Sure Footing in Christianity, Conclusion
COROLLARIES FROM THE Former Discourses. EXAMINED.
WE should have thought it the more Natural Method to have drawn Corollaries, after the next proof by consent of Authority had been joined; but we will not take upon us to give Law to him for his Order in writing, as he is pleased to do unto any others in answering: Yet we will follow him in his own Track. Only before we enter upon the Examination of his Corollaries we shall lay down some Precognitions n…edful to prepare Readers.
1. That every true Corollarie must be a natural Inference from some premised Principle Evident, drawing thence neither more, nor less, than what is necessarily imported therein.
2. That whatever the Author have asserted of the ind…ficiency of Oral-Tradition in general, his work undertaken is only to make good the actual indefectiveness or indefectibility, not of Christian Faith, as truly such, but of the Romish faith meerly, as stated by his Trent-Fathers, to be so descended from Christ and his Apostles unto this day. What he inferrs then must be from this only.
3. That the Discourser in all his precedent passages, hath not made good the actual Indeficiency of his Romish Tradition from the Apostles in any one point of Popery, much less in the whole Mass of Popish Religion. Let the Reader observe and judge.
4. That all his Corollaries must be drawn from this Hypothesis, That Popish Tradition is indefective or indefectible in its descent from the Apostles unto this present Age. Which being most eminently false, (whereof modest understanding Papists are ash…med) all his Corollaries must appear to be meer cheats or fallacies, or nothing. And indeed considering this, together with the unreasonableness of some, and coincidencies of many of his Corollaries; a man hath reason enough to fix his foot and go no further, in confuting that which falleth of it self. But then he will vapour that he is not fully answered; we shall therefore attempt shortly a Cursory over them, a little to scan them, and shew their faults.
His multiplying Corollaries to so many and such an odd number as 41, may carry some unlucky Omen, that they will never fall even with the Truth.
1. He inferrs thus. None can pretend to Cor. 1 Faith, (by the ordinary course of Gods Providence) but the holders to Tradition. This he saith must follow, because Tradition is the Rule of Faith.
Whereunto thus we say.
1. If we take Faith and Tradition syngeneously, both for saving and Apostolical, we grant the Proposition for a Truth, but not for a Corollarie from his Discourse.
2. If Faith and Tradition be understood as terms of the same kind both Popish, than the inference may be good thus farr; That none can pretend to Popish Faith, but Holders unto Popish Tradition; and that under a severe Providence, not approving but punishing such tenacious sinners.
3. If Faith be understood to be Apostolical and Tradition Romish or Apostolical; We deny the Proposition as false and the Corollarie as wholly inconsequent from his Discourse. Men may be true Beleevers in Christ who hate Romish Tradition, nay men must renounce it, if they embrace true Faith indeed.
2. He collects. None can with Right Cor. 2 pretend to be a Church, but the Followers of Tradition: because none can have Faith without it.
3. None can be of the Church, or any Cor. 3 Church, but the followers of Tradition. For they must have true Faith, and that only by Tradition.
VVe joyn these together, for they fall in compactly as the whole, and the parts which constitute the whole, of whom the same reason is given: For th…t which constitutes the parts of a Church, constitutes the whole, and that which destroyeth, one must null the other; VVe shall therefore answer to both in one, with which also the 11th. is coincident.
1. Understanding here the Church to be truly Christs, and Tradition truly Apostolical, we grant both Inferences to be true: none can be the true Church of Christ, in whole or part, who follow not the Apostles Tr… dition as in Scripture is fully given to us.
2. Taking Church and Tradition as Popish both. None can be that Church or of it, but the followers of Popish Tradition.
3. Yet looking here on Tradition as Popish, and the Church as truly Christs, we deny both propositions, as false in themselves and no way consequent from his discourses, they being all fallacious, and the indefectiveness of his Tradition no way prooved: Nay such as are followers of Romish Tradition, cannot be of the true Church.
4. VVe cannot but wonder at that distinction of the Discours…r, of the Church, or any Church: The Church we suppose to be his Own, that is Popish; out of which his Fathers have held that there is no salvation; and he seems not to contradict them in it, though he doth in other things. And how he should allow any other Church to be, of which no man can be a member, who followeth not his Popish Tradition, is one of the wonders, wherewith Satan hath deluded the world. For men may have true Faith who follow not his Tradition, as the means of it; nay this faith they could never have by following it. But probably he may suppose that all men must be of his Church or of none: Yet he may know that they are of a better, who beleeve in Christ according to the Scripture.
4. He gathers, Those who renounce Tradition Cor. 4 or immediate delivery, are ipso facto cut off from the root of Faith, and cease to be truly called Faithful.
5. That company of men, who follow such Cor. 5 Ancestors as formerly renounc'd Tradition, or immediate delivery, are no less cut off from the root of Faith.
6. They who follow such Ancestors as formerly Cor. 6 had manifestly renounc'd Tradition (how numerous soever) can never claim to be a part of Christian Tradition, or deliverers of Faith.
Thes… three we joyn together, as being only gradually distinct: And indeed really they d…ffer not from those precedent; for what difference is there between not following Tradition, and Renouncing it? or between not having Faith, or not being of the Church, and being cut off from the root of Faith, and not being deliverers of Faith? Yet thus the Discourser liketh to lengthen, though not to strengthen his matter. In short we return.
1. His ground-work is not made good, but faileth; therefore his building must fall, whatever he superstructs.
2. If Tradition or immediate delivery of Christs Doctrine were here intended, we should grant the Propositions; but not as Corollaries from his premises: Men are cut off from Faith renouncing that Tradition.
3. That Tradition of Christs Doctrine in truth whether Scriptural or Oral, should be the Root of Faith, is an unsavory expression; for Christs spirit only is the root of sound Faith, Tradition is but an external means unto it: But being means of Popish Tradition, it is a rotten and false conceit of its Author.
4. The renouncing of Popish Tradition, either by Ancestors or Followers, is so far from cutting off from the Root of Faith, or disembling a claim to true Faith, or to be deliverers of it; that it roots souls deeper in Christ: And had they not renounc'd it, they would be separate from Christ by cleaving to it. As to his presumptuous suggest…ons of the Indeficiency or uninterruptedness of his foolish Tradition from the Apostles, it is ludicrous and contemptible being not in the least measure proved by him. The saying of Vi…centius …rinensis, Id t…amus quod u…ique, quod s… per, quod ab om…ibus cre…um est Vin Lit.together w…th the …e…t of Ʋniv…sality, Antiquity, and Consent, w… gr…t with…n the ve…ge of the Church …posta…c…l adhering to their Tradi ion: But not to that Apostolical of Rom… w…o so…ge in their Traditi…n instead o… Christs.
7. They who pretend themselves Reformers Cor. 7 in faith, (he concludes) do ipso facto manifest themselves cut off from the Root of Faith and the Church. For the Doctr ne of Faith is indivisible, &c.
By Reformers h re we take for granted, he means Protestants, but he both bely them, For they were no Reformers …f or in Christs Faith delivered by the Apostles, nor ever pretended to be s…h, but only …o be Restorers of it, when it was almost lost in the Romish Sea of Errors, …nd to b… Reformers of their Eno…mi…ies in Doctrine, w…p, and discipline: Neither forth …re they …n …ny m…r… danger of being … ff from the R… of Faith, or the Church of God, th… Elijah, Hezekiah, and Josiah for th… Reform ti…ns n their respecti…e times: but this …th been an old slur cast upon them by his Jesuitical Forefathers to be Reformers of the true Faith which they detested —But to this Corollarie as thus laid, we do more distinctly answer.
