Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
reason_n doctrine_n interpretation_n proof_n 2,771 5 12.1339 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A59241 Reason against raillery, or, A full answer to Dr. Tillotson's preface against J.S. with a further examination of his grounds of religion. Sergeant, John, 1622-1707. 1672 (1672) Wing S2587; ESTC R10318 153,451 304

There are 14 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

discover'd to me that I could not bestow my pains better on any subject than in making known what was the Right Rule of Faith and evidencing to men Capable of Evidence out of the Nature of the Thing in hand that It had indeed the qualities proper to a Rule of Faith that is Virtue or Power to acquaint us that live now without the least danger of Errour what Christ and his Apostles taught at first To this end I shew'd first in Sure-footing that the Letter of Scripture had not this Virtue and by consequence could not be the Rule intended and left us by Christ. Many Arguments I us'd from p. 1. to p. 41. though these two short Discourses are sufficient to evince the point to any who is not before-hand resolv'd he will not be convinc'd First that that can never be a Rule or Way to Faith which many follow to their power yet are misled and this in most Fundamental Points as we experience in the Socinians and others For I see not how it can consist with Charity or even with Humanity to think that none amongst the Socinians or other erring Sects endeavour to find out the true sence of Scripture as far as they are able nor how it can be made out that all without exception either wilfully or negligently pervert it and yet unless it be shewn rational to believe this it can never be rational to believe that the Letter of Scripture as useful and as excellent as it is in other respects is the Rule of Faith for if They be not all wanting to themselves and their Rule 't is unavoidable that their Rule is wanting to them Next They who affirm the Letter is the Rule must either say that the bare Letter as it lies antecedently to and abstracting from all Interpretation whatsoever is the Rule and this cannot be with any sence maintained for so God must be held to have Hands Feet Passions c. Or else that the Letter alone is not sufficient to give as Assurance of Gods sence in Dogmatical Points of high concern as the Trinity Incarnation c. without the Assistance of some Interpretation and to say this is to say as expresly as can be said that the Letter of Scripture alone is not the Rule of Faith since it gives not the Certain Sence of Christ without that Interpretation adjoyned Nay more since 't is the nature of Interpretation to give the Sence of words and the nature of the Rule of Faith to give us the Sence of Christ this Interpretation manifestly is the Rule of Faith and the Revelation to us who live now of what is Christs Doctrine I know it is sometimes said that the Letter may be interpreted by it self a clear place affording light to one more obscure but taking the Letter as Antecedent to all Interpretation as in this case it ought I can see no reason for this Pretence For let us take two such places e. g. It repented God that he had made man and God is not as man that he should repent abstract from all interpretation and let him tell me that can of the two places taken alone which is the clear and which is the obscure one Atheists will be apt to take such pretences to reject the Scripture and impiously accuse it of Contradiction but how that method can assist a sincere man who hopes by the meer Letter to find his Faith and hinder the Obscure place from darkning the Clear place as much as the Clear one enlightens the Obscure one I understand not In fine It exposes a man to the Scandal and Temptation of thinking there is no Truth in Scripture but Absolute assurance of Truth it gives no man Besides the former of the Reasons Lately given returns again For the Socinians compare place to place as well as others other Sects do so too and yet all err and some in most fundamental Points Wherefore it must be either presum'd they all err wilfully or the Way cannot be presumed a Right Way Farther it may be ask'd when one pitches upon a determinate sence of any place beyond what the Letter inforces by what light he guides himself in that determination and then shewn that that Light whatever it is and not the Letter is indeed the Formal Revealer or Rule of Faith Much more might be said on this occasion but my business now is to state my Case not to plead it The Letter Rule secluded I advanc'd to prove that Tradition or that Body call'd the Church which Christ by himself and his Apostles constituted taken as delivering her thoughts by a constant Tenor of living Voice and Practise visible to the whole World is the absolutely-certain way of conveying down the Doctrine taught at first from Age to Age nay Year to Year and so to our time which is in other Terms to say that Pastors and Fathers and the conversant Faithful by discoursing preaching teaching and catechising and living and practising could from the very first and so all along better and more certainly make their thoughts or Christs Doctrine be understood by those whom they instruct than a Book which lies before them and cannot accommodate it self to the arising Difficulties of the Reader I am not here to repeat my Reasons they are contain'd in my Book which I called Sure footing in Christianity And because I observ'd our improving Age had in this last half Century exceedingly ripen'd and advanc'd in manly Reason straining towards Perfect Satisfaction and unwillingly resting on any thing in which appear'd a possibility to be otherwise or to express the same in other words bent their thoughts and hopeful endeavours to perfect Science I endeavoured in that Treatise rigorously to pursue the way of Science both in disproving the Letter-Rule and proving the Living Rule of Faith beginning with some plain Attributes belonging to the natures of Rule and Faith and building my whole discourse upon them with care not to swerve from them in the least And being conscious to my self that I had as I proposed to do closely held to the natures of the Things in hand I had good reason to hold my first five Discourses demonstrative which is all I needed have done as appears p. 57 and 58. the rest that follow'd being added ex abundanti and exprest by me An endeavour to demonstrate as by the Titles of the Sixth and Eighth Discourse is manifest though I do not perceive by the opposition of my Answerers why I should not have better thoughts of them than at first I pretended This is the matter of Fact concerning that Book as far as it related to me and a true account why I writ on that Subject and in that manner What thoughts I had of its usefulness and hopes it might prove serviceable towards composing the differences in Religion of which the World has so long complained though from the long and deep meditation I must necessarily have made upon those Principles I may reasonably be judg'd to
this Tradition in the matter of Tradition or matter of Fact before our time is self-evident to all those who can need the knowledge of such things that is to all Mankind who use Common Reason that is self-evident Practically or by ordinary converse with the world See Sure f. Disc. 1. § 12. it being impossible to conceive that those words all Mankind who use Common Reason should mean Speculaters And it seems very consonant to Reason that if the Vulgar must rely on and use Attestation as 't is manifest they must they should since they are not Schol●ars know by a natural means that 't is to be rely'd on The fair Admonition which he speaks of for these two Faults of mine is found Rule of Faith p. 47. where I am soberly warn'd to take heed how I go about to demonstrate First and Self-evident Principles Which first is no fair return to a Scholar to fall to exhort him with Fatherly Admonitions not to hold his Conclusion I mean that which is suppos'd his Conclusion without speaking at all to his Premises Next 't is far from fair in another regard which I am loth to mention to pick out of those two Propositions now mentioned those two words First Principle and Self-evident so closely woven there with other words to make up that one notion call'd the Predicate in either of them by this means making the Readers apprehend that I made Tradition not first IN WAY OF AUTHORITY onely as I had exprest my self but one of those Principles which are the very first of all or as himself expresses it such as have nothing before them as also that I made Tradition or the Attestation of a visible matter of Fact by so great multitudes as nothing can be imaginable to have byass'd them as I had often exprest my meaning not self-known Practically but Speculatively that is of the self-same nature with the very First Principles of all such as are 'T is impossible the same thing should be and not be A whole is greater than a part and such-like Observe next I beseech you that all his confute is intirely built on his carriage here laid open for he attempts not to shew that Tradition is not that which Principles Grounds or which is all one Authenticates all other Authority or that 't is not self-known practically but all the Cry and Irony is spent upon my ridiculousness in proving First and self-evident Principles and this because they have nothing before them and need no evidencing How NOTHING before them Does not every Scholar who ever read or studied the Subordination of Sciences know very well that what is a First Principle to the Inferiour Science is a Conclusion to the Superiour Does not all Mankind know that Maxims of Reason are before Authority and that No Authority deserves Assent farther than Right Reason gives it to deserve Does not the meanest Speculater know that most of the employment of learned men is to make out speculatively by looking into Proper Causes what is naturally or practically known to the Vulgar An old Wife knows by practice that such an herb cures such a malady are Naturalists therefore forbid to make out according to the nature of Causes how or by what virtue it performs that effect The vulgar have a rude yet true knowledge of what is meant by Hot and Cold Moist and Dry Is it needless therefore for Philosophers to define them artificially and so gain a more express notion of their natures Is it needless for Picture-drawers to delineate with curiosity and exactness because some Country-fellow can draw a rude yet right resemblance of a face upon a wall with a piece of charcoal Or for learned men to polish their knowledge and make it accurate and distinct because the vulgar know the same thing bluntly confusedly and in gross Lastly Is Are needless because there is Nature Yet this is the very case The vulgar know practically that there was such a one as K. James yet 't is not needless for one who is treating of the nature of Authority to make out speculatively that their knowledge is rightly grounded on the nature of Mankind and how this assurance is wrought in them out of the practically-instill'd knowledge of that nature § 3. But what I most complain of because which I am loth to say it argues a perfect wilfulness of Insincerity is this that after I had in my Letter of Thanks p. 10. offered my Proof that First Principles were Identical Propositions and could be no other Also after that p. 24 25. I had shown that things practically self-evident may be demonstrated and produc'd divers instances as that the vulgar know the Diameter of the Square is a nearer way than to go by the two sides that things seen afar off are not so little as they seem which yet Mathematicians demonstrate and none apprehends them to do a needless action Dr. T. not