Tabernacle placed iâ— the sun Ipsa est Ecclesia saith S. Austin Epist 166. In sole posita The Church is placed in the sun Hoc est in manifestatione omnibus noâ—a vsque ad terminos terrae That is She is known by Her own apparent and manifest Euidence all the whole world ouer And because no one Father touches this point with greater Energy than S. Austin Hear yet more Tract 1. m. 1. Ioan Possumus digito c. S. Austins Iudgement concerning The Churches Euidence we can point at the Church and demonstrate it with à finger and They are blind who see it not Lib. 2. contra Crescon Cap. 36. Extat Ecclesia The Church is in Being apparently clear and conspicuous to all Again Lib 2. Contra Petil C. 32. Neminem latet verae Ecclesia The Church of Christ lies hid to none And Lib Contra crescon C. 63. The Church so clearly presents it self to all sort of men euen to Infidels that it stopp's the mouths of Pagans c. See also this great Doctor pondering those words of the. 30. Psalm Qui videbant me foras fugerunt c. Obscurius faith Hee dixerunt Prophetae de Christo quam de Ecclesiâ c. The Prophets haue spoken more darkly of Christ than of the Church And I think this was done because they saw in spirit that men would make Parties against the Church and not contend so much concerning Christ ready to contend about the Church Christ almost euery where was preached by the Prophets in some hidden or couered Mystery Ecclesia apertè but the Church was pointed at so clearly that all might see it and those also who were to bee against it I waue other Authorities for t' is tedious to proue à Manifest Truth or here to transcribe plainer Testimonies relating to this subiect Thus much premised 7. I say first Though Church Doctrin be more clearly expressed by the Church chiefly in all Matters of Controuersy than in Scripture For example you know the Church deliuers the An Assertion concerning Church Doctrin Consubstantiallity of the eternal Son with greater clarity than Scripture expresseth that Truth Yet no man can proue to reason this clearer Doctrin to be immediatly true vpon this sole ground Mark my precise words that the Church teaches it My meaning is The Church yet not manifested to bee God's Oracle by marks extrinsecal to its Doctrin leaues Reason so in suspence that it Cannot say This is the Oracle which teaches Truth or that the Doctrin of this not yet euidenced Society is Diuine and Orthodox The Assertion is so amply proued aboue that it is needles to press the Arguments further in this place All I say now is that we discourse in like manner of Scripture and Church Doctrin precisely considered as Essential Doctrin not yet made Credible by The Doctrin of Scripture or The Church not Proued true by Saying its true signes and Motiues As therefore the Verities of Scripture are not known to be Diuine Ex terminis because I read them in that Holy book But must haue them proued Diuine vpon à certain Principle distinct from Scripture So the Verities of the Church are not known Ex terminis to be certain before I proue the Church by Clear Motiues to be the Oracle of Truth whereby God speaks to Christians what I Assert is euident in Christ our Lord and his Apostles when they first began to preach For neither Iew nor Gentil belieued that Sacred Doctrin vpon their bare preaching Nay It scandalized the one and seemed à foolery to the other But when they saw it confirmed by Euident Signes and Wonders by eminent Sanctity of life by vndeniable Miracles and other Signal marks which the Author of Religion laid open to Reason Both Iewes and Gentils were gained moued to belieue by Such Inducements no less prudent than forceably perswasiue 8. The reason of all à Priori giuen aboue euinces thus much None can indubitably and immediatly own the Doctrin of either Church or Scripture as true and Orthodox but by one of these two means Either the light of natural Reason discouers that Truth Or it must be known by Faith Reason alone too weak to comprehend the Sublime Mysteries reuealed in Holy writ or taught by the Church boggles at all And left to it self reiects The reason of our Assertion at least the harder Mysteries as is manifest in both Iewes and Gentils Now to know them by obscure Faith is wholly impossible vnless one haue sufficient Assurance before hand grounded on other prudent extrinsecal Principles That both Scripture and the Church teach Diuine and certain Doctrin To know thus much the Rational man must discourse And in this present state of things first find out the Church by her Marks and Signes visible to all If reason complies not with this duty the Faith we draw from thence is no Faith but à precipitous foolish Credulity For who can prudently assent to the high Mysteries of Christianity vnlesse Reason first see it is prudent to do so This is what the Apostle deliuer's in few but most pithy words Scio cui credidi certus sum That is I first know why I am to belieue by Reason and then stedfastly belieue without further reasoning But enough of this in the Chapter cited aboue 9. The. 2. Proposition If the Doctrin of Christ's Church precisely considered according to its Essence bee not ex exterminis manifestly true or proues not immediatly that the Church is Orthodox vpon Her own meer saying that She teaches Truth It is euident She must be proued Gods Oracle by Motiues extrinsecal to Her Doctrin Now these Motiues purely considered as Inducements to belieue are not Articles of Faith but sensible reasonable and of such weight that they powerfully incline euery The Church first proued Orthodox by rational Motiues well disposed vnderstanding to this rational assent As God anciently spake by Moses by Christ and his Apostles So he now also speak's by his own true Church And lead's men vnder her safe Conduct to Saluation 10. The ground of my Assertion is no less euident than the very Position it selfe First Christ himself neuer proued his Doctrin true by meerly saying it was so but confirmed it by signes and wonders which made it immediatly credible as is sayd already So also did his Apostles And so doth the true Church to this day 2. Vnless Christians haue those prudent Inducements preuiously applied to reason before they belieue the Holy Catholick Church The wise prouidence of God must be supposed so neglectiue as not to let men know after à prudent and diligent search which or where his true Church is Though Scripture Compares it to à glorious Sun most visible to all And the Fathers say they are blind that see it not 3. All those Millions of Christians who belieued the true Church who liued and dyed happily in it innumerable shed their blood for the verities of it were not
Credibility of Scripture is not grounded vpon any vniuersal fallible Consent but stand's firm vpon other stronger antecedent Motiues Nay it cannot Originally depend therevpon Seing that Consent is an Effect of those other preuious Motiues as S. Austin often cited fully and most amply declares Be it how will 4. The greatest Difficulty yet remain's for if we enquire of The Sectarles Plea taken from any vniuersal fallible Consent is groundless Sectaries where we may find this common Consent we haue but à very slippery Foundation to stand vpon Because not only Heretiques of old denied the greatest part of Scripture But to come to chese neerer times the Machiauellians and Socinians also called Christians hold many things in that Sacred Book so far aboue all humane reach that they Say it is vnworthy God to require from any à firm beliefe of them Add herevnto the multitudes of Heathens Iewes and Turks who imcomparably whole Multitudes against Sectaries surpass Christians in number All these you know Vnanimously reiect our Scriptures How then can the far lesser number of Witnesses agreeing in one consent Plead so much as probably against such multitudes of Opponents If no other motiue be alleged in behalfe of the Scriptures Credibility but only the Consent of few against many 5. But to silence all Sectaries hereafter Who insist so much vpon this vniuersal Consent we will here gratis suppose the Argument drawn from thence to be most conuincing Yet withall Assert it so little aduantages the pretences of Protestants That Sectaries plainly Conuinced it vtterly ruin's their vndefensible Cause For where haue these men any vniuersal Agreement of Christians for their Canon of Scripture Where haue they it in behalf of their iarring Opinions Where for their Negatiue Articles Where for their particular Sense of Scripture which not only the Roman Catholick Church but others also reiect as false vngrounded and Heretical If therefore this Common consent for the Bible Obserue the Proofs were more Vniuersal then it is it help 's not Sectaries whils't their singular Opinions their Canon and Sense And in à word their whole Religion as Protestancy is so particular to Them selues That the rest of Christians ashamed to own it will be no Partners with them 6. And thus you see where the Weaknes of this whole Plea lies They will haue à vniuersal Consent for the bare letter of Scripture Let that be so It s nothing to the purpose if afterward without any thing like à Vniuersal agreement they misinterpret the Book and make it speak what God neuer meant But this is done and I proue it vpon an vndeniable ground thus The Book of Scripture misinterpreted Proues nothing Whilst these men cannot name or Design à Church reputed Orthodox fiue or six Ages since which as vniuersally maintained their new Doctrin as She then owned the old letter of the Bible They misinterpret the Book And gain no more But Sectaries do So and t is proued by vrging that vniuersal Consent for the meer letter then the Arians â—r worst of Heretiques gain But to name such à Church for their Nouelties is imposible and consequently no less impossible to resolue one Article of Protestancy into God's Diuine Testimony expressed in Scripture 7. A 2. Obiection Christians faith seem's not resoluable into the Diuine Testimony speaking by the Church because How the Chutch is both the Truth belieaed And the Motiue also why we belieue the Church is Res credita ot the Material Obiect belieued Witness that Article of our Creed I belieue the Holy Catholick Church Therefore it cannot be Ratio Credendi or the Formal Obiect which moues to belieue I Answer first Sectaries must solue this Difficulty For is not the very Doctrin contained in Scripture according to them the Res Credita or the Material Obiect belieued The Incarnation I hope whereof we read in Scripture the like may be said of euery other Mystery is the Truth belieued with such à faith as they haue And the Sectaries must solue this difficulty very same Word of God wherein thefe Truths are contained is also the Ratio Credendi or Formal Obiect mouing to belieue For demand why they Assent to the Incarnation T' is Answered because God has reuealed it in Scripture No other Motiue can be pretended Therefore the same Scripture differently considered is both the Material Obiect or Verity belieued and likewise the Formal which moues to belieue And thus we Say The Churches Proposition Or rather God speaking by the Church may well be the Truth belieued and à Motiue also why we belieue wherein there is no Difficulty at all Take here one Instance in known Philosophy which teaches that light both terminates our Vision and so considered is the Material Obiect seen withall it moues By two Instances we ciear what is asserted the Power to see it and vpon that Account is rightly called the Formal Obiect In Acts of Faith you haue the like Instance For example When the Iewes Assented to the ancient Prophets vttering these words Haec dicit Dominus c. Our Lord speak's thus They belieued that God spake by the mouth of those Prophets it was one of the Materal obiects Assented to by Faith and they belieued also for those Prophets words as God's own Voice and had respect to them as to à Formal obiect Why they belieued 8. A 3. Obiection If the Church be the Primum Credibile or the first Belieuable Oracle whereby God speak's to all How and in what Order we belieue the truths Proposed by the Church in this present State We are to declare how and in what order those Truths are deliuered by it which all are obliged to belieue And this cannot be done without Confusion and perhaps danger of à Circle also We haue partly Answered aboue where it is said That as the Apostles after the Knowledge had of our Sauiours Miracles belieued first in à General way He was the true Messias So we in this present State induced by all the Motiues of Credibility already laid forth belieue first in General That this Manifested Oracle is Christs own Spouse This general Assent first precedes which infallibly teaches the right way to Saluation And this truth we Assent to immediatly vpon the Churches Proposition or rather vpon God's Testimony speaking by the Church without depending on Scripture Iust as the Apostles belieued Christ our Lord to be the true Messias vpon his own Testimony proued Credible by Miracles and other Signal Wonders Thus far there is no Confusion at all nor any danger of à vicious Circle Now further This General truth admitted we proceed to the Beliefe of other particular Verities proposed and herein also follow the Apostles Steps and practise who assented to euery single Article which our Sauiour deliuered afterward vpon his own Word Why therefore may not we also Afterward we descend to other particulars belieue euery particular
proue The Assertion 266 CHAP. V. A second Reason showing That if rhe Roman Catholick Church erred but in one Article of Faith thère is now no Fundamental Faith in the world VVere Errour in this Church it is à remediless Euil and cannot be amended by any least of all by Protestants 276 CHAP. VI. Other Euidences of the. Roman Churches Perseuerance in the Primitiue Faith without change or Alteration VVhether wickednes of life necessarily induceth Errour into the Church The Donatists and Protestants Argue and Err alike 285 CHAP. VII Manifest and most vndeniable Miracles peculiar to the Roman Catholick Church only proue Her Orthodox withall show that She still retain's the Primitiue Doctrin 296 CHAP. VIII Miracles euident in the Roman Catholick Church No less induce All now to belieue Her Doctrin Than Apostolical Miracles Anciently Perswaded to belieue that Primitiue Doctrin The Denial of Miracles Impossibilitat's The Conuersion of Iewes and Infidels 302 The Admirable cure wrought by Blessed S. Xauerius in the Famous Citty of Naples vpon à worthy Religious Person called F. Marcellus Mastrilli à Noble man by birth and by Profession of the Society of Iesus The Proof hinted at aboue reassumed 312 CHAP. IX A word to à few Obiections as also to Mr stillingfleets vnworthy Exceptions against that euident Miracle wrought at Zaragosa in Spain 321 CHAP. X. Other Marks and Signes peculiar to the Roman Cathollick Church proue her Orthodox And make Her Doctrin euidently credible These laid forth to Sense and Reason distinguish the true Church from all Erring Societies Inferences drawn from the Doctrin Here deliuered 333 CHAP. XI Christ and his Church made manifest to à Heathen No Prophet comparable to Christ no Church comparable to the Roman Catholick Our glorious Christ Iesus Exhibits à glorious Church Hee is proued the Only true Messias And the Roman Catholick Church His only true Sponse How the Heathen Discourses if rational And Prudent 349 CHAP. XII The Aduersaries of the Roman Catholick Church plead vnreasonably A Discouery of their fallacies The cause of all Errour concerning Religion The only means to remedy Errour 363 Arguments drawn from what is said Reflections made vpon the premised Doctrin 377 CHAP. XIII Other Inferences drawn from the precedent Doctrin Atheists and Hereticks Argue alike The Motiues of Credibility lead to à total Belief of what euer the true Church Proposes A word of Mr Thorndicks Mistakes concerning the Church 181 A VVord of Mr Thorndiks Mistakes discouered in His Book of Forbearance 387 CHAP. XIV VVhether there be à Church of one Denomination infallible not only in Matters miscalled Fundamental but in all and euery Doctrin She Proposes and Obliges Christians to belieue as Faith CHAP. XV. Diuine Faith in this present State of things necessarily requir's à Church infallible The Reason hereof The Church neither Defin's nor can Define by Humane Authority only Her Definitions more than morally certain are Infallible Sectaries Recourse to Moral certainly in Matters of Faith à most frigid Plea Their Fallacy is discouered Obiections Answered 408 Other Obiections proposed by Sectaries Solued More of Moral certainty 419 CHAP. XVI Principles premised to the following Doctrin The Roman Catholick Church is à Church of One Denomination She and no other Society of Christians is Infallible Othet Grounds of Her Infallibility laid forth The Infallibility of Councils maintained against Mr Stillingfleets Supposed Truth and Reason There are no Principles whereby Approued Councils can be proued fallible Sectaries Conuinced by their own Doctrin 423 CHAP. XVII More of this subiect A further Search made into Errours called intolerable VVhether the Roman Catholick Church must be supposed by Sectaries to haue already Committed intolerable Errours Or only whether She may for the future Err Intolerably The Doctrin of Protestants proued False And most inconsequent 443 CHAP. XVIII Two Aduersaries mainly Opposit to True Religion The last and most vrgent Proof of the Churches Infallibility taken from the Necessity the Notion and Nature of true Religion Mr Stillingfleets Obiections found weak and weightles Most of them already Proposed and Dissolued by others A short Reflection made vpon some few 452 CHAP. XIX Certain Principles where vpon the Churches Infallibility stand's firm The End of Diuine Reuelation is to teach all Infallibly Euery Doctrin reuealed by the fiast Verity is no less infallible then true It s one thing to teach Truth another to teach Diuine and Infallible Truth Sectaries Strangely vngrateful A word of Mr Stillingfleets weak Obiections 465 THE THIRD DISCOVRSSE OF The Resolution of Faith CHAP. I. Some chiefe Contents in this Discourse briefly declared Mr Stillingfleets weak attempts against the Churches infallibility and the Resolution of Faith The Catholick way of resoluing Faith the very same with that of the Primitiue Christians Of the mistakes which run through Mr Stillingfleets whole Discourse 477 CHAP. II. Mr Stillingfleets 5 th Chapter Part. 1. examined is found VVeightles The weaknes of his Arguments discouered His First and chiefest Argument retorted and solued 483 CHAP. III. More of this subiect Obiections Answered A word to Mr Stillingfleets forceless Instances Motiues of credibility euer Precede Faith VVhether the rational Euidence of the Truth of Christ's Doctrin can be à Motiue to belieue it 493 CHAP. IV. More of Mr Stillingfleets Errours Of that odd kind of Faith he seem's to maintain grounded on Moral Certainty VVhat Influence the Motiues of Credibility haue vpon Faith Other Parcels of his Doctrin Examined and refuted Obiections Solued 505 CHAP. V. More quarrels Answered Mr Stillingfleets endeauour to catch Catholicks in à Circle demonstrated both vain and improbable His Obiections are forceless A word to an vnlearned Cauil 516 CHAP. VI. Mr Stillingfleet solues not His Aduersaries Argument A word of his tedious Shuffing The Motiues of Credibility both distinguish the Church from all other Heterodox Communitier and proue Her Infallible The Agreement with the Primary Doctrin no Mark of the Church More Mistakes and Errours discouered Of Mr Stillingfleets double Faith who Belieues but not vpon Diuine the Testimony That the Books of Scripture contain Gods word in them Yet Belieues the Doctrin in those books to be Diuine 523 Whether vve Square Circles in our Resolution of Faith The other mentioned Points in the Tittle of the Chapter discussed Vpon vvhat ground those Articles called the fundamentals of Faith are belieued in the Opinion of Sectaries 534 CHAP. VII Necessary Principles premised to the Resolution of Faith God can Speak in à Language proper to Himselfe His external language is twofold VVhen God speaks not immediatly He must be heard by his Oracle VVhat the exact Resolution of Faith implyes 545 CHAP. VIII The main Difficulty in the Resolution of Faith Proposed VVhat Connexion the Motiues haue vvith the Diuine Reuelation Of their vveight and efficacy God's own Language not imitable by his Enemies Faith transcend's the certainty of all Motiues The main Difficulty solued Of our great Security in Belieuing God Though vve haue not
the Vulgar let him read Gretser now Cited Bib. Max. sect 19. C. 4. and Serrarius C. 19. quest 143. And thus much of à digression CHAP. IX Proofs demonstrating that Protestants haue not so much certainty of Scripture as excludes à possibility of reasonable doubting A word of Mr Stillingfleets weak discourse with à Heathen 1. LEt vs if you please suppose that wee and Sectaries had now in our hands the very Autograph's of the whole Bible as it was once writ by the Prophets and Apostles or if you would rather Imagin the book drop't down from Heauen pure and euery way incorrupt I say the Sectary has not probable assurance of Scripture much less such à certainty as excludes à possibility of reasonable doubting The ground of my Assertion is this vndeniable Principle owned as well by Protestants as Catholicks Viz Scripture solely considered according to the exteriour letter vnless the true sense intended by the Holy Ghost be had is no Scripture to the Reader For example Because the Arian read's that sacred truth My Father is greater then I and stand's meerly vpon the bare sound of words without the sense intended by the Holy Ghost Hee hath no true Scripture Whence it is that S. Austin serm 70. Temp. hold 's Hereticks most vnhappy because they take the words without the sense haue à body without Words without the true sense no Scripture à Soul the bark without the sap the shell without à kernel c. S. Hierom also in cap. 1. ad Gal. v. 11. speak's to this purpose Ne putemus c. Let vs not think that the Gospel lyes in the words of Scripture but in the sense of those words we read not in the out-syde but in the pith and marrow of it There is no need of quoting more Fathers The Principle is agreed on by all and most indubitable 2. Hence I argue Nothing is more essential to scripture than the sense deliuered by the Holy Ghost but the Protestant where he is most concerned has not so much assurance of the sense intended by the Holy Ghost as excludes à Possibility of reasonable doubting and I proue it He is most concerned when he opposes our Catholick Doctrin and stand's vp in defense of his own opinions but in neither has he such an indubitable assurance of the Scriptures sense as excludes à possibility of reasonable doubting and this I say is euident For he cannot haue so much assurance if as weighty yea à far more weighty authority contradict's his sense But it is clear that not only the present Roman Church but other particular Churches in former ages reputed Orthodox contradict that sense the Protestant drawes from Scripture But Sectaries haue no Certainty of the sense when he opposeth Catholick Doctrin or defends his own singular opinions Therefore he has not so much certainty of the Scriptures sense as excludes the possibility of reasonable doubting Now that the sole iudgement of our present Catholick Church to dispute the thing no higher is as great vpon all accounts as the iudgement of Protestants seem's vndeniable And that the Testimony of our Church weakens the assurance of that sense of Scripture which Protestants lay claim to is most euident as wee see in school opinions when contrary to one an other for no man whether Philosopher or Diuine can prudently hold his opinion so certain as excludes à Possibility of doubting when as many wholly as learned yea more learned and numerous after à full knowledge had of it and long Study also deny that certainty Thus much I say is euident Now if the Protestant tells ' vs the Authority of his party weakens as much that sense wee make of Scripture as the contrary iudgement of our Church lessens his I answer The reply here is to no purpose For all I proue at present is that he want's this certainty whether we haue it or not is an other quaestion and clearly decided for the Catholik cause in the other Treatise Disc 2. c. 9. per totum Again were all granted the obiection would haue Thus much which is most fals only followes that neither of vs know assuredly the sense of Scripture which touches not the difficulty now in controuersy 3. My 2. Argument is so demonstratiue that if the Protestant A 2 Argument most Conuincing will please to solue it I 'le neuer trouble him more with difficulties To propose it clearly know only thus much That when the sectary read's Scripture and would haue it to his purpose He either ouer reaches the Text or fall's short of its meaning For example To those words of S. Math. This is my body he adds this as good sense This is à signe or figure only of my body Mark well We both read the same words but Catholicks deny that to be Scripture not because we deny the words but his sense we say is no scripture To that of our Sauiour I am with you alwaies to the end of the world He adds I am with you alwaies by à fitting but no infallible assistance We say this is no Scripture To that of S. Iames. A man is iustified by works and not by Faith only He adds he is iustified not before God but before men we still deny this to be Scripture And thus sectaries proceed with vs in all other controuerted Texts of Holy writ Whence I argue These Additions of à sign only of à fitting Assistance of iustification before men c are either the true sense intended by the Holy Ghost or Sectaries fancy but most euidently they are not the sense intended by the Holy Ghost for this must either be gathered out of Sectaries glosses and additions not scripture so many express words of Holy writ which is prodigiously false or must arise from the Holy Ghosts infallible assistance whereby Protestants as people Illuminated aboue all others giue vs the true meaning of Scripture and this besides the Paradox when à whole learned Church contradict's the assertion is most destructiue of the Protestants own Principle For they say the Holy Ghost interpret's by none enlightens none teaches none to deliuer the true sense of Scripture but such as do it infallibly which Truth is most vndoubted They say again when they giue the sense of Scripture or interpret God's word they do it so fallibly that it may be false or if they interpret infallibly and cannot err Eo ipso they are so farr infallible which they vtterly deny See Disc 2. c. 9. n. 8. what then remains but that the sense of Scripture proposed to vs by such fallible Teachers is only the thought of their own fancy 5. Some may reply Protestants after long perusing Scripture and comparing seueral Texts together iudge the sense of these and No more are their deductions other controuerted places by à lawful deduction to be as they declare I answer first They shall neuer come to so much as à probable deduction and I earnestly press them to
so high as to giue fall satisfaction herein though he is pleased to plead euidence drawn from sense and reason against the B. Sacrament as if forsooth the full portion of both were like à legacy Mr stillingfleet argues Improbably bequeathed him and à few Sectaries whilst so many Fathers so many Schoolmen soo many profound Doctors of our renowned Church must haue no small share allowed in either but are as you see censured like men sensless and vnreasonable 2. Say I beseech you Who can perswade himself that those three worthy eminent Cardinals Bellarmin Perron and Richelieu all haue writ on this subiect and are famous the whole world ouer for their great wisdom and learning who dare I say without à measureless audacity cast these could we vrge no more into the Catalogue of dull sensles and vnreasonable men None would haue ventured on such à vast improbability but one who either knowes not or cares not what he saies Now add to these the consent and acknowledgment of the whole Orthodox world you may iustly say it is much harder or there is more violence offered to mans vnderstanding in conceiuing that God who is essential Verity and therefore inclined to preserue the Church he founded in truth should permit all those millions of Christians who haue belieued the Real presence to be so long deceiued in their Faith than to submit vpon so great authority to the very mystery we belieue Reason more rack'd by denying then belieuing the Mistery For by submitting to the mystery we proceed rationally and prudently iudge that an infinite power can do more than our weak capacities reach vnto but if we say his Goodnes hath permitted the Church to be seduced by à gross errour age after age or that so many Christians haue been cheated into à false belief of so high à Mystery we force our vnderstandings more we clash with an euident Principle and must assert that God has no care of his Church or of mans saluation The blame therefore if we be in errour would at last redound to God as I shall amply proue in the next Discourse 3. Thus much noted Let vs look à little into the strength of Mr Stillingf weak argument which must run thus What I see seem's or is bread to the Eye and tast yet t' is not bread but Christs sacred body therefore the Mystery is contrary to sense One distinction ouerthrowes this lame discourse I answer in à word What I see seems or is the inward substance of bread I deny it What I see seems yea really is the outward accidents or species of bread I grant that Therefore the Mystery is contrary to sense I deny the consequence The Argument purely fallacious supposeth Our Aduersaries fallacy solued the immediate obiect of our sense to be the inward substance of bread which yet as euery Puny knowes is not so in common Philosophy for the immediate obiect of the Eye is colour or light and so much remain's after consecration as well as other accidents doe but these sensible obiects are in known Philosophy distinct from the inward substance of bread which is not immediatly visible tangible or tastable Mr Stilling therefore gain's little by this dreaming way of arguing Now à word to his plea of Reason 4. He may say Reason tell 's me there is bread still after consecration Why so surely the answer must be because sense vpon the discouery of its immediate obiects colour quantity c. induceth reason to conclude there is bread vnder these accidents I answer Reason thus far would well conclude were it not that à stronger Principle enters here which ouerawes as it were weak reason and bids it yeild Pray you tell me Did not sense and reason also assure Christs Disciples Matth 14. before S. Peter was seen walking on the water that that liquid substance could not bear vp à weighty body without sinking yes most assuredly yet they saw him walk and reason following the guidance of their eyes checked that other natural discourse and acknowledged à Miracle And thus weak reason must yeild in the present Mystery when à Stronge Principles where vpon our Faith relies stronger Principle interuen's and forceth it to submit Thanks be to God Habemus firmiorem propheticum sermonem 1. Petr. 2. we haue yet à stronger Principle to vp hold our cause than weak discourse is The spirit of eternal truth The express words of Christ which the wit of man shall neuer draw to any other sense but what we Catholicks own 2. The constant professed Doctrin of the two Churches Greek and Latin yea and I say more of all other called Christians as is now declared 3. Might we here introduce the known Testimonies of most ancient Fathers They are so numerous and so fully significant that would à Catholick study to set down the truth of this Doctrin he cannot do it in clearer language 5. Good God saith S. Chrysostome lib. 3. de Sacerd Cap. 4. What à wonderful miracle is this how great is Gods loue towards mankind Behold who sitreth aboue with his Father in one and the same moment of time is touched by the hands of vs all and giueth himself to such as are desirous to receiue and imbrace him Theophilact c. 4. in 26. Matth. Bread is transelemented or transformed by an ineffable operation The ancient Fathers speak in our behalfe although to vs it seem's bread Because we are weak and haue horrour to eate raw flesh especially the flesh of man for this reason bread appears but in the essence and substance it is not bread Again Christ said not this is à figure but this is my body for by an ineffable operation bread is changed c. Indeed it appears Bread but it is really flesh Yet more How often do the Fathers S. Cyril of Hierusalem S. Chrisostome and others exhort vs not to come vnto the Eucharist as vnto simple bread and wine for say they it is the body and blood of Christ according to our Lords affirmation Although sense suggest the Contrary yet let faith confirm thee Iudge not of the thing by thy tast c. Again know this and with full certitude belieue that the bread seen is not bread though it seems so to the tast but the body of Christ and that wine seen is not wine though tast iudge it to be wine but the blood of Christ Though saith S. Chrisostome what we see seem's to our sense and thinking to be bread Let Gods saying This is my body Master our sense and reason Let vs doe this in all things especially in the Mysteries not regarding alone the things which lie before vs but holding fast to his words For by his words we cannot be-cousened our senses may be deceiued his words cannot be vntrue our sense is often time beguiled c. Thus these Fathers known to euery one to omit in numerable others speak and belieue thus the Church of Christ speaks and belieues also
neither the words nor the sense bear S. Cyril saith Do not consider them as meer bread and wine Then he tell 's you positiuely what they are For they are the body and blood of Christ Now your Gloss designed for à higher vse to exhibit the body and blood of Christ to Belieuers first Deads the very life of Cyrills words and then run's into nonsense I therefore Ask whether What is bread and wine to exhibit the body and blood of Christ this gloss Bread and wine exhibit the body and blood of Christ to Belieuers saies Bread and wine really changed out of their nature as water was at Cana in Galilee are after that change as really Christs body and blood as that water was really wine after Christs Miracle If your gloss say thus much you are à plain Papist if lesse it s none of S. Cyrills Doctrin for the Saint deliuers this as significantly yea and more fully then I now express it I well vnderstand S. Cyrills sense by his words but for my life I know not what you mean by your particle Exhibit Tell us I beseech you How do bread and wine Exhibit the body and blood of Christ to Belieuers Do they only mind vs of his body and blood A Crucifix representing our Lord bleeding on à Crosse can well serue for so much Do they shew or point vs out à Real presence of the same body and blood vpon the Altar which are now in heauen If so Belieuers haue an obiect of Faith and that truth to fasten on which the Church teaches but if your word Exhibit saies or signifies less then this or only expresses your euer yet concealed Sacramental presence you cheat the world with ambiguous dark Term's and in good earnest know not what you say 15. Answer therefore What is Christs body and blood to be Sacramentally present when really they are not vpon the Altar but absent in Heauen only The question deserues an Answer For you Sr distinguish between à Sacramental and à Corporeal Presence you grant the first and deny the second That which you grant is à Presence of Christs body and biood distinguished from the Catholick Real or as you call it Corporeal Presence Vouchsafe to enlighten vs à little concerning it which you page 574. seem to Our Aduersary is vrged to declare his sense make real There is say you à Real presence of Christ in and with them that is in and with bread and wine to the souls of Belieuers Very good Giue vs I beseech you the total Obiect which these Souls haue before them when they belieue à Real presence of Christ in and with bread and wine vpon the Altar Is this obiect Christ himself whom they pull as it were by Faith out of Heauen at the time they receiue your piece of Bread No. Christ still in Heauen is yet Locally distant and therefore not really present in and with bread and wine Vnless he be in two places at once And Consequently the Faith of these Belieuers has no real Obiect present to fasten vpon Is it that Christ is present in the Signes of bread and wine as Caesar is in his Image Pitiful He is thus present in euery Crucifix though really distant millions of Miles This no way makes him actually there in and with bread and wine as you Assert Doth finally this your Obiectiue presence imply only thus much that Christ by his power though really absent work 's the same effects in à worthy Receiuer as if he were actually there No. For he works the same effects and though absent produceth grace by the Sacrament of Baptism as if he were present dare you Therefore say he is in as peculiar à manner Really present in and with the water of Baptism as he is in this Sacrament in and with bread and wine Yet more Such à Moral The Sectaries Sacramental Presence contradict's all Authority Presence directly contradict's Christ's words This is my body It directly contradict's S. Cyrills words Though it seem to the tast to be bread it is not bread but the Body of Christs It directly contradict's that vnanswerable Truth As water was changed into wine so wine is changed into blood c. 16. And thus Sr you see how impossible it is to giue your poor Belieuers any thing like à Real obiect which may be called à true Real Presence though I hold you obliged to help both them and me to à clear Notion of it Because Christ's Sacred body and blood are Real things you attribute to these two Real things à true real Presence in and with bread and wine which cannot but denominate them really present with these two Substances vpon the Altar Therefore you are obliged to tell me what that is A parte rei which I once more say is impossible For as your Sacramental presence in your sense is à word no man vnderstand's so your Doctrin is as wholy vnintelligible Yet I haue not said all In this your discourse of à Sacramental and Real presence you would fain take some aduantage against vs by other words of S. Cyril Do not consider them as meer bread and wine for they are the body and blood of No aduantage giuen Sectaries by any other words of S. Cyril Christ according to his own word Hence you infer it is plain He speaks of à Sacramental presence for he doth not oppose the body and blood of Christ to the substance of bread and wine but to meer bread id est That they should not look on the bread and wine as naked signes but as Signa efficacia or efficacious signes Answ First The Saint has not à Syllable of either Signes or Signae efficacia Next your Speculation about meer bread is à meer nothing For meer bread is bread without Consecration S. Cyril opposeth the body and blood of Christ present to meer bread Ergo He opposeth them to bread without Consecration but bread without Consecration or meer bread is the very Substance of bread Therefore he opposeth the body and blood of Christ present to the substance of bread vnless you can find the Meerness might one speak so or nakednes of bread distinct from its substance which is not only improbable but impossible 17. Vpon this solid and vndeniable Ground it imports your A meer quibble about à word cause nothing whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in S. Cyril signifies Species as it is commonly rendred by Interpreters or as you say that which doth figure or represent for as long as this verity stand's vndoubted that vnder the Type or Species of bread Christ gaue his own body and That that body is opposed to the very Substance of bread the expression is so clear and the same with our Catholick Doctrin that were à hundred Glosses more laid vpon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All would not do nor rack it to any contrary meaning You Reply S. Cyril speak's of such à presence as hath relation
Ponderation of my Replies is so far to iudge between vs. But here is not all I must Say more Though I am as fallible in excepting against His glosses as he is in making them yet my Faith depend's not vpon my Exceptions but vpon the Doctrin of my Church The express words of Scripture and Fathers These oblige me vnder pain of damnation to belieue as I doe But all that Mr Stilling hath for his Faith is only the vncertainty of his own No man builds faith vpon his own Glosses coniectures ancient Church he has none nor express Scripture nor one Clear sentence of any Ancient Father And will hee Dare to oblige me vnder pain of damnation to belieue his Glosses or the opinion he would mantain by them vpon no other Ground but his weak Coniectures I appeal to his own Conscience for an Answer Well Be it how you will thus much is euident and T' is the only thing I aime at in this whole Discourse if Scripture and Fathers be interpreted in high matters of Faith by two Aduersaries of different Religions when no surer Principle is at hand to rely on but the fallible Glosses of the One and à contrary fallible combating with those Glosses in the Other they may both as the world goes now sit long at the sport before one Controuersy Other mean◠to end Controuersies then meer Glosses be ended Therefore God as I said aboue has Prouided vs of an easier way to end these weighty difficulties or we may All turn Scepticks Some may say The old mode of the World was to dispute by Scripture and Fathers dare we reiect this way of arguing as insufficient Answ No truely It is an excellent way amongst Christians though insignificant to Heathens when the Aduerse Parties can Clear the sense of Scripture and Fathers vpon certain Principles But if the very sense of Scripture and Fathers be called into Question As now à daies it is by Sectaries We must of necessity haue Recourse to an other more Clear easy and indubitable means of ending all Debates euer in vse among the Holy Fathers Whereof more afterward In the Interim the ensuing Chapter may giue you entertainment CHAP. XIV It is further proued that neither Scripture alone nor any other Principle distinct from an Vnerring Church can with certainty decide Controuersies in Matters of Religion or Regulate Christian Faith 1. THis Assertion not slightly proued in the other Treatise Disc 2. C. 4. I hold so certain That the wit of man shall not rationally contradict it And to giue yet more light to what is there said Be pleased to exclude or mentally only to cast aside All thought of an vnerring Church of her infallible Tradition al so of the Definitions of General Councils For all these which Sectaries hold fallible are Essential to an vnerring Church If any such thing be in the world whereof we shall Treat afterward Next look about you And consider well what remain's to end Controuersies withall or to regulate Diuine Faith You haue VVhat Principles Sectaries Can Pretend to distinct from an Infallible Church first Scripture which à Pagan wholly and à Iew partly reiects Yet with such Aliens from Christ à Christian can argue rationally yea and clearly conuince them as I shall proue in the second Discourse After Scripture you haue the sublime Mysteries of Faith the Fathers Doctrin laid forth in their Volumes and the History of the Church Here are all the Principles imaginable left Sectaries besides their priuate Spirit which can be no more à sound Principle to them than the contrary Spirit is to Their Aduersaries 2. Let vs now See how weakly the Sectary endeauours to end any Controuersy by these Principles without an infallible Church And be pleased euer to attend to the Aduersary he Treat's with If he attempt's to do good on à Heathen by Scripture or bring 's in the Reasonableness of Christian Religion The Heathen and Iew also laugh at his Folly And wish him to proue his Book to be Diuine If he proues that by the Vniuersal Tradition of all Called Christians the Heathen perhaps will not yet quarrel with him as I may hereafter about the Fallibility or Infallibility of Tradition but desires him to goe among the Chineses and lay his Bible down by That book which their supposed Prophet Confusius wrote full of excellent Moral Precepts Thus much done the Contest Begin's The Sectary saith his Bible is Authorized by à great Prophet called Christ A learned Bonzius Answer 's and his is also Authorized by à great Prophet called Confusius The Sectary saith all Christians own his book vpon à neuer interrupted The Protestants Contest with ◠Heathen Concerning the Bible Tradition to be indited by the Spirit of Truth The Bonzius replies All China of à mighty vast Extent age after age hath the like perpetuated Tradition for his Bible What followes but that These two Aduersaries peruse their Bibles The Bonzius read's ours and Reasonably ask's whether the Sectary can infallibly proue such strange Mysteries as are registred there for example à Trinity the Incarnation of the Diuine word to be Truths Reuealed by Almighty God The Sectary answers All the infallible certainty he hath of these particular Verities lastly Relies only vpon Scripture it selfe For what euer Principle can be imagined distinct from that written word whether Church or Tradition is Fallible and may deceiue If so saith the Heathen your Bible gain's no Credit with me Because you proue the Mysteries contained there by that which causes my doubt or is the matter in Question for you say all I read is of Diuine inspiration because your Bible relates them and therefore make that à proof of your Doctrin which is the Matter in question or causes my doubt O saith the Sectary read on with Humility and you will find that the very Maiesty of the style the Energy of the words will quit you of doubting And to ease you of too much pains know we Protestants hold That the Belief of à very few chief Articles or simple Truths as that Iesus is the Christ The Diuine Word is incarnated c is faith enough to gain Heauen Contra The Heathen except's against the Protestants plea. Replies the Heathen I see no other Maiesty in the Style of your Bible than in mine and other pious books The exteriour Syntax or ioyning of words together is common to all such Writings But aboue all I wonder why you talk to me of no man knowes what splendor shining in the bare Letter when you say that shines not to Pagans but only to those who haue the Spirit of God and are the Elect amongst you Now to what you Add of à few chief Articles necessary to be belieued and no more I answer first Your Scripture saith no such Thing nor tell 's me or you which Articles are necessary which not and if it did so you are only where you were before in darkness
ours Contrary to him is an Errour Ergo. The first part of my Assertion seem's euident For you know what hauock the Sectary makes of all infallible Principles Scripture only excepted which I am sure speak's not à word in his behalf nor against vs All Churches with him All Tradition All Councils All Fathers also are fallible and may deceiue Therefore thus much is indisputably clear He cannot proue infallibly I say no more yet that his Tenets are Christian Truths or infallibly That ours contrary are Errours For no man can more deriue an infallible proof from à meer fallible Principle than fetch gold out of dross or light out of Darknes Whateuer Therefore he plead's by next is vnder the degree of infallible certainty And what is it think ye O He has Moral Assurance and here is the Principle that his Tenets are Christian Truths and Ours false or erroneous Very Fallible Principles ground not infallible Doctrin good I ask Though moral certainty auail's nothings as we Shall see hereafter How he proues no Transubstantiation to be à Doctrin morally certain When the Contrary is expresly defined in three General Councils And held by à learned Church Has he any Council so renowned as either the Latheran or Tridentine which euer owned his Negatiue as à Christian Truth Has he any Church as Vniuersally spread the whole whorld ouer as the Roman Catholick is which maintained his Doctrin three or four Ages since Euidently No. Vpon what then ground 's He his Moral certainty I 'le tell you in à word All he can pretend to or plead in This Controuersy comes to no more if it reach so far But to two or three dubious Authorities taken from those Fathers who were Professed members of the Roman Catholick Church And this little slender part He makes not only to striue against the whole Church but moreouer giues it so much strength as to Impeach That great Moral body of errour And vtterly to ruin the Doctrin which hath been taught age after age That is to A part Compared with the whole say The lesser Part or rather à meer supposed part must be thought so powerful as to make à happy war Offensiue and Defensiue against that whole Moral body whereof it was à member Is not this à strange Simplicity 4. Be pleased to take here one Instance from Ciuil affaires only Suppose you haue à Parlament consisting of three hundred and three iust vpright graue and most intelligent Persons who first treat of some weighty Matter relating to the good of à Kingdom or Common wealth And after long deliberation Enact what in prudence is thought best in order to its Setlement Suppose withall that two or three of à different iudgement withstand the Act and hold what is concluded not well done Will any one think ye not only ascribe à greater moral Certainty to those three dissenting votes Than to the other three hundred But more ouer decry the far more numerous votes though of Persons equally wise as vniust impertinent and remote from the meanest degree of moral Certainty And this is done reflect An Instance seriously vpon no other ground for no other reason but because Three are wilfully supposed by à third Party looking o◠strong enough to oppose the greater Part. If this instance like you better make vse of it Imagin that à Synode Consisting of 303. Protestant Ministers define as they think What 's b◠to hold within the Compass of Protestant Religion Imagin also that three oppose Them Can any of that Religion allow more Moral certainty to the three votes than to the other three hundred if we respect Authority meerly Certainly ◠5. Our very case is here sufficiently expressed and the instances Applyed to our present purpose easily applyed to our present purpose The Roman Catholick Church is you know à great Moral body comprehending not hundreds but thousands and thousands whereof innumerable are now and in past Ages haue been most iust vpright prudent and without Controuersy most eminently-learned These vnanimously Enact as it were whether in the Representatiue of Councils or by the vniuersal voice and vote of the whole Church That Praying to Saints prayers for the Dead or which we now insist on the Doctrin of Transubstantiation are not only Tenets morally Authorities not clear impertinently alleged certain But more ouer Articles of Diuine Faith Our Aduersaries to oppose this vnquestionable certainty produce three or four Authorities not clear as is supposed done in Parlament but weak and strained and hope hereby to reuerse to vnuote what these thousands haue decreed contrary Three or four witnesses And these at most dubious are here brought in against Transubstantiation to make our new mens opinion Morally certain and yet These thousands most wise and learned though they clearly vote and profess against it cannot forsooth gain so much credit with à few Sectaries as to aduance the Doctrin to moral Certainty For here we waue the question of infallible Assurance What Doings are these What daies do we liue in The whole Catholick Church teaches as She euer taught that the very Substance of bread is really changed into Christs Sacred body And now o strange times one Theoderet though no way opposit is haled in to reuerse the Doctrin One must striue against and conquer Thousands It is we say à pretty feat to kill two Birds with one bolt But here we haue à greater exploit Theodoret is supposed to leuel so right with à darker expressions if yet dark That he destroies the Faith of two Churches at Once the Greeck and Latin Councils and eminent A parallel of Authorities learned councils haue defined in our behalf and one Tertullian Though herein he speak's most Catholickly is pick't out to plead against them What 's one against innumerable Tradition both Ancient and modern deliuers the Truth we Propugn And an vnknown Gelasius set vp by Sectaries must be thought powerful enough to repeal and contradict our fore Fathers Tradition What Doings are these Can the Sectary hope to beate down that stronge Fortress which Hell gates could neuer yet shake by such slight and forceless Armour Alas goe to single votes we oppose our Iustins our Cyrills our Cyprians our Chrisostoms clear and express against one Theoderet were he doubtful Now with an Addition adde to these The weight and graue Authority of our Church and Councils There is no Parallel no Comparison betwixt vs. Yet more Suppose these few Authorities were clearly contrary to vs the Protestant only has at most three votes as it were in Parlament against Millions and what gain's he by this His pretended Moral certainty stand's not firm like an vncontradicted Truth against such à Cloud of opposit witnesses And. 6. Here you haue à further reason of my Assertion As long as this Principle stand's sure in nature A whole body is greater than à Part and à Part thereof lesse extended than the whole So long it will
it self deriues from that Oracle of Truth I say Contrary As such Opinions when true Add no more weight or certainty to that Doctrin than it had antecedently from the The Fundamental ground of our Answer Church So if false They make not the Doctrin less certain Take one instance God reueals this Truth The Diuine word assumed Humane nature One preaches the Truth but Adds no degree of certainty to the Doctrin in it self which in the highest degree was most certain before his Preaching An other falsly as Arius did opposes the verity it is not Therefore less certain in it self because He contradicts it And thus we discourse of our Church Tenets indubitably most certain vpon Church Authority whether Hereticks deny or grant That Matters not the Doctrin stand's firm still as before And as we see by daily experience neither riseth higher in certainty nor fall's lower in the iudgement of Catholicks because Sectaries side with it or bend against it 22. Thus much proued The Paralogism is at an end The Catholicks held The Donatists Baptism valid so they would haue done had these Hereticks duely Ministred it and with all which is possible afterward denied it valid So independent Church Doctrin is of dissenting mens opinions The Donatists again slighted our Catholick Baptism the Church regards it not For as the Opinions of the Goodnes of their own Baptism heightned not the Churches certainty concerning it So their Contrary Opinion of its insufficiency made not the Truth less certain to the Catholick Apply what is here noted to our present case and you will see the like Conclusion Protestants Say we may be Sectaries Siding with vs neither Lessens nor increases our Certainty saued in Catholick Religion The Opinion is true But as asserted by them is no more but an Opinion which therefore Add's not one grain of more Certainty to Catholick Doctrin For had they denied vs à possibility of Saluation as now by meer Chance they grant it Catholicks would haue giuen as little eare to That as They now doe to their many other false Opinions So it is Church Doctrin as I now said neither fall's nor riseth in certainty vpon the account of our Sectaries Opinions 23. You will Ask what then gain we by the Concession of Protestants when it giues vs no more Assurance in this particular than we had before from the Church I haue answered aboue We gain thus much That they cannot rationally impugn any Catholick Doctrin without contradicting Them selues For if confessedly This bring 's men to Heauen the Religion is sound And implies no essential Errour The concession then as I said serues well as an Argument ad Hominem to stop the mouths of Sectaries And showes withall That they end controuersies For its What their Excession Serues for horridly vniust to dispute against à Faith which all grant saues souls We pretend no more nor can pretend it And here is the Reason 23. No Catholick nor indeed any other doth or can belieue à Christian Verity vpon this ground or Motiue that Sectaries say its true for their saying so is neither Gods Reuelation nor the Churches Doctrin But à meer Opinion as taught by them But an opinion chiefly theirs is to weak to ground any faith vpon Therefore if I belieue as I do Saluation most safe in the Roman Catholick Church I belieue it vpon à Motiue totally distinct from the Protestants Assertion It is true their Assertion or siding with vs may induce one to reflect on the great power Truth has in working vpon men most refractory Though it Adds no new degree of certainty to Catholick Doctrin I haue insisted longer vpon this point because it vtterly destroies what euer Mr. Stillingfleet can say against vs vnless he will quarrel vpon this score that I here suppose my Church Doctrin most certain which is not the Question now But may well be supposed in all good law of disputation And shall God willing be proued in the next Discourse 24. Page 619. you proceed to à second Answer of his Lordship And Argue thus If that be the safest which both Parties agree in the Principle makes much for the Aduantage of Protestants And why We Catholicks are bound Say you to belieue with you in the Point of the Eucharist For all sides agree The Sectaries Argument taken from the Eucharist in the faith of the Church of England That in the most blessed Sacrament the worthy Receiuer is by his Faith made Spiritually partaker of the true and Real body and blood of Christ truly and really c. Answ 1o. If we belieued As you do The motiue of our Faith would be As is now said quite different from the Motiue of your Opinion And so it is de facto in the belief of euery Catholick Mystery But I waue this And say Your Principle is ill applyed For you and we agree in iust nothing concerning the Eucharist but thus far only That what we see look's like bread We say that very Christ who was born of the Virgin and suffered on the Cross is really and substantially present vnder the form's of bread after true Consecration You by à strange fancy lay hold of Christs Presence existing in Heauen And think thereby to make your selues partaker of his real body We say Christ is rruly Worth nothing and why and really in two and more places at once you make this vtterly impossible We put the real Presence or local being of Christ in the very Obiect before our eyes vpon the Altar you put it in your faith or Fancy rather Hence your question afterward viz. Whether we do not allow any real and Spiritual presence of Christ besides the Corporal you mean the Real manducation is soon answered For we distinguish what you confound together And say if by these Terms Spiritual Presence you would exclude the real obiectiue Presence of Christs sacred body we dissent from you And absolutly hold that Real obiectiue Presence which may be rightly called Spiritual because by it Christ is placed Totus in toto totally in the whole host and totally in euery part of it Contrariwise if you make it only à fancied Presence of Christ or say Hee is not really vnder the Forms or Accidents of bread wee leaue that lean Sacramentarie Doctrin to you vtterly disanow it and still dissent from you 25. The whole cheat lies hudled vp in those vnexplicated words The worthy Receiuer is by his Faith made spiritually partaker of the true and real body c. As if forsooth your two terms The fallacy discouered Faith and Spiritual could make vs agree in one Tenet whereas we most vary about this very Faith and the obiect of it And also disclaime your fancied Spiritual Presence Hence we say you haue neither true Sacrament nor true Faith nor receiue worthily nor really partake of Christs true body nor of any benefit of his Passion We say you feed not spiritually but only tast natural
Set once more pen paper and proue vs guilty of damnable Errour and you 'l damn so many that very few of your Protestants will be left in à state of Saluation I 'le make the Assertion good hereafter In the interim you Tell vs Wee palpably beg the Question whilst we suppose the whole Church is on our side and against you which is à notorious falshood Sr words are but wind I shall by the Grace of God Euidence this Truth so notoriously in the next Discourse that you if reason may haue place must confess Catholicks are the only Orthodox Church And Consequently grant that Controuersies are ended between vs. THE SECOND DISCOVRSE OF The Church and Rule of Faith HEre wee come to handle à main Matter in Controuersies And first Euidence the true Church by Her Marks and Glorious Miracles The Roman Catholick Church is proued the only Orthodox Society of Christians and Rule of Faith also VVee Euince Her absolute Infallibility and shew by Reason That if She hath taught but one false Doctrin and obliged Christians to belieue it there is now no true Faith in the world CHAP. I. Necessary Principles premised relating to the Controuersy now in hand concerning the true Church And Rule of Faith 1. THE first Principle God whose eternal designe is to bring man to true Faith in this short pilgrimage and after to endles Happines afford's means to acquire both And hath as Principles presupposed well laid open the means whereby true Faith may be attained As made our final End known 2. The second Principle Those want the means leading to the last happy End who are Aliens from the true Church of Christ or Separated from that Catholick Society The Assertion is so plainly deliuered not only by most Ancient Fathers But by the more learned Sectaries also That it is needless to produce many Testimonies S. Cyprian Lib. de unitate Ecclesiae Saith Quisquis ab Ecclesia separatus est c. Who euer is separated from the Church is ioyned to an Adulteress And diuorced from all the Promisses of the Church He comes not to the reward which Christ has promised who leaues the Church of Christ He is an Alien Prophane an Enemy and cannot haue God for his Father who hath not the Church for his Mother S. Austin lib. 4. de Symb. C. 13. Speaks fully this sense Citing those last words of Cyprian And Lib. 4. de Baptis C. 17. Saith Out of the Church there is no Saluation Yet more Epist 152. Whoeuer is or shall be separated from The Fathers Testimonies preduced this Catholick Church although he thinks himself to liue most laudably For this one wickednes alone that he is disioyned from the vnity of Christ shall haue no life Sed ira Dei manet super eum But the wrath of God remains vpon him S. Fulgentius Lib. de fide ad Petrum C. 39. Hold this most certain and no way doubt of it That an Heretick or Schismatick baptized in the name of the Father of the Son and Holy Ghost if he be not in Vnion with the Catholick Church Although he giues neuer so great Alms And shed his blood for Christ yet he cannot be saued I waue other excellent Authorities known to euery one versed in the Fathers And need not to take more pains when Protestants themselues own the Doctrin The Ark was à type of the Church saith Perkins in Symb. Colum with me 785. extra quam omnes interibant out of which Ark All dyed and all are damned who are out of the Church Again In Caput 9. ad Sectaries Consent Galat. Those who are not members of the visible Church are not members of the Catholick Church Humfred Ad Ration 3. Campiani We condemn all who are not aggregated to the visible Church of God Finally Caluin the Master of Sectaries Lib. 4. Institu C. 1. 4. makes it absolutly necessary to be in vnion with Christs visible Church 3. The ground of this Truth is so solidly laid down in Scripture that none can contradict it For here the Church is called the Kingdom the Body the Inheritance of Christ purchased at à dear The Ground of our Catholick Truth rare the effusion of his sacred blood A Citty built vpon à Mountain The House the Temple of God the Hierusalem the Pillar and firmament of Faith c. Whereby it appears That whoeuer is out of this Kingdom out of this Citty out of this house and Temple of God whoeuer is not à member of this Mystical body or shares not in this purchased Inheritance or in à word out of the true Church be it where you will I yet define nothing is in à damnable condition A sad thought for all Sectaries because it is certain that Christ has not composed his Church of such Members as rightly belieue the reuealed Doctrin taught by the true Church and of such as oppose it Vnity and Diuision in Vnity and Diuision in Faith haue no place in the true Church points of Faith ase inconsistent in the same Orthodox Church and destroy the essential forme of it which is one Faith Now if our Aduersaries talk of à vnity in Fundamentals they are not only euidently conuinced of Errour in the other Treatise But vpon this very Account become Separaters from the Church and without Principles Assert that which neither Church nor Scripture teaches Who euer hold's not the Catholick faith entire shall Perish eternally saith S. Athanasius in his Creed but an entire Belief excludes all distinction between fundamentals and others as is manifest I little value some Protestants Glosses made vpon this Text for Glosses with me are weightles when they stand vnprincipled 4. The 3. Principle What the true Church of Christ teaches concerning the sense of Scripture That 's the sense intended by the Holy Ghost and Consequently most true The reason is Truth cannot be contrary to truth The Church and Scripture neuer Clash But alwaies speak one and the same verity This Sectaries must grant who define the Church to be an Assembly of men professing the pure Word of God Therefore it cannot deceiue or teach an Errour contrary to that pure word Or if it doth so it ceaseth eo ipso to be God's Oracle And the true Church of Christ 5. If these men still go on trifling with their wonted distinction of Fundamentals and not Fundamentals And allow à Perfect vnity of Doctrin between the Church and Scripture in The Distinction between Fundamentals and others friuolous things absolutly necessary to Saluation but not in others This is to define and not to define to build and destroy to teach and cheat in one breath For à definition which makes known the nature of à Thing must stand in its open sense without restraint and exactly agree to the thing defined Mark now Christs true Church is the Thing defined and the Definition charged with endless restrictiue Terms is drawn to Non-sense fot it tells vs the Church
à People mad nor besotted vpon this Account because As the Primitiue Christians more induced to belieue so are wee They proceeded iust as the Primitiue Christians did that alwaies belieued vpon Rational Motiues These Motiues then first enlightned the reason of the most ancient Christians And reason afterward preuented by grace submitted to all the Church teaches But much more of this hereafter because of greatest Consequence though it seem's Sectaries haue little regard to the Euidence of Christianity Drawn from rational Motiues 11. The. 3. Proposition The Marks of Christs Church manifest to all are more sensible and clear than the essential Doctrin is marked by them They are peculiar to the true Church only and distinguish Her from all Heretical Communities Finally taken all together and not by Piece-meal conuince this truth That God speaks to Christians by this Church Euery part of the Proposition proues it self First à Mark is more clear and sensible than the thing marked by it For who euer had seen our Blessed Sauiour walking here on earth and obserued his holy life whoeuer had heard his sacred words and seen his Miracles would haue said his Sanctity words and Miracles were more clear and euident to all than his Doctrin was of being God and man Therefore the first Christians belieued that great Mystery induced by euident works and wonders 2. These Marks are peculiar and proper to the true Church only You haue the reason hereof in the other Treatise Disc 1. C. 8. 1â—3 The force of prudent Motiues Because it is not possible if à true Church be now on earth that God can permit à false Society to equalize it much less to surpass it in the lustre of such Motiues as forcibly perswade to discern between That and all heretical Communities For were this done Falshood would be made as credible to reason as truth And God would be guilty of Arguing less efficaciously in behalf of his own Church against Iewes Gentils and obstinate Hereticks 12. Obserue well the Strength of this Argument I say in à word If an Arian could truly Assert I haue as many forceable Motiues And marks of truth belonging to my followers and Doctrin As the now supposed true Church of Christ can shew for it self could he say with truth I will euidence the like Antiquity the like Perpetuity the like lawful Mission of my Pastors the like vnity in Faith the like conuersions of Heathens wrought in and by my Church The like succession of Bishops preaching my Doctrin from Christs time to this day The like sanctity the like miracles as any Church on earth can demonstrate They distinguish the true Church from false Communities Could an Arian I say or Iew either speak all this with truth no Orthodox Christian could argue the one or other of Falshood in Doctrin For grant thus much These very men might much better handle and interpret Scripture than Protestants do vtterly destitute of all such Marks The Iew if the false supposition stand would draw the old Testament to his sense and so would the Arian the new And who could reproue them could they shew you à Church bearing these signes of diuine Authority Hence Sectaries that only Gloss Scripture and neuer had any thing like an euidenced Church which taught the Doctrin they now maintain and so earnestly Gloss for are most reproueable And vainly attempt to draw any prudent man to à belief of their Nouelties 13. By all you see how important it is to haue à Christian Society clearly marked and distinguished from false Communities with euident Signes and rational Motiues before we recurr to Scripture All faith depends on this greater Euidence laid forth to reason as Shall be demonstrated towards the end of this Discourse 14. I would haue euery one seriously to reflect on what is now said and once more to know That Christs Church like à glorious Sun euidenceth Her selfe by the Lustre of signal Marks though her essential Doctrin belieued by obscure Faith appear's not Euident Find me then out à Church euer in being since Christs time vnited in one Faith glorious in Miracles and conuersions of Heathens wherein Bishops and Pastors lawfully sent haue preached Christs Doctrin age after age Giue me à Church which was neuer censured or taxed of Errour by any Society of known Orthodox Christians She and She only is Christ's true Spouse All other late risen Assemblies are Conuenticles of Satan And these Marks do not only distinguish Her from all One only Church Shewes these Marks such Conuenticles as is now noted but Collectiuely taken conuince this Truth That God speak's to Christians by this Oracle whereof you haue more in the following Chapters 15. In the Interim we must enter vpon à further difficulty and next enquire which among so many Congregations as now are and haue been in the world is the only manifested true Spouse of Christ For all as I said aboue make not one Church vnless Christ hath composed this mystical Body of such members as rightly belieue and of others that iniuriously oppose his sacred Doctrin Now because the chief controuersy is between the Protestant and Catholick The first pretend's to à Church which teaches Christs Doctrin The Catholick vtterly denies the Pretence and pleads for his Own Oracle euidenced by prudent Motiues This I say being the Contest we are in the first place to vnchurch the Protestant and then proue by vndeniable Arguments where and with whom the true Church of Christ is CHAP. III. The Protestant has neither Church euidenced by Marks of Truth nor true Doctrin made credible to reason His whole Faith is built vpon Fancy 1. THe Marks of the Church as is now said are so clear to reason that they make the Oracle manifest to all sort of people to the learned and vnlearned to Iewes to Infidels and much more to Hereticks who pretend to belieue in Christ All of them are alike concerned and obliged to make à search after the true Church and when t' is found to belieue it 2. Now to find it out I Ask whether our English Protestants with these we chiefly dispute like well of the marks Questions Proposed to Sectaries already hinted at or will reiect them I propose my doubt with all candor Will they dare to say That their Church as it deliuers Protestants Doctrin or as it is now reformed in England was euer since Christ time In Being and visible to the world Can they produce à Succession of Bishops or Pastors that taught Protestancy Age after Age without intermission Can they show what Conuersions these Protestant Pastors wrought vpon Heathens to their faith fiue or six Centuries since Can they produce indubitable Miracles done by such Pastors Most euidently No. Therefore our later Protestants reiect these and the other like Motiues as slight and impertinent to euidence their Church which yet say they teaches Christs Doctrin and Wilily do so because they haue none of them Well To
