Vindication of the Faithful Rebuke to a False Report, Letter 6
LETTER VI. Of the Curious Artifices employed by the Defence, either to Blanch his own Errors, or to Blacken the Truth.
SIR, Your Letter comes like an Interloper, to disturb the setled Correspondence, and Epistolary Trade, now for some time driven between me and my old Friend; yet because you promise we shall receive no more such Interruption, you shall for this once be gratified.
You observe in my Author's Discourse more than ordinary Cunning; and 'tis true, I have been more puzzl'd to find out his Fallacies, than to detect and answer them when once found out: And if I can but clearly lay open to you the Intrigues of his Defence, you will easily answer his Book, nay the Book will answer it self, and you will always find there's the same Difference between a Poaching Sophister, and a Close-studied Divine, that there is between a Pettifogger▪ with all his Chicanery, and a profound Lawyer.
§. 1. His great Artifice, is to be operose and voluminous (if a Pamphlet may be styled a Volume) in Proving what his Antagonist never denied; sweating at an Argument, when he might as well be cool; and freezing, where 'twas expected he should have more warmth. Now do you not wonder, what he can propound or promise to himself from such a Procedure? I assure you Sir, 'tis the best piece of Policy he's guilty of.
1. An ingenious Reader will be so Civil to him as to think, sure I have denied, that Christ suffered and dyed in our stead, or else a Learned Divine would never take such Pains to prove he did; for no Man would be at all this fatigue to prove what was never denied; and if he can gain this Point upon his easie Reader, he has prepossess'd him with an Opinion, that his Antagonist is a wretched Heretick.
2. And what if the discerning Reader sees through the Fraud, its worth the while to deceive him for an Hour, though he sets himself to right in the next: And for the most part, he that Calumniates stoutly leaves some Prejudices behind, that will stick, and defie all after-Vindication.
3. And he gains this at least, that he shall be Reputed, a well-read Man, That can bring such Legions of Authors into the Field, though he has no Enemy to Fight with: Which was the Vain-glory of that Emperor who drew up his Army in Battalia, marcht to the Sea, and though he had no other Service to Command 'em, but to gather Cockle-shells.
4. Besides its absolutely necessary, that some or other should be daily made Socinians; for propagating the breed, as the individual wear out; for as a sorry Wisp, is a Theme copious enough to engage an Harangue for an Hour long to a well studied Scold; so these two Letters D. W. shall serve to Equip a whole Fleet of Pamphlets: And had it not been for him hitherto, and now for poor Me, I know not what the Club of Revilers would have done for a little scribbling Practice, or where they would have had Bread, but I will Address my Self to evince this great Artifice.
Page 15. Def. What more evident than that, if the Lord Christ had not made Satisfaction of Gods Iustice for us, there's nothing left for the Relief of a convinced Sinner? p. 16. Its Christ's Righteousness alone that can pass the Examen in the great Day of the Lord, ibid. If Christ endured not the Punishment due to us for Sin; there can be no proper Satisfaction made to the Iustice of God. And now to prove what none that deserve the Name of Reformed Protestants ever denied, he pours upon us a whole Brigade of Authorities, Rivet, Turrentine, Dr. Edwards; and thus, p. 44, 45. he is Copious in proving, in his way of Proof, by inartificial Arguments, That Christ dyed properly in our stead: And asserts from B. Reynolds, That Christ had the guilt of Sin, so far upon him, as it Notes the Obligation, and Subjection to Punishment: And after all these pompous Quotations, I have no other Answer to give, than what was given to Mr. Impertinent, when he made that starcht elaborate Oration in Praise of Peace; Quis enim unquam vituperavit? I pray Sir, who ever spoke one Word against it?
§. 2. Another of his familiar Artifices is, to advance very fair and modest Premisses, and then to hook in more to the Conclusion (even the Question it self) which was not contained in the Premisses.