so much as attempts to answer either my Instances or my Reasons but perfectly conceals them from his Reader and bears himself all along triumphantly as if I had produc'd none at all barely says over again his own raw sayings a little more merrily and there 's an end I beseech you Gentlemen would this be held a competent Answer in the University-Schools First to admonish the Defendant to relinquish his Conclusion instead of beating him from it by Reason then to combat the Conclusion instead of invalidating the Premises on which 't is built next to pick a word or two out of those Conclusions which taken alone alter their whole sence and then confute onely that new sence his designed alteration had given them and lastly when he was told of it his mistakes rectified Reasons and Instances brought to make good the true point to neglect them all say over again barely what he had said before break a jest or two upon a ridiculous point meerly invented by himself and then cry victory Certainly though such performances may serve a Prevaricator or a Terrae Filius yet some wiser kinde of return ought in reason to be expected from a Scholar and a sober man As for that point which he most confutes with laughter viz. That First Principles are Identical Propositions though something has been produc'd in my Letter of Thanks in the place cited and not yet answered and so no farther proof is due or needful yet because the clearing this point fundamentally conduces to settle the way to Science therefore for their sakes who are truly learned and aim at solid improvement of their minds by exact knowledge more than at pleasing their ears by pretty expressions I shall treat the point more accurately The stating the nature of First Principles must needs be Speculative therefore those Readers who pretend not to Science may please to pass over these two Discourses and go on to what follows though I shall endeavour as well as the matter will bear to deliver it so that a good natural Wit may in
a Conclusion of a Syllogism that is they can be concluded or admit of Proof Wherefore since 't is a contradiction to say that the Prime Verities can admit Proof their Terms must be farthest from having any Middle Term coming between them that is imaginable that is must be of the self-same notion and so they must be Identical Propositions The former of these Discourses was put down by me Letter of Thanks p. 10 11 12. which one would think it became a Logician to speak to But my Adversary is of another metal not the very same but near akin to aes sonans aut cymbalum tinniens He never meddles willingly with Premisses or Proofs but denies the Conclusion stoutly never acknowledging what was said in its behalf and tinkles a little Rhetorick against it which done who would think it immediately as with some Charm the Terms unconnect of themselves and miraculously fly asunder and though before it look'd like good honest Reason yet by his giving it a Disguise instead of a Confute 't is turn'd perfect Nonsence But to return to our Argument § 5. Logick tells us moreover that whatever accidental considerations may enhance Opposition 't is agreed by all that a Contradiction is formally and intrinsecally the greatest or First of Falshoods also that a Contradiction is An affirming and denying the same of the same according to all the same respects wherefore the very First Principles being the First of Truths ought to be diametrically opposite to Those that is an Affirming or denying the same of the same according to all the same respects which is impossible to be exprest but by an Identical Proposition § 6. Add that since Contradiction is Faulty and all Fault is a Privation of the opposite Good which it violates it follows that a Contradiction were innocent did it not violate some opposite Truth Since then the Light of Nature teaches every Reflecter that 't is impossible to assign any Truth Opposite to a Contradiction but an Identical Proposition it follows that First Truths or First Principles must be Identical Propositions § 7. To explain this better we shall find by reflexion that two Contradictory Propositions are comprisable into One equivalent to both whose Subject and Predicate contradict one another as Peter here and now runs Peter here and now runs not are necessarily equivalent to this What here and now runs here and now runs not So likewise Scripture's Letter is a Rule Scripture's Letter is not a Rule is equivalent to this Something which is a Rule is not a Rule and so of the rest By which 't is easie to discern how clear a Truth it is that Identical Propositions are the proper opposites to Contradictions or the Truths they directly and immediately violate and consequently First Principles Since 't is impossible mans wit rack'd to its utmost can invent any Opposite to What runs runs not but What runs runs or to What is a Rule is not a Rule but What is a Rule is a Rule Lastly The nature of Contradiction in common puts a thing to be and not be at once and consequently puts this Proposition What is not is to which the onely opposite Truth is What is is which is therefore the First Standard of all Truth and all other First Principles as A Rule is a Rule A Man a Man c. are but particulars subsuming under it and partaking in the most perfect manner of its clearest Light § 8. Farther 't is observable that the more remote the Terms of a Proposition are from Formal Identity the less evident they are and the more proof they require as also that they still grow nearer and nearer to evidence according to the degree of their approach toward the said Identity Wherefore since all Approach of distant things if pursu'd ends in a conjoyning and centering in the same 't is manifest that all distance in notion amongst Terms ends in their being the same in notion that is in an Identical Proposition as also that such Propositions are for the reason given the most evident that may be and so in both regards the very First Principles § 9. Farther All Propositions which are capable of proof or all Conclusions must have their Terms materially Identical that is what corresponds to both their notions must be found in the same Thing else they could not be True nor capable to be proved wherefore the Terms in First Principles must be formally such nay the most formally that is possible but nothing is or can be more formally Identical than to have the Predicate and Subject every way the same such therefore the very First Principles ought necessarily to be § 10. There is also in Logick a way of arguing by bringing one to an Absurdity or Contradiction And this is performed two manner of ways One by forcing the Defendant to contradict himself The other by obliging him to contradict the nature of the Subject in question The former of these is available as an Argument ad hominem but the latter attempt if brought to effect is a perfect Conquest And why but because it puts the Defendant to violate the nature of the Thing under debate that is to thwart this First Principle The same is the same with it self for example to make Quantity not to be Quantity a Rule not to be a Rule Faith not to be Faith as shall be shewn hereafter more clearly when we come to see the use of the First Principles in particular Instances § 11. Moreover if it be well examin'd 't will be found that all Efficiency and Passiveness that is all kind of Operation is nothing but the existence of such a Nature exerting or as it were imprinting it self upon the Subject in which it works its Effect For example when a Brass Seal makes an Impression upon soft Wax no account can be given of this Effect abstracting from Motion which is caus'd by a Nature superiour to Body but onely this that the Agent is of such a degree of Density or Hardness as if mov'd or apply'd to that matter is apt to alter the figure of its parts according to its own mould and the Patient of such a yielding nature in comparison of the other as to receive its Impression and yet not to that degree Rare as to lose it again by the Action of the common Causes in Nature till some more particular Agent comes to efface it 'T is manifest then that all Causality essentially depends on and is finally resolv'd into this Truth that Things are such as they are which is their being in part what they are All knowledge then of Cause and Effect and consequently all Demonstration is ultimately refunded that is primarily built on those Propositions which express Things being what they are that is into Identical Ones § 12. Lastly He who is Essential Wisdom and Truth it self has propos'd to us an Identical Proposition in those words I am what I am which is the First Increated Truth as
to viz. to Assent to the Existence of a Deity and other Points of Faith as Certain Truths nay lay down their l●ves upon occasion to Attest they are such And what is it to Assent 'T is to say interiourly or judge verily that the thing is so And can a Motive or Reason possible to be False ever induce in true Reason such an Obligation or work rationally such an Effect How should it be Since in that case a man must on the one side judge the thing Impossible to be False because he is to assent to it as a Truth and yet must at the same t●me necessarily judge it Possible to be False because he sees the Motives he has offer'd him raise it no higher that is he must hold both sides of the Contradiction which is absolutely impossible Now true Evidence that the thing is so takes away all possibility of Falsehood and so obliges to Assent and if Dr. T. produces such proofs as make the point truly Evident an Atheist is unreasonable and obstinate if he do not Assent to it But if by those words Atheism is unreasonable because it requires more Evidence than the things are capable of he means that the Things afford no true Evidence at all and judges Atheists unreasonable for not assenting without true Evidence because the Things afford none he in effect tells them they must forfeit their Manhood ere they can be Christians than which nothing can more reflect on the Profession of Christianity or be more unworthy a Christian Divine to propose Let us ●ee how far Dr. T. is blameable in this Particular He discourses thus and since he so earnestly presses it we will take his words in order § 8. Aristotle says he hath long since observed how unreasonable 't is to expect the same kind of Proof for every thing which we have for same things Aristotle said very well For speaking of Proofs in common and at large those we have for Success in our Exteriour Actions on the Hopes of which we proceed to Act are for the most Part but Probable but this reaches not our present business about a Deity in order to which this Preamble is fram'd where Exteriour Acting will not serve the turn but an Interiour Act of Assenting to the Existence of such a Soveraign Being is necessarily requir'd The Question then is Whether Aristotle did or could with any reason say that a Rational Creature that is a Creature whose nature 't is to deduce Conclusions by Discourse from Premisses or build the certain Truth of Those upon the certain Truth of These could be oblig'd in true Reason or acting according to Right Nature to assent judge or conclude a Thing True without such Motives or Proofs which did conclude it True or that what concluded a Thing True did not also conclude it impossible to be otherwise or to be False 'T is granted then that in our Exteriour Operations exercised upon Particulars where Contingency rules we must rest contented with Probabilities of the Event and proceed to act upon them the necessity of acting obliging us for should all the world surcease from Action till they were assur'd of the good success of it all Commerce and Negotiation must be left off nay all the means of Living must