not to believe Errours of faith to be damnable But if these Errours be fundamental and obstinately continued in against plain means of conviction in opposition to authority in spight of our Authors Reason I must believe them damnable Oh! no saith he for this is most wildly uncharitable but why so because this was to damn millions of men for one that shall be saved But this damns none but such as wilfully and obstinately continue in their errours and thereby become Hereticks nor them neither for it is possible they may live to repent and amend but if they die in heresie that they die in damable sins we must believe if we will believe either St. Paul Gal. 5. 19 20 c. who reckons up Seditions and Heresies amongst the rest of the Black Catalogue which shall shut us out from the Kingdom of Heaven or S Peter who plainly tells us that there are damnable Heresies 2 Pet. â— 1. Now if this be contrary to charity to assert I cannot help it I have very good company in my uncharitableness for S. Peter and S. Paul are both guilty of it as well as I. Oh uncharitable Apostles that had no more pity nor love nor compassion in you to those millions of dissenters that were hereticks in your time but that you must not onely believe but pronounce the Errours in faith of the greatest part of the World to be damnable Heresies even shift for your selves good Apostles for this Author hath charged you home with wild uncharitableness His fourth Reason Ibid. and p. 69. We ought not to teach men that any Errours in belief overthrow our hopes of salvation unless we could give them a catalogue of those Errours that do so But why Because this would be more uncomfortable then the other is uncharitable for it would necessarily lead men into despair What then Must we teach them to throw away their Bibles and renounce all the Articles of the Christian Faith and wholly to commit themselves to the guidance of their own Reason as our Author seems to do p. 65. and that then they shall be safe enough and need not further trouble their heads with matters of Faith or Religion No surely there is a middle way which is plain for all men to walk in which ought to be shewn them i. e. this That some errours of Faith are damnable though not all and we may easily give them a general Catalogue of what errours are so by which they may judge of particulars Those Errours of Faith are damnable which are wilfully run into and all such as are continued in in opposition to the Authority of the Church perversly and obstinately and thus our Author hath a general Catalogue of what Errours are damnable let him make what use of it he can The fifth Reason p. 69. and 70. is this Because we cannot know our fault and therefore have no means of repenting of it and consequently cannot expect pardon for it there being no forgiveness without repentance and repentance impossible without knowledge of our fault But if this be true it would damn all mankind For who is there that hath ever had a particular knowledge of all the sins that he hath committed so that there must be many of them according to this Gentlemans reason unrepented off and consequently unpardoned What 's become of this Gentlemans great charity which he hath always boasted of for this opinion is much more uncharitable then any of those whose uncharitableness he hath so much declaimed against But thanks be to God this is not true For sure we are David doth repent him of those faults which he had no knowledge of Ps. 19. 12. in that Prayer of his who can understand his errours cleanse thou me from my secret faults By which the Royal Prophet must mean such faults as he himself had forgotten and had no knowledge of else the first part of the verse which is the reason of the following petition could have no coherence with the latter which is the petition it self grounded upon the former Besides Why can we have no knowledge of our fault unless it be committed against our own Reason For though we err only against Authority and are for a time blinded with prejudice so that we cannot at present see our errour is it not possible that the prejudice afterwards may be removed by a duâ— information from others or by our own serious consideration assisted by the Grace of God If it is possible then there is nothing of truth nor consequence in this Reason His sixth Reason p. 70. is this The great probability of truth on all sides even the erring ones ought to make us believe that God will not punish those that err To this I answer If our errours be such as are not the effects or causes of any sin in us we have no reason to think but God will pardon them But if our errours are the effects of wilful ignorance pride or idleness or if they have led us into schism and heresie and contempt of authority then we can have no hopes of pardon without amendment wherefore sin being most commonly either the cause or the effect of our errours or both it proves that there is no small danger in them But there is no such great danger from errours saith this Gentleman p. 71. For it is not consistent with the goodness of God to have made truth so difficult to be found out if he intended to punish the miss of it with eternal punishments To this I answer That where the difficulty surpasseth the helps that God hath given us we need not fear that God will punish us eternally for not finding out such truths For if they had been necessary to be known for our salvation they should have been suited to our capacity But if we are wilfully ignorant of any necessary truths then it is not contrary to the goodness of God to punish us eternally for it as well as for any other sin which we die in without repentance For the same thing might as well be urged to free men from eternal punishment for most other sins as well as this of wilful errour For since it is so very difficult to flesh and blood to abstain from those sins which profit and pleasure tempts us to and so easie to run into them nay since there is but one way of exact vertue which is the middle way for those many hundreds that lead to vitious extreams and as he saith of truth there is no certain mark set upon that one to distinguish it from others he may therefore as well think it inconsistent with the divine goodness to punish men eternally for their vices as for their errours since the reason is the very same in both But now supposing it