1. His indefectible Tradition was not proved, therefore this cannot follow.
2. We have laid it a groundwork from the beginning that Faith with the Rule of Faith stand in Indivisibili; It is simple, therefore Indivisible, not consisting with addition or detraction; therefore this cannot be reformed. But Romish Faith and Tradition its Rule, are mixt and compounded things, and therefore are not Indivisible, nor consistent with the simple faith of the Gospel. It is reasonable enough then to reform them, which if the obstinate holders thereunto will not suffer, God knoweth how to consume them with the spirit of his mouth.
3. The Popish Apostasie did interrupt the descent of Christs simple Doctrine in their line, which yet was continued in all those Ages by those witnesses whom they slew, and destroyed for testifying against their Apostasie. So the Protestants did suppose an Interruption Papal, and are blameless. This then is no true Corollarie; neither doth it hurt us.
Cor. 8 8. He induceth, That body of men who adhere to Tradition, can evidence clearly and plainly, who are truely Faithful, who not.
Cor. 9 9. None else can give any certain account, who are to be held truly Faithful, and of the Church, who not.
These two are the same, only the one affirms something and the other denieth …t; opposite, but it will serve to make the number 41.
1. To these we say, they fall of themselves also, for their ground faileth.
2. Romish Tradition being a falshood, the whole body which adhereth to it, cannot know who are Faithful; no more then crooked can measure or demonstrate strait; but who are unfaithful and erroneous they may know, as Adam knew evil by experience.
3. His supposition hereupon is foolish, with his Inference. If Church-Government be instituted by our Saviour, and so a Point of Faith, and so descend…d to them by the Rule of Faith, they can only tell who are of the Church, who not. This we say is fatuous; For whatever Government Christ did ins…itute, it was not Papal; that Tyrannical usurpation which can own no Father but Satan. These then will be s…re to judge none to be of the Church of Christ, who are not of theirs. Herein the Discourser begins to d scover himself what matters of Traditi…n he meaneth to descend uninterruptedly from the Apostles. As well may he tell us that figs grow on Thistles.
4. Scripture Tradition only preached and declared purely, is that Touchstone which discriminates between true Faith and false, and true Church and malignant: We shall retort then one of his Corollaries or both, implicitely. The adherers to pure Scripture-Tradition only, and none else can discern, and give a certain account who are faithful to Christ, who; not and who are of his true Church, who not: Yet these are none of those who content themselves to talk a few fine pious words of God and Christ, but love him in sincerity.
Cor. 10 10. He collects further. None can rationally punish the Revolters from their Faith-but that Body which adheres unto Tradition.
It was likely he would skip from his Church-Government, to its tyrannical exercise of punishment against Revolters from it, but let him know.
1. This followeth not from the unproved Indeficiency of his Tradition.
2. Scr…pture sett ng …si…e his Tradition, is a full light to conv…nce Trangressors in the Church, and giveth sull Authority unto it, to chastise by due Censures unto Ed…fication but not to destruction, as the Papal usurped Power hath usually done, and for which God will account.
3. In his c me off it may justly be suspected, there is dissembling, that he professeth to judge only what is fit to be done on a Church and not on a State-account; He is not ignorant how much his Church medleth with State-matters. But let it pass: His Corollarie is but a Bulrush. And therefore we conclude, the Pop sh Body hath no power from Christ for punishing Revolters from their Tradition; f…r that it self, is Apost…sie from the Truth of Chri…t. Their Bulls and Excommunications w…th other Engines of Persecut…on are but the Devils Thunderbolts.
11. He adds, No c…mpany of men hang Cor. 11 together like a body of a Christian Commonwealth, …or Church but that which adheres to Tradition: viz Pop sh. This h… bangs also upon h…s Tradition, with many vain words.
To this. 1. What this differs from the 2d. Corollarie in sense we see not, where none are said to be a Church, but followers of his Tradition: Here it is sai… none can be a Church, who adhere no… to …t The answer is sufficient there: Yet because he insists further, we shall follow him.
2. This Corollary must be nought; for the Principle whence it springs is nothing.
3. Romish Tra…iti…n is no mark of the rrue Church, but of the false, being it self estranged from Chr…st.
4. The claim which the Church of Rome maketh upon this rotten and defective Tradition to be the Church Ʋniversal, is most irrational and Arrogant: So that to charge it on her as Antichristian Vsurpation, is no empty noise, but an unanswerable Crime: And seeing, that upon this Tradition only she proceeds and by it consists, let her perish with it. We know an Everlasting Scripture …ck of Truth upon which Christians true Church is built, against which the gates of Hell cannot prevail, whatever this D scourser doth vainly clamour against it.
Cor. 12 12. He inferrs. There is no arguing against Tradition out of Scripture: For Tradition only can make it certain.
The irrat…onality of this must be evident to every serious considerer thus.
1. The want of proof for the Indefectibility of his Tradition which is palpable, and therefore he doth but begg this as he doth in all the rest foregoing and fol…owing, which boon if his Adversaries would grant him, he would doubtless carry the world before him, and he might conclude the Devil is white by it. But they see better than to gratifie such an Impudent beggar.
2. The Doctr…ne whi…h the Apostles delivered from Christ, was the same, both as written, and preached; If any therefore by Oral-Tradition teach otherwise, that Tradition may be and must be lawfully, not only argued against, but confuted out of Scripture, wh ch is the standing Register of that Doct…ine: Of which we have certainty without Romes T…adition.
2. By the confession of the Trent-Fathers these Scriptures which we maintain are the word of God; Therefore all Traditions, which carry deform…ty to them, are to be not only convinced but judged by them. Who shall judge among men if God by his own word shall not judge? Let the Discourser take up second thoughts, and he may see his absurdities concluded to be not only against Gods Scriptures, but his own Trent-confessed Principles. Scripture is Gods word, therefore it must over-power in judgment Romish Tradition, which is not.
13. He collects, None can in reason Cor. 13 oppose the Authority of the Church or any Church against Trad tion: suppose Popish. For Tradition makes the Church, and that cannot prevail against its Maker. This being the same as to th…nk to establish the house by over-throwing the foundation.
What means the Discourser again to mention,, The Church, or any Church? Doth he indeed know that there is another Church besides that of Rome? because he is so wary to exclude the urging of their Authority against his Tradition: Th…s is somewhat suspicious, that he dares not deny a Scripture-Church, which will be too hard for his Traditionary Body, as the Ark was for Dagon; if their Authority of reasoning were allowed. But to the Consectary it self.
1. It is vain and invalid being built upon a begg'd principle as the rest.
2. Although Romish Tradition make the Church of Rome, and again that Church make Tradition; yet her Authority may as justly in reason be urged against Tradition, as its Authority against her; for they are according to this D scou…ser mutual efficients of each other. And there cannot be Oral-Tradition, before Men to give it, and that in a Church.
3. Any Church indefinitely includes the Church Apostolical in their time, and we hope the Authority of that Church may in reason be opposed against Romish Tradition, for …t was none of the l v…ng Voice of that Church, Essentia ly taken; however its descent is pretended from it.