be laid aside but then we are not bound to assent or judge absolutely that the thing will succeed well because we have no Certain Grounds or Conclusive Reasons for it but onely that 't is best to act though upon Uncertain Grounds of the Success for which assent also we have absolute Evidence from the Necessity of act●ng now spoken of Whereas on the other side where the whole business of our Christian Life which as such is spiritual is to worship God in Spirit and Truth or approach to him by ascending from Virtue to Virtue that is from Faith to Hope from Hope to Charity the Top of all Perfection the whole interiour Fabrick is built on a Firm Assent to the Truth of the Points which ground our Profession Wherefore if the Foundation for this Assent be not well laid all the Superstructures of Religion are ruinous Now Nature having fram'd things so and the Maxims of our Understanding giving it that those who guide themselves by perfect Reason that is the strongest and wisest Souls are unapt to assent but upon Evidence whereas the weaker sort as experience teaches us are apt to assent upon any silly Probability hence unless such men see Proofs absolutely concluding those points True they are unapt to be drawn to yield to them and embrace them as Certain Truths especially there being no necessity at all to assent as there was to act outwardly in regard Nature has furnish'd us with a Faculty of Suspending which nothing can subdue rationally in such men at least but True Evidence had from the Object working this clear sight in them either by it self or else by Effects or Causes necessarily connected with It. Other Evidences I know none It may be Dr. T. does Let us see § 8. Mathematical things says he being of an abstracted nature are onely capable of clear Demonstration But Conclusions in Natural Philosophy are to be proved by a sufficient Induction of Experiments Things of a Moral Nature by Moral Arguments and matters of Fact by Credible Testimony And though none of these be strict Demonstration yet have we an Vndoubted Assurance of them when they are proved by the best Arguments that the nature and quality of the thing will bear This Discourse deserves deep Consideration And first it would be ask● why Metaphysicks are omitted here which of all others ought to have been mentioned and that in the first place since its proper Subject is those Notions which concern Being and to give Being or Create is the Proper Effect of Him who is Essential Being whence it seems the Properest Science that is to demonstrate a Deity in case Metaphysical things be demonstrable and that they are such Dr. T. himself cannot deny for if as he says here things are therefore demonstrable because they are of an abstracted nature the Object of Metaphysicks which is Being is far more abstracted from matter and so from Motion and its necessary Concomitant Vncertainty or Contingency than is Quantity the subject of Mathematicks for this primary Affection of Body is the Ground and Proper Cause of of all Variation and Unsteadiness since all natural Motion or Mutation arises from Divisibility Yet because all Science is taken from the Things as standing under our notion or Conception and not according as they exist in themselves where thousands of Considerabilities are confusedly jumbled into one Common Stock of Existence or one Thing also because we can abstract by our Consideration the notion or nature of Quantity nay consider the same Quantity meerly as affecting Body as it were steadily or extending it without considering the same Quantity as the Proper Cause or Source of Motion hence the Mathematicks have Title to be truly and
Gods holy disposition than they would have had had they kept awake that degree of Suspense in their minds which Right Reason the nature God had given them requir'd they should § 8. 'T is time now to apply this discourse to Dr. T's Performances It appears hence that one may have no reason to doubt of a thing and yet withall have no reason in the world to assent firmly to it as a most Certain Truth which onely is to his purpose And this may be done two ways either by perfectly suspending and inclining to neither side as we experience our Understanding now bears it self in order to the Stars being Even or Odd Or by strongly hoping or inclining to Assent the Thing is True as when we expect a Friend such a time at London who never us'd to break his word which expectation though one may have very great ground to hope will not deceive us yet it were a mad thing to assent to it as firmly as I do to my Faith or that there is a GOD. But what I most admire is that Dr. T. can think an Actual not doubting or seeing no just cause to doubt is a competent assurance of the Grounds for Christian Faith as he all over inculcates For not to repeat over again what hath been lately prov'd that a bare not doubting is not sufficient to make a man a Christian● 't is evident first that Turks Jews and Heathens the Generality at least are fully perswaded what they hold is ●rue and see no just cause to doubt it whence by this kind of arguing if it be sufficient for Christian Faith to have such Grounds as exclude Doubt in its Adherents Turcism Judaism and perhaps Paganism too may claim to be true Religions by the same Title and if the Certainty or Security of Christian Religion be no more but a freedom from doubt all those wicked Sects have good reason to be held Certain too and so both sides of the Contradiction may become Certain by which stratagem Dr. T. is as compleatly revenged of his Enemies Identical Propositions as his own heart could wish and rewards his dear Friends and faithful Abetters direct Contradictions very honourably advancing them to be First Principles and even as Certain as Faith it self Secondly Passion and Vice can breed in a man a full persuasion that an Errour is True and such an apprehension as shall take away all Actual Doubt nay the more Passion a man is in and the more obstinate he is in that passion the less still he doubts so that by Dr. T's Logick no man can tell whether Christianity be indeed Rationally-wise or passionately-foolish in ca●e the Test of its Certainty or the Adequate Effect of its Grounds be not a steady Assent that 't is True that is if the Motives to embrace it be not Conclusive of the Truth of its Doctrine but one●y Exclusive of Doubt Thirdly Ignorance and dull Rudene●s is easily appay'd with any silly Reason and so a most excellent way to be void of Actual Doubt nay of all men in the world those who are perfectly ignorant see the least cause of doubting being least able to raise any wherefore if being free from seeing any just cause of doubt be the utmost Effect of Christian Grounds let all Christians be but grosly ignorant and they shall immediately without more ado become as Free from Actual Doubt as may be and by that means be the best Christians in the world and consequently Ignorance be fundamentally establish'd by Dr. T. the Mother of all True Devotion Fourthly Though out of a stupid carelesness men use to take many things for granted upon slight Grounds while 't is cheap to admit them and no danger accrues upon the owning them yet experience teaches us that when any great Inconvenience presses as the loss of Friends Livelihood or Life Reason our true Nature teaches men to study their careless thoughts over again by which means they begin now to Doubt of that which before they took for granted if they have not Certain Motives to establish them in the Truth of what they profess and to ascertain to them some equivalent Good at least to what they are in danger to forego In which case I fear it will yield small strength to a man put in such a strong Temptation to find upon review of his Grounds that they were onely able to make him let them pass for good ones while the Concern was remoter and less but that notwithstanding all these he sees they may perhaps be False and himself a great Fool for holding them True without Reasons convincing them to be so and consequently foolish perhaps wicked to boot for suffering so deeply to attest them If Dr. T. reply That such men dying for what they conceiv'd Truth meant well and consequently acted virtuously I must ask him how he knows that or can make them know it unless he propose Motives to conclude those Tenets True For as Errour is the Parent and Origin of all Vice so is Truth of all Virtue nor is Virtue any thing but a Disposition of the Will to follow Reason or Truth Whence if we cannot be ab●olutely Certain any Tenet we follow is Truth we cannot be absolutely-Certain any Action is Virtuous and 't is not enough to make a man Virtuous to mean well in common or intend to do his Duty and be onely free from doubt all the while unless they have some substantial Truth to proceed upon which renders their meaning and particular Action Good as to the main by directing it to that which is mans true Happiness For 't is questionless that the Generality of the Heathens who worship'd Juno Venus Vulcan and the rest of that Rabble meant well in Common were free from actual doubt nay had Dr. T's Moral Certainty too that is had a firm and undoubted Assent upon such Grounds as would fully satisfie a Prudent man for many of them were men of great Natural Prudence and were actually satisfy'd with the Motives they had for Polytheism Lastly they had Dr. T's Firm Principle too on their side for they had as far as they could discern the Judgment of the whole World round about them that is as much as the nature of the thing could give them though it were for had there been indeed such Gods and Goddesses yet being in Heaven they could have no more light concerning them than by Authority of others relating also as doubtlesly they did many wonderful things conceived to be done by their means and on the other side they had all the Authority extant at that time for them and what doubts soever a few Speculative and Learned men rais'd concerning them yet the Generality who were unacquainted with their thoughts had no occasion to raise any at all These advantages I say the Heathens had parallel within a very little if not altogether to Dr. T's Grounds and Principles that is able to produce an equal Effect viz. Not-doubting Yet because
