SURE
FOOTING
Examined
.
The
First
Discourse
.
THE
Author
both
in
his
Preface
and
Entrance
into
his
Discourse
premiseth
as
fair
demands
,
as
may
be
,
to
be
grounds
of
rational
arguing
in
matters
of
Controversie
debated
between
him
and
his
Adversaries
,
but
how
unevenly
he
followeth
them
in
his
mistaken
way
,
hath
appeared
partly
in
the
Examination
of
his
Preface
,
and
will
do
more
in
sifting
his
Discourses
.
1.
He
proposeth
this
as
determined
by
Reason
,
That
to
know
the
meaning
of
those
words
,
which
express
the
thing
under
debate
is
necessary
for
satisfaction
in
that
matter
.
That
Logick
assures
it
to
be
a
ready
way
to
a
clear
decision
of
most
perplexing
difficulties
:
That
the
meaning
of
the
word
includes
in
it self
the
nature
of
the
thing
,
together
with
the
Considerations
and
Attributes
intrinsecally
belonging
to
that
nature
;
so
that
we
may
know
what
is
to
be
affirmed
and
denied
of
that
thing
:
Therefore
he
applyeth
this
method
unto
the
present
debate
about
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
to
know
the
meaning
of
the
words
,
which
may
give
a
clear
and
brief
satisfaction
,
both
what
is
not
that
Rule
,
and
what
is
it
.
Unto
this
fair
and
plausible
demand
,
so
far
as
solid
Reason
doth
approve
it
,
we
shall
grant
without
dispute
.
Meanings
of
words
about
all
Controversies
must
be
understood
to
bring
debates
unto
a
rational
period
:
yet
with
respect
to
the
reason
added
,
That
words
include
the
nature
of
things
,
&c.
Our
grant
must
be
with
limitation
;
For
notions
do
not
alwayes
truly
express
the
nature
of
things
signified
by
them
,
but
may
be
dissentaneous
or
contrary
to
the
same
:
We
therefore
thus
limit
our
Grant
;
That
words
or
names
have
their
force
or
import
from
the
Authority
of
the
Imposers
;
If
they
be
by
God
himself
imposed
,
or
by
divine
Instinct
,
they
doubtless
import
the
nature
of
the
thing
,
so
far
as
God
would
signifie
it
by
them
:
but
if
words
be
framed
by
mens
phancies
to
denote
what
they
would
have
them
,
they
fall
far
short
of
declaring
the
nature
of
things
,
yea
and
sometimes
are
opposite
thereunto
.
Notional
descriptions
of
things
therefore
are
oft-times
faulty
,
and
help
not
to
knowledge
.
Let
us
therefore
in
our
debate
consider
these
words
or
terms
,
Rule
,
Faith
,
and
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
as
God
speaketh
of
them
in
his
Word
;
and
we
are
agreed
:
we
shall
have
there
the
true
meaning
of
them
,
and
upon
good
ground
may
we
expect
clear
satisfaction
,
What
the
Rule
of
Faith
is
,
and
what
not
.
No
more
needs
to
be
said
unto
this
,
but
to
animadvert
,
That
here
the
Author
puts
a
great
stress
upon
words
to
open
the
nature
of
things
;
but
else-where
he
sleights
words
,
Grammar
,
Criticism
(
in
the
the
best
sense
)
as
wordish
or
airy
fansies
,
when
his
Adversaries
pinch
him
to
the
purpose
in
opening
the
mind
of
God
thereby
in
the
Scriptures
.
2.
He
begins
to
tell
us
what
is
the
meaning
of
the
word
Rule
;
It
signifieth
a
thing
(
saith
he
)
which
is
able
to
regulate
or
guide
him
,
who
useth
it
:
Hereupon
he
addeth
that
it
must
have
all
those
qualities
,
by
which
it
is
able
to
do
that
,
it
is
proper
Effect
.
This
is
a
short
account
of
the
meaning
of
the
Rule
here
mentioned
;
and
may
serve
to
describe
a
Carpenters
Rule
unto
his
boy
for
drawing
lines
upon
Timber
to
make
an
Idol
:
Isa
.
44.13
.
but
we
must
look
for
a
better
discovery
of
it
,
as
to
its
nature
and
use
in
this
place
.
In
general
:
Regula
est
mensura
recti
&
obliqui
.
〈◇〉
.
Arist
.
A
Rule
is
a
Measure
both
of
things
straight
and
crooked
.
So
that
the
nature
of
a
Rule
is
to
be
a
Measure
meeting
out
things
measurable
,
and
so
distinguishing
straight
from
crooked
,
and
right
from
wrong
:
and
hereunto
it
guides
the
hand
that
useth
it
.
Yet
this
general
sense
is
not
sufficient
in
this
place
;
we
must
therefore
descend
to
specials
for
the
right
meaning
of
the
notion
.
This
term
Rule
then
is
diversified
in
its
sense
according
to
the
various
kinds
of
things
unto
which
commonly
it
is
applyed
:
As
,
1.
When
applyed
to
natural
things
,
it
hath
a
meaning
natural
.
2.
When
applyed
to
things
Artificial
,
and
Mechanical
it
must
have
a
sense
sutable
,
and
consistent
with
those
matters
.
3.
When
applyed
to
Moral
concernments
,
it
must
have
a
meaning
competent
to
moral
and
civil
actions
.
4.
When
applyed
to
divine
,
and
spiritual
matters
,
it
must
have
a
sense
proper
and
peculiar
unto
those
affairs
of
Religion
,
in
points
of
faith
and
practise
.
Now
to
this
sense
of
a
Rule
(
whatever
it
be
found
to
be
)
are
we
bound
up
in
our
present
debate
.
The
use
of
that
word
,
which
is
by
ours
translated
Rule
,
we
find
by
the
Spirit
expressed
in
three
Epistles
,
(
〈◇〉
)
which
the
Author
knoweth
is
frequently
used
,
or
abused
rather
by
his
Trent-Fathers
,
in
their
Canons
.
Of
this
word
if
we
may
give
the
meaning
,
as
in
the
premises
is
allowed
,
we
find
it
to
be
both
of
a
more
restrained
sense
;
as
in
that
passage
of
the
Apostle
,
2
Cor
.
10.13
.
〈◇〉
,
&c.
Acts
18.9
,
10
,
11.
According
to
the
measure
of
the
Rule
,
which
God
hath
distributed
unto
us
,
a
measure
to
reach
even
unto
you
:
which
Rule
was
a
special
revelation
of
Gods
will
unto
him
,
that
he
should
abide
at
Corinth
,
and
go
through
his
measure
in
preaching
the
Gospel
there
,
because
God
had
much
people
in
that
place
and
City
.
Again
,
we
have
it
in
a
more
large
sense
,
wherein
we
are
now
concerned
.
So
we
read
,
when
the
Apostle
had
declared
that
nothing
availed
any
thing
in
Christ
Jesus
,
that
is
,
Gal.
6.15
16.
the
Church
of
Christ
,
but
the
New
Creature
or
Creation
,
he
subjoyneth
this
incouragement
to
those
,
who
are
conformed
thus
in
Chist
,
As
,
〈◇〉
.
many
as
walk
according
to
this
Rule
,
Peace
be
on
them
;
where
by
Rule
is
meant
the
Will
of
God
in
the
New
Creation
revealed
unto
them
,
who
share
in
it
,
measuring
out
the
line
for
believing
and
walking
according
to
his
good
pleasure
,
who
created
them
.
A
like
use
we
find
of
it
by
the
same
Apostle
to
the
Philippians
,
Let
us
walk
by
the
same
Rule
:
Phil
.
3.16
.
〈◇〉
.
He
had
been
pressing
them
to
pursue
perfection
in
Christ
,
whereunto
he
giveth
his
own
example
as
a
directive
,
and
thereupon
exhorts
all
that
partake
of
that
high
calling
,
according
to
the
pitch
in
the
stature
of
Christ
,
whereunto
they
had
attained
,
to
walk
by
the
same
Rule
,
that
is
,
the
Will
of
God
made
known
by
the
Preachings
and
Writings
of
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
.
So
that
the
sense
,
meaning
or
nature
of
this
Rule
in
our
debate
,
(
it
being
divine
)
is
the
Will
of
God
revealed
,
measuring
out
the
lines
unto
creatures
for
true
believing
,
and
walking
safely
unto
attaining
the
purchased
salvation
.
Unto
this
meaning
of
the
Rule
we
shall
adhere
.
3.
He
addeth
unto
his
sence
of
a
Rule
the
proper
Qualities
of
it
.
as
1.
That
it
must
be
evident
as
to
its
Existence
unto
sense
,
if
it
be
to
guide
it
;
or
to
the
understanding
,
if
it
be
an
Intellectual
Rule
:
,
Sect
.
3.
—
2.
That
it
must
be
Evident
to
all
those
who
are
to
be
regulated
by
it
,
that
there
is
such
a
thing
,
Sect
.
4.
—
3.
That
it
must
be
knowable
to
those
who
can
have
doubts
in
them
(
that
is
,
in
a
manner
all
mankind
,
even
the
rudest
vulgar
)
that
the
Intellectual
Rule
hath
a
vertue
to
guide
their
understandings
right
,
and
so
deserveth
to
be
relied
on
as
a
Rule
.
Wherefore
it
must
be
,
either
Evident
by
its
own
light
,
or
Evidenceable
by
and
to
reason
,
Sect
.
5.
—
4.
That
it
must
be
certain
in
it self
,
or
establisht
on
sure
grounds
:
otherwise
it
is
not
possible
,
that
can
be
in
true
sense
called
a
Rule
,
which
one
may
follow
,
and
yet
go
wrong
,
or
be
misled
,
Sect
.
6.
All
these
properties
we
freely
grant
to
belong
to
that
which
is
truly
a
Rule
;
only
reserving
,
that
there
are
others
also
considerable
,
and
to
be
added
in
their
place
,
as
necessary
to
our
Rule
under
debate
,
as
any
of
these
.
4.
In
the
7th
.
and
8th
.
Section
,
He
giveth
us
the
meaning
of
the
word
Faith
;
where
(
having
premised
that
he
intends
not
to
give
a
rigorous
School-definition
of
it
,
but
only
to
reflect
upon
some
of
its
properties
)
he
giveth
this
account
;
Faith
is
the
same
with
Believing
[*](A44897-e15210-b)
*
In
the
common
sense
of
mankind
▪
And
Divine
Faith
is
the
believing
.
of
God
in
revealed
Truths
,
which
imports
necessarily
some
kind
of
knowledge
of
supernatural
things
;
as
Heaven
its
self
,
and
the
imcomparably
great
Good
of
the
next
Life
:
Moreover
Love
also
is
annexed
by
him
unto
this
Knowledge
or
Faith
,
(
as
he
parallels
them
)
without
which
none
can
come
to
heaven
:
Both
which
knowledge
and
love
are
had
by
Mankind
,
only
by
believing
;
and
hence
is
Faith
conceived
,
necessary
for
the
Salvation
of
Mankind
,
learned
,
and
vulgar
,
being
capable
of
the
same
;
which
faith
also
he
asserts
to
be
a
virtue
mainly
conducing
to
Bliss
,
and
its
Influence
towards
it
(
which
he
calls
its
merit
)
consisting
in
this
,
that
it
makes
us
submit
our
understandings
to
the
Divine
veracity
,
and
so
to
adhere
to
those
Truths
as
raise
us
to
heaven
.
S.
16.
This
is
all
that
he
giveth
in
this
discourse
to
make
out
the
sence
of
Faith
.
With
respect
to
this
discovery
of
Faith
,
we
shall
deal
openly
with
the
Author
,
in
granting
what
is
true
,
in
desiring
what
is
defective
,
and
in
denying
what
is
false
in
it
.
1.
We
grant
that
Faith
and
Believing
are
synonomous
or
of
the
same
signification
in
the
Common
sence
of
English
Mankind
;
and
that
Divine
Faith
is
the
believing
of
God
in
revealed
Truths
,
which
imports
knowledge
of
those
supernatural
good
things
as
Heaven
and
Eternal
Life
:
Again
,
that
Faith
,
which
giveth
this
knowledge
of
supernatural
good
things
,
worketh
by
love
toward
them
,
without
which
none
can
come
to
Heaven
;
And
this
Faith
is
necessary
for
Salvation
unto
all
sorts
of
men
,
learned
and
unlearned
,
of
higher
and
of
the
vulgar
sort
:
In
fine
we
yield
this
Faith
to
be
a
special
virtue
of
Christ
mainly
conducing
unto
Bliss
by
submitting
mens
understandings
unto
Divine
veracity
,
and
causing
them
to
adhere
to
those
Truths
,
which
being
truly
received
will
raise
up
souls
to
Heaven
:
This
is
the
sum
,
which
we
can
gather
out
of
many
words
of
the
Author
about
,
the
meaning
of
Faith
:
and
all
this
we
yield
freely
,
and
so
far
are
agreed
.
2.
Yet
as
defective
to
a
fuller
description
of
Faith
needful
in
our
debate
,
we
desire
some
addition
to
be
supplied
:
as
mainly
the
very
Form
of
it
,
which
must
difference
it
from
Faith
that
is
not
saving
.
This
by
the
Apostle
is
phrased
,
The
Spirit
of
Faith
,
2
Cor
.
4.13
.
or
Spiritual
Faith
:
which
we
conceive
not
to
be
sufficiently
expressed
by
Divine
Faith
forementioned
;
For
Faith
may
be
stiled
Divine
upon
several
accounts
.
1.
Objectively
only
,
as
receiving
those
Propositions
of
Truth
given
by
God
;
this
Humane
Faith
,
or
Credence
may
do
,
which
is
meerly
Natural
,
and
insufficient
thereby
to
raise
up
souls
to
Heaven
:
This
is
not
that
which
bringeth
to
Salvation
of
it self
.
2.
Subjectively
also
,
which
is
called
Divine
.
Eph.
2
8.
2
Pet
.
1.1
.
3.
Ratione
Principii
,
from
the
immediate
Creator
and
Donor
of
it
,
which
is
God
,
and
he
directs
this
lot
of
precious
Faith
unto
those
who
are
appointed
to
Salvation
:
Humane
Faith
is
his
Creature
,
but
this
Spirit
of
Faith
,
is
his
special
workmanship
in
Christ
Jesus
.
2.
Ratione
Formae
,
from
the
intrinsecal
formal
nature
of
it
,
which
is
Spirit
,
or
Spi●i●ual
and
Divine
;
2
Cor
.
4.13
.
Joh
.
3.6
.
2
Pet
.
1.4
now
Faith
is
a
member
of
the
new
birth
or
Creature
;
and
that
is
said
to
be
spirit
of
spirit
,
or
the
Divine
Nature
.
This
we
must
look
upon
as
transcendental
in
its
kind
,
seeing
it
issueth
from
God
its
Author
,
who
puts
forth
the
very
power
of
his
Arm
to
work
it
,
and
make
men
believe
:
Isay
.
53.1
.
Rom.
10.16
.
We
must
desire
this
then
in
that
Faith
about
the
Rule
whereof
we
are
now
discoursing
.
3.
Ratione
finis
,
from
the
end
is
it
rightly
stiled
Divine
,
because
it
maketh
the
soul
rest
in
God
,
and
acquiess
in
nothing
else
:
This
is
noted
of
Abraham
,
Ps.
116.7
.
Rom.
4.20
.
That
he
was
strong
in
faith
giving
glory
to
God
,
yea
Faith
is
not
satisfied
but
in
God
alone
,
as
its
full
Rest
.
This
is
indeed
Divine
Faith
,
and
being
so
taken
we
consider
it
in
this
place
:
which
may
yet
more
appear
by
these
proper
Acts
of
it
.
1.
That
it
only
doth
evidence
the
invisible
Father
in
the
Son
,
Heb
.
11.1
,
27.
and
by
his
Spirit
working
out
salvation
for
sinners
.
Rom.
10
,
9
,
10.
2.
That
it
causeth
Assent
unto
all
the
Truths
of
God
in
his
will
revealed
unto
this
Salvation
.
Joh
.
3.16
.
Joh
.
6.29
.
3.
That
it
worketh
Affiance
or
Trust
in
this
God
and
his
word
,
for
the
perfecting
of
this
Salvation
unto
souls
who
cleave
to
him
.
Heb
.
11.1
.
Isai
.
28.16
.
4.
That
it
consequently
realizeth
or
substantiates
things
hoped
for
,
and
so
holdeth
out
souls
in
the
certain
expectation
of
them
.
All
this
is
necessary
to
be
known
and
experimented
by
all
souls
of
all
ranks
,
learned
and
unlearned
,
in
order
to
their
salvation
:
Of
faith
under
this
discovery
do
we
treat
,
and
now
are
about
the
stating
the
Rule
of
it
.
3.
That
which
we
deny
as
odious
in
the
former
discovery
of
faith
by
the
Autho●…
is
the
Merit
of
the
work
or
influence
o●…
it
as
to
blessedness
;
which
we
detest
,
1.
As
brutish
,
that
any
Act
of
God●…
own
Grace
in
man
should
be
meritoou●…
as
to
him
who
gave
it
;
The
receiving
alm●…
by
the
beggars
hand
is
proportionably
more
meritorious
towards
a
Fellow-Creature
giving
it
,
than
any
work
of
dut●…
from
man
to
God
:
and
yet
none
wil●…
thank
the
beggar
for
taking
;
but
he
confesseth
himself
a
debtor
to
the
giver
.
2
,
We
cannot
but
abhorre
it
,
as
savouring
of
Antichristian
Pride
and
arrogancy
against
God
,
so
much
as
to
pretend
to
be
able
to
merit
of
him
,
any
thing
but
Hell
.
Let
the
Author
then
hugg●…
his
meritorious
Faith
and
fit
a
Rule
for
it
:
We
profess
,
that
Faith
alone
which
emptieth
man
of
himself
,
and
abaseth
him
,
giving
all
glory
to
God
for
his
free
grace
in
our
Salvation
.
We
shall
leave
this
,
with
one
single
note
impressed
on
it
.
In
all
Religions
,
wherein
a
Godhead
is
confessed
,
true
and
false
,
Mahometan
,
or
other
Pagan
Professions
;
as
they
all
pretend
Faith
in
their
Gods
,
so
none
(
that
we
know
)
arrogate
any
merit
to
their
Faith
,
save
only
Papists
.
That
which
is
worst
of
all
,
thinks
it
deserves
best
at
the
hands
of
God
:
Popish
Faith
then
is
that
only
which
is
asserted
meritorious
here
by
the
Author
.
He
had
need
therefore
to
find
out
such
a
Rule
which
may
maintain
the
merit
of
it
;
and
none
can
do
this
but
his
Tradition
:
He
hath
therefore
wisely
designed
it
.
5.
He
proceeds
to
speak
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
jointly
,
and
to
determine
several
properties
belonging
to
it
as
it
is
such
a
Rule
,
〈◇〉
S.
9
,
10
,
11
,
12
,
13
,
14
,
15
,
&
16.
And
he
summeth
up
all
in
S.
17.
which
thus
he
orderly
ranketh
.
1.
The
Rule
of
Faith
must
be
plain
and
self-evident
,
as
to
its
Existence
,
to
all
.
2.
It
must
be
Evidenceable
,
as
to
its
Rul●ng
Power
,
to
the
Vulgar
.
3.
It
must
be
apt
to
settle
and
justifie
undoubting
persons
.
4.
It
must
be
apt
to
satisfie
the
most
Sceptical
Dissenters
,
and
rational
Doubters
.
5.
It
must
be
able
to
convince
the
most
obstinate
and
acute
Adversaries
.
6.
That
it
be
built
upon
immoveable
grounds
,
and
be
certain
in
its
self
.
7.
That
it
be
absolutely
ascertainable
to
us
.
We
shall
not
weary
the
Readers
with
multiplying
word
for
word
,
but
we
have
those
two
things
to
try
.
1.
The
meaning
of
those
words
jointly
,
Rule
of
Faith
.
2.
The
Properties
claimed
thereunto
in
this
place
.
To
the
first
,
It
is
but
needful
to
understand
those
words
in
Syntaxe
,
as
well
as
in
their
single
posture
;
and
that
because
the
Author
changeth
often
his
form
of
expressing
this
:
Sometimes
he
stileth
it
,
the
Rule
of
Faith
as
in
the
Titles
of
his
Discourse
,
and
elsewhere
:
Sometimes
he
speaketh
of
it
as
the
Rule
or
Means
to
Faith
S.
9.
S.
11.
S.
15.
And
so
several
times
in
his
following
Treatise
:
Where
also
all
along
he
calleth
it
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
At
this
various
Expression
in
this
Controversie
we
are
at
a
stand
,
knowing
a
great
difference
between
Means
leading
to
Faith
,
and
the
Rule
of
Faith
it self
:
We
may
grant
something
to
be
the
means
(
or
as
the
Author
calls
it
)
a
Rule
to
Faith
,
which
we
shall
never
yield
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
about
which
Protestants
contend
with
Papists
.
It
was
doubtless
a
good
means
to
bring
Simon
Peter
to
the
Faith
,
when
his
Brother
Andrew
told
him
,
Joh
.
1.41.45
.
we
have
found
the
Messias
,
So
was
Phillips
report
to
Nathaniel
,
we
have
found
him
of
whom
Moses
in
the
Law
,
and
the
Prophets
did
write
,
Jesus
of
Nazareth
,
a
good
help
to
lead
him
to
Christ
,
and
to
faith
in
him
:
no
less
was
the
work
of
Phillip
and
Andrew
helping
the
Greeks
to
come
to
Jesus
,
Joh
.
12
▪
22
▪
a
very
ready
means
to
bring
them
to
Faith
in
him
;
yet
was
not
this
speech
of
theirs
the
Rule
of
Faith
;
For
that
was
only
the
Will
of
Christ
himself
the
Eternal
word
of
the
Father
,
which
was
revealed
to
them
.
We
shall
yield
the
same
to
speech
and
writing
of
Christ
,
that
they
are
means
to
Faith
,
but
of
themselves
no
Rule
of
Faith
.
In
the
present
Controversie
therefore
we
desire
to
clear
the
force
of
this
Genitive
(
of
Faith
)
which
is
not
here
the
Genitive
of
the
End
terminating
the
means
;
but
of
the
subject
regulated
or
to
be
ruled
,
and
ordered
by
that
Rule
unto
which
it
is
subjected
;
So
that
the
praeexistence
of
Faith
in
the
soul
is
supposed
before
the
actual
regulation
of
it
by
the
Rule
,
for
how
can
that
be
ruled
which
is
not
?
In
this
sence
do
the
Protestants
understand
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
in
their
Disputes
with
the
Jesuits
;
wherein
these
also
seem
to
agree
,
however
they
shift
sometimes
in
ambiguous
expressions
:
Of
this
therefore
we
fore-warn
the
Author
;
that
we
put
a
great
difference
between
means
directing
to
Faith
,
and
the
rule
disposing
of
Faith
:
To
this
we
shall
keep
close
in
our
present
work
,
and
make
bold
to
call
him
back
unto
it
,
where
his
words
vary
from
it
,
if
he
pretend
to
speak
any
thing
to
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
And
this
premised
,
we
shall
consider
now
the
properties
of
this
Rule
as
they
are
proposed
by
him
.
As
to
the
proper
conditions
named
by
the
Author
,
they
are
not
all
applicable
unto
that
which
is
stiled
,
a
Means
or
Rule
to
Faith
;
neither
as
we
suppose
,
so
intended
by
him
,
but
to
that
which
is
truly
the
Rule
of
Faith
;
which
must
command
,
order
,
and
direct
Faith
to
work
regularly
to
its
end
,
which
is
the
salvation
of
souls
:
And
all
these
which
are
orderly
forementioned
by
us
as
urged
by
him
together
with
the
reasonable
grounds
of
them
,
we
grant
,
and
shall
admit
them
in
our
further
Examination
following
;
but
these
are
not
all
,
to
which
we
are
bound
up
.
We
desire
therefore
the
addition
of
others
inseparable
to
that
,
which
truly
is
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
which
the
Discourser
must
also
grant
as
issuing
from
the
intrinsecal
nature
and
causes
of
it
;
and
this
ground
being
laid
,
we
shall
by
them
proceed
both
to
the
Examination
,
and
Demonstration
of
the
rule
of
Faith
,
following
the
Author
in
the
method
of
his
Discourses
.
All
the
Properties
mentioned
by
him
,
are
drawn
from
that
habitude
or
respect
,
which
the
rule
should
have
unto
the
persons
or
subjects
to
be
ruled
by
it
:
This
in
general
he
makes
all
mankind
,
but
in
special
,
sorts
them
into
vulgar
,
rude
,
or
unlearned
,
and
into
more
intelligent
,
ingenious
,
or
learned
men
;
and
into
those
that
are
setled
in
the
Faith
,
and
into
Heterodox
,
Infidels
,
who
are
Aliens
to
it
;
so
again
into
doubting
or
Sceptical
souls
,
and
such
as
are
obstinate
and
acute
Adversaries
unto
the
Faith
of
Christ
:
with
respect
to
these
several
sorts
he
frameth
the
properties
of
that
Rule
,
which
he
calleth
Means
to
Faith
,
and
Rule
of
Faith
,
promiscuously
and
unfitly
.
But
those
properties
,
which
we
desire
to
add
,
arise
from
God
the
Author
and
Object
of
Faith
,
who
alone
can
give
Rule
to
it
,
and
from
the
nature
of
faith
it self
,
which
is
to
be
ruled
by
it
:
as
1.
The
true
Rule
of
Faith
must
have
Supream
,
Soveraign
Power
,
praeceptive
as
well
as
directive
unto
Faith
:
Eph.
2.3
.
For
what
is
Faith
in
its
being
,
as
a
special
Grace
infused
,
but
the
creature
and
workmanship
of
God
?
And
if
so
,
none
can
give
Law
and
Rule
to
it
,
but
its
Maker
;
and
that
Rule
must
imply
Gods
own
supream
Authority
in
it
;
no
less
can
order
Faith
than
this
;
The
Command
of
God
,
and
the
Fa●th
of
Jesus
,
are
of
the
same
descent
and
must
be
kept
together
.
Again
,
the
true
genuine
Operation
of
Faith
is
reciprocal
with
God
;
this
giveth
God
that
glory
which
he
will
not
part
withall
to
another
;
Isai
.
26.4
.
Joh
.
14.1
.
therefore
must
the
Rule
of
this
supremely
order
it
unto
God
;
neither
is
it
to
be
directed
by
any
other
,
but
what
is
subordinate
to
this
.
He
will
not
have
his
Faith
any
more
than
his
Fear
taught
by
the
precepts
of
men
.
Supreme
then
is
the
rule
of
Faith
above
all
.
Deut
.
32.4
.
2.
The
rule
of
Faith
,
(
which
is
genuine
and
sincere
)
must
be
purely
right
and
strait
not
subject
to
any
warping
,
or
yielding
unto
the
crooked
dispositions
of
men
.
For
it
is
given
ftom
that
God
,
who
is
Rectitude
it self
;
Psal
.
19.8
.
and
he
hath
revealed
it
to
bring
souls
directly
to
him-self
,
that
they
may
not
miscarry
.
Otherwise
the
Rule
of
Faith
cannot
measure
true
,
and
false
,
or
right
and
wrong
,
which
is
the
most
intrinsecal
nature
of
it
.
Absolute
Rectitude
then
is
the
inseparable
Property
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
3.
The
rule
of
Faith
,
is
that
which
giveth
a
compleat
measure
,
and
full
proportion
to
Faith
,
for
all
its
Operations
toward
God
:
So
that
Faith
and
its
Rule
are
Commensurate
:
Likeness
of
Proportion
then
,
the
Rule
must
have
to
Faith
,
as
Faith
to
It
:
They
must
meet
even
,
or
else
Faith
will
be
found
faulty
and
so
want
its
measure
:
Proportionating
power
then
is
a
due
property
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
ordering
Faith
,
its
pitch
in
working
,
and
in
its
duration
.
4.
The
Rule
of
Faith
consists
in
Indivisibility
.
It
is
one
,
simple
,
undivided
thing
;
there
is
no
adding
to
it
,
nor
taking
from
it
,
nor
mixing
with
it
:
but
as
Faith
is
a
simple
Grace
singled
out
to
God
,
so
the
Rule
must
be
as
simple
or
undivided
,
which
keepeth
Faith
unfeigned
,
and
guides
inseparably
unto
God
.
A
warping
Rule
,
will
easily
make
a
warping
Faith
.
Indivisibility
then
is
a
natural
Property
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
So
much
for
our
Addition
;
other
things
might
be
added
,
but
they
will
fall
either
under
these
,
or
under
the
other
forenamed
by
him
.
And
now
having
gotten
this
Discovery
of
the
rule
of
Faith
,
we
shall
go
along
with
the
Discourser
,
and
try
to
what
and
to
whose
claim
this
truly
belongeth
;
as
he
directeth
in
his
next
Discourse
.
THE
Second
Discourse
EXAMINED
.
IN
this
Discourse
to
Examine
strictly
the
matters
contained
in
it
,
we
must
observe
,
that
after
the
pretext
of
the
Title
;
Shewing
the
two
first
Properties
of
the
rule
of
Faith
utterly
incompetent
to
Scripture
;
there
are
two
general
heads
offered
.
1.
Several
Presumptions
in
the
8
former
Sections
.
2.
Several
exceptions
pretended
to
be
answered
from
the
ninth
Section
to
the
end
.
1.
As
to
the
Presumptions
,
we
shall
consider
them
in
their
order
.
1.
It
is
presumed
,
that
there
was
a
clear
Description
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
given
in
the
former
Discourse
.
The
Author
must
not
be
offended
if
we
deny
this
,
for
it
is
a
defective
Explication
:
and
let
him
consider
whether
the
other
things
suggested
,
do
not
more
discover
the
nature
,
and
intrinsecal
properties
of
the
rule
of
Faith
than
his
.
If
he
will
join
issue
putting
all
together
we
shall
consent
.
2.
It
is
presumed
,
that
there
are
two
main
Pretenders
to
the
Claim
of
being
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
viz.
Tradition
and
Scripture
:
Although
the
Private
Spirit
,
Private
reason
,
Testimonies
of
Fathers
&c.
May
have
a
place
in
the
Claim
,
since
they
are
thought
to
give
unto
the
respective
reliers
on
them
security
of
Gods
sense
in
them
.
Sect
.
1.
We
shall
accept
of
this
Duel
between
Tradition
and
Scripture
,
leaving
out
all
Seconds
or
Thirds
,
to
shorten
our
Controversie
.
But
by
the
way
,
may
we
suppose
that
neither
of
these
nakedly
taken
,
can
be
the
rule
of
Faith
,
and
that
not
without
the
Authors
concession
.
For
in
the
close
of
the
first
Section
,
he
saith
,
Gods
sence
in
any
of
these
,
that
is
,
points
of
Faith
,
is
the
rule
of
Faith
;
and
the
others
obtain
that
name
only
,
because
they
are
thought
to
give
unto
the
Reliers
on
them
security
of
that
Gods
sence
.
If
the
Author
will
stand
to
his
word
here
,
we
are
like
to
put
our
discourses
into
a
fair
way
to
find
out
Truth
.
Gods
sence
either
in
Tradition
or
Scripture
is
,
as
we
take
it
,
Gods
mind
or
will
revealed
concerning
the
way
of
Salvation
,
which
we
assert
to
be
the
only
rule
of
Faith
:
Traditions
Oral
or
Scriptural
,
are
but
helps
to
bring
us
unto
this
sence
;
therefore
they
can
only
obtain
the
Title
of
the
rule
of
Faith
Metonymically
,
as
due
means
ordered
and
annexed
to
help
thereunto
.
So
that
the
issue
is
this
:
Gods
sence
,
mind
or
will
made
known
in
Scripture
,
or
Tradition
is
the
rule
of
Faith
only
.
Our
business
then
is
to
try
,
whether
his
Tradition
,
or
,
the
Scripture
of
Truth
,
which
we
assert
,
do
give
to
us
the
sence
of
God
.
3.
It
is
presumed
with
a
Note
,
that
they
who
say
Scripture
is
their
rule
of
Faith
cannot
mean
by
Scripture
the
sence
of
it
,
that
is
,
the
things
to
be
known
;
for
they
are
the
very
points
of
Faith
,
of
which
the
Rule
of
Faith
is
to
ascertain
us
.
The
rest
in
this
second
Section
are
fruitless
amplifications
.
1.
In
reply
to
this
,
we
deny
the
Authors
presumption
as
irrational
and
brutish
,
How
?
Cannot
they
who
say
Scripture
is
their
Rule
of
Faith
,
mean
by
scripture
the
sence
of
it
?
Why
so
?
Is
this
Impossibility
either
Moral
,
that
they
cannot
de
jure
or
in
right
reason
say
so
?
or
,
Is
it
natural
,
that
they
have
no
wit
,
or
ability
to
say
so
?
His
Jesuitical
Champions
against
Scripture
,
have
found
that
they
both
could
and
did
urge
the
Scripture
senced
by
God
in
it self
,
to
the
vanquishing
of
all
the
proud
and
blasphemous
attempts
of
those
Adversaries
against
his
word
.
And
they
had
the
greatest
reason
for
it
and
right
unto
it
;
for
it
is
brutish
to
give
a
senceless
Rule
to
men
,
much
more
to
believers
who
live
by
Faith
.
Unhappy
souls
must
Protestants
be
,
if
such
an
Impossibility
were
laid
upon
them
.
2.
His
reason
is
as
forceless
,
as
his
Assertion
wild
,
yea
and
crossing
to
the
very
words
dropt
from
him
in
the
close
of
the
former
Section
.
There
he
had
said
;
the
Rule
of
Faith
must
give
Gods
sence
,
that
is
,
Points
of
Faith
.
Here
he
saith
Scripture
as
a
rule
cannot
be
meant
with
the
sence
of
it
,
that
is
,
the
things
known
by
it
;
for
those
are
the
very
points
of
faith
:
How
do
these
agree
?
That
which
giveth
Gods
sence
,
even
points
of
faith
is
the
rule
of
faith
,
and
scripture
(
which
is
Gods
word
)
with
its
sence
which
are
points
of
faith
,
cannot
be
the
rule
of
faith
.
His
account
is
,
because
the
rule
Faith
must
ascertain
us
of
the
points
of
faith
,
therefore
it
cannot
be
the
same
.
Had
he
said
,
the
means
or
rule
to
Faith
do
but
ascertain
us
of
Gods
mind
in
points
of
faith
,
which
is
its
only
rule
,
he
had
made
a
clear
distinction
:
But
the
Rule
of
faith
is
altogether
the
same
with
Gods
sence
,
mind
,
or
will
,
in
points
of
Faith
revealed
,
which
must
regulate
Faith
in
all
its
Actings
.
3.
It
is
a
most
unjust
imposition
of
the
Author
upon
those
who
assert
Scripture
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
that
they
cannot
mean
by
the
word
Scripture
,
that
book
as
yet
senc't
,
or
interpreted
,
but
as
to
be
senc't
;
For
in
that
writing
there
are
none
but
characters
that
may
have
an
aptness
to
signifie
Gods
mind
.
Doth
the
Author
think
the
Protestants
in
their
Assertion
,
do
mean
by
Scripture
nothing
but
the
written
character
or
dead
letter
?
sure
he
cannot
think
so
,
if
he
have
read
their
defense
for
Scriptures
Right
to
be
the
Rule
of
faith
upon
that
account
that
it
doth
notifie
really
and
fully
the
mind
of
God
unto
salvation
:
But
if
yet
he
doe
think
so
,
and
would
force
them
to
this
,
that
by
the
term
of
Scripture
,
there
is
nothing
litterally
carried
but
written
Charectars
:
they
are
not
confined
to
his
thoughts
;
they
know
Scripture
or
the
word
of
God
,
and
the
will
of
God
are
convertible
;
and
so
they
assert
Scripture
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
Will
the
Discourser
suffer
it
,
if
we
should
say
,
that
he
cannot
mean
by
Tradition-oral
which
he
makes
the
Rule
of
his
Faith
,
any
word
senc't
,
but
to
be
senc't
,
which
were
i●deed
vox
et
praeterea
nihil
,
a
meer
empty
sound
?
We
think
not
;
and
yet
we
shall
try
him
upon
that
in
our
progress
with
him
.
Let
him
know
in
the
interim
that
we
both
can
and
will
mean
Scripture
the
Rule
of
our
Faith
,
senc't
by
God
himself
immediately
inspiring
the
penmen
of
it
,
when
he
gave
it
to
them
and
by
them
,
as
well
and
better
,
than
he
can
mean
his
Tradition
by
word
of
month
senc't
,
which
if
it
be
at
all
will
be
found
not
to
be
senc't
by
God
,
but
by
the
Evil
one
,
Even
that
Tradition
which
is
meerly
Popish
.
We
shall
leave
this
his
Quibble
upon
the
notion
of
Scripture
;
nothing
by
the
way
,
that
we
put
a
difference
between
the
sence
of
Scripture
,
which
God
hath
given
to
it
,
and
the
interpretation
which
Man
offereth
,
notwithstanding
he
confounds
them
in
this
Section
.
If
any
thing
else
be
intended
in
this
Impossibillity
laid
on
Scripture
as
a
Rule
of
Faith
,
to
be
senc't
;
It
must
be
on
this
account
,
that
the
Rule
of
Faith
is
supposed
by
him
not
possible
to
be
actually
senc't
;
And
his
discourse
then
may
be
summ'd
up
in
such
an
Argument
;
That
which
is
the
Rule
of
Faith
cannot
be
actually
senc't
,
but
Scripture
is
asserted
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
therefore
as
such
it
cannot
be
actually
senc't
.
The
Proposition
in
this
is
so
fowly
false
,
that
a
man
of
Reason
cannot
pretend
to
assert
it
,
and
then
the
whole
argument
is
vain
:
If
none
of
those
be
his
meaning
he
must
better
his
note
before
it
be
intelligible
;
and
if
in
any
we
have
but
his
meaning
,
we
have
also
made
good
that
Scripture
actually
senc't
by
God
,
and
only
so
,
is
the
true
Rule
of
Faith
.
4.
All
this
presumed
by
the
Author
,
he
proceeds
hereupon
to
apply
his
two
first
Properties
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
viz.
Evidence
of
its
Existence
and
Evidenceableness
of
its
Ruling
Power
to
all
;
and
to
prove
that
they
are
wholly
incompetent
unto
Scripture
in
Ss.
3
,
4
,
5
,
6
,
7
,
&
8.
1.
In
order
to
vindicate
Scriptures
consistency
with
these
properties
,
we
shall
premise
these
following
principles
to
be
foreknown
,
and
then
infer
such
Truths
as
may
tend
to
invalidate
the
proofs
urged
by
the
Discourser
,
against
it
.
1.
The
eternal
Jehovah
,
God
blessed
for
ever
,
who
is
the
first
and
the
last
of
all
his
Creatures
,
that
framed
the
Spirit
of
Man
within
him
,
is
the
Onely
,
Eminent
,
and
perfect
Law
giver
unto
the
Sons
of
Adam
,
who
works
Faith
and
ruleth
it
in
the
Hearts
of
his
,
D●us
ipse
est
Regula
primó
regulans
.
to
receive
Christ
Jesus
for
Righteousness
and
Life
,
as
revealed
by
him
.
This
is
the
Rule
of
Rules
.
2.
Gods
will
revealed
in
the
Rectitudo
and
Latitude
of
it
concerning
the
Just●fication
and
Salvation
of
sinners
by
the
Righteousness
of
his
own
Son
,
manifested
in
the
flesh
,
obeying
,
suffering
,
dying
,
rising
,
ascending
in
the
Flesh
to
the
Right
hand
of
the
Father
,
and
there
making
intercession
for
them
,
is
the
only
adequate
,
and
perfect
Rule
of
Faith
,
ruling
and
ordering
it
in
all
its
actings
upon
Christ
,
H●b
.
1.1
.
●
necessary
to
salvation
.
These
the
Authors
dares
not
deny
.
3.
This
will
of
God
was
committed
to
the
Prophets
,
and
by
his
own
Son
to
the
Apostles
,
that
it
might
be
made
known
to
th●ir
respective
Ages
,
and
succe●ding
Generations
,
these
two
waies
.
1.
By
Oral
Tradition
,
that
is
,
by
speaking
,
declaring
and
preaching
of
it
,
to
their
present
Posterity
in
their
respective
times
surviving
:
By
this
means
did
God
ordinarily
make
known
his
will
unto
his
people
,
to
the
daies
of
Moses
without
any
other
;
Onely
extraordinarily
God
did
in
those
daies
sometimes
appear
to
the
Patriarchs
,
and
immediately
spake
unto
them
himself
.
2.
By
written-Tradition
,
Ex.
24.4
.
Isai
.
30.8
.
Hab.
2
2.
Mat
.
28.19
.
2
Thes
.
2.2
.
Revel
.
1.11
.
which
is
Scripture
,
injoined
first
to
Moses
,
then
to
the
Prophets
afterward
by
the
Lord
unto
his
Apostles
,
this
way
or
means
they
used
jointly
with
their
preaching
,
which
also
was
to
continue
to
the
worlds
end
.
Where
note
,
that
these
were
but
means
to
help
unto
the
knowledge
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
the
reception
of
it
;
but
not
the
Rule
it self
;
This
is
only
the
will
of
God
revealing
Christ
Jesus
to
be
the
alone
Foundation
or
Ground-work
for
souls
to
build
on
unto
eternal
life
.
4.
This
will
of
God
made
known
by
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
either
in
preaching
or
writing
was
o●e
and
the
same
.
This
in
considering
and
comparing
the
old
and
new
Testament
is
most
evidently
apparent
:
So
that
neither
d●d
their
writing
add
unto
their
Tradition
,
nor
their
Tradition
to
their
writing
;
but
both
uttered
the
same
will
of
God
without
the
least
alteration
;
to
the
Exact
reception
whereof
the
Apostle
binds
the
Church
under
the
penalty
of
Christs
Anathema
.
Gal.
1.8
,
9.
Such
an
Identity
cannot
the
Discourser
shew
between
his
Tradition
,
and
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
and
Prophets
.
It
will
therefore
be
found
no
Tradition
from
them
,
or
owned
by
them
.
●
Tim
.
3.16
.
Jer
.
23
,
28
,
29.
Heb
.
4.12
.
5.
The
whole
Scripture
wherein
this
Will
is
made
known
is
inspired
,
or
spirited
by
God
himself
:
and
so
senced
by
him
:
So
that
it
is
no
dead
letter
,
but
the
quick
and
lively
word
of
God
,
he
breathing
in
it
and
by
it
;
nor
needs
it
to
be
senced
by
mens
Tradition
:
Hereupon
it
is
,
that
the
Holy
Ghost
guiding
the
Pen-men
of
Scripture
,
useth
the
Titles
of
Scripture
and
God
synonymously
,
As
Gal.
3.8
.
The
Scripture
foreseeing
,
that
God
would
justifie
the
Heathen
by
Faith
,
preached
before
the
Gospel
to
Abraham
,
saying
,
In
thee
shall
all
Nations
be
blessed
.
Did
the
Scripture
foresee
?
which
is
but
a
dead
letter
in
the
Authors
account
?
or
,
Did
not
God
speaking
in
and
by
the
Scripture
foresee
this
?
Doubtless
it
was
so
;
yet
Scripture
is
intitled
to
one
of
the
greatest
Acts
of
Gods
Soveraignty
even
his
Providence
:
God
therefore
is
in
it
and
breaths
forth
his
will
by
it
unto
men
.
Scriptura
est
Regula
regulata
.
〈◇〉
.
Is
not
this
then
the
Rule
of
Faith
ruled
by
God
himself
?
6.
The
Scripture
hence
is
concluded
to
be
worthy
of
Faith
,
and
to
be
beleeved
for
its
self
,
it
being
Gods
very
breathing
,
and
therefore
deservedly
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
This
was
and
is
an
Apostolical
Principle
known
sufficiently
in
the
Church
,
and
therefore
to
be
beleeved
by
Christians
;
and
not
to
be
proved
,
as
if
it
wanted
Evidence
of
its
Existence
:
seeing
it
hath
been
ever
,
and
uninterruptedly
so
received
in
the
Church
both
Jewish
and
Christian
:
And
to
go
about
to
shake
it
now
,
is
but
to
kick
against
the
pricks
;
The
word
of
the
Lord
is
such
a
fire
,
as
will
devour
the
Adversaries
of
it
.
7.
This
Hypothesis
we
adde
,
That
both
these
waies
and
means
of
oral
and
written-Tradition
for
making
known
the
will
of
God
for
salvation
by
Christ
(
which
is
,
the
onely
Rule
of
Faith
)
were
and
are
equally
Evident
,
or
Evidenceable
as
to
their
Existence
to
all
persons
whom
they
did
or
do
concern
.
The
Truth
of
rhis
is
indubitable
,
as
to
those
Ages
and
generations
,
wherein
both
those
means
were
given
together
;
That
speech
was
Evident
,
in
declaring
the
will
of
God
,
unto
them
that
could
understand
speech
;
and
that
writing
was
as
Evid●nt
a
means
to
reveal
the
will
of
God
to
them
,
who
were
capable
and
knew
letters
,
who
can
doubt
,
but
he
,
who
is
resolved
to
beleeve
nothing
?
But
the
greatest
trouble
is
about
succeeding
Generations
,
Dub
.
whether
they
are
as
equally
evident
to
all
persons
concerned
now
,
as
they
were
then
?
Here
it
seems
Scripture
must
depend
upon
Tradition
for
i●s
Evidence
;
for
what
Posterity
can
know
,
this
to
be
the
Scripture
,
but
that
,
to
which
their
Fathers
or
Predecessors
do
dictate
,
and
declare
the
same
,
and
if
so
,
Tradition
is
more
evident
,
giving
Evidence
to
the
very
Existence
of
Scripture
.
Sol
.
To
remove
this
rub
out
of
the
way
,
we
shall
suggest
these
notes
.
1.
That
both
these
means
of
bringing
men
unto
the
knowledge
and
Faith
of
Christ
,
were
instituted
by
God
jointly
to
carry
on
that
work
,
Hos
.
6.5
.
Hos
.
8.12
.
and
respectively
to
concur
in
their
mutual
help
of
each
other
for
the
effecting
of
the
same
:
Otherwise
God
would
not
have
needlesly
added
Scripture
to
Oral-preaching
or
Tradition
by
word
of
mouth
.
2.
The
mutual
help
of
these
to
each
other
is
,
1.
That
true
and
faithful
Tradition
declareth
the
Scripture
to
be
Gods
true
written
Law
or
will
.
2.
That
this
Scripture
doth
it self
demonstrate
by
its
innate
light
,
that
the
Tradition
of
the
same
mind
of
God
contained
in
this
writing
is
true
:
So
that
the
evidence
of
Scriptures
existence
may
be
and
is
known
to
us
by
way
of
Tradition
;
but
the
Evidence
of
the
Being
of
Traditions
truth
,
can
ordinarily
be
given
alone
from
Scriptures
Testimony
.
Let
men
judge
how
one
Evidence
can
help
to
Faith
without
the
other
.
3.
The
help
given
by
Tradition
to
Evidence
Scriptures
Existence
,
is
not
ment
of
Popish
Tradition
;
For
Gods
Tradition
instituted
,
was
before
either
Pope
,
Papists
or
their
Tradition
were
heard
of
in
the
world
.
And
besides
this
since
their
Tradition
hath
been
declared
and
confirmed
by
their
Trent-Fathers
;
thereby
they
have
made
no
Scripture
to
be
Scripture
,
and
the
lying
vanities
of
their
own
brains
,
to
be
the
very
will
of
God
,
which
is
horrid
Blasphemy
.
Now
this
Tradition
alone
is
that
for
which
the
Author
contendeth
under
the
general
notion
of
Tradition
,
but
he
may
know
,
we
can
distinguish
and
deny
.
8.
In
the
last
place
,
this
is
the
closing
Hypothesis
.
That
the
Reason
of
Gods
command
for
writing
his
will
,
which
was
once
only
delivered
by
speech
or
word
of
mouth
,
was
to
provide
against
the
Evils
incident
unto
Tradition
;
and
to
be
as
a
Touch-stone
or
Rule
to
try
True
and
False
Tradition
by
it
in
all
ages
.
This
is
most
true
,
for
God
himself
calleth
back
straglers
by
Tradition
,
to
the
Law
,
and
to
the
Testimony
to
set
them
right
.
But
we
suppose
the
Author
will
boggle
at
it
,
and
not
so
easily
grant
it
:
Therefore
shall
we
labour
to
clear
it
to
mens
Reasons
,
and
Conscience
:
by
these
Considerations
.
1.
Consider
we
the
evils
incident
to
Tradition
from
Adam
to
Christ
:
The
first
Tradition
of
Gods
Covenant
for
salvation
given
by
himself
to
Adam
,
was
by
the
old
serpent
corrupted
in
his
Assault
;
Hath
God
said
ye
shall
not
eate
of
every
tree
of
the
garden
?
Gen.
7.1
.
His
wile
was
to
make
them
forget
Gods
voice
,
and
so
he
did
:
Adam
delivered
the
same
Law
of
sacrifice
to
Cain
and
Abel
;
This
kept
it
by
Faith
unto
the
death
;
the
other
corrupted
it
,
and
slew
his
Brother
for
keeping
it
conscientiously
:
So
in
Cain's
line
Tradition
of
Gods
will
was
falsified
,
however
in
the
line
of
Abel
it
was
for
some
time
preserved
in
its
Truth
:
So
is
it
evident
in
the
several
lines
of
Noah
,
Abraham
,
&c.
Unto
Moses
,
that
however
their
Fathers
delivered
purely
Gods
truth
unto
them
by
word
of
mouth
;
yet
their
children
perverted
it
in
giving
it
down
;
So
that
God
complains
of
their
unfaithfulness
by
Moses
in
his
Age
,
and
by
the
Prophets
in
their
respective
generations
,
that
by
adding
,
and
taking
away
,
and
mingling
mens
Inventions
with
his
Law
they
falsified
his
Tradition
.
No
otherwise
was
it
in
the
Gospel
time
of
Christs
manifestation
in
the
Flesh
;
1
Tim
.
3.16
.
1
Tim
.
4.1.2.3
.
2
Thes
.
7.7.11
.
No
sooner
was
the
Mysterie
of
Godliness
preached
but
the
Mysterie
of
Iniquity
was
set
on
working
,
and
the
Tradition
of
this
exceedingly
obscured
the
Truth
of
Christ
preached
;
So
that
by
Traditionary
lyars
then
,
great
obstructions
were
laid
to
the
spreading
of
the
Gospel
,
and
the
ground
work
also
of
the
great
Apostasie
then
foretold
:
So
that
de
facto
it
appears
that
Cr●l-Tradition
was
liable
to
great
corruption
;
There
was
Cause
then
,
why
the
only
wise
God
should
provide
against
such
growing
evils
in
his
Church
.
2.
Consider
we
the
provision
made
by
God
against
this
incroaching
corruption
,
which
was
two-fold
.
1.
Extraordinary
,
Gen.
3.4.6
,
12
,
17
,
26.35
.
&c.
and
that
was
by
his
own
frequent
appearing
to
the
Fathers
before
the
Law
,
delivering
to
them
his
Covenant
,
and
repeating
it
as
necessity
required
,
by
reason
of
their
weakness
several
times
,
unto
the
daies
of
Moses
;
Exod
.
19
,
20.
which
also
he
vouchsafed
then
to
Israel
,
to
fix
his
Law
on
their
hearts
;
and
no
less
as
he
thought
fit
,
several
waies
appeared
he
to
the
Prophets
to
reform
the
abuses
of
corrupt
Tradition
in
their
respective
times
which
needs
no
proof
.
