صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

“ fame doctrine to their children which they had recei“ ved from their fathers, and did believe it under this

very notion and title as received. Nor could any one

[of that church] deliver another doctrine under this “ title, but he would be convinced of a lie by the rest : “ and if the whole [Greek] church should endeavour to “ deliver a new doctrine under that title, [and there is “ the same reason if they should leave out any article of “ the old doctrine], that whole age would be in their “ consciences condemned of perfidiousness and parricide. “ Now, this is as impossible, as it is that all mankind “ should conspire to kill themselves.” And he afterwards (ibid. 5.) gives the reason why it is so impossible that tradition should fail, and it is a very bold and faucy one, that“if the tradition of the Christian faith benot more “ firm, than the course of the sun and moon, and the

propagation of mankind, then God hath shewn him“ self an unskilful artificer.” What is there in all this demonstration which may not be accommodated to the Greek church with as much force and advantage as to the Catholick? unlefs he can shew, that it is very poffible that all the men in Greece may conspire to kill themselves, but yet absolutely impollible that all the men in the world should do so ; which I am sure he cannot fhew, unless he can demonstrate, that though it be pof sible for a million of as wise men as any are to be found in the world together, to conspire to do a foolish action, yet it is impossible that a hundred millions, not one jot wiser than the other, should agree together to the doing of it.

$ 4. From all this it appears, that Mr. White's answer to this objection doth not fignify any thing to his purpose. For if the procession of the Holy Ghost was part of Christ's doctrine, then it was delivered by the Apostles to the Greek church; if so, they could not fail to deliver it down to the next age, and that to the next, and so on ; but it seems they have failed. Where then is “the force of hopes and fears strongly applied ?' Where are " the certain causes of actual will to adhere

to this doctrine?” Why is not the effect produced, the causes being put actually causing ?”. If the ApoAles delivered this doctrine, oral tradition is so clear and

unmistakeable, must

[ocr errors]

unmistakeable, and “brings down faith clad in such “ plain matters of fact, that the most stupid man living " (much less the Greeks, that were the flower of man“ kind) could not poslibly be ignorant of it," p.53.54.; nay it exceeds all the power of nature, to blot know

ledge, thus fixed, out of the soul of one single belie

ver,ibid. [much more out of so vast a church]. And “ since no man can hold contrary to his knowledge, or “ doubt of what he holds, nor change and innovate with

out knowing he did fo, it is a manifest impossibility a “ whole church should in any age fall into an absurdity 66 fo inconsistent with the nature of one single man, p. 78. And since “it is natural for every man to speak truth, and grace

is to perfect nature in whatever is good in it, it follows, that one truly Christian heart " is far more fixed to veracity, than others not imbued

with those heavenly tenets; and consequently that a " multitude of such must incomparably exceed, in point “ of testifying, the same number of others unfortified by “ Christ's doctrine,” p. 86. And since "such a thought

cannot enter into the most depraved nature, as to “ harm another without any good to himself; and “ this must be, if we put Christian fathers misteaching « their children unreceived doctrines for received, (and I

hope, for the same reason, received doctrines for un“ received], contrary to their knowledge. For suppo

sing sanctity in the [Greek] church, (and why may

not we as well as in the Latin], that is, that multi“ tudes in it make heaven their first love, and look on “ spiritual goods as their main concern, &c. it follows, " that had the fathers [of that church], in any age, “ consented to mislead their posterity from what them“ selves [not only] conceited [but knew] to be true, " they should do the most extreme harm imaginable to

others, without any the least good to themselves ; “ which is perhaps impossible in one single man, more “ in few, but infinitely in a multitude, especially of “ good men,” p. 89.

5. Thus I might apply the rest of his ranting rhetorick (but that I am weary of transcribing it) concerning “ the natural love of parents to their children,” p.90.9 (unless we suppo e the Greek church destitute of it), which

yet

muft needs engage them to use the means proper to bring them to heaven, and save them from hell: as also concerning “the natural care men have of not losing their « credit, by telling pernicious lies.” And, not to omit the best part of his demonstration, p.93. (which was therefore prudently reserved to the last place), I might likewise shew, how the principles of each science, arithmetick, geometry, logick, nature, morality, historical prudence, politicks, metaphylicks, divinity, and, last of all, the new science of controversy, (as he calls it), or the blessed art of eternal wrangling and disputing, (the first principle whereof, he tells us, is, “That tradition is “ certain)," do all contribute to thew the certainty of tradition, that is, the impossibility that any part of Christ's doctrine should fail in the Greek church, any more than in the Latin. And surely arithmetick, geometry, logick, natural philosophy, metaphyficks, &c. will all stand up for the Greek church in this quarrel ; for considering that Greece was the place where the arts and sciences were born and bred, it is not to be imagined, that they should be so disingenuous and unnatural, as not to contribute their best assistance to the service of their country