all hapt to be a Lye that they proceeded on all their Religion for all this was wicked and the the most zealous Devotion to Dame Juno and the rest nay dying for their sakes was notwithstanding their good meaning in common Dr. T's Moral Certainty and Firm Principle a diabolical and mischievous Action not a jot better as to the effect of gaining Heaven than the making their Children pass through the Fire to Moloch perverting and destroying the Soul that perform'd it nay dy'd for it by addicting it to what was not its true last End or Eternal Good and all this because there wanted Truth at the bottom to render those Actions and Sufferings Virtuous Wherefore unless Dr. T. produces some immoveable Grounds to establish Christianity to be most certainly True especially the Existence of a Deity which enfe●bled all the rest falls down to the Ground he can never convince that either Acting or Suffering for it is a Virtue any more than it was in Heathenism when the same was done for their False Gods and so he can never with reason persuade his Auditory to it but having once prov'd that it matters less whether all the Assenters penetrate the full force of the motive or no for if once it be put to be True all Actions and Sufferings proceeding from those Truths shall connaturally addict those Souls to their True Last End and dispose them for it though their Understandings be never so imperfect and their good or well-meaning will certainly bring them to Heaven but 't is because their Will and its Affections were Good which they could not be as is prov'd were they not built upon some Truth § 9. Again Dr. T. discourses all along as if all were well when one is free from all doubt but I would desire his Friends seriously to ask him one question which is whether though his Grounds exclude all doubt from his mind at present yet he sees any certain Reason why he may not perhaps come to doubt of all his Faith and even of a Godhead too to morrow If he says He sees not but he may he must say withal that he sees it not and consequently holds it not to be True for if he once saw it to be Truth he could not hold it possible ever to be doubted of with reason If he affirms that he sees he can never come with reason to doubt of it then he sees his Grounds for holding it cannot possibly be shown False else it might both be doubted and what is more deny'd and if he hold his Grounds cannot possibly be made out to be False then he must say they are Impossible to be False and if they be Humane Authority Infallible which yet he stifly denies But the plain Truth is he holds not by virtue of any Grounds he lays his Faith to be True but onely a plausible Likelihood else Common Sence would force him to acknowledge and stand to it that the Grounds on which he builds his Assent are Impossible to be False and not to palliate his Uncertainty of it with such raw Principles and petty Crafts to avoid an honest down-right procedure which is to say plainly My Grounds cannot fail of Concluding the Thing absolutely True I will justifie them to be such and here they are But he is so far from this that the best word he affords them who do this right to Christianity is to call them vapouring and swaggering men with all the disgraceful Ironies he can put upon them § 10. By this time my last Charge that this Firm Principle of his betrays all Religion into the Possibility I might have said Likelihood of being a Lye instead of establishing it is already made good and needs onely a short Rehearsal For 1. He Asserts that we cannot be Certain of a Deity unless we entertain his Firm Principle which is so full stuft with Nonsence and Folly that unles● it be in Bedlam I know no place in England where 't is like to find Entertainment That the Evidence or Visibleness of an Object begets Certainty in us is that which the Light of Nature ever taught me and all Mankind hitherto but that the Obscurity of an Object or its affording us no True Evidence grounding our Absolute Certainty of it nay that even its Incapableness to afford us any in our Circumstances and consequently our Despair of seeing any such Evidence for it should contribute to make us Certain of it nay more that this must be entertain'd as a Firm Principle and which is yet more be obtruded upon all Mankind under such an unmerciful Penalty that unless they entertain this as honourably as a Firm Principle not any man shall be Certain of any thing no not so much as that there 's a God is such a super-transcendent Absurdity as surpasses all Belief or even Imagination but a Rhetorician may say any thing when talking pretty Plausibilities is onely in vogue and a melodious Gingle to please the Ear is more modish than solid Reasons to satisfie the Understanding Next he vouches not any Reason he brings to be absolutely Conclusive and consequently owns not any Point of Faith no not the Existence of a Deity to be absolutely Certain which not to assert but as has been shown from his Firm Principle equivalently to deny even then when he is maintaining it is an Intolerable Prejudice to that Weighty and Excellent Cause he hath undertaken and so is engag'd to defend 3. He waves the Conclusiveness of his Reasons that the Thing is True and contents himself that it keeps us free from actual doubt which reaches not Assent for to doubt a thing is to incline to think it False and so not to doubt is barely not to incline to think it False which is far short of holding it True and consequently from making a man a Christian Besides our not doubting may be in many regards Faulty and spring from Surprize Passion and Ignorance as well as from Ignorance as hath been prov'd but a good Reason cannot be faulty Wherefore to relinquish the patronage of the Goodness and Validity that is absolute Conclusiveness of Christian Proofs of which there are good store for this point defending onely their Plausibility and instead of that victorious way of convincing the Understanding into Assent requiring onely a feeble not doubting is in plain terms to betray his Cause and tacitly or rather indeed too openly to accuse Christianity of an Infirmity in its Grounds as being incapable to effect what they ought a Firm Assent to the Points of Christian Doctrine as to absolutely certain Truths 4. By making our Certainty of it or the adequate effect of its Motives consist meerly in our not doubting of it he makes its Effect and consequently the Efficacy of those Motives themselves no better than those which Heathens Turks and Hereticks have for these also exclude Actual Doubt from the Minds of the Generality of these respective Sects If he says Christians have no just reason
to doubt I ask him how he will prove that it must needs exclude all reason of Actual Doubt from the Minds even of the wisest Christians unless he can prove those Grounds cannot possibly be doubted of with reason for otherwise if those men may possibly doubt with reason 't is ten to one they will do so actually at one time or other He ought then to say those Motives exclude all possible doubt or are undoubtable of their own nature and so take it out of the Subjects strength or weakness and put it upon the Objects But this he is loth to say dreading the Consequence which is this that he who affirms a Thing can never be possibly doubted of in true reason must affirm withal that he has Motives concluding it absolutely True that is absolutely Impossible to be False and if it depends on Authority Infallible Testimony for it which his superficial Reason fully resolved against First Principles or Identical Propositions can never reach It remains then that he must hold to Actual Not-doubting on the Subjects side that is he must say the Motives are onely such as preserv● prudent persons from doubt and then he must either make out that Christians have more Natural Prudence than those in those other Sects Natural I say for all Motives Antecedent to Faith must be Objects of our Natural Parts or Endowments or else confess that he knows no difference between the Reasons for those other Sects and those for Christianity according to the Grounds deliver'd by him here Both exclude Actual Doubt in persons as far as appears to us equal in prudence as to other things neither of them exclude possible Rational Doubt each one had as much Evidence of their Deities they ador'd as they could have in their circumstances supposing those Deities were and no True or absolutely Conclusive Evidence appear'd on either side both had as good Proofs as the thing afforded supposing it were and such as excluded Doubting therefore according to Dr. T's Doctrine both had Certainty and all is parallel and so farewel Christianity Religion and First Principles too that is farewel Common Sence and all possibility of knowing any thing All Truth and Goodness must needs go to wrack when Principles naturally self-evident and establish'd by GOD himself the Founder of Nature are relinquish'd and others made up of meer Fancy and Air are taken up in their stead § 10. I know Dr. T. will sweat and fume and bestir all his knacks of Rhetorick to avoid these Consequences of his Doctrine I expect he will pelt me with Ironies and bitter Jeers cavil at unelegant words tell me what some Divines of ours say and perhaps mistake them all the while stoutly deny all my Conclusions instead of answering my discourse nay fall into another peevish fit of the Spleen and say I have no forehead for driving on his Principles to such Conclusions as he who was too busie at Words to mind or amend his Reasons never dream't of Therefore to defend my forehead it were not amiss to make use of some Phylacteries containing such expressions taken out of his First Sermon as best discover to us his thoughts as to the Certainty and Uncertainty of his Positive Proofs and the Point it self as prov'd by them I mean the Existence of a Deity or a Creation Such as are Serm. p. 19. A Being suppos'd of Infinite Goodness and Wisdom and Power is a very LIKELY Cause of these things What more LIKELY to make this Vast World c. What more LIKELY to communicate Being What more LIKELY to contrive this admirable Frame of the World This seems NO UNREASONABLE Account P. 21. The Controversie between Vs and this sort of Atheists comes to this Which is the MORE CREDIBLE OPINION That the World was never made c. or that there was from all Eternity such a Being as we conceive GOD to be Now COMPARING the PROBABILITIES of things that we may know ON WHICH SIDE THE ADVANTAGE LIES c. P. 22. The Question whether the World was created or not can onely be decided by TESTIMONY and PROBABILITIES of Reason Testimony is the PRINCIPAL Argument in a thing of this nature and if FAIR PROBABILITIES of Reason concur with it c. P. 29. The PROBABILITIES of REASON do all likewise FAVOUR the Beginning of the World P. 32. Another PROBABILITY is c. P. 34. These are the CHIEF PROBABILITIES on Our Side which being taken together and in their united sence have A GREAT DEAL of CONVICTION in them § 11. Upon these Words and Expressions of his I make these Reflexions 1. That as appears by his own stating the Point p. 21. he makes it amount to the same Question as indeed it does Whether there were a Creation or a First Being creating the World whom we call GOD so that all his Proofs are indifferently to be taken as aim'd to evince one as well as the other 2. That this being so he stands not heartily to any one Argument he brings as able to conclude the Truth of a Deity 's or Creator's Existence 3. That his words which are expressive of the Evidence of his G●ounds and the Certainty of the Point viz. that there is a GOD manifest too plainly that he judges according to his Speculative Thoughts at least he has neither one nor the other For if it be but Likely though it be exceedingly such yet as common Experience teaches us it may notwithstanding be False If the account he gives of a Deity creating the World be onely no unreasonable one this signifies onely that it has some Reason or other for it and every man knows that seldom or never did two Wits discourse contrary Positions or Lawyers plead for contrary Causes or Preachers preach for contrary Opinions but there was some Reasons produc'd by them for either side and so for any thing he has said the Atheist may come to give no unreasonable account too that there is no Deity though it be something less reasonable than that for a Deity And if the Controversie between Atheists and us be onely this Whether is the MORE CREDIBLE OPINION then the other Opinion viz. that there was no Creation or is no GOD is yielded to be Credible too though not SO Credible as that there is Also if we ought to COMPARE the PROBABILITIES of things that we may know on which side the ADVANTAGE LIES 't is intimated to us and granted that 't is Probable there is no GOD though it be more Probable there is and while 't is but Probable though it be very much more yet it may very easily be False as every days experience teaches us in a thousand Instances wherein our selves were mistaken through the whole course of our lives which commonly happen'd when the far more probable side prov'd False else we had not inclin'd to think it true and by that means been mistaken Again if the PROBABILITIES of Reason do but FAVOUR our side 't is a sign that