2.
Ordinary
Provision
also
did
God
make
against
the
falsifying
of
his
Tradition
,
Exod
,
24.4
.
Evod
.
31.18
.
Deut
.
10.5
.
Deut
.
17.18
.
Jos
.
1.8
.
which
was
his
command
for
writing
his
Covenant
,
as
he
began
to
do
somewhat
of
it
himself
,
with
his
own
finger
:
This
copy
would
he
have
to
be
reserved
,
and
laid
up
,
both
for
Rulers
,
Priests
,
and
People
to
order
all
their
thoughts
,
words
,
and
waies
by
it
;
and
thereby
also
to
distinguish
between
Truth
and
Falshood
,
good
and
evil
.
No
less
upon
this
account
did
he
enjoyn
the
Prophets
in
their
respective
times
successively
,
to
write
what
they
preached
,
at
least
an
abridgement
of
it
,
and
lay
it
up
for
a
Record
to
testifie
against
and
reform
sinners
who
walked
after
the
vain
Traditions
of
their
Fore-fathers
.
Joh
.
5.39
.
Yea
further
our
Lord
Jesus
himself
provoked
the
Pharisees
(
who
by
their
Tradition
made
the
Law
of
God
of
none
effect
)
unto
the
Scripture
,
as
the
great
and
true
Witness
of
himself
.
Once
more
the
Apostle
by
the
Spirit
of
Christ
giveth
us
the
sure
account
of
the
reason
for
writing
Gods
Law
,
Gal.
3.19
.
it
was
added
because
of
Transgression
,
that
is
,
to
prevent
Israels
warping
or
turning
aside
to
false
waies
of
worship
,
by
the
superstitious
and
idolatrous
Traditions
of
their
Fathers
.
From
all
which
put
together
it
appears
that
it
was
Gods
mind
to
have
Oral-Tradition
tried
,
rectified
,
and
ruled
by
his
written
will
,
or
Scripture
;
This
then
must
be
a
better
evidence
of
Truth
than
the
word
of
mouth
by
men
.
3.
As
assistent
unto
the
former
,
we
shall
adde
only
this
note
,
Natural
Reason
,
Sense
and
Experience
concurre
to
make
good
this
Hypothesis
:
For
the
strongest
and
most
faithful
memory
of
man
may
sail
sometimes
,
and
therefore
their
speeches
faulter
,
but
if
the
matters
testified
be
written
,
and
upon
faithful
Record
,
this
will
testifie
my
mistakes
in
mens
speeches
,
as
the
Authentick
Copy
by
which
they
must
be
proved
.
The
Author
therefore
who
pretends
to
so
much
reason
,
we
hope
will
not
deny
this
;
And
if
so
,
his
Reason
will
guide
him
to
yield
mo●e
Honour
to
Gods
Scripture
,
than
to
Mans
.
2.
These
things
being
premised
;
to
counterwork
the
Authors
proofs
of
the
Incompetency
of
his
two
first
Rules
unto
Scripture
.
We
shall
summe
up
his
objections
shortly
,
and
return
to
them
orderly
.
1.
He
urgeth
,
It
is
not
evident
,
that
the
books
pretended
to
be
Gods
word
are
indeed
Scripture
,
or
divinely
inspired
S.
3.
—
2.
It
is
not
evident
,
how
many
those
books
of
Scripture
are
S.
4.
—
3.
It
is
not
evident
,
that
the
Origin●l
Copy
of
those
books
was
preserved
indeficiently
entire
.
S.
5.
—
4.
It
is
not
evident
that
the
Translations
of
this
Origin●l
are
true
.
S.
6
,
—
5.
It
is
not
evident
,
but
that
the
Transcribers
or
Printers
have
been
careless
,
Knaves
,
or
Hereti●ks
.
S.
7.
—
6.
Suppose
all
these
were
clear
.
The
true
Sence
of
Scripture
is
not
evident
.
S.
8.
All
th●s
is
hid
from
the
Vulgar
,
&c.
Now
to
reply
unto
these
,
we
shall
from
the
former
Truths
inferre
.
1
,
That
the
Scripture
as
to
its
Existence
in
the
book
supposed
,
is
as
evident
or
Evidenceable
to
Subjects
capable
of
knowing
it
:
as
that
there
is
light
,
or
that
there
are
Colorus
to
such
as
have
the
faculty
of
seeing
.
And
it
is
absurd
to
require
that
light
should
be
evident
into
blind
men
.
That
there
is
such
a
book
of
Scripture
called
the
Bible
in
the
world
,
All
nations
Infidel
or
Christian
must
confess
,
as
much
as
they
do
any
known
books
of
men
:
but
to
know
this
to
be
divinely
inspired
belongeth
only
to
subjects
qualified
,
which
some
rude
and
vulgar
may
be
,
and
some
wise
and
learned
of
the
world
may
not
be
,
from
whom
it
●s
hid
.
1.
It
was
evident
to
be
Gods
word
,
(
as
the
Author
grants
)
to
them
in
whose
daies
it
was
given
;
So
that
,
what
was
,
may
be
still
.
2.
We
assert
Faithful
Tradition
,
to
have
its
proper
use
for
making
known
this
book
to
be
the
Scripture
of
God
from
Generation
to
Generation
:
So
God
ordered
the
Fathers
to
deliver
his
Law
downward
to
their
children
,
Psal
.
78.5
.
and
these
to
their
succeeding
generation
.
3.
Hence
also
it
follows
,
that
Scripture
which
is
the
written
will
of
God
is
as
self
evident
to
them
who
can
see
and
read
it
,
as
the
living
voice
of
any
declaring
the
same
to
them
,
who
hear
it
.
But
to
require
this
to
be
so
manifest
unto
such
vulgar
,
as
are
wilfully
ignorant
,
or
to
such
Doubters
,
who
will
not
be
resolved
,
or
to
more
curious
searchers
,
who
make
it
their
work
to
find
out
,
and
cavil
at
the
seeming
contradictions
of
Scripture
is
most
unreasonable
;
for
they
are
not
subjects
capable
to
receive
that
,
which
the
meanest
understanding
diligently
exercised
therein
,
may
and
doth
perceive
.
2.
We
assert
,
That
it
is
no
less
Evident
,
or
Evidenceable
to
Subjects
capable
,
even
the
vulgar
,
desiring
after
knowledge
,
that
the
number
of
books
,
which
are
the
Scripture
of
God
,
is
determined
in
the
old
and
new
Testament
,
written
by
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
.
That
no
more
are
truly
Scripture
,
but
such
as
were
written
by
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
,
is
confessed
,
not
only
by
Bellarmine
and
other
Jesuits
:
but
by
the
Trent-Convention
it self
unto
which
the
Author
subscribeth
.
It
is
true
that
all
of
them
do
father
Apocryphal
books
upon
the
Prophets
,
which
were
none
of
theirs
;
but
in
many
particulars
appear
to
be
the
works
of
Impudent
lyars
.
And
these
they
insert
among
the
Scriptures
of
the
Prophets
which
their
seduced
people
do
readily
swallow
down
:
But
never
did
so
much
darkness
from
the
bottomless
pit
so
farre
prevail
as
to
hide
this
imposture
from
the
true
and
seeing
witnesses
of
Jesus
,
but
that
they
could
discover
it
;
and
the
light
shining
at
this
day
must
needs
clear
up
these
mists
of
delusion
,
if
men
were
willing
to
see
the
light
.
However
these
proofs
we
suggest
.
1.
Acts
10.43
.
1
Pet
.
1.10
The
Scripture
of
the
New
Testament
(
which
the
Author
will
not
deny
)
beareth
witness
to
all
the
Prophets
,
that
they
did
speak
and
write
of
that
salvation
for
sinners
purchased
by
Jesus
,
and
evidently
manifested
in
the
Gospel
.
All
which
writings
of
Moses
and
the
Prophets
are
owned
,
Rom
▪
3.2
.
as
the
Infallible
Oracles
of
God
,
by
the
Spirit
of
Christ
.
This
Evidence
is
sure
.
2.
As
to
the
new
Testament
,
the
known
Titles
of
the
Pen-men
,
the
constant
reception
of
them
in
the
Church
,
and
the
faithful
Tradition
,
which
God
hath
continued
by
his
witnesses
from
Age
to
Age
,
whose
Authority
we
assert
,
do
give
full
evidence
of
its
Existence
,
and
ruling
Power
also
over
Consciences
(
It
containing
with
the
rest
the
will
of
God
)
:
So
that
unless
men
shut
their
eies
,
they
may
see
clearly
the
Power
of
God
in
this
Scripture
inabling
it
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
Yet
we
need
not
any
Tradition
descending
from
the
Mysterie
of
Iniquity
to
give
Test
unto
this
;
but
do
deny
it
,
as
the
convoy
of
all
Falshood
;
which
the
Polemical
discourses
of
the
Protestants
h●ve
sufficiently
discovered
against
the
Jesuits
.
Let
Readers
judge
.
3.
We
affirm
,
That
God
the
Author
of
the
Scriptures
gave
the
first
and
original
Copies
in
the
language
known
and
used
in
the
Church
;
viz.
The
old
Testament
in
the
Hebrew
mostly
,
and
the
new
in
the
Greek
tongue
.
In
these
God
ordered
his
Prophets
and
Apostles
to
preach
and
write
unto
his
Church
in
their
respective
times
;
And
the
wisdom
of
God
herein
,
would
not
make
his
Ministers
to
be
Barbarians
unto
his
people
to
whom
they
did
preach
and
write
.
This
Truth
is
made
good
by
Protestant
writers
against
that
Trent
Constitution
,
which
maketh
their
Vulgar
Latin
the
only
Authentick
language
to
correct
others
by
it
:
We
refer
for
a
larger
account
unto
themselves
,
yet
here
we
shall
suggest
something
to
the
Objection
.
1.
We
accept
from
God
,
and
assert
,
the
Testimony
of
Faithful
Tradition
from
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
continued
by
his
good
Providence
thorough
all
succeeding
Ages
unto
this
d●y
.
Yet
here
also
we
exclude
Popish
Tradition
as
perniciously
false
,
corrupting
and
destroying
the
Truth
of
Gods
written
will
.
2.
We
reject
as
a
most
unreasonable
demand
,
that
for
the
just
reception
of
the
Scripture
as
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
the
vulgar
in
every
nation
must
know
and
understand
the
Original
languages
wherein
they
were
given
;
or
be
sure
of
the
skill
of
others
in
the
same
.
Was
it
necessary
,
when
the
Spirit
fell
upon
the
Apostles
inabling
them
to
speak
the
great
things
of
God
in
the
several
languages
of
all
the
nations
,
then
dwelling
in
Jerusalem
,
that
they
must
understand
Hebrew
and
Greek
,
or
be
perswaded
of
other
mens
skils
therein
,
to
receive
the
words
of
the
Prophets
urged
,
as
a
Rule
of
faith
?
Was
it
not
enough
for
them
to
receive
this
will
of
God
written
by
the
Prophets
,
and
now
revealed
unto
them
in
their
native
tongues
,
for
a
Rule
unto
their
Faith
?
No
more
necessity
is
there
now
,
that
the
vulgar
should
un●erstand
the
Originals
;
neither
is
there
just
cause
for
them
to
mist●ust
their
Teachers
who
faithfully
open
this
Scripture
to
them
;
seeing
they
offer
their
doctrine
to
be
tried
;
and
Enemies
themselves
cannot
justly
gainsay
it
;
and
the
very
Truth
revealed
from
Scripture
in
their
Mother
Tongue
,
carrieth
self
Evidence
in
it
to
their
Consciences
.
This
then
is
too
frivolous
,
any
way
to
impede
the
Scripture
to
be
the
Rule
of
faith
,
for
the
want
of
Evidence
or
Evidenceableness
of
its
Existent
Power
.
The
Author
hath
more
Cause
to
find
fault
with
his
own
Tradition
,
which
teacheth
their
vulgar
to
worship
God
in
an
unknown
tongue
;
which
is
both
abominable
to
God
and
destructive
to
those
poor
deluded
souls
.
4.
We
conclude
,
that
the
same
God
,
who
gave
the
Scriptures
in
the
first
Copy
;
as
he
did
inable
his
servants
to
speak
it
in
all
languages
:
so
doubtless
ordered
he
them
to
write
those
revelations
of
God
to
the
nations
converted
in
their
own
Languages
;
which
was
no
more
,
than
the
Translations
of
them
;
whence
others
in
successive
times
attempted
the
same
work
for
the
edifying
of
the
Church
,
and
informing
others
.
So
that
it
is
not
impossible
but
that
the
Truth
of
Scripture
may
be
self-evident
,
though
translated
:
it
is
not
word
,
but
matter
,
which
is
the
Rule
of
faith
.
Yet
more
distinctly
to
return
to
this
1.
We
suppose
there
may
be
litteral
mistakes
in
Translations
,
yet
are
these
triable
and
corrigible
by
other
hands
;
So
there
is
a
remedy
:
But
among
all
none
are
more
vi●ely
corrupt
,
and
justly
culpable
then
the
Authors
vulgar
Latin
,
which
his
Tradition
upholdeth
.
2.
We
acknowledge
,
that
in
these
,
that
Scripture
which
holdeth
forth
the
will
of
God
to
salvation
,
is
self-Evident
;
and
to
be
known
.
3.
We
embrace
faithful
Tradition
,
as
a
good
Testimony
in
this
case
also
;
though
we
refuse
Popish
fables
.
4.
It
is
unequa●
to
require
the
vulgar
to
have
skill
in
all
Translations
before
they
can
take
Scripture
as
a
Rule
of
faith
;
It
is
enough
that
they
receive
the
Truth
of
God
from
thence
,
by
those
who
faithfully
declare
it
,
and
believe
it
,
because
it
is
written
.
But
as
to
the
matter
of
Translations
and
their
force
,
it
is
a
work
of
a
larger
scope
,
however
the
Author
do
but
touch
it
here
to
make
a
stumbling
block
;
we
must
therefore
referre
to
the
greater
works
of
Protestants
clearing
this
:
and
note
by
the
way
that
no
soul
hath
cause
to
be
offended
,
e●ther
at
Translators
or
Translation
,
when
the
true
will
of
God
unto
Salvation
is
held
out
by
them
.
Scr●pture
hath
its
Evident
Existence
,
and
evidenceable
power
even
in
Translations
.
5.
God
being
the
only
Author
and
Protector
of
Scriptures
Truth
,
we
infer
,
That
the
variety
,
weakness
,
insufficiency
and
knavery
of
Copiers
,
Transcribers
,
Scribes
,
and
Printers
,
cannot
enervate
the
Evidence
of
Scriptures-Tradition
,
or
incapacitate
it
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
The
o●ly
wise
God
hath
over-ruled
them
all
,
and
stirred
up
able
and
upright
men
to
display
the
hypocrisie
of
Hereticks
;
and
ev●dence
his
written
truth
,
which
is
evident
to
this
day
.
Never
were
there
a
worse
pack
of
knaves
,
than
those
who
●esigned
the
Index
Expurgatorius
;
and
yet
they
have
got
l●ttle
by
their
knavery
.
We
are
no
whit
startled
at
this
,
neither
hath
any
soul
reason
to
be
offended
at
the
Scripture
for
it
;
For
the
Mysterie
of
Truth
and
Godlines
,
is
too
mighty
for
the
Mystery
of
Iniquity
and
Falshood
;
and
will
preva
l.
We
shall
only
say
for
a
close
of
this
;
That
faith
in
Gods
Providence
,
a
discerning
reception
of
faithful
Tradition
,
and
a
dil●gent
search
into
the
Scriptures
,
and
studying
of
them
,
will
clear
its
evidence
sufficiently
,
and
secure
us
from
being
cheated
by
knaves
.
6.
The
Scripture
being
spirited
by
God
,
and
so
truly
senced
,
we
close
against
the
last
objection
.
That
it
is
no
hard
task
to
be
certain
of
the
sence
of
it
,
God
having
sp●ken
plainly
therein
his
mind
and
will
as
to
mans
salvation
.
Psal
.
19.7.8
.
This
testimony
of
God
is
sure
making
wise
the
simple
,
yea
his
Command
is
pure
enlightening
the
eies
;
So
the
Psalmist
saith
,
who
doubtless
(
without
disparagement
to
him
)
knew
the
Scripture
better
then
this
Discourser
.
As
to
the
numerous
Comments
,
and
infinite
disputes
pre●ended
about
the
sence
of
it
,
which
render
it
no
task
for
the
vulgar
to
undertake
;
We
shall
only
say
,
the
multitude
of
those
vain
words
cannot
darken
the
knowledge
of
God
plainly
exhibited
therein
;
Yet
for
this
trouble
may
we
charge
mainly
his
Jesuitical
corrupters
.
But
yet
neither
they
nor
any
other
deceivers
can
keep
the
Truth
of
God
therein
from
shining
forth
:
His
instance
in
the
point
of
Christs
Divinity
,
that
it
is
obscured
by
Interpreters
of
the
Scripture
is
forceless
;
For
however
the
Gospel
is
hid
to
them
,
who
will
not
see
,
and
to
the
wise
of
this
world
,
who
will
not
receive
the
simplicity
of
his
word
,
but
rather
perish
:
Yet
to
humble
souls
no
Truth
is
more
apparent
or
more
expresly
delivered
in
the
Scripture
,
than
the
God-head
of
Christ
.
Perverse
men
may
make
darkness
light
,
and
l●ght
darkness
unto
themselves
.
And
lastly
to
his
Censure
that
it
is
perfect
phrenzy
to
deny
,
that
to
search
out
the
sence
of
Scripture
is
not
a
task
for
the
vulgar
,
we
shall
only
inquire
of
him
:
Did
not
Christ
speak
to
the
vulgar
among
the
rest
,
when
he
said
,
Search
the
Scriptures
,
they
are
they
which
testifie
of
me
?
Did
he
not
therein
propose
the
Rule
of
Faith
to
them
,
as
a
task
or
work
fit
for
them
to
undertake
?
or
was
Christ
phrantick
when
he
layeth
such
a
task
upon
every
one
that
would
be
saved
,
or
is
capable
of
it
?
Of
such
phrenzy
we
are
not
afraid
to
be
by
this
Discourser
charged
as
guilty
.
And
now
having
thus
sifted
the
first
general
part
of
this
Discourse
consisting
of
his
Presumptions
about
,
and
his
Objections
against
the
Scripture
;
We
propose
it
to
ingenious
Readers
to
Judge
,
What
hath
he
said
more
in
this
Controversie
against
the
Scripture
,
than
the
Subtilest
Jesuits
have
s●id
before
him
?
Who
have
been
answered
sufficiently
by
the
Truth
it self
.
Or
what
he
proved
against
the
Evidence
of
Scriptures
Ex●stence
,
or
the
Evidenceableness
of
its
power
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
?
Only
he
hath
set
up
a
man
of
straw
to
fight
aga●nst
it
;
He
disputes
against
Scriptures
letter
without
its
sence
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
which
never
any
Protestant
maintained
.
Let
him
glory
in
his
victory
,
It
is
enough
that
his
design
is
so
farre
seen
.
2.
In
the
other
general
Head
of
this
Discourse
,
he
proposeth
several
Exceptions
that
may
be
alledged
against
his
objections
,
and
therein
seeks
to
solve
them
or
take
them
off
.
It
is
requisite
,
that
we
consider
,
how
he
dischargeth
himself
in
this
also
,
and
to
animadvert
what
is
just
upon
the
same
.
1.
He
alledgeth
as
urged
by
Protestants
.
1.
That
,
1
H●story
.
the
defects
pretended
in
Scripture
by
him
in
his
former
objections
may
be
provided
against
by
skill
in
history
.
Whereunto
we
shortly
reply
.
1.
That
the
defects
charged
on
Scripture
by
him
are
Causeless
,
and
therefore
need
not
to
be
supplyed
by
History
.
2.
We
deny
not
true
History
the
Authority
of
an
Humane
Testimony
to
matter
of
Truth
.
3.
The
Authors
Tradition
needs
the
help
of
History
more
than
Scripture
;
for
it
is
humane
at
best
,
and
therefore
mans
Testimony
must
support
it
;
nay
and
in
most
things
is
false
too
,
and
therefore
such
Historians
will
serve
them
best
,
that
had
nothing
but
bare
H●ar-say
for
what
they
wrote
.
2.
He
excepts
if
History
must
provide
,
then
all
that
take
Scripture
for
their
Rule
of
Faith
must
be
skilled
in
Histories
:
Now
few
of
the
unlearned
vulgar
,
nor
of
the
middle
sort
of
prudent
men
,
nay
of
very
good
Schollars
are
able
to
judge
of
points
in
History
;
Then
their
faith
is
not
rational
or
virtuous
,
but
an
hair
braind
op●n●onative
rashness
bu●lt
upon
principles
whereof
they
can
make
no
judgment
.
Section
.
9.
To
all
which
we
say
.
1.
There
is
no
such
need
of
skill
in
variety
of
Histories
;
The
Scripture
is
self-evident
as
to
saving
Truth
;
and
it
is
enough
for
all
to
be
skill'd
in
the
Sacred
history
of
God
,
given
by
his
Prophets
,
to
bring
to
Faith
unto
salvation
:
Learned
and
unlearned
ought
to
get
skill
herein
if
they
be
saved
.
2.
Faith
built
hereupon
is
rational
and
virtuous
working
by
love
,
obedience
unto
God
,
and
no
hair-braind
Opinionative
rashness
.
3.
Whatever
help
Protestants
may
crave
from
H
stories
of
men
as
to
Consent
,
the
Author
must
know
,
they
take
not
them
for
Principles
to
build
their
faith
upon
,
they
know
better
.
The
Author
might
then
have
spared
th●s
historical
Allegation
;
for
it
hurts
not
our
Cause
;
souls
may
be
true
Beleevers
,
and
yet
no
Historirians
.
2
Providence
.
2.
He
brings
in
some
replying
(
as
he
saith
)
of
necessity
,
and
not
willingly
,
even
what
their
Judgments
slowing
from
the●r
Principles
would
no●
,
That
God
assists
his
Church
,
and
therefore
his
Providence
will
take
care
that
the
Contingencies
whereunto
the
Scriptures
letter
,
their
Rule
of
Faith
,
is
subject
to
,
shall
be
avoided
.
We
shall
be
plain
in
our
return
to
th●s
passage
.
1.
It
is
a
slander
that
Protestants
principles
do
influence
their
Judgments
so
as
that
they
are
not
willing
,
but
are
necessitated
to
grant
,
That
God
assists
his
Church
,
and
that
his
providence
secureth
the
Scripture
both
in
the
letter
and
sence
of
it
.
We
acknowledge
Gods
special
Provi●ence
,
daily
to
assist
his
own
Church
,
and
powerful
to
preserve
his
Scripture
unto
this
day
;
and
we
blesse
him
with
our
souls
,
because
he
hath
magnified
his
word
above
all
his
name
.
Psal
.
138.2
.
2.
We
deny
yet
,
that
Scriptures
Letter
without
its
sence
is
our
Rule
of
Faith
,
though
the
Discourser
would
fasten
it
upon
us
throughout
;
It
is
a
Rudiment
remotely
helping
to
it
,
as
speech
is
:
but
not
the
Rule
of
Faith
it self
,
as
we
have
before
stated
.
3.
Yet
we
acknowledge
;
Protestants
do
deny
Gods
Assistance
to
the
Popish
Church
,
as
being
none
of
his
,
but
false
and
Adulterate
,
however
the
Discourser
means
no
Church
else
,
thorough
his
whole
Treatise
:
But
we
espie
his
drift
.
He
asks
then
,
how
we
are
certain
in
our
way
of
such
an
Assistance
.
We
answer
,
1.
We
are
of
the
Church
,
and
true
Body
of
Christ
while
by
Faith
we
are
united
to
him
as
the
Head
.
Mat
.
16.18
.
Joh
.
16.13
.
2.
We
have
many
very
great
and
precious
promises
in
this
Scripture
,
(
which
he
cannot
deny
to
be
the
word
of
God
)
and
these
secure
us
being
beleeved
by
us
,
both
of
Gods
Assistance
,
and
his
Providence
preserving
his
written
will
unto
us
.
He
demands
again
,
that
we
must
make
our
Rule
in
Scripture
Certain
,
before
we
mention
Faith
,
Church
or
Gods
Assistance
.
For
the
Rule
of
Faith
is
the
means
to
bring
to
it
,
and
this
must
be
certain
Antecedently
,
to
the
Notions
of
Faith
,
Faithful
or
Church
,
Sect
.
10.
We
grant
his
demand
,
and
therefore
say
.
1.
God
himself
hath
given
Testimony
to
the
certainty
of
Scriptures
Truth
,
which
makes
it
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
by
commanding
his
will
to
be
written
.
2.
The
letter
of
this
Scripture
is
but
a
means
unto
,
not
a
Rule
of
Faith
;
and
by
hearing
and
reading
the
same
we
come
to
know
the
will
of
God
,
which
is
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
3.
It
is
strange
,
that
here
the
Discourser
asserts
,
that
the
Rule
of
Faith
must
be
Antecedent
to
the
notion
of
Faith
,
and
that
also
,
to
the
notion
of
Faithful
or
the
Church
;
Else
where
he
saith
,
upon
the
Account
of
his
Tradition
,
that
the
Church
must
precede
this
Tradition
,
and
this
foregoe
Faith
,
he
rings
the
changes
:
but
we
freely
grant
,
the
Rule
of
Faith
from
heaven
doth
precede
all
;
yea
and
the
means
to
faith
must
go
before
its
effect
,
yea
and
the
Rule
must
prove
the
Church
,
not
the
Church
the
Rule
.
4.
We
conclude
,
that
by
Faith
in
this
Gods-Scripture-Rule
,
we
are
gathered
into
Fellowship
with
the
Father
,
Son
,
and
Spirit
,
with
the
Apostles
and
Saints
of
God
,
and
so
are
of
his
Church
;
neither
need
we
the
help
of
the
Authors
Tradition
,
Faith
,
or
Church
,
to
secure
us
further
:
We
are
sure
being
b●ilt
upon
that
Rock
,
from
whence
neither
he
,
nor
the
Powers
of
Darkness
can
remove
us
.
Let
him
look
to
his
own
footing
.
3.
He
pretends
,
that
some
do
urge
,
the
Testimonies
of
Councils
,
or
Fathers
,
to
be
sufficient
Interpreters
of
Scripture
,
and
so
they
make
up
the
defects
objected
by
him
.
We
shall
first
return
to
this
passage
,
and
explicate
the
Protestants
allegation
of
Councils
and
Fathers
in
this
Case
.
1.
They
do
honour
Councils
and
Fathers
which
are
such
indeed
;
and
they
are
such
only
who
honour
God
,
and
subject
their
determinations
unto
his
written
will
:
And
in
this
point
we
assert
that
Article
of
the
Church
of
England
concerning
this
matter
.
Scripture
makes
Councils
and
Fathers
such
as
God
will
own
;
They
make
not
Scripture
either
in
letter
or
Sence
.
2.
They
pin
not
their
Faith
upon
either
of
these
,
as
if
they
gave
them
their
Rule
for
beleeving
,
but
acknowledge
the
grace
of
God
given
unto
them
,
if
they
open
rightly
Scripture
Rule
,
and
interpret
the
mind
of
God
therein
,
and
upon
that
account
thank
God
for
them
.
In
the
next
place
,
from
this
supposed
Allegation
,
the
Discourser
draweth
some
Consequents
,
which
we
shall
weigh
.
1.
That
if
the
Allegation
be
true
,
then
none
can
be
capable
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
nor
of
Faith
it self
,
but
those
who
are
read
in
Councils
and
Fathers
.
Unto
this
shortly
we
say
,
1.
Let
this
absurdity-consequent
be
laid
upon
them
;
who
so
make
the
Allegation
,
as
he
represents
it
,
which
no
sound
Protestant
will
do
.
2.
We
deny
this
Consequence
from
t●e
explication
premised
;
Christians
are
true
Believers
by
knowing
Scriptures
,
and
not
Councils
nor
Fathers
.
2
Chron
.
20.20
.
Believe
his
Prophets
and
ye
shall
prosper
.
2.
He
inferreth
if
the
Councils
and
Fathers
help
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
they
must
be
accounted
Infallible
,
which
(
he
saith
)
none
,
but
Catholicks
,
that
is
,
Romish
or
Pseudo-Catholicks
will
say
:
or
else
they
must
urge
some
other
infallible
guide
to
interpret
the
Scriptures
by
.
Hereunto
also
we
reply
.
1.
Let
them
who
alledge
Councils
to
the
purpose
pretended
,
fence
off
this
Consequence
,
we
know
none
such
.
2.
We
deny
Councils
and
Fathers
to
be
infallible
;
no
true
Catholicks
will
grant
it
,
though
false
ones
do
:
That
Council
of
the
Apostles
only
was
such
,
who
could
truly
say
,
it
seemeth
good
to
the
Holy
Ghost
and
us
:
All
successive
were
good
,
as
farre
as
they
walked
by
the
same
Rule
,
but
none
infallible
:
neither
did
any
of
them
ever
pretend
to
be
so
:
Only
spurious
Conventions
,
have
dared
to
arrogate
the
spirits
presence
,
when
the
Devil
himself
acted
them
in
decreeing
against
Gods
written
truth
.
3.
We
assert
God
the
best
interpreter
of
himself
,
and
so
his
Scripture
of
it self
;
It
is
a
light
and
a
lamp
to
them
that
walk
thereby
in
the
way
unto
Salvation
:
To
this
infallible
guide
Gods
spirit
in
his
word
we
adhere
.
3.
The
last
fault
he
finds
about
the
former
Allegation
,
is
concerning
the
notions
of
Fathers
,
Councils
,
Church
and
rule
of
Faith
,
and
the●r
order
.
A
Father
,
he
saith
,
is
an
eminent
and
known
witnesser
to
Posterity
of
the
sence
and
Faith
of
the
Church
:
The
Church
is
a
notion
presupposed
to
a
Father
:
A
Council
is
a
representative
of
the
Church
,
and
a
right
Council
of
the
true
Church
,
which
he
meaneth
Romish
and
Popish
only
.
Council
therefore
and
Father
presuppose
Church
,
and
Church
presupposeth
Faithful
,
and
Faithful
presupposeth
Faith
,
and
Faith
the
rule
of
Faith
:
In
vain
then
do
they
strive
to
piece
out
the
sufficiency
of
Scriptures
letter
,
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
by
these
helps
,
seeing
that
Rule
must
give
being
to
all
these
S.
11.
Unto
this
plainly
we
return
.
1.
As
to
the
Notions
and
order
of
rule
of
Faith
,
Faith
,
Faithful
,
Church
,
Councils
and
Fathers
we
will
not
contend
with
him
,
if
they
be
understood
genuinely
,
and
exclusively
to
Popish
notions
of
all
those
things
.
2
,
We
assert
also
,
that
our
rule
of
Faith
which
is
the
will
of
God
revealed
in
Scripture
,
must
foregoe
Faith
,
Faithful
,
Church
and
every
member
or
part
appertaining
thereunto
,
for
it
doth
give
being
to
all
.
3.
Let
them
therefore
,
who
strive
to
piece
out
the
sufficiency
of
Scriptures
letter
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
by
the
help
of
Councils
and
Fathers
,
lye
under
the
blame
which
the
Author
casts
upon
them
:
We
are
not
concerned
,
nor
any
of
the
Protestant
Churches
in
this
matter
.
4.
In
the
close
of
this
we
shall
animadvert
;
that
here
he
speaketh
to
his
own
case
,
as
much
as
ours
,
that
his
rule
of
faith
which
is
Oral-Tradition
foregoeth
faith
,
Faithful
,
Church
,
&c.
And
yet
elsewhere
,
Church
must
foregoe
the
Tradition
,
and
one
mouth
must
deliver
it
to
another
,
is
not
this
to
run
in
a
ring
,
and
to
be
a
circular
Discourser
?
Viderit
ipse
.
4.
The
last
Exception
against
his
Objections
he
saith
is
,
some
reply
that
Fundamentals
are
clear
in
Scripture
,
which
may
be
enough
to
evidence
it
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
This
also
we
affirm
in
the
Apostles
words
that
the
houshold
of
God
are
built
upon
the
foundation
of
the
Apostles
and
Prophets
,
Jesus
Christ
himself
being
the
chief
corner
stone
;
and
all
this
is
revealed
in
their
writings
by
the
Lord
.
It
is
therefore
clear
in
Scripture
.
Yet
he
objects
to
this
.
1.
That
by
sufficient
Authority
a
certain
Catalogue
of
Fundamentals
,
was
never
given
or
agreed
unto
:
And
the
discourse
grows
ticklish
when
we
talk
of
Fundamentals
,
and
hazardous
upon
the
mistake
of
one
to
ruine
all
.
Whereunto
we
shall
only
say
.
1.
That
Gods
Authority
is
all-sufficient
to
lay
the
Fundamentals
of
salvation
,
which
he
hath
done
in
the
Scriptures
of
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
.
2.
That
the
foundation
or
the
fundamental
ground
of
mans
Salvation
is
but
one
,
the
Catalogue
then
is
soon
made
:
1
Cor
.
3.11
.
other
foundation
can
no
man
lay
than
that
is
laid
,
which
is
Jesus
Christ
.
Understand
we
this
either
of
the
foundation
personal
,
which
is
the
person
of
Christ
,
upon
which
the
persons
of
beleevers
are
built
as
living
stones
to
make
an
house
for
God
;
This
is
but
one
:
Or
if
we
take
it
for
the
foundation
Doctrinal
,
1
Cor
.
3.11
.
Act.
4
12.
it
is
but
that
one
saving
truth
,
that
by
his
name
alone
can
salvation
be
obtained
:
Or
if
it
be
looked
on
as
a
foundation
practical
,
that
is
as
Christ
is
laid
an
Example
to
us
,
that
we
should
walk
as
he
walked
;
All
this
is
but
one
,
and
this
most
plainly
,
evidently
,
and
expresly
laid
down
in
the
Scripture
of
God
:
So
that
this
is
no
ricklish
nor
dangerous
matter
to
treat
upon
,
as
the
Discourser
suggests
.
As
to
other
subordinate
Truths
naturally
deduced
from
this
,
how
few
or
many
soever
they
be
,
they
may
be
called
secondarily
Fundamentals
;
neither
can
it
be
hazardous
to
the
end
of
Faith
,
that
is
,
mans
salvation
to
treat
solidly
of
them
.
We
may
then
say
safely
,
Fundamentals
are
cle●r
in
Scripture
to
them
who
will
see
.
2.
He
expostulates
,
Is
it
in
a
fundamental
,
that
Christ
is
God
?
if
so
,
he
asks
again
whether
this
be
clearer
in
Scripture
,
than
that
God
hath
hands
,
feet
,
nostrils
,
and
passions
like
ours
?
Seeing
then
that
this
lat●er
point
is
certain
to
lead
vulgar
heads
into
exceeding
great
errors
,
and
that
Heresies
are
as
seemingly
clear
in
the
outward
Face
of
Scripture
as
Fundamental
Truths
,
how
mistaken
a
principle
do
they
rely
upon
for
the
main
hinge
of
their
salvation
,
who
say
that
Fundamentals
are
so
clear
in
Scriptures
letter
to
every
Capacity
?
S.
12.
To
solve
all
this
difficulty
.
1.
To
the
former
question
we
answer
roundly
,
it
is
the
Fundamental
,
Isa
.
45.22
.
Jer
.
23.6
.
that
Christ
is
God
;
For
otherwise
he
could
not
be
our
Saviour
:
He
is
indeed
Jehovah
our
Righteousness
:
This
is
our
Rock
.
2.
To
the
next
question
we
say
it
imports
a
fallacie
under
a
double
sence
:
For
,
if
the
meaning
be
,
whether
in
Scripture
when
we
re●d
,
God
said
to
have
hands
&c.
be
not
as
clear
,
as
that
Christ
is
said
to
be
God
;
we
ea●ily
grant
it
.
But
if
it
be
inquired
whether
that
proposition
,
God
hath
hands
,
&c.
be
in
Scriptures
sence
a●
c●ear
,
as
that
Christ
is
God
.
Thi●
we
deny
,
for
this
latter
is
a
Proposition
consisting
of
proper
terms
,
God
is
properly
attributed
to
Christ
;
but
t●e
former
is
a
Proposition
figurative
,
when
hands
,
feet
▪
&c.
are
attributed
unto
God
;
and
therefore
is
not
so
clear
to
be
understood
,
wi●hout
turning
the
Metaphors
into
proper
terms
,
which
is
no
hard
matter
for
common
understandings
to
do
;
when
they
know
God
speaks
of
himself
after
the
manner
of
men
,
not
to
debase
God
,
but
to
help
us
in
our
way
to
conceive
his
Providence
and
mighty
works
competent
to
God
,
by
eies
and
hands
which
men
use
.
He
that
knoweth
God
to
be
a
spirit
,
cannot
by
these
figurative
expressions
be
led
into
such
Errors
as
the
Discourser
doth
preten●
.
3.
We
conclude
therefore
that
his
inference
is
false
;
Scripture
upon
this
account
is
no
mistaken
Principle
to
rely
upon
for
our
salvation
;
but
the
surest
word
of
Truth
to
cause
Christ
the
day
starre
to
arise
in
our
hearts
;
And
he
is
the
Author
of
Eternal
Salvation
.
Here
is
our
sure-footing
still
,
and
unsh●ken
standing
.
THE
Third
Discourse
EXAMINED
.
IN
this
Discourse
the
Attempt
is
to
prove
the
three
following
P●operties
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
utterly
incompetent
to
Scripture
;
we
shall
keep
along
with
him
,
and
try
his
steps
herein
.
1.
He
layeth
down
his
third
property
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
which
he
laboureth
to
prove
inconsistent
with
Scrip●ure
;
and
for
the
more
clear
proceeding
,
we
shall
form
it
to
this
Argument
.
That
which
is
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
must
have
in
it
an
Aptness
to
settle
and
justifie
these
unlearned
persons
who
rely
undoubtingly
upon
it
,
but
,
the
Scripture
hath
not
in
it
such
an
aptness
to
settle
and
justifie
such
persons
,
unlearned
and
undoubtingly
relying
thereon
.
This
property
is
not
competent
unto
it
.
The
Proposition
is
in
the
first
Section
,
and
the
Assumption
in
the
second
.
Having
the
argument
in
this
form
,
we
shall
try
the
premisses
,
and
then
judge
of
the
conclusion
,
1.
As
to
the
proposition
.
1.
The
Subject
herein
is
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
the
main
point
in
hand
.
2.
The
Attribute
is
the
Property
spoken
of
it
,
Aptness
to
settle
and
justyfie
those
unlearned
persons
,
who
rely
undoubtedly
on
it
.
3.
The
connection
between
these
is
necessary
;
This
Rule
must
have
this
property
.
Now
before
we
affirm
or
deny
,
it
is
need●ul
to
distinguish
about
the
justifying
and
settling
power
of
the
Rule
.
1.
It
may
respect
the
way
of
believing
(
which
the
Discourser
passeth
over
,
)
that
it
must
justifie
Faith
to
be
the
way
of
life
.
2.
It
doth
respect
persons
rulable
by
it
,
whom
here
he
only
mentions
,
to
be
unlearned
persons
,
relying
undoubtingly
upon
it
;
who
are
to
be
distinguished
also
.
1.
Unlearned
may
be
understood
,
either
absolutely
and
simply
such
,
who
are
meer
sots
;
or
comparatively
such
;
who
though
unlearned
in
respect
of
men
more
skilful
;
yet
have
a
reasonable
understanding
exercised
according
to
their
capacity
for
apprehending
the
will
of
God
as
revealed
in
the
Scripture
.
2.
Undoubtedly
relying
,
may
note
,
either
souls
foolishly
presumptuous
,
or
else
through
faith
beleevingly
confident
,
and
regularly
walking
thereby
:
Hence
we
thus
determine
.
1.
It
is
a
necessary
property
for
the
Rule
of
Faith
to
justifie
the
way
of
believing
,
and
those
that
are
not
much
learned
,
yet
beleevingly
confident
and
undoubtingly
relying
on
it
,
yea
and
to
settle
them
while
regularly
walking
by
it
.
The
proposition
thus
stated
we
grant
.
The
Rule
of
Faith
must
have
such
an
aptness
to
justifie
and
settle
these
.
2.
If
this
be
meant
of
such
unlearned
ones
,
as
are
grossely
ignorant
,
rude
,
and
sottish
pretenders
to
the
Rule
of
Faith
and
yet
presumptuously
undoubting
thereupon
;
we
utterly
deny
the
Proposition
,
The
Rule
of
Faith
hath
no
such
property
as
an
aptness
to
justifie
or
settle
such
persons
in
their
grosse
ignorance
,
presumptuous
confidence
,
and
irregular
walking
in
their
profession
of
the
same
.
In
this
sence
we
put
the
Author
to
the
proofe
of
this
proposition
.
No
Rule
is
bound
to
justifie
irregularities
in
any
.
2.
The
Proposition
being
granted
in
the
former
sence
,
we
deny
the
Assumption
that
the
Scripture
hath
not
such
an
aptness
to
justifie
and
settle
men
;
and
assert
,
that
the
Scripture
is
most
apt
to
settle
and
justifie
in
their
way
such
persons
,
who
though
not
so
learned
,
yet
in
faith
undoubtingly
rely
upon
it
,
and
labour
regularly
to
walk
by
it
.
So
indeed
a
Rule
must
justifie
such
as
are
rulable
by
it
.
Now
to
make
good
this
upon
Scriptures
Rule
,
we
shall
resume
that
undeniable
P●inciple
,
all
Scripture
is
inspired
or
spirited
by
God
;
Whence
we
inferre
these
proofs
.
1.
2
Tim
.
3
,
15.16
.
The
All-sufficiency
of
Gods
wisdome
is
most
apt
to
settle
and
justifie
all
souls
beleevingly
relying
on
it
:
but
the
Scriptures
contains
and
reveals
the
All-sufficient
wisedom
of
God
,
so
that
they
are
able
to
make
souls
wise
unto
salvation
,
therefore
is
the
Scripture
most
apt
to
justifie
and
settle
learned
and
unlearned
persons
,
that
rely
on
it
.
2.
The
Infallibility
and
immutability
of
God
is
most
apt
to
settle
and
justifie
all
persons
of
all
sorts
beleevingly
relying
on
them
.
Heb
.
6.17
,
18.
But
the
Scripture
hath
the
Infallibility
,
and
immutability
of
God
revealed
in
it
,
and
annexed
to
it
;
therefore
,
is
it
most
apt
to
settle
and
justifie
all
persons
undoubtingly
by
Faith
relying
on
it
.
Gods
word
and
oath
are
in
the
Scripture
,
and
they
are
most
apt
to
give
souls
the
best
settlement
.
3.
The
Holines
,
Rectitude
,
Psal
.
119.140
.
and
Purity
of
God
,
is
most
apt
to
settle
and
justifie
Souls
in
their
relying
on
it
.
But
the
Scripture
,
is
full
of
that
Holiness
of
God
,
it
is
his
h●ly
word
,
therefore
is
it
most
apt
to
settle
and
justifie
souls
faithfully
relying
on
it
,
and
walking
regularly
by
it
.
Thus
far
for
making
good
the
denial
of
the
Assumption
,
and
of
our
Assertion
for
Scriptures
Aptness
to
settle
and
justifie
souls
depending
on
it
,
which
we
hope
will
appear
forceable
to
right
reason
.
Now
is
it
our
work
to
disprove
the
Authors
reasoning
against
Scriptures
fitness
,
as
he
giveth
it
in
the
second
section
.
1.
It
is
suggested
,
No
man
is
justifiable
for
assent
or
practise
of
any
thing
,
of
which
either
by
common-sense
or
some
Reflexion
they
cannot
take
to
be
true
;
but
these
unlearned
persons
proceeding
undoubtingly
,
have
no
occasion
to
reflect
,
nothing
then
can
justifie
them
,
but
Principles
of
Common-sense
;
but
by
this
they
have
no
self-assurance
of
Scriptures
letter
,
being
utterly
ignorant
,
when
it
was
writ
,
by
whom
,
how
brought
down
,
&c.
We
reply
,
1.
Scriptures
letter
is
not
our
Rule
,
that
can
justifie
any
without
its
sence
;
upon
which
false
ground
he
still
proceeds
.
2.
None
ought
to
be
so
unlearned
as
to
be
utterly
ignorant
of
the
Scriptures
to
be
Gods
word
,
it
having
been
alwaies
a
Principle
received
in
the
Church
;
nor
undoubtingly
to
proceed
upon
such
ignorance
in
their
presumptions
.
3.
They
that
know
not
letters
,
nor
can
read
the
letter
of
Scripture
,
yet
may
know
the
sence
and
meaning
of
God
in
it
savingly
,
being
taught
by
sound
Apostolical
Tradition
,
not
Popish
delusion
.
4.
It
is
not
necessary
for
their
justification
that
they
must
know
,
when
and
by
whom
the
Scriptures
letter
was
writ
:
If
they
receive
Gods
revelation
therein
beleevingly
,
(
which
by
the
light
of
nature
only
they
cannot
do
,
but
with
the
help
of
the
spirit
)
and
walk
regularly
thereby
,
God
by
his
Scripture
will
justifie
them
.
But
for
grosly
ignorant
,
and
presumptuous
ones
who
do
not
attain
to
Scriptures
Rule
but
abuse
it
;
The
Rule
cannot
justifie
but
condemn
them
.
2.
He
suggesteth
this
,
to
invalidate
Scriptures
aptness
to
justifie
its
followers
;
That
these
unlearned
,
and
undoubting
Ones
,
may
depen●
upon
the
great
schollarship
of
their
teachers
;
of
which
notwithstanding
they
can
have
no
more
knowledge
but
what
sensation
by
eies
and
ears
can
help
them
,
which
cannot
judge
of
such
high
skills
:
not
so
much
as
it
doth
of
Tradesmen
or
Artists
,
by
seeing
their
works
.
Neither
can
their
uncultivated
Reason
give
them
knowledge
this
way
of
the
goodness
of
Christian
Doctrine
;
and
its
p●oportion
unto
bliss
Now
what
is
all
this
to
weaken
Scriptures
aptness
for
justifying
its
Followers
.
1.
Suppose
these
unlearned
do
depend
upon
their
Teachers
abilities
,
and
honesty
.
2.
That
they
have
nothing
but
sensation
by
eies
and
ears
to
judge
of
them
,
and
an
uncultivated
reason
uncapable
of
such
skills
pretended
by
their
Teachers
.
The
proper
issue
must
be
,
that
they
make
this
skill
of
their
leaders
to
be
their
Rule
,
which
cannot
justifie
those
,
who
know
not
,
what
those
skills
do
mean
,
and
yet
depend
upon
them
.
These
may
be
more
to
blame
,
than
those
who
trust
Artists
,
when
they
see
their
work
.
But
herein
the
Discourser
,
as
well
as
elsewhere
seems
to
make
Christian
Religion
too
much
like
a
Mechanical
Trade
to
be
hammered
out
by
sensation
,
which
yet
is
known
in
the
Church
to
be
of
a
Higher
Extract
and
to
be
taught
from
heaven
though
entertained
and
helpt
on
to
practise
by
sense
and
reason
.
In
summe
,
all
the
hurt
intended
must
fall
upon
the
Teachers
skill
,
and
the
Disciples
ignorance
,
the
Scripture
of
God
cannot
justly
be
blamed
here
.
Put
we
this
case
;
Act.
17.11
.
the
Beraeans
heard
the
Apostle
preach
,
and
were
convinced
of
the
Truth
of
Jesus
,
and
received
it
;
Yet
they
had
no
cognisance
of
Pauls
skill
and
learning
further
than
as
he
opened
the
Scriptu●es
unto
them
;
and
having
heard
,
they
searched
daily
the
Scriptures
,
whether
matters
were
so
as
he
had
taught
,
and
finding
them
concordant
thereunto
,
they
received
the
word
with
all
readiness
of
mind
;
whereby
they
were
not
only
justified
but
commended
to
be
noble
souls
above
many
.
Had
they
depended
upon
mans
skill
,
they
might
have
been
condemned
.
Let
the
Author
look
into
this
glass
,
and
condemn
his
unlearned
foolish
ones
,
but
justifie
the
Scriptures
of
God
,
which
justifieth
beleevers
●n
it self
.
3.
His
main
suggestion
is
,
that
many
Professions
pretending
to
Scripture
,
differ
,
damn
,
condemn
and
perhaps
persecute
one
another
;
Now
these
vulgar
,
unlearned
ones
being
unable
to
judge
which
is
most
to
be
trusted
,
their
sense
brings
them
to
an
inextricable
blunder
;
They
have
so
much
reason
,
which
tells
them
there
is
but
one
Truth
;
but
these
honest
Schollars
of
down-right
Nature
,
and
of
her
lowest
form
,
being
unable
to
judge
which
truly
follow
the
Scriptures
letter
,
cannot
be
justifiable
by
Scripture
for
following
it
under
any
party
.
Therefore
it
must
be
meerly
for
want
of
Light
or
evidence
in
the
Directive
Power
of
the
Rule
.
This
properly
then
is
not
competent
to
Scriptures
letter
.
We
contend
not
for
Scriptures
letter
,
without
its
sence
or
spirit
,
which
we
must
urge
as
often
as
the
Discourser
argueth
against
the
letter
only
.
But
to
this
main
stumbling
block
,
that
we
may
remove
it
,
we
shall
reply
in
these
particulars
.
1.
It
is
to
be
granted
and
lamented
,
that
there
have
been
and
are
so
many
differences
among
Chr●stians
professing
faith
in
the
Scriptures
of
God
both
about
the
letter
and
sence
of
it
,
but
this
is
no
just
cause
for
men
to
be
offended
at
Gods
word
,
any
more
then
at
the
Eternal
word
himself
;
about
whom
the
thoughts
of
mens
hearts
were
not
only
various
but
contradicting
each
other
:
Yet
this
variety
and
contradiction
is
known
not
to
be
as
great
or
greater
than
these
among
his
own
Sects
about
his
Traditionary
Rule
of
Faith
;
but
we
stay
not
upon
this
recrimination
.
2.
The
dissentions
of
Professors
about
Scripture
,
or
about
Christ
himself
,
argue
not
want
of
light
in
the
one
,
or
in
the
other
:
For
the
Son
of
God
revealed
in
them
is
the
light
of
the
world
unto
salvation
;
but
they
may
note
blindness
in
them
who
so
much
differ
thorough
unbelief
,
ignorance
,
and
perverseness
:
who
are
no
more
fit
to
discourse
of
the
things
of
God
,
than
blind
men
of
Colours
:
and
we
suppose
no
seeing
man
will
be
offended
,
if
they
differ
in
their
judgments
,
who
cannot
sensibly
know
them
,
and
believe
his
own
senses
.
3.
These
honest
Schollars
of
downright
Nature
,
and
of
her
lower
Form
;
seeing
they
have
so
much
reason
(
so
the
Discourser
grants
)
as
will
tell
them
there
is
but
one
Truth
in
the
Scripture
,
may
possibly
imploy
both
their
sensations
and
reasonings
to
know
the
meaning
of
God
therein
concerning
the
way
of
his
salvation
,
and
hold
it
it
fast
,
yea
and
get
heaven
by
it
also
,
notwithstanding
the
differences
among
learned
men
disputing
about
the
letter
in
several
particulars
.
It
was
the
confession
of
that
good
Father
;
The
unlearned
arise
,
and
take
heaven
by
violence
,
whilest
learned
men
are
disputing
thereabout
.
