as all those must do who consider that they are Fallible and therefore may be Mistaken in their Interpretations There is also another supposed Irreverence towards the Holy Scripture that the Catholics are accused of which consists in this that they make the Tradition of the Church to be of equal credit with it On this Point I shall only ask this short Question viz. Whether it be not as much to be believed that St. Matthews Gospel is the word of God which is the Tradition of the Church as it is that our Saviour Fasted Forty Days and Forty Nights which is part of that Gospel If it be as I presume none will deny then it must follow that Tradition which is the unwritten Word of God must oblige us to believe as much as Scripture which is his written Word And indeed who is there that can doubt but that heretofore the Apostles Sermons and Verbal directions and that which the Faithful remembred of them were of equal Authority with their Epistles and other Writings Shall we not think that what was laid up in their Memories was as Obligatory as that which was committed to Paper Especially whilst we hear St. Paul Commanding the * 2 Thes c. 2. v. 15. Thessalonians to hold fast those Traditions which they had learnt whether it had been by word of Mouth or by Epistle On the whole matter I dare boldly affirm that there is none who shall impartially consider what hath been said here but will perceive that the Catholics have a greater respect for the Holy Scripture than the Protestants and this with relation both to it's Authority and Vsefulness First As to it's Authority I mean it 's Authentickness the Catholics Declare that it hath been handed from the time of the Apostles down to ours by a True and Uncorrupted Church Whereas the Protestants do not allow that they received it from any Society of Christians but such as according to their own sentiments were Corrupted The Inference of this and of what follows is too plain to need the making Secondly As to it 's Usefulness The Catholics affirm that God hath left us some sure means of understanding it a-right so far forth as it shall be necessary for our Salvation whereas the Protestants assign no other way of understanding the Scripture but what they acknowledge to be Uncertain And here I cannot but take notice that a Bible in an unknown Tongue which is capable of being rightly Interpreted and is daily so Interpreted to the Common People is incomparably of more use to them than one in the Vulgar Tongue which can be understood no otherwise than fallibly That is as I have said * See above Pag. 56. above cannot be * And consequently indeed can be of no use but rather hurtful understood An unknown Tongue which may be Interpreted being certainly less inconvenient than an unknown Sense which may not be Found out Wherefore if Scripture appear both more Authentic and more Vseful by Catholic Tenets than it doth by Protestant can it be thought to have less Respect amongst us than it has amongst them There is yet another plausible Pretence which serves rather to Amuse than Argumentatively to deceive the Common People whenever this Point viz. the Testimony on which Holy Scripture is to be received comes into Debate They say that the Holy Scripture hath a sufficient Authority from it self that it is discerned by it's own Light and that it's Style Contexture and Precepts are such as necessarily speak it to be Divine insomuch that it stands not in any need of being recommended to us by any Extrinsic Testimony whatsoever Certainly if this were so the Apostles would have had an easier task in the Conversion of the World than it proved to them They needed only to have Translated their Gospels into the Languages of all Nations and so by Ordinary Messengers to have dispersed them from one end of the World to the other And by this means they might have been in those days as sparing of their Journeys as their pretended Successors of the Church of England are in these And forasmuch as concerns those Miraculous Gifts which were Communicated to them for the propagation of the Faith all of them had been Superfluous excepting only that of Tongues Their Scripture would have discovered it self by it's own Light to be the word of God and what was Plain in it according to our Modern Doctrin would be sufficient for Salvation But since this was quite otherwise and that the Word of God was heretofore recommended to Mankind by the great Labors Holy Lives and frequent Miracles of those who Preached it and even with all these helps found not that Credit with the greatest part which it ought we must conclude that this Holy word stands in need of some Extrinsic Testimony since at the beginning it pleased God who does no unnecessary thing to accompany it with * But they the Apostles going forth Preached every where our Lord working withal and Confirming the Word with Signs that followed Mark c. 16. v. 20. such and that even when it came from the Blessed Mouth of his own * The Works that I do in the name of my Father they give Testimony of me John c. 10. v. 25. And again ver 38. Believe the Works that you may know and believe that the Father is in me c. Son. And yet tho' we should grant that there is somewhat so admirable in these Writings that forasmuch as concerns the whole frame of them it must necessarily appear at least to a well-disposed mind that they can have no other Author than God himself Will it therefore follow that every Verse is such every Historical passage or that some Syllable or Word may not be added or taken away in some Mystery of Faith without breaking in upon the Majesty of the Style or whatever else bespeaks our veneration for this Book May not I say somewhat of this Nature be done which may change the Meaning of a Sentence and yet thence no evidence arise that this Sentence so changed is not from God For further Illustration and Proof of what I say let us suppose that there were two Editions of the Bible delivered to us by an Extrinsick Testimony or Authority so equal that we could not discern which Testimony were best and that in one of these Editions our Saviour's words in the Institution of the Blessed Sacrament should be THIS is a Sign of my Body and in the other what they now are THIS is my Body Would it appear from the sound or any thing else which of these two Sentences was spoken by Christ I presume that considering the various opinions which are now in the World concerning this Mystery you are ready to say that it would not Suppose then that I or any other private person should put forth an Edition of the Bible which should have the former Sentence This is a Sign of my Body instead of the
or not The Scripture does not tell us of a Church which is to continue only to the end of the Fifth Age. It tells us indeed of one which is to continue to the End of the World And this Church I hope may be found as well in the Fourteenth Age as in the Fifth For if all the Christians of the Fourteenth were Erroneous and Corrupted and stood in need of Reformation those of the Fifth might have been so too for any thing which the Scriptures can assure us to the contrary This Rock then of my Protestant Faith being shaken I mean a Belief that the Church of England had Model'd it self according to the Doctrins of the first Five Hundred Years it will not be wonder'd at if at least I gave way to some doubts I found no better footing in that way which was taken by those Church of England-men who conversed more with Roman Catholics than with Protestant Dissenters viz. Scripture as it is understood by every private Man. First Because those who took that way differed from one another in most material things and also Such as were esteemed Heretics by the Church of England followed the same Rule Secondly Because according to my own Judgment who were by this Rule to judge for my self the Church of England was beholding to Tradition for some Parts of her Doctrin and Practice as Infant-Baptism the Observation of the first Day of the Week and the like having no clear Scripture for them and therefore could not hold them and require them to be held by the Rule of Scripture Interpreted without the help of Tradition Thirdly Because it was sincerely my own Judgment that the Scripture was much clearer for the Catholics than for the Protestants particularly in Transubstantiation Sacramental Confession Extreme Vnction Purgatory St. Peters Supremacy and lastly and chiefly being that which includes all other Points the Decisive Authority of the Church wherefore if I must follow Scripture Interpreted by my self I must at the same time necessarily cease to follow the Church of England These certainly were Motives if not for an absolute departure from the Church of England yet still at least as I have already hinted for the doubting of her Truth About this time I remember that I had two notions concerning Faith. First That Faith was not that which must necessarily suit with the Fancies of particular Men since then it ought to be as various as those Fancies were but it was that which God would have us believe whether we fancied it or not viz. That which he would have us * Bringing into Captivity all understanding into the Obedience of Christ 2 Cor. c. 10. v. 5. submit our Fancies and Judgments to meerly because it was revealed by him And in this submission as I thought consisted both the Difficulty and Merit of Faith. And consequently that I ought not so much to consider the nature of the things proposed to be believed as the Authority by which they were proposed Secondly That this Faith was the * Ephes c. 2. v. 8. Gift of God and for that reason that more confidence was to be put in humbe Prayer for the obtaining it than in any Human Skill or Industry Wherefore as far as God Almighties Grace assisted my weakness I endeavored to obtain this Gift by that means making it my earnest Prayer to his Divine Goodness that I might know the Truth and firmly purposing to embrace that which I should be convinced of tho' it should be ever so contrary to my Worldly Interest as the Roman Catholic Religion at that time most apparently was To Prayer I judged it necessary to add a serious endeavor of amending my Life lest otherwise I should be found to sue Hypocritically for more light from Almighty God whilst I made no use of that which I had received from him by complying with what I already knew to be his Will. This is a Point which all those who are in search of the True Faith ought to examin their Consciences upon and therefore I would not omit the mention of it in this place Amidst these doubts I confess ingenuously that what our English Doctors have made so light of was