right to alledge either Scriptures Fathers or Councils I add Reason History or Instances See Corol. 12. 15 16 18 19. And it is done thus All discourse supposes that Certain on which it builds But if Tradition or the way of conveying down matters of Fact by the former Ages testifying can fail none of these are Certain therefore a Protestant or Renouncer of Tradition cannot with Reason pretend to discourse out of any of these that is Reason being Man's Nature he has lost his natural right to alledge any of these in way of proof Now that none of these are Certain if Tradition be renounc't is shown thus Scripture's Letter as to its Incorruptedness nay its very Being is Uncertain alone or without Tradition as is confest by Protestants and proov'd Sure-Footing Disc. 3d and 4th So are Fathers and Councils too For Fathers being Eminent Witnessers to Immediate Posterity or Children of the Churches Doctrin received and Councils Representatives of the Church their strength as Proofs nay their very Existence is not known till the notion of Church be known which is part of their very Definition and to which they relate Nor is the Being or Nature of Church known till it be Certainly known who are truly Faithful or have true Faith who not which must be manifested by their having or not having the true Rule of Faith Wherefore since the Properties of the Rule of Faith do all agree to Tradition our Rule and none of them to theirs as was evidently and at large shown there in my five first Discourses it follows the Protestant or Renouncer of Tradition knows not what is either right Scripture Father or Council and so ought not to meddle with them nor alledge them Again since pretended Instances of Traditions Failing depend on History Historical Certainty cannot be built on dead Characters but on Living Sence in men's hearts deliver'd from age to age that those passages are true that is on Tradition it follows that if the way of Tradition can fail all History is Uncertain and consequently all Instances as being matters of Fact depending on History And lastly since Reasons are fetch 't from the nature of things and the best Nature in what it is abstracting from disease or madness Unalterable is the Ground of the human part of Christian Tradition and most incomparable strength is superadded to it as it is Christian by the supernatural Assistances of the Holy Ghost Disc. 9. 't is a wild conceit to think any piece of Nature or Discourse built on it can be held Certain if Tradition especially Christian Tradition may be held Uncertain Third Way 5. THe Third Way is to examin the Method he takes in dissuading For common sence telling us 't is not to be expected any should be able to perform any thing unless he takes the right way to perform it 't is Evidert he cannot be held in reason to have power to dissuade unless the Method he takes be proper to that Effect that is not common to that Effect and a contrary one Now to dissuade is to unfix the Understanding from what is held before which includes to make it hold or assent that what it held before Certain is False or at least Uncertain The Way then he takes must be evidently able to oblige to some kind of Assent nay as he handles it for I suppose he aims to make them hold as Protestants to Assent to the contrary which therefore must needs require the Evidentest Method imaginable obliging their Reason to conclude that a man who takes this way of Discourse cannot but make good what he sayes at least that it may be strongly hop't from his method he will do it This reflected on let us weigh the Method my Ld. takes in his Dissuasive and if it be Evident to every ordinary capacity that as to the Godly part of it the Quakers out-do him and as to its quoting part the Smectymnuans us'd the same against the Protestants to confute Episcopacy for They too quoted and gloss'd Scriptures and Fathers both and indeed every Sect that has not yet shaken of the shame to disrespect all Antiquity then it is also Evident that this Method is Common to those Discourses which have in them power to satisfy the Understanding and those who have no such power Now that being most evidently no Method or Way to such an Effect which many follow and take yet arrive not at that Effect 't is plain to Common Sence that my Ld. of Downs miscalls his Book a Dissuasive and that it can have in it no power of moving the Understanding one way or other unless he can first vouch some Particularity in the Method he takes above what 's in others in which we experience miscarriage and himself professes we though taking it miscarry in it Let us then search after this Particularity in his way of writing Is it that he brings some stronger or more unavoidable sort of Testimonies then were ever yet produc't by others No Every Scholler sees they are so common that they have been hundreds of times produc't and himself p. 1. 2. acknowledges their vulgarness But perhaps he invalidates all the Answers our Controvertists have given to those Testimonies and presses them farther against us beyond what any has done yet Quite contrary He barely and rawly puts them down as if this were the very first time they had seen light nor takes the least notice of any Answer at all given to them formerly But it may be he layes Grounds to distinguish and press home his Testimonies and so gives them their full weight which others have not done Alas no I fear he never thinks of that but judges if we may conclude from his carriage the deed done so he but quote nor can I see one Principle laid in his whole Book strengthening any one Testimony by bringing it to its Ground Experimental Knowledge in the Authour he cites that the Churches constant Voice and Practice manifested this her Sence but as they are put down carelesly so they are past over slubberingly without the least enforeing them by way of laying Principles Is he at least Particular in his Sincerity and Ingenuity I know not how they will be satisfied with it who read his late Adversary Impeaching him for the contrary Vices and some passages in this present Appendix Where lies then this Particularity in his Method without which his Dissuasive can never in reason be held Creditable I speak ingenuously and from my heart All the Particularity I can observe in it lies in these two things First that he huddles together multitudes of his own sayings without any pretence of proof for the most part and when he brings any they are such as we have spoken of Next that instead of enforcing his Proofs by way of Reason he overflowes strangely with godly language and Scripture-phrases with which plaufible manner of Expression most unreasonably and unnaturally he strives to combat the Wills of his
