of his ever had from the Church which argues it's perfect Conformity to the Churches Sense in setling and stating the Right Rule of Faith I transcribe then from this Ancient and Learned Father his whole Second Chapter in his Treatise Entitled Against the profane Innovations of Heresy which is this Hic for sit an requirat aliquis c. Here perhaps some may ask since the Canon of the Scriptures is perfect and enough nay more thâ—â— enough suffices to it self for all things what need is there that the Authority of the Churches Sense should be joyn'd to it Because all men do not take the Holy Scripture by reason of its depth in one and the same meaning but divers men interpret it's sayings diversly so that as many Opinions in a manner as there are men seem possible to be drawn thence For Novatian expounds it one way Photinus another Sabellius another and Donatus another Arius Eunomius Macedonius take it in one sense Apollinaris Priscillianus in another sense Jovinian Pelagius Coelestius understand it thus and lastly Nestorius otherwise And therefore it is very necessary by reason of so great windings of so various Error that the Line of the Prophetical and Apostolical Interpretation may be directed according to the Rule of the Ecclesiastical and Catholick Sense From which place we may Note 1. That though he allows the Canon of Scripture perfect and sufficient for all things yet by showing it Interpretable divers ways and this by Great and Learned men and so that they fall into multitudes of Errors by those Inerpretations and thence requiring the Authority of the Churches Sense as necessary to understand it right so as to build Faith on it he plainly shows that Scripture alone is not sufficient for this End since it needs another to atchieve it And hence it is not said simply it suffices for all things but Sufficit sibi adâ—omnia It is sufficient to it self for all things which can only mean that it has all the Perfection due to it 's own nature as I shew'd above p. 87 88 89. or is sufficient for the ends God intended it for reckon'd up by S. Paul to Timothy amongst which no such thing is found as sufficiency of Clearness to every sober Enquirer so as to build his Faith on his private Interpretation of it without the direction of the Churches Sense only which will come to Dr. St's purpose Since then I allow Scripture all Sufficiency and Perfection but this of being sufficiently clear to private Understandings so as to build their Faith on their own Interpretations of it I allow it all this Learned Father or the Ancient Church ever did 2. 'T is observable that he puts not the fault in the Persons but gives for the reason of their misunderstanding it the depth or deep sense of the Scriptures which argues that though some few out of wickedness wilfully mistake yet the General reason of the miscarriage is the disproportion of the Seripture to private Vnderstandings in Dogmatical Points of Christianity as I constantly maintain 3. He cals the Interpretation of it a Line which is Flexible and Dirigible and the sense of the Catholick Church the Rule which lies firm as apt to direct another and so with me he makes the sense of the Catholick Church the only Rule of Faith 4. This Sense of he Church is intimated to be Antecedent to all Interpretation of Scripture and therefore the Church must have had this Sense or Knowledge of Faith by Tradition there being no other way becoming Gods Ordinary Providence but these two 5. These things being so 't is most Evident that when in the former Chapter he mentions the Authority of the Divine Law meaning the Scripture and the Tradition of the Catholick Church he meant them jointly as appears expresly by the very next words beginning this present Chapter nor did he speak there of the means of bringing men to Faith as the Rule of Faith ought to do but of keeping them in Faith or preserving them from sliding into Heresie and since he attributes in this Chapter Convictiveness of what 's Faith only to the Churches Sense 't is manifest all that remains to be attributed to Scripture is Agreeableness of it's Letter if a good Pastor expound it to the present Faith of the Church to see which exceedingly comforts Faith in the hearts of the already-Faithful who must need 's have a high Reverence for the Holy Scriptures Authority The whole strain then of my Discourses here against Dr. St. concerning the Rule of Faith is perfectly consonant to this Learned Father of the Church and to all Antiquity Only our frequent and close Contests with our acute Modern Dissenters have obliged us to a more Scholar-like way of distinguishing our Notions exactly which the Ancients did not and Faith being contain'd in two things the Scriptures and the Breast of the Church of determining which of them is the Proper Ascertainer of Faith to all the Faithful and those which are to be converted and so in true and exact Speech the Rule of Faith and both this Father and Evident Reason give it to be the Church What then Dr. St. is to do in this Point if he makes any such Attempt is to alledge Convincing Testimonies that the Ancient Fathers held Scripture so plain to every Sober Enquirer as to give him such Certainty that he may safely build his Faith on his own Interpretation thereof without needing the Churches when he produces such Testimonies as come home to this or an Equivalent sense he will work wonders and unless he does this he does just nothing But I foresee two unlucky difficulties one that he will not find one Testimony of any Authority which excludes the Church from this Office as himself directly does next that could he produce thousands he would spoil them all at the next word and render them Inconclusive that is Insignificant with telling us very soberly they are all Fallible as to that effect and consequently were perhaps in an Error in all they say FINIS * See Sure Footing 2d Ed. p. 145 146. * Rule of Faith p. 118. Rule of Faith p. 153. Reason against Raillery p. 190 191 c. * Rule of Faith p. 118. See his Preface to his Sermons p. last