And
in
doing
this
,
the
Scripture
both
can
and
will
justifie
them
walking
by
this
Rule
.
4.
But
we
have
Cause
to
fear
,
that
these
honest
Schollars
of
Nature
,
are
but
some
of
the
Authors
making
,
who
continue
grossely
ignorant
,
and
presumptuous
;
and
are
feign●d
by
him
to
put
off
their
own
ignorance
and
maintain
their
own
confidence
upon
the
obscurity
of
Scriptures
letter
,
and
their
hear-say
of
its
being
the
Rule
of
Faith
:
of
whom
we
thus
determine
,
that
the
Rule
of
Faith
is
not
bound
to
justifie
such
irregular
Professors
of
it
.
The
Discourser
then
may
justly
lay
the
sin
upon
his
Schollars
,
they
deserve
it
;
but
most
wickedly
doth
he
thence
charge
defect
of
Light
or
Evidence
,
or
Power
of
iustifying
its
followers
upon
the
Scripture
.
2.
In
the
third
Section
,
he
attempts
to
prove
his
fourth
Property
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
incompetent
unto
Scripture
;
His
Arguments
runs
thus
.
—
The
Rule
of
Faith
must
be
apt
of
its
own
nature
to
satisfie
the
most
Sceptical
Dissenters
,
and
rational
Doubters
,
that
the
Doctrine
it
holds
forth
came
from
Christ
.
But
,
The
Scripture
is
not
able
so
to
satisfie
of
its
own
nature
the
most
Sceptical
Dissenters
,
&c.
Therefore
,
This
cannot
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
1.
Unto
this
,
we
say
;
It
is
needful
to
open
terms
,
before
any
thing
can
justly
be
denied
or
granted
:
The
greatest
difficulty
is
about
the
Subject
,
to
whom
the
satisfaction
must
be
given
:
The
Discourser
calls
them
Sceptical
Dissenters
,
and
Rational
Doubters
;
whom
he
describes
to
be
Thoughtful
men
,
calling
things
to
a
strict
account
,
before
they
yield
over
their
Assent
;
Therefore
nothing
less
than
a
demonstration
can
bind
those
Active
volatile
souls
from
hovering
in
doubts
,
when
their
Eternal
good
is
concerned
.
We
must
ask
him
before
we
proceed
.
Are
these
rational
Doubters
within
the
Church
,
or
without
it
:
If
within
Scripture
,
Arguments
are
fit
to
use
to
them
;
But
if
without
,
they
are
Infidels
uncapable
of
Scripture
reasonings
;
These
Scepticks
among
Naturalists
are
professed
Enemies
to
knowledge
,
and
will
not
yield
to
Scientifical
Mediums
,
neither
will
demonstrations
though
Divine
satisfie
them
:
And
in
truth
as
the
Apostle
stiles
them
,
they
are
wicked
,
absurd
,
unreasonable
men
,
2
Thes
.
3
2
having
no
Faith
:
These
then
are
no
Subjects
rulable
by
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
therefore
is
it
not
proper
to
the
Rule
to
satisfie
them
.
Hence
then
in
this
sence
we
deny
the
Proposition
as
untrue
.
Yet
if
it
be
meant
of
rational
Doubters
indeed
within
the
Church
and
not
Heretical
Apostates
,
The
Scripture
is
fully
able
to
satisfie
their
doubts
about
the
doctrine
of
Christ
;
and
in
this
sence
we
grant
the
Proposition
,
and
deny
the
Assumption
:
And
this
must
rest
upon
proof
.
2.
We
still
distinguish
between
the
Rule
of
Faith
which
only
concerns
them
under
it
;
and
the
Means
to
Faith
which
respecteth
others
.
Now
to
satisfie
these
Scep●icks
;
Other
Arguments
must
be
made
use
of
to
perswade
them
of
the
necessity
of
the
doctrine
of
Christ
and
Truth
of
it
,
before
Scripture
Authority
is
imposed
on
them
,
such
the
Apostle
useth
to
the
Athenians
and
Roman
Gentiles
convincing
them
by
their
own
light
of
their
own
lost
condition
;
Acts
17.
Rom.
1.
and
the
necessity
of
seeking
righteousness
in
another
unto
salvation
.
If
these
prevail
,
then
Scripture-Revelation
will
be
effectual
to
convince
of
this
Righteousness
to
be
had
in
Christ
Jesus
;
as
some
of
those
Dissenters
found
.
3.
To
discharge
this
objection
,
in
those
captious
suggestions
about
indeavouring
to
demonstrate
to
these
Scepticks
the
inspiration
of
Scriptures
letter
,
reconciling
seeming
contradictions
,
stating
number
of
books
,
Original
,
Translations
to
be
true
,
and
the
sence
of
them
to
be
sure
,
(
as
urged
Sect
.
3.
)
Yet
these
persons
are
left
in
suspence
,
with
a
why
might
it
not
be
otherwise
?
smiling
at
their
indeavours
,
who
labour
by
these
to
perswade
them
to
the
Rule
of
Scriptures
letter
:
We
shall
distinctly
give
answer
in
these
P.
1.
Excepting
still
,
that
we
urge
not
Scriptures
letter
unsenced
upon
any
as
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
we
say
,
it
is
incongruous
,
in
winning
these
gentile
wits
to
the
Doctrine
of
Christ
,
to
begin
with
Scripture
demonstrations
towards
them
;
It
is
likely
they
will
smile
at
such
Indeavours
,
and
abide
still
in
suspence
about
it
.
The
proper
work
with
them
is
to
convince
them
of
their
sinfulness
,
brutishness
,
and
ignorance
of
the
way
of
salvation
by
such
Principles
as
the
light
of
nature
must
grant
;
though
being
clouded
with
lust
in
some
it
will
not
.
If
by
this
means
these
persons
may
be
shamed
and
humbled
,
and
taken
off
from
their
proud
conceits
in
vilifying
the
Revelation
of
God
,
then
may
Scripture
demonstration
somewhat
prevail
,
and
satisfie
:
but
if
men
be
perverse
,
they
will
flout
at
the
strongest
reason
,
so
some
of
the
Athenians
did
at
Pauls
discourse
.
But
all
this
concerns
only
the
means
of
bringing
men
to
the
Faith
,
which
is
no
Rule
of
it
.
2.
The
Rule
of
Faith
is
in
correlation
with
those
who
are
ruled
by
it
;
therefore
it
is
just
that
it
should
be
able
to
satisfie
the
reasonable
doubts
of
them
,
who
profess
to
be
ruled
by
it
:
but
is
it
therefore
to
satisfie
the
sophistical
ventilations
of
Sceptical
d
ssenters
from
it
?
As
good
reason
is
it
,
that
the
Carpenters
Rule
should
direct
and
satisfie
the
Apothecary
in
ordering
his
Medicines
.
1
Cor
2.14
.
If
the
natural
man
cannot
discern
spiritual
things
(
such
as
is
the
Rule
of
Faith
)
much
less
can
or
will
those
Opinionative
dissenting
Scepticks
discern
or
entertain
them
.
Is
God
bound
to
satisfie
these
?
no
more
is
his
Scripture
.
3.
Let
the
Subjects
in
this
Case
be
stated
capable
of
satisfaction
from
the
Rule
of
faith
,
that
is
,
such
believers
,
as
may
be
apt
to
doubt
of
the
doctrine
of
Christ
from
weakness
and
not
from
wickedness
,
the
Scripture
is
most
able
to
satisfie
all
their
haesitations
and
doubts
,
and
as
containing
the
sum
of
the
Covenant
of
grace
,
is
set
up
purposely
to
resolve
and
drive
out
all
doubts
concerning
Christ
.
So
the
Apostle
determineth
.
Rom.
10.6
,
7
,
8
,
9.
Say
not
in
thine
heart
,
who
shall
ascend
into
heaven
,
that
is
,
to
bring
down
Christ
,
&c.
It
is
as
if
he
had
said
,
doubt
not
,
reason
not
doubtingly
in
your
spirit
about
Christ
.
The
word
is
nigh
thee
,
even
in
thy
mouth
and
heart
,
that
is
,
the
word
of
faith
,
which
we
preach
,
and
now
I
wr●te
of
unto
you
,
&c.
This
is
your
satisfying
and
settling
Rule
.
Whence
we
conclude
,
it
is
no
such
wearisome
or
tedious
way
to
be
satisfied
of
doubts
by
the
Scripture
to
them
,
who
humbly
seek
it
:
but
that
it
is
easily
victorious
by
reason
of
its
certainty
and
infallibility
over
the
shock
of
doubts
,
and
assaults
of
intellectual
fears
.
In
this
,
Scripture
both
in
the
letter
and
spirit
of
it
,
is
not
defective
,
but
compleat
;
therefore
by
this
property
also
is
it
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
3.
In
the
fourth
Section
he
undertakes
to
prove
the
fifth
Property
,
which
he
assigned
to
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
to
be
incompetent
to
Scripture
.
His
arguing
must
be
thus
.
The
Rule
of
Faith
must
be
Convictive
of
the
most
obstinate
and
acute
Adversaries
to
it
.
But
,
The
Scriptures
letter
is
not
so
.
Therefore
,
It
cannot
be
the
Rule
,
&c.
The
Proposition
is
taken
for
granted
by
the
Discourser
and
the
Assumption
only
he
indeavours
to
make
good
to
the
end
of
this
discourse
in
all
the
sections
following
.
Before
we
deny
or
grant
,
or
disprove
any
of
his
Objections
we
must
examine
terms
.
1.
In
the
proposition
,
the
Affection
attr
buted
to
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
is
to
be
Convictive
,
which
term
may
be
understood
of
Convictive
Virtually
,
or
Convictive
actually
.
2.
These
Adversaries
are
considerable
,
whether
they
be
in
the
Church
or
out
of
it
;
For
this
Discourser
argueth
also
against
Scripture
,
and
yet
he
takes
himself
to
be
in
the
Church
.
3.
The
Scriptures
letter
we
admit
not
without
its
sence
,
which
still
he
obtrudes
upon
us
.
Now
these
considered
,
we
say
.
1.
That
the
Rule
of
Faith
must
have
Convictive
Power
to
answer
all
Adversaries
against
it
;
So
we
grant
the
Proposition
.
2.
That
the
Rule
of
Faith
is
not
bound
de
Facto
to
be
Convictive
of
such
obstinate
and
acute
Adversaries
;
So
we
deny
it
.
3.
That
the
Scripture
in
the
Letter
and
sence
of
it
,
is
all-sufficient
to
convince
all
reason
though
obstinately
adverse
to
it
of
the
w●y
of
Gods
salvation
by
his
Christ
.
For
the
reason
of
it
is
strong
,
even
Almighty
,
and
the
Truth
of
it
infallible
;
why
then
should
it
not
convince
?
4.
That
it
is
perverseness
in
the
Discourser
to
require
this
in
Scriptures-letter
unsenced
;
We
assert
Scripture
fully
:
and
hereupon
deny
his
Assumption
;
We
shall
try
his
proof
.
1.
He
brings
in
the
Adversary
personated
under
the
Notion
of
a
Deist
making
his
obj●ctions
.
He
imagins
some
Text
of
Scripture
quoted
to
convince
him
of
some
point
,
(
suppose
)
of
Faith
.
He
asks
how
you
are
sure
that
it
is
the
word
of
God
?
You
alledge
the
Excellencies
of
it
:
And
the
Discourser
indeed
doth
grant
it
,
so
farre
,
that
eies
enlightened
by
true
Faith
,
may
discern
something
in
it
above
nature
,
and
cry
Digitus
Dei
est
hic
:
But
this
Deist
will
answer
that
many
parts
of
this
book
of
God
,
are
indeed
very
excellently
good
;
but
that
the
Devil
can
transform
himself
into
an
Angel
of
Light
,
and
therefore
,
it
may
be
his
book
,
as
well
as
Gods
.
This
is
the
scope
of
the
objection
to
bring
the
Scriptures
into
suspicion
,
that
it
may
be
the
Devils
book
and
not
Gods
;
and
so
all
the
Excellencies
of
it
to
be
the
Issues
of
the
Father
of
lies
.
Unto
this
we
reply
1.
That
it
is
a
most
odious
suggestion
,
which
he
being
a
Professed
Christian
;
puts
into
the
mouth
of
his
Deist
,
(
that
otherwise
might
never
have
entred
into
his
thoughts
)
that
the
Devil
should
be
the
Author
of
Scripture
;
Just
like
him
,
who
speaking
of
the
Souldiers
delusive
Apologie
,
that
his
disciples
stole
Christ
away
while
they
slept
,
(
infused
into
them
by
large
hire
from
the
Rulers
to
obscure
Christs
Resurrection
)
said
,
What
fools
were
they
?
could
not
they
have
said
rather
.
that
the
Devil
had
taken
him
away
?
This
might
have
salved
themselves
,
and
put
the
Assertours
of
his
Resurrection
to
a
farther
trouble
of
proving
it
:
And
so
the
Speaker
left
it
.
No
less
doth
this
Discourser
in
favour
to
the
Scripture
of
God
,
make
this
objection
,
and
so
leave
it
.
Yet
we
shall
not
leave
him
so
in
this
case
;
but
return
as
the
Lord
Jesus
,
the
Eternal
word
of
the
Father
unto
the
Pharisees
,
when
they
charged
him
to
cast
out
Devils
by
the
Prince
of
Devils
;
Mat
.
12.26
.
If
Satan
cast
out
Satan
he
is
divided
against
himself
;
How
shall
then
his
Kingdome
stand
?
So
if
the
Devil
should
ab●t
the
word
of
Scripture
,
which
is
the
Power
of
God
set
up
to
destroy
his
Kingdome
in
the
world
;
he
must
needs
be
the
subverter
of
his
own
Kingdome
.
No
just
cause
therefore
is
there
to
object
that
the
Devil
,
as
transforming
himself
into
an
Angel
of
light
,
might
be
the
Author
of
Scriptures
Excellencies
;
for
it
is
the
bane
of
his
Kingdome
.
2.
We
may
inquire
into
this
new
named
Person
the
Deist
,
stiled
before
the
most
obstinate
and
acute
Adversary
;
who
and
what
he
is
?
Whether
a
subject
,
fit
for
the
Rule
of
Faith
to
deal
withall
?
The
notion
seems
to
hint
a
person
who
grants
a
God
,
that
is
in
Abstracto
;
That
there
is
such
a
First
Being
called
God
;
and
this
is
all
,
but
denieth
him
in
Concreto
,
that
is
,
to
be
such
a
One
as
he
hath
revealed
himself
to
be
in
word
and
works
:
which
in
Gods
account
is
a
meer
Atheist
,
who
acknowledgeth
not
God
to
be
such
as
in
his
Covenant
he
hath
made
known
himself
Eph.
2.12
.
to
be
.
The
Rule
of
Faith
hath
nothing
to
do
with
these
men
as
a
Rule
;
For
they
reject
it
.
These
have
need
of
means
and
arguments
proper
to
them
to
bring
them
unto
the
Faith
of
the
Scripture
,
before
this
be
pressed
on
them
,
as
a
Rule
to
command
them
.
3.
It
is
no
impeachment
of
the
Scriptures
Excellency
and
convictive
power
;
though
blind
men
see
it
not
,
2
Cor
.
4.3
.
and
perverse
men
will
not
be
convinced
by
it
:
If
the
Gospel
be
hid
,
it
is
hid
to
them
who
are
lost
,
and
they
perish
by
their
wilful
and
obstinate
blindness
:
God
and
his
word
are
justified
in
this
case
.
And
though
they
will
not
acknowledge
Gods
power
in
his
word
revealed
,
yet
they
will
confess
in
the
sad
issue
of
unbelief
,
Digitus
Dei
est
hic
.
The
hand
of
Gods
vengeance
is
hence
come
upon
them
.
2.
He
m●kes
his
Deist
to
requite
the
Excellencies
of
Scripture
with
many
strange
Absurdities
,
and
Heresies
(
as
he
saith
)
by
the
Protestants
own
confession
,
lying
in
the
open
letter
of
Scripture
most
unworthy
of
God
,
as
that
he
hath
hands
,
&c.
He
finds
Texts
against
acknowledged
Science
,
and
reckons
up
a
multitude
of
Contradictions
therein
▪
which
are
such
in
their
own
Judgment
,
&c.
In
reply
to
this
passage
.
1.
if
any
Protestant
have
confessed
,
or
be
of
that
Judgment
,
That
strange
absurdities
,
and
Heresies
,
that
any
thing
against
true
Science
acknowledged
,
or
that
contradictions
lye
in
the
open
letter
of
Scripture
inspired
of
God
,
he
had
need
correct
his
Judgment
,
and
explain
his
confession
.
It
's
true
,
that
Absurd
,
Heretical
,
and
Perverse
disputers
have
by
their
sences
made
absurdities
,
and
heresies
,
and
contradictions
,
in
the
letter
of
Scripture
,
but
God
delivered
no
such
things
in
that
written
letter
,
unworthy
of
himself
however
he
hath
condescended
to
speak
to
us
of
himself
after
the
manner
of
men
:
His
sence
is
written
in
the
letter
with
the
Sun-beam
,
though
blind
men
see
it
not
.
What
though
those
sottish
,
carnal
Anthropomorphits
,
reading
such
passages
in
Scripture
,
where
hands
,
eies
,
nostrils
,
love
,
Anger
and
passions
,
are
spoken
of
God
,
do
foolishly
phansie
him
,
as
a
Man
?
Doth
this
conclude
against
Scripture
,
as
if
it
taught
men
to
think
so
of
God
?
or
doth
it
not
condemn
the
beastliness
of
men
so
to
abuse
Scripture
and
Metamorphose
God
into
a
Man
?
We
know
Eies
and
Ears
&c.
are
figurative
and
metaphorical
expressions
of
the
Providence
and
Government
of
God
in
the
world
;
and
the
sence
of
figures
is
the
proper
meaning
of
any
thing
which
they
represent
.
It
were
good
that
the
Discourser
would
perswade
his
Deist
(
who
perhaps
is
himself
,
)
to
be
more
reasonable
in
arguing
against
Scripture
.
2.
We
deny
that
there
is
any
thing
in
Scripture
against
acknowledged
Science
,
but
against
that
which
is
so
falsly
called
.
3.
Contradictions
real
in
Scripture
there
are
none
,
but
such
as
Corrupt
Disputers
have
feigned
.
Those
then
weaken
not
Scripture
.
4.
We
do
not
abandon
Scripture
as
our
Rule
of
Faith
,
when
we
say
there
are
no
Contradictions
therein
,
but
seeming
ones
to
bad-sighted
men
:
We
confess
no
heresies
to
be
in
the
open
letter
,
nor
any
Antecedent
knowledge
to
be
our
Rule
of
Faith
,
but
the
will
of
God
alone
revealed
in
the
Scriptures
.
True
it
is
that
Religious
Education
,
and
honest
Tradition
,
were
means
to
bring
us
to
understand
the
Scripture
which
is
our
Rule
,
but
that
means
is
not
the
Rule
it self
.
Let
the
Deist
consider
this
:
or
let
him
answer
a
Quaere
in
a
common
case
;
The
Carpenter
being
about
to
bring
his
Boy
to
the
use
of
his
Rule
,
informeth
him
of
the
Inches
,
half-feet
,
and
feet
,
with
other
lines
and
measures
contained
in
his
Rule
;
is
his
knowledge
of
those
things
prerequired
to
the
right
use
of
the
Rule
,
become
the
Rule
it self
?
His
sence
and
reason
will
not
suffer
him
to
say
so
in
this
Case
to
men
:
however
he
is
sharply
set
to
dispute
more
unreasonably
against
God
.
3.
He
puts
into
the
mouth
of
his
Deist
all
the
former
objections
of
his
Sceptick
to
be
more
obstinately
and
acutely
urged
:
As
,
1.
If
ye
answer
those
passages
,
which
give
hands
&c.
to
God
,
by
other
Scriptures
controlling
them
.
He
tells
you
,
then
ye
hold
both
parts
of
a
Contradiction
,
which
is
absurd
.
2.
If
ye
recurr
to
reason
or
Science
,
teaching
,
that
God
is
immutable
,
a
Spirit
,
&c.
He
replyeth
,
Science
then
is
your
Rule
,
and
not
Scripture
.
3.
If
ye
say
ye
relye
on
your
Forefathers
,
or
Pastours
skill
,
then
their
skill
of
which
ye
cannot
judge
,
was
your
rule
,
or
else
ye
must
come
to
Tradition
,
and
desert
your
letter-Rule
.
4.
He
challengeth
you
,
that
ye
bring
along
with
you
thoughts
by
which
ye
interpret
Scripture
,
and
to
which
ye
will
hold
;
and
so
you
make
the
Scripture
a
thing
ruled
,
but
not
a
Rule
.
5.
He
asks
this
smart
question
,
how
ye
are
certain
of
the
truth
of
the
letter
in
the
Text
,
or
whether
it
be
not
foisted
in
,
or
some
way
altered
,
&c.
as
leaving
out
such
a
particle
as
(
Not
)
which
will
turn
a
negative
into
an
affirmative
.
6.
If
you
reply
,
Consent
of
Copies
,
he
saith
all
may
be
alike
faulty
;
That
other
Scriptures
might
be
,
not
come
to
knowledge
;
In
short
,
that
Copies
,
Translations
,
and
variety
of
readings
are
full
of
uncertainty
:
Nay
the
last
,
so
many
in
the
New
Testament
,
that
Bishop
Usher
durst
not
print
them
for
fear
of
bringing
the
whole
book
into
doubt
.
If
you
say
that
the
Faith
of
Christ
was
taught
from
Father
to
Son
,
&c.
He
challenges
you
,
to
desert
your
own
Rule
,
and
imbrace
Tradition
,
the
Rule
of
Roman
Catholicks
;
in
fine
,
without
this
Error
,
might
creep
into
the
Text
in
substantial
points
of
Faith
,
which
devolves
into
this
;
That
Scripture-letter
held
forth
as
a
Rule
of
Faith
,
can
never
convince
an
obstinate
and
acute
Adversary
.
To
these
many
words
,
we
shall
return
these
few
things
.
1.
That
the
Discourser
doth
but
Cramben
recoquere
,
that
is
needlesly
,
and
unsavorily
reiterate
,
what
he
made
his
Sceptick
speak
;
only
he
may
suppose
it
more
obstinately
and
acutely
done
by
his
Deist
,
whom
he
hath
armed
for
this
purpose
.
2.
He
concludes
nothing
but
against
Scriptures
letter
unsenced
;
which
never
any
Protestant
(
unless
wild
)
did
maintain
of
it self
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
;
but
as
expressing
Gods
will
.
3.
Figurative
expressions
of
God
,
and
proper
discoveries
of
him
are
not
contradictory
;
therefore
he
that
opens
the
one
by
the
other
,
is
farre
enough
from
holding
both
parts
of
a
Contradiction
,
as
is
fondly
,
not
acutely
suggested
.
4.
We
acknowledge
the
Exercise
of
reason
and
Science
needful
requisits
,
and
useful
means
under
the
teaching
of
Gods
spirit
,
to
understand
the
Rule
of
Faith
delivered
in
the
Scripture
,
but
this
means
is
not
the
Rule
it self
.
5.
Protestants
never
denied
,
but
strongly
asserted
the
necessary
use
of
our
Forefathers
teaching
their
children
the
Law
of
the
Lord
;
and
so
,
honest
and
faithful
Tradition
to
be
an
appointed
means
to
bring
to
the
knowledge
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
revealed
in
the
Scripture
:
Nevertheless
they
grant
not
any
Tradition
Oral
or
Scriptural
to
be
the
Rule
it self
;
much
less
Popish
Tradition
which
is
the
Rule
of
Roman
Catholicks
:
but
have
proved
it
to
be
delusive
and
Apostate
from
the
Faith
of
Christ
.
6.
It
is
a
foolish
challenge
,
that
Protestants
bring
forestalled
thoughts
,
thereby
to
interpret
Scripture
to
their
own
wills
,
and
so
make
it
a
thing
Ruled
,
but
not
a
Rule
.
For
Scripture
by
its
innate
sence
held
out
,
forms
their
thoughts
as
the
Soveraign
Rule
to
square
them
by
;
So
their
thoughts
are
ruled
by
it
,
and
they
are
not
the
Rule
of
that
.
7.
As
to
his
smart
question
,
We
shall
mildly
return
,
it
hath
been
answered
already
;
Gods
Providence
hath
kept
his
own
written
Oracles
in
his
Church
from
time
to
time
.
And
to
avoid
prolixity
,
we
do
referre
this
Deist
to
peruse
the
Protestant
Assertours
of
Scriptures
Truth
;
who
have
rationally
and
firmly
confuted
all
these
Jesuitical
quirks
about
the
Originals
,
Translations
,
and
various
readings
of
Scripture
.
If
he
be
not
obstinate
to
destruction
he
may
receive
satisfaction
from
them
,
slips
or
omissions
of
a
tittle
or
term
may
be
by
the
oscitancy
of
some
,
(
worthy
of
sharpest
censure
)
but
this
is
curable
by
comparing
with
others
.
But
as
to
what
is
charged
upon
that
Admirable
Man
,
Bishop
Usher
,
we
must
suspend
our
giving
credit
to
the
testimony
of
this
personated
Deist
.
He
might
well
suspect
,
what
use
the
obstinate
Adversaries
of
Gods
word
might
make
of
the
various
readings
;
but
feared
not
the
shaking
of
the
Authority
of
the
New
Testament
thereby
,
or
of
the
weakning
Scripture-Truth
by
the
same
.
8.
It
seems
all
this
while
,
that
this
Deist
is
a
Roman
Catholick
;
for
were
he
one
at
large
,
he
would
be
as
obstinate
to
be
perswaded
to
Christ
by
oral
,
as
by
written
Tradition
.
Let
us
unsmask
him
then
,
and
he
is
a
Jesuitical
Papist
;
who
hath
obstinately
enough
oppugned
the
Scripture
of
God
;
but
how
accutely
,
let
the
wise
Reader
judge
.
Surely
nothing
hath
been
proved
at
all
to
enervate
the
power
of
Scripture
Reason
,
as
to
the
convincing
of
the
most
obstinate
and
acute
Adversary
of
the
necessity
of
Faith
in
Christ
Jesus
unto
eternal
Salvation
.
We
shall
therefore
bestow
no
further
labour
upon
him
,
but
rather
be
obedient
to
the
Apostles
Rule
:
If
any
man
consent
not
to
the
wholesome
1
Tim
.
6
,
3.4.5
.
words
of
our
Lord
Jesus
Christ
,
he
is
a
proud
fool
,
knowing
nothing
,
dotingly
sick
about
questions
,
strifes
of
words
,
perverse
disputings
of
men
of
corrupt
minds
,
and
destitute
of
the
Truth
;
from
these
with-draw
thy self
.
So
we
have
done
with
the
obstinate
Opposer
.
THE
Fourth
Discourse
EXAMINED
.
IN
this
fourth
Discourse
the
Author
strives
to
prove
the
two
last
Properties
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
6th
.
and
7th
.
incompetent
to
Scripture
:
Certainty
in
it self
,
and
Ascertainableness
to
us
.
The
last
of
these
he
saith
must
stand
or
fall
with
the
former
;
therefore
he
insists
only
upon
the
Rules
certainty
in
it self
.
Form
it
thus
.
That
which
is
the
Rule
of
Faith
must
be
certain
in
it self
,
and
Ascertainable
unto
us
,
but
the
Scripture
is
not
certain
in
it self
,
nor
Ascertainable
unto
us
,
therefore
it
cannot
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
In
this
Syllogism
,
we
deny
the
Assumption
,
although
we
grant
not
the
proposition
neither
,
but
upon
a
due
understanding
of
the
terms
.
It
rests
upon
the
Discourser
to
make
proof
against
Scripture
;
but
the
upshot
of
all
his
ventilation
,
is
against
the
letter
of
Scripture
only
:
His
Title
beareth
it
against
the
Scripture
in
its
full
comprehension
;
but
his
discourse
is
against
the
letter
,
which
barely
taken
by
it self
,
no
Protestant
ever
held
to
be
a
Rule
of
Faith
,
but
with
its
sence
;
and
yet
this
Disputer
will
father
this
all
along
upon
them
as
Assertors
of
it
,
and
so
labour
to
batter
them
.
But
it
is
all
injurious
and
fallacious
,
unworthy
of
an
ingenious
Discourser
.
Yet
let
us
see
and
consider
how
he
acquits
himself
in
this
field
.
1.
He
premiseth
some
distinctions
about
the
Scriptures
letter
;
As
that
it
is
considered
,
either
Materially
as
such
and
such
Characters
,
or
Formally
as
significative
of
a
determinate
sence
supposed
to
be
Christs
.
Again
,
both
of
these
are
considerable
,
either
in
its
single
self
,
or
as
dependention
other
helps
or
Causes
on
foot
in
the
world
.
S.
1.
We
shall
animadvert
a
little
here
before
we
proceed
;
The
first
distinction
seemeth
uncouth
and
strange
to
us
,
and
unknown
in
any
,
unless
Popish
schools
:
That
the
Divisum
,
the
thing
divided
,
and
the
Membra
dividentia
,
the
parts
dividing
,
should
be
every
way
one
and
the
same
:
So
it
is
here
,
The
Scriptures-Letter
is
the
Divisum
,
or
thing
divided
;
The
Character
,
which
is
the
very
same
with
the
Letter
,
and
its
significativeness
or
aptness
to
signifie
,
is
an
Affection
indivisible
from
it
:
unless
we
make
Scripture
letter
to
be
as
insignificant
dashes
,
and
crooked
lines
,
which
new
scriblers
use
to
make
.
Indeed
we
know
that
Scripture
as
the
integrum
or
whole
hath
been
divided
into
,
the
letter
as
its
matter
;
and
the
sence
as
its
form
,
as
into
its
due
parts
.
This
we
grant
,
and
what
use
the
Discourser
will
make
of
his
distinction
,
we
shall
consider
though
we
grant
it
not
as
lawful
:
The
Second
is
but
a
various
acception
of
letter
and
significativeness
together
,
either
in
it self
,
or
in
dependence
upon
helps
or
causes
of
its
preservation
:
we
may
note
the
use
he
makes
of
this
also
.
2.
He
applies
his
first
distinction
in
Sect
.
the
2d
.
to
this
purpose
by
way
of
proof
of
his
assumption
;
as
is
really
implied
;
That
which
is
lyable
to
be
destroyed
,
as
to
be
burnt
,
torn
,
blotted
,
worn
out
&c.
is
not
certain
in
it self
to
endure
,
and
therefore
not
ascertainable
unto
us
.
But
Scriptures
letter
being
the
Basis
of
its
significativeness
of
Gods
Sence
is
so
liable
to
be
destroyed
;
Therefore
this
cannot
be
certain
in
it self
to
endure
,
nor
ascertainable
unto
us
,
and
then
no
Rule
of
Faith
,
being
so
perishble
.
Whereunto
the
wise
Disposition
of
Divine
Providence
is
urged
to
back
it
;
That
he
intending
mans
salvation
,
would
not
lay
it
upon
such
weak
means
subject
to
perishing
so
many
waies
.
As
to
this
passage
our
reply
is
this
.
1.
The
Discourser
mistakes
still
his
mark
with
us
in
disputing
against
Scriptures
letter
only
.
2.
In
his
complication
of
words
is
ambiguity
,
when
sometimes
he
calleth
Scriptures
letter
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
sometimes
the
means
unto
it
:
between
which
we
have
stated
a
great
difference
already
,
we
grant
Scriptures
letter
to
be
a
means
to
Faith
,
but
not
the
Rule
of
it
.
3.
We
lay
not
the
letter
of
Scripture
,
as
the
Basis
of
Gods
sence
,
or
Faiths
Rule
,
but
only
as
one
special
means
of
expressing
it
;
Gods
Arm
alone
is
the
Basis
upon
which
his
revealed
will
or
the
Rule
of
Faith
is
grounded
;
not
perishable
or
al●erable
Elements
,
as
is
causelesly
suggested
.
4.
Suppose
books
,
letters
,
characters
,
or
Elements
,
that
express
the
will
of
God
should
be
destroyed
,
(
which
God
never
hitherto
totally
suffered
)
yet
the
word
and
will
of
God
,
the
Rule
of
Faith
endureth
for
ever
:
Mat
.
5
18.
1
Pet
.
1
15.
Heaven
and
Earth
may
pass
away
,
but
not
one
jot
or
tittle
of
Gods
law
.
The
Almighty
will
secure
and
perpetuate
it
.
5.
It
is
no
impeachment
of
the
glory
of
D●vine
Wisdome
and
Providence
to
order
and
bring
about
Mans
salvation
by
weakest
means
and
in
themselves
perishable
;
but
the
greatest
sublimation
of
it
;
therefore
did
God
choose
weak
things
not
only
to
confound
the
mighty
,
but
to
bring
about
the
most
powerful
effects
in
mans
Salvation
.
So
God
is
pleased
,
by
the
foolishness
of
writing
his
will
,
as
well
as
preaching
,
to
save
them
that
beleeve
:
Upon
which
account
the
Apostle
wrote
to
the
Corinthians
to
whom
he
also
preached
.
1
Cor
.
1.21.27
.
Words
fail
as
much
as
letters
or
rather
more
speedily
:
Yet
the
Discourser
will
not
deny
,
but
that
the
wise
disposition
of
Divine
Providence
doth
by
Oral
Tradition
bring
about
salvation
unto
men
.
Let
him
weigh
then
,
which
is
the
strongest
and
most
lasting
means
,
words
or
writings
.
We
do
not
slightly
passe
over
,
but
most
seriously
consider
,
adore
and
admire
divine
Providence
,
who
thus
crosseth
the
wisdome
of
the
world
in
effecting
his
m●ghtiest
designs
by
most
weak
and
despicable
means
,
in
the
account
of
his
subtlest
Adversaries
:
We
have
therefore
answered
the
Exception
.
3.
In
the
next
place
he
proceeds
to
●…
rove
the
uncertainty
of
Scriptures
letter
,
●…
s
.
3
,
4
,
5.
and
then
of
the
Scriptures
signi●…
icativeness
,
S.
6.
In
S.
3.
he
considers
●…
criptures
letter
in
the
Causes
of
its
preser●…
ation
,
which
he
makes
two
.
1.
Some
material
liable
to
conitnual
alte●…
ations
,
and
innumerable
Contingencies
,
(
suppose
writing
,
printing
,
&c.
2.
Some
Spiritual
,
as
Mens
minds
contradistinct
to
hands
.
Hence
he
premiseth
,
that
from
these
noblest
pieces
in
nature
in
good
reason
we
may
hope
for
a
greater
degree
of
Constancy
,
than
from
any
other
,
nay
for
a
perfect
unalterableness
,
and
in
conceiving
truth
an
inerrableness
,
if
due
Circumstances
be
observed
,
which
are
two
here
noted
.
1.
Due
proposals
to
affect
sense
and
so
beget
natural
knowledge
.
2.
Due
care
to
attend
unto
such
proposals
,
when
the
impression
of
the
objects
is
heeded
,
and
the
mind
affected
by
it
.
In
return
to
this
passage
.
1.
We
take
for
granted
,
that
the
material
Characters
spoken
of
,
are
the
very
letter
of
Scripture
considered
in
the
causes
of
their
preservation
.
2.
We
grant
freely
that
the
material
means
of
preserving
Scriptures-letter
are
liable
to
many
alterations
and
contingencies
,
as
in
hand-writing
and
printing
.
3.
We
say
,
that
mens
minds
are
morally
mutable
and
corruptible
notwithstanding
their
physical
Immateriality
:
Now
this
moral
Corruption
of
mens
minds
indangereth
Truth
most
;
therefore
there
is
no
such
reason
as
is
pretended
,
to
hope
for
greater
constancy
from
them
,
in
p●eserving-Scriptures
letter
,
than
from
me●
hand-work
in
writing
,
forasmuch
as
th●…
mind
guides
the
hand
:
much
lesse
a
perfect
unalterableness
,
and
inerrableness
in
conceiving
Truth
,
although
the
due
circumstances
proposed
by
the
Discourser
be
observed
.
4
,
Mens
minds
are
as
deficient
preservatives
of
Scriptures-letter
,
as
their
hands
,
both
by
moral
Corruption
and
obnoxiousness
to
perpetual
alteration
through
the
alloy
of
their
material
compart
.
5.
Notwithstanding
the
due
proposal
of
object
and
due
care
to
attend
,
there
must
be
also
a
due
disposition
of
the
Subject
,
and
means
of
bringing
home
,
or
impressing
the
object
on
the
mind
,
to
beget
the
certain
knowledge
of
any
thing
;
and
no
less
of
Scripture
.
6.
Though
God
make
use
of
mans
mind
and
hand
as
means
to
continue
his
Scripture
in
his
Church
,
yet
he
himself
alone
is
the
efficient
and
preserving
Cause
of
it
,
who
will
keep
it
from
perishing
.
In
the
4th
Section
he
makes
a
reflection
from
his
premises
.
1.
That
the
Rule
of
Faith
must
be
obvious
to
men
of
ordinary
sense
,
not
only
to
Speculators
.
2.
That
Objects
of
senses
,
are
either
Natural
,
as
simple
vulgar
actions
,
and
matters
of
Fact
,
which
being
oft
repeated
,
are
unmistakable
&c.
or
compounded
Actions
,
as
the
Transcribing
a
whole
book
consisting
of
such
myriads
of
words
&c.
that
it
exceeds
humane
ear
,
to
keep
awake
and
apply
distinct
attentions
to
every
of
those
distinct
actions
.
Yet
he
grants
,
that
this
defect
may
be
provided
against
,
by
the
care
of
many
sober
and
sedulous
Examiners
who
may
ascertain
the
truth
of
the
letter
of
a
whole
book
u●to
us
,
&c.
Hereunto
we
shortly
reply
.
1.
The
Rule
of
Fai●h
ought
to
be
obvious
to
men
of
ordinary
sense
,
in
their
own
language
and
plainest
way
for
their
understanding
;
And
no
less
ought
these
vulgar
souls
set
themselves
to
apprehend
the
Rule
of
faith
to
salvation
;
therefore
hath
God
given
them
reasonable
souls
.
2.
These
souls
are
not
bound
to
look
over
Transcribers
and
observe
so
many
myriads
of
words
,
single
letters
,
tittles
and
stops
,
no
more
then
the
Beraeans
were
,
who
searched
the
Scriptures
given
to
them
,
without
such
excessive
labour
.
3.
Whatever
numerous
multitude
the
Discourser
requires
to
ascertain
him
of
the
truth
of
Scriptures
letter
;
It
satisfieth
us
,
that
God
hath
raised
up
his
Instruments
in
all
ages
,
both
for
number
and
weight
sufficient
to
be
his
Competent
witnesses
of
his
written-Tuth
;
And
what
is
Gods
good
pleasure
in
this
matter
,
contents
us
,
notwithstanding
the
Exactions
of
unreasonable
men
.
4.
Yet
we
wonder
,
that
the
Discourser
should
trouble
himself
and
his
Readers
,
with
recalling
the
certainty
of
Scriptures
letters
being
;
which
was
enough
debated
in
the
two
first
properties
of
evidence
as
to
its
existence
;
wherein
these
are
coincident
:
but
we
must
follow
him
,
as
he
leadeth
.
5.
In
this
5th
.
Sect
.
He
applyeth
his
former
Discourse
to
the
matter
in
hand
,
which
to
contract
,
we
shall
form
into
this
Argument
.
If
it
were
certain
that
there
had
been
such
a
multitude
of
Examiners
of
Scriptures
letter
in
each
Copy
taken
from
the
first
Original
,
&c.
If
by
Excommunication
or
heavy
Ecclesiastick
Prohibitions
,
and
Mulcts
it
had
been
provided
for
from
the
beginning
,
that
none
should
presume
to
take
a
Copy
of
it
,
nor
that
permitted
to
be
read
,
unless
thus
examined
,
then
much
might
have
been
said
for
the
certainty
of
Scriptures
letter
:
but
,
no
such
order
or
exactness
was
ever
found
to
be
used
,
especially
about
the
New
Testament
,
therefore
Scriptures
letter
may
be
uncertain
in
every
tittle
,
notwithstanding
the
diligence
used
de
facto
to
preserve
it
uncorrupted
.
This
is
the
sum
,
only
he
harps
upon
some
doctrine
of
Christs
written
in
hearts
,
which
he
calls
Tradition
,
whereby
Scriptures
letter
may
be
ascertained
;
which
he
referrs
to
another
place
.
Hereunto
we
orderly
return
.
1.
No
multitudes
of
men
even
the
best
,
can
give
more
assurance
of
Scriptures
letter
,
than
a
few
,
where
God
is
the
preserver
of
it
:
Men
by
their
crowds
may
prevail
with
men
,
as
to
gain
humane
Faith
to
any
thing
;
but
God
himself
by
few
or
one
witness
is
able
to
give
certainty
of
his
Truth
,
and
work
faith
unto
salvation
.
2.
No
Excommunications
,
Prohibitions
or
Mulcts
,
either
from
Ecclesiastick
or
Civil
powers
,
can
keep
mens
hearts
more
upright
,
and
faithful
to
their
Trust
,
than
the
Almighties
threatnings
,
vengeance
and
curse
denounced
against
such
evil
doers
;
therefore
the
Discourser
may
do
well
to
consider
,
whose
punishments
are
most
likely
to
keep
men
upright
,
Gods
or
M●ns
:
If
Gods
;
he
will
see
h●s
Consequence
from
mens
Exactions
is
not
firm
,
to
give
us
more
certainty
of
mens
integrity
in
the
present
case
;
seeing
Gods
judgments
de
facto
do
not
keep
men
upright
.
3.
As
to
the
Assumption
,
it
is
partly
granted
,
that
no
such
numbers
,
and
Exactness
,
as
the
Author
captiously
requires
,
may
be
found
:
but
otherwise
we
deny
it
,
and
assert
;
that
God
hath
alwaies
maintained
his
number
for
this
work
to
ascertain
Scriptures-letter
both
in
the
old
and
new
Testament
:
Whereupon
the
very
Romish
adversaries
are
forced
to
confesse
it
to
be
the
word
of
God
,
however
this
Disputer
thinks
by
his
paralogisms
to
delude
the
world
.
4.
From
the
premises
we
conclude
,
Scriptures
letter
cannot
be
uncertain
in
every
title
,
seeing
the
Almighty
Arm
of
God
hath
directed
it
,
and
by
the
faithful
diligence
of
his
witnesses
conveied
it
unto
us
.
5.
As
to
his
exceptions
,
that
the
more
Copies
make
the
more
errors
,
and
many
Corrections
to
have
passed
over
the
vulgar
Edition
,
and
still
various
readings
make
doubts
,
we
answer
.
1.
That
is
not
justly
to
be
charged
upon
Scripture
,
which
is
accidental
to
it
,
by
some
mens
Oscitancies
and
Gods
permission
,
who
orders
even
such
evils
of
men
to
the
manifestation
of
his
own
Truth
,
and
the
shame
of
lyars
:
This
hurts
us
nor
.
2.
The
vulgar
Edition
,
which
the
Trent-Confederacy
,
have
Canonized
,
is
the
most
corrupt
of
any
,
as
hath
been
shewed
by
many
witnesses
:
What
impudence
then
is
it
for
their
Pope
to
injoin
it
to
his
Creatures
,
as
the
only
Authentick
Copy
?
As
it
is
most
current
,
so
is
it
most
Currently
false
.
3.
Multitude
of
Copies
do
not
corrupt
Scripture
but
the
multiplied
faults
of
men
,
for
which
God
will
plead
with
them
:
Yet
is
there
a
sufficient
Remedy
also
against
this
evill
;
by
more
careful
inspection
of
faithful
Instruments
under
Gods
guidance
.
These
then
are
but
reiterated
cavils
.
6.
As
to
his
close
,
That
we
will
not
have
the
sence
of
Christs
Doctrine
writ
in
hearts
to
be
the
Rule
for
Correcting
of
Scriptures
letter
,
which
writing
he
takes
for
his
Tradition
,
and
the
help
of
it
to
ascertain
Scriptures
letter
,
he
referrs
to
another
enquiry
,
we
say
.
1.
We
acknowledge
that
Spirit-writing
of
Christs
Law
in
hearts
,
to
be
a
glorious
saving
work
;
beyond
the
Discoursers
phansie
of
it
here
.
2.
We
deny
it
in
any
measure
to
favour
Popish
Tradition
,
or
to
be
a
Rule
of
correcting
Scrip●ure
;
for
by
this
must
hearts
try
,
whether
that
be
the
same
mind
of
Christ
written
in
them
as
is
in
the
Scripture
of
God
:
which
will
be
declared
,
where
the
Author
urgeth
that
Scripture
for
his
ends
.
3.
We
shall
expect
howsoever
,
what
certainty
will
accrue
to
Scriptures
letter
from
his
Tradition
,
in
the
place
where
he
shall
offer
it
;
and
there
consider
it
.
6.
In
this
Section
he
argueth
against
the
2d
.
thing
proposed
,
which
is
Scriptures
significativeness
,
Thus
,
Scriptures
letter
is
uncertain
;
therefore
,
the
certainty
of
Scriptures
significativeness
is
quite
lost
therein
.
This
he
exemplifieth
.
1.
In
the
vulgar
,
they
have
no
Arts
,
Grammar
,
Logick
,
&c.
they
are
unable
to
compare
places
,
and
want
Principles
to
settle
their
Judgments
therein
.
2.
In
the
wits
of
Protestants
and
Socinians
clash●ng
against
each
other
with
Scripture
,
about
the
great
points
of
the
B.
Trinity
and
Christs
Divinity
.
The
weak
vulgar
cannot
attain
the
sence
of
Scripture
:
The
strong
and
learned
do
not
,
for
they
differ
about
it
:
therefore
Scriptures-letter
is
not
certain
in
it self
,
and
so
cannot
perform
the
office
of
the
Rule
of
faith
,
to
guide
Mankind
in
their
way
to
Faith
,
with
a
rational
assuredness
.
In
short
to
all
this
.
1.
We
deny
the
Antecedent
,
and
have
proved
the
contrary
,
even
the
certainty
of
Scriptures-letter
under
the
good
hand
of
God
,
given
and
continued
untill
now
de
Facto
,
and
which
the
same
Providence
will
keep
in
being
and
duration
:
therefore
the
Consequence
is
false
,
Scriptures
significativeness
is
not
lost
upon
that
account
.
2.
As
to
the
vulgar
they
have
reasonable
souls
,
and
thence
natural
Logick
,
which
God
required
them
to
exercise
for
understanding
his
Law
written
;
and
delivered
unto
them
;
unto
which
all
that
Mankind
may
attain
through
grace
,
and
be
saved
by
it
,
who
do
diligently
attend
on
such
Revelations
of
God
;
though
they
have
no
Arts
or
skils
:
as
captiously
are
required
by
the
Discourser
:
God
requires
not
these
but
the
former
.
3.
As
to
the
clashing
of
witts
among
the
Orthodox
and
Socinians
:
one
by
Scripture
affirming
,
and
the
other
denying
the
Trinity
,
or
Deity
of
Christ
,
This
concludes
not
uncertainty
in
the
Scriptures
letter
or
sense
;
but
infirmity
,
or
worse
,
iniquity
in
men
,
who
pervert
the
plain
written
word
of
God
.
St.
Paul
according
to
the
wisedome
given
to
him
wrote
to
the
Hebrews
;
yet
many
unstable
and
unlearned
,
untaught
of
God
,
wrested
his
Epistles
,
as
they
did
other
Scriptures
unto
their
own
destruction
.
Were
his
Epistles
or
the
Scriptures
any
whit
the
more
uncertain
in
their
letters
or
sense
because
of
their
perverse
abuse
of
them
?
The
Disputer
dares
not
say
so
;
and
then
let
him
answer
himself
.
4.
These
things
being
clear
we
infer
,
Scripture
in
letter
and
sence
,
is
certain
in
its
self
,
and
so
ascertainable
to
us
,
and
therefore
can
perform
the
office
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
to
guide
men
in
the
true
way
of
Faith
,
with
a
rational
assuredness
,
who
do
sincerely
and
knowingly
resign
themselves
to
be
ruled
by
it
.
In
fine
to
this
Discourse
we
remind
the
Author
still
,
We
maintain
not
the
Scripture-letter
barely
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
;
but
the
Scr
pture
spirited
and
senced
by
God
.
This
is
the
Protest●nt
Confe●sion
:
We
therefore
close
with
this
Counter-Conclusion
general
against
that
of
the
Discourser
,
which
he
layeth
against
Scripture
.
The
Scripture
of
God
in
its
integrity
wants
none
of
the
forementioned
properties
belonging
to
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
7.
In
this
last
Section
he
dischargeth
these
two
things
.
1.
An
Apologie
for
himself
,
to
keep
him
from
being
mistaken
,
as
if
in
these
Discourses
he
were
an
Enemy
to
Scripture
;
He
telleth
us
therefore
,
that
in
a
great
part
,
he
doth
but
argue
as
to
man
.
2.
He
declares
also
,
that
he
acknowledgeth
such
Excellencies
in
those
sacred
Oracles
,
as
would
task
the
tongue
of
men
and
Angels
to
lay
them
forth
:
And
in
short
that
he
contests
with
them
only
,
who
maintain
Scriptures-letter
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
:
which
he
supposeth
is
warranted
by
the
Apostles
and
their
Successors
,
who
went
not
with
books
in
their
hands
to
preach
and
deliver
Christs
Doctrine
,
but
with
words
in
their
mouths
,
&c.
Unto
this
briefly
we
return
.
1.
Arguing
against
Truth
only
,
as
to
man
,
will
not
render
any
excusable
or
g●iltless
,
when
all
the
while
he
cordially
disputes
against
God
in
his
written
word
,
which
is
true
and
Faithful
.
2.
As
for
the
Reverence
he
bears
to
those
sacred
Oracles
,
it
is
by
his
own
confession
in
another
place
with
this
proviso
,
that
they
be
senced
by
his
Tradition
:
otherwise
he
concludes
them
to
be
no
words
of
God
.
And
is
not
this
great
honour
done
to
the
Scripture
,
that
mans
Tradition
should
make
it
Divine
Truth
?
3.
He
professeth
to
contest
with
none
but
such
as
hold
Scriptures-letter
only
unsenced
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
:
And
who
are
they
?
Surely
they
are
no
Protestants
:
Let
him
not
therefore
falsly
charge
them
.
4.
The
instance
of
the
Apostles
will
not
help
him
;
For
though
they
went
not
with
books
in
their
hands
to
preach
,
yet
both
Christ
himself
read
a
written
Text
out
of
the
Prophet
Isaiah
,
Luk
.
4.17.18
,
19
,
20.
●1
.
Acts
2
,
16
,
●5
.
and
preached
on
it
;
And
the
Apostles
also
themselves
urge
constantly
the
writings
of
the
Prophets
to
make
good
their
Doctrine
of
Christ
:
So
that
they
were
no
Enemies
to
the
right
use
of
Scriptures-letter
;
Neither
are
we
.
It
had
been
to
better
purpose
,
if
the
Discourser
had
brought
this
Example
to
his
own
Priests
and
P●elates
with
other
idle
Droans
,
to
teach
them
to
preach
without
book
;
and
in
that
rational
convincing
way
as
the
Apostles
did
:
But
this
would
spoil
his
Popish
Cause
.
2.
