and Socin Meth. p. 26. Work of his own in these Words Though he the Right Socinian thinks a Doctrin is plain in Scripture yet if he believes it to be against HIS REASON he assents not to it And p. 27. A Man of this Church of England suspects not Reason it self but his own present Art of Reasoning whensoever it concludes against that which he reads and reads without doubting of the Sense of the Words This he lays down for the Difference between the Church of England and the Socinians Hitherto I have taken the Socinians at least for a witty Generation But henceforward if the Doctor 's Character of them be true I must hold them all for Blockheads on pain of being held for one my self For what is it to think a Doctrin plain in * Supposing Scripture to be the Word of God. Scripture but to think it to be revealed by God And consequently what is it not to believe a Doctrin which is thought to be plain in Scripture but not to believe what is thought to be revealed by God And is not this in other terms to suppose that it is possible for God to reveal a Falshood Wherefore if this be the sign of a Right Socinian as the Doctor would have it a Bedlam is fitter for him than an Inquisition But the truth is the Socinians are not such Fools as this Gentleman would make them They do not think the Doctrin they reject to be plain in Scripture Nay before they reject it they conclude it not to be * The Arians and Socinians are so far from thinking the Catholic Doctrin touching the Divinity of our Savior to be plain in Scripture that they think the contrary to be plainly there bringing for in many Texts as My Father is greater than I Joh. 14. 28. and the like which the Doctor knows well enough plain Wherefore in those points wherein they differ from the Catholics what the One understands Literally in the Word of God the Other interprets Mystically or Figuratively And in reference to these Texts they behave themselves no otherwise than the Protestants do towards those Words of our Savior in the Institution of the Blessed Sacrament viz. This is my Body which they will not understand in a Literal Sense Again the Doctor says That a Church-of-England-man suspects not Reason it self but his own present Art of Reasoning I have not time to speculate on the nicety of this Distinction and so I let it pass altho' I believe that a Socinian would be extreme glad to know how he might come to be guided by Reason it self when he suspects his present Art of Reasoning * What causeth a Church-of-England-man to suspect his present Art of Reasoning Is it not his present Art of Reasoning Can Reason guide him without any Reasoning The Doctor seems to be very subtil here Is not the Faculty to be suspected when its Operation is faulty Can the Reason be Perfect and yet the Reasoning which flows from it Defective But whereas the Doctor 's Church-of-England-man suspects his own present Art of Reasoning whensoever it concludes against that which he reads and reads without doubting of the Sense of the Words I dare likewise engage that whatsoever the Right Socinian reads in Scripture without doubting of the Sense of the Words he shall believe as firmly as any Church-of-England-man in the World. This is proved already and if the Doctor think otherwise I shall have cause to suspect if not his Reason yet at least his present Art of Reasoning The Reason why I have examined this Quotation is because it is taken out of a Book which I am recommended to by the Doctor for an Answer to those Questions I would have propos'd to him at the Conference The Readers have my sense * Above p. 73. sequ already concerning the Answering of short Questions and proposed in a Personal Conference by a Reference to long Books which seems to be but the putting off the Trial at best What Encouragement I have from this Quotation to have recourse to that Book in particular out of which it was * But if this he the choice what is the refuse chosen by the Author himself let them Judge For if we may guess at the Stuff by the Pattern they will be able to do it A. P. press'd Writing says the Doctor pag. 60. yet when Dr. T. began to do so he declin'd it The Reader will have * Above p. 67. seq See also Mr. P. 's Acc. p. 10. seq seen that A. P. had a great deal of reason to decline the signing an insignificant Wrangle about the Authority of one single Book which was all the Writing Dr. T. propos'd and that the Doctor had no Reason at all to decline what was propos'd to him viz. the writing of the whole Conference unless it be such as he will be loth to own Whereabouts proceeds Dr. T. would these Disputers Pag. 60. be A while ago they were all for Verbal Conferences when Written ones were offer'd as more safe and useful Now when Verbal Conferences are agreed to Writing is press'd What a pretty Sophism is here Does not Dr. Tenison know whereabouts these Disputers would be Did not those who were all for Verbal or rather Personal Conferences desire that the Argumentative part of such Conferences might be taken in * Viz. for hindring such after misrepresentations as we have had from our Dr. as I said before pa. 61. Writing and that nothing else might be published as Authentic but what was so written And were not Conferences so managed viz. Personally and by Writing * See the above-mentioned Letter to Dr. E. S. p. 26. seq preferr'd before the carrying on of a Disputation by Books and not Verbal Conferences as the Doctor insinuates before Written ones Was the Doctor ignorant of this I do not think he was But a pretended Mistake is an excellent Instrument in the hand of a Controvertist It serves to deceive his own Party and at least to make Work for his Adversaries And now I would not have the Sense of what I have said here or elsewhere on this Subject so far mistaken as that I should be thought to look on such Personal and Written Conferences as infallible means of deciding Controversies whereas I only prefer this way of proceeding in them before that of writing Books I know there is nothing of this Nature which some time or other is not liable to the underminings of Craft and therefore as far as I have been able to observe when such kind of Conferences are obtained which is only where they cannot be kept off with any credit the Protestants either refuse to dispute of the Main Points such as the Rule of Faith the Proof of Scripture or the like and fall on some other Branch where as I have said before there is more room for disputing unless the matter be soon brought to the Rule of
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'
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