4. However …o oppose the Authority of the Romish church against its own Tradition, m… prove such kind of work as to establish the House by overthrowing the foundation. Yet to oppose the power of the Church Apostolical against that false Tradition, is to overthrow …hat Apostolical house with its foundation together, which it will do in Gods appointed time.
Cor. 14 14 He gathers, None can in reason oppose the Authority of Fathers and Councils ag…inst Tradition. For these are Representatives o… the Church spoken of before, therefore Tradition makes them also.
15. He adds. No Disacknowledgers of Cor. 15 Tradition are in due of reasod, but in courtesie only to be all …ed to argue ou… of Scriptures Letter, Father or Council. For none of these have certainty wanting T…adition, &c.
1. We may perceive how this Dis…ourser multiplyeth his Corollaries gratis: for the 12th 13. & 14 h. are taken up in the 15th. Therefore they deserve little or no answer more; but what may shew we note them.
2. These fall as the first, having no foundation, but a denied proposition, never made good, or to be proved by him.
3: The certainty of Scrip…ures truth a…d sound Testimonies of Fathers and Councils which are such indeed, is known sufficiently without Romes Tradition. That makes it not, therefore may it in just reason be urged against it.
4. His Climax turn'd Retrograde, makes a pretty circle. Fathers and Councils are of the Church, the Church …s …f the F… thful, the Faithful are of Faith, Faith is of the Rule of Faith, and this Rule is …f Tradition; This is somewhat strange, for he asserts Trad tion to be the Rule of Faith it self; how then c…n the Rule be of Tradition? So again, somet…mes Tradition is of Faith, this of faithful, these of the Church, this of Fathers &c. How doth this man confound himself, and the Readers in such a circular walk? If h…s head be not giddy, it may be quickly by running in th…s round.
5. We deny that to be any Courtesie from Rome, which is a …uty injoyned on us by God, and that is to impugn and thrown d…wn the Traditions of men by asserting the written Truths, and Precepts of God: which our Lord Jesus hath done before, and given us boldness to do it without leave from men.
6. His avouching Tertullian was vain, unless he first make good, that he meant the same Church, and the same Hereticks, which the Discourser doth, which he will not do, and therefore it is but a bubble.
7. It savours of Luciferian pride for him as an Advocate of his Controvertists to tell us, they don't allow us our method of arguing from Scripture against them, unless interpreted by the language and practice of their Church, whose glosses are the most intolerable Abuses of Scripture, as ever were inven…ed: which is made good against them in some of the mainest points of Faith, as they are managed by their Rhemists. Neither is it less folly in him to reiterate his scoffs against hammering out the sense of Scripture by Criticisms, and such pretty knacks of learning; which is all wordish-stuffe with him. He hath been answered already, and we shall say no more; But it is such learning as angers the Disputer (it seems) for it sheweth the unsavory madness of their Popish glosses.
8. It is bravely said, when they are charged to desert Scripture, to tell us, The unreasonableness of the Calumny, is to be made appear, which is quicklier done, and not our expectation to be satisfied. We are not out-braved by this, but reply; This is no Calumny to say Popish Controvertists desert the Scripture as the Rule and Ground of their Faith, and maintain Tradition only to be it, as the Author doth in his Discourses. Yet we see they are ashamed to own the deserting of Scripture, in that they do count it a Calumny to be charged with it; Yet seeing it is so easie to be made appear to be a Calumny, and quickly done, It is strange that the Discourser should not take a little pains to w…pe it off; for if this were indeed done, our expectations would not be so unreasonable, but that they might be satisfied: But let it alone, seeing it cannot be done by him or any of them, we will expect no longer.
16. He proceeds. No Authority from Cor. 16 any History, or Testimonial writing, is valid against the force of Tradition. For these writings are subject unto falshood, neither can the true be known from Fables, but by the Heart-Tradition from Father unto Son, &c. Therefore some living Testimony, &c.
17. He collects No Tradition is alledg'd or alledgable in reason, against Christian Religion.
1. That it is not alledg'd he proves from matter of Fact.
2. That it is not alledgable by Protestants, because their Fore-fathers were Papists 100 years ago. &c.
These two may well be joyned, for the former forbids History to oppose his Popish Tradition, because it self is strengthened by Tradition natural from Father to Son; and the latter forbics that Tradition to be urged against his Christian Tradition, that is Romish: so they seem to be dependent. And so we shall reply unto them, and the Confirmations of them.
1. They both fall with the rest upon the account of the sinking of their Foundation, the indefectiveness of Popish Tradition from Christ.
2. The Tradition by which History is certified, is Natural from Father to Son; who ha…e given down such Books to be of such Authors from Age to Age, and not Romish miscalled by him Christian. And why may not that have force against Popish Tradition; which delivers known untruths, see…ng it depends not thereupon, and may give down more Truth concerning H…story, than that doth of truly Christian Doctrine?
3. It is frivolous to tell us, that falshood is as easily conveied by writing as Truth, no less is it by living and Oral-Tradition.
4. If no Authority from any History can be valid, then not that of the Ev…ngelists, for he excepts none. And what a vain speech is this, that those first Publishers of Christs doctrine from whom he pr…tends an indefective descent, shall be made invalid against his Tradition, when from their writings it shall be conv nced to be falshood?
5. It is evident there is as great a liv…ng Testimony concerning History, as any for Popish Tradition and gre…ter also, wherein the Discourser may have an equal match, and competent to be alledg'd against it.
6. If he think to help himself by his next Consect…ry, that no Tradition is alledgeable against Christian; We should grant it concerning the true and infallible Tradition of Christs own doctrine by h s Apostles, and their sincere Followers, for this excells all Tradition in weight, though not in number: But since it is clear th…t he intends thereby P…pish Tradition only, we deny it and assert natural Tradition of History doth out-number them; and true Christ…n Tradition of Gods saving Truth doth outweigh them; and therefore may justly be alledged ag…inst them.
7. His suggestion is false that the Protestants alledge no Tradition against them: for they know they h…ve alledged Tradition bo…h Scriptural and Oral, given from saithful witnesses slain by them in several Ages for their testimony unto Jesus against their lies and corruption of the Gospel-Truth. As to what he urgeth of Dr. Whittaker and Mr. Powel, That the time of the Romish Churches change, cannot easily be told: He should have cited the places, but in short this we do say: The whole business of Popery was carried on in a Mistery sutable to its Title the Mysterie of Iniquity. And Rome was not built in a day: But the gradual Apostasie to several false doctrins of Transubstantiation, and Image worship, &c. is d…scernable enough in several centur es. And the Trent-Convention of Anath…matizers of them, who kept to the full and sincere faith of the Gospel, may be truly judged to give the perfect System of their abominable untruths gather…d form the former Ages of that Apostasie. His Tradition then is not so impregnable. Suppose it be not very easie to discover the secret Methods of Satan for above 1600 years past, inventing and hammering the Mysterie of Iniquity to bring it to this Body in the Papal Head and Body. If we now see it plainly, that P…pish Tradition hath compleated this Mysterie of Iniquity, and set it up against the Mysterie of Godliness, even God manifested in the Flesh, that only Mediator between God and man, and forging other Daemon-Mediators to intercede with God for sinners, Is there not just cause to urge this against all Popish Tradition, which falsifieth the same? Let Readers judge.
8. As to his plea against any alledgableness of Tradition by Protestants now aga…nst this, because their Fore-fathers little more than 100 years since were Roman Catholicks.