of great moment with me viz. That the Church of England-men affirmed that Salvation might be had amongst the Roman Catholics but the Roman Catholics absolutely denyed that the like was to be had amongst them For Salvation in the Roman Communion both Churches concurr'd whereas for the latter we had only the bare word of Protestants in their own behalf Who likewise at the same time told us they were fallible and consequently for ought they knew might be mistaken And if they were actually mistaken I should be undone by rarrying with them whereas on the other side if they were not mistaken I could receive no damage by being amongst the Roman Catholics In a word I considered that if the Protestants were true I should be safe with the Roman Catholics but if the Roman Catholics were right I could not be so with the Protestants This Motive is so strong in it's own Nature that many Protestants confess that it must needs have great Power with those who as they say cannot throughly examin the differences betwixt us and these I take to be the greatest part of Mankind And if so I will venture to add that GOD Almighty having taken as much care of the Ignorant as of the Learned would never permit Falshood to be supported by such Arguments as must in common Prudence oblige all unlearned persons to be engaged in it But above all methinks this Argument should be of force with those Vniversal Gentlemen who pretend that their Religion is the Catholic because they believe nothing but that wherein all agree forgetting that such a Restraint of their Belief is peculiar to themselves and not common whereas here is an Agreement of all Parties at least such as have any Esteem with them on which they may safely rely viz. That Salvation may be had in the Roman Catholic Church which is all we do or at least ought to aim at by our Religion As for those other Points which perhaps they hold viz. A Deity a Saviour and the like tho' they have the universal consent of all Christians for their Truth yet they have it not for their sufficiency to Salvation especially so as to exclude the Necessity of believing other Articles when they are duly proposed and it will be of small Consequence to them that what they hold common with others proves True if their additional Article which holds this Truth to be sufficient should prove False What was urged in derogation of this Argument as if the Protestants shew'd a greater Charity by thinking well of Catholics than Catholics did by thinking ill of them was nothing to my purpose For I was then in search of True Faith and not of Charity and knew withal that how great appearance soever there might be of Charity it could not
hardly avoidable on these occasions That he desired that I would be the person who accompanied him Lastly That it would not be my Province to speak any thing but only as he had said to take notice of what passed I must confess my willingness to be engaged in this affair was not extraordinary It had not been very long since I had drawn a sufficient trouble on my self by hearkening to such another Invitation and had learnt at the expence of losing that Privacy which I would have preserv'd how unsafe it is to share tho' never so inconsiderably in a Difference with Men who possibly may have better Wits than Consciences and care not how they wound the latter so they may secure the Reputation of the former However considering that we were not born for our selves and that our reward hereafter will be proportionable to our labors here I resolved to comply with Mr. P's desire and leave the event to Providence which disposes all things for the best and will not suffer us to be * 1 Corâ—c 10. v. 13. â— tryed beyond that which we are able to bear-Wherefore I told Mr. P. that I was to Dine at an House in Spring-Garden near Charing-Cross and that if he pleased to call on me there at two of the Clock I would wait on him to the place appointed for the Conference which as he had told me was in Long-Acre Mr. P. came to me at the prefixt hour having no body in his Company as several worthy persons can witness and I likewise alone immediately departed with him Whilst we were on our way Mr. P. told me that he intended to propose a Rule of Faith for the Subject of the Conference Which I very much approved as being that whereon according to my judgment the whole business of Controversie depends for since all sides agree that there are some things necessary to be Believed in order to Salvation and hence it is rationally inferred that Almighty God must have left some means of coming to the knowledge of such necessary things Which means we call the Rule of Faith It follows that when we have the Rule of Faith we have the means of knowing what we are bound to believe and what not which is the end of all Controversie And therefore I wonder that Dr. T. should so often say * Pag. 13. 17 21. c. that he desired to fix Mr. P. to something in his Disputation that he could keep him to nothing and the like As if he had proposed nothing for the matter of their Debate when he proposed a Rule of Faith whereas it is the main or indeed the only thing which ought to be well settled For particular Articles of Faith may be True according to one Rule and False according to another and therefore unless we know what Rule is true we shall not be able to distinguish what Articles are true As for instance the Quakers Article of the unlawfulness of all manner of Swearing is true according to the Rule of * Swear not neither by Heaven neither by Earth neither by any other Oath c. St. James c. 5. v. 12. Scripture interpreted by themselves but false according to the Rule of Scripture interpreted by the Tradition of the Church and there will be no means of telling the Quakers which Doctrin they ought to believe unless you can tell them which of the two Rules they ought to follow I hope the Reader will pardon this Digression for the great importance of the matter and when he hath well considered it will not be of Dr. T 's mind and think the adjusting or ascertaining a Rule of Faith to be so trivial a thing nay to be nothing as the Doctor makes it But because I believe that I shall have occasion of saying more on this subject hereafter I will say no more at present Mr. P. having as I said acquainted me with the Question he had chosen out for the subject of the Conference I told him That having had some experience of such meetings I foresaw that all would end in confusion unless what was spoken on both sides by way of Argument were immediately Written down And therefore I advised him to propose as soon as we met that it might be so Being come to Long-Acre we went into an House which was not far from that where the Conference was to be and stayed there till news was brought us that Dr. T. was come During our stay in this House there came in a Gentleman to us whom I had never seen before Nor as I understood afterwards was he so much as known by name to Mr. P. He looked as if his Curiosity or some better Motive led him to know what should happen at the Conference We were told also that it had been noised abroad and that there would be many Protestants at it For my part I thought that the more persons were present the more good would probably be done in case the Conference were fairly carried on and especially by Writing I had never heard that it was agreed on that the Meeting should be private nor cared that it should be so For Veritas non quaerit Angulos and the Catholic Faith was never yet affraid of Appearing but always of being Hidden that is by Lies Slanders and other Misrepresentations kept from the Peoples knowledge Word being brought that the Doctor was come we viz. Mr. P. and my self went immediately to him Who followed us I neither knew nor troubled my self to observe having always understood that there were but two concerned Mr. Pulton as the Controvertist and my self only as a witness And that the rest whether Protestants or Catholics came only as Hearers As soon as we entred into the Room where Dr. T. was the Doctor Greeted us with a Cavil saying somewhat to this purpose Look you here I am come without so much as a Friend or Servant This viz. The coming in of so much Company is not according to our agreement M. P. replyed to this effect That he had only brought one Gentleman with him viz. Me That I was not to speak at all in the Controversie but only came as a witness of what passed That he thought this caution reasonable in regard of the many Misrepresentations which had been but too frequent of late in things of this Nature Hereupon the Doctor addressed himself to me and asked me in a Tone more imperious than I have usually met with whether I was a Priest or not Saying that now to his grief I suppose I need not be affraid to own it I answered him tho' I * Pag. 15. thought it a condescention to an impertinence that I was not He continued that he would know who I was And I was so much in the Condescending humor that I told him my Name was Meredith At which words the Doctor seemed to start crying out immediately that he excepted against me * Dr. T 's 1st Objection against me That I
