and the Book it self to merit no Reply You see here Gentlemen how great stress I lay upon Dr. T.'s confession that the Ground of his Faith and consequently his Faith it self is possible to be False And really if he clears himself of it I must acknowledg I suffer a very great Defeat because I so much Build upon it If he does not he is utterly overthrown as to all intents and purposes either of being a good Writer or a solid Christian Divine and he will owe the World satisfaction for the Injury done to Faith and the Souls of those whom his Doctrine has perverted by turning their Faith which ought to be an Assent whose Grounds and consequently it self are Impossible to be an Error or False into Opinion whose Grounds and by consequence it self are possible to be such and lastly unless he Avoids or Râ—â—ants this Error objected all he has Written 〈◊〉 â—â—nvinc't without any more ado to be againâ—â—â—ith and its true Grounds and so it will be quite overthrown in the Esteem of all those who have the Nature of Faith writ in their hearts and that 't is Impossible an Act of right Faith that is an Asseâ—â— built on those Grounds God has left in the Church for Mankind to embrace Faith and commanded them to believe upon those Grounds whether Scripture's Letter or the Churches Voice should be an Error or the Profession of it a Lye which all sober Protestants Presbyterians nay almost all Sects except some few witty men inclining much by reading such Authours to Scepticism that is inclining to be nothing at all perhaps some Socinians reject abhominate and hate with all their hearts The Charge is laid and the Case is put now let us come to the Trial Which ere we do I desire those Readers who have Dr. T.'s Preface by them to read his 9 th page or else his whole page 118. in his Rule of Faith lest either of us may injure him by a wrong Apprehension I discourse thus § 2. First 't is Evident that he who makes the Ground and Rule of Faith possible to be False makes Faith it self such likewise since nothing is or can be stronger than the Grounds it stands on Next the Rule of Faith to Dr. T. is the Scripture's Letter and consequently that what he conceives the Sense of the Scripture is God's Sense or Faith Lastly that in the place now Cited and Related by him he speaks of the Authority of the Book of Scripture and of its Sence as he acknowledges here page 15. These things thus premised I put him this Dilâ—mma Either he holds what he conceives to to be the Sence of Scripture that is his Faith True or he does not If he holds it not to be True then 't is unavoidable he must hold it at least possible to be False if not actually such But if he says he holds it to be True then since after he had spoke of the security he had or had not of the Book and Sense of Scripture he immediately subjoyns these very words It is possible all this â—ay be otherwise He as evidently says that what he conceives the Book of Scripture and Sence of such or such passages in it that is his Faith is possible to be False as 't is that what 's OTHERWISE THAN TRVE is False I do not know how Dr. T. could possibly speak more plainly what I charge him with than he has done in those words unless he should use the word False which too Candid and Rude expression would expose him openly to the dislike of all Sober mâ—n and therefore he disguiz'd it in its more moderate Equivalent otherwise I say Equivalent And if it be not I would gladly know of him what the word otherwise relates to Human Language forbids that any thing can be said to be otherwise unless it be otherwise than something I ask then otherwise than what does he mean when being in the Circumstance of Discoursing what security he had of the Antiquity Writers and Sence of Scripture he told us It is possible to may be otherwise Is it not as evident as words can express he must mean It is possible the Book of Scripture is not so antiâ—nt as the Apostles time It is possible it was not Writ by the Apostles and Evangelists It is possible this is not the Sence of it in such passages as concern Faith for to these and these only our Discourse and the Nature and Title of his Book determin'd it which amounts to this that none has absolute Certainty of either Letter or Sence of Scripture nor consequently of his Faith in case it be solely grounded upon that as he professes See Reader how all Truths even the most Sacred ones go to wrack when men fram'd only for fine Talk undertake to prove and how parallel his defence of the Ground of all Christian Faith is to that he gave us lately of the Existence of a Deity He so prov'd a God that he granted it possible there might be none and now he so proves Scripture to be a Rule that he grants it possible it may be no Rule since common Sence tells us that can never be an Intellectual Rule which followed may lead into Errour By which we see Dr. T. needed here the Blessing as he calls it of that Identical Proposition A Rule 's a Rule else he would not write a Book to prove Scripture a Rule and then ever and anon in equivalent Language tell us 't is none I wish he would now and then reflect upon such Evident Truths and not out of an openly-declar'd Feud against those First Principles fall thus perpetually into manifest Contradictions § 3. But how does Dr. T. clear himself of this Charge of mine or how comes he off from his own words First he again puts down those very words which say over and over what I charge upon him and then asks very confidently where he says any such thing which is just as wise a craft as Children use when they hoodwink themselves and then tell the By-standers they shall not see them Next he tells us that All he sayes is that we are not Infallible in judging of the Antiquity of a Book or the sence of it meaning that we cannot demonstrate these things so as to to shew the contrary necessarily involves a contradiction but yet c. Is this all he sayes What then is become of those famous words It is possible all this may be otherwise which were onely objected But let us examine what he does acknowledge Whether he be Infallibly certain or no it matters not but it should be shewn why if Scripture be the sole Ground of Faith some at least in the World who are to Govern and Instruct the Church should not be thus certain of both in case we be bound to assent and as we questionless are dy to attest the Points of our Faith to be absolutely-certain Truths Again if Dr. T. be not Infallibly certain
Infallibly Certain on the Subjects side than another And thus in the same Person his Faith may be come more Lively than formerly according as he renders it more Express to his Thoughts and better dinted or imprinted in them which is done two manner of ways Habitually by often thinking on the Points which way is Proper to the Vulgar or Knowingly by penetrating it's Grounds still better and better and so making those Judgments solider and firmer 'T is seen also that one Object maybe justly said to be more Impossible to be false than another because that other is not at all such but by virtue of it and dependence on it according to that Axiom Quod per se est tale est magis tale What is so of it self is more or more perfectly such than what is such by means of another and with good reason for being impossible to be false solely by dependence on another 't is consequently of it self possible to â—e false Yet this Possibility can never be reduc'd into Act because that Object or Truth is never found unconnected with that other on which it depends but ever most intimately united with it and so engaging it's verity § 14. Pag. 18. Dr. T. endeavours to acquaint us with the Notion of Moral Certainty which I should be glad to learn for I am not ashamed to own that I never understood it perfectly in my life Some mean one thing by it another means another thing as their Fancy leads them now I for my part declare that I have no distinct notion or knowledge of any thing that I cannot define nor can I define that the limits or bounds of whose Nature I see not nor I am confident any man living I wish Dr. T. better success Moral Certainty says he is sometimes taken for a high degree of Probability which can onely produce a doubtful Assent He means I suppose such an Assent as is a Doubt or Suspending of Assent that is such an Assent as is no Assent I wish Dr. T. would go to School a while to honest Dame Nature and learn his Hoâ—n-book of First Principles and not thus ever and anon commit such bangers To doubt signifies to fear a thing is not true or not not to dare to assent to it that is not to assent and so a doubtful Assent is not Assenting Assent that is an Assent which is not an Assent He proceeds Yet it is also frequently us'd for a firm and undoubted Assent to a thing upon such Grounds as are fit fully to satisfie a prudent man Here are many things worth remark if one had leasure And first what means an undoubted Assent 'T is the Thing properly speaking is undoubted or not-doubted of and not the Assent But that 's but a slip of word I conceive by the word yet which introduces it he means an undoubtful Assent onely he fear'd the Inelegancy of the word in opposition to the doubtful Assent here spoken of and because speaking properly the opposit to Doubt is Hope an Vndoubtful Assent means a Hopeful Assent which since Doubting speaks a Disinclining to assent or judge the thing so and Hoping an inclining to it very fairly gives us a second dish of an Assent which is no Assent for Inclining only to be is not being such and so Inclining to Assent how strong soever it be is in reality no Assent Well Dr. T's resolution against Identical Propositions was certainly the most fatal bolt that ever was shot making him discourse like the man that said he had three Lights in him a great Light a little Light and no Light at all Next I would know what grounds are fully fit to satisfy a prudent man One man likes some Grounds others like others A sleight proof from Scripture likes some man better than the Practice of the Church the Consent of Mankind or the clearest Demonstration another I mean the Atheist likes a plausible Reason that sutes with and takes fancy better than all of them together A third likes Nonsense prettily exprest better than the clearest Truths unelegantly deliver'd A fourth values nothing that is produc'd to ground Assent but what when examin'd subsists by engaging First Principles and bears the Test of right Logick My Friend on the other side bids defiance to First Principles and Logick too and is all for Likelihoods more Credible Proofs Fair Probabilities Doubtful or rather Hopeful Assents Yet there want note now in the world esteem'd sober Persons who judge all these to be Prudent Men. Where then is this Prudent Man that we may take measure of his pitch and fit him with Grounds for any thing yet appears 't is as easie to fit the Moon with a Coat There are many prudent men among the Protestants who judge the Scripture's Letter interpreted by private Wit is a competent Ground for Faith There are other prudent men among Catholicks who judge the Contrary Nay more there are questionless amongst Turks and even Heathens divers men of grert Natural Prudence and we can only mean such a Prudence antecedently to the Illumination of Faith and they too have Grounds fit fully to satisfie them for they doe actually satisfie them so that they see not the least Reason to doubt of what they profess and so according to Dr. T's discourse these too have moral Certainty of what they hold Wherefore unless we could state what 's meant by a prudent man we can never come to understand what is meant by Dr. T's moral Certainty nor consequently when Faith is Certain when not nay which is worse if moral Certainty be that which he appoints as sufficient for Faith and for any thing appears by his words Turks Heathens and all Hereticks have the same since they have such Grounds as do fully satisfie prudent men it will follow that they may have as good Grounds as Christians have at least that no man can tell who have right Grounds of Faith who not since this notion of what is fit fully to satisfie a Prudent man has no determinate limits to state the nature of this mock-Certainty Besides 't is common in the course of the world and I have divers times observ'd it my self that two persons may contest about some passage even in humane affairs as when any thing is by a strange surprize or forgetfulness lost or to seek each of them may seriously protest they are morally Certain of it each may alledge Reasons they may be both prudent men too and both be fully satisfi'd with their Reasons and yet the plain discovery of the thing may shew afterwards that one of them prov'd to be in the wrong Now if this happen in a Controversie for example between a prudent Socinian and a prudent Protestant how must it be decided Both alledge Scripture each sees no Reason to doubt of his own Interpretation and both are fully satisfi'd that is both have Dr. T's moral Certainty and so both must be in the right if his Grounds be in the
and divinely assisted are no Christians In a word this way of Divinity or Resolution of Faith which I take makes every man both those in the Church and those out of it rely on the Churches Authority or Testimony diversly consider'd in order to their respective capacities and so still makes the Church THE PILLAR AND GROVND OF TRVTH which all Catholicks in the World not so much as any one School-Divine excepted hold the securest way that can be imagined And should any one dislike it I see not what he can with any show pretend He must allow some Natural Motive antecedent to Faith and what is known by means of it that is he must grant some Motive antecedent to the Knowledge of Supernatural Assistance and where he will find in the whole World any such Motive stronger than is the Humane Authority of the Church as to matters of Faith I profess I know not nor I am confident can any man living imagine If this then be absolutely speaking the securest way that is 't is securer or firmer than is the way of proceeding upon Motives of Credibility and incomparably more secure than is that of resolving Faith into Motives onely Prudential Though indeed things rightly stated and understood the Motives of Credibility are some of them Coincident with Tradition and the rest which can lay just claim to Certainty depend on it taken at large as their Ground as hath been prov'd in the Corollaries to Sure-footing It may be ask'd Why since Tradition and Church are one and the same Thing I did not chuse to say that the CHVRCH gives us Knowledge of the first deliver'd Faith rather than that TRADITION does so seeing none could have scrupled or excepted against the former manner of Expression whereas this gives occasion of mis-apprehension to some unattentive Readers I answer I us'd on that occasion the word Tradition rather than the word Church for the same reason the Geometricians use the words Line or Surface when they have a mind to express Body as Long or Broad for these are in reality the same thing with Body but in regard Body is the Subject of many other Considerations as well as these and these speak Body precisely according to the Considerations of Length and Breadth to which onely it was Intended to speak hence it was better both for Succinctness of Expression and Exactness of Science which is built on the perfect distinction of our Conceptions to use the Abstract or Distinguishing words Line and Surface rather than the Concrete or Confused word Body which involves much more than the Discourser in that circumstance intended to consider or speak to Now this being the very method observed in that Science which bears the name for the greatest Exactness in Discourse I much fear the Objecters mistake proceeds from not reflecting that whoever pretends to an Accurate and Connected way of Discourse and rigorously to conclude what he intends must either follow that best of Methods or he falls short of his Duty and wrongs his Cause § 9. To clear this a little better and withal to apply it I shall make choice of another familiar Instance We use to say in Common Speech that the Countenance or Carriage of a Man makes known his Genius Now all these three viz. Countenance Carriage and Genius are in reality most evidently the same Thing with the Man himself onely they differ from it in the manner of Expression the word Man nominating the Whole or Intire Thing which is the Subject of all these and innumerable other Considerabilities confusedly imply'd in that word The other three are more distinct indeed in their manner of signifying but they fall exceedingly short of the others vast extent and express Man but in part or onely a few Respects found in that Subject whereof some