Page images

I Answer, 1, If the Fathers do in some places afferi the fufficiency of proof from Tradition, and in other places the necessity of Scripture proofe, these afsercions being dire&ly concrary one co another it invalidates their authoricy in maccers of religion : For fo lay the Lawyers molt justly and truly, Teftis pugnantia dicensin dem non facit.

2. But upon enquiry it will be found in the places ciced for Tradition (especially if you compare them with those alledged for Scripture)chat they do plead Tradition onely as a lecondary Argument to confirme chat Faich which is grounded upon Scripture, but it is as clear as the Sunne that they ever made Tradition strike saile to the Scripture, and made no scruple of deserving Tradition when the evidence of Scripture Argumenes Itood on the other side.

Answ. 6. The Romanists themselves are undeniahle instances of the vanicy of their own Argument: They tell us Tradition cannot deceive us : Why Tradition hath deceived chem: There are diverse contradictory opinions maincained in the Church of Rome, about 300 are reckoned out of Bellarming: The dissengers, though never so implacably divided amongst themselves,do agrec in this, Thac they believe nothing but what hach come to them by Tradition from their Fathers, and so from the Apostles; Then certainly either Tradition hach deceived some of chem.or both the parts of a contradiction may be true : I shall not launch forth inco che Sea of Romish contradictions, nor take notice of pettie differences as mongst obscure Auphors, but shall instance in two maceriall points, viz, The Doctrine of Gods grace, and mans will, and the appurtenances as they are controverted be tween the French and Italian Papists : In both of them, it is as clear as the Sun chat both parties pretend Tradition: Now the Trumpet of Tradicion gives an uncere

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

taine found for Tradition tels the Jesuites this is truth, Thatche will is derermined to good actions? not by Gods grace, but by its own inclination and agency : Tradition rels the Dominicans and Jansenists thac chis is a grosse falicy : So for the Church if you inquire in whom Supreme Auchority and Infallibility relides (for that is the great question.) Tradition cels the Jesuites, it is in the Pope , Tradition not long lince told the Councels of Bafil and Constance that it was in a Councell, not in the Pope, and so it tells many of the French Do&ors at this day, And (I will tell you a thing in your eare) both these are Apostolicall Traditions though you and I think they are directly contrary : It is true chac St fames faith, No Fountain can yield both Salt water and fresle, Cha. 3. 8. 12. But that is to be understood onely of the Found taine of the Scripture, buc the Fountaine of Tradition can yield boch Salc and fresh, bosh biccer and sweet. You may well allow Tradition to be infallible, for you see it can work wonders, and reconcile contradictions: If this seem strange to you, you may expect the proof of it in an Appendix to the next Edition of Mr Whites Apology for Tradicion demonstrating that Cuntradiétoria por unt ele fimul vera, to be dedicated to the Defenders of Tran. substantiation ; but to returne : Wbat say our masters to this difficulty; why, I will faithfully acquaint you where their strength lies, and what their pretences are: I find three things which are or may with some colour be said for them to safeguard the Infallibility of Tradition against this dreadfull Thock.

2. They say there are onely Doctrines ventilated in Schooles, not of any great consequence to Christians : Thus the controversies between the Jesuites and Dominicars about Gods free grace and mans free will (they say) are but Scholasticall nicecies, wherein the fubstance of Religion is not at all concerned: So for that point of


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Supremacy and Infallibilicy it is no great matter, The diff enters onely seek out the decider of Points of Do&trine that is, by whose month we are to know, which be our Articles of Faith, whether by the Popes or Courcels or both, which is not much materiall (Iaith Rushworths second Edition Dial. 3. 5. 9.) to our purpose what ever the truth be, fupposing we acknowledge no Articles of Faith but such as have descendid to us from Christ and his Apostles,