1. We say, all our Fore-fathers were not such then, and before that time; for there were many persecuted by his Fore-fathers to death for testifying against Romish Tradition.
2. We take not our faith from our Fore-fathers, but from Christs own Tradition of his Fathers will unto Salvation, however we acknowledge them Instruments of making known, that to be the Gospel of Christ, and bless God for them.
3. Fathers have been Apostates from Gods truth in the Church of the Jews, and yet their Children have been reclaimed by their Pastors: So it may be in the Christian Church, and hath been without endangering the loss of true Religion by Tradition; for thereby they might have walkt in errors still.
4. As for having recourse to the Greek Church; we bless God for any truth continued with them, and pity any mistakes among them: Neither shall we disdain to call them Fathers for any truth of Christ, we have learned from them, though they be not our natural Parents. Natural Fathers do not beget us spiritual, as Christians indeed must be. God useth other Instruments most times for Regeneration; as the Apostle owneth the Relation of Father to the Corinths upon that Account. This therefore profits not the Discoursers Tradition, nor hurts ours. We have one God and Father in Heaven of whom are all things, and we to him; and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things, and we by him, whose Truth delivered in the Scripture, we still maintain as the Rule and Ground of our faith, and alledge in his name against all Popish Tradition obtruded on us by this Discourser, and his Compeers. These Corrolaries then we throw out among the rest.
Cor. 18 18. His Consectary is. No solid Argument from Reason or Intrinsecal Principles; is producible …gainst Christian, that is, Popish …radition. For, this is built on the best n…ture, that is mans, &c. He addeth; No possibi…ity of arguing with any show of …eason, & Cor. …3.
Cor. 19 19. H… annexeth. …he arguing by way of some few Instances (as the manner is,) can have no force against Tr…ditions Certainty, and Ind…fectiveness. This he seeks to strengthen …rom contingency in some particulars▪ which makes not a general failing of Tradit…on: This he amplifies with many n…ed…ess words.
These with the 23d Corollarie we shall consider together: In the 18th. he denieth all solid arguing from Reason against his Tradition. In the 23th. All possibility of arguing with any sh…w of reason against it. In the 19th. He denie…h as borderi…g upon Reason, the arguing against his Traditions Indefectiveness by way of some few instances of Traditions failing. Unto these we shall shortly return.
1. The Discourser might have saved himself and Readers much …abour if he had drawn all from the 12th. hitherto into one Corollary, viz. Supposing his Trad…tion cert…in and indefectible, that there is no Argument from any Medium, Scripture, Church, History, Reason, &c. against it.
2. But his Tradition Popish is not certainly descended from Christ, nor indefective; therefore all his Consectaries are vain and foolish.
3. However against Christs own Tradition, (It being infallible, and the highest Reason) there is no arguing with any shew, much less solidity of reason; yet against this Romish Tradition carrying in it many irrational things, there is the greatest reason to be urged against it: the edge of which the Discourser cannot endure, when it shall evince the whole fabrick of Romish Religion irrational, by the light of nature, as well as Scripture.
4. His pretended best nature of man, upon which he builds his Tradition, his sensations, causes of preserving it, and his most powerful assistances, have been already proved corrupt, vain, deceitful and mistaken. These therefore cannot stand against the force of solid Reason.
5. Suppose humane nature were so good, as to prove a sutable Basis for a Rule of Faith (which none can be but God himself) Is all humane nature laid as the foundation of Popish Trad…tion? Surely then all must be Romish-Catholicks from Adam: Or, if not, there is reason enough from men to confute his Romish Tradition. If he say Papists are men; let them be so: Yet all Humanity is not inclosed in them, upon which he fondly builds his Tradition.
6. Is there not an Intrinsecal Principle in the soul of man,Acts 17. which is a reasonable and eternal spirit, teaching him, that the God who made it, is a spirit, not dwelling in shrines or houses made with hands but in a spiritual house compacted of living stones; and that such a God must be worshipped in spirit and Truth? And shall not this Reason evince that such Tradition is v…in, false, and to be loathed, that shall pretend from Christ that God is to be worshipped by Images, and with such apish gewgaies, foolish gestures, postures, mumblings, and histrionical carriages as the Papists do use, and their Priests seducing them? His reason must be blinded who seeth it not.
7. In reference to the 19th. Cor. Is not this a Truth upheld by the clearest Reason that the failing of any one integral part destroyeth the Integrity of the whole; and so makes it defective? Is not reason to be heard when it saith, that man is not whole or intire, but defective who wanteth a leg or Arm, &c? And is it not as rationally argued, That Tradition of Rome is not intire or perfect, or intirely descended from Christ, but defective, the particulars whereof are supposed by the Discourser himself to fall short of him? Contingency in this case pretended w…ll no more prove Popish Tradition intire or Indefective; than that a man is intire because by chance he lost some of his members. But not to stick at this, Take we Popish Tradition in the bulk of it,Chem. Exam. Concil. Trid. as meerly such, and contradistinct to Christian-Tradition of the Trinity or Incarnation, &c. (which yet the Doctors of Rome do not soundly hold, though they say the same Creed with us) it is no hard task to make a full induction of all particulars therein failing, and so the Defectiveness of his whole Tradition from Christ, but this is no work for this place. As to his suggestions of presumed mistakes, interest of parties, &c. to strengthen his Contingency, they are vain, and false, and fall with it. And lastly, to his magisterial Rule teaching solid men in answering his Traditions demonstrableness to shew the Incoherence of the Terms (we suppose Tradition and Indefective) it is returned, there is an utter inconsistency between Popish Tradition, and Indefectiveness of descent from Christ; for it is abominable to him and never came from him or his Apostles: therefore the Incoherence, and more may appear to them who will see and consider.
8. To the 23. which we consider in this place, becau e it is either coincident with the 18th. or worse, that is, Non sense, we thus reply.
1. All his proofs are but his formerly begg'd principles and Corollaries, and he shrowds himself under the notions of Christian Tradition, and Catholick Church, while he is as far from it, as Antichristian from Christ; or East from West.
2. His so often boasting of living Testimony is a Chimaera, a witness from such as are dead while they are alive. There is a spirit of life indeed, and power from God in the Scripture, against which all his Traditionary Troops are not able to stand; and from hence are rais'd up still living w…tnesses, who have wounded his Traditionary Beast so much, that though his Limbs seem to st…rre and struggle a little, as if he were reviving, yet is he caught fast enough, as a wild Bull in a net, kept to be destroyed. Vain helpers are his discoursing Auxiliaries by their Tradition.
Cor. 20 20. He collects, That denying Tradition (viz. Popish) is a proper and necessary disposition unto Fanatickness. For it cannot be denied but by pretending some light within from the first Cause, &c.
Cor. 21 21. He concludes, Fanatick Principles can have no force against Tradition, though unconfutable but by it. For nothing can shew evident Principles contrary to it, but his Tradition, &c.
These two also, seeing both concern Fanaticks, may be well joyned in a reply together which we shall make concisely to them. Seeing in the one is pretended the Cause of that distemper of Fanaticism, even the denial of his Tradition, and in the other is prescribed the Cure, viz. the receiving of it.
1. The Discourser doubtless was resolved to have a fling at the Fanaticks, or else very little overture was given him to make those Corollaries, from his pretended Tradition; but when he hath done, it is to no purpose to build these upon a begg'd foundation, which is already taken from him; therefore can infer no such thing.