Principles are here Supposed First that the Markes of the Protestant Church or of its Doctrin lie as these men will haue it in the Purity of Scripture only 2. That their Church Doctrin is either contained in the 39. Articles or implies so much as all called Christians Belieue and no more Though plain Hereticks in many particular Tenets 3. That this Protestant Community as it Teaches is either the whole Church of Christ excluding other Societies or only à Part of the vniuersal Church These Principles Supposed you haue my Demonstration 14. Scripture Marks the true Doctrin of Christs Church but it neither mentioneth nor marks out the Doctrin contained in the 39 Articles for our newer men call these inferiour Truths only And hold them not Registred in God's word Neither doth it Assert so much as darkly that à Mixture of Truth and Falshood such as all Hereticks haue owned and do own is the Doctrin of the true Catholick Church Least of all That à Doctrin common to Arians Protestants and Catholicks is sufficient Scripture disowns Protestancy to Saluation Lastly it saith no where that the Protestant Church containing that reformed Doctrin is by it Self the whole true Church of Christ excluding all other Societies nor so much as à Part of it And this I proue 15 If as reformed it be à Part of the true Catholick Church the Professors of it haue now and had before Luther some Partners who ioyn'd with them in the belief of their reformed Doctrin But before Luther they had not one sole man in the world that belieued as they belieue and so wanted fellowship because neither they nor their Partners were at all in Being Now at this instant they haue no Society of men called à Church run ouer all the world which side 's with them or hold's either the. 39. Articles or à Doctrin common to all Christians to be the true Doctrin of Christ or of his vniuersal Church All this I say is euident And. 16. Hence you see in what plight these men are who pretend to à Church marked and made euident by Scripture and A clear inference against Sectaries when they haue that sacred Book in their hands it is impossible to find so much as one Sentence or syllable in behalfe of Protestancy Those other exteriour Signes of Conuersions Miracles Antiquity c. are of no Account with them And were they otherwise most euidently they belong not to the reformed Doctrin of the English Church Here is à piece of sad newes for Sectaries who haue à Church neither Spoken of in Scripture nor manifested to Reason by one Supernatural wonder So vneuidenced à Thing it is And Consequently vpon à double Account no Church at all 17. The Sectary may reply When he Asserts Scripture Marks the true Church or Her Doctrin the meaning is not that it speak's expresly the Tenets of Protestants but only Saies it is à sufficient Repository of all things necessary to Saluation and deliuers so much plainly What euer therefore is not plainly taught in scripture ceaseth to be necessary Contra. 1. Protestants A Reply Answered granting thus much may seek long before they find Their particular Tenets because Scripture deliuers none of them either expresly or by any clear Deduction Contra. 2. The Iew and Heathen regard not the plainest Truths in Holy Writ before the book be proued Diuine The most plain Verities auaile nothing with them Yet God hath afforded means to draw them to Christianity But it seem's our Sectaries in all their talk of the Scriptures clarity neuer reflect on these Strangers from Christ nor point at the means whereby their Conuersion may bee wrought Contra. 3. The Arian and the Orthodox as highly differ about the sense of plain Scripture as the Protestant and Catholick about the sense of Christs own words This is my body And these differences either touch on fundamental Matters or there are none such in the whole Bible Contra. 4. The Protestant only tells vs what he saith of all things necessary contained in Scripture and speak's his own Sentiment boldly without either proof or Principle 18. Some obiect first God can endite à Book in as plain An Obiection solued words as any man can speak and t' is not supposed that he affected obscurity in his own Scripture already written Contra. 1. If Scripture be not obscure How is it That Christ told the Saduces they mistook the true meaning of it How is it that these Protestant Pillars Luther and Caluin so grosly contradict one an other in their Commentaries made vpon holy Scripture And this in points most material How is it that innumerable others called Christians Professe to reuerence to Read to spend the greatest labour vpon Scripture and when all is done draw out of it plain Contradictions in points as is nâ—w said most Fundamental Contra. 2. We question not what God can do but say he hath not endited Scripture plain de facto S. Peter Epist 2. 3. 16. Speaking of S. Pauls Epistles is my warrant In which saith he Certain things are hard to be vnderstood which the vnlearned and vnstable depraue as also the rest of Scripture to their own perdition And the words relate not only to the Mysterious Matters whereof the Apostle wrote but to his Phrase and forme of writing also Therefore the Greeck Copies haue both in which things and in which Epistles And all Expositors hitherto euen S. Austin haue acknowledged an obscure way of speaking in S. Pauls Epistles chiefly in that to the Romans Yet we are not to say that Truth expressed without harshness God affects Obscurity the word is vnmeet but speak thus His prouidence purposely would haue Scripture deliuered in such à dark manner that all might haue recourse to à liuing Oracle His true Church which speaks more plainly and cannot swerue from any verity in Scripture No offence is giuen to pious ears In à word you haue à Verity expressed with out harshness See S. Austin lib. 2. de Doct. Christ c. 6. And S. Ambrose Epist 44. Again vote Scripture most plain what gain Sectaries by the Clarity when they neither haue plain nor obscure Text through the whole Bible for their Protestancy 19. Hence we Answer to an other petty obiection Scripture say some relates many Things not necessary to Saluation Therefore it cannot be supposed to omit things necessary Contra 1. Ergo it speak's some things of pure Protesstancy or nothing in that Religion as reformed is necessary to Saluation I would willingly haue an express Text for this reformed Nouelty and these few difficulties solued Contra. 2. Though the whole Bible were without dispute most plain or told vs all things necessary yet this neither moues Iew nor Gentil nor drawes any to Christianity without further light as is already proued We haue shown aboue how Scripture contain's all things necessary in the Reflex Part thereof It is now our Task and intent to Mark out the true
Fathers or of any man now liuing Again What if most of those ancient Writings be lost many certainly are we are at à Stand. But finally what if doubts arise concerning the sense of those few preserued copies yet extant can Sectaries Glosses or ours either determin what 's right Orthodox Doctrin by them No. Therefore By what means one may come to the primitiue Doctrin as I said aboue no man can come to à full exact and satisfactory knowledge of the Primitiue Truths but by the voice and Tradition of the present Church Reiect this voice of the present Church we are cast into darkness we may dispute long but end nothing Now because it lies not in my way to Treat of that excellent Rule of Tradition learnedly handled by others I 'le giue you three Conuincing reasons And proue my Assertion viz. That the Roman vniuersal Church once Orthodox neuer changed the Primitiue Doctrin To show this Two certain Principles are to be reflected on 6. First God had alwaies an Orthodox Church on earth founded by Christ which was and is pure without mixture at least of notorious damnable Errours and which neuer taught An Argument prouing the Roman Catholick Church stil pure in Doctrin Christians any shameful false Doctrin for had it done so in any Age it had then ceased Eo ipso to be Christ's pure Church The 2. Principle Protestants confess and t' is à certain truth that the Roman Catholick Church continued Orthodox without Notable errour for the first three or four Centuries 7. Hence I argue If this Church once pure abandoned Christ's Doctrin in after Ages or forged new Articles of faith contrary to the Primitiue verities that Change was Notorious shameful and damnable as we shall see presently But it is not possible that She euer made such à shameful Notorious change And here is my Reason Had She done so Christ in that Age when this supposed Alteration began would haue had no Orthodox Church on earth free from gross and culpable Errour and Consequently his own pure Church would wholly haue been abolished 8. You will Ask how I proue this I Answer most euidently Begin if you please from the third Age when the Roman Church was pure And descend to Luthers dayes you will find all the known Societies of men called Christians to haue been either Orthodox Belieuers Or grosly erring in Faith yea plain condemned Hereticks And so reckoned of by Protestants Such were the Arians Nestorians Pelagians Monothelits Donatists c. And all others nameable excepting Roman Catholicks But those gross erring men euidently taught not Christs pure One reason vrged Doctrin without notable Errour much less constituted either à Part or the whole Orthodox Church which Christ established in truth Therefore if the Roman Catholick Church went to wrack also if She erred notoriously with these known erring Societies the Orthodoxism and Purity of the whole Church ceased to be in the world And this is impossible 9. Here in à word is all I would say Christ had euer à Church Entierly pure on earth for he founded one pure which should alwaies continue in that integrity laid in Her very foundation But no errour was laid in the foundations of the Roman Catholick Church once Confessedly pure therefore no notorious Errour stained it in after Ages Or if any such errour fouled that once fair Spouse of Christ this Sequele is euident There was at that time no pure Church in Being vnless our Nouellists please and perhaps they may do so in time to make Arians Donatists and such à rabble of men more Orthodox Christians than their own Progenitors were and all the Roman Catholicks are now the whole world ouer 10. You see I insist vpon notorious Errours And do so on set Why wee insist vpon Notorious errours purpose to preuent à Reply of some newer Sectaries who say the Church of Rome hath indeed Her Errours But not fundamental or destructiue of Saluation And will you know the reason of this trifling Here it is If they say She was not Orthodox in fundamentals there was no true Church in being for à thousand years before Luther and this no Christian dare Assert And if they make her Orthodox in euery Article She taught both Heresy and Schism fall's shamefully vpon Protestants Who dare not grant they abandonned à Church Entierly pure and blamless when they left it Hence à middle way was wisely or rather most simply thought of Our Church forsooth must be what Protestants please partly true viz. in à few Fundamentals and partly false in other Matters of less concern which these men elected by God were to reform and tell exactly what was amiss or how far it hath erred c. And therefore name themselues the Reformed Church Well Let this whimsy pass largely refuted in the other Treatise and in passing take notice of à pitifull Church indeed which Christ had by these mens own Confession ten whole ages before Luther It was à meer deformed Monster made vp of Linzy wolzy stuff of tawny Colours of something and nothing in à word of Truth and Falshood But here is not all 11. I am to proue much more if Protestants Principles stand firm viz. That neither we nor they had any Orthodox Church in fundamentals before Luther and Consequently no true Church was in being for ten whole Ages Now most euidently Sectaries had nothing like à Church for they were not in the world And it is as euident if their Charge hold good against our Church it had bin much better neuer to haue appeared than to see it turned into so many vgly shapes into such an vnfashioned Monster as these new men make it In à word this ancient Catholick Society if Sectaries say right and Mark euer the Supposition erred notoriouslly in the very fundamentals of Faith and Faith totally ruined in Sectaries Principles neither belieued in Christ nor Creed and therefore there was no Orthodox Church before Luther nor yet is to this day If I euidence not this vpon the supposition now made neuer Credit me here after To doe it please to obserue that by à fundamental Errour in Faith I vnderstand à Doctrin which if falsly taught contrary to Christs verities is as damnable to those who teach it as the Arians errours are at this day damnable to Arians Hence I Argue 12. What euer Society of men forges new Articles of Faith contrary to the Primitiue Doctrin or tell 's the world à loud lye that God reuealed such things as he neuer reuealed but vtterly The Assertion manifestly proued disowns and yet execrat's And more ouer obliges all Christians after à sufficient proposal to belieue such falsities vpon Diuine Reuelation and this vnder pain of damnation doth open iniury to Gods Infinite verity Assert's that which Eternal Truth neuer taught And therefore sins damnably or err's in the fundamentals of Faith But Protestants say the Roman Catholick Church long before Luther did so
assumed Corps as haue been seen in many Miraculously restored to life Be it how you will We are sure God can doe yea and hath done great Miracles when therefore all imaginable Circumstances forceably induce vs to belieue that they are his own glorious works it is I hope more wisdom to Ascribe them to an Omnipotent Power than to Father them vpon Diuels 3. Some who plainly see it s à degree of madness to doubt of so much humane faith as Testifies of Miracles wrought in the Roman Catholick Church grant many haue been done But then Obiect 2. God did them to manifest that Christ is the true Messias or to work à Belief in vs of so much Doctrin only as is Common to all Christians but not to confirm our Popish Errours of Praying to Saints Purgatory c. Contra. This Argument also impugn's our Sauiours great Miracles which were not wrought one may say to confirm all the Doctrin he taught but à Part or parcel of it only Contra. 2. If Miracles Mark out à Doctrin common to all or confirm so much truth And no more It seem's strange that Arians Pelagians and Protestants work not Miracles as frequently as the Church doth For these men own à Doctrin common to all Christians yet show none of these wonders Contra. 3. There is not one Miracles truly alleged for euery Doctrin the Church teaches Doctrin taught by our Church and held erroneous by Sectaries which is not Sealed Signed and Attested by euident Miracles We haue innumerable for Christs Real and substantial Presence in the Eucharist As many for the Inuocation of Saints as also for the Honour due to holy Reliques Innumerable proue that third place of Purgatory c. All these may good Authors deserue Credit are vpon vndoubted Record And what iust Exception haue Sectaries against so great Authority I 'le tell you Their own incredulous Humour Here is all Whereas could they speak to the cause they should giue vs weight for weight and Oppose what we Allege in behalf of Miracles vpon grounded Principles That is they Should euince positiuely that our Authors are meer Cheats and fain Stories when we read of Miracles wrought in confirmation of praying to Saints the Real Presence And this in all law of Disputation they are obliged to do vpon solid Proofs indeed distinct from their own Incredulity or à meer Saying Such Records are false But do what ye will Sectaries can neuer be driuen to dispute vpon Principles 4. A third Obiection S. Austin Lib. de Vnit Ecclesiae Saith We therefore say not we belieue because so many wonders are done all the world ouer in holy places for what euer we find in this kind Ideo sunt approbanda quia in Ecclesiâ Catholicâ fiunt are to be approued S. Austin alleged against Miracles Speak's nothing for Sectaries because they are wrought in the Catholick Church Hitherto the obiection is of no force For the Saint only Saies No new Miracles ought to gain certain credit But such only as are wrought in the Church or such as confirm Her Doctrin or finally haue the Churches Approbation Now because he disputes against the Donatists and supposeth the Church known vpon other grounds expressed in Scripture Her Vnity Chiefly and vniuersal extent ouer the world before these latter Miracles were heard of Let us Saith S. Austin waue this Plea of Miracles you Donatists allege yours and I mine and Argue by Scripture only and see what Church Scripture commend's antecedently known before these latter Miracles came to our knowledge Which is to say though the after Particular Miracles added to others formerly done may much strengthen our Faith yet absolutly How the Saint pleaded against the Donatists Speaking Faith depend's not of them Because the Church we belieue in is sufficiently manifested by Her Vnity Perpâ—tuity and Vniuersallity expressed in Scripture Haec sunt causae nostrae documenta hac firmamenta Here in sies all we haue to Say Whilst we contest with you Donatists that own Scripture with vs yet Cauil at our Miracles Who euer read's this one Chapter exactly And drawes any other sense from the whole Context than what is now briefly hinted at will much oblige me may he please to discouer it 5. One yet may Obiect S. Austin Saith more and it seem's much against vs. Non ideo ipsa manifestatur Catholica quia haec in ea fiunt The Catholick Church is not vpon that Account manifested to you Donatists because these Miracles are wrought in it I Answer 1. The words vnderstood as Sectaries interpret Euert as wholly the Miracles of our Sauiour who said If you will not belieue me belieue my Works 2. The Sectaries sense impugn's also the express Doctrin of S. Austin de Vtilit Credendi C. â—7 Where He Asserts that Hereticks are condemned by the Maiesty of Miracles Besides Their sense is nothing to the purpose because in this very Passage He speak's of latter Miracles known to S. Ambrose at Millan And Saith Hee will no more insist on These than permit the Donatists to talk of their False-visions For the Church is sufficiently manifested without them vpon à Surer Principle the Holy Scripture which the Donatists admitted and therefore Why Heâ— waued the proof of Miracles with the Donatists whilst They pretended to Miracles as well as S. Austin did Hee prudently waued that Discours and Argued by Scripture only leauing Miracles to their own worth and weight I Say to their ovvn vveight which is gathered from this great Doctors Discourse 6. Our Lord Iesus saith he arose from the dead and manifested Himself to his Disciples and offered his sacred body to be touched by their hands yet least that might be thought à fallacy he iudged it meet to confirm his Resurrection more Principally by the Testimony of the law the Prophets and Psalms showing All things were now accomplished â—n him Whence I inferr as the touching his Sacred body was Proof enough though not the chiefest of his Resurrection when Scripture was at hand to make that most manifest So Miracles also The true Reason giuen wrought in the Church manifest that Oracle but not Principally to the Donatists who ought to haue belieued more firmly the Churches Doctrin vpon that one potent Proof of the Apostle 1. Tim 3. 15. The Pillar and ground of Truth than for all the latter wonders done in the Church Yet these haue à mighty force and are stronge Inducements so far as Motiues can reach but not the chief and Principal cause of any mans Belief or Assent Read then S. Austin's words thus The Church is not made manifest by her latter Miracles to à Donatist who Cauils at such wonders but Principally by Scripture which he admit's and will like Protestants be tryed by You haue the Saints full Sense and à great Truth with it whereof there can be no doubt at all when Lib. Contra Epist Fundamentâ— C. 4. 5. He Demonstrat's the Church by Her Miracles
no For this we believe by Faith And know not Scientifically Yet they plainly Mark out the great Oracle whereby God speaks to the world And therefore wonder not that Sectaries striue so earnestly to Obscure the euidence Their design is to take from vs the clearest Principle which must end Controversies Why Sectaries endoauour to obs 〈…〉 â—he Churches Lustre For cast oncâ— off à Church manifested by Antiquity Miracles Conuersions c. Nothing remains to regulate Faith but the dark and yet vnsensed Letter of Scripture which is most grosly abused by the one or other dissenting Party who force vpon it quite contrary Senses And by what means can any one come to the knowledge of Him or these that abuse it if Church Authority be excluded or decide not in this most weighty matter VVe need not saith Mr Thorndicke in his Book of Forbearance P. 2. The Heresies of the Primitiue times to tell vs what Irreligious pretenses may be set forth in Scripture Phrase Our own Fanatiks would furnish sport enough with the Foolâ—riâ—s they pretend as from Gods Spirit because they can dâ—liuer their Nonsense in the Phrase of Scripture Again This two edged sword of holy Scripture may proue an edged tool to cut their sâ—ins with who take vpon them and haue not skill to handle it Much better were it say I were the Abuse or ill handling of the Book only found among à few Fanaticks But the euil is spread further you Gentlemen are all alike whether Fanaticks or Protestants that handle gloss and interpret Scripture by Priuate reason conttary to the Iudgement of an uniuersal euidenced Church 13. A third Truth The Church thus manifested by Her Marks which are Obiects of Sense and induce reason to iudge that She only is Gods Oracle Catholicks neuer call into doubt Her Essential owned Doctrin nor seek for further Euidence thereof because there is none in this present State But humbly submit to all she Teaches This Euidence then once attained which ariseth from the Churches Marks And hath drawn Millions to belieâ—e her Doctrin We next turn to our Bible and learn there that the Language of these Motiues for etiam factâ— What these Motiues Speak loquitur Deus saith S. Austin aboue God speaks by his works and the Language of his own written word is one and the same That is what these Inducements point at God expresly deliuers in holy Scripture Obserue an exact parallel 14. The Antiquity of our Church and here is one sensible Mark we plead by giues Assurance that the first Founder was our Lord Iesus Christ No Sectary call's this truth into Question and the Gospel confirms it Luc. 24. 48. Beginning from Hierusalem c. Her Constant Perseuerance visible in all Ages God reueals in Scripture proues Her indeficiency And this is manifest in Scripture A Citty placed on à Mountain Hell gates shall not preuail against Her Om 〈…〉 m etiam infidelium oculis exhibetur saith S. Austin Lib. Con. Crescon C. 63. The Church is so well seen by all that the very Pagans cannot contradict Her She showes you à continued Succession of her Popes Bishops and Pastors from the beginning and Scripture also Ephes 4. 11. And he gaue some Apostles c. long since foretold it She giues in à clear Euidence of Her Miracles through euery age Our Blessed Sauiour prophesied it should be so Iohn 14. 12. Maiora horum facient They shall work greater wonders None can deny most Miraculous Conuersions of Kingdomes and Nations to Her Faith and the Prophesies of Christ's Church fulfilled Prophets euery where Proclaim the truth Many Nations shall flock to Her Zachar. 2. 11. She Shewes how Her Doctrin was propagated through the whole world And therefore is called the Visible Catholick or Vniuersal Church Scripture also Confirm's it Doâ—ete omnes gentes Teach all Nations Dominabitur à mari vsque ad mare She shall raign from sea to sea Finally to say much in few words which might be further amplifyed Is it true which the Church demonstrates that Hereticks as Arians Nestorians Pelagians Eutichyans Lutherans and Caluinists once Professed Catholicks shamefully abandoned Her Vnion and for that Cause iustly deserued the reproachful name of Hereticks and Separatists Scripture Foretell's vs of the Breach and Apostacy Iohn 1. 2. 19. Ex nobis prodierunt They left vs went out from vs. for had they been of vs they would haue remained And thus both Church and Heresy are visibly pointed at by clear Marks and Gods written word also Videndum it is the Expression of Optat. Mileuit Lib. 1. à little after the middle Quis in radice â—um toto orbe â—aâ—serit quis foras exierit We are to see who They were that continued in the root with the whole world and who parted from it We are to see who erected another Chair distinct from that which was before Call these and boldly Hereticks straglers from the Church and the Verities of Christs Gospel And here by the way we vrge our Nouellists to point at à visible Sectaries Vrged to Answer Orthodox Society which the Supposed erring Church of Rome abandoned as clearly as we lay forth to them the time the place the circumstances not only of their own impious Reuolt But of all other more ancient Hereticks from this Catholick Society Could the Sectary do thus much Hee might speak more confidently 15. To end the matter now in hand You see by what is said already If Christs words haue weight Math. 18. 16. In ore duorum vel trium Stet omne verbum That Truth stand's firm vpon the Testimony of two or three vnexceptionable Witnessess Wee here introduce two Testimonies in behalf of our Church which none can except against Gods own voice speaking to reason by Miracles and the Motiues now mentioned is the One And his own sacred reuealed word which most significantly teaches what these Motiues speak is the Other Hence I say Sectaries cannot dispute against this Church without proofs drawn from Motiues as strong and Scriptures as clear as are now alleged in our behalf We press them again and again to giue in their Euidence and seriously demand whether Protestancy was confessedly founded by Christ Or but once owned Orthodox by any sound Christians Sectaries Grauelled at Euery Question As all acknowledge the foundation of the Roman Catholick and the Orthodoxism of it to haue been established by Christ our Lord. We further enquire after à visible Succession of their Pastors after their visible Miracles their visible Conuersions made in foregoing Ages Nothing is answered nothing is or can be pleaded nothing in à word is returned probable Therefore Protestancy is an vneuidenced Religion no Motiues countenance the Nouelty no Scripture speaks for it and Consequently cannot but be in the highest degree improbable 16. A fourth Truth A Church which weares as it were Gods own Liuery and beares the Signatures of Divine Authority in Her Miracles Prodigious Conuersions
and his Church though sublime and difficult was miraculously Spread the whole world ouer when you Demonstrate how manifestly Diuine prouidence hath Age after Age Honoured Christ and his Church and seuerely Chastised the professed Enemies of both When finally you make it manifest that there is no Vnion no Form no fashion of Religion in any Society now on earth but in How the Heathen is Conuinced the Roman Catholick Church only Then the Heathen if reasonable and desirous to learn Truth must confess that God speaks Truth by this one Catholick Oracle only Or there is no such thing as à reuealed Verity taught in the world 16. Out of what is said already I infer first If that Maxim of Philosophy he vndoubted Frustra sit per plura c. It is needles to multiply many proofs in behalf of à Verity when one most clearly conuinceth it This Argument alone drawn from the glorious Marks of our Catholick Church which cannot but proceed from God proues Her his own faithful Oracle With these Signes we haue the thing signified These in à General way settle in euery reasonable vnderstanding this fundamental Truth God speak's to the world by his euidenced Church I say in à General way For as the visible works in nature proue this General Truth Ipse fecit nos c. A mighty power made vs we made The efficacy of Church Motiues not our Selues though as yet none comes thereby to an explicit knowledge of many Perfections in God So the Marks and Motiues manifest in the Church conuince this General Truth also That the same Power which made Nature giues being to these the same Power which preserues nature preserues these glorious Signes for our instruction And Consequently it followes That as the visible world is proued Gods own work so this visible glorious marked Church is proued his own Oracle Though yet neither the Heathen nor any knowes euery particular Doctrin which God teaches by the Church In like manner great Diuines assert that Christs own Disciples owned first our blessed Lord as the true Messias and à great Prophet Ioan. 1. 41. Inuenimus Messiam We haue found the Messias before they learned the other high Mysteries of his being the natural Son of God the second Person of the Blessed Trinity the Redeemer of Israel c. see Suares 3. Part. Tom. 2. Dispu 31. Sest 4. 17. A second Inference The General Truth now spoken of well established God teaches the world by à Church Signed with Supernatural wonders All further disputes cease concerning the particular Doctrins She teaches though sublime and aboue the reach of our weak Capacities For none whether Heathen Iew or Heretick can boggle at à Doctrin which God reueal's How reason discourses vpon these Euident Motiues But God saith prudent Reason reueal's such and such Truths The Incarnation of the Diuine word the Trinity Original sin c. by à Church which most pressing Motiues euince to be His own Oracle Therefore it is my duty to Submit and belieue euery Doctrin She proposes 18. The Ground hereof seem's clear For as there can be no endles Progress or going on in Infinitum in the intrinsecal formal Obiect of Faith because Faith at last rest's vpon one sure Principle An infinite Verity So we can haue no endles Process in the extrinsick Lights and Motiues whereby we are induced to fix à firm Belief vpon that one sure Principle Therefore in what euer Society of men Reason finds these Motiues it rest's without further Enquiry after stronger which cannot be found But most euidently reason finds them in one only Oracle the Roman Catholick Church as is now proued and prudently resteth there as vpon lights which immediatly manifest the Church Scripture not so immediatly Credible as the Church and make Her Doctrin euidently credible Scripture t' is true is the obiect of Faith but not so immediatly credible as the Church for independently of Scripture I can belieue the Church as the first Christians did before the Book was written but men generally in this present State cannot belieue Scripture without the Churches Testimony As is already and shall hereafter be proued more at large 19. A third Inference Who euer pretend's to à Doctrin reuealed in Scripture and hold's it of Faith has either à Church which teaches it euidenced by the Marks of our Lord Iesus Christ or He publisheth à falshood Which is to say in other Terms If the euidenced Church of Christ positiuely own 's not or reiects such à Doctrin that Doctrin Eo ipso is spurious forged and not de Fide Hence it is that when our Blessed Lord Commissoned the Disciples to Preach his sacred Verities Math. 28. 19. Goe and teach all Nations Hee sent them abroad with the Characters Marks and Ensigns of his own Preaching Mark 16. 2. Our Lord working with all and confirming the word with Signs that followed And here by the way I can neuer sufficiently admire the open folly of Sectaries that wholly Churchless A lawful Mission required to teach our Christian truths will yet needs perswade vs into new opinions vpon their own bare word That they teach truth It is impossible Nay I say more Although which is false they should speak Truth they ought not Churchless as they are to be listned vnto For suppose one should present himself as an Embassadour from à Prince to à forreign State but without Credentials or Authentick letters iustifying his Embassage no State can or will admit him though he speaks truth He must not only do so but show his Authentick Commission that he speaks truth deliuered by the Princes own order or he is sent back vnreceiued in the quality of an Embassadour In like manner I say No more can any one essentially vncommissioned pretend to teach Christs Doctrin whilst he is not sent to teach by Christs own euidenced Oracle than this vncommissioned An Instance Legate to speak in his Princes name Many à man knowes the law well and is fit enough to pronounce à iust Sentence yet sitt's not on the Bench nor giues it because he is not Authorised to do so And thus we discours of all Hereticks no members of the euidenced Church though as I said they deliuer truth by chance they yet deserue not the hearing wanting power and Authority to teach it 20. S. Cyprian Epist. 2. Speak's very pertinently to our present purpose Quod vero ad Nauatiani personam pertinent c. For as much as concerns Nouatians Person I would dear Brother haue you know in the first place we are not to be curious concerning what he saies when he teaches out of the Church S. Cyprian Confirm's the Doctrin Quisquis ille est qualiscunque est Christianus non est qui in Christi Ecclesiâ non est Whoeuer or of what condition soeuer he be is no Christian that is not in the Church of Christ And hence S. Austin in his frequent Disputes with the Donatists
And because it is here impossible to descend to all particular controuersies we will fall vpon one only much debated one serues for all Viz whether Transubstantiation or no Transubstantiation be Orthodox Doctrin The truth yet lies in darkness there is no Self-Euidence either in the Affirmatiue or Negatiue T' is yet no more but doubtful or à meer Perhaps whether the Protestants or we Speak Truth Gods reuelation which only can giue certainty is Where the difficulty lies yet obscure to vs both and as little euidenceth it Self as the Verity we enquire after By what means then can we raise our selues aboue this state of Doubting to so great à degree of certainty as to Say without fear Transubstantiation is Orthodox Doctrin And the contrary is not so 10. The Catholick to waue in this place other proofs recur's to his Church And saith this Publick euidenced Oracle as well raises him to à State of certainty for his Tenet as the euidenced Primitiue Church rais'd the first belieuing Christians from their doubts to Security For the like full euidence alwayes lead's to How the Catholick Peoceed's a like certainty of Belief The Protestant hauing reiected our present euidenced Church hopes well and will needs find flawes and falsity too in Her Doctrin not by confronting Her Euidence or denoting an other Church As ample as ancient as miraculous as She is which held his Doctrin for this though it should be pleaded if we come to à clear Decision is vnpleadable because the Protestant has no such Oracle What 's done therefore I 'll tell you and you may iustly wonder He shaks of this clear Principle of an euidenced Church and pretend's though there is no such matter to launch into the vast Ocean of Scripture Councils volumes of Fathers ancient Records and thinks The Sectary takes à Contrary way to carry on his cause this way Here He pick 's vp one dark Sentence of à Father and triumph's with that There on another Here vpon the least hint giuen he Snarles at one piece of Popery there at another Here he guesses and there he misses In à word the man is busily idle doth much and iust nothing run's on but is out of his way utterly lost without the guidance of God's euidenced Oracle which only can draw him out of the Labyrinth And if you Ask why he is out I Answer his Errour lies here that both in this and all other Controuersies he makes his false Suppositions to pass for proofs against euidence 11. You shall see what I here Assert Made Good To proue no Transubstantiation the Se ary read's Scripture Fathers Antiquity or what els you will Be it so He read's but not alone For the learned Catholick bear's him companie and read's also Mark now The One after his reading glosses so doth the other The One compares Passage with Passage so doth the other The One discourses So doth the other But when all is done and here lies the mischief the Protestant imposes one sense vpon the perused Testimonies and the Catholick another Which leaues him in State of doubting quite contrary This dayly Experience teaches viz. That we differ not so much about the words we read as about the sense of Scripture and Fathers Therefore this also is Euident That the Protestant aduances not his Doctrin if yet he get so high aboue the degree of guessing only whilst he pleads by his glossed Scripture and Fathers For as long as the Catholick wholly as learned and conscientious as He is and an ample Church besides opposes his far-fetch'd Sense out of the Fathers He cannot without Impudency and making à false Supposition to pass for his Proof cry it vp as certain Now further As the sense he drawes from Scripture and the Fathers is no more but at most doubtful I say improbable so his Assertion concerning no Transubstantiation or what euer els he holds contrary to the Roman Catholick faith is wholly as much wauering or purely doubtful But that which is only doubtful and no more is too weak What euer is doubtful grounds not Faith either to ground any Christian Tenet vpon or to Contrast with the Roman Catholick Church whose Doctrin is indisputably made euidently credible Therefore unless à weake Vncertainty can reuerse Euident Credibility the Sectaries Plea against the Church is not only improbable but highly improbable 12. To conclude this Point Here is an vnanswerable Dilemma It is possible to Denote and point at another Church which without dispute taught Protestant Doctrin and opposed ours as Ancient as large and euery way as Euidenced to sense and reason as the Roman Catholick Church is Or it is not possible If possible controuersies are strangely ended for proue A Dilemma me once such à Church I say plainly There is no such thing as true Faith in the world worthy defense Why Because if the Supposition hold's two different Churches euidenced à like equally as ancient as efficacious in Doctrin and glorious in Miracles clash with one another Say and Vnsay approue and condemn The one condemn's Protestancy The other Popery One will haue Transubstantiation belieued The other not which is as wholly destructiue of Christian Faith as if Scripture it self should plainly Speak Contradictions 13. On the other side If the Sectary can neither name nor point at à Chutch euery way as euidenced as the Roman Catholick No euidenced Protestant Church no pleading for Protestancy which expresly propugned Protestancy and opposed Popery He shall neuer utter probable word against any one Article of our Catholick Faith For throw an euidenced Protestant Church out of the world All that is allegable in behalfe of its Doctrin or against vs will either End in à slight discharge of à few scattered vnweighed Sentences of holy Fathers no sooner read than Answered or as we dayly Experience in gross Mistakes and bold Calumnies laid on our Doctrin And can these think ye extinguish the visible Lustre of our Chureh can these lessen the euident Credibility of Her Doctrin or bring so known and owned an Oracle into open disgrace or publick Disreputation It is impossible The most vigorous Abbettors of Protestancy may not only blush to Assert it but will be bafled did we once liue to see the happy day when our iust cause might be proposed and heard in à Publick Dispute before Learned and impartial Iudges A VVord of Mr Thorndiks Mistakes discouered in His Book of Forbearance 14. Though I Honour Mr Thorndick and hold him much more wise Learned and moderate then some late voluminous Writers haue been yet because Truth will out I must not dissemble but Speak truth And therefore Say in à word His whole attempt against the Roman Catholick Church is weake And the feebleness of it Cannot but appear to euery Reader that penetrat's the force of the Principles already established My wish indeed was to haue Vnderstood his meaning better in some particular passages For
is in the hearts of such as are Assembled together in God's name and Assisted to define infallibly Diuine Faith T is true actually elicited euen after the permanent Habit infused requires à Supernatural Motion of Grace But hereof we speak not at present 5. A. 4. Principle When it is enquired Whether the Church Distusiue be infallible the Querie is not whether the Motiues inducing to distinguish that Oracle from others Demonstratiuely and with all Metaphysical certitude euidence likewise Gods Reuelation relating to the Mysteries Belieued For this might lead vs to enquire whether Faith be euident in Attestante That is so Vnexceptionably manifest that all may clearly Infer from the Reuelation clearly known That the Mysteries belieued are euidently true We now meddle not with that Difficulty though great Diuines patronize the Affirmatiue But only Ask Whether the Doctrin of Christ's Church be so infallibly Certain that it cannot be False or deceiue any Catholicks The Question Stated own à triple infallibility necessary to Faith The first proper to God's Reuelation no Protestant denies that The second belongs to the Church either Diffusiue or Representatiue in General Councils whereby we learn and that infallibly those Truths which God reueals The third infallible Assurance necessary to Faith all Orthodox Christians haue that belieue the A threefold Infallibility Mysteries reuealed vpon the Diuine Testimony Proposed by Christ's Church 6. A. 5. Principle If what is most vndoubted Diuine Faith essentially relies vpon Gods infallible Verity speaking by one or more men sent to Teach who proue their Mission and Demonstrate the Credibility of the Doctrin deliuered it necessarily followes That that first infallible Verity beget's in euery true Belieuer no less perfect Faith Than what is most certain and infallible Wherefore as it is the indispensable Duty of euery belieuing Christian to acquiese in and rest vpon God's infallible Mans Duty grounded on Christ's Promise Veracity So it is an indispensable Promise That we haue Christ present with à Church which teaches all Truth And therefore cannot but Propose the Obiect of Faith infallibly The firm Promise irreuokably issued from Power and Goodnes it selfe Matt. 28. 20. I am with you alwayes to the end of the world Iohn 14. 16. I will Ask the Father and he will giue you an other Comforter the Spirit of truth to remain with you for euer Hell gates cannot preuail against the Church Thus much premised 7. The Difficulty now agitated is Whether the Roman Catholick Church and Her approued General Councils be so secured from Errour That She cannot swerue from that first Support of Truth I mean God's infinit Veracity But must when She teaches Teach that exactly which God hath reuealed and will haue after à sufficient Proposal Vniuersally belieued Sectaries say She may Yea actually has swerued from God's Reuelation and in great Matters too though not perhaps in the What Protestants assert Primary Fundamentals as they are Called or in Fundamentals Simply necessary to Saluation And they were forced to this wicked Doctrin vpon three naughty Motiues 8. First to giue Scope or rather to inuite Libertins to hold or deny so much of Christian Religion as pleaseth their fancy And do we not see the liberty effectually laid hold on in England amongst Phanaticks and such giddy People All this giddines And why came first from the reformed or rather the deformed Nouelty of Protestancy They do it 2. to make Controuersies Endles For deny the Churches Infallibility Cauils go on Grant Her infallible Disputes are ended 3. This is done to quit themselues of an Infamy iustly laid vpon them of being both Schismaticks and Heretiques at once which shall neuer be claw'd of do what they can For these vnsound reasons or pestilent The Catholick Assertion Motiues rather The Church forsooth must needs be fallible Catholicks on the other side maintain the contrary And say there is à Church so Infallible that She cannot err in any thing She teaches as Faith And thus much God willing shall be euinced in the following Discourse But to do it exactly I am briefly to lay open to all that haue eyes The Abiect the Desperate and Desolate condition of à fallible Church You haue here my first Proposition 9. A fallible Church is essentially Constituted in à State of publick A fallible Church is in à State of rebellion Rebellion and Hostility with it Self Wages war against Infidels without hope of conuincing or conquering any And therefore cannot be Christ's Orthodox Church To declare further what I would say know first That Sectaries own à Catholick Church much larger than the Roman Catholick And make Themselues Part of it Conceiue now which though very hard is yet possible that the Representatiue of this great Moral Body meet 's in à General Council and discusses the Question now in hand Viz. Whether there be à Church of one Denomination Preserued infallible by Diuine Assistance Part of the Representatiue and these are Protestants Oppose the total Infallibility of euery Church Part Catholicks I mean Say one Church is infallible and that is the Roman The Difficulty proposed can be decided or not If not This great Representatiue meet 's to no purpose but only to make more No means to vnite it Strife in the world If it can be decided God has prouided means whereby the truth of so weighty à Matter may be known But there is no such means left vnless some one Church or other or all together be owned infallible Therefore an endles Hostility goes on in this supposed Representatiue 10. That all means fail may Sectaries Votes haue place is indisputably Euident You shall see it clearly The Catholick Party Appeales to Scripture alleges these and other like Passages Without some One Church be Infallible He who hear's you hears me and from thence infer's Who euer hear's the Church hear's Christ an Infallible Teacher The Church is the Pillar and ground of Faith and hence concludes She is infallible The Spirit of Truth shall remain with the Church for euer Pastors and Doctors are appointed by Prouidence to preserue the faithful from wauering in Faith and all erroneous Circumuention Hell gates cannot preuail against the Chutch c. What can be more The Scripture Significant if plain words haue sense for the Infallibility of some One Church Yet all these and many other Testimonies so shrink to nothing may Sectaries Glosses stand in force That no man can say what God speak's in these Scriptures or know the Truth now debated Viz. Whether any Church be infallible or not This means failing of its End which ought to compose our Strife Hostility is as vigorous as when the Dispute began for yet we know nothing certainly 11. Passe from Scripture to Fathers We haue there most pregnant Expressions The Church cannot be adulterated Cypria◠And Fathers Speak significantly the Churches Infallibility de Vnit Eccle VVhat She once receiued from Christ
publick Dissention Answ These men certainly neuer say their Creed I belieue the holy Catholick Church that is in mind interiourly I giue Assent to all the Catholick Church teaches Now if this Doctrin stand They may well not yeild Assent at all to any Doctrin the Church teaches but like Hypocrits may outwardly be fair Catholicks and inwardly foul Hereticks And this is to Profess one thing and belieue another Christ is ashamed of them Luke 9. 26. and so is the Apostle also Rom. 1. 16. VVho blushed not to preach as he belieued And to belieue as he preached But enough hereof is said in the other Treatise CHAP. XV. Diuine Faith in this present State of things necessarily requir's à Church infallible The Reason hereof The Church neither Defin's nor can Define by Humane Authority only Her Definitions more than morally certain are Infallible Sectaries Recourse to Moral certainty in Matters of Faith à most frigid Plea Their Fallacy is discouered Obiections Answered 1. ONe Principle established aboue N. 6. Proues the first part of my Assertion Diuine Faith which is à firm Assent to what euer God speak's So vltimatly rest's vpon his Infallible Veracity One Principle premised That if à true Belieuer yeild Assent to him as He speaks and because He speaks All the power in Heauen cannot Separate Infallibility from that Belief Herein consist's the Perfection of all Diuine Faith That without sweruing it tend's vpon a Verity Infallible and without Hesitancy hold's that infallibly true which the infallible Verity Reueal's A lesser Perfection than this is not Faith And à greater the Apostles had not if we precisely respect The perfection of Faith the Motiue of their Assent Hence all must Distinguish à twofold Infallibility One intrinsick and infinit proper to Gods Verity The Other answerable to à creatures Capacity finit t' is true yet Infallible and such the Apostles Faith was 2. Thus much Supposed not easily gainsaid by Sectaries the infallibility of one Church which we say is the Roman Catholick Stand's firm And here is the Reason As Faith relies vpon an infallible Verity that reueal's Truth So it also rest's vpon an infallible Oracle which without danger of Errour Applies and Proposes that very Truth yet obscure to Belieuers For it little auail's to haue à Verity infallibly Reuealed if à fallible Oracle which may both Miss and Mislead be our best One ground of the Churches Insallibility and only Guide or Proponent The Church therefore which Saith Indubitably I Propose what God Reueals must be infallible answerable to the Infallibility of Diuine Reuelation Ruin the One or Other Infallibility Faith can be no more but an vncertain Assent And consequently no Faith at all 3. To Reinforce this Reason Please only to cast à serious The reason reinforced Thought vpon such as haue been iustly reputed Hereticks and vpon their Procedure The Arians after the reading Scripture denyed the high Godhead in Christ His Eternal Consubstantiality also to the Father And erred The Pelagians reiecting Original Sin swerued likewise from the Verities of Christian Religion so did the Monothelits that impiously bereaued Christ of his two Sacred Wills Diuine and Humane The true Church All know condemned and yet condemns these Tenets as Heretical Right say modern Sectaries And it was well done Very Good If well done herevpon ensues another troubleson Question and it is Whether that true Church whilst She condemned these Errours and defined the contrary Truths proceeded Doubtfully Probably vpon Moral Certainty only or Spake as Gods Oracle ought If the Church defines doubtful to speak Infallibly If She Defined doubtfully it is yet also doubtful whether Christ be the high God and Consubstantial to his Father Vnless Scripture now supposed God's word in express Terms clear the doubt and raise the Doctrin to absolute Certainty which most euidently is not done 4. The whole Contest then is VVhether the Church or Arians Interpret Scripture better For the Obiect of my Assent when I belieue the eternal VVord Consubstantial being not Express Scripture but an Interpretation only it followes if the Interpretation which the Church giues be supposed doubtful She wrong 's the Arians and all other Christians whilst She obliges them to belieue the Mystery otherwise than only Sub dubio or doubfully which is not to belieue at all Again If the Churches She wrongs both Arians and All Christians Definition get à Step higher to à degree of Probability and no more The Arians Opinion for ought we know yet may be as tenable as the Contrary Doctrin now supposed Orthodox And Consequently the real Consubstantiality of the Son to his Father is no more any Obiect of Faith but meerly à disputable Matter like this or that Opinion in Schools earnestly tossed to and fro But neuer ended Doubts therefore And meer probabilities reiected too weightles for Church Definitions 5. We are next to look à little into one only Refuge left The Sectaries Plea of Moral Certainty examined Sectaries called Moral Certainty T' is à dark cloud they are lately got into our Endeauour shall be to dissipate it They may say When the Church condemned Arianism the like is of any other Heresy and defined the Eternal Word Consubstantial The Definition much aboue Probability though not absolutely Infallible was yet so morally Certain that no man can but most vnreasonably doubt of its Verity In passing I may without Offence take notice of Sectaries Inconsequences and Ask if Moral Certainty be at least had from Church Definitions when She interpret's Scripture though the Doctrin be not formally expressed There Why are not Her Definitions euery whit as Morally certain against Luther and Caluin though what She Defin's be not in express Terms Gods word I would also as willingly learn why Protestant Doctrin is not esteemed ouer all the world so Morally certain as thefe Ancient Catholick Definitions are But let these Queries not easily Answered pass We come to the main difficulty and demand 6. Whether this Positiue Doctrin Christ is the Highest God and Consubstantial to his Father be à Fundamental Article of Christian Faith finally resoluable into the Diuine Reuelation And admitted A question Proposed to Sectaries as most Fundamental by Protestants I verily perswade my self they will Say it is If not This followes ineuitably that there is no fundamental Article in our Christian faith Vpon the supposed Concession I Argue But If the Church be fallible this Positiue Doctrin Christ is Consubstantial is no Article of Faith because it cannot be resolued into an infinite Verity infallibly Reuealing Truth Therefore it is only à Moral humane Perswasion at most which may be false 7. The Proof of the Minor will best appear if we Ask why Sectaries belieue that positiue Doctrin They cannot Answer Scripture expresly Teaches it For most euidently that 's not so Will they say the Mystery may by good Discourse be deduced The true Answer proues Faith Certain from
Christians who are to learn it as Infallible But Sectaries do So That is they vnnaturely turn A Conuincing â—eason hereof Gods infallible Doctrin out of its own intrinsecal Certainty and Say its only Morally Certain to vs Therefore they wrong that first Verity and abuse all Christians This Principle alone Proues the Churches Infallibility And vtterly ruin's the Protestants Pretence to Moral Certainty whereof you Shall haue More hereafter 25. Now to deal fairely with Mr Stillingfleet let vs at present falsely Suppose Moral Certainty à sufficient ground of Faith Were Church Doctrin only Morally certain Sectaries yet gain Nothing what Good for Gods sake get Protestants by that Can They tell vs where the Church is whose Doctrin must be reputed only morally certain The Arians call themselues à Church so do the Graecians the Protestants likewise and finally so do Catholicks Are all these different iarring Doctrins Morally certain Euidently No. For the Professors of them maintain Contradictions vtterly Destructiue both of Moral and all other Certainty Some One Society therefore teaches it For more than One if diuided in faith cannot This One must be Signalized and pointed out which no Protestant can do For if he name his own Church he hath the whole world against him and will be forced to proue his Assertion vpon indubitable Principles And if he point at the Roman Catholick Church he ruin's his own cause For two opposite Churches cannot teach Doctrin morally Certain Now if he can point at no Church of One Denomination teaching Doctrin Morally certain This certainty is only an insignificant word in the aire appliable to no Christian Society 26. A second obiection The Motiues of Credibility though commonly held only Inducements morally certain so Denote the true Church that all may find it out Therefore though Church Doctrin were only morally Certain and not Infallible it may sufficiently lead to belieue that Doctrin which God has Reuealed Answ Here is neither Parity nor any Inference consequential Faith relies not vpon Motiues inducing to Beliefe And the want of distinguishing between the Credibility of Reuealed Doctrin and its Truth breed's the Confusion The Motiues then only make the Doctrin euidently Credible and remit vs to the Church which teaches Truth She proposes the Doctrin and vpon Her Proposition Faith relies which therefore must be infallible not vpon the Motiues too weak to Support Faith In à word here is all I would say God Reueal's truth infallibly the Motiues in à General way manifest the Church where truth is taught the Church thus Signalized Proposes Truth infallibly And vpon Her infallible Proposition not for the Motiues Christians belieue Infallibly 27. A third Obiection If the Churches Proposition be infallible or if God speaks by the Church As he anciently did by the Prophets and Apostles And She likewise Speak's in his name Whateuer this Oracle Proposes may be called the Voice of God and Consequently the Formal Obiect of Faith I Answer no hurt at all were it so For perhaps in this present State of things few Articles of Faith are or can be belieued independently of the Churches Proposition At least it is very easy to say I Belieue the Sacred Trinity because God anciently Reuealed it to whether the Churches Proposition may be Call'd the Obiect of Faith the Apostles and also because the Church now Testifies that the Mystery was anciently Reuealed Howeuer we here waue this Doctrin and Say The Churches Proposition though absolutely infallible is not properly speaking the Formal Obiect of Faith Though much may be de Nomine First because it is meerly Accidental not Essential to Faith to be proposed by the Church by this or that Oracle For Christ our Lord at his first Preaching was not the Church yet he Proposed Articles to be Belieued and most Infallibly 2. Diuines by the word Formal Obiect vsually vnderstand the Ancient infallible Reuelation made to the Prophets and Apostles And not the Churches Proposition which though it be an Intrinsick Essential and Necessary Condition compleating and Applying the Ancient Reuelation to Belieuers yet Principally it Terminates not Faith Now to be an essential Condition nothing at all impairs the Churches Infallibility Thus much is said to solue the Obiection though the Matter t' is true is capable of higher Speculation but Sectaries like not Speculatiue Learning 28. A fourth Obiection The Churches Infallibility seem's chiefly Asserted vpon this Ground that She is to be Heard and Obeyed which proues nothing For Iudges Gouernours and Parents The Disparity between Gouernours Commanding and the Church defining are to be heard and obeyed though all are fallible Answ A most silly Obiection The very Matter wherein These and the Church are to be Obeyed Shewes the disparity For No Ciuil Magistrate pretend's to regulate Faith or to Define what God Reueal's This the Church and She only is impowred to do To crush Heresies as they rise vp and to establish without Erring the contrary Truths which cannot be effected the matter being so Sublime without the infallible Assistance of the Holy Ghost Now we are to Proceed to the main Business in hand CHAP. XVI Principles premised to the following Doctrin The Roman Catholick Church is à Church of One Denomination She and no other Society of Christians is Infallible Other Grounds of Her Infallibility laid forth The Infallibility of Councils maintained against Mr Stillingfleets Supposed Truth and Reason There are no Principles whereby Approued Councils can be proued Fallible Sectaries Conuinced by their own Doctrin 1. WE here first Premise three certain Principles One that the Doctrin of all Churches seuerally Denominated One Principle importing the Disunion in Faiih from their Authors as Arianism from the Arians Protestancy from Protestants Christian Verities from Christ our Lord â—s not in the whole or totally considered vnder One Notion of Christian Doctrin either True or Infallible For in this whole diffuâ—ed Body We euidently find Contradictions The Arians conâ—adict Protestants These Set against Arians And the Catholick Church Opposes both Therefore All of them maintain neither One nor true nor infallible Catholick Doctrin And consequently infallibility ceases in the VVhole when the seueral Parts stand in an implacable Opposition with One another 2. A. 2. Principle If all Churches which Contradict One another are not infallible One only and of one Denomination Another Principle must be infallible or none at all can be so For example Catholicks and Protestants teach Contrary Doctrin the like is of all other dissenting Societies both Parties cannot be infallible Therefore the One is so or Neither Now further Protestantâ— disclaim the Prerogatiue of teaching infallibly whence it followes First That the Roman Catholick Church enioyes that Priuiledge or there is no such thing on earth as an infallible Church Secondly this is Consequent It is the same to Say The Roman Catholick Church is infallible as to Say that God yet Preserues an infallible Church in Being This
of that weak Declaration it appear's no other to me but As things are proposed so they are to all that belieue weak and fallible And none on earth can vnbeguile me or Propose it with greater certainty Because all are now Supposed fallible in their Teaching 8. One Instance may yet clear my meaning The Protestant reads Christs Sacred words Matt. 26. This is my Body And Proposes what he conceiues to be belieuable by Faith But An Instance doth it fallibly Imagin that the Roman Catholick Church also could Say no more for Her Doctrin or the Sense of those Words But as the Protestant doth so fallibly that all might be False it is clear That none whether Catholick or Protestant can haue Certainty of the Doctrin which Christ our Lord deliuered in that one short Sentence Why Both declare their fallible Sentiments only and Fallibly concerning the Sacrament So far their teaching reaches and not farther Therefore the Faith which should be had of the Mystery dwindles into nothing but into à fallible Opinion by virtue of that imperfect Teaching 9. Hence we learn that à Doctrin though infallible in Gods word without more Help makes no man though he be à Prodigy of wit an Infallible Teacher The reason is Infallibility Scripture alone makes no man infallible And why Proceed's not from Scripture easily misinterpreted but immediatly from Gods special Assistance And this Assistance which fixes an Assumed Oracle vpon Truth vnerrably no malice can wrest to falshood Now that the Book of Scripture as dayly Experience teaches is horridly peruerted to à Sinister sense needs no proof For all know what ruin Hereticks haue to the vttermost of their Power endeuoured to make of the chief Articles of our Christian Faith though they aknowledged Scripture to be God's Diuine Word There is scarce One which remain's Vnperuerted Some Deny the Necessity of Diuine Grace Others that great Mystery of the Incarnation Others an Equality in the Diuine Persons Others our Sauiours two Wills Diuine and Humane Thus the Pelagians the Antitrinitarians the Apollinarians and Monothelits taught and deceiued The world And when Scripture is Alleged in behalf of euery Orthodox Truth All you haue from them is à return of ouerthwart Glosses Grace must signify what the Pelagians please The VVord made Flesh How abused what the Antitrinitarians fancy and so of the rest Whence it is Euident that Scripture Alone without more light clears not sufficiently its own Truths For here you Se the most Primary Atticles disowned and Consequently Scripture abused by Priuate Spirits which therefore makes none infallibly certain of God's reuealed Doctrin 10. We Catholicks require à further Help One faithful Oracle to teach which in this contest about the Sense of Gods What Catholicks require besides the bare Letter of Scripture Word end 's all Strife and Saies both plainly and infallibly Thus and thus an Infinite Verity speaks in Scripture Yet Sectaries are offended with vs because we can assert without hesitancy VVe belieue infallibly what Truth it Selfe Reueal's infallibly Nay more They are angry with God for hauing done them the greatest fauour Imaginable For to put à Period to these endles A signal Mercy of God makes sectaries offended debates raised among Christians To teach all Infallibly by his own vnerring Oracle what may and ought to be belieued Infallibly is à signal Mercy for which due Thanks can neuer be rendred Disowne the Mercy we liue and shall liue in à Spirit of Contention to the worlds end 11. Now if you Ask why the Church after She has proposed the Sense and verity of Scripture more easily beget's infallible Faith in Her Children Than the bare letter of Gods word can doe without Her I Answer The facility Diuine assistance Supposed arises from the Clarity of Her teaching known to all Vniuersally whether Orthodox or others Whence it is that few of our Aduersaries scarce moue any doubt concerning the Sense of the Churches vniuersal receiued Doctrin for that 's plain but chiefly Question the Truth of it Whereas all is contrary in our contest with the forenamed Hereticks For there is no Dispute whether Scripture be true What is chiefly debated with Sectaries The debate only being what it Saith or what the Sense of Gods sacred word is Here we fight in darkness before the Church Speak's and Declares Her Sense And if She be diuinely Assisted to teach truth as is already and shall be more amply proued in the sequele Discourse that doubt also ceases and vanishes into nothing 12. In the mean while Some may Object 1. The greatest part of Christian Doctrin is now agreed on and Supposed by Catholicks and Protestanss both true and infallible what necessity then haue we of any other Oracle besides Scripture to teach infallibly Answ The Agreement is Null and the Supposition destroies it self if all that taught Christian Doctrin since the Apostles time teach it fallibly For How could any An Obiection Answered agree in this That such and such à Doctrin is both true and infallible when He or They yea all that teach may because fallible erre in their very teaching and call that infallible Doctrin without Assurance giuen of its Infallibility Do Therefore all own the Verities in Scripture infallible not infallible ex Terminis We must ioyntly own with that an Oracle which Proposes these Verities infallibly or can belieue nothing And by this you Se the Supposition destroies it Selfe For The Sectaries Supposition destroyes it selfe to Suppose à Doctrin infallible when none can Propose it answerably to its Merit as infallible or infallibly is as implicatory as to Suppose without Proof the Starrs in Heauen equal in number and from thence to Inferr they are to be iudged equal The Parity holds exactly 13. Obiect 2. Whoeuer though fallible Deliuers by chance Infallible Christian Doctrin Teaches the very sence that Christ taught Answ Very true But he giues no Assurance Aunother Errour of Sectaries That he doth so For à fallible Deliuery of à Truth as yet only Supposed not Proued infallible raises it no higher but to such à State of Vncertainty that one may iustly doubt whether it be Christ's infallible Doctrin or no. 14. Obiect 3. The fallible teaching of an infallible Verity may well conuey vnto à Hearer that which God has Reuealed For why may not an infallible Verity as Reuealed though fallibly Proposed haue influence vpon Faith and work in Belieuers à most firm Assent Answ It is vtterly vmpossible For à fallible teaching of an infallible Verity not yet Proposed as infallible by any neither Supposes the Truth Certain vpon other principles and this is euer to be noted nor makes it infallible It Supposes no Truth taught infalliby for Protestants Say None now can teach so All Doctors being fallible And most euidently Sectaries clearly conuinced it makes not that Verity infallible For the Verity as reuealed was antecedently Infallible before this fallible teaching
improbable Yea and destroies Protestancy It is And why improbable Because it cannot be Supposed that any priuate man or men haue vsed full Diligence to vnderstand the Scriptures Sense And that à Church of à thousand years standing hath neglected à Duty so necessary But these priuate men whether Arians Protestants or Socinians and the Church draw contradictory Senses from Scripture And all these iarring Sectaries with their different Senses defend not truth Therefore some of them let the fault yet light where you will haue not vsed Diligence nor righly vnderstood God's word The Question now is and some Oracle must decide it where or in whom this Misunderstanding lies Most willingly would I haue this one Difficulty folued and t' is worth the Labour whilft euery one See's it is no more certain that the Protestant hitt's on the Scriptures true Sense than it is certain that the whole Church after à thousand years Diligence mistakes it Can this think ye be euer cleared in behalf VVhy Should Sectaries his right on the Scriptures Sense of Protestants by any Proof so much as meanly Probable It is Impossible Wherefore I Conclude Their Grand Principle is rotten at the very root fail's all that Rely on it I will say it once more If the Protestant hath no greater Certainty of his Sense of Scripture than it is certain That he hitts right and the Church Err's in her Sense His Belief after all industry And the Church be deluded vsed stands vnprincipled rests on his own fancy and is not rectifiable while he iudges so Say the very vtmost it is no more but à meer hazard whether he belieues or no and this destroies Protestancy Thus much of Scripture 21. The next thing pleadable in behalf of Mr Stillingfleets Truth and Reason may perhaps be the Authority of Holy Fathers It is weightles if the Church be fallible or has Erred And first Protestants say all Fathers are liable to Errour I add more and Assert if that Church whereof They were Members taught or can teach false Doctrin it is à meer vanity to seek for certain Truth or any satisfactory Reason in the Fathers Writings What can Streams the Fathers were no other be Supposed pure and The Sectaries pretence to Fathers improbable the Head fountain Gods own Oracle Poysoned and infected Did they hit right vpon our Christian Verities when their only Guide Christ's sacred Spouse misled Posterity Could they Dedicate all their Labours to make an Oracle renowned that afterward whispered Errours into all mens ears These are Paradoxes I Say then it is à stronger and far more reasonable Principle to Assert That the Church neuer erred nor can erre Than first to Suppose Her erroneous And next to find truth in the Fathers who were no more but Schollers and suck't the milk of purest Doctrin from the Brests of this their Mother The Catholick Church If She therefore poysoned them with fals learning both She and They yet poyson vs And consequently neither the Church nor Fathers deserue credit nor can be prudently Belieued 22. And here by the way I cannot but reflect vpon à strange Procedure vsual with Sectaries in All their Polemicks First The procedure of Sectaries vnreasonable they Suppose the Church and Councils errable yea actually misled in Asserting Purgatory Transubstantiation c. And to Rectify what is thought Amiss Some few Gleaning of Fathers how little to the purpose is seen aboue are produced and these Forsooth must stand as it were in battail Array fight against à whole Church and ouerthrow Her Errours Is this think ye Reasonable Can it be imagined that God preserued his Reuealed truths in the Hearts thoughts and words of à few Fathers and suffered his Vniuersal Church with so many learned Councils conuened after the Four First to fall presently into so shameful à Dotage as Sectaries charge vpon Her Were the Fathers Then illuminated and was the Church afterward darkened and besotted There is none so blind But must needs se Himselfe out of Countenance by aduenturing to Defend à Tenet so highly Contrary to all Reason Wherefore I must earnestly petition the Reader once more to reflect vpon the greatest Folly which Methinks euer entred the Thoughts of men Thus it is The primitiue To say the Fathers taught truth and that che Church deserted Truth Fathers not many in number Who wrote in the First three or four Centuries in different Times and Places perused by few and vnderstood by Fewer are Supposed to Deliuer exactly the Catholick Verities What They sayd was True And an Ample Vniuersal Church together with Her Learned Councils known to All spread the whole world ouer for à Thousand yeares and vpward must be Supposed so Abominably sinful Is worse then a Paradox so Fearfully misled as to Desert the Ancient Faith of Those Fathers to Peruert God's Truths And Finally to Bring into the Vast Moral Body of Christians à Vniuersal Mischiefe à Deluge of Errour of Idolatry And no man knowes what If this be not pure Phrensy there was neuer any 23. The last Principle to ground Truth and Reason vpon or to bring Controuersies to an end is Vniuersal Tradition but this also Fail's to vphold Truth if the Church be fallible For who will or can with certainty trust the Tradition of à Church or so much as take the Book of Scripture from Her were she branded with this foul Note of hauing Publickly taught and wilfully imposed à hundred Doctrins vpon Christians contrary to Gods reuealed Reuealed Truths But more of this aboue C. 5. 6. 24. After all you se first Truth and Reason brought to Ruin Faith and Religion vnhinged if the Church and Councils be Fallible You se 2. These Inferences Setled vpon vndeniable Principles The Church is infallible Ergo Controuersies are without Perplexity ended Contrarywise The Church is Fallible Ergo Contentions Clear Inferences against Sectaries goe on without Redress endlesly Scripture as you haue heard because differently Sensed decides nothing No more do the Fathers Say Sectaries confessedly fallible Church and Councils are reiected as errable when and as often as Sectaries please Those that Dispute of Religion Yet more Fallible are not to be Iudges in their own Cause and without à Iudge Their best Arguments will be thought by all Prudent men no more but Vnconcluding Topicks And really they neither are nor can be better for want of Principles and some Oracle Infallible 25. Whoeuer desires to haue the Principle I Rely on further established by clear Inferences drawn from our Aduersaries needs only to read M. Stillingfleet from page 534. to the end of that 2. Chapter My Principle is There is no possibility of ending strife touching Religion if the Church and Councils be fallible yet Mr. Stillingfleet and his Lord Say they must haue some end or They 'l tear the Church à sunder My Task then is to show that these mens Doctrin Tears all in pieces and makes Controuersis
