I ever said the People should have it The same I conceive hath ever been in the Church in a certain degree Of which there are manifest signs in Saint Denys the Areopagite Saint Basil Saint Gregory Nazianzen and others as also in the Latin Church specially in Saint Austin Boetius Saint Auselm and others But I conceive demonstration will be both in its matter and in Divines much more diffus'd then it is yet So that in the Church will ever march together Science and Faith though in diverse measures Some other little nibblings at my Doctrin or rather at little bits of it snatcht from the Context as your custom is because taken entire 't is too difficult for your teeth interlace your jollity in these your Sections of mirth and raillery As that of a dispossest Governour which you deform in the worst manner you can by leaving out the Antecedents and Consequents which would have let you see that my discourse proceeds in the case that onely his own private interest or particular good be oppos'd and counter-ballanc't to the publike not if the publick good be for his restorement For then my whole Book favours him Wherefore to make my Doctrin invidious against the Person you mean you must first subsume that his re-entry is against the common good otherwise I say nothing against him but all for him and if you subsume this I believe you will deserve no great thanks for your officious mistake but approve your self his greatest enemy Next you are hugely troubled that in Rushworth's Dialogues which you say are mine I make the letter of the Scripture so uncertain And this objection I may conceive you borrow'd from Doctor Hammond whose Book in which he has something against me and as I am told this very passage was extant long before yours and I doubt not but you read very diligently whatever opposes me Unless perhaps good wits jump't in their observations which also may be likely for you agree much taken as Scholars in your method of seeking for Truth I must profess therefore to answer both in one that you are two of the prettiest men that ever I met with and most hard to please with reason Neither of you can endure I should attempt profess certainty and evidence in things capable of it that is in matters scientifical nor yet profess uncertainty in matters not capable of certitude as in our present point about the delivery of words by way of transcriptions of Copists or Scriveners relying upon their own human diligence which 't is impossible to secure against over-sight besides divers other miscarriages which the Fathers as well as I complain the Letter of the Scripture was lyable to But to satisfie your tender Conscience and other Catholikes like yours I profess that that place speaks of the Letter of Scripture as left to multitudes of human contingencies and imbecillities and as taken abstractedly from and unassisted by Tradition or the Churches living voice and practice to guide securely the delivery of it downwards But I ever profess that this guidance of Tradition did efficaciously preserve the Letter untainted in all that was coincident with Christian Tradition that is in all points necessary to mankinds salvation and not onely so but so far the rest of the Scripture's Letter too that nothing evidently contrary to the doctrin of Tradition or Christian Faith could light into it So that Catholiks may with all security accept it and hold to it And yet notwithstanding the aid of tradition formerly above 2000 faults were corrected in it by our late Pope's since the beginning of the Council of Trent and more still remain to be a mended as the Preface to the same Bible grants nor is any person living able to stint us the ultimate compleating of the true copy Thus much to you How I can satisfy Doctor Hammond who holds Tradition onely then when he can serve his turn of it and otherwhiles impugns it by what way in his grounds he can be certain of one little of it I know not and therefore must leave him to the Fruits of his Labour in impugning Tradition that is to a perfect uncertainty of any thing that can concern his Faith In a word to a Catholik my position onely signifies that we are beholding to the living voyce of the Church even for any Certainty of the true Copy of the Scripture which why it deserves more exception that Saint Austin's noted saying of Evangelio non crederem c. I should be glad to learn But you think Rushworth has made too long a Catalogue of uncertainties To which I answer that if you please to scan the occasions of that long Catalogue and then tell us how many we may safely abate I shall in his behalf remain very much oblig'd to you If not 't is plain you do not know we can abate any or that his Catalogue is longer then it should be in his case After this you give a wipe at my denying the Popes personall Infallibility and as for the point you well know 't is held but a probable opinion and that many learned Authors hold the same opinion with me As for my censuring it I shall hope