The
next
thing
in
his
close
is
a
Crimination
of
others
,
whom
he
stileth
Revolters
(
suppose
from
his
Tradition
to
the
Scripture
)
:
These
he
saith
put
the
Scriptures
into
the
peoples
hand
to
please
them
,
and
leave
it
to
their
Interpretation
:
So
it
is
brought
to
the
vilest
contempt
:
This
makes
so
many
Sects
in
this
our
miserable
Country
,
Country
,
that
it
is
impossible
to
bring
them
under
Ecclesistical
or
Temporal
Government
;
and
in
sum
,
this
Principle
that
the
Scripture
is
the
Rule
of
Faith
is
the
necessary
Parent
of
such
ruinous
and
unredressable
disorders
.
Here
we
have
his
Reverend
thoughts
of
the
Scripture
,
where
his
venom
is
disgorged
against
the
word
of
God
,
and
the
Assertours
of
it
:
But
it
is
a
most
untrue
and
malitious
charge
,
whereunto
it
were
answer
abundantly
sufficient
,
only
to
say
,
The
Lord
rebuke
thee
Satan
:
But
yet
we
shall
adde
some
things
by
way
of
reply
in
the
words
of
soberness
and
Truth
.
1.
It
is
no
Revolt
from
lying
Tradition
to
the
Truth
of
God
in
Scripture
,
but
a
Conversion
from
Idols
unto
God
.
2.
Scripture
is
the
gift
of
God
to
his
people
,
and
Protestants
dare
not
deny
it
to
,
or
take
it
from
,
them
;
(
as
the
Papal
Powers
exalting
themselves
above
God
most
Antichristianly
do
)
yet
is
it
not
left
to
every
ones
vain
and
private
Interpretation
:
This
is
slanderous
.
3.
Scripture
being
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
wherever
it
ruleth
,
maketh
souls
most
orderly
and
exactly
obedient
to
Civil
,
and
True
Church-Government
.
It
doth
indeed
oppugne
the
Tyrannical
Hierarchy
of
Rome
,
and
every
thing
that
exalts
it self
against
God
:
but
it
makes
souls
obedient
to
Powers
ordained
of
God
and
that
for
Conscience
sake
.
This
soul
reproach
the
Authors
fore-fathers
have
charged
on
the
Scripture
,
and
he
walketh
in
their
steps
:
We
shall
only
retort
thus
much
in
experienced
Truth
,
that
both
France
and
England
have
felt
the
sad
and
deadly
Events
of
their
Traditionary
Jesuitical
Doctrine
,
which
the
Scriptures
of
God
and
the
lovers
of
them
abhorre
.
We
conclude
then
Scriptures
Rule
of
Faith
is
no
Parent
of
ruinous
and
unredresseable
disorders
,
but
of
the
sweetest
order
,
which
followed
,
would
work
out
most
perfect
peace
in
the
Church
and
in
the
world
:
Isai
.
11.6
,
7
,
8
,
9.
The
wolf
would
dwell
with
the
lamb
&c.
Righteousness
and
Peace
would
then
kisse
each
other
,
yea
and
abundance
of
peace
so
long
as
the
moon
endureth
.
This
is
Scriptures
Honour
,
the
Rule
of
our
Faith
.
We
shall
now
hear
what
he
can
say
for
his
Tradition
.
THE
Fifth
Discourse
EXAMINED
.
About
Traditions
,
Notion
,
&c.
THis
whole
discourse
contains
two
Heads
.
1.
The
opening
of
the
Notion
of
Tradition
.
Ss.
1
,
2
,
3
,
4
,
5
,
&
6.
2.
The
applying
of
the
premised
Properties
of
the
Rule
unto
Tradition
and
the
conclusion
from
the
whole
.
1.
Of
the
opening
the
term
.
1.
In
the
Entrance
the
Discourser
professeth
,
that
he
had
quite
lost
his
labour
in
his
former
search
for
the
Properties
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
in
Scripture
:
Therefore
,
he
will
see
,
whether
better
hope
may
be
to
find
them
in
his
Oral
or
Practical
Tradition
,
by
which
he
meaneth
,
a
delivery
down
from
hand
to
hand
of
the
Sence
and
Faith
of
Fore-fathers
.
Sect
.
1.
To
this
,
1.
We
maintain
,
though
,
the
Disputer
have
quite
lost
his
labour
(
which
he
is
willing
to
do
)
yet
we
have
not
lost
ours
in
proving
Scriptures
All
sufficiency
,
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
;
and
disproving
his
frivolous
and
fallacious
Exceptions
against
it
,
—
2.
We
take
his
meaning
,
That
Oral-Tradition
,
is
a
Delivery
down
from
hand
to
hand
,
that
is
,
by
word
and
visible
Action
of
the
sence
and
faith
of
his
Fore-fathers
:
Where
yet
we
note
that
the
matter
delivered
by
word
is
part
of
h●s
meaning
;
for
it
is
the
delivery
of
such
a
thing
even
sence
and
faith
of
Fore-fathers
.
2.
In
the
next
Section
,
he
illustrates
his
meaning
of
Tradition
by
a
more
express
conceit
of
it
in
the
nurturing
of
Children
as
to
the
knowledge
of
Natural
,
Civil
,
and
Artificial
things
,
S.
2.
All
which
without
reiterating
we
easily
grant
;
though
it
will
not
in
all
things
fit
so
wel●
to
the
conveying
down
of
Faith
as
we
may
find
hereafter
.
3.
In
this
Section
,
he
saith
,
there
wants
nothing
but
to
apply
the
same
Method
to
spiritual
affairs
,
and
then
may
be
gained
a
compleat
and
proper
notion
of
Faith
,
Tradition
,
S.
3.
We
shall
therefore
observe
how
we
apply
it
;
if
justly
,
we
shall
join
issue
,
if
not
we
shall
declare
our
reasonable
dissent
,
and
shew
the
disproportion
,
which
is
not
little
between
Spiritual
and
Natural
things
as
to
the
knowledge
of
them
.
4.
He
applyeth
this
to
Christians
Children
,
and
observeth
.
1.
They
hear
sounds
,
and
have
dim
notions
of
God
,
Christ
,
Saviour
,
Heaven
,
and
Hell
&c.
Afterward
according
to
capacities
they
are
put
upon
some
External
Actions
,
deterred
from
sin
,
taught
virtue
;
and
to
do
some
duties
of
prayer
,
&c.
They
learn
the
Commandements
,
Creed
,
&c.
And
by
conversing
with
Fore-fathers
,
they
come
to
more
knowledge
:
Then
they
atise
a
swarm
of
the
same
Religion
,
hold●ng
the
same
points
with
the
former
Age
:
And
this
comes
on
not
by
leaps
from
100
years
to
a
100.
but
from
mouth
to
mouth
,
and
day
to
day
,
as
young
Eaglets
made
to
see
the
sun
by
degrees
in
his
full
glory
,
&c.
So
these
proceed
from
perceiving
the
dawning
to
be
acquainted
with
the
common
day-light
of
Christian
Doctrine
,
S.
4.
Whereunto
,
1.
We
grant
this
to
be
a
rational
and
natural
help
to
bring
up
posterity
to
the
knowledge
and
Faith
of
Christ
and
a
means
commanded
.
2.
Yet
we
say
also
,
that
by
the
same
means
from
Fathers
to
Children
is
delivered
down
all
false
,
superstitious
,
Idolatrous
Religion
and
all
ungodliness
and
Profaneness
.
So
that
it
is
not
peculiar
to
convey
Faith
.
3.
We
except
further
,
that
this
Oral-Tradition
,
is
not
hereupon
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
(
which
the
Disputer
is
to
prove
)
but
only
a
partial
help
or
means
to
nurture
up
Children
from
their
infancy
toward
the
knowledge
of
it
,
which
is
the
will
of
God
only
,
revealed
in
the
Scripture
.
4.
We
animadvert
that
all
this
is
only
able
to
guide
unto
the
external
profession
of
Faith
,
but
not
without
Grace
to
make
true
beleevers
.
5.
He
proceeds
to
prove
this
a
real
Truth
;
from
the
practise
of
the
Primitive
Faithful
,
before
the
books
of
Scripture
were
writ
:
and
from
the
first
imbuing
of
Protest●nts
with
Christian
Principles
:
Nay
he
affirms
that
the
very
Presbyterians
,
much
more
the
Protestants
do
adhere
to
their
Faith
,
because
their
Parents
and
Pastors
taught
them
:
and
not
upon
the
Ev●dence
of
Scriptures
letter
,
He
casts
in
the
next
place
some
reflexions
on
persons
,
and
concludes
,
that
the
Protestants
owe
all
their
union
and
strength
to
Tradition
;
and
all
their
distractions
and
weakness
to
the
renouncing
of
it
,
S.
5.
In
short
to
this
,
1.
By
Primitive
faithful
,
we
suppose
he
means
Primitive
Christians
in
and
immediately
after
Christs
and
the
Apostles
times
;
Had
not
these
the
Scriptures
of
the
Prophets
in
that
time
?
Did
not
they
teach
their
Children
from
those
Scriptures
?
was
not
Timothy
taught
those
holy
Scriptures
?
and
was
he
not
made
wise
by
them
unto
salvation
?
they
were
not
then
before
all
Scripture
was
extant
,
nay
some
of
the
Churches
then
,
had
Epistles
written
from
the
Apostles
:
It
seemeth
this
was
not
narrowly
heeded
by
the
Discourser
.
2.
No
Protestants
ever
denied
the
necessary
use
of
Tradition
of
Truth
unto
posterity
,
but
assert
it
as
a
duty
Commanded
by
God
upon
Parents
to
their
Children
to
bring
them
unto
Faith
in
the
Revelation
of
God
:
and
acknowledge
,
that
they
were
at
first
so
imbued
with
the
Elements
of
true
Christian
Religion
.
3
,
Yet
all
true
Protestants
grown
up
to
knowledge
deny
,
that
they
adhere
to
the
faith
of
Christ
upon
this
account
,
because
their
Parents
and
Pastors
taught
them
,
but
because
now
they
find
it
to
be
indeed
the
true
revealed
will
of
God
in
his
written
word
:
of
the
truth
whereof
not
their
own
private
Interpretation
;
but
the
powerful
wo●k
of
Gods
spirit
by
it
upon
their
hearts
perswadeth
them
.
4
It
is
something
strange
that
this
Disputer
shoul●
make
Presbyterians
and
Protestants
contradistinct
members
;
unless
he
account
the
Episcopal
order
Protestants
,
and
the
Presbyterian
scarce
so
much
;
and
so
cast
in
a
bone
of
Contention
between
them
:
which
savours
not
of
Ingenuity
.
He
cannot
be
ignorant
that
several
of
the
Protestant
Churches
embrace
Presbyterian
Government
;
And
however
others
are
under
other
forms
,
yet
have
they
equally
contended
for
the
Protestant
Faith
against
Popish
Errors
:
which
doubtless
they
will
do
still
.
5.
It
is
a
most
unhandsome
reflexion
,
upon
those
Persons
whom
he
nameth
,
meerly
to
cast
an
odium
on
them
,
or
render
them
more
suspicious
than
others
;
when
he
desires
from
his
Answerer
more
civil
usage
toward
himself
.
He
may
receive
a
mark
also
.
6.
The
Protestants
do
owe
their
un●on
and
strength
to
God
only
,
and
to
their
stedfastness
in
one
Scripture-Truth
.
Their
Distractions
and
their
we●kness
,
they
own
unto
sins
among
them
:
and
specially
to
those
who
forsake
the
simplicity
and
unity
of
Gospel-written
Truth
to
cleave
unto
the
vain
and
unsavory
Traditions
of
men
.
No
more
to
this
,
but
only
a
desire
,
that
the
Discourser
would
resolve
this
question
,
why
are
there
so
many
Sects
,
orders
,
and
distractions
among
the
Papists
,
if
Tradition
be
such
a
soveraign
Cure
,
and
all
of
them
are
professed
subjects
thereunto
?
6.
The
nature
of
his
Tradition
being
thus
explained
,
it
renders
,
as
he
saith
,
many
objections
unnecessary
to
be
answered
or
mentioned
.
1.
That
this
Tradition
may
come
from
a
kind
of
Prophetical
Afflatus
or
Inspiration
;
it
is
only
built
upon
perfect
Evidence
of
their
best
senses
.
2
,
That
Protestants
have
taken
a
wrong
aim
,
to
dispute
against
Res
traditae
,
the
things
delivered
,
and
so
accuse
Papists
for
holding
humane
Traditions
,
or
things
invented
by
men
for
faith
:
whereas
when
they
speak
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
they
mean
by
the
word
Tradition
,
only
the
Method
of
publickly
delivering
and
conveying
down
Tenets
held
to
have
come
from
Christ
.
S.
6.
This
is
the
sum
of
the
first
Head
for
opening
Tradition
.
We
perceive
not
yet
,
that
Tradition
explained
by
the
Author
rendreth
many
or
any
objections
unnecessary
to
be
answered
or
mentioned
;
whatever
conceit
he
may
have
of
his
own
Explanation
;
for
it
no
way
cleareth
those
two
,
which
he
himself
here
suggesteth
.
It
is
requisite
therefore
to
ponder
what
he
saith
.
1.
Cannot
his
Tradition
explained
be
truly
charged
to
slow
from
some
kind
of
Prophetical
Afflatus
or
slashes
of
pretended
Inspiration
,
because
it
is
built
upon
perfect
Evidence
of
their
best
senses
?
may
not
senses
even
the
best
be
deluded
?
yea
and
be
so
bewitched
by
the
Devil
to
beleeve
lies
?
We
must
therefore
,
seeing
he
hath
started
it
,
deal
with
him
about
this
objection
,
against
his
Tradition
.
2.
We
take
it
for
granted
,
notwithstanding
his
touch●ng
upon
natural
Tradition
,
his
scope
is
to
transfer
all
to
his
Popish
Tradition
,
for
which
he
only
contends
in
all
his
discourses
;
when
he
speaks
of
the
doctrine
of
Christ
uninterruptedly
delivered
to
his
Romish
Church
thereby
:
and
hereupon
owns
himself
and
Papists
to
be
Traditionary
Christians
.
But
for
him
to
argue
from
Tradition
general
to
his
own
in
special
or
from
one
kind
of
Tradition
in
the
Church
which
is
true
,
to
another
which
is
false
,
it
is
but
fallacious
,
and
will
not
be
allowed
him
;
we
see
him
better
,
than
to
be
so
cheated
by
him
.
3.
We
shall
suggest
unto
him
that
ever
since
God
had
a
Church
in
this
world
visible
,
there
were
therein
,
A
seed
after
the
flesh
,
and
a
seed
after
the
Spirit
.
So
it
was
between
Cain
and
Seth
in
Adams
family
.
Now
doubtless
Cain
by
Tradition
taught
his
Children
his
Faith
of
God
,
which
made
them
Apostates
from
the
Truth
:
and
no
less
did
Seth
teach
his
Poster●ty
by
Tradition
his
Faith
in
God
;
and
thereby
kept
them
to
the
true
faith
untill
they
mingled
with
the
children
of
men
and
were
corrupted
so
farre
,
that
God
took
them
away
by
the
flood
.
Yet
both
these
received
their
respective
Traditions
,
upon
the
perfect
Evidence
of
the
best
senses
they
had
.
Evidence
of
sense
then
,
that
this
was
delivered
to
them
as
from
God
,
did
not
secure
any
of
them
from
being
deceived
,
but
some
higher
power
of
the
Lord
guided
the
true
seed
in
his
way
.
So
it
was
in
Noahs
Family
.
So
in
Abrahams
,
and
so
along
unto
Moses
,
and
from
him
to
Christ
;
who
contended
against
the
Pharisees
in
the
days
of
his
Flesh
,
for
nulling
the
written
commands
of
God
by
their
Tradition
.
4.
To
come
neerer
to
him
;
after
Christs
ascending
to
glory
,
and
the
Apostles
then
surviving
,
there
arose
two
parties
in
the
Christian
Church
visible
;
The
one
sprung
from
the
Mysterie
of
Godliness
God
manifest
in
the
flesh
:
1
Tim
.
3.15.6
.
2
Thes
.
2.
The
other
spawned
from
the
Mysterie
of
Iniquity
.
These
both
professed
Christ
,
and
doubtless
by
word
of
mouth
taught
him
to
their
Children
and
Disciples
;
but
the
one
purely
and
sincerely
as
the
truth
was
in
Jesus
;
and
the
other
corruptly
with
those
lyes
and
falsehoods
which
turned
away
many
from
the
true
faith
of
Christ
,
even
in
those
times
:
and
yet
both
these
Disciples
received
what
was
delivered
of
Christ
unto
them
upon
perfect
Evidence
of
their
best
senses
;
but
the
one
with
sense
and
reason
inlightned
by
Gods
spirit
;
and
the
other
with
senses
,
the
best
they
had
,
but
fascinated
by
the
Devil
,
to
beleeve
lyes
,
because
they
loved
not
the
Truth
.
5.
To
draw
a
little
closer
to
him
,
we
may
thus
put
him
to
it
:
If
his
Popish
Tradition
did
indesectively
issue
from
the
Church
in
the
Apostles
time
,
was
it
from
them
that
issued
from
,
and
contended
for
the
Mysterie
of
God●iness
?
or
from
them
,
who
took
their
rise
from
the
Mystery
of
Iniquity
,
and
wrought
under
i●
?
The
first
we
deny
;
for
Tradition
meerly
Popish
,
is
but
from
corrupt
sences
of
men
,
added
to
the
simple
Truth
of
Jesus
which
he
abhors
,
as
Peters
Prelacy
,
The
Popes
succession
of
him
,
the
introducing
of
other
Mediators
,
besides
the
Son
o●
God
,
who
is
the
only
way
to
the
Father
;
none
of
these
came
from
Christ
or
his
Apostles
.
The
second
is
justly
charged
on
them
,
that
Popish
Tradition
is
the
great
Apostasie
from
the
Mysterie
of
Godliness
;
and
so
the
design
of
perfecting
the
Mysterie
of
Iniquity
in
these
latter
daies
:
turning
souls
from
the
true
Faith
of
Christ
,
unto
lying
vanities
,
and
that
by
the
hypocrisie
of
their
Forefathers
telling
lyes
unto
their
Children
.
This
is
strongly
made
good
aga●nst
the
Papal
Sea
,
by
many
Witnesses
of
Gods
Truth
,
and
specially
by
that
Renowned
Mr.
Mead
,
in
his
book
of
the
Apostasie
of
the
latter
times
,
from
that
Prophesie
,
1
Tim
.
4
,
1
,
2
,
3.
And
by
the
learned
Dr.
Moor
in
his
Treatise
of
the
Mysterie
of
Iniquity
2
Thes
.
2
,
3
,
4
,
7.
The
Discourser
and
his
Confederates
have
need
to
clear
themselves
from
this
charge
:
But
if
not
(
as
none
could
do
yet
)
the
objection
stands
in
more
force
notwithstanding
h●s
Tradition
explained
,
that
some
kind
of
Diabolically
Prophetical
Asslatus
,
is
the
Cause
of
his
Trad
tion
,
however
they
rece●ve
it
,
as
he
boasts
,
upon
perfect
evidence
of
their
best
senses
:
For
so
they
may
embrace
lyes
,
and
yet
take
them
to
be
Truth
.
2.
He
supposeth
,
that
by
his
explaining
the
notion
of
his
Tradition
,
he
hath
at
once
dasht
all
the
objections
of
the
Protestants
against
Popish
Tradition
;
for
he
saith
,
they
took
all
a
wrong
aim
,
to
dispute
against
things
delivered
by
Oral
speech
,
in
stead
of
Tradition
it self
,
which
is
only
the
Method
of
delivering
down
publickly
the
Tenets
held
to
come
from
Christ
:
So
they
have
all
mistaken
the
Papists
meaning
in
the
controversie
about
Tradition
,
and
all
their
batteries
have
missed
the
mark
.
Silly
Protestants
!
Had
they
no
more
wit
all
along
but
to
mistake
the
question
?
nay
simple
Jesuits
!
Could
not
they
see
their
mistakes
in
all
their
Combats
with
them
;
and
tell
them
they
shot
besides
the
mark
?
Surely
this
Discourser
is
more
quick
sighted
to
perceive
this
error
at
this
day
,
than
all
his
Fore-fathers
.
But
let
us
use
our
eies
also
,
to
see
this
mistake
if
we
can
,
or
else
let
this
Disputer
see
,
that
even
in
this
matter
he
himself
is
mistaken
.
1.
Have
not
the
Protestants
alwaies
in
the
Controversie
with
Papists
about
Traditions
being
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
distinguished
between
the
Form
and
Method
of
Tradition
by
speech
,
and
the
matter
of
Tradition
delivered
?
Nay
and
as
they
have
distinguished
so
they
have
determined
;
that
as
to
the
way
of
delivering
Christs
Doctrine
by
Oral
Tradition
,
Catholici
in
hoc
toto
negotio
distinguendum
putant
inter
res
quae
traduntur
in
Ecclesia
et
rationem
earum
tradendarum
.
&c.
Panst
.
To
.
1.
8.
c
.
1.
S.
18.
Rationem
rerum
tradendarum
duplic●m
esse
agroscimus
:
vel
per
Scripturam
sacram
&c.
vel
per
quotidianam
instructionem
ibid
.
S.
19.
they
granted
it
to
be
a
special
means
of
conveying
down
Truth
and
bringing
unto
Faith
;
though
not
the
only
one
,
but
joint
with
the
Scriptures
of
God
being
conformed
to
them
,
yea
and
subject
to
be
tried
by
them
.
Hear
the
words
of
one
Souldier
of
Christ
,
Chamier
.
In
this
whole
business
)
Catholicks
(
truly
so
called
even
Protestantss
think
it
must
be
distinguished
between
things
which
are
delivered
in
the
Church
,
and
the
course
or
manner
of
delivering
them
.
And
further
,
the
form
of
delivering
we
acknowledge
twofold
,
either
by
the
Holy
Scripture
,
or
by
daily
instruction
;
which
is
oral-Tradition
.
This
and
much
more
to
this
purpose
doth
this
Protestant
Souldier
express
.
And
no
less
the
Churches
of
them
,
who
are
not
offended
with
the
name
or
use
of
Tradition
rightly
stated
;
He
did
not
therefore
take
wrong
aim
;
no
more
do
the
rest
.
2.
Let
the
Discourser
speak
out
yet
;
Doth
he
maintain
Tradition
only
as
Oral
speech
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
without
the
sence
or
matter
delivered
in
it
?
Let
him
take
his
aiery
Rule
then
which
is
but
a
senceless
sound
:
But
he
tells
us
,
that
his
Tradition
is
the
method
of
delivering
down
Tenets
held
to
come
from
Christ
;
Are
not
these
Res
Traditae
?
against
which
while
we
dispute
,
he
saith
we
mistake
the
mark
;
And
doth
not
he
deliver
these
things
all
along
in
his
Discourse
,
for
Tradition
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
?
Let
him
reconcile
himself
:
and
not
pretend
to
vent
some
new
thing
to
the
world
,
for
defense
of
his
Popish
cause
,
seeing
he
saith
no
more
,
than
what
his
Fathers
have
said
before
him
,
when
they
maintained
the
unwritten
word
of
God
,
which
was
Tradition
in
matter
and
form
,
to
be
their
Rule
of
Faith
.
The
Protestants
then
mistook
not
in
charging
them
to
hold
humane
Tradition
for
Faith
,
or
things
invented
by
men
.
3.
The
Explication
of
Tradition
by
the
Author
proveth
not
any
mistake
of
Protestants
in
their
disputes
,
neither
weakens
their
objections
against
Popish
Tradition
.
In
sum
to
shut
up
this
head
;
If
the
Discourser
aim
only
to
prove
the
necessity
of
giving
down
the
doctrine
of
Christ
by
Oral-Tradition
,
we
join
issue
and
grant
it
to
be
a
good
means
to
bring
to
the
Faith
of
the
Gospel
:
but
not
the
only
me
ns
,
nor
independent
upon
any
other
,
but
such
as
must
convey
the
same
will
of
Christ
contained
in
the
Scriptures
,
and
ought
to
be
tried
by
them
.
Yet
still
do
we
deny
it
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
which
alone
is
the
will
of
God
,
revealed
in
Scripture
;
and
thence
opened
,
and
delivered
down
by
teaching
to
the
Sons
of
men
.
2.
After
his
Explication
of
the
meaning
of
Tradition
,
he
proceeds
to
apply
the
properties
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
unto
it
in
the
following
Sections
.
1.
In
the
7th
.
Sect
.
he
saith
,
that
to
be
be
Evident
to
all
as
to
its
Existence
(
which
is
the
first
Property
)
absolutely
agrees
to
Tradition
:
For
this
conveying
Practical
doctrines
by
best
Senses
,
as
Eies
and
Ears
,
and
that
by
sounds
daily
heard
,
and
Actions
seen
,
is
as
Evident
to
all
sorts
as
to
its
Existence
,
as
to
see
and
hear
:
So
it
may
be
insinuated
into
Vulgar
and
Children
and
Babes
in
some
degree
to
affect
them
therewith
.
1.
We
would
understand
what
the
Discourser
means
by
this
Properties
absolutely
agreeing
to
Tradition
;
If
he
mean
Convertibly
so
that
it
agreeth
to
nothing
else
,
we
deny
it
:
but
if
he
mean
only
that
it
plainly
or
simply
agreeth
to
it
,
we
grant
it
;
Vocal
sounds
are
Ev●dent
to
their
Existence
:
So
are
letters
and
writing
also
unto
such
subjects
as
are
capable
of
them
.
2.
We
grant
that
Oral-Tradition
doth
reach
more
ages
and
capacities
than
Scripture
doth
,
therefore
hath
God
commanded
it
to
be
used
to
our
Children
,
as
they
may
become
capable
of
hearing
,
and
observing
:
but
still
do
we
bind
up
this
method
to
the
matter
,
that
is
imported
and
conveid
in
it
;
that
it
be
consonant
to
Gods
revealed
will
in
Scripture
;
and
that
reading
also
as
well
as
hearing
is
as
useful
and
necessary
for
subjects
capable
,
to
bring
them
to
know
Christs
Doctrine
.
3.
We
demand
of
him
,
whether
practical
doctrines
conveied
by
this
Tradition
,
be
not
Res
Traditae
,
that
is
,
matters
delivered
in
this
method
?
He
cannot
deny
it
?
How
then
can
he
charge
us
with
mistake
,
when
we
grant
the
method
agreeable
to
Gods
will
for
conveying
his
Truth
,
but
deny
their
doctrins
to
be
Christs
which
they
give
down
this
way
.
Popish
Tradition
in
form
and
matter
is
peccant
.
4.
We
deny
,
that
his
common
vulgar
children
,
and
much
more
Babes
,
are
affected
with
the
Practical
doctrines
pronounced
although
they
hear
the
sound
of
words
:
It
would
be
a
rare
thing
to
shew
such
Babes
as
are
affected
with
Doctrine
:
Many
may
hear
the
voice
,
and
yet
not
receive
the
Doctrine
,
who
are
more
capable
then
his
Vulgar
are
.
5.
Suppose
these
sounds
may
affect
these
persons
,
yet
they
are
but
only
means
to
bring
to
Faith
,
not
the
Rule
of
it
,
which
is
the
Discoursers
task
to
make
good
.
Therefore
this
Tradition
may
have
Evidence
as
to
the
Ex●stence
of
means
,
not
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
which
is
not
to
his
pretended
purpose
.
His
own
first
Property
then
is
not
so
absolutely
agreeable
to
his
professed
Rule
of
Faith
.
2.
In
S.
8.
He
applyeth
his
2d
.
Property
of
the
Rule
to
his
Tradition
,
which
is
,
That
its
ruling
Power
should
be
easily
Evidenceable
to
any
Enquirer
.
This
he
illustrates
to
any
rude
Doubter
by
instancing
in
Protestants
,
that
if
they
in
successive
generations
,
should
by
speech
deliver
down
to
their
children
their
professed
faith
,
and
these
successively
receive
it
,
they
must
all
be
Protestants
;
This
Tradition
would
have
such
evident
ruling
Power
over
them
.
This
method
then
is
easily
Evidenceable
to
be
the
certain
way
of
deriving
down
Christs
Doctrine
while
the
world
shall
last
.
This
property
therefore
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
agreeeth
to
Tradition
.
Our
Reply
is
1.
That
the
instance
given
holdeth
forth
only
the
Evidence
of
the
ruling
power
of
the
means
or
method
of
bringing
to
Faith
,
and
to
walk
by
the
true
Rule
of
Faith
;
not
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
it self
:
Such
is
Oral-Tradition
of
the
Truth
and
no
more
.
2.
Neither
is
this
a
Reciprocal
Property
of
the
means
to
Faith
.
For
it
agree●h
as
well
to
help
on
and
convey
down
all
false
Religion
,
as
well
as
true
;
So
Mahometan
Tradition
helps
on
to
give
down
the
Faith
of
Mahomet
:
and
Popish
Tradition
to
convey
Popery
to
their
Posterity
;
which
is
faith
,
Papal
,
Idolatrical
,
and
Apostate
from
Christ
Jesus
,
the
only
Mediator
between
God
and
Man
:
This
way
also
Protestants
convey
their
Principles
unto
their
Children
,
which
are
the
written
Truths
of
God
,
or
Christs
true
Doctrine
.
If
therefore
this
Property
agree
to
all
Tradition
;
and
not
to
that
only
which
giveth
out
the
knowledge
of
Christ
;
It
is
not
worthy
of
the
name
of
a
Property
,
either
of
the
means
or
Rule
of
faith
,
being
common
to
all
other
things
.
3.
Further
we
except
,
that
bare
Oral-Tradition
,
is
not
so
much
as
a
means
to
bring
to
faith
of
It self
,
but
as
it
carrieth
in
it
the
Principles
and
Doctrine
of
Christ
and
therewith
indeed
it
may
bring
to
the
knowledge
of
Christ
.
So
that
this
is
Res
Tradita
or
the
thing
delivered
,
without
which
Tradition
cannot
be
so
much
as
the
means
to
bring
to
the
faith
of
Christ
.
Concerning
which
this
Disputer
warneth
us
,
that
we
mistake
,
if
we
aim
at
the
matter
of
his
Tradition
.
We
grant
Tradition
by
word
of
mouth
to
be
a
special
way
to
faith
,
but
no
further
then
as
it
conveyeth
the
Truth
of
Christ
.
The
Method
without
the
matter
is
a
vain
found
.
4.
As
the
Ruling
Power
of
Tradition
,
It
may
be
natural
and
de
Facto
;
So
Tradition
of
falsehood
may
have
actually
a
delusive
power
to
lead
to
lies
:
Or
it
may
be
Divine
and
de
jure
,
which
is
reciprocal
with
the
Tradition
of
Truth
;
This
indeed
hath
a
Ruling
Power
from
God
to
command
Faith
,
and
souls
are
bound
to
be
obedient
to
it
.
But
Popish
Tradition
hath
no
such
Ruling
Power
;
much
less
is
it
evident
or
evidenceable
to
any
reasonable
Enquirer
;
The
Disputer
therefore
concludes
falsely
and
fallaciously
,
that
this
Property
evidently
agreeth
to
his
Popish
Tradition
,
because
it
agreeth
to
some
other
kind
of
Tradition
of
Gods
Truth
contradistinct
to
that
.
He
must
therefore
reason
better
to
gain
Credit
to
his
Rule
.
3.
In
the
9th
and
10th
Ss.
he
proceeds
to
apply
his
third
Property
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
unto
Tradition
,
which
is
,
That
it
is
apt
to
justifie
unreflecting
and
undoubting
persons
,
that
they
proceed
rationally
while
they
relye
upon
it
:
This
he
saith
is
found
exactly
in
Tradition
.
Concerning
this
we
assert
No
Rule
can
justifie
them
as
rationally
proceeding
in
their
relying
on
it
,
who
irregularly
use
it
,
though
it
be
the
truest
.
Now
that
men
should
take
any
thing
upon
trust
without
reflecting
on
the
matter
delivered
,
or
doubting
of
it
in
the
least
measure
,
whether
from
Oral
or
Scriptural
Tradition
,
esspecially
in
matters
of
faith
unto
salvation
,
is
unreasonable
and
brutish
.
For
it
is
necessary
for
reasonable
Creatures
both
to
reflect
,
and
question
matters
of
serious
concernment
,
(
among
which
the
matters
of
salvation
are
the
greatest
)
before
they
beleeve
them
:
whoever
do
otherwise
,
do
foolishly
;
neither
are
they
justifiable
in
relying
presumptuously
on
the
best
of
Rules
.
No
Tradition
of
Truth
therefore
doth
actually
or
can
justifie
such
kind
of
irregular
believers
.
If
Popish
Tradition
can
do
it
,
for
which
the
Author
pleads
,
it
must
be
a
Rule
like
themselves
;
and
so
Folly
may
justifie
folly
among
the
Papists
;
but
otherwise
it
cannot
justifie
them
before
God
or
Men
.
Yet
he
goeth
on
to
prove
it
and
to
remove
objections
against
it
.
1.
It
is
madness
(
as
he
saith
)
not
to
beleeve
great
multitudes
of
knowers
,
if
no
possible
reason
be
to
doubt
,
that
they
conspire
to
deceive
us
.
Now
in
his
way
of
Tradition
,
all
Deliverers
or
immediate
Fore-fathers
are
knowers
:
As
they
who
immediately
heard
the
Apostles
who
were
taught
and
practised
all
requisite
knowledge
:
of
which
it
is
impossible
the
rudest
person
should
be
ignorant
,
whoever
had
any
effect
of
such
a
teaching
wrought
upon
him
,
&c.
in
S.
9.
We
reply
1.
We
beleeve
,
that
whoever
had
the
saving
Effect
from
the
Apostles
teaching
wrought
upon
them
,
had
all
requisite
knowledge
to
salvation
,
and
accordingly
practis'd
it
all
their
lives
.
2.
Yet
all
who
heard
the
Apostles
preach
,
were
not
such
knowers
,
neither
such
practisers
of
their
doctrine
;
but
many
turned
Apostates
and
made
shipwrack
of
Faith
and
a
good
Conscience
;
of
which
n
their
times
they
all
complained
,
while
the
Mysterie
of
Iniquity
was
working
.
1
Joh
.
2.19
.
3.
Such
multitudes
of
knowers
,
as
they
professed
to
be
,
it
is
no
madness
to
suspect
,
that
they
were
deceived
,
and
so
to
make
their
party
stronger
,
might
and
did
consp●re
to
deceive
:
2
Cor
.
11.3
.
If
it
be
madness
,
the
Apostle
was
so
mad
,
as
to
call
them
dece
tful
workers
,
and
their
number
was
not
small
,
as
is
apparent
:
Gods
true
number
was
the
least
.
But
could
all
these
numbers
justifie
any
who
without
reflecting
,
or
inquiring
,
or
reasonably
doubting
,
did
rely
on
their
word
?
we
suppose
none
so
w●ld
as
to
affirm
it
.
Reason
will
try
before
it
trust
.
1
Thes
.
5.21
.
And
such
beleevers
who
upon
due
trial
,
receive
and
hold
fast
that
wh●ch
is
true
and
good
,
are
justified
by
God
himself
.
Joh
.
1.46
,
47.
Hereupon
Nathaniel
was
commended
by
Christ
h●mself
,
to
be
an
Israelite
indeed
:
when
other
hasty
and
unreflecting
hearers
are
rejected
by
him
.
4.
We
assert
there
is
not
only
possible
,
but
probable
consideration
to
awaken
in
our
reason
a
doubt
,
that
multitudes
may
conspire
to
deceive
;
that
they
d
d
so
under
the
Mysterie
of
Iniquity
in
the
Apostles
time
;
and
in
carry●ng
on
that
design
of
Satan
in
after
ages
,
as
Histories
do
declare
,
and
the
sad
Effects
of
it
do
demonstrate
to
us
at
this
day
.
5.
We
deny
that
in
the
way
of
his
Tradition
,
all
Deliverers
or
immediate
Fore-fathers
were
knowers
;
neither
did
they
all
hear
the
Apostles
and
obey
them
as
is
pretended
:
And
if
a
judgment
may
be
made
by
their
succeeding
and
surviving
seed
,
the
Popish
Fore-fathers
were
rude
and
ignorant
enough
.
Let
the
Body
therefore
of
these
Popish
●radition-Deliverers
,
be
never
so
considerable
for
number
,
they
are
inconsiderable
for
weight
or
worth
.
6.
We
also
charitably
judge
that
Parents
may
be
apt
to
teach
their
Children
,
what
they
have
been
taught
themselves
to
be
good
and
true
and
needful
to
Eternal
salvation
;
and
that
they
would
not
purposely
destroy
them
:
yet
this
knowingly
we
say
,
that
Parents
carried
by
the
strength
of
delusion
themselves
,
may
and
do
actually
lead
their
Children
to
perdition
which
they
seem
to
abhor
.
7.
We
conclude
,
as
to
that
which
the
Discourser
studieth
here
to
evince
,
That
Fore-fathers
delivering
down
the
Truth
of
Christ
to
Children
,
were
a
good
help
to
bring
them
to
Faith
;
but
their
Tradition
was
no
Rule
of
their
Faith
,
when
it
came
to
Act
:
but
the
will
of
God
revealed
.
Yet
we
deny
that
hence
it
follows
,
all
Tradition
is
of
a
certain
kind
of
nature
to
bring
souls
to
the
Faith
of
Christ
much
less
Popish
Tradition
,
which
in
most
things
seduceth
souls
from
h
m
,
and
for
this
alone
the
Disputer
here
contends
.
In
all
which
returns
our
brains
rove
not
wildly
,
neither
are
unsettled
to
any
degree
of
madness
,
but
we
have
spoken
the
words
of
soberness
and
Truth
:
or
if
we
be
herein
reputed
to
be
besides
our selves
,
it
is
for
Christ
and
his
Scr●ptures
sake
,
against
false
Tradition
.
As
for
what
the
Discourser
imposeth
on
us
,
that
we
must
not
suspect
deceit
among
his
multitudes
unanimously
agreeing
in
their
Testimony
about
matter
of
Fact
,
We
do
not
contend
with
him
about
matter
of
Fact
.
We
yeeld
that
the
multitude
of
his
Fore-fathers
did
give
out
Tradition
to
their
Posterity
;
but
we
strive
about
matters
of
Faith
,
and
deny
,
that
in
their
Traditions
they
did
teach
their
children
the
true
faith
of
Christ
.
And
notwithstanding
their
postures
and
gestures
,
that
they
look
seriously
,
when
then
speak
,
act
themselves
,
and
practise
accordingly
,
and
shew
in
the
whole
course
of
their
Conversation
,
that
they
hope
to
be
saved
&c.
We
say
the
greatest
False-Prophets
,
false
Apostles
,
Idolaters
,
and
superstitious
ones
have
done
the
like
in
outw●rd
professi●ns
of
God
and
h●s
Christ
;
when
their
hearts
have
been
farre
remote
from
the
Truth
.
No
trust
is
to
be
given
either
to
the
looks
or
to
the
garb
of
Protestants
or
Papists
:
These
things
are
weak
to
move
wise
men
or
argue
men
mad
,
●ronti
nullo
fidei
.
who
suspect
hypocrisie
in
them
.
2.
He
moveth
an
objection
against
this
justifying
Power
of
Tradition
,
which
he
attempts
to
answer
in
S.
10.
It
is
objected
thus
:
Multitudes
of
plain
honest
meaning
souls
are
as
much
justifiable
for
beleeving
Scripture
,
therefore
this
property
belongs
not
only
to
Tradition
.
His
answer
is
,
that
they
cannot
be
so
much
justifiable
,
setting
aside
Traditions
help
;
For
without
this
,
the
sence
totally
depends
upon
the
Judgments
,
Fancies
or
skils
of
men
;
which
they
are
unqualified
to
judge
of
,
not
upon
the
open
verdict
of
sense
and
sensations
,
which
is
certain
.
This
he
illustrates
by
the
proceedings
of
a
Jury
of
the
plainest
high
shooes
in
matter
of
Fact
:
and
by
the
common
course
of
the
vulgar
,
in
believing
there
were
such
a
one
as
King
James
,
and
Queen
Elizabeth
,
of
which
Tradition
ascertains
them
,
and
not
the
Authority
of
any
Statute-book
&c.
whence
he
concludes
the
3d
condition
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
is
manifestly
found
agreeing
to
Tradition
.
We
return
to
all
this
that
the
objection
stands
in
force
,
notwithstanding
his
pretended
answer
to
it
;
For
the
demonstration
whereof
,
we
shall
reply
unto
particulars
.
1.
We
have
already
proved
that
Scripture
can
and
will
justifie
all
them
who
regularly
rely
upon
it
as
a
Rule
of
Faith
,
that
is
,
such
as
upon
due
and
serious
consideration
of
it
,
and
a
due
reception
of
the
will
of
God
in
it
,
do
resign
themselves
to
be
guided
by
it
:
God
will
justifie
such
reliers
on
Scripture-Tradition
:
but
none
that
foolishly
,
unreflect●ngly
,
and
undoubt●ngly
pretend
to
cast
themselves
upon
it
,
for
this
is
rash
presumption
.
2.
We
deny
not
the
help
of
true
and
Faithful
Tradition
,
to
shew
us
that
the
Scripture
is
the
true
word
of
God
;
but
yet
this
Tradition
,
we
acknowledge
not
needful
to
give
us
its
sence
,
neither
want
we
Popish
Trad●tion
at
all
.
The
B●ble
is
sufficiently
known
.
3.
We
say
aga●n
,
that
the
sence
of
Scripture
is
insp
red
of
God
;
and
so
innate
;
as
all
propositions
uttered
by
men
carry
their
sence
in
them
:
speaking
or
preaching
may
hold
out
that
sence
,
but
it
giveth
none
to
the
propositions
of
Gods
Truth
4.
Faith
depending
on
this
sence
,
is
not
relying
on
the
judgments
,
Fancies
or
skils
of
men
;
but
upon
the
plain
revelation
of
God
,
in
matters
of
salvation
:
And
every
man
is
bound
to
exercise
his
reason
,
and
grow
to
such
abilities
that
he
may
d
scern
between
Truth
and
falshood
.
Hereunto
the
most
Vulgar
should
labour
to
attain
;
but
spiritual
sluggishness
in
themselves
,
and
carelesness
in
their
guides
and
teachers
,
causeth
most
to
sit
down
in
ignorance
,
and
please
themselves
in
presuming
on
mercy
,
especially
when
they
are
taught
that
ignorance
is
the
mother
of
Devotion
.
These
are
not
justifiable
by
Scripture
,
nor
by
Tradition
:
but
other
serious
souls
are
justified
by
God
,
however
condemned
by
this
Disputer
.
5.
Senses
and
sensations
are
not
quadrate
means
to
take
in
Faith
.
These
may
judge
of
sights
and
sounds
,
but
not
of
spiritual
matters
conveyed
by
them
.
The
best
understanding
is
required
to
receive
in
these
things
,
and
that
not
only
natural
but
Spiritual
,
which
alone
can
receive
these
great
things
of
God
.
Such
beleevers
than
are
not
justifiable
,
who
take
in
nothing
of
God
but
by
their
Senses
and
sensations
.
There
is
no
proportion
between
these
and
faith
;
much
less
certainty
of
their
reception
of
it
:
upon
whose
verdict
yet
in
these
matters
the
Discourser
placeth
his
greatest
stress
and
assuredness
.
6.
As
to
his
Illustrations
they
blind
the
matters
in
hand
,
but
give
no
light
to
them
.
1.
His
Jury
of
plain
High-shooes
judge
only
of
matter
of
Fact
by
the
sight
of
six
witnesses
;
and
yet
they
must
proceed
according
to
the
Law
too
:
but
we
are
contending
of
matters
of
Faith
,
whereof
sense
is
no
judge
.
2.
His
application
is
no
way
fit
;
when
he
saith
,
take
away
Tradition
,
(
which
he
meaneth
Popish
)
and
all
ground
for
certain
sence
fails
us
,
either
for
the
meaning
,
or
even
Letter
of
Scripture
.
The
letter
of
Scripture
is
evidently
testified
by
Tradition
faithful
before
Papal
Rome
was
built
,
and
as
to
the
sence
and
meaning
of
Scripture
it
is
inspired
,
and
self
evidencing
to
faithful
humble
and
industrious
souls
searching
therein
without
help
of
his
Tradition
.
3.
As
to
his
Method
of
knowing
,
that
there
were
such
a
one
as
King
James
and
Queen
Elizabeth
;
we
grant
that
by
Tradition
the
rudest
may
come
to
know
there
were
such
persons
;
without
troubling
them
with
statute-books
.
Yet
suppose
that
Statute-books
make
no
mention
of
any
such
King
or
Queen
,
or
that
History
should
not
only
be
silent
of
them
,
but
testifie
that
there
were
no
such
persons
:
wise
men
would
stagger
at
it
,
and
not
believe
you
,
however
your
vulgar
Tradition
give
it
out
.
Let
us
truly
bring
this
home
to
our
Case
.
The
Discourser
saith
,
that
his
Popish
Tradition
bringeth
down
the
Faith
of
Christ
:
The
Scripture
(
which
neither
he
,
nor
his
Fathers
durst
deny
to
be
the
word
of
God
)
is
not
only
silent
of
many
points
which
he
calls
Faith
;
but
expresly
contradicts
them
,
what
wise
man
will
believe
his
Tradition-Oral
against
Tradition
Scriptural
in
these
matters
of
Faith
?
His
third
Condition
then
agreeth
not
to
his
Tradition
.
4.
He
advanceth
his
strength
to
make
good
his
sixth
Condition
,
and
in
doing
this
,
he
will
evidently
prove
the
fourth
,
fifth
,
and
seventh
also
agreeing
to
his
Tradition
,
in
the
11th
.
12th
.
13th
.
14th
.
Ss.
We
shall
hear
and
try
.
1.
In
Ss.
11.
he
layeth
down
some
premises
,
and
from
them
concludeth
.
His
Argument
intire
and
rightly
formed
is
this
.
What
is
built
on
Immoveable
grounds
,
or
is
certain
in
it self
,
hath
in
it
wherewith
to
settle
or
satisfie
the
most
piercing
wits
,
convince
the
most
obstinate
Adversaries
,
and
to
ascertain
us
absolutely
:
but
Scripture
is
not
,
and
Tradition
is
built
on
such
certain
grounds
&c.
Therefore
to
this
and
not
to
that
agree
,
those
conditions
.
Other
passages
intervene
between
the
premises
and
conclusion
,
deserving
animadversion
.
In
this
Argument
.
1.
We
grant
the
Proposition
as
universally
stated
.
2.
We
deny
the
assumption
concerning
Tradition
,
whether
universally
,
or
particularly
taken
;
For
all
Tradition
is
not
built
upon
immoveable
grounds
,
as
all
men
know
:
Neither
is
Popish
Tradition
so
certainly
founded
,
for
which
the
Discourser
here
only
contends
,
however
he
hideth
it
under
indefinite
terms
.
Some
Tradition
we
yeeld
,
is
so
built
upon
immoveable
Grounds
;
as
Scriptural
(
which
we
have
proved
)
and
all
that
Oral-Tradition
which
is
equivalent
to
it
,
and
reciprocal
specially
he
seeks
to
charme
.
3.
They
cannot
therefore
grant
his
Conclusion
for
the
certainty
of
his
Popish
Tradition
to
be
sufficiently
consequent
.
2.
He
did
foresee
this
,
that
more
would
be
expected
from
him
pretending
to
demonstrate
Traditions
certainty
:
Therefore
he
attempts
it
from
intrinsecal
Mediums
:
His
argument
is
thus
formed
:
That
which
hath
for
its
Basis
the
best
nature
in
the
universe
,
even
Mans
,
the
Flower
and
End
of
the
Rest
,
must
needs
be
certain
.
But
Tradition
(
suppose
Popish
)
hath
for
its
Basis
the
best
nature
&c.
therefore
,
This
Tradition
must
needs
be
certain
.
To
clear
up
his
proposition
,
he
doth
specifie
and
commend
this
best
nature
of
Man
,
by
these
considerations
of
him
.
1.
He
is
not
in
this
place
considered
according
to
his
Moral
part
,
defectible
by
original
sin
.
2.
Neither
according
to
his
Intellectuals
darkly
groping
in
the
pursuit
of
science
by
reflected
thoughts
,
&c.
3
▪
But
according
to
those
faculties
in
him
perfectly
and
necessarily
subject
to
the
operations
and
stroaks
of
nature
;
that
is
,
his
Eies
,
Ears
,
&c.
whence
the
direct
impressions
of
knowledge
as
naturally
and
necessarily
issu●
from
the
affecting
of
those
Senses
,
as
〈◇〉
is
to
feel
heat
,
cold
,
pain
,
&c.
This
is
his
first
intrinsecal
Medium
to
prove
his
Trad●tions
certainty
.
1.
In
the
Examen
of
this
Demonstration
,
we
deny
both
the
Proposition
,
(
For
a
Basis
of
the
best
nature
created
cannot
give
certainty
unto
faith
for
salvation
)
and
the
Assumption
also
,
(
For
no
Tradition
especially
Popish
is
founded
upon
the
best
Nature
)
as
will
appear
in
the
sequel
.
The
conclusion
then
for
Traditions
certainty
is
not
demonstrated
from
the
premises
.
To
clear
the
reason
of
our
denial
,
we
shall
animadvert
some
things
in
the
argument
.
2.
We
must
observe
,
that
it
is
a
very
strange
Man
here
presented
,
whose
Nature
is
the
best
Basis
for
Faiths
Tradition
:
How
not
considered
in
his
Moral
part
?
Not
a
Man
of
Morals
,
good
or
bad
?
what
,
nor
a
Man
conceived
in
his
Intellectuals
,
as
Understanding
,
or
not
understanding
?
Is
it
only
then
a
Man
of
Sense
?
And
is
his
sensitive
nature
the
best
in
the
universe
to
be
the
foundation
of
Faiths
certainty
by
Tradition
?
How
much
doth
this
lift
a
Man
above
a
Beast
?
Hear
and
consider
ye
noble
Christian
Ingenies
;
Is
this
a
man
for
Faith
?
3.
We
assert
every
man
from
Adam
equally
infected
with
Original
Corruption
,
not
only
in
his
Moral
part
and
disposition
,
(
as
the
Discourser
fixeth
it
)
but
also
in
his
Intellectual
and
Sensitive
Faculties
;
His
reason
,
seeing
,
hearing
,
handling
,
&c.
are
all
as
defective
by
original
sin
,
as
his
disposition
to
moral
good
,
which
,
we
suppose
,
he
meaneth
by
his
Moral
part
.
If
in
one
therefore
he
is
defective
or
defectible
,
he
is
so
in
all
:
He
hath
not
therefore
the
best
nature
in
the
universe
,
it
being
sinful
.
4.
We
deny
expresly
that
natures
stroaks
upon
senses
,
can
make
direct
impressions
of
knowledge
unto
Faith
in
any
man
:
How
many
eies
and
ears
,
do
receive
sensible
impressions
by
Scriptural
and
oral
revelation
,
and
yet
never
come
to
the
true
apprehension
of
the
doctrine
of
Christ
?
This
impression
must
be
made
by
an
Almighty
arm
,
to
make
men
beleeve
.
Yet
we
deny
not
,
but
that
mans
sense
is
helpful
to
his
understanding
in
its
measure
;
therefore
sights
and
sounds
may
be
a
good
means
to
bring
things
heard
and
seen
to
the
understanding
:
but
matters
of
faith
are
proper
objects
of
intellectual
faculties
,
if
we
speak
as
men
.
5.
We
judge
it
a
brutish
assertion
,
that
the
sound
of
the
Oral
Tradition
of
Christs
Doctrine
to
eies
,
or
ears
,
should
make
such
impressions
of
knowledge
naturally
and
necessarily
,
as
the
affecting
of
senses
,
to
feel
heat
,
cold
,
pain
,
pleasure
,
or
any
other
material
quality
:
For
these
are
proper
to
sense
;
but
the
matters
of
faith
far
above
.