Endles 26. The Determination of à Council erring say our Aduersaries is to stand in force and to haue external Obedience at least yeilded to The Sectaries Doctrin breed's Confusion it till euidence of Scripture or à Demonstation to the Contrary make the Errour appear and vntil therevpon another Council of equal Authority reuerse the Errour Here is their Position which breed's nothing but Confusion among Christians and licenseth euery vnquiet Spirit interiourly at least to Censure Church Doctrin as abominable if He iudges it Erroneous or Contrary to Christ's Verities I say Interiourly And T' is hard to Silence and oblige men to external Obedience if this full Perswasion remain's And necessarily brings in Diuision stedfast in their minds Gods truths are Ouerthrown by an Erring Church or à misled Council There is no law humane or Diuine wich can bind to Hypocrisy But to iudge one thing Euidently fals and to Profess it as true is pain Hypocrisy To auoide therefore this Sin all are in points of faith not to Speak Contrary to Truth or hostility will of Necessity follow Between the Profession of priuate men and their interiour Iudgements which cannot but foment Rebellion in the Church whilst People generally liue in such à Perswasion that God's Truths are wronged 27. But here is not my greatest Exception Please to mark those other words Till Euidence of Scripture or à Demonstration makes the Errour appear Or another Council reuerses the Errour of the Former And say I beseech you to whom must this Euidence of Scripture appear To whom must the Councils Errour be Demonstrable What to Priuate men and these It can not be said to whom the supposed Errours of Fallible If so the Contest will be whether these Priuate Erring men or the Supposed Erring Council has the greater Euidence of Scripture Or on which Side the Demonstration against the Errour lies I say if the Church and Councils be fallible There neither is nor can be any thing like Euidence or à Demonstration in either of the Contenders Therefore an Councils must appear endles Dispute vpon meer Vncertainties must ensue vnless Mr. Stillingfleet laies the Errour vpon whom he pleases and makes Himself Vmpire in the cause You will say he supposes the Councils Errours euidently known Pitiful To whom I bescech you must they be known It s impossible to return an Answer Again if Suppositions may once pass for Proofs I 'll goe the Contrary way and either Suppose all Councils infallible or maintain this Truth Errours cannot be euidently known And why should not my Supposition be as good as his What then remain's but that we bring these Suppositions to the Test and Examin which is better And here the Dispute begins again in behalf of what is Supposed which can neuer be ended without an infallible Iudge 28. It may be replyed These Aduersaries proue not Councils fallible vpon any bare Supposition but only Say thus much If they were Fallible the Peace of the Church may yet be Preserued Contra 1. Peace is infinitly better vpheld were Councils as they truly are owned Infallible For so euery one would Acquiese in their Decrees as the Christian world has done hitherto Contra 2. The Churches Peace is torn in pieces Sedition Sedition reign 's if Councils be fallible necessarily reign 's Debates are endles if Councils be fallible To proue this 29. Call once more to mind the Assertion Viz. The Determination of an erring Council is to stand in force vntil there vpon an other Council of equal Authority Reuerse the Errour Obserue I beseech you Both these Councils are Supposed fallible and of equal Authority The Second therefore cannot reuerse the One Proof of the Assertion Errour of the First being as weak as fallible and of no more Authority than That first was Or if thus by Turns one may Annull the Decrees of the other A third may be conuened which recall's the Decrees of both and à Fourth which Cashieres all the precedent Definitions And so in Infinitum without Stop or Stint Hence arise endles Quarrels not only between Council and Council For euery one will Stand for its own Right But also among Christians Who seing the Discord are thrown into à remediles Perplexity and can neuer know what to Belieue or whom to Obey You will see clearly what I would expres by one or two Instances The Nicene Council Defined Further declared by an Instance the Consubstantiality of the Son to his Eternal Father So much is vndoubted Imagin now that an other like Assembly as fallible as the Nicene for that with Sectaries was fallible and of equal Authority had Defined the quite Contrary Doctrin And let this be also supposed for in Protestant Principles iâ— is Supposable that this Second corrected the Errour of the First What tumults think ye what an endles Rebellion would haue ensued there vpon in Christendom had the One Council thus clashed with the other No man in Prudence could haue Belieued or Obeyed either because both are Supposed fallible and of equal Authority 30. There is yet one Instance more Suitable to à Sectarian Humour Imagin only another Council Conuened as Learned Another Instance Shewing as General and as fallible as Protestants Suppose the Council of Trent to haue been And that this reuerses all the Doctrin contained in the Tridentine Offenfiue to our Nouellists Would not this destroy the Vnity of the present Church Would Ths horrid Inconuenience of Iarring Councils not some Side with the first some with the second or rather would not All vpon the Supposition scorn and contemn the Authority of both Church and Councils The like Inconuenience followes were the Catholick Church as large as some Sectaries make it or embraced all called Christians If in that case Two Councils representing the whole Moral Body should meet and the later Tear in pieces the Decrees of the former Would not Dissentions Grow as high and as odious vpon these Voting and Vnuoting Councils as they are now in England whilst Prelatiks Preach One kind of Doctrin and Fanaticks another quite contrary And is it Possible Do all Eyes se the Horrour of this contrary Preaching in One Island and are they shut vpon à greater more Terrible were it true That two of the highest Tribunals in the Church could stand in open Hostility and the One band against the other Thus much of Dissentions and Tumults necessary Appendants to iarring Representatiues 31. But all is not yet Satisfyed Our Aduersaries Say There can be no cause of Tumults in the Church if an Errour be euidently Discouered For euery One ought to thank God not to grumble when they se themselues freed from so great Sectaries â—â— destroy their own Principles à Mischief On the other side if the Errour be not Euident All are to submit to the Councils vntil à Publick Declaration makes the contrary truth manifest And thus the Peace of Christendom seem's well secured Answ And
I said well His reading and glosses and all he can Allege for himself are nothing but His own weak thoughts as far remoued from the foundation of truth Gods infallible Verity as earth is from Heauen and more 23. But its needles to Prosecute this Point further when one only reason which none can contradict giues Euidence enough against Protestants I Propose it thus What euer Doctrin they teach peculiar to Protestancy or maintain against the Roman Catholick Church either proceed's from Gods infallible Assistance or wholly borrowes strength from their own Sectaries teach Doctrin diuorced from Diuine Assistance fallible Conceptions after their reading and comparing Scripture Grant the first They teach infallible Doctrin by virtue of Gods infallible Assistance and consequently are the men who constitute an Infallible Church Say secondly that all they teach deriues force from their own weak reason guided only by the external words of Scripture vnderstood as they conceiue They teach as the Arians and all Hereticks haue taught before them à learning which is not from God Their And therefore not from God Doctrin in à word Diuorced from all Diuine Aide and Assistance stand's tottering vpon their own errable Sentiments and therefore neither is which I intended to proue Christ's Doctrin nor at all resoluable into that first Principle of truth God's vnerring Verity 24. Shall we to giue some clearer Light to the Controuersy hitherto handled compendiously recapitulate à few of these many reflections made already in the foregoing Chapters And then more establish the Churches infallibility vpon vndoubted Principles To do so may perhaps benefit the Reader 25. Say therefore Is it true that Christian Religion vltimately A briefe recapitulation of what has been Said depend's vpon God the first vnerring Verity No man doubts it Is it true that innumerable called Christians grosly misconceiue those reuealed Truths after their reading and perusing Scripture It is no less certain Is it true That the bare reading and pondering Scripture Sectaries like Arians no more ascertain's Protestants of the Verities there registred than the Arians or any other Hereticks The truth is vndoubted For from whom should they haue greater certainty Is it true That Funaticism Scripture wrested Doubtful faith euâ—ry Fanatique recurr's to Scripture as Sectaries do Experience proues it Is it true That this sole recourse to Scripture wrâ—sted to a sinister Sense vpohld's the most false Sects in the world Is it true That Christian Doctrin doubtfully taught beget's only à doubtful faith Is it true That the only support of Protestants in points of Religion Comparing Texts fallible Scepticism amount's to no more but to their own doubtful and bare pondering Scripture or to their various and fallible comparing Texts together Is it true That these men like Scepticks would stand euerlastingly quarrelling about the sense of Gods word and cannot be iuduced to hear any Iudge No Iudge speak in this cause of Religion but themselues Is it true That we urge them to make choise of what Iudge they please prouided they appeal not to their own Sentiments and Glosses as much controuerted as Protestancy is Is it true That they can name no Orthodox Church which No Orthodox Church Nor Councils Want of Infallible Assistance Fallible Professors of fallible Doctrin Diuine Reuelation wronged Doctrin neuer owned taught as they teach glossed Scripture as they gloss No Council generally receiued Comparable either to the Lateran or Florentine which fauours their Interpretations forced vpon Christs words Is it true That the Doctrin they propound confessedly proceed's not from Gods infallible Assistance Is it true That they assume to themselues the name of Christians and yet are ashamed to be called infallible Professors of the whole systâ—me of Christian Religion Is it true That they haue done their vtmost to take from God's infallible Reuelation it s own intrinsick nature of Infallibility by making it no more but morally certain in order to our Christian Faith Is it true That that half Infallibility some lay claim to in à few yet vnknown fundamentals appear's euen to Protestants not any Doctrin owned by the Christian world nor can it appear otherwise whilst à whole vniuersal Church decryes it as improbable Is it true That These Nouellists raise not their Doctrin Endles Disputes any higher but only to an endles Contest whilst no Iudge but themselues must speak in the cause 26. Are all these things I say more amply enlarged and clearly proued already so vndoubted that no Sectary shall euer rationally contradict them If the Iudicious Reader find I speak truth as he will may Preiudice be laid aside I may boldly Conclude Who euer see 's not the deplorable Condition of misled Sectaries who euer see 's not also an absolute necessity of an infallible Church to set them in the right way of truth Again is wilfully blind supinely negligent Yea vtterly Careless of Saluation CHAP. XIX Certain Principles where vpon the Churches Infallibility stand's firm The End of Diuine Reuelation is to teach all Infallibly Euery Doctrin reuealed by the fiast Verity is no less infallâ—ble then true It s one thing to teach Truth another to teach Diuine and Infallible Truth Sectaries Strangly vngrateful A word of Mr Stillingfleets weak Obiections 1. NOw wee come to the last certain Principles whervpon the Churches infallibilitâ— stand's most firmly Here is one The Doctrin which God reueal's as it proceed's from that first vnerring Verity is not only true but infallible The Second Principle Scripture which makes none infallible is often abused by Hereticks Principles premised The third Principle Some Christians are yet in Being That both teach and learn this true Diuine and infallible reuealed Doctrin The Proof is easy For vnless some Teach and learn it All Teach and learn another Doctrin distinct from that which God reuealed The Principle Proued and this neither is nor can be Diuine but meerly humane at most and Perhaps à foolery That therefore which the Prophet Asserts Iohn 6. 43. All shall be Docibiles Dei docible or taught of God is not so For now if the Supposirion hold's the whole Church take it in what Extent you please is deludeâ— as the Apostle Saith Ephes. 4. 14 With the wind of Doctrin in the wickednes of men in Craftines to the circumuention of errour And this brings ruin to Christian Religion 2. The. 4. Principle This Diuine Doctrin is not only A Church must be acknowledged absolutely infallible true and infallible in it self but moreouer so infallibly Proposed by one vnerring Oracle That all who will receiue it are most indubitably certain of those very truths which God has reuealed and therefore cannot err Make good this one Proposition We haue an infallible Church established not only in à few nicknam'd vnknown fundamentals but in euery Doctrin She teaches Now the Proof is taken from the End of Diuine reuelation which seem's most Conuincing For say I
beseech you Why did God impart truth and infallible truth to the world The end was not to improue his own knowledge being euer Omniscient It was not that the Angels and blessed in Heauen should belieue for Faith ceaseth in that happy State All there se intuitiuely what they once belieued The end therefore The Proof is taken from the End of Diuine Reuelation why God reuealed true and Infallible Doctrin was That we yet Pilgrims on earth walking by Faith should yeild Assent to it and belieue all as both true and infallible But this is impossible if the Church which immediatly Proposes the Doctrin can clash with Scripture or with Gods Reuelation and peruert his Verities Therefore She must be acknowledged both true and infallible in euery Doctrin She teaches 3. If any reply It seem's sufficient that the Church teaches Truth though She neither proposes nor teaches it so infallibly but that some times She may swerue from it He destroyes again Christian Religion Be pleased to obserue my reason If the Diuine reuelation is to be assâ—nted â—o infallibly infallibility of reuealed Doctrin be lost as it were in the way between God and vs If the Reuelation appear not as it is in it selfe infallible when we assent to it by Faith That is if it be not infallibly conueyed and applyed to all by an vnerring Proponent as it subsists in its first cause infinitly infallible Faith perishes we are cast vpon pure Vncertainties and may iustly doubt whether such à Doctrin separated from that other Perfection of infallibility be really true or no To se this clearly laid forth Please to make one reflection with me 4. May not either Iew or Gentil well inclined to Christian Religion rationally propose this Question to the Protestants or to any Has God reuealed any Doctrin which is only true God's reuealed Doctrin is no less infallible then true and not infallible You will Answer No because the same infinite verity which support's truth is powerful enough to vphold also its infallibility Say on I beseech you Can you who pretend to teach truth the worst of Heretiques haue done so Ascertain me also that you teach and propose Gods infallible Truths infallâ—blâ— Proue your Selues such Doctors and none will euer Question further the Truth of what you teach For if you once make this clear that you teach the infallible Doctrin which God has reuealed the truth inseparably connexed with infallibility is no more disputable but manifestly Credible But if you turn me off with à fair Story of teaching truth and Ascertain me not of your teaching it infallibly euery rational man will most iustly doubt of your teaching Truth And here is the reason à Priort 5. Euery Doctrin which is taught as à Verity founded vpon God the first Verâ—ty is no less Infallible than true Therefore who euer Ascertains me of the one must ioyntly ascertain me of the other Or if he will diuorce truth from that perfection of Infallibility There is no parting Infallibility from truth he giues me no more but at most the half of that Doctrin which God reueal's Nay I learn not so much from him seing God own 's no true Doctrin men can teach natural truths which is not as eminently infallible as true Now further If I be fob'd off with no man knowes what halfes of Diuine Doctrin That is if the Proponent parts truth from its infallibility and no Authority in Heauen or earth licences any to Separate what God has ioyned together I only learn the faint Sentiments when We belieue God's reuealed Doctrin or weak Opinions of fallible Teachers founded vpon fancy which God disclaim's And which is euer to be noted man by nature fallible can do no more but only propose them as meer humane or doubtfull Vncertainties But à humane doubtful Proposition though true beget's as is said aboue no certain faith in any Therefore who euer will not vtterly ruin the very life and Essence of Christian Religion must absolutely assent both to the truth and Infallibâ—lity of Religion and consequently acknowledge an Infallible Oracle which teaches and One Church only Infallible proposes Infallible Verities Infallibly But this is only the Roman Catholick Church as is said aboue for no other Society of men laies claim to teach Gods infallible truths infallibly 6. To solue all Obiections against this Discourse it will much auaile to be well grounded in this sure Principle Viz. A certain Principle It is one thing to teach truth and another to teach Diuine and infallible truth Man by natural reason can teach truth yet is insufficient to teach Diuine reuealed and infallible Truth this must come from à higher Power either from Diuine Assistance or Supernatural Wherevpon our Answers to Sectaries Illumination If therefore the Protestant Should demand Why we cannot belieue his Doctrin euen when he only Proposes those general Verities which all Christians admit He neuer offers to Obtrude vpon you his inferiour Tenents peculiar to Protestants Answer They are truths indeed and infallible truths but not proued so because he Vnassisted teaches them If he Ask again vpon what foundation do we Catholicks lay the truth and infallibility of that Doctrin we belieue and teach Answer are grounded Vpon this firm Ground that Scripture interpreted by an Assisted Oracle the Chruch which cannot beguile any Proposes all we learn as true and infallible Doctrin 7. If he reply 3. Protestants abstract from the Churches Interpretation and hold Scripture plain enough in all fundamental Doctrin necessary to Saluation Answer He err's not knowing the depth of Scripture which is so dark and vnintelligible in the abstruse Mysteries of faith that vnless certain Tradition and the Sense of the vniuersal Church cast light vpon it or impart greater clarity to the bare letter The wisest of men Scripture is obscure will be puzled in what they read or at most guess doubtfully at its meaning And therefore may easily swerue from truth To se what I say proued 8. Imagain only that twenty learned Philosophers or more who neuer heard of Church Tradition or of her Generael re 〈◊〉 Doctrin had our Bible drop't down from Heauen with Assurance that it contain's Gods infallible truths prouided all they read be rightly vnderstood but not otherwise Suppose The most learned Philosophers ignorant of Tradition and Church Doctrin 2. They peruse that one Sentence in S. Iohns Gospel Iâ— the beginning was the Word and that Wâ—rd was with God Thâ— same was in the beginning â—irâ— God c. Suppose 3. They also confer the Sentence with all other Passages in Holy Writ relating to this Mystery Could these Philosophers think ye by the force of their natural discourse only acquire exactly the infallible truth of the Incarnation iust so as the Church now teaches and belieues No. Euery Particle would put Cannot Vnderstand it them vpon à further Scrutiny What is signified Saith one by this In
Her Motiues Ascertain's vs that such Books are Diuine I Answer 2. Grant such Motiues may in some weak manner and particular Circumstances conduce to belieue the Scriptures Diuinity yet in this present State when we haue à Church most clearly manifested which both Ascertain's vs of Scripture and the Sense also it would be no less than an vndiscreet rashness to cast off her Authority being the most facile and plainest Rule and in Lieu of Her to rely on another forrain vnfit way of Belieuing by Motiues not half fo clear and far less conuincing 2. Thus some Diuines Teach though à Heathen after à due Consideration of the works in Nature may come to belieue that God will reward Good and punish Euil yet none do Assert That when our Christian Articles are clearly proposed to An Instance him by the Pastors and Teachers of the Church For example That Christ dyed for vs. The dead shall rise again God will reward the iust c. That then if he reiect Church Authority he can belieue the forenamed Articles with Diuine Faith This I Deny And the reason is because that way of belieuing when à It is imprudent to reiect we easiest was of Belieuing more ordinary and facile is proposed Seem's temerarious and imprudent And so it would be should any now when the Church giues vs full Assurance of the Scriptures Diuinity lay aside Her Authority and Say I will alsolutely belieue this or that Truth to be God's word because I Discouer apparent Signs of Diuinity in what I read 3. In the next place Mr Stillingfleet Quarrel 's with à word The Roman Catholick Church which in his opinion is iust as much as to Say The German vniuersal Emperour That is particular and vniuersal together for Roman restrain's or marks out one Church vniuersal includes all Answ It is à meer Quibble exploded by A meer quibble exploded by Fathers the Fathers particularly S. Hierome Apolog. 1. aduersus Ruffin not far from the beginning who call's the Roman Faith the Catholick Faith VVhat Saith he is Ruffinus his Faith It is that there with the Roman Church preuail's or another founded in Origens Writings Si Romanam responderit Ergo Catholici sumus If he Answer 's it is the Roman Faith This Inference is good we both profess the vniuersal Faith Therefore Roman and Vniuersal are here synomimal or words of one Signification which the Apostle clearly Insinuates Rom. 1. 8. Your Faith is renowned the whole world ouer Again Epist 16. ad Principiam Virg circa medium He showes that the most ancient Saints addressed themselues to to the Roman Church Quasi ad tutissimum communionis suâ— S. Hierom's express Testimonies portum as to à place of refuge or of mutual Communion which was General Publick and belonged to all Yet more When Epist 57. ad Damasum This great Doctor positiuely teaches That he was ioyned in Communion with no other Society of men then such as adhered to Damasus S. Peters Successor where vpon the Church was built And that those who eate the lambe out of this House were prophane Did he think ye speak of any one particular Roman Diocess and not of the vniuersal Catholick Church It is contrary to his Discourse and reason also 4. Se more of this subiect in the Epistle of S. Athanasius to two Popes Iulius and Marcus Read also S. Cyprians Epistle 52. n. 1. Other Fathers Speak with S. Hierome And S. Ambrose De obitu fratris about the middle and know withall The word Roman added to Catholick is not to limit the vniuersal Iurisdiction of that See But to distinguish Orthodox Belieuers from Hereticks who were professed Enemies of the Roman Faith If therefore we may rightly comprise vnder this word Roman all other Christian Societies past or present vnited in Why the Roman Church was called Vniuersal belief with this one Mother Church There is neither Bull nor Solaecism in speech to call the Roman euer One and the same in Faith the vniuersal Church of Christ 5. Page 127. To catch Carholicks in à Circle Mr Stillingfleet Ask's why we belieue Scriptures to be the Word of God If we Affirm vpon this Ground That the Church which is infallible Mr Stilling endeauour more then weak deliuers them so to vs He demand's again and bidd's vs Answer if we can whether t' is possible to belieue the Churches infallibility any other way than because infallible Scriptures Say She is infallible which implies à plain Circle Answ It is very possible For seing Scripture demonstrat's not ex terminis its own Diuinity nor can be made euidently credible by any light internal to catch Catholicks in à Circle to the Book some other infallible Oracle distinct from it must necessarily ascertain vs that the Book is Diuine And the Doctrin there preserued is yet pure as the Apostles wrote it But this Oracle can be no other but the Church which proues Her selfe by Signs and Miracles to speak in Gods name independently of Scripture therefore the first act of Faith whereby we belieue in à General way the Churches infallibility relies not as this Gentleman weakly supposes on Scripture But vpon the Church it Selfe as the most known manifested Oracle And thus the Circle is easily auoyded 6. You will se more clearly what I aime at by one Instance taken from the Primitiue Christians Ask what induced them to belieue the Apostles Infallibility when they Preached All No Circle in the Primitiue Christians Faith Answer They belieued so because those blessed men immediatly proued themselues commissioned Oracles sent from God and made their Doctrin euidently Credible by sensible Signs and Wonders which surpassed the force of Nature Very true Iâ— like manner we belieue the Churches infallibility hauing preuious Motiues as Stronge to belieue that Truth vpon her Authority as euer Christians had to belieue that S. Paul was infallible when he preached If then there was no Vicious Therefore none in our Resolution Circle in those first Christians Faith there can be none in Ours vhilst all of vs haue infallible Oracles manifested by Supernatural Signs to rely on And Those first now mentioned had them before Scripture was written You will say this Discourse seem's to proue we cannot belieue the Churches Infallibility vpon the Scriptures Testimony It has been Answered ouer and ouer supposing Scripture be one admitted as God's sacred Word â—e proue the Churches infallibility so strongly by it against all Aduersaries who own the Book as Diuine that none of them shall euer return à probable answer to our alleged Testimonies 7. But what Saith Mr Stillingfleet Is there no difference between the way of prouing à thing to an Aduersary and resoluing ones own Faith Answer yes But we both resolue and proâ—â— We Resolue the first Act of Faith concerning Scripture How we both resolue and proue the Churches Infallibility into the Churches infallible Authority and belieue that Book to be
of Diuine Inspiration because this Otacle saith so Then we Argue vpon à Principle proued by vs and supposed though not proued by Sectaries The Principle is Scripture is God's word We read the book which all Christians Say is Diuine And proue also from it the Churches infallibility against our Aduersaries Ex probatis concessis That the book is Diuine Here is no danger of à Circle nor any fault in this way of Arguing 8. Yet Mr Stillingfleet makes his Exceptions and will needs haue the Circle goe on against vs. You proue Saith he the Churches infallibility from such Passages Super hanc Petram Pasce oues c. But how come you to know infallibly A reply retorâ—ed that the Sense of those places is as you belieue For your Aduersaries deny any such thing as infallibility proued out of them I may Answer first by proposing the like Question How do these Aduersaries know that their contrary sense is exactly the true Meaning of the Holy Ghost Will they tell vs they think so here is all we haue from them what am I better for that When the Donatists Pelagians and all Heretiques can think as boldly as any Protestant And by their deluded thoughts vnsense as we se by experience the most choise and sacred Passages in holy writ To whom then shall we recurr in case the Sense be doubtful I Answer to the Church O saith Mr Stillingfleet Here we are got into à Circle again and though his own words see them in the page cited fine giue no force to his Probation yet I 'le help them on to all the Strength his meaning is capable of He should therefore Another Reply Answered Argue thus We belieue the Churches infallibility because the true sense of Scripture sayes she is infallible Again We belieue this very Sense of Scripture to be infallibly true because the infallible Church saith so I haue Answered The first Act of Faith wherwith we belieue the Churches infallibility is not at all founded vpon the true Sense of Scripture as yet not known in illo signo to be so much as Diuine but vpon the Churches own infallible Testimony made by it self and for it self immediatly credible 9. Now if we Speak of another Distinct consequent and more explicite act of Faith when we belieue the Churches infallibility vpon this ground That She declares the Scriptures geâ—â—in Sense which proues Her an infallible Oracle There is no difficulty at all Because this very Exposition or Interpretation of Scripture brought to its last Principle is vltimatly resolued into and therefore again belieued vpon the same infallible Authority The sense of Scripture resolued and belieued of the Church or rather vpon Scripture and the Churches Interpretation together For thus iointly taken They ground Faith and not like two disparate Principles As if we first belieued the Scriptures sense independently of the Churches Interpretation And then Vpon Scripture and Church Authority ioyntly again belieued the Churches Interpretation to be infallible because the Sense of Scripture known aliunde or without Depending on Church Authority Saith she is infallible This cannot be if Scripture and the Churches Interpretation Indiuisibly concurr to this lotter act of Faith whereof we now speak 10. Here then is à Dilemma that clear's all and free 's vs from the least Shadow of à Circle We either know or belieue the Scriptures Sense independently of the Churches infallible The Assertion Clearâ—d Interpretation or receiue it vpon her infallible Authority Grant the first There is no danger of à Circle for in case that Truth were know vpon à sure Principle distinct from the Church it would be another new and as strong à Probation of her Infallibility as if an Angel sent from Heauen should interpret Scripture to the Catholick Sense And then we might Assent to the Churches Infallibility vpon two disparate Principles which proue not one another The one Ordinary the Churches own Interpretation The other independent and extraordinary Should an Angel or Prophet sent from God interpret Say 2. We belieue the Sense of Scripture vpon the This way no two Propositions to make à Circle of Churches own infallible Authority There are no two imaginable Propositions to make à Circle of whilst that Sense internal to the letter can not be infallibly propounded otherwise then by the Church 11. Page 128. I find an vnlearned Obiection much to this Sense We Catholicks destroy all Possibility of auoiding à Circle if we proue by the Motiues of credibilty no new Reuelations Distinct from the old And this we Pretend not to For A weak Obiection in effect solued we only seek to euince by these Motiues à Diuine Assistance with the Church in euery thing She Defines but this Assistance cannot be proued from any other ground but only from the Promises made in Scripture Therefore we are still in à Circle For we belieue the Scriptures infallible because of the Churches Testimony and we belieue the Church infallible because of the Promises in Repeated Again Scripture concerning the Assistance of the Holy Ghost with the Church so as to secure Her from all Errour Here in Effect is the same Obiection repeated again Therefore I Answer We belieue not in the first place the Churches infallible Assistance moued therevnto by the Promises in Scripture For this first General Act of Faith wholly relies vpon the Churches own infallible Testimony without depending on Scripture because Her Testimony One Instance clear's all is made most Credible to reason by conuincing Motiues before we belieue that She is insallibly Assisted All must Say what I now Assert For before Scripture was written The Primitiue Christians belieued infallible Assistance granted the Apostles in euery Doctrin they taught being induced to belieue so by the Signes and Miracles which those blessed men Euidenced In like manner we in this present State answerable to the Procedure of these Christians hauing the same Motiues manifest in the Church may well be induced to belieue That She both now is and euer was no lesse Assisted by the Holy Ghost to speak Truth then the Apostles were for as much as concern's the Substance and Verity of her Doctrin CHAP. VI. Mr Stillingfleet solues not His Aduersaries Argument A word of his tedious Shuffling The Motiues of Credibility both distinguish the Church from all other Heterodox Communities and proue Her Infallible The Agreement with the Primary Doctrin no Mark of the Church More Mistakes and Errours discouered Of Mr Stillingfleets double Faith who Belieues but not vpon Diuine the Testimony That the Books of Scripture contain Gods word in them Yet Belieues the Doctrin in those books to be Diuine 1. IN the next place Mr Stillingfleet labours to solue his Aduersaries main Argument the Substance whereof The substance of the Argument is As Christ and his Apostles proued themselues Oracles sent from God by their works Signes and Miracles Again as the Primitiue Christians
belieued S. Iohns Testimony or that our Sauiour Spake those words Here is our solution God long since said the dead shall rise but this Ancient Reuelation being remote from vs if solely considered cannot moue vs to belieue the truth vnless an Infallible Oracle Ascertain vs that God once spake it iust as S. Iohn assures all that Christ said I am the Messias Ask now â—hy Mr Stillingfleet belieues that our Sauiour vttered those â—ords He will Answer God speaking by S. Iohn an Infallible An Application of the Instance clear in Scripture Oracle Affirms it So I say God speaking by the Church an Infallible Oracle affirm's the Resurrection of the dead O but independently of Church Authority we know the resurrection is reuealed in Scripture Contrariwise we know nothing of our Sauiours words but from S. Iohns Testimony Answ we know indeed the Resurrection is asserted in à Book called Scripture But that the Assertion is Diuine or vttered by Eternal Truth we haue no more Infallible certainty without the Churches Testimony Then if any vulgar Samaritan without Diuine Assistance had said Christ spake those words I am the Messias 23. By what is now briefly touched you se first That as our Sauiours own words and S. Iohns reflex Testimony vpon them concurr Indiuisibly to the Faith of these Aduersaries So the reuealed Verity of the Resurrection in Scripture And the The ancient Reuelation and the Churches reflex Testimony Churches reflex Testimony which infallibly Ascertains vs that it is reuealed may well indiuisibly concurr as one compleat Motiue to our faith whereof more hereafter I say indiuisibly And therefore this Faith vltimatly resolued relies not first vpon Scripture only as our Aduersary conceiues without any relation to the Church and then rest's vpon the Churches Concurr indiuisibly to Faith Testimony as vpon à distinct Formal Obiect but by one simple Tendency it pitches on both together 24. You se 2. It s hard to Say what Mr Stillingfleet would haue when he tells vs. This Principle The Church is infallible must be more credible then the Resurrection of the Dead If We clearly distinguisâ— what our Aduersary Confound's he mean's the Churches Testimony is to vs in this present State the more known and nearest Motiue wherevpon the Faith of that Article is grounded we easily Assent But if he think 's we must first Assent to Scripture which asserts the Resurrection and own that as Diuine or the only Motiue of Faith without all Church Authority attesting it to be Diuine He err's not knowing our Doctrin For we Say no Scripture can be infallible An improper Speech assented to as Diuine independently of the Churches Testimony Again those words More Credible are improper if applyed to the Formal Obiect of Faith For the Formal Obiect terminates Belief the Credibility whereof goes before and is grounded on the preuious Motiues inducing to belieue VVhether we Square Circles in our Resolution of Faith The other mentioned Points in the Title of the Chapter discussed Vpon what ground those Articles called the fundamentals of Faith are belieued in the Opinion of Sectaries 25. In many following Pages we haue little but that the Churches Infallible Testimony must be called the Formal Obiect of Faith whereof something is said aboue And you shall haue more hereafter 26. P. 149. He thinks we Argue like men squaring Circles when on the one side we make Scripture obscure yet on the other giue it light enough to proue the Churches infallibility And then he talk's of an Apocalyptical key hanging at the Churches Scripture Proued Diuine Conuinces the Churches Infallibility girdle able to vnlock all the Secrets in it To the first I haue Answered Thus much Supposed that Scripture is proued Diuine we haue so great light from the seueral Passages thereof to conuince the Churches Infallibility that no glosses of Sectaries shall euer obscure them To the Ieer of the Clauis Apocalyptica I Answer Some one or other must vnlock those high secrets when t' is euident innumerable Heretiques by à wrong key wrest Gods word to most pernicious Senses The Question is whether you Sr or the Church must rurn the key 27. Page 152. After thanks giuen for our Coleworts so often serued â—y Those mute Persons the good Motiues of credibility He is Brisque Ieâ—rs and empty words and in earnest resolute to solue our Argument Asking before hand Whether it be not enâ—ugh to be in à Circle our selues but must â—eed's bring the Apostles into it also Reflect I beseech you We said aboue that the Apostles induced by the Signal works and Miracles of our Sauiour Assented to his sacred Doctrin as most infallible In like manner The Primitiue Christians induced by the works and Miracles of the Apostles belieued them to be infallible The force of our Argument Oracles Therefore we also in this present State hauing Motiues and Miracles of the same weight and Euidence in the Roman Catholick Church Belieue with à firm Assent of Faith that She is God's Oracle and her Doctrin most infallible The short Answer to all this saith Mr Stillingfleet is That the ground why the Christians did Assent to the Apostles Doctrin as true was because God Wholly waued gaue sufficient Euidence that their Testimony was infallible in such things where such infallibility was requisite Pray Consider well whether this be not à gliding or rather à plain running away from the Difficulty We haue vrged all this while the Parity between the Churches Motiues and those of the Apostles We haue proued and yet plead That the Euidence is à like in both The Churches most manifest Signes are The blind se The lame walk The dead rise Diuels are dispossesed c. And these termed by you vnsauory Coleworts and mute good Things were the Apostles Signs also Are not you therefore obliged in all law of Disputation What all law of Disputing requireâ— either to proue and vpon sound Principles indeed That we falsly appropriate such Motiues and Miracles to the Church Or if you cannot disparage so illustrious an Euidence to shew à fault in this Inference The Church is known as well by her Signs to be an infallible Oracle 28. Now mark how we are put off with half an Answer God â—y you gaue sufficient Euidence that the Apostles Testimony was infallible None doubt's it But Say on what want do you find of the very like Euidence in the Church Her Miracles are as manifest Her Conuersions as Numerous and more Her fame as renowned Her name as Catholick finally might we vse your scornful language Her Motiues no mute Persons speak Nothing like an Answer giuen aloud and Her Colewarts are euery whit as good as those were the Apostles serued vp To this you Answer not à word but first tell vs with your Aduersary that the Apostles confirmed their Doctrin with Signs that followed by which Signes all their Heares were bound to aknowledge them for
those first great Masters vpheld the Primitiue Faith without any further ground or Process in Infinitum So his own Speaking Our resolution the same with that of the Primitiue Christians by this Oracle of the Church vphold's mine And I can go no further For the last formal Obiect of Faith has none latter That One word of Truth is enough to belieue vpon Again as those first pious Christians had any moued à doubt concerning their Inducements to Faith would haue answered The blind see The lame walk strange Miracles are wrought by ehese blessed men And therefore we both must in Prudence and will belieue that God speak's by them So I likewise bring to light the same Signal Motiues Euident in the Church and The Motiues alike Say I both must if prudence guides me and Will belieue that God speak's by this Oracle known as well by Her Miracles and supernatural Signatures as euer any Apostle was known 20. And thus you see first as I noted aboue How we passe from the Formal Obiect of Faith God's own Testimony proposed by the Church to the Prudent Inducements of belieuing wherevpon the Iudgement of Credibility not Faith it felfe is vltimatly Why we belieue And how vve proue by rational Motiues grounded Now these Inducements being laid forth to reason The Will command's an absolute Assent which rest's vpon God's word spoken by this Oracle You see 2. All danger of à vicious Circle auoyded in this way of resoluing Faith For when I belieue that God speak s by the Church I resolue not the Belief of that Truth into another antecedent Reuelation taken from Scripture yet wholly obscure and no way so immediatly Credible as the Church is for if I did so a Process in Infinitum would necessarily follow But I belieue that word of Truth for it selfe immediatly and rest there As the ancient Christians The word of truth belieued for it Selfe relyed vpon the very words spoken by the Apostles without recurring to any former or surer Reuelation If therefore those happy Belieuers made no vicious Circle in their Faith hauing no tâ—o Propositions prouing one another to make à Circle of We in our belief are altogether as free from that faulty Circular way in our Resolution It is true All of vs if The primitiue Motiues and ours the same Questioned about the Euidence of Credibility most bring to light Motiues inducing to Faith They theirs We ours both are à like significant both Supernatural as is already explained 21. You may gather 3. out of what is here and formerly noted how easy it is after à full Sight had of those signal The illustrious Signs apparent in the Church Motiues and they more set forth the Churches Glory than any Traine of attendants can illustrate the greatest Monarch That the first connatural Language which God speak's by the Church is this general Truth There only his Special Prouidence are God's own Voice Directs and gouâ—rn's where the illustrious Signes of his own Soueraignity manifest That he teaches by à Voice peculiar to Himselfe But these Signes most euidently are seen in one only Society of Christians the Roman Catholick Church Therefore he teaches by this One only Oracle And the necessary Lesson he will haue all to learn is That he has called all to one Communion what we learn by them of Faith in one Church Euidenced by Supernatural wonders This fundamental Verity we belieue And it is the first Act of faith we elicite Or that Primigenial Assent which connaturally arises from God's own voice deliuered to vs by this Oracle without depending on Scripture if we make à right Analysis This General truth once established and none can rationally contradict it We now proceed to solue à few Obiections CHAP. XI Sectaries Ohiections solued The fallible Agreement of all Concerning the Canon of Scripture no Proof at all No vniuersal Consent for the Sectaries Scripture or the Sense of it How the Church is both the Verity belieued and the Motiue why we believe Other Difficulties Examined 1. I Speak here of Sectaries Obiections knowing well some Diuines who make the Churches Proposition most infallible Sectaries Obiections only answered and herein all Catholicks agree yet hold it insufficient to be the last Principle Whereinto Faith is resolued For say these it is only à necessary Condition by virtue whereof the ancient Reuelation is infallibly applied to vs. In this Strife purely Theological and some what as I thinke de Nomine I shall not long busy my Selfe being chiefly to attend to what Sectaries do or can propose against our Doctrin 2. The first Obiection If the Catholick after à prudent Consideration had of the known Motiues already specified can belieue what euer the Church teaches and Consequently resolue why Sectaries cannot resolue their Faith into Scriptures his faith into the Authority of God speaking by that Oracle Why may not the Sectary as well vpon this one Iudgement viz. All acknowledge Scripture to bee God's word as easily belieue and resolue his faith into pure Scripture independently of Church Authority Answ Such à Beliefe and Resolution is impossible because as we said aboue none can in this As Catholicks Doe into the Church present State assent to this general Truth Scripture is God's word or belieue so much as any Verity in it if the Authority of an Infallible Church be reiected To the pretended ground taken from the Consent of all Christians owning Scripture for God's word I haue partly answered That consent alone induces not any to belieue one reuealed Article by an Infallible act of Faith if those whole Consenting multitudes be all supposed fallible First euery one knowes the multitudes of Turks agree thus far that their Alcoran is God's word yet such an agreement though very Vniuersal induces no wise man to belieue any Diuinity in the Book or to own its Doctrin as Diuine and sacred 2. And this reason hinted at aboue is more à Priori 3. The Agreement of all Christians is truely an effect of Faith or rather of the Obiects Credibility antecedently presupposed The agreement of all Concerning Scripture is an effect Credible vpon other grounds before men agreed so vniversally in that Christian truth For this Causal is good Therefore Christians agreed in that Truth because it was preuiously made Credible vpon other sound Motiues And not the contrary It is credible because all conspired in à Consent so vniuersal Wherefore if very many who now own Scripture to be Diuine should leaue off to iudge So and reiect the Book or any Part in it as fabulous That would not diminish its ancient Credibility And no more Not the Original Proof of the Scriptures Credibility Say I would the Addition of any new Consenters who now reiect it should they agree with vs highten one whit our Beliefe or make the Truth we Assent to more Credible than it was before And this proues That the Original
Euangelists 6. Whoeuer read's these and the like Authorities cannot but Say the Voice of the Church as it Proceeds from that Oracle is the Voice of God And therefore Diuine certain and infallible Or contrarywise must grant it 's only Humane fallible and may â—r Speake so And it followes first that if the whole Church should err in the most essential Points of Faith God would not be yet Said to deceiue any because his increated Authority Speak's not by it nor is engaged to rescue this his own Spoufe from errour It followes 2. If any one denied either Purgatory or Transubstantiation explicitly defined by the Church and not so clearly expressed in Scripture He would not be guilty of Heresy though he peruersly refused to belieue these Articles precisely vpon this account That the Church Defines them The Inference is Reason also proues the Assertion clear for in doing so He denies not Gods Reuelation because the Churches Definitions no Diuine Testimony are in à lower ranck and much inferiour to all that God has spoken It followes 3. We belieue the Churches Definitions by à very different infused Habit from that whereby we Assent to the Truths reuealed in Scripture and to find such à supernatural and Infallible Habit distinct from Faith when we Assent to the Churches Definitions seem's to me à new learning vnknown to Antiquity 7. Thus much and more well considered which might be Said in behalfe of Christ's glorious Oracle And this one Principle added which all Catholicks grant viz. That the Church and Scripture Speak alwaies the same truths and can neuer be at Variance 8. Why may we not in this present State resolue Diuine Faith into the first Verity Speaking by the Scripture or Infallible Faith may be resolued into Scripture and the Church together Tradition and by his own Oracle the Church also For example We belieue the Sacred Trinity the Incarnation Original Sin c. because God reuealed them in Scripture or first conueyed them by Apostolical Tradition But these Verities which the Apostles and Euangelists long since made Credible are now remote from vs without the Churches reflâ—x Testimony whereby God ascertain's all in this State that both Scripture is Diuine The reason and that his Church speak's the very same Verities in Scripture And consequently we Assent to euery particular vpon à Twofold Motiue or rather vpon this one Formal Obiect ioyntly and indiuisibly Scripture and the Church make but one ioynt indiuisible Motiue taken because Scripture and the Church Assert's them Neither is there the least Difficulty in ioyning one reflex Testimony with another former or anciently deliuered whereof we haue examples in Holy Writ For we all belieue God made à Couenant with Abraham of multiplying his Seed because Eternal Truth said so some Ages before Moses Again we belieue that Verity because the reflex Testimony of Moses reiterat's the same Verity anciently spoken to Abraham Gen. 17. 4. An instance Other Instances of the same nature you haue aboue and more are found in Holy Writ 9. Thus much supposed It 's Methinks easy to Say if all be not de Nomine how the Churches Testimony may in one Sense be called the Formal Obiect of Faith and not in another Consider it as Diuine infallible and God's own Voice proceeding from no humane Authority but from the First Verity speaking by How the Church yeild's to Scripture this Oracle it well merit 's the name of à Formal Obiect Compare it again with the Primary Reuelation which it only compleat's in order to vs and consequently presupposes more Ancient more excellent and all things considered more worthy it must yeild to Scripture And may be called an intrinsecal condition whilst it Declares what anciently was Reuealed 10. Now if any Ask wherein the Excellence and Dignity of Scripture consists when you compare it with the Churches Definitions Diuines answer 1. Euery word and reason in Holy writ is de Fide but not so in the Churches Definitions where the Sense only of the Definitiue sentence has weight as comming from the Holy Ghost's Assistance 2. The Church The excellence and dignity of Scripture has her limits and Defines nothing but what was long since reuealed or necessarily connexed with the ancient Doctrin And vpon this account the Hagiogrophers are deseruedly called our first great Teachers who made first euery Truth they wrote à matter of Faith 3. When she Church Defines or interpret's Compared with the Church Gods word All is done for Scripture and look'd vpon as the end of Her labours But what is performed for another yeild's in worth and weight to that other it is done for as S. Austin obserues Lib. de Magist c. 9. Whoeuer desires more of this Subiect may read Bellar. Lib. 1. de verbo Dei C. 15. and Serrarius in Proleg 6. 7. 9. 12. 11. To solue other difficulties proposed by Sectaries please to Note first This Primary Act of Faith All are called into the Communion of one infallible Church whereby God teaches the true way to Saluation is grounded immediatly vpon the Authority One Primary act of Faith is grounded on Church Authority of this Oracle manifested by her Marks and Supernatural Signes Although yet the Book of Scripture be not admitted as God's word Notwithstanding when it is once owned as Diuine vpon Church Authority I can belieue this Oracles Infallibility with another Act of Faith grounded on Scripture How Scripture also terminates that Faith yet if we make à search into the vltimate Principle or final Resoluent of that very Belief We must as is said aboue come at last to Church Authority whereby Assurance is giuen that such à truth is Scripture 12. Note 2. This General truth supposed of the Church being immediatly Crediblâ— or known by her Motiues as an Oracle which teaches the right way to Saluation it therefore followes not that euery other particular Verity for example the â—â—pes Supremacy the Infallibility of Councils c. can in like manner be first and immediatly Credible or belieued explicitly when I Assent to that General Truth For it is enough that such Particulars be consequently or afterward assented to vpon the Diuine Reuelation in Scripture and the Churches own Proposition as is already declared 13. The Reason is because the Marks and Motiues manifest in the Church immediatly induce to belieue that She is How other particular Truths are belieued afterward God's Oracle constituted by Prouidence to guide all in the way of Truth But how or in what manner this Duty is complyed with must be learned by the Practise and Doctrin of the same Church by Scripture and Tradition also Now that it is most Connatural to know first in à General way The Churches Infallibility before we descend to belieue euery Doctrin She teaches in Particular you may well conceiue by the Instance giuen aboue of the blessed Apostles who first acknowledged Christ our Lord
after our priuate perusing those few ancient Records left vs end our debate whilst you 'l turn them to one Sense and I to another Nouel Reason shall end all Catho That I wish for But quit me yet of one Scruple What if your priuate Reason be byassed one way and mine another Or what if you Iudge that Reasonable which I doe not Here the Nouellist like one struck dumb spake not à word 13. Yet the Discourse might well haue gone on for I would haue further inquired whether to do as all the Christians what is to be Iudged reasonable in the world learned and vnlearned haue done be not reasonable None can deny it Then I would haue inferred But all these Innumerable Christians The very Apostles themselues and others haue vpon prudent Motiues Constantly iudged it reasonable to submit to Mysteries aboue the reach of humane Reason Ergo that must pass as à reasonable Principle But the Reason cannot be taken from the very Act The Euidence of Credibility not taken from Faith of submission For that is Faith nor from any Euidence in the Mystery belieued or obscurely proposed nor finally from Scripture alone for that Book Considered in it selfe is not its own Euidence Therefore the Euidence of Credibility Or the Euidence Proposed to Reason is extrinsecal to what euer I belieue and fundamentally lies in the Marks and Signatures of Christs own manifested Church 14. Hence I Conclude with this Dilemma and hold it vnanswerable Either God has set before all Mens Eyes An Oracle which now teaches truth most discernable by clear Marks and Motiues from all false erring Societies Or omitted to do so Grant the first Reason is as much obliged to belieue A Conuincing Dilemma that Signalized Oracle now As the Primitiue Christians were anciently bound to belieue the Apostles Say Contrary There is no such Marked Oracle distinguishable from erring Sectaries Reason is left in à Labyrinth and shall neuer find out true Religion Wherefore Protestants who seemingly stand for Reason and slight the Doctrin of our Euidenced Sectaries vnreasonable Church are the men amongst all other most vnreasonable and as dayly experience teaches meer Scepticks in matter of Religion 15. A 5th Inference The readiest way to conuince à Sectary How they are easily Conuinced and one though no great Clerk may easily do it is in the first place at least to waue that long tedious work of handling particular Controuersies which depend vpon Authority and to plead by Reason Thus I would Argue and haue often done so with good Success You as à Protestant lay claim to à reasonable Reformation and consequently to à Reasonable Religion Say I beseech you from whence haue you the Moral Euidence which makes this Reformation Credible to Reason I speak not yet of it's Truth for Euidence of Credibility e 〈…〉 preced's the anouching of it true We Catholicks proceed candidly Euidence of Credibility is first to be laid forth and propose to the reason of euery one learned and vnlearned the very Marks and Signs of truth manifest in our Church which Christ our Lord and the Apostles euidenced to the sirst Conuerted Christians You set vp à new faced Religion and when that 's done put it out of Countenance because Reason sees nothing in it which has appearance of Credibility You auouch it true before you make it Credible which Sectaries auouch their reformation true before it be made Credible is to put the Conclusion before the Premises 16. One perhaps will Say first The reason of your Reformation stand's vpon this rational Ground that wee Catholicks were deformed or out of all right fashion in our Religion Lamentable And are you the doughty Doctors that must mend what was marred and prescribe à new Model of Religion Can you Say what is or what is not Catholicism It is too much Boldnes not only to teach more learned then They make à false supposition their Proof you Selues But à high Iniury also to make à meer Supposition and very false too to pass for à rational Proof You know wee deny your improbable Supposition And you vpon no Principle call it reasonable Howeuer Suppose the falshood that wee are out of Fashion doth it therefore follow that you are got into the right Mode of Religion No truly If the Supposition stand's wee are both out And both need à new Reformation 17. Some may yet Reply Sectaries regard not that new coyned word of Euident Credibility à Term wholly Popish They endeauour to proue the Truth of Protestancy by Scripture and Fathers And to do so much is more than to make it Credible Contra. 1. Were it possible as it is not to proue the truth of Protestancy That 's besides the matter here in hand They are still besides the matter now agitated whilst wee only Treat of ending Controuersies by Reason Now all know that Authority whose Credibility must first be Euidenced before it haue weight precisely considered as Authority is not the Reason here spoken of For Example I Assent to the Mystery of the Incarnation vpon Gods own Authority that 's Faith but no rational Inducement to belieue What we demand of Sectaries is to haue the rational Motiues which induce to belieue this Protestancy laid open before the Eyes of rational men Herein we require Satisfaction but haue none 18. Contra. 2. Could these men proue their Protestancy by If the Reformation could be proued true Scripture and Fathers it should Methinks be very easy to point at an Orthodox Church which Six Ages since publickly owned the particular Tenets of it Here is my Reason Whateuer Doctrin the Scripture and Fathers teach the Orthodox Church conceal's not but openly Professeth She is not ashamed if Orthodox to teach what God has reuealed Now further Some Orthodox Church must haue owned it Had such à Church euer owned this Reformation it must either haue been like an inuisible Ghost not perceptible which our Newer Sectaries Disclaim or contrarywise discernable by the like Marks and Signatures of the Apostolical Church And if their Doctrin was euer taught by it They are to talk no more of its Truth before Its Credibility be euidenced to Reason by the Marks and Signs of that Church which is now supposed to haue taught pure Protestancy That is in à word They are first obliged to Say plainly what Articles of Faith Protestants as Protestants hold Essential to their Religion And then to make so much Doctrin and no more first Credible then true by the known Authority of an Orthodox Church But This is impossible Hence 19. And it is the last Inference whereby one grand Cheat of our Sectaries is discouered Long haue we inquired but without Satifaction Where their Church was before Luther The Common Answer returned by some latter Protestants making little Account of an inuisible Church is much to this Sense Our Church was there where it now is and where it alwayes
sacred Doctrin hath been à Diuine vvork aboue the force of nature Thus much performed vve Shevv hovv Sectaries erre it their Search after Religion and euince that it is not found by their priuate pondering Scripture alone much lesse by any vnprincipl'd Glosses Lastly in this Discourse vve lay forth an easy vvay vvhereby all these vnfortunate Debates concerning Religion may come to à happy period THE RVLE OF FAITH Wherin the infallibility of the Roman Catholick Religion is established against Atheists Heathens Iewes Turks and all Sectaries CHAP. I. VVhether true Religion be in the world The Affirmative proved Against Atheists Atheism evidently Shewd'improbable 1. THe question may perhaps seem doubtful to many upon Different judgements Concerning true Religion these grounds First Who euer admit's of Religion must either hold it true upon the Authority of others or because he is perswaded it can be found out by his own search and industry If he relies on Authority He meet 's with as many Pretenders to truth as there are different Professors of Religions on earth The The most of men pretend to it Iew pleads for his as the most ancient the Christian for his the Turk for his the Heathen for following the light of nature and every one thinks well of his own way and votes his own Religion best If therfore à searcher after truth relies on Authority He can no more say these take the Christians word than the Heathens the Heathens then the Jewes the Jewes then the Turks the The diffically about the choise Arians then the Catholicks the Catholicks than the Protestants and Consequently ought in prudence to reject all Religion 2. On the other side if He chuse à Religion by the force of his private judgement only or own industry He is cast into à Labyrinth and shall never find an exit He is obliged in prudence to make à diligent search into all the different Sects which are or have bin since the first creation of things He is carefully to examin the causes of them the grounds they rely on the connexion or coherence they have with one an other He is to converse with the learned of these different Religions or read their books and then to pitch by his own erring judgement on what likes him best which perhaps may be worst of all This task you see is immense and no lesse unsuccesful than laborious mans life is spent before halfe the work be done Therfore it seems none can come to the certain knowledge of true Religion either by Authority or reason Ergo saith the Opponent there is no such thing as true Religion in Being 3. Contrariwise I say True Religion most evidently is in the True Religion is in being The reason of the Assertion world The Assertion is grounded on this certain verity God eternally existing by himself without cause and infinite in all perfection is in Being therfore true Religion cannot but bee also For Grant such à Being as God is necessary of himself without any superiour cause it followes He is to be adored by all rational creatures essentially inferiour to him and not by any false or mock-worship but in Spirit and Truth for such an adoration only suites his Divine nature Of the adoration due to God This reason is reinforced by the light of one indubitable Maxim Quod universis videtur est verum What appeares to all or at least to the most Civillized Nations to be à Truth is so for such à universal consent of nature is the Dictamen and voice of God the Author of nature But all Nations ever owned some Religion therfore this agreement of God and nature is à Truth The minor is evident All civillized Nations own à Numen to say nothing of Christians out of the very writings of Heathens who assure us though people are found so barbarous as to live without lawes learning or civil goverment yet no whole nation was ever yet heard of but owned some kind of Numen some sacrifice some homage some worship due to à power either falsly or truely judged worthy of Reverence and honour Neither is the One difficulty removed force of the Argument infringed by saying many and very many Nations erred in the Truth of Religion which may seem as great an Evil as to have none for thus much is only proved at present that the voice of nature more easily ownes Religion then it professes one true That therfore being the universal Testimony or General consent of all cannot be false Haec testimonia animae its Tertullians Doctrin which S. Cyprian borrowed from him quanto vera tanto simplicia quanto simplicia tanto vulgaria c. This general Truth by how much more pure and simple by so much it 's more vulgarly known by how much more vulgarly known by so much its more common by how much more common by so much it 's more natural by how much more natural by so much it 's more Divine Omni literaturâ notius saith Tertullian omni Doctrinâ agitatius omni homine Majus 'T is à learning more known and resolved in mans mind than all other learning greater then man is and therfore à certain truth setled in all by the Author of nature God himself Now that many err in the truth of The cause of Mistaking true Religion Religion proceeds without doubt too often from want of instruction sometimes from pride ignorance or Malice in the Teacher which is the deplorable case of condemned Hereticks Sometimes and this is most usual it comes from an obdurance of heart begot by à custome of sinning and transgressing against the very light of nature For this custome bring 's à punishment with it that it darken's the mind notoriously and makes reason à stranger not only to weighty rational motives which forceably draw us to good but more over it so stupifies so dulls and indisposeth à soul that the impressions of grace not wanting to the most barbarous touch as it were on flintly rocks and produce either â weak barren fruit or rather no penitential fruit at all Would therfore the most obdurate Scythians or any other uncivilized People yeild to the ordinary grace allowed them for the avoiding of sin known contrary to nature God who illuminates every man in the world would give more light until they came to the knowledge of truths necessary necessitate medij to attain saluation For this is an undoubted Maxim of Divines God is not wanting in necessaries and Facienti quod in se est non denegat gratiam He denies not grace to such as endeavour by the ordinary means afforded them to avoid sin contrary to nature but if careles of that duty which nature obliges to they voluntarily plunge themselves into an Abiss of horrid transgressions the obdurance now mentioned followes The powerful operation of grace lies stifled and much deaded in such hardned hearts and Consequently sense and love of pleasures bear greatest sway
far equal that as Mahomet driues all to his belief by the sword the cause is natural so the Church drawes all to it by wit policy and humane learning and this means is altogether as natural Now if you say those first Conuersions were truely effects of grace and wrought by Gods special assistance This sequele is Clear The like made in after ages by the Church far more numerous as difficult and wholly as glorious proceed from the same fountain of Goodnes God's Diuine grace and special Assistance And note I speak here of real Conuersions wrought in Belieuers vpon solid motiues the Church shewes you millions of them not of hypocritical changes pretended hypocritical Conuersions not Valuable for God and Religion when worldly interest has à hand in them These are as soon distringuished by their false lustre as à comet from the sun they last not long but fall like blasing starrs We meddle not with them Thus much of à short digression which makes way to an other querie and 't is as followeth CHAP. V. VVhether all called Christians Belieue intirely Christ's sacred Doctrin And whether meanes be afforded to arriue to the knowledge of true Christian Religion 1. THese questions largely handled in the other Treatise are soon resolued vpon certain Principles I say therfore first All called Christians belieue not truely and intirely Christ Sacred Doctrin and proue it If Hymenaeus and Alexander Timoth. 1. c. 1. 20. once true Belieuers made shipwrack of their Faith if the Arians Monothelits Pelagians Donatists and such known Hereticks named Christians haue fallen also and lost true belief of Christian verities sufficiently proposed This sequel is euident All of them though named Christians haue not Faith intirely good nor indeed any Diuine Faith at all See the other Treatise Disc 3. c. 3. n. 4. 2. I say 2. All and euery one may with ordinary diligence come to the knowledge of the true Christian Religion I proue the Assertion Diuine Faith without which we cannot possibly Means sufficient to know true Religion please God is determinatly necessary to saluation and consequently the Religion where true Faith is taught is also necessary Therefore both these after Ordinary diligence vsed may be known vnlesse we wil say that God first makes such things necessary to saluation and then remoues them so far out of sight that none can know by prudent ordinary diligence what these necessary things are I say necessary to saluation not to dispute with Melchior Canus and others of the necessity of faith to the first iustification of à Sinner This difficulty we waue and Argue 2. God as we now suppose with all Christians yea with Iewes and Turks also is the Author of true Religion which he reuealed to the world for no other end but mans happines and eternal saluation therfore if he desires all to be saued by true Religion which is the final end therof He cannot vnles his Prouidence fail but afford meanes to know where it is professed otherwise which ill beseem's an infinite wisdom he would set vs all on work to gain Heauen by the belief of true Religion and withall leaue vs so in darknes that we cannot with all prudent industry come to the knowledge of it which is to say He will haue vs know the end of Religion and yet conceal the meanes leading to the knowledge of it 3. Again I argue 3. God who obliges not to impossibilities laies à strait command on all to belieue true Religion and not to assent to any fals sect therfore it may be known and clearly distinguished at least from the errours of infidels Iewes and Turks Known I say but how Not by its internal light immediatly for no Religion euer yet was its own self-euidence ex terminis or prudently got admittance because the Professors of it Cryed it vp as true Therfore the credibility of true Religion which must be True Religion is not its own selfe euidence laid open to Reason by force of Conuincing motiues is made as well discernable from Heresy destructiue of saluation as from Turcism or Iudaism yea and may be no lesse clearly discouered by its proper signes and lustre than à true Miracle for example that of S. Peter from Simon Magus Sorcery This cannot be denyed vnles God as I now sayd either command's impossibilities viz to find that out which cannot be found or licenceth vs to embrace any Religion called Christian whether good or bad true or fals it imports not because the best if it can be found is no more but à meer Probability or like vncertain opinions in Philosophy which may be reiected or followed according to euery priuate fancy This execrable Doctrin of the indifference to any Religion learned in the Diuels school is now à daies much in the mouths of many and I fear too deeply rooted in the hearts Nor à thing indifferent of some later Sectaries But of this more here after In the mean time you may conclude If true Religion be in the world it s made discernable not only from Iudaism but Heresy likewise and if it haue this discernibility it can be known if known it induceth an obligation to be belieued with Diuine Faith if it grounds certain Faith Subiectiuely taken in him that belieues it is no Opinion and considered Obiectiuely it implies the highest certainty Imaginable setled on God's Reuelation as is largly proued in the other Treatise Disc 1. c. 5. n. 6. 7. CHAP. VI. Of our Sectaries errour in their search after true Religion As also of Mr. Stillingfleets inconsequent way of Arguing 1. ONe errour common to all condemned Hereticks is in the first place to find out true Religion by the book of holy Scripture alone A most improbable way as the ancient Tertullian learnedly obserues lib de Praescrip cap. 9. 15. but chiefly cap 19. at those words often cited Ergo non ad Scriptuâ—as prouocandum c. The reasons of my Assertion well pondered are most conuincing 1. The Sectary laies hold of à book which he sayes teaches truth and yet knowes not in his Principles nor shall euer know infallibly whether the book he own 's contain's the Doctrin of true Religion or ought to be valued as Gods assured word which is to say in other terms He learn's infallible truths of à Master before he hath infallible certainty of this Masters teaching truth infallibly That the Sectary wants infallible assurance of his book is euident for he saith no word of God written or vnwritten no infallible Tradition no infallible authority on earth ascertain's him of the Scriptures Diuinity So Mr Stillingfleet in seueral places chiefly part 1. c. 6. Pag 170. Therfore he can haue no in fallible Assurance of the Doctrin contained in Sectaries haue not infallible assurance of their Bible Scripture and consequently no Diuine Faith grounded on that Doctrin as I shall shew hereafter How euer grant him an indubitable assurance in à general way of some