are less known some more and so a Means to know others Whence it comes to pass that Countenance signifying Man as Looking or according to the outward Appearance of that part in him call'd the Face also Carriage signifying him as bearing or demeaning himself and lastly Genius as having such a peculiarity of Humour or Nature in him hence these words The Speech Countenance and Carriage of a Man discover his Genius amount to this the Man according to his Speech Countenance or Carriage which are visible and more Intelligible Considerations belonging to him is a means to notifie himself to us according to something in him which is latent and less manifest viz. his Genius This I say is the plain Sense of the other words onely this later manner of speaking is prolix and troublesome the other short and yet fully expressive of the Speakers Intention Again the other manner of Expression is Proper and Apt whereas should one put it thus The Man makes known the Man besides the confusedness of the expression since Man signifies the whole Intire Thing without distinguishing any particular Respects it would make the whole or the self-same thing abstracting from all different Respects to be before and after more known and less known than it sel◠which is a direct Contradiction § 10. Applying then this Discourse The word Church being a Congregation of Men answers in its way of expressing to the word Man in the Example now given and involves confusedly in its notion innumerable Considerations belonging to that Body of which True Faith which is as it were the Genius or Nature of the True Church is of it self latent unknown and far from self-discoverable Others such as is the Humane Testimony of the Church meant in those Circumstances by the word Tradition in regard it depends on Testifying Authority is more known and being Oral and Practical fitly corresponds to Speech Countenance Carriage and such-like It being known then by this means that such a Body has in it the first-deliver'd or True Faith 't is known immediately that having in it the Genius or Nature of a True Church 't is indeed the True Church Again it being known likewise and conceived by all who understand what is meant by that word that True Faith is a firm Adhesion to Christs Doctrine also it being apprehended by those against whom we dispute nay demonstrable out of the nature of that Doctrine that 't is a means to love God above all things hence 't is justly concluded that there is in the Generality or in great Multitudes of this Body a due love of Heaven call'd Sanctity or Charity which is the Gift peculiarly attributed to the H. Ghost and it being known and experienc'd by those already in the Church that this Love of Heaven or Sanctity gives the Faithful a particular Strength and Power to perform all good Duties and this of preserving uncorrupted the deliver'd Faith being one and that a most concerning one hence they come to know that the Church is assisted by the H. Ghost as in all other good Duties so especially in this of delivering and continually proposing Right Faith So that as Reason requires
would believe him That my Principles do plainly exclude from Salvation at one blow Excommunicate Vnchristian all that do not believe upon my Grounds And nothing is easier than to prove it in his way 'T is but mistaking again the Notion of School-Divines for the Notion of Faithful and School for Church as he did lately and the deed is done immediately without any more trouble He is the happiest man in his First Principles and his Method that I ever met with the parts of the former need not hang together at all but are allow'd to be Incoherent and the later is a building upon false pretences and wrong Suppositions and then what may not he prove or what Conquest cannot he obtain by such powerful Stratagems He sayes he has proov'd at large in the Answer to Sure-Footing that the Council of Trent did not make Oral Tradition the sole Rule of her Faith Possibly I am not so lucky as to light on this large Proof of his all I can finde with an ordinary search is four or five lines Rule of Faith pag. 280. where after a commonly-Objected often-answer'd Citation from the Council of Trent declaring that Christian Faith and Discipline are contain'd in written Books unwritten Traditions therefore that they receive honor the Books of Scripture also Traditions with equal pious affection and reverence He adds which I understand not how those do who set aside the Scripture and make Tradition the sole Rule of their Faith Now I had put this very Objection against my self Sure-f pag. 346. and proceeded to clear it to the end of pag. 150. particularly pag. 147.149 upon this Reason because taking the Scripture interpreted by Tradition as the Council expresses it self to do and forbids any man to interpret it otherwise it has the full Authority of Gods Word and so equally to be reverenced Whereas taking it interpreted by private heads which only will serve Dr T's turn 't is nothing less as not engaging the Divine Authority at all But now to the Notion of a Rule there is more required as Dr. T. himself grants and contends 't is found in Scripture viz. that it be so evident that every sensible may understand it as to matters of Faith and this building on the Council of Trents Authority and Judgment I deny to be found in the bare Letter of Scripture and hence say 't is no Rule I omit the repeating very many Arguments from the Council for that point deduc't from pag. 141. to pag. 146. never toucht nor so much as taken notice of in that Mock-Answer of his § 16. But that he may not mistake me I shall not stick to declare whom I exclude from Salvation at least from the way to it whom not and upon what Grounds speaking of the ordinary course of Gods Providence as I declare my self to do throughout this whole Treatise I make account that perfect Charity or Love of God above and in all things is the Immediate Disposition to Bliss or Vnitive of a Soul to God Also that this Virtue cannot with a due heartiness be connaturally or rationally wrought in Souls if the Tenet of a Deity 's Existence and of Christian Faith be held possible to be a Ly. Hence I am oblig'd by my Reason to hold that those who judge there are no absolueely-Conclusive Reasons for the Existence of a Deity nor for the Truth of Christian Faith are as such out of the Road of Salvation On the other side those who hold the Church the Pillar and Ground of the Truths they profess Infallible and by Consequence their Faith Impossible to be False as all Catholikes do though as Divines they fail in making out how and by what particular means it comes to be Infallible yet through the virtue of this firm and steady Adhesion to such Principles as are because they are Truths apt to beget solid and well-grounded that is indeed True Virtues such as are a vigorous Hope and a fervent and all-ovre-powering Charity hence they possess the Connatural Means or are in the right way to Heaven And for this Reason I esteem Dr. T 's way of discoursing concerning a Deity and Faith in his Sermons most pestilent and mischievous to Souls as being apt of its own Nature to incline them if they have wit to discern its shallowness first to a kind of Scepticism in Religion and at next to Carelesness Irreligion and Atheism though truly I think 't is not his Intention to do so but that his shortness in Understanding the Nature and Grounds of Christianity makes him conceit he does excellently even to admiration all the while he commits such well-meaning Follies Nor do I think the Church of England will upon second thoughts think fit to Patronize Principles so destructive to the Nature of Faith found in the breast of every Protestant I ever yet met with who all with one mouth will own that 't is absolutely Impossible Christian Faith should be a Lye and abhor the contrary Position as wicked and damnable How Dr. T. may have season'd some of his own Auditors by preaching Controversy to them which he extremely affects I cannot tell 't is according as they incline to believe him more than the Generality of the Christian World whose Sentiments he opposes in his Discourses about the Ground of Faith DISCOURSE VIII With what Art Dr. T. answers my METHOD A Present made to his Credulous Friends shewing how solidly he confuted SVRE-FOOTING by readily granting the main of the Book What is meant by Tradition That J. S. is not singular in his way of discoursing of the Grounds of Faith § 1. HE makes a pass or two at my METHOD and that I conceive must serve for an Answer to it for an Answer I heard was threatned would appear very shortly but this pleasant Preface was the only thing which appeared and all that appears like Answer in it is that he would make it believ'd he ought not answer at all And this he does very neatly and like a Master For let no man think I have a mean Opinion of Dr. T. but every one is not good at all things some are good at proving some at disproving some at shifting of the Question without either proving or disproving every one in his way and in his way I know no man living a greater Master nor so great as the Dr. Two things he does and both of them strange ones First he affirms that Discourse is founded on the self-evident Infallibility of ora◠Tradition Next that He has sufficiently considered that point in the Answer to Surefooting The first of them would make the Reader apprehend I there suppos'd Oral Tradition self-evidently Infallible and then run on all the way upon that supposition which if it obtain belief as from his Credit he hopes it may since every Scholar knows all Discourses must be founded either on first Principles or at least on such as are granted by those against whom we
earnestly with me to surcease They alledged that unpassionate Examiners might easily discover by what had been done already how frivolous and insignificant the whole way was which my Adversary took and that another and more convictive Reply might possibly heighten the anger to fatal extremities That if I were less sensible of my own safety I should yet have regard to my Friends and all Catholicks that it was to be feared that an exception against a particular person might in that Iuncture be enhanc'd to a Crime of the Whole and the crossing the humour or interest of that implacable Party raise the storm of the Great Diana of the Ephesians and give the Gospel-Trumpeters occasion to sound out aloud Papa ad Portas To this was joyned for why should I be ashamed to acknowledge my Poverty into which that Persecution had driven me that I had written more then I was able to print In fine Authority and Reason and Necessity prevail'd with me and I forbore to finish what I had begun and to publish what I had finish'd But yet the desire I had to be instrumental in settling so important a Truth suggested to me a middle way which as I hoped would be incapable to be wrested into offence so I saw plainly would be much more beneficial to the world and to the Learned more satisfactory I had observ'd in the Sermon which Dr. T. call'd the Wisdom of being Religious a Concession which amounted to this that the very Tenet of a Deity might possibly be false I saw the same sence often imply'd in his Rule of Faith and p. 1â—8 plainly own'd I perceiv'd and knew all men of insight must needs perceive with me that as this was the onely material so 't was a full Answer to my Book and rendred the disquisition whether this or that be the Rule of Faith very superfluous if it might be maintained It had no Rule at all nor was capable of any For a Rule speaking of an Intellectual Rule as both of us do being a means to make us certainly know something to be a Truth He who says that thing may possibly be false or not be a Truth says it neither has nor can have any Rule I resolved therefore to write a Treatise in behalf of Christian Faith in common in which I endeavoured to demonstrate from all Heads I could invent that the Generality of Christians or those who rely on the common Motives left by God to the Church as I exprest my self in my Introduction the assent called Faith must be Impossible to be False or Erroneous And applying this to Dr. T. and his Adherents who as I shew'd from his own words granted his Assent built on that which he esteems his onely Rule of Faith possible to be false I concluded them beyond all possibility of evasion not to have true Faith nor be truly Faithful And this I conceive was to follow on my blow as I had promised it being unimaginable how the Controversie could be prest more home than to conclude my Adversary and his whole Cause from the very An Est of Faith the Subject of our Dispute nor how his whole Book which he calls the Rule of Faith can be more fundamentally overthrown than by shewing from his own words and the Nature of the Thing that his mis-called Faith has no Rule at all nor can have any I conceiv'd too that this was to make good the engagement into which I had enter'd to force them either to lay Principles which would bear the Test or let all the world see they had none For in case they did manifest their Faith Impossible to be False they must of necessity build it upon such Grounds as would sustain such a Building if they did not the World must needs judge by their silence that they had none and that they knew and confest they could not evidence themselves truly Faithful and right Christians I saw besides that this method permitted me to pursue a rational close way of Discourse without the continual interruption which the insisting upon my Adversaries mistakes must needs occasion which as it was more satisfactory to me and more creditable to my Cause so I judg'd it more beneficial to the intelligent Reader for a particular Answer must of necessity be made up for the greatest part of accusations where the Answerer thinks it his best play to mistake all along instead of direct confuting I cannot say I am in the right but I must say likewise that who says otherwise is in the wrong and that he either misunderstands or misrepresents and this either ignorantly or wilfully to show which is a task no more pleasant to the Reader than the Writer People being of opinion and I think they have great reason that the time and pains spent in such wranglings might with much more advantage be employ'd in convincing the Truth in question Lastly my aim was from the beginning to bring Controversies to a Conclusion in order to which I had proposed a Conclusive Method my Adversary neither accepted of mine nor proposed any other of his own as I had desired And I saw that by proceeding with him in his talking fashion the Point might come to be lost in a Wilderness of Unconnected Words Wherefore I judg'd it better to pursue my design more closely and by the bare stating the Nature of Christian Faith to reduce all Disputes to this short Period Either produce and vouch such Grounds for your Faith as are Impossible to be False or 't is evident you have none It seemed by the Event the way I took was not ill chosen Dr. T. being still able to boast his Book was not particularly answer'd and so uphold his Credit with those who look not deeply into Things seem'd by his silence well-appay'd and I heard of no more extraordinary Anger against me And for my part I was contented that superficial People should judge as their wit serv'd them it being abundant satisfaction to my Labours that Intelligent and Insighted Persons might perceive by them how matters stood and into how narrow a compass Controversie was reduced And of this I have ample experience from the most Iudicious of our Nation who unanimously assur'd me that it was impossible to carry things farther or bring Controversie to a shorter Method since now the whole Cause depended upon one single Proposition by the sole examination of which it was to be decided Thus stood the Controversie and thus for some years it rested For the future I intended when it might be seasonable to write onely such Grounds as I judged might be a solid Foundation for Union which as I have always look'd upon as the best of Works so I know 't is Impossible till order be first taken to secure the Absolute and Immoveable Certainty of Faith it self which I think is not otherwise to be done then by shewing how and which way it comes to be Certain In this Calm I heard several reports that the