if they do not 't is their own fault they shall be sure to be sav'd And as for such points as a Trinity Christ's Godhead Real Presence and such like the knowledge of them even in case they are truths is not of necessity to salvation since none doubts but tis absolutely speaking possible to be sav'd without knowledge of them since many have been actually sav'd who never heard of any such points Having impartially said in short the best I could in Dr. Sts. behalf and much more than he has said for himself let us see now what ought to be reply'd in behalf of Truth To make way to it I premise these Maxims 1. That according to the Ordinary course of God's Providence men are sav'd by means 2. That All points of Faith are to some degree Means of salvation 3. That according to the several Circumstances and Exigencies of particular persons one needs more Means than another 4. That therefore it must be said some have miscarry'd because they had no more of those means of salvation apply'd to them who might yet have been sav'd had they had more This being so how great a presumption and madness it is to affirm that every man who reads the Scripture shall be sure to understand there so much as is sufficient means for His salvation or motives to work up his soul to a disposition for Heaven considering his Exigencies without needing the knowledge of other Points which contain other Motives ten times more forcible perhaps to move and excite him to true interior goodness Is it not manifest that considering mens several capacities which 't is a perfect Phrenzy to think they must needs be perfectly adjusted to their spiritual necessities one may as well say that every one who throws a Die upon a Fortune book shall most certainly light on his own Lot as that every one who reads Scripture shall let his exigencies be what they will find motives sufficient for his salvation If Dr. St. sayes that some one or two Points have prov'd sufficient for some few therefore they might have serv'd All if they would and that God's goodness towards Christians obliges him to no more I reply First That he speaks against nature since t is evident some temptations require greater Motives to overcome them than others and no man can assure us that those who have fewest motives shall not have the strongest temptations And if it were but rightly comprehended that t is Love of God which unites us to him and so saves us and that 't is for want of this those miscarry who do miscarry it would be easily understood that many excellent and incomparable motives as the Godhead of Christ and such like are lost to weak souls and consequently Heaven by their not understanding them and not only so but by the necessary connexion of truths with one another while they misunderstand the Scripture and so by their holding opposite to such great truths oppose in their thoughts other points of Faith those also lose their motive force whence their souls become tainted with multitudes of erroneous Maxims and Practices Secondly this answer takes away the necessity of all other points of faith but of such a few of them only which have hapt by the very especial assistance of God's preventing and assisting grace to have accidentally as it were suffic'd to have sav'd some few If he sayes that proceeding on this manner none can hold an error for they are to hold nothing but what they see to be evidently there and in all other things which they see not they are to suspend I would know what should hinder them from thinking they see that to be evidently there which is not evidently there since 't is acknowledg'd the vulgar or Generality are but bad judges and distinguishers of a true Evidence from a Counterfeit one besides there are in the open Letter as it lyes many Heresies and if they know these to be such how can they be sure of any thing they read there to be True since nothing is plainer in the letter than are those Heresies unless it be said that natural or moral Maxims taught them these places are to be literally understood and did not tell them so of the other and then they are beholding to those Maxims and not to Scripture for their faith since in that case It has taught them no more than they knew before Again may not an acute wit make out to the generality of D. Sts. Faithfull that to know the meaning of Scripture right they must compare one place with another and then by doing so dexterously make them beleeve a thousand Errours to be pure Scripture and God's Word which are not Much more might be said on this occasion but I only make one reflexion on this Principle and so proceed His intent in it is to shew which Party runs greater hazard The Adherers to Scripture us'd on his fashion or those who hear the Church and he would run us down by vertue of an unprov'd Supposition that the Church is not Infallible To offer him fair play let us grant him all the advantages he pretends to in Scripture and let him grant us all we pretend to secure us in the Church and then compare the two hazards together nay more let us condescend as much as himself can imagine even so as to abate the Infallibility of the Church and to grant that she is Fallible and yet the very light of Nature will stand on the side of our Faithfull against his For this teaching them that Superiours are to be obey'd and their Teachers to be heard and believ'd in things not known to be against God's Command and experience telling them that Scripture is oft times liable to dispute in passages that