books of Scripture hee hath not yet so much as moral certainty of that precise Canon he receiues excluding other books which he denies as Scripture For no Orthodox Church no vniuersal Tradition no consent of Fathers no definition of any Council approues his Canon or explodes those books reiected by him therfore the sectaries Canon wherof there is so Much doubt can giue no moral assurance of Gods reuealed verities vnles it were without dispute à liquid truth that their Canon only is Gods word which cannot be supposed whilst so learned and numerous à multitude of Christians oppose it as defectiue and imperfect Yet more Suppose he giues you the exact number of Canonical books hee gain's nothing because the very Doctrin of these books is no more but à Translation and therefore vnlesse the Translator or Printer haue faithfully complyed with their duty and preserued the books in their ancient purity no Protestant can assure himself or any that what we now read is without change or corruption pure in the very necessary points of Faith If you say you compare them with the ancient Original Copies of the Hebrew and Greek I answer the very best Originals men can light on now are no more but meer Transcriptions and consequently may haue been corrupted by the Transcriber The best Originals now extant are only transcriptions the Printer or Librarian Therefore the Sectary hath no Moral certainty of the bare letter in Scripture if he cannot shew vs the hand writing or Autograph's of the Prophets and Apostles wherof there is no danger because he neuer saw any Hence I argue He who hath not infallible certainty of the very letter of Scripture want's infallible certainty of the Doctrin contained in Scripture but the Protestant hath no infallible certainty of the letter of Scripture Therefore he want's infallible certainty of the Doctrin contained in Scripture for no certainty of the letter no An argument against sectaries certainty of the Doctrin drawn from thence But if he has not certainty of the Doctrin he can haue no infallible faith grounded on it Therefore Scripture alone is an unmeet means to teach him what either true Faith or Religion is 2. Mr. Stillingfleet to solve this vnanswerable Argument Part. 1. c. 6. p. 196. saies we beg the Question when we require an infallible Testimony for our belieuing the Canon of scripture yet grants such à certainty as excludes all possibility of reasonable doubting and Chap. 7. p. 211. declares himself further thus Giue me leaue to make this supposition that God might not haue giuen this supernatural Assistance to your Church which you pretend makes it infallible whether men through the vniuersal consent of persons of the Christian Church in all ages might not haue been vndoubtedly certain that the Scripture we haue was the same deliuered by the Apostles I answer if you take leaue to make that supposition licence me to tell you you haue not that certainty of Scripture which Diuine Faith both supposeth and requires And here is one reason to omit others insisted on here after Deny this infallible assurance of the books of Scripture you haue no greater certainty that God endited those words we now read than you haue assurance that Aristotle wrote his Topicks or Caesar his Commentaries And dare you or any say that we receiue Mr. Stilling answer dissatisfactory our Bible vpon no surer ground Or can you Imagin if Christians accept these books vpon à Testimony lesse then vndubitable it may not be suspected that à thousand gross errours haue entred the Copies by the negligence or inaduertency of such as transcribed them Belieue it Were Aristotles Topicks matter of Diuine Faith none would dy after the fallible conueyance of them to our age vpon this perswasion that nothing substantially first writ by that Author hath been changed or altered Since and the same I assert of the Bible vnlesse you say that the words of Scripture were writ in some celestial and incorruptible Matter yet to be read by all or grant which is truth that as God by special Prouidence caused them to be writ pure so also he yet preserues them without blemish and now witnesseth the truth by the Testimony of his infallible Church wherof more largely hereafter At present I will only answer your difficulty about that fallible certainty which you affirm excludes all possibility of reasonable doubting and say first The vniuersal consent of persons of the Christian Church in all ages neuer approued the intire Canon of your Scripture for not only the present Roman Catholick Church but the ancient councils also receiued books which you reiect This truth is so manifest that it need 's no further proof therefore your Canon want's the approbation of the whole Christian world and consequently you haue not so high à certainty of Scripture as excludes all possibility of reasonable doubting I answer 2. And it is à demonstration against Protestants who say the whole Christian world for à thousand years at least erred in Doctrin contrary to the verities of Holy Scriptures for if we goe up from Luther to the 4 th or 5 th age after Christ you 'l find none but condemned erring Hereticks and Roman Catholiks no lesse actually guilty say Sectaries of these professed errours Of praying to Sainâ—s of an vnbloody Sacrifice of the the A further Argument taken from the papists supposed errours real presence c. Thus much supposed I both answer and Argue against you If the whole Christian world was for that vast time so strangely infatuated as to mantain errours contrary to Scripture when the true Doctrin therof no lesse concerned their eternal Saluation then the true letter it cannot possibly be supposed vpon any weak Probability much lesse on such à certainty as excludes all reasonable doubt that these besotted Christians preserued the letter of Scripture pure and intire whose errours are now imagined most gross against the Doctrin contained in God's word Obserue my reason It is much more easy to conceiue if all held corrupted Doctrin that the very letter of Scrtpture was by negligence or ignorance of these Corrupters of Doctrin also corrupted then to imagin the records preserued pure and Millions of Christians to read them and after the reading grosly to mistake Gods verities registred in that book And here I must mind M. Stillingfleet of his proofless and inconsequent way in Arguing 3. You Sr. say first The whole erring multitudes of Christians before Luther preserued Scripture pure yet forsooth these silly men taught one Doctrin after an other contrary to Scripture They perused the book interpreted it yea preached it to their own confusion and condemnation You say 2. It is not possible that Mr. stillingfleets arguments retorted these writings could be extorted out of mens hands by fraud or violence vnder their eyes or suffered to be lost by negligence Yet you make it not only possible but grant the Doctrin therof to haue
None can question whether the Doctrin be Diuine when the Person who declared it to the world was so Diuine and extraordinary à Person holy in his conuersation wrought vnparalled miracles rose from death to life conuersed with his Disciples and gaue euidence of their fidelity by laying down The question Still begged their liues to attest the Truth c. Contra. 1. Replies the Heathen Here is again the same Petitio principii for either you belieue these particulars because Scripture record's them and then you suppose Scripture to be true and Diuine which he denies or because fallible men report them you own no infallible tradition and this aduances not your cause at all for the Turks and those of China talk as much of their Mahomet and Confusius vpon fallible and perhaps false reports also for yet the Heathen knowes not what Religion is true And next wonders why you speak of miracles of power ouer euil spirits of men laying down their liues c. when you Sectaries either deny or slight all the miracles euidently done in the Catholick Church as also the power She manifest's in casting out Diuels c. And if we mention Martyrs Catholicks haue more who layd down their liues in defense of the Doctrin of this one Church than suffered for Christ whilst the Apostles preach't to the world You hint some thing at miracles like one half affraid to meddle with such Motiues and say these wonders proue the truth of Apostolical Doctrin Pray you Sr Answer When you plead by miracles Doe you only allow those which Scripture relates or others By what miracles Sectaries plead also known by History and humane Authority If you rely on the first you suppose what now is in Question Viz. That Scripture is infallible and of Diuine inspiration If you own miracles registred in Ecclesiastical history and the liues of Saints you haue as I now said of Martyrs à greater number wrought in the Roman Catholick Church in the ages after Christ than were done whilst he and his Apostles liued Slight such à Cloud of witnesses as attest these later wonders and speak no more as you doe of any certainty grounded vpon the report of honest men Own them vpon humane authority as morally indubitable and you proue by virtue of these Miracles that the Doctrin of the Catholick Church is still Apostolical and Orthodox 12. Now here by the way I must lay open your fallacy A dilemma which forceth Sectaries to à vicious Circle when you recurr to miracles recounted in Scripture only and reiect others wrought by the Church Thus I argue Either you suppose and belieue the Doctrin of Scripture to be Diuine because you find the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles recorded there and propose these as the first Motiue and inducement of your belieuing Scripture or independently of Scripture Miracles you proue the Doctrin to be Diuine yea and the very miracles recounted there to be indited by the Holy Ghost If you belieue the Diuinity of Scripture induced therevnto by Miracles related in that Holy book you aduance nothing for all you say is that you proue Scripture Diuine because it recounts these wonders which are as obscure to à Heathen as the Diuinity or the sacred Doctrin of Scripture is Therefore you make à most vicious Circle for you proue the Diuinity of Scripture by Miracles internal to the book and the Miracles themselues not otherwise known by the Diuinity of Scripture Now if you say you know the Scriptures Diuinity antecedently or before you recurr to Miracles related there Scripture-Miracles are vseles to your purpose for if the supposition stand They are yet no more but obiects of Faith and therefore cannot serue you as motiues and inducements to belieue that very Diuinity which is now supposed known aliunde and most sufficiently without them 13. One may ask if God had neuer done any other Miracles but such as Scripture relates whether these are not sufficient to work belief in all The Heathen answers negatiuely and makes them insufficient because Scripture is not proued Miracles related in Scripture Conuince not à Heathen Diuine by them And all may answer so if Scripture be not otherwise first proued Diuine before we haue recourse to miracles internal to the book Howeuer admit gratis they were sufficient the most you can inferr is That the Primitiue Church which shewed them was Orthodox but whether any other Church yet preserues the same pure Doctrin may bee well questioned by à Heathen And here in passing you may note à singular Prouidence of God who age after age has illustrated his Church with most manifest and vndoubted miracles whereof more largely hereafter Disc 2. C. 8. 14. You say lastly That which God chiefly requires from à Heathen is the belief of the Truth and Diuinity of his Doctrin He answers he is ready to do so when you proue the Doctrin to be Diuinely inspired and infallible But hitherto you handle things so faintly that though the matter you treat be excellent in it self yet your proofs most disatisfactory come not home to conuince it Your mishap is iust like that of an ill lawyer who has à good cause in hand but knowes not how to handle it Your whole Method is vnmethodical your proofs prooflesse your iumbling most intolerable In à word you giue no rational A Good Cause ill handled by Mr Stillingfleet account of the reasonableness of the Truth of the Diuinity or of the infallibility of Christs Doctrin Therefore saith the Heathen I 'le suspend my iudgement till I meet with à more knowing Aduersary who I hope will not proue Truth by simply saying he speaks it but Conuince it vpon vndeniable Principles 15. But our Heathen hath not yet done with Mr Stilling for he saith plainly Though all the proofs hitherto hinted at might pass or were supposed valid yet there is not one word spoken to the purpose in behalf of Protestancy If you wonder at the bold Assertion ponder well his reason You Mr Stilling haue treated all this while of the excellency and reasonablenes of Christian Religion considered no man knowes how Pray you lurk not in such General terms but tell me particularly what Christian Religion is thus good excellent and reasonable If good and excellent it must be now found in the world Is it Arianism Pelagianism Donatism Quakerism These sects profess Christianity Are they all excellent and reasonable Affirm it openly if you dare Perhaps you will say no. Is it Popery By no means For may your word be taken it mantains false Our Aduersary Cannot say which à mong so many Religions is excellent and reasonable and erroneous Doctrin and that 's neither excellent nor reasonable Is it Protestancy Yes surely This is the excellent and reasonable Religion And is it possible Can you perswade your self without further proof than your own prooflesse word that the perfect draught or Idea of Christianity lies so fair
Fathers nay you haue not so much for this Negatiue Doctrin which vpon that account proue nothing because they are as dark for your sence as the Doctrin is which you would proue by them 5. For example You may allege some passages out of S. Austin chiefly that contra Adimant C. 12. Our Lord doubted not to say This is my body when he gaue à sign of his body The obuious sense whereof without torturing the Text is thus Our Lord gaue vnto his Disciples the Consecrated species and accidents of bread which were à sign of his Body there contained and doubted not to say that what he gaue them vnder those accidents was really his body Let now any one probably inferr that his S. Austin's words fauour not Sectaries sacred body was not then present vnder the accidents of bread because S. Austin saith those accidents were à sign of his body not absent for à sign or figure implies not the absence of the thing signified by it Well but grant contrary to truth all you can wish The words at most are ambiguous and therefore no fit Principle to ground an article of faith as is now noted You may next allege that known Testimony in Theodorets Dialogues The Mystical signes after the sanctification recede not from their nature but remain in their first substance figure and form are seen and touched as before I answer Theoderet plainly speaks of the Mystical signes More of Theoderet afterward which are seen and touched not of the inward substance of bread and wine which are no immediate obiect of our senses those signes recede not from their nature but remain in their form and figure as before and t' is Catholick Doctrin whereof more presently But grant the vtmost The words are only dubious and therefore insufficient to assure vs of an article of Faith when contrary to the receiued Doctrin of the present Church I assert yet more Though any Father should say That the substance and nature of bread and wine cease not to bee there is nothing yet concluded against vs for by these words substance or nature the outward Massinesse or Corpulency of bread and wine may be well vnderstood which as Theoderet saies remain The reason is In ordinary Speech we often giue to qualities which flow from the essence or nature of à thing the very name of the thing it self Thus we say an excessiue heat is fire à Massy heauiness is lead or à stone wheras heat and heauiness in common philosophy are only natural qualities or properties distinct from each substance respectiuely Such locutions were they found are at most dubious but we stand in no need of any far-fetch't glosses 6. Lastly Tertullians speech lib. 4. contra Marcio cap. 39. ex Cap. 21. Lucae contain's no difficulty Christ taking bread into his hands and distributing it to his Disciples made the same his body Tertullians sense most plain and easy saying this is my Body That is à figure of my body Obserue the words Made the same his body and all is clear What did he make so I answer That bread which in the old Testament was à figure of his body according to the words of the Prophet Mittamus lignum in panem eius Let vs put wood into his bread that is à Cross into his body he makes now in the new law most truely and really his body Whoeuer read's Tertullian will find this to bee the genuine sense of his whole Discourse in the place cited where first he ieer's Marcion Faciebat ad vanitatem Marcionis vt panis Crucifigeretur Then saies Marcion vnderstand's not that bread in the old Testament was à figure of Christ's body as the Prophet Ierimie speak's Conijciamus lignum in panem eius scilicet They are Tertullian's own words Crucem in Corpus eius That is à Cross into his body See Pamelius his learned notes vpon this passage chiefly n. 662. and. 667. and you will easily free Tertullian from all ambiguity in Speech There are yet other Authorities much weaker produced by Sectaries but these now quoted seem sufficient for my chief aime whereof more presently In the interim I expect from these men à clamorous reply 7. They will certainly tell vs the sense and explication now giuen to these Fathers are no more but meer vnproued guesses or A reply of sectaries answered thoughts of our fancy I might first answer This sense immediatly flowes from the plain words which we admit according to the rigid grammatical signification of euery particular sentence But let vs waue this and ask whether the contrary sense of sectaries be any more but meerly their vnproued glosses or thoughts of fancy I say they are so and consequently as dark and wholly obscure as that Negatiue Proposition is which should be proued by them They storm and say the sense is clear for them I stifly deny it and assert the conttary They perhaps will vrge me to proue my sense I vrge them to proue theirs which cannot be done by the Fathers own words without à surer Principle For you see the words occasion the quarrel but that which is the cause of our dissentions can neuer end them or bring vs to any acquiescency without à further Principle And thus we stand Andabatarum more winking and fighting The one saies Yea The other No. without fruit or further progress and are yet farr from ending difficulties 8. Now here is that which I would haue all to reflect on for it is of mighty importance viz. That controuersies between the A reflection necessary for all that write Controuersies Catholick and à sectary cannot but be an endles work if both endeauour to decide them by Principles and vary as much about the sense of those Principles which are supposed to end the Dispute as we do about the very matter in question This is euer so whilst the sectary reiect's an infallible Church or her vniuersal Tradition Obserue well The matter now in question is Whether Christ be really present in the blessed Sacrament We allege his own Sacred words The Sectary saies we mistake the sense and consequently will not haue the difficulty decided that way To know the Truth both of vs examin all the other passages in Scripture relating to the Mystery both read the originals and the different versions both compare Text and text together nothing is yet ended Still we stand at variance about the sense which should decide matters between vs. Next we read the Holy Fathers for our Sectaries like not Tradition they produce their How Disputes are made endless Testimonies we interpret We produce ours They also interpret Obserue well I say Are we not as much at variance about the sense of these Fathers which are supposed à Principle to end our debates as about the very meaning of Gods word And doth not the matter in question still remain vndecided Most euidently yes Therefore vnless some other means be afforded whereby we may come
more easily to the knowledge and belief of the reuealed truth in this Mystery may Sectaries glosses haue place all are cast into à labyrinth of seeking without hope of finding what God will haue vs to belieue In à word the plain truth is thus 9. Sectaries will haue vs to dispute of Religion but on such Terms as shall be sure neuer to end one difficulty That is they will haue vs to reason about matters of highest consequence and with it destroy the best ground of all reasoning I say therefore If Religion were to be proued by Scripture only add to Scripture the authorities of Fathers when euery one makes that sense of scripture orthodox which he conceiues to be so Religion ere this day had been long since destroyed For the Arian would haue his sense passe for truth The Pelagian his The Monothelite his The Protestant his All these different senses admitted destroy the very Essentials of Christian Religion And for this reason I would fain learn of any knowing man What that owned Principle is whereby the Sectary proues the sense he giues of Scripture to be more certainly à reuealed Truth than that glosse is which either Arian or Pelagian forceth out of the very book which Protestants read I assert boldly they are all alike Guesses and meer fancies guide A iust parallel between Arians and Protestants them and nothing els The Arians sense is not clear no more is the Protestants The Arian has no vniuersal Tradition for his sense no more hath the Protestant The Arian has no vniuersal consent of Fathers no more has the Protestant The Arian has no Church euer reputed Orthodox which owned his sense no more hath the Protestant Now if the Protestant recurr to the Primitiue Church The Arian will go higher to the very Apostles preaching and auouch that his sense was taught by those first Masters of the Gospel I say it once more they are all alike there is no difference between them The Arians gloss is as good as the Protestants and the Protestants wholly as bad as the Arians 10. Hence I say 2. The Protestant cannot aduance any thing like à proof in behalf of his own new opinions and he is as farr from Principles when he opposes Catholick Doctrin You haue the reason giuen already No proof less sure than the true sense of Scripture taught and deliuered by à Church confessedly orthodox No proof less firm than that Churche's authority and her receiued Tradition can indubitably ascertain any of Christ's Sacred Doctrin But it is euident Protestants want such proofs when they either plead for their own opinions or impugn Catholik Protestants Condemned by their own writings Doctrin And to make good what I say I appeal to their own writings and ask euery iudicious Reader whether he euer yet heard Protestant whilst he asserts no Transubstantiation for example No Sacrifice of the Mass no Inuocation of Saints say plainly and positiuely vpon à solid ground Such an ancient Church reputed Orthodox confessedly denied Transubstantiation Inuocation of saints the Sacrifice of the Altar c Such à passage of Scripture sensed and interpreted by that Orthodox Church or general consent of Fathers agreeing with known Scripture and Church Doctrin decried these In what manner Sectaries handle controuersies Catholick Tenets as we Sectaries do now Has euer Protestant I say gone thus plainly to work No God knowes I 'le highly extoll the man that shall offer at it What then is their strain of writing All à long à meer cheat They either argue negatiuely We find not forsooth Such Doctrins in antiquity which is false and though true t' is to no purpose Or they cite you two or three ambiguous Testimonies of the Fathers gloss and sense them as they please and then cry victory Thus Mr Stilâ—ingfleet proceed's as you shall see presently I say No such matâ—er An ambiguous Testimony of à Father glossed or sensed by â—ou is wholly insufficient to ground faith vpon or to assert abâ—lutely This is Christs Doctrin without an ancient Orthodox Church which indubitably maintaine'd the Position and that â—nse you would draw from à Father And mark well what I say â—or we shall afterwards end all controuersies by it In the mean â—me who is there so far from reason that can perswade himselfe â—t I or any ought to reiect what my Church teaches because à Sectary offer 's to draw some few Fathers to à new sense which no Orthodox Church euer heard of When all know or should know that no priuate mans opinion no doubtful Text much lesse Sectaries glosses added to an ambiguous sentence can assure me what Christ's Doctrin is which as I said euer stand's firm vpon vndubitable Principles or à Belieuer ought not to own it as Doctrin truely reuealed 11. But before I press this point further and shew vpon what certain Principle the Catholick relies when the Scriptures sense the like is of the Fathers is debated I must needs entertain you à little because it much auail's to my present purpose with à few known Authorities of Fathers which either conuince our Catholick Doctrin of Christs real Presence in the Eucharist or we may boldly say no truth was euer established by those great lights of the Church I say only à few for it is not my intent to collect half of what is vsually quoted by Catholick Authors my chief What is chiefly intended in Citing the Fathers ayme being thus much at present to make this truth manifest That as long as Sectaries iarr with vs about the sense of Fathers and only deliuer opinatiuely their contrary Sentiments so long they do no more but without fruit beat the aire and dispatch no work Recourse therefore must be had to à clearer Principle whereof we shall afterward treat at large Now as I promised one Authority is to be examined Theoderets Testimony alleged aboue Contains most Catholick Doctrin 12. Whilst I was in hand with this Chapter à Gentleman â— our Nation pleased to tell me of à late little book called to hâ— remembtance The Rule of Faith wherein one passage of Theoderâ— is much vrged and thought vnanswerable After some Discourse I shewed him my notes in the other Treatise Disc 4. C. 7. n. â— wherevnto He replied modestly Surely Theoderet saies morâ— who either must suppose the very inward substance of bread â— changed at all or his Conference with the Eutichian Heretick becomes What Sectaries would force from this authority forcelesse and this the little book presseth most Sr said I. It seem's very strange that your late book bring 's again to light such stale obiections long since answered by one to say nothing of many others of our own Nation the learned Brereley Please to read with me Theoderet's own words first and Brereley afterward We turned to Theoderet Paris Print 1642. Tom. 4. Dialog 2. called Inconfusus Dialogus and began with the pag. 84. Next I produced Brereley of the Liturgie
none can adore one that meerly takes vpon him the Maiesty of à King who is not with an Adoration due to that Maiesty so none can honour or adore Christ in the Eucharist with an honour due to Christ when truely and really he is not present but saith Theoderet Christ is to be really adored in the Eucharist and Consequently he is really present there 21. For the rest I remit the Reader to C. Perron who in the following Chapters dissolues and most clearly what euer can be obiected against his Doctrin To end this point be pleased to reflect vpon this one particular Had Theoderet said The Symbols remain in their first essence figure and form and included in that very speech as our Aduersaries will haue the One reflection more very substance of bread He had spoken most improperly which ill beseem's so learned an Author for vpon this supposition he speak's as incongruously as if one should say Peter this very hour who is himselfe both Soul and body remain's in him selfe that is The Cardinals reading clear's all in his Soul and body But if you read with the Cardinal Thus. Car ils demeurent en lae forme en la sigure de la premiere substance They remain and in the form and in the figure of the first substance of bread before Consecration really formed and figured by them the Construction is good the sense most clear perfect and without exception 22. Thus much I haue noted to satisfy the Gentleman and hope neuer to hear Theoderet obiected hereafter against Transubstantiation If I doe I shall say an old obseruation of mine alwaies proues true and t' is That the best Arguments of Sectaries Printed and reprinted in their little books are like old thread-bare garments quite out of fashion cast off and reiected I mean answered ouer and ouer by Catholick Authors yet Brusht vp must appear as new And this less blamable may pass for they can do no better but methinks it is intolerable that they bring again to light such worn-out stuff as you see now done in this particular and dare not inform the Reader how often it hath been torn à pieces Yet the worst of all remain's Viz. That they build their faith vpon sand one dubious Authority of à Father if yet dubious supports it and seem's to these new spirits ground enough to foment Schism to maintain à rebellion against as ancient Church which neuer belieued as they do CHAP. XII A Digression concerning the Real Presence The Fathers plainly assert it Sectaries glosses friuolous The agreement of the Church and Fathers make à Doctrin indubitable The Catholick's certain Principle A word with Mr Stillingfleet 1. BEfore we produce these Testimonies and lay open Mr Stillingfleet's Mistakes turn I beseech you to his Account of Protestancy Part. 3. c. 3. page 567. Where he treat's of Transubstantiation and calls it an vnreasonable Doctrin because repugnant to sense and reason also It seem's contrary to sense for sense tells vs what we see and tast is bread after consecration and reason vpon that sensible suggestion ought to conclude it still remains substantially bread Obserue I beseech you how the Gentleman to maintain his proofs drawn from sense is not only forced to reiect the plain sense of Christ's words according to the letter This is my body which is giuen for you This is the Chalice of the new Testament wich is or shall be shed for you But more Mr Stilling quarrel 's with all Christians except à ferr Protestants ouer how he is thrown into à desperate quarrel wherein he will neuer come off hansomly For he is engaged to make not only the Professors of the Roman and Greek Church who indubitably belieue the Real presence more than stupid because opposit to that he call's sense and reason but besides He contrast's with à far greater moral body of Christians I may rightly stile it the Representatiue of all named Christians in the world excepting à few Protestants I 'le shew you how At this day there are in that famous Temple of Hierusalem dedicated to the Holy Cross called the Church of the Sepulcre Catholicks Graecians Abyssins those most ancient Christians Syrians Maronits Georgians and others All haue their Altars in one and the same Church and all though different in some Doctrinal points and Ceremonies vnanimously belieue à true vnbloody Sacrifice and with it the real presence of Christ after Consecration No moderne sectaries haue place here witnesse Prince Radziuill in his Ierosoly Peregrin Antwerpe Print 1614. Pag. 109. Nay they are so meanly thought of that when the Prince named Lutherans Zwinglians c. The party he conuersed with demanded whether they were Christians What Christians said he and haue no Priest no Altar no sacrifice offerred vp to god in this sacred place where Christ wrought our redemption you may see more hereof in the following page of this Author In the mean while shall any say that à Representatiue of so many Christians are to be deemed fooles vpon this account that they contradict sense and reason It is so vast à Paradox that though Mr Stillings should write volumes on this subiect He would neuer speak à probable word against such à cloud of witnesses You may add herevnto if you please those many Christians conuerted to our The Chineses difficulty Catholick Faith in that vast Kingdome of China à People the whole world knowes most ingenious All of them as I haue heard from two worthy men à long time Missioners there the one is yet liuing who reclaimed many from their errours raise most difficulties before their conuersion against that one Mystery of our Faith the Incarnation of the Diuine word but after satisfaction receiued in this particular they submit easily to the belief of other Catholick verities and neuer Scruple in the least at the Mystery of the Eucharist as à Doctrin Contrary to sense and reason And they proceed most rationally for in real truth there are incomparably Most Concern's the Incornation greater difficulties in this one Mystery of the Incarnation to say nothing of the Trinity might weak reason decide the case than in the other What That God who is essentially immutable becomes man by à vnion betwixt the Diuine word and humane nature which vnion toucheth so intrinsecally on that Diuine Person that we must truly say This word is now intrinsecally affected otherwise then he was before and to conceiue all this done without à real change may the Common notion of mutation stand Mutari est rem aliter se habere is à difficulty so great say good Diuins that it hath rack't many à strong wit and yet can scarse be well solued Vtramque enim Substantiam in vnam conuenisse personam c. They are words of S. Leo Sermo 9. de Natiu Dmi nisi fides credat sermo non explicat That is the Mystery is very abstruse I verily belieue Mr Stilling Metaphysick will not reach
belief of Christ's real Presence in the Eucharist be an errour Christ and his Church and innumerable Fathers also haue deceiued vs. 2. One Authority alleged against Mr. Stillingfleet you haue in his own page 568. And t' is à known passage of S. Cyprian de Caena Dmi or of some other Author not much inferiour to him if we belieue Mr Fulk against the Rhem's Testament In 1. Cor. 11. and Erasmus his Annotations vpon S. Cyprian Basil print anno S. Cyprians Authority examined 1558. fol. 287. Mr Stilling contend's it is of à later Date yet is pleased by an Addition of his glosses to vnsense the words as well as he can and at last make them to speak Protestancy 3. The Authors words are These This common bread changed into flesh and blood giues life The bread which our lord gaue to his Disciples being Changed Non effigie sed naturâ not in outward form or semblance but in its inward nature or substance by the Omnipotency of the word is made flesh 4. Mr Stilling Asserts all this proues not Transubstantiation first because the Author Saith Christs words Vnless ye eate the flesh Mr stillingfleets reasoning not solid and drink the blood of the son of God you shall haue no life in you are not to be vnderstood after à Carnal sense Answ That 's true yet your Inference Sir is most improbable The Principle you must rely on is None are to think as the Capharnits did witness S. Austin that they were to cut into pieces Christs Sacred flesh and eate that as we do Common meats And your inference ill deduced run's thus Therefore the inward substance of bread is not changed into his body This inference I say is null for both these are eternal truths and well consist together Bread is changed into Christs body yet we neither cut that body à pieces or eate it as the Capharnits grossly imagined 5. He argues again and more improbably This Author saith he by the effects attributed to the Sacrament calling it His second Argument more slight food which nourished to immortallity cannot possibly be conceiued to speak if Christ's Corporal presence because we Catholicks confess Christs body remain's no longer in our body then the Accidents of bread and wine are there I verily think the man was busied with other thoughts when he wrot these lines For what sense haue we here Christ's Sacred body really present giues grace and is no longer present then the Accidents of bread and wine remain Ergo bread and wine are not Really changed into his body This I say is à most improbable inference For the effects of the Sacrament which imply the production of Grace may and must stand with Christ's real Presence though that production of grace Sacramentally giuen last's no longer then his Blessed body is vnder the forms of bread and wine 6. But an other doughty Argument is drawn out of S. Cyprian's words which Mr. Stilling cites in his Margent Sed immortalitatis alimonia datur à Communibus cibis differens corporalis substantiae retinens speciem sed virtutis diuinae inuisibili efficientiâ probans adâ—sse presentiam His third Argument proues nothing And He vnworthyly renders them thus in English That immortal Nourishment is giuen vs which differs from common food that it retain's the Nature of à Corporeal substance but prouing the presence of à Diuine power by its inuisible efficiency So that saith he what presence of Diuine power is there is shewed in regard of the effects of it not in regard of any substantial change of the bread into the body of Christ Sr I vtterly deny your prooflesse So That and say your deduction is more then improbable This Author saith expresly common bread changed into flesh by the omnipotency of the word giueth life and immortal nourishment which is Diuine grace and therefore the Diuine power appeares in both first in the substantial change of bread into Christs body next in the effect or production of grace in à worthy Receiuer and you improbably conclude it shewes it self in regard of the effects only 7. Like one half guilty of iugling you goe on I know you will quarrel with me for rendring Corporalis substantiae retinens speciem By retaining the Nature of à Corporeal substance Answ I do so indeed and will proue you à cheat for your pains First because you make this Author speak nonsense for if Corporalis substantiae The fallacy discouered retinens Speciem may be Englished By retaining the nature of à Corporeal substance you may as well render it by retaining the substance of à corporeal substance because nature and substance are here synomima's And if this be sense we haue à pretty Tautology or rather non-sense with it thus It differ's from Common food yet retains the substance of Corporeal substance or common food and in real truth is still natural bread or Common food Wheras if we read It differ's from common food yet retain's the outward forms or external Accidents of à Corporeal substance or common food the sense is good clear and open to euery Reader But we must go on You contend that the word Species in this place Signifies Nature or à solid body and not the external Accidents because Species anâ—nariae Species largitionales Curator Specierum whereof we read in the Ciuil law express the substance of things not the Accidents and so S. Ambrose must be vnderstood when speaking of our Sauiours changing water into wine he faith Vt rogatus ad nuptias aquae substanâ—â—am in vini speciem commutaret Now no man will say that he changed the substance of water into the external Accidents of wine but into the nature of wine Therefore Species may sometimes signify substance Answ All this is true yet nothing to the purpose What the word Species signifies for can you or any man proue because Species signisies sometimes kind or substance that it alwaies doth so We read in Scripture Daniel 13. Species decepit te Isa 53. non est ei Species neque decor Daniel 10. Species mea immutata 1. Tim. 3. Habentes Speciem pietatis c. Will you translate Nature or substance hath deceiued thee There was no nature or substance in Christ of whom the Prophet speaks My nature or substance is changed Hauing piety in nature or substance All is ridiculous and therefore though Species may sometimes signify substance or kind vnless that signification hold vniuersally these instances of Species annonariae and Species vini proue nothing You will ask perhaps because the word is ambiguous how we may know whether in our present Controuersy Species signifies shape form Accidents or substance Answ This rule is certain when the word Species stand's in opposition or is distinguished from an inuisible Nature or essence it must of necessity signify the external shape or form of à thing and not the substance So when the Apostle exhorts vs. 1. Thess 5. The
to the Receiuer Speak out Sir What is it that has relation to the Receiuer only The very body and blood of Christ vnder the Type of bread and wine which are changed out of their nature as water was at Cana in Galilee These substances of his body and blood as really present work their effect in à worthy Receiuer where you euidently see that the Real Presence of Christ's Sacred body and blood is presupposed to the effect or to grace wrought in à Soul Therefore to talk of à presence which hath relation to à Receiuer only without the true supposed real verity of Christ body and blood present is no more then à peruerse and an improbable Gloss if S. Cyril speak sense 18. Your next Gloss vpon these words It is not bread though it seem to the tast to be bread but the Body of Christ is worse if worse can be For you only frigidly say Hereby is meant no alteration i◠the Substance of it but only that it is not That common Bread it was before Sir the contrary is now demonstratiuely proued against The change made in Chrism wholly different from that in the Eucharist you But you hope to help your self by an Instance which S. Cyril hath of Chrism in his 3. Mystag Pag. 525. where he Seem's to Parallel the change made in Chrism or holy oyntment with the Change of bread in the Eucharist By the way If Chrism be so sacred à thing it is à shame you haue no more vse of it in your Church but let that pass and mark the Parallel and your own mistake with it A change there is in both bread and common ointment but as different in Themselues as they are differently expressed by this Father The one change is Real and intrinsecal made in the Substance of bread and wine The change of common ointment is not so but Moral into à grace or Gift or Christ S Cyrills words take away all ambiguity See saith he That thou think not this ointment to be common or meer ointment For as the bread of the Eucharist after the Inuocation of the Holy Spirit is no longer common bread but the body of Christ here is the real change So this holy ointment is no longer naked or common ointment after it is consecrated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Cyrill's words denote the difference but à grace or Gift of Christ and the Holy spirit which operates through the presence of the Diuinity Here is the other and à quite different change Bread is made the body of Christ Chrism his holy and sacred Gift The Parallel or parity therefore as I now said lies in this That both bread and Common ointment are changed from what they were and this is enough for Cyrills intent who only proues Chrism to be à holy thing but it fail's when he positiuely and expresly diuersifies the nature of these changes of bread into Christs body of Common ointment only into à grace or à gift of Christ And Hence Sr your Question whether we may not as well proue à Transubstantiation in the Chrism as we do in the Eucharist is both fond and friuolous We Answer No because the real change of bread into Christ's body fully expresseth Transubstantiation the Terminus à quo and ad quem being Real and Substantial The other Change of ointment into à Gift of Christ denotes à moral change quite different and nothing like the other which is most real S. Ambrose next cited no less abused then others 19. Your next and last Gloss abuses S. Amb. De ijs qui initiantur C. 9. who saith Bread is no longer that which Nature has framed it but that which the Benediction of Consecration has made it You Answer It is the body of Christ but not in our gross sense Pray Sr Inform vs à little of your more quaint meaning Say how bread is Christs body if it still remains as substantially bread after the Benediction as water in Baptism remain's substantially water Doth the water wherewith an infant is washed cease to be water because it is à Sacrament No certainly yet bread if S. Ambrose speak truth ceaseth to be that which nature framed it You endeauour to make These words forceles because S. Chrisost in Act Hom. 23. saith of Baptism I'ts virtue is so great that it suffer's not men to be men and then you wisely ask whether we will grant it Transubstantiat's them Friuolous The Saint only speaks of the virtue of Baptism which as he obserues makes vs sons of Adoption That is it Changes à soul from the miserable state of Sin into à happy state of grace and so permit's not men once infected with that leprosy to be men as they were before vnregenerate And therefore he adds in the ensaing words The great power of the Holy Ghost is that it Transform's our Manners and makes them composed What is here of any thing like Transubstantiation or of à ceasing of that which nature hath framed But enough and fully enough of Mr Stillingfleets most improbable glosses so I must and will term them vntil some surer Principle than fancy giues them more strength which shall neuer be 20. To end I 'le say à great Truth Had this Gentleman twenty Cyprians twenty Cyrills twenty Austins as clear and express for his Opinion of the Sacrament as the Testimonies Had this Aduersary so much Authority for hy opinion as wee Produce in behalfe of Catholick Doctrin No man Could belieue any thing now cited are significant for Catholick Doctrin Had he à Church reputed Orthodox which as indubitably mantain'd his Opinion fiue or six ages since as the Catholick Church then held and yet hold's our Catholick Doctrin Finally had he Scripture as plain for his Sign or Figure of Christs body as it is euidently clear for the Real Presence I verily think no prudent man could or would belieue any thing of this great Mystery And consequently all might rationally doubt of euery article in Christian Religion Because Fathers vpon the Supposition are directly contrary to Fathers Church stand's against Curch and Scripture against Scripture But now when he hath not one Clear Testimony of à Father much less the Sentiment of any Orthodox Church nor so much as à word of Scripture contrary to our Catholick Position I must Conclude that his Glosses already laid on these Fathers are not only improbable but more than highly improbable 21. Perhaps Mr Stillingfleet may reply His glosses T' is true because they are the Sentiments of à fallible man are indeed lyable to errour but He bidds me look well to my Refutations and beware of setting to high à value on them whilst I oppose him For my Opposition because I may mistake amount's to no more but to à weake degree of Fallibility so that Hitherto He and I stand vpon equal Terms Answ If the contest be thus much only whether his Glosses are not clearly refuted the Iudicious Reader after à due
one whit but most willingly Silence vs with Gods own plain language This we look for but in lieu of it what haue we Fancies Coniectures Glosses friuolous Discourses And thus forsooth Popery must down I marry and Protestancy be thought the pure and most refined Religion 7. By what is said already you see how vnluckily these men run Sectaries argue improbably out of the way of all probable Arguing whilst Scripture is made so clear that by the light thereof All Controuersies now raised amongst dissenting Christians can be determined Is it so conuincing and clear Proue you no Purgatory no Inuocation of Saints by plain and express Scripture Is it so conuincing and clear Proue you plainly that to deny Purgatory or Transubstantiation is as necessary to Saluation as to deny à Quaternity of Diuine Persons Now if it be not clear in such matters Why keep you à coile about these Negatiues Why do you threaten vs with God's iudgements for mantaining the Contrary Doctrins Why haue you not only made an vproar in the world about Doctrins meerly vnnecessary but more which may lay sorrow at your hearts why haue Negatiue Opinions the cause of Sectaries Separation you shamefully separated your selues from an Ancient Church whereof your Ancestors were members And this is desperately done for à Company of Negatiue Opinions Though it import's not one straw whether they be belieued or no. Contrariwise if you make the Belief of these Non-Articles necessary to Saluation they must be proued by the plain and express word of God which is vtterly impossible and therefore I said right that Scripture cannot end Controuersies between dissenting Christians Catholicks for example and Protestants 8. And thus much in effect our Newer men grant who talk much of à few simple Truths sufficient to saluation called fundamentals Is is not enough saith Dr Taylor in his 2. Disswasiue P. 168. That we are Christians that we put all our hope in God who freely giâ—es vs all things by his Son Iesus Christ That we are redeemed by his Death that we are members of his body in Baptism that he giues vs his spirit that we do no Euil that we do what good we can c. Is not this Faith ruâ—e Righteousness and the Confession of this faith sufficient vnto saluation Obserue well If such à faith of à few Nouellists and the like simple Truths which no Arian denies vnder such general Terms Of Sectaries simple Truths and cannot be proued sufficient by plain Scripture be enough to Saluation what need had Sectaries to Calumniate our ancient Church and expose Christianity to the scorn of Iewes and Atheists for lesser Matters as they think than these fundamentals or few simple truths are Do we disown any of them No. We are Christians as well as they we put our hope in God we say all things are giuen vs by his son Iesus Christ we are redeemed by his Death c. Wherein then lies our Offence O we hold strange Nouelties Inuocation of Saints Purgatory Transubstantiation I dâ—â—y they are Nouelties but be it as you will They are out of the 〈◊〉 â—f your simple Truths and in your Principles no more but Opinions and can you haue such cruel hearts as to persecute vs banish vs and shed our blood for meer Opinions Where is your Châ—rity Again I argue Ad hominem If to hold à Purgatory be only â— Opinion your denying it is no more but an opinion also Therefore you cannot proue your Negatiue by plain and express Scripture for if you do so it well be no longer an Opinion but à 〈◊〉 led Truth and certain Doctrin Conuince this if you can and thâ— tell vs that Scripture decides all Controuersies between vs or his an obligation on vs to belieue more then These few simple Truths 〈◊〉 No Purgatory for example No Transubstantiation or say plainly that Scripture doth not put an end to these Controuersies which Truth is euident by manifest Experience 9. It is strange to see how endlesse Sectaries are and to no purpose at all in quoting Fathers for the Clarity and sufficiency of Scripture in all things necessary but afterward spoil all with à new Scripture sayes not how many are necessary Whimsey For they make iust so much as they please à few Simple Truths serue the turn to be Necessary and sufficient Here are three insuperable difficulties First They speak without book For God neuer told them in Scripture how many or how few of these Truths are necessary and Sufficient Therefore if I admit this Principle the Protestants sole Word must secure me though I know well that their word is neither à necessary nor à sufficient warrant for my saluation Hence 1. I vrge them to show by plain Scripture the number of these fundamentals precisely necessary 2. I must tell them If Scripture be clear in à few Fundamentals and so much only be necessary and sufficient this reasonable Quaestion may well follow What 's the rest of the Bible good for with them Most certainly the far greater part of it where it speak's not of these few Necessaries may be cast away as vseless and impertinent 3. These Nouellists Pronounce and Proue against themselues in all such Controuersies as are now in debate between them and Catholicks For if Scripture which tell 's vs of all Necessary and Sufficient things to saluation comprised in à few simple Truths whereof there is no strif now omit's whilst it mentions Sectaries proue against themselues these to speak plainly in behalf of our Protestant Opinions Nâ— Sacrifice No Transubstantiation c. With what Conscience can they tell vs and They haue often said it that this Book alone can decide these controuersies and recall vs from Popery to their new mode of Protestancy I would willingly haue Satisfaction to this one difficulty 10. Well To answer all they can pretend to out of the ancient Fathers for the Clarity and sufficiency of scripture in order to things necessary be pleased to obserue that the learned Tertullian against Marcion but chiefly in his book de Praescript cap. 16. at those words We are not to recurr to Scripture wherein there is no victory or à very vncertain one c. And S. Austin S. Chrisostome with others may perhaps seem to à less diligent Reader to be of contrary iudgements Tertullian now cited saies Scripture is insufficient to decide Controuersies concerning Religion amongst Christians S. Austin De Bapt. Contra Donat lib. 2. C. 6. plead's much for it's sufficiency I say here is no Contrariety both speak well both deliuer Catholick Doctrin Know therefore that Scripture is deuided into two Parts or Sections as you may read in Sixtus Senensis Two parts of Scripture distinguished Lib. 6. Bibl. Annot 152. Who cites S. Chrisostom for it The one vsually called Pars Directa or direct part treat's of the abstruse Mysteries of Christian Faith and this which is Matter of Contest between vs and Sectaries
of this particular Which holy Scripture without all ambiguity Doth demonstrate Thus S. Austin himselfe Answers most profoundly S. Austin And he giues an Answer to the present difficulty viz. That if the Obscurer Part of Scripture speak not plainly in the debate betwixt him and an Heretick the Heretick is to address himself to the Church and learn by Her what the sense of Scripture is Without light borrowed from the Church we haue only words about these high Mysteries but not fully sensed words chiefly when we argue with contentious Sectaries whose glosses depraue the plainest Passages in Holy writ as the Protestant doth Christ's clear Proposition This is my body If therefore we go on in such à contest with words not fully sensed we may well end our liues as S. Austin notes before we end one Controuersy 14. And thus you see as the One Part of Scripture is à body without à soul before it be receiued by the Church so the Other Part is also before it be both receiued and sensed by this Oracle of Truth Vpon this ground all those other Testimonies vsually alleged by Sectaries out of S. Austin against the Donatists Of Optatus Meleuitanus and S. Chrysostom for the clarity of Scripture are clearly solued for here is S. Austins Principle The sense of Scripture intended The sense of Scripture and the Church alwaies the same by the Holy Ghost and the sense of Christs true Church concerning Scripture can neuer clash but is one and the same If therefore I know the sense of the Church I haue with it the sense of Scripture also but with this difference That what Scripture often expresses less clearly Christ's Church deliuers more fully and Explicitly Whence it followes that if the Churches sense conclude against these Sectaries the Scriptures sense where it is obscure is in like manner concluding 15. You may obiect Scripture is in the noblest manner infallible For it hath its infallibility from God immediatly and may well be à distinct Rule or Principle from that sense which the Church giues of it Why therefore should not Sectaries haue recourse to that first and noblest Principle without relying on the Churches interpretation I haue answered because they know not guess they may and miss what Scripture saies in à hundred difficult Passages Therefore they are to recurr to the Church or must make vse of their own fancies to sense it The Argument purely fallacious is much to this sense Christ our Lord when he taught his Disciples was in the noblest manner infallible being Truth it self the Apostles were only infallible in their teaching and An Obiection answered further Explanation of those Verities they learn'd by à Singular Grace or participation of Infallibility Why then should not Sectaries rely only on the first sure Principle Christ's own words flowing from the Fountain of infallibility without depending on the Apostles Doctrin not so eminently infallible Now be pleased to hear S. Austin pondering those words Psal 57. Alienati sunt peccatores c. Where he makes this Parallel betwixt Christ and the Church and solues the Difficulty Ex veritatis ore ag 〈…〉 Christum ipsam veritatem Taught by the mouth of Truth I acknowledge Christ Truth it self ex veritatis ore agnosco Ecclesiam participem veritatis And by the same mouth of Truth I acknowledge the Church partaking also of Verity That is I own the Church to be not Truth it self not Scripture it self but à Copartner of Truth with Christ and Scripture I own it to be not Infallibility it self yet so eminently infallible by à singular grace or participated Infallibility That to dispute against it is most insolent madness Witness the same S. Austin Epist. 118. C. 5. ad Ian If he dare to do so Saith the Saint Serm 14. de verbis Apost C. 18. or rus◠violently against this impregnable wall of the Church let him know his doom ipse confringitur He is shattered in pieces Hence you see first that no mans priuate Iudgement can be contrary to the Churches sense giuen of Scripture without thwarting Scripture it self You see 2. That Scripture and the Church are not two Principles looking as it were different waies but one and the same in order to our direction and regulating Faith whereof Scripture and the Church in order to all is one Principle more Hereafter 16. In the mean while you may ask why our Sectaries keep such à Coile about the Clarity of Scripture concerning things necessary It is hard to say what they driue at For if all this pretended clarity diffused it self through euery passage of Holy writ worse it is for them and to their vtter confusion Obserue My reason The more clear Scripture is made by Nouellists the greater is their shame whilst they cannot proue by it's supposed clarity so much as one Protestant Doctrin nor probably oppugn one Article of our Catholick Faith Therefore nothing is gained this way Nay all is los t by Their casting off Church Authority when after that wicked Fact clear Scripture leaues them as Scripturelesse as Their own malice has made them Churchlesse It is true I see some Colour for their Pretence to Scripture and thus it is Like men lawlesse they haue shaken of all other receiued Principles of Christian Religion Speak of à Church She is fallible and has actually erred Cite Fathers some pitifully gloss them others roundly reiect them as men meerly Fallible Mention Tradition the very word is odious Now for stark shame whilst they bear the name of Christians it is hard to throw away all Christian Principles What 's done therefore Why Sectaries take recourse to the bare letter of Scripture I 'le tell you They lay hold of à body without à Soul I mean the bare letter of Scrrpture without the Sense and this is all that 's left them I say without the sense whereof you haue seen enough already for when the sense of God's word is controuerted between them and vs and their sense run's contrary to the receiued Church Doctrin no probable Principle can make it defensible and vpon this Ground I said right They are as Scripturelesse as Churchlesse All this is most true and I well vnderstand it But why these men labour so earnestly to make the Bible plain when not so much as one plain passage is found there for Protestancy or against our Catholick Doctrin is à Riddle aboue my reach I vnderstand it not Let then as much as you will of the book be clear whilst the Clarity fauour 's not one of our Sectaries forged Nouelties nor Contradict's one of our Catholick Tenets it neither help 's the Protestant nor hurt 's the Catholick In the next Discourse we shall treat of the Church and more oportunely solue there à few obiections of Sectaries CHAP. XV. The other mentioned Principles aboue are insufficient to decide controuersies Or to Regulate Faith 1. THe next Principle after Scripture we named the
what auail's it to haue à Church garded from vniust dealing in Matters of Trust if you make it lyable to Errour in the main Essential which is true Faith the very ground of Saluation And Principle cause also of iust proceeding amongst Christians Perhaps these men will say S. Cyprian in his Elogium respected only the first Romans commended by the Apostle not Those who liued in his An other Gloss refuted time Contra 1. That is not only said without Proof but improbably falsifies the Saints express words Eos esse Romanos as is now noted Contra. 2. If S. Cyprian only relate to the Romans whom the Apostle taught what need is there to keep à coile about the signification of Perfidia when those first Christians had for their Instructor an Infallible Apostle If therefore S. Paul could not err in faith Perfidia may well exclude all misbelief or errour in Matters of Faith from that Apostolical Church And here we make way to discouer the Bishops leuity in his second Gloss. 8. Suppose saith he it be granted that Perfidia Signifies errour in faith or Doctrin yet it belongs not to the Romans absolutely but with à respect to those first Romans whose Faith was commended by the Apostle Contra 1. Vpon what certain Principle doth this confident Assertion stand It belongs not absolutely to the Roman Church Proue thus much by à sure Principle and something is said to the purpose But without à solid Probation we look on it as à whimsey only or à thought of fancy Yet more What mean's his Lordship by those dark words With à respect to those first Romans Will he say that the first Romans were infallible in Faith and make those others to whom S. Cyprian wrote fallible This must be his meaning or nothing A second and third Gloss reiected For if both were equally infallible or both alike fallible he gains nothing by the word Respect to the first Romans Therefore he must hold that ancient Church of Rome to be more infallibly founded in Faith than the later Romans were to whom S. Cyprian wrote Admit this He makes the Saint not only to flatter à whole Church but to speak Nonsense also For in effect he saith thus much Your Ancestors the Romans were so secured from errour in Faith that they could not decline from Christ's Doctrin but you now are in à very tottering Condition for you may swerue from the Faith of your Ancestors you may perhaps belieue as they did and perhaps not Howeuer I will sooth you vp and praise you as à Church impossible to erre with an Ad quos Perfidia habere non possit accessum You are men so faithfull that no Misbelief can touch you The last Gloss of the Bishop is thus S. Cyprians Elogium seem's rather à Rhetorical insinuation than à Dogmatical Assertion Mark the proofles word Seem's t' is only à thought of my Lords fancy which I am sure seem's far from à dogmatical Assertion What That à Saint and worthy Bishop should Rhetorick it in so weighty à Matter But enough of this nothing 9. To make something doe at last Mr Stilling Page 317. laies his Gloss by my Lord's and has à good opinion of it To Mr Stilling misinterpretation giue every man his due it is better than any of the Bishops He sayes in à word after à relation of the present state of Rome at that time when those Schismaticks Felicissimus and Fortunatus came thither that Perfidia may well denote the Falsness and treacherous dealing of those two Persons who seemed good Catholicks but were not so and sought to ioyn in Communion with Cornelius and the Catholick Party but meant it not Now such Iuglers should haue no Access to the Principal Church or to those Romans whose Faith the Apostle so highly extolled so that Perfidia Respects not the Romans nor excludes Errour from that Church but laies falshood as was well deserued on those Schismaticks This I take to be Mr Stilling meaning Contra. 1. The Gloss euery one sees violently strained makes the allusion between Fides and Persidia Both Strained and inconsistent with S. Cyprians sense insignificant 2. It is inconsistent with the Authors whole sense who speak's not of perfidious men but of Falshood and Vntruth which could not haue Access to that principal Church For it is euident that perfidious persons as Mr Stilling tell 's the Story actually had Access And therefore could certainly haue it when Fortunatus and Felicissimus came to Rome 3. Make the most you can of this Gloss it reaches no further but to à meer far-fetcht Guess and what is gained by That Can Mr Stilling establish his Opinion of the Churches fallibility on no surer grounds Can he hope to driue me by guesses and Glosses not only from the Obuious sense of these words but also from the clear Expressions of innumerable other Fathers who stand openly for an infallible Church It is à disperate Improbability Yet so it is These selfconceited Glosses and nothing els Vphold Protestancy in euery controuerted Matter The infinite number of them and the Stories Mr Stilling tell 's to no purpose at all so enlarge his Rational account That if you fling these away you may easily put the remainder of that Book into à smal Decimo sexto 10. Be pleased to obserue à little We say and Christ said it before vs Hell gates should not preuail against the Church founded Glosses opposed to manifest Proofs by Diuine Prouidence But fancied Glosses disputes it at last into à Possibility of being peruerted by Hell and Heresy also We say it is the Pillar and ground of Truth but Glosses laid vpon these words must be thought so strong as to shake it all in pieces We say Christ will be with his Spouse to the end of the world Hold there say Sectaries our Glosses tell you No For this promise was only Conditionally True in all that succeeded the Apostles A fitting Assistance we allow it such as pleases our fancies But no more We say with S. Cyprian S. Hierome S. Irenaeus and other Fathers that the Church neuer depart's from what She once held that in Her is the Rule and square of Faith that in Her is the Spirit of God That She is the welspring of truth The dwelling place of Faith c. But à companie of Glosses spoil all this Doctrin And so rack the sense of these clear Expressions that one may boldly swear the Gloss and Text are sworn enemies CHAP. XVII VVhy the Glosses of Sectaries are impertinent and weightles Mr Stillingfleet misinterprets other Fathers Of his vnskilful Speculation concerning Idolatry Charged on Catholicks 1. MVch is said in the Other Treatise Disc 4. C. 4. n. 8. of our Protestants Glosses Here you haue à further discouery of their weakness And t' is the only thing aym'd at in this And the precedent Chapters In à word thus I conclude That man who in Matters of Controuersies defend's à Doctrin
any firm Belief or to ground so much Moral certainty of à Christian Truth as excludes à possibility of doubting 10. You will Ask what then is there which may raise these two Aduersaries from that low degree of meer Opining to à higher degree of certainty I shall fully Answer the Question in the next Discourse Here I say in à word No Principle can do this But one only which the Sectary want's And the Catholick has to rely on which is the Tradition the Voice and open declared Iudgement of Christs Catholick Church here on earth This faithful Oracle raises vs from the supposed State of our guessing Probably to the highest degree of not only Moral but also of Infallible certainty Though now we press not that against our Aduersaries The Sectary Therefore who disdain's to learn of this Oracle what Christian Truths are shall neuer come to his Moral certainty though the Supposition already made of Authorities equal stood in vigour Iudge then I beseech you How desperate his Cause is now How remote from all such certainty De facto whether he impugn's our Doctrin or plead's for his own opinions when he hath nothing to rely on but only à few dark and dubious Passages of some ancient Fathers 11. I say dubious Passages for in Truth if so much they are no more And Therefore though we haue hitherto supposed Authorities euenly laid on both sides To Show that nothing What the Sectary can Plead help 's the Sectary out of his labyrinth yet now I must tell the Story as t' is All he has in this world to plead comes only to à few misinterpreted Authorities And with such poor Gleanings Churchless man as He is he thinks to Out-braue à whole Church To decry Tradition to vnsense the Fathers to rob vs of our right And finally to throw vs out of the Possession of those ancient Christian Truths which both we and our Ancestors haue professed age after age without Alteration What think ye Haue à few rack't and tortured Sentences Add to them as many Cauils as many Criticisms as you please force enough to do such wonders Can these gleanings misinterpreted as you haue seen better inform vs of the ancient Primitiue Truths than the General voice or vniuersal consent of à whole Church now in being It is improbable Grant therefore which I do On what Principle the Catholick Stand's not That we know not too well the sense of one Theoderet or of à Tertullian c. The Catholick cleares his Doctrin And drawes it from surer Principles viz. From the voice and open declared Iudgement of his Church And most deseruedly look's on the Sectaries attempt as highly improbable who will needs know what Doctrin we are to hold now or was anciently held amongst Christians by à Fathers Testimony when the very sense is supposed doubtful And lies in obscurity That is He will know more than can be known He will force light out of darkness And deriâ—â— the moral certainty of his Doctrin from meer doubtful Principles which is impossible And thus these men proceed in all other Controuersies though Conscious that à whole ample Church decries their Doctrin as false And the open abuse of Fathers also O saith the Sectary I little regard what the Church decries Ansâ— And much less do I regard what you cry against it When the whole strength of your Clamours vltimatly resolued comes to no more but to fancied Glosses laid vpon ambiguous Authorities What in God's name would you be at What can you pretend The Church opposed to Sectaries Clamours or intend Shall clamours Think ye and your few clouded Testimonies force me to leaue my ancient Faith when I euidently know That the Church I liue in call's louder on me and more rationally command's me to Belieue as I doe This audible known voice of Christ's Church dull's your clamours infinitly Outweigh's your Glosses your guesses And the doubtful Sentiment of any priuate Father 12. The Sectary may reply I haue now supposed without Proof the Fathers abused by him whereas if the Supposition hold's it s only doubtful whether it be so or no. Answ Thus much is only supposed doubtful That neither of vs can learn by words precisely obscure what Doctrin to embrace or what to reiect Before à surer Oracle speak's and decide the Controuersy Catholicks say this Oracle is the Church The Protestant who has no Church to recurr to stand's trifling with his obscure Passages hoping at last to make something of nothing to hammer out of dark sentences the Clear Moral certainty of his new Doctrin Though contrary to the whole Church And thus He abuseth both Fathers and reason also Because as I said iust now A doubtful Principle yeilds not so much certainty If He say 3. His quoted Authorities are sufficiently clear to ground the Moral certainty of his Doctrin against the Church it is à desperate improbable Speech For Moral certainty which should pass as an vncontradicted truth most euidently loseth that force when à whole Church manifestly contradict's it But hereof enough is Said in the other Treatise Disc 1. C. 6. n. 3. 13. You will ask perhaps What is to be done if we meet with à Father so clear and express against Church-Doctrin that he cannot possibly be brought to à Catholick sense I Answer A doubt proposed and solued Suppose thus much which I think was neuer yet heard of in any Contest betwixt the Protestant and Catholick I 'le absolutly deny the Authority and adhere to Church-Doctrin For as the whole body is greater than à part so the iudgement of à whole Church is the stronger Principle here and ought in reason to regulate and bear sway before the sentiment of any priuate man who by weaknes or inaduertancy may slip aside into Errour I say through weaknes or incogitancy for if he obstinately oppose the Church He is no Father in that But an Heretick 14. Whoeuer reflects well on what is noted already will see I hope How neer we are to an End of disputes with Protestants if the Contest arise from the Authority of Fathers Here is the Ground of what I am to Say All the Authorities which can What Authorities can be quoted be quoted in Points now Controuerted are either plain or esteemed plain for Catholick Doctrin both by the learned of our Church and Sectaries also As is amply proued aboue Or Contrariwise are at most supposed doubtful I Assert it boldly the Sectary has not one plain Testimony for him in this debated Matter of Transubstantiation And if one or two were granted plain that 's nothing to contrast with à whole Church and innumerable other Fathers 15. Hence I Discourse In case Authorities be Clear for Catholick Doctrin the Sectary opposes vs improbably if he seek to establish his Nouelties vpon à Principle which plainly teaches what we teach And quite ruin's his contrary Opinions If the Authority be doubtful I haue said enough already