the reasons given for it in Tabulae Suffragiales will stand to justify me till something of greater force than clamour appears to overthrow them that is till it can be shown less than Archi-hereticall to say that an opinion which confessedly is no more but probable can be a sufficient ground to build Christian Faith upon Your next piece of Gallantry is your old and oft repeated clamour of my denying the Infallibility of Councils which forces me to lay open to the world how far your Malice is above your Conscience in writing against me To do which I offer the Reader those few notes First that you onely cite here three words non est impossible to prove confusedly that I deny all Authority of Councils whereas in my Tab. suffrag. p. 277. the place where it is found which had you quoted the Reader might have rectify'd himself it follows immediately ut Concilium tentet hoc facere tentando in errorem incidat It is not impossible a Council should attempt This and so err Now what this word This relates to is to be seen in the Paragraph immediately foregoing to wit to the making new Articles of Faith so that I put Councils errable onely in such a matter that is in creating us a new Faith you by maiming purposely my words make me hold them to have no Authority in any thing Can this consist with honesty or fair dealing Next is to be noted that in the same Discourse there which gives account of my Doctrin professedly concerning Councils I maintain in express terms that Councils are of Infallible Authority in declaring Articles of Faith that the Pope declaring ex cathedra concerning a matter of Faith is infallible and that the same is to be said of Generall and even Provinciall
ante-judiciary Delivery never taught as certain p. 83 84. 87. It s beginning and progress p. 77. to 81. True Discourse in Angels following from the Vindicators tenet p. 162 163. Distinguishers between Faith and Opinion must neither be illiterate nor meanly learned p. 76 84 85 87. Divinity grafted on the stock of our naturall speech and so on Philosophy p. 24. E. EYmericus his mistake p. 47 48. His censoriousness p. 39 40. F. FAith not endanger'd by true Science p. 12 13. but its objects better understood by it p. 9 10 14 15. not diversify'd according to the severall Apppehensions of the Faithfull p. 9 10 11. 14. 191. 198. 199. Soâ—e False-dealings and disingenuities toucht at p. 22 23. 27 28. 31. 48 49 50 52 61. 93 94. 112 113 115 120 121 125 126 174. Father and Son spoken of God metaphorically 102 103 104. That Foundations contradict ante-judiciary Delivery p. 79. G. THat a Governour dispossest ought to be restor'd when the common Good requires it the profest and express Doctrin of the Author p. 116. S. Gregory not the Author of those Dialogues which gave us the first news of an ante-judiciary Delivery p. 77 78. Hence the origin of that Opinion much later p. 107. I. I Dentification of the Soul and Body necessary for a Body's action on her p. 153. 155. Identity of the Soul and Body p. 154 155. Infallibility when certainly found in decrees of a Pope and Council p. 72 73. Inquest not necessary to find our Faith p. 73. Interpretation of the Bull and Council by the Vindicator manifoldly defective p. 75. M THe Method of a Divine in seeking Truth p. 8. to 14. Diverse Mistakes about the Council of Florence p. 92 93. of a Censure p. 16 17. of the occasion of my writing the Middle State p. 28 29. of a Metaphor p. 101. of the Liturgyes manifoldly p. 109 110. of my Doctrin concerning a dispossest Governour p. 116. and the Vncertainty of Scriptures letter 110 117 118. of best corporeall pleasures p. 134. of eternall Happiness to be no Good at all p. 166 167. of the Souls nature at reunion p. 183. Mysteries of Faith not knowable without Revelation p. 11. P. PAganism uncharitably and weakly objected p. 187. Pains of Purgatory what in the true opinion of the Author p. 144. Prayers and Alms for the Dead in use before the Opinion of ante-judiciary Delivery p. 78 79. and many wayes beneficiall to them in the Authors Doctrin p. 167. to 173. A Prohibition of a Book no Censure p. 16. to p. 20. Punishments of pure Spirits agreed by all to be Acts of the Will p. 88. Q. THE Question stated as in the Bull p. 34. S. Scriptures Letter uncertain without the ayd of Tradition p. 117. The Soul how substantially chang'd by separation yet the same p. 139 140. Pure Spirits know all things together and perpetually p. 156. to p. 161. The Sufferings of our Saviour not prejudic'd by the unyeeldingness of separated Souls to externall torments p. 146 147. T. TRadition not examinable p. 72. More or less Time coexisting adds or dimininishes nothing to a pure Spirit p. 149. to 153. Errata P. 114 l. 19 20. these terms but the Terms expressing those Mysteries which were p. 147. l. 9. conform. p. 157. l. 12. appetit RELIGION AND REASON First Essay Introduction SIR HAD your Answer to the unknown Author been written in my fresher dayes I should have endeavour'd to