Learned Protestants But on the contrary I have been so far from repenting that I turned so Young that the more I read or discoursed of these matters the more I discerned the Excellence of the Catholic Religion on the one hand and the blindness of so many of my fellow Creatures on the other and consequently I had no other causes for grief than first that my Conversion was no sooner and next that I had not yet been grateful enough that it was so soon The Doctor says that * Pag. 5. no Man who well understands their Church departs from it upon true Principles And I am much mistaken if there be not very many who know well enough what the Church of England Teaches and yet depart from her on no other principles than those which they learnt from her self viz. That the Church is to be followed no farther than she agrees with Scripture and every particular Man is left to judge how far she agrees with it It would be tedious and unnecessary to set down here all those Principles or Motives upon which I departed from the Church of England since I cannot so much pretend to extraordinary things as to deny but that they are the same which have led others from her both before and since and may be seen at large in many Books However if my Readers will give me leave I will lay before them some of those Points which began my doubts and prevail'd more particularly with me * Some Motives of my Conversion to the Catholic Faith. First I had been taught that the Church of Christ continued pure for the first Five Hundred Years after it's Institution and that from thence downwards several gross Errors and Corruptions had crept into it and that it had been infected with these Plagues for about a Thousand Years And that then Almighty â—od out of his Infinite Commiseration enlightned Martin Luther Zuinglius and other as I thought Pious Men so far as that they clearly discern'd these Corruptions Preach'd against them and by that means rescued a great number of Christians from that darkness which the Gates of Hell contrary to our Lords promise or some unaccountable Fatality had engaged them in And Lastly that I my self had been so happy as to be one of this number This was that Idea of Christianity which I then had For as to what they talk'd of a constant Succession of Protestants from the fifth Age down to our times I had never heard it from any Wise Man nor indeed can such an Imposture find place with any one who is so much an Historian as the common Discourse will make him Every body knows that the first Reformers when they left the Roman Church joyned with no other Society or Sect of Christians then in the World either in Communion or Doctrin which must have been done had this pretended Succession continued Their pretence was at that time to Reform the whole Church and not to seek out any True one which then had a Being and stood in no need of Reformation Nay they were so far from thinking it necessary to joyn with any former Church in order to the preserving a Succession that they did not unite with one another But parted their stock and each Adventurer set up for himself This then was the most Rational Account that I could give of my Faith viz. That our Church finding that all Christian Churches had been in Error for a Thousand Years forsook that Error and reformed it self according to the pattern of the first Five Hundred Years after Christ For to be of a Christian Church which never had any being from Christs time till this present I thought a most unreasonable thing Now none can write after a Copy without having that Copy which they pretend to Write by I mean it was impossible for the Church of England to Reform it self according to the first Five Hundred Years of Christianity without knowing what those Christians Taught and Practis'd And how could this possibly be done but by the Holy Fathers and other Writers of those times Wherefore I firmly believed as I am persuaded many Thousands do that these Writers were meer strangers to all those Doctrins which we had forsaken and consequently that no mention was made amongst them of Purgatory Prayer for the Dead Invocation of Saints Veneration of Holy Images and Relics the Sacrifice of the Mass the Reality of Christs Flesh in the Eucharist the Decisive Authority of the Church in Controversial matters the Spiritual Supremacy of St. Peter and his Successors with some other things of this nature I say I took it for granted that nothing of all this was to be found in those Primitive Records of the Christian Religion But when I looked into them I found it quite otherwise and that those things which hitherto I had accounted Novelties were as clearly set down in these Writings as any other Points of Christian Doctrin For instances to avoid length I will refer my Readers to a Book not long since Published Entituled Nubes Testium which hath Collections out of some of those Books which then fell into my hands and must weigh with Men of any tolerable moderation notwithstanding that which is or can be said against it Now what was there for me to be done in this condition I had taken it on trust that I was a Member of a Church which had Copied out the first Five Hundred Years but found my Error It was not unknown to me that several Quotations out of the Fathers were produced in the behalf of Protestant Opinions But-to me they all seemed wrested or at least capable of interpretations which were not repugnant to what the same Fathers more plainly and fully speak in other places for a contrary Doctrin In a word what appeared to me in favor of the Catholic Cause was clear full and incapable of any other meaning But that which offered it self in opposition to it was obscure short and interpretable in another sense and indeed for the most part evidently requiring another when joyned to it's antecedents and consequents Others said That the Fathers were Men and had Errors and that they contradicted one another and themselves to boot But this Plea was as little to my satisfaction as the former For this serves only to weaken the Authority of the Fathers and if good evinces nothing but that They are not to be relyed on And then how can the Church of England make out that she follows the first Five Hundred Years when she hath no other means of knowing what was believed in those times but by such Authors as are not to be trusted For what some People say of our being able to know by Scripture what was the Belief and Practice of these Primitive Christians is wholly absurd For we know not from Scripture at least according to the Principles of the Church of England whether the Christians of the first Five Hundred Years lived according to the Scripture
be Real unless it were grounded on * Without Faith it is impossible to please God Heb. c. 11. v. 6. Orthodox Faith. It seemed to me to be a surer mark of Charity for Men to adventure both Estate and Life for the Conversion of others as formerly the Apostles and now the Catholic Missioners did than to keep at home and in our warm Beds and cry We hope or we declare they may be saved tho' they are in an Error Which if it were a Charity was in my opinion a very Lazy one Moreover if the Protestant Religion were false it was more Charitable in the Catholics to tell them so than by soothing them in their Error to engage them faster to it Wherefore the Protestants ought not to fetch an Argument as some most unreasonably do for the Truth of their Religion from their having as they imagin a greater Charity than Catholics since it must first be proved that their Religion is true before it will appear that the Catholics want Charity in condemning it Lastly If it must pass for a Sign of Charity to think well of more Religions than one the Turkish Tenets will have the advantage of the Nine and Thirty Articles forasmuch as the Mahometans declare that every one will be saved in his own Religion and the Articles on the other side confine Salvation to the * See 18th Article Christians only But both these Charitable Religions must give way to the Origenists who will have neither Men nor Devils to be Eternally Damned Wherefore it is apparent that this plausible pretence of Greater Charity weakens not the force of the forementioned Argument but leaves it Such as that the most cautious Christian may safely repose on it Nay the more cautious a Man is in his everlasting concerns the better and safer this Argument will appear to him For those who have a quicker Sense of their Temporal Interests than their Spiritual will not so much consult what is safe for their Souls as what is secure for their Estates And if both cannot be made sure alike they will trust a scanty probability or rather an Improbability with the former so that they may have Demonstration which yet Gods knows can be but Imaginary for the latter Now what would Dr. Tenison have me do in these circumstances Would he have me Read the Scriptures Iread them Would he have me peruse the Fathers I did it without his advice Would he have me make use of what he calls * Pag. 18. Ministerial Guides I heard the Instructions of the English Clergy for many Years Would he have me pray I looked on Prayer as the chief means of obtaining true Faith and therefore omitted it not Would he have me be humble In this Point I can only say that during this search I had so mean an Opinion of my own understanding that I could not but conclude that Almighty God whose Providential care appeared in all other things had likewise provided some * Such a guide must be one who could not Err himself i. e. Infallible Guide for me that I might not Err in so important a concern as that must needs be without which it was impossible to please him viz. * Ut supra Hebr. 11. 6. Faith. Wherefore having thus far observed as I suppose the Doctors directions what would he have me do after all Doth he require the interior Sense he speaks of pa. 10 That also pleaded for the Roman Catholics And now if this be all he looks after would he have me according to what he says p. 15. at last Judge for my self Why then I do Judge and Pronounce too I mean for my self that Holy Scriptures Antient Fathers and Common Reason are all for the Roman Catholics and against the Protestants And what shall interpose between this Sentence and it's Execution I mean between Concluding that the Roman Catholic Religion is the best and Embracing it as such Doth the Church of England pretend that I ought to submit my private Judgment to her Public Decisions She doth not Nor if she did would Dr. Tenison be her Advocate And therefore to conclude if Dr. T being as I conceive no great friend to Retractations of this kind will still affirm that I departed from the Church of England on false Principles he must at least acknowledge that those principles were such as I had received from her So that in effect I am censured by my Teachers for doing that very thing which they Taught me to do An hard case and that which certainly must prevail with us to observe our Saviours Command in being * Matth. c. 7. v. 15. aware of such Teachers for the future I have said nothing here at least directly of the marks of the True Church viz. Vnity Holiness Universality Perpetuity Conversion of Infidels and the like nor of many other things which concurr'd at that time to convince me of the truth of of the Religion I embraced But thus much I have said that since Dr. Tenison hath been pleased to make the World acquainted with my Conversion it may not be wholly ignorant of those Motives which occasioned it And since we are Commanded * Ready always to satisfie every one that asketh you a Reason of that Hope which is in you 1 Pet. c. 3. v. 15. to give a Reason of the hope which is in us to every one that asks when we are upbraided with our change in this public manner the public seems to demand this Reason and consequently we seem to lie under an obligation of rendring it Which I hope will excuse me with my Readers for so long a Comment on the Doctors Text. And now to return to my Remarks methinks Dr. Tenison conceiving that I had left his Church for want of due Information ought not to have press'd so much for my being excluded from that Conference but rather to have been glad of this opportunity wherein by his great Learning he might have rectified my understanding and been a means of reducing me to one of his two fair Flocks viz. to St. Martins in the Fields or St. James Westminster For tho' those Flocks are so numerous that one stray Sheep can hardly be found missing yet we know it was the property heretofore of a good Shepherd to leave the Ninty Nine that he might seek after the Hundredth this being perhaps in former days a competent number for one Shepherd I say it had been a clearer sign not only of the Doctors Charity but also of his confidence in the goodness of his cause to have admitted me to his Conference than to pretend my turning Roman Catholic through Ignorance as an Argument for the sending me away and consequently depriving me of what he ought to think an opportunity of being better informed But perhaps the Doctor who thought this Conference * Pa. 3. And yet D. T. was displeased with Mr. P for proposing a Rule of Faith for the Subject of that