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
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
me in short concerning a Guide in Controversie viz. That a Man after using all Christian means and Pag. 18. the help of all Ministerial Guides possible must at last judge for himself and that this was not to run on his own head As also that their People could know the Voice of their Church it being in their own Language but not so readily the Voice of the Church of Rome it being in an unknown Tongue for the true Interpretation of which the unlearned depend upon the particular Priest that instructed them I say since the Doctor Publishes what he said to me on this subject he ought to have added what I replyed to him tho' likewise it were but very short for the Reasons already given My Talk was to this purpose viz. That if Men after the use of those Christian means and Ministerial Guides he spoke of were by Gods appointment to follow their own Understandings Those Laws must needs be unjust which punished them for doing so And consequently what could the English Penal Laws have to say for themselves which did not enquire whether Men had used Christian Means and Ministerial Guides or not but punished them for following their own Understandings altho' they should have used ever so many Christian means c. before-hand Neither do Men suffer by these Laws only for Doctrins relating to the Civil Government as perhaps the Doctor would insinuate by what * Pag. 24. follows but for Points meerly Religious such as are Transubstantiation Purgatory Invocation of Saints not going to a Protestant Church c. For all which Points they are punished and this to make the case yet harder by such Men as owning themselves Fallible must likewise own that those Opinions for which they punish may be Truths and Those which they would compel us to embrace Errors for ought they know This Subject is so plain and obvious in it's own Nature and there hath been so much said on it already that I shall only add one word by way of of a Recapitulation which is That on the one side we have the Church of England Teaching us to Judge for our selves in Religious Matters and on the other Hanging us for following her Doctrin If we are to be our own Judges why are we Condemn'd for it And if not why are we Taught to be so Most Religions have their Mysteries and therefore this may be allowed to the Protestants But for my part I can sooner admit that God is able to do more than I am able to understand in the Belief of Transubstantiation than that Men can at once have a just ground for the Approbation and Condemnation of the self-same Proceeding It being easier to dis-believe our Senses when our Creator Commands than to forego our Reason when we have no higher Motive for it than the Will of our Fellow-Creatures I must confess that my Discourse on this Subject at the Conference was not so large as it is here by reason of the shortness of those Interlocutory spaces that were allowed us by the Doctor which seemed to be designed by him not so much for our Speaking as for his own Breathing so that I was forced to cramp what I had to say into a few concise and general Propositions and to throw them out before the Doctor was aware of them Viz. That in case we were not bound by Almighty God to submit our Judgment to any others but presupposing the use of the Doctors Christian means were left to the Guidance of our own Understanding in matters of Faith we ought not to be hindred from or which is the same thing punished for Taking it for our Guide in such matters That the Penal Laws Punished us for so doing and therefore were unjust And the like Which Propositions tho' too brief perhaps for their being thoroughly Comprehended by the Rabble of our Hearers were yet sufficient to let the Doctor know what I meant and consequently for a larger Account of them than what we have from him pa. 24. Viz. Mr. M. took leave and just at the Door Muttered something about Penal Laws In which as the Reader will have found there is no Information either of the nature or of the occasion of that Discourse The matter being so obscurely express'd that a Protestant Gentleman of my acquaintance was so far deceived by the Doctors Terms that he imagined that I had risen up in a heat and threatned something as I went away And therefore for the future when Dr. Tenison shall tell us That he thinks it will give the greater satisfaction to tell the whole Truth That Truth is best Painted at full length and that he will let the World know the whole Truth so far as his Memory with all due helps will serve him as he doth pag. 45. 46 and 50. We will be so civil to him as not to understand him in a Literal Sense Dr. T. says in the place above cited that we are to have the help of all Ministerial Guides possible before we must Judge for our selves Now I suppose that by all Ministerial Guides possible the Doctor does not mean all sorts of Guides True or False First Because the Penal Laws hinder us from conversing with those of other Communions And Secondly Because our Saviour himself Commands us to * Matth. c. 7. v. 15. beware of false Prophets Wherefore I would fain know what mark the Doctor hath to distinguish such Ministerial Guides as may be Addressed to from such as may not If he say that we shall know these Guides by the purity of their Doctrin the only Mark commonly assigned by Protestants as was intimated above for That of the True Church Then it must follow that I must first Judge what Doctrin is Pure before I can know what Guides to have recourse to and consequently I must Judge for my self in the particular * Viz. In the Interpretation of the Scripture Doctrins of Christianity before I use the help of these Ministerial Guides Which according to the Doctor is not to be done The Circle in other Terms and more concisely is thus We cannot know what Doctrin is Pure without Guides And we cannot know what Guides to consult without first knowing what Doctrin is Pure If he shall Name Succession Universality or any thing else for the mark of these Guides then we will consider whether That which is assigned belong to the Church of England or not The Doctor seems to say in the close of his * Pag. 18. Answer which as the Reader will perceive was nothing less than one of his usual Digressions from the Point in hand That their People knew the Voice of their Church and needed not to depend upon the Learning of any Particular Priest for it If so How could the Doctor blame this Apprentice as he doth in his 55th Page for not coming to him with his doubts Would he have him repair to a particular Priest for Instruction whilest he Heard