have given you an ampler satisfaction Now being come forth in my frozen Age when my long ague hath made me fitter to think of death than of School-quarrels I hope you will be patient with me if in as short a method as I can I give you rather hints by which a little endeavour of your own may find out satisfaction than dilate my self so far that every weak eye may see it Doctor Hammond as I am told about the same time hath bent himself against my Doctrine whom though I much esteem being assured by friends common to us both that he is a very courteous and civill person and hath spent much time in reading good Authors yet have I rather preferd the answering you both because I expect better quarter at your hands since the stricter bond of Religion should make us apt to interpret one another more fairly as also and indeed far more for I see that Tye very slippery in many because you have some tincture of the School and to my thinking are much sharper and abler to set off an argument and write a style solid and proper to the matter Whereas that loose way of preaching and affecttaion of words the Doctor uses shews more vanity than substance in his Discourses Besides he has an Adversary from satisfying whom he seems to me very short and I am gladly willing to excuse my pains when I see the same or more fruit come from anothers Pen Returning then to you I hold it my first duty to give you many thanks for your work you being the first who though somewhat late for me now scarce able to keep my self warm by a fire have given me the occasion to speak for my self that the world may see whether those many smother'd slanders which so long have layen heavy on me and my works bear a value proportionable to the noyse they have made Which to examin in short I divide your Treatise and so my Reply into two Parts the first holding twenty two of your Sections and belonging chiefly to the Middle State of Souls the second containing the rest of your Sections touching upon many points of my Doctrin in which you find fault FIRST PART Refuting some of the Vindicators Objections as they ly in his Book chiefly those that concern the Middle State FIRST DIVISION Containing an Answer to his five first Sections The Vindicator's mistake of the manner of treating Controversies and of the nature of a Censure The Method a knowing Divine ought to pursue Diverse Errors rectify'd TO begin then with your first Section I confess you speak very fairly had your patience but held out not to have broke your word in that very Section which I intend presently to declare if first I desire you to beware how you take principles out of Hereticks mouths The Nobleman out of whom you cite the Maxim that writing of Controversies ought to carry as much sweetnesse as Love-letters was a very ingenious and worthy Person but if you enquire of his Religion you shall find it in Chillingworths book in which he is thought to have had a great hand And Mr Chillingworths Religion how sound it was you may ghess out of the answers made by himself to himself which go before his book In one whereof he candidly professes that if tomorrow he sees more reason for another Religion and next day for a third he will change his Religion as often Now who can doubt but he that has his Religion tackt on him with such slight pins that he may change
which the Latines position was abstracted from as you may plainly see in the Council and is before more fully declar'd Now as to your argument every one can see 't is weakly done to talk of actions proceeding out of knowledg or apprehension not according to the apprehension but according as things really are He that thinks two opinions probable takes both as possible whether they be or no For howsoever they are in themselves to him they appear so Now to argue out of the nature of things which he professes not to know to the actions that must flow from his apprehension is a clear inconsequence Yet all your great clamours have no other ground and therefore I think I may leave out your petty quarrells with your Adversary about his examples as superfluous and nothing conducing to the main point in controversy SECOND PART Refuting the Vindicator's other scatter'd Objections chiefly those which oppose several Doctrins of the Author in other points FIRST DIVISION Containing an Answer from Sect. 22. to Sect. 27. The Vindicators unskilfulness in the nature of a Metaphor The Triall of his Tenet and mine by Fathers and Liturgies His Drollish Calumnies shown groundless by the Authours Explication of his tenets about the Church's future proficiency in science a dispossest Governour and the uncertainty of the Scripture's Letter by meer transcribing His manifold abuses of the Authour in his citing him about Councils and Hell His miscalling God's doing what 's wisest and best Pagan Fatality DEar Sir that I may following your Directions though not your Example begin like a Love-Letter by chance I had turn'd over a leaf too much and so