Mr. P. might mention this again after he sat down tho' I do not remember it Moreover after this first sitting down the Doctor added two of his Objections against me and offered at some Preliminary things as he called them And it was after these Discourses tho' they are omitted as trivial in Mr. P s account that Mr. P. began his Argumentation and not immediately after the proposal of having it Written as Dr. T. says for Mr. P. perceiving that the Doctor had a mind to consume the time in unprofitable Cavils endeavored to cut him short by putting him in remembrance of the business for which they had met I mention these particulars that the not admitting of this Proposal of Writing may appear what truly it was the Doctors Tergiversation Had Mr. P. been then as well acquainted with Dr. T. as he is now he would absolutely have refused the Conference had not his desire of Writing been yielded to And this is the resolution which he has taken for the future Which in my judgment is but shutting the Stable-door after the Steed is Stolen For I believe he is never like to have the Doctors Company on such hard terms notwithstanding that he seems to offer p. 70. what he refused at the Conference Whereas he says Mr. P. began a Verbal Conference by saying the Protestants had no Bible It was not so For he began the Conference by desiring the Doctor to Assign his Rule of Faith Having first given us some account how the Youth for whose sake the Conference was came to entertain thoughts of making himself a Member of the Roman Catholic Church And to that Proposition after much debate concerning these Desires in the Youth the Doctor replyed being again and again pressed to it by Mr. P. that his Rule of Faith was the Holy Scripture And it was on this Answer that Mr. P. asked the Doctor how he could prove that the Book which he called Holy Scripture was truly such and not before as it is made by the Doctors Account which as I have complained before is one of the most intricate things I ever met with and no more like the Conference than it is usual for the new hands at Cards after the Pack is well shuffled to be like the former ones The Cards it is true are all the same but their places being changed the Games are different I do not say that this Account is more confused than the Conference but the confusion has quite another shape or figure than it had But the matter of Fact being cleared as above it becomes more evident how much Dr. Tenison dissembled when instead of proving his Bible to be true Scripture as was desired he offered to dispute Pag. 6. out of that Book which Mr. P. should own to be Scripture since it could not but be manifest to him that Mr. P. did not only ask him for the proof of those places wherein his Bible differs from ours but for the proof of the whole or if he had demanded a proof of such places only it was not for the sake of any Arguments which the Protestants take thence for the defence of their Religion but that it might appear on what Testimony they had received the Scripture and consequently on what grounds their Reformation had proceeded And therefore when to avoid this proof he offered to dispute out of Mr. P's Bible which he might easily have done by the help of his own Interpretation it was a plain tho' with the Rabble a very plausible evasion This * Ibid. Method viz. of Disputing out of Mr. P's Bible says the Doctor Mr. P. would not allow but repeated his Discourse about our not having a Bible and our not being able if we had one to prove we had one and asked again about the Rule of our Faith. Dr. T. before he answered to this applyed himself to Mr. M. who seem'd to be the calmer person c. Here the Doctor discovers his way of Disputing How comes the Doctor to apply himself to Mr. M. whereas Mr. P. had begun his Conference with him and proposed the main Question of it How come we not to receive an Answer to this Question till two or three Pages full of wrangling after it was proposed nor then neither as he confesses p. 9. till Mr. P. and Mr. M. not suffering him to tell a Story pressed him to it nor even then as he farther * Pag. 9. owns till he had chid Mr. P. for asking him Questions and seeming to Catechize him Surely after so long an Expectation the Answer must needs be extraordinary In the next place how comes Mr. M. tho' a Convert and * Pag. 5. possessed with a Spirit of fiercer Bigottry than other Romanists to be the calmer person But Dr. T. wants an excuse for turning away from his Antagonist and speaking to one who as he was told at the beginning was to have no part in the Dispute And as for the Complement he is resolved that I shall pay dear for it before he parts with me Besides some such appearance of Candor the common Artifice of Detractors is necessary for the obtaining a belief to the basest of Calumnies which is to * Pag. 23. follow Dr. T. * Pag. 6. put Mr. M. in mind that such Discourses as these concerning the proof of Holy Scripture and some others lately used by the Romanists about the Trinity and Transubstantiation would rather make the People Atheists or Vnbelievers than Converts And that the Indifferent were ready to say Content We cannot believe Transubstantiation and we will have no Trinity We cannot have the Bible unless we take it upon Roman Authority and none we will have Mr. M. said That would not be the consequence but gave no reason why he said so But Mr. M. can give a very good reason why he then gave none It is because before he could pronounce Six words Dr. T. turn'd back again to Mr. P. And it was not for one as I have intimated already who looked on himself as wholly unconcerned in the Controversie to interrupt it so far as to press the Doctor to hearken to him What I would have then said had the Doctor been pleased to stay for it was That those who would give themselves leave to consider would find so good Authority in the Roman Church for the belief of the Trinity and the Holy Scripture that tho' there were no other Authority for them as indeed there is none yet this alone would be sufficient And consequently that there would be no danger of Atheism but where Obstinacy and Perversness should interpose which would never leave Men destitute of a Pretence for Incredulity tho' they should want a just reason for it ever so much I should have added that it was an excellent Argument of the Truth of a Religion when it could be shewn that either such a Religion was True or else that none was so Wherefore if it could be
proved that on the denyal of this Roman Authority as the Doctor calls it Men would have no reason to believe a God it must needs have followed that the Roman Authority was not to be denyed Besides An Arian might have upbraided the Antient Catholics after the same manner and said that so much insisting on the necessity of believing a Trinity would rather make the People Atheists or Vnbelievers than Converts And that the Indifferent would be ready to say content We cannot believe the Trinity and we will have no Deity For Athanasius tells us that it will stand us in little stead to believe a God unless we also believe what is plainly repugnant to our Reason a Trinity of persons in an Vnity of Substance And this Discourse would not have been less conclusive in the Arians Mouth than it was in the Doctors This was the Answer which the Doctor by the Spirit of Prophecy thought not worth the tarrying for and therefore faced about to Mr. P. Which I should not have complained of had it been to have Answered Mr. P's Question But instead of this to shew how sollicitous he was for the Discovery of Truth in so important a Point as a Rule of Faith he * Pag. 6. near the end falls into an insignificant cavil Where I leave him it being too troublesome for me to trace him through all his turnings and windings However what is here said may serve to give the Reader some kind of Notion of them He says p. 14. Mr. M. had some while before asked Pag. 14. Dr. T. who had said that we find the Bible which we now have Quoted by the Antient Fathers how he came to know they were Fathers To which Question he thought an Answer in that place a condescention to an Impertinence The Doctor had been asked upon what Authority or Testimony for the Doctor distinguishes between them he had received his Bible He answered amongst other things that he found his Bible Quoted by the Antient Fathers Now I considered that the Fathers and their works stood in need of some Testimony themselves for their being relyed on And therefore I asked the Doctor how he knew they were Fathers By Fathers I suppose he meant Orthodox Bishops or Doctors of the Church Wherefore the meaning of my Question was how he could prove those whom he accounted Fathers to be Orthodox If he should have said that they had been allowed to be such by all Christians It would have been denyed him there having been and still being several Societies of such as Profess Christianity who assert the contrary And therefore unless the Doctor could give us a mark whereby we might know which sort of Christians are in the right and which in the wrong it would be impossible for us to understand from their Testimony whether the Fathers were Orthodox or not If he should have replyed that these Fathers were approved by our selves That also would have been as little to his purpose For if he looks on our Authority as Good he ought to receive several other things upon it which he does not And if he takes it not to be such he cannot confide in it either for Scripture or Fathers Since here they are not Arguments ad hominem or concerning only the Private difference between us