and Demonstration that is at all absolutely-Certain Grounds and Conclusions which if they can bring into disgrace and contempt as they hope they may because such reflexions are unusual and unsuitable to the Fancies of the Generality they see plainly their work is done and that all Infallibility and Absolute Certainty which stands against them because they can with no show of Reason pretend to it must be quite overthrown The next way they take is to abuse with Ironies any man who offers or attempts to settle Faith on immovably Certain Grounds as Confident Swaggering men or vapouring Dogmatists as if it were such a piece of Confidence to say and go about to maintain that Christian Faith cannot possibly be a lying Imposture or that God cannot deceive us in the Grounds he has laid for his Church to embrace Faith A third means they use is to abuse and baffle the nature of True Certainty by clapping to it the Epithet of Moral and then proposing that to the World dilating upon it and fitting it to Faith as well as they are able which conception being suitable to the Fancies even of the weakest they hope it will take with those who reflect not that the Basis of Mankind's Salvation must be incomparably more secure than that which we usually have for the attainment of a Bag of Money a Place at Court Merchandise from the Indies and such like trivial Concerns Fourthly they avoid by all means looking narrowly into the Natures of Faith Truth Assent Demonstration Principles or shewing the necessity of Consequence for any thing they produce and above all settling themselves or yielding to any Conclusive Method of Discoursing propos'd by others or any other things equivalent to these and in their stead they are given to talk much of Probabilities Fair Proofs Great Likelihoods More Credible Opinions Prudential Reasons or such as are fit to satisfie prudent men in Humane Affairs of not-doubting seeing no just cause of doubt and such-like bashful and feeble expressions which they dress up plausibly and talk prettily and doubt not but by this means to find Understandings enow so shallow as to admire their superficial gayness This is the Character of this dangerous Sect of which what opinion we are to have or by what name to to call them this short Discourse will inform us If we know any thing of Christianity or have any notion of what is meant by that word 't is questionless this that 't is a means to attain Bliss or Heaven by nor does any Christian doubt but that it performs this by raising us to a vigorous Hope of it as a thing attainable and to an ardent and over powering Love of it in Christian Language call'd Charity as also that both these excellent Virtues are built upon the Basis of Faith this being as S. Paul calls it the substance of things to be hoped for the Argument that is the Conviction of things unseen Again common Reason informs us that the Assent of Faith depends on its Grounds and consequently cannot be stronger than They are These things understood let us consider how Impossible 't is that any one should have an efficacious Hope and a Love of Heaven while he judges himself capable to understand all the Grounds of it as to our knowledge and yet sees they may be all False and consequently that perhaps there is no such thing as this thing call'd Heaven Can any one that is not Frantick connaturally hope for and love effectually a thing which he sees perhaps is not or has not absolute Certainty of its Existence A Merchant hopes and desires Wealth from the Indies but then he holds it absolutely True that there is in Nature such a Thing as Wealth and that it is not a Chimera else he were mad either to hope or desire it and stark mad to love it above all things as we must do Heaven even above the dearest Goods he at present sees experiences possesses and actually enjoys Wherefore to omit diverse Arguments produc'd for this point in Faith vindicated from p. 144. to p. 164. 't is concluded that the denying any Grounds for Faith but what we see are onely-morally Certain that is possible to be false is unable to breed that disposition in the Soul as fits it for Heaven and so as far as is on its part destroys the nature of Christianity or the means to carry Souls to Heaven in those men who see that what they are to love above all things is perhaps a Chimera wherefore being by this means destitute of the nature of Faith and Christianity they are concluded taking them precisely as holding this Tenet of Faiths possible Falsehood to be in reality no Christians though they should profess all the points of Faith that are How Catholicks that Speculate amiss become not liable to this Note I have shown in Faith Vindicated p. 129 130. and elsewhere in this present Treatise If these men then be not indeed or in True Speech Christians what must we call them Seekers No For these though they judge they have not yet found out certainly what is Truth yet they hold 't is to be found and thence continue to enquire after it Whereas these men are doubly Irrational First in resting satisfied when as they see they have not yet found out certainly that what they hold to is Truth and which is much worse equivalently say that it cannot be found out to be Truth by saying the nature of the thing cannot bear it Atheists or Iews they are not because they deny not the Tenet of a Deity or Christianity though they do not hold them absolutely Certain Nor yet are they taken under this notion Hereticks For those deny still some point of Faith or other whereas these men may deny none but hold all and yet be what they are their Errour consisting in a wrong apprehension concerning the Grounds or Certainty of Faith which renders all the Points of Faith Ineffectual for for what they were intended Whence the malice of this Tenet is something above that of Heresie as not destroying some one or a few Points but quite enervating all Faith Nor yet are they meer Scepticks in Religion or hovering indifferently between the opposite sides of the Contradiction but they bend strongly towards thinking it True They are therefore certain Incliners to Christianity or Deemers that 't is True and not of the FAITHFUL that is Holders of a Deity or Christs-Doctrine but rather of the HOPEFUL For whereas Faith being a firm Belief or Assent that Christs Doctrine is True and so settles the existence of of it and particularly of a Heaven in our minds antecedently to Hope of attaining Heaven these men substitute Hope to Faith and onely Hope those Points are true or in all likelihood may be true Whence though this be a good name I must not say to Christen them but to call them by yet perhaps their own dear word Moral will best suit with their Genius
't is the first Created one or the First Principle in discoursing about Creatures as to their Natures or Essâ—nces that Every Thing is what it is which is therefore True because God is what He is or because Self-existence is Self-existence as was explicated above § 1. 2. which I hope Dr. T's Goodness will so much prevail above his Ignorance as not to judge ridiculous whatever he thinks of the first Created Truths which immediately depend on the Other § 13. But why must First Principles be necessarily exprest with that most perfectly-formal Identity Or the Subject and Predicate be put in the self-same words Is it not enough the Sence be the same as is found in Definitions but the Words must be the same also Which bears a show of ridiculousness and seems to admit of no possibility of advance towards new Knowledges Why cannot then the Definition serve to principle all our Discourses about the Thing defin'd without recurring to such Propositions as appear little better than flâ—t and insignificant as to that purpose I answer The Objection in great part demands what Use can be made of First Principles which shall be spoken to in the next Discourse But that Definitions are not the very Prime Verities of all appears evidently already because those Propositions which express the Things Possibility to be defin'd must necessarily antecede the Definition And the same will be farther clear'd by these following Considerations 1. That Definitions are often liable to dispute but Identical Propositions never I have heard a certain learned and ingenuous person disallow A Rational Creature to be a right definition of a Man and discourse very soberly how proud a thing Mankind was to arrogate all the Reason to himself whereas diverse Birds and Beasts in their several spheres have as much or more Reason than He. And yet I dare say the same Gentleman would heartily allow the Truth of this Proposition A man is a man Nay indeed all the Scepticks in the world admit Identical Propositions to be True yet the same men quarrel every Definition extant Since then 't is directly against the nature of the very first Principles to be dlsputable 't is evident that Definitions cannot be the very First Principles of all 2. First Principles ought to be Principia Intellectus and naturally ingrafted in us that so they may oblige all under forfeiture of their nature to acquiesce to their verity whereas Definitions are not such but acquir'd by Practical self-evidence For example by a long course of observation heedfuâ—ly attending to the actions of men as men and thence by means of some First Principle evidencing so constant a hitting in so many particulars to be beyond Chance or Accident gathering his primary and proper Operation we come to know the Definition of Man none of which needs to know the Truth of this nature-taught Proposition A Man is a Man or A Rational Creature is a Rational Creature Moreover Definitions generally need some skill of Art to make them and all Art presupposes some First Principles whence 't is impossible Definitions should be the First Principles of all 3. Experience teaches us that words being liable to Equivocation where there are fewer words there is less room for Equivocating wherefore since First Principles ought to be the câ—earest and consequently the most unequivocal that can be imagin'd Definitions which explicate the notion in more words afford more room for Equivocation and consequently are even in this regard less fit to be First Principles 4. Lastly Logical tricks of nicely distinguishing sometimes elude the Truth of a Proposition at least darken it from which Inconveniences First Principles ought to be the most Free that may be Now Definitions yielding more room for Equivocaâ—ness do by consequence give more occasion of distinguishing whereas Identical Propositions afford not the least For example this Proposition A Man is a Rational Creature bears this distinction A man is rational in some things as in discoursing those notions that concern Quantity but not in others e. g. those which concern Being or Rational that is capable to discourse right the nature of some Bodies but not of Spirits Is it not evident hence that this Definition of Man is by this means render'd in show ambiguous And I wish there were not too many in the world who out of their ignorance of the true Method to Science think this distinction both well-grounded and very pertinent Now this being so who sees not that the true limits of the definition of Man become doubtful by such kind of distinctions and consequently the sence of the Definition it self unknown whereas nothing of this can possibly happen in that Identical Proposition A Man is a Man since whatever distinction affects the Predicate must also affect the Subject and so the Proposition remains still intirely Identical and perfectly true and not in part onely as it happens in the other 'T is concluded then from all imaginable considerations that can belong to this peculiar matter that the very First Principles neither are nor can be any thing else but Identical Propositions § 14. As for their seeming ridiculous to some persons the reason is because those men of mirth being led much by Fancy and inur'd all their lives to pretty plausibilities and seldom or never reflecting on or discoursing orderly from such Grounds are hence apt to imagine that First Principles aâ—e Certain great Rarities or Productions of some extraordinary height of Wit when therefore they come to hear Identical Propositions alledged for First Principles seeing their high expectations so strangely disappointed they hereupon grow pleasant at the defeat of their Fancy never considering that because First Principles ground all possible discourse of what nature soever and therefore are common to all Mankind even the rudest in the world and inbred in them they must therefore be the farthest from being the effect of Wit and the most plain down right sayings that can be conceiv'd Whence they are better learn'd from the Vulgar than they are from great Scholars and therefore the most learned men that are if they would go to work solidly ought in such things as are the Results of pure Natural Knowledge attend to such as speak meer nature rather than to those who mingle and perhaps corrupt it with airy speculations which have not that firm Basis to ground their Discourses Now 't is obvious to observe that the nature-instructed Vulgar are apt to deliver themselves in such kind of plain Speeches in due occasions and make use of them as Truths which fix their Judgments in an Unalterableness For example if a man would force one of them to forgo what 's very evident he will stick firmly to the point and tell you soberly that Truth is Truth or that he 's sure a Spade is a Spade or that he knows what he knows or if it be in a point belonging to Justice that Right is Right and brings in these as Evidences from
and adhering to them as such Since on the one side they are of a large extent as Principles use to be and on the other side he sees no Principle they are opposite to and so ought to take them for Truâ—hs When Dr. T. gives the World â—atâ—sfaction in this point I will follow his Nonsensical Admonition and renounce all Prâ—nciples as far as God and Nature will give me leave for in that case Nonsence would be the best Sence and Contradictions the perfectest Truths But till he does this he must remain in his despair of convincing me I cannot for my heart help it § 19. I shall adde one word more to the truly Learned Reader Our imperfect manner of knowing in rhis state obliges us to detail or as it were divide the Object we would know into many abstracted inadequate or partial Conceptions which we use to rank orderly in the ten Predicaments and then to compound those single Conceptions into Propositions and those into Discourses Whereas separated Substances when they know any Object neither compound nor divide at all but with one Intuitive View see the Whole to be as it is Wherefore there is nothing in all our knowledges that in the manner of it comes so near their way of operating as our Act of knowing Identical Propositions It divides as little as is possible for our state for it predicates the Whole of the Whole for which very reason it as little compounds again and did not our Condition here forcibly exact oâ— us to frame a Proposition or connect together inadequate notions by a Copula when we would express a Truth it would be a kind of Intuitive seeing the Thing as it is and so indeed after a sort it is but confused all Clearness here arising from a perfect distinguishing our notions yet it resembles not a little in its absolute Evidence immovable Firmness and its nearest approach possible to Simple Intuition Whence it hints to a Soul deâ—irous of Truth the glorious satisfaction it will enjoy when the Screen of our Body is taken away to have at one Prospect all the whole Creation and each single thing in it presented to her ravish'd Understanding and seen to be what they are with a far greater Evidence possest and held with an incomparably greater Firmness and penetrated by a transcendently more excellent and Simple manner of knowing than whâ—t we now experience here in those weak yet best resemblances our knowledges of the First Principles And indeed ' â—is but fitting that those supreme Knowledges which ground both our Definitions the Matter and all force of consequence the Form of our inferiour way of Knowledge by Reasoning should be nearest ally'd to the manner of Knowing proper to those Higher sort of Intellectual Creatures that so as the wisest order of the World requires the Supremum Infimi may touch or immediately confine upon that which is Infimum Supremi § 20. By this time I hope those Learned and Intelligent Persons to whom I address this Discourse will discern I had some Reason to hold Identical Propositions to be First Principles I beseech them to review all Dr. T. hath said against them either here or in any other place and when they have discover'd it all to be meer empty Drollery they will justly wonder at his Confidence that dare appear before Scholars in Print and think to carry it off with soppish Jests as if his Readers had onely Risibility in them and no Rationality Yet in reliance on these unfailing Grounds he ends with a Declaration to all the World That if there be no other Principles but such as these meaning Identical Propositions he neither has any Principles nor