صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

but by tradition, which conveys this doctrine to us. And if tradition of itself can infallibly affure us, that there are fupernatural affiftances of the Holy Ghoft, then a man muft know, that tradition is infallible, antecedently to his knowledge of any fupernatural affiftance. And if fo, what can any fupernatural affiftance add to my affurance of the certainty of tradition, which I do fuppofe to be infallible before I can know of any fupernatural affiftance? Can any thing be more ludicrous, than to build firft all our certainty of the affiftance of the Holy Ghoft upon the certainty of tradition; and then afterwards to make the certainty of tradition to rely upon the affistance of the Holy Ghoft? as if that could contribute to our affurance of the certainty of tradition; which, unless tradition be first fuppofed certain, is itself wholly uncertain.

§2. The conclufion of this ninth difcourfe is fomewhat ecftatical; poffibly from a fudden disorder of his fancy upon the contemplation of his own performances, to fee what a man he has made himself, (with the help of Rufhworth's dialogues); or rather, what his party has made him by the office they put upon him: for it feems (by his telling, p. 165. & 166) Mr. Creffy, and the reft, are ordained to cajole the fools, leaving him the way of reafon and principles; and that himself is chofen out, to demonftrate to the wife, or those who judge of things per altiffimas caufas. In the discharge of which glorious office, he declares, that he intends no confutation of those authors which Mr. Creffy and others have meddled with: "yet if any will be fo "charitable as to judge he hath folidly confuted them, "because he hath radically and fundamentally over"thrown all their arguments, &c. he fhall rejoice, and "be thankful." That the intelligent reader (for he writes to none but fuch, p. 159.) may also rejoice with him, I fhall recite the whole paffage: for it is thick of demonstration, and as likely as any in his book to have the altiffimas caufas contained in it.

[ocr errors]

$3. "It would require a large volume to unfold particularly how each virtue contributes to fhew the iner"rable indeficiency of tradition, and how the principles "of almost each fcience are concerned in demonftrating

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

66

"its certainty. Arithmetick lends her numbering and multiplying faculty, to fean the vast number of testi"fiers: Geometry, her proportions, to fhew a kind of "infinite ftrength of certitude in Chriftian tradition, a"bove thofe atteftations which breed certainty in human affairs: Logick, her skill, to frame and make us "fee the connexions it has with the principles of our understanding: Nature, her laws of motion and acti"on: Morality, her firft principle, That nothing is done gratis by a cognofcitive nature; and that the body of "traditionary doctrine is moft conformable to practical "reason: Historical prudence clears the impoffibility of an undifcernible revolt from points fo defcended, and "held fo facred: Politicks fhew this to be the best way imaginable to convey down fuch a law as it concerns every man to be skilful in: Metaphyficks engages the "effences of things, and the very notion of being, which "fixes every truth; fo establishing the fcientifical know

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

ledge which fpring from each particular nature, by "their firft caufes or reafons, exempt from changes or "motion: Divinity demonftrateth it moit worthy God, " and most conducive to bring mankind to bliss: Laltly, Controverfy evidences the total uncertainty of any thing concerning faith, if this can be uncertain; "and makes ufe of all the reft, to establish the certainty "of this first principle," p. 93. A very fit conclufion for fuch demonftrations as went before. It is well Mr. S. writes to none but intelligent readers; for were it not a thousand pities, that fo manly, and folid, and convincing a difcourfe as this fhould be caft away upon fools?

SECT. XII. Mr. S.'s corollaries confidered.

$i. As S for his corollaries, fuppofing them to be rightly deduced from his former difcourfes, they must of neceffity fall with them; for they fignify nothing, but upon this fuppofition, that his foregoing difcourfes are true. And yet this being granted, it were easy to fhew that most of them are grofsly faulty. For, first, feveral of them are plainly coincident. The fecond, viz. "None can with right pretend to be a church, but the VOL. III. "followers

LI

66

"followers of tradition," is the very fame in fense with the 11th, viz. "No company of men hang together like "a body of a Chriftian commonwealth or church, but "that which adheres to tradition." So likewife the 12th and 14th are contained in the 15th; the 16th and 17th, in the 19th; the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th, in the 21t; and the 32d and 34th, in the 31ft. Secondly, Divers of them are manifeftly abfurd; as the 12th, 13th, 14th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th; the fum of which is, That there is no arguing against tradition "from fcripture, or the authority of the church, or fa"thers and councils, or from history and testimonial "writings, or from contrary tradition, or reafon, or 66 any inftances whatsoever; "which is as much as to fay, If this proposition be true, "That tradition is cer"tain," then it cannot, by any kind of argument, be proved to be false. But is this any peculiar confectary from the truth of this propofition? Doth not the fame follow from every propofition, That if it be true, it cannot be proved to be falfe? Yet no man was ever yet fo frivolous, as to draw fuch a confequence from the fuppofed truth of any propofition. His 23d alfo is finguJarly abfurd, That "there is no poffibility of arguing at