exprest to be the Scripture and on this Expression he so strongly builds that p. 10 11. he concludes thence and Certainly too thus The Religion of our Church sayes he is therefore certainly Primitive and Apostolick because it teaches us to believe the whole Scriptures of the old and New Testament and nothing else as matter of Faith What mean the word Scriptures Any determinate sence of it or the dead Characters Alas their Church is far from teaching them the first or from having grounds to own such a pretence but puts the Book in their hands and bids them find the sence of it or their Faith for there is their Rule 'T is the bare Letter then unsenc't he means by the word Scriptures and so he must say 't is the outward Cuaracters his Church teaches us to believe and nothing else as matter of Faith that is their whole Faith has for its object Ink thus figur'd in a Book A worthy Argument to proove their Church is certainly Primitive and Apostolick whereas itis known Faith was before those Characters and besides if this be to be Apostolical we owe nothing to the other Apostles for our faith but onely to those six who writ But we mistake him he means neither sence of the word Scripture and hates these distinctionswith all his heart which would oblige him to either He meant to talk of Scripture indeterminately and confusedly which might make a fine show and yet expose him to no Inconvenience by giving any particular account of his meaning His Inference from this his First Principle being an Immediate one will utterly overthrow the Papists without doubt Therefore saith he p. 11. unless there can be New Scriptures we can have no New matter of Belief no new Articles of Faith No my Ld Yes as long as by Scriptures you mean no determinate sence of Scriptures but the bare Letter onely whose sence is fetch 't out by Interpretations and these as we experience depend on menes private Judgments and Fancies if menes Fancies may vary every hour you may have diverse Interpretations every hour and so new Articles of Faith every hour Is not this a mad kind of arguing to conclude as absolute an unerrableness in Faith as if they had not onely a determinate Principle but even as self-evident and unmistakable as the First Principle in Metaphysicks to guid themselves by whereas our daily eysight and their own sad experience every day teaches us by the practice of this Principle and yet their differing in the Sence of Scripture in most high and most concerning Points that the Speenlation is naught and the Principle it self a false and mis-guiding Light Nay I doubt my Ld. himself has no hearty value for this his First Principle though he sayes he wholly relies on it For I never saw Protestant Book in my Life thinner and sleighter in Scripture-Citations than is his Dissuasive so that if that be his First Principle he makes little use of it 35. Many other Propositions or Supposals are imply'd in his book to give it force As that It matters not how a Citation is qualify'd so it be but alledg'd 'T is no matter whether the question be rightly stated or no. The Tenets of our Church are not to be taken from the use of definitions found in approved Councils speaking abstractedly but from the particular Explications of some Divines Every Foppery is a proper Effect of the Churches Doctrin Points of Faith ought to be comprehensible to Reason and Spiritual things sutable to Fancy The Act of an Inquisition Sayings of a few Divines or Casuists are all Catholik Faith and the Doctrin of the Church That is rationally dissuasive which is confessedly Uncertain No Answer was ever given to the Citations or Reasons produc't in the Dissuasive Talking soberly and piously about a point is oftentimes as good as prooving it That t is Self-evident Scripture's Letter can bear but one Interpretation as wrought upon by Human Skills These and multitudes of such like though not exprest yet run imply'd in his carriage all along this book and suppos'd true to give it any force yet so evidently false and weak that to pull them out thence and make them show their heads is enough to confute them I conclude and charge the Dissuader that he not onely hath never a Principle for his Dissuasive to subsist by but farther that 't is Impossible but himself should know in his own Conseience that he has none nay more that the Protestant Cause and the same I say of all out of the Church can have none The first part of my charge I have manifoldly prooved in this present Appendix The other part of it which charges him with Consciousness of having no Grounds hath two branches and for the former of those I alledge that the wayes he takes all along to manage his Dissuasive are so evidently studious so industrious so designed and perfectly artificial that though one who is guided on in a natural way is oftentimes not aware of his thoughts or their method till he comes to reflect yet 't is Impossible he should not be aware of his which he postures with such exquisit craft and such multitudes of preternatural sleights to render his Discourse plausible For the later of those Branches namely that he cannot but know the Protestant Cause can have no Principles to make it Evident I discourse thus ad hominem what I have prov'd in Sure-Footing out of the nature of the Thing 'T is their most constant and avow'd Profession and his p. 9. that they do wholly rely upon Scripture as the foundation and final resort of all their Persuasions This being so Fathers and Councils are not held at all by them but as far as they are agreeable to Scriptures that is their Testimony has no basis of Certainty from themselves or of their own but what they participate from Scripture Wherefore either they are No Principles or else Subordinate ones to their First Principle Scripture Unless then It be Certain or deserve the name of a Principle They can never be held by Protestants such nor consequently can merit the name of Principles even Subordinate ones because then pretended First Principle from which onely they can derive Title to that dignity is in that case none it self To Scripture then le ts come By which word if they agreed to mean any determinate Sence of it certainly known to be the true one their Discourse were well-built But since their Church can own no determinate Sence of the Scripture deriv'd down from Christ and his Apostles in antecedency to the Scripture's Letter but having renounc't that Way or Tradition must say she has it meerly from that Letter as yet unsenc't She must mean that 't is the Scripture Letter She relies on as the foundation and final resort of all her Persuasions nay for her Persuasion that this is the Sence of it Since then Principles are determinate Sences not characters or Sounds neither is