probable that they whose business it is to study those things must know them more certainly then I who have never had time nor convenience to study them But supposing they should deceive me as long as I am in this life I shall always be subject to errour and if I do follow these directions sure I am it is their fault and not mine if they lâ—ad me into errour for I have done what I could to prevent it and sure I am I cannot this way be led into Popery Infidelity and Atheism as I may be if I wholly commit my self to the sole guidance of my own reason since our Church hath so plainly guarded us against the Idolatry of Rome in its plain Homilies and against Infidelity and Atheism by her full and short Catechism and by allowing us the use of the Scriptures I dare confidently aver that there is no ways in the world left for us that are unlearned to keep us without a miracle from Heresie and Schism or Popery and Atheism but only by this method that I have now laid down If I am mistaken I shall be very thankful to any one that will shew me wherein If I am not mistaken I must desire our Author to give me leave to think that the Authority of the Church is a safer Guide to me then my own Reason and consequently that all his boast of safety is nothing else but meer impertinence and falshood Several things it is possible will be objected against this method which I have laid down for the safety of all private Gentlemen and men of ordinary capacity especially for common people which was this That every one should rely upon the Church of England and those Guides of Conscience which she hath authorized in all difficult cases and doubtful matters which surpass his own abilities to judge of Against this it may be objected First That this is ro run into the same implicit Faith which we condemn in the Romanists and put out our own eyes that we may see with other mens I answer Not at all for I allow every one the free use of the Scriptures and their own Reasons in all matters that are within the reach of their capacity and within their proper sphear of Action and for all others that are above them I have shewn them I am sure the safest guide I can possibly find If any body can produce a safer Iet them and they will do very good service to the publick Secondly It may be objected That by this Direction they that are Papists especially the common sort of them are in no possibility to be freed from the Roman Yoke and consequently must continue in Idolatry and therefore in most imminent peril of damnation I answer I gave not this direction to Papists or those that are without our Church For what have I to do to judge them that are without But to those who are or ought to be obedient Children of the most Christian and tender Mother the Church of England who is guilty of no corruption from the Primitive Christianity either in Doctrine or Worship who enjoyns the Belief of no new Articles of Faith nor no Idolatrous Worship nor commands any thing that is sinful to be obeyed the contrary to which the Church of Rome is most apparently guilty of Now I refer it to any man or to all mankind to judge which is the safest way for us of the Church of England whether to perswade all of our Communion to be governed by their own Reason and so to endanger the loss of the greatest part of them that are now free and must continue so so long as they continue in obedience to our Church from all fear of Popish Idolatry and thereby to expose them not onely to all false Religions but even to be of no Religion at all for fear of using such Arguments to secure them as might if used to ignorant Papists continue them in their Errours and obstruct their conversion to our Church of which we cannot have half so great a probability as there is of losing or at least hazarding their Souls who now are not nor never can be in any danger so long as they continue in obedience to their own Church or whether it is safer for them to be kept by Laws in the Communion of the Church of England and in obedience to her Injunctions in all honest and lawful things which is all that our Church requires even of the Clergy themselves Thirdly Another Objection may be this That possible it is our Church may in time as well as the Church of Rome which formerly was a Church as free from all corruption as ours is now degenerate into the very same Crimes which we now blame Rome for I answer That then our Church must be quite altered from what it is at present and I onely propose my Method of Safety to all illiterate Persons in Her present Communion and therefore am not at all concerned for future contingencies But if ever She should be changed from her Primitive Purity which God forbid then and not till then will this Objection deserve an Answer