Thus he quotes Grotius to prove, that Christ suffered truly and properly in our stead, and that there was a real Commutation of Christ's Person for us, all which we grant, and earnestly contend for; but then he draws in his great Phrase, a Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners; which should have been solidly proved, not shamefully begg'd. Thus he speaks, p. 37. Here's not a Word of the change of one Person only; it being a Commutation, which is a change between one Person and another. No Sir, this is your own Fallacy: It's a change of one Person for another, which Grotius proves, but not a Commutation of two Persons, for each other: Which you should have proved, and if you could, no doubt would.
§. 3. His famous Artifice, which had better become the Chaplain of the Copper Mines in Sweden, than one that stiles himself a Minister of the Gospel, is a down right Falsification.
The Rebuke, p. 30. had asserted, that the Brethren did unanimously agree to grant as much as the sound Sense could bear; (viz. in these Phrases a Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners, &c.) Now he charges the Rebuke, p. 16. as if he said, they could not bear a sound Sense: And p. 26, 27. If we may believe our Brother. The Assertion of the Necessity of a Commutation of Persons between Christ and us, in order to a due Explication of Christs Satisfaction, and our Iustification, cannot bear a sound Sense! Is it possible, that the Reader however prejudiced, however byassed, should not observe? 1. That it was granted, that the Phrase might possibly bear a sound Sense. 2. That the other Sense (and that only) which was liable to a Sense of Malignity, was waved; and yet he asserts, that the Rebuke affirmed, it could bear no sound Sense at all; and is at it again, p. 29.
Again, whereas the Rebuke had affirmed and proved (nor has any Thing been offer'd in the least to invalidate the Proof) That Mr. W's did not deny a change of Person universally, but restrictively; i. e. he denied nothing, was concern'd to deny nothing, but what the Dr. had affirmed; Reb. 38. he nevertheless affirms, Its clear enough to me, (but to no Body else) that Mr. W's doth deny a change of Persons in every Sense. Why then (say I) to what end do we Write, or Discourse or Dispute; if whatever we say, or however we express our selves, our Words must be interpreted to a Sense and Sound clear contrary, and contradictory to what they Literally carry?
One Instance more shall conclude this Subject. The Defence, p. 76. tells us: That one Error embraced by the Remonstrants was (The same which his Brother has in his Rebuke) that to Dye for Sinners, must not be understood, as if Christ died loco, aut vice ipsorum, in their place and stead, sed bono tantum; but only for their good. Now I challenge this false Accuser to produce the Place, where I ever denied that Christ died loco nostro, vice nostra; or whereever, I affirmed that Christ dyed only for our good; I did indeed say, it was impossible that Christ should dye for more than our Good: That is, that there was nothing beyond this, nothing more than this upon the Heart of Christ, than the Benefit of those he dyed for; even when he offered himself, a Sacrifice to Divine Iustice, when he made his Soul an offering for Sin, when he was wounded for our Transgressions, when he bore the Iniquities of us all in his own body on the Tree, yet all this Terminated ultimately in our good; He was wounded for our Transgressions, that by his stripes we might be healed; and beyond these spiritual and eternal Benefits, our Faith cannot believe, our Hope cannot expect.
I will yet add one more: The Rebuke, had owned a change of Christ's Person for us, that is, in our place and stead; and to make sure work, that no false gloss might be put upon it: It was explained from the Bishop of Worcester, who calls it a Substitution of one Person (Christ's) in the room of anothers (Ours.) Now how wretchedly and falsly does this Author represent this, p. 35. As the Phrase of a change of Persons between Christ and us, is intirely denied. (There's one Rapper! It was never intirely denied in the Rebuke) so, A new Phrase is invented and put into its place, of a change of Christ's Person: That's another loud Rapper, for the exchange of Christ's Person in suffering for us, is no new invented Phrase, but the Invention of the Holy Ghost, who assures us, that Christ gave himself a Ransom for us, Math. 20. 28. But then he adds a third, Interpreting this change of Person into a Socinian Sense: As if all we allowed was, that the change was in Christ's Person from Ease to Pain, whereas what we asserted was a change of Christs Person for us, in our stead.