Sense
takes
the
sound
not
the
Faith
.
6.
We
conclude
,
that
neither
is
mans
nature
now
the
best
in
the
Un●verse
since
the
fall
;
therefore
not
according
to
the
Discoursers
reason
,
a
sufficient
Basis
for
the
Certainty
of
that
Tradition
,
which
by
him
is
pretended
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
Man
is
the
subject
indeed
of
Faith
in
his
fallen
nature
:
But
the
Divine
nature
only
is
the
Basis
of
his
own
will
,
which
is
truly
the
Rule
of
the
Creatures
faith
in
him
,
and
through
his
grace
the
main
impressing
cause
of
the
knowledge
of
his
Christ
upon
the
souls
of
men
,
by
means
offered
to
sense
and
understanding
for
the
effecting
of
the
s●me
.
It
is
not
M●n
then
but
God
,
who
is
the
true
Basis
of
Traditions
certainty
,
and
Faiths
infallibility
.
If
this
Argument
therefore
be
from
an
intrinsecal
Medium
,
it
concludes
very
weakly
as
to
the
Discoursers
purpose
.
7.
We
infer
further
,
That
(
suppose
mans
nature
in
general
were
the
best
in
the
universe
,
)
yet
the
intire
nature
of
man
,
cannot
be
either
Basis
or
subject
of
Tradition
Popish
,
unless
all
men
naturally
were
Papists
or
Popish
men
.
It
is
true
,
that
it
is
a
property
adaequate
to
Man
in
his
generality
to
speak
,
and
give
out
from
reason
Oral-Tradition
;
but
it
is
not
so
appropriated
to
Man
as
Man
to
spe●k
,
or
give
out
Tradition
of
Remish
Faith
.
Now
this
only
is
the
Disputers
aim
,
to
found
Popish
Tradition
upon
humane
nature
;
But
most
miserably
doth
he
m●stake
the
mark
,
and
miscarry
in
his
Demonstration
:
Seeing
falshood
as
well
as
Truth
,
and
infidelity
as
well
as
Faith
,
may
claim
that
interest
in
mans
nature
,
to
be
as
he
calleth
it
,
the
Basis
of
it
;
for
all
are
alike
delivered
down
to
Posterity
by
Mans
Oral
Tradition
:
And
mans
nature
is
equally
a
Basis
to
all
,
if
to
any
.
3.
To
strengthen
this
Medium
,
he
adds
the
frequent
impressions
of
knowledge
upon
sense
,
many
times
every
day
:
Nay
more
their
lives
are
to
be
framed
by
the
Precepts
they
hear
,
and
conformable
examples
they
see
:
So
that
Faith
comes
clad
in
such
plain
matters
of
Fact
,
that
the
most
stupid
man
living
cannot
possibly
be
ignorant
of
it
.
We
must
a
little
inquire
into
this
passage
;
for
it
seems
very
strange
.
1.
Is
this
Tradition
(
spoken
of
)
sine
re
tradita
,
without
matter
delivered
?
unto
such
only
the
Discourser
did
pretend
before
:
Then
it
is
a
voice
,
and
nothing
else
,
that
hath
such
effectual
operation
toward
Faith
;
which
is
insipid
and
ridiculous
.
2.
Is
the
reiteration
of
such
a
voice
,
(
suppose
)
uttering
precepts
from
God
unto
the
sense
of
hearing
10000
times
a
day
,
able
to
impresse
faith
or
knowledge
there
?
Sense
is
not
capable
of
it
:
nor
mans
voice
able
to
effect
it
;
they
do
but
beat
the
air
.
3.
Are
the
lives
of
all
the
Traditionary
hearers
and
Seers
conformed
to
precepts
and
examples
,
which
they
hear
and
see
?
or
if
not
,
Is
it
the
duty
of
having
their
lives
to
be
framed
,
sufficient
to
bring
this
Faith
unto
them
,
when
it
is
not
done
?
The
Disputer
(
we
suppose
)
will
be
ashamed
to
affirm
either
of
them
.
And
is
not
this
also
to
consider
man
as
to
his
Moral
part
,
when
his
life
is
supposed
to
be
conformed
to
precepts
and
Examples
?
which
consideration
of
Man
he
excluded
before
,
as
not
pertinent
to
his
demonstration
in
the
present
Case
.
4.
Is
Faith
comming
clad
in
matters
of
Fact
,
sufficient
of
it self
to
cause
true
down-right
Christian
practise
,
and
influence
the
most
stupid
Creatures
with
knowledge
?
If
he
affirm
it
,
we
deny
it
.
The
Arm
of
God
only
can
do
this
.
5.
Are
the
most
stupid
men
living
among
Papists
under
an
impossibility
of
being
ignorant
of
Faith
,
by
having
their
senses
,
eies
,
and
ears
so
often
affected
with
their
oral
,
and
practical
Tradition
?
The
palpable
ignorance
of
thousands
of
those
sottish
Creatures
,
contradict
such
an
Assertion
before
the
Sun
:
They
may
have
knowledge
of
grosse
superstitions
impressed
on
their
senses
that
way
,
but
not
of
true
faith
.
And
not
only
is
it
so
with
them
;
but
to
their
shame
also
,
may
it
be
spoken
,
who
among
protestants
,
where
they
hear
and
see
the
true
faith
of
Jesus
preached
and
practised
daily
,
do
abide
in
multitudes
ignorant
of
the
true
faith
of
the
Gospel
.
The
Discoursers
demonstration
then
is
not
firm
for
the
certainty
of
his
Tradition
upon
this
Basis
;
notwithstanding
the
most
frequent
reiteration
of
words
and
practise
upon
their
senses
.
4.
He
draweth
us
to
compare
,
the
certainty
each
Christian
Fore-father
hath
of
what
he
hath
practis'd
all
his
life
with
that
which
a
sworn
witness
in
Court
hath
of
what
he
saw
and
heard
but
once
,
thence
to
multiply
,
these
thus-qualified
witnesses
,
to
equal
the
vast
total
of
Christianity
;
and
then
to
invent
what
force
in
natures
universe
is
comparable
to
this
inerrability
of
Tradition
.
Whence
with
very
great
confidence
he
concludes
,
that
men
must
cease
to
be
men
,
and
nature
loose
it self
,
and
by
overstraining
crack
her
sinews
sooner
,
than
the
vast
Testification
called
Tradition
can
possibly
be
violated
.
It
must
therefore
unerringly
regulate
and
bring
down
faith
to
its
followers
;
whose
Basis
is
stronger
than
all
material
nature
,
that
is
,
such
a
one
as
was
fit
for
supreme
wisedome
to
lay
for
faith
,
being
so
neer
and
necessary
means
to
bring
Mankind
to
his
Beatitude
.
Great
swelling
words
of
vanity
,
here
packt
up
together
,
do
not
scare
us
from
a
just
reply
to
this
pretended
Auxiliary
unto
his
former
Demonstration
▪
we
do
therefore
thus
answer
.
1.
Upon
comparing
a
Christian
Fore-father
with
a
sworn
witness
in
Court
,
we
find
both
alike
subject
to
Error
and
obnoxious
to
mistakes
;
which
is
farr
from
inerrability
avouched
hence
unto
Tradition
:
For
it
is
possible
,
that
a
sworn
witness
may
mistake
in
sight
and
hearing
;
and
then
his
confident
swearing
maketh
the
matter
worse
.
No
lesse
a
Fore-father
called
Christian
,
although
he
be
certain
of
what
he
hath
practised
,
yet
all
the
while
may
be
mistaken
in
the
matter
of
Faith
,
which
is
true
and
saving
,
and
instead
thereof
imbrace
lying
vanities
and
fansies
,
and
deliver
down
the
same
for
faith
unto
his
Children
:
neither
of
these
enforce
an
Infallibility
.
We
ought
indeed
to
give
much
credit
to
a
man
swearing
in
the
fear
of
God
,
and
to
an
honest
Fore-father
,
testifying
what
he
hath
received
truely
from
Christ
and
practised
;
but
neither
of
these
are
inerrable
,
nor
their
Testimony
infallible
.
And
besides
we
have
just
cause
to
suspect
,
the
Fore-fathers
intended
by
the
Discourser
to
be
no
such
witnesses
as
these
.
2.
We
will
multiply
these
thus
qualified
witnesses
according
to
the
just
Rule
of
their
multiplication
,
that
i●
,
of
them
in
their
proper
kind
:
Now
if
this
Dissputer
will
speak
out
he
must
tell
us
,
that
the
Fore-father
Christian
,
which
he
mentioned
,
must
be
a
Papist
,
for
no
other
Christianity
doth
he
contend
;
therefore
in
multiplying
as
he
desireth
,
it
must
be
within
the
verge
and
compass
of
this
Christianity
,
that
we
shall
deal
with
him
about
a
Testimony
to
his
Tradition
.
We
shall
therefore
to
avoid
all
fallacious
dealings
in
this
matter
,
consider
Tradition
.
1.
As
humane
and
natural
.
2.
As
truly
Christian
and
spiritual
with
respect
to
the
matters
delivered
.
3.
As
meerly
Popish
as
to
the
matters
singly
given
down
by
them
as
Papists
;
and
so
we
shall
determine
the
matter
in
these
Propositions
,
as
to
multiplying
.
1.
We
shall
multiply
witnesses
qualified
concerning
humane
natural
things
unto
the
vast
Total
of
Mankind
,
and
we
determine
,
that
their
continued
Tradition
in
these
matters
within
their
sphere
,
may
carry
much
certainty
in
many
things
,
proved
every
day
by
experience
:
but
yet
not
in
all
things
,
within
the
compass
of
Nature
;
neither
for
all
this
is
this
Tradition
,
which
concerns
all
Mankind
unerrable
.
2.
We
will
multiply
the
qualified
witnesses
of
true
Christian
Doctrine
descended
from
Christ
,
unto
the
total
of
true
Christianity
,
or
of
Christians
indeed
,
be
it
great
or
small
;
and
we
conclude
,
that
their
Tradition
,
so
farre
as
they
follow
Christ
uninterruptedly
is
certain
,
as
any
can
be
in
the
universe
;
yet
as
men
and
in
themselves
are
they
not
infallible
:
They
are
certain
and
so
to
be
trusted
as
farre
as
Christ
speaketh
in
them
,
which
also
must
be
tryed
by
the
Scr●pture
.
3.
We
shall
multiply
the
Authors
Popish
Fore-fathers
,
whom
he
stileth
Christian
,
unto
the
vast
Total
of
Papists
;
and
then
wi
hout
any
labour
of
Invention
,
we
deny
all
inerrability
in
their
Tradition
,
which
is
the
Rule
of
their
Faith
;
and
by
comparing
do
assert
,
there
is
much
more
force
within
the
compass
of
the
Universe
as
to
testifying
to
the
Truth
of
Christ
,
than
Romish
Tradition
,
which
is
the
matter
only
intended
by
this
Disputer
,
under
the
general
notion
of
Tradition
,
where
he
hides
his
plot
,
Nay
we
again
affirm
,
there
is
nothing
else
,
but
error
and
errability
in
that
Tradition
pretended
to
come
from
Christ
.
So
that
hereby
notwithstanding
proud
vain
words
,
there
is
no
fear
of
denying
men
to
be
men
,
nor
of
Natures
cracking
her
sinews
,
by
overstraining
and
loosing
her self
;
the
greatest
danger
is
of
proving
Popish
Tradition
to
be
Delusion
;
and
poor
Papists
to
be
deceived
and
misguided
from
the
true
faith
of
Christ
,
by
their
blind
Fore-fathers
,
who
about
matters
of
Faith
(
which
he
commends
)
testifie
by
sense
only
.
3.
We
expresly
deny
,
that
ever
the
supreme
wisdome
of
the
Almighty
laid
this
Tradition
as
a
Basis
for
Faith
,
or
de●ermined
it
as
a
means
so
near
and
necessary
to
bring
Mankind
to
their
Beatitude
;
however
the
Discourser
presumptuously
say
,
that
his
Romish
Trad●tion
is
such
a
one
as
was
fit
for
supreme
wisedome
to
say
.
Dares
Rome
fit
a
foundation
of
Faith
for
God
to
lay
?
She
hath
framed
her
own
Tradition
to
convey
her
filthiness
down
;
and
here
a
Son
of
he●s
judgeth
it
fit
for
God
to
lay
it
as
a
Basis
of
Faith
.
Yet
how
can
this
Disputer
say
,
that
his
Traditions-foundation
is
stronger
then
all
material
nature
,
seeing
he
pitcheth
it
on
mans
senses
?
which
are
most
external
,
and
belong
mostly
to
his
material
part
.
Thus
he
is
in
and
out
.
We
acknowledge
Divine
wisdome
hath
la●d
himself
only
the
Foundation
of
Faith
in
Christ
Jesus
,
and
hath
appoin●ed
true
Scriptural
and
Oral-Tradition
,
as
concurrent
means
to
bring
men
to
Faith
,
and
to
blessedness
by
it
:
and
here
we
fix
,
desi●ing
to
walk
in
this
way
.
4.
We
conclude
from
all
,
that
Popish
Tr●dition
is
not
able
unerringly
to
regulate
its
●ollowers
,
let
them
be
never
so
exact
,
nor
bring
down
true
faith
unto
them
;
for
it
is
not
of
God
.
The
Discourser
therefore
,
hath
not
acquitted
himself
of
his
undertaking
to
demonstrate
the
certainty
of
his
Tradition
by
intrinsecal
mediums
.
No
such
thing
hath
be
done
in
the
premises
;
Therefore
his
6th
Condition
is
not
made
good
by
him
;
and
then
all
the
rest
which
he
builds
upon
this
,
must
fail
by
his
own
Concession
.
This
is
all
the
Demonstration
,
which
hitherto
he
hath
made
;
and
indeed
it
is
none
at
all
to
strengthen
his
Tradition
;
but
he
hath
made
it
weaker
,
and
exposed
it
to
ruine
by
the
least
rational
Batteries
.
3.
In
pursuance
yet
of
his
design
.
S.
13.
He
will
not
neglect
to
remind
us
of
the
Evidenceableness
of
Traditions
Ruling
power
:
That
while
the
next
Age
beleeveth
and
practiseth
as
the
former
Age
did
,
those
of
the
latter
Age
are
still
of
the
same
Faith
with
the
former
,
as
it
is
,
that
to
believe
the
same
,
is
to
believe
the
same
:
Only
he
is
Cautelous
not
to
prove
idem
p●r
idem
,
the
same
by
the
same
.
We
shall
shortly
return
.
1.
This
would
have
been
no
wonder
in
this
Discourser
,
who
elsewhere
runs
round
in
a
circle
between
his
Church
and
his
Tradition
,
proving
them
each
by
other
,
as
Causes
one
of
another
.
2.
We
will
not
neglect
to
remind
him
also
of
the
answer
already
given
upon
that
account
;
which
may
be
enough
for
him
to
review
.
3.
We
shall
only
adde
,
that
if
the
former
age
do
misbelieve
,
then
they
,
who
follow
their
Trad
tion
,
must
misbelieve
also
:
So
that
Tradition
is
as
sure
a
rule
of
error
and
misbelief
,
as
it
is
of
Faith
and
Truth
;
so
long
as
it
is
taken
by
it self
abstractly
without
the
matter
delivered
in
it
.
This
is
no
singular
property
then
for
Tradition
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
or
means
unto
it
,
as
he
promiscuously
calleth
it
.
Where
then
appears
yet
the
certainty
of
Tradition
fit
for
the
Rule
of
Faith
?
The
Author
therefore
hath
more
to
do
,
then
to
open
terms
and
explicate
the
proposition
;
for
necessity
lyeth
on
him
to
prove
the
certainty
of
his
Tradition
,
which
yet
he
hath
not
proved
as
to
Faith
.
4.
In
S.
14.
He
challengeth
the
most
Sceptical
Dissenter
to
muster
all
the
Caprichoes
of
Pansie
,
&c.
And
the
most
obstinate
and
a●ute
Adversaries
to
whet
their
wits
to
that
degree
of
sharpness
:
as
to
be
able
to
penetrate
with
n●ce
dist●nctions
&c.
What
can
they
say
in
this
case
?
If
they
argue
it
must
be
from
knowledge
,
this
must
be
from
things
;
the
best
thing
is
mans
nature
,
and
that
is
ingaged
for
the
certainty
of
Tradition
:
But
their
proper
task
is
to
loose
two
notions
,
which
perfect
Identity
binds
(
suppose
Certainty
and
Tradition
)
and
to
blunder
that
Truth
,
which
the
noon-daies
Sun
of
self-evidence
discovers
,
&c.
If
bold
Bravadoes
or
daring
words
will
do
it
,
surely
the
Discourser
will
bear
away
the
Bell
,
and
level
all
to
his
own
Tradition
;
It
is
well
we
know
words
are
but
wind
,
and
so
let
them
blow
over
.
Our
work
is
to
search
the
bottom
of
the
matter
,
and
weigh
his
reason
.
1.
We
may
without
offence
inquire
of
this
Discourser
;
Have
his
Scepticks
no
more
but
Caprichoes
of
fansie
against
his
Tradition
to
suggest
;
and
yet
had
they
so
many
real
and
rational
doubts
against
the
Scripture
of
God
?
or
,
have
the
obstinate
and
acute
Adversaries
,
not
an
Argument
against
his
Tradition
,
but
are
put
to
such
a
strait
as
to
loose
those
two
notions
,
which
perfect
Identity
binds
;
or
all
they
can
say
must
avail
nothing
?
Or
must
we
not
complain
,
that
the
Disputer
is
partial
?
who
could
put
so
many
doubts
and
objections
into
their
mouths
against
the
Scripture
;
and
not
one
against
his
Tradition
.
We
leave
it
to
his
Ingenuity
to
consider
:
It
is
no
fair
dealing
.
2.
Let
us
therefore
suppose
his
Sceptick
and
obstinate
Adversary
urging
thus
against
his
Tradition
,
which
possibly
he
may
hear
.
1.
The
one
moveth
his
doubts
against
Romish
Tradition
after
this
manner
;
Is
there
not
much
more
fallibility
,
in
what
Popish
Fore-fathers
give
to
their
children
,
than
in
that
Testimony
which
God
commanded
to
be
written
,
and
is
his
very
word
,
as
acknowledged
by
the
Trent-Confederates
themselves
?
Is
it
not
possible
that
the
Discoursers
Father
or
Teacher
might
delude
him
?
and
he
be
deluded
by
his
Fore-father
?
and
so
thorough
the
Popish
line
,
might
they
not
all
be
seduced
from
Father
to
Child
?
How
can
the
Discourser
know
but
that
the
Tradition
of
other
Mediators
besides
Jesus
Christ
,
might
be
from
the
Devil
?
And
the
Tradition
of
Righteousness
by
mens
own
good
works
added
to
Christs
satisfaction
,
may
fall
under
the
Apostles
Anathema
?
Gal.
1.8
,
9.
If
any
,
or
an
Angel
from
Heaven
preach
,
&c.
Let
it
be
accursed
.
Nay
how
can
the
Method
of
Popish
Tradition
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
which
delivereth
down
so
many
Fables
and
lyes
;
as
Popes
Supremacy
,
Transubstantion
of
bread
into
the
flesh
or
humane
nature
of
Christ
,
born
of
the
blessed
virgin
,
(
a
monstrous
Chimaera
)
with
multitudes
of
such
like
absurdities
?
Who
can
acknowledge
that
Tradition
,
which
giveth
down
such
things
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
?
Sense
and
Reason
do
abhorre
them
.
2.
The
obstinate
and
acute
Adversary
moreover
will
tell
this
Discourser
more
smartly
;
That
Romish
Tradition
of
faith
by
Popish
Fore-fathers
,
is
from
the
Devil
;
that
its
Rise
was
with
the
Mysterie
of
Iniquity
;
that
the
Romish
Church
is
Mystery-Babylon
the
great
,
the
Mother
of
Harlots
;
that
the
Pope
is
the
Apocalyptical
Beast
and
False
Prophet
,
that
Antichrist
,
and
Son
of
Perdition
;
That
by
the
Hypocrysie
of
them
who
continually
have
told
lies
in
their
Traditions
,
all
spiritual
filthines
,
Idolatry
,
and
Apostasie
,
have
been
conveied
down
to
the
present
generation
of
Papists
:
yea
and
all
this
he
hath
proved
,
and
will
prove
against
them
.
Are
all
these
doubts
and
objections
only
Caprichoes
of
Fansie
,
or
Quirks
of
wit
,
or
vain
and
groundless
Oppositions
?
The
Discourser
may
talk
so
,
of
that
which
he
cannot
answer
.
His
Deist
whom
he
brought
in
cavilling
against
the
Faith
of
Scripture
,
hath
much
more
to
say
against
the
Faith
of
his
Tradition
,
would
he
but
let
him
speak
freely
,
but
here
he
kept
him
silent
,
as
if
engaged
unto
his
Cause
.
3.
If
the
Discourser
say
they
mistake
him
,
because
he
speaks
only
of
the
method
of
Tradition
,
not
of
the
matters
delivered
;
Surely
he
mistakes
himself
,
for
he
pleads
for
the
Rule
of
Faith
;
and
Faith
then
must
be
ruled
thereby
,
which
is
the
matter
delivered
;
to
divide
these
is
to
separate
unseparable
things
.
Besides
his
Adversaries
grant
Oral-Tradition
to
be
a
means
certainly
conveying
Truth
and
falshood
:
and
therefore
deny
its
appropriation
unto
Faith
.
In
summe
they
say
,
as
Tradition
is
one
means
to
convey
matters
of
Faith
,
so
the
matters
delivered
do
specifie
the
Tradition
to
be
good
or
bad
:
So
that
if
such
foul
things
be
given
down
by
his
Method
of
Tradition
,
this
also
must
be
filthiness
it self
.
4.
His
Adversaries
therefore
see
no
such
task
incumbent
on
them
as
to
loose
those
two
notions
which
perfect
Identity
binds
;
for
Tradition
and
Certainty
are
not
so
united
;
The
noon-daies
Sun
would
discover
this
to
him
,
but
that
he
is
blinded
with
his
own
self-conceit
,
hugging
his
new
Invention
.
Let
him
injoy
it
.
5.
In
S.
15.
He
gathers
up
from
his
premises
his
general
conclusion
:
Taking
for
granted
,
that
all
his
seven
Properties
of
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
do
peculiarly
belong
to
his
Tradition
,
and
that
they
are
incompetent
to
any
Competitor
,
he
concludes
in
his
own
Judgment
thus
,
That
,
Tradition
is
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
For
a
closing
answer
to
this
Discourse
.
1.
We
deny
that
any
of
these
Conditions
,
as
rightly
understood
,
are
proper
to
his
Tradition
,
which
is
Popish
;
or
that
he
hath
in
the
least
measure
proved
,
or
made
it
good
.
And
this
we
leave
to
impartial
Readers
to
judge
.
2
We
offer
it
to
observation
,
that
the
highest
Demonstration
,
which
he
hath
attempted
to
give
thus
farre
of
any
particular
Property
hath
its
strength
only
from
Man
,
whose
nature
he
stileth
the
best
in
the
Vniverse
:
And
yet
at
the
best
is
but
frail
and
wavering
and
perishing
.
3.
As
to
all
other
properties
of
an
higher
descent
,
and
more
necessary
Ally
to
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
he
passeth
them
by
,
as
not
fit
to
be
considered
in
the
present
case
,
or
not
worthy
it
.
Yet
must
he
know
that
nothing
can
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
without
them
.
As
Supremacy
,
Rectitude
,
Commensurateness
with
the
matter
ruled
,
and
Indivisibility
,
that
nothing
can
be
taken
from
it
,
or
added
to
it
;
we
expect
these
to
be
reciprocal
with
that
which
is
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
if
not
,
we
shall
not
yield
it
so
to
be
.
These
then
and
the
rest
being
not
so
peculiar
unto
his
Tradition
,
his
main
Conclusion
is
denied
.
Tradition
is
not
the
Rule
of
Faith
.
1.
Not
general
humane
Tradition
,
for
this
medleth
not
with
Faith
at
all
.
2.
Not
his
special
or
Popish
Tradition
,
for
that
falsifieth
and
corrupteth
the
true
faith
of
the
Gospel
,
as
hath
been
hinted
.
3.
Not
true
Christian
Oral-Tradition
,
as
it
notes
only
the
mode
of
del●vering
down
faith
,
without
the
matter
delivered
,
which
is
the
will
of
God
,
the
only
Rule
or
Ground
of
Faith
unto
Salvation
.
What
a
due
and
necessary
means
God
hath
made
it
to
beget
faith
,
hath
been
declared
,
and
granted
.
The
Discourser
then
may
silence
his
boasting
,
untill
he
acquit
himself
and
his
Tradition
better
.
That
he
promiseth
himself
in
the
sequel
by
a
fuller
demonstration
:
we
shall
go
on
to
try
his
performance
.
THE
Sixth
Discourse
EXAMINED
.
THe
Title
of
this
Discourse
tells
us
,
it
is
an
Endeavour
to
demonstrate
a
Priori
the
Indefectibleness
of
Tradition
.
Wherein
we
have
.
1.
His
Preface
,
Ss.
1
,
2
,
3.
—
2.
His
Demonstration
,
S.
5.
—
3.
His
answer
to
some
Objections
,
Ss.
6
,
7
,
8.
All
are
to
be
considered
orderly
.
1.
In
his
preface
he
brings
in
some
,
commending
his
former
discourses
:
but
withall
questioning
;
Was
this
Tradition
held
to
?
Who
beg●n
to
desert
that
Rule
?
Whoever
held
to
it
?
or
Was
it
ever
held
to
by
any
?
Ss.
1.
2.
He
chargeth
the
Protestants
to
make
this
labour
of
his
further
demonstration
needless
,
being
cast
in
their
Cause
,
&c.
S.
2.
3.
He
makes
a
needless
digression
,
about
an
Exaction
upon
his
Rule
.
S.
3.
4.
He
promiseth
a
double
demonstration
of
his
Conclusion
.
S.
4.
All
this
might
have
been
better
spared
and
the
Discourser
might
have
fallen
closely
to
his
Demonstration
;
which
would
have
advantaged
him
more
,
and
lesse
burdened
his
Readers
with
a
multitude
of
needless
words
.
We
will
not
follow
him
at
his
Range
,
but
shortly
animadvert
upon
the
special
Heads
.
Commend
his
Discourses
they
who
can
:
We
shall
onely
reply
to
the
Queres
.
Supposing
Tradition
twofold
.
1.
General
of
all
things
.
2.
Special
of
Faith
.
And
these
two
under
the
notions
,
either
of
the
manner
of
delivery
,
or
Matter
delivered
by
it
.
And
then
we
return
to
them
thus
.
1.
None
did
ever
question
,
or
doubt
,
but
that
alwaies
by
speech
all
things
have
been
derived
from
the
Fathers
to
the
Children
;
neither
could
this
ever
be
deserted
;
by
the
law
nature
.
2.
Considering
this
Mode
of
Tradition
carrying
in
it
matters
of
Faith
,
which
here
the
Discourser
owns
as
delivered
by
the
Apostles
,
we
say
many
did
desert
their
Doctrine
of
Faith
,
while
they
survived
;
and
all
the
continued
deserters
of
the
same
Truth
in
all
Ages
since
,
are
of
the
same
stock
.
3.
They
only
held
to
the
Apostles
Tradition
of
Faith
by
preaching
,
who
kept
close
to
the
same
doctrine
written
by
them
and
to
none
besides
it
:
and
by
such
it
was
and
is
held
unto
at
this
day
.
S.
1.
4.
The
Discourser
hath
not
prov'd
evidently
that
Romish
Tradition
is
a
certain
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
Scripture
not
.
His
fallacious
treating
upon
Tradition
in
general
,
and
Scriptures
letter
,
are
but
senseless
gingles
;
for
neither
is
the
one
denied
its
due
place
,
nor
the
other
at
all
affirmed
by
the
Protestants
:
Therefore
are
they
not
cast
in
their
Cause
,
as
he
vainly
cryeth
out
.
5.
They
assert
true
Tradition
oral
of
Christs
Doctrine
in
its
true
use
;
and
prove
that
Papists
have
fallen
from
that
Rule
,
by
the
undeniable
effects
of
that
Apostasie
in
Doctrines
expresly
contrary
to
that
of
Christs
and
his
Apostles
,
maintained
by
them
to
this
day
;
which
is
enough
to
make
them
blush
and
be
ashamed
;
but
that
a
Roman
face
is
steeled
against
such
modest
reflexions
.
The
matter
delivered
if
evil
,
spoileth
the
method
of
delivering
,
be
it
never
so
good
.
6.
The
Discourser
forgets
himself
to
be
an
Adversary
to
,
while
he
takes
upon
himself
to
be
a
Judge
over
Protestants
;
but
to
his
Censure
they
reply
.
1.
They
do
not
in
the
least
tacitely
yeeld
the
Doctrine
held
by
the
Romish
Church
,
to
be
of
Faith
,
uninterruptedly
come
down
from
the
Apostles
,
or
that
it
was
ever
and
is
Christs
Doctrine
.
They
do
openly
and
lowdly
deny
it
;
neither
were
ever
any
of
their
Jesuitical
Champions
able
to
disprove
them
.
If
so
,
let
the
Author
produce
them
:
We
grant
the
derivat●on
of
Christs
Doctrine
downwards
by
Tradition
Oral
and
Scriptural
,
in
all
things
concurring
;
but
Pop●sh
Oral-Tradition
we
abhorre
as
much
as
that
abhors
the
Scripture
of
God
.
This
is
a
foolish
Censure
then
by
the
Disputer
.
2.
They
appeal
to
God
against
the
blinding
of
their
Consciences
with
glances
of
Fancy
from
private
Interpretations
of
Gods
word
,
or
deafning
their
ears
with
false
Ecchoes
from
those
sacred
Oracles
,
who
is
their
righteous
Judge
,
and
will
determine
the
Cause
between
Protestants
and
Papists
:
who
they
be
that
lye
against
God
,
and
who
that
maintain
his
Truth
,
in
his
appointed
time
.
In
the
interim
,
the
Discourser
had
need
to
remember
that
he
must
appear
himself
at
the
judgment
seat
of
Christ
,
and
be
certainly
judged
,
for
all
those
hard
and
ungodly
reproaches
cast
upon
the
Scriptures
of
God
under
pretence
of
honouring
them
.
Woe
be
to
them
at
that
day
who
shall
then
be
found
guilty
of
drawing
away
souls
from
the
faith
of
God
manifested
in
the
flesh
unto
other
Daemon-Mediators
by
the
hypocrisie
of
them
who
give
down
lying
Traditions
.
Their
Consciences
will
be
found
to
have
been
seared
with
an
hot
iron
.
Let
him
and
his
be
afraid
of
this
judgment
,
S.
2.
7.
In
S.
3.
It
is
hard
to
say
what
the
Discourser
aimeth
at
;
for
it
may
well
be
put
in
a
Parenthesis
as
not
necessary
to
this
Discourse
.
Yet
we
shall
say
something
to
it
.
1.
It
is
no
unreasonable
expectation
that
the
Rule
of
Faith
should
both
order
its
Followers
,
and
oblige
them
not
to
desert
it
:
So
God
hath
established
his
Rule
in
the
Holy
Scriptures
.
2.
The
goodness
of
our
Saviour
is
not
to
found
his
Rule
of
Faith
upon
mans
nature
,
but
upon
God
himself
,
that
it
may
be
able
to
rule
Souls
unto
life
,
and
oblige
them
firmly
unto
Faith
.
3.
It
is
no
less
the
justice
of
the
Lord
to
suffer
an
Efficacy
of
Delusion
to
go
along
with
Popish
Tradition
,
to
spread
that
Religion
under
the
name
of
Christian
.
And
having
thus
replyed
to
these
things
in
his
Preface
,
we
shall
expect
his
promise
of
a
double
demonstration
,
which
he
giveth
,
S.
4.
2.
He
enters
upon
his
first
a
Priori
.
S.
5.
Here
he
would
have
us
pick
out
his
demonstration
from
four
Grounds
laid
down
by
him
.
1.
That
Christian
Doctrine
was
at
first
unanimously
settled
by
the
Apostles
in
the
hearts
of
the
Faithful
in
great
multitude●
over
several
parts
of
the
world
.
2.
That
this
Doctrine
was
firmly
beleeved
by
them
to
be
the
way
to
Heaven
,
and
the
contradictory
to
it
the
way
unto
Damnation
.
3.
That
hopes
of
goods
(
as
Heavenly
)
and
Fears
of
harms
,
(
as
Damnation
)
strongly
applyed
,
are
the
Causes
of
Actual
Will
.
4.
That
the
thing
was
feesible
,
that
whatever
they
were
bred
to
,
was
knowable
by
them
.
All
this
put
as
his
Medium
,
his
Conclusion
is
.
That
it
followeth
as
certainly
,
a
great
Body
of
the
first
Believers
,
and
After-faithful
in
each
Age
,
that
is
,
from
Age
to
Age
,
would
continue
to
hold
themselves
and
teach
their
Children
,
as
themselves
had
been
taught
,
that
is
that
they
should
follow
and
stick
to
Tradition
;
as
it
doth
,
that
a
Cause
put
actually
causing
,
produceth
its
Effect
.
1.
This
is
somewhat
an
obscure
way
of
Demonstration
;
It
had
been
plainer
and
shorter
to
have
given
it
in
three
propositions
,
so
more
easily
might
we
have
seen
the
strength
of
his
conclusion
:
We
shall
to
help
the
Readers
more
clearly
to
judge
in
this
matter
,
contract
it
,
and
put
it
under
view
together
.
His
conclusion
pretended
by
him
to
be
inferred
is
,
The
Indefectibleness
or
Actual
indefectiveness
of
Tradition
from
Christ
and
his
Apostles
.
(
Suppose
of
the
Romish
Faith
or
Religion
,
as
it
is
gathered
into
a
systeme
by
his
Trent-Fathers
,
and
is
now
received
and
practic'd
by
Papists
)
For
this
is
the
only
thing
contended
for
by
him
in
all
his
Discourses
:
Otherwise
that
Oral-Tradition
of
humane
concernments
is
from
the
beginning
indefective
actually
and
indefectible
so
long
as
mankind
is
in
being
on
earth
,
must
be
yielded
by
all
.
His
Medium
to
conclude
this
must
be
gathered
out
of
his
4
grounds
,
or
at
least
the
proof
of
it
:
The
whole
together
must
be
thus
formed
.
That
Doctrine
of
Faith
,
which
was
at
first
delivered
by
Christ
and
his
Apostles
,
and
firmly
beleeved
by
all
the
Faithful
in
that
Age
,
and
willed
and
known
by
all
the
Faithful
in
all
succeeding
Generations
to
this
very
Age
,
is
actually
Indefective
from
the
time
of
Christ
.
But
,
The
Traditional
Doctrine
of
Faith
compiled
in
the
Trent-Canons
,
and
as
now
beleeved
and
practised
in
the
bulk
of
it
by
Papists
at
this
day
,
is
that
which
at
first
Christ
delivered
,
&c.
Therefore
This
Traditionall
Doctrine
of
Faith
received
and
practised
by
Papists
at
this
day
,
is
actually
indefective
from
the
time
of
Christ
.
In
th●s
demonstrative
Syllogism
according
to
the
Discoursers
platform
laid
,
we
peremptorily
deny
the
Assumption
:
which
if
he
can
prove
,
we
yield
his
Conclusion
;
but
as
soon
may
he
prove
darkness
to
be
light
,
and
Hell
to
be
Heaven
.
And
untill
he
perform
this
Task
,
we
judge
his
Demonstration
,
but
a
Quibble
,
not
worthy
of
a
farther
answer
.
No
actual
Indefectiveness
,
then
much
lesse
indefectibility
from
Christ
,
is
made
good
to
Popish
Tradition
,
which
is
this
Disputers
Rule
of
Faith
.
1.
As
to
what
he
may
conceive
of
proof
lying
in
his
grounds
,
we
shall
grant
what
is
to
be
granted
,
which
will
avail
him
nothing
;
and
except
against
the
rest
.
1.
We
grant
that
the
sound
of
the
Apostles
Doctrine
went
into
all
the
earth
,
Rom
,
10.18
.
and
their
words
to
the
end
of
the
world
.
So
also
was
the
same
delivered
in
their
writings
and
Epistles
;
Each
Tradition
was
of
equal
account
with
them
.
2.
We
except
that
however
they
delivered
this
Doctrine
to
their
ears
and
to
their
eies
;
yet
they
could
not
settle
it
in
their
hearts
;
2
Cor
.
3.3
for
then
no
Apostates
had
been
in
those
daies
:
This
was
a
work
for
Gods
spirit
only
.
Neither
indeed
was
this
Gods
way
to
propagate
truth
to
others
;
for
it
was
a
secret
work
which
none
could
know
but
such
as
had
it
.
The
means
of
conveying
Gospel
Doctrine
must
be
visible
,
as
preaching
and
writing
,
such
as
work
upon
senses
,
which
the
Author
contends
for
under
the
notion
of
a
Rule
.
It
may
be
therefore
perhaps
his
meaning
,
that
those
multitudes
did
learn
the
Apostles
Doctrine
by
heart
,
that
is
,
without
book
,
which
best
suiteth
with
his
Tradit●on
to
teach
their
Children
by
heart
:
but
this
is
poor
Heart-work
unto
salvat●on
.
This
makes
no
more
for
his
Indefectiveness
,
than
to
note
the
Term
only
from
whence
it
must
begin
;
Take
it
all
in
the
soundest
Sence
.
2.
As
to
his
second
ground
.
1.
We
grant
it
fully
as
concerning
them
,
who
were
truly
faithful
,
that
they
did
beleeve
Christs
Doctrine
to
be
the
way
to
Heaven
,
and
the
deser●ing
of
it
the
way
to
damnation
;
and
that
the
hopes
of
Heaven
,
and
fears
of
Hell
impressed
upon
their
minds
by
divine
Authority
,
d●d
make
not
only
the
first
Believers
,
but
all
truly
faithful
in
all
Ages
following
to
adhere
to
that
Doctrine
of
Christ
,
and
d
d
deterr
them
from
the
relinquishing
of
it
.
2.
Yet
we
deny
all
them
to
be
truly
faithful
,
who
professedly
in
the
first
and
following
times
received
this
Doctrine
;
neither
did
hopes
of
Heaven
nor
fears
of
Hell
ke●p
many
from
forsaking
the
Truth
of
Christ
in
the
times
of
the
Apostles
;
for
there
were
multitudes
of
Apost●tes
from
it
under
the
Mystery
of
Iniquity
in
those
daies
;
And
no
lesse
were
in
Ages
following
,
when
the
Apostasie
grew
stronger
,
notwithstanding
therefore
these
hopes
and
fears
many
might
and
did
fall
from
the
Faith
.
This
step
then
in
the
Discoursers
Climax
for
h●s
Demonstration
is
but
feeble
:
And
it
doth
concern
him
to
study
more
seriously
whether
the
Romish
Apostasie
took
not
rise
from
the
worse
and
failing
party
then
,
which
hath
been
charged
and
proved
against
them
.
His
Indefective
Tradition
must
then
fail
him
,
unless
it
be
from
Apostate
Professors
in
that
Age
3.
As
to
his
next
ground
.
1.
We
grant
that
Hopes
of
Goods
,
and
Fears
of
Harms
,
are
objective
Causes
of
actual
will
,
and
no
more
;
for
they
move
the
will
to
chuse
and
to
refuse
.
2.
We
add
further
,
that
the
strength
of
Application
of
these
objects
,
whether
in
matters
natural
,
or
spiritual
unto
the
will
,
must
be
to
victory
over
all
repulses
,
to
actuate
the
will
unto
its
office
of
chusing
,
or
refusing
.
3.
That
in
spiritual
matters
the
Application
must
be
made
to
mans
will
by
the
Arm
of
God
,
or
else
Heaven
will
never
keep
them
close
to
the
way
of
Truth
,
nor
Hell
,
ever
deterr
them
from
relinquishing
it
;
nor
actuate
will
to
a
regular
choice
or
refusal
.
Now
the
Event
in
those
first
times
plainly
shews
,
that
hopes
of
Heaven
and
fears
of
Hell
,
did
not
actuate
the
wills
of
beleevers
to
adhere
to
Christs
saving
Doctrine
,
nor
terrifie
them
from
relinquishing
it
;
for
many
fell
away
,
notwithstanding
the
strength
of
those
Motives
,
because
they
were
not
applyed
by
the
Power
of
God
.
Which
being
so
,
the
Discourser
had
need
mind
this
role
of
his
Ladder
also
,
or
else
it
will
crack
and
not
bear
his
Traditional
Fore-fathers
in
bringing
down
his
Traditionary
faith
to
this
Age
:
For
he
can
never
prove
that
their
wills
were
acted
by
God
upon
thoughts
of
Heaven
or
Hell
to
bring
down
the
Truth
of
Christ
unto
their
Posterity
,
seeing
his
Trent-Canons
contain
so
many
falshoods
contrary
to
the
same
.
4.
To
his
last
ground
.
1.
It
may
be
yeelded
,
that
it
was
in
their
power
(
God
vouchsafing
them
natural
understandings
)
to
know
literally
the
Doctrine
of
Christ
and
his
Apostles
,
and
yet
not
in
their
power
to
stand
to
it
.
2.
We
deny
neverthelesse
that
it
was
in
the
power
of
all
those
multitudes
pretended
savingly
to
know
the
Doctrine
of
Christ
,
unless
those
onely
who
were
taught
of
God
,
and
upon
whose
wills
his
own
Arm
had
made
impression
of
his
motives
to
keep
them
fixed
to
the
truth
of
the
Gospel
.
Now
seeing
there
were
so
many
deficient
in
saving
knowledge
both
of
former
and
latter
times
;
It
will
be
a
very
hard
matter
for
the
Discourser
to
draw
out
from
these
premised
grounds
,
a
certain
conclusion
of
his
Traditions
Indefectiveness
or
Indefectibility
,
from
the
Truth
of
Christ
,
to
the
false
Religion
of
Rome
at
this
day
:
Idem
jungat
vulpes
&
mulgeat
hircos
.
The
same
wild
Foxes
then
may
coat
,
And
milk
the
Romish
Goat
.
Yet
let
us
look
forward
and
see
what
way
he
will
make
in
clearing
up
the
objections
proposed
by
himself
.
3.
He
now
cometh
to
satisfie
objectors
out
of
his
foresight
,
and
so
he
hopes
to
clear
his
Demonstration
.
1.
He
saith
,
The
indisposition
of
the
wills
of
beleeving
Parents
,
by
reason
of
Original
Corruption
,
may
be
objected
as
a
cause
hindering
them
from
a
faithful
delivery
of
Christs
Truth
down
unto
their
Children
.
Unto
which
he
attempts
to
give
satisfaction
.
S.
6.
To
avoid
transcribing
of
words
we
shall
animadvert
upon
his
answer
and
reply
.
1.
That
we
grant
freely
Christs
Doctrine
was
intended
to
be
an
Antidote
against
that
original
malice
,
and
an
help
to
preserve
mens
minds
and
wills
right
and
pure
:
For
he
was
manifested
to
destroy
the
works
of
the
Devil
;
of
which
that
was
the
first
and
worst
.
2.
We
doubt
not
,
1
Joh
.
3.8
.
but
that
the
Gospel
of
the
Son
of
God
did
heal
the
corrupt
natures
of
many
to
whom
God
applyed
it
by
his
special
Grace
:
Therefore
Christs
wisdome
is
not
questioned
as
if
the
means
appointed
by
him
were
not
fit
to
do
the
Effect
.
But
when
this
Discourser
minds
us
of
many
thousands
of
Martyrs
and
holy
Confessors
,
who
by
the
Power
of
this
Doctrine
overcame
this
inbred
declivity
of
their
wills
;
we
may
as
justly
remind
him
of
so
many
millions
,
to
whom
the
sound
of
it
came
,
whose
natures
were
never
healed
,
nor
w●lls
rectified
by
it
.
And
besides
we
deny
that
his
Traditionary
fore-fathers
,
as
to
his
Trent-Doctrine
,
were
such
Martyrs
and
Confessors
whose
wills
were
so
cured
:
And
we
leave
it
upon
him
to
prove
it
,
3.
We
deny
that
this
Doctrine
of
Christ
was
delivered
by
the
best
willed
souls
only
by
Oral
,
but
also
by
Scriptural
Tradition
,
against
both
which
neither
the
stratagems
of
the
Devil
,
nor
the
gates
of
Hell
did
or
could
prevail
.
4.
We
add
that
however
weak
the
Disputer
may
think
Original
sin
to
be
,
yet
it
inclineth
to
all
malignity
against
God
,
and
Apostasie
from
the
Truth
of
Christ
:
but
much
more
when
Parents
are
to
be
supposed
to
have
improved
that
root
of
bitterness
by
bringing
forth
many
bitter
fruits
in
Actual
sins
,
habituating
themselves
unto
backslidings
from
God
;
and
then
it
will
not
be
so
hard
for
him
to
grant
they
might
be
so
vicious
as
to
seduce
their
Children
.
5.
Although
we
are
willing
to
think
,
no
Parents
should
be
so
unnatural
,
to
teach
their
children
,
what
they
think
will
damn
them
;
Yet
we
shall
offer
to
him
some
Experiments
which
are
undeniable
.
1.
There
have
been
Parents
who
have
offered
their
children
to
the
Devil
;
such
therefore
may
be
at
this
day
.
2.
Parents
bewitched
themselves
,
are
most
apt
to
fascinate
their
Children
to
idol-worship
,
&c.
A
Father-theef
usually
teacheth
his
Son
to
be
a
Theef
,
though
he
knows
the
end
will
be
the
Gallows
.
When
the
blind
do
lead
the
blind
,
they
will
both
fall
into
the
ditch
.
Nay
nothing
is
more
evident
,
than
that
Parents
bred
up
in
superstitious
and
idolatrous
waies
,
will
force
their
Children
to
be
of
the
same
Religion
,
that
if
themselves
be
damned
,
they
shall
be
damned
with
them
.
And
to
this
efficacious
delusion
God
hath
given
up
them
,
who
loved
not
his
Scripture-Truth
.
No
greater
Example
of
it
than
in
Rome
.
5.
These
things
being
thus
stated
,
how
hath
the
Discourser
quitted
himself
of
the
first
objection
?
The
Tradition
of
Romish
Faith
is
notwithstanding
descended
from
minds
and
wills
,
not
only
not
healed
by
the
Gospel
,
but
more
perniciously
infected
with
wilfull
and
obstinate
falshood
against
the
written
Truth
of
Christ
.
2.
The
next
objection
is
,
That
the
fickle
nature
of
the
will
,
may
exempt
her
from
the
Law
of
Causes
.
Whereupon
he
makes
some
Queries
,
to
which
we
shall
answer
.
1.
We
grant
that
good
is
the
object
of
the
will
,
and
doth
affect
it
when
it
is
sufficiently
applied
:
Natural
good
to
natural
will
,
and
spiritual
good
to
spiritual
will
.
2.
We
assert
Temporal
goods
and
harms
,
do
more
affect
natural
wills
than
all
Spiritual
:
Experience
sheweth
it
,
men
usually
prefer
temporal
rewards
before
heaven
,
and
fear
bodily
punishments
more
than
hell
;
such
wills
are
fickle
.
3.
His
world
of
Beleevers
we
take
for
the
multitude
of
his
Popish
Fore-fathers
,
and
their
wills
were
carried
under
blind
,
superstitious
minds
,
to
forsake
the
Truth
of
Christ
,
and
so
to
seduce
Posterity
;
notwithstanding
the
loss
of
infinite
goods
,
and
gain
of
infinite
Harms
.
Such
wills
are
no
Causes
of
conveying
down
the
Truth
of
Christ
.
In
all
this
nothing
strengthens
his
demonstration
.
3.
The
last
knot
which
he
would
untie
,
is
That
the
Objector
doth
fault
the
Application
of
these
motives
to
the
wills
of
his
Traditionary
Fore-fathers
;
and
then
their
wills
may
fail
in
doing
th●ir
office
.
What
his
reply
is
,
we
shall
weigh
and
answer
.
The
Discourser
may
put
his
Teeth
and
nails
to
untye
this
knot
,
and
all
to
no
purpose
;
For
that
which
is
a
sufficient
application
of
these
spiritual
motives
to
mens
wills
,
so
as
to
make
them
faithful
in
giving
down
Truth
,
must
needs
convert
them
,
and
make
them
of
flesh
,
spirit
.
Now
all
applications
from
humane
strength
are
not
able
to
change
mans
will
;
It
must
be
Gods
arm
alone
,
that
can
so
effectually
apply
the
foresaid
motives
.
Leaving
therefore
his
Reflection
upon
pursuit
of
ends
proposed
by
undoubted
Authority
,
and
his
needless
illustrations
of
it
by
a
King
preparing
for
Expedition
,
or
a
Gentleman
travelling
to
Rome
,
we
fall
upon
his
proof
of
a
sufficient
application
of
these
motives
,
which
we
find
to
be
mostly
humane
,
and
only
his
last
instance
any
whit
ingaging
God
;
To
all
he
urgeth
we
thus
reply
.
1.
We
observe
,
he
gathers
his
sufficiency
of
application
from
humane
means
,
which
we
deny
to
be
sufficient
to
actuate
mans
will
into
regular
working
;
and
this
in
5
particulars
.
1.
The
proposal
of
Gods
supremely-fallible
veracity
from
man
to
man
,
is
not
sufficient
to
turn
the
will
truly
to
close
with
Truth
;
for
then
it
would
have
been
done
upon
all
that
heard
Christ
and
his
Apostles
preach
it
.
2.
The
representation
of
these
infinite
goods
by
most
familiar
Metaphors
,
venerable
Sacraments
or
the
spectable
Majesty
of
Ceremonies
(
nay
of
Romish
themselves
)
is
no
sufficient
application
to
move
the
will
to
close
with
the
Truth
of
Christ
.
These
are
weak
operatives
from
men
when
they
are
true
;
but
pernicious
when
adulterate
as
in
Rome
.
3.
The
Applications
of
these
goods
in
the
Visibility
of
the
words
being
made
flesh
,
was
not
sufficient
to
change
mens
wills
unto
the
choice
of
Truth
;
for
then
all
among
whom
he
Tabernacled
,
would
have
chosen
him
and
cleaved
to
him
.
Unless
the
Discourser
think
the
setting
of
him
forth
by
Crucifixes
or
Popish
Pageantry
may
do
more
;
which
is
some
of
the
spawn
of
his
Tradition
.
These
turn
hearts
to
Satan
.
4.
The
Application
of
these
goods
by
Examples
in
course
of
life
and
actions
and
outward
shews
,
is
not
sufficient
to
turn
wills
unto
the
truth
of
Christ
.
Long
experience
makes
this
good
.
Indeed
if
the
misteries
of
God
were
mechanical
and
maniable
(
as
he
makes
them
)
he
might
have
hope
to
make
many
of
that
Trade
.
It
may
be
so
with
Papists
.
5.
All
the
frequent
and
efficacious
application
of
these
eternal
goods
and
harms
by
Education
under
Parents
and
by
the
Discipline
and
oeconomy
of
the
Church
is
not
sufficient
to
change
wills
to
God
:
It
was
not
so
to
all
under
the
Apostles
government
,
it
was
less
in
after
ages
;
but
not
at
all
in
that
Romish
Church
,
for
which
the
Discourser
contends
;
nay
they
harden
wills
against
God
.