be much Contingency in such an Universality depending on their private Reasons whereas scarce two men debating the same point particularly can light into the self-same Consequences but differ in their deductions Thinks he it possible many should not be Ignorant and so miscarry casually many Passionate and incline to some Tenets because sutable to their humour many conceited of their new Inventions and thence judging their Consequence to be connected with the point of Faith cry it up to be de side in their opinion and alledge that denying this you by consequence deny Faith This being so nay impossible to be otherwise and every Reader that sees the Dissuader's unreasonableness against us easily judging he would pick out the worst Instances he could find in that Infinity of Authours and the very complexion of his style being wholly Invidious expose them to shame with all the most disgraceful Rhetorick so great a wit as his heighten'd by that bitterest of Passions could deliver he will easily be able to make an Estimate what he may judge of my Ld's performance in this kinde 18. But now whates all this to to our Church For his Title p. 127. tells us 't is the Church of Rome which teaches such Doctrins and uses such Practices c. The Notion of Church as one would conceive is terminated and bounded precisely within the limits of its Definition a Body of the Faithful and Logick tells every one who understands it that since we work by abstracted notions or conceive a thing now thus now otherwise we must not confound those notions but hold strictly to the formal meaning of the word which expresses the thing we undertake for We are then to expect in honesty that since the Dissuader charges all those Doctrins and Practices on our Church all his Testimonies to fasten them on her should be of our Churches words or Expressions of the Churches Faith we need not doubt then but they will all be Definitions of General Councils Let the Margent inform us The first Citation is of Navarr's Enchiridion a private Casuist The 2d. of Reginaldus another Casuist The 3d and 4th of Sotus and Medina two other School-Divines Then comes in Reginaldus again then Sotus again in this tenour he proceeds for 133 pages that is from p. 127 to p. 260. not quoting the Council of Trent past 3 or 4. times but once as I remember the words of that Council and as oft abusing it by his strange misconstructions 19. For instance take his first Quotation of that Council p. 135 which I the more insist on because on that occasion I shall lay open his crafty and voluntary defiling every point he touches with most abominable misrepresentations and â—hose vizarded with an outward form of Holiness and such devout expressions as a Saint from Heaven would scarce 〈◊〉 lest prudent men should think it too much which I intended for a SIXTH Head of his disingenuities After then p. 133 and 134. he had made all the most odious Cases he could pick out the Roman Doctrin because the books of three or four Authours perused and allow'd by two or three others as not opposit to Faith See Coroll 33. that is the private Reasons of half a dozen Divines conceiv'd so which he amplifies beyond all bounds of moderation that one would judge a General Council or Provincial one at least that many Church Governours or Bishops had recommended those Cases to be held and follow'd at length he tells you sadly p. 134. that This though INFINITLY INTOLERABLE yet it is but the BEGINNING OF SORROWS Then follow the SUPER-INFINIT Sorrows themselves the first of which Sorrows is the Council of Trent's Doctrin and if it be Naught 't is certainly the Chief of them and so had I a word to express it so high which the Dissuader's Rhetorick would easily reach it should be phrased something above Super-infinit in regard by the Sacredness of it's Authority it would be a Ground and an Abetment to all the wicked Cases issuing from it Ere I come to examin it I premise this note that such Testimouies as This are onely to my Ld's purpose if he will argue against our Churcheâ— Doctrin In the success of these then lies the whole Trial of our Cause We have seen how he has sped formerly in his plain Demonstration and his onely efficacious Testimony of a Father let 's see how he thrives in this which we must acknowledge beyond all Evasion to express the sence of our Church 20. His last § then p. 134. begins with describing a true and Perfect Contrition and its Sacred Recommends as sufficient to blot out Sin All this is well nor is there as far as I know a Catholike in the world that was ever taught otherwise what follows Yet sayes he the Church of Rome does not allow it to be of any value unless it be joyn'd with a desire to confess their sins to a Priest saying that a man by Contrition is not reconcil'd to God without their Sacramental or Ritual Pennance actual or votive And this is decreed by the Council of Trent c. Then comes thundring in a Declamation fraught with such Invidious yet Holy Rhetorick that any honest unexamining Reader would almost lay his Salvation on 't he had all the Reason in the world Which things adds he besides that is against Scripture the promises of the Gospell and not onely teaches for Doctrins the Commandments of Men but evacuates the Goodness of God by their Traditions and weakens discourages the best repentance prefers repentance towards men before that which the Scripture calls Repentance towards God Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. And there ends his paragraph in which his passion was in such hast that he forgot to add an Also to answer to the word Besides Now Ld have mercy upon usl What strangely wicked Doctrin is this which can occasion such a clutter of Devotion and Invectiveness jumbled together Attend Reader and from one Instance which I pick't not out purposely but took the first that my discourse led me to accidentally learn the nature of all the rest for scarce one passage in his whole book is free from this Fault The Council Sess. 14. as it is commonly reckon'd not 4th as perhaps his Printer mistook it c. 4. speaks of Contrition which it distinguishes into Perfect Contrition the same my Ld describes and declares that It reconciles a man to God before this Sacrament to wit of Pennance be actually received and Imperfect or Attrition springing from Consideration of the vileness of Sin or fear of Hell not from Love of God as its motive and to this it requires actually the Sacrament of Pennance this being properly efficacious to advance by Preparations to it beforehand which Attrition gives them will to make use of and the whole course of Exercises in it or belonging to it that Attrition into perfect or properly call d Contrition And speaking of the first sort or