2. If denial of Popish Tradition do properly and necessarily make Fanaticks, then all must be Fanaticks who do deny it, that is, who are no Papists; for all Protestants do deny his Tradition, as well as other Christian Churches: Never heard we Fanaticks so handsomely characteriz'd and described before. This is enough to make men post to Popery, that they may shun the mark of a Fanatick, of which name some are more afraid, than to be called a Papist. His Holiness oweth him a good reward for this. Yet he adds a self contradiction, when he saith, men may be so long preserved from Fanatickness, as they follow Tradition either in his Church or some other Congregation: which must be divers then from his, and deny his Tradition: however they maintain That of the doctrine of Christ written and preached by the Apostles. He d…d suspect this would be urged as a better preservative; and so thought best to joyn it with his.
3. If Fanaticism be (as he defines it) a Pretence of some inward Light or knowledge extraordinarily infused by the first cause to attain Heavens Influences, without help of ordinary waies, as preaching his word, appointed by God himself: then there is no greater Fanaticism in the world than Popery, nor worse Fanaticks than some Papists have been, who by their extatical Postures, raptures and lying wonders, have drawn aside multitudes of simple souls to beleeve the Popish-Legend Traditions, with pretence of immediate light from heaven without ordinary means. The narrative of which is made clearly by some of their own. The reviving of this Tradition then is a more proper disp…sition to Fanaticism.
4. Let Fanatick Principles be what they will, or let them have as little force against Popish Tradition, as the Discourser can imagine; Let he and they try it out; It is none of our Interest to maintain them: we have one sword of the Spirit which is the word of God, by which we can sufficiently defend Gods saving truth and cut the throat of lying Tradition, and all other Satans methods of deceiving souls unto perdition by false pretended lights.
5. Lastly to lay aside this great Battle-Axe of Fanaticism, (it having not been worth the taking up at all in our business) we cannot but tell the Discourser, it is one of the greatest absurdities that hath fallen from the mouth of a man pretending to reason to say, Fanatick Principles are unconfutable but by Popish Tradition: Whereas a little before he had said, Men might be preserved from them by the sence of Christ declared in other Congregations, as well as by the Fathers in his Church: now if that means can give preservation from it, needs must the same give confutation to it. We shall say no more to it, being not worthy of any further confutation; we have light and strength enough through Grace to confute Fanatick Principles without his help. To try his strength yet, it were desirable, that all the Fanaticks were let loose upon him, to baite him with their Arguments, they might perhaps shake him and his Tradition to pieces, and make better sport than any Bear-baiting unto these Gentlemen, whose heels he labors to trip up by his Sure-footing.
22. He infers again, There is no arguing Cor. 22 against Tradition, that is Popish, without questioning the Constancy of every species in Nature, that is the certainty of whole nature. His proof is from his former presumptions on Mans nature denied and disproved; wherewith he notes, that all Arguments against him are only fetcht from Contingency to some few, which witty Reasoners would argue as possible to all, with a why not; And so oppose any constancy in the natural kinds, and destroy their own Arguments to boot.
What will not this man say, who so confidently over and over saith this which is so irrational? We have declared the sottishness of his comparing the fruit of his Tradition, with the propagation of natural kinds before, and his preferring that before th…s; and therefore need say no more to this but lay down the contrary to it, That arguing against Popish Tradition is rational and p…werful, without questioning the Constancy of every species in nature, which is the Certainty of whole Nature, and put him upon a better proof. Yet not to weary Readers with these many repetitions, in short we say further.
1. This must sall, because his Tradition with its Indefectiveness, whence he draweth it, is fallen before it: which is enough.
2. Yet suppose his Tradition were certain, How possibly can the denial of that bring into question the certainty of whole nature? It is such a monstrous inference, that may make young Sophisters start at it. What a vast difference hath been shewed between the state of natural causes and voluntary; and natural effects and voluntary, and natural contingencies and voluntary, that is, such as fall out in the ordinary course of nature, and such as depend much upon the will of man, though under an over-ruling Providence? And can there be any lawful arguing from voluntary, such as Tradition is to natural, such as all the kinds of Creatures in Nature are? This Gentleman hath set up a new Logick for his Popish Schools, which they may receive but we shall not: He that denieth any one to be an honest man, doth not therein deny him to be a man. Is this arguing à Fortiori? Let wise men judg.
3. To dispatch this, we shall give him but Note for Note. His note is, That it is a wild kind of roving, thus to argue from Contingency against his Tradition; Some particulars of Tradition have failed, therefore all may: Or: Some few, men can erre, therefore all can, whereupon he jeers them with a Why not. Our note unto him by retaliation is; (This Maxim granted,Humanum est errare. That it is a general accident unto all Men to erre) That which is competent to this and that man,Quod convenit tali qua tale, convenit omni tali. and the other man as men, is competent to all men; But, to erre is competent to this, and that, and the other man, &c. as men; Therefore, It is competent to all men. Is not this good Logick? Let the Discourser tell us: Why not: Surely, This is pitiful Logick, which the Man supposeth, Romish Traditi…n may fail, or be defective from Christ; therefore every species in nature, or whole nature may fail, and be uncerta…n. This is as good arguing, as from Chalk to Cheese. Let the Disputer reflect, and by a better consideration he may find that the Protestants in denying his Tradition do not destroy but confirm the Certainty of nature, and their own Arguments to boot.
23. His consectary is, There is no possibility of arguing at all against Tradition rightly understood, or the living voice of the Catholick Church with any shew of Reason.
We think we rightly understand his Traditio… to be Popish Tradition, and his Catholick Church to be Roman Catholick, to whose living voice, we have given answer under the 18th Corollarie; and here shall adde no more, only noting its order.
Cor. 24 24. This is made a Corollary. Tradition is the first Principle in way of Authority, as it ingageth for matter of Fact long ago past. For all is resolved into Tradition.
Cor. 25 25. This is another. Tradition in the matter of Tradition, (that is, in matter of Fact before our time) is self-Evident to all those who can need the knowledge of such things, that is to all Mankind who use common reason. This he saith is evident from the former.
Call ye these Corollaries, They are Coincident and the very same with his first proposition of his work undertaken, That Tradition is the Rule of Faith, which must be First; and with the first condition proposed of that Rule, which is Self-evidence? This seems to be strange work; yet shortly we return thus further.
1. Understanding matter of Fact here to be the actual delivering down of the Doctrine of Christ from the Apostles pretended to be Indefective to this Age, we deny the Proposition, as we have done before, Popish Tradition is no first Principle giving Authority to any matter of Fact in that kind, but using its power rather to undo it.
2. Tradition in this matter delivered by Romish witnesses is not self-evident to men who should use their Reason to know the things, which concern their salvation, as hath been declared already. Again if both these were rational Consectaries; they are false, because Tradition-Popish is defective. Let these go.
26. It followeth. The Certainty of Cor. 26 Tradition being established, the whole Body of the Faithful, (by which I mean Catholicks,) or the Church Essential, is by relying on it infallibly certain, that it is in possession of Christs true Doctrine. This he builds upon his former grounds.
27. It is inferred. Tradition once establisht, General Councils, and even Provincial Cor. 27 ones, nay particular Churches are infallible by proceeding upon it, This he laieth on the same ground.