and them but general Arguments which we require of them I mean such as may serve to evidence the certainty of Holy Writ to the whole World. And if the Doctor would have granted that this could have been done by our Authority it may easily be believed that we should have asked no more Lastly If he should have said that he knew those Antient Fathers to be Orthodox no otherwise than by the Conformity which he observed in their Tenets to the Doctrin of the Scriptures which is the Protestant way of proving the Orthodoxness of either particular Men or Churches he would have involved himself in a Circle by proving the Fathers to be true from their agreement with the Scriptures and the Scriptures to be so from the approbation of the Fathers By this time I suppose it sufficiently appears to unbyass'd Readers that Doctor Tenison would have shewed his Learning more by Answering this Question than he has done his Manners by calling it Impertinent Here I cannot but take notice that this Question of mine is inserted in a wrong place to make People believe that I was present to so much of the Conference Whereas I am as certain as my memory can make me that I heard none of those Discourses from the middle of the Doctors 10th Page till towards the latter end of his 17th When the Doctors loud Clamors about the Quotation out of St. Ambrose brought me back from the Window whither I had retired long before viz. before the abovesaid Discourses which begin at the middle of the Tenth Page I say I was present to none of those Discourses between the middle of the Tenth and the latter end of the 17th Page excepting somewhat which is mis-placed viz. Mr P's Reprehension of the School-master for his Wry Mouths c. which was soon after the beginning of the Conference and a little while before I withdrew But the Doctor sets it down in this Pag. 15. place that the People may not imagin that the School-master came so soon to his Assistance as in Truth he did Neither was this Reprehension occasioned as the Doctor would have it by any Discourse concerning the Lateran Council which was not then spoken to but on the School-masters producing a Picture in a Breviary and to shew his Wit laughing at it Which was an action no way pertinent to the matter then in debate And therefore the Doctor to disguise the School-masters intrusion says nothing of the Discourse which happened about the Picture It is unhappy says the Doctor p. 65. that amidst so many things we can have nothing sincere and in it's Naturals The reason of it is because in such occasions the Truth is seldom honorable for both sides And I question not but the Doctor is convinced by this time that he was much in the right when he chose rather to trust his own Memory than his own Amanuensis Concerning what he says p. 14. viz. Mr. M. asked what Writers I do not remember that Question neither did I hear the Discourse of that Paragraph What he said also to me in Derogation of Mr. P. tho' he hath it p. 15. was a long time after But the Doctor is resolved to spread my Controversie through his whole Narrative tho' by this means it be very thin and neither much for my credit nor his It is possible that the Doctor thinks to help it out by putting my Name at length so * Six times in two Pages often as he doth throughout this famous Story whereas the rest of the persons of his Drama excepting only one as I take it have only the first Letter of Theirs However lest the Doctor should design
a Favor by it tho' his not dealing so by his most worthy Friends might make one think otherwise and since whilst I am contented to yield to him in Contumely and Abuse I am resolved not to come one jot behind him in Point of Courtesie I have desired the Printer to pay him the same Respect as often as he can do it conveniently That his NAME may rumble as much in my Pamphlet as mine doth in his And altho' this should prove to be a sign of ill Will for I know not what to make of it our Spleen would not be mis-placed upon the Doctors Name since it is That which has done us Ten times more harm than his Arguments tho' indeed ever since his late Book we have some reason to hope that it's Authority is much lessened with all Those whose minds are at liberty to Consider There is one thing which with my Readers Licence I desire to take notice of before I pass on to the remainder of the Doctors Relation which is the gross fallacy wherewith some Protestant Divines are wont to delude the Common People whensoever they are called upon by Catholics to shew on what Authority they receive the Holy Scripture The Papists say they question the Authority of Scripture Again when it is alledged that the Scripture left to the Interpretation of each private person can decide no Point of Controversie since doubtlesly every one will declare that the Scripture is for him and in effect he does declare it by holding his particular Tenet whatsoever it be as grounded on Scripture I say when this is urged They cry The Scripture is undervalued by the Papists And this makes such deep Impression on the unthinking Multitude or shall I say strikes such a damp on their Spirits that many times it surpasses the skill of the ablest and plainest Logician to undeceive them And yet it is not because they cannot think Rationally enough to discern the Fallacy but because they will not since there is no understanding amongst them so dull or short-sighted but if it be made use of must see through it None can have a greater respect for the Holy Scripture than Catholics have I my self have known several of them beyond-Sea who amongst their other Devotions Reading some part of the Holy Scripture every day to shew their profound Veneration for it were always wont to Read it on their Knees which whosoever observes and compares with that very indifferent behaviour wherewith it is ordinarily handled here in England will not say that Catholics have a less regard for the Holy Scripture than Protestants And consequently they do as little question it 's Authority Why then do the Catholics urge the Protestants to shew on what Authority or Testimony they receive the Bible since it's Authority is undoubted on both sides It is because the Catholics would take this occasion of shewing their Adversaries that of necessity a True and Uncorrupted Church must be allowed to have been in the World when they began their pretended Reformation viz. about a hundred and fifty years ago For since they received their Bible from some Church then in the World in case there were at that time no true nor uncorrupted Church it must follow that they had no good Authority for their Bible And on the contrary if the Protestants will own that they received their Bible from good hands they must acknowledge that they had it from a True Church and consequently that there was such a one in the World when they began to Reform And from hence it will immediately follow that the first Reformers separating from the whole World as hath been said did also separate from the True Church which as we here suppose them to confess was then in it And therefore must be accounted Schismatics unless they can give us some better Definition of Schism than that which hitherto we have had viz. of it's being a Separation from the Obedience and Communion of the True Church There is yet another Reason why we ask the Protestants on what Authority they receive the Scriptures And it is because we would likewise put them in mind of what I hinted above viz. that they ought to admit other things and indeed the meaning of the Scripture upon the same Authority on which they admit the letter And therefore when they say that they had the Scripture from the Roman Catholics we tell them that if the Roman Catholics may be relyed on for the reception of the Scripture they may be credited for other Doctrins If they are bad Witnesses no part of their Testimony can be valid Wherefore if any part of it be so they must be look'd on as Good Witnesses and consequently their whole Testimony ought to be embraced And this is another cause of this Question But why do the Catholics derogate so much from the most abundant Perfection of Holy Scripture as to affirm that it is insufficient of it self to decide our Controversies in Faith It is because the daily and palpable experience of Mankind Teaches it to be so Neither is it any derogation to a Law to say that it stands in need of what never yet any Law was without viz. A Judge or Interpreter of it And I wonder that the Protestants who confess that every Man is fallible and as such may be mistaken in the Sense of Scripture and that to his Damnation should look on it as a Derogation to the same Scripture to think that God whose Mercy is over all his Works hath appointed some means to keep us from being so mistaken Especially when this help is not so much for the Scripture as for our understandings It arguing no more a defect in those sacred Volums that our narrow Intellects are not able to comprehend their meaning without an Interpreter as it fared with the * And Philip ran thither to him the Eunuch and heard him Read the Prophet Esaias and said understandest thou what thou Readest And he said how can I except some Man should guide me c. Act. c. 8. v. 30.31 Eunuch spoken of in the Acts of the Apostles than it doth a fault in a good Print that it cannot be Read by weak Eyes without the assistance of a Glass To conclude if it be a Derogation to the Scripture to say that it stands in need of somewhat besides it self for it's being understood by us How will those Protestants defend themselves who affirm that Prayer Humility and * See Pa. 18. Ministerial Guides are necessary for this purpose What greater affront is it to the Scripture to declare that it cannot be understood without the Authority of the Church than it is to say that it cannot be understood without Ministerial Guides Nor even with them according to Protestants any more than fallibly which is in truth not to be understood at all for how can a Man be said to know the meaning of a thing whilst he doubts whether he know it or not
