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
Scripture as they take the word a Principle nor consequently Fathers or Councils whose Certainty is resolvable into It. They 'l say that Letter is a Certain Way to arrive at a determinate Sence and consequently that they have determinate Sence by means of it I ask is the Letter alone such Then in case it alone be absolutely sufficient to such an Effect it will perform it in every one as if Fire be alone sufficient to burn all the world and so overpower all the resistence of the matter do but apply it 't will do that effect or burn it Is there requisit some Schollership in the Subject Scripture's Letter is to work upon or desire to see Truth in their Will Then if this be the onely requisit it will work its Certifying or determining Effect upon all Schollers and well-meaners and so no Schollers and well meaners can disagree in the Sence of it The contrary to which all sober men acknowledge daily Experience teaches us as much as we can be sure of any Human Action The like Discourse holds whatever requisits they desire for still it will follow they must say that in whomsoever they place that requisit they cannot differ in the since of Scripture which Common Experience will confute Nor will it avail them to run to Fundamentals unless it be said the Trinity is no Fundamental which the Dissuader makes the onely one p. 12. for the Socinians deny this amongst whom 't is a strange Immodesty in the Protestants to say there is nonc well-meaning Learned or unapply'd to Scripture Adding then to this most Evident Proposition that a Cause proper to produce such an Effect if we put the Patient dispos'd and the Application alwayes produces its Effect on the Truth of which all Nature depends adding this I say to the obvious and common Experience of Differers about Scriptures sence in all whom 't is Impossible to judge either Disposition of the Patient or Application is wanting for all read it and strive with all the wit and skill they have to find the sence of it it will follow most Evidently that the Fault is in the Agent or Cause that is that Scriptures Letter is unsit to Certify or bring us to a determinate sence of it and therefore since till we know the Sence of that Letter 't is to us but meer Words I am forc't by my reason to judge they have no Principles Those being Sence but that their whole way is wordish and not out of disrespect to them for this touches not them more than it does all others who have lest off the way of conveying down determinate Sence by Living voice and Practise or Tradition but I am oblig'd by Conscience and my duty to my Cause to declare that their whole Ground of their Faith is thus hollow and empty Whence I contest out of the nature of the thing that their Cause can bear no way of Sence or Principles but must forcibly be upheld by Wordishness as by quoting Texts without any Certain Interpreter Citations of Fathers not brought to Grounds not held by themselves Certain fine Scripture phras'd flourishes of piety and such like In which the Dissuader is Excellent Or else if the Objecter be very witty and have taken a great deal of pains in the way of Scepticism to be too hard for himself by bringing all into Uncertainty which is the acutest way of Wordishness and most proper to oppose any Discourse that tends to Establish and Settle because most opposit to it and so I am to expect Necessity will force them to take this way when any replies to SURE-FOOTING I know some will expect I should have answer'd the Dissuasive particularly but I know no reason why I should be sollicitous to stand cutting of each single Branch of Errour or be careful to hinder their growth after I have once pluck't the Tree that bore them up by the Roots POSTSCRIPT IF my Ld. please to reply which I fear will be too troublesome a task because of the illnaturedness and Inflexibleness of Principles or if he resolve to write hereaster against our Church his LP is intreated he would please to go to work like a Man that is orderly not confounding and jumbling all together Let him first define then what makes a Thing obligatory to be held by Catholiks a Doctrin of our Church or point of Faith then put down the very words of the Council in case it be difin'd next acquaint us with the nature of his objections vouch them Conclusive and let his Reader know in what their virtue or force of Concluding is plae't for this will strengthen them exceedingly and then let him fall to work when he will Above all I beg of him not to go about to forestall the sincere verdict of Reason by corrupting first the Will of weak people by pious Talk but first speak smart and home to their understandings with solid Reasons and then at the end of the Book preach as much as he pleases against the wickedness of a Point when he hath once demonstrated its Falshood Otherwise the Sermon so expands and ratifies the Proof and his Godly Rhetorick so evaporates his Reasons that it reflects no light at all and so no mortal eye though straining its optick nerves is able to discern it A Letter To Dr. Casaubon Honoured Sir AFter I had printed Sure-Footing I heard accidentally that you had been pleas'd to take notice of my Way and some signal Passages in Schisms Dispatcht I was glad to hear that so ancient a Friend of mine had offer'd me a fair occasion to renew our acquaintance resolving to take an account of his Exceptions and requite them