will have any An excellent Resolution and hard to keep Yet I 'll wager ten to one on his head that in despight of both Art and Nature he shall hold it as well as any man living and that when he comes to lay any Principles of his own the Terms shall be so far from Identical that all the Wit of man shall not make them hang together at all § 21. The Sum of thâ—s whole Discourse about Principles is this All Science à Priori is thus originiz'd The First Being is what He is that is Self-Existence is Self-Existence and so Essentially Unchangeable Wherefore the Essences of Things depending solely on the Relation they have to what is in in GOD that is to what is GOD are Unchangeable likewise or are establisht in their own Being that is fixt in their own particular and distinct Natures which we fitly express by Identical Propositions affirming them to be what they are Hence they become capable of having the determinate bounds of their natures described in certain Forms of Speech call'd Definitions which are nothing else but expressions of their Distinction from all other Things in the World The way to make these Definitions is two-fold One by collecting the natural Sayings of the Generality of Mankind about that thing as such and then observing in what notion those several Sayings of theirs do center the distinct Expression of which must needs be the Definition For they knowing through Practical Self-evidence the distinction of one Thing from another by a perpetual converse wâ—th them have the right notion or nature of the Thing in theâ—r Minds and those Sayings genuinely deliver'd are the Proper Effects of that Notion imprinted there by the teaching of Nature The otâ—er way is by sorting all our Notions under certain distinct Heads and then dividing the highest or most General Notion in such a Head by iâ—trinsecal differences till by descending they light on that difference which constitutes and joyn'd with the Genus which it divides defines that Nature The Definition had that is a diâ—â—inct Knowledge being gain'd of what 't is in which any nature agâ—ees with others and in what it differs from them Reason has more room to stir her self in or more matter to work upon in order to bring things to a further distinction and clearness And first by a due consideration and reflexion Practical Self-evidence still assisting for the Greatest Men of Art must nâ—t leave off being Children of Nature nay perhaps 't is their best Title the Proper Causes and Effects of such a nature begin to appear and thence Middle Terms for Demonstrative Syllogisms disclose themselves and Science begins to spread it self and advance Or if two Notions are to be shown connected which seem'd remote the Notions which directly compounded their Definitions are to be resolv'd farther and their resolution pursu'd till something appears in both of them which is formally Identical that is till some Identical Proposition comes to be engag'd For example if one would prove that Virtue is Laudable he will find that Laudable is deserving to be spoken well of and Practical Self-evidence as well as Reason telling us that our Speech being fram'd naturally to express our Thoughts that thing deserves to be spoken well of which deserves to be thought well
nibbling § 4. But I may blush he says and what 's the Crime Why to acknowledge that ever I have read my Lord Falkland Mr. Chillingworth and Doctor Stillingfleet and have no better a style and way of reasoning whom he praises for Persons of admirable strength and clearness in their Writings What would he have I freely confess and ever did that they are Persons of much Wit and a clear Expression yet I never understood till now that men us'd to read their Books to learn a good style and methods of Discoursing As for their admirable strength I could never find it The strength of a Discourse as I imagine consists in its Grounds not in witty Plausibilities and and fine Language Though I know Dr. T. who seems never to have aym'd at any higher pitch thinks verily such ingenious Knacks make a Discourse stronger than all the Principles in the world And for them all put together if Dr. T. can show me any one Principle in any of them which they heartily stand to able to put Christian Faith beyond Possibility of Falsehood I promise to yield all I have writ for false and accordingly renounce it § 5. As for their Clearness and Dr. T's too whom I rank with them in that Quality having really a disposition to do him all just honour he makes himself capable to receive I acknowledge 't is found in them to a fair degree of Excellence But I must distinguish Clearness into two sorts one that clears their own thoughts by means of Language the other that clears the Truth of the Point in dispute which is done by means of Principles The former makes the Reader understand Them the latter makes him understand Truth The one renders it clear that they say thus the other makes it clear that they say right when they say thus In the first sort of Clearness they have not many Fellows In the latter they are like other Mortals or rather indeed they are quite destitute of it For being utterly void of Grounds they leave the Point unseen to be true that is obscure and far from Clear And if Dr. T. thinks I wrong them I desire him to show me either in any of them or in himself any Principle he can justly call theirs or his and then go to work Logically and make out how and by virtue of what its Terms hang together and if he can do this I shall acknowledge publickly my Errour and make them all honourable satisfaction the very next Piece I print In a word they are pretty dextrous at pulling down or bringing all things to Incertainty as becomes Men of Wit and Fancy and what easier than to raise a thousand wild Objections at rovers without ever heeding the natures of the Things but aâ— Building which requires a Judgment made steady by Grounds and Principles they ever did and ever will and so must all who follow their steps fall infinitely short § 6. As for my style I declare that I regard it no further than it serves to express my thoughts especially not intending to perswade the Vulgar Rhetorically by advantage of Language but to prove severely the point to Scholars by the connectedness of my Sence I am of St. Austin's mind that in this circumstance an Iron-Key is as good as a Golden one where no more is requisite but aperire quod clausum erat to open what was before conceal'd or shut In my younger years and spring time of my life I apply'd my self much to those flourishes of Poetry and Rhetorick but I am now in my Autumn and my riper thoughts applying themselves to study Knowledge the Flowers fell off when the Fruit-time was come I endeavour as far as I am able to fill my mind with grounded and sollid Reasons for the point in hand and then let my Sence give me my Style and not frame my Sence to my Words or make my Words supply the want of Sence as gay Discoursers use Besides no mans Attention is infinite and so should I mind my Style too much in all likelihood I should mind Sence which I a thousand times more value less and I take this to be one Reason why Dr. T. for otherwise the man has a very good wit heeding his Style and Words so extreamly much scarce attends at all to his Sence or as an Ingenious Person reading this Preface exprest it had rather be guilty of ten Errours than one Incongruity Lastly how does Dr. T. know my Style were I to make a Sermon Does not every Oratour know that the Style due to a Sermon and a strict Discourse of close Reason are the most different imaginable I will not say Dr. T. has no good Judgment in Words for this would make him good for little but I must say he was very rash in concluding absolutely of my Style from seeing it in one kind of matter onely and this the most Incompetent of any in the world to show what Language one is Master of Now to his Sermon and let him remember 't is himself forces me to lay open the weakness of his Discourses by his frequent and scornful Provocations Which I was very loth to do in this Circumstance lest it might wrong the Common Cause of Christianity against Atheism But I consider'd that should Christian Divines acquiesce and seem to consent by their Carriage that they judge such quivering Grounds competent to build their Faith and the Tenet of a Deity upon it would be a far juster Scandal to Atheists than 't is to disclaim from them and avow in the name of the rest the absolute Certainty of those Maxims which ground our Persuasions as Christians Add that it was my Duty to those who yet are firmly persuaded of their Faith not to permit them to slide into a less hearty Conceit of it than the nature of Faith and the Obligations springing from it do require at their hands These Considerations justifying me fully to the World and Dr. T's daring Provocations particularly to hâ—s Friends I resolv'd to answer his Challenge though I foresee my Discovering the Weakness of his Discourses upon this Subject engages me to make better of my own in confâ—tation of that Irreligious Sect of which I here acknowledge my self a Debtor to my Readers and shall perform that Obligation as soon as I have done with those Pretenders to Christianity who make Faith and its Grounds Uncertain â—nward Ulcers are far more dangerous and require speedier cure than those which are without § 7. His intent in his First Sermon was to show the Vnreasonableness of ATHEISM upon this account because it requires more Evidence for Things than they are capable of But let us Christians take heed that we give not scandal to Atheists and obstruct their Conversion by exacting of them what is opposite to the true Nature God has given them or Right Reason and requiring of them Impossibilities And for this end let us impartially consider what 't is we invite and perswade them
properly a Science for this Abstraction or manner of being in our mind frees the notion or nature thus abstracted that is the thing as thus conceiv'd by us from Vncertainty nay indeed fixes it in a kind of Immutability whereas were it consider'd as found in the World there would be no firm Ground at all for any Discourse For example perhaps by reason of the perpetual turmoil of things in Nature there is not to be found in the World any one Body either mathematically Straight Circular or Triangular yet because the nature of Body conceiv'd as in Rest bears it we can abstract from Motion and so consider quantitative Things according to what they can bear in themselves taken as not moving or in Rest therefore we can make such steady notions and when we have done discourse them and ground a long train of new Conclusions which we call a particular Science upon such a Nature thus conceiv'd § 9. And for that reason I would gladly know why Ethicks or Morality is not equally demonstrable as Mathematicks For we can equally abstract those Moral Notions of Virtues and Vices and consider them apart as we can do those Mathematical ones of Lines and Numbers I know 't is grown a common humour in the World taken up I know not how by course and continu'd none knows why to think otherwise But I must confess I never could discern any reason for it and shall be thankful to that man who can show me any that convinces In the mean time I give mine for the Affirmative which is this That the same reason holds for Ethicks as for Mathematicks since all the perquisits for Demonstration are found in the one as in the other To put it to the Test let 's consider what Euclid does when he demonstrates and by virtue of what We see he puts his Definitions and some common Maxims peculiar to that Subject and then by his Reason connecting the first Deductions with his Principles and the following Deductions with the foregoing onâ—â— weaves them into a Science And is it not evident that we can as well know what 's meant by those words which express Virtues and Vices and so as well define them as we can those other Also that the Common Maxims of Morality are as self-evident to Humane Nature as any First Principles in the World I admire then what should hinder Ethicks to be as perfect a Science as the clearest piece of Mathematicks since we can equally abstract the several notions handled in it from matter equally define them and consequently assisted by Common Maxims equally-evident with equal clearness discourse them which is all that is requir'd § 10. If it be said that particular Moral Actions are liable to Contingency 't is answer'd that this hinders not but the Speculative part of Morality is a true Science Even Mathematical Demonstrations when reduc'd to practice and put in matter are subject also to Contingency as we experience daily in Mechanicks and yet the Speculative part which abstracts from matter is never the less Scientifical § 11. The greatest difficulty is in that Cardinal Virtue call'd Prudence and I confess that because the exercise of this Virtue is surrounded with an incomprehensible number of Accidents and way-laid as it were with all the Ambushes and Stratagems of Fortune and consequently to make its Success Certain we must be put to fathom the natures of many several things nay more their Combinations or Joynt-actings with their several circumstances and especially of those things which are the Common Causes of the World as the influences of the Sun Moon and other Stars if they have any that is considerable and lastly of the Elements which 't is impossible for our short-sighted Knowledge to reach hence Prudence in its Execution or put in matter is liable to more Contingency by far than any piece of the Mathematicks where we have but one or two single notions or natures to grapple with and weild Yet notwithstanding all these difficulties I must still contest that the Maxims of Prudence upon which its Dictamens are chiefly grounded are self-evident practically and to the Learned Demonstrable viz. That we ought to sow and plant in their proper seasons that 't is best for Merchants to hazard though they be insecure of the Event and a thousand such-like § 12. I expect Dr. T. will object the fickle nature of the Will which renders all Contingent where this perpetually-changing Planet has any Influence But yet there 's a way for all that to fix this volatil Mercurial Power and make it act with a constancy as great as any other thing in Nature To conceive how this may be effected we are to consider that the Will too has a peculiar nature of its own which it can no more forgo than the most constant Piece found in Nature can do Its that is The Will can no more leave off being a Will than a Rule can not-be a Rule Faith not-be Faith or any other of those ridiculous Identical Propositions as Dr. T. calls them not be true Now the Will being a Power and Powers taking their several Natures from their Objects or as the Schools express it being specify'd by them and the Object of the Will as distinguish'd from the Understanding being Good and this propos'd to It by that Knowing Power that is Good at least appearing such if it can be made evident that such a thing can never appear a Good to the Subject thus circumstanc'd 't is demonstrable the Will cannot will it nay as evident as 't is that A Will is a Will § 13. To apply this to particulars In case there be a Trade or Profession of Merchants and it be evident to all the Followers of that sole Employment that Themselves Wives and Children must starve unless they venture to Sea the notventuring can never appear to them thus circumstanc'd that is addicted to that onely way of Livelihood as is suppos'd a Good and so 't is demonstrable that abstracting from Madness or Exorbitant Passion which is not our Case they can never will not-to-venture Or if a great multitude of men have embrac'd no Profession but that of the Law and as we 'll suppose have no other Livelihood but That so that it becomes evident it can never appear a Good to them not to take Fees 't is as Certain they will not refuse them as 't is that a Thing is it Self or that a Will is a Will because a Will is a Power whose Essence 't is to have such an Object as is appearingly Good § 14. To come closer to our purpose Suppose Innumerable multitudes of Fathers or Immediate Predecessors in any Age had an inclination to deceive their Children or immediate Successors in the World and consequently that the Immediate End they propos'd to themselves were to make them believe such Points of Faith were received by them from Forefathers which were indeed newly invented these men I say in case they must see