§. 4. 'Tis a little pretty Device, and he makes much use of it: To Vest himself, and his Friends, with the splendid Titles of the Godly Learned: And then to be sure all that oppose their Sentiments, must be Ungodly Block-heads. Thus when the Pope had arrogated to himself the Title of Infallible, he has in that one word determin'd all Controversies, for what can be reputed Orthodox which is Condemned by the Infallible Chair? The same use the Romanists have made of the Word Church: So that whoever detains their pretended rights is a Church-robber, and guilty of Sacrilege. These Terms our Author has engrossed to himself and party, p. 12. Def. These are the Phrases pitcht upon by the Godly Learned; p. 17. This is Matter of grief to the Godly Learned among us; p. 48. It has been the Practice of some to reject the use of such Phrases as have been pitcht upon by the Godly Learned: It would be a great kindness to inform us, who these Godly Learned Persons are? How we may meet with them? Where we may speak with 'em? For those Reverend Divines who Composed the Articles of the Church of England; those who Compiled the Confessions of Faith at Westminster, and at the Savoy have been reputed by us, to be Godly and Learned too, but not one of these is to be spoken with; and which is worse, none of these did ever pitch upon these, or any of these controverted Phrases; but did conceive according to the Light of the Age, that they had fully and clearly explicated the Doctrines of Satisfaction and Iustification, without these Pen-andInk-horn-Terms; but our Author having monopolized Learning and Godliness to his own Party, runs away with the Question, and they that boggle shall be censured for Prophane and Illiterate Coxcombs; and thus has he dealt with his Rebuker.
§. 5. 'Tis an useful Piece of Art, which yet needs some Application of Mind to discern it: That he secretly yields the Thing in Question, and then proclaims himself Victorious and Triumphs in his Victory: Thus when he has made a hugeous Bluster to justifie his Phrases; yet he melts them down at last into that Expression of Christ's Suffering in our place and stead. And this we call stealing of a Fall.
P. 80. Defence, he speaks thus: Is it not enough that I have shewed that the controverted Phrases are included in the acknowledgment of Christ's making a proper satisfaction to God's Iustice for us? Is it not enough? No indeed, Sir, is it not! For the Controversie was about the Phrase; whether that was proper, adequate to the things pretended to be signified by 'em; but your Solution speaks to the thing, about which we have no Controversie, but do zealously contend for; tho we dare not with equal Zeal contend for a Phrase that was never delivered to the Saints, nor they obliged to contend for it: But if it be enough for you to own the Doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction, without proving the Phrase, it must be enough for us to own the Doctrine, tho we should reject the Phrase.
But again, ibid. All these Phrases are virtually owned in sundry Confessions and Synods, which have openly owned the Phrase of Christ's Suffering in our stead. Why then does he quarrel? For if the owning the Confessions, be a virtual owning of these Phrases, we who have openly owned these Confessions, have virtually owned the Phrases; and why may not we be Orthodox upon as easie and cheap Terms as himself?
But yet the Truth is; this Phrase, A Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners, is not in my Judgment so much as virtually included in the Phrase of Christ's dying in our stead. That which is larger, cannot be included in that which is narrower; but this phrase, A Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners, is larger, wider by one half, if I have admeasured right, than that of Christ's dying in our stead, as I have already made it appear: Therefore if we could persuade this Gentleman to wave his fine Phrase; and adhere to, and be content with that other which he says virtually includes it, we should soon adjust all Controversies, by resting in the Confessions and Synods; but that would utterly spoil the gainful Trade of Doubtful Disputations.
§. 6. It seems 'tis a necessary, tho' I humbly conceive an Impious Artisice, to Depreciate the Sacred Scriptures, that he may magnifie his Phrases of Humane Invention: And if the Word of God be a perfect Rule of Faith and Obedience, (as Protestants have ever hitherto maintained) we cannot allow the Imposing upon our Faith any New Phrases, which carry not a sense evidently supported by the Word of God.