the small strength they have when they do their utmost is not earnestly and heartily engag'd neither in the Patronage of our Cause or in proving it probable there 's a GOD but onely incline favourably towards us rather than the other Besides those who are of moderate tempers use to be favourable to every Body and there is not in the whole World such sweet soft-natur'd melting pliable tender-hearted compassionate and indulgent things as these same Probabilities They are ever at hand to lend their weak help to any body that wants a good Argument and will fit any Cause in the World good or bad Yet for all their kind and gentle behaviour in obliging none to assent to them or say as they do as your rude Demonstrations use I have notwithstanding a kind of prejudice against them which is that they are False hearted and use to play Jack-a-both-sides most egregiously for scarce was there ever any Tenet in the world so absurd but when not one good Reason durst appear for it this tatling Gossip Dame Probability would for all that undertake it and let her have but her neat Chamber-maid Rhetorick to trick her up with Laces Spangles Curles Patches and other such pretty Baubles she will dare to incounter with any Truth in the World or maintain the most absurd Paradox imaginable as Dr. T. and his Friend well know else they would be out of heart ever to write more And this is the Reason I conceive why p. 22. he calls them FAIR saying If FAIR Probabilities of Reason concur with Testimony and no less than thrice in the same page he makes mention of FAIR Proofs He says not GOOD Proofs or CONCLVSIVE that the Thing is TRVE or that there 's a GOD no take heed of that this would quite take the business out of the hand of Probability which a Rhetorical Divine ought not to do for nothing suits with Rhetorick's humour so well as Probabi●ity does and Demonstration cares not one straw for her But he gives them their just due and calls them onely Fair Proofs and Fair Probabilities that is Pretty Plausible and Taking and if they were not so of themselves what is there which a little daubing with Rhetorical Varnish will not make FAIR But the Upshot o● Sum Total of his Proofs is the best sport if it were not most pernicious 't is this That these Fair Probabilities taken together and in their united force have a great deal of Conviction in them Which amounts to this plain Confession though couch'd in wary Terms that there is not one good Proof amongst them all yet many bad ones put together will make a good one I know indeed that a concurrence of many Likelihoods renders a thing more Probable and encourages us to Outward Action but to think that many Probabilities will reach that Indivisible Point in which Truth and consequently our Assent to any thing as a Truth is found is quite to mistake the nature of Truth and Assent too which consist in Is or Is not and since to convince rationally is to conclude the thing is I desire Dr. T's Logick to inform the World how since a Probable Proof is that which onely concludes the thing Probable and consequently many probable ones are terminated in rendring it MORE Probable how I say many Proofs onely Probable can conclude the thing to be MORE THAN PROBABLE that is to be CERTAINLY or convince the Understanding that 't is unless they happen to engage some Nature or other and consequent●y some Identical Proposition which Dr. T. neither pretends nor goes about to show but on the other side declares himself an utter Enemy to such Principles and consequently to such a way of Discourse § 12. In a word Dr. T's Positive Proofs of a Godhead are reducible to these two Heads Humane Testimony and Probabilities of Reason as appears by his own words Serm. p. 22 23. and Testimony which p. 22. he tells us is the Principal Argument in a thing of this nature he divides into Vniversal Tradition and Written History Now Written History is not therefore True because 't is writ but depends upon Living Authority or Tradition to authenticate it and how ridiculous he would make the Certainty of Tradition even that which is confessedly grounded on the Sensations of great multitudes which is vastly above this here spoken of is seen in h●s Rule of Faith and here again he tells us Pref. p. 16. All Humane Testimony is Fallible and so all built on it is possible to be False for this plain reason because all men are Fallible Wherefore according to his Grounds 't is concluded there may possibly be No GOD for any thing Humane Testimony says to the Point And 't is as evident from the very word that Probabilities of Reason though never such Fair ones conclude as little Lastly he tells us Serm. p 22. that Fair Probabilities of Reason concurring with Testimony this Argument has all the strength it can have and thus Dr. T. instead of proving there is a GOD has endeavour'd to make out very learnedly that it may be there 's no such Thing and that neither Reason nor Authority can evince the Truth of the Point § 13. I omit his abusing the word Testimony which is built on Sensations in alledging it to prove a Creation which neither was nor could be subject to the Senses of the first Mankind nor consequently could the persuasion of future Deliverers and Writers have for its Source Attestation or Testimony I omit also his neg●ecting to make use of Testimony to prove Miracles GOD's proper Effect which are subject to Sense and which both Christians Jews and Heathens of all Nations and Times both unanimously have and the first Seers could properly attest I suppose his Confidence in his Rhetorick made him chuse the worser Arguments to show how prettily he could make them look or perhaps the Genius of Things lie so that the slightest Arguments most need and so best suit with Rhetorical Discoursers § 14. By this time I suppose Gentlemen there will appear just reason for that moderate and civil hint I gave Dr. T. in my Introduction to Faith Vindicated of the weakness of his Grounds in these words In which Sermon under the Title of the Wisdom of being Religious and a great many seeming shows and I heartily think very real Intentions of impugning Atheism by an ill-principled and in that circumstance imprudent and unnecessary Confession in equivalent Terms of the possible Falsehood of Faith nay even as to the Chiefest and most Fundamental Point the Tenet of a Deity Religio● receives a deep wound and Atheism an especial advantage as may perhaps be more particularly shown hereafter After which I give his Sermon all its due Commendations and then subjoyn Onely I could wish he had right Principles to ground his discourse without which he can never make a Controvertist but must needs undermine the solid Foundation of Christianity if he undertake to meddle with
most unmercifully even to utter desolation § 3. In return to which kind of carriage though it deserves only contempt let us hear first how Dr. T. answers himself who Serm pag. 120.121 very zealously reprehends and preaches against this absurd Fault in himself in these words Let none sayes he think the worse of Religion or those Reasons which oblige us to profess 't is absolutely-True because some are so bold to despise and deride For 't is no disparagement to any person or thing to be laught at but to deserve to be so The most grave and serious matters in the whole world are liable to be abus'd Nothing is so excellent but a man may fasten upon it something or other belonging to it whereby to traduce it A sharp wit may find something in the wisest man whereby to expose him to the contempt of Injudicious people The gravest Book that ever was written may be made ridiculous by applying the sayings of it to a foolish purpose For a j●st may be obtruded upon any thing And therefore no man ought to have the less Reverence for the Principles of Religion or those Reasons which oblige us to hold and profess Faith absolutely-True because idle and prophane WITS nonplust Controvertists can BREAK IESTS upon them Nothing is so easie Dr. T. knows that by long and very useful Experience as to take PARTICVLAR PHRASES and EXPRESSIONS out of the best Book in the world and to abuse them by forcing an odd and ridiculous Sense upon them But no wise man will think a good Book FOOLISH for this Reason but the MAN that abuses it Nor will he esteem that to which every thing is liable to be a IVST Exception against any thing At this rate ase must despise ALL things But surely the better and shorter way is to condemn THOSE who would bring any thing that is worthy into Contempt Also in his foregoing Sermon pag. 86 87. he gives good Doctrine to the same purpose but never intended to follow it himself These things whether Faith be absolutely true or no are of Infinit consequence to us and therefore 't is not a matter to be slightly and superficially thought upon much less AS THE WAY OF ATHEISTICAL MEN IS to be PLAID and IESTED withal If any one shall turn Religion or a Discourse aiming to shew it absolutely Certain into Raillery and think to CONFVTE it by two or three BOLD IESTS this man doth not render IT but HIMSELF Ridiculous Again Though the Principles of Religion or the Proofs of Faith's absolute Certainty were never so clear and evident yet they may be made RIDICVLOVS by VAIN and FROTHY MEN as the gravest and wisest personage in the world may be abus'd by being put into a Fools Coat and the most Noble and excellent Poem may be debas'd and made vile by being turn'd into BVRLES QVE Thus Dr T. by Preaching what he never intended to Practice has most amply laid open his own Folly and hits himself still while he aims at the Atheist and no wonder for their Causes as far as I impugn him here are not very wide of one another since nothing approaches neerer to the denying all Religion than to hold it all Vncertain At least I would gladly know of him in what his way of Discourse here against my Reasons for the Absolute Certainty of Faith differs from that of Atheists against a Deity and all Religion The Points to be considered by both of them are of a solid and concerning Nature and both handle them drollishly and make Raillery supply the place of Reason Nor will it avail him to reply that my Proofs were not solid and so oughr to be confuted with mockery For he ought first shew by reason that they thus highly misdeserve and then employ his Talent of Irony upon them afterwards and not make meer Irony supply the place of Reason Besides himself acknowledges pag 87. that If the Principles of Religion were doubtful and Vncertain yet this concerns us so neerly that we ought to be serious in the Examination of them And certainly no judicious or good man will doubt but that it highly and neerly concerns all good Christians to know whether their Faith the Substance of all their Hope particularly the Existence of a Trinity and Incarnation the Points I mention'd be absolutely Certain or not I leave it to the choice of Dr. T's Friends whether they will rather approve his Doctrine in his Sermons or his unconsonant Practice in this Preface If the former they must condemn him out of his own mouth to be Foolish Ridiculous and an Imitator of Atheists and his way of writing Insignificant But if they like the Later then they must conclude his Sermons as equally blame-worthy for opposing so laudable a Practice Unfortunate man who very gravely takes Texts against Scoffers and makes Sermons upon them and then behaves himself all over so Scurrilously and Drollishly in his whole Preface to them as levels those very Sermons as directly against himself as could possibly be contriv'd or imagin'd Which is in effect by his carriage to tell the Atheist that that Scoffing and Drollish way of answering and managing Discourses about Religion which is so horrid sin in them because they are of the Vngodly and Wicked is notwithstanding none at all but a very great Virtue in the Saints and the Godly and in a particular manner Meritorious so it be practis'd against those Men of sin the most abhominable Papists § 4. Besides as Dr. T. well observed when he was in a more sober humour Every thing even the best is liable to be abus'd and made ridiculous by drollish Jests and consequently this Method be so exactly observss when he is to confute me will as he very well expresses it in his Pref. pag. 26 equally serve to prove or confute any thing To shew the all-powerful strength and virtue of it let us imagine that Euclid had been a Catholick Dr. T. might have preacht ● Sermon or two full of zeal against Witchcraft and have produc't some Fair Probabilities to perswade the people that Mathematicians were all meer Frier Bacons and absolute Conjurers because they use to draw Circles and uncouth Figures which look like Magick to second which Dr. St's Book concerning Images would mutatis mutandi● light very pat and home and then when he had done writ a Preface to those Sermons against the Prince of Conjurers or the Belzebub of those Incarnate Devils Euclid and confute him on this manner First he might pick out some Demonstrations of his in which were five or six words harder than ordinary at least too hard for the Vulgar though clear enough to the Learned men in that Art as Isosceles Parallelograms Parallelepipe Cylinder Diameter Eicosaedron and such like and when he had transcrib'd them into a Ridiculous Preface which he was sure no good Mathematicians would ever care to read but vulgar Souls would much admire and out of their hatred to these Popish