In
all
these
he
hath
not
cured
the
faulting
of
his
Application
.
The
knot
is
made
faster
.
6.
In
the
last
place
he
offers
something
worth
consideration
indeed
,
if
he
could
prove
it
to
his
purpose
,
Christianity
urg'd
to
execution
,
gives
its
Followers
a
new
life
,
and
a
new
nature
;
than
which
a
neerer
application
cannot
be
imagin'd
.
This
is
application
sufficient
indeed
of
these
motives
to
the
regeneration
of
men
;
for
this
must
change
the
will
:
but
none
can
so
urge
Doctrine
,
but
God
himself
.
Yet
if
this
be
made
serv●ceable
to
the
mans
turn
,
he
must
prove
.
1.
That
this
Doctrine
preacht
by
the
Apostles
with
urgency
,
did
give
a
new
life
to
all
their
professed
followers
.
2.
That
the
multitudes
thus
regenerated
by
the
Apostles
,
did
give
this
new
nature
to
the●r
followers
.
3.
That
these
also
did
give
a
new
life
by
their
Doctrine
to
the
Generation
Following
,
and
so
successively
to
all
the
fore-fathers
of
him
and
Papists
unto
this
day
.
But
all
yours
is
false
;
and
impossible
to
be
made
good
.
For
the
huge
gulf
made
between
the
Apostles
doctrine
and
Application
,
and
Popish
doctrine
with
their
application
,
will
never
suffer
this
to
arise
from
that
,
or
consist
with
it
.
The
Testimony
of
several
Centuries
concerning
the
wicked
doctrins
and
beastly
lives
both
of
Popes
and
Papists
,
will
sufficiently
demonstrate
,
that
Christian
Doctrine
was
never
so
applyed
to
them
,
as
to
make
them
new
creatures
.
If
this
Tradition
hath
,
it
must
needs
send
forth
sad
swarms
or
multitudes
of
such
Christians
among
them
to
the
worlds
end
.
Thus
we
have
the
strength
of
his
first
Demonstration
.
A
further
clearing
we
are
promised
in
the
next
discourse
.
THE
Seventh
Discourse
EXAMINED
.
About
an
Objection
cleared
.
IN
this
Discourse
the
summe
may
be
taken
in
3
Heads
general
.
1.
An
objection
and
proposed
answered
.
Sect
.
1.
2.
An
Elucidation
of
the
a●swer
by
stating
the
rise
of
Heresie
.
Ss.
2.
3.
4.
—
3.
A
close
excusing
th
s
Parergon
,
by
the
usefulness
of
it
.
Sect
5.
1.
The
Objection
formed
by
him
,
may
run
thus
,
There
have
been
actually
many
Hereticks
or
Deserters
of
Tradition
,
therefore
Tradition
must
needs
have
been
defective
and
interrupted
.
We
understanding
this
Tradition
to
be
of
the
Primitive
Doctrine
of
Christ
,
(
whether
it
be
Oral
or
Scriptural
)
do
grant
the
Antecedent
,
There
have
been
many
Heretical
Deserters
of
that
Tradition
which
the
Discourser
cannot
deny
;
however
he
would
wave
the
Consequence
as
concluding
against
his
Daemon
.
But
we
yeeld
the
whole
Argument
,
and
shall
maintain
it
.
1.
The
Antecedent
is
verified
all
along
,
since
that
Man
of
sin
,
and
son
of
perdition
was
revealed
,
who
exalted
himself
above
the
〈◇〉
,
or
Augusti
,
2
Thes
.
2.4
.
and
sat
in
the
Temple
of
God
,
shewing
himself
that
he
was
God
.
Thus
his
Universal
Head
hath
done
;
and
he
and
his
Hierarchy
have
been
and
are
the
sons
of
that
great
Apost●cy
,
who
did
desert
the
true
Faith
of
Christ
taught
and
written
to
them
;
and
are
turned
and
keep
unto
most
damnable
Heresies
that
ever
were
invented
.
These
prove
plainly
a
defection
from
,
and
an
interruption
of
the
true
Tradition
from
Christ
.
2.
The
Consequent
therefore
of
Traditions
defectiveness
cannot
be
denied
;
neither
dareth
the
man
here
expresly
to
deny
it
.
Only
so
farre
as
his
skill
serveth
him
,
he
labours
notwithstanding
to
assert
his
conclusion
,
the
Indefectiveness
of
his
Tradition
.
His
props
are
broken
Reeds
,
which
fall
with
their
building
by
a
touch
.
1.
Contingency
is
urged
,
Such
a
thing
may
be
in
working
upon
a
whole
species
or
kind
;
an
yet
the
general
Indeficiency
ab●de
.
We
can
tell
him
,
there
is
not
only
a
Contingency
,
1
Cor
.
11.19
.
but
a
necessity
laid
by
heaven
;
that
such
Heresies
must
be
,
that
they
who
are
approved
may
be
made
manifest
.
Yet
again
if
it
be
but
a
Contingent
defect
of
Trad●tion
,
it
is
enough
to
destroy
the
Indef
ctibility
.
2.
It
is
a
most
gross
untruth
,
That
the
Causes
propagating
faith
to
Posterity
,
are
as
Effic●cious
,
s
those
which
are
laid
to
propagate
mankind
;
unworthy
of
a
man
of
Reason
to
utter
.
For
,
the
Causes
●f
Mans
propagation
are
natural
and
laid
under
providence
necessarily
producing
the
same
kind
;
but
the
causes
of
Faiths
conveiance
and
preservation
among
men
,
such
as
the
Author
mentions
,
Fore-fathers
teaching
,
Church
Inspection
&c.
are
voluntary
,
depending
on
mans
will
;
and
therefore
weak
and
uncertain
to
produce
the
effect
intended
.
Are
these
equal
then
in
force
of
propagation
?
Besides
the
reason
added
is
insipid
;
Because
Faith
continueth
no
longer
than
Mankind
it
is
only
Subject
.
Suppose
th●s
true
:
Is
therefore
Faiths
Propagation
as
extensive
and
sure
as
Mankinds
?
Or
is
Faith
con-natural
to
Mankind
?
Or
because
Faith
is
competent
only
to
Man
,
is
it
proper
to
all
men
?
What
mea●s
the
man
by
such
wild
kind
of
reasonings
?
As
well
might
he
say
;
Mankind
is
born
learned
.
3.
It
is
as
frothy
a
suggestion
,
he
maketh
in
the
next
place
,
That
these
Causes
of
Faiths
propagation
before
explicated
,
are
effectively
powerful
to
make
multitudes
daily
debar
themselves
of
those
pleasures
,
which
are
the
Causes
of
Mankinds
propagation
.
The
Inference
hence
must
be
,
that
Faiths
propagation
is
more
ample
and
sure
,
because
it
hinders
the
propagation
of
men
O
monstrous
fruit
of
Popish
Tradition
.
What
can
he
mean
,
but
that
his
Traditionary
faith
hindreth
men
from
marrying
,
and
so
from
p●opagating
their
kind
;
that
their
F●ith
may
have
the
better
increase
?
Which
is
one
express
character
of
Antichristian
Apostasie
to
forbid
men
to
marry
.
And
the
Author
here
confesseth
that
his
Traditionary
faith
puts
a
bar
unto
such
marriage
pleasures
allowed
and
ordained
of
God
for
propagation
of
Mankind
,
and
so
his
Church
among
them
.
Unless
he
mean
adulterous
and
unlawful
pleasures
;
which
he
knows
that
his
Traditionary
Faith
could
never
bar
out
of
their
Monasteries
and
Nunneries
:
and
that
it
hath
allowed
common
stews
for
the
relief
of
those
Monastical
Persons
,
to
whom
they
have
interdicted
Marriage
,
as
an
unholy
thing
.
Their
own
Children
of
Rome
have
written
,
and
testified
these
things
to
their
faces
.
Why
then
should
not
the
Discourser
blush
to
render
such
a
reason
of
Faiths
more
certain
increase
to
a
Posterity
of
Beleevers
,
then
the
Propagation
of
all
Mankind
?
If
he
will
not
,
we
shall
cast
a
vail
over
him
and
pass
away
.
4.
As
to
his
last
proof
from
History
,
since
the
first
planting
of
Christianity
,
Th●t
by
experience
we
shall
find
more
particular
failing
in
propagating
their
Kind
than
their
Faith
.
1.
We
challenge
him
to
produce
such
an
History
,
or
else
he
is
a
Fabler
.
2.
We
charge
him
with
this
Issue
,
which
must
follow
from
his
History
alledged
,
That
there
have
been
more
Believers
born
than
men
.
For
if
Faith
have
failed
less
in
its
propagation
,
than
men
in
propagating
their
kind
;
there
must
needs
be
more
Faith
than
Manhood
in
the
world
,
Risum
teneatis
Amici
?
If
the
Discourser
be
a
reasonable
man
,
and
learned
as
he
seemeth
to
profess
himself
,
let
him
clear
himself
from
this
absurd
Consequence
of
his
Historical
proof
:
Or
if
not
,
let
him
ingeniously
say
he
was
mistaken
:
but
if
he
will
not
,
all
men
may
see
that
a
spirit
of
perverseness
doth
misguide
him
.
So
much
to
his
answer
of
the
Objection
.
2.
All
that
follows
in
Ss.
2
,
3
,
&
4.
The
Discourser
himself
stileth
very
truly
a
Parergon
,
that
is
,
a
Glosse
besides
the
Text
,
or
a
needless
digression
,
beside
the
matter
in
hand
,
or
a
troublesome
Parenthesis
,
justly
to
be
expunged
;
Yet
not
to
leap
over
all
at
once
(
as
justly
it
may
be
slighted
)
we
shall
make
some
steps
over
it
,
in
a
way
of
Animadversion
.
In
the
second
and
third
he
sheweth
the
Rise
and
growth
of
Heresie
;
In
the
fourth
the
sad
consequents
of
the
same
.
We
shall
not
repeat
all
he
saith
,
but
animadvert
upon
his
passages
S.
2.
1.
He
supposing
Heresie
an
Evil
incident
in
the
visible
Church
,
and
seducing
from
it
,
we
add
,
It
must
then
be
the
true
Primitive
Church
settled
by
the
Apostles
,
not
the
Apostate
Church
of
Rome
,
(
which
the
Author
intends
)
For
it
can
be
no
heresie
to
separate
from
Hereticks
as
being
such
;
among
which
none
are
greater
than
Papists
sworn
to
their
Trent-Doctrine
.
And
that
he
must
mean
this
Church
,
and
not
the
other
,
every
Reader
may
perceive
from
his
own
suggestion
:
That
these
Deserters
lay
hold
on
some
accidental
miscarriages
,
as
foolish
Opinions
or
ill
lives
of
some
in
the
Church
,
which
they
aggravate
b●y●nd
all
reason
to
justifie
their
Rebellion
.
Were
there
such
foolish
opinions
in
the
Church
Apostolical
?
Or
such
ill
lives
among
them
to
give
occasion
unto
such
,
who
pretended
better
,
to
forsake
them
?
Idolatrous
Balaamits
indeed
,
and
Lascivious
Nicolaitans
,
left
them
,
because
their
doctrine
was
truly
spiritual
,
and
and
their
lives
too
strict
,
and
holy
for
them
.
If
the
Discourser
therefore
characterize
Hereticks
by
this
,
in
forsaking
a
Church
for
foolish
doctrins
,
and
loose
lives
;
It
will
prove
at
last
better
to
be
such
an
Heretick
,
than
a
member
of
such
a
Church
,
when
he
saith
,
that
there
are
but
some
so
bad
;
and
that
their
failings
are
aggravated
beyond
all
reason
:
Let
him
know
that
all
his
Church
are
alike
guilty
in
matter
of
Doctrine
,
if
not
in
beastliness
of
life
;
and
that
false
Doctrine
and
wicked
life
cannot
be
aggravated
beyond
reason
or
measure
upon
such
as
pretend
to
be
of
the
Church
of
Christ
.
It
is
no
Rebellion
to
relinquish
Rome
,
for
wicked
opinions
and
sinful
lives
;
nor
an
unreasonable
crime
to
aggravate
their
abominations
,
which
may
make
the
Heavens
blush
to
behold
,
and
be
astonished
,
that
they
should
be
acted
under
the
name
of
Christ
.
2.
As
to
his
method
of
inventing
new
Tenets
,
and
suting
them
by
plausibleness
and
licentiousness
w●th
the
passionate
humors
of
d●vers
;
and
so
drawing
into
a
Faction
,
get
the
state
on
their
sides
;
and
so
having
●ndemnity
and
hop●s
of
rewards
,
their
Corrupt
●e
low
Revolters
bandy
with
them
against
the
former
Church
,
and
thus
a
Body
is
made
&c
▪
Our
return
is
,
1.
Th
t
t●is
is
the
fairest
description
of
the
Me
h●d
taken
by
R●me
Papal
in
their
Apostasie
from
Christs
Doctrine
delivered
by
the
Apostles
in
word
and
writing
,
none
could
give
a
more
lively
discovery
of
it
from
History
.
2
That
this
they
did
by
their
Oral-Tradition
contradicting
the
Scripture
of
Truth
.
3.
The
known
newness
of
which
to
the
first
settled
Doctrine
of
Christ
,
is
so
evident
,
that
to
deny
it
,
were
(
as
the
Discourser
phraseth
it
)
to
tell
an
open
lye
to
no
imaginable
purpose
.
3.
As
to
his
Inferences
fetcht
from
the
premises
.
1.
We
see
plainly
that
it
is
the
Romish
Society
,
which
he
covers
under
the
name
of
the
Church
,
concerning
which
we
professedly
assert
,
that
they
have
erred
from
the
Faith
of
Christ
;
and
that
by
their
Tradition
.
And
this
is
proved
in
the
sight
of
the
Christian
World
,
above
their
contradiction
.
2.
The
Protestants
who
maintain
the
former
,
seek
out
no
new
Rule
but
the
first
and
oldest
,
even
the
Scripture
of
God
as
senced
by
himself
.
3.
They
detest
private
Inspirations
inconsistent
with
the
word
of
God
;
they
scorn
quirks
of
wit
to
blunder
any
;
their
learning
is
not
wordish
nor
curiously
Critical
:
but
such
whereby
their
most
learned
Jesu●ts
have
been
proved
foolish
Soph●sters
,
in
defending
their
cause
against
the
Scriptures
of
God
;
even
the
wisedome
of
God
in
his
Mystery
.
4.
They
scorn
to
hook
in
Romish
Catholicks
,
but
tell
them
plainly
that
their
Infallible
and
evident
way
of
Tradition
is
a
Lie
;
neither
do
they
cry
victory
,
but
where
Gods
word
(
which
he
cannot
deny
)
prevaileth
and
puts
them
to
silence
.
5.
The
Protestants
are
not
ambitious
of
any
name
,
given
or
assumed
by
men
;
They
content
themselves
with
that
Primitive
Name
of
Christs
Disciples
,
divinely
imposed
,
Act.
11.26
.
which
is
Christians
,
no
new
Name
.
As
for
the
name
of
Catholick
they
offer
to
prove
.
If
the
reason
of
it
be
the
holding
of
the
Catholick
Faith
,
delivered
by
the
Apostles
,
it
is
most
properly
theirs
;
as
our
own
Country
men
have
made
good
,
and
that
famous
Chamier
stileth
the
Protestants
commonly
by
that
name
in
opposition
to
Papists
.
His
Enumeration
of
Titles
afterwards
is
ridiculous
and
scandalous
:
Who
knoweth
not
that
the
Papists
named
them
Lutherans
and
Zuinglians
in
scorn
,
who
entertained
the
Doctrine
of
Christ
preached
by
them
?
Did
Luther
or
Zuinglius
baptize
Sects
into
their
own
names
,
any
more
then
the
Apostle
Paul
?
The
Discourser
may
be
ashamed
of
such
Foolish
reflexions
.
Let
Tritheits
and
Sacramentarians
injoy
the
Title
of
their
Tenets
,
if
they
deserve
them
.
The
Protestants
will
maintain
their
name
(
however
they
glory
in
none
,
but
the
name
of
Christ
Jesus
put
upon
them
,
from
their
Profession
of
Christs
Truth
against
Romish
and
Antichristian
Falshood
;
The
Combination
they
leave
to
those
Popish
vassals
,
that
are
conspired
against
the
Scripture-Truth
.
Lastly
,
as
to
the
poor
Quakers
and
Dippers
,
the
man
knoweth
or
may
know
,
that
his
Popish
Emissaries
have
abused
them
,
taught
them
Quaking
and
Dipping
;
and
then
abuse
them
.
It
is
known
that
the
Jesuitical
Mountebanks
have
transformed
themselves
into
all
sorts
of
Sectaries
,
that
have
been
active
in
these
latter
times
;
and
that
they
have
more
prevailed
under
a
Form
of
Godliness
with
poor
simple
souls
to
invalidate
the
Authority
of
Scriptures
,
and
to
deny
Just
fication
of
sinners
by
the
Righteousness
of
Christ
without
them
,
by
a
pretended
Christ
within
them
,
than
ever
they
have
done
,
since
their
Trent-Doctrine
was
established
.
They
have
more
cause
therefore
to
incourage
these
so
far
Proselytes
of
theirs
,
than
thus
to
jeer
them
.
It
is
but
a
just
Diversion
to
put
him
upon
the
reconciling
of
all
the
names
of
the
several
orders
in
his
own
Romish
Catholick
Profession
;
there
he
will
find
work
enough
,
if
he
passes
by
the
names
of
other
Sectaries
.
2.
All
in
S.
3.
is
Calumny
and
slander
,
cast
upon
the
Protestants
;
which
they
blow
off
easily
and
truly
.
1.
They
throw
not
by
that
Scripture
Rule
(
which
they
professe
)
to
take
up
Tradition
without
it
;
They
maintain
not
Scriptures
Letter
their
Rule
.
2.
They
never
denied
Oral-Tradition
of
that
Truth
of
Christ
,
which
is
written
.
3.
They
leave
not
men
to
interpret
Scripture
to
their
fancies
,
but
mainta●n
the
sufficiency
of
Scripture
to
open
it self
to
rational
understanders
of
it
;
all
the
Contradictions
then
suggested
they
detest
.
4.
It
is
a
sin
rightly
charged
upon
Romish
Powers
,
to
punish
any
for
deserting
their
Traditionary
Rule
of
Falshood
,
which
they
recommend
.
And
a
greater
sin
it
is
for
Protestants
to
punish
those
under
them
for
following
the
Scriptures
too
close
,
being
the
Rule
which
themselves
recommended
and
applauded
,
as
the
whole
and
sole
Basis
of
their
Reformation
;
for
they
must
sin
not
only
against
the
Truth
,
but
the
Light
it self
.
And
that
a
Papist
should
charge
this
upon
Protestant
Church-Powers
before
the
Sun
,
if
he
can
prove
,
it
wee
l
say
,
—
Pudet
haec
opprobria
nobis
.
Et
dici
potuisse
.
&
non
potuisse
refelli
.
We
shall
yet
say
,
no
Principle
of
Protestantism
alloweth
this
.
Let
the
guilty
suffer
,
let
the
innocent
go
free
.
This
makes
not
Tradition
any
whit
the
better
,
neither
renders
the
Scripture-Rule
any
whit
the
worse
.
3.
In
the
fourth
Sect
.
He
draweth
sad
consequences
from
his
premises
,
which
we
shall
only
shake
off
from
our
Scripture-Rule
;
whence
his
use
will
be
as
useless
,
as
his
Parergon
.
1.
Protestant
Christians
learn
better
from
the
Scriptures
,
than
to
wreak
their
malice
against
their
Persecuters
;
or
by
numbers
to
involve
nations
in
war
and
blood
.
The
Scripture
Rule
teacheth
them
to
pray
for
those
that
persecute
them
,
and
bless
them
that
curse
them
.
This
is
the
natural
Fruit
of
Scripture
Grace
;
and
made
good
by
multitudes
of
suffering
Christians
:
who
will
heartily
say
Amen
to
that
Petition
,
God
of
his
mercy
avert
such
war
and
blood
from
our
distracted
Nation
.
This
is
a
malicious
insinuation
against
the
Scripture-Rule
:
They
who
own
it
,
abhorr
disobeying
of
a
certain
and
known
legall
Authority
,
and
of
making
Rebellion
,
and
an
unimpowred
sword
the
Defence
of
Truth
.
2.
His
next
insinuation
hereupon
is
to
prudent
Considerers
,
how
much
it
conduceth
to
State-unity
and
peace
,
that
the
Principle
of
conveying
Faith
,
be
built
upon
Sensible
Evidence
,
acknowledgable
by
all
Mankind
,
when
rightly
understood
.
This
in
plain
Terms
is
Romish
Tradition
.
And
hereupon
let
us
a
little
querae
.
1
:
How
many
of
Mankind
,
can
or
do
understand
this
?
2.
Can
they
who
know
it
,
upon
due
comparing
it
with
the
primitive
Doctrine
of
Christ
,
understand
it
otherwise
than
to
be
a
Lie
?
3.
Is
the
way
of
conveying
down
Faith
by
lies
conducible
to
State-Unity
,
and
Peace
?
4.
Why
hath
not
this
Tradition
made
peace
among
those
Popish
Nations
of
Germany
,
Spain
,
France
,
and
Portugal
.
&c.
Who
are
enslaved
to
it
?
Nay
hath
not
this
Jesuitical-Traditionary
Doctrine
been
the
only
cause
of
blood
and
Massacres
in
France
,
&
c
?
The
Scripture
Rule
will
advise
Christian
Rulers
and
States
better
for
keeping
themselves
in
a
prosperous
Unity
and
Peace
:
Psal
.
2
,
12.
Kiss
the
Son
,
lest
he
be
angry
,
&c.
Whatever
worldly
Politicians
say
;
Submission
of
Thrones
and
Powers
to
the
Law
of
the
Prince
of
Peace
in
the
simplicity
of
the
Gospel
,
is
the
only
way
to
have
swords
beaten
into
Plowshares
,
and
Spears
into
pruning
hooks
;
and
to
settle
Peace
in
all
Nations
.
This
digression
hath
been
forced
by
the
Discoursers
Parergon
;
leaving
his
Demonstration
:
whereunto
the
trouble
of
it
is
due
.
3.
In
Sect
.
5.
To
make
amends
,
he
telleth
us
,
The
usefulness
of
this
Parergon
,
serves
to
elucidate
as
it
were
practically
and
experimentally
,
the
certainty
of
Tradition
,
&c.
We
shall
close
up
this
Discourse
with
him
by
some
counter-positions
.
1.
With
the
best
eies
we
have
,
we
can
perceive
no
Elucidation
by
all
that
he
hath
said
of
the
Certainty
of
his
Romish
Tradition
;
nor
any
eies
but
his
own
,
or
such
as
look
with
his
spectacles
,
can
perceive
any
such
thing
:
But
in
truth
he
darkens
knowledge
by
many
vain
words
,
as
any
careful
,
judicious
and
impartial
Reader
will
see
.
2.
The
number
of
the
actual
Deserters
of
the
way
of
natural
Tradition
we
judge
was
none
;
Seeing
constantly
Fathers
to
children
,
did
still
convey
down
their
language
:
but
the
Revolters
from
Apostolical
Trad●tion
were
numerous
,
as
the
very
Scriptures
and
the
next
following
Centuries
do
evidence
.
As
to
the
Deserters
of
Romish
Apostatical
Tradition
,
(
for
this
the
Discourser
must
mean
,
and
he
can
go
no
higher
)
if
they
were
but
few
(
as
he
observeth
)
then
was
fulfilled
that
Prophesie
,
That
all
that
dwell
upon
the
Earth
should
worship
that
Romish
Be●st
,
and
receive
his
mark
,
Rev.
13.
whose
names
were
not
written
in
the
Lambs
book
of
Life
.
Let
him
make
the
best
of
it
.
3.
Protestant
Revolters
from
Rome
,
did
maintain
Christs
Tradition
before
,
though
not
Popish
;
neither
gave
they
their
Interpretations
of
Scripture
,
as
Tradition
misplace
The
Disputer
is
mistaken
.
4.
The
unsavory
urging
of
the
means
to
lessen
Mankinds
Propagation
beneath
that
of
Faith
,
and
greatning
the
means
of
Faiths
Issue
beyond
that
of
Mankind
,
must
nauseate
a
Rational
stomack
that
hath
any
savour
of
Christianity
in
it
:
As
1.
The
numerous
contingencies
hindring
the
propagation
of
mans
nature
,
more
than
of
Faith
.
2.
The
da●ly
decay
of
men
,
by
natural
and
accidental
deaths
,
not
incident
to
Faith
.
3.
The
whole
Nations
into
which
Tradition
hath
and
doth
propagate
it self
&c.
without
one
Deserter
of
it
.
4.
The
many
External
Instruments
for
propagating
Faith
,
when
single
Progenitors
only
continue
their
kind
.
From
all
,
which
he
concludes
the
causes
of
propagating
a
Body
of
Traditionary
Christians
,
are
lesse
needing
any
particular
Providence
,
than
the
keeping
on
Foot
a
Body
of
men
.
Wherefore
they
be
all
roving
Arguments
in
his
account
,
that
are
against
the
Perpetuation
of
his
Tradition
,
and
as
well
may
they
be
against
the
perpetuating
Mankind
;
And
his
answer
is
ready
for
them
,
only
that
they
do
so
.
O
the
blindness
and
efficacious
delusion
which
God
hath
sent
upon
these
seducing
Papists
,
while
they
contend
against
his
Scripture
Truth
!
Can
an
understanding
Christian
beleeve
,
that
there
are
more
Contingencies
,
or
accidents
hindring
mens
propagation
than
Faiths
.
If
thousands
of
accidental
deaths
lessen
the
number
of
men
,
Are
there
not
millions
of
●●ns
in
every
man
which
are
so
many
spiritual
deaths
destroying
faith
?
What
means
the
Man
by
such
wild
expressions
?
Doth
not
also
the
Faith
of
men
dye
with
them
,
as
to
their
being
in
the
world
?
And
besides
them
,
Are
there
not
millions
of
men
in
the
world
surviving
,
who
have
no
Faith
when
multitudes
of
Believers
dye
?
Do
only
single
Progenitors
or
lawful
Fathers
beget
Children
among
the
Papists
?
Are
there
nor
as
many
Adulterous
Parents
with
them
as
Emissaries
who
compass
sea
and
lan●
to
make
Rom●sh
Proselytes
?
Is
Popish
Faith
so
fruitful
by
their
Tradition
?
So
it
may
be
among
Whores
:
But
in
Christs
own
observation
,
it
is
otherwise
,
as
to
the
off-spring
of
true
Faith
;
So
his
question
imports
,
when
the
Son
of
Man
commeth
,
shall
he
find
Faith
in
the
Earth
?
Luk
.
18.8
.
He
doubts
not
to
●●nd
men
enough
;
but
he
foreseeth
●e●
Beleevers
.
What
the
Body
of
Traditionary
Christians
means
,
we
may
know
to
be
a
most
●●me●o●
seed
of
Papists
,
to
whom
he
approp●●ates
that
Title
:
And
yet
that
there
should
be
such
a
vast
number
of
such
corrupt
Beleevers
,
exceeding
all
other
mankind
,
is
most
inc●edible
;
unless
the
Pope
hath
●egotten
all
the
earth
to
him
;
and
then
his
Men
and
his
Beleevers
are
but
equal
;
In
short
,
it
is
little
les●
then
Blasphemy
to
say
,
that
Faith
needs
less
of
particular
Providence
to
produce
it
than
Man
,
seeing
the
most
special
Providence
g●●eth
it
,
and
the
arm
of
God
worketh
it
in
special
chosen
Subjects
,
to
whom
it
is
designed
.
But
what
will
not
a
spirit
of
delusion
utter
against
the
Almighty
?
In
fine
this
sottish
discourse
,
was
sufficiently
uncovered
,
as
to
its
folly
.
S.
1.
Neither
would
we
have
said
any
more
here
,
but
as
provoked
with
his
unsavory
re●terations
of
the
same
:
We
shall
conclude
,
here
is
no
Demonstration
of
Romish
Traditions
Indefectiveness
made
good
.
If
yet
the
Discourse
should
boldly
say
,
that
he
ha●h
done
it
;
It
will
be
answer
enough
in
his
own
kind
to
tell
him
,
That
he
saies
so
.
Enough
of
this
:
We
shall
inquire
further
into
his
second
Demonstration
.
THE
Eighth
Discourse
EXAMINED
.
HErein
he
pretends
a
Demonstration
of
the
Uninterruptedness
of
his
Tradition
,
à
Posteriori
,
or
from
the
Effect
:
Wherein
.
2.
He
sheweth
his
scope
to
shew
the
certainty
of
Faiths
conveiance
guarded
,
and
on
all
sides
Evident
.
S.
1.
2.
He
pretendeth
the
needlesness
of
this
labor
as
to
Protestants
,
S.
2.
3
,
He
layeth
down
the
Effect
which
is
the
Medium
of
his
Demonstration
,
S.
3.
4.
He
offers
the
proof
of
it
,
Ss.
4
,
5.
5.
He
advanceth
his
conclusion
,
S.
6.
We
shall
reply
orderly
.
1.
To
his
aim
or
mark
set
up
,
we
only
say
,
he
will
do
his
cause
right
,
and
play
the
man
,
if
he
hit
it
:
but
we
doubt
his
skill
.
2.
If
his
indeavour
were
needless
upon
the
Protestants
Account
,
he
might
well
have
spared
it
:
but
he
thought
it
not
so
,
whatever
he
saith
;
therefore
he
pursueth
his
work
.
But
why
was
it
needless
as
to
them
?
Have
they
granted
his
Conclusion
?
He
dareth
not
say
so
.
Yet
he
examines
them
upon
some
Interrogatories
,
to
which
he
desireth
them
to
answer
candidly
,
and
so
they
will
.
1.
To
his
fi●st
.
Quaere
they
reply
.
That
the
Doctrine
of
the
Trinity
,
Incarnation
,
and
all
Points
of
sound
Faith
delivered
in
the
Scriptures
,
were
held
in
all
Ages
since
Christ
,
by
Gods
Church
:
Yet
they
have
some
limitations
,
and
Exceptions
to
propound
unto
him
.
1.
That
these
Doctrines
were
held
then
in
the
true
and
genuine
state
of
them
;
not
with
corrupt
glosses
concealed
under
these
terms
,
which
were
various
.
2.
That
in
the
true
and
sound
sense
of
the
Trinity
and
Incarnation
there
is
not
a
full
agree●ent
between
Protestants
and
Papists
.
For
they
differ
about
the
notions
o●
●●rd
and
Image
used
about
the
Trinity
:
an●
how
vastly
they
disagree
about
the
words
being
made
Flesh
,
and
th●
ends
of
the
in●●rnation
of
the
Son
of
God
:
the
Controversies
about
that
Monster
of
Transubstantiation
making
Christs
fle●h
of
bread
,
and
about
the
Mediator
in
his
person
,
natures
,
&c.
maintained
to
this
day
between
them
,
do
s●fficiently
declare
.
3.
Although
Protestan●s
acknowledge
these
doctrines
in
truth
to
be
held
in
the
Church
of
God
,
yet
they
agree
not
that
upon
this
account
alone
,
it
was
truly
called
Gods
Church
;
for
in
word
man●
professed
these
,
and
yet
held
things
destructive
to
them
;
as
among
the
●rent
Anathemas
may
appear
,
that
Rome
doth
at
this
day
.
They
judge
therefore
that
the
T●tle
of
Gods
Church
,
is
truly
given
unto
that
Body
alone
,
which
resigneth
it self
up
unto
Christ
as
th●ir
Head
:
to
be
ruled
by
him
in
doctrine
,
worsh●p
,
and
discipline
,
according
to
his
Evangelical
Law
written
by
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
.
Herein
the
Discourser
will
hardly
acknowledge
an
agreement
with
them
.
2.
To
his
second
quaere
they
say
,
that
these
p●ints
of
Faith
were
taught
by
Fathers
to
Children
,
and
by
the
former
Age
to
the
lattet
:
But
withall
they
say
,
That
all
true
Teachers
,
Fathers
and
others
,
taught
them
these
things
from
the
Scriptures
,
and
du●st
not
imbue
them
with
any
Doctrine
that
was
not
written
:
So
that
Oral
did
but
convey
the
Scriptural
Tra●●tion
:
which
use
of
it
Protestants
did
alwaies
grant
:
And
what
advantage
hath
the
man
by
this
Concession
?
3.
To
his
third
quae●e
,
they
demur
a
little
,
before
they
expresly
answer
.
1.
They
stick
upon
the
notion
of
Virtue
of
Tradition-oral
;
and
they
conceive
,
there
is
both
a
natural
force
of
speech
to
make
known
things
,
and
an
assistent
power
or
virtue
given
it
by
Gods
ord●nance
,
as
it
is
appointed
a
means
to
give
down
the
true
knowledge
of
Christs
doctrine
.
Again
they
stop
upon
those
terms
,
Others
as
well
as
these
;
which
they
think
he
should
mean
of
other
points
of
saving
Faith
,
as
those
of
the
Trinity
and
Incarnation
:
but
they
suspect
him
to
intend
other
points
of
Romish
Faith
,
which
he
should
have
exprest
.
Upon
these
Terms
debated
,
now
they
answer
.
1.
That
they
are
affirmative
in
this
,
That
by
the
natural
virtue
of
speech
natural
matters
of
Truth
are
given
down
to
Posterity
.
2
,
They
assert
that
by
divine
virtue
assisting
,
this
Oral-Tradition
convey●th
down
the
saving
knowledge
of
Christ
from
Father
to
Children
,
in
all
points
of
Truth
revealed
in
the
Scripture
unto
Salvation
.
3.
They
charge
deceit
upon
this
Discourser
in
concealing
his
other
points
,
to
be
brought
down
by
virtue
of
his
Tradition
.
And
question
him
,
why
he
did
not
name
his
other
points
of
Popish
Faith
,
debasing
Scriptures
,
settling
their
Popes
Supremacy
,
their
lye
of
Transubstantiation
,
their
Fable
of
Purgatory
,
&c.
Which
he
insinuates
,
must
uninterruptedly
proceed
from
Christ
,
and
his
Apostles
;
as
the
Doctrine
of
the
Trinity
and
Incarnation
.
4.
They
are
positively
negative
(
however
he
may
not
suspect
them
)
That
the
divine
vertue
assisted
not
the
Tradition
of
any
of
these
Popish
Artic●es
,
or
the
like
,
imported
under
those
other
:
●nd
do
affirm
that
by
the
power
of
Satan
that
first
lyer
and
deceive●
,
all
those
untruths
issuing
from
the
mistery
of
●n●qu●ty
were
powerfully
given
down
to
P●pists
in
O●al-Tradition
contrary
to
●ods
written
word
:
It
being
under
Gods
permissive
,
and
overruling
Provide●ce
as
apt
to
convey
down
Falshood
and
lyes
to
Posterity
,
as
any
Truth
of
God
.
4.
As
to
his
4th
Quaere
about
Connection
between
Cause
and
Effect
.
1.
They
yeeld
under
the
Providence
of
God
constituting
a
nec●ssary
connection
between
subo●dinate
natural
causes
,
and
their
formal
effects
;
as
betwee●
the
Sun
and
light
.
2.
In
voluntary
Causes
and
effects
,
as
Tradition
and
Faith
,
where
God
hath
not
settled
a
necessary
connection
,
they
deny
the
constant
issue
of
such
Effects
from
such
Causes
.
3.
They
yeeld
also
where
the
Truth
of
Christ
was
ever
delivered
,
it
was
ever
received
:
that
is
,
by
them
to
whom
it
was
delivered
effectually
by
the
spirit
of
God
in
such
Tradition
.
4.
They
deny
that
Papists
can
argue
from
any
such
Effect
,
to
such
a
Cause
for
any
point
that
is
in
Controversie
between
them
and
Protestants
;
For
all
meerly
Popish
Points
cannot
be
asserted
,
as
ever
delivered
f●om
Christ
unto
this
day
;
therefore
can
the●
not
be
so
received
.
Jesuitical
impude●●●ay
be
ashamed
to
say
it
.
Whereupon
the
Discourser
,
adds
as
a
subterfuge
,
(
In
case
it
be
a
Point
we
held
ever
delivered
)
Hath
he
been
contending
all
along
for
the
indefectibil●ty
of
Traditionary
Romish
Faith
from
Chr●st
,
as
ever
delivered
,
and
as
ever
received
from
Christ
to
this
day
?
And
now
come
to
shuffle
in
this
job
,
In
case
it
were
by
them
held
so
ever
delivered
?
Is
it
their
holding
it
ever
or
never
delivered
,
that
makes
it
so
?
What
unreasonable
arguing
is
this
?
Are
there
an●
points
of
Faith
that
were
not
at
first
delivered
by
Christ
and
so
ever
drawn
down
from
him
?
Had
any
Church
power
to
make
new
points
of
Faith
in
ages
after
?
How
then
should
any
true
point
of
Faith
be
otherwise
held
,
but
as
ever
delivered
from
Christ
.
To
save
any
more
pains
they
say
.
1.
No
points
of
Faith
controverted
by
Papists
with
Protestants
,
are
ever
or
uninterruptedly
delivered
from
Christ
to
them
at
this
day
;
neither
can
they
be
rationally
so
●eceived
.
They
who
will
be
bl
nd
must
be
blind
.
The
Sun
beam
is
not
clearer
then
this
.
2.
From
all
the
Concessions
of
Protestants
,
it
appears
not
needless
that
he
should
demonstrate
better
the
Indefectibility
of
his
Tradition
.
If
not
,
he
hath
proved
nothing
;
and
so
our
dispute
may
be
well
put
to
an
end
.
As
to
his
suspicion
,
it
is
malitious
folly
:
For
Protestants
know
no
chance
,
nor
Fortune
,
nor
contingency
in
Gods
ordering
means
to
bring
down
the
true
Faith
of
Christ
unto
the
worlds
end
:
but
an
infinite
wise
and
unchangeable
Providence
;
which
hath
ordained
true
and
faithful
Tradition
both
Scriptural
and
oral
to
preserve
the
saving
knowledge
of
Christ
unto
his
chosen
in
the
world
:
which
also
suffereth
and
ordereth
lying
Tradition
to
fascinate
those
unto
perdition
,
who
will
not
receive
the
love
of
the
Truth
,
that
they
might
be
saved
.
But
he
pursueth
his
design
and
method
at
first
intended
,
and
we
shall
closely
follow
him
,
to
try
his
attainments
therein
.
3.
He
proceeds
to
his
Demonstration
from
the
Effect
,
about
which
he
laieth
down
.
1.
His
Medium
or
Ground
of
it
.
S.
3.
—
2.
His
Proof
of
this
,
S
,
4.
5.
—
3.
His
Conclusion
.
S.
6.
The
sum
of
all
which
Sections
,
to
make
the
work
shorter
and
easier
to
be
apprehended
,
may
be
reduced
to
this
form
of
Argument
in
three
propositions
.
That
which
is
the
present
perswasion
of
Trad●tionary
Christians
,
or
,
Romish
Catholicks
,
that
their
faith
hath
descended
from
Christ
and
his
Apostles
uninterruptedly
by
Oral-Tradition
,
is
undoubtedly
a
Truth
,
But
It
is
the
present
perswasion
of
Romish
Catholicks
,
&c.
Ergo
,
This
uninterrupted
descent
of
their
Faith
from
Christ
by
Oral
Tradition
is
undoubtedly
a
Truth
.
1.
In
this
Syllogism
we
have
at
once
a
view
of
all
his
strength
in
this
second
Demonst●ation
:
And
to
cut
the
sinews
of
it
,
we
deny
the
Proposition
as
most
ridiculously
false
:
Had
he
offered
it
only
to
his
blind
Papists
it
might
have
past
for
current
with
them
,
as
other
notorious
falshoods
do
,
g
ven
them
by
Tradition
:
But
to
argue
thus
with
Protestants
or
any
other
reasonab●e
men
,
not
of
his
R
ligion
,
is
to
expose
himself
to
hi●sing
.
For
who
of
them
w
l●
value
the
present
pe●swasion
of
Romish
Catholicks
about
the
uninterruptedness
of
their
Tradition
as
an
undoubted
Truth
?
and
so
it
must
be
,
if
it
be
a
certain
Medium
to
infer
a
true
conc
usision
.
The
Protestants
therefore
deny
his
Proposition
,
whereof
he
labours
not
to
make
the
least
proof
at
all
,
but
beggs
it
as
a
ground
not
to
be
questioned
.
We
dare
not
trust
Popish
perswasions
;
therefore
we
grant
it
not
.
And
untill
he
prove
it
,
his
Demonstration
is
void
,
and
our
work
is
at
stand
.
2.
His
endeavour
is
to
prove
his
Assumption
in
S.
4.
5.
and
that
by
two
Principles
(
as
he
calleth
them
)
which
when
he
hath
done
is
but
to
little
purpose
;
for
we
believe
that
Romish
Catholicks
have
such
a
present
perswasion
without
proof
.
And
the
impossibility
of
the
being
of
this
perswasion
in
them
,
we
grant
,
without
the
existence
of
their
pretended
indeficiency
of
Romish
Tradition
:
But
impossible
it
would
have
been
that
such
a
perswasion
should
be
,
had
the
ever-indifficiency
of
Christs
Doctrine
alone
continued
with
them
.
Yet
we
will
glance
at
his
Principles
,
which
he
thus
laieth
down
.
1.
That
Age
which
holds
her
Faith
delivered
thus
from
the
Apostles
,
neither
can
it self
have
changed
any
thing
in
it
,
nor
know
or
doubt
,
that
any
Age
since
the
Apostles
had
changed
or
innovated
any
thing
therein
.
2.
No
Age
could
innovate
any
thing
,
and
withall
deliver
that
very
thing
to
Posterity
,
as
received
from
Christ
by
continual
Succession
.
Upon
these
he
descants
a
little
to
delude
his
unwary
Reader
;
but
we
shall
a
little
sift
him
.
1.
Are
these
indeed
Principles
?
Then
they
must
be
known
to
men
as
men
,
and
command
their
reason
by
such
light
,
as
they
cannot
but
unreasonably
deny
:
Now
what
man
as
a
meer
Man
regards
the
Faith
of
Christ
either
to
its
being
or
Traduction
?
They
are
no
Principles
to
them
.
2.
What
Ages
doth
this
man
mean
,
that
cannot
change
nor
innovate
Faith
,
so
held
to
be
delivered
from
the
Apostles
?
Surely
they
must
be
successive
Generations
of
Papists
and
these
were
alwaies
fittest
to
prove
their
own
perswasions
.
So
he
plainly
argueth
,
That
the
perswasion
of
Romish
Catholicks
about
indeficiency
of
their
Tradition
must
be
true
,
because
no
Age
of
them
could
change
or
innovate
that
which
was
delivered
of
faith
unto
them
.
This
wil●
do
it
indeed
,
if
such
things
pass
for
Principles
.
3.
We
do
charge
it
on
several
Ages
of
Pap●sts
,
that
hower
de
jure
they
co●ld
not
do
it
;
yet
de
facto
they
have
both
changed
and
innovated
that
Faith
of
Christ
once
delivered
by
the
Apostles
to
the
Saints
in
the
written
Gospel
,
and
withall
have
conveied
it
unto
posterity
,
as
received
from
Christ
by
continued
Succession
.
Several
Centuries
have
declared
it
:
And
this
daies
experience
testifieth
to
it
,
that
their
Teachers
do
perswade
them
,
that
all
their
abominations
in
doctrine
and
worship
,
which
the
Lord
abhorrs
,
and
the
rest
of
the
Christian
world
knoweth
to
be
false
,
are
indefectively
descended
by
Trad●tion
from
Christ
unto
them
.
4.
The
pretence
of
an
Impossibility
that
whole
Ages
should
thus
deceive
and
be
deceived
is
frivolous
;
seeing
the
thing
is
visibly
done
;
as
it
was
also
foretold
,
that
the
world
should
go
after
the
Romish
Beast
,
God
hath
past
that
sentence
upon
those
earthly
m●nded
men
,
who
love
not
the
simple
spiritual
Truth
of
Christ
.
Neither
is
it
rare
for
seared
Consc●ences
to
deliver
falshoo●
for
Truth
against
their
knowledge
.
And
the
s●o●er
they
begin
thus
to
corrupt
their
Off-spring
every
month
ripening
to
a
capacity
of
such
knowledge
,
it
is
the
more
effi●acious
;
To
all
which
Motives
are
not
wanting
to
ingage
unto
their
faction
all
they
can
;
For
the
glory
of
the
world
binds
them
,
which
the
Papal
Interest
doth
so
much
as
it
can
assure
them
of
:
And
in
fine
,
To
hold
contradictions
,
and
tell
lies
for
their
advantage
,
is
nor
are
thing
for
them
,
who
are
the
the
sworn
Vassals
unto
Romish
Tradition
,
against
the
Scriptures
of
God
:
They
must
contradict
themselves
,
who
walk
so
contrary
unto
the
Lord
in
faith
and
practice
.
From
the
premises
then
men
may
see
the
ridiculousness
of
h●s
Principles
.
4.
Yet
he
advanceth
from
these
his
Conclusions
in
S.
6.
Seeing
this
is
the
present
perswasion
of
Romish
Catholicks
that
their
Faith
is
uninterrupte●ly
descended
from
Christ
to
them
,
and
the
ages
of
their
Fore-fathers
could
not
change
or
innovate
it
nor
deliver
it
,
if
innovated
,
as
received
from
Christ
by
continual
succession
;
therefore
the
indefectiveness
of
their
Traditionary
Fai
h
from
Chr●st
must
be
true
:
They
hold
it
descended
to
them
as
such
,
therefore
it
di●
descend
to
them
as
such
.
And
hence
the
Demonstrator
collects
confidently
,
That
no
power
nor
wit
of
man
could
make
their
Faith
now
held
to
be
so
descended
,
but
it
is
having
been
actually
so
descended
:
that
is
,
by
the
only
existence
of
Traditions
indefic●ency
this
present
perswasion
could
be
effected
in
Romish
Catholicks
of
their
faiths
uninterrupted
descent
from
the
Apostles
:
For
they
hold
that
the
Church
,
(
which
is
their
Romish
)
never
failed
in
Faith
.
Unto
all
which
we
reply
in
shorr
,
and
leave
it
to
be
weighed
in
an
equal
ballance
.
1.
His
proposition
is
denied
,
Popish
perswasion
argueth
not
the
indefectiveness
of
their
Tradition
.
2.
His
Principles
are
vain
and
begg'd
,
by
which
he
makes
good
his
Assumption
.
His
Inference
is
the
same
with
his
medium
.
They
hold
their
Faith
descended
to
them
as
such
,
therefore
it
did
descend
to
them
as
such
.
4.
Although
the
Power
and
wit
of
man
,
could
not
have
made
them
hold
their
Faith
to
be
so
ever
descended
to
them
,
unless
it
had
been
so
actually
descended
;
Yet
some
Power
and
wit
of
the
Devils
added
to
it
,
under
the
r●ghteous
judgment
of
God
,
could
easily
delude
them
,
and
make
them
hold
that
,
which
was
not
true
.
5.
Their
tenaciousness
of
their
Romish
Churches
never
failing
in
the
Faith
of
Christ
,
is
the
grand
delusion
by
which
the
old
Serpent
hath
beguiled
them
into
their
obstinate
and
wilful
erring
by
its
Tradition
.
Her
Apostasie
is
so
notorious
that
if
the
Scripture
be
the
word
of
God
,
she
cannot
be
the
Church
of
Christ
.
6.
We
conclude
from
all
,
that
the
Discourser●
Demonstration
●s
sappless
and
irrational
,
concluding
nothing
as
he
pretended
,
which
we
leave
to
the
judgment
of
the
most
acute
Christian
Readers
.
Blind
Papists
may
beleeve
him
and
perish
by
him
;
but
such
whose
eies
are
he●led
with
Christs
eye-salve
,
will
easily
perceive
,
there
is
neither
Truth
nor
Reason
in
it
.
So
that
we
hold
still
.
-
1.
Romish
Oral-Tradition
of
their
Trent-faith
is
not
uninterruptedly
descended
from
Christ
and
his
Apostles
.
-
2.
Scriptural
Tradition
of
the
Gospel-faith
,
is
indefectively
descended
from
Christ
and
his
Apostles
unto
us
.
He
next
proceeds
from
Demonstration
unto
Church-proof
of
the
indefectiveness
of
his
Tradition
.
THE
Ninth
Discourse
EXAMINED
.
IN
this
Discourse
the
Author
endeavours
to
better
his
Demonstration
by
the
strength
of
the
Churches
Testimony
un●o
his
Tradition
,
wherein
occurre
unto
observation
.
1.
A
preface
unto
his
Discouse
.
S.
1.
2.
A
discovery
of
the
Churches
Humane
Authority
.
S.
2
,
3
,
4.
3.
A
narration
of
her
div●ne
Assistances
in
testifying
,
S.
5
,
6
,
7.
&c.
1.
In
his
preface
he
personates
an
objecter
,
who
should
say
,
that
by
all
his
former
discourses
,
(
they
being
but
Nature
)
a
Heathen
by
his
natural
wit
may
become
a
good
Christian
:
To
which
hav
ng
in
his
loose
fashion
returned
;
He
t●lls
us
it
was
out
of
his
road
,
and
only
that
hence
he
might
take
his
rise
to
shew
how
far
Christian
Trad●tion
is
strengthned
above
the
greatest
humane
Testimony
,
&c.
Not
to
repeat
his
many
words
,
we
shall
only
note
somethings
in
his
reply
.
1.
Seeing
he
wonders
what
else
should
be
supernaturality
,
but
supernatural
motives
laid
before
natural
men
,
to
be
considered
and
received
by
natural
faculties
;
we
cannot
but
wonder
that
such
a
Master
in
his
Church
should
be
so
ignorant
of
Supernaturality
,
or
a
state
of
Grace
above
nature
;
Nicodemus
was
not
so
dark
in
this
business
.
We
therefore
shall
shortly
suggest
.
1.
That
nothing
beneath
Regeneration
,
Joh
.
3.3
.
can
put
a
man
above
the
state
of
nature
,
or
make
him
supernatural
or
spiritual
.
2.
The
objective
Power
of
supernatural
motives
,
is
not
of
it self
sufficient
to
regenerate
,
being
apprehended
only
by
the
scantling
of
natural
reason
:
but
the
Almighty
Spirit
of
God
must
come
upon
souls
to
make
them
be
born
Spirit
of
Spirit
,
to
effect
this
.
Joh
.
3.6
.
Moral
perswasion
may
make
almost
a
Christian
,
as
Agrippa
was
,
but
not
a
Christian
truly
and
throughout
.
3.
No
extraordinary
Inspiration
is
expected
for
each
particular
man
,
as
to
this
effect
,
but
the
Ordinary
work
of
Gods
spirit
by
his
word
,
which
is
so
far
from
unraveling
the
order
of
Gods
best
Providence
in
bringing
men
to
salvation
;
that
nothing
doth
more
magnifie
and
confirm
it
.
And
if
this
be
the
very
Notion
of
Fanatickness
,
let
our
souls
be
under
that
Character
,
to
which
the
Discourser
must
come
if
ever
he
be
saved
,
although
now
he
jeers
it
.
4.
All
this
is
out
of
his
road
,
(
as
he
saith
)
and
indeed
it
is
as
many
other
things
,
needless
and
inapt
unto
his
present
business
;
but
he
excuseth
it
,
that
it
was
but
to
take
his
rise
,
to
shew
Traditions
strength
by
the
humane
Authority
and
div●ne
Assistances
of
his
Church
:
He
were
best
to
beware
,
lest
(
as
the
Schollar
)
he
mount
on
the
wrong
side
of
the
horse
,
and
tumble
over
.