lighted on the beginning of your 22 Section in which you design'd to give a clearer view of my Doctrin and so I hop'd to have been quit of the former controversy and could willingly upon that condition have endur'd the bitter dissemblings wherewith you end this Chapter But finding you fall back to the same quarrel again I perceive you had condemn'd me to the Oar for another Caravan And therefore I must repeat to you that you talk so unskilfully of faith as if there were none but in Popes Bulls and Definitions of Councils As if the Apostles had gone about preaching that such a Council had defin'd such an Article and such a Pope the other And so you ask a monstrous question How if some Imp of Hell should arise and admit onely a Metaphorical and not a real Son in Divinis how could this blasphemy be repress'd by Consubstantialem Patri A shrewd question I confess for it so confounds the termes that it is very hard to make sence of them First I would know what you mean by that terme in Divinis Whether in the substance of God or in Theâ—logy or speaking of God For if you speak of the Essence the Arrians never held a Metaphorical son in the Essence of God but in the Essence of Christ Nor do I think any who understand a Modicum of Divinity can put so foolish a Position that to be a Son should be to be God or the very Essence of God and yet should be so solely Metaphorical that it should be no reality But if you mean that there was no Son in God but some creature was call'd Son as the Arrians held then what signifies this word in Divinis rub over your old School-notions again a little before you put your self in print Now against these was made the Nicen creed and not against the former But I must advertise you that by your high skill in Divinity you should have fram'd a new nature of Metaphors to have come home to your position For I doubt not you can as well square Grammar as Philosophy to Divinity Then in our way who look into nature to know what a Metaphor is it appear's to be the use of a word in a second sence derived from a former And so how you jumble together onely a metaphorical and not a reall Son I do not understand For they have no more connexion then green and dâ—lâ—ful or what disparate terms you please to compound into strong non-sence Reality speaks nature metaphorical a manner of speech yet both these must be joyn'd to condemn some Trinobant to be an Imp of Hell And why such fierce unchristian words Miscreant and Imp of Hell I remember indeed the furious zeal of a Pharisee let fly at our blessed Saviour language far worse then this but whether my Chider be Pharisee or Publican or both or neither I know not God knows and God forgive him and bless me with grace to take patiently all his injuries and I hope he will give me strength to refute his arguments But let us look into the thing it self and seek how a Son is spoken of God And let our first question be what those people who first brought the words of Father and Son into use mean't to explicate by them And I know nothing but that they mean't by Father a man who by means of a Woman produc't a creature like to himself by Son a creature thus produc't This then must be evidently the first signification of the words and if another be attributed to them by design not pure hazard they must be acknowledg'd to be translated from this first signification to that next as when he that converts one to faith or good life is call'd his Father the person converted his Son Now because translations are made upon divers kinds of connexions of the things signify'd not all but such a one onely as is translated for a proportion or likeness is called a Metaphor as a Governour or Gubernator in Latin first signifies the Master or Pilot which governs a Ship thence it s translated by reason of similitude or proportion to him that in a City or Common-wealth behaves himself as the Master or Pilot doth in a Ship Now let us affirm something of God by this word Father Will you say the word was not translated to him from a former signification but given him by pure hazard without any respect to a fore-used sense Sure either you or the Readers will not be so senceless It remains then to see by what connexion it was translated Certainly not that it was a cause or effect or a concomitant for all these are more improper but because there is a similitude or proportion seeing that in God another Person proceeds in likeness to him from him Therefore a Father is spoken of God metaphorically And if you but consider the language you use by custom and not by understanding you would know it were onely metaphorically spoken of God that is to say in no other signification of the Word not by a Metonymie Synecdoche or Catachresis nor in the first signification For these are the termes which are excluded when onely is added to Metaphorically and not the terme really which is a manner of being not of speaking and so cannot be oppos'd to metaphorically by one who understands