to both sides seem clear both Humility Prudence Obedience and the due care of their Salvation and all Virtues that can be concern'd in this kind of action incline them strongly rather to adhere to what Persons wiser then themselves or their Pastors conceive to be the meaning of Scripture than to what seems so to themselves in opposition to the same Pastors and Multitudes of other Christians who are evidently of greater knowledge and as far as they can be inform'd of equall sincerity 19. The Assistance which God hath promis't to those who sincerely desire to know his will may give them greater assurance of the Truth of what is contain'd in the Books of Scripture than it is possible for the greatest Infallibility in any other Persons to do supposing they have not such assurance of their Infallibility God hath promis't no Assistance that those should arrive at their end who take a way disproportion'd to that end otherwise God should oblige himself to work constant Miracles as oft as well-meaning people out of weakness should act imprudently Next if men desire sincerely to know Gods will and be humble and if they be not 't is doubtfull their desire is not sincere as is
which places each word is to be taken thus or thus nor can it justifie with absolute or Infallible Certainty either its Text or Copy to be substantially like the Original nor if we may trust Dr. St. here Princ. 15. can any Authority on Earth supply that necessary duty for it nor it being requisite to compare one place to another so to find out the sense does it tell us which place is to be compar'd to another as its proper Explainer nor of the two alluding places which is to stand firm and be taken as the Letter lies which to bend its signification in correspondency to that other without fore-knowledg of which 't is pure folly to think to avail our selves by comparing Places None of these things I say are found in the Scriptures Letter as it lies which notwithstanding and perhaps many other such like it had been agreeable to Gods Wisdome and Goodness to have given it in case it had been intended by him for a Rule of Faith or such a Direction by relying on which people of all capacities might have so well-grounded an Assent to those Points as is impossible to be an Errour while they thus relie on it which Assent in Christian Language we call Faith On the other side 't is evident that of some Points it gives onely accidental hints here and there without insisting upon them amply or explaining them fully and that Book which was most designedly intended to assert Christs Divinity was yet so far from putting it out of all dispute or preserving it from being oppos'd and call'd in question that never yet did Heresie prevail so much against Gods Church as did the Arians who deny'd that very Point of Faith But what needs more to evince this Point than these two Arguments one à priori the other à posteriori All words are either Proper or Improper and Metaphorical of which Proper ones express that the Thing is indeed or in reality so but Improper ones that 't is not indeed or in reality so whence it happens that in matters of so exact Truth as Points of Faith especially when the Points are of main Concern it imports a plain Heresie either to take a Proper word for an Improper or an improper one for a Proper For example those Texts expressing that God has hands feet repents grieves is mov'd by our Prayers c. are if taken properly wicked Heresies and destroy the Spiritual and unchangeable nature of the Godhead Also to take those words Christ is man suffer'd dy'd rose again c. improperly are wicked Heresies too and take away the main supports of our salvation This being so it follows that the absolutely-certain Knowledg when the words of Scripture are taken properly when not being determinative of what 's true Faith what Heresie it must be had from the Rule of Faith it self and so from the Letter of Scripture if that be indeed the Rule But this Knowledge is not had from the Scriptures Letter for this must either be done by that Letters signifying in each place expresly or equivalently that the words are properly or Improperly there taken which is Impossible to be shown nor was ever pretended or else by signifying the contrary Point in another place and this as far as the bare Letter carries or abstracting from all Interpretation can onely signifie that the Letter in one place seems to contradict it self in another place and this as far as the bare Letter carries or abstracting from all Interpretation can onely signifie that the Letter in one place seems to contradict it self in another place which is far short of giving us an unerring security which side is Truth Or if it be said the Letter alone gives us not this security without some Interpretation then this Interpretation performs what the Letter if it be a Rule ought but could not and determines with Absolute Certainty when the words are taken properly when not that is gives us our Faith and consequently that Light or Knowledge whatever it was which the Interpreter brought with him and had it not from the Letter gave us the right sense of Scripture and so It not the Scripture was the True Rule of Faith From the Effect or à posteriori I argue thus We experience that Great Bodies of men of divers sects with equal earnestness as far as appears to us go about to find their Faith in the Scriptures Letter and equally profess to rely upon Gods Assistance to that end wherefore either we must be forced to judge that none of those several sects do sincerely desire to find True Faith in the Scriptures and so by Dr. St's Principles no sort of men in the whole world has right Faith which quite takes away all Christianity or else we must think all of them truly desire to