latter This is my Body It is evident indeed that such an Edition would be of no Credit But why Not for any defect in the sound or other intrinsic fault as hath been shewn but because the Authority of one single person which recommends the first Sentence cannot weigh with that of the whole World which delivers the last For could these two Sentences change their Extrinsic Testimonies they would change their Credit also Much more of this Nature might be added But we need not have Recourse to Suppositions for an Evidence of this Truth which is sufficiently confirmed by that Difference in the Translations of the Scripture which is already in the World. By Difference in Translations I mean a Difference in * Viz. when one Translation hath Words expressing a different Sense from those which are in another Sense and not in Language as Dr. St was pleased to Mistake my meaning in his second Letter to Mr. G In which piece for the most part he Answers my Objections by mistaking them And certainly Books may be Answered with ease when Ignorance it self as Mistaking is either Real or Pretended is able to do the work The prevention of such mistakes was one of the Reasons why I preferr'd Personal Conferences before the Writing 〈◊〉 â—ooks tho indeed for the securing such Conferences from such after mis-representations as we have here I thought it convenient that what was said in them should be committed to Writing immediately upon the place I say then that this Difference of Sense in the several Translations of the Bible which are now in Being is an undenyable proof that the Scripture does not manifest it self to us by it 's own Lustre as is pretended at least in all it's parts For since all these Differences of Sense expressed by Different words are held for Authentic by Different Bodies of Christians whereas at most there can be but one of these Different Expressions Genuine or True it must follow that the Truth of every parcel of Scripture is not evident to All alike and consequently not Evident from it self And indeed to say the truth I never knew that any sort of Christians endeavored to justifie the preference of their own Version before that of others from the Sound or Texture of the Expressions but always from it's Conformity to the Original Languages Antient Copies or the like which they would not have done could the bare Sound or Frame have sufficiently pleaded for it What is here proved from the Difference in the Translations of the Bible may be yet farther evinced by that which there is in the number of the Canonical Books since if the Scripture were evident of it self how come whole Books to be received by some and rejected by others And here a new Reason offers it self to me why Protestants should be asked more particularly what Testimony they have for their Bible since they lay aside so much of that Canon which was confirmed by the Council of Carthage in the year 397. subscribed to by St. Augustin as also by the sixth General Council A. D. 680. and hath been so generally in use ever since for want as they pretend of that Testimony which is sufficient I should design an endless piece of work should I purpose to set down all the absurdities which necessarily are derived from this Assertion viz. that the Scripture is Proved by it self Dato uno absurdo mille sequuntur I hope what I have said is enough for the rejecting a Position which ought rather to be esteemed it 's own dis-proof than the Scripture can be look'd on as it 's own Proof For since it is most apparent that the Sense of all the parts of Holy Scripture is not Plain to us by it 's own Light how comes it to pass that without further help we may know the Words which we Read to be the Words of the Holy Ghost and not know the Sense which we have of them to be the Sense intended by the same Holy Ghost The Sense being that which immediately is from God whereas the words are from Men At least in such Translations as are not made by Divine Revelation or Inspiration Which as I take it the Reformed Church of England doth not pretend to Wherefore I cannot think that any one will say that the Phrase or Form of Words in any place of Scripture is such as manifestly shews it self to be from God and yet that at the same time he is ignorant whether the Sense which he conceives of those Words be from God or from himself It follows from these Considerations That Scripture how Sacred and Divine soever it be is not manifested to us by it 's own light and consequently it is neither impertinent in it self nor derogatory to the Scripture to ask upon what Extrinsic Testimony it is received and acknowledged for Such Give me leave to add one word by way of Corollary to what hath been said which is that seeing the Holy Scriptures are not made Evident by themselves and that no Prudent Man can receive any thing upon the credit of False and Corrupted Witnesses it must be inferred that the Protestant Reformers ought to quit their pretence of being Guided by Scripture since they have no other Rule of knowing what is such and what not but the bare Letter of that which is called so and the Testimony of those whom they accounted to have so much Corruption and Falsness that they separated from them without the least apprehension of the Guilt of Schism For separating from the whole World as hath been said they must needs separate from those upon whose Authority or Testimony they received their Bible And this in effect was the summ of Mr. P's Argument against Dr. T. I should not have insisted so tediously on the foregoing points had I not known that how frivolous soever those pretences of our vilifying Scripture looking on it as Insufficient and the like may seem to any thinking Man yet the common People are most grosly and almost incurably deluded by them And we are * Rom. 1. v. 14. Debtors both to the Wise and to the Vnwise And forasmuch as concerns this last Point which I have spoken to viz. the pretended self-evidence of the Scripture it hath dropt in my hearing not only from the Mouths of the middle sort but even from those of the Learned World. And even Dr. T. himself glances at it in his Tenth Page Nothing being more Necessitous or putting a Man upon worse shifts than an ill Cause But tho' I have been very long on this subject yet I cannot but make one Observation more before I proceed to another which is that the Protestants when they find themselves destitute of solid Proof as in truth they always do for the Support of their peculiar Tenets are wont to heap a great many Unconcluding things together that so if possible what is wanting in Strength may be made out by Number Which however like Cyphers tho'
but the second Branch of Mr. P's Mr. P. ask'd from whom we were to receive the Scriptures My Question was from whom we were to have the Meaning of them Now St. Augustin will tell you that you ought to receive the Sense or meaning of the Scripture from those on whose Testimony you admit the Letter according to a * Aug. contra Epist Fundam passage which I formerly Quoted to Dr. St And which he not liking as I suppose St. Augustins Judgment took no notice of Wherefore according to the Sense of this Father if Dr. Tenison had found out those Christians on whom he might have relyed for the receiving of the Scriptures which was Mr. P's Question he would have known whom to have trusted for the understanding them which was Mine Which being so I leave my Readers to Judge whether either of these Questions were not much more to the purpose than that which the Dr. set up Indeed it was so little to our Controversie whether that Book were truly St. Ambrose's or not that I wonder that a grave Man should forget himself so much as to lay any stress on it when other Proofs were offered full as plain and out of Writers of as great Authority as St. Ambrose and even when there is a passage to the same purpose and to a great degree in the same words in an undoubted Work of St. Ambrose Nay one of the Arguments which is brought against the Authority of this Book De Sacramentis is that the words of this Quotation are in another Work of the same St. Ambrose and that it is improbable this Author would use the same Words and Phrases in two distinct Books Which if a good Argument against the Authority of that Book is likewise a very good one for the Authority of the Passage Wherefore if that passage which was alledged or one Equivalent to it were undoubtedly St. Ambrose's of what moment could it be whether that particular Book which was first named were St. Ambrose's or not If the passage prove what it was produced for it is at least Equivalently in an undoubted work of St. Ambrose And if it prove nothing why so much clutter whether the Book be Authentic or not Here the Reader may be put in mind of another Method which the Protestants use in their Disputations When the Work of any Father is Quoted by Catholics if it were ever doubted of there is no remedy but it must pass for Spurious And when it shall happen to be Undoubted they will do as much as in them lies to render it Dubious at least in those places which are Quoted But when nothing of this will do their last shift is Interpretation which indeed does their business effectually This Interpretation is laid up like a Treasure which is never to be brought forth but in cases of urgent necessity Otherwise they would need no other Fond for the carrying on of almost all their Controversial Expeditions For what need is there that they should spoil their Eyes with poring on old Worm-eaten Manuscripts for the disproof of an Author when perhaps the passage which they would evade is not half so plain against them as that of some unquestioned Book which already they have set aside by their Interpretation What Obligation is there that Words in a Spurious Work should have quite another Sense than the self-same words in one which is Legitimate No but this knack of Interpreting is too great a cheat to be often Practised and therefore when any thing else will serve the turn this must not appear I said that Interpretation was their last shift But unless this be understood with some restriction I think I was too hasty in my Reckoning Their shifts are like the Priviledges of some Parliaments not so easie to be numbred For sometimes when the Author is unquestioned the passage too palpably plain to be wrested and the Party somewhat more indifferent and not so greedy of being impos'd on and when for these reasons the Gordian-knot cannot be untyed what should they do but follow Alexanders example They lop off a Century or two out of the Five Hundred Years which their Brethren are wont to Appeal to and it is great odds but the Father that is Quoted most of them and those the most Celebrated being in the fourth and fifth Centuries drops with them and loses his Authority not out of any particular picque that they have against this Father whoever he be but because he lived in ill times and when Popish Errors began to be predominant But if it shall so happen that they do not see him lying on the ground together with these Two Hundred Years the third Century is sure to follow and then it is a Thousand to one but they have him down However if after all this he shall yet remain