proper Contrition It adds farther that Reconciliation to God is not to be ascrib'd ipsi Contritioni sine Sacramenti voto QUOD IN ILLA INCLUDITUR to Contrition without desire of the Sacrament WHICH IS INCLUDED IN IT that is in Contrition Thus the Council I note First the Dissuaders craft in not putting down the words of the Council A practice frequent with him as I show'd before and purposely omitted as appear'd evidently then and will do more now because not at all favourable to his insincere humour of deforming all he meddles with Next by this means he handling onely Perfect Contrition makes our Church require actual or votive Pennance to Its Sufficiency Whereas the Council expresly voids any necessity of actual Pennance to this or proper Contrition and onely requires it to Attrition 3ly He omits the words which is included in it which put down had disanull'd all his whole discourse and cleard our Church from all his Calumnies For this shows the Councils sence to be that Contrition alone if qualifyed as it ought to be reconciles to God but that to be qualify'd as it ought to be it includes a purpose or desire of doing other duties incumbent on the sinner by reason of his Sin and signalizes this particularly of his duty to the Church in resolving to come to the Sacrament of Pennance Let us parallel it Suppose the Council had said True sorrow for sin will save you but not unless you have a will to restore what you have stoln for otherwise your sorrow is not true in regard true sorrow for Sin includes a will to rectify what sin had disordered Where 's now the occasion of my Lds. ranting declamation of the Councils going against Scripture and the promises of the Gospel teaching for Doctrins the Commandments of men of evacuating the goodness of God by Traditions of weakening and discouraging the best Repentance and of preferring Repentance towards men before that which the Scripture calls Repentance towards God and Faith in our Ld. Jesus Christ. Yet supposing that sinners are commanded by Christs Law to give account of their Souls to the Church and receive their Absolution and Pennance from her as well as they are to restore what 's stoln the case is undeniably parallell But since many other duties are included in Contrition as an obligation to restore credit or goods unjustly taken away to repair temporal damages our Neighbours have incurr'd by us and the spiritual ones of Scandal asking pardon for affrontive Injuries curing our former Uncharitableness and wordliness by giving Almes and such like a purpose of all which if our Contrition be right ought to be included in it 't is worth Enquiry why the Council particularises this of coming to the Sacrament of Pennance And to Catholicks who understand the nature of that Sacrament the Answer is so easy that 't is needless For after the heart is contrite or substantially turn'd there remains no more to be done but to wash of the tainture of bad Inclinations Mortal Sin uses to leave behind it and to make Satisfaction to our Neighbour or the World Wherefore because the wholsome Sacrament of Pennance rightly us'd is ordain'd and apt of its own Nature both to wash away those remaining staines by sorrowful and penal actions enjoyn'd by Church disciplin and also to ty men to the Execution of all due Satisfaction to the injur'd World hence the heart being truly converted interiorly this Sacrament is the most Efficacious means to set all else right so to come to it is the onely remaining duty as including all else and for that reason 't is particularly exprest by the Council that true Contrition must include a purpose to come to it because if true it must needs include a desire to take the best means to rectify what 's amiss And lest a Sinner should be apt to conciet and say within himself thus I am truly sorry for my offending God there is then no more to be thought on the Council most prudently declares that That will not do unless they desire likewise to set right what they had disorder'd of which the Church is to be the Judge and careful Overseer and so 't is their duty to the Church to let her take Cognizance of it The Dissuader did ill then to phrase it Ritual Pennante as if onely a dry Ceremony had been enjoyn'd by the Council ere the Soul could be reeoncild to God whereas 't is a Sacrament of its own nature executively satisfactory of all the kinds of duties and efficaciously reparative of all the disorders which are the Arrears and Effects of a sinful Action But he did worse to omit the Councils words and so leave out totally Quod in illâ includitur which candidly put in had made all his Process to no purpose But worst of all when he could not but see all this to inveigh against so innocent so rational charitable and wise Proceedure of this Grave and Venerable Council with the harshest Expressions that ever were clad in Holy Language And it were good my Ld. who is so high against our Casuists would let us know by what Cases he guides himself in his whole Book where he sprinkles Scripture Holy-water all over as if every thing were a Devil he met with and here particularly in wilfully publickly and causlesly calumniating not a private person but an whole Council consisting of so great a multitude of the most Grave most Venerable and most Sacred Personages in the whole Christian World 21. A seventh kind of his Disingenuities is his Exaggerating and magnifying manner of Expression by virtue of which he can make any mote seem a Beam and though the Fault would ly in a very small room perhaps require none at all yet as men blow up Bladders with wind he can so swell and puff it up by plying it with his aiery Rhetorick that it looks as big as a mountain whereas come neer it examin and grasp it that will not now fill your hand which before took up the whole prospect of your Eye He can also by placing things in false lights make even the greatest Virtue seem a Vice and then make that new-created vice a monstrous one Both which were visibly discovered in our last Instance out of the Council of Trent 22. I pass by many other of his petty Disingenuities as his interposing Parenthesisses of his own speaking most confidently where he has least Ground so to make up the want of this with abundance of the other His confounding good Cases with bad Some private Bigotteries with acts of true Piety Books approved by the Church with those of private Authours understanding spiritual things grosly and materially as in his whole business of Exorcisms In which were I in as merry an humour as his Lp. is there I could make his discourse there far more ridiculous than he makes any thing found in the Churches Ritual which book we are onely to defend or he to object if