find right Faith in the Scripture and rely on Gods help to assist them In which case since the fault is not in them taken as applying themselves to their Rule and relying on it and yet 't is maniâ—eâ—t they differ that is one side errs in most Fundamental Points as in the Trinity Divinity of Christ Real Presence of Christs Body in the Sacrament c. it follows unavoidably that the Faulâ— is in those persons in holding it their Rule for in case they err'd not in holding it to be a Rule that is in case it were indeed apt to ascertain them absolutely if they apply'd it and that they did actually apply it it is impossible they should have ever err'd Scriptures Letter then is far from securing men of all sorts while they rely on it from Errour since whole Bodies of men and amongst those multitudes of great Scholars and learned Scripturists erre grievously and that in most Fundamental Points even while they rely upon it Which if it destroy not the nature of a Rule I know not what does This Discourse being forelaid we shall be able to make shorter work with his Principles to which we now address Whereas then in his tenth Principle he contend that the will of God can be sufficiently declar'd to men by writing I answer That by Extraordinary Contrivances and Actings of Gods Wisdome and Power it may but that this will avail him little since 't is evident that de facto God has not thus exerted his Wisdome and Power in making Scriptures Letter fit for that End whence we conclude that it was never meant for a Rule and whereas he says that words are equally capable of being understood spoken or written I deny it absolutely for nature teaches us that the countenance and Carriage of the Speaker the Accent of the voice the giving a due and living Emphasis to the words with the whole Complexion of Circumstances in which the Speaker is found and which generally are not unknown to the person to whom he speaks and amongst these principally his applying himself pertinently to the present exigency Thoughts and Expectation of the Hearer All these I say and
enough and apply that Capacity to their power by as great a Diligence as any nor can he in Charity deny but they sincerely endeavour to know the meaning of it in such points Therefore he cannot deny but the persons attending to the Rule are faultless either in understanding Scripture in these points if it be to private Understandings clearly intelligible or VVill to understand it if they could and indeed 't is Incredible they should not will or desire this since they use such exact diligence in it and solemnly profess to rely on the Letter alone or that did they indeed sleight the Letter or purposely decline relying on it their byass should not manifestly appear in so long time and they be branded for Evident Insincerity He cannot deny then but the Persons are faultless as to their Capacity and Will to understand the Rule therefore unless he will renounce his Reason he cannot deny but the Fault must be in the same Persons judging that to be the Rule which is not and consequently that the Letter of Scripture is not alone and of it self clear and Intelligible enough to preserve private men both capable and diligent and relying solely on It from possibility of Error no not from actually Erring in most Fundamental Points of Faith nor consequently has it in it the true nature of the Rule of Faith and so since God never intends any thing should do what its Nature reaches not to do that is should do what it cannot do 't is manifest Scriptures Letter was never intended by God for that End or to be such a Rule 13. Although we cannot argue against any particular way of Revelation from the necessary Attributes of God yet such away as writing being made choce of by him we may justly say that it is repugnant to the nature of the design and the Wisdome and Goodness â—f God to give infallible assurance to persons in writing his Will for the benefit of Mankind if those Writings may not be understood by all persons who sincerely endeavour to know the meaning of them in all such things as are necessary for their salvation It is not yet prov'd nor ever will that God hath made choice of the Way of writing for a Rule of Faith nor design'd it for that end nor that the benefit he meant Mankind by such Writings was to Ground their Faith on what appear'd to their private Judgments to be the sense of the Letter therefore 't is no wonder if all persons stould hap to misunderstand it even in such things as are necessary for their salvation notwithstanding their sincere endeavour to know the meaning of them since God has never promis'd that any who takes a way never intended by him for such an End shall infallibly arrive at that End by such a Way nor is the Wisdome and Godness of God at all concern'd in preserving any from Error if they take such a Way especially if we reflect upon these following Considerations First That God hath no where engaged his word to secure every single or private man from Error who shall sincerely endeavour to find his Faith in the Scripture in case he rely on his own private Judgment neglect to hear his Pastors whence if such private persons rely on Gods promis'd Assistance to such an End they rely on what neither is nor ever was and so no wonder their hopes fail them if those Hopes be groundless Secondly They cannot but know if but meanly vers'd in the world that whole Bodies of men and amongst them divers of great learning interpret Scripture several ways in very concerning points of Faith and it must needs favour of a proud self-conceit in any person to think God regards his single self more than he does whole Bodies and Great Multitudes Again it cannot without a strange Unreasonableness Uncharitableness be imagin'd or judg'd that