with a due Satisfaction assoon as I could find a season proper Wherefore when the last sheet of my Appendix against the Dissuader was under the press finding both leasure and Opportunity to second my Intentions I took your Book perus'd diverse chief passages in it and particularly what concern'd my self p. 87. The first glance of it put me in some Wonderment at the difference I found between you in your Book and the character of you in my Thoughts long ago imprinted there For in these I found you a solid sober man a good Schollar as also ingenuous and candid but in your Book particularly in those passages I saw plainly and was troubled to see it you had either none of those Qualities I imagin'd in you or to a very small degree But I began straight to reflect with my self that as when I was a child I fancy'd rooms very spacious and streets very long which coming to the state of a Man I found very strangely diminisht so my riper and more Judicious Thoughts saw now the measure of your virtues in their true demensions which my younger and unexperienc't years had so strangely magnify'd and enhanc't I doubt not but your outward appearance will make it thought by those that know you I have said too much let 's see how
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
so qualify'd as is apt to convince to answer it and not at all by Protestant Grounds which yield them all Fallible yet I have that regard for any thing that tends though remotely to Solidity that I will even remit something of my own advantage to give it a respectful Consideration The Testimony is of Gennadius cited by my L. p. 58 59. thus For after Christ's Ascension into Heaven the Souls of all Saints are with Christ and going from the body they go to Christ expecting the resurrection of their body with it to pass into the perfection of perpetual bliss To which my Ld. subjoyns and this he delivers as the Doctrin of the Catholick Church I take this excellent Testimony as put down by himself to do which the usage of St. Greg. Nazianzen's immediately foregoing gives me small encouragement In answer then I affirm that this Testimony so insisted and rely'd on as against us is as plain a declaration of the Faith of our Church at present as any now-adayes Catholick could pronounce For since no Catholick holds that any goes to Purgatory but they who die Sinners to some degree and that all who are Saints are with Christ in Heaven as is evident by the Churches common language affirming constantly the Saints are in Heaven and never that the Saints are in Purgatory but the Souls onely it is manifest that the words are as expresly for us as we our selves could invent or wish I hope it will not wrogMethod if on this occasion I show how Protestant Writers speed when they bring against us any Testimony of a Father speaking as a Father that is declaring that he delivers the sence of the Catholick Church however in other Testimonies which speak not narratively or matter of Fact the very nature of words joyn'd with the variety of their Circumstances must needs afford room for ambiguity and several Glosses I affirm then that this Testimony not onely is not in the least opposit to us but is directly opposit to the Protestants in another point of Faith in which we differ To discover this let us reflect on the words After Christes Ascension into Heaven the Souls of all Saints are with Christ and ask what mean these words After Christs Ascension And first 't is Evident it puts a distinction between the Souls of Saints before Christs Ascension and After it in some Respect and what is this Respect most expresly this that the Souls of the Saints After Christes Ascension go from the body to Christ that is that before the Ascension none did The avowed Doctrin of the Catholick Church prosessing that those who die Saints in the Law of Grace go straight to Heaven but that the best Saints before our Saviours dying for them and Ascending with them did not Whence also we hold that Christes descending into Hell was to free them from that State of Suspence and Want of their strongly desired and hopet for Bliss According to that Hymn of S. Ambrose and S. Augustin in the Common-prayer-book so oft said over by rote but never reflected on When thou hadst overcome the Sharpness of death thou didst open the Kingdome of Heaven to all Believers Signifying plainly that no Believers sound Heaven open for them till after Christ's death By the Success of this one Testimony is seen how utterly the Protestant Cause would be overthrown by way of Testimony as well as Reason were Citations distinguish't brought to Grounds and those onely admitted from the Fathers in which 't is manifest they speak as Fathers or Witnessers of what is the present Churches doctrin To close up this Discourse about the Dissuader's Citations He is to show us first that they fall not under the Faulty Heads to which they are respectively assign'd or under diverse others of those Heads Next that they have in them the nature of Testimonies And lastly which is yet harder that though they have in them the nature of Testimonies their Authority is Certain and their language unambiguous so that they may be safely rely'd on for Principles or Grounds of a solid Discourse This if he shows of any one citation which strikes at our Faith I promise him very heartily to subscribe to the validity of all the rest 13. Thus much for his Authorities Next should