all against tradition rightly understood, or the living "voice of the Catholick church, with any fhew of rea"fon." Thefe are large words. It might have contented a reasonable man to have faid, that no good argument could be brought against it: but he is jealous of his hypothefis, and can never think it safe till it be fhotfree. Nor will that content him; but it must be also impoffible for any one to make a fhew of shooting at it. This were, I confefs, a peculiar privilege of Mr. S.'s difcourfes above other mens, if they were, as he fays, by evidence of demonftration fo fecured, that not only no fubftantial argument could be brought against them, but that even the moft fubtile fchoolman of them all fhould not be able to come near them with fo much as a Videtur quod non. But it may be, he means no more by this corollary, than what he faid in the 18th, viz. That no "folid argument from reafon can be brought against "tradition." If fo, then the fenfe of his 23d corollary muft be this, That there is no poffibility of arguing

[ocr errors]

at

at all against tradition with any folid fhew, or fubftantial fhadow of reafon ; which would be a little inconvenient. I will inftance but in one more, his 40th; which is this, "The knowledge of tradition's certainty is the first "knowledge or principle in controverfial divinity, i. c. "without which nothing is known or knowable in that "fcience:" which is to infer, that because he hath with much pains proved the certainty of tradition, therefore it is felf-evident, i. e. needed no proof. Nay, it is to conclude the prefent matter in controverfy, and that which is the main debate of his book, to be the first principle in controverfial divinity, i. e. fuch a propofition as every one ought to grant, before he can have any right to difpute about it. This is a very prudent courfe, to make begging the question the firft principle in controverfy; which would it but be granted, I am very much of his mind, that the method he takes would be the best way to make controversy a fcience; because he that should have the luck or boldness to beg firft, would have it in his power to make what he pleafed certain.

§2. Were it worth while, I might farther purfue the abfurdities of his corollaries: for they are not fo terrible as he makes fhew of, by his telling Dr. Cafaubon, p. 330. that "Sure-footing, and its corollaries, may put him out "of his wits: " which though intended for an affront to the Doctor, yet it may be mollified with a good interpretation; for if the reading of wild and fantastical ftuff be apt to disorder a very learned head, then fo far Mr. S.'s faying may have truth in it.

It remains only that I requite his 41ft corollary, not with an equal number, but with two or three natural confectaries from the doctrine of his book.

1. No man can certainly understand the meaning of any book whatsoever, any farther than the contents of it are made known to us by a concurrent oral tradition for the arguments whereby he and Mr. Rushworth endeavour to prove it impoffible without tradition to attain to the certain fenfe of fcripture, do equally extend to all other books.

2. The memory of matters of fact done long ago may be better preferved by general rumour, than by publick records for this is the plain English of that affertion,

LI 2

That

That oral tradition is a better and more fecure way of conveyance than writing.

3. That the generality of Papifts are no Chriftians: for if, as he affirms, tradition be the fole rule of faith, and those who difown this rule be ipfo facto cut off from the root of faith, i. e. unchriftianed; and if, as I have fhewn, the generality of Papifts do difown this rule, then it is plain that they are no Christians.

PART

IV.

Teftimonies concerning the rule of faith.

$1.

SECT. I. Mr. S.'s teftimonies examined.

T

Hus far, in the way of reafon and principles. The reft is note-book learning, which, he tells us, p. 337. he is "not much a friend to: " and there is no kindness loft; for it is as little a friend to him, and his caufe, as he can be to it. I fhall firft examine the authorities he brings for tradition; and then produce exprefs teftimonies in behalf of fcripture. In both which I fhall be very brief; in the one, becaufe his te ftimonies require no long anfwer; in the other, because it would be to little purpose to trouble Mr. S. with many fathers; who, for ought appears by his book, is acquainted with none but Father White; as I fhall fhew hereafter. By the way, I cannot much blame him for the courfe he uses to take with other mens teftimonies; because it is the only way that a man in his circumstances can take otherwife nothing can be in itself more unreasonable, than to pretend to answer teftimonies by ranking them under fo many faulty heads; and having fo done, magifterially to require his adverfary to vindicate them, by fhewing that they do not fall under fome of thofe heads, though he have not faid one word against any of them particularly nay, though he have not fo much as recited any one of them; for then the trick would be spoiled, and his Catholick reader, who perhaps may believe him in the general, might fee reafon not to do fo, if he fhould defcend to particulars;

« السابقةمتابعة »