that I never said or thought it was self-evident that Tradition had alwayes been followed but only that it is of own nature 〈◊〉 evidently infallible Rule abstracting from being followed his answer to my Method is this I have not spoken to the point before and therefore am not concern'd to speak to it now for why should people expect more from me here than elsewhere or rather I have granted the point already and therefor● am not concern'd to say more to it And I for my part think he is in the right because it seems a little unreasonable to require the same thing should be done twice I think it best to leave him to his sufficient-consideration and go on to the next Onely I desire the Reader to reflect how empty a brag 't is in the Drs. how partial in their Friends to magnify this peece as Vnanswerable Yet in one Sense 't is such for a Ready Grant of what 's Evident Truth can never be answer'd or refuted § 7. His next Pretence is that my METHOD excludes from Salvation the far greatest part of our own Church To which though enough hath been said already yet because the clearing this will at once give account of what I mean when I affirm Faith must be known antecedently to Church which bears a shew as if I held we are not to rely on the Church for our Faith I shall be something larger in declaring this Point To perform which more satisfactorily I note 1. That those who are actually from their Child-hood in the Church have Faith instill'd into them after a different manner from those who were educated in another Profession and after come to embrace the right Faith The form●● are imbu'd after a natural way with the Churches Doctrine and are educated in a high Esteem and Veneration of the Church it self Whereas the Later are to acquire Faith by considering and looking into its Grounds and are educated rather in a hatred against the true Church than in any good opinion of her The former therefore have the full weight of the Churches Authority both as to Naturals and Supernaturals actually apply'd to them and working its effect upon them Practical self-evidence both of the Credit due to so Grave Learned Ample and Sacred an Authority as also of the Holiness the Morality or Agreeableness of her Doctrine to Right Reason which they actually experience rendring in the mean time their Assent Connatural that is Rational or Virtuous The later Fancy nothing Supernatural in her nor experience the Goodness of her Doctrine but have it represented to them as Wicked and Abhominable In a word the Former have both Faith and the Reasons for it practically instill'd into them in a manner at the same time and growing together daily to new degrees of Perfection whereas the Later must have Reasons antecedently to Faith and apprehending as yet nothing Supernatural in the Church must begin with something Natural or meerly Humane which may be the Object of an unelevated Reason and withal such as may be of its own nature able to satisfie rationally that haesitation and disquisitive doubt wherewith they are perple●● and settle them in a firm Belief 2. My Discourse in that Treatise as appears by the Title is intended for those who are yet to arrive at satisfaction in Religion that is for those who are not yet of the Church and so I am to speak to their natural Reason by proposing something which is an Object proper and proportion'd to it and as it were leading them by the hand step by step to the Church though all the while they walk upon their own Legs and see with their own Eyes that is proceed upon plain Maxims of Humane Reason every step they take 3. Though I use the Abstract word TRADITION yet I conceive no wise man will imagine I mean by it some Idea Platonica or separated Formalility hovering in the Air without any Subject but that the Thing I indeed meant to signifie by it is the Church as DELIVERING or as Testifying and taking it as apply'd to those who are not yet capable to discern any Supernaturality in the Church the Natural or Humane Authority of the Church or the Church Testifying she receiv'd this Faith uninterruptedly from the beginning So that Tradition differs from Church as a man consider'd precisely as speaking and acting differs from Himself consider'd and exprest as such a Person which known by Speech and Carriage or by himself as speaking and acting other considerations also belonging to him which before lay hid and are involv'd or as the Schools express it confounded in the Subject or Suppositum become known likewise So the Churches Humane Testimony or Tradition which as was shown Sure f. p. 81 82 83. is the greatest and most powerfully supported even naturally of any in the World is a proper and proportion'd object to their Reason who yet believe not the Church but it being known thence that the Body who proceeds on that Ground possesses the first-deliver'd that is Right Faith and so is the true Church immediately all those Prerogatives and Supernatural Endowments apprehended by all who understand the nature of Faith to spring out of it or attend on it are known to appertain and to have ever appertain'd to the True Church and amongst the rest Goodness or Sanctity the proper Gift of the H. Ghost with all the Means to it which with an incomparable Efficacy strengthens the Souls of the Faithful as to the Delivery of Right Faith whence she is justly held and believ'd by the new-converted Faithful to be assisted by the H. Ghost which till some Motive meerly Humane had first introduc'd it into their Understandings that this was the True Church they could not possibly apprehend § 8. In this way then of discoursing the Church is still the onely Ascertainer of Faith either taken in her whole Latitude as in those who are already Faithful or consider'd in part onely that is as delivering by way of naturally Testifying which I here call Tradition in order to those who are yet to embrace Faith Whence appears the perfect groundlesness of Dr. T's Objection and how he wholly misunderstands my Doctrine in this point when he says the Discourse in my Method does Vnchristian the far greatest part of our own Church For first he mistakes the Ground of Believing to those actually in the Church for that which is the Ground for those who are yet out of the Church to find which is the Church Next since all Believers actually in the Church even to a Man rely on the Church both naturally and supernaturally assisted and I am diseoursing onely about the Natural means for those who are out of the Church to come to the Knowledge of it his Discourse amounts to this that because those who are yet coming to Faith rely onely on the Humane Testimony of the Church therefore they who are in the Church and rely upon the Church both humanely
say that 't is the highest degree of humane Certitude of which it may simply or absolutely be said Non posse illi falsum subesse that 't is IMPOSSIBLE IT SHOULD BE FALSE Can any thing be produc'd more expresly abetting my way of Discoursing the Grounds of Faith Nothing certainly unless it be that which immediately follows containing the reason why Tradition is by the very nature of it simply Infallible For says he Tradition being full Report about what was EVIDENT UNTO SENSE to wit what Doctrines and Scriptures the Apostles publickly deliver'd unto the World it is IMPOSSIBLE it should be FALSE Worlds of Men CANNOT be uniformly mistaken and deceiv'd about a matter Evident to Sense and not being deceiv'd being so many in number so divided in place of so different affections and conditions IT IS IMPOSSIBLE they should so have agreed in their Tale had they so maliciously resolv'd to deceive the World Observe here 1. That he alledges onely Natural Motives or speaks onely of Tradition as it signifies the Humane Authority of the Church that is as taken in the same sense wherein I took it in my Method 2. He goes about to show out of its very nature that is to demonstrate 't is absolutely Infallible 3. He makes this Tradition or Humane Authority of the Church an Infallible Deriver down or Ascertainer that what is now held upon that tenure is the Apostles Doctrine or the first-taught Faith which once known those who are yet Unbelievers may infallibly know that Body that proceeds upon it to possess the true Faith and consequently infallibly know the true Church which being the very way I took in my Method and other T●eatises it may hence be discern'd with how little reason Dr. T. excepts against it as so superlatively singular But to proceed Hence p. 40. he avers that the proof of Tradition is so full and sufficient that it convinceth Infidels that is those who have onely natural Reason to guide themselves by For though saith he they be blind not to see the Doctrine of the Apostles to be Divine yet are they not so void of common sense impudent and obstinate as to deny the Doctrine of Christian Catholick Tradition to be truly Christian and Apostolical And p. 41. The ONELY MEANS whereby men succeeding the Apostles may know assuredly what Scriptures and Doctrines they deliver'd to the Primitive Catholick Church is the Catholick Tradition by Worlds of Christian Fathers and Pastors unto Worlds of Christian Children and Faithful People Which words as fully express that Tradition is the ONELY or SOLE Rule of Faith as can be imagin'd And whereas some hold that an Inward working of God's Spirit supplies the Conclusiveness of the Motive this Learned Writer p. 46 on the contrary affirms that Inward Assurance without any EXTERNAL INFALLIBLE Ground to assure men of TRVTH is proper unto the Prophets and the first Publishers of Christian Religion And lastly to omit others p. 47. he discourses thus If any object that the Senses of men in this Search may be deceiv'd through natural invincible Fallibility of their Organs and so no Ground of Faith that is altogether Infallible I answer that Evidence had by Sense being but the private of one man is naturally and physically Infallible but when the same is also Publick and Catholick that is when a whole World of men concur with him then his Evidence is ALTOGETHER INFALLIBLE And now I would gladly know what there is in any of my Books touching the Ground of Faith which is not either the self-same