not one person of those many who adhere to the opposite Tenet as clear to them in Scripture according to their best Judgment does sincerely endeavour to know the meaning of these Sacred Books and if they do then Common sense tells this private person that the whole Foundation on which his Hope is built is unsound and that more is requisite than the Letter of Scripture and a sincere endeavour to understand it and that if these suffice to direct him right they ought for the same reason be sufficient to direct another and so he ought to doubt whether himself or those others proceeding on the same Grounds and having the same Means be in the right that is he ought to doubt of his Faith no better grounded Lastly This private man belongs to some particular Church and so has Pastors and Governors set over him to teach and instruct him and those too as wee 'l suppose read and rely on the Scriptures Also he must judg this Church sincerely endeavours to know the meaning of Scriptures for this being the requisit condition to find right Faith without this his Church has no right Faith and so is no Church now for a private man who is subject to such a Church and ought to be taught by the Pastors of that Church not to submit to the Judgment of that Church and his Lawful Pastors as to the Sense of Scriptures or his Faith even though they be sincere endeavours as well as he but to adhere to that for his Faith which appears to his private self to be in the Scriptures though he contradict and defy all the Church he his a member of in so doing which he ought to do if he proceed on this Principle that Scriptures may be understood by all persons who sincerely endeavour to know the meaning of them in all things necessary for his salvatiou for he ought not for any mans sake relinquish his Faith or its Rule I say to behave himself thus as in that supposition he ought is such an intolerable ma apert Presumption so Sensless and Unnatural and Self-condemning a Rebellion and such a Fanatick Spiritual Pride as I much doubt will give a man but small title to hope for Especial Assistance from Gods Wisdom and Goodness At present I onely remarke the Faults of this Principle which are these First That it supposes God has made choice of or designd the Scriptures to be this Rule of Faith for private persons Next that Gods Wisdome and Goodness is Engag'd that it be thus Intelligible to every sinâ—ere Eadeavourer Neither of which is in the least prov'd or proveable Lastly when he comes to the close instead of making it so intelligible as that all sincere Endeavors might therby be absolutely secur'd from erring as to the Truth of their Faith which is the Duty of the Rule of Faith seeing very well these slight Grounds were not able to carry so far he substitutes in their room these waty words in all such things as shall be necessary for their salvation so that though they erre in all the main points of
ought they will as God's command the Order of the World and common Reason obliges them be rather willing to trust their Pastors who are better qualifi'd for such Knowledge and whom God hath set over them to instruct them what is the sense of Scriptures than trust their own private shallow judgments And 't is observable that Dr. St's discourse all along concerning this point is a plain begging the Question For if God have left a Church and commanded the Faithfull to hear it and conform to it's Faith and consequently to receive the sense of Scripture as to Points of Faith from it then there is no necessity of Scripture's being intended to be plain to all Capacities of it self nor of thinking men may sincerely desire to know God's will in Scriptures and use due means to understand it without making use of the Churches Judgment in that affair upon which false supposition Dr. St. wholly builds his otherwise perfectly ruinous discourse Wherefore his supposition being deny'd I must reply that those who sincerely desire to know Gods wisl have a certain virtue in them called Humility and this teaches them not to overween in their own opinion but to think that their Pastors appointed by God to teach them are generally wiser then those who are to be taught and that those who are wiser know better than those who are lesse wise A little of this plain honest rational Humility would quite spoil all Dr. St's discourse and convince all his Principles to be a plausible piece of Sedition and licentious presumption tending of its own nature utterly to destroy all Church and Church-Government and if applied to that Subject Temporal too I should be glad to know what means the word such in the last line if he means Infallible and that the Church pretending to Infallibility must have Infallible Assurance that she is Infallible t is asserted by us and his supposition that she is not is absolutely deny'd For the Church is Infallibly certain that Christ's promise to her shall not fail and also Infallibly certain by constant Tradition and the beleef of good Christians in all Ages that Christ has promis'd her this Security or Immunity from Errour in Faith none questioning it but those who have rebel'd and revolted from her In a word this whole Principle is Faulty being built on a False and unprov'd Supposition and were the Supposition granted and that the Church were Fallible still it were false that his Faithfull would have greater Assurance of their Faith than ours as hath been partly now shown and more amply in my Reply to the foregoing Principle Recapitulation The Sum then of Dr. St's Performances in these ten Principles of his which most Fundamentally concern his Faith and the pretended Reduction of it to Principles is briefly this that he hath not brought so much as one single Argument proving either that Scripture's Letter is