For if possibilities of Errour may render Separation allowable we must never be fixt in any Church till we can come to that which is triumphat in Heaven nay neither can any man be free from a possibility of Errour as long as he is here on Earth let him propose to himself what Guide he can And I dare appeal to any man that is rational whether he must not think that his own Reason may in all probability lead him into Errours much sooner then the Guides of the Church especially in such things as he is not a capable Judge of For surely every mans own Reason is much more subject to a possibility of Errors then an whole Church is to a possibility of a total change and alteration So that it must still remain much safer to rely upon the Church according to the Rule I have laid down then it is to rely wholly upon our own Reason 4. The last Objection I shall answer is this That if we that are illiterate must rely upon our Church in all things above our capacity that then we ought to have practised the same Rule when we were Members of the Church of Rome and consequently ought never to have separated from it and therefore that our Reformers were Schismaticks To this I answer That the Romish Doctrine of Transubstantiation and their Idolatry in worshipping the Host c. besides the Popes Usurpation upon our Regal Authority was so directly contradictory to the Word of God that he must needs see it that doth not wilfully shut his eyes Secondly Our Reformation was carried on not by Private Persons but by the Publick Power of the Nation and by all the wisest and most learned Men in it And consequently it could be no Schism it being granted upon so warrantable a Cause and done in so orderly a manner To conclude
all their Cant of New Light From whence nothing can be more evident then this that since they make onely their natural Conscience or Humane Reason as our Author doth the onely Rule of all their Actions they are at best but good Heathens Now whether he saw this consequence of his Book or no it seems they did For as I am very credibly informed they sent an Agent extraordinary to this Author to give him thanks for his Book Who when he told their Agent that he was no Friend of the Quakers Opinion was answered that he had set a fair step towards it for which they gave him thanks Now I wonder that our Jews Infidels and Atheists together with all the debauched persons in London were not as Gentile as the Quakers to pay their due thanks to this Author who hath as well deserved it from every one of them as he did from those his light-headed friends and acquaintance The Second Principle he examines is the Authority of Men particularly that of a Council Which he saith may as well lead men to deny Christ as every mans own Reason And for proof of it he instanceth in the great Council of the Arrians as he is pleased to call it that condemned Athanasius and denied the Divinity of Christ and therefore were no more to be called Christians then Abrahamists or Davidists To this I shall return no other Answer but these following Questions 1. Whether it is not probable that this great meeting of the Arrians might not rather be called a Club of them pack'd together by the command of Constantius who was wheadled into that Party then to be thought a General Council rightly called and ordered to which all Parties ought to be summoned and to be heard freely to speak their sense and opinions in any Debate Which let the Authour prove if he can was observed in this Council 2. Whether or no the grand controversie there decreed viz that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be put into the Creed did amount to a denial of Christs Divinity For I do not see but that they might believe that Christ was God though they could not determine the manner of his Divine Essence and his procession from the Father As our Church doth agree in the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament though we profess not to know the manner of it But however I appeal to this Gentleman himself whether or no this did amount to a denial of Christ and desire to know of him whether or no the Arrians did believe or profess to believe that Abraham or David was sent by God into the World to make satisfaction for the sins of mankind and to preach the Christian Law to the World or whether they did deny Christs satisfaction and the Christian Law If they did deny neither of these then they cannot be said to be Abrahamists or Davidists as well as Christians neither is it possible for them to exalt any other Prophet above Christ as he saith they might if they did acknowledge Christ only to be their Law-giver and Redeemer As for the 2 7 Council of Nice that established the Worshipping of Images it may also he enquired Whether that was a lawful General Council or onely a Conventicle of the Popes Creatures And whether as they had since to Trent the Holy Ghost was not sent them from Rome in a Cloak-bag by which they governed all their Transactions If so then it was no General Council and therefore makes nothing against the Authority of a General Council rightly called and qualified which may with good Reason be supposed to be guided in all their Sanctions by Gods holy blessed all-wise and immaculate Spirit But Secondly If we could suppose that this was a lawful General Council yet if this Gentleman would but consult the Records of it and not onely invent notions of it from his own phantasie he should find by the Reasons that are there given for the use of Images in the Worship of God and by the particular