Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A59811
|
A defence of the Dean of St. Paul's Apology for writing against the Socinians in answer to the antapologist.
|
Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707.
|
1694
(1694)
|
Wing S3283; ESTC R8168
|
44,628
|
72
|
against the Truth of the Charge he does not say it was not his design tho it is very iniquitous in the Dean to charge him with it because whatever his Intent was he has given us two admirable Reasons why it cannot be concluded from his Book The first is That others as well as Socinians are Heterodox in this Point But the Dean and Dr. Wallis writ only against Socinians and he owns his Suit was chiefly to them and no body else is particularly named in his Suit and therefore the Dean guessed pretty right and had some reason for his guess 2dly These are not the only Points in which they are Heterodox and therefore the Doctor had liberty to write against them in other Points But still was not he and every body else desired to forbear them in these their principal Errors And did the Dean charge him with any thing more For in this present Controversy what had he to do with their other Errors And yet I believe many at least of his Reasons for not writing will hold as well in other Points as in this of the Trinity In the next place he gives an account why he stiles himself a Stander by which does not become any Divine of the Church of England in such a Fundamental Article of the Christian Faith The first Reason he gives is his mean opinion of his own Skill in the Controversy but it is modestly express'd with a perhaps and therefore perhaps it was his ill opinion of the Controversy it self His next Reason is That every one who is skill'd at his Weapon must not draw upon every one he meets begirt with a Sword but if they draw upon him or to take it out of the Metaphor assault the Catholick Faith which every Christian is concerned in and every Divine concern'd to defend it does not become him to be a Stander by but to use his Skill to defend himself and his Faith for to be a Stander-by in such cases in plain English is to be a Neuter and when there is a dispute of Faith if a Neuter be not a Heretick he cannot be Orthodox for he is on neither side if we can suppose a Medium between these two In the next place he does not like to be thought tender on the wrong side but certainly he is so if he means any thing that he speaks He readily owns what I believe no body will lay to his charge That he has shown a Tenderness to the Church of England and the Nicene Faith I suppose by those severe Reflections which he makes upon both and his Burlesque of the Athanasian Creed and the Litany which as yet stand in our Liturgy and are like to do so till it fall into the hands of such Melancholy Reformers as out of pure Tenderness for the Credit of the Old Reformation are for changing the Frame of our most Fundamental Articles or resolving them all into a mere Negative Belief which is to leave no positive Faith in the Church And here our Author would know how he is Tender on the Wrong side when he has only express'd a tenderness for the Church of England the Credit of the Reformation and for Peace and Holiness and I 'le warrant you has not said one word in favour of the Socinian Heresy and therefore the Dean may keep his profound politick Notes of mens tenderness being due to their Inclinations for better purposes What these purposes are I know not but certainly 't is no improbable conjecture that men have some Inclinations to that for which they express a great tenderness though t is possible this Rule may sometimes fail and that tenderness which our Author saith he has expressed for the Church of England may not be due to his Inclinations But now let us go forward to the next Paragraph and we shall meet with some farther instances of the Dean's disingenuous arts who perverts our Author's Peaceable Assertions and makes what he pleases of them by odious that is's which the Reader must know is his common way of dealing A short but heavy Charge this if it be true but the comfort is that he who reads the Dean's Book with his own Eyes rather than the Antapologists will find no ground for such an Accusation for he does no where pervert his Peaceable assertions nor do his that is's Misrepresent the consequences of our Author's Assertions And I take it for no disingenuous art to expose any Assertion by shewing its true mâ—â—ning and laying open the just consequences of it Aâ—â— as to that publick hate which he saith the Dean endeavouâ—s to cast on him I don't see how that can be since 〈◊〉 Dean has never mentioned his Name and therefâ—â—◠〈◊〉 did not know him or had no mind to expose him In the next Section he confesses himself an 〈◊〉 â—o such open Disputes between Protestants as only Puâ—liâ—â—â—o the common Enemies the Divisions of the Protestants And so I believe is the Dean too as also to all such open Disputes among Christians as have the same ill consequences with respect to the common Enemies of Christianity and yet I believe neither he nor our Author would from hence conclude That we must not dispute against any Popish Errors because this publiâ—hes to the common Enemies of Christianity the Divisions of the Christians or that if there be any such open Disputes those who defend the Truth when openly contradicted must bear the blame of them As to what he says That Voluntary Disputings have never suppressed but rather revived old Heresies If he means by Voluntary Disputing a necessary Defence as he must mean if it be any thing to the present purpose 't is very wisely thought of that disputing against those who revive and propagate old Heresies is the thing which revives them How this Projector for the Churches peace would have those who should Write in this Controversy authorized he will set down anon and then 't will be time enough to admire the wisdom of his Contrivance Let us in the mean time come to his Latitude of Faith which is another branch of his notable project for Peace which he still adheres to though I think he has given little or no answer to what the Dean urged against it so that the Dean's Arguments hold good still notwithstanding his Exceptions against them Nor are we one dram the wiser for all that fine Lecture which he here reads concerning Latitude as a Metaphorical term derived from Astronomy Geography Triple Dimensions or what else you please nor yet for his citation from one who I believe was far enough from his Latitude of Faith For I can't yet find what he would be at in the present point unless it be what he has been already charged with That every man should be let alone to believe what he pleases so he doth but profess to believe the Words of Scripture though in never so perverse a sense This I can't believe is that Latitude in