p. 8. The clear saying of one or two of those Fathers truely alledg'd by us to the Contrary will certainly prove that what many of them suppose it do affirm and which but two or three as good Catholicks do deny was not then a matter of Faith or a Doctrin of the Church I wish my Ld. had been so Ingenuous as to have made use of this Principle when he charg'd our Church it self with the mistakes of a few Writers contradicted not by one or two but sometimes by a whole Nation But this Principle shows 't was not Reason in him but Will and Interest which made him so hot As for his Principle it self it subsists not at all For is it not known that more than one or two that is S. Cyprian and the African Fathers deny'd the Baptism of Hereticks Valid yet the Contrary was notwithstanding found and defin'd to be Faith and the Sence of the Church Let him consider how perfectly he engages himself in the very Sphere of Contingency and recedes from Universality the Sphere of Certainty when he comes to rely on one or two unless he can show those one or two strangely supported and upheld by Universal Nature or concurring Circumstances 'T is possible even one or two Lawyers may hap to be ignorant of two or three Acts of Parliament But my Ld is still the best confuter of himself as appears lately by this present Principle apply'd to his former carriage against our Church To himself then let him answer I conceive that if one or two's not denying it to be of Faith or affirming expresly 't is not-of-Faith he engages not so far but bare denying a point argues what many do affirm to be not-of-Faith à fortiori one or two's affirming positively that to be of Faith and the Doctrin of the Catholick Church which many others barely deny argues 't is of Faith 'T was of Faith then what Gennadius cited by himself p. 59. affirms that After Christs Ascension the Souls of all Saints go from the body to Christ This being so let him reflect what himself asserts p. 49. that Justin Mariyr Tertullian Victorinus Martyr Prudentius S. Chrysostom Arethas Euthimius and S. Bernard affirm none go to Heaven till the last day Either then Gennadius his Testimony delivering the doctrin of the Catholick Church is Inefficacious and yet 't is incomparably the best nay the onely Efficacious one in my Lds. whole book or else according to him many Fathers and not one or two onely denying a point is no argument but that point may be of Faith Whether all those Fathers held so or no is another Question and requires a longer discussion 32. Fathers then are useless to the Dissuader as having according to him no virtue at all of setling the Understanding Yet he must make a show of them else all 's lost and so he tells his Readers p. 8. as if all were well two things both very remarkable The one that notwithstanding In the prime and purest Antiquity the Protestants are indubitably more than Conquerours in the Fathers A high Expression but compar'd with what he sayes p. 7. that in those times our present differences were unheard-of it signifies that they miraculously more then conquer where if his words be true no mortals else could either conquer or even attacque For how should one fight against such points in difference from those Fathers who never heard of those points The other is that even in the Fathers of the succeeding Ages the Protestants have the advantage both numero pondere mensurà in number weight and measure which joyn'd to his words at the bottome of p. 7. that each side may eternally and inconfutably bring sayings for themselves out of those Fathers which signifies that 't is to no end or purpose to alledge them amounts very fairly to this that he brags Protestants have a far greater number of Citations which are to no purpose than Catholicks have that those Citations which have no possible force of concluding or no weight at all do weigh more strongly for them than for us and lastly that they have a greater measure than we of proofs not worth a rush with which they can bubble up their books to a voluminous bigness And we willingly yield them the honour of having a very great advantage in all three in case they be such as his own words qualifie them to wit that each side may Eternally and Inconfutably alledge them 33. We come now to his main and most Fundamental and in comparison his onely Principle p. 9. laid out thus We do wholly rely upon Scriptures as the Foundation and final resort of all our Persuasions but we also admit the Fathers c. To finish our Discourse about the Fathers will make way to the Scripture What means admitting as contradistinguisht to relying on Not relying on that 's certain for 't is contradistinguisht to it And yet to alledge any thing for a Proof as they do Fathers and not to rely on it is to confess plainly for Truth will out that they alledge them meerly for a show He sayes they admit them as admirable Helps for the Understanding the Scriptures and good Testimony of the Doctrin deliver'd from their Forefathers Have a care my Ld. This supposes the Certainty of Tradition For if there be no Certainty of delivery there is no doctrin delivered nor consequently any thing for them to testify and so the words good Testimony unless our Ground of Continual Tradition stands mean directly that they are good for nothing as your former Discourses or Principles made them But I ask is their Interpretation of Scripture or Testimony Certain If not why should they even be admitted Or how can Vncertain Interpreters and Witnessers be admirable Helps to interpret right and good Testimony I fear my Ld. can onely mean they are Admirable Helps as Dictionaries and Books of Criticisms are to assist his Human Skill about the outward Letter which is a rare Office for a Father and not to give him the inward Sence of it or the deliver'd Doctrin of the Catholick Church for unless All conspire to speak to the same point if any one be silent concerning it it argues not according to my Ld. p. 8. a Catholick Consent and so is far beneath an admirable help And this is what we reprehend exceedingly in the Protestants that they love to talk gaily in common of any Sacred or Grave Authority for an affected form or show but not at all value the Virtue or Power of such an Authority not judge interiorly they have any worth valuing They would credit themselves by pretending Fathers yet at the same time lay wayes to elude them at pleasure or which is their very temper springing from their renouncing Living and determinate Sence and adhering to dead unsenc't words they study to speak Indeterminately and confusedly not particularly and closely 34. Do I wrong them Let my Ld. clear me His First Principle is by him