28. Yet further. The Roman See with Cor. 28 its Head, are particularly Infallible by the same means. All this is given on the same account,
The Discourser might have saved himself with his Readers and answerers, much labour, and to as much purpose, if he had put 7 of his Corollaries into one, these three named and the four next following; for they all proceed from the same ground presumed, viz. The Certainty of his Tradition establisht; which being false and denied, all these must be false and fall with it. Yet to silence clamour, we shall shortly return to each of them.
1. Unto the 26th. tak…ng his meaning to be of Popish Tradition and his Church essential of Roman-Catholicks, we deny that the certainty of his Tradition pretended to be from Christ is establisht as Truth; therefore that his Church relying on it cannot be infallibly certain thereby that they are in a possession of Christs true Doctrine: But sure they may be, that by their Traditionary Leaders they are laid upon a foundation of lying vanities. Poor souls to be lamented and praied for, that their eies may be opened to see the way of escaping out of the snares of their destroying Guides.
2. To the 27th. The reason as he saith being the same, we reply, that his Tradition being not establisht, No Councils General, Provincial, nor particular Churches, can be Infallible by Proceeding on it: Nay they are all deceived and deceiving, who are guided by it; Here we may remind the Man of his circle, The Church and Councils &c. must by their Testimonies make sure Tradition, and then by another turn round, Tradition must make them Infallible.
3. To the 28th. issuing from the same ruin'd principle of Popish Traditions certainty, we say, neither Roman See, nor its Head, which is the Pope, can particularly be infallible by that means. And indeed it is enough to deny, untill the Discourser acquit himself better, in prooving his Traditions certain Indefectiveness. Yet we may a little animadvert the Ingeny and confidence of the m…n in reviving the fable of his Popes Infallibility, whereof wise and modest Papists have been ashamed; Yea and his new way is a little considerable, that he will make it good by his Tradition: the certainty whereof is but a lye. Is all the virtue sled from the Pontificial chair which was wont to be urged for it? And is Christs promise made to Peter worn out which was wont to be applyed to their Popes to make them infallible. Thou art Paul, thou art Innocentius, thou art Alexander, and upon thee will I build my Church? Doth all this fail his Popes, that he must come to support the Infallibility at last with his uncertain Tradition? O miserable head of the See of Rome! All else here added are but such like Fables; as of St. Peters being at Rome, where he never was, unless it were Babylon, which some of them grant, to prove him to have been at Rome: God in that, had a pure, poor, persecuted Church there, when the Apostle Paul suffered under Nero; but alas no Papal Pompous See; this is utterly Apostate from that. And for his uninterrupted publicity of Professing faith there, as now is continued, is a vain story: The truth of God and the true Church of God were preserved in his persecuted Portion all along, even those who suffered as he saith, by Barbarians. Lastly, his Traditional Asistances to that Head, that See and Clergy of Rome, to make up this infallibility for them, are most cheating de…usions and delitions shifts. Let but their own Histories of the ignorance and scandalousness of many of those Heads and chief Pastors of the Roman See be read,I refer to that Book intitled Romes Triumphs over despised Protestancy, ch. 7. for a short view. and then judge what Assistances they had from Gods sp…rit, who abhorrs such unclean wretches; and what P ety or Infall bility could accrue unto them, seeing they were acted by Satan, who ruleth in the Children of Disobedience. Wisely therefore did the Discourser forbear …o mention the particular Assistances of Gods spirit, the far contrary being known to his Adversaries to rule at this day in his Roman See even the efficacious delusions of the old serpent.
Cor. 29 29. His Inference is. Tradition establisht, the Church is provided at a certain and infallible Rule to preserve a Copy of the Scriptures letter truly significative of Christs sence, as farre as it is coincident with the main Body of Christian Doctrine preacht at first. This he argueth from his Indefective Tradition.
30. He urgeth. Tradition establisht, Cor. 30 the Church is provided of a certain and infallible Rule to interpret Scriptures Letter by, so as to arrive certainty at Christs sence, as farre as that letter concerns the Body of Christian Doctrine preacht at first, or points requisite to salvation. He argueth it from his Traditions preserving the first delivered sence in mens hearts sent down by its living voice, &c.
If these hold true, the Discourser may hope to triumph bravely over the Scripture of God, when he laieth both letter and sence of it, under the foot of his Tradition: Never could there be a clearer Character of Antichristian Pride than this. Yet we return.
1. The Certainty of Popish Tradition is not establisht, therefore the infallible Rule of preserving Scriptures letter, and interpreting it unto Christs sence is become most fallible, like a broken Reed deceiving them who lean on it, whose splinters run into their very souls and hurt them, so that they fall together with it.
2. Although that be enough to undo the mans Sure-footing and Corollaries which he makes terrible to his Adversaries: Yet we shall proceed to animadvert shortly som… things in his inlargements thereupon; as,
1. His assertion that the Apostles taught …he same Doctrine, which they writ; if so, …han they writ all the same which they taught and which is the more certain Record of that Doctrine? their writing which remains, or their speech which is past away long since, and hath been diversified and corrupted thorough many generations, and none can doubt but that written Registers are more certain and stedfast than reports. However the Disputer most irrationally asserts that his Popish fore-fathers have uninterruptedly spoken all the same words after them to this generation. If it be so, will they bring all that they hold to be of Traditionary faith from them, to be tried by their writings? They dare no…, they decline it, they hate that light, which reproveth their darkness.
2. Doth his Tradition, (if he had it setled) preserve the Scriptures letter? It is that by whic… the Discourser doth impeach the letter of S…ripture of uncertainty, weakness, liableness to Corruption &c. throughout his Treatise. And will not this prove as good a preserver of it,Jud. 4.21. as Jael was to Sisera? Surely no better than a Destroyer of it.
3. Yet he pretends better when he adds that his Tradition provides an infallible Rule to interpret Scriptures-letter unto the Church, and give Chr sts sence in it, therefore it must preserve it. This is pretty; Provided that h…s Tradition may give the sence, then it will preserve Scriptures letter. Shameless Impudence! Scripture is a Light discovering it self and darkness also. Popish Tradition is a lye; and to be an infallible rule of giving Christs sence, none can beleeve but the Romish Church which is adulterated from Christ by it. In a word, if this Tradition can give Christs sence in Scripture why doth not th…s Discourser and his Tribe give us such an infallible interpretation of the whole Scripture? This would be a most honourable work; But alas, how farre are they from that? And if they did give us any, it would be like to that gloss of some of his Fathers, Arise Peter kill and eat, Act. 10.13that is, Arise Pope and kill the Hereticks; or like his own of those few Texts that he urgeth, which is sapless and ridiculous.
3. We cannot but note his limitation given in both Corollaries (As farre as the letter is coincident with or concerns the body of Christian Doctrine preacht at first, or points requisite to salvation) what may this mean? Is there any other Doctrine of Christ besides that first preacht? or, any more points requisite to salvation expected to come after? Some such device the Man hath which his next words perhaps may bewray. But however Tradition gives no such infallible Rule, as is here pretended, for points of salvation.
31. He draweth on; Tradition establisht, Cor. 31 nothing can be received by the Church at held from the first, or ever, unless held ever. This he grounds upon certainty, and self-evidence of his Tradition.
Cor. 32 32. He putteth on. Tradition establisht, it is impossible any Error against Christs Faith should be received by the Church; that is, no Error contradicting Faith, can be received as of Faith. This he grounds on the former, that which is received as of Faith, is received as held ever from Christs time, &c.