He
offers
to
rise
to
the
Assistances
of
the
Holy
Ghost
,
which
he
saith
are
built
upon
Perfections
of
will
in
the
Faithful
,
or
on
Virtues
,
the
effects
properly
attributed
to
that
Divine
Person
How
?
The
Assistances
of
the
Holy
Gho●●
built
upon
mens
wills
,
and
its
own
Effects
?
He
attempts
his
rise
most
sillily
,
we
judge
the
Effects
of
the
Spirit
to
be
built
upon
his
Person
,
and
not
this
,
c●…
its
Operation
upon
them
;
and
man●…
will
to
be
the
subject
of
the
spirits
infl●ence
,
and
not
the
Basis
on
which
it
〈…〉
built
.
This
fore-bodes
but
a
bad
expedition
;
yet
we
shall
try
what
he
will
do
Although
the
sum
of
all
expressed
here
hath
been
handled
heretofore
.
2.
Before
he
declareth
these
Assista●…ces
of
the
Holy
Spirit
,
he
adventureth
to
she●…
first
the
Churches
Humane
Authority
for
testifying
,
to
exceed
any
other
in
the
world
;
which
he
doth
by
comparing
it
with
the
vast
number
of
Turks
,
Testifiers
of
Tradition
from
their
Mahomet
;
in
Sect
.
2
,
3
,
&
4th
.
This
may
be
shortly
presented
to
one
view
in
this
form
of
Argument
.
If
the
humane
force
of
the
Churches
Testimony
that
their
Faith
descended
from
Christ
unto
them
by
indefective
Tradition
,
farre
exceed
the
witness
of
the
Turks
concerning
their
Mahomets
existence
,
then
its
Authority
is
to
be
beleeved
before
theirs
,
But
The
humane
force
of
the
Churches
Testimony
far
exceeds
that
of
the
Turks
,
Therefore
,
The
Churches
witness
is
much
more
to
be
beleeved
,
&c.
The
Assumption
is
expresly
laid
down
,
averred
by
the
Author
S.
2.
The
Proposition
is
supplied
to
form
the
Argument
;
The
proof
of
the
Assumption
is
given
,
S.
3.
And
the
Conclusion
drawn
.
S.
4.
Now
having
the
whole
matter
so
laid
forth
before
us
,
we
shall
both
animadvert
upon
and
answer
to
the
whole
Argument
.
1.
When
he
urgeth
the
Churches
Testimony
we
must
understand
him
speaking
of
the
Romish
Church
,
whose
Authority
he
maintains
.
2.
We
note
also
that
he
speaks
not
of
this
Church
,
as
Such
,
but
only
of
them
as
Men
;
for
here
he
urgeth
only
their
humane
Testimony
.
3.
We
wonder
at
the
Mans
artificial
Logick
in
this
,
as
in
other
places
,
to
prove
circularly
Idem
per
Idem
:
Elsewhere
he
tells
us
,
that
his
infallible
and
Indefective
Tradition
only
can
make
men
fit
witnesses
in
our
present
controversie
,
and
here
he
urgeth
Humane
Testimony
to
make
good
indefectiveness
of
his
Tradition
;
So
he
may
make
us
giddy
by
rounding
us
in
a
circle
;
but
rather
then
so
,
we
will
stand
still
,
and
m●ke
a
retrograde
motion
in
denying
the
whole
form
of
his
Argument
,
as
foolish
and
ridiculous
,
not
shewing
him
to
be
the
Man
,
which
he
would
seem
to
be
:
In
the
next
help
of
his
Assistances
,
we
shall
see
him
in
the
same
fault
.
4.
To
the
matter
of
his
Argument
,
we
deny
his
Assumption
,
That
the
Huma●e
Authority
of
his
Churches
Test
mony
f●r
their
Tradition
,
doth
far
exceed
the
Testimony
of
the
Turks
for
the●r
Tradition
about
the
Existence
of
th●ir
Mahomet
:
For
as
men
they
are
equally
sinners
,
and
may
equally
be
deceived
and
deceive
.
So
were
Jews
and
Gentiles
.
He
hath
no
cause
therefore
to
charge
Protestants
as
unjust
to
grant
that
to
a
body
of
Turks
,
which
their
Passion
makes
them
question
,
and
even
deny
to
a
Church
of
Christians
;
for
here
he
speaks
of
his
Church
,
not
as
Christian
,
but
as
Humane
;
only
as
they
are
men
and
not
Christians
.
Moreover
the
Protestants
do
yield
the
same
to
both
;
That
under
the
just
judgement
of
God
the
Mahometans
may
maintain
their
Trad●tion
o●
Mahomets
Existence
indefectively
;
but
not
as
des●ended
from
Go●
.
And
no
lesse
under
Gods
sen●ence
of
justice
may
the
Papists
convey
the
Tradition
of
their
false
faith
,
and
●dolat●ons
worship
indefect
vely
to
the
r
own
per●ition
:
but
not
●s
descended
from
Christ
.
He
must
therefore
prove
what
he
averts
,
before
that
his
con
lusion
will
get
credit
.
5.
As
to
his
proof
,
S.
3.
It
is
but
an
empty
sound
,
to
which
we
ret●rn
.
1.
The
credibil
ty
of
witnesses
depends
more
upon
the
Quality
,
than
the
Q●antity
of
Testifiers
,
both
for
matters
of
Faith
and
of
Fact
.
One
Elijah
testifying
unto
Gods
Truth
,
is
of
more
value
than
the
Test
of
4●0
Priests
for
Baal
:
Numbers
therefore
will
not
help
h
m
against
Truth
.
2.
Suppose
there
were
vast
multitudes
,
whom
the
Apostle●
and
Disciples
converted
in
many
distant
Nati●ns
,
and
there
were
but
an
han●ful
o●
men
about
Mecha
,
and
some
other
places
where
Mahomet
conquered
and
pl●nted
his
Doctrine
;
the
Turks
will
tell
him
,
t●at
the
Apostles
converted
them
to
be
Christians
,
and
not
to
be
Papists
:
Neither
did
any
of
them
give
testimony
unto
Popish
Tradition
:
And
also
that
as
many
of
theirs
,
saw
their
Mahomets
existence
as
of
those
multitudes
converted
,
who
saw
Christ
in
the
flesh
.
The
Discourser
were
best
to
provide
an
answer
for
them
.
3.
It
is
more
than
probable
,
that
it
was
easier
for
a
single
company
of
Arabians
,
and
Syrians
to
conspire
in
a
lye
for
Mahomet
,
than
it
was
for
such
a
multitude
converted
,
as
suckt
in
Christianity
at
first
,
to
conspire
in
a
lye
for
Christ
;
Nay
we
say
they
did
not
,
they
durst
not
,
yet
this
hinders
not
,
but
that
it
was
as
easie
for
a
multitude
of
Popish
Fore-fathers
as
they
were
men
,
to
conspire
to
a
lye
as
much
as
Arabians
and
Syrians
,
as
they
are
such
:
We
see
no
difference
in
this
Case
.
4
,
As
to
his
repeated
sensations
to
know
Christs
Doctrin
,
we
say
no
more
but
this
,
that
the
Turks
sensations
may
be
as
good
and
as
quick
,
and
as
oft
repeated
about
their
fabulous
doctrins
of
Mahomet
,
as
the
Papists
in
reiterating
their
many
fables
in
their
Religion
unto
their
Posterity
:
And
if
so
,
this
Argument
of
sensation
(
wherewith
he
nauseates
his
Readers
)
is
little
worth
.
The
Turks
Testimony
for
the
Traditions
of
his
Mahomet
,
may
be
as
firm
as
the
humane
Testimony
of
the
Romish
Church
,
for
their
Popish
Tradition
given
down
to
this
day
.
However
we
will
be
no
Umpires
between
them
.
Let
them
make
good
their
Authority
one
against
another
;
They
will
joyn
issue
at
last
:
For
their
Traditions
will
destroy
them
.
See
the
strength
of
the
Humane
Authority
of
his
Church
for
his
Tradition
.
6.
From
this
exceeding
Humane
Authority
of
his
Church
(
having
lasht
frantick
and
stark
mad
Opiniasters
,
who
deny
it
)
he
concludeth
no
greater
evidence
can
be
to
ascertain
the
conveiance
of
their
Faith
from
Christs
time
unto
them
.
Unto
the
support
whereof
he
ingageth
Scripture
and
Metaphysicks
,
S.
4.
We
need
trouble
our selves
about
this
;
for
the
premises
being
false
,
the
Conclusion
must
fall
;
yet
but
to
glance
.
1.
It
is
no
strange
thing
for
Frantick
and
mad
men
to
think
all
others
like
themselves
.
Surely
if
this
man
were
master
of
his
reason
,
he
must
needs
see
the
weakness
of
his
Argument
,
and
unreasonableness
of
his
conclusion
;
and
not
cast
firebrands
at
his
opponents
;
and
say
they
are
mad
.
Himself
will
prove
the
Opiniaster
.
2.
Is
there
no
greater
Evidence
of
their
indefective
Tradition
than
the
Humane
Authority
of
their
Church
?
Why
then
doth
he
add
the
Assistances
of
the
Holy
Ghost
as
greater
.
So
he
seems
to
advance
his
reasoning
from
that
as
the
less
and
lower
unto
those
helps
as
better
and
higher
.
3.
What
his
Metaphysicks
do
demonstrate
of
the
perfect
method
and
waies
of
essential
Wisdome
,
in
laying
this
indefect●ve
Tradition
,
as
such
a
means
(
unto
mans
salvation
,
that
all
Gods
other
preservation
of
natural
things
in
their
kinds
,
scarce
deserves
the
name
of
a
Providence
in
comparison
of
that
;
We
must
desire
him
to
shew
us
,
before
we
can
see
it
.
Our
M●taphysicks
re●ch
not
th●t
Mistery
of
Salvation
.
But
perhaps
he
is
Hyper-Hyperph●sic●l
.
4.
How
he
brings
in
Scripture
by
Head
and
shoulders
,
to
help
the
humane
Authority
of
his
Churches
Testimony
for
the
indefectiveness
of
his
Tradition
,
it
is
st●ange
to
us
;
And
how
he
ingageth
the
Lord
Jesus
,
Joh
.
3
,
16.
Matth
.
6.26
.
To
adv●nce
his
Tradition
together
with
Gods
sp●r●t
in
the
Apostle
,
1
Cor
.
9.9
.
and
in
David
that
holy
Meditator
on
Go●
L●w
.
Ps.
93.5
.
Where
his
vulgar
Transl●tion
corru●ts
the
Text
too
,
and
in
stead
of
Thy
Testimonies
O
Lord
are
very
sure
,
do
render
it
,
Thy
Testimonies
are
made
too
much
credible
.
It
may
astonish
sober
and
understand
ng
Readers
:
For
what
hath
Gods
love
in
giving
his
only
beg●tten
Son
to
love
sinners
,
or
,
his
Care
over
his
Children
,
more
than
over
Fowls
and
Oxen
,
to
do
with
Romish
Tradition
,
which
is
a
Lye
,
and
contrad●cts
Scripture-Truth
?
The
Lord
abhorrs
it
.
And
did
David
ever
th●nk
th●t
the
Testimonies
of
God
,
were
Popish
Trad●tions
?
Or
,
did
he
prophesie
of
them
?
Never
did
man
more
grosly
abuse
,
and
misapply
Scripture
than
this
.
If
this
be
his
Church-Traditional-Interpretation
;
Reason
must
loath
it
.
But
the
best
is
,
he
giveth
his
quotations
in
Latin
,
that
the
vulgar
should
not
understand
them
.
Here
we
have
the
close
of
his
Churches
humane
Authority
,
testifying
to
his
Tradition
.
Let
this
piece
of
Latin
answer
his
,
Traditiones
&
ineptiae
Pontificiae
incredibiles
factae
sunt
nimis
.
3.
He
proceeds
to
shew
those
Assistances
of
the
Holy
Spirit
superadded
to
nature
,
given
to
his
Church
,
which
he
leavs
to
be
scanned
by
the
leasurely
thoughts
of
Attentive
considerers
,
S
5.
We
wish
all
the
leasure
and
attentiveness
unto
the
Intelligent
considerers
of
him
;
the
more
they
be
,
they
will
cast
him
in
this
point
of
his
Assistances
,
which
we
leave
to
Trial
.
But
in
the
interim
he
is
guilty
of
the
crime
again
of
proving
Idem
per
Idem
.
Must
his
Tradition
testifie
to
those
Assistances
to
make
them
such
,
or
else
they
are
false
?
And
the●
must
these
Assistances
testifie
to
the
truth
and
perpetuity
of
his
Tradition
?
If
this
be
good
Logick
;
The
Discourser
will
carry
all
before
him
:
But
men
will
laugh
at
him
for
such
reasoning
;
much
more
may
understanding
Christians
have
him
in
Derision
.
And
indeed
this
is
enough
to
answer
to
the
end
of
this
Discourse
:
But
least
he
clamour
,
that
we
do
not
hear
him
out
,
we
shall
consider
what
follows
.
1.
In
general
,
S.
6.
He
asserts
,
the
Effect
wrought
by
these
assistances
,
in
his
witnesses
,
to
be
veracity
,
beyond
all
others
,
who
have
not
the
same
:
Now
to
leave
out
his
bombast
stuffing
of
Phantasms
,
&c.
I
shall
cast
his
Assertion
by
adding
a
Proposition
to
it
into
this
form
of
Argument
.
If
Popish
Christians
by
grace
are
far
more
fixt
to
Veracity
,
than
others
not
imbued
with
those
Heavenly
Tenets
(
who
yet
naturally
speak
Truth
,
if
design
hinder
not
;
yea
even
Fools
and
Drunkards
)
then
a
multitude
of
them
incomparably
exceeds
in
point
of
testifying
the
same
number
of
others
,
unfortified
by
Christs
Doctrine
.
But
Popish
Christians
are
far
more
fixt
to
veracity
by
Grace
than
others
,
&c.
Ergo
,
These
Popish
Christians
must
exceed
in
point
of
testifying
unto
their
Tradition
.
This
is
the
general
sum
.
There
is
no
wrong
done
to
him
by
forming
his
discourse
thus
.
It
is
true
Popish
here
is
added
to
Christians
;
for
such
only
he
can
intend
,
seeing
he
denieth
such
Assistances
to
any
Christians
out
of
his
Church
:
and
yet
he
deludes
his
Readers
under
the
general
notions
of
Christians
,
as
if
his
witnesses
were
all
professed
Christians
.
This
by
the
way
To
the
Argument
,
1.
Seeing
the
Proposition
is
Hypothetical
,
including
many
particulars
,
though
we
may
grant
it
in
the
whole
;
yet
several
things
supposed
by
him
,
and
included
in
it
,
are
false
;
As
1.
That
it
is
natural
for
every
man
to
speak
Truth
,
if
d●sign
hinder
not
.
True
it
is
,
man
was
created
Truth
in
Gods
Image
,
and
so
did
necessarily
speak
truth
:
But
after
the
Father
of
lyes
had
deceived
him
,
and
he
was
fallen
from
the
Image
of
God
,
Every
man
became
a
lye
;
and
naturally
speaks
not
Truth
but
falshood
,
as
their
Father
doth
;
and
that
from
the
womb
without
design
.
2.
As
to
his
instance
in
Fools
and
Drunkards
speaking
Truth
without
artifice
.
Let
his
Popish
witnesses
be
like
them
or
go
beyond
them
,
he
gains
little
by
it
;
for
those
witless
Creatures
speak
no
truth
of
God
at
all
,
with
which
we
have
to
do
.
And
what
Truth
they
do
bewray
,
it
is
out
of
weakness
or
wickedness
;
and
let
the
Authority
then
of
such
advance
the
veracity
of
Popish
Testifiers
,
so
much
as
may
be
,
(
for
with
those
he
doth
compare
them
.
)
And
indeed
they
will
prove
spiritual
Fools
,
and
Drunkards
all
.
Whence
may
be
judged
easily
,
what
truth
they
will
testifie
for
Christ
.
In
a
word
if
Design
may
hinder
men
from
speaking
truth
,
none
are
more
to
be
suspected
than
Popish
witnesses
,
whose
Religion
hath
been
carried
on
from
the
first
Defection
to
this
day
upon
Papal
Designs
,
most
inconsistent
with
the
Faith
of
the
Gospel
.
2.
But
letting
go
the
Proposition
,
we
deny
his
Assumption
,
Pop●sh
Christians
are
not
far
more
fixt
to
Veracity
by
their
Tenets
,
or
pretended
Grace
,
than
other
men
not
imbued
with
them
;
for
they
may
be
imbued
with
better
.
Were
there
nothing
but
their
own
Testimony-work
opened
about
this
,
a
clearer
Demonstration
,
cannot
be
given
to
prove
the
Averseness
of
Popish
witnesses
to
Veracity
,
as
to
declaring
Christs
pure
Doctrine
and
the
way
of
his
Salvation
.
This
therefo●e
must
be
proved
by
the
Discourser
,
or
else
his
witness
is
not
worth
a
straw
.
2.
In
special
he
laboureth
to
prove
this
Veracity
of
his
Testifiers
,
by
his
formentioned
assistances
of
the
Holy
Ghost
,
whereof
he
giveth
an
account
in
all
the
sequel
of
this
discourse
;
numbring
many
.
1.
In
S.
7.
The
first
Assistance
to
Veracity
in
his
Witnesses
(
as
he
saith
)
is
the
cure
of
Original
Corruption
in
them
by
Grace
,
so
that
they
incline
not
to
the
undue
love
of
Creatures
,
nor
the
injuring
of
Gods
ten
Comm●ndements
;
But
it
implants
in
their
hearts
an
over-powring
Love
of
Supreme
spiritual
Goods
,
which
leaveth
their
natural
disposition
to
Truth
,
free
to
do
its
Effect
,
and
renders
needless
,
that
crafty
way
of
design
,
&c.
1.
Here
we
must
note
,
that
this
is
but
Actum
agere
,
to
say
over
the
same
thing
again
;
for
this
he
had
ascr●bed
unto
his
Tradi●ionary
Christians
before
.
Needless
therefore
is
it
so
to
repeat
it
:
there
is
enough
there
answered
to
it
.
2.
Though
we
grant
the
power
of
Grace
sufficient
to
take
off
hearts
from
the
love
of
creatures
,
and
to
fix
hearts
upon
the
love
of
spiritual
goods
;
Yet
we
deny
this
Effect
wrought
upon
Popish
Witnesses
.
3.
It
is
apparent
,
that
they
have
done
the
greatest
inj●ry
to
known
rational
,
Orders
,
even
the
Ten
Commandements
,
laid
for
the
subsistence
of
the
Universal
well-being
of
M●nkind
;
that
they
have
excluded
the
second
Command
forbidding
their
Image
worship
,
and
turned
the
whole
Law
from
the
Spirituality
of
it
to
become
meerly
literal
and
external
,
as
the
Pharisees
did
by
their
carnal
glosses
.
4.
As
to
design
,
it
hath
been
said
and
we
say
it
again
,
The
whole
Popish
Religion
since
the
Roman
Empire
,
was
changed
from
Temporal
to
Spiritual
,
hath
been
carried
on
meerly
upon
the
Papal
Design
.
Histories
proclaim
it
against
all
Contradiction
,
that
the
Pope
by
his
Religious
Emissaries
hath
enhanced
K●ngdoms
,
and
brought
the
powers
of
the
Earth
under
to
promote
his
worldly
designs
;
Hereupon
their
prosperity
became
one
of
the
great
Characters
of
the
True
Church
:
The
Mystery
of
Jesuitism
hath
revealed
much
of
this
.
These
witnesses
then
are
more
to
be
suspected
than
other
men
:
Neither
are
their
Natures
by
all
they
hold
,
set
free
unto
Veracity
.
This
Assistance
then
is
nothing
,
the
Holy
Ghost
will
not
own
it
.
Moreover
,
were
this
a
fit
place
to
ingage
upon
a
corrupt
passage
here
used
,
it
should
be
made
appear
,
that
Grace
doth
not
only
leave
mans
natural
disposition
free
to
veracity
,
but
makes
a
reall
change
in
mans
nature
from
a
Lye
into
Truth
.
Let
it
pass
here
.
2.
The
next
supernatural
Assistance
unto
the
Veracity
of
his
Testifiers
,
is
in
S.
8.
by
him
made
to
be
supernatural
Motives
of
Eternal
goods
and
harms
,
subjected
to
mens
hopes
and
fears
,
much
more
powerful
than
natural
to
oblige
unto
Veracity
in
natural
matters
,
which
the
sufferings
of
the
Martyrs
in
all
ages
declare
;
therefore
his
witnesses
having
such
motives
,
must
needs
speak
truth
.
1.
That
this
is
a
supernatural
Assistance
objectively
and
externally
to
some
,
who
may
have
an
impression
of
it
from
Gods
spirit
,
may
be
granted
.
2.
But
why
doth
the
Discourser
weary
us
with
his
Battisms
,
to
tumble
over
the
same
things
so
often
?
The
force
of
this
hath
been
repulst
before
.
3.
We
deny
that
these
motives
have
prevailed
with
his
Popish
witnesses
to
speak
Truth
for
Christ
:
For
their
Trent-Canons
injoyn
many
lies
and
fables
instead
of
Gospel-Truth
:
Whatever
force
therefore
those
motives
may
have
upon
such
,
who
duely
receive
them
,
to
perswade
them
unto
veracity
,
they
have
had
none
upon
those
Popish
Testees
;
natural
Tests
concerning
matters
of
Fact
are
much
mo●e
true
.
The
inward
work
of
the
spirit
is
that
only
which
makes
men
to
speak
truth
for
God
:
Neither
Heaven
nor
Hell
will
perswade
without
this
.
3.
In
S.
9.
He
giveth
us
to
consider
another
supernatural
Assistance
unto
his
Testifiers
for
Tradition
,
which
is
the
ingaging
of
them
unto
veracity
by
the
Sacraments
of
the
Church
,
held
to
have
been
instituted
by
Christ
himself
.
Now
if
oaths
and
other
Ceremonies
,
do
keep
natural
men
to
their
Trust
which
are
made
by
them
;
how
much
more
must
the
Sacraments
of
Christ
,
both
general
to
all
Christians
,
and
special
to
Officers
,
oblige
all
not
to
prevaricate
from
the
Faith
held
,
nor
belye
their
Fore-fathers
,
nor
betray
their
Deposition
?
1.
We
have
had
this
help
also
to
Tradition
once
before
pressed
,
whereunto
answer
enough
was
made
.
Yet
we
are
put
to
it
once
again
.
2.
These
Sacraments
which
are
Christs
,
are
indeed
supernatural
external
means
,
ingag●ng
men
to
be
Truth
,
speak
Truth
,
and
do
Truth
as
unto
God
;
but
these
may
be
used
(
as
some
Papists
themselves
confess
)
without
the
Assistance
or
Cooperation
of
the
Holy
Ghost
.
And
in
such
case
they
do
indeed
de
jure
oblige
men
to
speak
truth
,
but
not
de
facto
;
for
many
use
falshood
,
who
do
receive
them
,
3.
The
supernatural
virtue
of
these
also
,
is
peculiar
only
to
those
two
Sacraments
,
which
the
Lord
himself
instituted
,
viz.
Baptisme
and
the
Lords
supper
,
(
whatever
Papists
do
hold
otherwise
)
For
he
had
no
more
;
they
have
made
the
rest
;
which
being
of
humane
Institution
,
are
no
Assistances
of
the
Ghost
.
5.
The
Corruption
which
they
have
made
in
Christs
own
Sacraments
by
adding
to
Baptism
,
and
taking
away
half
from
his
Supper
,
together
with
the
addition
of
five
other
Sacraments
appointed
to
be
peculiar
to
several
Conditions
and
Orders
men
(
which
the
Lord
never
intended
)
are
all
ineptae
Tesserae
,
very
unseemly
pledges
to
oblige
men
to
Veracity
,
being
Falshood
themselves
.
5.
These
may
by
the
efficacious
workings
of
Satan
,
ingage
souls
not
to
prevaricate
from
their
Faith
held
(
though
false
)
nor
belye
their
Fore-Fathers
,
but
take
for
truth
all
that
they
have
told
them
(
though
nothing
but
Fables
)
nor
to
betray
their
Depositum
or
Trust
whatever
it
be
.
But
what
is
all
this
to
Veracity
?
We
can
tell
him
,
that
his
Sacrament
of
the
Altar
was
used
to
obl●ge
some
of
his
Profession
to
be
true
to
their
Trust
in
●onceal●ng
Powder-plots
for
execuitng
most
barbarous
and
unheard
of
Massa●res
.
Was
this
to
ingage
unto
Veracity
?
The
good
Lord
keep
poor
Souls
from
being
deluded
,
by
such
deceits
of
these
supernatural
Assistances
.
Procul
,
Proculite
,
Profani
.
4.
In
S.
10.
He
suggesteth
this
among
his
supernatural
Assistances
:
That
Christian
Fathers
(
that
is
,
Popish
)
cannot
misteach
their
Children
unreceived
doctrine
for
received
,
contrary
to
their
own
knowledge
;
and
that
without
the
least
good
to
themselves
,
to
debar
them
Heaven
and
send
them
unto
Hell
gratis
.
Which
could
not
enter
into
the
most
depraved
nature
to
harm
another
without
any
good
to
himself
.
Besides
their
Sanctity
and
number
and
Chr●sts
Law
of
Charity
with
them
,
will
not
suffer
them
to
do
such
a
thing
,
but
keep
them
to
Veracity
.
1.
We
have
here
another
Crambe-recoction
,
but
we
must
labour
to
digest
it
,
and
rid
it
off
;
that
it
offend
not
too
much
.
2.
Is
this
a
Supernatural
Assistance
to
deny
,
that
wh●ch
could
not
enter
into
the
most
depraved
nature
to
do
,
even
to
harm
another
without
any
good
unto
ones
self
?
What
doth
the
man
mean
by
this
?
Surely
his
Super-naturality
is
become
very
low
.
3.
We
question
the
Sanctity
of
Popish
Fore-Fathers
,
(
as
we
have
just
cause
to
do
)
and
of
making
Heaven
their
first
Love
,
and
of
their
looking
on
Spiritual
goods
,
as
their
main
concern
.
We
must
see
their
progeny
,
who
have
received
their
Faith
from
them
,
walk
in
more
spiritual
waies
,
before
we
can
trust
this
report
.
Neither
doth
their
number
avail
with
us
;
for
the
most
may
be
the
worst
,
as
hath
been
already
declared
.
4.
Christ's
Law
indeed
is
the
Law
of
charity
,
which
when
written
in
hearts
,
inableth
▪
them
to
love
Neighbours
,
and
Children
in
their
order
;
neither
will
it
suffer
them
to
debar
any
from
Heaven
,
or
to
send
them
to
Hell
gratis
:
But
in
Idolatrous
souls
,
though
Parents
,
no
such
law
is
written
;
but
being
deceived
themselves
they
have
also
deceived
their
Ch
ldren
,
and
have
barr'd
them
out
of
Heaven
and
sent
them
to
Hell
gratis
.
This
hath
been
shewed
already
:
And
so
it
may
be
still
with
them
that
follow
lying
Tradition
.
Quantum
,
Quantum
?
O
how
great
is
this
supernatural
Assistance
?
Miserable
children
of
miserable
Parents
so
misguided
.
5.
In
S.
11.
He
adds
another
Assistance
as
Supernatural
unto
Veracity
given
to
his
Testifiers
of
Tradition
,
and
that
is
,
the
great
Recommends
,
which
Christian
Doctrine
had
received
from
Fore-Fathers
;
both
by
the
Faithful
transmission
of
its
serious
import
,
the
Universality
,
conceited
wisedom
,
goodness
&c.
of
the
Recommenders
:
In
comparison
of
which
all
Recommendation
of
Natural
or
Civil
Truth
,
doth
lev●tate
like
an
inconsiderable
Fe●ther
or
Air
.
These
Recommends
then
must
keep
them
to
speak
truth
.
1.
As
to
this
may
we
mind
the
Discourser
,
these
Recommends
are
not
in
his
terms
of
the
Method
of
delivering
by
speech
,
but
only
of
Christian
Doctrine
,
which
is
the
matter
delivered
,
and
was
waved
heretofore
.
2.
These
Recommends
at
highest
,
were
but
from
men
,
whose
Universality
,
conceited
wisdome
and
goodness
in
speaking
for
Tradition
,
are
very
questionable
.
How
then
comes
this
to
be
a
supernatural
Assistance
to
Veracity
?
3.
Whatever
this
Recommendation
be
,
it
hath
not
kept
Romish-Tradition-Deli
,
verers
unto
Truth
;
for
they
have
given
down
deceits
and
Falshood
from
Fathers
to
Children
:
therefore
it
hath
been
no
help
unto
Veracity
as
to
them
.
4.
If
the
H●ghest
Recommends
may
fix
unto
Truth
,
we
shall
give
the
Discourser
to
consider
the
Recommends
of
God
himself
given
unto
Scripture-Tradition
,
Jer
.
23.28
.
in
comparison
of
the
vast
poize
and
weight
whereof
all
the
Recommendation
mentioned
by
him
,
lev●tates
indeed
like
Air
and
an
inconsiderable
Feather
:
Yet
neither
he
nor
his
seduced
Papists
will
receive
this
Truth
of
God
before
their
Tradition
.
Wo
unto
them
self-condemned
souls
!
6.
In
S.
12.
He
giveth
another
Supernatural
Assistance
unto
Veracity
,
which
is
Christian
Affection
of
Parents
unto
Children
:
This
is
so
efficacious
in
them
to
bring
their
Children
to
everlasting
and
infinite
Bliss
in
Heaven
,
and
to
keep
them
from
intolerable
and
endless
miseries
in
Hell
,
that
they
must
needs
speak
truth
unto
them
in
giving
down
their
Tradition
.
1.
Why
doth
the
man
so
trouble
his
Readers
with
vain
and
useless
repetitions
.
We
have
had
Parents
Affections
once
and
again
urged
and
answered
,
their
sanctity
also
superadded
,
which
here
he
stileth
Christianity
:
and
yet
all
this
proved
ineffectual
to
make
Fathers
speak
Truth
to
their
Children
;
for
they
have
left
them
lyes
in
stead
thereof
,
given
down
by
their
Tradition
.
2.
All
the
Christian
Affection
,
which
Popish
Fore-fathers
do
express
unto
their
Children
is
,
but
to
make
them
Papists
;
and
in
this
way
they
labour
to
bring
them
to
bliss
in
Heaven
,
and
keep
them
from
miseries
in
Hell
,
or
leave
them
in
Purgatory
.
And
in
this
way
Parents
and
Children
may
perish
together
,
as
deceiving
and
being
deceived
,
with
a
form
of
Christianity
for
the
very
truth
and
power
of
it
:
And
if
sensation
be
enough
(
as
he
saith
)
to
make
such
Christians
,
there
need
no
supernatural
helps
,
to
compass
this
Effect
:
Neither
indeed
is
this
Christian
Affection
,
an
ingagement
to
speak
truth
,
it self
being
a
delusion
.
7.
In
S.
13.
He
addeth
this
as
a
supernatural
Assistance
to
Veracity
,
even
the
Credit
and
Repute
,
which
his
Testifyers
look
unto
in
the
world
among
men
,
that
must
needs
keep
them
from
lying
:
This
he
amplifieth
by
comparing
it
with
other
mens
converse
in
the
world
,
whose
credit
for
Truth
speaking
,
is
their
life
in
society
;
and
their
discredit
for
lying
their
undoing
:
And
at
last
tells
us
,
That
the
Advantage
,
which
the
natural
care
of
Credit
,
giveth
to
the
preserving
Tradition
inviolable
,
is
incomparable
,
and
in
a
manner
infinite
.
It
is
boldly
spoken
:
but
let
us
try
,
whether
it
be
as
truly
asserted
.
1.
Is
Credite
or
Repute
with
men
moving
us
to
speak
Truth
,
a
supernatural
Assistance
?
What
is
natural
then
?
The
very
Gentiles
that
knew
not
Christ
,
were
upon
this
Account
perswaded
to
Veracity
:
They
were
ashamed
,
some
more
Moral
of
them
,
to
tell
lyes
upon
that
account
.
2.
There
is
a
Credit
indeed
,
and
a
good
Report
with
God
,
which
may
be
a
supernatural
help
unto
Veracity
;
but
the
Discourser
speaks
not
a
word
of
that
:
After
this
did
all
the
Saints
look
,
and
they
had
a
good
report
in
heaven
,
from
Abel
to
the
last
of
all
as
that
Catalogue
sheweth
which
the
Apostle
mak●th
.
Heb
.
11.2.39
Rom
2.29
2
Cor
.
10.18
.
And
it
is
written
,
That
only
is
Creditable
Religion
whose
praise
is
not
of
men
but
of
God
;
And
he
alone
is
approved
,
whom
the
Lord
commendeth
.
To
this
we
should
yeeld
,
that
such
as
expect
Credit
,
or
Praise
with
God
,
will
think
and
speak
,
and
do
truth
.
3.
This
being
none
of
that
Credit
which
the
Author
speaks
of
,
as
aimed
at
by
Testifiers
,
We
assert
it
is
neither
supernatural
nor
can
it
effectually
oblige
unto
Veracity
:
For
what
is
man
to
man
,
but
as
one
lyar
to
another
,
who
doubtless
will
applaud
;
or
if
the
lye
be
too
loud
,
at
least
excuse
one
another
.
But
as
to
his
Testyfiers
for
h●s
Tradition
,
if
Histories
may
h●ve
any
cred●t
,
the
most
debauched
fellows
and
Devils
incarnate
have
not
been
more-brazen
faced
and
impudent
in
any
sorts
of
lies
,
than
some
of
them
:
Men
having
Consciences
seared
with
a
hot
iron
,
Mr.
Mead
Apostasie
of
latter
daies
.
have
been
exercised
in
giving
down
lying
Traditions
of
false
Mediators
.
It
is
not
fit
here
to
relate
all
Histories
;
We
referre
therefore
to
the
faithful
Relaters
of
them
.
This
prop
of
Credit
then
among
men
,
is
no
supernatural
help
to
Popish
Fathers
,
or
Pastors
unto
Veracity
in
their
Traditions
,
notwithstanding
all
other
ingagements
binding
them
thereunto
.
It
is
therefore
Incomparable
boldness
,
and
an
Evil
in
a
manner
Infinite
against
the
most
infinite
God
,
who
is
Truth
it self
,
in
this
Disputer
thus
to
vent
his
own
vain
fancies
for
Christs
Doctrine
,
and
falseshood
for
Truth
.
8.
Lastly
in
S.
14.
Having
laboured
thus
far
to
support
the
Veracity
of
his
Testifiers
unto
the
Indefectiveness
of
his
Tradition
,
with
his
pretended
supernatural
Assistances
(
though
with
a
very
unhappy
success
)
He
now
musters
up
a
number
of
Arts
and
Sciences
contributing
to
his
former
witnesses
;
telling
us
withall
,
that
each
vertue
contributes
to
shew
the
inerrable
Indeficiency
of
his
Tradition
:
And
after
an
hint
upon
their
several
assistances
,
he
concludeth
,
that
he
hath
proved
his
Tradition
to
be
an
inerrable
Rule
,
and
m●de
the
Indefectibleness
of
it
Scientifically
Evident
,
and
as
strong
as
nature
and
grace
strained
to
their
uttermost
,
can
make
it
.
O
confident
man
!
Who
in
his
w●tts
,
that
hath
seriously
read
and
considered
his
arguments
,
can
beleeve
him
?
Hath
he
made
his
Demonstration
of
his
Traditions
Indefectiveness
as
strong
as
Nature
and
Grace
strained
to
their
uttermost
,
can
make
it
?
Surely
Nature
is
a
stranger
to
Popish
Tradition
,
and
Grace
truly
so
called
is
an
enemy
to
it
,
if
ever
Grace
dropt
from
the
lips
of
Christ
in
the
Gospel
;
For
he
hath
thrown
down
all
Tradition
contradicting
the
Spirit
of
Scripture
among
the
Jews
;
And
would
he
set
it
up
again
among
Christians
?
It
is
impious
to
think
,
much
more
with
such
boldness
to
utter
it
.
As
to
his
Muster
of
Arts
for
his
help
,
it
is
so
sapless
and
ridiculous
that
to
name
them
in
this
great
business
in
hand
,
is
to
shew
the
Author
to
be
scarce
himself
in
reason
;
when
he
call'd
them
in
to
his
Assistance
.
It
would
make
a
pretty
Theme
for
a
Pasquil
,
or
a
Romance
to
be
fram'd
upon
,
or
to
make
a
new
Comedy
of
the
Arts
attending
one
Complementing
,
with
the
Tripple-cround
Papal
Tradition
,
and
at
last
all
vanishing
and
leav●ng
it
to
shift
for
it self
:
But
it
is
a
hard
tasks
to
answer
seriously
such
frivolous
allegations
.
Whoever
doth
it
must
suppose
.
1.
That
Arithmetick
can
only
give
the
number
of
his
false
witnesses
.
2.
That
Geometry
by
its
lines
,
can
only
measure
them
as
earthly
minded
ones
.
3.
That
Logick
indeed
,
will
discover
all
the
Parologi●ms
of
his
Testees
.
4.
That
Natures
Law
w●ll
condemn
their
forged
inventions
and
Actions
.
5.
That
Morality
will
discover
his
Tradition
to
be
gratis
,
to
no
purpose
.
6.
That
History
for
several
ages
proves
his
Tradition
deficient
.
7.
That
Politicks
,
if
they
do
favour
him
,
it
is
in
the
worst
sense
,
that
is
,
with
subtilties
and
deceits
.
8.
That
Metaphysicks
,
can
give
no
Entity
to
that
which
is
not
,
and
thar
is
the
indefective
descent
of
Popish
Tradition
from
Christ
.
9.
That
Divinity
,
which
is
truly
the
knowledge
of
God
in
Christ
revealed
in
the
Scripture
,
is
so
farre
from
demonstrating
Popish
Tradition
worthy
of
God
,
or
to
bring
Mankind
to
bliss
,
that
it
damns
to
Hell
every
way
and
practice
contradicting
Scripture-Truth
.
10.
As
to
Controversie
he
doth
a
little
puzzle
us
;
For
Popish
Controversie
will
settle
and
unsettle
any
thing
for
Truth
or
no
Truth
at
their
pleasure
:
But
if
he
will
stand
to
the
Apostles
expression
of
contending
for
the
Faith
once
delivered
to
the
Saints
,
we
shall
make
it
good
,
Jud.
15.3
.
there
was
no
such
Principle
delivered
by
Christ
or
his
Apostles
,
that
Oral-Tradition
must
be
the
first
upon
which
all
others
depend
.
Nay
more
,
that
Scripture
needs
no
security
from
his
Tradition
,
nor
any
thing
else
that
can
mainly
concern
salvation
;
but
that
all
Tradition
Orall
must
be
made
good
by
Scripture
,
or
else
it
cannot
guide
to
salvation
,
but
to
destruction
,
being
false
and
erroneous
.
To
close
:
Why
doth
this
Discourser
so
palpably
dissemble
at
last
,
to
tell
us
that
he
hath
many
other
Testimonies
of
his
Traditions
Infallibleness
,
but
it
is
not
his
Task
to
pursue
them
?
Hath
he
not
repeated
the
same
proofs
over
and
over
to
turn
up
our
stomacks
,
if
we
were
squeamish
?
Was
it
not
his
intended
work
from
the
beginning
to
prove
the
infallibleness
of
his
Tradition
to
his
utmost
,
and
yet
he
saith
it
was
not
his
task
?
Who
can
beleeve
him
?
Notwithstanding
the
man
is
content
from
what
he
hath
said
,
to
conclude
that
he
hath
proved
it
self-Evident
,
That
Romish
Tradition
is
an
Inerrable
Rule
,
and
not
only
Indefective
but
Indefectible
from
Christ
to
this
day
,
and
that
by
the
utmost
strained
strength
of
Nature
and
Grace
.
Lord
open
this
Mans
eies
.
We
conclude
too
:
Nothing
but
the
utmost
of
Satans
Efficacy
,
and
Ma●●
Lust
,
could
work
such
delusion
.
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
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
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
Church
,
but
the
followers
of
Tradition
.
For
they
must
have
true
Faith
,
and
that
only
by
Tradition
.
We
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
;
We
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.
We
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
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
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
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
Univ●●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
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
here
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
.
8.
He
induceth
,
That
body
of
men
who
adhere
to
Tradition
,
can
evidence
clearly
and
plainly
,
who
are
truely
Faithful
,
who
not
.
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
.
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
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
Universal
,
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
.
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
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
that
Apostolical
house
with
its
foundation
together
,
which
it
will
do
in
Gods
appointed
time
.
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
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
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
his
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
.
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
.
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
.
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.
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
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
.
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
.
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
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
ones
,
nay
particular
Churches
are
infallible
by
proceeding
upon
it
,
This
he
laieth
on
the
same
ground
.
28.
Yet
further
.
The
Roman
See
with
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
.
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
,
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.
10.13
that
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
,
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
.
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
.
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
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
.
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
in
Divinity
,
if
Universal
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
!
37.
He
pleadeth
on
Erroneous
Opinions
,
and
the
Irrational
practices
issuing
from
them
(
though
supposed
Universal
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
its
proper
practice
,
is
imputable
to
the
Church
properly
and
formally
taken
.
39.
It
is
exceedingly
weak
,
and
senseless
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
.
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
.
CONSENT
OF
AUTHORITY
To
the
Substance
of
the
Foregoing
Discourses
EXAMINED
.
HAving
spent
his
strength
of
Reason
for
his
Traditions
Indefectiveness
,
(
how
little
soever
,
and
with
how
little
success
let
Reason
in
the
Intelligent
Readers
judge
)
he
now
layeth
aside
his
own
bulrushes
,
and
calls
in
Auxiliaries
to
second
him
by
a
consent
of
Authority
;
which
may
distresse
him
,
but
yeeld
no
support
to
his
Cause
;
and
then
he
is
left
miserable
bereft
of
his
Reason
;
and
his
Friends
to
boot
,
whom
he
beggs
also
to
yeeld
Assistance
,
but
they
hear
him
not
.
We
have
here
offered
by
him
these
general
Heads
as
to
his
closure
.
1.
Authorities
urged
as
consenting
,
three
fold
,
1
Scriptures
,
Ss.
2
,
3
,
4.
—
2
Councils
.
S.
5.
—
3
Fathers
.
Ss.
6
,
7
,
8
,
9
,
10
,
11
,
12
,
13.
2.
A
Question
proposed
and
answered
,
S.
14.
3.
Notes
upon
the
Authorities
alledged
,
S.
15.
4.
A
Declaration
of
his
Churches
sence
in
his
Doctrine
,
Ss.
16
,
17
,
18
,
19
,
20.
Among
his
consenting
Authorities
,
he
giveth
the
Scriptures
the
first
place
;
and
its
consent
he
only
beggs
,
and
that
in
vain
,
in
three
Eminent
promises
;
which
we
shall
orderly
consider
.
But
before
we
examine
what
consent
they
give
him
,
or
not
give
him
to
establish
his
Tradition
:
we
shall
only
hint
some
special
animadversions
about
the
whole
Authority
of
them
urged
.
1.
He
giveth
the
Scriptures
of
God
the
only
Authority
of
consenting
to
that
Doctrine
of
Popish
Tradition
,
which
his
reason
had
forged
,
and
as
he
thinks
,
establisht
:
And
is
not
God
upon
this
account
much
ingaged
to
him
for
this
honour
vouchsafed
him
to
come
and
begge
his
Consent
unto
his
vain
Invention
?
We
are
by
the
light
of
nature
guided
to
ascribe
the
Supreme
and
commanding
Authority
to
God
,
whose
word
must
be
the
Creatures
Law
:
And
is
he
now
call'd
in
as
a
Consenter
only
,
and
put
in
a
second
form
of
Power
,
as
we
usually
make
Consent
?
See
the
Antichristian
Pride
of
Popish
Reason
and
Religion
setting
the
Almighty
God
in
the
same
Classis
of
Authority
with
Councils
and
Fathers
.
2.
He
yet
alloweth
the
Scripture
to
be
in
its
consent
an
Authority
proving
his
Tradition
:
A●otiori
ignotius
,
Scientifical
.
And
is
not
the
Medium
proving
more
sure
and
known
than
the
matter
proved
or
concluded
?
How
then
can
Tradition
be
more
certain
than
Scripture
,
seeing
the
Discourser
urgeth
Scripture
to
prove
the
certainty
of
his
Tradition
?
The
Apostle
Peter
on
whom
these
Traditionaries
do
depend
,
2
Pet
.
1
,
17
,
18
,
19
as
on
their
Rock
,
prefers
the
word
of
Prophesie
written
for
certainty
before
his
own
Tradition
given
of
Christ
,
which
was
grounded
upon
his
own
eyes
and
ears
.
What
Logick
this
man
hath
,
who
pretends
to
so
much
,
we
know
not
:
but
surely
he
sheweth
little
here
.
3.
Suppose
we
,
that
it
is
no
more
but
consent
,
that
he
beggs
from
Scripture
;
what
is
this
worth
,
seeing
it
is
a
Consent
,
which
he
espouseth
only
by
force
?
When
the
Scripture
can
come
to
speak
for
it self
before
fair
and
equal
discerning
Judges
,
it
will
clear
it self
,
that
it
never
gave
consent
unto
this
Discoursers
abuse
of
it
,
and
will
charge
him
w●th
a
worse
violence
,
than
for
a
man
to
force
a
womans
Consent
to
marry
him
by
his
pistol
or
sword
.
4.
We
shall
desire
the
man
candidly
to
answer
;
Will
he
warrant
us
,
that
the
Interpretation
of
these
Scriptures
which
he
urgeth
is
Traditionary
,
that
is
,
according
to
his
sence
,
the
very
same
,
which
was
the
mind
of
Christ
in
them
,
and
so
uninterruptedly
descended
to
him
by
Tradition
?
Let
him
speak
out
:
But
that
he
loveth
not
book-learning
much
,
as
he
professeth
,
he
might
find
many
of
the
Pillars
of
his
own
Church
disowning
his
Interpretations
of
them
.
However
were
he
and
they
all
agreed
in
such
a
sence
,
as
he
makes
,
〈◇〉
opposed
unto
〈◇〉
.
2
Pet
.
1.20.21
.
it
is
all
but
priv●te
Interpretation
estranged
from
the
opposite
to
the
Innate
sence
which
the
spirit
delivered
to
,
and
by
those
Prophets
;
which
will
appear
unto
a
serious
and
due
consideration
of
the
occasion
,
Scope
,
Logical
coherence
and
signification
of
the
words
:
all
which
means
the
spirit
useth
,
to
open
Gods
mind
in
Scripture
unto
men
.
These
things
being
generally
premised
,
we
shall
proceed
to
consider
the
special
Texts
alledged
by
him
;
whether
they
give
their
consenting
Authority
to
his
Indefective
Tradition
or
not
.
1.
He
urgeth
,
sai
.
35.8
.
of
which
place
,
1.
We
have
his
Translation
thus
:
This
shall
be
unto
you
a
direct
way
,
so
that
Fools
cannot
erre
in
it
.
2.
His
Interpretation
,
That
is
,
saith
he
Evident
to
the
Rudest
vulgar
,
or
self
evident
;
else
Fools
might
posssibly
erre
in
it
,
in
case
it
needed
any
skill
of
Discourse
,
and
were
not
obvious
to
common
sense
.
So
then
his
sence
of
it
is
This
,
that
is
,
This
Method
of
Popish
Tradition
,
shall
be
to
you
a
direct
way
,
that
is
,
this
Method
of
Popish
Tradition
,
shall
be
to
you
a
direct
way
,
that
is
,
to
you
Papists
Traditionary
Christians
,
a
plain
and
straight
means
unto
salvation
:
So
that
Fools
cannot
erre
in
it
.
That
is
,
the
rudest
vulgar
among
Papists
,
continuing
such
fools
as
to
the
knowledge
of
God
,
and
living
by
common
sense
,
cannot
miscarry
in
it
.
Unto
this
we
shall
but
oppose
the
Truth
of
the
letter
,
and
natural
sense
;
and
then
let
wise
men
judge
how
this
Scripture
is
forced
by
him
for
a
consent
to
his
Tradition
,
which
we
shall
do
in
this
way
.
1.
We
give
Scriptures
Readers
this
note
.
That
this
Evangelical
Prophet
under
the
Jews
Captivity
unto
,
and
deliverance
from
Babylon
,
describeth
both
spiritual
bondage
to
sin
,
and
redemption
from
it
:
Both
are
to
be
considered
in
the
present
promise
.
2.
The
true
literal
reading
of
the
whole
Text
is
this
:
And
there
shall
be
a
troden
path
and
a
way
(
such
as
we
call
a
Fosse-way
)
Even
the
way
of
Holiness
shall
be
called
on
it
,
the
unclean
shall
not
passe
over
it
;
but
this
shall
be
for
those
;
(
viz.
whose
hands
and
feet
were
confirm'd
and
strengthned
,
&c.
)
He
that
walketh
the
way
,
even
fools
shall
not
erre
.
Here
is
difference
enough
between
Readings
.
3.
The
meaning
then
of
it
,
as
it
concerns
spiritual
Redemption
(
typed
under
the
return
of
the
Jews
from
Babylon
to
Sion
,
by
the
Decree
of
Cyrus
)
is
this
,
Gods
high-troden-Fosse-way
to
Salvation
,
is
the
way
of
Holiness
in
Christ
Jesus
:
The
unholy
and
unclean
shall
not
passe
over
it
,
indeed
they
cannot
,
their
feet
sute
not
with
it
;
but
they
whose
feet
are
strengthened
and
cleansed
shall
pass
thorough
it
,
yea
he
or
they
who
walkt
his
way
of
holiness
,
though
formerly
fools
and
ignorant
of
the
way
unto
salvation
,
yet
now
having
God
w●th
them
,
and
being
confirmed
unto
his
will
,
taken
off
from
folly
,
even
these
shall
not
erre
,
or
mistake
the
way
to
heaven
.
This
is
the
naked
and
innate
sence
of
this
Promise
;
and
what
agreement
hath
this
with
the
Discoursers
gloss
?
God
saith
,
Holiness
is
the
way
which
will
lead
men
to
salvation
,
and
they
shall
not
erre
:
And
the
Discourser
renders
it
,
Romish
Tradition
is
the
way
to
salvation
,
in
which
though
fools
do
walk
,
and
abide
such
,
yet
they
cannot
erre
.
What
Intelligent
Reader
will
not
nauseate
at
such
senseless
and
unsavory
glosses
as
this
.
But
it
may
be
he
will
better
it
in
the
next
;
we
shall
try
.
2.
To
prove
this
way
meant
of
Tradition
,
he
tells
us
the
same
Prophet
doth
expresly
declare
it
.
Isai
.
59.21
.
in
these
words
:
This
is
my
Covenant
with
them
,
saith
the
Lord
;
my
Spirit
which
is
in
thee
,
and
my
words
which
I
have
put
in
thy
mouth
,
shall
not
depart
from
thy
mouth
,
and
from
the
mouth
of
thy
seed
,
and
from
the
mouth
of
thy
seeds
seed
from
henceforth
for
ever
.
His
Interpretation
runs
thus
.
1.
It
is
a
promise
of
perpetuating
Christs
Doctrin
.
2.