the Rule of Faith nor that Tradition or the Infallible Testimony of Gods Church is not it And as for the particular Maxims or Sayings of his on which he chiefly relies they have been one by one disprov'd and the opposite Truths establish't As 1. That Faith being such an Assent as when built as it ought to be on the means left by God for mankinde to rely ou is impossible to be False and so that Means or the Rule of Faith being necessarily such as while men rely upon it is impossible they should erre These things I say being so as I have largely prov'd in Faith Vindicated and the Introductory Discourse to this present Examin Dr. St. has not so much as made an offer or attempt to show that Scripture is the Rule of Faith 2. That since 't is agreed God can contrive Writings sufficiently Intelligible for that End or sufficiently clear to ascertain those who rely upon them of their Faith and yet on the other side 't is evident God has not de facto done this or contriv'd such Methods and ways as our Reason tels us evidently are proper means to keep those Writings call'd the Scriptures from being thus mis-understood by severall Parties even in Fundamental Points as we experience they are it follows hence most manifestly that God never intended the way of writing for the Rule of Faith 3. Since several Parties of excellent capacities in understanding words aright and both owning Scripture for their Rule and applying themselves with greatest diligence to know the true sence of it do notwithstanding differ in those Fundamental Points of a Trinity and the God-head of Christ 't is manifest that Scripture is not able so secure those who rely on it to their power of the Truth of their Faith and so is not the Rule of Faith 4. Again since in passages that concern Faith the knowing whether the words be taken properly or improperly is that which determines what is Faith what not and this knowledge is not had from Scripture it follows that Scripture is not the Rule of Faith 5. God has no where promis'd that he will still assist those who sincerely endeavour to compass an end in case they take a way disproportion'd to attain that end and which way was consequently never intended by him for such an end for this were to engage himself to do perpetual Miracles when ever any one should act irrationally Wherefore unless it be first solidly prov'd that Scripture is the Rule of Faith or apt of its own nature to give those who rely on it Inerrable security of the Truth of their Faith while they thus rely on it and consequently that it was intended by God for such an end none can justly lay claim to God's assistance or tax his Justice or Veracity if they fall into Errour Much lesse if they neglect those Duties which Nature makes evident to them and common Christianity teaches viz. to obey and hear their Governours Pastors and Teachers ordain'd by God and rely on their own private Wit or God's Immediate Assistance to their single selves rather than to those Publick Officers of the Church God had appointed to govern and direct them for this intolerable spiritual Pride is so odious and pernicious that it most justly entitles them to delusion Errour and Heresie 6. Hence since God has left some means for Faith and 't is Blasphemy to say that those who rely according to their utmost power on the means left and Intended by God to lead Men into Truth can while they do so run into Errour which yet private understandings as was seen may relying on the Written Word it follows 〈◊〉 unavoidably that some other way is left which is not Writing to secure the Relyers on it from Errour in Faith or to be to them the Rule of Faith 7. Scripture not being the Rule and Christ's Doctrine being once settled and accepted in the Christian part of the World by means of Miracles there needed no more but to derive it down to future Ages and this Doctrine being Practicall and so objected
to to our Sences Testimony was sufficient to do it so it were sufficiently qualify'd that is the best and on the best manner supported that any ordinary means can be such was the Testimony of the Church or Tradition which besides what is found in humane Testimony has also the whole body joynt force of supernaturall motives to preserve the Testifiers Attentive and Veracious Thus the Church or the Christian Society of Men being establish't Infallible in delivering down Faith needs not prove her Infallibility by Miracles but 't is sufficient the Faithfull beleeve that Christ promis't to protect her from Errour and consequently to beleeve the An est of her Infallibility or that she is infallible upon the same Rule they beleeve all their Faith and the Scriptures too viz. upon Tradition and that her Controversiall Divines who are to defend Faith by way of Reason or Argument prove the Quid est of this Infallibility or make out in what it consists or in what second Causes this ordinary and constant Assistance is founded and consequently prove it's force by such Maxims as ground the Certainty of Humane Testimony and if the Reader comprehends them by the strange efficacy of supernaturall motives also conspiring to strengthen Nature as to that effect of rightly testifying the Doctrine received and beleeved to be Christ's 8. There is no Necessity then of proving this Infallibility meerly by Scripture interpreted by virtue of this Infallibility Nor do the Faithfull or the Church commit a Circle in beleeving that the Church is Infallible upon Tradition For first taking them as Faithfull precisely they are meerly Beleevers not Reasoners or such as put one proposition artificially before or after another Next they beleeve only the supernaturall Infallibility built on the Assistance of the Holy Ghost that is on the Churches Sanctity and this is prov'd by