virtue of the plain Evidence of this one Paradox to overthrow the Certainty of Tradition nay the Certainty of all Natural Sciences to boot for these according to him are solely built upon Induction which depends on Sensations and These if we may trust him are all possible to be deceiv'd § 19. And is not Faith it self by these Grounds left in the same pickle It s Rule whether it be Tradition or Scriptures Letter evidently depends upon Humane Authority and this says he is all Fallible and what 's built on a Fallible Authority says Common Sence may possibly be an Errour or False therefore 't is most unavoidable from his Principles that all Faith may Possibly be False however the shame of owning so Unchristian and half-Atheistical a Tenet makes him very stifly and angrily deny the Conclusion but he shall never show why 't is not a most necessary and genuine Consequence from his Position of all Humane Authority being Fallible I expect that instead of a direct Answer to the force of my Argument he will tinkle a little Rhetorick against my Conclusion or start aside to a Logical Possibility that men may be deceiv'd and affirm that 't is not a Contradiction in Terms and so may be effected by the Divine Omnipotence But that 's not our point We are discoursing what will follow out of the ordinary Course of Causes the Conduct of which is the work of the Worlds all-wise Governour whence if those Portions of Nature or Mankind cannot be deceiv'd without Miracle and 't is most vnbeseeming GOD to do a Miracle which reaches in a manner a whole Species as that no Fire in the World should burn no Water wet especially if it be most absurd to conceive that GOD the Author of all Truth nay Essential Truth it self should do such a stupendious and never-yet-heard-of Miracle to lead Men into Errour as is our case 't is most manifestly consequent it cannot be effected at all that Mankind should be Fallible in Knowledges built on their constant Sensations § 20. It follows And though none of these be strict Demonstration yet have we an undoubted Assurance of them when they are prov'd by the best Arguments that the nature and quality of the Thing will bear To this we will speak when we come to examine his Firm Principle He proceeds None can demonstrate to me that there is such an Island in America as Jamaica yet upon the Testimony of credible Persons and Authors who have writ of it I am as free from all doubt concerning it as from doubting of the clearest Mathematical Demonstration True none can demonstrate there is either Jamaica or any such Place Yet I see not why they may not demonstrate the Knowledge of the Attesters from the Visibility of the Object and their Veracity from the Impossibility they should all conspire to act or say so without some appearing Good for their Object or intend to deceive in such a matter and so circumstanc'd when 't is evidently Impossible they should compass their intended end As for his affirming that he is as free from all doubt concerning it as he is from doubting of the clearest Mathematical Demonstration I answer that a man may 〈…〉 yet not hold the Thing True as shall presently be shown And if Dr. T. pleâ—se to look into his own Thoughts he shall find instill'd through the goodness of Nature by Practical Self-evidence more than a bare freedom from doubt viz. such a firm Assent Adherence to it as a Certain Truth that he would deem him a Madman or a Deserter of Humane Nature who could doubt of it and in a word as firm an Assent as to any Mathematical Demonstration which why he should according to Maxims of right Reason have unless he had a Demonstration of it or at least saw it by Practical Self-evidence impossible that Authority should hic nunc be deceiv'd or conspire to deceive and so held the Authority Infallible as to this point I expect his Logick should inform me § 21. We are now come to take a View of Dr. T's performances hitherto He hath omitted the proper Science for his purpose Metaphysicks I suppose because it sometimes uses those hard words Potentiality and Actuality which his delicate Ears cannot brook and has secluded Morality Physicks and the Knowledge we have of the Nature which grounds all Humane Authority and Christian Faith from being Sciences allowing it onely to the Mathematicks which would make one verily think the VVorld were perversly order'd and odly disproportion'd to the nature and good of Mankind for which we Christians agree it was created that greater Evidence and Certainty and consequently Power to act aright should be found in those things which are of far less import than in those which are of a Concern incomparably higher Yet it matters less some may think as long as we are not bound to assent to any of those Conclusions in those respectâ—ve Subjects the absolute Certainty of whâ—ch Dr. T's Discourse calls into question or rather denies whence iâ— we have in these and such as thesâ— knowledge enough to determine us to act Exteriourly it may seem to suffice But now when We come to FAITH where We are Oblig'd to Assent or to hold Fâ—rmly and verily judge the Thing True and where Exteriour Acting will not do the Work or carry a Soul to Bliss but Interiour Acts of a Firm Faith a Vigorous Hope built on that Faith and an Ardent and Over-powering Love of Unseen Gooâ—s springing out of both These are Absolutely Necessary to Fit Us for an Union with our Infinitely-Blissful Object and the Strength of all These is Fundamentally built on the SECURENEâ—S of the Ground of Faith In this Case I say a Rational Considerer wouâ—d think it very requiâ—â—â—e that the Reasons of so Hearty an Assâ—nt but especially for that most Fundamental Point of the Existence of a Deity it being of an infinitely-higher nature and import should be fâ—ll as Evident as the most Evident of those Inferiour Concerns and in comparison Trâ—fling Curiosities And not that the World should be manag'd on such a fashion as if Mankinâ— were onely made to study Mathematicks since absolute Evidence his best natural Perfection is according to Dr. T. onely found in These Whence we see that Mathematicians are infinitely beholding to him but Philosophers not at all and I fear Christians as little Now these two points are according to my way of discoursing for this very reason taken from the End and Use of Faith and the Obligation lying on us to hold and profess it True Self-evident Practically to the Generality of the Vulgar and demonstrable to the Learned Let us see what strong Grounds of such an immovably-firm Assent Dr. T. will afford the World for that first and most Fundamental Point of all Religion the Tenet of a Deity of which if we cannot be assur'd all else that belongs to Faith is not worth heeding DISCOURSE V. Dr. T's Firm
Gods holy disposition than they would have had had they kept awake that degree of Suspense in their minds which Right Reason the nature God had given them requir'd they should § 8. 'T is time now to apply this discourse to Dr. T's Performances It appears hence that one may have no reason to doubt of a thing and yet withall have no reason in the world to assent firmly to it as a most Certain Truth which onely is to his purpose And this may be done two ways either by perfectly suspending and inclining to neither side as we experience our Understanding now bears it self in order to the Stars being Even or Odd Or by strongly hoping or inclining to Assent the Thing is True as when we expect a Friend such a time at London who never us'd to break his word which expectation though one may have very great ground to hope will not deceive us yet it were a mad thing to assent to it as firmly as I do to my Faith or that there is a GOD. But what I most admire is that Dr. T. can think an Actual not doubting or seeing no just cause to doubt is a competent assurance of the Grounds for Christian Faith as he all over inculcates For not to repeat over again what hath been lately prov'd that a bare not doubting is not sufficient to make a man a Christianâ— 't is evident first that Turks Jews and Heathens the Generality at least are fully perswaded what they hold is â—rue and see no just cause to doubt it whence by this kind of arguing if it be sufficient for Christian Faith to have such Grounds as exclude Doubt in its Adherents Turcism Judaism and perhaps Paganism too may claim to be true Religions by the same Title and if the Certainty or Security of Christian Religion be no more but a freedom from doubt all those wicked Sects have good reason to be held Certain too and so both sides of the Contradiction may become Certain by which stratagem Dr. T. is as compleatly revenged of his Enemies Identical Propositions as his own heart could wish and rewards his dear Friends and faithful Abetters direct Contradictions very honourably advancing them to be First Principles and even as Certain as Faith it self Secondly Passion and Vice can breed in a man a full persuasion that an Errour is True and such an apprehension as shall take away all Actual Doubt nay the more Passion a man is in and the more obstinate he is in that passion the less still he doubts so that by Dr. T's Logick no man can tell whether Christianity be indeed Rationally-wise or passionately-foolish in caâ—e the Test of its Certainty or the Adequate Effect of its Grounds be not a steady Assent that 't is True that is if the Motives to embrace it be not Conclusive of the Truth of its Doctrine but oneâ—y Exclusive of Doubt Thirdly Ignorance and dull Rudeneâ—s is easily appay'd with any silly Reason and so a most excellent way to be void of Actual Doubt nay of all men in the world those who are perfectly ignorant see the least cause of doubting being least able to raise any wherefore if being free from seeing any just cause of doubt be the utmost Effect of Christian Grounds let all Christians be but grosly ignorant and they shall immediately without more ado become as Free from Actual Doubt as may be and by that means be the best Christians in the world and consequently Ignorance be fundamentally establish'd by Dr. T. the Mother of all True Devotion Fourthly Though out of a stupid carelesness men use to take many things for granted upon slight Grounds while 't is cheap to admit them and no danger accrues upon the owning them yet experience teaches us that when any great Inconvenience presses as the loss of Friends Livelihood or Life Reason our true Nature teaches men to study their careless thoughts over again by which means they begin now to Doubt of that which before they took for granted if they have not Certain Motives to establish them in the Truth of what they profess and to ascertain to them some equivalent Good at least to what they are in danger to forego In which case I fear it will yield small strength to a man put in such a strong Temptation to find upon review of his Grounds that they were onely able to make him let them pass for good ones while the Concern was remoter and less but that notwithstanding all these he sees they may perhaps be False and himself a great Fool for holding them True without Reasons convincing them to be so and consequently foolish perhaps wicked to boot for suffering so deeply to attest them If Dr. T. reply That such men dying for what they conceiv'd Truth meant well and consequently acted virtuously I must ask him how he knows that or can make them know it unless he propose Motives to conclude those Tenets True For as Errour is the Parent and Origin of all Vice so is Truth of all Virtue nor is Virtue any thing but a Disposition of the Will to follow Reason or Truth Whence if we cannot be abâ—olutely Certain any Tenet we follow is Truth we cannot be absolutely-Certain any Action is Virtuous and 't is not enough to make a man Virtuous to mean well in common or intend to do his Duty and be onely free from doubt all the while unless they have some substantial Truth to proceed upon which renders their meaning and particular Action Good as to the main by directing it to that which is mans true Happiness For 't is questionless that the Generality of the Heathens who worship'd Juno Venus Vulcan and the rest of that Rabble meant well in Common were free from actual doubt nay had Dr. T's Moral Certainty too that is had a firm and undoubted Assent upon such Grounds as would fully satisfie a Prudent man for many of them were men of great Natural Prudence and were actually satisfy'd with the Motives they had for Polytheism Lastly they had Dr. T's Firm Principle too on their side for they had as far as they could discern the Judgment of the whole World round about them that is as much as the nature of the thing could give them though it were for had there been indeed such Gods and Goddesses yet being in Heaven they could have no more light concerning them than by Authority of others relating also as doubtlesly they did many wonderful things conceived to be done by their means and on the other side they had all the Authority extant at that time for them and what doubts soever a few Speculative and Learned men rais'd concerning them yet the Generality who were unacquainted with their thoughts had no occasion to raise any at all These advantages I say the Heathens had parallel within a very little if not altogether to Dr. T's Grounds and Principles that is able to produce an equal Effect viz. Not-doubting Yet because
the Grounds of it even while he goes about to defend it These were my words then and I am sorry he would needs dare and provoke me to make them good In which if I have justified my self too particularly let him blame himself All this while I seriously declare that I am far from thinking that Dr. T. himself is not assur'd that there is a GOD and farther yet from imagining that already holding one he should hold it possible afterwards GOD should cease to be which ridiculous folly constant to his prevaricating humour he puts upon me p. 8. What I affirm is That his ill Principles do equivalently confess it possible there neither is nor ever was a GOD and this I have abundantly shown out of his own words Yet I doubt not but himself through GOD's Goodness has by Practical Self-evidence in the same manner the Vulgar who are no Speculaters or Scholars also have it absolute Certainty of the Existence of a Deity in despight of his weak Speculations nay that in this very Sermon he hath one or two Proofs which have in them the force of a Demonstration though his not understanding and so ill-managing of them and then calling them Probabilities has endeavour'd all that may be to render them good for nothing I end with some of his own words Pref. p. 37. That if Dr. T. did in truth believe that the Existence of a Deity or a Creation are as he says Serm. p. 20 so evident that they can hardly be made plainer than they are of themselves he should by all means have let them alone for they were in a very good condition to shift for themselvs but his blind and Sceptical way of proving them is enough to cast a mist about the clearest Truths in the world And I must take the liberty to admonish him that it lies not in the power of all the Enemies of Christianity in the world to do it half that Mischief as one Christian Divine may who by his earnestness manifests a desire to do the best he can by the vogue he bears seems able to do the best that may be done yet produces not any one proof which he vouches to be absolutely conclusive of the Truth either of Christianity or a Deity but rather by his carriage denies there are any such while he talks of Likelihood Probability more Credible Opinion Moral Certainty and such-like whose very names ought not to be heard or endur'd in a discourse aiming to settle the Grounds of Faith or the Tenet of a Deity Let him consider that he must take his measure of the Certainty of Grounds from the Object or Thing not from our freedom from doubt and such-like for these may be light and silly whereas the Grounds of Faith being â—aid by GOD must necessarily be wise and solid and so when look'd into Absolutely-Conclusive of the thing Let us then who hold a GOD leaving Creatures to their weaknesses vindicate our Maker from the scandalous Imputation of governing Mankind tyrannically by commanding us to assent thâ—t a thing is which at the same time we see may not be so obliging us to hold contrary to the Light of Nature and the very First Principles which Himself had ingrafted in us that what is is at the same time possible not to be and to profess a point True nay dy to attest its Truth which may perhaps be shown False to morrow nay which our selves see may be now False He tells us here in common p. 90 and he tels us truly that which way soever we turn our selvs we are incountred with Clear Evidences and sensible Demonstrations of a Deity Why does he then coming to make out that point say the nature of the thing will not bear clear Demonstration and that onely Mathematical matters are capable of it Why pursues he not such Proofs as these and makes them out and stands