to be said since the whole world sees plainly we still maintain the Field against them nay dare pretend without fearing an absolute baffle which must needs follow had we not at least Probabilities to befriend us that our Grounds are Evidently and Demonstrably Certain nay more dare venture to take the most clearing Method imaginable to stand or fall by and withal are bold to challenge them that they have no Evident Grounds to begin with nor dare venture to pursue that evidencing Method But my Lds own words in his Liberty of Prophecying Sect. 20. § 2. will beyond all confute evince it ad hominem at least that we have Probabilities and those strong ones too on our side I pick out some leaving out other weighty ones which hisExpressions had too much deform'd His words are these Such as are the Beauty and Splendor of their Church their pompous Service the Stateliness and Solemnity of the Hierarchy their name of CATHOLICK which they suppose their own due and to concern no other sort of Christians he ought have said which the establisht use of the word and deriv'd riv'd down to the Successours of those who first had that Name forces all even their Adversaries to give them when they speak naturally and makes them despair of obtaining it for themselves The Antiquity of many of their Doctrins The Continual Succession of their Bishops their Immediate derivation from the Apostles the Title to succeed S. Peter the Multiteudand Variety of people which are of their Persuasion Apparent Consent with Antiquity in many Ceremonials which other Churches have rejected a pretended and sometimes an apparent Consent with some elder ages in many matters Doctrinal the great Consent of one part with another in that which most of them affirm to be de fide the great Differences which are commenced amongst their Adversaries Their happiness in being Instruments in converting divers Nations he should rather have said All The Advantages of Monarchical Government the benefit of which as well as the Inconveniences they dayly enjoy the Piety and Austerity of their Religious Orders of men and women the Single Life of their Priests and Bishops the severity of their Fasts and their Exterior Observances the known Holiness of some of those persons whose Institutes the Religious Persons pretend to imitate c. After which he subjoyns These things and diverse others may very easily persuade persons of much reason and more piety to retain that which they know to have been the Religion of their Forefathers which had actual Possession and seizure of men's understandings before the opposit professions had a name Thus he By which words 't is Evident we have Probabilities and high ones too on our side else how could they be able very easily to persuade persons of much reason especially they having as he sayes more piety or more then much that is very much which argues rather that those motives for Catholick Faith were sutable to Piety or Truths ot at least exceedingly-seeming-Pious so as the great Piety of those persons neither checkt at the practice according to those Motives nor their much Reason reach't to a discovery of their Fallaciousness Whence we may gather farther than those Motives so standing for us are to be rankt in the highest degree of Probability For since those Persons are confest to be very Pious that is very Good and so unapt to be byast by Passion and withal to have much Reason 't is plain the Cause of their Assent to Catholick Faith must be look't for in the Object and have a wonderful appearance at least of Evidence or highest Probability which is able to conquer and satisfy so Rational and sincere Understandings This being so my Ld. cannot in reason own himself a Dissuader nor pretend his Discourse has power to dissuade any from our Faith unless he put down the whole force of what we build our Faith on together with his motives why he judges it false and then compare or weigh those reasons together and so conclude his absolutely preponderating I doubt those very motives deliverd faintly by himself though an Adversary are such as had he laid them open at large as he does his own Objections he would have been infinitely puzzled to find others to overballance them with any show of Reason But I will not put him upon so large a task Let him onely consider on what Grounds the Rule of our Faith is built to wit on sensible and unmistakable matter of Fact from age to age and this unmistakableness confirm'd supernaturally by the concern of the Thing obliging the Beleevers best care to preserve it and by the Goodness implanted in their hearts by Christ's Doctrin which kept lively awake that care as it is at large laid open in Sure-Footing and then compare it with Descanting upon Scripture's Letter by Human Skills which is the Ground of the Protestants Faith as contra-distinguish't from ours or rather of their Dissent or negative Tenets and show those Grounds preponderating ours and then his Reader will have some encouragement to heed his Dissuasive otherwise he can have none Sixth Way 10. A Sixth way is to demand of his Lp. if he will undertake the pretended Evidences he produces whether Reasons or Citations have not also been pretended at least to be answered by Learned men on our side and that the Indifferent part of the world have judg'd the Catholicks were so evidently concluded against by the Protestants that they were not able in reason to reply However he ought to have alledg'd that in the Evidences he brings the Protestants have had the last Reply that so at least there may be some sleight conjectural likelihood they were Unanswerable or Convictive This I say seems in reason fit to have been voucht and as Natural Method requires it plac't at the very Entrance of his Book so to give the Reader some faint hopes his perusing it might be perhaps to some purpose What does my L. of Downs He professes at the very beginning of his Introduction the direct contrary For he confesses there that the Evidences on both sides in questions of difference between our Churches have been so often produc't c. It will seem almost impossible to produce any new matter or if we could observe how unlikely he makes it he should conclude any thing it will not be probable that what can be newly alledg'd can prevail more than all which already hath been so often urg'd in these Questions He should after the words so often urg'd have added and never answer'd otherwise the often urging signifies nothing as to Convictiveness Yet careless of this he proceeds But we are not deterred from doing our duty by any such considerations as knowing that the same medicaments c. Which waving the pious Rhetorick to any Understanding man signifies directly as much as if he should profess I am resolv'd to write a Book against the Papists whatever comes onit or whether it be to purpose or