follow a Refutation of his Reasons produc't against our Faith for as for those against our School-Divines or Casuists they concern not me as a Controvertist Let him and them fight it out Now Reasons that strike at our Faith must either be against the Ground of Faith and those shall be consider'd in my Answer to his First Section or against points of Faith And these may proceed two wayes First by showing those points Incomprehensible to our Natural Reason or unsutable to our Faney and this way he frequently takes making a great deal of game upon such subjects as any Atheist may do by the same way in points common to him and us But this hurts us not in the least in regard we hold not Mysteries of Faith Objects of Human Reason nor Spiritual Things the Objects of Fancy and so these Reasons need no farther Answer The other way Reasons against Points of Faith may proceed is to show those Points contradictory to some Evident Principles at least to some other known or else acknowledg'd Truth And these were worth answering But such as these I find none in his whole Book rather that he builds his sleight Descants or Discourses on some controvertible Text or Citation relying on them as firmly as if they were First Principles Indeed p. 65. the Dissuader tells us of a Demonstration of his for the Novelty of Transubstantion and that a plain one too But I shal manifest shortly from the very words of the Author Peter Lombard on which his Plain Demonstration relies that 't is either a plain mistake or plain Abuse of him nay argues the direct contrary to what the Dissuader product it for Some Consequences also he deduces ad hominem against diverse points of our Faith built on our own Concessions or Allow'd Truths taken from the Fathers by which he attempts to overthrow it But these Consequences are so strangely Inconsequent and those tenets he would counterpose so far from Contradictory that 't is hard to imagin whence his Reason took its rise to leap into such remote conclusions I 'le instance in two found p. 49 and 50. That the Conflagration of the last day and the Opinion of some Fathers that the Souls were detain'd in secret receptacles till the day of Judgment do both destroy intermediate Purgatory Which Consequences if he will make good I will vield his whole Book to be Demonstrative and Unanswerable In a word all the good Reasons he brings are taken from some of our Divines writing against others and he hath done himself the right to chuse the best which levelled against the opinion of a less able Divine in stead of a point of Faith must needs bear a
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
Catholick which was greedily catcht at by such as leapt for joy to find any licks thing to bespatter the Church with and startling some unattentive and too credulous Catholikes drive them zealous of defending the Council to an unwarrantable position which Tenet and its practice my Ld. himself knows well the Generality of Catholikes hate and detest as much as himself Eighth Way 27. THe eighth and last Way is to pick out as well as I can those Propositions or Principles my Ld relies on and show their Weakness which is sufficiently performed by singling them out and then naming them PRINCIPLES they are so quite unlike what they 're call'd Now his Principles he layes in his first Section I mean his main and Fundamental Propositions which because he relies on yet never proves we are from his carriage to take for Principles and Self evident to him though he himself calls them not so for 't is dangerous to them who have not Truth on their side even to mention the word Principle Evidence or Demonstration His First concerning Scripture I shall speak to anon A second seems to be this p. 6. We all acknowledge that the whole Church of God kept the Faith entire and transmitted faithfully to the After-ages the whole Faith that is to the Ages next after the Apostles as he expresses a little before call'd by him p. 7. the first and best Antiquily and signify'd to mean the First three Ages Now the Positive part of this Principle is good and Assertive of Tradition but withall unapt to stead him The Negative part of it or that the third Age transmitted it not to the fourth and so forwards imply'd in his Discourse would onely stead him but 't is left unproov'd and so is a Voluntary Assertion and strangely ridiculous For if the first two Ages kept the Faith entire and transmitted it to the third 't is Evident the Third was able to transmit it to the fourth and so forwards wherefore it being Evident from the Concern of the Thing it was also willing to do so 't is demonstrable it did so This Principle then on which he so much builds is either not for him or else highly against him 28. Another main and Fundamental Proposition or Principle is found p. 7. and as the former concern'd the Tradition of the Church so this and the three following ones concern the Authorities of Fathers The present Roman Doctrins saith he which are in difference were Invisible and unbeard of in the first and best Antiquity That is no Heretick had arisen in those dayes or in the first three hundred years denying those points and so the Fathers set not themselves to write Expresly for them but occasionally onely and yet by his leave our Controvâ—â—â—â—â—â— are frequent in citing them for diverse points especially for the Ground of our Faith the Churches voice or Tradition to the utter overthrow