by them and reduces them to First Principles and so obliges Humane Nature to assent to them under evident forfeiture of their Sincerity and even Manhood Is he afraid clear Evidences and sensible Demonstrations will not necessarily conclude Why does he put Suppositions that the thing were and then argue thus blindly that since supposing it were it would give no more light of it self than it does therefore it is Is there any necessity for such a ridiculous perplexing and inconclusive method when we may vouch we have Clear Evidences and Demonstrations Lastly Why does he distrust the Objects strength and explain our Assurance of a Deity and Faith by Moral Certainty or such as will satisfie prudent men in humane Affairs Probabilities amassed together not doubting and other such-like feeble diminutive expressions Are not Clear Evidences and Sensible Demonstrations that is Demonstrations à posteriori in point of Certainty incomparably beyond such quivering Grounds and such dwindling Adhesions I wish Dr. T. would take these things into his better thoughts and at least by amending his Expressions and Reasons hereafter make some tolerable satisfaction for this intolerable Injury done to Faith and GOD's Church DISCOURSE VI. That Dr. T. makes all the Grounds of Christian Faith Possible to be False Of Infallibility Demonstration and Moral Certainty § 1. THus much to justifie my first Charge that Dr. T. made that Fundamental Tenet of a Deity and consequently all Religion Possible to be False My second Charge is that he particularly makes all Christian Faith possible to be false and 't is found Faith Vindicated p. 171. where I put down his own words which concern that purpose though he who presuming on the Partiality of his Friends takes the Liberty to say any thing which even Eye-sight may Confute assures his Reader pag. 5. that I durst not Cite them I laid my Charge in this Tenor 'T is necessarily consequent from the foregoing Paragraphs that if I have Discours't right in this small Treatise of mine and have proved that Faith and consequently its Grounds must be Impossible to be False then Mr. T.'s Confession p. 118. to which Mr. St.'s Doctrine is Consonant that It is possible to be otherwise that is to be False that any Book is so Antient as it pretends to be or that it was Written by him whose Name it bears or that this is the sence of such and such Passages in it is a clear Conviction that neither is the Book-Rule he maintains the True Rule of Faith § 3. Nor have he and his Friends True Faith § 4. And consequently there being no other Rule owned taking away Private Spirit but Tradition that Tradition is the only-True Rule of Faith § 6. and so the main of Sure-Footing stands yet firm And lastly 't is evinc't that his own Book which opposes it opposes the only-True because the only Impossible-to-be-False Ground of Faith that is he is convinc't in that Supposition to go about to undermine all Christian Faith Whence the Title of his Probable-natur'd Book Rule of Faith is manifested to be an improper Nickname
of these things then let him say he is fallibly certain of it which done Nature will shew him how perfect Nonsence he speaks whence the same Nature will tell him with a little reflexion that since the word Infallibly can with good sence be joyn'd with the word Certain either 't is adeqaate to that word and extends its sence as far as the others and then there is no Certainty where there is not Infallibility or it does not extend as far as the word Certain and then we may be Certain of some things yet not-Infallibly Certain which since not-Infallibly means Fallibly signifies clearly we may be fallibly certain of those things But common sence teaches us how ridiculous 't is to say we are fallibly certain of any thing 'T is most evident therefore and demonstrable that there is no Certainty but where there is Infallibility and that we can never be said to be truly Certain of any thing till all circumstances consider'd we see our selves out of possibility of being deceived hic nunc in that very thing Whence Dr. T. denying Infallible assurance of both Letter and Sence of Scripture is convinc'd to deny all true Certainty of either and so to render all Faith built upon it Uncertain that is possible to be false and could he with sense take the other part of the distinction and say he is fallibly certain of it yet the guilt of the same Position will still remain with him This Logical Demonstration I produc'd in Faith Vindicated pag. 37. of which Dr T. takes notice here pag. 17 thus Mr. S. is plâ—as'd to say that Certainty and Infallibility are all one concealing thus from his Reader I had ever prov'd it lest he should be oblig'd â—o speak to my Proofs which he neither likes nor uses and bears himself as if I had only said it which suppos'd then indeed his bare saying the contrary was a competent Answer This done he confutes it manfully with telling his Readers I am the first man that evâ—r said it and that 't is foolish I beseech you Gentlemen is it the fashion in the Univeesities to solve Arguments on this manner That is to neglect the Premisses call the Conclusion foolish and think to overthrow the Reason in the Opinion of his Readers because 't is not some hackney Argument brought into play perhaps an hundred times over and ninety nine times answer'd but now produc'd first Certainly one would think in reason that what has been many times alledg'd should rather be slighted because it may have received already many Answers and not such Pcoofs as first appear because 't is certain they never yet had any at all nor do I conceive that the Noble and Learned Virtuosi of the ROYAL SOCIETY use to reject any Production because the Author of it is the first that invented it but they allow it Examination and if it hold the Trial approve it and commend the Author § 4. I shall endeavour to give him another Argument of the Necessity of admitting Infallibility though I have good reason to fear he will afford it again no other Answer but only this that I am the first man that ever produc'd it 'T is this Taking the word False or Falsus subjectively or as in the Subject that is as making the Jugment False or Erroneous 't is a Participle of the Verb Fallor and signifies deceived actually to which corresponds as its proper Power Fallible or capable to be deceived Now the contrary to False thus understood is True taken also subjectively or as making the Judgment which in it is True or Un-erroneous in that its Act. Wherefore the proper Power corresponding to that Act must necessarily be that which is oppos'd to Fallible that is Infallible Again taking the word False Objectively or as found in the Proposition which is the Object or Cause of our Judgment as 't is false or actually deceived It s proper Power corresponding to it is Capable to deceive Wherefore also taking its Opposit Truth Objectively or for the Object of our Judgment when 't is True the proper Power corresponding to it must be Incapable to deceive 'T is concluded then from both these Considerations that we can neither affirm Points or Propositiont of Faith which are the Objects of such Acts True but we must affirm withal that they are Incapable to make us judge erroneously while we assent to them nor that our Judgment or Act of Faith can be True or Un-erroneous but we must be Infallible in so judging Thus far concerning the necessity of admitting Infallibility if we once put our Assents or Acts of Faith to be true Judgments From which 't is a different Question to ask how we become thus Infallible onely 't is Evident that in case the former Proposition be put viz that we must affirm our Acts of Faith True Infallible we must be or Impossible to be in an Errour when we make those Acts. But now to this Infallibility in those Acts God's Providence leads men diversly according to their several degrees of Capacity Those who are arriv'd to a great pitch of Learning come to it by absolutely-concluding proofs call'd Demonstrations that is by penetrating the nature of the Authority on which it is built and such men can make out clearly and distinctly to their own Thoughts the Certainty of that Authority by discoursing it to themselves others they can resolve it into its Grounds meet with and answer Objections and in a word see themselves to be Infallibly Certain of it In these men therefore though the Truth of their Tenet be indeed taken from the Object as 't is always yet the Clearness Distinctness and firm Strength of it springs from the Perfection of their well-cultivated Understanding Those who are of a weak pitch are led to it by Practical Self-evidence of the nature of Authority and of the way in common by which they receive Faith which dim rude sight even in the simplest serves to carry them on to act according to right nature when they assent but they cannot discourse their thoughts nor resolve them into Principles nor answer Objections nor see themselves clearly to be infallibly Certain Nay more the greatest part of these especially if very simple do by some lucky chance or rather by a particular disposition of Gods good Providence light upon this right way more than by any strength of their own wit looking into Grounds but being in it once they find that which satisfies them according to knowledges familiariz'd to them by converse with the World and which are of themselves solid and satisfactory In a word it became Gods goodness so to order things that the Acts of all the Faithful might be as much as was possible in men of every pitch and capacity Rational or Virtuous whatever Contingency may happen in some particulars Original Sin and by it Passion Ignorance or Interest sometimes byassing them and making them act with precipitancy In which case
the Motives laid by God for Mankind or his Church to embrace Faith are possible to be False As if the simplest could not nay were not most likely of all other to believe upon weak and incompetent Motives which therefore could never have been laid by God for his Church to embrace her Faith upon Or as if the most Simple that are could not rationally believe the Church and so become Infallible in their Assents by adhering to her though their weak understandings do not penetrate or comprehend how the Church or themselves come to be so nay perhaps have not a clear sight of what the word Infallible means till some Discourse awaken the apprehension of it in them § 10. Having thus acted the Disputant Exit Theologus intrat Scuâ—ra and pag. 13.14 plays the old Tricks of Legerdemain over again that is leaves out half an Argument of mine and playâ— upon the other half with all the disingenuous craft a wit bent that way could invent In Faith Vindicated pag. 89. and 90. I discours't thus The profound Mysteries of Faith will seem to a Heathen Impossible to be True therefore the Motives must at least seem Impossible to be False but Dr. T. confesses both Letter and Sence of Scripture which are his Rule of Faith possible to be False nor it being an Object proportion'd to humane Reason is there any thing to make it seem better than it is that is to make it seem Impossible to be False therefore were there no better Grounds than his it would be against all Reason to believe Having view'd my Discourse I desire the Reader to peruse the Answer here given by my Confuter He names the word Argument says two pretty words upon it that 't is pleasant and surprizing leaves out better half of it conceals perfectly all that part of it which concludes strongly against his own insufficient Grounds catches at a word and would make my Discouse and Argument aim to prove Faith Impossible to be False because the Motives are only seemingly such Whereas every Page in that Book and its whole Design shews I meant and prov'd them to be actually really and indeed such Had I a mind to evade such petty Cavils I could alledg that both may seem Impossible to be False yet one more seem so than the other But the Truth is advancing to confute him I argu'd ad hominem and contended that against a seeming Impossibility to be True nothing but Motives seemingly Impossible to be False can with any show of Reason be held convictive but he had no Motives even seemingly Impossible to be False but confessedly Possible to be such therefore they had no imaginable show of Convictiveness I grant then 't is a drawn Match as he calls it between equally-seeming Impossibilities and because 't is so therefore a seeming Impossibility to be True in the Object is by much an overmatch to what 's less than a seeming Impossibility to be False in the Motives or Grounds but both Letter and Sence of Scripture his Grounds of Faith are confessedly possible to be otherwise that is False and so are less than seemingly even to himself impossible to be False therefore his Motives to believe are incomparably overmatcht by the difficulty of the Mysteries to be believed and so there could be rationally according to his Grounds no Faith at all This is my true Argument which perhaps might be surprizing to him which made him thus start aside from putting or answering it though we may perceive by his carriage he esteems not it and others such like very pleasant Indeed he still puts on a pleasant Look when he should be Sober and is ever most Merry when it becomes him to be the most Serious but this is long since understood to be a necessary Policy not a Genuine effect of Nature He tells us that Transubstantiation is evidently Impossible to be True If so then it implies some Contradiction which if he shows me in any thing held of Faith by Catholicks in that Point I will become Dr. T's Convert and obedient Auditor But alas How will he prove any thing to be a Contradiction Since those Faulty Propositions are as was prov'd Disc. 2.3 therefore such because they are Opposite to Identical ones or the First Principles as hath been prov'd Seeing then Dr. T. has long since renounc't all those from being First Principles for any thing I can discern he must either hold there are no Contradictions at all or else which comes to the same hold that Contradictions are Truths § 11. But he goes forwards amain in confuting a Point which no man living ever maintain'd viz. that every single Christian must be Infallible that is as Dr. T. will needs take it must so penetrate his Grounds and what relates to them as to see clearly he cannot be deceivâ—d in judging his Grounds of Faith Conclusive Whereas my Tenet is that let any man though of the Acutest Understanding and greatest Learning that may be entertain any Tenet as Faith oâ— Reveal'd by God upon any other Motive than what God has lost to his Church this man however thus Endow'd not only may but in likelihood will be deceiv'd not for want of Wit but for want of Grounds ascertaining and infallibly engaging the Divine Revelation On the other side let the Simplest and Weakest Understanding that is happen to embrace Faith upon the Motives laid by God and left in his Church he is Infallibly secure from being in an Errour not through the strength of his Understanding perfectly discerning and penetrating the Conclusive nature of his Grounds but though the strength of those Grounds themselves or of the Causes laid by Gods Providence to plant and continue right Faith in the Church by means of which what he has thus more by the peculiar disposition of God's gracious Providence than any reach of his own Wit or Judgment fortunately embrac't is preserv'd impossible to False and consequently his Assent to it impossible to be an Errour because the Churches Authority upon which he receiv'd it is Infallible And surely 't is but fitting that all who believe upon that Rule God has left and commanded us to follow should be thus secur'd from possibility of Mistake for otherwise since a Power is relative to its proper Act what 's possible to be False may actually be so and so we might come to be led actually into Errour by obeying God's Commands which is impossible To apply thâ—s If Dr. T. therefore makes Scripture's Letter the Rule of Faith left by God for Mankind to receive their Faith upon and by doing so has commanded them to believe it he must either say that its Sence and Letter taking them as he builds his Faith on them have no Possibility of Falshood or besides the many absurdities already mentioned grant that our All-wise and Good God can possibly lead men into actual Errour nay command them to profess and die for a Ly than which nothing can be imagin'd