For Answer, I would know whether a private Chriftian can infallibly know what are those Articles of Faith which came from Chrilt and his Apostles without the de. cision of Pope or Councell, or not:If they say he can know it, then it followes chat private Christians may be in fallible of themselves, and consequently there is no necesity of Pope or Councels, for what need any more then infallibility? If they say he cannot, then an infallible guide, judge, and interpreter is necessary to Tradition as well as to Scripture, and without this Tradition cannot make us infallible, and consequencly, if it be doubtfull and disputable who this Judge is, it must be also doubcfull whe clier che Tradition be right; and therefore Tradition can: not make me infallible : It is an audacity beyond parallel thar they who make it so materiall as that they affert we have no certainty in our Faith for want of a decider of points of Doctrine, and make no fcruple of sending us to Hell for want of such a Decider , should say this amongst themselves is not materiall, for (as to use and be nefic) it is all one to have no decider of controversies, and not to be agreed who it is , according to that known maxime of ehe Lawyers; Idem est non aparere nonelle: As for the other points between the Jesuites and Dominicans, how materiall they are we will take their own judgments: if we may believe either one or other of, them, the points are of great moment: If you aske che Jansenists or Dominicans their opinion of the Jesuiticall


[ocr errors]

Do&rine, they tell you that it is the very poison of the Pe lagian Herely, yea, it is worse then Pelagianisme, that they are contemners of Grace, such as robe God of his honour, taking halfe of it to themselves, that it is here disputed, Whether God alone be God, or whether the will of man be a kind of inferiour, yet (in part) an independent Deity. Thele are Mr Whites words in his Sonus Buccina. quajt. Theclog. in Epif.c in parag. 7

And for the Jesuites, they are not one jot behind hand with them in their censure of the Dominican Doctrine which (fay the Jesuites) brings back the "stoicall paradox, robs God of the Glory of his goodnesse, makes God a lyar and the Author or linne ; and yet when we tell them of these divifions, the breach is presently healed thele savages are grown came, their differences triviall, and onely fome School-niceries, wherein Faich is not concerned; And now both Scoicks and Pelagians are grown

Orthodox, and the grace,glory, Loveraignty and holiness f of God, are matters but of small concernment: and sa

ic feems they are to them, else they durst not so fhame e Jelly dally with them: But it is ufuall with them to make

the greatest points of Faith like Counters, which in computation somecimes stand for pounds, sometimes for pence, as interest and occasion require. And it is worth Observation, These very points of difference when they fallout among Protestants, between Calvin and Armia nius , they are represented by our Adversaries as very materiall and weighty differences, but when chey come to cheir share they are of no moment.

2. It may be said, Tradicion may deceive some of the Romanists but not all : Now it is the Church which is said to be Infallible, not particular Doctors : For An. swer, let it be remembred that I am not now speaking of the deception of some few private Doctors, but the points alledged arç controverted amongst as learned and



[ocr errors]

devout men (as they call Devotion) as cver the Churcht of Rome had, here is Order against Order, University, against University, Nation againit Nation, all of them precending Tradition for cheir contrary opinions with greatelt confidence and eagernesle. Premising this, I Answer, Thar Tradition which hath deceived thousands of the best and Learnedst Romanists may deceive ten thousand: That which deceives the Jesuites in fome points may deceive the Domin cans in ochers,ché Franciscans in others; If it deceive

the French Papists in fome points, it may deceive the Italians in others, and so is not Infallible in any : Or else, what bounds will these men let to the Infallibility of Tradition? Will they say Tradition is onely infallible in France, and.chose of the fame perswalion, who plead Tradition for the Supremacy of the Councell above the Pope ? Or will they say the Infallibility of Tradition is kept beyond the Alpes among the Italian Duđors, who urge Tradition for the Popes Supremacy above Councels ? Put what security will they give us, That the Fallibility of Tradition cannot passe over the Alpes and get from one side to the ocher ? Indeed Infallibility may happily be a cender piece not able to get over those snowy Mountains: But Fallibility can travell co all parts and at all times : In short, it being certain thac: Tradicion doch deceive thousands of them it may deceive the rest : Nor can this be any way prevented, but by pretending the promife of Jofallibility, but this is Heterogeneous to the present enquiry. and they are now pleading for another Infallibility from the nature of Tradition, and that is hereby disproved ; and for the fiction of a promise, I have discovered chai before.

But the third and last pręcence is moft frequent; That however in leser points they may be mistaken and divided, yet they are agreed in all that is de fide, in'all points


« PreviousContinue »