your Glosses To point at his Church and Councils which taught Protestancy to an Orthodox Church The world was neuer without one Say therefore in Gods name where or when was such an Orthodox Christian Society in Being that positiuely taught no Transubstantiation No sacrifice of the Mass No inuocation of Saints c Where or when were your Councils which positiuely defined these Doctrins c You may Answer and truely You haue indeed neither Church nor Councils Nor Tradition Express for these your Negatiues Very right Therefore I wrong you not in saying your whole Cause subsist's vpon Coniectures cauils And Glosses Because now you cast your selues into an Impossibility of pleading by any better Principles than meer guesses are Thus much supposed Say I beseech you What auail's it if when an Authority is plain for Popery that you can by à nimble gloss darken it Or if obscure You haue A Fiat lux at hand and can charm it into so much Clarity as may suffice to dazle the eyes of à vulgar Reader What Satisfaction haue I here or what gain you by this Proceeding when you know we haue more witnesses ready to attest yea to dye for our Catholick Verities than you haue hairs on your head or Glosses in your book What gain you to your cause could you missinterpret all the Fathers that euer wrote when you without the warrant of any Orthodox Society haue yet à whole learned Church Her Councils and Tradition against you And all the store of Ammunition left you to attaque this great Oracle of Truth is very small no more God knowes but à without them no satisfaction is giuen flash of lightning borrowed from the Ignis fatuus of your far-fetcht Glosses Gloss on Cauil on coniecture on to the worlds end As long as no known or Owned Principle distinct from Glosses and coniectures Support's them You only beat the aire or to vse à pretty late phrase amongst you lapwing-like Pew most when furthest from the nest I mean you are most fierce to end Controuersies when you are furthest off from Principles which only can end them 8. Thus then you should proceed had not God and Truth silenced you I E. S. B. D. declare to you honest Papists That in the Sixth or seauenth age after Christ His true Orthodox Church positiuely taught no Transubstantiation Such à Council either in former or later Ages expresly defined so Then and before also Church Tradition was vniuersally for my Doctrin And thus much I can make good to the learnedest Romanist among you Wonder not Therefore when you quote your Iustins your Cyprians your Chrisostoms seemingly contrary to my Church Doctrin That I interpret all I am forced to doe so or against conscience must desert my old Mother Church Her Councils How Sectaries ought to plead and Tradition likewise From which You haue too licentiously swerued to side with your Iustins and I know not who els Could the Sectary plead after this manner His Glosses would haue force But he neuer meddles with the First main Business That is neuer ground 's his Doctrin vpon any thing like à satisfactory Principle But as if He minded to tire Ones patience run's on headlong with Glosses When he has no Principled Doctrin to Gloss for Iust as if One should tell his neighbour Sir you lye And this I auerr to your face Though I want where withall to proue my Saying true In all these Controuersies Sectaries are so pertly vnciuil as to giue the Lie to à whole Church And what supports the Boldnes Haue they any other Church more Orthodox Councils more learned Tradition more vniuersal to proue we lye than our Church our Tradition And Councils are which say we speak truth Nothing at all like them We here challenge them to speak to the cause and controuersies are ended What then remain's to plead with Plain Scripture Not à word Fathers plain Not one O yes Tertullian is drawn in to help at à dead lift so is Theoderet And one or two more Very true But he is à glossed Tertullian à glossed Theoderet c. Separate then these Glosses from the Fathers genuin Doctrin giue them the Sectary to manage you see him in open field compleatly armed ready to encounter Church Councils Tradition And all the other Principles of the Catholick world Are not Glosses think Glosses strangely powerful with Sectaries ye strong and prodigiously powerful which haue not only force to plead against à whole Church But more ouer to implead her of palpable errour This Church is supposed to haue changed Her ancient Doctrin And Sectaries will reform it not by recurring to any other more Orthodox Society of Christians But by meer guesses and Glosses That is The Fallible Glosses and gueses of men confessedly fallible must reform à Church which hold's Her selfe infallible And proues it also 9. Thus it is Christian Reader I speak plainly And can defend my Assertion Besides meer begging the Question in all Disputes besides Cauils And weak coniectures The Sectary hath no more left him to oppose our Catholick Tenets but meer vnprincipled Glosses I neither word it nor wrong Protestants in saying thus much Peruse if you please their writings chiefly Mr Stillingfleets Account you will find when the Churches Infallibility or Transubstantiation c. Happen to be handled That Glosses laid on the Authorities vsually quoted for Catholick Doctrin euer take vp the most room And which is worse yea pitiful in à Rational Defender of Protestancy You shall neuer find through this whole Book waue Cauils coniectures and Glosses one sound Principle laid plainly forth nor so much as hinted at in behalf of any Protestant Article What think ye Shall Yet Most weak and feeble Christians who would fain haue à Church to liue in see the old House of God pulled down by vnhandy Glossers before They haue à better built vp And well setled on good Foundations Pulled down What say I Alas our Glossers haue not strengh to vntile it much less force to demolish that long slanding Fortress Yet Glosses chiefly And t' is à sad thought for the Sectary support his vndefensible Schism made in the desperate quarrel against that Church which gaue his Ancestors Baptism These only there is no more must plead in behalf of his inhuman and barbarous Reformation These finally must answer before an Impartial Iudge at that great day of Doom for all his merciless cruelty practised vpon the deceased and some yet liuing Catholicks Sad thoughts I say they are to goe to bed with to rise with to banquet with which like Ghosts will haunt him to his dying day And lay Torment at his restles hart in his greatest iollities And more in the houre of death 10. After all you see the Conclusion and an end put to Controuersies The Conclusion against Sectaries If no Orthodox Church vphold's this Protestancy or any article of it which is euident No Councils nor Tradition can support
granted so much The Argument is clearly proposed Mr Stillingfleet return's no probable Answer A full discouery of his fallacies 1. SOme may think the particular Matter now hinted at too largely handled being scarce worth halfe the labour here spent vpon it And They iudge right Should I once so much as offer to proue as Mr Stillingfleet fondly Imagin's the Roman Catholick Church à safe way to saluation because Protestants Say so Far bee it from mee to entertain such à Thought For whether They side with vs or not Wee haue absolute Absolute Certainty of Faith without dependence of Sectaries Certainty of our Faith independently of Their suffrages or Voting vs in à Secure way to Heauen Wherefore Should Sectaries recoile And say wee are all damned as some haue done wee regard it not That would no more Lessen the Certainty wee now haue of sound Faith than Their Casual Granting vs Saluation in the way wee are in Heightens it 2. 'T is true were it doubtful or no more but Probable whether Catholicks Could bee saued in their Religion The agreeing of Sectaries with vs might serue for something But now when the Certainty of our Doctrin Stand's as wee here Suppose most secure vpon an Infallible Principle which is Church Authority The Proof taken from the Agreement of both Parties is an Impertinency And in real Truth De subiecto non supponente That is Not to bee supposed if which is euer to bee noted wee should goe about to strengthen our Catholick Doctrin because Heretiques Agree with vs. 3. Howeuer though the Agreement Considered in it selfe beâ— no more but à fallible Protestant Opinion yet laid by the other indubitable Doctrin of the Catholick Church 'T is à Truth as asserted by them And ties their tongues so fast that They shall Neuer hereafter speak à probable word against our Catholick Faith Again the Concession presses Sectaries Ad hominem who admit Scripture vpon the General Agreement of all Called Christians If therefore They argue well Both you Catholicks and wee Protestants hold these books Diuine Ergo They are so Wee Argue as strongly Both Parties also grant saluation to Catholicks An Argument against them vpon their Concession ergo They are so secure that it is impossible to plead against the Truth Though as I said now The Sectaries Concession heightens not one whit our Certainty whereof you may see more n. 20. In the Interim please to know The only reason why I discuss this Controuersy more at Large is first to discouer Mr Stillingfleets gross fallacies Next to Show that Protestants are forced at last to Put an End to Controuersies Seeing the most Learned that euer wrote ingenuously acknowledge the Roman Catholick Faith to bee à safe secure and abundantly sufficient Means to attain Saluation which is to say A true belieuing Catholick Cannot bee Damned vpon the Account of Wanting Faith if other Christian Duties bee Complyed with 4. Now if you Ask what forced Sectaries to grant thus much to Catholicks I answer it was no kindness God knowes But stark shame to touch here on no other Motiue which extorted the Concession from them For would not both Heauen and earth haue Clamour'd had They damned all their own Ancestors all the learned and ignorant of the Roman Catholick Church far and neer extended for want of Diuine Faith Yet this followes Because without Faith it is impossible to please God And thus they stand perplexed Allow sauing faith to the Roman Catholick Their Plea is ended Deny it They send millions and millions of Souls to Hell Thus much premised I Argue 5. That Faith which the Roman Catholick Church and Protestants The Ground of our Doctrin also iointly own as sufficient to bring à man to Heauen is intirely perfect And cannot be rationally opposed by either Party But the Faith of à true belieuing Catholick is such à Faith Therefore it is entirely perfect And cannot be more rationally Opposed Now further If it stand's thus firm vpon Church Authority That 's the certain Principle And the Concâ—ssion of Aduersaries As an ouer-measure though weightles it cannot be rationally excepted against by either both Parties owning it sufficient to Saluation Therefore All controuersies concerning Faith are clearly ended in behalf of Catholicks Vnless meer Cauils may pass for rational Arguments 6. It is truly Pitiful to see how vainly Mr Stillingfleet Part. 3. C. 4. Page 611. striues to Euert the force of this short Discourse Sometimes The difficulty is not so much as touched by him Sometimes Hee mistakes the Question And euer beggs it Now He run's away with half à Principle which lead's in à lame Conclusion Now false Suppositions pass for Proofs Now Protestant Opinions enter in as sound Doctrin Here he wrong's our Catholick Authors There He contradict's himselfe In à word you haue nothing through His whole fourth Chapter But I know not what strange Confusion Thus He Begins 7. Protestants confess there is à Pissibility for some to escape Damnation The Aduersaries discourse in the Communion of the Roman Church But it is as men may escape with their liues in Shipwrack But they Protestants vndertake to make it euident There can be no danger if they obserue the Principles of Protestant Religion Mark first How strait hearted The man is in granting as little as may be viz. A meer Possibility And of some only to be saued in the Roman Faith hoping Thereby to remoue his own Ancestors and Millions of Pious Christians as far from Heauen as à Possibility conceiued by Him is from an Actual Being I know other Protestants speak more roundly And say absolutely Saluation may be had in the Roman Catholick Church because it is à true Church in Fundamentals And that the differences betweem them And vs are about lesser Matters or meer Opinions c. See Mr. Thorndicke in his Book of Forbearance page 19. Therefore Mr. Stillingfleets lean bare and remote Possibility of Saluation is only his own particular Opinion Proved weak and vnconcluding Howeuer though he see 's not the Consequence Wee haue enough to conclude against him I 'le s'hew you how 8. There is Saith he A posibility of being Saved in the Romam Catholick Faith That is Catholick Religion has in it à Possibility of bringing men to Heauen if there be nothing wanting on Their parts Very Good This Possibility intrinsecal To the Religion is now as actually in Being as the Religion it Selfe But the Religion is actually in being Therefore this Possibility inseparable from it is also Actual And lies not in the Series of things yet producible as Creatures doe which God if he please may Create to morrow And thus you see Possibility stand's here not opposite to non-Existency but to an Actual impossibility Therefore when I say Catholick Religion now existing can possibly saue All I say with the same breath it cannot possibly damn Any Unless you 'l Grant it can saue All and damn some which is
impossibile 9. Hence Mr. Stillingfleets pretty Put off of Sauing Some and The Religion which saues Some can saue all not All is most inconsequent Doctrin For clear the Religion from all actual essential Errour it can as well Saue all as some And if it be tainted with any essential Errour The whole Religion is naught And can save none But of this more in the next Discourse Chap. 5. 6. where I shall proue that Catholick Religion is eithér intierly Good totally Orthodox or worth nothing And consequently if vpon à supposed impossibility There were but one essential errour in it which I through invincible ignorance know not yet Assent to That invincible ignorance would T is true excuse me from Sin But it cannot free the Religion from being false and forged in it self 10. What followes in the Objection of our narrow escaping damnation in Catholick Religion as men doe with infinet danger in Shipwrack is no more but Mr. Stillingfleets own improbable Assertion not worth refuting And His reason is far worse Protestants Our Adversaries improbable Assertion forsooth vndertake to make it euident There can be no danger if they obserue the Principles of Protestants To make it evident What à vast ouerlashing is this Sir make your Assertion only Morally certain Nay but so much as meanly probable And May I haue the honour to Answer yo will soon disclaim Euidence In the mean while I look vpon it as à meer Vanity worth nothing And so is all the rest in your next page 612. Where you bid vs iudge whether it be wisdom in such à point as saluation is to forsake à Church in which the ground of Saluation is firm to follow à Church in which it is but possible one may be saued but very probably he may doe worse All this is worse than your own improbable Hic glorious bragging Opinion You here Suppose without Proof that the ground of Saluation is firm in your Protestancy And therefore shamfully begg the question in euery word you speak Yet thus you go on 11. His Lordship still asserts the Protestants way to be only the Safe way to Saluation and that in the Church of Rome there is only à limited possibility of it Answ Enough is said already of the Possibility Here you begg the question again you run away with half à Principle And only tell vs what his Lordship Asserts What security haue I from his Assertion There is yet more of this stuff Protestants confesse there is Saluation possible to be attained in the Romam Church but they say with all that the errours of that Church are so many and some so great as weaken the foundation that it is very hard to goe that way to Heauen especially His begging the question to them that haue had the truth manifested Here is nothing but words We only hear what Protestants prooflesly Thinke and Say What am I wiser for that These false Suppositions This His false suppositions manifest begging the Question fall of Themselues without further refutation 12. Were it worth the while I might Ask whether these supposed errours so far weaken the foundation of Catholick Religion that Saluation cannot be had in it His Lordship Answers I grant saluation to Romanists But not as they are Romanists but as They are â—hristians And belieue their Creed c. Pitiful Speak plainly Will The Belief of Roman Catholick Religion damn them or no If it Damn's them The Belief of their Creed's cannot saue them Vnless you both damn and saue them at once Contrarywise if the Belief of the Creeds saues them Roman Religion cannot Damn them for now vpon the Supposition it destroies not that sauing Faith of the Creeds But stands well with it here And therefore cannot damn any hereafter What followes is yet worse if worse can be You Sr Say Page 613. His Lordship dares not deny à possibility of Saluation for the Roman Cathelick but he is far from Asserting it of those who either know the corruptions of that Church and yet continue in them or of such who wilfully neglect the means whereby they may be conuinced 13. Here is first à false Supposition for à Proof Of known Corruptions And à pure begging the question besides Here is 2. The half Principle of his Lordships bare saying laid hold on without more which inferr's no Conclusion But only thus much That my Lord spake and perhaps not what he thought Or if Hee did so wee Catholicks are not of so easy Faith as to belieue him Here is 3. A pretty piece of Non-sense in those words Nothing but Confusion in the Replies of Sectaries But he is far from Asserting it of those who know the Corruptions of that Church c. As if forsooth one truely Catholick could know and own any Corruptions in his Church And yet remain Catholick These two things are inconsistent To remain Catholick And to iudge this Church corrupted in any point of Doctrin Such men My Lord may list among his Protestant Belieuers In à word His Proposition is de Subiecto non supponente And so is also what crowd's in next Of Those who neglect the means afforded by Protestants sufficiently Proposed c. Here is again the false Supposition not proued wee neuer yet heard of any such means nor shall here after I am sure your Rational Account afford's none 14. You add presently à desperate word And t' is That his Lordship Speakes of such Catholicks whose meer ignorance excuseth when the Fundamentals are held c. Ergo you and your Lord damn all Sectaries send to Hall innumerable Learned men the learned of our Church That intierly belieued the Catholick Faith for à Thousand years and vpward You Damn our Bâ—des our Bernards our Dominicks our Brunoes not to be listed amongst the Ignorant You Damn more ouer all the learned Catholicks who haue liued since your Heresy began in Italy Germany Spain France and in other parts of the world Bethink your self well whether this can pass for either Catholick or Charitable Doctrin And neuer more raile at vs vpon the account That we Condemâ— you For for one we comdemn you damn Thousands Comparâ— the ignorant amongst you late beginners with the ignorant oâ— our Church Past and present The learned amongst you with thâ— learned of our Church confessedly Popish for à Thousand year and vpward There is no parallel in the number If then yoâ— damn many why may not we condemn the late risen fewer Multitudes among'st you wilfully diuorced from the Mother Church Again we damn not your Persons No. One Supreme Iudge Catholicks damn none but Condemn Heresy only is to Pronounce the final Sentence vpon vs all But we condemn your Heresy And say as You ought to speak of the Arians Pelagians Macedonian's c. and all such known Renegados That you haue no better Faith than these Look you to the Consequence 15. Your next Demand is When we grant Ã
is an Assembly of men professing the pure Word of God But how far In à few simple Truths called fundamentals in others it may err and profess as much falshood as you please against the Verities of Scripture So that the true Church not defined at all is made by these à fair and foul Spouse at once fair in à few vnalterable necessary Truths but foul vgly and deformed because erroneous in à hundred other matters Mark the Paradox and call it à flat Heresy which separat's him who assert's it from the Catholick body Thus it is Christs Church is true and falfe pure and vnpure right and wrong louely and hateful together The Inhabitants of this Citty of God of this Temple and safe dwelling place are in it by belieuing à few simple Truths And at the same time out of it by belieuing more Falsities This is Mr Stillingfleets strange Doctrin who think 's there is no Church now in the world of one Denomination free from Errour To what desperate improbabilities doth Heresy driue men 6. The 4. Principle The receiued Doctrin of Christs Church chiefly in all points of Controuersy is euer as clear and often more clear by what She teaches than it is in any express words of Scripture The Assertion is vndubitable For Church Doctrin clear in the Churches Definitions who see 's not but that the whole Catholick Doctrin of the sacred Trinity of one God and three distinct Persons of the Father improduced the eternal Son begotten and of the Holy Ghost proceeding from both is more plainly deliuered in Church Doctrin than in any sentence or sentences of Holy Writ The like I say of the high Godhead in Christ which the Arians deny Of Original sin reiected by the Pelagians and other Articles of our Christian faith And thus much is euident against Secctaries for do not they make their own Doctrin of their Caen◠Not alwaies so inscripture as Sectaries grant or Sacrament when they call it à Sign à Figure c. more plain than any words are for it in Holy writ And will they not also grant T' is an Argument ad hominem that our Catholick Tenet of this sacred Mystery laid forth in the Council of Trent Sess. 13. Can. 1. is more express and plain Popery than lies couched in Christs own words This is my body Though the Popery is there clear enough to euery Reader Yes most assuredly For if our Doctrin stand as plain in Christs words as in the Churches Definition drawn from thence Sectaries cannot as they do admit of the one and scornfully reiect the other Therefore they must suppose Scripture more dark and obscure than either their own or our Churches Doctrin is And hence it followes that the very Arians were not so much Hereticks vpon the account that they opposed any most clear and express sentence in Holy writ for really it 's hard to find one manifestly express against them as for contradicting plain Church Doctrin or the true sense of Scripture deliuered by this Oracle of truth Their Heresy then proceeded first from some words in Scripture seemingly clear in their behalf as My Father is greater than 1. 2. From no Text so manifest but that still place was left them to Why the Arians were accounted Heretiques Glosse as they haue done and in their Iudgements with some appearrance of truth yet Hereticks they were and so deseruedly accounted of for contradicting the Church's clear Doctrin Be it how you will thus much I am sure of They neuer mangled or misused any passage in holy Writ when contrary to their Heresy more shamfully than our Protestants now mangle and abuse our Sauiours Proposition This is my body 7. By all you see this Principle well grounded Whateuer Clarity Scripture hath chiefly in Matters of controuersy and clarity helps much in the Rule of Faith Gods true Church which cannot but speak the Scriptures sense in euery particular deliuers it most clearly Wherefore S. Austin told Manicheus Tom 6. contra Epist Fundam C. 14. That if hee was to belieue the obscure Mysteries of Christianity Hee would assent to them vpon the weighty Authority of People and Nations celebrated and spread abroad By the consent of all learned and vnlearned which consent implies the vniuersal Agreement of the Catholick Church And to establish this Doctrin more firmly He assures vs. Tract 18. in Ioan That all Heresy which intangles souls and cast's them into Hell S. Austins Iudgement concerning Scripture proceed's from this one misery that Good Scripture is not rightly vnderstood by them Hence also Hee told vs aboue Lib. 1. contra Crescon C. 32. That if any doubt arise concerning the obscurity of Scripture we are to haue recourse to Christs holy Church and receiue from Her satisfaction To which purpose S. Cyprian speaks most piously Lib. de Vnit Ecclesiae illius lacté nutrimur Spiritu eius animamur adulterari non potest sponsa Christi We are nourished by the milk we are animated by the Spirit of this faithful Spouse of Christ which cannot play the Harlot or become an Adulteress 8. The last Principle The Rule of Faith is plain or its own Self-euidence apt of its own nature to conuince the most obstinate Aduersary whether Iew Gentil or Heretick And for this reason must be immediatly credible by it Self and for it self otherwise it must suppose an other distinct Rule yet more plain more euident more conuincing and more immediatly credible And that Rule à third à fourth And so in infinitum which is impossible Again the Obiectiue Rule we Shall now speak of Answer 's to the thing regulated by it which is true certain and Diuine Faith This Rule then must not only be true and certain in it self but also certainly applyed to Belieuers For à certain What the Rule of Faith implies Rule in it self dubiously applyed to an vnderstanding auail's only to leaue all in Suspence and lead's none to any further Acquiescency but to à wauering and vncertain Opinion And this is neither suitable to firm Belief nor to the Rule it self which ought to establish vs in Gods reuealed truths without doubt and hesitancy Grant this Notion of à Rule to be exact and none shall iustly except against it All we haue said aboue of the Scriptures Insufficiency to regulate Faith or to decide controuersies is no less than à Demonstration against Sectaries Whereof see more in the other Treatise Disc 2. per totum Scripture Certainly is not plain in all things necessary to be belieued for were the true sense of it which indeed is only Scripture as plain and indisputably clear for the Arians or Protestants in euery particular controuersy as their Doctrin is plainly deliuered by them Or contrariwise were the sense of it as plain and indisputably clear for the Catholick Doctrin in Matters of debate as the very Doctrin is taught by the Church All Contention would soon cease because either They vpon the Supposition
say Antiquity erred no less than we do now And therefore Caluin professeth he followes none of the Fathers but S. Austin Though when He pleases he is too bold with the Saint and scornfully reiect's his Authority also See Bellar de notis ecclesiae lib 4. What Sectaries Nouelties are Cap. 9. I might also show that our Sectaries Nouelties for the greatest part are nothing els but à List of old long since dispersed and condemned Heresies now brought to light again and knit together in one bundle to poison the world withall They haue renewed the Heresy oâ— the Donatists who taught that the Church of God had perished throughout the world except in some few obscure Corners They renew the Heresy of the Arians teaching it vnlawful to offer Sacrifice for the dead They renew the Heresy of the Eunomians saying that by Faith only man may obtain life Euerlasting You haue with These men the Heresy of the Iconomachians in breaking down the Images of Christ our Lord and His Saints reuiued again Of the Berengarians denying the true Body and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ really present in the Eucharist as likewise of the Vigilantians that slighted the Inuocation of Saints denying Honour due to the Relicks of holy Martyrs But I need not to insist vpon these and many more reuiued Heresies they are things Vulgarly known to all largely laid forth in the writings of our Catholick Authors Se Bellar now Cited CHAP. VII Manifest and most vndeniable Miracles peculiar to the Romani Catholick Church only prone Her Orthodox withall show that She still retain's the Primitiue Doctrin 1. BY this word Miracle or Miracles I vnderstand à supernatural work done by Almighty God aboue the power and force of Nature For there is no doubt but that God who What is meant by Miracles created Nature has within his boundles Omnipotency Supereminent effects of Grace which far surpass the little Might of all Creatures made by him These are finite The Author of them infinite And can do more 2. 2. This Principle is certain God hath wrought innumerable Miracles not only to Testify He can do more then Nature Why Miracles are wrought but with this express Designe also that by the Manifestation of such wonders All may come to the knowledge of those Oracles whereby He speaks and Reueals most sublime Mysteries far aboue the reach of our weak Reason Now whether these Oracles be Prophets Church or Apostles seems one and the same thing If they be equally Manifested by miraculous Effects and speak in his name who Assumes them to teach the world 3. I say manifâ—sted Oracles by Signes And say it for this End That all may reflect vpon the depth of Diuine wisdom which may on the one side Seem too rigorous in obliging vs to belieue most Difficult Mysteries neither seen by Eye nor heard by eare They facilitate Faith Were it not That on the other side the burden is lessened and our Faith much facilitated by the Euidence of most prudent and conuincing Motiues For t' is à great Truth Non sine testimoniâ— reliquit Semetipsum benefaciens de Caelo His Goodnes so fauorably condescend's to our weaknes that though he remoues not Vneuidence and Obscurity from the Mysteries belieued Yet he makes them all so euidently Credible to prudent Reason Benefaciens de Caelo by the Lustre of Signes and Wonders That the man who belieues not after à Sight had of such glorious Marks stand's guilty before Gods Tribunal of damnable Sin 4. The third Principle Miracles eminently great in number and quality for example the raising of the dead to life Chiefly when wrought by Persons of Singular virtue to Confirm our Christian Faith are from God and euident Signes leading to the knowledge of true Religion None can doubt of the Assertion seing Christ our Mord. Matt. 11. When Questioned whether He was the true Messias proued the Affirmatiue by his Signal Miracles The blind see the lame walk Lepers are Cleansed And lead to the knowledge of true Religion the deaf hear the dead rise again c. Which is to say in other Terms These wonders speak in my behalfe and plainly Testify that I am the Messias For only to say I am à Prophet sent from God without prouing the Truth to Reason by Signes and wonders Conuinces nothing Induces none to Belieue Therefore Iohn 10. Christ remitted the vnbelieuing Iewes not to the Euidence of his Doctrin for really no Doctrin of Mysteries aboue Reason though most true is or can be its own Self-euidence But to his manifest Miracles The Works which I do in the Our Sauiour pleaded by His Miracles name of my Father These giue Testimony of me Again If you wâ—st not belieue me belieue my works Blessed S. Paul might haue Long preached the Sublime Doctrin of Christ and without Fruit vnless Miracles had confirmed it which he call's the Signes of his They were Signes of Pauls apostleship Apostleship 2. Cor. 12. And How long think ye would Nabuchodonozer haue remained in his Idolatry vnless He had beheld that prodigious Wonder wrought by God vpon the three Israelites in the fiery Fournace Daniel 3. But when he saw them walk in the flames nothing hurt He cryed out Blessed be the God of Sydrack Misack and Abdenago who hath sent his Angel c. Miracles therefore are powerful Inducements to Beliefe which Truth might be yet more largely demonstrated by the Wonders of Moses of Elias of the Prophets and Apostles But these I waue and briefly take notice of our Sauiours sacred words Iohn 15. If I had not come and spoken to them they should not haue finned but now they haue no excuse of their sin c. And to show that Speaking only was no sufficient Conuiction The Text add's If I had not done among them works which no other man hath don they should not haue sinned but now they haue seen and hate me and my Father c. 5. Three things follow from hence First That eminent Miracles of their own Nature are Marks of Christ's Doctrin and true Religion 2. That Our Sauiour most iustly condemned Why the Iewes were taxed of Incredulity the Iewes of infidelity not so much for reiecting his word or Preaching as for not belieuing after they had seen it confirmed by Wonder 's from Heauen For t' is Said plainly Had they not seen they had not sinned A Doctrin Therefore attested by Miraculous signes and wonders renders the Vnbelieuer guilty of Infidelity Consider it alone deuested of such Marks what haue we High Mysteries preached But without Proofs antecedently laid forth to Reason Truths taught but yet vnknown whether so or otherwise In à word we haue the Decrees of à great Monarch obliging all to submission but without his Seal or Signature 6. And Hence it is that our blessed Lord impowred those first great Masters of the Gospel Matt. 10. not only to teach his Sacred Verities but to teach
Perswasiuely by the vertue of Miracles Goe and preach saying the Kingdome of God is at hand Cure the sick raise vp the dead cleanse the Lepers Cast out Diuels c. And they did so Mark 16. 20. They Went abroad preached euery where God Cooperating with them and confirming their Doctrin by Signes wich followed Or to speak in the words of S. Paul Heb. 2. God withall Testifying by Signes and wonders and diuers Miracles c. A third sequele If the Iewes had not sinned by reiecting Christ Why sectaries are blameable and his Doctrin which then was new in case he had not wrought greater Miracles amongst them than euer Any did before him How highly imprudent think ye How notoriously culpable are our Sectaries who belieue the new opinions of one wretched Luther or Caluin without so much as one Miracle wrought to make them probable 7. A fourth Principle True Real Miracles are Still necessary in the Church and fortold to be so by Truth it self Ioan 12. Amen Amen I say vnto you he that belieues in me the works which I doe he shall doe and greater works than these shall he doe I say purposely True real Miracles mindful of S. Chrisostoms profound Discourse vpon these very words in his Book against the Gentils There haue been saith the Saint certain Masters you may call them Impostors who had their Disciples and talk't much of Wonders whilst they liued but none of them euer came to the impudency S. Chrisosloms excellent Reflection as truely to Prophesy of Miracles to be done by them after death No A Iugler may do something strange whilst he is on the Stage But take him off the Theater Throwe him out of this life The cheat appeares He is worth nothing 8. All is contrary in our Sauiour who here foretold of greater Wonders to be wrought in after Ages by his true Belieuers Than He had done in this Mortal life And if we Speak of great Conuersions which all most iustly account Miraculous the Truth is Euident For our Blessed Lord conuerted but few in Comparison of those who followed in the Church after his Death A parallel of other Miracles we shall see presently Yet more The Apostles wrought the greatest Miracles after Christ's Ascension And t' is worth Reflection whilst Christs Disciples conuersed with Him the Gospel record's little of their Miracles But after his leauing this world Signes followed them They cast out Diuels raised the dead spake with new tongues conuerted Nations laid hand on the Sick c. And the like Supernatural effects haue been visible in the Church through all Ages after the Apostles So true are the words of Christ Greater Things shall be done And the meaning is not that euery true Belieuer should work Miracles For so Christs promise would not bee truly fulfilled because All do them not But that some choise elected of his Church as it happened in the Primitiue times Members of this Mystical Body should haue the Priuiledge 9. One Reason of my Assertion is If Miracles Gods own Seals and Characters were Necessary at the first preaching of the Gospel to induce all to belieue Christs Doctrin or to distinguish his Truths from the Errours of Iewes and Pagans The like Necessity is for their Continuance in after Ages not only in respect of Infidels but erring Christians also For no sooner had Christ founded his Church But the Diuel raised vp his Chappel by it Pestiferous Hereticks from Simon Magus haue Why Miracles are now Necessary been in euery Age his Chaplins All of them Pretended to Truth with an Ecce hic est Christus Loe we preach Christ In this Confusion of Sects it was absolutly needful to Mark out that happy Christian Society which taught sauing Faith and Shewed where God was adored in Spirit and Truth Now no Mark can be more Palpable or more attractiue than the Glory of indubitable Miracles Christs own Cognisances and the Clearest Euidences of Apostolical Doctrin 10. 2. Miracles are necessary in the Church to stirr vp Christian Faith and Deuotion with it which would soon grow cold Two other Reasons alleged were it not that Diuine Prouidence frequently quickens both by these exteriour Signes and wonders Wherefore as His Goodnes works inwardly and plyes our hearts with Grace so outwardly also to Testify that nothing is wanting He moues vs to Belieue by no less visible Inducements than Those were which first made the world Christian 11. 3. The Continuation of Miracles Clearly appeared in the first fiue Centuries after Christ And as Authority makes them indubitable So reason also proues them necessary vpon this very Account that the Conuersion of Infidels strangers to Christ was not wrought on à suddain or all at once But successiuely Age after Age If then Miracles were necessary to conuince our Christian Verities when Christ and his Apostles first preached to vnbelieuing Iewes and Gentils no man can probably iudge them Vseless in after Ages when the like Barbarous the like Ignorant and vnciuilized Nations who neuer heard of Christ or Scripture became Christians Induced to so happy à change not because they heard truths Taught But because they saw all confirmed by Euident Signes and Wonders 12. Reflect I beseech you à little Were not the Natiues of those vast and remote Regions we call the Indies whether Orient or Occident à People as ignorant of our Christian verities and as much auerted from Christs Doctrin when S. Francis Xauerius and other laborious Missioners first preached There as any Nations One Reason further illustrated were to whom the Apostles preached Christ Yes most certainly In both cases the disdain and ignorance may well be paralled Imagin now that S. Xauerius had only opened his Bible And told the ruder People of the high Mysteries of Christian Faith would this think ye though neuer so speciously laid forth haue gained credit No. But when their eyes beheld Miracles and glorious Miracles accompaning His laborious Preaching The By an Instance of Missioners sent to preach deaf dumb blind and sick instantly cured When they saw the Sanctity the Austerity and Innocency of His virtuous Life When they heard him indued with the Gists of tongues When they knew that after à noble contempt of the world The blessed man sought nothing but God And fearing neither death nor dangers Couragiously trauelled from one end of the world to the other c. Then it was they began to look about them to open their eyes more to Renounce Idolatry and submit to Gods truths most manifestly euidenced by glorious Miracles Then it was that the Saint Gods grace concurring conuerted Thousands and Thousands All which is vpon certain Record and witnessed by those who haue written the wonders Howeuer grant that S. Xauerius wrought but one or two Miracles when many more cannot without impudency be denyed him our Assertion subsists that Miracles are necessary for the reclaiming of Infidels And if he did none at
the Iewes also for they neuer had any after our Sauiours Comming T' is Sectaries Iewes and Turks disclaim Miracles true that Pond vpon Probatica Ioan. 5. Or as many will haue it the Pond it self so called because the Sheep ordained to Sacrifice were washed there continued Miraculous whilst Christ our Lord preached But soon after ceased And so do all other wonders amongst that abandoned People The Turks who say God gaue Mahomet the sword and Christ the Power of working Miracles pretend to no such supernatural effects at all No more in Iustice can Heathens or the Donatists lay Claim to any whose wonders were but trifles compared with the Glorious works of Christ and His Church None of them all conuerted whole Nations to Christian Religion none of them raised vp the dead None of them after death wrought any Miracles See Tertullian writing of the Heathens In Apolog C. 22. 23. And S. Austin against the Donatists Homil. 13. in Ioan. De Vtilit Credent C. 16. As also Lib. 10. de Ciuit. C. 16. 13. I say 2. If the Miracles of Christ and the Apostles rationally proued against Iewes and Gentils the Credibility of Apostolical The ancient and modern Miracles compared together Doctrin The very like Signes and supernatural effects most euident in the Roman Catholick Church as rationally proue against Sectaries the Credibility of our now professed Catholick Doctrin I would say Church Miracles constantly wrought in all Ages since Christianity began are no less efficacious to draw Sectaries to the Belief of our Church Doctrin than those the Apostles wrought were to induce Iewes and Gentils to the belief of Apostolical Doctrin Here is one Proof The same Signes and Marks of Truth when equal in Maiesty Worth Quality and Number euer discouer to Reason the same Truth For God can no more deceiue by such works of Grace than by his own Diuine word Interrogemus ipsa Miracula saith S. Austin Tract 24. in Ioan Quid nobis loquantur de Christo. Let vs ask of Miracles what they say of Christ Habent enim si intelligaâ—tur linguam suam They want no tongue to speak with their Language is plain for Christ Iust so Say I and proue it Church Miracles Speak as planly for the Church Wherefore if the Roman Catholick Church most clearly giues in euidence of Her Miracles equal in worth quality and number with those wrought by Christ and his Apostles it followes that as those first Apostolical wonders were sufficient to conuince Iewes and Gentils of the Truth of Christianity So these latter also wrought in the Church are of like force and no less efficacious to conuince Sectaries of what euer Doctrin She teaches Now ponder What the Apostles did the Church doth well what the Apostles did They cured the sick dispossed Diuels raised the Dead conuerted Nations c. But these very Miracles haue been done in the Roman Catholick Church yea and greater too Ergo we haue the like Euidence of Truth in both the primitiue Age and this Consequently with it the same Truth The Euidence hath been partly laid forth already and shall be further proued presently The Sequel is vndeniable 14. I say 3. No otherwise nor vpon any better ground can the Sectary Oppose the Miracles of our Church than Iewes and Gentils haue opposed and yet doe oppose those of Christ and his Apostles Obserue well Will the Sectary Say our Miracles are wrought by the Diuels power So the Iewes Calumniated Christ own Glorious works Will he Say they are only fained by poor deluded or bold-lying Catholicks So the Iewes speak of Christ's own Miracles to this day Will he Say that some Miracles auouched true haue been afterward euidently The like opposition made against Christ's Miracles and the Churches Counterfeit and why may not those the Church glories in be rancked with such Contra. And why may not Christs own wonders be also listed with them The Argument if of any force equally concludes against both For if the Forgery of some proue all forged Christ's own Miracles no more escape the Censure than if one should say t' is S. Austins instance all women are naught because some haue been so Let then the Sectary show vpon good Principles That Church Miracles haue been forged and he speak's to the purpose In the interim he may well think his bold incredulous Humour makes none forged 15. One may reply There is à vast disparity between our Sauiours Miracles registred in Scripture and those we plead for only attested vpon humane Faith I Answer in order to Christians there is à Disparity in the Testimony But that fall's from the purpose now First because Christs Miracles were known and admitted vpon humane Authority before Scripture was written 2. And chiefly because both Iewes and Gentils as much slight our Scripture testifying those wonders as the Miracles themselues And make little account of either 16. But when they read these things in Scripture and moreouer both Iewes and Hereticks conuinced hear what Miracles God hath Constantly wrought in euery age yea almost euery year in his Church and yet continues that fauour to our present dayes When they hear and read of the Miracles which that one sacred house of Loreto Euidences the publick Monuments and Testimonies whereof are vndeniably Authentick and able to conuince the most obdurate Gentile When they read or hear of the continual Miracles done at the Reliques of S. Iames at Compostella in Spain the infinite number of Pelgrims resorting thither from all parts of Christendom besides Records bear witness of those great Benefits When they read or hear of that perpetual Miracle seen in France exhibited to all mens eyes in the Sacred Viall of S. Mary Magdalen wherein the precious Blood gathered by that penitent Saint at our Sauiours Passion is yet perserued and Visibly boyl's vp on the very day he suffered after the reading of the Passion A whole Nation testifies this thousands and thousands haue seen it and Spondanus ad An 1147. Saith he beheld the viole in the Church of S. Maximin 17. When again they hear or read of the vndoubted Miraculous Cures wrought vpon the blind the lame and all sort of diseased Persons by the Intercession of our Blessed Lady at Montaigu By what particular Miracles they are Conuinced English vsually call the place Sichem The euidence whereof is so vndeniable without dispute that Iustus Lipsius in suâ— Aspricolli to the Reader most iustly saith They are not men but rather beasts or purposely shut their eyes that See not those Miracles as clear as the Sun For Saith He many of them haue been manifest to our eyes and senses And Erycius Puteanus speak's as fully the sense of his Predecessor See his Praeface ad Aspricol Hâ—c ista c. These very Miracles which the Mother of God began to work at Montaigu this very Age we liue in are so manifest so many and most stupendious that if any doubt of them
7. To end this point between S. Austin and the Donatist as also between Catholicks and Protestants I say all Controuersies are fully tried and happily ended by Scripture only But how Not because any can pretend to find euery Tenet of Faith clearly set down in so many express Terms of holy Writ For the Protestant How Scripture decides all Controuersies pretend's not to so much in behalf of his Doctrin But thus the Orthodox discourses with S. Austin Scripture euidently points at the Church of IESVS Christ known by Her Marks and manifest Signes by Her Antiquity Her large Spread ouer the whole world by the Succession of Her Pastors and Doctors Miracles and the like Signal Motiues Thus much once clearly laid forth in the written Word that Holy Book remit's him to the Church Clearly marked commend's Her faith S. Austin and command's him to hear and learn what euer She teaches 8. Whence it is that our profound Doctor Disputing the Case whether the Baptized by Hereticks were to be rebaptized laboured not to decide the Question by any express words in holy Scripture wholly silent in this particular But contrarywise teaches that the Church which is diffused all ouer and no Party of Donatists shut vp in à corner of Afrique was to giue Sentence herein For She is that great Oracle which Scripture commend's Read Lib. 2. de Bapt. C. 4. And de Vnit Eccles. C. 22. Thus briefly you see the true difference between the Protestant and Catholick The first has not à word of Scripture for his Tenets much less any Orthodox euidenced Church The Catholick relies on à Church spread the whole world ouer known by The Catholicks stronge hold Miracles Conuersions c. And Scripture command's him firmly to belieue what euer She Proposes as Faith Qui vos audit me audit Whoeuer hears the Church hears Christ And in this Sense Scripture manifesting Gods own Oracle which cannot but propose truth end 's all Controuersies 9. A 4 th Obiection Iulian the Apostata as S. Gregory Nazian Orat. 1. in Iulian And Theoder Lib 3. Histo C. 3. attest droue away Diuels with the Sign of the Cross Therefore wicked men can doe Miracles And why may not Almighty God A fourth Obiection solued for Reasons best known to his infinite wisdom do strange wonders and permit an Arian to Say All are wrought to Confirm his false Doctrin Contra. Both Parts of the Obiection equally impugn the Primitiue Miracles of Christ and the Apostles To the first I answer An Heretick may work à Miracle to proue Catholick Doctrin but neuer to make his own False Opinion probable The Reason is God who is Truth and Goodnes it self can no more deceiue by his ovvn VVorks than by his ovvn VVords Sicut humana consuetudo saith S. Austin Epist 49. verbis Diuina potentia etiam factis loquitur As man speak's by words so God speak's by his works But the Works or Wonders now Spoken of because supernatural proceed from God And as is God can no more deceiue by his ovvn Works then by by Words supposed deceiue Therefore it ill beseem's an Infinit Truth and Goodnes to do them Vpon this Ground I say likewise Diuine Prouidence will neuer permit his own glorious Works Seals and Signes of Truth to be abused by wicked men But of this particular I intend to speak more largely hereafter 10. Wee now Come to Mr. Stillingfleets Cauils you haue some of them Part. 1. C. 5. p. 134. And 135. Where he doth not Mr Stillingfleets Cauils answered so much impugne Miracles as would haue them done by such Persons as he likes well of Popes for example that pretend to infallibility And if which is easy we produce many wrought by Holy Popes His next Querie perhaps may be Why all all of them are not Miraculous men alike In à word I like not to search into the depth of Gods secret Counsel And therefore briefly discourse of persons fauoured with such Graces as S. Austin doth of different Places Tom. 2. Epist 137 to his Clergy and people at Hippo where he proposeth this Question Quare in alijs locus haec miracula fiant non in alijs Why are Miracles done in some places and not in others VVe haue known some wrought at Millan â—n Africa though full of Saints Bodies not so He return's this wise Answer grounded on the Apostles wotds 1. Cor. 12. Non omnes Sancti c. All saints haue not the Gift of curing diseases all discern not spirits ita nec in omnibus memorijs Sanctorum c. So God And first why God works Miracles by some and not by others who divides his Graces according to his own best will doth not these wonders at the Memory of euery Saint And who dare enter into his secret Counsel or ask why he doth so Why raised he three dead men by S. Dominick and not one we know of by S. Austin Dividit propria unicuique prout vult He is Lord and distributes his own fauours as he pleaseth And thus we Answer Mr. Stillingfleet who next Saith some thing of Miracles done in Corners What can the man mean Are all the wonders wrought at Loreto Compostella Sichem and other places seen to innumerable and All vpon certain record to be callid Corner Miracles Be pleased to hear worse yet 11. Page 135. Think not saith Mr. Stillingfleet VVe are of such easy faith that the pretended growing out of à leg in Spain or any of your famous Miracles wrought by your Priests in Italie will persvvade vs Mr Stillingfleets vnjust exceptions against the Miracle wrought at Zaragosa to believe your Church infallible Again after his Talk of Diuels doing no feats when Opposers are by He utters this scornful language It is an easâ— thing for à Stump to grow à leg in its passage from Spain hither For fama crescit eundo And in despite of Truth cast's out too much bitter venom to obscure à Glorious work of God wrought by the Intercession of our Blessed Lady vpon à young man at Caesar Augusta or Zaragosa in Spain where you haue her miraculous Statua Set on à Marble Pillar And for that reason is called Neustra Sennora del Pilari It is one of the most euident and clearest Miracles vvhich I belieue hath been done in the memory of any man now liuing I haue the whole Printed Relation by me both Latin and Dutch vvritten by Peter Neurat Doctor of Phisick and dedicated to his Excellence Don Francisco Marquis of Caretto and Grana Embassador Extraordinary from the Emperour to His Catholick Maiesty The Substance whereof is thus 12. Ego ab Caesaraugusta Venio c. I come from Zaragosa and bring tydings of à Miracle not heard of in any age A young man had his leg cut of and buried which was Miraculously restored again by the Intercession of the most Sacred virgin My Lord I here present you with à Gift it is not mine but our
c. so far Eclipses the false lustre of Heathens Iewes and Hereticks that reason concludes In this one manifested Oracle it is that Eternal Wisdom deliuers his Diuine Truths Or there is no such thing as à reuealed Truth taught in the world This iudgement most rational once well setled in an vnderstanding without further debate ends all controuersies of Religion So forceable and perswasiue is the language of God's own glorious works 17. Imagin I beseech you that God should now lay the Heauens open and euidently declare to the whole world in most significant and clear words That the Roman Catholick Church is Gods works speak no less plainly to reason then His vvords his own faithful Oracle and exactly teaches those truths he reuealed All whether Heathens Iewes or Hereticks would submit and if reasonable yeild Assent to so great an Euidence manifested by words And what shall his own glorious works of Miracles the known language of Heauen euer spoken since Christianity began proue less perswasiue than words but once only deliuered Interrogemus Miracula saith S. Austin cited aboue Quid nobis loquantur c. Ask of Miracles what they speak of Christ demand also what they say of his Church Habent enim 〈…〉 guam suam They are neither dumbe nor silent Orators Works therefore speak and can Answer both for Christ and his Church S. Paul Rom. 1. 20. drawes euidence of Gods inâ—isible Perfections of his Power and Diuinity from the Creation of the visible effects in Nature And shall not Christians think ye find euidence enough in the works of grace I mean in Miracles and other most Signal Marks manifest in the Catholick Church which make it highly Credible That he speak's his eternal verities by this one Oracle The Euidence in both cases well penetrated seem's much à like call it moral physical or what you please whereof more presently 18. From this Discourse it followes That à Church demonstrating Gods own Seal and manifest Caracters of Truth so exactly All walk in Darkness without an Euidenced Church teaches Truth that none can rationally contradict Her Doctrin though often difficult to weak Reason The ground of my Assertion is Renounce once such an Oracle we are cast into confusion and haue no other Master to teach Christians but the obscure Mysteries of Faith far enough God knowes from any Self-euidence and the yet not sensed words of holy Scripture because the Church which only can and must interpret is vpon the Supposition reiected In this two fold Darkness of obscure Mysteries and vnsensed Words weak Reason toyls as our Sectaries haue done à whole Age But with what success think ye S. Peters night labour return's the true Answer Totá nocte laborantes nihil cepimus All night long vve haue took much pains yet got nothing Such is the Fate and Folly of our modern Sectaries that will vvalk in the dark without the Guidance of à Church And Her infallible Tradition Here also we haue The true Cause of our Sectaries endles Diuisions the true cause of their endles Dissentions and multiplicity of Religions which almost euery year are coyned nevv All Pulpits saith Mr Thorndicke P. 5. so ring of this multiplicity That novv no Religion stand's to be the Religion of that Kingdom 19. A fifth Truth The Sectary that Professeth himself à Christian and seriously ponder's the Marks the Signes of Diuine Authority openly seen in the Roman Catholick Church stand's so conuicted of wilful Errour that practically he is either to renounce Christianity or obliged to belieue this euidenced Church I proue him First conuinced of wilful Errour vpon these grounds The Sectary confesseth or he is no Christian That this Argument is efficacious against the Iewes Christ our Lord did greater wonders shewed more manifest Miracles than all other Prophets wrought in the time of Iudaism and from hence He inferrs or shall neuer proue it that Christ is the true Messias Therefore this Argument is equally pressing against Protestants What euer Argument Proues Christ to bee the true Mosâ—ias proues also the Catholick Church true The Roman Catholick Church only has euidently done greater Wonders chiefly in the Conuersion of Nations She has shewn more manifest vndoubted Miracles than all Protestant Professors in the world Ergo She is the only true Church because She beares the Marks doth the works and wonders of that great Lord that laid Her foundations firm Whereas Contrarywise this naked Protestancy has no resemblance of à Church But lies in Obscurity vneuidenced only known by its own Monstruâ— firy vpon this Account That two hideous Rebells begot it in Pride and brought it forth in Diuision to no other purpose but to fright all that look on it Again the Sectary if he be Christian must hold this Argument Valid against the Iewes All the Prophesies in Scripture speaking of the true Messias exactly agree to and were amply fulfilled in the Person of Christ our Sauiour and in no other But the like Argument hold's as strongly in our case For all the Ancient Prophesies of the true Christian Church whereof we read in the old Testament As of Her Continuance Visibility and Nations flocking to Her only agree and are exactly fulfilled in the Roman Catholick Church And not so much as one appeares in this naked Nouelty of Protestancy Ergo the Roman Catholick Church and not that Fatherles Progeny of Protestants is the only true Catholick Oracle of Iesus Christ 20. Lastly this Argument is stronge against the Iewes and Proues them deserted by Almighty God Since Christ came to Redeeme vs This abandoned people lie vnder contempt and are A visible Mark of Gods wrath Set vpon Ievves and Sectaries best known vpon the Account of their open iniustice Wherefore God to set à visible Mark of his wrath vpon them has not only scattered them vp and down some few corners of the world but also permitted them to Deuide and Subdiuide into seueral Sects and Factions But the same Argument is as forceable against Protestants For first the whole Christian world abroad slights the men as Innouators and their Doctrin also as Nouelties Arians Semiarians Graecians Abyssins detest Protestancy and as highly contemn the Authors of it as the far extended Church of Rome condemn's both the one and other 21. 2. No Iniustice euer done by Iew except that one wicked fact of crucifying Christ our Lord is comparable to the open The open iniustice of Protestants clamorous wronge of Protestants who without law or right yea contrary to all conscience violently vsurpe the Ecclesiastical goods in England and worse than Robbers on the high way appropriate all to Them selues which neither God nor man intended for them These Reueneues were giuen by Catholicks for the Orthodox Pastors and Teachers of our Ancient Religion that lawfully and quietly possessed them for à thousand years And now behold à Robbery done but one age since turn's the true Owners out à doores And serues forsooth
presseth this point most efficaciously Lib. de vnit Eccles. Cap. 2. Quaestiâ— inter nos versatur vbi sit Ecclesiá vtrum apud nos aut illos Here lies the main Business where the Church is whether with vs or them Again Epist 163. Quaritur vtrum vestra an nostra sit Ecclesia Dei We demand whether yours or ours be the Church of God which must be known saith Optat. Mileuit Lib. 2. By Her Marks and Characters And therefore we said aboue though S. Austin made vse of Scripture against the Donatists it was not done to decide euery particular Controuersy by the bare and obscure words of that holy Book No. The profound How Scripture manifests the Church Doctor aymed not at such impossibilities his whole drift being to teach the Donatists à great Verity which we all subscribe to viz. That Scripture once admitted as Gods word without Dispute clearly demonstrat's the Church by Her visible sensible Marks Antiquity Miracles Conuersions Digito demonstrari potest We can point at Her with our finger Saith S. Austin The Church therefore thus manifested we haue enough and rely on Her as à faithful Oracle in euery Doctrin She professeth Se Cardinal de Richelieu Traitte pour conuertâ—r ceux c. Lib. 2. C. 7. § Cest encore Where he exactly renders S. Anstins meaning conformable to what we deliuered Disc 1. C. 14. n. 10. 21. The last Inference If all are bound to embrace true Religion All haue also with the obligation means to know where it is taught But the means to know this lies not in the essential Verity thereof for that is no Self-euidence or manifestly true ex Terminis The means to know it is not found in the high Mysteries of Faith for these far aboue the reach of humane vnderstanding remain yet in darkness without More light Scripture alone makes not its own Diuinity known and though it did so And the Heathen owned it as most Diuine yet when he euidently discouer's that dissenting Christians Sense the book quite contrary waies he has not the means to learn what true Religion is or where it is taught Thus then He must Discours or belieue nothing 22. God that 's Truth reueal's the Verities of true Religion If so some vnited Society of men teaches what euer God reueal's for Angels are not our Doctors I find Saith the Rational man great Signes of truth amongst the Christians and after The Heathens prudent Disâ—ourse many à serious thought Cast vpon à Matter of highest Concern I sind also that all those Signes as Antiquity Vniuersallity à visible Succession of Pastors euident Miracles which cannot but proceed from God belong to one only Christian Society the Roman Catholick Church I se moreouer à strange benign Prouidence held forth in preseruing Her from innumerable attempts of Aduersaries No Iew no Heathen no Heretick can show the like Signal Marks and Proofs of Gods loue as this one Catholick Oracle demonstrat's Therefore all other Societies are false Sects misled by erring Prophets according to Christs own Prediction Math. 24. For there shall rise false Christs though they clamour neuer so loud Ecce hic est and Conclusâ—on Christus Loe we preach Christ and his truths Thus Reason test's satisfied yet because the Heathen see 's who le Armies banding against the Church and rationally hold's their Arguments like theer cause very weak He is desirous to haue the Fallacy of some chiefe Aduersaries laid forth to his reason For your Satisfaction be pleased to read the following chapter CHAP. XII The Aduersaries of the Roman Catholick Church plead vnreasonably A Discouery of their fallacies The cause of all Errour concerning Religion The only means to remedy Errour 1. THe enemies of the Roman Catholick Church are chiefly reduced to these four Classes to Atheists Heathens Iewes and Hereticks A word briefly of their fallacies in order Some Atheists there haue been and perhaps Lucian was one that to cast off all thought of Religion more expresly denyed Diuine Prouidence than they did the Existency of à God And à chief The Atheistâ— Plea Argument to omit others of less weight is much to this sense A Numen Infinitly wise and powerful shewes his careful Prouidence in gouerning the world But an euident Principle opposes this careful Prouidence and no contrary Principle of equal strength Seem's to establish it Therefore reason well denies Prouidence Now here is the euident Principle The Oppression of iust men manifest to our eyes the preuailing of the wicked against the iust of Turks against Christians to say nothing of other much visible Confusion and Discorder proue à neglect of Prouidence and no contrary Principle half so strong or euident conninces it none counterpoises the weight of this clear proof now hinted at ergo Reason reasonably denies Prouidence Thus the Atheist The Pagan Argues That Religion is false which holds Mysteries ridiculous and impossible but Christians How the Heathens and Iewes Argue teach that God is one Essence and three Persons Both seem impossible The Iewes vapour against à crucified Sauiour and lay its vnworthy God to become man and to dye ignominiously vpon à Cross Lastly our modern Sectaries that own Christ come limping after the rest and except much against the Roman Catholick Church She Say they has changed the ancient Articles of the Primitiue Faith and introduced Nouelties in lieu of them She maintains errours contrary to sense in Her Doctrin of Transubstantiation And much more seem's amiss 2. I say first All these and the like Arguments are meer vnsound Paralogisms and proue iust nothing against Prouidence against Christ or the Romam Catholick Church Before I discouer the fallacies be pleased to note 1. That God whose existence we haue proued Disc 1. C. 2. is à Being incomprehensible and far transcend's the reach of our narrow Capacities The very Gentile Philosophers owned the truth agreeing in this Principle That humane reason is as weak to know what God and diuine Mysteries are as an owle is to behold the Sun at noon-day Note 2. Reason in man often too bold enters into Diuine Mysteries though conscious it walks in à Labyrinth not so much as Principles prâ—mised to solue these Obiections half-sighted in the search it makes and this less than Half-insight into Diuine truths is the cause of Atheism of all Heresy and the most gross errours now raigning in the world The Apostle 2. Tim. 3. 7. Point's at the misled Semper discentes They are alwaies learning but neuer come to the knowledge of truth Note 3. Reason in the inuestigation of Religion and Diuine verities may tend two different waies Directly and Reflexly Direct reason as is now said fall's vpon some great Mystery in faith finds it harsh yea most difficult to be vnderstood and What follows The faint man with his feeble reason either reiect's the Mystery or remain's so perplexed in the search that he can resolue nothing His procedure is iust like