untoucht Perhaps another Branch may fall for these Errors were very early in the Church or else the Fathers are sicut caeteri Homines and as Dr. T. intimates p. 16. there is no Decisive Determination to be built on what they say This you will say as I have said * See above pa. 27. before agrees not well with an Appeal to the first Five Hundred Years However this gradual Proceeding argues great Moderation a thing that is sometimes bragg'd of and shews that the Members of this Church are not for carrying matters to Extremities but where Necessity which hath no Law obliges them I intimated above that it was ten to one but Dr. Tenison would have refused to Write or Sign any Answer to my Questions Which was no groundless Conjecture of my own For had he not differed from himself he would most certainly have done so A Gentleman of my acquaintance then a Protestant had formerly carried him these Questions and desir'd his Answer to them in Writing In the first place the Doctor took a very sufficient time for consideration And in the second he absolutely refused to give any thing under his hand saying in excuse that he knew not what Inference might be made Whereupon I remember I advised the Gentleman to put him in mind at their next meeting of the Logical Maxim A veris possunt nil nisi vera sequi telling him consequently that if his Answer were true he need not fear that any thing should follow from it but Truth In the mean time I am not ignorant that there is something in the Doctors Narrative which is a kind of * Pag. 18. Answer to my Questions But as the Reader will perceive it is not offered by the Doctor as his Answer to them neither is there any thing else set forth as such throughout his whole Pamplet save only the mention of two Books pag. 56. and a little one which perhaps might be one of them that Mrs. V. had from him pag. 24. I say there is nothing else but these Books which is proposed by Dr. T. as an Answer to those Questions Now for my own part I
and Knew the voice of their Church and therefore according to the Doctors own assertion needed it not But perhaps the Doctor will say that for the Verbal Translation of the Scripture the Protestants are not necessitated to have recourse to particular Men the Bible being Translated to their hands and warranted by public Authority tho' here too they will be at a loss unless it appear to them that they may confide in this Authority but for the Sense in all dubious places they ought to Address themselves to their Ministers They may do it if they please And if not I suppose they may let it alone and this last with most safety For according to our late Divines all things necessary to Salvation are plain in Scripture and therefore to look after the meaning of dubious places is to do more than of bounden Duty is required and has the appearance of a Work of Supererogation which is such an abominable thing with the Church of England that they have a whole * See 14th Article Article against it and declare that it cannot be taught without arrogancy and impiety much less as I suppose PRACTISED Wherefore as yet there appears no cause why the Apprentice should be chidden for not having waited on Dr. T. in this occasion And indeed if that be the case viz. That the Members of the Church of England are to go to their Ministers for the Construction of these dubious places I do not perceive that they have any great advantage over those of the Church of Rome tho' what the Doctor says were true viz. That Roman Catholics were to apply themselves to particular Priests for the Translation of the Scriptures since the Protestants themselves must make the same application for the Sense and Meaning of these Scriptures And this Sense is that which is of the greatest importance or rather That which is of any Importance at all But in Truth they are not particular Priests which Catholics depend on for either the Translation or Sense of the Scripture in any necessary Point of Faith but it is on their Church whose Voice is as Intelligible at least and with the Doctors leave much farther Heard than that of the Church of England For is it not full as evident in England and much more evident in other Parts of the World that the Church of Rome Teaches a Purgatory than it is that the Church of England Teaches the contrary And so of other Doctrins This is an Age wherein Men whilest they Scepticize on evident Truths are Positive in Absurdities and therefore there want not Those who ask how the Members of the Church of Rome can know what their Church holds But when they shall have considered how they themselves come to know what That Church holds whilest they Condemn it's Doctrins as also how a Man may come to understand what is held by the Church of England they will not I suppose expect any farther Answer This were it not so Common and even with Men of no Common Wit would have been too frivolous to have been taken notice of One endeavor which I used for the speaking somewhat of a Guide in Controversie was on the following occasion Dr. T. having called me to him and desiring as he said that * Pag. 21. Mr. P. would stick to something took upon him to explain a Text of Scripture which had been long before Cited by Mr. P. for the Authority of the Church viz. That of St. Matthew c. 18. v. 17. If he will not hear the Church let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican The Doctor said that considering the Antecedent Verses this ought to be understood of ordinary Trespasses such as the not paying of a just debt c. And not of Articles of Faith making use of a tedious Instance to that purpose the summ whereof was * Ibid. that in case a Man should refuse to pay his debts after one or two demands he is put into the Ecclesiastical Courts supposing it proper for their cognisance And if he will not stand to their Sentence then he is Excommunicated and Treated as such a One. Whereupon I told the Doctor that for my own part I understood that Text of Scripture quite otherwise than he did being persuaded that we were obliged by it to Hear the Church in all those things wherein the same Church doth declare that she hath Power to Judge And most especially in matters of Faith Which in their own Nature seem more proper for the Cognisance of Ecclesiastical Courts than a Question of Debt That it was not unusual for our Blessed Saviour on a particular occasion to deliver a general Precept as for instance when the Jews ask'd him whether or no it were lawful to pay Tribute to Caesar he * Mat. c. 22. v. 19 c. called for the Tribute-mony and ask'd whose Image it bore and being Answered that it was Caesars he gave this Rule Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesars Which Rule I suppose is general and hath regard not only to Tribute but also to whatever else is due from Subjects to Sovereign Princes as Respect Obedience and the like tho' the occasion on which the Rule was made and that which immediately preceded it seem to be Particular and to look no farther than his Pecuniary Rights That in like manner tho' this Text viz. If he will not hear the Church c. might be spoken in a Particular occasion it could not be thence inferr'd that it was not of a more large Extension especially if we should compare it with other Texts such as are * Joh. c. 20. v. 21. As my Father sent me so I send you * Matth. c. 28. v. 19 20. Go and Teach all Nations and lo I am with you always even unto the end of the World. a Luke c. 10. v. 16. He that Heareth You Heareth ME c. b Eph. c. 4. v. 11 c. And he gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints for the Work of the Ministry c. That we henceforth be no more Children c If Pastors are left to keep us from being tossed to and fro it follows that we must hearken to them as also that they must be kept from being tossed to and fro themselves Otherwise they will not be able to effect that for which they were left tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of Doctrin c. d Hebr. c. 13. v. 17. Obey those that are set over you for they watch as being to render account for your Souls All which places at least according to my own Judgment are clear for that Perpetuity and that Authority of the Church which are believed by Roman Catholics But above all this Truth seems to be most apparent to me when I consider what immediately follows in this place of Scripture viz. When
our Saviour had said If he will not hear the Church let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican which is the subject of our present Controversie He adds in the very next Verse speaking to his Church Verily I say unto you whatsoever you shall Bind on Earth shall be Bound in Heaven c. * The Doctor ought to have considered what came after his Text as well as what went before the one having as manifest a regard to it as the other This Term WHATSOEVER whether it regard the Persons or the Things which fall under the Ecclesiastical Censure or else Both is of a most general Signification So that it is evident that the Power given in this place hath no other Restriction or Limit but the Will and Determination of those to whom it is given there being nothing more required for the Binding or Loosing a Thing in Heaven than that the Church should determin to Bind or Loose it on Earth Which proves what I asserted above viz. That the Church hath Power to Judge in all those things wherein she Declares Her self to have it It is true however that being always Guided by the same Holy Spirit which invests her with this Authority she can never Declare Her self to be our Judge but where she ought and where it is highly for our Advantage that she should be so My Discourse on this occasion was to this effect but as I have said of those on other subjects much shorter tho' this was the fairest opportunity of speaking that Dr. Tenison allowed me during the whole Conference In Conclusion I assured the Doctor that I was wholly convinced that the abovementioned Text as I declared before had quite another meaning than what he gave of it And therefore I ask'd him whether being so convinced as I was I ought to follow his Interpretation or my own He Answered that he would appeal to the Company whether the Sence which he gave of the place were not * Had it been plain it would not have stood in need of his explanation plainly so I told him that this would not serve my turn for tho' that Company should happen to be all of his Mind as they were not there being some amongst them of my own Judgment yet so long as my opinion continued as it was I should be still at the same loss unless the Doctor could inform me whose Judgment I was to trust my Own