But our Author tells us, P. 59. Defence, That the most pestilent Doctrines have been oftentimes communicated in the Language of the Scripture: I must declare my abhorrence and detestation of the Position, as Scandalous and Blasphemous; and will maintain the contrary: That the Language of the Scripture never communicated one pestilent Doctrine. Hereticks may force, impose, obtrude an Heretical Gloss, Interpretation upon Scripture Language, but the Language is still sound, Orthodox and pure: And he quotes St. Hierome, Think not the Gospel to be in the Words of the Scripture; but in the sense. Well: The Gospel lies not in the Words of Scripture; then farewell the Sacred Canon! I did always believe, that foreign, 2 Tim. 3. 16. That the foreign, the Writing was Divinely inspired; and to what purpose do we inquire for a Divine Sense of Words that are not so? This Principle would cut up all Revealed Religion by the Roots, at one Blow. 'Tis this Principle the Iesuits have proceeded upon, when they blaspheme the Holy Scriptures, as a Nose of Wax, a Leaden-Dagger, a pair of Seamens-Hose; from this Principle have risen those audacious Attempts to fetch new Senses from the transposing of Letters, Words, Sentences, of which Meibomius has given some desperate Specimens.
But he goes on higher still, p. 60. and labours to prove his Error from Biddle's Scripture Catechism: For there he has (says he) delivered in Scripture Words very gross Errors. But this is a gross mistake; for Biddle does not deliver his gross Errors in Scripture Words, but applies the wrong Scriptures to his own captious Questions. Dr. Owen observes accurately upon this very point: Biddle's Errors, his Body of Religion, lies not in the Answers; (which are the Words of Scripture) but in the Interpretations and Conclusions couched in the Questions: And it's most evident, that in all the Heretical Catechism, had he applied the proper and pertinent Texts of Scripture to the Question, the Scripture would have delivered it self from the Heresie insinuated in the Question. See Dr. Owen Pref. to Brid. p. 11. 41.
At these horrid Rates must the Holy Word of God be reproached, that he may advance his darling Phrases into the Throne: And they say, 'tis the Custom in some Countries, That a Virgin must never be executed for any Crime, till the Hangman has defloured her.
I add yet further, If the Word of God be not so secure, but that Men of corrupt Minds, Reprobate concerning the Truth, may vitiate it with Heretical Glosses, what security can we expect, that Phrases of Humane Invention should escape better? And we have seen already a deplorable Instance in this Phrase, A Commutation of Persons, &c. from whence such erroneous Inferences have been drawn.
§. 7. The last I shall mention is, That he has wholly altered the state of the Question and Controversie; for whereas all that I opposed, was some odd Phrases of dark and dubious Meaning, and as the Words seem to sound of dangerous Design and Tendency. Keeping my self still Religiously to the Good old Doctrine of the Gospel, proposed in the Holy Scriptures, in the publick Confessions of the Protestant Churches, even all we can meet withal in the Harmony, or Body of the Confessions; and further, I do not know that I am obliged or allowed to go. This Gentleman makes a heavy noise about the Doctrines we all own, waving the Controverted Phrases: Thus fighting with his own shadow he is secure of the Victory, and running alone, is sure to win the Prize.
Sir, I cannot forbear to give you a further taste of the excellent Temper and Moderation of Dr. I. Owen, Diatrib. de Iustit. Divin. cap. 16. Summam rei quod attinet, nos sententiae Piscatoris, suffragamur, sed quoniam nullius, in verba jurare Discipulis Christi fas est: Omnium Phrasium, Argumentorum, Rationum, quibus in sententiae istius Defensione utitur Piscator, patrocinium suscipere Obligatos, nos esse minime Arbitramur? As to the Main of the Cause, I agree with Piscator's Judgment; but because 'tis not lawful for the Disciples of Christ to swear implicitly to any Man's Words, I do not judge my self obliged to justifie all the Phrases, Arguments and Reasons, which Piscator makes use of in the Defence of his Opinion.
Sir, I can safely trust you to apply this Passage to the Case in Hand; and only shall desire you to admire the Defender's singular skill, that can draw Water, and strike Fire out of the same Flint, and can find Draining-work for his Engine upon Salisbury-Plain: Tho I must aver it, That none do more Disservice to the Truth, than by adding Humane Inventions to Divine Revelations; and where the Golden-Chain of Salvation ends, to Eke it out with a Thumb-Rope of Sand. Thus much in haste, from
Sir, Yours, &c.