Images which they decreed to be set up viz no other but of Christ the Virgin Mary the Apostles and Christian Saints and Martyrs that it was not possible for them to have fallen into a denial of Christianity thereby Nay so far were they from it that the main Reason that is given for the use of Images is that they might be as Books to the ignorant to instruct them in the main Articles of the Christian Religion and might encourage them to suffer Martyrdom for it by the so many Examples of those that had gone before them which they daily beheld and adored But it may be our Author thinks it enough for him with his grateful friends the Quakers to consult the Light within him and to throw away all books but his own Now by what I have said in answer to this Author it is evident that it is so far from being true that General Councils may equally lead men to a denial of Christ as every mans private reason that this Author is not able to instance in any one General Council or any thing like a General Council that ever gave the world so much as a possibility of it in any of their Canons and Decrees Whereas all the Apostates that ever were in the world had some reason or other which they followed or else something that they thought a Reason for deserting Christianity So unsafe and dangerous is it to follow our own Reasons which are so easily and damnably mistaken in opposition to the Universal Church But what doth he tell us of the Church of England of these Councils of Ariminum and the 2 7 of Nice For these were never acknowledged to be General Councils of any Son of our Church Let him if he can charge the four first General Councils according to which our Reformation was carried on with the least of Errours Which if he cannot do then those Councils must remain a safer Rule for us and all men then every mans particular Reason The third Principle he examines is the Tradition of the former and present Ages To this our Author saith That what those Traditions were of the former or what are the Commands of the present Church are no ways to be known but by trusting some number of men present which is not without the possibility of being misguided c. But what then Is not the same difficulty applicable to all History whatsoever and yet he that will give an account of former Times must not invent it out of his own Humane Reason but must consult Historians for it But then saith this Gentleman this is to fall into that opinion you condemn in me No surely no man is so foolish to condemn the use of our own Reson in reading History so far as to judge of the true meaning of the words all that can be condemned by any man of common sense is that which I apprehend our Author would wheadle into other
matters of Fact the reason of our belief can be nothing else but the authority of the Witnesses and in all matters of history the reason of our belief is not so much the reasonableness or credibility of the thing that is related as the credit and consent of Authors which is nothing else but Authority from whence it is that we can prove the truth of the Scriptures themselves and if so then surely it was very Christianly said of this Gentleman that we have onely good fortune in our obedience to authority for then we have nothing but good fortune for our belief of the Scriptures themselves since the Reason of it is only grounded on Authority But he proceeds p. 64. That if it lead us into errour we have nothing to plead for our excuse for we have nothing to say for our obedience to that Authority Who would have thought it have we nothing to say for our belief of matters of fact and history if we be deceived in them have we no excuse for our selves certainly any body but this Author would allow us a very considerable nay a full excuse of our errour from the testimony of the witnesses else our Magistrates are in a very hard case who are bound to pass sentence even in cases of life and death Secundum allegata probata i. e. according to Evidence which they have from the Witnesses But however he is resolved to prove it from the example of Eve who pleaded the Authority of the Serpent and yet was punished Did she not deserve it since she dared to believe the Serpent rather then God himself Aye but Adam too was accursed because he believed that which was figuratively one with him his Wife as Members of the Church pretend to do the Church rather then that which was most certainly and singly one with him which was his own Reason Pag. 64. What a fine story have we here the Author might if he had pleased have made short work and have told us that Adam was accursed for believing his Wife rather then himself But then the pretty Simile had not so well brought in the Church which this Gentleman was resolved to drag in as Henry the Eighth was drawn in just before by the head and shoulders For if ever any thing came in impertinently this does For was there ever any Member of the Church that believed the Church for no other reason but because it was figuratively one with himself if not to what purpose was this parenthesis of the Church crowded in in this place unless it was to make all his admirers to cast off their obedience to the Church But if any be hereby perswaded to it they must be such as are not able to distinguish between Reason and Impertinency But to let that pass I wonder who told him that Adam was accursed for believing his Wife rather then his own Reason whoever he was a Scotch man would call him a merry Gentleman that is in plain English a down-right Liar For if our Author will believe the authority of Moses in the case Gen. 3. 