$ 6. But it may be the Greeks cannot fo justly pretend to oral tradition as the Latins. What if St. Peter, the head of the Apostles, thought fit to share scripture and tradition between these two churches, and laying his left hand on the Greek church, and his right on the Latin, was pleased to confer the great blessing of oral tradition upon the Latin church? which being to be the seat of infallibility, it was but fitting that she should be furnished with this infallible way of conveying the Christian doctrine. And therefore it may be, that as the scriptures of the New Testament were left in Greek, so oral tradition was delivered down only in Latin. This, I confess, is not altogether without some shew of reason. Mr. S. may do well to take the matter into his deeper consideration ; he hath in his time improved as weak probabi. lities as these into lusty demonstrations. And if he could but demonstrate this, it would very much weaken the force of this instance of the Greck church. Otherwise (for ought I fee) this instance will hold good against him :

and And un

and whatever he can say for the impossibility of tradition's failing in the Latin church, may all be faid of the Greek church; if he will but grant that the Apostles preached the same doctrine to them both; that the arguments of hope and fear which this doctrine contains in it, were applied as strongly to the Greeks as to the Latins. And yet, notwithstanding all this, tradition hath plainly failed in the Greek church. Let him now assign the age wherein fo valt a number of men conspired to leave out the article of the procession of the Holy Ghost, and shew how it was possible a whole age could conspire together to damn their posterity, or how the faith of immediate forefathers might be altered, without any such conspiracy; and we are ready to satisfy him how the doctrine of the Latin church might be corrupted and altered, and to tell him punctually in what age it was done. til he do this, I would intreat him to trouble us no more with those canting questions, (wherein yet the whole force of his demonstration lies), How is it possible a whole age should conspiré to change the doctrine of their forefathers ? and, in what age was this done? For if it be reasonable to demand of us, in order to the overthrowing of his demonstration, to align the particular age wherein the Latin church conspired to change the ancient doctrine ; with the same reason we require of him, in order to the maintaining of his demonstration, to name the particular age wherein the Greek church con{pired to alter the doctrine of Christ, (which yas undoubtedly in the first age truly delivered to them by the Apostles); and also to Thew, from the rational force and strength of tradition, how it is more impossible for the whole church to have failed in transmitting the doctrine of Christ down to us, or to have conspired to the altering of it, than for such a multitude of Christians as is the vast body of the Greek church. If Mr. S. or Mr. White fhiew this, they do fomething; otherwise I must tell them, that unless they can manage these pretty things they call demonstrations better, they must shortly either quit their reason, or their religion; or else return to the honest old Mumpimus, of the infallibility of the church from an extraordinary and immediate assistance of the Holy Ghost: or (to make the business short, and stop VOL. III.

all

GS

all gaps with one bush) come over to the Jesuits, and acknowledge the Pope's infallibility both in matters of faith and fact; by which means they may reconcile themselves to him, and prevent that direful stroke which threatens them from Rome, and is ready to cut them off from the body of the traditionary church. And thus I have done with his first demonstration ; and I take it for a good sign that the Popish caufe is at a very low ebb, when such stuff as this must be called demonstration.

SECT. VI. Mr. S.'s demonstration à posteriori. $1. I Come now to his demonstration à posteriori ;

which although it fall of itself if the demonftration à priori fail, yet because it hath fome peculiar abfurdities of its own, I shall consider it by itself, as well as with relation to the other.

§ 2. Before he comes to lay it down, with the grounds of it, according to his usual fashion, he premiseth fomething as yielded by Protestants, which, in his fenfe, no Protestant ever granted. Just so he dealt with us before concerning the scriptures, saying, that by them the Protestants “must mean unsensed letters and characters." But let us see what it is, p. 76. That “this demonstra“ tion à posteriori seems a needless endeavour against the “ Protestants, who yield, that those points in which we

agree, as the Trinity, incarnation, &c. came down “ by this way of tradition ; and this (he faith) no Pro" testant ever denied.” And then he asks, Whether « the same virtue of tradition would not have been as

powerful to bring down other points in which we do not agree, had

any

such been?” Now, if he speak any thing to his own purpose, he must suppose Protestants to yield, that all those points wherein we are agreed were conveyed down to us folely by oral tradition without writing : but this all Protestants deny. So that that only which would avail his cause against us, is, to Thew, that those points wherein we differ, have not onJy come down to us by oral teaching, but that they are likewise contained in scripture, without which, we say, we can have no sufficient certainty and assurance at this

distance,

« السابقةمتابعة »