Which is to say the Reason we call reflex and prudent most easily finds out the Master that teaches truth and hauing once found him it relies on his word whilst direct Reason stayes intangled in difficult Mysteries and learns nothing Hence also it is that S. Thomas and others most profoundly Obserue à notable difference in our proceeding when we harken to God and to man When we treat with man we rigidly What man speak's is to be examined what God saith not examin the things he speak's and if found absurd or impossible reiect them We obserue the coherence of his Discourse and iudge whether it be consonant or dissonant to reason But to proceed thus with God who can neither deceiue nor be deceiued is Impudence Enquire then no more but thus much only what God saies and rest Satisfied his own sole word is warrant enough 11. We come now to apply this Doctrin more home The Primitiue Christians after à prudent search found out by euident signes and wonders the great Master of the world Christ our Lord and were commanded to hear him Matth. 17. 5. Ipsum audite And because he proued Himself by manifest fignes to be à Doctor and Prophet sent from God They belieued the Doctrin he taught vpon his own word though very sublime and aboue weak reason Now here is à Point of consequence worth our serious ponderation 12. Can any one imagin that our great Doctor of truth An application of the Doctrin left vs all comfortles or so destitute in his Absence without Pastors without Prophets withous liuing Oracles that yet speak in his name and deliuer with all certainty those Verities he taught and will haue euer taught Reflect I beseeck you This great Master saith No. Iohn 20. 16. As my Father sent me so I send you Matth. 20. 19. Goe and teach all Nations Luke 10. 16. He that hear's you hears me And to these Pastors he promises his presence and continual assistance to the end of Ages Matt. 28. 20. I will be with you euer to the end of the world And the There is yet à teaching Oracle very excellency the very nature of Diuine Learning requires this Assistance and must if Diuine depend on an Oracle which cannot but speak in Gods name Truth and Truth only For how is it possible to conceiue the vast moral Body of Christians of so different tempers diffused the whole world ouer knit firmly together in one sauing Faith if no certain Oracle laies forth that learning which God has reuealed and will haue all to belieue 13. The Sectary may Answer Scripture is his Oracle he needs no more Contra. 1. Christianity had à liuing Oracle before Scripture was written did then that Oracle cease to be because Gods truths were committed to paper or parchment Contra 2. And mark I beseech you how vnwarily weak reason already reiected works mischief to it self and others Reason The Plea of Sectaries reiected reads Scripture and when that is done it sett's endles iarrs incomposable debates not only between man and man but which is worse between God and man Therefore Scripture thus handled can be no Oracle that vnites all in one Faith Theses Iarrs between man and man are manifest for the Arians Pelagians Protestants and Catholicks read the book and you see what fighting there is about the Sense which only indeed and not the bare letter is Scripture Now that some of these many Contend also with God is vndeniable For God approues not all these different senses because contradictory Therefore some draw à false meaning from Scripture and these Some let the fault light yet where you will oppose the true Sense of the Holy Ghost yea act stifly to their Eternal shame against that noble perfection in God his vndeceiued Verity and this I call contention or quarrelling with God Truth it self which as you see our Sectaries will haue goe on without redress because they allow of no Doctor no Teacher no Oracle that can end the Strife or reduce the erring Party to due submission 14. I say therefore And here is my last Proposition The The true teaching Oracle name'd Roman Catholick Church which prudent reason easrly find's out and no other Society of Christians is Gods own Oracle What she teaches we learn what she reiect's we reiect Her Definitiue word is our warrant without further dubious search made into the Mysteries proposed The proof of my Assertion depend's on this brief discourse 15. God obliges all poor and rich learned and vnlearned to embrace true Religion And consequently afford's means to find it out being à matter of so much weight as concerns Saluation But the Necessary means to find true Religion is to come to the knowledye of that Oracle which Proposes and teaches truth with all certainty For no man teaches Himself but learns if wise of à better Master Scripture you see Ends not our Controuersies The Mysteries of Faith are not our Doctors because these in themselues obscure are belieued after Reason has found out Gods liuing Oracle Therefore all Christians must own à Teacher an Oracle of truth established by Almighty God commissioned to enlighten and to instruct the world How shall they hear saith S. Paul Rom. 10. 15. without à Preacher Obserue well à teaching Oracle is to Propose Euangelical Doctrin But how shall they preach vnless they they be The Church Commissioned to teach instruct's all sent Here you see the Mission and commission of Euangelical Doctors plainly pointed at Now further As none can but own such an Oracle so all must likewise acknowledge it so Visible by Marks and Signes so obuious to sense and prudent reason that the most simple may discern it from Heretical Communities For this Oracle teaches the poorest sort of men therefore Prouidence has made the euidence thereof plain and suitable to the meanest capacities 16. Here we See again the difference between the essential Doctrin of the Church and the Churches outward lustre manifest in Her Signes The first is not got by long Pausing vpon the Mysteries of Faith nor by rigidly examining the things reuealed as we discuss Doctrins probable or improbable in Schools No. The Christian saith not I will either Know how God can be one Essence and three distinct Persons How the Incarnation is possible or I will belieue neither For goe this way to work he doth like one that takes wholsom Pills and chewes them but finding much bitternes soon spits them out Thus then he should proceed guided by à Reflex prudent discourse My only search is to find out that Oracle whereby God speaks to Heathens Iewes Christians and Hereticks There is such an one manifested or none can Belieue any thing This once found How prudent reason discourses I examin no more nor intricate my self in the Mysteries proposed but will humbly Submit to all that 's taught This wisdom I learn from the Primitiue Christians who most easily knew that Christ
Scripture I Could wish to see à clear Deduction yet fear it Howeuer Suppose that done new Doubts arise concerning the certainty of the Deduction which can be no more but morally certain most insufficient to ground Diuine Faith The true Answer therefore must be or none The Nicene Council The both pas't and Present Church faithfully interpreting Scripture Definitiuely deliuered the Doctrin and vpon this ground we belieue the Mystery 8. Now here we come to the main Business and Ask again whether God speaking by this Church as his own Oracle Proposes that Doctrin and obliges all to belieue it Or Contrarywise whether the Church diuorced as it were from Diuine Assistance teaches vpon Her own humane fallible Authority And The Churches Infallibility further euinced obliges all to belieue the Mystery Grant the first The Definitions of the Church are infallible because an Eternal Verity speaks infallibly by Her Say secondly That the Church wholly Vnassisted teaches and Defines vpon Her own fallible humane Authority the Doctrin we learn from Her of the Incarnation of the highest Godhead in Christ of his being Consubstantial of the Blessed Trinity of Original Sin beget's no Faith Because if the Supposition hold's that Assent relies not at all vpon an Infallible Verity speaking by the Church Assisted but vpon à weak and fallible Human Authority which cannot support any certain Beliefe For it is most preposterous to Say that men meerly fallible as all are left to Themselues can Assure vs what that Doctrin is which God Reueal's Infallibly Now we Come to this Moral Certainty 9. And one Perhaps will say Such men though fallible may at least giue Moral Assurance of the truth of the Doctrin and that 's enough Contra. 1. Moral assurance which euer implies some weak Degree of fear of the contrary may in rigour be false But the Church which obliges all to belieue Her Doctrin vnder pain of Damnation speak's without fear and Saith boldly God reueal's as I teach Therefore her Doctrin if false is the Diuels Doctrin But none can say That the Nicene Definition against Arius was the Doctrin of Diuels But Contrarywise à Truth reuealed by God and Belieuable Fide Diuina Ergo it was infallible and more than Morally certain Contra. 2. God The Churches Definitions More then Morally Certain Speaking by the Church giues greater Certainty than Moral And if he do not speak at all by Her the Definition now remoued from Infallible Assistance Vphold's not Faith as we shall se presently nor can it be prudently iudged morally certain 10. Though much be said in the other Treatise Disc 1. C. 4. 6. against this Pretence to Moral certainty Sectaries casually light on it because forsooth they brook not the word Infallibility yet here we must wholly weaken that Plea I say Therefore could the Church as She cannot Define or teach without Gods special Assistance Christians would either not attain to so great certainty of Her Doctrin as is Moral Or if no greater could be had That certainty would not be Diuine Faith Euery one knowes Moral certainty to be à kind of knowledge whereby men iudge such things are or are not without great Hesitancy or any reasonable cause of Doubting It is vsually grounded vpon some vulgar Perswasion or common half owned Euidence which the most of men trust to prudently When no surer can be had Thus we say All People in Common Conuersation speak not alwayes contrary to their thoughts Some mean well in their Priceeding The Nature of Moral certainly briefly hinted at Rome and Constantinople are now Citties in being These and the like Assertions may in rigour be false Yet our Iudicatiue faculty without Violence readily yeild's to all induced thereunto by à Perswasion vulgarly receiued whereby we say That as such things are Commonly reported So they also are vsually belieued and Commonly true In à word the greatest part of Moral certainty may be rightly stiled à kind of half Supposed Euidence current in the world which may Deceiue yet easily deceiues not 11. Now be pleased to reflect The sublime Mysteries of A reflection Faith remote from all vulgar Apprehensions and half owned Euidences are neither visible like Constantinople seen by innumerable Eye-wittnesses Nor assured vpon any either Fallible or deceiuable Authority nor finally belieued vpon à meer humane prudential Discourse only No. They lie in à higher Region aboue our natural knowledge in the Abyss of Gods inscrutable Wisdom and the more remote they are from Sense Or any Half-euidences the more they stand in need of an infallible Proponent No Power deceiuable can ground Faith Whereby All rest Ascertained of their being Eternal Truths Hence I Argue None but God aboue who Reueal's and an infallible Church which Proposes the Mysteries can giue Assurance of their being Diuine Truths or say absolut'ly They ought to be belieued answerably to their Dignity as Diuine Now further But if God reueal's them as his own Truths for this End that all belieue them infallibly the Church cannot but Speak in the name of God and independently of this Vulgar The insufficiency of Moral Certainty humane knowledge Propose them also infallibly as Diuine Or if She could turn vs off with no more but à Moral Perswasion of their seeming Gods truths yet may not be so The Strength of Faith vanishes into à dissatisfactory Topick into à meer Perhaps thus It may be we Belieue Truth it may be not In à word we belieue not as the Apostles did infallibly 12. Hence none I think shall euer comprehend how this Whimsy of Moral Certainty got into our Protestants thoughts For had Christians agreed in that Certainty or had they said Because the Mysteries of faith are proposed so weakly We can belieue with no Stronger assurance but Moral They must haue receiued and learn'd that Doctrin not from their own fancy but from some Superiour Power some known Oracle that taught so which either reuealed or proposed the Mysteries as only Morally certain and no more But to point at any such Oracle is impossible And here is the reason All know that God Faith only Morally certain reiected by all that taught Christianity an infallible Verity cannot Reueal any Truth only Morally Certain Christ our Lord taught his own Verities infallibly so also did the Apostles who were Strangers to this low and half lame Assurance No ancient Christians nameable professed à less certainty of Faith than infallible in the Church which taught them The Roman Catholick Church you see for conuincing Reasons laies claim to diuine Assistance when She Teaches and disclaims this petty kind of Certainty which may be false From whence then came the Perswasion of that certainty into mens Heads when neither God nor Christ nor Apostles nor Ancient Christians nor any Orthodox Church euer fauoured it 13. The true Answer is Inimcus homo hoc fecit An old Enemy to decry the Infallibility of Gods own Oracle conueyed the fancy into Ã
the Definition And might he not haue Argued to the purpose Thus If no man can hold himself happy for being actually in Errour He cannot Certainly think himself out of the danger of an vnhappy State if he be exposed to the danger of Errour But the Moral certainty you defend thrust's you vpon the danger of being in Errour Therefore your Condition is none of the surest Nay it is as bad as mine For the worst that can befall my Doctrin which I pretend Scripture for is That it may one day proue false and so may yours too Good Fathers if in the least degree fallible 19. Hence You se first That the Definitions of Christs euidenced Church must either be owned infallible And then meer Moral certainty hath no place Or Hereticks may endlesly cauil at Her Doctrin and boldly say nothing is taught nothing can be belieued infallibly If you Reply Many cauil and except To except against the Churches Infallibility destroyes Faith against the Churches Infallibility I answer This is to say Exception is made against à Truth which either must stand vnshaken or Faith made no more but à tottering Opinion is destroyed And Mark in what à Distress poor Christians are who Ask. Domine quo ibimus Lord whither shall we goe to learn Eternal truth Protestants will needs draw vs from à Church hitherto held infallible And to afford à better prouision of Truth remit vs to Themselues who confessedly are fallible in all they Teach A Paradox beyond Expression The Church is supposed fallible The Sectaries Paradox and Protestants are really fallible Where then is our Security From whom shall we learn Truth From no body But more of this hereafter 20. You se 2. There is not one receiued Christian Principle so much as seemingly fauourable to Moral certainty only which may be fals or which forces That vpon the Churches Infâ—rences Definitions Whereas on the contrary Scripture Councils and Fathers Positiuely Averr Church Doctrin to be infallible You se 3. To pretend to true Faith or to true Religion diuorced from Infallibility Destroyes Both For although euery Truth be not infallible yet Truth and Infallibility inseparably meet in Faith Wherefore this Inference inuiolably hold's good My Catholick Faith is true Ergo it is infallible For Faith relies vpon And is vltimatly Resolued into God's infallible Veracity which with the Concurrenee of other Principles requisite Transfuses into it à Supereminent infallibility aboue all natural Certitude What euer makes Faith true makes it Infallible That Therefore which makes Faith true makes it also Infallible Now further to our present Purpose God as we here Suppose reuealed the Consubstantiallity of his Son Infallibly But the Mystery lies dark in Scripture The Church impowred to Propose exactly eternal reuealed Truths Answerable to Her Trust and the weightines of the matter speak's not like one faint hearted Forsooth Morally speaking Christ is the highest God The word is Consubstantial But Asserts it without all Peraduentures And strik's Arianism dead with one only Definition And thus Faith stand's firm vpon à double infallibility the One infinite and Essential to God's Verity The Other the infallible Proposition of an Assisted Church For as She Proposes the obscure Mysteries of Faith so we belieue Whereof more presently Other Obiections proposed by Sectaries Solued More of Moral certainty 21. One though enough broken already must appear again in our New mens Terms or nothing is done Thus they Discourse If Christian Doctrin be in so high à Degree Morally Certain As it is Certain that Caesar Pompey and Cicero were men once in Being None can reasonably doubt of the Doctrin And why may not Such an Assurance Content vs without our pretended Infallibility I read this in Mr Stillingfleet more then once And had I not seen it with my own Eyes I Should neuer Sectaries Mistaks concerning Moral certainty haue thought That One Professing Knowledge in Diuinity could haue erred so enormously To lay open the foule Mistake 22. All know the Certainty we haue of Caesars once being in the world was first grounded vpon à Visible clear Euidence for Innumerable saw the man heard him Speak whilst He liued on earth The Verity euer since conueyd down from Age to Age Continues still to our dayes And here is all the Moral Certainty men can haue of Caesar of Pompey or of any other so remote from vs. Please now to obserue As Caesar and Cicero were seen by many Eye-witnesses So Christ our Lord was both heard and seen by Innumerable when he Preached and suffered on the Cross The Euidence to those Spectators was Sensible and Physical To Iewes and Gentils now its Moral who vpon à Vniuersal report Say without boggling There was once à man in the world called Christ as they say There was once One Called Caesar But and here we Come to discouer Mr Stillingfleets Errour Do These Iewes and Gentils therefore To say Christ was vpon Moral certainly belieue in Christ or Assent to his Sacred Doctrin by Faith because they Iudge vpon Moral Certainty He was once on earth Is this Truth I say As it is grounded vpon à Common Report or Morally Certain the Obiect of Faith It is more then ridiculous is not to belieue in Christ For grant That All the Iewes in Europe at this Day may be well thought to Belieue in Christ because they haue Moral Certainty of his once Being in the world 23. To Belieue in Christ Therefore is not to Say such à man once had his Being he Preach'd and suffered for this lay open to Sense But implyes Much more viz. To Assert indubitably vpon Diuine Reuelation That the Man called Christ Iesus was truely the Highest God The only Messias The Redeemer of Mankind Consubstantial to his Eternal Father and finally to Assent to Euery Doctrin he taught These and the What is to belieue in Christ like Truths neither visible nor sensible like Caesar are Obiects of Diuine Faith far enough remoued from Physical and Moral Certainty And we firmly Assent to All not because they are seen with our Eyes or Scientifically known Or finally Conueyed vnto vs vpon the weak Support of Moral certainty But because God an Infinite Verity has reuealed them Here is our Ground Now This Reuelation being not euidently known by virtue of any Principle in Nature must be Belieued together with the Obscure Mysteries Attested by an Act of Diuine Faith 24. And Hence it followes That as no Obiect as seen or Faith is more then morally Certain Euidently known Can terminate Supernatural Faith So no Moral Certainty can be essential to it Or vphold it The vltimate Reason hereof is most Conuincing and Briefly thus What euer God reueal's as it is reuealed is Certain and Infallible Doctrin Wherefore He or those that take from this infallible reuealed Doctrin it s own intrinsecal Certainty And make it no More but Morally Certain wrong God the first Verity and iniure all
medled with it Which therefore can not make it Infallible By what is said you se our Sectaries Supposition of some Christian Doctrin acknowledged infallible is pure Sophistry for none can Assure them so much if All that teach it be fallible The very Apostolical Doctrin respectiuely to vs now liuing loses i'ts Infallibility if this Supposition stands That all Teachers are fallible Now we Proceed to à Second Argument and Discourse thus 15. If the whole Church the like is of any General approued The Churches Infallibility further proued Council can err She may not only traitorously betray Her Trust But moreouer doe so much Mischief to Christians by vniting all in Errour That they must remain in it without redress or remedy For if the Church may mistake whilst She Teaches No man on earth can be rationally Supposed wiser than She is nor goe about to Vnbeguile the deceiued by Her The Euil here hinted at is so Notoriously horrid the Perplerity it causes so Great that either Church Doctrin vnauoydably becomes despicable whilst euery one may iustly Quarrel with it Or this Principle must stand vnshaken that the Church cannot teach à Falshood 16. Some Sectaries seing the Force of this vnanswerable Argument hold the Church Diffusiue infallible in fundamentals Yet neither name nor can name those Christians who constitute an infallible Church larger than the Roman whereof enough Sectaries Oppose The Infallibility of Councils without reason is said both in this and the other Treatise In the next place their whole Strife is to Oppose the Infallibility of the Churches Representatiues in her General Councils But methinks inconsequently For what euer Reason proues Immunity from Errour in that diffused Moral Body Conuinces as forcibly the like Priuiledge in its Representatiues Which are not Conuened to deceiue But to teach God's reuealed Verities 17. Mr. Stillingfleet Part. 3. C. 1. 2. P. 506. After à larger Prologue to very little Substance Tell 's vs. It is not any high challenge of Infallâ—bility in any Person or council which must put an end to Controuersies For nothing but Truth and Reason can euer do it and the more men pretend to vnreasonable wayes of deciding them instead of ending One they beget many I say contrary If the Church and Her Councils be infallible Controuersies are ended without more Adoe For all know vpon that Supposition What to belieue and what to reiect And if they be not Owned infallible there is no such thing or things in being as Truth and Reason which can put an end to Controuersies To explicate the Assertion is to proue it 18. Doe then no more but cast away all thought of an Infallible The Infallibility of Councils asserted Church as also of Her infallible Councils It is clear that euery Doctrin Taught since the Apostles time has been deliuered Fallibly T is clear likewise All that teach it at this day highly dissenting among them selues Teach fallibly Imagin now that two aduerse Parties Ten learned Protestants on the one Side And as many learned Catholicks on the Other meet together and seriously Discuss this Point whether Protestancy or Catholick Doctrin as opposed to Protestancy be the true Religion the like is if any particular Controuersy fall vnder Debate I say the Attempt to decide any one controuerted matter is Vain and Impossible if both Church and Councils be Supposed fallible And consequently Mr. Stillingfleets Truth and Reason are no more but meer insignificant Words The Reason is Whilst fallible men pIead for Religion vpon Principles as fallible as they are that Argue the Result of that Dispute necessarily carried on by Arguments and reasoning purely fallible can end in nothing but in dissatisfactory Topicks if yet it come so far But this is so and obserue well The Protestant plead's The weaknes of two parties pleading fallibly for his Tenents or oppugn's our Doctrin and doth it fallibly The Catholick Answers and fallibly too The Protestant Replies but hath no infallible Principle to ground his Reply vpon no more hath the Catholick if the Supposition hold's any other Answer but what 's Vngrounded and Fallible Say I beseech you do not both Parties busied in this Contest vpon vncertainties run on in Darkness Haue we yet the least hope of Satisfaction Or so much as the Truth we all seek for yet discouered in this weak skirmish Whilst Fallible men and Fallible Arguments and Fallible Principles are the only Support of the whole Discourse Most euidently no. All are left where they were before in à deep Perplexity 19. I Said iust now If we we exclude an Infallible Church and her approued Councils Truth and Reason vanish to nothing and that no Principle remain's whereby these Contests of Religion can be ended To proue the Assertion further I first vrge the Protestant to name the last certain Principle or that vltimate Sectaries are vrged to name the last Iudge in these Debates Iudge in whose Sentence he dare Acquiese and Say positiuely vpon this Principle we must both rely This shall Define whether you my Aduersary or I yours defend Truth The man will not for stark shame name Himself nor any priuate Person on earth for Iudge He cannot recurr to an Inferiour Council and Oppose that against One Generally receiued the Whole world ouer He will not adhere to à Schismatical and Heretical Church and plead by Her in defence of his Doctrin against an Oracle neuer yet taxed or tainted of Errour Or if he doth so he gain 's nothing For all those are as fallible as the two Parties now in contest Where then is the Sectaries Sure Principle or last Iudge to stand to in these Debates Or whither will he goe to find out his yet Vndiscoured Truth and Reason Will his refuge be to Scripture It help 's nothing in this Case not only because Scripture omit's to speak either explicitly of the half of such And cannot pitch on any Controuersies as are now agitated But vpon this Account Chiefly That if the Church and Councils be fallible the Book it self becomes à most fallible Principle to all For neither Catholicks nor Protestants nor Arians nor any can Say with Assurance â—uch and Such is the vndoubted â—ense of Gods word in Controuerted Matters if the Churches Iudgement be set light by and look't on as fallible Yet I 'll Say thus much Were the Church fallible Sectaries may well blush first to decry Her Sense of Scripture and then to set vp the far inferiour and fallible interpretation of euery single Person against the Church 20. Some may Reply The grand Principle of Protestants The grand Principle of Protestants reiected is that Scripture in things necessary to Saluation appeares plain to all who vse ordinary Diligence to vnderstand it wherein certainly their Truth and Reason may be found Contra. And I Press not in this place the Vncertainty of the Principle which is as disputable as any other Protestant Tenet But Say more it is wholly
Peace of Kingdoms and Common-wealths wherevpon their Happines â—est's more secure And is better preserued than if this fiction 〈◊〉 not Hence it followes euidently To know and Profess Truth to quit our Selues of Errour and fiction robb's vs of Happines and makes humane nature miserable The Inference is vndeniable For if we be happy vpon this score that we liue in à Dâ—tage we are miserable in case we get free of it or become Wise which is against the light of Reason For if God has endued Nature is not miserable by being freed from dotage all with à desire of true Wisdom and the knowledge of truth whereof none can doubt Man cannot be miserable if he Possesses that Good which the Author of nature would haue him to enioy Hence it in also Inserred that the vniuersal Perswasion of true Religion is no Dotage no Deception but à Truth and that most notorious 3. Now if you Obiect some liue without Religion and â—â— few embrace à false one you plead by cases meerly Accidental As if one should Say Nature has made man Sociable and giuen him à tongue to Conuerse with others But some Cases meerly Accidental made vse of to no purpose are dumb others abuse their faculty of speaking Therefore man is no sociable creature This is our case Those who liue without all Religion if any such be are the dumbe and blind Those that Profess à falss Religion like lying tongues abuse Gods Gifts the Abuse is Theirs not God's who would haue all to be vâ—ius labij of one Tongue and one heart in à matter of so high Concern And thus much of these first Aduersaries Opposite to true Religion 4. In the next place I may well name our modern Sectaries no less than Arch-aduersaries of Religion who make the Church and all that teach Church Doctrin fallible My reason is A Fained and Fallible Religion are neer Cous 〈…〉 Sectaries parallel'd with the other Aduersaries Germans The one is à Fiction The other at least may be so And for ought any man can know is no better For there is no Principle whereby it may appear so much as probably that all the Christians who liued since the Apostles time or yet are aliue haue not been deluded with fictions concerningâ— Gods truths but rather are plunged into à deep Deluge of gross Errours if the Church and Councils can Teach or belieue false Doctrin And here be pleased to reflect à little Hoâ— neer these two Aduersaries come to one another 5. The first mentioned account it Happines to remain in Errour and Sectaries like well not only the Possibility but more à prefent manifest danger of erring in this matter of highest The Parallel laâ—id forth and proued Consequence Actual errour pleases the one and à great hazard of it contents the other Humane nature say the first would be miserable were men so wise as to learn this Truth that Religion is à Foppery though it be so And we are all vndone Say Sectaries could we acquire so much Wisdom in this present state as to be infallibly Ascertained that Religion is no Foppery which perhaps may be one Wherefore to weaken all certitude They tell vs That none can learn infallibly those truths which God has reuealed because all Churches all Councile all Pastors and Doctors whose Duty is to giue Assurance of trutâ— are so fallible And that the very best may erre and oblige men â—â— belieue Errour Here is all the comfort we haue from Sectaries Thus much premised 6. We come to the fundamental Ground which proues our Catholick Religion and the Church that teaches it to be infallible I Said in the first Disc C. 1. n. 9. speaking against Atheists If we receiue the first lights of nature called general The fundamental ground of the Churches Infallibility 〈◊〉 from any Power inferiour to God They are all fallible and may deceiue vs. This granted which I think no Christian can deny It is most consequent to Assert That if we receiue the Supernatural lights or truths of Grace reuealed in Scripture vastly aboue all humane Comprehension from à less Power than God the wisest of men may liue in errour and cannot but be deceiued And thus both Nature and Grace necessarily depend on God 7. This great Truth iâ— the Apostles Doctrin Iacob C. 1. 17. Omne Donum perfectum de sursum est Euery perfect Gift Deduced from the Apostles Doctrin comes from aboue descending from that Father of lights God therefore rightly stiled the Father of light or as Diuines Speak Prima veritas the first vnerring Verity Pleased to make known some few of his Diuine truths in that Book of Holy Scripture Few I call them compared with innumerable others not at all reuealed which yet his infinite Wisdom comprehend's Howeuer these few often darkly expressed in that mysterious Book or in Terms less perspicuous Dazle the eyes of weak sighted Mortals and wonder nothing The Apostle giues the Reason â— Tim. 6. 16. because all proceed from him Qui lucem inhabitat inaccessibilem That dwell's in an vnaccessible light none can attain vnto Yet truths they are the first vnerring Verity Treasures Communicated Asserts it and therefore ought to be estemed treasures If treasures Prouidence will haue them conueyed vnto vs by secure hands And if eternal truths concerning Saluation God cannot but will and his Will is à law That all be Proposed and Taught as Diuine and infallible Verities depending vpon none How to be Valued if we vltimately bring them to their last Center but vpon the first Truth only who neither will nor can deceiue any 8. Now here is the Difficulty Seing it hath pleased Almighty God for reasons best known to Himselfe to leaue most of the high Mysteries registred in Scripture in no little Obscurity The main Difficulgy Proposed Some express his own Perfections of being one essence and three distinct Persons Others relate to the admirable works of Grace effected by his Infinite Power Of this nature are the Incarnation and the whole Series of mans Redemption The Difficulty I say is to find out à trusty Interpreter some faithful Oracle which can when doubts occurr concerning the darker Mysteries clear all lay open the Book and absolutely Assert An infinite verity speaks thus This sense and no other is what the Holy Ghost intended And this is necessary because Almighty God teaches no more immediatly by himself nor will haue Enthusianisms to be our Doctors 9. Moreouer the necessity of such à sure Oracle if Diuine The necessity of an Infallible Oracle truth must be learn'd is proued vpon this ground chiefly That these mysteries as is now said haue both their Difficulty and Darkness Natural reason left to it self boggles at them Iewes Gentils and Hereticks reiect the highest It is Say they mighty hard to believe á Trinity the Diuine word made flesh God and man to dye vpon à Cross c. What can
Reason yeild so far or submit to these as eternal Verities when their last and only Proof is taken from à Book which we se euidently sensed different wayes and so interpreted that One in rigour may own the Quineced because the Mysteries are difficult Scriptures Diuinity as the Arians do and yet so farr fauour Reason as not to force vpon it the Belief of such sublime secrets which offer violence to our intellectual Faculties Thus the Arians discourse 10. Now here I iustly appeal to the common Iudgement of Mankind and Ask whether our God of truth who on the one side perfectly comprehend's the depth of his own reuealed Mysteries and on the other penetrat's no less our shallow capacities puzled as we se in the search of the most Obuious things in nature could make choise of men meerly fallible and diuorced from Diuine Assistance to interpret Scripture whilst all of them none excepted because errable may grosly mistake and change the purest Verities which were euer yet reuealed into Errours What think ye could God who from Eternity foresaw and yet sees his written Truths depraued abused yea Heresies drawn from his most sacred words Could this Al-seing wisdom I say put his own Sacred book into such Sacrilegious hanâ—s or like well that à few scattered and diuided Sectaries should be the only best Interpreters of it 11. I say yet more All the men in the world considered meerly as nature has fram'd them fallible would commit the Presumption in this matter easily Committed Sin of Presumption and wrong both God and his verities did they venture so far as to interpret Scripture by no other Rule or law but by their own weak Reason and there vpon resolutely define that God is one pure Essence and three real distinct Persons Original Sin is such an euil as the Orthodox Church teaches Children are to be Baptized c. To deduce thus much from the bare letter of Scripture and to define euery particular resolutely is aboue the force of all natural knowledge Those then who Interpret the Truths of the first Alseing Verity that inhabits light not seen by our natural eyes must be specially Priuiledged and either receiue Diuine Assistance necessary illumination from the Father of Light or thankfully take infallible Assistance from the Holy Ghost the Spirit of Truth which is both promised and readily giuen to the Catholick Church 12. Hence I deduce the Churches infallibility and Argue thus Either there is such à Society of men preserued by Prouidence infallible in all they Define and interpret or not If you Affirm The Roman Catholick Church alone has the Priuiledge for all others disclaim Infallibility If you Deny The A further Proof highest Mysteries of Christian Religion are things only sought for but not found talked of but neuer learned In à word Religion is à meer Scepticism the best that learn it seem iust like those Schollers the Apostle mentioneth 2. Tim 3. 6. Semper discentes c. Alwaies learning but neuer throughly instructed If I euidence not what is here said so manifestly That no Sectary shall rationally contradict it censure me at your pleasure 13. A few Questions will clear all And first I must Demand From whence has that we call Religion its truth All Answer from God the first vnerring Verity Very right But we Ask again Where is the Master teaching Oracle which plainly deliuer's these reuealed truths or clearly Proposes the Mysteries now named Sectaries vsually tell vs Their Oracle is holy Scripture Herevpon followes à third Querie more difficult than all the rest Viz. Who Ascertains you Arians you Donatists you Pelagians you Protestants you Quakers All fallible that you The Sectaries pretence to their reading Scripture examined rightly vnderstand what you read and grosly depraue not Gods Word for without controuersy innumerable called Christians do depraue it Protestants à perfect Representatiue of all the other shall Answer for all O say they VVe read Scripture attentiuely we pray for light we peruse the Originals we compare Passage with passage and after much pains taken we both belieue the highest Mysteries and moreouer perswade our Selues that the new Model of Protestancy is conformable or at least not Dissonant to Gods word Here you haue their last and very best Principle For they will not hear of an Infallible Church 14. Reflect Gentle Reader à little Do Protestants only read pray peruse and compare No Certainly The Arians long since haue done So yet boldly oppose Protestants and deny the highest Mysteries of our Christian Faith If then the Arians Praying perusing and comparing proue no conuiction to Protestants Arians also read and Oppose Protestants Why should the Protestants praying or perusing Conuince the Arians of Errour Again Haue not Catholicks think ye of à longer continuance and far more numerous than Sectaries prayed and perused Scripture None can doubt it And yet they hold the whole Model of pure Protestancy à Nouelty and openly declare it Heretical Therefore vnless Sectaries haue So do Catholicks à singular talent in praying and perusing aboue all other Christians Vnless they can produce better Proofs for the Mysteries of Faith against the Arians and stronger Arguments against Catholicks in behalf of Protestancy than the bare letter of Scripture Sectaries Pretence to reading Scripture And their own weak conferring Texts together or praying vpon them They do not only make Protestancy ridiculous but moreouer euery new whimsy defensible For was there euer yet Fanatique in the world that could not Say thus much He certainly both professes and teaches truth because he has à Bible read's that peruses it and prayes earnestly And will not any Aduersary retort the Argument vpon him and defend whateuer foolery he fancies contrary 15. Belieue it if this way of Arguing haue force the meanest Quaquer in England will make his cause good against the makes Protestancy ridiculous stoutest Protestant and the Protestant if he say I read I Ponder I pray proues his Religion euery whit as strongly against the Quaquer That is neither proues any thing Nay more the worst of Hereticks may vpon this ground maintain his Errours against the Orthodox Church be that yet where you will and could the Church only say She reads Scripture ponders it and prayes Her case would be the same with the worst of Hereticks But besides reading and praying There are other Proofs whereby One Church only is euinced God's Faithful Oracle 16. From what is now said I Argue first A Principle which makes false Religion true yea all Religions though most erroneous as credible as true Religion is more than intolerable The Sectaries Principle makes false Religions true But this Principle of Protestants we read Scripture we ponder and pray makes false Religions true and all Sects though most erroneous as credible as true Religion is Ergo it is more than intolerable The Minor as is now said proues it self For euery Heretick pretend's to
antecedent Assent to this Proposition That what soeuer those Dort-men taught is true Doctrin before you own it as true Ascertain vs of thus much And you solue your own difficulty If this Instance please not make vse of another Your Ministers in England pretend to teach true Doctrin though not infallibly Say only vpon what antecedent Proposition the Truth of their Doctrin is assented to by all before it be belieued as true and we shall without labour Answer in behalf of our infallible Doctrin 16. In à word thus Catholicks plead This generall Proposition is to be assented to as both true and infallible Viz. All And clearly solued are obliged to Hear and Belieue the Pastors of God's Church when Lawsully Commissioned to teach in God's name and as the Orthodox Church teaches Here is the Thesis or the vniuersal receiued Proposition But these Pastors and Doctors when assembled in Council are still Pastors of the Church and lawfully commissioned to teach in God's name both true and infallible Doctrin Therefore they are to be heard and belieued in all and euery Definition proceeding from that Assembly lawfully conuened Here you haue the Hypothâ—sis as indubitably certain as the Thesis 17. A second Obiection you meet with in his Page 509. Another Obiection retorted and Solued What infallible Testimony haue you he means Catholicks for this that Councils are Infallible It is not enough for you to say That the Testimonies of Scripture you produce are an Infallible Testimony for it For that were to make the Scripture the sole Iudge of this great Controuersy which you deny to be the sole Iudge of any I first retort the Argument and Ask. What Testimony haue you Sectaries I do not say Infallible But so much as seemingly probable taken from Scripture whereby Councils the greatest Representatiues in God's Church are made fallible Not one can be alleged 18. Now my Answer briefly is Scripture once admitted for God's word which our Aduersaries will not reflect on manifestly The Catholick Principles for Infallibility conuinceth the Churches infallibility To those express and significant Passages of holy Writ known to euery one The Church is the pillar and ground of Truth you haue them already We add the iudgement of Fathers cited aboue The guide of Controuersies C. 3. P. 147. Produces more Besides Gods Church which we hold an Infallible Oracle interpret's Scripture to this sense and here are our aboundantly full Principles for Her Infallibility Come you Sr now closely to the point confront vs if you can with as many Passages of Scripture as many Testimonies of Fathers Or and this we alwayes vrge with the Authority of any Orthodox Church which fauours your contrary Tenet of Fallibility The Strife is ended But hereof there is no fear at all And thus you se how Scripture is the Iudge Sectaries haue none for their Tenet when once admitted as Diuine and faithfully interpreted not otherwise 19. A. 3. Obiection Page 509. The Decree or Definition of à Council receiues Infallibility from the Council before the A third weak obiection retorted Pope confirm's it or not If not The whole infallibility resides in the Pope and this some Say is not de Fide vniuersali If it arise from the Council before the Pope confirm's it for that act of confirmation followes the Definition the Council is infallible antecedently to the Popes Confirmation I first retort the Argument An Act of Parlament or à law made for all receiues its force from the Conuened Members before his Maiesty Confirm's it or not If not The whole Power of making such à Law resides in His Maiesty which some will say is not so If it arise ftom the Parlament before His Maiesty Confirm's it and that Confirmation followes the Act The Parlament is impowr'd to make such Lawes before His Royal. Assent Confirm's them Here is the very same Form of arguing though in à different matter and you se the weaknes of it 20. The true Answer to the Obiection is as followes Euery Doctrin definable may be considered two wayes first as it Proceed's from God the most supreme Verity and vnder that Notion it is both true and infallible in it self before the pope and Council Define it And note they can Define no other Doctrin And solued on earth but what God ratifies in Heauen 2. It may be considered as the Doctrin of the Representatiue Church infallibly Assisted to teach Diuine truths And vnder that Notion it is called Church Doctrin proceeding from the Head and Members of one mystical Body The Head therefore Separated or solely taken Defines not in Councils The Members diuided from the Head define not But one and the same Definition proceed's ioyntly from both Head and members vnited together The Instance already hinted at giues light enough If any reply The Definition when the Council proposed it was both true and infallible Doctrin I distinguish the Proposition It might be then Certain Euery Doctrin true in it selfe is not therefore Church Doctrin and infallible Doctrin in it self that 's true but as yet it is neither known or owned as such or called Church Doctrin It was then the whole Councils or Churches true and infallible Doctrin I deny it This is founded vpon both Pope and Council infallibly assisted as is now supposed and already proued 21. I find no more in Mr Stillingfleet worth any notice That which followes in his Page 510. ouerthrowes all councils Other Obiections waued as impertinent or proues nothing What certainty haue you Saith he that this or that Council proceeded lawfully That the Bishops were lawful Bishops That the Pope who confirm's them was à lawful Pope That some By-ends or Interest swayed not many That all conditions were exactly performed c. I Answer first and Ask. What certainty haue you of any illegal Bishops of vnlawful Popes of Interest Swaying all Here because you accuse we put you to the Proof I Answer 2. That Certainty which you or any has of no By ends in the four first general Councils of their lawful Bishops of no interest swayng c. The same we haue of all the approued Councils in Gods Church To insist further vpon such saint Obiections is only to lose time or might one retaliate in Mr Stillingfleets own language meerly to kill flies to run after them and make sport with them And thus much of the Churches Infallibility I mean the Roman Apostolical Catholick Church to whose Censure and infallible Iudgement I do most willingly submit my Selfe and euery particular in this Treatise THE THIRD DISCOVRSSE OF The Resolution of Faith THe subiect here hinted at is as all Shollers know very Speculatiue Terms according to my little Skill in the English Tongue often Fail to express what is necessary Wonder not therefore if now and then you meet with that which may seem Obscure to à Vulgar Reader My Endeauour Shall be to giue the Discourse so much Light as
infallibly the Infallible Testimony of the Apostles Preaching with à Diuine Infallible Assent Most certainly they Did. Yet the Infallibility of that Testimony was not known if we speak strictly of Knowledge but by Motiues of Credibility which were no Obiect of their Faith vnless you make faith to be Science The Argument retorted but Inducements only to belieue Ergo this very Primitiue Faith was vnreasonable because it was an infallible Assent built vpon probable grounds beyond all Proportion or degree of that Euidence whereby those pious men were moued to belieue Hence You Se though the Motiues which illustrate the Church were in themselues fallible and not Metaphysically conexed with the Diuine Testimony yet Faith grounded on that Testimony cannot but be certain and infallible and consequently must Transcend or goe beyond all the degrees of Certitude appearing in the prerequired Motiues Mr Stillingfleet reply's This is to require Infallibility in the Conclusion where the Premises are only probable Answ He err's not knowing the nature of Faith which Discourses not like to Science For example Make this Sillogism Whateuer God reueal's is True but God reueal's the Incarnation of the Diuine VVord Ergo that is true The difficulty only is in the Minor But God reueal's which cannot be proued by another belieued Article of Faith wholly as obscure to vs as the Incarnation is I say proued by Reason because the same difficulty will be as much moued again Concerning the Proof of that second belieued Article as concerning the first of the Incarnation and so in Infinitum And Shew'd Proofles Therefore all rational Proofs auailing to beget Faith in any must of necessity be extrinsecal to belief and lie as it were in another Region more clear yet less certain than the reuealed Mystery is we assent to by Faith 4. Now to our Purpose We hold this an Article of Faith The Church is God's infallible Oracle And therefore Say antecedently Rational Proofs for the Churches infallibility to Faith it cannot be proued by Arguments as obscure or of the same Infallible certainty with Faith For then Faith would be superfluous or rather we should belieue by à firm and infallible Assent before we do belieue vpon the Motiue of Gods infallible Reuelation which is impossible Hence it is that when we goe about Haue not the certainty of Faith 〈◊〉 the Infallibility of the Church independently of Scripture Yea and also independently of all belieuâ—d Church Doctrin We must necessarily Euince this rationallâ— by reflex Arguments and Motiues extrinsecal to what we Belieue which are not of the same certainty with Supernatural Faith it self Now these Arguments what these Motiues Proue founded vpon the Motiues of Credibility can goe no further stretch them to the vtmost But only to proue this great verity That what euer we belieue either of Scripture or of the Church is most euidently Credible aboue all things proposable to the contrary And this great light the learned at least haue before they yeild an infallible Assent vpon Diuine Reuelation to the very Doctrin of the Church or Scripture either 5. I Say 2. Mr Stillingfleet and all Sectaries whilst They Belieue with an Infallible Assent the most fundamental Articles in Sectaries goe beyond that Euidence whereby they are induced to belieue Scripture goe beyond all Proportion of that Euidence whereby they are induced to Belieue And consequently must Solve their own â—eak Argument yet strong Ad hominem against them If I Euince not this Truth blame me boldly And obserue my Proof 6. The Sectary belieues that Verity which S. Iohn expresses in this short Sentence The word was made Flesh That is he belieues the Incarnation of the Son of God with an Assent so infallible that it cannot only be false but that he would not disbelieue it vpon any reason Proposable Though an Angel should preach Contrary But neither this Act of Faith nor its Formal Obiect the Diuine Reuelation are ex terminis euidently true Quoad â—s yet must be proued â—uidently Credible to reason or Faith becomes vnreasonable and rash For Qui cito credit leuis est corde Now further None can proue this by another Act or Article of Faith no more its own Self-euidence than the belieued Incarnation The Assertion Proued is All therefore which can be done is to make it euidently Credible by Motiues extrinsecal to Belief by vniuersal Tradition and the Consent of innumerable learned men who haue both conueyed vnto vs the Words as Diuine Scripture and the genuine Sense of them also But this very humane Tradition this exteriour Consent of all or what other Motiues can be Imagined preuious to Faith because fallible may deceiue Yet by the help of such fallible Motiues Mr Stillingfleets Our Aduersary Clearly Conuinced Faith if it rest's vpon the Diuine Reuelation is raised higher and stand's firmer vpon that Ground than the Euidence of his Motiues can induce to Therefore he makes the conclusion surer than the Premises And goes beyond all Proportion and degree of fallible Euidence preambulatory to his certain Belief What I Assert is manifest For by Faith he The Conuiction Manifest Sayes the Incarnation is so infallibly true that it cannot be false Yet all the Motiues which induce him to belieue Say Possibly it may be false or exclude not à Possibility of falshood And if this be not to Transcend all Proportion of his acquired Euidence nothing is to goe beyond it 7. The Argument will be yet more clear if proposed after this manner Mr Stillingfleet infallibly belieues the truth of that Scripture now Quoted I Ask by what means can he know That this very belieued Truth is à Diuine Verity or Scripture The Answer may be That 's known vpon Tradition or the publique Authority of all not only Christians but others also who haue conueyed the Book to vs. Very Another most Conuincing Proof good But this Publick Authority this Conueyance or what euer Tradition you will is either of equal infallible certainty with the Belieued Truth of Scripture Or less and much weaker If less and weaker Mr Stillingfleets Faith goes beyond all propotion and degrees of his preuious acquired Euidence Not to be answered And it be of equal infallible Certaintly That is If he belieues as infallibly the Conueyance of those Words For or Vpon Gods Diuine Testimony as he belieues the Doctrin there contained to be à Diuine Truth He makes one Article of Faith the Proof of another and euidently incurrs the Circle obiected to Catholicks as shall appear afterward When we examin his 170. Page and refute his Errour concerning the Moral Certainty of Faith 8. Now to the Obiection It is not possible That the Assent in matters of Faith rise higher or stand firmer than the Assent to the Testimony is vpon which those things are belieued Answer Very true But know Sr we Assent to matters of Faith vpon Gods Diuine Testimony and not for the Motiues
both Ascertains him of the Canon and the Sense also Hence That other Obiection fall's to nothing How can there be an infallible Assent to the truth of this Proposition Scriptures are The third retorted and answered the word of God when that Infallibility at the highest is but euidently Credible I Answer and retort the Argument How could the Primitiue Christians Assent to the Apostles preaching as infallible when that infallibility at the highest was but Euidently Credible before they belieued 3. The whole Confusion lies as is said in not Distinguishing between Faith and the Iudgement of Credibility Infallibility therefore whether we Assent to Christ to his Apostles or to the Church all taught one and the same Doctrin is the Obiect of Diuine Faith but none euer assented to any Doctrin these Oracles taught infallibly without sufficient Euidence preuiously had A Discouery of the whole Fallacy of its Credibility And thus I belieue by Faith Scripture to be God's word because the Church Saith so But if you Ask why I hold all the Church Teaches to be Euidently Credible I Euince not this truth by the Infallibility I belleue But recurr to those Motiues whereby She is proued an Oracle as euidently Credible as euer any Apostle was And consequently I belieue Her Infallibility with the same Diuine Faith as I belieue the Words of Scripture 4. Page 114. He Obiect 's 3. We Catholicks make by this way of resoluing Faith euery man's reason the only Iudge in the Choise of his Religion Why doe we more so I beseech you than the Primitiue Christians who certainly had the very like rational Motiues with ours and no other before they belieued But of this Subiect we shall treat largely towards the End of this Discourse 5. Page 115. He Saith If the Infallibility of the Church of Rome be à sure foundation of Faith what will become of the Faith of all those who receiued Diuine Reuelations without the Infallibility of any Obiections grounded on Instance Church at all And he brings in these Instances First of the Apostles belieuing the Diuine Authority of the old Testament when Christ suffered which certainly was not Grounded on the infallible Testimony of the Iewish Church for at that time it consented to the Death of the â—essias 2. Of all that belieued the woman of Samaria no infallible Oracle when She declared the Discourse between Christ our Lord and her self 3. Of such as belieued our Sauiours Doctrin and Miracles related by men honest and faithful These Saith â—e had no infallible Testimony but only à rational Euidence to build Faith non and consequently an Infallible Testimony of the Conueyers of Diuine Reuelation is Vnnecessary to Diuine Faith which seem's vndoubted For very few in the first Ages of the Christian Church receiued the Doctrin of the Gospel from the mouths of persons infallible 6. By the way I much wonder Why Mr Stillingfleet omitted to touch here vpon an other Instance farr more difficult which both he and all other must solue concerning rude and illiterate Persons chiefly if of no great maturity who are induced to belieue by the Testimony or Instruction of their Parents or of Another Instance more difficult some other simple Teachers These certainly may haue Faith without acquiring that full Euidence of Credibility whereunto the learned reach yea and without any Discouery of the Scriptures rational Euidence neuer perhaps heard of much less vnderstood by them 7. Now I Answer to the Obiection None makes the Roman Catholick Church in all Circumstances the only sure foundation of Diuine Faith For the first man that belieued in The Church in all Cireumstances was not the only Foundation of Faith Christ our Lord before the Compleat Establishment of His Church had Perfect Faith resting on that great Master of Truth without dependance on the Christian Church For Christ alone was not the Church But the supreme Head of it Faith therefore in General requires no more but only to rely vpon God the first Veriâ—y speaking by this or that Oracle by one or more men lawfully sent to teach who proue their Mission and make the Doctrin proposed by them Euidently Credible In like manner the Apostles preached no Doctrin in the name of the new Christian Church whilst our Sauiour liued here on earth But Testified that he was the true Messias by virtue of those Signs and Miracles which had been already wrought aboue the force of nature Thus much Supposed 8. It is hard I think for any to Say where the force lies in The Mistake of the first Instance that Instance of the Apostles belieuing the Diuine Authority of the old Testament which innumerable Iewes then dispersed all Iury ouer and the other parts of the world not at all conscious of Christ's Passion most firmly belieued Why therefore might not the Apostles belieue the Diuinity of the old Scripture vpon the Authority of that Church whereof there were at that time many and very many Professors in other places distant from Hierusalem Hence I say the Belief of that Article neuer failed But was alwayes preserued entire in both Churches of the Iewes and Christians for we all yet belieue the Authority of the old Testament And Consequently its hard to Conceiue what this Obiection aymes at 9. Again admit à total Subuersion of the Iewish Church Had not the Apostles our Blessed Lord present who could well Ascertain them that he came not to Cancel any Diuine Supposed true its forceles Authority of Scripture for this was impossible vnless God be contrary to God but to fulfil to perfect and change the old Law into à better State O but the High Priest and the Elders also erred in consenting to Christs death Very true and the Reason is because their Priuiledge of not erring lasted only to Christ's comming and not longer But hence it followes not that then there was no Iewish Church which belieued the Diuine Verities of the old Scripture I verily think Mr Stillingfleet mistook one Obiection for another Perhaps he would haue said that the Apostles lost faith of our Sauiours Resurrection at the time of his Passion But this Difficulty is solued ouer The Apostles failed not in Faith and ouer First it is Answered that Article was not sufficiently Proposed to them Therefore we read Luke 18. 34. They vnderstood none of these things This Word was hid from them Again Had they failed in Faith ar that time They were then as Bellarmin obserues Lib 3. de Ecclesia C. 17. neither the whole Church but only material Parts of it nor could that improbable Supposed Errour haue preiudiced one whit the Faith of others who firmly belieued in Christ 10. That other Instance of the Samaritan woman is soon cleared if we distinguish between the Motiue or the natural Proposition The other Instance cleared by one 〈…〉 tion of Faith which comes by hearing and the infallible Oracle wherevpon it relies And T' is
and all the particular Sentences contained in them are not God's written word He could not yet for such à peruerse Denial be accounted an Heretique I Proue it None can incurr the guilt of Heresy but he who denies à Truth which God has reuealed or which stand's firm vpon à Diuine Testimony But he that denies the Books of Scripture to contain Heresy not incurred though one denyed the Books of Scripture to be Diuine God's Word in them renounceth no Truth reuealed by Almighty God For Saith our Aduersary this is no reuealed Truth nor stand's firm vpon any Diuine Testimony Therefore he is no Heretique Now further if he may without the sin of Heresy deny these Books to be Diuine Seing God neuer said so It is impossible to belieue the Doctrin therein contained to be Diuine vpon any Diuine Testimony yet Mr Stillingfleet thinks he may 35. My Reason is No man vnderstand's by the Books of Scripture which contain the Principles or Doctrin of the Iewish and Christian Religion to be meerly the Paper or Couer of the Books but he must vnderstand if he rightly conceiues VVhat is to be vnderstood by the Books of Scripture what Scripture is the very Principles and Doctrin contained in those writings For example Here is one Principle in the old Testament Gen. 17. 4. God made à Conuenant with Abraham and his seed for euer Another in the New Ioan. 1. 14. The Word is made Flesh. Answer I beseech you Can any man truly affirm that these two Principles the like is of innumerable others contained in Scripture stand not firm vpon God's infallible Testimony when T' is manifest the whole Christian world is obliged to belieue them with à Faith grounded vpon the same infallible Testimony that reuealed them Principles of Religion denyed It was Therefore no little Ouersight in Mr Stillingfleet to Speak here of the Principles of the Iewish and Christian Religion contained in à Book called Scripture And positiuely to Assert these cannot be belieued vpon à Diuine Testimony This certainly is not Defensible 36. Some may yet Reply Two things are here to be considered First the bare letter or outward words of Scripture and these we belieue not vpon Diuine Reuelation but haue them from vniuersal Tradition or the consent of Nations An Answerto such as here diflinguish The second is the Sense or Diuine Doctrine which these outward Signes or exteriour words Conuey to vs. Now this Sense or the interiour Doctrin of Scripture as contradistinct from the bare outward letter we purely belieue vpon the Diuine Testimony casting the Assent giuen to the Words vpon Between the bare words and the sense other forrain Principles I belieue Mr Stillingfleet elswhere Saies some such thing as this or must say it Contra. 1. The meer outward words though pure are no Books of Scripture And as separated from the Sense and interiour Doctrin are neither Principles of the Iewish or Christian Religion nor in rigour God's word For God neuer spake nor inspired others to write words but he iointly conueyed with them his own Sense and Doctrin also And Methinks its very hard to belieue this Doctrin This is my beloued Son as God's sacred words and not to belieue those very words to come from God vpon the same Diuine Motiue which Support's the Doctrin Moses saith our Sauiour Iohn 5. 47. Has written of VVords are Diuine me And if you will not belieue his Writings how will you belieue my Words These outward Signes therefore the very words of truth called by the Apostle 1. Thess 2. 13. Verbum auditus Dei words of hearing or heard are in very deed the VVords of God and consequently may well where none can rationally doubt of their Purity be assented to vpon the same Diuine Testimony with the Doctrine contained in them 37. The Reason is God would haue been the same Verity he now is although he had reuealed nothing that therefore which moues or determin's Belieuers to assent to the truths reuealed is not only his increated Authority but the sincere external Reuelation with it also These Two iointly The First Veritas Speaking is the Obiect of Faith concurr as one Motiue whence it is that the First Verity as Speaking or Reuealing may be rightly called the Formal Obiect of Faith I know Diuines vary about this Question Whether the external Proposition be à partial Motiue with Gods internal Verity or only à necessary condition whereby that Verity the vltimate ground of faith is applyed to Belieuers herein much may be de Nomine But none of them all Say The exteriour Reuelation is assented to vpon one Principle which is not Diuine and that the Doctrine conueyed by it is belieued vpon another most Diuine and infallible This is à nouelty VVhat Sectaries should grand Neither do I see how Sectaries can find that Lustre that Maiesty and Diuinity so often talk'd of in the purest words of holy Writ if they be not owned as God's true words vpon his Diuine Testimony 38. Let vs now briefly examin Mr Stillingfleet's Proposition without depending on what he teaches or must teach concerning the belief of words separated from the Doctrin VVe belieue Saith he the Doctrin contained in the Books of The Doctrin in it selfe examined Scripture vpon à Diuine Testimony because God has giuen abundant Euidence that this Doctrin was or is of Diuine Reuelation Here are three things Distinguishable The Doctrin Belieued The Incarnation for example The Testimony reuealing the matter bebelieued and finally the Euidence whereby that Testimony is brought to light Now all our difficulty is concerning the Euidence of this Diuine Testimony wherevpon we belieue any Mystery and we Ask from whence Mr Stillingfleet takes his Euidence He has you se abundance of it wherewith to proue that God euer Said The Diuine word was made flesh 39. The Question seem's reasonable because this Testimony which all ought to belieue and consequently doth Exist is not it's own Selfe euidence nor can it be euidenced by another Testimony of Scripture wholly as obscure to vs that God spake The Diuine Testimony not its own Self euidence that Truth For so we should goe in insinitum and Proue one dark Testimony by another equally as dark Infallible Tradition not written and the infallible Authority of the Church our Aduersaries reiect And may Say Both though admitted are Obiects of faith and consequently vnder tâ—at Notion appear as little Euident to vs as the Scriptures Testimony is we desire to proue Therefore whateuer is rightly called Euidence in this matter whereby all would discouer an obscure Testimony not yet proued God's word must of necessity be extrinsecal to the Testimony it selfe and if extrinsick no other Euidence can Therefore the Euidence of its Credibility must be taken from extrinfick Motiues Possibly be had but that which arises from the known Motiues of Credibility For by these the Church is proued an Oracle no lesse
an infinite Goodnes cannot permit either Diuel or false Prophet to vse the like way of Speaking I mean by Signs peculiar How this Diuine Language is known to proceed from God to God and withal to vtter à falshood in his name For were this possible we infringe the greatest Euidence which Christianity has and must Say though Christ our Lord and his Apostles Significantly spake to all in God's name by their wonders and Miracles Yet neither Iewes nor Gentils could be obliged after à clear discouery of them to belieue that they were sent from God To teach the world 3. Now because this external Language is twofold First Priuate and Immediate 2. Publick and Mediate both for our better Satisfaction are to be declared Concerning the first Imagin By one Example Gâ—ds immediate way of speaking that one like another Mofes were in à Desert and saw à Bush burn yet not consumed Drawing neer he hear's one Speak out of the flame and Asking who it is it is Answered I am God that speak's and command thee to belieue and deliuer to all what I Say And to Euidence that I am God I fore-tel thee now things which shall happen in thy dayes Besides thou shall see these is declared wonderful Signes to confirm this Truth that I Speak Put thy hand into thy bosome it shall become leperous and presently The language known to proceed from God And why pure again Cast thy rod vpon the ground I 'll make it à Serpent and without delay turn it into what it was before And if these Signs moue thee not look into the next Thicket there is one lies dead barbarously slain by his Enemies this man I will raise vp to life and thy own eyes shall see the Miracle For these wonders therefore thou must belieue I am God who speak's and know it belongs to my Prouidence not to permit such à signalized Language to passe from me vnless it were mine Thus we haue Gods priuate and immediate way of speaking 4. Herevpon this retired man leaues his Solitude goes abroad and publisheth to all what he has heard and seen but yet gain's no credit He then tells his incredulous Auditors God has sent him as à Messenger to speak in his name and proues his Commission The way of Speaking by another by working strange Wonders He cures the sick dispossesses Diuels raises the Dead which done the most obdurate hearts Assent to what he teaches and belieue he is no Impostor but à Messenger indeed sent from God For none as that Prince amongst the Iewes argued aboue Iohn 3. 1. can say he comes from God and work such wonders vnless God be with him And this is God's publick way of speaking by another 5. A. 3. Principle Whoeuer grant's that God can speak what we are obliged to if God â—peak's not immediatly to man by an Oracle distinct from himselfe must also if so great à Maiesty pleases not to impart his truths immediatly hold it Obligatory to hear the Mediate Language of that Oracle whereby God speak's 6. Imagin now you had an earnest Seeker after Truth à meer Stranger to Christ yet thoughtful of à long Eternity that look's about him and is resolued to find out what God has spoken by the best Oracles He read's Aristotle Plato and the like ancient Philosophers And ponders all most diligently What How à Zealous Inquirer after â—tuth proceed's followes Some few Sparks of light he finds there but so mix'd with darkness and errour that the ill Lustre of it leaues him quite dissatisfied Perhaps he may hope to learn more from Mahomet's Alcoran Worse Success here For no sooner has he the Book in his hands but the impudent lies the horrid Impostures the filth and contradictions discouered there so disquiet He meet 's first with prophane learning his troubled soul that be curses the Book And rightly Conclud's so foul à language could neuer come from God Inquiring moreouer who this Mahomet was He learn's he was à Counterfeit an Ignorant an vnpure and most cruel man onely praysâ—ble in this that he owned One God Though he neuer adored him in Spirit and truth 7. Thus much done our Zealous Seeker hears of à Book Fall's next on the Holy Scripture called the Holy Scripture highly reuerenced by Christians He reads and reioyces for now he meets with à language beseeming God graue Simâ—le familiar yet withall serious The Doctrin and Preceps of the book appear also most sacred But one doubts occurr ' doubt occurr's Concerning the strange Miracles and wonders in the old and new Testament So doth another in no few Passages which there Seem so obscure that He vnderstand's them not Howeâ—er by what is discouered most happy Man were He could any Ascertain him of the truth of all now perused And indubitably proue it to be God's own infallible word 8. In this restles condition He proposes the Doubts to one He seek's Satisfaction or more of Caluins followers and Ask's how they proue the Scriptures Diuinity They tell him the Question is as impertinent as if he should demand how light my be known to be light and not darkness white to be white and not black Much dissatisfied with the Answer wholly as bad as that other Proof is taken from the priuate Spirit The inquisitiue Person hauing And repaires to Catholicks heard of à known Christian Society called Catholicks addresses himselfe to some of the learned among them who pretend to Speak in the name of Christ and the Church And assure him that God is the Author of Scripture This yet reaches not home and though it were further answered the Church positiuely teaches so yet he may iustly demand How we proue the truth of the Churches Testimony 9. Here whilst Sectaries are silent We proceed as the solitary Man did and euidence God's own Language spoken by one only Oracle That is We lay forth the Motiues mentioned aboue which illustrate the Church and most prudently conuince that God speak's by this Oracle The Motiues are her vndeniable Miracles the eminent Holiness of life in thousands the Sanctity He listens to God's own language Spoken by the Church and Vnity of her Doctrin witnessed by the consent of so many different Nations who all agree and will agree in one and the same Faith to the end of Ages We Add hereunto the Constancy and fortitude of Martyrs those admirable Conuersions the Church has wrought Her amplitude extended the whole world ouer and yet to giue more light We Ask whether euer since the first Creation of things such multitudes of Professors so well vnited in one Faith so wise so learned so pious and virtuous can be found in any other Religion not Catholick Who more exactly complied with the Law they liued vnder or yeilded à readier Obedience to it then those doe and haue done that make Profession of the Roman Catholick Faith The Ingenuous man saith No and