evidently that they renounce not Evidence and that the Scriptures Letter thus manag'd is not apt to ascertain them at all and so no Rule Yet he gives us one great Reason as he calls it why men do not agree in the Sense of Scripture as well as in the others because their Interests and Lusts and Passions are more concern'd So that according to Dr. T. a man who is to be guided by his Pastors and Teachers cannot be Certain of the Sense of Scripture nor consequently of Faith unless he can look into the hearts of men which is proper to God alone and discern who are Passionate prejudic'd Interessed and Lustful Again this Reason is found on either side to a great degree for were not those Axioms and Definitions so Evident that absurd men would incur the shame of Mankind to deny them there wants no temptation of Interest and passion to make Authors go about to control and contradict the Writings of others to gain themselves applause and credit But if this be one great Reason of disagreement in the Sense of Scripture I would gladly know what are the other great Reasons But of these we hear nothing and there is good Reason why for since his one great Reason is the ill-disposedness of the persons the other great Reason must be the defectiveness of the Thing that is the Inability of Scripture's Letter by reason of its Inevidence to private Understandings to make them agree in one Sense of it which manifestly makes it unfit to be a Rule of Faith § 20. To Conclude the Summe of Dr. T's Vindication of himself from making according to his Grounds Faith possible to be False amounts to this He produces words to disprove it which manifoldly confess it he endeavours all along to shew that Infallible Certainty cannot be had of either Scripture's Letter or Sense that is he grants that the whole world may be deceiv'd though all the Causes be put to secure them in the Ground of Faith or denies that absolutely speaking Faith is Certainly-True Again loath to speak out to that point candidly he shuffles about and puts upon his Adversary divers odd and ridiculous acceptions of the word Faith omitting the right one which was given to his hand Lastly being to give account what kind of Certainty he allow'd to Faith he gives such a Notion of it as signifies nothing and has all the Marks of Vncertainty imaginable taking his measure of Certainty which ought to proceed from the Object or Proof from the Subject's perswasion or adhesion to it which common Experience testifies may indifferently be found in Truths and Falshoods and Common sense confutes Nature telling every man that my Assent is not therefore Certain because I do not doubt it see not the least cause of doubt am fully perswaded and verily think so but because the Thing is seen indeed to be so or because the Proof is Conclusive Either then let him bring such Proofs and own and shew them to be such or he leaves his Cause in the lurch and his Credit which he is here defending unclear'd by yielding Faith possible to be absolutely False that is for any thing any man living knows actually such DISCOURSE VII In what manner Dr. T. replies to FAITH VINDICATED § 1. DR T. has no Fellow nor his way of Confute any parallel Not to provoke the peevishness of malice too far and yet follow home my blow more fully and yet withal to uphold the Efficacie of Faith grounded on the just Conceit of its Absolute Certainty I writ a a Book call'd Faith Vindicated in behalf of Christian Faith in Common shewing the absolute Certainty or Security from Error of that kind of Assent provided it be grounded on those Motives God had left to settle his Church and by it Mankind in Faith as I declared my self in my Introduction It pretended Demonstration from the beginning to the end and had not one drollish or unsober expression in it Take a Map of it in a few words I conceiv'd my self debtor both Sapientibus and Insipientibus and hence the Concern being common to all Christians amongst the rest to Speculative Divines I resolv'd to prove it by Arguments sutable to every Capacity To the more Intelligent to the end of the Third Eviction to the Middle or Prudential sort to the end of the Fifth· and to them of the lowest Capacity in the last every one being enabled by Tradition or Education to comprehend what the common Language and Practice of Christianity teaches them as to Speechees and Carriages appertaining to Faith I begun after I had put two Postulatum granted by all Christians with Logical Arguments which I pursu'd at large because as 't is a common Trick in Sophisters and half Logicians to abuse that Excellent Art to elude the clearest Evidendences so it became a more necessary Duty in me to prevent by the closest Proofs fetch 't from almost all Heads imaginable that belong'd to that skill any misusages of its Maxims to patronize Falshood This could be no other than very Speculative and accordingly I declar'd in my Introduction what my Reader was to expect in Discourses of that kind nor will any man indu'd with common Sense wonder that I should use Logical Expressions when I make Logical Discourses or Terms of Art when I speak to Scholars These things reflected on let us see now what a dextrous way our Learned Confuter takes to answer that whole Book for he manifests here an intention to give it no other and to overthrow so many Demonstrations § 2. His first way of Confute is to pick out a leaf or two of the most Speculative part of that Treatise only intended for Scholars and apply it to the Understandings of those who are onely Sermon-pitch to whom because such Discourses are unsutable and withal too hard for him to answer hence he very politickly both gratifies the Fancies of those Readers and avoids himself the difficult task of answering the pressing Reason in it by playing the Wit when 't was dangerous to act the Scholar and making use of his constant Friend at a dead lift Drollery in stead of relying on the Patronage of Reason which as he experiences so often betrays and exposes hss weakness He runs on therefore a whole leaf or two in this jovial Career ere he can recover himself till even his own Friends who are not aware of the necessity admire at his endless Raillery and true to his Method neglects wholly the Sense and excepts mightily against five or six hard words namely potentiality actuality actuation determinative supervene and subsume which it seems puzzle him exceedingly for he professes to think them Mystical He calls the Discourse jargon Foolish and Nonsense which two last words he is ever most free of when his Reason is most at a loss He likens it to the Coptick and Slavonian Language talks of Astrology Palmistry Chymistry and what not and with such kind of stuff confutes it
before and after it self as also that for the same Reason it can have no force upon one not yet arriv'd at Faith as the Rule of Faith ought to have because 't is as yet unknown to him § 14. Again I agree with them that there are ought to be many several Prudential Reasons suted to men of several Capacities and Circumstances moving them to disquisition and inclining them to embrace the right Faith and joyn themselves to the true Church but I say withal that 't is one thing to move a man to enquire and incline him to Assent another thing to settle him in a most firm Assent to such and such Points as absolutely Certain Truths which is requisit to Faith Hereupon I affirm that this later Effect cannot be wrought rationally without Grounds truly Evident and absolutely Conclusive of the thing and Knowable either by Practical Self-evidence to men of all sorts or also to the Learned by a certainly concluding Proof which I call a Demonstration I affirm moreover with due respect to those Divines that Motives onely Prudential seem improper to be named in this Case and that they must be Principia Sapientiae and not Prudentiae which can rationally make us absolutely Certain of the being or not-being of any thing that is of its Truth or Falshood the Object of Prudence being Agibilia and not Intelligibilia as such and its proper Exercise and Use being to determine a man to act exteriorly or to act thus in Circumstances where Contingency and hazard is found and not to act interiorly or meddle in the affair of Intellectual Certainty or Truth depending solely on the Principles of our Vnderstanding which are Impossible to be False and therefore plac't beyond all Contingency and Hazard In a word I shall not fear to be thought singular in my Principles while I ground my self on the nature of Faith which both all Catholicks and the Generality of those who are call'd Christians hold and St. Thomas of Aquin the Prince of School-Divines asserts as I shew'd Faith Vindicated pag. 130. § 14. As for all Objections of this nature once more I request Dr. T. to make good this Consequence that my Discourse cannot be true unless all our Divines even of the same way in common agree with me and I promise him this done to reply distinctly to all his Extrinsecal and Impertinent Exceptions which waving in the mean time my Premises he so constantly lelevels against my Conclusions And whereas he sayes I cannot reasonably charge him with those things till I have vindicated our own Divines I desire him to consider that I could not were I their Adversary charge them with what I can justly charge him They all to a man hold the Catholick Church on which they rely Infallible and hold this more firmly than they do any of their Speculations and consequently they hold their Faith Impossible to be False and so preserve the true Nature of Faith Inviolate whereas what he is to hold to most firmly according to his Principles is his own private Interpretation of Scripture which he himself and all the world besides see and hold to be Fallible and so he must say that all his Faith built upon it is possible to be a Ly for any thing he knows by which means he destroyes the nature of Faith as far as Gods Goodness will give him leave in himself and others and corrupts it into Opinion They produce Motives which though they call them Prudential are indeed some of them Demonstrative and coincident in part with Tradition whereas Dr. T. has nothing at all in his Grounds taking him as opposing Catholicks or standing to his own Rule of Faith which rightly stated has even the least shâ—w of Prudential to an unbyast man much less of Demonstrative Lastly were it a proper place to handle the point at large it were easy to shew they differ onely in a word but Dr. T. errs in the whole Thing though indeed in most of our Divines here cited he mistakes them and not they the main point whatever he pretends for however they make Prudential Motives sufficient to find the Church yet not one of them but makes the Authority of the Church when found on which they ground their Faith of far greater weight than such an Evidence as does ordinarily satisfie prudent men in humane affairs since they all hold it Infallible which is vastly more than Dr. T. holds to ground his Faith § 15. His third Answer is that this Principle of mine makes every true Believer Infallible in matters of Faith which sayes he is such a Paradox as I doubt whether ever it enter'd into any other mens mind Now this Charge of his joyn'd with my true Tenet that true Believers are those who rely on the Motives or Means left by God in his Church to light mankind in their way to Faith signifies thus much that 't is a wonderful and strange Paradox that those that follow and rely on the Motives laid by Gods Providence to direct them to Truth should in so doing not possibly be led into Error that is 't is a most absurd Paradox to say that Essential Truth should not be the Immediate and Proper Cause of Falshood But he discourses still upon this point as if I had held that the Vulgar are preserv'd from possibility of Errour or are Infallible not through the Goodness of the Grounds left by God to preserve them from Erring but from the strength of their own Vnderstanding which I do not remember I ever thought or said even of the most Learned He asks If this be true what need then of my Infallibility of Pope or Council And I ask him what need Governors when people know their Duty or Judges seeing the main of the Common Law is Traditionary to men verst in such affairs Self-known practically Let him but assure the world that no Upstart shall have an humour to rebel and innovate but that all Christians shall practice and hold to what they know evidently was practic'd and held by the immediately foregoing Church and I will assure him there will need no Infallible Desiner not any at all as to such points But Dr. T. discourses still as if there were no difference between the rude dim degree of Knowledge in the Vulgar and the accurate exact and oft-reflâ—cting Knowledge of those who by their great Learning their Education their Posture and Office are particularly verst and most deeply insighted into the affairs of Faith and all that belongs to the right explaining or wording it thence declaring it authentickly so to keep its distinct Sense clear in the minds of the Faithful which the Equivocating Witty Heretick endeavours to render confus'd and obscure I wish he would study our Tenets a while and understand them ere he undertakes to confute us He is very raw in things of this nature § 16. His next Errour is worse than the former He would fain perswade Catholicks if any
that I never said or thought it was self-evident that Tradition had alwayes been followed but only that it is of own nature 〈◊〉 evidently infallible Rule abstracting from being followed his answer to my Method is this I have not spoken to the point before and therefore am not concern'd to speak to it now for why should people expect more from me here than elsewhere or rather I have granted the point already and thereforâ— am not concern'd to say more to it And I for my part think he is in the right because it seems a little unreasonable to require the same thing should be done twice I think it best to leave him to his sufficient-consideration and go on to the next Onely I desire the Reader to reflect how empty a brag 't is in the Drs. how partial in their Friends to magnify this peece as Vnanswerable Yet in one Sense 't is such for a Ready Grant of what 's Evident Truth can never be answer'd or refuted § 7. His next Pretence is that my METHOD excludes from Salvation the far greatest part of our own Church To which though enough hath been said already yet because the clearing this will at once give account of what I mean when I affirm Faith must be known antecedently to Church which bears a shew as if I held we are not to rely on the Church for our Faith I shall be something larger in declaring this Point To perform which more satisfactorily I note 1. That those who are actually from their Child-hood in the Church have Faith instill'd into them after a different manner from those who were educated in another Profession and after come to embrace the right Faith The formâ—â— are imbu'd after a natural way with the Churches Doctrine and are educated in a high Esteem and Veneration of the Church it self Whereas the Later are to acquire Faith by considering and looking into its Grounds and are educated rather in a hatred against the true Church than in any good opinion of her The former therefore have the full weight of the Churches Authority both as to Naturals and Supernaturals actually apply'd to them and working its effect upon them Practical self-evidence both of the Credit due to so Grave Learned Ample and Sacred an Authority as also of the Holiness the Morality or Agreeableness of her Doctrine to Right Reason which they actually experience rendring in the mean time their Assent Connatural that is Rational or Virtuous The later Fancy nothing Supernatural in her nor experience the Goodness of her Doctrine but have it represented to them as Wicked and Abhominable In a word the Former have both Faith and the Reasons for it practically instill'd into them in a manner at the same time and growing together daily to new degrees of Perfection whereas the Later must have Reasons antecedently to Faith and apprehending as yet nothing Supernatural in the Church must begin with something Natural or meerly Humane which may be the Object of an unelevated Reason and withal such as may be of its own nature able to satisfie rationally that haesitation and disquisitive doubt wherewith they are perpleâ—â— and settle them in a firm Belief 2. My Discourse in that Treatise as appears by the Title is intended for those who are yet to arrive at satisfaction in Religion that is for those who are not yet of the Church and so I am to speak to their natural Reason by proposing something which is an Object proper and proportion'd to it and as it were leading them by the hand step by step to the Church though all the while they walk upon their own Legs and see with their own Eyes that is proceed upon plain Maxims of Humane Reason every step they take 3. Though I use the Abstract word TRADITION yet I conceive no wise man