Certain means to arrive at their Sence and till then I beseech you what are they else but meer WORDS or rather meer Characters and Sounds What high deference I give to Scripture see § 18 19. beginning p. 146. in Sure-Footing To Councils see Corol. 27. To Fathers taking them properly you may be inform'd by the whole Body of my Discourse concerning Tradition of which they are a part and the Eminentest Members of it in Proportion to their number Your 4th Injury is that the onely thing I place Infallibility in is Oral Tradition and the Testimonies of Fathers of Families whereas I place Infallibilities also in other things though I make this the greatest But your discourse makes me disesteem and exclude all others both Popes Prelates Fathers and Councils by establishing this Whereas by settling this I establish all others nor find you any such Expressions in my Book on the contrary 't is evident by those words I include them unless you think Popes and Prelates are not Fathers of Families but take lodgings or hire rooms in other mens houses by the week Truth is being to express the obligatory descent of Faith from Age to Age I cast about for a common word fit to express such Deliverers and conceiv'd this of Fathers of Families the aptest because the Church consisting of Families this was most General and every Master of a Family by being such has an Obligation to see all under him taught their Catechism or Faith This in common which was enough for my purpose then But were I to distinguish the strength of those Testimonies I should show that a Priest hath an Incomparable advantage above a Layman a Bishop above him and the Head of the Church above a Bishop Your 5th Injury is lighter because it speaks but your own Apprehensions and I am to expect no better from you My many chimerical suppositions and my Impertinencies in which I so please my self must needs begets wonder say you in case the man as probably be of any account and reputation in the world Now my Suppositions in the way I take are chiefly these that men in all Ages had Eyes and Ears the wit and if they were good Christians the Grace not to tell an open and damnable ly to no purpose and for these I should much wonder my self if you did not wonder at such odd Grounds and esteem them Chimerical because you have read them in no ancient book for you use not to look into Things By this extravagant kind of dealing you say you cannot but suspect me to be one of the Fraternity of the new-pretended Lights I believe you heartily For to begin with Self-evident principles and thence to deduce Immediate Consequences is such a new Light to you as I dare undertake scarce one beam of it ever enter'd into the Eye of your Understanding I conceive 't is the difference between your way ours which breeds all this mis-intelligence Ours ayms to bring all Citations to Grounds by way of Cause and Effect yours to admit them confusedly especially if writ by some old Authors provided they speak not for the Interest of Papists for then they are questionable Ours is to be backwards in assenting to any thing writ long ago till our Reason be satisfy'd no Passion or mistake could invalidate its Authority yours to believe them hand over head if the book be but said to be Authentick which is to a degree the same Weakness as that of the rude Country people who think all true they see in Print and that their having a ballad of it is sufficient to authenticate it Our Principle is that no Authority deserves any Assent farther than Reason gives it to deserve and hence we lay Principles to assure us of Knowledge and Veracity in the Authour ere we yeeld over our Assent to his sayings Yours is kinder-hearted than to hold them to such strict terms and is well appay'd if some Authour you have a conceit of praise the other for a good Writer or his work for a good Book Ours is to lay Self-evident Principles and deduce immediate consequences and by this means to cultivate our Reason that noblest Faculty in us which constitutes us Men yours to lay up multitudes of Notes gleand from several Authours and if you better any Spiritual Faculty you have 't is your Memory not your Reason Hence we carry for the main of our Doctrin and as far as 't is antecedent to written Authority our Library in our Heads and can as well study in a Garden as sitting in a Library stufit with books whereas your way of Learning ties you to turn over leaves of Authours as children do their Dictionaries for every step of your discourse and as an ingenious man said of those Poets who spun not their Poems out of their own Invention but made them up of scraps of wit transcrib'd from other Authours Lord how they 'd look If they should chance to lose their paper Book So we may say of you that if your Notes you have with much pains collected hap to miscarry you are utterly at a loss so that little of your Learning is Spiritual and plac't in your Soul as true Learning should be but in material and perishable paper and characters In a word your whole performance ends here that you are able to declare what other men say whereas ours aims at enabling us to manifest what our selves KNOW No wonder then if our wayes being so different we cannot hit it but that as you think ours Chimerical so I assure my self yours and consequently all you write in that way is as far as you go about to conclude or cause Assent by it exceedingly ridiculous This I doubt not will confirm you in what you said before that I am no Friend to Ancient Books or Learning To Note-book Learning indeed not much to true Learning or Knowledge very much and even to the other as far as it conduces to This. To Books I am so much a Friend that I desire not a few should be selected of each sort by a General Council of Schollers and the rest burn'd as did an ingenious person but I would onely have the riff-raff burn'd 't is no great matter if that tedious Legend of Dr. Dee's Sprights accompany them and the Generality preserv'd but so that their Contents should be gather'd in Heads or Common-place books for Schollers to look in occasionally not for rational Creatures to spend their whole lives in poring on them and noting them with a foolish expectation to find true Knowledge by stuffing their Heads with such a gallimawfry and after 40. years thus spent never the wiser for indeed this is little better than for one to hope to frame himself a good sute of Apparel by picking thrums ends out of a multitude of old and overworn Garments But to the point I distinguish Books And as for the Scriptures ascertaining their Letter and Sence which is done by Tradition 't is clear they