Here be strange Issues of Popish Tradition indeed. It will make nothing to be received as held ever, but what is held ever: And puts an Impossibility of any Error contradicting Faith to be received by the Church as of Faith, because that of Faith is received as held ever. O marvellous! Was it ever or never that this Tradition could do such Feats? But let us weigh.
1. Popish Tradition establisht, as to its certainty and Indefectiveness is supposed indeed by the Discourser, but denied by us; therefore be it what will, that thereupon is received, as held ever of Faith, or rejected as Error, never possible to be received by the Church, It is all as false and defective as Tradition it self.
2. Doth the man mean by things held, ever received, or not held ever received, matters of Faith? His words express so; To be received as of Faith is to Traditionary Christians, (that is his own) the same as to be received as held ever or from Christs time. If so, what point of Faith is that which his Church receiveth as held not ever delivered from the time of Christ? He would have done well to give us an …nstance: But seeing he hath not; we shall only remind him, what he hath before granted, that the Doctrine of Faith consists in Indivisibili, or undivisibile unity, which cannot be one held ever, and another not held ever: Himself saith notwithstanding, Points not held ever, must be conveied down, such as they were found; which we understand to be points of Faith: and again, That which is of Faith is received as held ever from Christs time. This seems to be a perplexing knot of Traditions making, and implieth a pure contradiction. All of Faith is held ever. Some Points of Faith are not held ever: but we shall cut it if we cannot loose it, and throw it all away as Bedlams work, who are tying knots in straws, having nothing else to do. We grant one Faith from the beginning ever received, even the Doctrine of Salvation by Christ promised in the seed of the woman: And all that the Prophets and the Apostles gave down afterward were not other doctrins, but explications and manifestations of the same. So that Scripture faith is one and that held ever. Popish Tradit…on faith is ever and not ever held. And better it were, that it had been never. For it was never true.
3. We shall touch these Corollaries but once more. The most of Faithful Tradition of Christs Doctrine by the Apostles themselves could not keep error out of the visible Church in their time: How then dareth this Discourser assert, that by his Tradltion establisht, it is impossible any Error against Christs faith should be received by the Church? But thus the Devil transformed into an Angel of light, braggs to out do God himself in his own work: and under this pretence plungeth souls into the Abyss of Error. This is not only the possible; but the necessary Issue of Popish Tradition in the Church of Rome. The man hopes to mend his former Corollarie about Error in his seven next Conclusions following; which with him pass under the Title of Corollaries as following from the Principle of his Indefective Tradition; But every one may see they have no dependence on that; for they refer all to the Impossibil ty of Errors being received in the Church by vertue of his Tradition. And are all Exceptions, limita…ions, &c. Which it will be enough to cite for orders sake, and leave a mark upon them.
Cor. 33 33. He adds. Notwithstanding Tradition, Erroneous opinions, and (their proper Effects) absurd practices may creep into the Church, and spread there for a while.
1. Is this a Corollarie from his first Principle? Surely the man forgets himself in his reckoning of this and divers others under that n…tion, unless he resolve to have them so to make up his number of one and forty.
2. If it be a Corollary let him salve the contradiction which it giveth to the next foregoing, By the virtue of Popish Tradition, it is impossible any Error against Faith should be received in the Church. And again, Notwithstanding such Tradition, it is possible that such Errours and absurd Practices may creepe into the Church, and spread there a while: Was the man sober, or in his wits thus palbably to lay Contradictions together in every ones view? But we will excuse him, and take it for no Corollary, but as an exception to correct his former; yet must we tell him it shakes the uninterruptedness of his Tradition.
34. He saith further. Erroneous Opinions Cor. 34 can never gain any solid footing in the Church.
This is an Exception from an Exception, That however Tradition Popish cannot wholly keep out Errors from creep…ng into that Church, yet it will prevent it from gaining any solid footing there; and so farre uphold its own credit, for this would be no Sure-Footing. But alass it is so notoriously apparent, that their Tradition hath filled that Synagogue with such odious Errours, subverting the Doctrine of Salvation, and by continuance hath so rooted them not to be separated, untill divine wrath consume them, and Rome together. That day of the Lord is hastening.
Cor. 35 35. He proceeds. The prudence requisite in Church Government is one cause, why Errone…us opinions are not immediately, but after some long time perhaps to be declared against by the Authority of the whole Church.
This the Discourser himself surely will not stile a Corolla…e from his first Principle; Let it be then an Apologetical Proposition by way of prevention of an objection, that E…rors have had long fooling in the Church of Rome: He tells us prudence requisite in Church-government is the ca…se of it. If such Prudence be requisite, it must be required by Christ: But his wisedome decla…es the quite contrary: He rebukes the Angels of the Asian Churches for their connivance at, and toleration of Balaams▪ Doctrines and Jezabels Spiritual Sorceries, and threatens them sever…y for it. He never intended by respiting …ares to grow a while with wheat, Erroneous d…ctrines to be permitted to grow together with Truth, for the sooner these are p…uckt up, the firmer will the Truth be and prosper; And to use Authority from Christ for this with the soonest, cannot be to destruction of souls, but to the greatest Ed…fi…ation of them in delivering them out of the snares of Error: but alas, this prudence commended by the Discourser is Earthly sensual, and devilish whereby the Romish See hath still been guided: For should they set upon rooting up Error, they must throw down the whole Fabrick of the Popish Church, which consists of little else, But their Father the old Serpent, hath taught them his wisdome; That to cast out, error and wickedness, were to destroy their whole Kingdoms, both his and theirs. Let the Discourser answer; Is it truly Prudence not to declare ag…inst sin.
36. He annexeth. No erroneous Opinion Cor. 36 in Divinity, if Ʋniversal and Practical, can be very long permitted in the Church.
What means the man so frequently to contradict himself? He said but now, Some long time Erroneous Opinions might be suffered. Here he saith Erroneous Opinions in Divinity (which we understand about the Doctrine of Faith) cannot be v…ry long permitted, &c. Doth he think, that his Readers do observe him? This deserves an Asterism. Doth he imagine to evade it by his supposition, (If universal and Practical?) All Errors in the Church of Rome, are such as that Doctrine of Transubstantiation, and that against Justification by Faith in the Righteousness of Christ only, &c. and yet are not only permitted, but injoyned to be beleeved under the penalty of a Curse, by the Trent-Anathematizers. His pretended reasons are frivolous, and his conclusion ridiculous, that these Errors are quasht by the incomparably more powerful force, and all over-bearing Authority of Popish Tradition. O stupendous virtue of lying Tradition to destroy it self!
Cor. 37 37. He pleadeth on Erroneous Opinions, and the Irrational practices issuing from them (though supposed Ʋniversal and of long continuance) can never corrupt Substantially the judgments or wills of the Faithful.