allow his Latitude of Faith and from hence to prove that the Scripture words have no determineâ— sense and are not to be believed in one determined sense is to prove that the multitude of Heresies destroys the certain and determined sense of Scripture and I wonder what he means who pretends to own One Faith to object against this One Faith the various and contrary Systems of Opinions in Religion unless he thinks all these contrary Systems are within the Latitude of the Vnit or of the One Faith And now that this Latitude may not pass for his own invention he tells us That God is doubly the Author of a Latitude in Faith 1. In revealing his Truth in such terms as admit of a Latitude of conception that is in not revealing it at all for if the terms admit of a Latitude of conception i. e. two contrary senses which is the truth Both cannot be and if both are equally the sense of the words then the Truth is not revealed but as far to seek as ever Now for my life cannot I imagine what else this Latitude of conception should be unless he means that God has revealed his Truths and those too the most Fundamental Articles of Christian Faith for concerning such our present Controversy is in such dubious and ambiguous Phrases that we cannot understand the true sense of them or at least that very few can and that even they few cannot be certain that they understand them in the right sense that is in that sense which God meant them tho that is improperly said for it seems God meant them in none but intended that every man should believe them in what sense he pleases This he may call a Latitude of Faith but it is such a Latitude that if I should tell any Infidels of it whom I would convert to Christianity they would presently laugh at me and my Faith too But in the second place God is the Author of a Latitude in Faith in giving to men as he sees fit such measures of knowledge and persuasion as leaves them in a higher or lower degree of Faith and even of Holiness This is impious for in the true consequence of it he charges not only all the Heresies but all the Infidelity in the world on God Almighty and justifies both their Heresies and their Infidelity by the different degrees and measures of Faith or by the No-Faith which God gives them but I am not at leisure to dispute this now for it does not concern our present purpose But if our Author would say any thing either in defence of what he pleads for or against what the Dean maintains he must show that Christians are not obliged to profess and believe one and the same Truth that agreeing in Scripture-words tho understanding them in contrary Senses is sufficient to make Orthodox Christians that we must not defend the true Faith against such as oppose it especially if they or any Peaceable men for them pretend that they believe as they can and as by Grace they are able and that the Church must not require an open and undisguised Profession of the True Faith Now all this he says is far from thinking it indifferent what men believe but very far I am sure from being any Proof of what he pleads for for there is nothing that can uphold his Cause but such an Indifferency as will not allow the Church to concern her sâ—lf what men believe nor her Members to defend the True Faith But I must conceive as I can and judge as I can and believe as I can too I must not believe what I cannot believe Very well And I need not believe any more than I can and this is true too if it be not my own fault that I can believe no more but if it be I shall hardly be excusable before God or Man I cannot it may be believe the true Faith of the Holy Trinity or it may be I cannot believe the Truth of the Christian Religion as I fear too many now-a-days will be ready to tell you some Luâ—ts and Prejudices hinder me from discerning the clear evidence of it and so long I cannot believe and therefore I hope I shall be excused and no body will be so quarrelsome as to litigate with me about it nor go about to confute me for I believe as by Grace I am able for though the Gospel be never so true if God has not given me Grace to understand so much how can I believe it For neither I nor any man alive who believes any thing can believe all that Dictating men will impose upon them But can't he believe what Reason and Divine Revelation Diâ—tate And who desires him to do more If the Doctrine of the Trinity be the Imposition only of Dictating men let him prove that and we will no longer desire him or any man to believe it But if it be the plain truth of the Gospel we will desire him to believe it and think the Church has Authority enough to require him to do it though the Church can't make that an Article of Faith which God has not made so For I hope she can require the profession of that which God has made so and that is all we desire But in Controversies the Church may declare her Sense and we are bound so far peaceably to submit and accept it as not to contradict it or teach contrary under Penalty of her Censures A very bountiful Concession for which he deserves her publick Thanks if he will but stay for them till a fit Time and Place And this he would be content I doubt it not to conceive the whole of what our Church requires as to these things which are merely her Determinations Now who can tell what he means by merely her Determinations for I never heard that the Church delivered any Doctrines especially the Creeds as merely her Determinations which would be indeed with a bare face to impose upon the Faith of Christians but she never pretended to make a Faith but to teach that Faith which was once delivered to the Saints But does he really think the Church desires no man to believe the Creeds and particularly the Doctrine of the Trinity but only not to oppose them Doth she indeed hand them to us merely as her own Determinations Can any thinking man say so But if this were all Do our Socinians observe this Why does not he first persuade them to comply thus far before he desires us not to defend the Church's Doctrine But let us hear his profound Reason For in truth it is to no purpose for her to require such Approbation and Consent which whether paid or no she can never come to have knowledge of which sort is Belief and inward Approbation Is it then to no purpose to teach men the Truth because they may put upon us and say they believe it when they do not Is it to no purpose to require