17. he will find that the reason of his curse is there given to be no other then because he had broken Gods Command and had not obeyed his Authority So that his crime was not that he had believed his Wife rather then his own Reason For that Law was not a Law of Nature or Reason but a meer positive Law of God For had not God particularly forbid it it had been for all any reason to the contrary as lawful for Adam to have eaten of that Tree as of any Tree in all Eden But the cause of his curse was this that he followed his Wifes example and perswasion rather then the express commands and threatnings of God What does all this make against Authority since Adam was accursed for not obeying the Divine Authority Who would ever believe any Authority after so grand a demonstration against it fetched from Adams green Breeches As for what he saith p. 65. of blinding our own eyes c. I onely desire him to tell me whether he doth believe that we must never follow nor assent to Authority If he cannot be so ridiculous to believe it then surely our obedience and assent to Authority where it is necessary as in most cases of our lives I have already proved it is is not a blinding our own eyes and a putting our selves into a greater probability of not finding then of lighting upon the true passage to Heaven as he would there insinuate For I must needs tell him that his Book is nothing else almost but a piece of common Sophistry viz. an universal conclusion from some few particulars and this managed by hiding himself in general and ambiguous terms little similies and sly insinuations exactly fitted to deceive the Vulgar and thereby to destroy all Peace and Unity in the Church by making them have so high an opinion of their own Reasons that is of themselves to which they are naturally proue enough for the Fool is wisest in his own eyes that they shall soon scorn and contemn all Authority whatsoever which he endeavours to insinuate by the advantage of safety on the contrary part p. 65. Now contrariwise saith he they that are guided by their own understanding if they commit themselves wholly to it are as safe on the left hand as on the right as secure of happiness in their Errours as others are in the Truths they happen to fall into Hath he not now discovered most apparently what he means by his Humane Reason Is it not the very same with Ralpho's New-light For as of Vagabonds we say That they are ne'r besides their way What e'r men speak by this New-light Still they are sure to be i' th' right Suppose then that any one should commit himself so wholly to his understanding that he should by the Errors of it be led into Theft Murder Rebellion Schism Heresie Infidelity and Atheism it self would not this man hereby think you be in a very safe condition and would not God Almighty at the great day of Judgment be very well satisfied for the commission of all these crimes with this answer that the man did wholly commit himself to the guidance of his own understanding or rather would not his own conscience tell him that he ought to have been better informed and that he might have been so if he had not been so self-conceited of his own Opinions Did ever any man but this Author make such use of his Humane Reason to countenance all the Villanies in the World For what mischief is there so great that a man may not be led into by committing himself wholly to the guidance of his own understanding if it be not before-hand rightly informed and instructed Now should we not have a blessed World were men as secure in these Errours that might lead them into all these Villanies before mentioned as others are in their Truths But further should a
man chance to prove that in most cases of our lives we are secure if we follow Authority though we may err thereby may though we err contrary to our own Reason and that on the other hand if we err by following our own Reason against Authority we are clearly left without excuse for our presumption How then what would become of the grand security our Author saith every man hath in being guided by his own understanding Would it not thence be clearly proved that Authority is a much safer Guide in those things then every mans own Reason and yet I think what I have undertaken will neither require any extraordinary brains nor pains to demonstrate For is it not as visible as the Sun in our assent to all matters of Fact from the Authority of Witnesses and in our obedience to Authority in all indifferent things for in both these Cases especially in the latter he that errs with Authority may plead the Authority for his excuse but he that errs against it is quite Ieft without any excuse at all For in all things indifferent in their own nature i. e. all such things which before any Humane Commands concerning them are wholly left to every mans own judgment being neither forbidden nor commanded by God if the Authority of our Governours doth intervene and command that this indifferent thing shall be done though we did think it more reasonable to be left undone yet we must be bound in these Cases to obey Authority rarher then our own Reason For otherwise every mans Reason would be his Magistrate and he should be onely bound to do that which is right in his own eyes and nothing else Would not our Authors Doctrine be very well fitted to the peace of all Society and does not he deserve very well from the publick by doing what lies in his power to wheadle into the heads of his unwary Readers which are the greatest number of men amongst us that