This position certainly is put in but as a plea, if any should charge the Incomparable Power, and over-bearing Authority of his Tradition with a cheat; when he saith it will quash Errors, and every one, that will look about may see, that it doth in no kind restrain them. Now for a Salve he adds, though Errors be not quasht, yet by virtue of his Tradition, they can never corrupt substantially the judgments or wills of the Faithful.— Poor man! to what shifts is he driven to maintain a bad cause? But what means he here by that specificating term (substantially) Doth he joyn it with the verb Corrupt? Then the sense must be they cannot really, or (as he saith) a…solutely corrupt: O…, doth he annex it to Minds and Wills of faithful, which is the subject of corruption? Then Substantially to corrupt, is accord…ng to the substance and nature of minds and wills, which is, the very faculties themselves. We shall easily grant that error corrupts not the very Faculties of mind and will; but he must understand it of a Moral corruption, deprav…ng the judgments and wills of men, as to their Imaginations, thoughts and practices in their course of life. Now in this case, Error it self is spiritual catching poyson: Error universal and of long continuance, habituated in men, is deadly poyson against which there is no Antidote. Therefore no Tradition even the best can cure it of it self; much less Popish Tradition, which is it self a complexion of all Errors against the true Faith; A very mixture of unmixt spiritual poysons, so far from being an Antidote against b…d opinions and practices, that it is the very spring of all, the Issues of which must be death and destruction of souls. As to his reasonings about this, they are vain r…iterated Ventilations: O vile Trad…tion of Rome.
38. He asserts. No Erroneous opinion or Cor. 38 its proper practice, is imputable to the Church properly and formally taken.
39. It is exceedingly weak, and senseless Cor. 39 to think to impugn the Church by objecting unto her such opinions and practices.
These we joyn together, because the Discourser hath coupled them to make a shield or buckler to defend his Church from any just Imputations, that he foresaw must be laid upon her from those universal and long continued Errors in her: Give the Son leave to purge his Mother as well as he can from her Adulteries, though but by covering her shame with fig-leaves. It concerns his own credit: But it will be all in vain be…ore seeing and impartial Judges. For
1. The Romish Church is formally such, as she proceeds on Popish Christian Tradition, (as the man here saith) Now th…s Tradition deriveth down such falshoods as Christ abhorreth; therefore these Errors and Practises abominable issuing thence, are imputable to that Church as formally taken.
2. Whereas he transfers the charge only upon some men in the Church (materially considered) that is, to the Schools; we ask, whose Schools are these? are they not Romes under the Power of the Church and Roman See? Should they not correct them? nay they have maintained them only to just…fie their Errors;Qui non vetat peccare, cum potest, jubet. Sen. and are they not then justly imputable to that Church? Yet we confess, our thoughts are that some of their Schoolmen are much honester, than their Trent fathers and deliver more Truth in some Doctrins of Christ than they do; and therefore are lesse culpable, though too too blame in corrupting the Gospel with their foolish Quiddities and speculations.
3. But it is a wise objection (as the Disputer flouts) that the Church hath in he… men who are fallible in their private discourses, and School disputes, that is, she hath men who are men. A heavy Imputation. Yet we reply. It is no weakness to impugn the Romish Church by objecting to he… such Errors and practises: More sence is i… it, than he will be able to answer: we charge not men as men, and private members subjec… to mistakes; but the whole Body of the Roman See to be guilty of these abominations. And he with his Fathers shall find it, when God shall plead with their Mother, and charge her to be Mysterie-Babylon the Mother of Harlots and Abominations in the Earth. Though Romes Children laugh at this now, yet it will prove an Imputation heavy enough when the Lord God Almighty shall come to judge her. Beware ye Scorners.
40. He inferrs again, The knowledge of Traditions certainty, is the first knowledge or principle in Controversial Divinity, that is, without which nothing is known or knowable in that Science.
Were this but granted him with his former begg'd Principles and Corollaries, he would be the greatest and most victorious Champion that ever Rome sent out against the Protestants: Bellarmin, Coster, Suarez. &c. the Bratts of that Gyant Ignatius Loiola, would be but Pygmies in comparison of him: Yea we dare assert that among all the Mendicants, that the Pope alloweth, there is not a more hearty confident or Impudent Beggar (if you will) than He. But we are a little hardned against common Beggars; and deny him again the certainty of his Tradition; and therefore That it is the first principle in Controversial Divinity; which no man (we think) did ever make a Science, or number it among the Sciences before himself: But truly, he may make any thing a Science and what he will knowable, if he have but this granted him, That Popish Tradition is certain and Indefectiv…ly descended from Christ: It would be a Scientifical medium to prove, That the Dev l in a Creature is to be worshipped instead of God: or what not, to maintain Romes Idolatry? But we are Owners of our Alms; therefore let him pack away like a sturdy Beggar, as He is.
Cor. 41 41. He concludeth. Christs Promise to his Church (however comfortable to the Faithful) can bear no part in the notion of the Rule of Faith, nor be the first Principle of a controversial Divine.
Is this is a Corollary from his presumed Traditions Certainty? He is a notable Artist to wire draw this, and exclude Christs Promise from bearing a part in the Rule of Faith, or steering men in contending for his faith, which we understand by his Controversial Divines; as for other vain whifflers or Logomachists in his Schools, Christs Promise respects them not, neither do we regard them: As to his reiterated Ecchoes and noises in the air, we are even weary to hear them, they have been answered over and over. And therefore shall we conclude, Christs Promise to his own true Church (not to the Popish) is not only comfortable to the truly faithful, in giving hope of guidance in truth, here and of eternal and invisible glory in the end of their way; but as it is part of Gods revealed will in his written Truth, it beareth its part also in the Rule of Faith; which must regulate it in its exercise toward God; however the Discourser wilfully mistakes means to faith, for the Rule of it, as hath been told him heretofore.
Passing by therefore his vain Exceptions of Christs promise being a Point of Faith, and thereupon no part of the Rule; and of the self-evidence of his Traditions Indeficiency; and of the weakness of Scriptures-letter opened by private Interpretations, which have been re-recocted to the very vomiting of them up; we shall only animadvert upon his last suggestion against Christs promise beating a part in the Rule of Faith, viz. Because Christs promise puts things delivered to be beleeved, not seen: What strange discourse hath the man here, about a matter little concerning his Cause? Unless as he would have it, the Rule of Faith where the object is sence: Means to faith indeed are applicable to senses of hearing and seeing; but the Rule of Faith, concerns the spirit of Faith only, working in the inward faculties of the soul, Faith therefore is said to be the Evidence of things not seen, which are matters in promise,Heb. 11.1, and we as beleevers are said to live by faith and not by sight. Things therefore not seen,2 Cor. 5.7. must draw out and regulate acts of faith. How then can this Discourser exclude Christs promise from bearing a part in the Rule of Faith? By his leave therefore, He that saith of any Event, that Gods will bringeth this about by the secondary Cause, speaks proper enough, as Philosopher and Divine. And no less he who asserteth Christs Promise by his spirit and word, is the Basis, Rule and Principle of saving faith, and that by which men can only contend victoriously for the same. Bu… all alo…g this man hath been doting upon a sensitive Faith; or a Faith that works no h…gher than sense carrieth it; such is his Philosophy and Controversial Divinity. Let him injoy and reap the fruit of it: We contend for faith without seeing, founded in Gods word; for of this our Lord hath said,Joh. 20.29. Blessed are they who have not seen and yet beleeved. Here is our Sure-footing; Let the Disputer keep his.— Thus have we plaid out with h…m his New-game at one and Forty; For indeed no better a Title doth it deserve; and might all have been spared but for his Recreation; Clubs and Spades he makes use for Mechanical Beleevers, No Hearts or Diamonds, which are of a more Ruddy and spiritual Hue. Who hath won let standers by and lookers on Judge. If he have any other M…sterie in this odd number, as the false Church hath in other things, Let it serve among the …est to characterize their Falshood. His Tradition hath gathered no credit to its Indefective certainty out of all. For,
As of nothing, nothing can be made,
So from Tradition nothing can be had.
He must therefore go and begge more.