the Human Testimony of the Church to have been ever held since the beginning and the force of the Human Testimony of the Church is prov'd by Maxims of meer Reason Add that the Certainty of such a vaâ—t Testimony is self-evident practically in the same manner as 't is self-evident that the Testimony of all England cannot deceive us in telling us there was such a man as King Iames whence no Circle can possibly be committed if it be beleeved for it's own sake or rather known by its own light though there would be if discoursing it rationally we should put the same Proposition to be before and after it self 9. Since those who have the least capacity of penetrating Scripture and consequently according to Dr. St. have the fewest Motives of good life applyed to them may frequently live amongst greatest Temptations that is in circumstances of needing the most 'T is a blind Undertaking and no securer nor wiser than idle Fortune-telling to bear men in hand that persons of all capacities who sincerely Endeavour shall understand Scripture in all such things as are necessary for their Salvation 10. Since 't is most evident that private Iudgments may err in understanding Scripture but not evident that Christ has not promis'd his Church Security from erring in Faith they run the greater hazard by far who rely on their private sense of Scripture then those do who rely on the Church especially since the Church denyes not Scripture but professes to go according to it and so in common reason is likely to comprehend its meaning far better than private men but most especially since our Moderns when they first began to rely on their own Judgments of Scripture for their Faith revolted from hearing the Church and rebell'd against Pastours and lawfull Superiours which both Gods Law and the light of Nature taught them they were to follow and submit to Thus our new Apostle of the private spirit of Gifts and new Light hath endeavour'd to pull down the Church and subvert the Foundation laid by Christ and instead thereof to set up as many Churches as there are private and proud Fancies in the world Each of which may by this devillish Doctrine defy the Church for Teaching him his Faith or for governing him as as a Church that is governing him as one of the Faithfull for she can bind never a subject in conscience to any thing but what her self and each man judges to be True and Sound wherefore if any or each private person understands Scripture another way then she does he is enfranchis'd by his Rule of Faith which he ought not relinquish from her Authority she may in that case wish him well and pity him as every old wife may also do and he in return may wish well to the Church end pity her She may endeavour to admonish and instruct him better so to pluck him out of his Errour and he in requital that he may not be behind-hand with the Church in Courtesy may with equal nay better Title admonish the Church of her failing and endeavour to pull her out of her Errour or as the new phrase is reform her for being conscious to himself that he reads the Scripture and sincerely indeavours to know the meaning of it he has all the security of his Faith and consequently of the Churches being in an Errour that may be Nor can he being thus gifted want Power to preach to her and others For certainly the World would be most perversly ordered if they who are in Errour should have Licence and Power to propagate their Errours and those who follow Truth should have no leave to propagate Truth Thus the Church has lost all power that is has lost her self being able neither to lead nor drive her equally-gifted Subjects so that her exercising Jurisdiction over them would by this wicked Doctrine be a most Tyrannical persecution and every such private man's refractory Disobedience see the wonderful gifts of the private spirit would become a most Glorious Confession of Christian Faith and every Rebell acting against the Church so he be but so self-conceited as to judge he knows more of God's mind in the Scripture then all the Church besides would by this Doctrine in case the Secular power should think fit to curb his Insolence be a most blessed Martyr such no doubt as John Fox'es were The Fifth Examen Sifting the Eleven remaining Principles which seem Chiefly to concern the nature of Faith WHoever hath perus'd the foregoing Examin and reflected well upon what a sandy Foundation Dr. St. has built his Faith will doubtless expect that he will assigne it such a nature as is of no exceeding great strength for fear lest his weak Grounds ' should not support his Superstructures nor his Proofs carry home to his Conclusions Now the Conceit which the Generality of Christians have of Faith importing it's true Nature is that 't is such an Assent as is impossible to be an Errour or False Whence follows that its Grounds are likewise such And indeed since all hold That Faith is an Immoveable and Unalterable Assent which is to