or Theirs The Doctor said that for the right Interpretation of Scripture I ought to examin the Originals consult Learned Men * Why so much ado for what be said was plain Had the Company he appealed to done all this c. Whereas said he this Boy did none of these things he came not to Me nor to his Master c. and so striking out of the Road with a Cavil about the Boy I could never get him into it again Had I been able to have held him to the Point a little longer he must have granted me according to his own principle of Every ones Power of Judging for himself That seeing I Judged the Sense of Holy Scripture to be Different from what he thought I was as much bound to dis-believe his Doctrin as he was to believe it Which would have been an excellent instance how much Dr. Tenison's Rule of Faith tended to the Vnity of it And undoubtedly must have sounded very strangely in the Ears of his Parishioners notwithstanding their great esteem and affection for him Which I question not but the Doctor was well aware of and therefore thought it more to his purpose to chide the Boy for not having wash'd his Face as the Story goes of such another Answerer than to suffer the Disputation to proceed And yet this is the Doctor who in this very place desires that his Adversary would * Pag. 21. stick to something But non videmus id Manticae quod à tergo est I have already taken notice of a Sentence or two which the Doctor sets to my account more than I can remember my self to have been guilty of There is another of them pa. 21. viz. Mr. M. asked Dr. T. if he could tell Chapter and Verse throughout the Bible And I think there are one or two more of the like nature But they are of so little importance one way or other that tho' I believe they were never spoken by me yet they shall be said or not said as the Doctor pleases But touching what he says pa. 18. Of something spoken to me about the Conference betwixt some Gentlemen of the Church of Rome and Dr. Stillingfleet and Dr. Burnet I remember nothing of it Neither had I any concern in that Conference or in any thing relating to it In the Doctors 22d and 23d Pages the Reader will find the following Lines After this Dr. T. said to Mr. P. there was one thing remaining and fit to be said to him He had in a Printed Paper promised not to tamper about Religion with the Protestant Boys who should come to the Savoy-School it had appeared that he tampered with Boys out of his care and would do so much more with those under it he said it did not follow because of his word which he would not break and that for this Boy he had done it in order to his everlasting Salvation Dr. T. answered that being your Principle that all out of your Communion are Damned you being a Jesuit and a Papist must break your word in that Paper for the necessary good as you think of the Souls of the Boys especially you having hope of turning Boys under your care Mr. M. said to Dr. T. This reflects upon the King. Another more loud this reflects upon the King and suggests that he will break his word And Mr. P. joyned in the Accusation but many of the Hearers cryed out against them and said it was a Knavish trick Mr. M. was going away Dr. T. called to him and desired him not to run away with a false Tale. Mr. M. denyed he said such words Dr. T. told him he did and that for his part he thought his Loyalty at this time to be more valuable than Mr. M's Because he as a Son of the Church of England professed he would not Rebell against the King notwithstanding he might be of another Religion whereas Mr. M. being of the same Religion could not so well separate Loyalty from Interest Dr. T. being concerned at this false and unworthy way of catching Men did say to Mr. M. at the Door of the first Room that if he had persisted in this Trick he could not have forborn to have given him the Name of Evidence Meredith Here it is that the Doctor Storms indeed Here it is that his Rage breaks forth Hunc tu Romane Caveto Here it is that he manifests the Truth of what he tells us in his Epistle to his Parishioners and convinces us at length that amidst so many things there
he should take that which he said to me for something For my part I do not remember what passed herein at the Conference with distinction enough to be able to relate it wherefore I shall take it for granted that the Doctor gives us a faithful Account of the whole Affair neither indeed is it so much for his advantage that I should suspect a Fraud What the Doctor says of my not replying is likewise extremely probable I told him at the beginning of the Conference that I came not as a Disputant but an Hearer and he treated me ever after and even when he disputed with me accordingly viz. as one who was to hear and not to speak And in the present Case whether it be probable that my silence proceeded from the want of a Reply or of the Liberty of giving it I shall freely leave my Readers to judge after a short Reflection on the Doctor 's words The Doctor it seems had been ask'd how the Church of England granting her self to be Fallible could be the Church built upon a Rock c. viz. one that could not fail To this he says and calls it an Answer that their Church is no more Fallible than any other in the World. What trifling is here The Quaerist supposes that according to Scripture there must be an Infallible Church viz. as I have said one that cannot fail and that the Church of England acknowledges her self to be Fallible and then concludes by asking How that which by its own Confession is Fallible can pretend to be what is truly Infallible The Answerer neither tells him at least plainly whether there be any Infallible Church or whether the Church of England deny or own her self to be Fallible but answers like one who knew not what to say The Church of England says he is no more Fallible than any other which is as much as to say She is no more Fallible than those whom she takes to be in Error An excellent Security For whil'st he pretends that his Church is no more Fallible than others he doth not deny it to be as Fallible as others Wherefore the whole Discourse amounts to this Gentlemen here are many Churches that have fallen into Error and we have been so wise as to separate from them on this account and now for our comfort we are as Fallible as they and for ought we know may be as much mistaken But proceeds the Doctor the Providence of Godwill not suffer * One would think however that the Providence of God had suffer'd all Churches to sail together who should consider that the Reformers could find none amongst them with which if you will believe them they could joyn with safe Consciences and so were forced to separate from ALL. The common Answer is That before the Reformation there were some Churches sound in Necessaries of Faith which say they is a sufficient fulfilling of our Lord's Promise of being always with his Church So then it seems we are assured by a Divine Promise that at least some Church or Churches were sound in Necessaries before the Reformation But that a Church separating from all others shall be so they do not they cannot pretend that they have any Promise from God nor other security than what they receive from a Banquerupt Ensurer viz. their own Presumption And this certainly deserves their most serious Consideration Members may fail without the Destruction of the Body all to fail together The place of Scripture alluded to by the Quaerist speaks of one Church whereas the Doctor talks of several It is true that this one Church to which this Promise of Infallibility is made consists of divers particular Churches as its Members and that it is possible for any of these Members to * So far as such fail in Particular but not for all of them together and therefore if the Doctor had proved either that his Congregation was this whole Infallible Church here spoken of or else shewn some such whole Church whereof the Church of England was a Member he had done his business But whereas he does neither of these things the Query continues still without an Answer But because what is defective in Strength may be supply'd by Number according to what I have said * Pag. 64. above out comes another Cypher We have says the Doctor a certain Rule and sufficient Means I suppose the meaning of this is That the Scripture is certain and I will add in the Name of the Church of England That if we could hit on the right Sense of it we should be so too But because we are uncertain whether we have this Right Sense or not notwithstanding our certain Rule we must continue uncertain And then because we have no means of knowing when we have this Right Sense and when we have it not whatever our means are sufficient for they do not suffice for Certainty Hitherto we have made but little progress let us therefore make room for what comes next We are adds the Doctor as infallibly sure of the Necessaries of Faith as a man is of casting up a Sumright tho' by Misattention 't was possible to commit a mistake Not to ask the Doctor at present By what Scales he weights the * I thought the Infallibility of a Church had been from God's Promise and consequently somewhat more than what is meerly natural Infallibility of the Church of England and finds it neither more nor less than a man has in casting up a Sum Is not what he says here also as much as to say that they are as Infallible as a man that may be mistaken which was never that I know of deny'd to the Church of England But here I take it for granted tho' the expression as well as that which follows seems to be somewhat doubtful that the Dr. does not intend to say thus much viz. That tho' indeed His Church might be mistaken in casting up its Sum were it guilty of Misattention yet now being assured that it is guilty of none it is impossible for it to mistake I suppose I say he does not mean this For if there be no possibility of mistaking in this Computation but by Misattention and the Church of England is sure that it has no Misattention when it computes it is sure likewise that it is Infallible because it is sure by being without Misattention that it is without a possibility of mistaking which is contrary to the supposition of the Query which was not deny'd by the Doctor and to the Fallibility which this Church owns of her self The like must be said of that which follows viz. That the Church of England can prove it hath rightly computed For if a right Computation be liable to no mistake and the Church of England can prove that it hath this right Computation it proves at the same time that it is liable to no mistake and therefore Infallible In a word if what the Doctor says imports that his