it is safer for every man to be govern'd by the Laws of his own Reason then by the Laws of the Church and Nation of which he is a Member But now suppose we should err in doing any indifferent things in obedience to our Governours and that it had been really better that it had not been done yet our obedience though contrary to our own Reason should in this case excuse us Whereas whoso errs in following his own Reason contrary to the commands of Authority in indifferent things is altogether left without excuse either before God or Man unless it be before this good-natur'd Author who is resolved to excuse him by half a Jury of Reasons but I may justly except against every one of them for there is none of them that is both honest and true First Reason is this There is no danger of perishing where there is no disobedience but without this every man may often err the command of God being not to find out Truth but to endeavour the finding it for the Command is Search and ye shall find p. 66 Is not this pleasant For what was the end and design of this Command onely that we should turn Seekers and borrow Diogenes his Candle and Lanthorn and go peeking about all our life time that we might in searching have something to busie our selves about or was it given us that we might find out Truth If the latter was the end of the Command then that which binds to the end commands all the lawful means to that end So that he which is to search for Truth is by that Command bid to make use of all those means that God hath afforded him to the finding it out Wherefore who ever faileth by the wilful neglect of any means he had for the finding Truth is therefore inexcusable Now since Authority is the immediate and ready way by which we find out many Truths as all matters of Fact and History on which the Truth of Scripture it self doth depend if any man being to search for any Truths of this sort shall out of his own self-conceit neglect all Authority by which the matter was onely to be known and shall search onely by the Reason of the thing would not any man conclude him to be just as wise and just as excusable as he who being commanded to look for the Hare when the Dogs were at a loss runs to the next house and falls a pulling off the Tiles to look for her in the roof of the house For might not this wise servant pretend as good a Reason to excuse himself as our Authors wise Reason that he here alledgeth For might he not say to his Master Sir your Command was not to find out the Hare but onely to search for it Do we not think now that this man did very well obey his Masters Command and that he ought to be return'd an abundance of thanks for his pains for alas poor Fellow he did as he was bidden he looked for the Hare nay possibly he could give as good a Reason for the manner of his search as any is in all Humane Reason viz. that he that will find what is lost must search as well where it is not as where it is so that he followed but his own Reason in the search and therefore if our Author was his Master he would without doubt rest very well satisfied with him Secondly Our Authors next Reason p. 67. is this Because we lay the blasphemous accusation of injustice upon God if he punish us for an Errour that we could not avoid These are his words But I suppose it should be thus if we say that he punisheth us for an Error we could not avoid for if God Almighty doth really punish us for such Errors then it could be no blasphemy in us to say so neither would it be any accusation of injustice but onely a declaration of the plain Truth But what man ever said so that understood what he said that God will punish us for Errours that we could no ways avoid What then is this Reason to the purpose Oh! very much saith he For are not all Errours such which we fall into after a full search for Truth according to the best means represented to our understanding I grant it But if we do not rightly inform our understanding when it is in our power to do it nay if we shall neglect any of those means that God hath given us for our information then our Errour will not be such as we could not avoid and consequently without any injustice God may and will punish us for it Wherefore he that shall out of wilful pride neglect Authority or Revelation in searching for Truths that are most properly found out by them does not use the best and most proper means that God hath given him to that end and therefore may as justly be punished for his folly though he may think he follows his own Humane Reason in the search as that Servant did deserve to be well
all this Discourse Let all Circumstances be impartially considered as they are now in the Church of England and I dare refer the Question to the Writer of Humane Reason himself whether it is not a much safer way for the common People especially to relie upon her judgment then upon their own And whether it is safer for the Publick to maintain the established Religion by the execution of our Laws or to let Hell break loose amongst us by a general Toleration of all Religions and by consequence of all debauchery and Atheism I refer to our Government to consider Now for our Authors next Argument by which he would prove his Opinion to be most natural if he had said purely natural we might well have granted it him for it is as foolish an one as one would wish The Argument is grounded upon a pretty similitude which our Author loves as dearly as he doth his Mistress they that have a mind may read it at length p. 72. to the 78. for I have something else to do then to bestow