the truth is manifest The Heathens so notoriously transgressed the Law of nature that few and very No Motiues sound in any other Religion but the Catholick few obserued it During Moses Law the Church was but little yet the Peoples sins were great And if we compare the Learning Wisdom and Piety of the Iewes with the eminent Knowledge Virtue and Piety of those who profess the Catholick faith there is no Parallel Mention modern Sectaries diuorced from Christ and his Church what are they Men of yesterday truely Lawless in à word à very small disioynted company Their Critical learning appeares in their Writings and the virtue they haue is best known by their works Nothing hitherto of God's Language I mean no rational Motiues illustrate this Religion 10. Thus you se First How à Seeker after truth may by prudent Industry learn that the Doctrin contained in Scripture is Gods own Sacred and Diuine word But. 2. To be Assured hereof an Infallible Oracle euidenced by Supernatural Signes The last assurance giuen is to attest the Verity for so Prouidence has ordered That God's own most sublime and Diuine languaâ—e mâ—st be conueyed to vs by another more plain and easy The Motiues which illustrate the Church are this plain exteriour Language Induced by them we hear the Church speak And vpon her Testimony belieue that other sacred Language of God deliuered in Holy Writ 11. A. 4. Principle The Resolution of Faith is then exactly made when all the Causes or conditions wherevpon it depend's what the Resolution of Faith implies and when exactly made are plainly laid forth vntil we fall vpon the very last Cause or Motiue of our assent giuen to the Diuine Reuelation Briefly The final Cause of belieuing is that in this our short Exile we liue virtuously as Faith requires and after enioy eternal Happines The material Cause or Subiect of Faith is Man's vnderstanding The intrinsick Formal cause is no other but Faith it selfe which as truely makes à soul bâ—lieuing as vision receiued in the â—etina of the Eye denominat's it seing Thus far there is no great dispute nor much can be questioned concerning the resolution of the very Formal Act of Faith as distinguished from the Obiectiue which is made by à reflex Contemplation vpon it as it tend's in to all those causes and Conditions whereon that act depend's The only difficulty therefore remaining concern's the Formal extrinsecal Motiue which all Say is Gods Diuine Reuelation 12. Now one Question may be From whence haue we Catholicks greater assurance of our Doctrin or why Say we That that stand's firm vpon the Diuine Testimony and reiect the Arians and Protestants Doctrin as à Nouelty or not built vpon the same foundation whilst all of vs pretend to Scripture The Arians say Christ is not the highest God We assert the contrary Protestants teach the Church is fallible We the contrary In rhis Opposition of Iudgements who An easy difficulty can certainly Define what God has spoken To this and it is the least of difficulties we Answer God who cannot deceiue has giuen so many Diuine and manifest Signes in behalfe of the reuealed Doctrin which the Church teaches that none can Question the Truth vnless he will either Solued vpon this Principle That God cannot cheat the world say An infinite Wisdom cannot declare his own Interiour mind by clear exteriour Signs Or which is worse That he has established an Oracle and set it forth with strange Supernatural wonders only to make à fair Appearance though the final End be to cheat all that belieue it 13. Now here is the only Question Whether these Arians or Protestants haue any better euidenced Oracle by more or equal Signs and miracles which teaches their Tenets then the Roman Catholick Church is that Teaches ours Could such an Oracle be euidenced They might talk of the Assurance of their particular Doctrins but till this be shown which will neuer be silence must proue the best Answer CHAP. VIII The main Difficulty in the Resolution of Faith Proposed VVhat Connexion the Motiue haue with the Diuine Reuelation Of their weight and efficacy God's own Language not imitable by his Enemies Faith transcend's the certainty of all Motiues The main Disficulty solued Of our great Security in Belieuing God Though we haue not Euidence of the Diuine Testimony 1. THe real Difficulty in this matter which Mr Stillingfleet hitt's not on is so common to all Christians The Difficulty common to all that Sectaries are as much yea more obliged to solue it then the Catholicks Thus I propose it The last Resolution of faith is made into this Obiectiue Truth God has reâ—ealed the Incarnation the like is of any other Diuine Mystery None knowes Euidently the Mystery of the Trininity in it Selfe but the Reuelation appear's and must appear Obscure to him that belieues For T' is neither its own Selfe-Euidence nor can be euidently applied by any other Medium especially if the Motiues of credibility haue not infallible connexion with the Diuine Testimony Thus much supposed which none The ground of the difficulty can deny it followes that the intellectual Faculty when the Reuelation is obscurely proposed stand's as it were houering and cannot for as much as yet appear's be more inclined to assent infalliblâ— then to dissent 2. If you Say â—â—e Will after à full Sight of the Reuelations credibility can dâ—â—ermine the vnderstanding to assent suâ—er Omnia or Infallibly t' is Answered This seem's impossible First because the Motiues whereby the Obiect is made credible can settle in vs no other iudgement but This. God's Testimony and the thing attested by it are most prudently thought to exist or appear so highly credible that it is the greatest folly not to belieue But this Iudgement you se neither reaches to the Verity of the Reuelation in it selfe nor to the matter reuealed therefore Faith cannot as yet be elicited 3. Again The will cannot moue the vnderstanding to assent The will Seem's to help nothing in this particular to an obiect Sub ratione veri infallibilis vnder the Notion of an infallible Truth vnless manifest reason first conuinces the intellectual Power that it Exists and is infallible But all the reasons preceding Faith bring with them no such Conuiction for all are here supposed fallible Therefore if the vnderstanding yeild's an infallible Assent to that which is not rationally conuinced to be infallible it proceed's temerariously and doth more then it can do for it goes beyond the limits of Prudence saying This is infallibly so though it has no reason to iudge it infallible The force of what is now said will best appear in this Syllogism A Truth though really à truth Proposed The whole difficulty proposed in one Syllogism or represented as obscure cannot moue the vnderstanding to an infallible Assent but the Diuine Reuelation is proposed and represented as an obscure truth Ergo it cannot moue the
laies claim to no lower à Verity then the most Pure and Supreme only And if it rest's not here it is no Faith I say Supreme and Pure and for this reason also we exclude Faith relies vpon the most pure and supreme Verity the connexion between the Motiues and Diuine Reuelation from the Formal obiect of Faith because the Connexion implies à Complexum or Mixture of two things known Scientifically and therefore is vnmeet to ground Faith One may replie The exteriour words of Scripture taken with the Diuine Testimony are Obiects of Faith therefore these Motiues assented to vpon the same Testimony can also terminate Faith For we all belieue The same thing known and belieued that the Church is Holy and Vniuersal Answ Very true because the same thing can be Sâ—itum Creditum both known and belieued vpon different Motiues known by the force of reason which see 's the Connexion between the One and the Other and belieued also vpon pure Reuelation Thus we know the Existence of God by the works manifest in nature and withall belieue it vpon his own sole word or the Diuine Testimony 12. Vpon these Principles we Answer to another Obiection To belieue Say some is to trust God whom we belieue which How we trust God by Faith is impossible if his outward words or exteriour Signes be necessarily connexed with his interiour speaking For how can we trust when an absolute Assurance is had of his Testimony Answ This is done very easily when the Assurance giuen is extrinsecal to the Testimony and far inferiour to the Supereminent Infallibility of God that speaks Now this Motiue only and no lesser certitude ground 's supernatural Faith In à word we trust because we transcend all created Certitude and rely vpon the most Supreme Verity by an Obscure Assent of Faith 13. Others Obiect 3. We suppose all this while the Motiues inducing to belieue more perswasiue and efficacious then Church Motiues proued efficatious can be euinced by reason For why may not God separate the exteriour appearance of à Miracle from the reallity of it And So permit the Diue I to delude vs all I Answer 1. This Criticism first reuerses the most glorious Miracles which Christ euer wrought I Answer 2. Though the appearance and reallity of à Miracle be separable yet the euident Signes of Sanctity manifest in innumerable The Euident Appearance of whole Nations conuerted to the Catholick Faith are inseparably conioyned with the reallity of interiour Sanctity and real interiour conuersions All Collectiuely taken most Conuincing Now in the weighing these Motiues One is not to be thought of singly but pondered with the rest Altogether indubitably euince that God speak's by them Or if you Still Deny Say I beseech you whose language they are I Answer 3. The obsolute Power of God cannot permit If He positiuely intend's not to lead all into errour That à false Miracle be wrought and God cannot cheat any by à false Miracle done in his name to confirm à Doctrin suitable to his Goodnes and the increase of Holyness In this Case therefore The Miracle must bâ— real without guile and deceipt For were this cousenage possible God could haue â—o language proper to Himselfe Contrary to what is already proued Thus much premised 14. We are to solue the Difficulty another way perhaps The Difficulty solued another way more plain and easy And therefore distinguish with Diuines à Twofold câ—rtitude in euery act of Faith The one called the Certitude of Infallibility arises from the supernatural Principles which concurr to the very act of Belief And these not liable to errour can neuer operate but when the Diuine Reuelation really is This certitude may be had though we no more experience or know it by any reflex Consideration than One who is directly A twofold Infallibility explained moued by the Holy Ghost to write à Truth need 's to know that he is diuinely assisted And it implies not only the meer Truth of the Act but moreouer an infallible Determination to truth The other called Certitudo adhaesionis or à firm Adhesion belong's to the Belieuer and is not grounded on Euidence as it fall's out in Science but vpon most prudent Motiues proposed to Reason which clearly discouered the Will by her pious Affection commands and determins the intellectual Faculty to Assent indubitably The he art or will furthers our Assent For corde creditur ad lustitiam Rom. 10. The Heart or Will can thus further and incline the mind to yeild when t' is euident credible that God speak's and eternal Saluation depend's vpon an assent which is giuen without fear or hesitation 15. S. Bonauenture eminent for Sanctity and Learning 3. Distinct. 23. art 1. Quest 4. speak's most pertinently and profoundly to my present purpose Est certitudo speculationis est certitudo adhaesionis c. There is Saith he à speculatiue certitude S. Bonauenture and à certitude of adhesion or of cleaning fast to what we belieue The first has respect to the intellâ—ctual power the other to the pious Affection of the will If we speak of this firm adhesion it is Both clearly distinguishes and. far greater in faith then in Science because faith makes him that belieues more certainly to adhere to the truth reuealed then Science doth to any thing known Hence we se that men truely faithful cannot by Arguments Torments or inticements be inclined to deny in words à belâ—eued Verity which râ—â—e in his wits will doe for à thing he knowes vnless it be vpon this account that faith dictates he is not to Lye Stultus etiam esset Geometra c. A Geometrician would be Explain's this twofold Infallibility very vnwise who for any certain Conclusion would vndergoe death as thousands haue done for their faith Whence it is that one truly Faithful though highly learned in natural knowledge would rather lose it all then deny one only Article of Faâ—th so strong is his adhesion to truth belieued What this great Doctor Asserts need 's no Faith no Speculatiue operation further Probation For if it be certain as all confess that Faith is no speculatiue knowledge grounded purely vpon Euidence discouerable in the Diuine Reuelation it must of necessity be à practical Assent in order to the effects now mentioned of suffering and dying for Diuine Reuealed Truths when occasion is offered Now that such an Assent may be elicited vpon Prudent Hereticks without Motiues assent to fooleries Motiues has no difficulty whilst we se condemned Heretiques by meer pertinacy so Stifly fastened to their Errours without Motiues that it is very difficult to make à Diuorce between Heresy and their Phanfies 16. One may obiect first The vnderstanding cannot practically Assent to à thing as indubitably true by any Command of the Will when this Power is vtterly vnable to change the nature of Motiues or to make them appear otherwise then they are That
is highly Probable yet vncertain I Answer to omit VVhat force the will hath that Heretiques without Motiues pertinaciously assent to meer fooleries The Will can with another Help whereof more presently Supply the inefficacy of those intellectual Lights which prudently euince this truth It is euidently credible that God speak's by the Signs laid before mee God's peculiar Language his Seal and Signature appear more clearly in these Euidences tâ—an in any Princes commission sent me when I see his own Seal and Hand writing O but yet we haue not Euidence of his Testimony No thanks to thee poor Creature to Assent had'st thou Euidence Know therefore His Maiesty is too far aboue vs all to humour As reasonable Creatures we are Obliged to submit such à Curiosity As reasonable creatures we are obliged to submit our iudgement to his though it be not euident he Speak's for this Duty the highest Power imaginable requires of vs who infinitely surpasses all created Excellence That vpon à most credible Appearance of his speaking when nothing makes the contrary probable we yeild an Assent answerable to his supreme Excellence that is firme certain and Infallible Who then dare stand trifling in so weighty an Affaire as concern's Saluation Or who dare tell our glorious God Lord I find my self obliged to belieue And Se great Soueraign the Signes and seales Witnesses of your Speaking Yet because all possibly may be counterfeited I will like one little Loath to yeild deal both warily and Sparingly with you You shall haue no other faith Vpon à Credible appearance of God's Speaking from me but what is faint and meagar In fine à poor miserable and moral certain Assent Is this think ye to proceed Nobly with God No. If we belieue our faith ought to suite his great Worth and Dignity or really we belieue not at all 17. From what is Said Two things follow 1. That our Security is greater whilst we belieue God induced by most prudent Motiues though we se not the Euidence of his Testimony Than to belieue the most euident Assertion of any man liuing esteemed one of the very best Reputation The reason is If God speak's I am certain he deceiues not And therefore Two Certainties compared together cannot mistrust his Veracity But If man speak's whom I know liable to errour and deceipt The main ground of Certainty fail's For though I hear his voice and haue euidence of his words yet neither giue me absolute Assurance of Truth 18. The Question therefore is Whether I may not more prudently belieue God who cannot deceiue though I want euidence of his Testimony than to belieue man that by errour or The difference declared mistake may deceiue when I haue only Euidence of his outward words which are separable from Truth In the one case words are euident And I haue with them some degree of moral certainty concerning Truth In the other I haue infallible certainty of truth If God speak's and the highest moral Assurance imaginable of his speaking before I belieue 19. It followes 2. That Euidence in the formal Obiect assented to is inconsistent with Faith which implies à prudent and withall à most infallible practical Assent in order to an Faith quite different from Science appretiatiue Esteem of the will and those effects mentioned by S. Bonauenture Therefore it is of à quite different nature from Science whose tendency is Speculatiue and sees clearly the Obiect assented to But I know some will yet require further Satisfaction in this hard matter I shall endeauour to comply with their wish in the next Chapter CHAP. IX The whole Progress of Faith explained in order to its last Resolution Of that which the Fathers Call the light of Faith It s wholly different from Sectaries Priuate Spirit From whence Faith hath Infallible Certainty Obiections Solued 1. FAith saith the Apostle Rom. 10. 17. Comes by Hearing Again V. 14. How shall they hear without à Preacher Faith comes by hearing But how shall they preach vnless they be sent All then must hear the Diuine Verities and belieue what they hear taught by men lawfully sent to preach Now because God has been pleased to speak by different Oracles anciently by his Prophets by Christ our Lord his Apostles and finally by the Church all together make vp but one School as it were of Diuine learning His One great Truth to be heard whole endeauour euer was in all ages to haue this truth Taught by these Oracles viz. God is the Author of the Doctrins which all are obliged to belieue and to make thus much highly Credible He neuer sent as I said aboue Prophet Apostle or Christ himself to â—each but iointly Authorised them to show the Royal Signes and Seals of his own Soueraignity Miracles I mean and other Supernatural wonders whereby they were proued commissioned Oracles to speak in the name of God 2. To our present purpose therefore None can belieue What necessarily proced's Faith A natural proposition of the Mystery with à Motiue aboue the power of Nature râ—less he hear Which is to Say That Viâ ordinariâ before the Hearer elicites Supernatural faith à natural Proposition of the Mystery reuealed necessarily precedes that Assent Yet more He that Teaches is not barely to Say Vnlesse you yeild assent you will be damned But he must also propound some Motiue of prudent credibility with the Mystery which Motiue so far surpasses all the Power in nature that it manifestly appear's to be God's work or his own vnimitable language as is already noted 3. Besides it is not sufficient that the Preacher tell 's vs God is the Author of his Doctrin clearly confirmed by Miracles but he is to make the Assertion morally certain either by working à Miracle Himselfe as Christ and the Apostles did or in want of that to bring in strong Arguments and witnesses whereby Moral euidence by witnesses it may appear such supernatural Wonders haue been done to confirm that God is the Author of his Doctrin Now this Moral euidence by witnesses is equiualent to the seing of Miracles done before our eyes which fall's out in all euidence called Moral For I am now no lesse assured by most credible witnesses that Cardinal Altieri was clected Pope of Rome then if I had been present at his Election After this natural Proposition made of any Diuine Mystery some apprehensions of its Verity or credibility rather easily follow in the Hearer which also are natural 4. Thus much done by the Preacher One desirous to learn truth discourses and perceiues so great à Concern as Saluation The prudent Iudgement of Credibility depend's vpon his belieuing the Mystery proposed that at last he is brought to this prudent Iudgement of credibility God cannot deceiue the world by such exteriour Signs as are here proposed by this Preacher therefore I ought in prudence to yeild my Assent and belieue Now here enters another Principle wholly necessary
to make Faith certain which may well be called the last hearing of Gods Voice or his powerful Inuitation to belieue with full certitude and it consists in an interiour illustration of Grace imparted God's powerful inuitation to belieue to à soul whereby the Obiect of Faith with its credibility is represented another way more clearly then before yet so that no Mystery is seen euidently 5. Herevpon the VVill preuented with diuine Grace begin's to work by her Pious affection after that preuious iudgement The will preueated by grace Command's had of the Mysteries Credibility and the interiour Diuine illustration which is the last speaking of God to à Belieuer The Will therefore affectioned to the Happiness propounded moues the vnderstanding to elicite most certain Faith Super omnia The The intâ—llectual Faculty Obeyes and belieues Vnderstanding Obeyes and forthwith belieues by an infallible Assent the truth of the Mystery though not seen euidently 6. Hence you se This infallible Assent proceed's from à Twofold Voice of God First from the Motiues preuious to Faith whereby it s euidently credible that God speak's though the The Twofold voice of God Motiues were fallible But the last Voice of his Diuine illumination which represent's the Reuelation more indubitably than meer Motiues can doe takes all doubt away And we come to an absolute certitude in Faith vpon this interiour sacred language of God called by the Fathers Alta Doctrina à high learning Caelestis Doctrina The Language of heauen which opened Lydia's The last â— voice called high learning heart Act. 16. 14. And made her to attend to such things as S. Paule deliuered And might I here speak à word in passing I can auouch in all Christian Sincerity rhat treating with many reconciled to our Catholick Faith I haue heard some Ssy and it was à singular comfort to me that such Miracles so strange Conuersions as the Catholick Church has made Her long Continuance Maugre all attempts against Her The eminent Sanctity Giues certainty to Faith of innumerable who profess her faith appear to be Gods own glorious works But besides these outward lights which conuince much God Said these seem's to Speak to our very hearts and tell 's vs. Truth only is taught by this Oracle and vpon so clear conuiction we find our Selues obliged to belieue But as S. Austin profoundly obserues Lib. 1. de Praedest Sanct. Cap. 8. Valde remota est à sensibus carnis haee Schola in quâ Deus auditur docet The School where God is heard and teaches is very remote from flesh and blood 7. Answerable to what is here noted of God's interiour voice by Illumination the illuminated S. Austin lib. 11. Confess Cap. 3. S. Austin confirm's our Assertion speak's most significantly Where he desires to Hear and vnderstand How God in the beginning made Heauen and earth Scripsit hoc Moyses Scripsit aebijt c. Moses wrote this but he his gone from vs. Now he is not before me for if he were I would hold him fast c. And for your sake intreat him to lay open these things I would giue good eare to his words If he spake in Hebrew I could not vnderstand him but if Latin I should know what he Said But how should I know that he Speaks Truth And if I knew so much Truth inwardly teaches should I know it from him The Saint Answers Intus vtique mihi intus in Domicilio Cogitationis c. Inwardly where my most secret thoughts dwell Truth verily spoken not in Hebrew Greek Latin or Certainty arises from that interiour learning any other babarous Language without mouth or tongue without à rustling noise of words would tell use Moses speak's Truth Et ego statim certus And I presently made certain Mark wherevpon his last certitude is grounded would confidently Say to that blessed man You speak truth Thus S. Austin who in the 8. Chap. now cited call's this light à secret Grace giuen by God to take away the hardness of hearts in Matters of belief And his Doctrin Scripture Speak's fully this Sense is consonant to these and like Expressions of Holy Scripture 2. Cor. 4. 6. He hath shined in our hearts to the illumination of the knowledge of the Glory of God Esa 54. All shall be taught of God Matth. 16. Flesh and blood hath not reuealed it to thee but my Father which is in Heauen Iohn 1. 2. 27. His vnction teaches all things Iohn 6. 44. No man can come to me vnlesse the Father that sent me draw him Iohn 10. My sheep hear my Voice c. 8. From these and many other Passages The most ancient Fathers especially S. Austin and our Venerable Bede teach that none can Hear and Assent to the exteriour Proposition The Holy Fathers Inferences of the Diuine Mysteries vnless at the same time the light of Grace work 's interiourly and proposes all after another way more efficaciously Read S. Austin towards the end of this 8 th Chap. at those words Cum ergo Euangelium praedicatur c. Where he tell 's you when the Gospel is preached some belieue and others do not Those saith he who belieue when the Preachers outward words sound in their eares Intus à patre audiunt discunt interiourly hear Gods own Voice and learn what he teaches Others who belieue not Hear words Chiefly S. Austinâ— spoken by the Preacher but hear not that interiour Diuine Language and therefore learn nothing 9. Gant then first That the Motiues inducing to Faith were supposed fallible because perhaps we haue no reflex Euidence of their infallible Connexion with the Reuelation Grant also that the exteriour Proposition of Diuine Mysteries retain's Obscurity which is true yet this Secret this perswasiue illustration of Grace being as I said the last hearing of God's Voice The illustration of grace supplies the Inefficacy of Motiues can on the one Side supply the inefficacy of the Motiues And on the Other so accomplish the Mysteries exteriour Proposition that it brings faith to its full certitude Do then the Motiues Shine lesse clearly or leaue Some Capacities as it were in à wauering condition The illustration giues more light and And add's more Clarity driues doubt away Is the Divine Testimony meerly considered according to its outward proposal obscure The Illustration add's new clarity to it and makes Faith most certain yet still without Euidence Et ego statim certus And by virtue of this light I say confidently with S. Austin what I belieue is infallible true 10. To Illustrate yet more this necessary Point I speak to Catholicks Sectaries will not hear me Read the Angelical Doctor S. Thomas 2. 2. quest 2. a. 3. Where as his manner is He obiect 's It is dangerous to giue an assent to things when we know not whether that which is Proposed be true or false as it seem's to fall out in matters
Article proposed by the Church speaking in the name of God If which is already proued the same God deliuers Truth as well by this Oracle as he did anciently by the Prophets and Apostles No disparity can be giuen 9. Hence I Say whoeuer will make à full Proposition of Diuine Faith and giue à Satisfactory Resolution thereof must both Propose and Resolue it into God's Authority speaking by this one Signalized and euidenced Oracle And here in few words is the vltimate reason of our Assertion If we exclude the infallible Authority of an euidenced Church neither the Canon of Scripture nor any verity in it nor its true sense which Heretiques depraue can be admitted as Gods infallible word Therefore S. Austin Spake most profoundly where He The reason why faith must be resolued into Gods Testimony Speaking by the Church professes He would not belieue the Gospel without Church Authority Hence it followes That though one might belieue the Mystery of the Trinity or the Incarnation for the truths reuealed in Scripture yet if à further Question be moued concerning the Authenticalness of these very Scriptural Expressions All if they will finally resolue their Faith must rely on Gods Testimony speaking by the Church and belieue that very Doctrin to be Diuine because She own 's it as Diuine 10. Thus we said Chap. 20. n. 11. That the infallible Authority of the present Church consummates the ancient Reuelation which long since past and remote from vs cannot moue to belieue vnlesse Her Testimony conuey's it to vs and in this sense compleat's it And what way of belieuing or resoluing Faith can be more easy then to Say I belieue the This way of belieuing most easy Incarnation both because S. Iohn wrote it and because God speaking by the Church saith he wrote it These two Indiuisibly taken may as well make vp one total Motiue of belieuing as the Royal Prophets Testimony and. S. Peters infallible declaration added to it Act. 2. V. 25. became one entire total Motiue to those first belieuing Christians I say Indiuisibly And The Churches Testimony not meerly à Condition therefore the Churches Testimony concurres not meerly as an extrinsecal condition preuiously assented to but iointly terminates Faith together with the ancient Reuelation as shall be Presently declared Herein also there is nothing like confusion but the greatest Clarity free from all danger of any vicious Circle 11. A. 4. Obiection The Motiues inducing to belieue that God speak's by the Church or that all ar called to seek their Saluation in this one Euidenced Oracle are Church Doctrins For we all belieue that the true Spouse of Christ is Holy How the Motiues inducing to belieue vnited in Faith vniuersally spread the whole world ouer c. Therefore they can no more rationally induce to belieue that first necessary Truth Viz. All are called to one Communion of Faith Than one Article of faith obscure in it selfe rationally induce to belieue another wholly as obscure We haue Answered aboue These Motiues may be considered two wayes First as they are euidently perceptible by sense and so naturally they precede Faith and induce to belieue 2. As attested Are Doctrinâ— of the Church also vpon Gods own Authority speaking by the Church And in this Sense they precede not Faith but are Articles belieued wherein there is no Mystery at all if which is certain The same thing can be both known and belieued by different Assents vpon distinct Motiues A. 5. Obiection Scripture when newly written and proposed by the Euangelists or Apostles to the Primitiue Christians In what sense Scripture was Compleat to the Primitiue belieuers was to them so total and compleat à Formal Obiect to ground faith vpon that they needed no Authority of the Church to compleat it more Therefore it 's still à full and perfect Motiue of belieuing in order to all this very Age independently of Church Authority The Obiection brings with it its own Solution For if those Holy Writers of Scripture were Infallible whereof no man doubt's and proposed all they wrote as Gods Diuine word That very Proposition was fully as certain to them as any Church Authority whether past or present can be to vs. Hence I say though Scripture was then That infallible Publication supposed à full and compleat Motiue to ground faith vpon yet now it Cannot be so Quâ—ad nos or in order to Belieuers in this present State without more not because there is any want in Scripture considered in it self But vpon another account that Circumstances are very Why not so now to vs without Church authority different and notably changed since those first dayes For now we haue neither Apostle nor Prophet at hand to Testify or publish the Scriptures Diuinity The ancient signes of Credibility which adorned those first blessed men and made Scripture most acceptable are out of our sight Therefore God's Church succeed's with her Lustre and Supplies as it were that want or takes the place of those deceased Prophets and Apostles 13. By what is here Said you may easily vnderstand the Two Terms explicated sense of those two Terms Quoad se and Quoad nos frequently vsed in this matter though not free from Sectaries Cauils Who say Whateuer is Quoad se considered in it selfe à Formal Obiect must be so in order to others because it is à Relatiue and cannot but haue respect to our vnderstanding Answ All this is true after à full and infallible Proposition A Reuelation may be in it selfe Diuine made of the Obiect Otherwise most certainly à Reuelation may be in it Selfe both Diuine and infallible though it appear's not so to all for want of à due application to Belieuers Again It may be in some Circumstances à compleat Motiue to ground faith vpon and in another State cease to be so Many Verities in Scripture when first written and proposed by Apostolical men were compleat Obiects of faith to the Primitiue Christians yet are not by virtue of that Proposition Thought it appears not so to all now so to vs Because They neither write in this State nor immediatly Propose the truths contained in Scripture Hence it is that the Church as wee said Supplies that defect and compleat's by her Proposition those ancient Reuelations which issued from Christ and his Apostles And for The Churches Testimony Clear this reason Her Testimony Quoad nos is more clear more known and more immediatly Credible than Scripture can bee 14. 3. Difficulties may arise concerning the Scriptures Canon and sense also which none can decide but the Church only and vpon that Account Shee is more Credible and more And necessary for other Reasons immediatly known to vs than the Scriptures abstruse Sense which is very often remote from vs before God speaking by this Oracle laies the truth open in clearer Terms And what wonder is here Whilst Sectaries confess to vnderstand the true sense of God's word
as à true Prophet sent from God before they belieued many other Verities which afterward were taught by that great Master and learned by them 14. Note 3. In the Resolution of Faith into Church Authority we vnderstand not in the first place the Church Representatiue VVe vnderstand by the Church the whâ—le moral body of â—hristians vnited in one Faith VVhat the Beliefe of Councils presupposeth consisting of the Head and Members conuened in General Councils but rather this whole large diffused Body of Christians vnited in one Beliefe all ouer the world Wherein the way to Saluation is laid forth to all The Reason of my assertion is first Because that more explicite and distinct Faith had of General Councils Connaturally as wee now said presupposes the other General Truth assented to Viz. This manifested Society of Christians is God's Church and the only way to Saluation and the truth is assented to by Faith antecedently to the beliefe of the Churches Representatiues 2. Because all Catholicks asfert that the whole Moral Catholick Body consisting The promises in Scripture belong Properly to the vniuersal Church of Pastors and Hearers cannot totally err or Swerue from Christ's Sacred Doctrin Whence it is That those Promises of the Gospel Hell gates cannot preuaile against the Church The Spirit of truth abides with it for euer most Properly and Primarily belong to this one diffused and vnited Society of Chtistians To the Pastors as Teachers to the Hearers as Schollers or Learâ—ers And if the First according to Christ's promise teach infallibly the instructed must learn also infallibly And thus the whole Moral body guided and directed by the Spirit of Truth is that stronge Fortress wherevpon all must rely at last if à â—ight account be giuen of Faith or the true Analysis be made Neither can what is now said Preiudice in the least the infallible Authority of the Church Teaching I mean of the Pope and Council assembled together for this notwithstanding is most properly called the Church has and hold's the keyes whilst it vnlock's the Mysteries of Faith and laies open Explicitly A lawful Representatiue properly the Church also our Christian Verities Children teach not Layicks teach not weomen teach not Therefore the Church Representatiue properly teaches although it be not first known viâ Analyticâ that is when faith is brought to its last Principles 15. Note 4. When Sectaries demand where doth the Church taken vniuersally as one diffused Body teach that She is Infallible or that She deliuer's Gods truths Whilst yet neither Scripture nor Councils which teach so are reflected vpon or known in All Oracles sent by God to teach were first made Credible by Motiues that Priority of nature when we belieue that great Moral Body is an infallible Oracle If this I Say be demanded I Answer by proposing à like Question Where did Moyses where did the Prophets or Apostles explicitly and signally Say at their first Appearance VVe are Infallible wee are the sure Rule of Faith and because we say it you Hearers are obliged to belieue Not à word to this Purpose What then was done God Honoured And so the Church was and iâ— yet and priuiledged such Persons with Miracles and other visible supernatural Wonders These Euidenced They actually taught the truth and were credited vpon their Teaching not because they Said in Actu Signato They taught it but because really they did so in Actu exercito and confirmed all by Signs from Heauen And thus the Church teaches to this present Day and gain's Beliefe CHAP. XIII Protestants haue no Faith to resolue And vpon that account are freed from à vicious Circle Some yet are in à Circle Two Sorts of Sectaries refuted 1. I Proue the first part of the Assertion The Protestants supposed Faith is either reduced to the Beliefe VVhat the supposed Faith of Protestants is of their own Negatiue Articles No Transubstantiation No Sacrifice of the Altar No Purgatory c. Or to à Faith common to all called Christians which consists in belieuing One God and one Iesus Christ as à Redeemer This or something like it must be called Faith common to all For to belieue the Sacred Trinity the Incarnation with other great Mysteries is no common Faith because many deny these Articles Now my Assertion is What euer can be conceiued out of the The Obiect of this Faith must either be their Negatiues List of these Negatiues or is not inuolued in that Common Faith ceaseth to be an Article of Protestancy as Protestancy For example To belieue one God is à Tenet common to Iewes Turks and Christians That 's no Article peculiar to Protestants To belieue the Sacred Trinity and the Incarnation is common to Catholicks Protestants and other Heteredox Christians therefore no singular no Special Protestant Doctrin Besides these imagin whateuer can be Imagined you must either Or à Doctrin Common to all Christans pitch vpon things which no Christian has obligation to belieue or finally vpon such Doctrins as Catholicks own and are disowned by Protestants 2. Thus much Supposed it is demonstrable That the Protestant has no Faith to resolue who first doth himselfe so Their Negatiues no reuealed Verities much Iustice as to Cashiere all his own Negatiue Articles from being truths spoken by Almighty God which therefore are not resoluable into the Diuine Testimony because God neuer reuealed any of them Again his Articles common to all Christians without more cannot be resolued into Diuine Reuelation vnless he first excludes with the Arians The beliefe of The Trinity and Incarnation as not necessary to Saluation And afterwards proues by plain Scripture or the Authority of an Orthodox Church that such an Abstract Doctrin wherein Catholicks and all Heretiques agree is sufficient to saue Souls But to Euince either by Scripture or any Church Authority will be wholly as impossible as to proue that the Negatiue Articles are Doctrins reuealed by God 3. Vpon these grounds my Proposition stand's so firm that none can contradict it For if whateuer they doe or can belieue A Doctrin Common to all as Vnsound aâ— their Negatiues as Protestants be euidently such Doctrins as God neuer reuealed it 's manifest they haue no Faith to resolue and consequently are easily freed from all danger of à vicious Circle But this is so For cast away Their Negatiues All that remains as matter of Beliefe to them can be no other but the Common faith now mentioned Or if they require more as necessary to Saluation That More will either be Confessedly no Their particular Doctrins no reuealed Truths Doctrin reuealed by God Or not peculiar to Protestants For example Suppose the Protestant layes Claim to these two Articles Scripture Contain's all things necessary to Saluation Or thus VVhat Scripture speak's plainly is the Protestants Doctrin and no morâ— I say first Neither of these Articles are Confessedly truths reuealed by God And this I assert not only because
The Roman Catholick Church denies them to be truths in the Sectaries sense But vpon this Account Chiefly that it is impossible to Show where or in what passage of Holy Writ God euer sayd plainly Scripture Contain's All things necessary to saluation Or that such Doctrins as are plainty expressed there without more Comprehend Matter enough to Saluation This cannot passe for an indubitable Principle whilst euident Experience tell 's vs That VVhat Sectaries â—ccount clear Veritios Others do noâ— such Verities as Sectaries hold clear and indisputable are yet to this day Controuerted and not esteemed clear by many who goe vnder the name of Christians Obserue well 4. What Verity can be more clear then the Incarnation of the Eternal word Yet Arians deny it What more clear then the real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist Yet the Caluinists reiect it Therefore when we Come to Examin which Verities are clearly expressed in Scripture and which not we are thrown into à Labyrinth whilst no other Iudge is made vse of but the bare words of Scripture manifestly peruerted when Opposit to the Interpretation of à Vniuersal Church 5. But here is my least Exception We will Contrary to truth grant gratis That Scripture Contain's all things necessarily to Saluation Withall that the plain Doctrin thereof is matter enough Sectaries clearly conuinced by their own Principles for Beliefe The Sectary yet gain's Nothing vnless He descend's to the Particular Tenets of Protestants Mark my words And truly Assert's These and these Doctrins are plainly set down in Scripture These and these Doctrins I am as Protestant Obliged to belieue vnder pain of Damnation and no more Thus much I say ought to be done which is vtterly Impossible And the Reason is Either those Doctrins layd claim to will not be plain express Scripture Or if plain and express they cease eo ipso to be the particular Tenents of Protestants The last reason of all rest's vpon à Truth already proued and T' is That Protestants haue no Essence of Religion and therefore haue no Faith to resolue 6. In passing you may Ask. What Say we to such Protestants as make the Negatiues now mentioned Articles of their Faith These we dispatch in à word and vrge them to proue their Negatiues by Scripture which is impossible But what is to be done if they Pretend to belieue the Catholick Doctrins the Trinity the Incarnation or any other reuealed Mystery vpon God's diuine Testimony 7. Here we must distinguish between Protestants and Protestants Two sorts of Protestants refuted The older sort belieue the Scriptures Diuinity attesting the Incarnation For example by virtue of à secret and hidden Diuine Spirit of God working in their hearts this being the only light or means whereby that Diuinity is laid open to their intellectual The Priuate Spirited men plainly in à Circle Eyes These ineuitably fall into à Circle for they proue Scripture to be of Diuine inspiration because the Spirit tell 's them so And again they belieue this interiour light or Spirit to be from God moned thereunto by the very light or letter of Scripture not known at all to be Diuine but by this hidden Spirit which is as much vnknown as Scripture without their light But because the recourse to the Priuate Spirit in the Resolution of Faith is amply refuted by euery Polemick Author And now much vnderualued by our latter Sectaries I 'll only briefly Propose one Argument against all that Patronize it 8. Either this Spirit is Scripture or really distinct from A Conuincing Argument against the Priuate Spirit Scripture Grant the first Scripture no Selfe euidence is yet belieued for it Selfe only and so no more is Said but that Scripture is belieued because t' is Scripture without all further Probation If secondly you distinguish this Spirit or light from Scripture it followes that the Diuinity of Gods word is Assented To and belieued Vpon à Motiue which is not Gods word For this supposed Light of the Spirit not at all contained in Scripture is no reuealed word of God and consequently Scripture is belieued for That which is no Scripture 9. The newer Sectaries with whom Mr Stillingfleet Sides suppose à fallible Tradition as à Preparatiue to receiue the meer Books of Scripture which once owned vpon the account Other resolue Faith into the internal Euidence of Scripture of Tradition The Resolution of their Faith is made into the Diuine Light which Shines in the very Doctrin of God's word That is into the rational Euidence thereof So Mr. Stilling P. 226. And P. 222. Discourses thus Though Tradition doth not open our Eyes to see this light yet it present's the Obiect to vs to be seen and that in an vnquestionable manner To giue his Doctrin Tradition Say these Conueyes the Book more Lustre he set's it forth with the sparkling of à Diamond Nay not à man Saith he very probably belieue that à Diamond is sent hiâ— foom à friend vpon the Testimony of à Messenger who brings it and yet be firmly perswaded of it by discerning the Sparklings of it He He would Say Tradition resembles the Messenger that hand 's Scripture to vs but the very innate Splendor and Sparkling of its Doctrin is that which Faith must be finally resolued into without regard had to Tradition 10. This way of resoluing Faith differ's from the Former that it makes the pure Verity of Gods word considered Obiectiuely in it Selfe the last Resoluent or the only Formal Obiect of belieuing How these men differ from the Formar whereas the more aged Protestants superadd to that an internal vital act called the Priuate Spirit or an infused instrinct of Grace whereby the Scripture is clearly discerned to be Diuine and into this Instinct as à Medium Cognitum or the only means to see by which both discouer's the Scriptures Diuinity and it's sense they resolue their Faith This way being already reiected 11. We now Argue against Mr Stillingfleet and Say first The similitude of à Messenger deliuering the Diamond is nothing The Similitude of à Diamond Proofles to the Purpose For were that Diamond found in the streets à skilful Ieweller And who more skilful then Protestants when they read Scripture would soon know its worth by his Art and presently tell you whether the sparkling were Counterfeit or no. Can the Sectary as easily discouer the Diuinity in Scripture by its innate Light and Splendor Speak plainly If The Disparity plain between the Diamond and Scripture he can Tradition no more conduces to its Sparkling then if à Boy first put the Book into our hands or were found by chance in the Highway For as the Diamond Sparkles by it selfe without dependance of the hand which giues it so the Scripture must do if it haue that splendor in it whether Conueyed by Tradition or not Nay if another Scripture were now drop't down from Heauen were the Parity of the Diamond worth any thing
All skilful and well spirited Protestants might without any Tradition know it to be God's word This double resolution Supposed 12. Yet more Our Aduersaries maintain à twofold Resolution of Faith First into the Books of Scripture and these Books fallible Tradition without any Diuine light seen as yet Conueyes to vs For Tradition as they say is not Diuine 2. â—to the internal light of the Doctrin contained in the Books And into this light of Doctrin they Resolue their Faith not â—to Tradition 13. Now here you shall haue an vnanswerable Dilemma The Tradition which only Conueyes the Books as Contradistinct from the internal Doctrin makes that very Diuine Doctrin to sparkle we Argue against Sectaries more than it would sparkle without Tradition Or not If â—ot The light the Splendor the internal Lustre of that Doctrin Considered as Doctrin is and must be independent of Tradition and Shine as I now said by it Selfe as à Diamond doth though the Books were found in the Streets Contrarywise if the Tradition of the Books Augments in the least or makes the internal Doctrin there contained to appear more Diuine than it would appear without Tradition That very Tradition must be à ioint Motiue wherevpon we belieue the Diuinity of Scripture I proue it demonstratiuely That â—hich laies before the intellectual Eye of à Belieuer the Lustre light and Sparkling of the internal Doctrin contained in Scripture is the true cause or à Partial Motiue at least The force of the Argument why He belieues that Doctrin Tradition doth this Ergo it is à Partial Motiue why he belieues the Doctrin Or if it â—ail's not at all to discouer that Lustre of the Doctrin the pretious Diamond of Scripture may be well discouered and known without Tradition I would willingly hear what our Adâ—ersaries can reply to this very plain and as I think no triuial Obiection without reminding vs of their killing flies 14. To Say more in this place is needles hauing proued in the other Treatise that the Maiesty and sparkling of Scripture what the true Maiesty of Scripture is lies not in the exteriour Syntax or in any outward Connexion of words common to other pious Books But Contrarywise in the Special Assistance wherewith God directed the Hagiographers to write as also in his own Diuine Volition which Seal'd and approued all that 's Writ as Verities issuing from no other fountain but from Truth it selfe Herein consist's the Dignity worth and Maiesty of Holy Scripture 15. Now because that Diuine Assistance and God's internal Volition whereby Scripture is approued as most sacred are no Obiects of sense It necessarily followes that none can discouer The true Excellence not discouerable by our exteriour Sonses the true Excellence of that Holy Book by any Inspection though most diligently made into the Syntax or outward words of it only Hence I said Had. S. Iohn not at all recorded that truth in his Gospel The word is made flesh buâ— some other without Diuine Assistance had left the Verity written in Velume The words and Truth also would haue been the very same now and then yet very different in their value if Considered as Proceeding from the Spirit of truth in the one case and from no Diuine Assistance in the other 16. By this its plain that the Maiesty of Scripture lies not in any expression of outward words Howeuer admit gratis it did doth that Majesty think yee help any to vnderstand its Though the Maâ—esty of Scripture lay in the words true Sense in Matters controuerted Euidently no. For manifest experience teaches that whole Multitudes of dissenting Christians both read and Reuerence the same bare letter Yea and haue the same Majesty of words laid open to their view yet so notoriously oppose one another and in Points most fundamental concerning the genuin Sense thereof that plain contradictions That would not auail to vnderstand the Sense are forced out of this sacred Book after their Reading But enough of this is said aboue And much more you haue of Mr Stillingfleets strange way of Resoiuing the Protestants faith in the other Treatise Discourse 1. C. 9. Where you may see that Protestancy is neuer medled with nor brought to any better Resolution by him than Arianism or à worser Heresy Yet I Say he took the right Course for in real Truth Protestants haue no Faith to resolue which truth will better appear in the following Chapter where we examin whether true Religion Can be found out by Reason CHAP. XIV The Mistakes of some Sectaries in this Controuersy It s necessary to distinguish between true Reason and fallacious Reasoning Priuate Reason liable to Errour Principles presupposed to the Decision of this Question Reason easily finds out true Religion by à rational Euidence preuious to Faith 1. SOme who endeauour to make à Friendly Agreement The Attempt of some Sectaries between Reason and Religion wholly omit to discusse the mainest point of all which concern's Christianity And T' is in à word to tell vs whether amongst those innumerable Religions now swarming in the world whereof certainly many are false and Only is true men by the force of prudent who Omit the main Business concerning Religion Reason can come to the Knowledge of the true One. This is the Vnum necâ—ssarium worth our knowledge indeed For what auailes it to hear of an Agreement between Reason and Religion if I cannot by the light of Reason find out that Religionwhich God hath established It would be but à comfortles Word should One Say Sir There is à rich Inheritance in the world belonging to you but neither you nor I nor any other after all diligence vsed can tell you where or what it is 2. This and it is à grand Omission may be well grounded The ground of their Omission on another errour these Authors Maintain who first make à Religion according to their own Phansy and then offer to Shew the Reasonableness of it Wheras All iustly expect to haue at least in à General way some Hint of that full Doctrin which Christian Religion comprises before we Cry it vp as reasonable or yeild our Assent to it Thus much neither is nor can be done by any Sectary And mark how we are left dissatisfyed 3. After some general Duties pointed at which belong to Their Distinction of Fundamentals and others improbable natural Religion we hear of à Distinction between the Fundamentals of Faith and Others Then we are told that All the Fundamentals are contained in the Apostles Creed And that if we go beyond the Creed for the Essentials of Faith none can Say where we shall stop Answ Sr you are told in this Treatise where the stop is to be made And there also you will find this late Inuented Distinction of Fundamentals and no Fundamentals cast away as vnsound Doctrin All I will Say at present is that you build vpon Sand you make à meer fancied Supposition
your Proof in Calling That à Reasonable Religion which the greatest Part of Christians reiects as both false and Improbable 4. What Scripture I beseech you what Orthodox Church Why improbable what receiued Authority Nay what Reason euer yet made à few owned Verities and the fewer the better of Christian Religion The whole the full and only Essentials of it If this once passe for sound Learning I se not why à Turk that Own 's one God and Christ our Lord as à Very great Prophet May not as well account those two Articles the Essentials of Christianity as our Sectaries do their Few Fundamentals For if we once begin to Diuide Christs sacred Doctrin Nothing lesse and more valuable in Christ's Doctrin into different Shreds More and Iesse Valuable Say I beseech you where shall we stop in the Diuision And thus your own Question is retorted 5. You tell vs indeed you take some few Fundamentals to be Religion and can proue so much Reasonable I Answer The ground of our Assertion you Mislake For no halfe Pieces of Religion can be proued reasonable without the whole entirely taken and Assented to Here is the Ground of my Assertion and it is amply Proued in this Treatise Either All that Doctrin which Christ our Lord taught And the Church euer since deliuered as Faith is Fundamental Or Nothing at all can be Fundamental 6. Other Flawes I find in this Gentlemans Discourse but haue not time to pursue halfe of them Here is One and of main Importance also He neuer rightly distinguisheth between that Obiect wherevpon Reason rest's And the Obiect of Faith Considered in it self Reason euer precedes Faith A want of Distinguishing between the Obiect of Beason and Faith and is grounded vpon those rational Motiues which Induce to Belieue Faith precisely Considered as Faith relies vpon à quite Different Obiect God's pure Reuelation and Cannot Discourse For the Reasons giuen aboue not here to be repeated Only know thus Much in passing That the wrong done by this Author to the Learned Perron Veron and Others hath its Origen from this Ouersight of not distinguishing between the Obiect of Reason and Faith These Saith He loudly declaim against Reason All know it very well I Answer they declaim Perron and Others Causlesly blamed against Reasoning or Arguing in the very intrinsick Act or Tendency of Faith For Fides non quaerit cur aut quomodo is most true and So you and the whole world must do if you Belieue They declaim against Reason or all rational Discourse built vpon Manifest Motiues Inductiue to Faith is à Calumny and most vntrue 7. Another Mistake The Diuine Authority of Scripture is to be proued by Reason and only by it Yet more The great Argument Another errour for the truth of Scripture is the Testimony of the Spirit in the Miracles wrought by Christ and his Apostles Sr I thought ye all pretended to belieue the great Miracles of Christ and of his Apostles by Diuine Faith founded vpon God's Reuelation in Scripture This granted the rational ground why you belieue such Miracles Cannot be your very Act of belieuing them But must be extrinsecal both to your Faith and its Immediate Obiect also What I Say is Manifest For Questioned by à Iew vpon what rational ground I say rational you belieue the Incarnation or any Miracle in Scripture you will not answer the reason of our belieuing is your Beliefe but must fall vpon prudent Motiues extrinsecal to Faith Otherwise you Confound again the Obiect of Faith with that of Reason 8. You Say moreouer Though Reason Cannot of it Selfe immediatly proue the truths of pure Reuelation Concerning the Trinity for example or the Incarnation Yet it Demonstrates the Diuine Authority of the Testimony that declares them And that way Viz. by demonstrating the Testimony proues euen these Articles Euidence of the Diuine Testimony infer's euidence in the thing attested This Certainly is à Mistake First because great Diuines teach That if the Diuine Testimony be demonstrated Or euidently proued to exist The Verity attested by it is also euidently known Therefore who euer has euidence of this Truth God that Cannot err Reueals the Trinity must euidently infer The Trinity is And So Faith would be euident both in respect of its Formal Obiect and Material also But here lies not my greatest exception 9. I say in à word There is no Principle in Nature or Grace which has force to demonstrate and mark my word That No Principle giues Euidence of the Diuine Testimony God euer said The Mystery of the Trinity Exist s. And first the Doctrin in Scripture no Selfe-Euidence demonstrates not its own Verities The Beliefe of Orthodox Christians terminated vpon the Diuine Testimony is Faith and vnder that Notion obscure Infallible Tradition you own not and Though you did it would Lay no Euidence of the Diuine Testimony before Reason Nothing then remain's if you seek for Rational Euidence but that you recurr to the known Motiues of Credibility which Induce to belieue Now Sr These Motiues demonstrate not the Truth of the Diuine Testimony Euidence of Credibility and Euidence of truth But only make it euidently Ctedible And here by the way I must needs reflect vpon another Mistake You seem not to distinguish between Credibility and Truth Nor between Truth and Infallible Truth A thing may be Credible which is false◠Are to be distinguished As if three or four of good reputation for ought I know Should Conspire to inform me of the death of à Friend in England who yet liues The Relation to me would be prudently Credible yet false Truth implyes à Conformity with its Obiect and Cannot be false Infallible truth in the present matter of Faith requires moreouer the Influence of Supernatural Principles whereby the Act of Faith is determined to rest vpon its own Obiect the First Verity All these Particulars are largely explain'd in this Treatise 10. Thus much briefly noted Though more might be said we Shall Examin by the help of Good Principles How far Reason can proceed in Matters of Faith And whether by prudent reason all may Come to know where true Religion is taught and professed 11. Cardinal de Richelieu Traitte pour Conuertir ceux c. Lib. 1. C. 11. well obserues with the best Philosophers That when à Verity stand's sure vpon one clear rational and indubitable Principle its needless though sometimes not amiss to bring in more Proofs For frustra fit per plura c. One solid Ground is equivalent to many 12. I am you se engaged to answer the Question proposed All debates concerning Religion may be decided by Reason Viz. How far reason is to meddle in matters of Religion And Say in à word All debates in this most weightly Affaire may be decided and easily by Reason only But to clear the Assertion from Mistake we are first To distinguish between à nicknamed or miscalled Reason
And that which really is Reason There being no word more abused or fallacious than this This word Keason abused by many which vphold's all the Heresies in the world Yea and Atheism also For Euery Atheist euery Arian Euery Donatist laies claim to Reason And thinks his own Errour built vpon reasonable Grounds 13. I Say first The priuate Reason of fallible men considered as priuate and fallible Discerns not easily between truth and falshood chiefly when the contest is about this or that particular Controuerly of Religion The Assertion stand's firm vpon this indubitable Principle None can prudently acquiesce in so weighty à matter as Religion is to that which The weaknes of Priuate and clouded Reason of its own nature may probably bee clouded with Ignorance and Errour to say nothing of passion And for that cause seems vnable to discern between Truth and falshood But the priuate Reason of falltble men considered as priuate and falltble may be so clouded that it discern's not between Truth and falshood Therefore T' is most vnmeet to decide in particular Controuersies 14. To confirm what I Say Imagin that à Protestant and an Arian were at an earnest dispute concerning That which each Party belieues Both plead by Reason What result An Instance think ye can follow vpon the contest whilst both the one and other may iustly auouch Neither of vs know our own Ignorance or weakness Therefore vnless you with whom I Argue can ascertain me And I you That our Reason is purely disinteressed free from mistake and all clouds of Ignorance We must of necessity quit this Tribunal of our own priuate Reasoning and take rccourse to some Iudge that giues Satisfaction And finally declares whose reason is more reasonable 15. One may Reply And t' is the only Obiection of Sectaries Were it possible to find our such à iudge as it is not the priuate Reason of these two Disputants And of euery other particular Man is in points of Religion to ponder well the Sentence giuen T' is He and no other that must The chiefest Obiection of Sectaries conclude within his own Interiour whether the Sentence giuen be reasonable or no And consequently the last Vmpirage the final Decision of all in the choise of Religion is brought to euery Mans priuate Reason Here is the true Rule of Faith Say these when that choise is made For to say Men are damned for Proposed in their own Terms not following the Iudgement of another whilst their own Reason hold's it not Reasonable to do so is harsh Doctrin dissonant to the Principles of nature it selfe And to all Euangelical liberty Wherefore though Atheists Iewes and Turks be Iustly reprehensible because they abuse the Principle of following Priuate Reason yet Sectaries who vse the Principle with moderation And euer belieue something within the compass of Christianity seem not blamable Here you haue the Ground of all Heresy 16. To Ouerthrow this false Pretence and to lay before you à manifest Truth its necessary to premise à few Postulate before we come to our Second Proposition I Suppose first with all Christians Iewes and Turks accord also That God Principles prâ—mised to the has established one true Religion only The Verities whereof as reuealed by the first Verity are infallible I Suppose 2. The end why he reuealed these Truths was that all Should belieue them and belieuing gain eternal Happines Now seing the Apostle 2 Tim. 1. 12. send 's afore his Beliefe à measure or Decision of this Contrâ—uersy degree of knowledge Scio cui credidi I first know it followes that all prudent Belieuers must haue the Euidence of Credibility before they elicite Faith I Suppose 3. That God's eternal Design in establishing Religion which comprises reuealed Truths was to haue it known or found out by easy means obuious to the Reason of euery one learned or vnlearned And certainly its far more easy to know by sensible Marks and Signatures where and by whom true Religion is taught than with an industrious and almost endless Scrutiny to find it out by examining euery particular Tenet contained in it 17. The Ground hereof is clear for true Religion cannot Two Reasons shewing but Shew its own facile Obuious Marks and rational Discernibility Otherwise the Ignorant and Vnlearned would be exempted from all obligation of belieuing seing none can Assent to the high Mysteries of Faith without Preuious Euidence of Credibility laid forth to Reason 18. Now if you Reply The learned in case of Ignorance and obscurity are to instruct the illiterate I Answer That 's very why true Religion is easily found out true But if after all Instruction they bring not the Learner to à due Degree of preuious Euidence The Instruction void of substance becomes both vain and fruitless Again And here is my second Ground The Purpose of Almighty God in foundâ—ng Religion was not to puzzle Mens wits with it or to set them at endless debates concerning so weighty à Concern But if it be not obuious and easily found out by its own rational and clear Indications represented to Reason There arises not from Mans malice as now à dayes fall's out But from the very Nature of it euerlasting Quarrels which breed distast and rather inuite all to loath then to loue Religion 19. Hence I boldly Assert could Religion not be known without so many Iniunctions as Sectaries vsually lay vpon vs. The Sectaries way of Seeking is Were it not attained before an exact perusal made of the Fathers and Councils large Volumes Did it lye in Obscurity till such and such Inferences were drawn out of Scripture Had it dependance vpon This and That Deduction framed by euery fancy that reads Gods word were Libraries to be turned ouer and Languages to be learned as necessary to settle all in Truth Could I Say none come to the true knowledge of Religion long tedious and dissatisfactory without without fo much Adoe And so many endless Incumbrances The most of men might well Supersede all further Disquisition and rightly Iudge all further Enquiry too intricate for them being out of the reach of that wee call easy and obuious Reason God I am sure Disowns such Perplexity in the Religion he founded who tell 's vs Deuter. 30. 11. His commands And what 's more seuerely commanded then to embrace reuealed Truths are not hid from vs nor farr off We need not to The word of truth is neer vs. ascend to the Heauens or Cross the Sea to find them out No. The VVord is neer to vs in our mouth and heart c. But of this enough aboue 20. A second Proposition Reason clear from Passion find's out and easily True Religion by an vndoubted Euidence before debates arise concerning particular Controuersies One Proof of our Assertion is already hinted at God obliges all to embrace true Religion and consequently afford's means to know it for to Say on the one side He
is Sayd already now Sectaries are as much obliged to follow this light of Euidence And to belieue the Church as they would haue been obliged to belieue the Apostles Had they been Eve-witnesses of their Wonders and heard them Preach Say Contrary The Euidence of Credibility seem's much abated from what it was in those Primitiue times I 'll first vrge these Nouellists to giue à Disparity between that ancient Euidence whereby Nations were Conuerted And this we now plead for And if none can be giuen as manifestly there is none I must conclude they are either blind and Se not what the whole world has seen Or which is à Truth that they wilfully shut their Sectaries Obstinate Eyes and vpon that Account are peruersly Obstinate 15. Again Because such Miracles and those other Signes are manifest in the Roman Catholick Church and in no other Society of Christians I will Demand what God for they Gods Intention was not to delude any are the works of his own Power intended by them Was his meaning think ye to foole the world To delude poor Christians To Contenance and Colour falshood by His By His admirable Wonders own admirable Wonders Most certainly No. For they haue not only inclined but obliged all to belieue Christ's Doctrin vnder pain of damnation Again Truth it Selfe can oblige none to Erre The very light of nature teaches there neuer was nor will bee any necessity for God to work Miracles in Confirmation He loues truth for truth of Falshood which He abhorr's louing Truth for Truth as well in others as in Himselfe 16. Some who for stark Shame cannot deny all our Churches Miracles grant many and withall Assent to the other signal Motiues already Specified Yet 3. Obiect None of them haue any necessary Connexion with Truth I haue Answered aboue This Argument either destroies the first great Euidence of Christianity manifest in our Sauiours wonders and the Apostles or becomes forceless Besides the Ground of it The ground of chis Obiection worth nothing hinted at is null For I haue proued already à necessary Connexion between à Real Miracle and Truth vpon this conuincing Principle True Miracles as is now Supposed are and haue been wrought in the Church And by no other but by the Infinite Poâ—er of God they surpass the force of Nature Therefore Wisdom it Selfe either deceiues equiuocates and openly speak's Real Miracles infer truth vntruth when He shewes these supernatural wonders Or this Inference stand's firm A real Miracle and Truth are necessarily conâ—exed 17. Others Argue 4. And more impertinently Were All that profess the Roman Catholick Religion holy and virtuous we might better plead for the Churches Euidence of Credibility But many and very many are great Sinners and this seem's much to obscure Her Euidence Now if we retort the Whâ—ther sin and sinners can obscure the Euidence of Credibility Argument vpon Sectaries and tell them also of their lewd Liuers that Darâ—en Protestancy it s easily replyed and very truly They haue no Euidence of Credibility to Obscure Therefore We who certainly haue it and not They are obliged to Solue the Obiection Answ That 's quickly don And to solue it I am once more to lead our Nouellists to those hapy Dayes of the Primitiue Age and Demand Whether all The Answer is negatiue and then were Saints No certainly We read of à wicked Iudas who betrayed his Master Christ our Lord. Say I heseech you would that haue extinguished the lustre of Christs Glorious Miracles or withdrawn them from belieuing in the true Messias We Read also of à couetous Demas that abandoned S. Paul and returned to the world Demas me reliquit diligens hoe sâ—culum would his bad Example haue obscured the Apostles Wonders Proued by many Examples in the Primitiue times or made the Beliefe of His Doctrin less firm Finally we read of an incestuous Corinthian infamous for Luxury would Sectaries think ye therevpon haue been dismayed or giuen ouer the Practise of Virtue because he was naught Not at all For if Wise they know that Cockle and Wheat grow vp together in the same large field of the Church and it will be so the Gospel is my warrant vntil the Haruest makes the separation Say then did those Iudases those Demases those Incontinent Liuers dishearten any or Eclyp's in the least that Apostolical Euidence We speak of when vast Multitudes were found faithful and eminently virtuous You will Answer No. Why therefore should lewd Liuers at this day Eclyp's Sin Eclypses not or discountenance the Glorious Euidence of the Roman Catholick Church whilst we find in it Innumerable iust Innumerable strong in Faith confident in Hope Zealous in Charity And The resulgent signs of power and Wisdom moreouer which is euer to be noted behold to our great Comfort Gods own illustrious Signatures most apparent Age after Age in this one Blessed Society of Christians 18. Some to Oppose what we said aboue Obiect in the. 5. Place The Church cannot be according to the Principles Another Obiection of à Catholick the Rule of Faith But contrarywise the Catholicks own internal Iudgement of Reason must regulate For this makes the best Catholicks in the world to belieue the Church If you will haue à Proof Hereof Ask any knowing Orthodox Christian Why he hold's the Church His Rule of Faith He cannot Answer because He belieues so but will presently tell you He is assured of that truth by prudent Reason Answ No man whether Sectary or Catholick can make his own internal Iudgement though fancied reasonable à hundred times ouer the Rule of Faith Vnless more bee added Now If you enquire Pretended Reason without rational Euidence no Rule of Faith after what I express by this word More I Answer It implies an Obiectiue Euidence set before euery rational vnderstanding which laid hold on makes à the Iudgement Reasonable without this Obiectiue Light or Euidence euery condemned Heretick may nickname things and call his own fancy Reasonable though He hath nothing like à rational Motiue to settle it vpon This is the main thing to be noted in our present controuersy 19. Now here is the whole Contest between vs and Sectaries We ground our Iudgement of Credibility vpon such an Euidence of Motiues as Conuerted the world We say An Infinite The Catholicks rational Euidence grounded Goodnes cannot permit the world to be led into Errour by Euident Miracles â—uident Conuersions and other both Signal and Supernatural Wonders All this is Reason and vndeniable reason The Signs are Manifest Sensible and Visible In the next place We vrge Sectaries to speak in behalfe of Protestancy or to giue in the like Euidence for that Nouelty They recoyle draw back and talk t is true of Reason but turn vs off with the bare word alone hauing no obiectiue Euidence to ground à rational Iudgement vpon I Sectaries haue none at all speak truth And will defend