of the Protestant Cause So far this improov'd and main position disannulling all use of the Fathers of the first 300 years in our Controversies is from not needing proof or being Self evident 29. It may be his respect and value for the Fathers of the next Ages will make amends for this rashness He tells us immediately after that in the Succeeding Ages secular Interest did more prevail and the Writings of the Fathers were vast and voluminous full of Controversy and ambiguous Sences fitted to their own times and questions full of proper Opinions and such variety of sayings that both sides eternally and Inconfutably shall bring sayings for themselves respectively Now if they be so qualify'd that both sides may eternally dispute out of them and neither be ever able to confute the other or conclude then let him speak out and say all the Fathers after the first 300 years are not worth a straw in order to decision or Controversy nor yet the Fathers of the first 300 years because they spoke not of our points in difference and so there is a fair end of all the Fathers and of his own Dissuasive too for that part which relies on them which looks like the most authoritative piece of it The Reader will easily judge now whether we as he charges us p. 18. have many gripes of Conscience concerning the Fathers that they are not right on our side or the Dissuader Our constant and avow'd Doctrin is that the Testimony of Fathers speaking of them properly as such is Iufallible that in two Cases they speak as Fathers that is when they declare it the doctrin of the present Church of their time or when they write against any man as an Heretick or his Tenet as Heresy Some complexions of Circumstances also may be found out by much reading and comparing several considerations which make it Evident they speak as Witnesses though it be more laborious and tedious to compass a Satisfaction this way Whereas as appears by our Dissuader the Protestants neither acknowledge them Infallible nor indeed Useful And this is my Ld's FOURTH PRINCIPLE which with the former destroyes the Efficaciousness of all the Fathers invalidates all that part of his own Book which should seem weightiest 30. Notwithstanding the two former Principles to invalidate the Fathers it may still be said by the Catholicks in behalf of their validity as was by me now that the Sayings of Fathers as Witnesses are Convictive and therefore it should seem sit my Ld did lay another Principle to provide against that He is not unmindful of it but hath taken order about it For though p. 9. he tells us the Fathers are good Testimony of the Doctrin deliver'd from their Forefathers down to them of what the Church esteem'd the way of Salvation yet that is to be understood according to the Rule premised p. 8. thus Things being thus it will be Impossible for them the Catholicks to conclude from the sayings of a number of Fathers that the Doctrin they would prove thence was the Catholick doctrin of the Church because any number that is less than all does not proove a Catholik Consent So that unless each single Father affirm each single point to be of Faith or the Doctrin of the Catholick Church which morally speaking is Impossible to happen it follows by his words that 't is Impossible to conclude thence the Catholick Doctrin of the Church which amounts to this that 't is Impossible to conclude any thing in Controversy from the Fathers even taken as Witnesses And this is his FIFTH PRINCIPLE A strange conceit that it should be Impossible to know the Consent of all England in a matter of Fact for example the late war without speaking with each single man in the whole Nation Yet this is his Discourse when he sayes that no number less than all can prove a Catholick consent 31. Yet some use certainly he allows of the Fathers for all this else why does he quote them Yes and the Principle which I reckon his SIXTH by virtue of which he enforces them is this
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
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
are of Incomparable value not onely for the Divine Doctrin contain'd in them but also for many particular passages whose Source or first Attestation not being universal nor their nature much Practical might possibly have been lost in their conveyance down by Tradition Next follows those of Councils and Fathers and supposing Christ a perfect Law-giver 't is clear all they have to do with Faith is to witness the Churches beleef and the former of them to declare or explain Faith or the Churches Sence against obstinate Hereticks As such then their Books are to be valu'd that is exceedingly Next follow such as Euclid's or Archimedes his which express Science and those are of very great worth in regard they acquaint us with and manifest to our hands the Knowledge of the former world which being Speculative little of it could have come down by Tradition except when that Speculation became Practical and exprest it self in Matter by many useful or rather needful Arts Trades or Manufactures After these succeed Opinionative Books of which this last Age has produc't multitudes and these also are very useful if the Reader go not too credulously to work but have right Principles laid already in his head for then the variety of mens Conceits and their Reasons for them will hint to a Considerer diverse Consequences which otherwise the slowness and distractedness of our Reason