time to transcribe it The sum of it is this viz. That as in all visible Objects we appeal to the eye and sense of seeing and make no appeals from it either to other senses or to revelation so in all rational Objects we must have recourse onely to our Reasons and must in no case appeal from thence and especially in matters of Religion For Religion was the main design of mans Creation But now if in visible Objects there is an appeal to our higher faculties then by vertue of this Gentleman 's own Metaphor there may and ought to be an appeal from our Reason even in rational Objects to some more certain Judge where it may be had That there is such an appeal in visible Objects from our sense of seeing to our understanding is evident in all those Cases in which either the Eye or the medium is defective or disturbed as he himself doth acknowledge p. 74. to which I need add but this one Instance The Stars appear to our eyes to be no bigger then the Nails in the Spoak of a Cart-wheel though they are as Astronomers do demonstrate vastly greater then the whole Earth Now then it is as clear as the Sun that there must be an appeal from our senses otherwise we must believe that the Stars are very inconsiderable things and that the Sun it self is no bigger then a Bushel because we see them appear of no greater Dimensions From whence there can be nothing more evident then this That as in visible Objects the Soul can make no certain judgment when the Sense is diseas'd or defective or the Medium is disturb'd and that as when the appearance of visible Objects to our Senses doth contradict our rational Faculties we believe our Reason rather then our Eyes so our Souls can pass no certain sentence concerning intelligible things when her understanding is any way s disturb'd and when the Object is too high for our Reason and that we ought therefore to appeal from our Reason when it contradicts any higher and better Demonstration particularly when it seems to contradict Divine revelation because we must be assured that the Reason of God is much more certain and infallible then the Reason of man unless Humane Reason teacheth us to think our selves wiser then God So that from this Metaphor if similitudes may pass for Arguments as they do with our Author who scarce useth any other it sollows that as in visible Objects we must not always believe our eyes so neither in intelligible Objects must we always believe our Reason Wherefore all that this Gentleman hath got by this Argument is That he hath made a Rod for his own Breech For he hath hereby fully demonstrated the folly of his whole Book for the Reason of most men being depraved and blinded with prejudice and passion ignorance and interest is no more to be believed then the eye that is distempered with the Jaundise or any other Disease and therefore that is a madness for most men to give themselves up wholly to the guidance of their own Reasons Nay it further follows from hence that as he would be thought a mad man or at least a very pragmatical fellow who will believe his own eyes against the testimony of thousands of others who have greater advantages of seeing the object then himself so he must be thought very pragmatical if not mad who will believe onely his own Reason against the judgment of thousands of others who are all wiser then himself he then must be a pragmatical fool that will believe his own Reason when it contradicts the Universal testimony of the whole Church So that our Authors singularity in renouncing all Authority his own Argument proves is a piece of the greatest pride and folly Now Sir you see how easie it is to retort your little similies upon your self and what a great advantage you gain to your Cause by making true comparisons of things I do believe your wit is good but your luck is stark naught at similitudes since therefore they have proved so unlucky to you let me advise you as a friend not to use them any more for demonstrations and then I am very confident that the world will not be troubled with any more of your scribling But now let us suppose our Author's consequence to be good and his metaphors to be demonstrative and let us but observe the natural tendency of it and if that will not be sufficient to demonstrate the danger and folly of his opinion I know not what can For if because God hath given us our reason to be our guide in all intelligible matters and consequently in matters of Religion as he hath given us our eyes to guide us in all visible objects and that therefore there must lie no appeal from our reason in any matters of saith or religion why then doth it not hold in all matters of Law and Justice I challenge him to shew me any reason if he can for is it not the office of our reason to guide us as well in all other matters as in the concerns of religion and yet surely there is no man unless it be this Author can be so sensless to think otherwise then that he which lives in a society must submit the external exercise of his own private reason to the publick laws or else that he ought to be cast out of the protection of that society and to have no benefit of those laws which he will not submit to and yet is it not natural for every man to govern himself by his own Reason in every particular concern and action of his life as well as in Religion Must then our Governours out of pure good nature cancel all our Laws and give every man leave to follow the guidance of his own Reason alone in all things because it is most natural to every man to be so guided What an unnatural Parliament have