or else necessarily consequent or at least very consonant to what I have here cited from this Judicious Author and Great Champion of Truth in his Days whose Coincidency with other Divines into the same manner of Explication argues strongly that it was onely the same unanimous Notion and Conceit of Faith and of true Catholick Grounds which could breed this conspiring into the same way of discoursing and almost the self-same words § 13. Hence is seen how justly D. T. when he wanted something else to say still taxed me with singularity in accepting of nothing but Infallibility built on absolutely-conclusive Motives with talking such Paradoxes as he doubts whether ever they enter'd into any other mans mind that all mankind excepting J. S have hitherto granted that no Humane Vnderstanding is secur'd from possibility of Mistake from its own nature that my Grounds exclude from Salvation and excommunicate the Generality of our own Church that no man before J. S. was so hardy as to maintain that the Testimony of Fallible men which word Fallible is of his own adding mine being of Mankind relying on Sensations is Infallible that this is a new way and twenty such insignificant Cavils But the thing which breeds his vexation is that as my Reason inclines me I joyn with those who are the most solid and Intelligent Party of Divines that is indeed I stick to and pursue and explain and endeavour to advance farther those Grounds which I see are built on the natures of the Things Would I onely talk of Moral Certainty Probabilities and such wise stuff when I am settling Faith I doubt not but he would like me exceedingly for then his own side might be probable too which sandy Foundation is enough for such a Mercurial Faith as nothing but Interest is apt to fix DISCOURSE VIII In what manner Dr. T. Answers my Letter of Thanks His Attempt to clear Objected Faults by committing New Ones § 1. MY Confuter has at length done with my Faith Vindicated and my Methed and has not he done well think you and approv'd himself an excellent Confuter He onely broke his Jests upon every passage he took notice of in the former except one without ever heeding or considering much less attempting to Answer any one single Reason of those many there alledg'd and as for that one passage in which he seem'd serious viz. how the Faithful are held by me Infallible in their Faith he quite mistook it throughout Again as for my Method he first gave a wrong Character of it and next pretended it wholly to rely upon a point which he had sufficiently considered that is which he had readily granted but offer'd not one syllable of Answer to any one Reason in It neither My Letter of Thanks is to be overthrown next And First he says he will wholly pass by the Passion of it and I assure the Reader so he does the Reason of it too for he speaks not a word to any one piece of it Next he complains of the ill-Language which he says proceeded from a gall'd and uneasie mind He says partly true For nothing can be more uneasie to me than when I expected a Sober and Scholar-like Answer to find onely a prettily-worded Fardle of Drollery and Insincerity I wonder what gall'd him when he lavish'd out so much ill-language in Answer to Sure footing in which Treatise there was not one passiona●e word not one syllable
apparent respect of Scripture to be found in Rushworth whereas there is not a syllable to that purpose in my Book Thirdly to give Countenance to this False Charge those words of mine whereas in the place you cite he onely expresses which in me were immediately subjoyned to his Comment and were evidently design'd to restrain that Authors words to a Sense different from what he had impos'd he here joyns immediatly after the very Wo●ds themselves though there were three or four lines between one and the other By this stratagem making the Reader apprehend the word onely was exclusive or negative of more words found in Rushworth whereas by the who●e tenour of the Charge by all the words which express it and lastly by the placing those words he onely exprest immediately after his unhandsome Comment 't is most manifest they onely excluded any Ground or occasion of so strange a misconstruction and aim'd not in the least at denying any other words but onely at clearing that this was that Authors sole Intention Yet in confidence of these blinding Crafts and that his unexamining Readers will believe all he says he sounds the triumph of his own Victory in this rude and confident manner Certainly one would think that either this man has no Eyes or no Forehead I will not say as Dr. T. does here in a Sermon preach'd against himself p. 123. that a little wit and a great deal of ill-nature will furnish a man for Satyr onely I must say that the tenth part of this Rudeness in another though justly occasion'd too would have been call'd Passion and ill Language But I see what 's a most horrid Sin in the abominable Papist is still a great Virtue in the Saints On this occasion since he is so hot and Rustick I must be serious with him and demand of him publickly in the face of the World Satisfaction for this Unjust Calumny and that I may not be too rigorous with him I will yield him innocent in all the rest if he clears himself of this one passage in which he counterfeits the greatest Triumph and Victory Of this Fault I say which he has newly committed even then when he went about to clear himsellf of a former § 12. His last Attempt is to give an account why he added that large senc'd Monosyllable All to my words which is the onely False Citation be hath yet offer'd to Examination the former two not being objected as such whatever he pretends Now the Advantage he gains by adding it is manifestly this that if that word be added and that I indeed say The greatest Hopes and Fears are strongly apply'd to the minds of ALL Christians it would follow that no one Christian in the world could apostatize or be a bad man which being the most ridiculous position that ever was advanc'd and confutable by every days experience his imposing this Tenet on me by virtue of this Addition i● as he well expresses it Serm. p. 87. putting me in a Fools Coat for every Body to laugh at I appeal'd Letter of Thanks p. 66 67. to Eye-sight that no such word was ever annext to the words now cited and thence charg'd him with falsifying He would clear himself in doing which he denies not that he added the word All this was too evident to be cloak'd but he gives his reason why he added it on this manner He alledges my words that Christian Doctrine was at first unanimously settled in the minds of the Faithful c. and firmly believ'd by all those Faithful to be the vvay to Heaven Therefore infers Dr. T. since in the pursuit of the D●scourse 't is added that the greatest Hopes and Fears vvere strongly apply'd to the minds of the First Believers those First Believers must mean ALL those Faithful spoken of before and the same is to be said of the Christians in after Ages This is the full force of his Plea My Reply is That I had particular reason to add the word All in the former part where I said that That Doctrine vvas firmly believ'd by ALL those faithful for they had not been Faithful had they not firmly believed it and yet had equal reason to omit it when I came to that passage the greatest motives were strongly aprly'd to the minds of the first Believers because I have learn'd of our B. Saviour that many receive the word that is believe and gladly too yet the thorny cares of this world to which I add Passions and ill Affections springing from Original Sin choak the Divine Seed and hinder it from fructifying whereas had it had the full and due effect which its nature requir'd it had born Fruit abundantly Now since those Motives are of themselves able to produce it in all and oftentimes convert the most indispos'd that is the most wicked Sinners I conceive this happens for want of due Application making the Motives sink deep into the Understanding Power so as to make it conceit them heartily which vigorous Apprehension we use to call Lively Faith nothing else being required to any effect but the Agents Power over the Patients indisposition and a close Application of the Power to the Matter t is to work upon Which kind of Application being evidently not made to All there was no show of reason why I should put that word in that place and much less that Dr. T. should put it for me I was forc't indeed to name the word Believers because it was impossible to conceive that those Motives should be strongly apply'd to the Minds of Jews or Heathens Again I was forc't to express it plurally since no sober man can doubt but the doctrine of Faith sunk deep into the hearts or wills of more than some one and thence wrought in them through Charity but that I should mean by that word onely plurally exprest a Number of Believers having those Motives strongly applyed to them Equal to those who firmly believed or were Faithful is unconceivable by any man who looks into the sense of words this being the same as to apprehend that all who believe speculatively lay to heart those Motives to good Life which Faith teaches them a thing our daily Experience confutes Moreover I endeavoured to prevent any such Apprehension in my very next words after my Principles which were these This put it follows as certainly that a GREAT NVMBER of the first Believers and after faithful would continue c. Now these words a Great number of the first Believers having most evidently a Partitive sense that is signifying onely a Part or some of them it might seem strange to any Man that knows not Dr. T 's might in such performances and that nothing is Impossible for him to mistake who will do it because he must do it that he could interpret those very same words First Believers to mean all not one excepted 'T is a trifling Evasion then to hope to come off by saying as he does here p. 36. If it
little after that Historians write of King Pepin must I needs mean by Historians onely plurally exprest when I come to name them the second time All Historians no● one excepted write of King Pepin What Logick but Dr. T's who defies all Principles could ever stumble upon such a Paradox § 15. To conclude this matter All these particularities here related being well examin'd by Eye-sight and weigh'd by Reason 't is impossible any Candid Considerer however he may favourably judge Dr. T. mistaken in words which at first sight bore such a semblance to one who read but half the Discourse can for all that excuse him from great Rashness and strong Inclinations to draw every thing in his Adversary to a sinister sence and to take him up before he is down But I must farther say that the Constancy he shews in this kind of Carriage and the Interest which evidently accrues by it to his Cause and himself as a Writer which is at once to make his Adversary talk like a Madman and Self-Contradictor both and divert the Readers Attention from the true Point and by that means avo●d the duty of Answering discover too palpably 't is a willing and designed Mistake What that signifies let others judge without putting me still to name it I am heartily weary of such Drudgery § 16. And so I take my leave of this pretty Preface which has not one word of Reason in it but built on Mistake nor one good Excuse for so many bad Faults· But pretends to speak to three Treatises of mine without taking notice candidly of so much as one Argument in any of them and is a meer Endeavour by multitudes of impertinent and insignificant Scoffs to make some plausible show of an Answer for those merrily-conceited Readers to sport at who fancy such frothy Talk far above solid Reasoning In which pleasant strain consists also his Friend Dr. St's greatest Talent Whence the Comedian in their