would not have light of nay even the miscairiages of such Reasoners avail a wise man as Aristotle out of the contrary Opinions of Philosophers whom he saw failing in their Grounds gathered very happily the middle Truth These Books therefore are worth preserving Human Histories come next and These second Tradition in her object matter of Fact after she hath authenticated them and the Circumstances of their Writers There are others fit for Explications or Rational Declarations of a point by Similitudes allusions Examples such like as Pliny's Natural History Emblems Fictions others of an Ornamental Nature which being useful for Sermons and Discourses sutable to the middle size of the world 't is plain they are preservable With this caution that these and chiefly Opinionative books be either kept from the weak and credulous vulgar or else in the Preface to them some learned Authority declare in common how far they are to be credited lest by imposing on the reasons of the Generality they hinder the world's improvement Prayer-books and Recreation-books 't is almost as Evident they are to be preserv'd as 't is that Prayers and Recreations are to be used Onely caution is to be had the former be examin'd well and approov'd by Ecclesiastical Authority and that the later be chast and unabusive You have here my sentiment concerning Books against which you shall find nothing in Schism Dispatch't or any of my Writings In a word I would have every thing distinguish't examin'd by Grounds allow'd as far as 't is reasonable Nor wonder I much at your mistake of me in this point for you are not the onely man that thinks all Books and even Authority to be absolutely deny'd when they are sorted and rank't in their just degree of merit that is indeed settled and establish't for we Metaphysicians think nothing to stand firm but by being or being held-to-be truly what it is You denounce Wo to Colledges and Libraries if these men should prevail Yet you see now I leave you Libraries enow and permit you your onely darlings Books and onely desire you would love them wisely Neither will Colledges forfeit their Libraries to my Discourse Onely whereas you would have Schollers educated there onely pore on books Note and when they come to write quote I would have them take Principles along with them by which to judge and consider of what they read Without which 't is to be fear'd their much reading will do them more harm then good and even pervert honest natural Reason in them by filling their heads with a multitude of unconnected and unconnectible Ends of Sayings impossible to be ever postur'd in the frame of Reason and themselves unfurnish't of means to know which rather to adhere to which may sit them to talk indeed of many things like Parrats yet all the while for want of Principles know nothing of what they say If you would have Colledges consist of such I conceive I am a far better Friend to Colledges than your self are and that no great cause of Woe will come to them by my means But as our way in your conceit brings Woe to Colledges and Libraries so you affirm that Atheism and Mahometism will get by it By which I understand what a Disputant you are I beleeve you would quote Scriptures and Books to confute an Atheist or Mahometan whereas I conceive since all Discourse supposes an Agreement between the Discoursers in some Common Principle and they denie or undervalue your written proofs you must begin to confute them by Maxims of common Reason antecedent to all Authority For these Human Nature obliges all men to hold to unless they have quite irrationaliz'd themselves into perfect Scepticism whereas they reject or sleight the other which to render Efficacious you must go to work first with Principles of plain reason Your last Injury which I account the worst of all the rest is deliver'd thus Others of approved worth and abilities have met with this man who I think have done him more credit than he deserved This argues you are so set to abuse me that no Testimony though never so valid and confest to be such can stave you of And the Judgment or Veracity of my Friends who speak by Experience shall be question'd rather than you will be brought to entertain any conceit of me that 's handsome You leap voluntarily into Falsifications and ill-languag'd misconceits without any motive but are so restif and backward to think or speak in the lest civilly of me that witnesses of approved worth and abilities cannot win you to favourable apprehensions nor keep you from pursuing your resolute Censoriousness Had you found half that Testimony for the Authentickness of an old Writer in some mouse-eaten rag of Antiquity it had gone down currently with your Genius and bin next to Gospel I value not your Judgment of me but highly and equally dislike your humour as void of all Ingenuity whether it had been us'd to my self or another When you review Schism Dispatcht and see your mistakes I hope you will have a good conceit of my Friends at least for whom in this passage I apologize But that I may re-acquaint my self with you I am to tell you that you also have met me formerly and knew me very well Nay that I am exceedingly bound to you for the best favour in the world which is that accidentally you contributed to make me a Catholick But because 't is long ago I am forc't to remind you of it by two Tokens One is that in Durham-house where you at that time lodg'd when you came to