to beat down the wordish and dissatisfactory way of Writing and go about to Evidence the Ground of all our Faith knowing that as wounds are never connaturally and solidly cur'd by uniting the distant sides at the surface and leaving them disunited and unheal'd at the bottom but the cure must begin there first so the onely Way to heal the Wounds of the Church is to begin first to win some to acknowledge the most radical and bottom-Principle of all Faith as controverted between us without which all agreement in particular points must needs be unsound and hollow-hearted This is my onely aym in Sure-Footing That therefore you may not obstruct so good a work and withall perform the duty of a solid and candid Writer I offer to your self and all ingenuous Readers these few Reflexions not sprung from my Will for what Authority have I to prescribe you your method but from true Reason working upon the Thing which makes it just duty in you and so ought oblige you to follow it 3. In the first place fince the scope of my whole Book is about the First Principle in Controversy or the Ground of all Faith as to our Knowledge that is about a Point antecedent to all particular Points I conceive it reasonable you should let your Discourse stand firm to the matter in hand and not permit it to slide into Controversies about Particulars For so 't is evident we shall be apt to multiply many words little to our present purpose On what conditions you may have right to alledge Particulars as pretended Instances of Traditions failing shall be seen hereafter 4. Next I desire you would please to speak out Categorically and declare whether you hold Faith absolutely Certain to us or else Possible to be false for any thing we know To explicate my self better that so I may void some common and frivolous Distinctions my intent is to demand of you in behalf of the Christian Reader and his due satisfaction whether you hold Gods Providence has laid in the whole Creation any Certain means by way of Proper Causes to such an Effect to bring down Faith truly to us and whether we can arrive at Certain Knowledge of those means that is come to see or know the Connexion between such Causes and their Effect spoken of I make bold to press you earnestly to this declaration and my reason is because nothing will more conduce to the Conclusion of our present Debate For in case such Causes be laid and can be seen by us then they are Evident or Demonstrative Reasons for the Ground of our Faith's Certainty But if no such Causes be laid or being laid cannot be seen by us then all the Wit of man can never avoid the consequence but that we can have onely Probability for all our Faith that is for any thing we absolutely know 't is all as false as an old wife's tale since there are no degrees in Truths and Falshoods If you advance this Civil piece of Atheistry you must pardon me if I be smart with you in opposition to so damnable and Fundamental an Errour I love Christianity and Mankinde 〈◊〉 well to suffer that Position which destroyes effectually the Root of all their Eternal Happiness and the Substance of all their Hope to pass unstigmatiz'd as it deserves Nor think to avail your self by some Discoursers in our Schools It will be shown when prest that they are still preserv'd good Christians through the virtue of Tradition which they all hold to notwithstanding their private speculations but you not because of your want of Certain Grounds to make you rationally hold Christs Faith They onely mistook a Word whereas you will be found to erre in the whole Thing or the ordinary Means to true Christianity Again if such Causes be fitting to be laid by God's Providence 't is impossible to avoid the Doctrin propos'd in Sure-Footing because 't is absolutely Impossible to invent any thing that looks like such Causes but those which are deliver'd there nor did any other Way ever attempt to show any such Whence I foresee your Cause will force you to fly for refuge to the actual Uncertainty or possible Falshood of all our Faith for any thing any man living knows by ordinary means A sad consequence of an erroneous tenet But 't is connatural and so to be expected such Effects should follow the renouncing the Rule of Faith 5. Thirdly I conceive it very reasonable that you would please to declare whether Controversy onght to have any First Principle or no If none then to speak candidly out and confess that Controvertists are Certain of nothing they say since their discourse has no Ground or First Principle to rely on If any whether Tradition be It or if it be not what else is and then vouch as plain reason tells us you ought that what you assigne has truly in it the nature of a First Principle which common Reason gives to be self-evidence Or lastly to profess if you judge it your best play that what you substitute in stead of Tradition though it be a First Principle yet it need not be at all self-evident Any thing shall content me so you will but please to speak out and to the point 6. Again since it is evidently your task to argue against Tradition's Certainty 't is as Evident that while you argue against it you must bear your self as holding It uncertain I conceive then plain Reason obliges you not to produce any thing against Tradition which depends upon Tradition for its Certainty for in doing so you would invalidate and even nullify all your own proofs Since if Tradition be held by you uncertain and they have no certainty but by means of It they must be confest Uncertain too and so they would be incompetent to be produc't as proofs and your self very dis-ingenuous to produce them I add self-contradicting too and Unskilful Nature and Aristotle teaching us that a Discourser ought not sustain contrary to himself Hence plainest Reason excludes you from alledging any kind of Testimony either from Scripture Councils Fathers or History till you answer my Corollaries 12 15 16. which pretend to demonstrate the Certainty of all these dependent on Tradition's and the onely way to show my discourses there to be weak is to manifest my mistake by declaring into what other thing your Certainty of those Testimonies is finally resolvable which is not coincident with Tradition When you produce such a Principle and prove it such you have right to alledge the foresaid Testimonies for then you can make good their Authority Till then you can have no right in true reason to do it Not onely because till then you are to be held a Renouncer of that Thing 's Certainty upon which there are pretended demonstrations against you Theirs is built and those presum'd true ones because you let such strongest Attempts pass unanswer'd but very particularly for this Consideration that our present matter