be so the not appearing to be otherwise will avail nothing to conclude it so All it can effect is to make us maintain our liberty of suspence and Indifferency that so we may be void of forestalment or prejudice and free to believe it when competent or conclusive Reasons shall appear to evince it What then Dr. St. is to do is to produce Conclusive Reasons to evince that the Letter of Scripture has such a perspicuity and other Perfections belonging to such a Rule as must ground that most Firm Vnalterable and if rightly grounded Inerrable Assent call'd CHRISTIAN FAITH and this considering the Nature of Faith the Effects which are to proceed from Faith and Obligations issuing from it and Incumbent on the Faithful as such But in stead of performing this necessary Duty of his to argue as if though the Reasons he brings conclude it not yet it must needs be so because we have no Evidence 't is not so is so pleasant and new invented a way of arguing that he must find the VVorld a new Logick and Mankind it self a new nature ere he will arrive by means of such Discourse at any Conclusion And whereas he seems to build much on the word Equal alledging that we must for the reasons there given hold the Scriptures the Rule of Faith unless it appear they are defective with an Evidence Equal to that whereby we believe those books to be the word of God 'T is absolutely deny'd not only for the reason lately given in common that none can be bound in reason to hold or own any unprov'd Position but particularly because of the peculiar nature of the thing we are discoursing of For the Rule of Faith being that which is to tell us God said such or such things or engages the Divine Authority for their Verity if we should happen to misuse Scriptures Letter by letting loose people of all capacities to rely on it as their Rule of Faith then in case it should peradventure not have been intended by God for this end but for some others we expose our selves and others to the desperate danger of running into Endless Errors by this misusage of Scripture and of adhering to those Errors as firmly as if God himself had spoke them that is we hazard erring irrecoverably in matters which ate the proper means of salvation and blaspheming God daily in making him the Patron of Lies In this case then there is particular caution to be used and so if upon sincere and strict Examination it be but any thing dubious that Scripture was never intended by God for a Rule of Faith we can never be obliged to hold or own it for such especially not having any Certain Argument to conclude it such much less must we be oblig'd to hold it to be such unless we have EQVAL Evidence of its Unfitness to that whereby we believe those Books to be the word of God unless Dr. St. will say that nothing ought to restrain a man from hazarding the greatest mischiefs in the world but perfect Evidence that no harm will come of it So that still his main business and without which he does nothing at all remains yet to be done which is to bring solid convincing Proofs that God intended Scripture or his Written Word for the Rule of Faith that is for such a Rule as people of all sorts relying on it should be Infallibly or absolutely-secur'd from Error by so doing In making good which concerning Point he hath hitherto trifled exceedingly Nay himself here is afraid to own the Goodness of his own Proof otherwise he would never have thought it fit to annex those words Vnless it appear with an Evidence equal to that whereby we believe those books to be the word of God that they were never intended for that End because of their obscurity or imperfection For the Evidence whereby it appears those Books are the word of God must be conclusive else according to his Grounds we can never conclude one word of Faith True and so an Evidence equal to it must be Conclusive likewise If then he had thought his reasons to prove Scripture the Rule of Faith were Good and Conclusive Common sense would have forbid him to add these cautious words Vnless it appears with an equal evidence c. for Common sense tells us no Conclusive reason can possibly be brought for the Negative if Conclusive Reasons be once produc'd or be producible for the Affirmative It appears then by this behaviour of his on this occasion that he distrusts that either he has produc'd any Conclusive reason for that main Point of Scriptures being intended for the Rule of Faith or that any can be produc'd Lastly That we may give perfect satisfaction to this Fundamental Principle of his though perhaps there is not Evidence Scriptures Letter was never intended for the Rule of Faith equal to that whereby we believe those Books to be the Word of God in regard we believe this upon the Authority of Gods Church which is supported with the whole strength of Best Nature and Supernaturals yet we have rigorous and Conclusive Evidence that it is not penn'd in the very best way imaginable to avoid all ambiguity of words and forestall mistakes as being immediately inspir'd by God whose works are perfect if it had been intended by him to be our Rule of Faith it ought to be And I shall presume I have already brought Conclusive Evidences both à priori and also à posteriori in my answer to his 10th Principle to evince that it has not in it the nature of such a Rule nor consequently was it intended by God to be such a Rule How incomparably excellent soever it be for other Ends for which it was indeed and solely intended But omitting all the rest at present I remind him of one which I cannot too often repeat and enforce it upon him thus He cannot deny but the Points of a Trinity and Christs Godhead are most Fundamental Points of Faith he cannot deny but both Protestants and Socinians rely on the Letter of Scripture for the sole Rule of their Faith and sincerely endeavour to know the meaning of them which is all he requires on the Persons side He cannot deny but that notwithstanding this one party holds There is no Trinity and that Christ is not God the other that there is a Trinity and that Christ is God and so one side erres most Fundamentally He cannot deny but Error being a Defect there must be a fault somewhere to beget this Error that is either in the Persons judging of what the Rule of Faith tells them or else in judging that to be a Rule which is not the Rule for in case they erre in neither of these 't is impossible they should erre or misconceive at all in matters of Faith He cannot deny in any reason but the persons on both sides being such acute men and excellently well vers'd in the Letter of Scripture have both Capacity