performances supplies the Divine and Plautus with his fellows is by far more propitious useful and influential to their Imaginary Victories than Aristotle and all the Learned Authors in the world who write Sence or Logick And as these Comick Controvertists affect the same Manner of writing which those Stagers did so their End and Aym is the same too viz. not to propose any thing like exact Knowledge to men truly Learned but meerly Populo ●t placerent quas fecissent Fabulas The Conclusion Containing The AUTHOR'S REQUEST To the Knowing Candid WITS of This Nation THis being the Genius of my Adversary such his Method of Answering my Books and yet his numerous Party hazarding to over-bear Reason with Noise at least in the Esteem of vulgar Scholars making up the Generality who are not able to weigh either the Strength of the Arguments or the Worth of the Authorities engag'd for either Party but onely to number them or scan their Multitude I am forc'd to Appeal to You our Learned Umpires offering You these few Proposals with my humble Request that if You find them reasonable and agreeable to the Maxims of Learning or the clearing of Truth Mankinds best Interest You would be pleas'd in all handsome occasions to use your Power with Dr. T. and his Friends and sollicit a due compliance with them 1. That this Extrinsecal and Ignoble way of answering Arguments with Persecution and Railing may be left off and that when the Reason too much presses it may not be held Supplemental to the Duty of Replying to cry out POPERY Particularly that they would please to consider how improper this Carriage were on this occasion in case it had been otherwise laudable in it self seeing the onely Point maintain'd by me here is this That Christian Faith is Absolutely or Truly Certain 2. That when the Point depends intirely on Reason and not on the miscall'd Authority of Speculaters it may not be held a just Disproof of my Arguments to alledge the different Sentiment of some Speculative Divines since that Carriage supposes as its Maxim the Truth of this Proposition That cannot be True which all School-Divines do not agree to Wherefore unless he first makes out this to be a Truth to be proceeded and rely'd on this way of arguing which takes up no small part of Dr. T's Controversial Writings is convinc'd to be al●●gether Impertinent 3. That Dr. T. would himself please to follow that Doctrine which in his Sermons he so oft and so pressingly inculcates to others and that in handling this grave and important Point all Raillery Drollery Irony Scoffs Ieers rude and bitter Sarcasms breaking of Iests and such-like Attempts of vain and frothy Wit or splendid Efforts of peevish Zeal which so abound in his Rule of Faith and in a manner wholly compose this Preface be totally superseded and onely Serious Reason made use of To oblige him to which Sober Demand I promise on my part That though these being here my onely Confuters I was forc'd at present to give them sometimes their proper Answers by retorting now and then his own Language onely better apply'd yet in my future Writings I shall seriously pursue the Proof of the Point without minding at all his Impertinencies that is I shall rigorously observe the same sober Strain which as my own Inclinations lead me I follow'd in Sure-footing Faith Vindicated and my Method till Dr. T. seeing it his Interest to avoid Answering in a solid manner or closing by way of rigorous Discourse with my Arguments thought it his best play to bring the Controversie 〈◊〉 of the Way of Reason into that of Burlesque Also that all Childish Cavilling at Inelegancies or hard Words at want of Rhetorick in a circumstance where none was intended or needful at my being the first that said he should have said prov'd this or that be for the same Reason laid aside as Things p●rfectly Useless towards the Clearing of Truth As likewise that it be not held and imputed as Confidence to maintain Faiths Absolute Certainty or any Point else for which I offer my Reasons nor to pretend to Self Evident Principles and Absolutely-Conclusive Proofs or Demonstrations whenas the Circumstance and Matter to be prov'd nay the very Name of a Scholar renders it shameful to pretend or produce any thing of an Inferiour Strength in case I aym'd at winning others to assent to my sayings But above all I request that none of these trifling ways be made use of to supply the want of pertinent Reason or make up the Whole Confute as is practis'd throughout this Preface but that Reason where-ever it is found may have its due and proper Return Reason 4. That while he goes about to reply to my Arguments he would please to use my words and not insert others of his own and then combat them instead of me Or if he undertakes to speak to my Reasons themselves that he would take the full import of them and not still catch at and then play upon some word or two which
he can most easily seem to misunderstand so to divert the Discourse A Method so constantly observ'd in his Reply to Sure-footing where he made Witty Dexterity still supply the place of Pertinent Solidity that instead of Rule of Faith it ought more justly have been entitled Sure-footing Travesty 5. And since all Discourse is ineffectual which is not grounded on some Certain Truth and consequently not onely he who settles or builds but also he who aims to overthrow or the Objecter must ground his Discourse on some Certain Principle if he intends to convince the others Tene● of Falsehood that Dr. T. would therefore esteem it his Duty even when he objects to ground his Opposition upon some Firm Principle And since no pretended Principle can be Firm but by virtue of some First Principle and that Dr. T. has disclaim'd here Identical Propositions to be such 't is requisite that he either confute my Discourses produc'd in this Treatise proving First Principles to be of that nature and show some other way by which the Terms of those he assigns for such do better cohere or he is convinc'd to have none at all and so all he writes or discourses must be Groundless and Insignificant 6. Thus much in common for the Manner of his Writing As for his Matter I request he would not in the subject of this present Discourse about the Certainty of a Deity and Christian Faith hover with ambiguous Glosses between Certainty and Uncertainty that is between Is and Is not but speak out Categorically and plainly declare whether he holds those Points absolutely True that is whether they be absolutely True to us or whether any man in the world can with reason say he sees they are True or has any Reason or Argument to conclude them True If not then ●et him show how 't is avoidable but all the World must with Truth say Both these may be False for any thing they can discern than which nothing sounds more horrid and blasphemous to a Christian Ear. If he says there are such Reasons extant but he has them not then let him leave off attempting to settle those Tenets or writing on those Subjects since he confesses himself unqualify'd and unfurnish'd with means to manage them If he says there are such Proofs and that he has them let him produce them and stand by them and not blame the nature of Things for bearing no more and others for saying they have more and that the Things do bear more To express my self closer and more particularly Let him speak out ingenuously and candidly to these Queries Whether be holds that God's Church or any man in the World is furnish'd with better Grounds for the Tenet of a Deity or for Christian Faith or any stronger Reasons to prove these Points True than those in Joshua's and Hezekiah's time had or could have the day before that the Sun should not stand still or go back the next day than that Person who threw a Glass on the Ground which broke not had or could have that it would not break ●han the Inhabitants of divers Houses had that they would not suddenly fall which yet did so or lastly to use his own words than those Reasons are which satisfie Prudent Men in Humane Affairs in which notwithstanding they experience themselves often mistaken If he say he has let him produce them and heartily maintain them and endeavour to make them out and I shall hereafter express as much Honour for him as I have done here of Resentment and Dislike for advancing the contrary Position But if he profess he has no better or that the nature of the thing not bearing it there can no better be given then 't is unavoidable first that the most Sacred Tenets of a Deity 's Existence and all the Points of Christian Faith may be now actually False since Points which had Reasons for them of Equivalent strength did prove actually such Next that no man in the world is in true Speech Certain there is a God or that the least word of Christian Religion is True since 't is Nonsence to say any of those Persons in those former Instances of equivalent strength were or could be truly Certain of Points which prov'd actually False and in which themselves were mistaken In a word I would have him without disguise let the world know whether as there was Contingency in those Causes and so the imagin'd or hoped Effects in the former Instances miscarried and prov'd otherwise than was expected so there be not also Contingency in the Motives for those two most Sacred Tenets upon whose Certainty the Eternal Good of Mankind depends so as they may perhaps not conclude and so both those Tenets may perhaps be really and actually otherwise than we Christians now hold If he professes to embrace this wicked Tenet and his words are too express for it ever to be deny'd though upon second thoughts I hope they may be retracted he owes me an Answer to my Faith Vindicated which hitherto he has shuffled off without any at all and to my Reasons alledg'd in this Treatise for the same Point FAITH's ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY Now Gentlemen since nothing conduces more to Knowledge in any kind than that the Matter of the Dispute be unambiguously stated and clearly understood and that a solid Method be observ'd in the managing it I become a humble Petitioner to your Selves as you tender that Excellent Concern of Mankind and that most Sacred One of Christianity to use your best Interest with Dr. T. that he would please to yield to these Duties here exprest and I oblige my self inviolably to observe the same Carriage towards him which I here propose and press he would use towards me which if he refuse I declare I shall leave him to the Censure of all truly-Learned and Ingenuous Persons however he triumphs amongst Those who are great Admirers of Pretty Expressions resting assur'd that your selves will not onely hold me Unblameable but also highly Commendable for no● losing my precious time in reciprocating his trifling and insignificant Drollery Your True Honourer and Humble Servant J. S. FINIS AMENDMENTS PAge 1. line 21. read that both first p. 47. l. 3. self possible to p. 50. l. 20. solid p. 101. l. 6 7. possible all this may p. 115 l. 12 Judgment in which it is l. 25. can never p. 118. l. 26. resolute hatred p. 121. l. 23. did equivalently p. 124. l. 21. 28. Speculaters p. 127. l. 17. nay more p. 135. l. 7. to be p. 139. l. 18. greater degree p. 142. l. 2. is not true or not to dare p. 146. l. 14. Chimerical p 157. l. 16. Fourth Eviction l. 18. of the Sixth p. 162. l. 16. Sermons equally p. 163. l 27. Parallelepiped p. 166. l. 30. Predicate p. 176. l. ult all good p. 183. l. 28 sensible man may p. 184. l. 2. deduc'd there p. 186. l. 12. of discoursing the p. 199. l. 25. it is is not more p. 200. l. 16. of its own p. 212. l. 24. not the Rule dele express p. 218. DISCOURSE IX p. 219 l 13 14. Reason in it p 229. l. 28 29. the Authors mistaken in undervaluing it p. 234. l. 17. I do non stand p. 239. l. 5. apply'd l. 6. I had