will imagine I mean by it some Idea Platonica or separated Formalility hovering in the Air without any Subject but that the Thing I indeed meant to signifie by it is the Church as DELIVERING or as Testifying and taking it as apply'd to those who are not yet capable to discern any Supernaturality in the Church the Natural or Humane Authority of the Church or the Church Testifying she receiv'd this Faith uninterruptedly from the beginning So that Tradition differs from Church as a man consider'd precisely as speaking and acting differs from Himself consider'd and exprest as such a Person which known by Speech and Carriage or by himself as speaking and acting other considerations also belonging to him which before lay hid and are involv'd or as the Schools express it confounded in the Subject or Suppositum become known likewise So the Churches Humane Testimony or Tradition which as was shown Sure f. p. 81 82 83. is the greatest and most powerfully supported even naturally of any in the World is a proper and proportion'd object to their Reason who yet believe not the Church but it being known thence that the Body who proceeds on that Ground possesses the first-deliver'd that is Right Faith and so is the true Church immediately all those Prerogatives and Supernatural Endowments apprehended by all who understand the nature of Faith to spring out of it or attend on it are known to appertain and to have ever appertain'd to the True Church and amongst the rest Goodness or Sanctity the proper Gift of the H. Ghost with all the Means to it which with an incomparable Efficacy strengthens the Souls of the Faithful as to the Delivery of Right Faith whence she is justly held and believ'd by the new-converted Faithful to be assisted by the H. Ghost which till some Motive meerly Humane had first introduc'd it into their Understandings that this was the True Church they could not possibly apprehend § 8. In this way then of discoursing the Church is still the onely Ascertainer of Faith either taken in her whole Latitude as in those who are already Faithful or consider'd in part onely that is as delivering by way of naturally Testifying which I here call Tradition in order to those who are yet to embrace Faith Whence appears the perfect groundlesness of Dr. T's Objection and how he wholly misunderstands my Doctrine in this point when he says the Discourse in my Method does Vnchristian the far greatest part of our own Church For first he mistakes the Ground of Believing to those actually in the Church for that which is the Ground for those who are yet out of the Church to find which is the Church Next since all Believers actually in the Church even to a Man rely on the Church both naturally and supernaturally assisted and I am diseoursing onely about the Natural means for those who are out of the Church to come to the Knowledge of it his Discourse amounts to this that because those who are yet coming to Faith rely onely on the Humane Testimony of the Church therefore they who are in the Church and rely upon the Church both humanely
say that 't is the highest degree of humane Certitude of which it may simply or absolutely be said Non posse illi falsum subesse that 't is IMPOSSIBLE IT SHOULD BE FALSE Can any thing be produc'd more expresly abetting my way of Discoursing the Grounds of Faith Nothing certainly unless it be that which immediately follows containing the reason why Tradition is by the very nature of it simply Infallible For says he Tradition being full Report about what was EVIDENT UNTO SENSE to wit what Doctrines and Scriptures the Apostles publickly deliver'd unto the World it is IMPOSSIBLE it should be FALSE Worlds of Men CANNOT be uniformly mistaken and deceiv'd about a matter Evident to Sense and not being deceiv'd being so many in number so divided in place of so different affections and conditions IT IS IMPOSSIBLE they should so have agreed in their Tale had they so maliciously resolv'd to deceive the World Observe here 1. That he alledges onely Natural Motives or speaks onely of Tradition as it signifies the Humane Authority of the Church that is as taken in the same sense wherein I took it in my Method 2. He goes about to show out of its very nature that is to demonstrate 't is absolutely Infallible 3. He makes this Tradition or Humane Authority of the Church an Infallible Deriver down or Ascertainer that what is now held upon that tenure is the Apostles Doctrine or the first-taught Faith which once known those who are yet Unbelievers may infallibly know that Body that proceeds upon it to possess the true Faith and consequently infallibly know the true Church which being the very way I took in my Method and other Tâ—eatises it may hence be discern'd with how little reason Dr. T. excepts against it as so superlatively singular But to proceed Hence p. 40. he avers that the proof of Tradition is so full and sufficient that it convinceth Infidels that is those who have onely natural Reason to guide themselves by For though saith he they be blind not to see the Doctrine of the Apostles to be Divine yet are they not so void of common sense impudent and obstinate as to deny the Doctrine of Christian Catholick Tradition to be truly Christian and Apostolical And p. 41. The ONELY MEANS whereby men succeeding the Apostles may know assuredly what Scriptures and Doctrines they deliver'd to the Primitive Catholick Church is the Catholick Tradition by Worlds of Christian Fathers and Pastors unto Worlds of Christian Children and Faithful People Which words as fully express that Tradition is the ONELY or SOLE Rule of Faith as can be imagin'd And whereas some hold that an Inward working of God's Spirit supplies the Conclusiveness of the Motive this Learned Writer p. 46 on the contrary affirms that Inward Assurance without any EXTERNAL INFALLIBLE Ground to assure men of TRVTH is proper unto the Prophets and the first Publishers of Christian Religion And lastly to omit others p. 47. he discourses thus If any object that the Senses of men in this Search may be deceiv'd through natural invincible Fallibility of their Organs and so no Ground of Faith that is altogether Infallible I answer that Evidence had by Sense being but the private of one man is naturally and physically Infallible but when the same is also Publick and Catholick that is when a whole World of men concur with him then his Evidence is ALTOGETHER INFALLIBLE And now I would gladly know what there is in any of my Books touching the Ground of Faith which is not either the self-same or else necessarily consequent or at least very consonant to what I have here cited from this Judicious Author and Great Champion of Truth in his Days whose Coincidency with other Divines into the same manner of Explication argues strongly that it was onely the same unanimous Notion and Conceit of Faith and of true Catholick Grounds which could breed this conspiring into the same way of discoursing and almost the self-same words § 13. Hence is seen how justly D. T. when he wanted something else to say still taxed me with singularity in accepting of nothing but Infallibility built on absolutely-conclusive Motives with talking such Paradoxes as he doubts whether ever they enter'd into any other mans mind that all mankind excepting J. S have hitherto granted that no Humane Vnderstanding is secur'd from possibility of Mistake from its own nature that my Grounds exclude from Salvation and excommunicate the Generality of our own Church that no man before J. S. was so hardy as to maintain that the Testimony of Fallible men which word Fallible is of his own adding mine being of Mankind relying on Sensations is Infallible that this is a new way and twenty such insignificant Cavils But the thing which breeds his vexation is that as my Reason inclines me I joyn with those who are the most solid and Intelligent Party of Divines that is indeed I stick to and pursue and explain and endeavour to advance farther those Grounds which I see are built on the natures of the Things Would I onely talk of Moral Certainty Probabilities and such wise stuff when I am settling Faith I doubt not but he would like me exceedingly for then his own side might be probable too which sandy Foundation is enough for such a Mercurial Faith as nothing but Interest is apt to fix DISCOURSE VIII In what manner Dr. T. Answers my Letter of Thanks His Attempt to clear Objected Faults by committing New Ones § 1. MY Confuter has at length done with my Faith Vindicated and my Methed and has not he done well think you and approv'd himself an excellent Confuter He onely broke his Jests upon every passage he took notice of in the former except one without ever heeding or considering much less attempting to Answer any one single Reason of those many there alledg'd and as for that one passage in which he seem'd serious viz. how the Faithful are held by me Infallible in their Faith he quite mistook it throughout Again as for my Method he first gave a wrong Character of it and next pretended it wholly to rely upon a point which he had sufficiently considered that is which he had readily granted but offer'd not one syllable of Answer to any one Reason in It neither My Letter of Thanks is to be overthrown next And First he says he will wholly pass by the Passion of it and I assure the Reader so he does the Reason of it too for he speaks not a word to any one piece of it Next he complains of the ill-Language which he says proceeded from a gall'd and uneasie mind He says partly true For nothing can be more uneasie to me than when I expected a Sober and Scholar-like Answer to find onely a prettily-worded Fardle of Drollery and Insincerity I wonder what gall'd him when he lavish'd out so much ill-language in Answer to Sure footing in which Treatise there was not one passionaâ—e word not one syllable
he can most easily seem to misunderstand so to divert the Discourse A Method so constantly observ'd in his Reply to Sure-footing where he made Witty Dexterity still supply the place of Pertinent Solidity that instead of Rule of Faith it ought more justly have been entitled Sure-footing Travesty 5. And since all Discourse is ineffectual which is not grounded on some Certain Truth and consequently not onely he who settles or builds but also he who aims to overthrow or the Objecter must ground his Discourse on some Certain Principle if he intends to convince the others Teneâ— of Falsehood that Dr. T. would therefore esteem it his Duty even when he objects to ground his Opposition upon some Firm Principle And since no pretended Principle can be Firm but by virtue of some First Principle and that Dr. T. has disclaim'd here Identical Propositions to be such 't is requisite that he either confute my Discourses produc'd in this Treatise proving First Principles to be of that nature and show some other way by which the Terms of those he assigns for such do better cohere or he is convinc'd to have none at all and so all he writes or discourses must be Groundless and Insignificant 6. Thus much in common for the Manner of his Writing As for his Matter I request he would not in the subject of this present Discourse about the Certainty of a Deity and Christian Faith hover with ambiguous Glosses between Certainty and Uncertainty that is between Is and Is not but speak out Categorically and plainly declare whether he holds those Points absolutely True that is whether they be absolutely True to us or whether any man in the world can with reason say he sees they are True or has any Reason or Argument to conclude them True If not then â—et him show how 't is avoidable but all the World must with Truth say Both these may be False for any thing they can discern than which nothing sounds more horrid and blasphemous to a Christian Ear. If he says there are such Reasons extant but he has them not then let him leave off attempting to settle those Tenets or writing on those Subjects since he confesses himself unqualify'd and unfurnish'd with means to manage them If he says there are such Proofs and that he has them let him produce them and stand by them and not blame the nature of Things for bearing no more and others for saying they have more and that the Things do bear more To express my self closer and more particularly Let him speak out ingenuously and candidly to these Queries Whether be holds that God's Church or any man in the World is furnish'd with better Grounds for the Tenet of a Deity or for Christian Faith or any stronger Reasons to prove these Points True than those in Joshua's and Hezekiah's time had or could have the day before that the Sun should not stand still or go back the next day than that Person who threw a Glass on the Ground which broke not had or could have that it would not break â—han the Inhabitants of divers Houses had that they would not suddenly fall which yet did so or lastly to use his own words than those Reasons are which satisfie Prudent Men in Humane Affairs in which notwithstanding they experience themselves often mistaken If he say he has let him produce them and heartily maintain them and endeavour to make them out and I shall hereafter express as much Honour for him as I have done here of Resentment and Dislike for advancing the contrary Position But if he profess he has no better or that the nature of the thing not bearing it there can no better be given then 't is unavoidable first that the most Sacred Tenets of a Deity 's Existence and all the Points of Christian Faith may be now actually False since Points which had Reasons for them of Equivalent strength did prove actually such Next that no man in the world is in true Speech Certain there is a God or that the least word of Christian Religion is True since 't is Nonsence to say any of those Persons in those former Instances of equivalent strength were or could be truly Certain of Points which prov'd actually False and in which themselves were mistaken In a word I would have him without disguise let the world know whether as there was Contingency in those Causes and so the imagin'd or hoped Effects in the former Instances miscarried and prov'd otherwise than was expected so there be not also Contingency in the Motives for those two most Sacred Tenets upon whose Certainty the Eternal Good of Mankind depends so as they may perhaps not conclude and so both those Tenets may perhaps be really and actually otherwise than we Christians now hold If he professes to embrace this wicked Tenet and his words are too express for it ever to be deny'd though upon second thoughts I hope they may be retracted he owes me an Answer to my Faith Vindicated which hitherto he has shuffled off without any at all and to my Reasons alledg'd in this Treatise for the same Point FAITH's ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY Now Gentlemen since nothing conduces more to Knowledge in any kind than that the Matter of the Dispute be unambiguously stated and clearly understood and that a solid Method be observ'd in the managing it I become a humble Petitioner to your Selves as you tender that Excellent Concern of Mankind and that most Sacred One of Christianity to use your best Interest with Dr. T. that he would please to yield to these Duties here exprest and I oblige my self inviolably to observe the same Carriage towards him which I here propose and press he would use towards me which if he refuse I declare I shall leave him to the Censure of all truly-Learned and Ingenuous Persons however he triumphs amongst Those who are great Admirers of Pretty Expressions resting assur'd that your selves will not onely hold me Unblameable but also highly Commendable for noâ— losing my precious time in reciprocating his trifling and insignificant Drollery Your True Honourer and Humble Servant J. S. FINIS AMENDMENTS PAge 1. line 21. read that both first p. 47. l. 3. self possible to p. 50. l. 20. solid p. 101. l. 6 7. possible all this may p. 115 l. 12 Judgment in which it is l. 25. can never p. 118. l. 26. resolute hatred p. 121. l. 23. did equivalently p. 124. l. 21. 28. Speculaters p. 127. l. 17. nay more p. 135. l. 7. to be p. 139. l. 18. greater degree p. 142. l. 2. is not true or not to dare p. 146. l. 14. Chimerical p 157. l. 16. Fourth Eviction l. 18. of the Sixth p. 162. l. 16. Sermons equally p. 163. l 27. Parallelepiped p. 166. l. 30. Predicate p. 176. l. ult all good p. 183. l. 28 sensible man may p. 184. l. 2. deduc'd there p. 186. l. 12. of discoursing the p. 199. l. 25. it is is not more p. 200. l. 16. of its own p. 212. l. 24. not the Rule dele express p. 218. DISCOURSE IX p. 219 l 13 14. Reason in it p 229. l. 28 29. the Authors mistaken in undervaluing it p. 234. l. 17. I do non stand p. 239. l. 5. apply'd l. 6. I had