Se more hereof in the other Treatise Disc 1. C. 5. n. 12. 13. 26. By all hitherto Said you se How the Priuate Reason Particular Controuersies examined by this and that particular Authority not easily ended of this or that Man may more easily swerue or lose the right way of Arguing when à Dispute is held vpon particular Controuersies then when it s brought to the Censure and easy Tryal of an euidenced Church This Oracle Speak's clearly Whereas if the debate be of particular Points examined by Scripture or Authority We find by experience that two Aduersaries seldom or neuer agree vpon the Sense of those very Authorities they would haue Matters decided by 27. You se 2. The Summ of all handled in this Chapter The summ of all hitherto handled to be as followes The Catholick hold's his Faith infallible which essentially relies vpon à Reuelation Diuine and Infallible Now because God proposes not by Himselfe or immediatly His own sacred Doctrin to Euery faithful Belieuer in particular He hath established à Church and made Her an Oracle briefly hinted at to speak in His name She comes as it were between God and Belieuers And conueyes vnto vs the true Diuine Doctrin of the first reuealing Verity Now because She is an Oracle immediatly Credible by supernatural Signs which an Infinite Power and Wisdom Demonstrates We Iustly call Her the Infallible Rule Though Scripture faithfully interpreted be our Rule also but not so immediatly Credible The Church once discouered by the Euidence of an Assent grounded on conuincing Motiues Regulates Faith plain Reason preuiously resting vpon those Motiues tell 's vs God speak's by Her Here we rest by this Rule we are guided 28. Hence you se 3. Whoeuer depriues the Church of her Lustre and Signal Wonders manifest to Reason makes her Doctrin and the very Scriptures also not worthy Beliefe Ill ' Consequences follow the Denial of Church Motiues dead 's Faith Eclipses Gods reuealed Truths and doth the vtmost to bring in Atheism In à word He makes Christian Religion vnreasonable which is vtterly to Destroy it what I say seem's manifest For Suppose we had had no Miracles since the Apostles times no Succession of Commissioned Pastors no further Conuersions of Nations No more eminent Sanctity in this great Moral Body after that first Age No Martyrdoms no Generous contempt of the world Who I beseech you would or Could haue certainly belieued either the Sacred Trinity or the great Mystery of the Word Incarnate vpon the bare report of à few fallible vncommissioned Men or woemen that might Perhaps haue Spoken and Perhaps not of these and other sublime Mysteries but without The world not with standing most glorious Motiues Shewn is much incredulous rational Motiues Appeal now boldly to the Tribunal of Reason and Ask whether such à Doctrin appears not to all Prudent men more than improbable Whilst experience teaches that à great Part of the world both now and in former Ages also though the Church euer shewed Her Selfe the only glorious euidenced Oracle remain's notwithstanding in à State of Incredulity What then would so many Nations haue done without them would haue not belieued any thing How cold would Their Faith haue been Who would haue belieued had all the After-Motiues of Faith perished and nothing been heard of but high Mysteries mentioned without supernatural Signs Confirming the Doctrin In à word without all Euidence of Credibility Hence 29. You Se. 4. The hideous sin of Sectaries who do not only rob the Church of her Glorious Marks manifed to Reason and so make Her Doctrin and whateuer Scripture teaches The sin of Sectaries incredible But to ruin all They will haue the Mysteries of our Faith talk't of but not one Taught Infallibly And thereby destroy Faith it Selfe Thus Reason and Religion go to wrack at once 30. You Se. 5. It is impossible without subuerting Christianity to Seperate the euidence of Credibility grounded on Conuincing Motiues from true Christian Religion Wherefore Euidence of Credibility not Separable from true Religion I conclude That as God has euer hitherto assisted the Orthodox Church to Teach Truth So also he has and will preserue in Her the euidence of Credibility whereby all Rational men may find truth And indubitably Assert This and no other is the only Society of Christians which teaches God's reuealed Verities and can best inform vs of euery Doctrin the Church taught in foregoing Ages CHAP. XVII A Digression Concerning Doctor Stillingfleets Discourse VVhere he treat's of the Protestants Faith reduced to Principles He is all à long quite besides the matter handled and Sayes no more for Protestancy than for Arianism or any other Heresy 1. KNow Courteous Reader that when this Treatise The Occasion of writing this Chapter was vnder the Press and towards an end there came now very lately to my hands A Discourse concerning the Idolatry practised in the Church of Rome A stale worn-out Cauil by Edward Stillingfleet D. D. Doctor as I interpret of Diuinity though in his Account he was only B. D. and therefore hitherto named by me plain Mr Stillingfleet The fault if any is easily amended He shall haue his due hereafter and be called Doctor In this Discourse which very candidly I haue not read nor I belieue euer shall For the matter appear's very triuial and look's like à Rapsodie I find towards The Doctors quick Dispatch the end of it à Flurt and no more at à Book Intituled Protestants without Principles I know Saith he no other Answer Like one Loath to engage necessary not only to this present demand but to à Book called Protestants without Principles the falsity of which will appear by what followes 2. You may well imagin I hasten'd to this What Followes And saw in the next Page Six Principles agreed on by â—oth Sides 1. That there is à God from whom Man and all other Creatures had their Being 2. That the Notion of God doth imply that he is à Being absolutely perfect 3. That man receiuing his Six Principles remote from Protestancy Being from God is thereby bound to obey his will and so on to the Sixt which Methought seem'd as remote from Principling the Protestants Faith as if he had told vs. Adam was tempted by Eue. 3. The next Leaf turned ouer I found this Title Contrary to Protestancy without Principles The Faith of Protestants reduced to Principles with this Addition These things viz. The six Principles being agreed on both Sides we are now to inquire into the particular wayes which God has made choise of for reuealing his will to Mankind He should also haue said And Coâ—cerning the Faith of Protestants here lies the main Business if mankind be concerned in it but this is waued 4. Nay more is waued whereon all depend's Obserue I A promising Title But the main matter is waued beseech you We haue here à fair Title The Protestants faith reduced
to Principles before we know what these men belieue Yet most certainly we should first haue had some light concerning their Beliefe before we hear talk of its Principles We should know how many Articles the Professors of it maintain as necessary to saluation How many also they reiect as Heretical We should know what it is one may boldly renounce Particulars omitted as an Opinion proper to Protestants And what it is he must hold as Protestant or be damned All this I Say and more Should in the first place haue been fully explained to the end we may haue some hint of the Thing Principled before we are informed of its Principles The Proof of à Thesis euer presupposes the Thesis plainly set down You neuer heard of any Tenet publickly exposed in Schools to The pretended Faith of Protestants Cannot be known All may abiure that Faith without danger of Saluation the Examination of others But euery Opponent knowes what 's Asserted All here run's in à contrary Strain A Faith is spoken of reducible to Principles which is so remote from all humane vnderstanding that none shall or can euer tell me what iâ— is Or speak thus And you speak truth VVhat euer the Protestant maintain's as he is Protestant though called Faith may without danger of our Souls be boldly renounced by him by me and the whole world besides 5. The Conuincing Reason of what I now Assert is so groundedly laid forth in this present Treatise that no Sectary shall ouerthrow our Proofs Read I beseech you The. 1. They haue no Essence of Religion Disc C. 20. n. 7. and what followes you find there à Sect of men called Protestants but without the very Essence of Religion Read also the. 2. Discourse you haue there in seueral places the whole Faith of Protestants brought to à List of meer false Opinions or rather to flat Heresies Their Their Negatiues disowned Doctrin Common to all Insufficient negatiue Articles of not Praying to Saints Of no Transubstantiation are cashiered by them The Doctrin common to all called Christians without more is à plain Fourb unless they deny the sacred Mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation also with Arians Their Pretence to belieue so much of Catholick Doctrin as pleases their Fancies is not singular to them but common to others no Protestants 6. Now and it s euer to be noted we enquire after the singular Faith of Protestants as contradistinct from Popery And Where the main difficulty is And what Should be Answered all other known Heresies And desire That this Faith as it is Peculiar may be reduced to Principles I Say the Reduction is vtterly impossible and the Reason is best expressed in few words Their Faith is Phansy They haue nothing like Faith to found on Principles But to Se this proued You are once more wished to read the Discourses and Chapters already quoted for I will not take so much pains for the Doctor as meerly to blot Paper and repeat in this place what is there Conuinced Thus much Noted 7. Be pleased to hear two Propositions which come neerer to our present matter One is VVhateuer Faith the Sectary 〈◊〉 Claim to as peculiar to Protestancy be it what you will if Two Propositions contrary to the receiued Doctrin of the Roman Catholick Church is not reducible to Principles 8. Another Assertion All the Principles tediously made vse of by the Doctor we may Suppose him very conuersant in the best are wholly impertinent And haue no more to doe with the Faith of Protestants No more support that Nouelty then if one should tell you Abraham begot Isaac If I proue this you 'l Say the Doctor has ventured vpon à desperat Attempt If not I disgrace my selfe 9. To goe on and proue We must first well distinguish The Doctrin contained in these Principles between the Doctrin contained in these Principles supposed to vphold the Protestants Faith and the Application or Inferences drawn from it in order to that end The Doctrin is sometimes true sometimes false and often not well expressed dubious But the Application of it to Protestancy And this And the Application are to be distinguished most Concern's the Doctor when true is as remote from the purpose or no more Concern's the faith of Protestants then if one should Say God made the world I say when is true for if false or dubious it s wholly impertinent 10. Thus the Doctor begins and pity me that I trouble the Reader and my Selfe also with meer Parergons which relate The first Principle not at all to Protestancy First An entire Obedience to the will of God being agreed on to be the condition of Mans happines no other way is in it selfe necessary to that end than such whereby Man may know what the VVill of God is Answ This general Doctrin though true Support's no more the particular faith of Protestants be it what you will then the Faith of Arians or Pelagâ—ins For all these and Catholicks likewise may grant A meer parergon to the present Controuersy There is no other way necessary to happines than such whereby à Man may know what the will of God is yet must withall acknowledge the Inference the Reduction or Application to this or that particular Doctrin wherein these Parties dissent from one another wholly impertinent vnless more be Sayd For Example the worst of Heretiques hold with Catholicks There is no other way to be saued but by Christ Iesus our Redeemer But as the Arian neuer offers immediatly to draw from thence his Denyal of à Mysterious Trinity So the Catholick would be as far to seek should he aduenture without more to build the Infallibility The reason why it â—s impertinent of the Church or the Doctrin of Transubstantiation vpon that General owned Truth only The Reason is A Principle Common to all or more Considered as Common stand's firm giues light T' is true so sar as it reaches but cannot possibly extend it selfe to all the different Tenets Wherevpon Men fall when they vary and dissent among Themselues Here the Principle becomes vseless without more light or à new Supply of other Proofs which relate immediatly to euery particular Doctrin really true or pretended to be so 11. Thus you Se the Doctors errour whilst first he giues The Doctors errour you à Principle common to all And will next build the particular Faith of Protestants vpon it I Say this is impossible For à truth so General as is now noted giues no more Support or Light to Protestancy than to Arianism Had the Dr better explained these General words There is no other way than such whereby Man may know what the will of God is And then adioyned But Protestants in behalf of their new Faith Teach and Proue such and No application made of the general Principle such to be the only only wayes whereby Man may know the Will of God and Papists cannot
doe it He had offered at something But in doing so He would First haue receded from the General true Principle And next haue spoken à loud vntruth because Protestants haue no such wayes Now only to tell vs what all the world knowes and to make that à Principle for Protestancy is certainly more then à strange Impertinency Yet this Strain run's through all his other miscalled Principles 12. Obserue it in the three following Paragraphs Man The want of Application hold 's â—n Saith He being framed à rational creature may Antecedently to any external Reuelation certainly know the Being of God and his dependency vpon him What 's this to the Purpose All is true but the Truth is so General that it reaches not at all to the Protestants particular Faith No more doe the other two which follow immediatly as euery Reader will easily perceiue at the first view 13. Perhaps the Fift in order may proue better There can be no other means Imagined whereby we are to Iudge of the truth of Diuine Reuelation but à faculty in vs of discerneng truth and falshood in matters proposed to our beliefe which if we doe not exercise in Iudgeing Another Principle proues nothing Vnless Sectaries suppose themselues the only vpright Iudges the truth of Diuine Reuelation we must be imposed vpon by euery thing that pretend's to be so The Assertion Still too General Euinces nothing for Protestancy Vnless these words If we do not Exercise VVe must be imposed vpon Signify that Protestants only are to Iudge excluding others both Catholicks and all called Christians Say that Protestants only can iudge you speak à Paradox Allow others à Faculty in Iudgeing the Question will be who Iudges best Which is far from being decided by this abstract Principle Therefore as its worth nothing it concludes Nothing without à further Application Now if you desire to Se how Reason proceed's in Iudging of Religion Read the. 3. Discourse C. 15. 14. The sixth Way or Principle The Pretence of Infallibility in any Person or Society of Men must be Iudged in the same Way and by the same means that the truth of à Reuelation is Say good The Doctor speak's of à way but tâ—ll's vs not Reader who can know what to do by force of These General Terms whilst neither Way nor Means in particular are so much as hinted at The Arian takes his way The Protestant another the Catholick proceeds contrary to both Therefore vnless the Doctor can proue that Protestants take What Christians follow it the right way and All the rest of Christians doe not and it must be proued by à Principle distinct from this General one He abuses the Reader and will seem to speak in behalf of the Protestants Faith though he comes not neer it 15. The. 7th Principle It being in the Power of God to make The 7th Principle as bad as the rest choice of seueral wayes of reuealing his will we ought to enquire what way God has chosen Answ Once more who are these We that ought to enquire What Protestants only Haue not others before Sectaries were born both sought and found the true way to Saluation But let this pass The Principle too General concern's not Protestants at all before it be shewn vpon better Proofs that they only haue hit on the right way which neither is proued nor can be made probable 16. The. 8th and 9th Principles only fill Paper and concern not the matter now in hand In the 10th we are told that God can as well declare his Will by Writing as by men Infallibly assisted Answ All grant God can clearly declare his mind in Sectaries haue not the singular grace to vnderstand Scripture before all others Writing But the Question is whether this be done de Facto in the Holy Book of Scripture S. Peter cited aboue Sayes no. Howeuer suppose it done A second Question followes and T' is à hard one Viz. Whether that singular Priuiledge of vnderstanding Gods declared Will expressed in Scripture can be granted Protestants before all others called Christians and particularly before their Elder Brethren the Roman Catholicks Affirm The Paradox must be euinced by à stronge Proof in deed Say No or grant that others besides Protestants may as well vnderstand it as They The Principle no more Concern's them them the rest of mankind And thus you Se The Application of all true Principles to Protestancy euer Fail's and Cannot but faile 17. The 11th Principle is true But touches Protestants no more then other Christians The 12th Where t' is Sayd we are to Iudge by those writings of Scripture what the will of An vntrue Supposition God is in order to Saluation is no Principle but à false Supposition in case the Authority and infallible Interpretation of the Church be reiected But grant all Ask again who are those We that must Iudge What Protestants only Or others What followes if all diessenting in the high matters of Faith may Iudge with them If all may Iudge and differ as is most euident in the highest matters of Faith after the perusal of Scripture A new Question ensues Whose iudgement is finally to be stood to which shall neuer be decided without introducing another Principle whereby all must say Such an Oracle Iudges for all 18. Hence I briefly Answer to 13th and 15th Principles The 14th is à meer Parergon In the first we are told It is repugnant to the Designe to the wisdom and Goodnes of God to giue infallible Assurance to Persons in writing his will for the benefit of Mankind if those writings may not be vnderstood by all persons who sincerly endeauour to know the meaning of them in such things as are necessary for their Saluation Answ And mark How remote we are yet Who are the Sincere Seekers from Protestancy Grant those writings may be vnderstood by all who take the right Way and endeauour to know their meaning Nothing followes whilst the Doctor proues not by another distinct Principle that Protestants only are the sincere Inquirers excluding others who after all endeauour vsed Dissent Still want of Application from them This not done he turn's vs off with à general Proposition making no Application of it to his own particular Cause You will Se what I would Say by this one Syllogism Euidenced by this one Syllogism Those writings may be vnderstood by all who take the right way and endeauour to know their meaning But Protestants do this and Papists do not Here the Minor is euidently dubious I say absolutely false and therefore the Application of the general Principle to Protestants fail's But this failing or not applied home by another Proof The general Proposition no more Supports Protestancy then Arianism or Pelagianism Of this want of application which transcend's all the Doctors Principles when true you shall haue more presently 19. In the mean while take notice of it again in the. 15th Way These
Part or member of it is his own bare Assertion already proued à loud Vntruth 7. Hauing now done with this List of Principles and Inferences we may I hope without offence iustly require the Doctors Express direct and Categonal Answer to these few following Questions 8. The first and of main importance though already plainly The first Question Proposed set down may be thus What that Essential reuealed Doctrin is now peculiar to Protestants and held by them necessary to Saluation which distinguishes that Religion as it is Protestancy from Popery and all known Heresies I Speak of Doctrin indubitably reuealed by Almighty God or taught by any Vniuersal Church which these men own as à Truth peculiar to themselues and necessary for Saluation If à List of some such few Articles peculiar and necessary mark my words can without dispute be clearly giuen in Protestants will highly aduance their own Cause and most easily point out some ancient Christians that in former Ages belieued as they do now But Contrarywise if not so much as one reuealed Article of this nature I mean peculiar to Not one Truth reuealed by Almighty God taught by Protestants as Protestants them and in their Iudgements necâ—ssary for Saluation can be owned or laid claim to It followes euidently that Protestancy as Protestancy is no Christian Religion because in the whole Essence of it you find not one truth reuealed by Almighty God or taught by any Vniuersal Church 9. In the. 2. place Dr Stillingfleet who charges flat Idolatry vpon the Roman Catholick Church is desired to Answer Two Demands more Categorically to these two Demands The first If he acknowledge with Dr Bramhal and others that the first Protestant Bishops receiued their Ordination from the Roman Catholick Bishops or will assert with Luther that the first Protestants had the Bible from the Catholick Church My demand I Say One concerning the ordination of the first Protestant Bishops is Whether Mr Stillingfleet will roundly grant that the Protestant Bishops receiued their Ordination from Idolatrous Popish Prelates or that Luther and Sectaries had their Bible from an Idolatrous Church Affirm and it must be granted Mr Thorndicke in his Iust VVeights and Measures Page 7. tellâ— vs plainly If it be true Viz. That the Papists are guilty of Idolatry Orders taken from Idolatrous Prelats argues an vngodly Communication We cannot without renouncing Christianity hold Communion with those we charge with it And what greater Communion Can there be then to take Orders from such Idolatrous Prelates and the Bible from an Idolatrous Church Again in the Contents of the first Chapter Mr Thorndicke add's They that Separate from the Church of Rome as Idolaters are thereby Schismaticks before God This truth he proues very amply in the following Pages And in the 7. P. now cited Concludes thus So that Should this Mr Thorndick's Iudgement Church declare that the Change which we call Reformation is grounded vpon this Supposition to wit of Idolatry I must then acknowledge that we are the Schismaticks 10. Moreouer whereas the Doctor Charges the Church with Idolatry vpon this twofold account Chiefly That She adores Another Concerning worship and Adoration Christ in the blessed Eucharist and allowes the Veneration of holy Images Mr Thorndicke Chap. 19. in the Contents free 's Her from both these Calumnies The worship of the Host in Papacy Saith he is not Idolatry and he Proues the truth in the Context because no Papist will acknowledge that he honours the Accidents of bread for God Again Reuerencing of Images in Churches is not Idolatry Se the Probation hereof in his Page 127. For it is not now my Intent to debate these Controuersies but only to let the Reader know how clearly the old Doctor and I think the far more knowing man Contradict's the younger And this Two Doctorâ— Contradict one another is done not in Matters disputable or agitated in Schools but in à Point of the highest Concern Imaginable touching the very essence of Religion Wherefore he that Err's in à thing of such weight vnless inuincible ignorance excuses incurr's God's Just The one or other of thâ—se Doctors horrid Sinners Indignation and Sin 's damnably If therefore Mr Thorndicke clear's the Church were She guilty of Idolatry from that Crime He wrong's God that hates Idolatry But if our younger Doctor lais an Aspersion so abominable vpon the most ancient Mother Church and thereby send 's to Hell all his own Ancestors with Millions and Millions of other Souls T' is He that drawes God's heauy Iudgement vpon him and for this loud Crying sin besides Shame and Confusion will haue many à sorrowful thought laid to his heart before he dyes 11. My Second demand Proposed to the Doctor includes A second demand contains two things these two things The first Whether the Roman Catholick Church which the Dr expressy Saith err's not against the Fundamentals of Faith yet withall boldly auerr's that She teaches Idolatry be not à most open plain and manifest Contradiction I Affirm it is For to auerr on the one side that She err's not in an open Contradiction the Fundamentals of Faith and on the other to say she teaches Idolatry which is à fundamental errour is with one breath to affirm She Err's and err's not in the fundamentals of Faith One A Turk errs not so far as he teaches truth may reply so far as the Church teaches truth She err's not in fundamentals Answ No more doth à Turk who hold's one God err in that yet because the rest of his Religion is false and destructiue of Saluation he can neuer get to Heauen by it In Idolatry makes Saluation impossible though the Church teaches some truths like manner I Say Though the Church teaches twenty fundamental Truths yet if She spoil's all by maintaining one Point of Idolatry Her Condition is damnable and can no more bring any that belieues Her whole Doctrin to Heauen then Mahometism can which owns the Belieue of one God 12. Hereupon you haue another manifest contradiction and the Doctor shall neuer quit himselfe of it In his Rational Account He grant's à Possibility of Saluation to Catholicks because they belieue in à Church sound though not euery way The Doctors open Contradictions safe in fundamentals Here again he taxes Her with the horrid Sin of Idolatry which most euidently makes Her Doctrin damnable and Consequently Saluation impossible to those that The Church â—an saue her Children She cannot saue them belieue it Therefore vnless these two Propofitions which are Contradictory be true There is â Possibility of Saluation in this Church to saue Souls There is no Possibility in it to saue them the Doctors Assertions are as euidently Opposite to one another as if you should Say She can saue soules And she cannot saue them Or She is à true Church and she is not à true Church 13. A third Question Whereas
Both I suppose are not guilty The Iudge speaks once and no more but these two at discord agree not Their vnreasonable proceeding declared by one Instance about the main point which â— the true meaning of his Sentence may not Both return home as wise as they came and contend till Dooms Day vnless some other Iudge break 's off the quarrel and sayes plainly Thou art the Traitour 22 This is our very case either we or Protestants betray This Discourse driuen home and applyed to these two dissenting Parties Gods truths The one or other Party Contradict's the first Verity and boldly auerres he Speak's what he never Spake We appeal to Holy Scripture and would haue our Debates decided by that Oracle Two or three Passages He that hear's you hears me The Church is the Pillar and ground of Truth He that hears not the Church let him be as à Heathen c. literally taken denote the guilty Party But our Sectaries tell vs we mistake the Scriptures meaning They Sectaries cast themselues into in extricable difficulties vary from vs in the main Point concerning the very Sense of our Iudges Sentence Is it not therefore euident that they must either recurre to some other Tribunal for à final decision or Secondly ingenuously Confesse they are the men who will not haue the traiterous Party discouered Or lastly acknowledge Controuersies can haue no End and that God has not left any means on earth whereby the notorious Deprauers of his reuealed Truths may be known One only Instance will giue more light to what I haue sayd 23. We and Sectaries appeal to Christs sacred words This is my Body We vnderstand them literally and strongly plead our cause what different senses are made of Christs own words alleging for vs not only the Authority of the western and eastern Churches but if need were of the Lutherans also They reiect all yea Say we grosly mistake the sense of Christ's words and therefore hold vs the Traitours that commit grosse Idolatry in the sight of God and Angels Consider good Reader are not such Aduersaries obliged to plead their Cause before How the Catholick plead's this Iudge of Scripture by à Church as vniversal by witnesses as Faithful by an Authority as great as we produce against them or to confesse ingeniously This Controuersy cannot be decided They may 'T is true Oppose the Caluinists to Lutherans but to Sectaries allege nothing for their Sense denote à Church either Latin or Greek that maintained their Opinion of the Eucharist Shall neuer be made so much as meanly Probable O yes the Primitiue Church taught as they teach Contra. It s vtterly vntrue as is largely proued in the first Discourse Again that 's à thlng yet in Controuersy and therefore far from being à manifest sentence against vs yet their Clamours against our Idolatry are manifest and as iniurious as manifest 24. These and yet far more forceable Arguments proposed by Catholick Authors against Protestancy our Aduersaries call Flies Small Grains gnawing of Rats c. We wholly Contrary hold them conuincing and the cause we defend most iust Here both Parties Stick in the hight of their heats Stiffe in their wayes without yeilding to one another Is it not therefore full time and reasonable think A Iudge distinct from Scripture proued absolutly necessary ye to appeal to some Iudge distinct from Scriptureâ— by whose just Sentence it may appear whether we old Papists or our young Nouellists are the guilty men that impiously oppose God's truths 25. You se whilst the sense of Scripture and Fathers is not agreed on we are aduanced no further but only to quarrel as if Contention is not the last end of writing Controuersies Contention were the final end of writing Controuersies Or as if an eternal Debate were desired and after that to haue nothing decided For this sole Reason A Iudge is absolutely necessary though our Aduersaries will hear of none hauing an horrour to admit of any Churches Iudgement whereby the cause now in debate may be happily ended Yet if we follow the Rule of Catholicks appeal to one Iudge Reason what can be more Satisfactory then to appeal to Church Authority in this weighty matter We Catholicks stand to the Sentence of our own euidenced vniuersal Church She is our Protestants are forced to appeal to another of equal Authority or their Cause is lost Iudge Are not Sectaries therefore obliged if their Arguments against vs be thought solid and their cause good to appeal to the Iudgement of some other Church as euidenced by Miracles and as vniuersal as ours is which once taught as they teach and publickly decryed our supposed Errours 26. What we now propose seem's reasonable because Protestants most certainly aâ— they defend Protestanism will not pretend to publish à Doctrin with à strict obligation laid on their They cannot pretend to teaâ—h à Doctrin which no ancient Church euer taught Partizans to acquiese in it which no Orthodox Church euer taught or if any Church euer taught so This must be as clearly euidenced as it is euident that the Roman Catholick Church taught Popery seuen or eight Ages since Here in à word is the true trial of their whole Cause Denote Point out or name an Orthodox Church which owned this Protestancy fiue or six Centuries since Controuersies are ended But if it be as it is most impossible to name such à Church The Abetters of Protestancy Sectaries proue themselues heretiques only follow the strain and Method of all Condemned Hereticks and proue themselues by their own procedure Heretiques That is They plead against Catholick Doctrin by false Calumnies weak Cauils lame coniectures vnsensed Scriptures and Calumnies their only Defensâ— abused Fathers without any Church Authority to rely on And thus all your ancient Heretiques haue Proceeded 27. Wherefore to conclude I Say in à word Protestancy Protestancy proued an Improbable Religion as Protestancy is à most improbable Religion or to speak more plainly no Religion at all The ground of my Assertion will be best laid forth in these few words No ancient vniuersal Church no Orthodox Christians in any part of the world euer taught Protestancy Ergo its improbable Nay more no Heretical Society The ground of our Assertion of men euer taught that whole Doctrin Therefore it is an vnpatronized Nouelty reiected by the Vniuersal Christian world whether Orthodox or others And Hence it is that whateuer Protestants can Say in behalfe of their own Tenets or Contrary to Catholick Doctrin comes to no more but to improbable and vnproued Suppositions Obserue I beseech you 28. They tell vs the Roman Catholick Church once true deserted Improbable Suppositions the only Proofs of Sectaries the Ancient Faith we vrge them to proue the Assertion and with good reason because neither ancient Church nor any sound Christian euer said so before themselues And what Answer haue we The
of the Fathers which Sectaries Cannot answer now alleged Therefore if we be in errour the wit of man cannot vnbeguile vs vpon rational proofs and Principles And here I vrge Mr Silling to bring to light his contrary Principles as full and significant that is Scripture as clear Fathers as clear Tradition as clear the Iudgement of some owned Orthodox Church as clear and vndoubted for the opinion he hold's as we now allege in the defense of our Catholick verity Belieue it if he suppose as he certainly doth the Church to haue erred so grosly for à thousand years The Fathers to haue beguiled the world with their mistaken and most improper expressions on this subiect when they meant no such thing He ought to fasten vpon sound Principles indeed before we yeild and must not think to ouerthrow What sectaries are obliged to our Doctrin or foile vs with à few gleanings pick't here and there out of antiquity set forth with à hundred false and fancied glosses Volumes may be filled with such slight stuff which comes no neerer to Principles than improbability to Euidence Will you hear in passing one of his improbabilities If à man saith he P. 567. may be bound to belieue that to be false which sense iudges to be true he means which weak reason vpon the discouery of sense iudges true for our outward senses make no iudgement What assurance can be had of any Miracles wrought to confirm the Christian Doctrin A word to our Aduersaries strange demand Or what assurance had the Apostles of Christs resurrection if their sight might be deceiued about its proper obiect c I am astonished to read this and answer briefly Christ's Resurrection the like I say of Miracles was most vndoubted vpon the discouery which sense and reason made in the presence of such obiects because no contrary Principle so much as weakly stood against that euidence and therefore reason could no more doubt of what was obiected to sense then I now doubt of writing these lines But all is contrary in the present Mystery For here the vnanswerable words of Scripture the Authority of my Church the Clear Testimonies of Fathers the voice and vote of Christianity force submissions on me to belieue the Diuine Reuelation which is either certainly known vpon these grounds or we boldly say no Christian verity was euer yet known vpon any sure Principle What if sectaries deny Church authority and explicate the Fathers 10. Perhaps Mr Stilling may roundly grant that the Greek and Latin Church erred in this Doctrin of the real presence for many ages and consequently that innumerable learned Doctors haue not only been besotted them selues but moreouer haue basely drawn millions of Christians into à damnable heresy of belieuing that to be Christs body which really is not Howeuer he will honour the Fathers so far as to afford them the fauour of his glosses Contra 1. If the Church and all Christians erred so vast à time in professing this Doctrin Mr Stilling is obliged to name some Churh reputed Orthodox 3. or 4. hundred years past for then there was à true Church in the world which held his opinion or as expresly denyed the real Presence as our Church both then and now mantains it and this will cost him more pains than to writ an other Account of Protestancy for I am sure there was neuer any such Church on earth Contra. 2. If He interpret's the The Church and Fathers speak alike of this Mystery Fathers He may as well interpret our Church Doctrin and make all belieue that we Catholicks hold not yet the real presence Obserue the same language in all That wich in seen is not bread though it seem's so to the tast But the body of Christ Our sense may be deceiued Gods word cannot deceiue vs. The bread indeed â— made the flesh of Christ and the wine his blood c. Thus the Fathers deliuer their sense and it is the Churches language also If therefore Mr Stilling can so gloss these words of the Fathers as to make them speak Protestancy or not to deliuer our Catholick Doctrin I should not wonder if in the next book set forth he aduentures to draw the very Definitions of the Council of Trent to his Protestant opinion of no real presence If he did so I am sure his attempt would proue as vnsuccesful in the one case â— in the other 11. Well But permit him to interpret the Fathers and to fall foule as he is wont to do vpon our supposed Church errours what is the vtmost that followes Thus much only Meer talk without Principles For I ask vpon what Principle may I or any know that his glosses which striue to dead the very obuious sense of the Fathers plain words implie not altogether as little satisfaction as little assurance as the very Doctrin doth which he would defend by it If so and so it is most euidently as his Doctrin before his glosses was improbable to the rest of Christians so his interpretations goe no higher but are euery whit as improbable 12. I must therefore tell Mr Stilling that vnless his explanation Sectaries glosses vnprincipled worth Nothing of Scripture and Fathers rely on à certain Principle distiâ—ct from and extrinsick to his glosses they are worth nothing For what auail's it me to read his glosses when no receiued Principle vp hold's them but fancy Reflect à little I read in Scripture This is my body My Church tell 's me the literal sense is true The Fathers as you haue heard and the Tradition of two Churcheâ— confirm this sense Now comes Mr Stillingfleet and first reiect's my Churches authority then begins to strain the Fathers Testimonies with his glosses Stay Sr say I. I except against your glosses and iustly ask whether they are true or Counterfeit Coynâ— If true they stand vpon Principles now briefly hinted at Proue this and I 'le reuerence your glosses but if you fail and fail you must your Doctrin and glosses are both alike Counterfeit and thoughts of fancy only 13. Hee may reply When Protestants cite the Fathers against the Real presence For example That of S. Austin or Theoderet mentioned aboue we Catholicks explicate them and now which seem's foul play we except against his Glosses For If we interpret An Obiection why may not Hee doe so also A word only in passing conformable to what is noted aboue If to decide this one Controuersy of Christ's Real Presence recourse be had to the Fathers and the two aduerse Parties do no more but load such Testimonies as are alleged with their priuate interpretations the Dispute will neuer be ended Because priuate glosses leaue the two Dissenters as much at iarrs as they were before God therefore as I haue often said affords an easier means to know his reuealed Truths Now my Answer to the obiection is The Catholick then only blames the Protestant's wilful interpretation when it sham fully out-faces the
clear words of à Father and when the Glosser has no vndubitable Principle distinct from his gloss wheron to settle his Doctrin as he has not in our present Controuersy Obserue well The Fathers say What wee see is not bread but Christs very body The Sectary interpret's That wee see is not common bread indeed but Christs body Figuratiuely or Sacramentally The Fathers say it is not figuratiuely only but really his body So Theophilact Answered and the reason giuen and S. Iohn Damascen cited aboue Had the Sectary who interpret's thus an vndoubted Reuelation for his Gloss deliuered by any Oracle of Truth Scripture Traditions or Orthodox Church there would be good reason to giue him hearing But when we euidently see that the best and only proof of his Doctrin is no more but the very gloss he makes without Further Principles we iustly except against him and hold such glosses improbable 14. Now all is contrary with the Catholick who neuer interpret's any Authority but when t' is dubious and if it be so it neither help 's the Sectary nor hurts the Catholick and therefore ought In reason to be cast aside as either impertinent or as weak and forcelesse in all disputes of Controuersies The fundamental Christ's Doctrin not proued by glosses or any ambiguous Testimony Reason already hinted at is The true Doctrin of Christ is not proued by Glosses or any doubtful Testimony but stand's most firm vpon known and indubitable Principles or if in order to Christians it want's such supports it cannot pass for Christ's Doctrin An ambiguous Testimony therefore which seemingly opposes this true Doctrin Certainly Principled is most impertinently alleged against any Tenet of our known and owned Catholick Faith 15. Vpon this one sole ground now clearly laid forth I confidently Affirm all Controuersies in Religion might be easily ended would Sectaries please to lay Preiudice aside and follow manifest reason I 'le shew you how Write down first the two contrary Tenents of Catholicks and Protestants Christ is really and substantially present in the Eucharist Christ is not really and substantially present Next examin well the Principles wheron these Contrary Doctrins rely or are supposed to rely The Catholick vrgeth first Christ's plain words 2. The Authority of his Church and saith his Churches Doctrin is the very same that Christ words literally taken express 3. He ponder's the clear Testimonies of The Catholick Principles Fathers and discourses thus When I find the most significant expressions of Fathers consonant to our Sauiour's plain words and to the owned Doctrin of my Church I must assuredly rest on these as indubitable grounds or Confess that There neither is or was euer any Principle for the soundest Article of Christian Faith Examin next the Sectaries Principles Has He any words in Scripture as clear as mine or to this sense This is not my body b◠à Sign only of it Euidently No. Has he any Church esteemed Orthodox by the Christian world which without Controuersy taught this Doctrin of à sign only three or 4. ages since Name Sectaries haue none such such à Church He will speak's to the purpose Has he Fathers so numerous so express and clear for his Signe and figure only as the few Testimonies now alleged are in behalf of Catholick Doctrin If he haue let him please to produce them I 'le doe no more but lay my Testimonies by them and if after the perusal or à iust Parallel made of both All the world iudges not those I quote to be most conuincing may the literal sense stand and his both dark and ambiguous I will vndergoe any Censure You haue heard how loud and express the Testimonies briefly hinted at and innumerable more are for our Catholick Verity I challenge Mr Stilling to Confront them with others as openly significant for his opinion I verily think he will neuer goe about to doe what is desired but fob vs off with killing flies and no man knowes what 16. In the interim I Argue I am either obliged to renounce An Argument drawn from our Catholick Principles the obuious sence of these Authorities which I see euidently Consonant to the words of Scripture and to the Doctrin of my Church or by force of these Proofs am still to belieue as I doe Grant this second I stand on secure ground But if I am obliged to renounce the obuious sense of Christs words my Church Doctrin and the expressions of these Fathers c. Our Aduersaries are bound if à spark of Charity liues in their Hearts to plead by stronger Principles which may settle me in an absolute Renuntiation of my Doctrin and withdraw me from the supposed errour I liue in Is not this iustice and Charity think ye And is not the Compliance most easy For if their Doctrin be Christ's Doctrin and mine not Theirs stand's as I now told you vpon clear and indubitable Principles And Principles of that nature are easily laid forth to euery ordinary vnderstanding Now I subsume But it is euident the Sectary hath no such conuincing Principles which can oblige me to renounce the plain literal sense of Christs words and the Fathers already cited And this I proue What euer Principle obliges me to renounce or to deny the plain literal sense of such words must giue assurance that those expressions literally Why none can remoue me from our Catholick Tenet vnderstood are dangerous and apt to induce Christans into gross errour for if literally taken they do no mischief or be not apt to induce into dangerous errour why should I Deny their obuious sense because Ptotestants will haue me do so But there is no Principle so much as meanly probable whereby these expressions are proued false or inductiue into dangerous Errour for were this really so some Church or Author of Credit would long sincé haue noted their ouer much vehemency in sayng more then was true concerning this Mystery which none euer yet did Therefore I may still and without Reproof hold where I am and adhere to their literal Doctrin which my Church teaches 17. Some may teply Sectaries vrge vs not so crudely to reiect the Fathers Testimonies as only to moderate or rectify their sense by the help of our Modern mens glosses which is à blamles proceeding for we do so with Gelafius and other Authors when they seemingly make against our Doctrin and Protestants do no more Answ Protestants do more for their interpretations euer imply à peremptory and absolute denial of that very literal sense which the Father words express For example S. Cyril saith Catech. Mystag 4. He that changed water into wine by his sole will hath also A reply of sectaries answered changed wine into blood The expression inuolues à parity and implies thus much That as water was really changed into wine at Cana in Galilee so wine was really and substantially changed into Christs blood Sectaries as peremptorily deny this real and substantial change of wine
ignorant what euer Adoration followes vpon them is only à material Offence without the Formal sin as is now declared Wherefore I verily think you Sr vnderstand not your selfe too well when you first suppose the Ratio formalis of prayer or Adoration the same in the Catholick and Heathen And then tell vs we are not to enquire whether the Apprehension be true or false but what the nature of that act of Religion is which is consequent vpon such an apprehension 12. Sr in case of inuincible ignorance it little import's to inquire after the Truth or Falshood of the Apprehension for neither the one nor other because out of the reach of one erring inuincibly has influence into any act of Religion Aand therefore there can be no irreligious worship or formal sin grounded vpon such à iudgement if that Supposition stand All then which ought to be searched into though omitted by you is How or in what manner these misled iudgements tend vnto their Obiect If blameably because vincible they are sinful if inuincible and not in mans power to mend They cannot hurt any In all other cases except this one of inuincible ignorance you must enquire whether the Apprehension or iudgement be true or false Suppose then it be vincibly and culpably false it is apt to beget false worship And should be laid aside Suppose it true It only saies thus much Dead Augustus was à wise and gallant Commander Here is all that can be truely apprehended of him But this iudgement as it find's no What is to be inquired excellence in that dead Prince deseruing prayer or religious Veneration so it cannot incline the will to exhibit any religious duty to him 13. And here we come to enlighten you à little because you say You see not but that kind of worship which was giuen by the Heathens to their Daemons was as defensible vpon the same grounds as the Inuocation of Saints is now Can you Sr Speak in earnest What Now in this present state when mens iudgements are cleared of errour and inuincible ignorance can you find no difference The difference is most palpable For that Deity is not in being The Saint really is in Heauen The Heathen adores his Daemon misled by à false improbable Opinion and Therefore commit's Idolatry The Catholick worship's à Saint assured of the Truth by à iudgement most certain And therefore what He adores is worthy Adoration vnless you can Vnsaint those who are in Heauen or proue they deserue no Reuerence The diffrence between 〈…〉 e and fâ—â—se worship in hat happy State Finally the Heathens iudgement because vnâ—easonable and against the light of nature if it own 's à Deity in Caesar is culpably sinful and ought to be laid down The Catholicks Iudgement point blank contrary ought not to be put away Now Sir if you say All the Heathens worship of their Daemons or inferiour Gods arose from inuincible ignorance of their Excellence which is more then you can proue or probably maintain Here is yet the difference between them and Catholicks that These are neither formal nor material false worshipers The Heathens were at least materially so 14. What followes in Mr Stilling is not like his speculation any choise Matter but vulgar only refuted again and again As. 1. That the Rites of Canonizing Saints Answer to the Rites of the ancient Emperours Apothâ—osis 2. The Formal reason of Idolatry lay in offring vp those deuotions to that which was not God which only belong's to an Infinite Being Let the Expression passe Catholicks I am sure offer vp no such deuotions to Saints as they Adoration very different doe to God knowing well to distinguish by the internal Acts of their Will between the Supreme Excellence and all other power inferiour to That 3. Saith Mr Stilling it is not possible to conceiue any Act which doth more express our sence of an Infinite Excellence And the Profession of our subiection to it than Inuocation doth Pitiful He should haue said then such à particular Inuocation doth tending to an Infinit Maâ—esty For we inuoke and call vpon men now liuing to Assist vs with their Prayers And likewise Address our selues to the Saints in Heauen Yet no man can gather from such deuotions any thing like an acknowledgement of an Infinite Excellence in men now liuing or the Saints in Heauen But enough of these weightles Arguments to touch them is to refute them And thus much of this And the other former Digressions Now we are to à prosecute further Two necessary points CHAP. XVIII The Protestant after all his Glosses can not ascertain any of true Religion He would make Controuersies an endles work 1. YOu haue been ofen told aboue that Sectaries would fain make controuersies à long work I must now giue you the vltimate reason Thereof And withal proue it impossible to know in these mens Principles what is à Christian Truth and what not Their Glosses and impropable way of Arguing laies all which can be said in darknes and obscurity 2. To proceed clearly I suppose first that Christian Truths as reuealed or Contained in Christs Doctrin are infallible and Principles supposed stand firm vpon infallible Reuelation I may here also suppose 2. That either we Catholicks or our Protestant Aduersaries euen in such Tenets as we differ Belieue and profess Christian Truths For example Transubstantiation or no Transubstantiation is à Christian truth The Infallibility of the Roman Catholick Church or Her fallibility is à Christian Truth for they are Contradictories held by Christians Therefore the one or other must be owned true if maintained as Christian Doctrin I suppose 3. That neither part of these Contradictions Transubstantiation or no Transubstantiation in like manner we discourse of all other opposite Doctrins are held their own Self-euidence or manifestly true Ex terminis like the first Principles in nature If Therefore assented to as Christian Truths by the one contrary Party or the other They must be proued by sure Principles extrinsecal to the Doctrin which each Party embraceth 3. Now you shall see What work Sectaries make in these Disputable Matters And how nothing can be certainly known by Them or owned as à Christian verity I would say It An Assertion Proued Can neither be proued in their Principles That to deny Transubstantiation let this one instance serue for all is à Truth or that to hold Transubstantiation is an Errour Here is my reason When Principles whereon solid proofs should subsist are not Proofs must of necessity fail But in those Controuerted Matters Sectaries haue no Principles at all to Argue by Therefore proofs must fail The Minor is euidenced thus All imaginable Principles whereon Proofs can stand in this contest must either be infallible or at least morally certain Meer Probability want's strength to vphold à Christian Truth But the Sectary cannot proue by any either infallible or Moral certain Principle that his Tenet is à Christian Truth And
we will first begin with these last words If the Errour be not Euident or intolerable all are obliged to submit to the Council vntil some publick declaration c. Hence I Argue But there neither is nor euer was any Euidence of Errour produced against one of our Catholick Councils the Lateran Florentine or Tridentine for example there neither is nor euer was any Legal Declaration more against these than against the First most ancient and purest Councils in Gods Church Therefore Sectaries by their own Principle are obliged to Submit to the Lateran Florentine and Tridentine as well as to others That there has not been any Publick Legal Declaration made against them is manifest And here is my proof 32. The clamours and Calumnies of Arians Cast vpon the The Assertion proued Nicene Council were no Legal Declaration against That but most Vncanonical Ergo the clamours and calumnies of Protestants cast vpon the now named Representatiues are fully as Illegal and Vncanonical yea and more forceles if more can be to Declare Clamours no Proofs them Inualid And besides clamours we neuer yet had nor shall haue hereafter any Thing from Sectaries The true Reason is Go groundedly to work There is not one Imaginable Principle whereby the Nicene can be proued à more lawful Council then the great Council of Lateran was so much decryed by Nouellists And if 't were Possible as it is not to Ouerthrow the One by any solid proof the Other Eo ipso loses all Credit and Authority 33. Hence These and the like calumnies vented by Sectaries The Arians and Protestants Clamour and Calumniate alike iâ— Corners The Lateran and Tridentine were vnlawful Councils 〈…〉 ed by the Pope they had not freedom Their Votes ought to be 〈…〉 ted Surreptitious The Conuened were not men of vnquestionable Integrity Some few by fair Pretences brought ouer the greater number wanting Iudgement to side with their Designs c. Such corner-Calumnies I say and I read them in our Aduersaries As easily â—â—attered out by Arians against the Nicene Fathers can neuer pass for legal Declarations against Catholick Councils whilst euery Proposition want's proof and euery word its due Weight That iâ— what euer can be said to this Sense stand's Vnprincipled Therefore vnless all must be iust so as Sectaries will haue it Vnless fals Suppositions become conuincing Arguments and à pure begging the Question proue it Or be able to decide our Differences We haue Right to cry as loud They. Audiatur altera Pars. A Iudge is to decide all and not Clamours Let Catholicks be heard also And when they are heard and return their Answers before à lawful Iudge to euery particular these Calumnies will vanish or rather appear like Themselues Forged and far-fetch't Improbabilities Exclude à Iudge and à iust Sentence Sectaries are where they would be in the old Labyrinth of Quarrelling without Principles or giuing any hope of ending One Question in Controuersy 34. Now to implead our Councils of Errours and to pretend Sectaries neuer legally assembled Euidence for it is more than à desperate Attempt vnless as I say the Corner-votes of à few iarring dispersed Sectaries neuer legally Assembled haue Power to create à new kind of Euidence vnknown to the world Please to reflect à little It must Forsooth be Euident That the Doctrin of Transubstantiation or Praying to Saints are Errours whilst à whole vnited learned Church Opposes these vain Pretences and Defend's the Articles as Catholick Create à new Kind of Euidence Verities It was neuer yet heard that Sectaries Scattered here an there had Authority to impose such foule disgraceful Names of Euident Errours or Errours morally Certain vpon Doctrins so vniuersally receiued when as I say The most learned Body of Christians that euer was Vnuotes all they blow into the eares of others as meer Impertinences Euidence Good Reader and Moral certainty lose force and neuer yet stood in the Sight or presence of so strong an Opposition I will yet say more Though we abstract from Church Authority we Catholicks are able to maintain our Doctrin against Sectaries vpon Tradition the Authority of Fathers ancient Records c. But still we require A last Iudge to giue Sentence whether they or we abuse the Principles we plead by For certainly the one or other Party doth so But this Nouellists euer Decline and Sectaries decline both Iudge and final Sentence will haue vs to Dispute without either Iudge or indubitable Principles and so make as is now said all Controuersies endles which indeed is the only Thing they ayme at and I haue vndertaken to proue against them 35. Mr Stillingfleet P. 539. speak's so fully to my purpose that more cannot be desired from an Aduersary He Demands how it can be known when Errours in Councils or the Church are manifest or intolerable and when not And Answers thus We appeal to Scripture interpreted by the Concurrent Sense of the primitiue Church the common reason of mankind the consent of wise and learned men Supposing Scripture to be the Rule of Faith And à little after Our Aduersaries Doctrin If you Ask further Who shall be Iudge what à necessary Reason or Demonstration is His Lordship tell 's you plainly enough from Hooker It is such as being Proposed to any man and vnderstood the mind cannot chuse but inwardly assent to it Here you haue the Gentlemans last Principles And euery one when applyed to our present Matter is as much Controuerted between Catholicks and Protestants as the very Question now in Dispute Obserue well 36. The Question is whether the Lateran Florentine and Tridentiue Councils haue erred in their Definitions the like may be moued of all others Protestants say they haue erred Catholicks Lead's still â—n to dispute but to make no end of Controuersies Deny it Both Parties Appeal to Scripture interpreted by the Sense of the Primitiue Church So far as that Oracle learns vs. And if any Passage be found there seemingly fauorable to Sectaries Catholicks after the Contest of one whole Age haue been more ready to clear all Doubts To take of any thing like Imagined Errours Than Protestants were euer yet able to lay such foul Aspertions vpon either Church or Councils What then is to be done Must we eternally Dispute concerning that Sense and end nothing Must we Commence new Quarrels Sectaries who began the quarrel about Matters so often debated Must the old Actum agere come ouer and ouer again Sectaries like that Sport well but no Progress is made this way As yet we only skirmish in the dark Wherefore recourse at last is to be had to à lawful Iulge to some known Oracle or other in whose final Sentence all are to acquiese If any lawful Iudge or owned Oracle Primitiue or latter Condemn our Councils of Errour and we licence Sectaries Like well â—â— hear themselues talk without Principles to name either Prouided they make not
principio In the beginning What is that Word saith another which was with God or how was it with God Was it One real thing Essential to him or meerly à breath à Word terminated vpon creatures without which nothing was made All know though the Arians had à Church to teach yet with that sure Rule of faith they mangled and misvsed this very passage of the Gospel Therefore difficulties much more would molest these Philosophers hauing no Oracle to interpret And as many would arise concerning other Scriptures relating to the sacred Trinity Original Sin and the like Mysteries 9. Now here is my reflection and I think euery Intelligent An application made to Sectaries person will speak as I doe Iust so much as these Philosophers haue to gloss with and descant vpon So much Sectaries may challenge but no more if we seuer Scripture from the Churches Interpretation Both haue à Body without life words without sense difficulties proposable concerning their reading but none to Answer them 10. The only difference between them is That the Philosophers yet ignorant of Church and Tradition haue no Schoole to go to Sectaries haue both yet run as it were from Schoole with half à Lesson with one part and t' is The difference between them and the Philophers much the obscurer part of Diuine Learning only the bare Texts I mean of holy Scripture shutting out the Churches infallible Sense And what haue you in lieu of this light which hath hitherto illuminated Millions of Christians The weak and errable Sentiments of a few disvnited Sectaries And is this all we can rely on Do we belieue the Trinity the Incarnation and other high Mysteries so obscurely expressed in Gods word that innumerable haue mistaken the true Sense because à Luther à Caluin or their followers expound Whether Luthers followers or an Ancient Church is to teach it Or is our Belief grounded vpon that Churches Interpretation which has euer taught the world The One or Other must haue influence vpon Faith if we will belieue But most manifestly the first men only of yesterday and fallible are not our Doctors Therefore the Church is the only Oracle which Ascertains vs of the Scriptures Sense of its Truth and infallible Doctrin also 11. Two things necessarily follow from this Discourse The one That Protestants Shew themselues strangely vngrateful because Sectaries manifestly vngrateful And why they slight an Oracle which has taught them all they know concerning the Primary Articles of Christian Faith for in real truth the Churches Authority in Her expounding Scripture vpholds that true Assent they yeild to the Mystery of the Sacred Trinity So much is granted Or not Grant it I Ask. Why disdain they to hear this Church in other matters If you deny Their Submission to this and the like Mysteries wholly relies vpon their own fallible dissatisfactory thoughts and glosses Here Some perhaps will retire to the Primitiue Churches interpretation and ground their Assent vpon Her Doctrin Nothing is got this way For the most Primitiue Recourse to the Primitiue Church friuolous exposition of Scripture was no more infallible than what the latter Church or Councils haue Defined But enough is said aboue of this Chasing all Controuersies vp to the Primitiue Ages 12. The second Inference is If God has not made Religion à matter of eternal Debate If all are obliged to belieue by diuine Faith the very truths yea the same infallible truths which God has reuealed and no other of à lower or slighter Rank If he has reuealed them for this end that all may be Ascertain'd A second Inference of their intrinsecal Worth That is of being both Diuine and infallible If the whole Christian world remain's not at this day in Errour or is not cast vpon vncertainties what to belieue If both the truth and infallibility of all reuealed Doctrin stand's and subsist's firmly ioyned together in God the first Verity impossible to be separated there And if Finally as T' is there true and infallible all are obliged to learn it Nothing can be more manifest then that diuine Prouidence has established and impowred Some Oracle to teach and propose that very reuealed Doctrin vnder its own Nature and Nâ—tion as it is both true and infallible 13. Thus much Supposed and proued All further Questions The Oracle teaching truth cannot be questioned concerning the Oracle ceases For it neither is nor can be another but the Roman Catholick Church which has charge to interpret Scripture faithfully to rescue Gods truths from the lewd misusage of Hereticks Clear therefore once that Sacred Book from abuse Learn what this one certain Oracle teaches our Faith is sound Catholick and Apostolical But if Scripture by reason of its Obscurity deceiues any or the Church could deuiate from the sincere interpretation of Gods truths there registred The Very life of true Religion is lost Faith vanishes into errour 14. Who euer seriously Consider's what is already said in this and the precedent chapter will find Mr Stillingfleets scattered Mr Stillingfleets Obiections weightles Obiections against the Infallibility of Church and Councils vtterly void of strength Some worthy person of our Nation who he is I know not in his Guide of Controuersies Disc 3. has so broken and vanquished the little force they haue that I may well supersede all further labour herein There is not one Obiection proposed but T' is either first euidently retorted vpon Mr Stillingfleet Or 2. Implies à pure begging of the Question Or 3. Impugn's all Councils Or 4. Appears so slight at the very first view that it deserues no Answer What can be more slight then to tell vs as he doth P. 508. That we He Speak's not truth are absolutely auerse from free Councils because we condemn all other Bishops but those of our Church without suffering them to plead for themselues in any Indifferent Council It is hard to say what the Gentleman mean's by free and indifferent Councils for he fetters all with so many Conditions that neuer any was yet found in the Church so qualified as he would haue it Read him through his 1. and 2. Chapter as also P. 557. You will se what I assert Manifest It is true we condemn A Calumny for à Proof all heteredox Bishops and doth not Mr Stillingsleet recriminate and condemn ours But to say we suffer none to plead for Themselues in à free Council is à flat Calumny vnless that only be free which some bodies fancy makes free and no other A word now to one or two Obiections 15. If you saith Mr Stillingsleet require an Assent to the Decrees of Councils as infallible There must be an antecedent Assent to this Proposition That whatsoeuer Councils decree is infallible I first retort the Argument If you require an Assent to your Definitions in the Dort-Meeting Or hold That the conuened there deliuered true Doctrin There must be an The first Argument retorted
of faith void For suppose I belieue Euery Resolution made null by this Obiection the Trinity because God hath reuealed the Mystery plainly in Holy Scripture I Ask whether God's Testimony supposed the Principle of belieuing be more infallible then the Trinity which is belieued vpon it here called the Conclusion Say The Diuine Testimony is more Infallible I 'll Affirm the very same of the Churches Proposition For what the Church speak's God speak's Answer No. And giue this reason Because we belieue the Testimony and the Mystery attested by one Indiuisible certain Act of Faith which tend's infallibly vpon both these Obiects at once without making Conclusions The difficulty ceases And hereby you se How the Churches Testimony is the Clearer Principle first How the Churches Testimony is à Principle to the thing belieued For euery one knowes that à Formal Obiect compared with its Materialâ— which lies in darkness is the greater Light and has the preheminence to be immediatly known For it Self and not for another Whereas the material Obiect would still remain in à State of obscurity and neuer be yeilded to but by the Energy of its formal Motiue In this sense therefore the vltima ratio assentiendi or formal Obiect may be well called the more certain Principle Though as I now said the Assent be indiuisibly terminated vpon both Obiects infallibly 18. You se 2. Where the mistake of our Aduersarie lies He Supposes faith generated by Discourse First that we belieue The Mistake discouerd the Trinity for example vpon one Principle Viz. The Churches Tradition or Testimony and then descend lower to belieue the same Mystery vpon God's Reuelation distinct from the Churches Testimony As if forsooth the Churches Testimony were an â—xtrinsecal condition preparing all to belieue vpon the Diuine Reuelation This must be intended or nothing is said to the Purpose now we vtterly deny the Supposition and Say when we belieue the Trinity or any other particular Mystery vpon the Churches Testimony or rather vpon this reuealed truth God speaks so by the Church We then elicite not two distinct Acts one depending on the other but with one One Indiuisible tendency in Faith indiuisible tendency of Faith belieue at once the Formal and Material Obiect together That is we belieue God speaks the truth by the Church which is to say we Assent to it because he speak's it by his own infallible Oracle 19. This one syllogâ—sm clear's all What the Church Saies is true The Church Saies God has reuealed the Trinity Ergo that 's true We resolue the Maior or first Proposition thus What the Church saies iâ— true That is What God speaking by the Church saith is true But God speaking by the Church Saies the Mystery of the Trinity is Ergo That 's true Where you see we only Discourse could Faith be so generated which some Diuines Assert from the Formal obiect or from Gods Reuelation to the Material belieued Now Mr Stillingfleet makes this Sense of the Maior Proposition and here lies his Errour that the Church Saies of Her self not including Gods Reuelation is The Errour more Clearly pointed at an act of Faith and true But the Church of her own sole Authority saith God reuealed the Trinity Ergo I must first belieue the Mystery by one act of Faith vpon the Churches Testimony as à Preparatiue to belieue it better vpon Gods pure Reuelation which is another distinct Formal Obiect from the Churches Testimony This Discourse is implicatory First because the Churches Testimony if separated from the Diuine Reuelation can ground no act of Faith 2. If which is true it only cooperates with or consummates the ancient Reuelation in order to the Belief of any Mystery it can help nothing to bring in à Conclusion wholly as obscure as it self is That word Conueyance beguiled Mr Stillingfleet for he thought if the Churches Testimony conueyes vnto vs the ancient Reuelation What beguiled thy Aduersary it must be excluded from being infallible and much more from being à ioynt Motiue with it Herein lies his Errour 20. It is difficult enough To Say what He would be at in his two next pages Some times he will haue no want of Euidence in faith as to the Reason inducing to belieue And if he means That what we Assent to by faith must be euidently Credible before we belieue it s à Truth but if he will haue the very act of Faith elicited to be euident the Apostle Heb. 11. 1. Faith implies Obscurity contradict's him For Faith is an Argument of things not appearing Sometimes again he saith the Assent is not requried to what is obscure and Vneuident And then to mollify the Proposition add's But what is euident to vs And theresore credible In à word Obscure Doctrin if he intend's thus much only That the euâ—dence of credibility precedes the inâ—â—dent act of Faith all is well But by one Instance we may guess where he err's The manner of the Hypostatical vnion Saith he is to vs ineuident wherevnto God requires not our Assent but to the truth of the thing it selfe Answer good Sr Is the truth of the Hypostatical vnion in it selfe or of the Trinity euident to vs Where lies that Euidence The truth of the Trinity euident to no Belieuer Or vpon what Principle is it grounded Hereticks are found that for the very difficulty of these ineuident Mysteries deny both And the best Orthodox Christians ingenuously Profess they so far Surpass all natural capacities That ther is no assenting to either but only by an humble submissiue Faith which essentially implies Obscurity If therefore what you say bo true We may lawfully suspend our Assent where God giues not euidence of the thing Assented to you may Consequently suspend your Assent and neither belieue the Trinity nor the Incarnation 21. Page 140. He demands why we belieue the Resurrection of the dead We Answer because God reueal's it An Obiection Proposed But Questioned again why we belieue that God hath reuealed it We Answer because the infallible Church saies God did speak it whereby it is plain that though our first Reply be from God's Authority yet the last Resolution of our faith is made into the infallibility of the Churches Testimony For though God had reuealed it yet if this Reuelation were not attested by the Church'es infallible Testimony we should not haue sufficient ground to belieue it Therefore the Churches infallibility must be more credible then the Resurrection of the dead 22. To giue à Satisfactory Answer please to hear what I demand also Mr Stillingfleet belieues that our Sauiour is Answered by Scripture it selfe the true Messias because Christ spake the Truth with his own sacred mouth Iohn 4. 26. And if he belieues Scripture He Assents again to that truth vpon S. Iohns Testimony And so firmly belieues it that if the Euangelist or some other of like authority had not wrote it he could not haue