That
it
expresseth
on
what
manner
;
that
is
,
as
he
saith
,
by
Oral-Tradition
,
or
delivering
it
from
Father
to
Son
by
word
of
mouth
;
not
by
a
Book
.
3.
That
this
Tradition
shall
be
indefecti●le
and
Uninterrupted
.
4.
That
the
spirit
is
in
the
Church
and
will
be
ever
,
supernaturally
to
assist
her
in
this
work
.
Whereunto
we
shall
only
oppose
these
plain
things
evident
to
all
rational
observers
in
the
very
letter
of
the
Text
.
1.
That
in
this
and
the
former
verse
are
given
to
us
two
main
Articles
of
Faith
in
Promise
.
1.
The
Redeemers
Advent
2.
The
Fathers
Covenant
to
him
,
and
in
him
to
his
seed
the
Church
.
2
That
after
the
promise
of
the
Redeemers
coming
to
Zion
(
that
is
,
his
Church
,
turn'd
away
from
their
Iniquities
)
he
declareth
his
Covenant
both
to
him
and
them
;
wherein
his
Son
manifested
in
the
flesh
the
Redeemer
,
Isai
.
53
11.
is
the
first
party
with
whom
the
Father
covenanteth
,
and
his
seed
begotten
out
of
his
bloody
Travels
are
secondarily
in
and
by
him
Parties
confederate
with
the
Father
;
so
that
none
but
these
are
in
this
Covenant
or
concerned
in
any
of
the
matters
mentioned
therein
.
3.
That
under
Spirit
and
word
are
carried
all
Grace
tending
to
salvation
,
both
given
to
him
in
the
flesh
without
measure
and
to
his
seed
according
to
their
respective
measures
assigned
them
;
Act.
10
,
Ps.
45
7
He
was
anointed
with
the
Holy
Ghost
and
Power
;
or
as
paraphra●ed
with
the
oil
of
gladness
above
his
Fellows
;
1
John
2.20.27
.
they
also
receiving
in
their
proportion
of
the
same
anointing
which
must
needs
keep
them
unto
salvation
.
4.
That
this
is
God
the
Fathers
own
Act
incommunicable
to
any
other
,
to
put
his
Spirit
upon
Christ
and
his
word
or
will
in
his
mouth
,
and
so
upon
his
seed
,
and
his
seeds
seed
,
in
their
perp●tual
generations
,
they
do
not
,
they
cannot
convey
or
put
this
spirit
and
word
one
upon
another
:
It
is
his
own
Tradition
.
5.
That
this
Covenant
the
Father
himself
will
perform
and
execute
upon
this
seed
of
Christ
only
in
their
successive
generations
for
ever
,
while
sojourning
in
this
Earth
:
The
fruit
whereof
doubtless
must
be
spirit
and
mouth-profession
of
the
Fathers
love
while
they
have
being
.
And
to
all
this
the
Prophet
adds
three
times
here
Gods
Test
,
that
Jehovah
hath
said
it
;
therefore
it
must
be
done
.
Now
this
being
the
plain
and
simple
sence
of
the
words
,
what
can
this
promise
have
to
do
,
with
Romish
Church
Apostate
,
or
with
Popish
Tradition
of
Fore-fathers
to
their
Children
by
word
of
mouth
?
Could
ever
the
best
of
Fathers
living
put
spirit
upon
their
Chitdren
,
or
the
word
and
will
of
God
into
hearts
and
mouths
to
be
beleeved
and
really
professed
and
practiced
by
them
,
by
their
Oral-Tradition
?
Cain
would
then
have
been
as
good
as
Abel
,
and
Ishmael
the
son
of
Promise
as
much
as
Isaac
:
Much
less
can
Popish
Fathers
do
it
.
We
grant
that
the
Doctrine
of
Christ
unto
Salvation
is
contained
under
this
spirit
and
word
:
but
the
Tradition
Indefectible
and
uninterrupted
together
with
the
perpetuation
of
it
,
in
the
seed
of
Christ
only
,
throughout
all
their
generations
,
we
assert
peculiar
unto
the
Father
alone
in
his
Son
and
by
his
Spirit
:
These
are
all
the
true
words
of
Jehovah
which
he
hath
promised
to
perform
himself
,
and
thereby
to
fix
his
fear
in
the
hearts
of
his
,
that
they
should
never
depart
from
him
.
What
violence
then
is
this
that
the
Discourser
should
transfer
all
this
unto
Popish
Forefathers
,
as
if
they
could
put
the
spirit
upon
the
Redeemer
,
and
Gods
word
into
his
mouth
,
and
his
seeds
by
their
Oral-Tradition
?
And
what
madness
is
it
to
arrogate
this
spirit
for
supernatural
Assistances
to
his
Romish
Church
,
who
with
her
seed
is
a
bitter
enemy
to
Gods
word
,
(
as
this
Disputer
confesseth
)
unless
it
may
be
senced
by
his
Tradition
?
It
is
as
mad
a
prank
for
this
man
to
challenge
the
Church
to
be
his
,
that
is
,
Popish
,
as
it
was
of
that
mad
fellow
,
who
would
call
every
ship
his
own
,
that
he
saw
and
yet
he
had
none
at
all
.
But
it
is
enough
for
this
.
God
knoweth
them
that
are
his
.
And
his
spirit
and
word
abiding
on
them
will
declare
them
.
Let
them
who
have
eyes
to
see
,
see
and
consider
.
3.
His
last
Testimony
for
consent
of
Scripture
unto
his
Tradition
is
Jer
.
31.33
.
I
will
give
my
Law
in
their
bowels
,
and
in
their
hearts
will
I
write
it
.
This
he
interprets
by
the
Apostle
in
the
2
Cor
,
3.3
.
Where
he
descants
on
the
Terms
,
Heart
,
Fleshie
,
e
.
i
.
&c.
We
allow
his
Translation
,
but
deny
utterly
that
this
Scripture
or
that
by
which
he
would
interpret
it
,
giveth
the
least
consent
to
his
vain
Tradition
.
That
of
the
Prophet
is
recorded
also
by
the
Apostle
to
the
Hebrews
as
a
copy
of
that
better
Testament
,
whereof
Jesus
was
Mediator
,
whence
we
have
help
for
a
better
Interpretation
than
what
the
Discourser
would
impose
on
us
by
and
for
his
Tradition
.
1.
We
deny
that
either
here
by
the
Prophet
,
or
else
by
the
Apostle
,
the
Law
of
Grace
is
opposed
,
or
contradistinguished
to
the
Law
of
Moses
,
as
to
the
substance
of
it
;
For
Moses
wrote
of
Christ
,
as
Mediator
,
and
of
the
same
Covenant
of
Grace
:
Only
the
Forme
and
manner
of
delivering
and
ministring
th●s
Testament
,
was
vastly
different
as
to
the
Efficacy
of
it
,
between
Moses
the
Servant
and
Christ
the
Son
.
This
administers
it
powerfully
as
God
,
in
and
upon
Hearts
;
but
he
though
faithfully
yet
weakly
to
eies
by
writing
on
stones
,
and
to
ears
by
voice
and
speech
.
Whereupon
God
promiseth
here
to
make
a
new
Covenant
,
not
according
as
he
had
done
when
he
brough●
their
Fathers
out
of
Egypt
which
they
brake
;
and
so
he
regarded
them
not
:
but
now
by
Christ
he
would
make
sure
work
to
write
his
law
in
the
hearts
of
his
Covenanted
ones
,
so
that
they
should
not
depart
from
him
,
nor
he
any
more
forsake
them
.
2.
We
assert
that
all
spoken
in
this
promise
are
Acts
of
Grace
peculiar
unto
and
possible
only
for
Iehovah
himself
to
do
,
as
1.
That
of
Adoption
,
I
will
be
their
God
,
&c.
2.
That
of
Iustification
,
I
will
forgive
their
Iniquity
,
and
remember
their
sin
no
more
.
3.
That
of
Regeneration
or
Sanctification
with
the
saving
Effect
of
it
,
described
indeed
by
Metaphorical
terms
of
writing
,
but
properly
noting
the
change
of
their
nature
;
when
hearts
,
inward
parts
and
whole
Man
,
shall
be
delivered
up
to
the
will
of
God
,
and
be
conformed
to
it
.
Whence
most
inseparably
followeth
the
saving
knowledge
of
God
which
comprehends
all
duty
into
him
,
from
those
Hearts
.
3.
We
note
also
that
God
by
the
Prophet
expresly
denieth
any
work
of
man
or
his
Tradition
,
as
to
the
producing
of
this
effect
,
They
shall
teach
no
more
every
man
his
neighbour
,
&c.
saying
know
the
Lord
,
&c.
Not
,
but
that
God
hath
appointed
Tradition
both
Scriptural
and
Oral
as
subordinate
means
to
saving
knowledge
,
as
he
injoyneth
in
other
places
:
but
in
th●s
place
he
speaks
of
his
own
work
only
reciprocal
with
himself
,
declared
in
this
Testament
what
he
will
do
by
his
own
finger
as
to
the
saving
of
his
Covenanted
ones
.
Now
these
things
being
so
apparent
in
the
native
sense
of
this
Scripture
:
Who
seeth
not
what
violence
is
offered
unto
it
?
when
the
writing
this
Law
in
hearts
,
is
wrested
to
this
corrupt
sence
,
of
making
men
acquainted
with
the
law
of
God
,
that
they
by
Tradition
should
convey
it
down
to
others
:
And
the
work
spoken
of
in
this
Text
is
only
the
Lords
,
wherein
mans
help
of
teaching
is
excluded
?
How
much
more
Impudence
is
here
discovered
in
Coster
the
Iesuite
and
others
of
his
Tribe
with
this
Discourser
,
who
transfers
all
this
to
Popish
rotten
Tradition
,
which
giveth
no
sound
knowledge
of
God
at
all
,
but
keepeth
souls
in
dismal
destroying
Ignorance
of
the
mysterie
of
his
will
?
But
their
folly
is
made
known
,
enough
to
make
it
odious
and
ridiculous
in
this
matter
:
As
well
may
they
hope
to
evince
this
sense
from
th●s
Scripture
as
that
Philosopher
who
would
fetch
fire
out
of
the
Sea
.
They
will
prove
Artists
alike
.
Could
ever
any
of
them
say
so
,
as
to
do
it
,
by
their
Tradition
,
that
all
to
whom
they
spake
from
the
greatest
to
the
least
shall
know
the
Lord
.
O
be
ashamed
!
4.
The
corruption
of
the
Apostles
words
is
as
bad
.
1.
In
setting
the
heart
whereupon
this
law
is
written
in
contradistinction
to
the
Brain
,
that
is
Affection
unto
Reason
;
whereas
nothing
is
more
clear
,
than
that
all
the
faculties
of
the
soul
are
here
intended
by
Heart
,
and
this
as
bringing
in
the
whole
of
man
,
which
God
doubtless
intends
,
when
he
calls
for
mans
heart
.
2.
In
a
most
abusive
gloss
upon
the
word
fleshy
,
which
he
makes
,
to
note
the
Inferior
part
of
the
soul
,
even
Sense
and
sensation
:
whereas
he
that
runs
may
read
that
the
Apostle
opposeth
Fleshy
Tables
to
stony
ones
,
whereon
the
law
was
written
;
And
in
this
case
Fl●sh
is
the
paraphrase
of
Tenderness
of
Heart
as
the
Stone
is
of
the
Hardness
of
the
same
:
Ezek
.
11.19
.
and
so
usually
are
they
opposed
both
by
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
:
So
that
the
sence
is
pl●in
that
the
Epistle
or
mind
of
Christ
was
written
by
the
spirit
of
the
living
God
upon
fleshy
,
soft
and
tender
hearts
not
upon
stony
,
hard
,
and
unyielding
ones
.
What
blindness
or
pervers●ness
then
is
it
,
to
turn
this
so
as
to
note
the
Inferior
part
of
the
soul
,
meer
natural
sense
,
when
it
signifieth
the
whole
soul
sanctified
?
And
to
make
this
to
be
the
work
of
Gods
spirit
by
sensations
to
force
into
men
natural
knowledge
,
when
it
is
to
renew
and
regenerate
men
,
by
giving
up
their
hearts
to
Gods
will
metaphorically
expressed
by
writing
his
Law
within
them
.
Thus
when
Popish
Tradition
must
sence
Scripture
,
this
must
needs
give
consent
to
that
,
to
be
Indefective
from
Christ
.
Understanding
Readers
will
see
hence
,
what
Consent
he
hath
obtained
to
his
Rule
of
faith
from
Scripture
:
And
for
his
belying
God
in
his
own
word
we
leave
him
to
his
reproof
:
But
for
his
abusing
men
in
his
Circular
notion
from
Tradition
to
Scripture
and
from
Scripture
to
Tradition
,
he
deserves
an
Hiss
from
junior
Sophisters
;
as
well
as
a
check
from
his
Sup●rintendents
,
for
such
unhandsome
medling
in
Scripture
debates
with
Protestants
,
of
which
he
had
warned
his
Romish-Catholicks
before
with
an
Item
that
their
Adversaries
having
hooked
them
in
to
fight
with
their
weapon
,
would
even
cry
Victoria
;
and
now
he
falls
into
the
same
fault
himself
.
Alass
poor
man
!
But
so
it
is
that
Popish
Doctors
could
never
do
their
work
without
Scripture
,
and
when
they
use
this
two
edged
sword
,
having
neither
wit
,
nor
honesty
rightly
to
wield
it
,
they
blunt
it
what
they
can
;
but
it
pierceth
and
destroyeth
them
,
being
turn'd
against
them
.
For
shame
let
them
meddle
with
Scripture
no
more
,
to
begg
help
from
it
;
For
it
hath
them
in
derision
.
2.
His
next
rank
of
consenting
Authorities
is
humane
;
only
here
it
is
Complexe
in
Councils
,
the
Representatives
of
the
Church
as
he
makes
them
:
Among
which
he
only
nameth
three
in
this
order
.
1
The
first
Synod
of
Lateran
.
2.
The
Council
Sardica
.
3.
The
7th
.
General
Council
of
(
as
he
calleth
it
)
All
as
he
saith
consent
to
his
Indefective
Oral-Tradition
.
To
return
shortly
and
enough
to
these
1.
Generally
.
2.
Specially
.
1.
In
General
we
animadvert
,
that
the
Discourser
urgeth
his
Consenters
disorderly
;
For
that
of
Sardica
was
much
elder
to
the
first
Lateran
:
That
being
held
under
Pope
Julius
the
first
about
An.
Dom
.
340.
or
a
little
after
:
And
this
was
held
under
Pope
Martin
about
the
year
643.
Order
therefore
might
have
set
the
eldest
first
.
2.
That
in
these
Councils
or
some
of
them
,
the
notion
of
Tradition
is
intended
by
the
most
ancient
of
them
,
especially
of
Scripture-delivery
;
and
most
usually
;
therefore
the
Disputer
is
either
unwary
or
unfaithful
to
annex
it
only
unto
Oral-Tradition
:
So
also
is
it
used
by
the
best
of
the
Fathers
to
note
Scripture-Tradition
from
the
Apostles
.
3.
We
acknowledg
no
Council
expresly
infallible
,
but
that
one
of
which
we
read
,
the
Holy
Ghost
was
President
.
Act.
15.
Others
have
proudly
boasted
of
his
presence
with
them
,
but
in
vain
.
4.
As
to
all
Councils
,
since
that
we
professe
our
Faith
concerning
them
,
to
be
the
same
with
our
Church
of
England
in
these
words
.
General
Councils
may
erre
&c.
Therefore
things
ordained
by
them
,
as
necessary
to
salvation
,
have
neither
strength
nor
Authority
,
unless
it
may
be
declared
,
that
they
be
taken
out
of
Holy
Scripture
.
Upon
this
ground
,
we
deal
with
the
Discourser
and
shall
not
shrink
from
it
:
Unless
Scripture
Authorize
both
Councils
and
Tradition
too
,
we
shall
trust
neither
of
them
:
And
this
might
be
a
sufficient
answer
from
us
to
this
Authority
.
2.
Yet
more
specially
,
least
he
may
think
we
fear
his
Witnesses
.
1.
As
to
the
Lateran
Testimony
,
all
that
he
urgeth
is
,
They
substracted
nothing
of
those
matters
which
were
delivered
to
them
by
the
Holy
Fathers
:
Grant
this
,
Those
things
were
delivered
first
from
the
Holy
Scriptures
,
as
well
as
taught
them
by
voice
.
Let
the
man
disprove
it
if
he
can
;
if
not
,
what
helps
this
consent
?
2.
As
to
that
of
Sardica
(
however
it
hath
been
branded
and
rejected
by
Ancients
;
which
is
enough
to
suspect
it
)
yet
all
urged
here
is
nothing
to
the
purpose
;
For
if
it
were
that
they
did
hold
Catholick
Tradition
,
Faith
and
confession
;
This
was
by
Scriptural
,
as
well
as
by
Oral-delivery
.
Nay
Osius
a
Bishop
(
as
their
own
Caranza
giveth
it
)
against
ordination
of
Laicks
,
urgeth
that
Scripture
against
Novices
,
1
Tim
.
3.6
.
So
that
here
was
use
of
written
Tradition
in
this
Council
expressely
,
though
unknown
to
this
Disputer
.
3.
As
to
his
3d
.
It
was
the
2d
.
Nicene
Synod
,
which
the
Greeks
(
as
the
same
Caranza
reports
)
did
call
the
7th
General
Council
held
in
the
year
780.
under
Pope
Adrian
the
first
,
Bishop
of
the
City
of
Rome
,
which
was
celebrated
against
them
,
who
condemned
Images
in
Churches
,
and
cast
them
out
,
wherein
it
was
decreed
,
That
images
were
relatively
to
be
worshipped
,
and
the
Reliques
of
Saints
honored
.
This
being
declared
by
their
own
Historian
,
and
other
idolatrous
and
abominable
Constitutions
(
for
which
it
hath
been
branded
for
a
Filthie
Conventicle
)
the
Discourser
might
be
ashamed
to
urge
it
as
a
Consenting
Authority
,
and
that
under
the
Title
of
the
7th
General
Council
,
when
there
was
never
so
many
stiled
truly
General
,
by
almost
half
the
number
:
But
he
had
no
better
to
make
use
of
for
his
purpose
;
Therefore
his
Tradition
maketh
this
a
General
Council
,
and
then
the
Authority
of
this
must
prove
his
Tradition
Indefective
from
Christ
;
and
so
we
run
the
round
still
.
Yet
we
may
excuse
him
,
for
he
had
much
need
of
this
Council
to
make
his
Tradition
of
Image
worship
indefectively
descended
from
Christ
.
Let
him
hugge
it
,
and
perdition
with
it
;
but
we
abhorre
it
as
an
odious
Conspiracy
against
the
Lord
and
his
Christ
.
3.
His
last
consenting
is
humane
also
from
single
witnesses
,
such
as
he
calleth
Fathers
,
though
all
of
them
deserve
not
the
Name
.
Popes
may
be
his
Fathers
;
they
are
none
of
ours
.
He
urgeth
some
passages
out
of
six
of
them
;
which
we
shall
shortly
review
.
1.
In
general
we
premise
,
1.
We
honor
the
venerable
name
of
Fathers
in
the
Church
,
where
truly
named
.
2.
We
say
also
according
to
our
Church
,
Scripture
is
not
to
be
beleeved
for
Fathers
sake
,
but
Fathers
for
Scriptures
sake
:
When
they
leave
this
they
speak
as
men
and
so
are
to
be
esteemed
.
3.
Tradition
generally
used
by
them
signifieth
delivery
of
Gods
mind
by
Scripture
,
as
well
as
voice
,
and
under
both
these
not
the
manner
but
matter
of
Tradition
,
which
is
the
will
of
God
.
Which
being
applyed
to
all
his
particular
Instances
,
might
be
reply
sufficient
to
the
purpose
for
which
he
urgeth
them
:
For
he
overlooks
and
mistakes
them
both
in
their
Authority
and
use
of
the
word
Tradition
,
which
he
claims
every
where
to
be
understood
in
his
sence
,
for
delivery
oral
,
from
mouth
to
mouth
.
2.
In
special
we
return
.
1.
To
his
Celestin
(
whom
he
stileth
Saint
and
Pope
;
)
Two
Titles
that
seldome
have
met
together
,
if
we
may
believe
his
Historians
concerning
the
lives
of
h●s
Popes
.
Yet
we
have
to
do
here
with
what
he
saies
,
more
than
with
what
he
was
:
And
to
that
which
is
urged
by
him
,
That
we
should
belieue
and
retain
what
to
this
very
time
came
by
succession
from
the
Apostles
:
And
did
not
the
Scriptures
come
down
to
us
by
that
succession
?
what
makes
this
passage
more
for
Oral-Tradition
?
Nay
to
what
follows
,
the
Apostles
did
leave
us
the
Scriptures
,
therefore
we
must
follow
them
.
And
whatever
he
speaks
more
of
his
Testimony
relates
as
much
to
scriptural
,
as
to
Oral-Tradition
from
the
Apostles
:
which
we
have
cause
to
beleeve
,
because
the
Ephesine
Council
under
h●m
,
did
confirm
their
decrees
by
Scr
pture
as
their
Caranza
r●ports
.
He
is
then
ou●
witne●s
for
Scripture
more
than
his
●o●
Oral
Tradition
,
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
not
the
way
to
it
,
as
the
Discourser
usually
confoun●s
them
.
2.
As
to
Origen
;
whoever
knoweth
him
can
never
beleeve
him
to
test
he
aga●nst
Scripture
Tradition
:
For
he
is
all
or
mostly
upon
●t
;
Only
his
slip
was
to
abuse
it
too
much
by
Allegorical
Interpretations
of
it
.
He
cannot
therefore
assi
t
the
Disputers
cause
for
Oral-Tradition
opposed
to
the
Scripture
;
unless
his
Allegories
be
Tradition
.
3.
As
to
Tertullians
vote
,
If
thou
beest
but
a
Christian
beleeve
what
is
(
Traditum
)
d●livered
,
&c.
We
quest
on
not
this
Delivery
to
be
from
Scripture
,
whi●h
we
find
him
o●ten
to
urge
in
his
D
scourses
with
the
Adversaries
of
Christs
Incarn●●ion
,
we
do
not
therefore
trust
this
mans
●nterpretation
of
him
:
however
,
we
have
m●ch
more
to
say
about
this
witness
.
4.
As
to
Athanasius
;
it
is
wonderful
that
any
should
be
so
impudent
to
urge
his
Authority
for
Oral-Tradition
against
Scripture
,
when
every
man
may
see
th●t
he
confuteth
the
Arians
from
the
Scriptures
;
and
when
he
useth
the
word
Tradition
,
he
must
understand
it
,
that
,
which
issueth
from
the
written
word
,
and
is
conformed
to
it
,
unlesse
he
would
undo
his
former
proofs
.
He
therefore
will
not
help
the
Discourser
in
the
Cause
for
which
he
produceth
him
.
5.
As
for
Clemens
Alex
.
It
is
most
shameful
that
this
man
should
pick
out
some
independent
shreds
out
of
his
discourse
and
pervert
them
to
his
corrupt
ends
;
when
as
he
is
known
to
be
a
most
strong
Assertor
of
Scriptures
Power
and
Authority
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
;
and
sheweth
it
to
be
the
Cause
of
mens
Errors
,
that
they
forsake
that
Rule
of
Truth
.
He
that
will
know
the
true
Testimony
of
this
witness
must
read
him
.
6.
His
last
is
Austin
,
whom
whosoever
urgeth
as
a
witness
for
Oral-Tradition
against
Scripture
,
must
have
a
face
of
brass
;
for
none
more
maintains
the
written
Truth
of
God
to
be
the
Rule
of
faith
than
He
.
Wilfully
therefore
must
this
man
mistake
him
under
the
notion
of
Tradition
which
with
that
Father
refers
to
Scripture
;
but
he
returns
it
to
his
Popish
Oral-Delivery
.
None
of
these
then
speak
home
to
his
Cause
,
though
he
doth
most
impudently
begg
them
,
or
force
them
.
We
shall
therefore
stay
no
longer
on
this
Head
.
It
is
not
seasonable
here
to
insert
those
Testimonies
of
Fathers
against
him
,
which
are
numerous
,
and
would
swell
into
a
volume
.
The
Champions
of
our
own
Church
who
have
entred
those
lists
heretofore
with
the
Jesuits
have
given
large
Discoveries
of
them
.
He
that
will
see
the
votes
of
Greek
and
Latin
Fathers
in
this
Controversie
may
read
many
compacted
in
that
famous
Chamier
more
faithfully
,
Cham●…
1.
lib
.
〈…〉
18
,
1●…
21.
and
fully
to
give
satisfaction
in
this
matter
.
And
so
we
leave
him
Fatherless
in
his
generation
.
2.
His
question
proposed
is
:
How
shall
we
know
who
enjoyes
this
Tradition
?
or
what
points
have
been
handed
down
by
it
from
the
beginning
?
His
resolution
of
enjoyment
,
is
unto
his
own
Mother-Church
of
Rome
doubtless
;
that
she
enjoyeth
it
in
her
living
voice
,
which
he
would
prove
by
Irenaeus
,
Tertullian
,
and
Chrysologus
.
And
concludes
his
Discourse
true
from
Effects
in
Renouncers
of
Tradition
,
that
there
were
more
Heresies
in
the
first
400
years
than
in
any
400
after
,
&c.
We
shall
survey
this
a
little
.
1.
In
his
one
Question
we
have
two
.
1.
Who
enjoyeth
this
Tradition
Indef●ctive
from
Christ
at
this
day
?
2.
What
points
have
been
handed
down
by
it
from
the
beginning
?
We
shall
note
;
That
his
pretended
answer
is
only
to
the
first
,
unto
the
second
he
speaks
not
one
word
:
which
had
been
Honesty
to
have
done
,
and
would
have
given
us
more
light
concerning
the
matter
in
debate
,
than
any
thing
in
all
his
discourses
.
2.
We
animadvert
,
that
to
the
first
Question
he
answereth
not
one
word
directly
but
obliquely
he
insinuates
it
must
be
the
Church
of
Rome
;
for
he
hath
told
us
before
,
That
none
hold
Tradition
or
are
Traditionary
Christians
,
but
Romish
Catholicks
:
Now
then
,
unto
this
he
is
to
answer
;
who
now
at
this
day
do
injoy
Tradition
,
as
he
hath
stated
it
?
He
saith
,
the
Romish
Church
.
How
doth
he
prove
it
?
He
tells
us
by
the
Fathers
,
if
he
may
trust
them
:
what
a
strange
answer
is
this
?
Can
any
of
the
Fathers
who
lived
so
many
hundred
years
since
,
g●ve
evidence
to
whom
this
injoyment
is
come
at
this
day
?
Let
the
Discourser
bethink
himself
:
Can
any
men
dead
so
long
ago
,
testifie
who
injoy
the
Tradition
of
Christ
in
this
Age
?
Yet
this
is
the
best
return
that
he
giveth
us
.
Can
Irenaeus
,
●ertullian
,
or
Chrysologus
tell
of
what
Religion
Rome
is
at
this
day
?
Egregious
over-sight
!
To
what
purpose
is
it
here
for
him
to
tell
us
,
that
they
say
,
Tradition
is
the
Rule
?
(
however
we
assert
they
mean
Scripture-Tradition
,
and
none
else
but
what
is
conformed
to
it
,
)
Do
they
testifie
that
the
Romish
Church
at
this
day
have
this
Rule
?
This
must
be
to
prove
his
intended
answer
to
his
Question
.
No
man
(
we
suppose
)
could
have
put
him
an
harder
quaere
to
puzzle
him
:
But
the
wit
of
the
man
hath
insuared
him
:
Let
him
see
his
folly
.
3.
We
make
bold
to
ask
him
,
seeing
he
hath
not
touched
one
tittle
of
it
;
What
are
those
points
,
that
by
Tradition
have
been
h●nded
down
to
this
Age
from
the
beginning
?
Let
him
speak
.
Is
the
point
of
the
Popes
Supremacy
over
Christian
Princes
one
?
Is
that
Doctrine
of
Christs
being
Mediator
only
in
his
humane
nature
anothe●
?
Is
the
joyning
of
Mans
merit
unto
Christs
Righteousness
for
justification
one
of
them
?
Are
the
monster
of
Transubstantiation
,
Decrees
for
Image-worship
,
Purgatory
,
Laws
of
Penances
,
or
indulgences
to
be
placed
among
them
?
What
an
ease
had
this
been
to
all
his
Readers
to
have
known
the
Points
that
he
had
meant
?
But
he
durst
not
reveal
,
what
a
sink
of
filthiness
by
his
Tradition
,
is
thus
maintained
by
him
,
indefectively
to
come
down
from
Christ
.
Well
,
fools
sometimes
seem
wise
men
by
holding
their
peace
.
4.
We
who
own
the
Scripture
to
be
the
Rule
of
Fai
h
,
as
senced
by
God
himself
,
do
know
that
we
injoy
Scripture-Tradition
from
the
Apostles
;
which
the
Trent-Authority
it self
durst
not
deny
to
be
the
word
of
God
.
And
all
tho●e
points
of
Faith
and
no
more
than
are
contained
therein
,
we
ma●ntain
were
handed
down
from
the
beginning
,
that
is
,
from
Christ
unto
us
.
He
and
all
his
Traditionary
Auxiliaries
cannot
disprove
it
.
5.
His
pretended
effect
of
more
Heresies
to
be
in
the
first
400
years
by
reason
of
Renouncers
of
Tradition
at
that
time
,
than
in
any
400
years
afterward
,
is
a
great
untruth
in
it self
;
and
implieth
other
iniquities
in
it
:
For
the
Hereticks
which
were
then
,
did
truly
renounce
Apostolical
Tradition
by
word
and
writing
;
But
they
who
renounce
the
Tradition
of
Rome
now
,
leave
only
that
which
is
Apostolical
from
them
:
yet
are
they
called
Hereticks
by
Papists
:
But
no
great
matter
is
it
,
seeing
it
is
only
from
Hereticks
themselves
.
And
to
tell
him
his
own
,
in
the
nine
last
Centuries
may
it
appear
that
more
pernicious
Errors
against
the
true
Faith
of
Christ
,
and
●mpious
practices
have
been
hatched
and
harbored
in
Rome
,
than
were
known
in
all
the
Centuries
before
:
The
comparing
of
the
first
and
last
times
will
prove
it
:
And
all
this
is
not
by
renouncing
but
by
following
Popish
Tradition
under
that
pretence
that
it
was
uninterruptedly
descended
from
Christ
.
We
shall
only
make
this
counter-close
with
him
.
No
man
needs
more
to
doubt
of
the
Truth
of
Scriptures-Tradition
,
and
the
Falshood
of
Popish
Oral-Tradition
,
than
of
the
Existence
of
Mahomet
,
or
Julius
Caesar
,
what
time
soever
they
lived
.
3.
He
adds
some
notes
to
strengthen
his
Allegations
.
1.
That
almost
every
citation
alledged
is
of
Councils
and
Fathers
speaking
directly
against
Hereticks
.
To
which
we
shall
return
these
notes
,
1.
That
[
Almost
]
saved
a
Lye
.
2.
That
his
7th
.
venerable
Council
,
dealt
against
pernicious
Hetericks
(
without
doubt
)
Such
as
denied
Images
to
be
in
Churches
,
and
to
be
worshipped
and
the
Reliques
of
Saints
to
be
honoured
.
Were
he
not
an
Image-Worshipper
himself
he
would
be
ashamed
to
reckon
them
among
Hereticks
,
who
maintained
the
second
Commandment
for
Gods
spiritual
worship
,
against
Image
or
Imagination-worship
of
Iehovah
who
is
a
Spirit
.
His
relative
distinction
will
clear
it
no
more
from
Idolatry
than
it
could
the
Israelites
worshipping
of
him
,
who
brought
them
out
of
the
land
of
Egypt
in
the
Image
of
a
Calf
.
2.
That
though
some
Fathers
and
Councils
speak
highly
of
Scripture
as
containing
all
Faith
,
&c.
yet
it
must
be
mark't
,
whether
it
be
of
Scripture
senc't
,
or
to
be
senc't
,
&c.
O
most
subtle
note
!
It
telleth
us
that
some
Fathers
and
Councils
speak
highly
of
Scripture
as
a
Rule
of
Faith
,
or
containing
all
Faith
:
this
is
granted
fully
by
him
,
which
he
spake
not
out
before
.
2.
Yet
he
bids
us
mark
whether
they
assert
this
of
Scripture
,
senc't
or
to
be
senc't
:
which
is
the
greatest
mark
of
folly
that
ever
any
man
put
upon
himself
;
to
question
Councils
whether
they
should
maintain
the
Scripture
to
contain
all
Faith
,
and
yet
not
senc't
.
Is
not
Faith
,
or
doctrine
to
be
beleeved
the
sence
of
Scripture
?
Sure
he
must
be
sick
of
that
phrensie
,
which
he
chargeth
on
others
,
to
suppose
such
persons
,
and
Assemblies
to
speak
unsenc't
Scriptures
.
3.
If
he
had
lived
to
ask
them
,
by
whom
these
Scriptures
were
senc't
?
They
would
have
answered
,
by
God
himself
:
They
being
his
word
.
3.
He
notes
again
,
That
we
may
observe
it
frequ●nt
in
Fathers
to
force
Hereticks
to
accept
the
sence
of
Scripture
from
th●se
who
gave
them
the
letter
;
and
that
by
Tradition
:
but
never
to
bend
Tradition
to
Scripture
or
to
say
,
Vniv●rsal
Tradition
is
insufficient
witho
t
it
.
We
sh●ll
he●e
note
also
.
1.
That
the
Fath●rs
do
for●e
H
retick●
to
the
innate
sence
of
Script●re
●nspired
by
God
,
not
affixed
by
Tradi●
on
.
2.
That
the
true
Fathers
did
subject
all
Tradition
unto
Scripture
to
be
tried
thereby
.
3.
That
universal
Tradition
with
them
was
both
Scriptural
and
Oral
;
therefore
they
did
not
allow
Tradition
by
word
to
be
true
,
unless
it
were
evidently
apparent
in
the
written
Truth
of
●od
:
nor
to
be
sufficient
without
it
.
4
He
saith
.
It
is
impossible
that
the
Fathers
should
hold
Scripture
thus
interpretable
the
Rule
of
Faith
;
because
the
Hereticks
,
did
h●ld
it
their
Rule
,
&c.
We
reply
,
1.
What
means
Scripture
(
thus
Interpretable
)
?
Is
it
by
his
Tradition
?
we
verily
beleeve
,
that
they
never
held
Scripture
so
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
:
but
only
as
senced
by
God
.
2.
What
a
sottish
reason
is
●dded
?
That
the
Fathers
could
not
urge
Scripture
for
Truth
,
because
the
Hereticks
did
urge
it
for
their
Errors
:
Let
the
Discourser
answer
this
:
could
not
Christ
urge
Scripture
to
maintain
Truth
,
because
the
Devil
ci●ed
it
to
tempt
him
?
Let
him
●e
dumb
,
if
he
cannot
answer
this
,
and
we
are
sure
,
The
case
is
the
same
.
His
vaunts
there●ore
are
the
fro●h
of
folly
;
Scripture
hath
not
lost
its
edge
to
cut
down
his
Popish
Tradition
;
neither
hath
it
outfaced
Reason
or
true
Authority
,
which
is
alone
from
Heaven
.
Let
h
m
triumph
therefore
in
the
ruins
of
his
Cause
:
His
wild
sh●uts
will
not
amaze
wise
and
sober
Christians
.
His
last
shelter
is
,
that
in
all
this
he
hath
but
only
explicated
his
Churches
sence
;
and
then
he
thinks
he
is
safe
enough
,
and
shall
be
secured
under
her
wing
.
We
shall
try
whether
he
speak
Truth
in
this
;
that
he
may
not
say
any
thing
w●s
left
unconsidered
;
though
it
do
not
much
concern
us
,
or
the
p●e●ent
Cause
,
whether
he
have
given
us
herein
only
the
sence
of
his
Church
or
not
,
seeing
all
is
contrary
to
the
sence
of
God
.
4.
His
last
work
is
,
to
shew
that
all
his
discourse
is
the
Sense
of
his
own
Romish
Church
,
and
that
held
out
in
her
famous
Representative
,
the
Council
of
Trent
,
not
by
any
private
Authors
(
as
the
Protestants
mode
is
to
affix
on
her
)
And
their
sence
he
giveth
in
their
several
Sessions
4th
.
5th
,
6th
,
7th
,
13th
,
14th
,
21st
,
22d
,
23d
,
24th
.
25th
.
His
close
is
,
This
is
the
Faith
of
blessed
Peter
,
&c.
Whereunto
we
say
.
1.
He
seems
in
all
th●s
to
be
an
obed●ent
son
to
his
Trent-Fathers
;
let
him
have
their
blessing
if
he
prove
so
.
2.
We
are
not
swayed
by
Trent
Canons
;
they
are
improper
mediums
to
use
unto
Protestants
,
they
deny
all
their
Authority
for
Tradition
.
3.
He
need
not
put
the
Protestants
in
that
Parenthesis
,
for
they
have
as
m●●h
battered
his
Counc●●s
,
as
private
Authors
.
4.
As
to
the
closing
acclamation
of
Trent
.
This
is
the
Faith
of
Blessed
Peter
.
This
is
the
Faith
of
the
Fathers
.
This
is
the
Faith
of
the
Orthodox
.
It
is
as
mad
an
outcry
,
as
that
of
Demetrius
and
his
Rout
,
Act.
19.28
.
Great
is
Diana
of
the
Ephesians
.
For
this
Tradition-Faith
hath
got
more
revenue
to
the
Roman
See
;
than
ever
Diana's
shrines
brought
in
to
Demetrius
and
the
Crafts-men
imploied
in
that
work
.
This
was
none
of
the
Apostles
Faith
,
but
they
do
bely
them
.
Unto
this
declaration
of
his
Trent-Confession
,
he
adds
four
notes
.
1.
That
the
Council
constantly
professeth
Tradition
.
2.
That
it
layeth
claim
perpetually
to
th●
uninterruptedness
of
this
Tradition
.
3.
Tha●
it
makes
the
suggestion
of
the
Holy
Ghost
▪
efficacious
to
perpetuate
the
Tradition
of
D●ctrine
;
As
in
their
Decree
about
Iustification
,
and
their
Sacrament
of
the
Eucharis●
.
4.
That
(
though
the
Council
mention
the
Holy
Scriptures
with
Tradition
)
ye●…
it
is
very
rarely
,
and
then
Interpreting
the●
by
Tradition
;
Jam
.
5.14
,
15.
as
in
that
text
of
the
Apostle
about
the
anoynting
of
the
sick-f●…
healing
,
&c.
To
all
these
notes
we
reply
.
1.
Let
it
be
granted
that
the
Council
constantly
professe
Popish
Tradition
.
Protestants
do
as
constantly
deny
it
.
2.
That
it
claims
the
uninterruptedness
of
it
from
Christ
;
Is
it
therefore
so
because
those
deluded
guides
do
claim
it
?
It
hath
been
proved
that
the
Tradition
meerly
Popish
is
Apostolical
from
Christ
;
therefore
could
not
uninterruptedly
descend
from
him
.
They
are
mad
Claimers
.
3.
Though
they
arrogate
the
suggestion
of
the
Holy
Ghost
to
p●rpetuate
their
Tradition
,
yet
the
spirit
of
Truth
abhorrs
it
.
And
specially
in
those
two
decrees
mentioned
,
which
concern
justification
,
by
mingling
man's
works
with
Christs
Righteousness
;
And
Transubstantiation
in
their
Sacrament
of
the
Eucharist
;
no
doctrins
of
Error
are
more
Characteristical
of
Antichrist
,
than
those
as
they
are
stated
by
the
Trent
Decrees
.
4.
That
it
doth
so
rarely
mention
Scripture
,
and
when
it
doth
,
that
it
submits
it
to
the
Interpretation
of
Tradition
;
we
must
charge
it
as
a
sin
on
them
if
this
Testimony
be
true
:
For
nothing
but
Scripture
is
inspired
of
God
,
to
give
forth
Doctrins
of
Faith
:
But
this
child
may
bely
his
Fathers
,
in
this
as
in
other
things
afterward
,
though
they
use
not
Scripture
so
frequently
and
honestly
as
they
should
:
which
appears
in
hammering
out
their
Sacrament
of
extreme
Vnction
to
fit
men
for
death
out
of
those
words
which
express
only
an
extraordinary
work
of
anoynting
with
oyl
for
that
time
;
and
that
was
only
to
restore
to
life
and
health
.
And
who
dares
intrude
into
the
office
of
Christ
to
make
Sacraments
,
but
only
the
Antichrist
?
so
we
give
him
notes
for
notes
.
Next
to
these
,
1.
He
objects
against
himself
;
Why
then
is
the
Holy
Scripure
made
use
of
at
all
by
the
Council
,
and
that
so
solemnly
?
Nay
,
why
doth
it
put
Scripture
constantly
before
Tradition
.
This
difficulty
he
undertakes
to
satisfie
fully
.
Though
he
saith
,
it
is
no
proper
season
,
&c.
Why
then
doth
he
propose
it
.
We
shall
try
how
he
performs
this
task
:
He
may
salve
his
credit
somewh●t
,
if
he
do
it
,
which
is
in
no
little
danger
to
be
lost
.
1.
His
scope
is
to
acquit
his
Trent-Fathers
from
the
guilt
imputable
to
them
,
for
making
use
of
Scripture
and
setting
it
before
his
Tradition
.
An
heavy
Crime
!
which
if
prov'd
,
would
declare
them
honester
:
Or
if
exc●sed
and
palliated
by
him
,
as
done
in
design
to
exalt
Tradition
,
It
must
evince
them
to
be
a
Pack
of
Hypocrites
;
or
himself
to
bely
them
.
For
which
his
Mother
should
severely
censure
him
.
2.
To
do
this
he
leads
us
about
the
bush
to
look
upon
Aristotle
and
Vitruvius
;
whose
minds
,
if
we
would
know
,
we
mu●●
make
use
of
Scientifical
discoursing
interpreters
,
or
a
Carpenters
practical
Art
:
And
such
is
,
Tradition
Popish
unto
the
Scripture
(
As
he
saith
)
About
three
Pages
he
spends
in
those
Extravagancies
.
But
in
short
.
1.
We
ask
,
May
not
an
able
writing
Commentator
salve
difficulties
in
such
Authors
,
as
well
as
a
Discourser
?
If
so
,
Scripture
may
be
opened
by
Scripture
:
neither
will
he
gain
one
jot
by
this
Ambushment
.
His
girds
against
the
use
of
Grammar
and
Criticismes
in
opening
Scripture
so
frequently
and
frivolously
repeated
,
may
perswade
us
he
hath
little
skill
in
either
;
And
then
it
is
no
rare
thing
for
men
to
speak
evil
of
the
things
they
know
not
.
His
flout
that
this
kind
of
interpreting
is
of
sleight
force
,
and
at
best
,
good
only
for
Ecclesiastical
Rhetorick
,
or
Sermons
,
savours
of
a
Profane
spirit
:
seeing
(
what
ever
Papists
deem
)
Sermons
that
are
such
indeed
,
are
convincing
discoveries
of
the
Gospel
,
applied
effectually
to
save
souls
:
But
Papists
care
for
no
such
Sermons
;
They
will
quickly
batter
down
their
Tradition
,
as
ungrammatical
,
and
a
Syntackical
;
which
is
plain
non-sense
.
In
all
this
we
have
no
word
of
answer
to
the
objection
:
only
he
confidently
concludes
,
Tradition
gives
us
Christs
sence
,
that
is
,
the
life
of
the
letter
ascertain'd
to
our
hand
;
Against
which
Authority
of
interpreting
,
notwithstanding
the
Grammar
and
Reason
of
Scripture
,
we
shal
urge
only
his
own
Maldonat
:
Vellem
ut
unam
aliquam
ex
his
quae
bonos
Authores
habent
sequi
possem
Interpretationem
:
sed
fateor
praeter
voluntatem
meam
in
novam
rationibus
majoribus
impelli
.
Maldon
.
Matthew
19.11
.
I
would
follow
(
saith
he
)
the
Interpretation
which
good
Authors
have
,
but
I
confess
my self
to
be
forced
into
a
new
one
by
greater
reasons
:
Reason
then
,
and
not
Tradition
swaied
with
him
best
,
for
Scriptures
Interpretation
.
Let
the
Discourser
grapple
with
him
:
He
speaks
in
this
like
a
man
:
but
we
have
Reason
,
and
the
very
Reason
of
G●d
helping
us
to
interpre●…
Scripture
,
which
indeed
giveth
life
to
th●
letter
,
and
moves
it
as
the
body
naturally
but
Popish
Tradition
moveth
it
indeed
artificially
,
to
counterfeit
that
life
which
it
truly
wants
.
3.
After
this
diversion
,
he
giveth
this
answer
.
The
Council
proceeding
upon
Traditionary-Interpretation
,
honors
Scriptures
Testimony
,
so
as
to
put
it
before
Tradition
:
Scripture
thus
alledged
,
having
the
same
force
,
as
if
the
Apostle
or
Evangelist
himself
did
sit
in
the
Council
,
&c.
This
is
the
summe
of
his
answer
,
with
some
other
loose
Appendic●s
thereunto
:
Hereabout
note
.
1.
He
satisfieth
not
,
the
first
part
,
why
the
Council
makes
use
of
the
Scripture
at
all
?
This
perhaps
were
harder
to
answer
;
But
we
have
told
you
before
;
They
can
do
nothing
as
to
the
Popish
design
without
Scripture
cloak
and
pretence
to
cover
it
and
carry
it
on
.
2.
He
doth
most
grosly
abuse
his
Fathers
,
making
them
to
set
their
Tradition
before
Scripture
in
the
Authority
of
an
Interpreter
:
These
are
their
own
words
;
Omnes
libros
tam
Veteris
,
quàm
Novi
Testamenti
(
cum
utriusque
unus
Deus
sit
Author
)
nec
non
Traditiones
ipsas
,
&c.
pari
pietatis
affectu
ac
reverentia
suscipit
ac
Veneratur
sacro-sancta
Synodus
.
Conc
.
Trid
.
Sess.
2d●
An
,
1546
All
the
Books
both
of
the
old
and
new
Testament
(
seeing
one
God
is
the
Author
of
both
)
as
also
Traditions
themselves
,
the
Holy
Synod
receiveth
and
honoureth
with
an
equal
Affection
of
Piety
and
Reverence
.
What
Adversary
of
the
Trent-Council
,
can
so
disingeniously
misinterpret
their
words
any
way
to
prefer
Tradition
before
Scripture
when
they
say
expresly
,
they
do
equally
receive
and
honour
them
?
What
a
degenerate
son
then
is
the
Discourser
thus
to
abuse
them
?
for
he
is
wholly
silent
of
the
work
of
this
Session
.
3.
What
simple
Hypocrites
doth
he
make
his
Fath●rs
,
that
they
should
set
Scripture
before
Tradition
in
word
,
and
yet
make
it
lacky
after
it
indeed
;
For
Tradition
is
made
the
life
,
and
Scripture
only
the
carcase
,
or
dead
letter
.
How
doth
he
make
this
council
a
very
Cheat
?
Notwithstanding
we
think
better
of
their
words
;
and
beleeve
if
they
were
surviving
,
they
would
look
upon
this
man
as
an
unlucky
Son
,
born
out
of
due
time
,
so
to
bewray
them
and
betray
their
cause
,
as
if
it
were
an
Hypocritical
design
.
1.
We
must
carefully
and
candidly
review
his
words
and
see
how
his
reason
abetts
his
answer
:
No
wonder
saith
he
,
the
Council
honors
Scripture
Testimony
,
so
as
to
put
it
before
Tradition
,
they
keeping
to
Traditionary
Interpretation
.
For
Scripture
thus
alledged
and
secur
d
hath
the
same
force
as
if
the
Evangelist
or
Apostle
himself
should
sit
in
the
Council
,
and
by
living
voice
declare
his
own
sence
in
the
matter
:
To
whom
what
Reverenc●
(
we
suppose
he
meant
)
however
the
Typographer
hath
abused
him
to
put
in
Deference
for
i●
,
the
Council
would
have
given
is
obvious
to
imagine
.
Here
w●
animadvert
.
1.
Expresly
he
s●ith
,
Scripture
sen●'●
by
Tradition
hath
the
same
force
as
an
Evangelist
sitt●ng
in
Council
.
So
then
,
Tradition
supplieth
the
place
of
an
Apostle
or
Evang
list
:
Scripture
is
the
matter
under
debate
,
what
sence
it
shall
bear
;
The
Council
hereupon
giveth
Reverence
to
Tradition
as
to
its
president
Apostolical
.
Is
not
this
handsomely
con●rived
?
Who
durst
put
Tradition
Popish
into
the
room
of
an
Evangelist
or
Apostle
,
but
Antichristi●n
Impudence
.
2.
This
Apostle
Tradition
giv●ng
sence
to
Scripture
the
Council
receiveth
it
,
and
for
recompence
to
this
diminution
,
doth
in
order
of
words
set
the
Scripture
before
Tradition
:
And
for
this
the
Discourser
procla●ms
the
Protestants
may
see
,
what
high
esteem
their
Church
giveth
to
Gods
word
:
very
high
indeed
!
to
take
away
its
life
by
their
Tradition
;
and
then
g●ve
it
a
mock
Primacy
in
naming
it
fi●st
.
Even
such
as
the
Ruffian
Souldiers
vouchsa●ed
to
the
Lord
himself
,
they
put
him
on
a
purple
Robe
and
Crown
of
Thorns
;
an●
then
cry
,
Hail
King
of
the
Jews
,
and
so
cruc
fi●
:
him
.
Such
Honour
gives
the
Trent-Council
to
Scriptures
,
unless
their
Assertor
do
bely
them
:
If
he
do
,
vapulet
ille
.
3.
Suppose
an
Apostle
himself
did
sit
in
Council
as
divers
did
in
that
of
Jerusalem
,
Act.
15
,
13.
&c.
A●●
9.11
to
determine
the
matter
about
Circumcision
:
we
find
the
Apostle
James
urging
a
Scripture-Promise
out
of
the
Prophet
Amos
for
inlarging
Gods
Church
among
the
Genti●es
,
without
imposing
on
them
the
Legal
O●dinances
:
Gal.
1.8
.
Did
that
Apostle
arrogate
to
himself
to
give
life
to
that
Scripture
,
or
set
his
determinat●on
above
it
?
Did
he
not
submit
his
judgment
to
it
?
Would
it
not
incur
the
danger
of
that
Anathema
,
by
an
Apostle
,
as
mu●h
as
by
an
Angel
,
to
impose
a
sence
upon
Gods
Scripture
more
than
simply
his
own
.
Yet
thus
this
Disputer
cal●eth
in
his
Council
to
him
to
intrude
on
Gods
Scripture
their
Tradition-sence
,
which
makes
it
none
of
Gods
word
indeed
,
and
then
read
Scripture
before
Tradition
as
a
great
point
of
hono●r
done
unto
it
.
In
sum
his
answer
●s
full
of
mockery
and
derision
o●
the
holy
Scripture
,
and
of
the
God
of
it
,
for
if
it
be
h●s
word
(
as
the
Trent
Confession
ack●owledgeth
)
He
himself
must
spir●t
it
,
and
put
that
life
into
it
,
by
wh●ch
he
dot●
regene●ate
souls
,
to
attribute
this
then
to
Tradition
,
to
give
life
to
Scripture
,
which
is
Gods
word
can
no
more
truly
be
said
,
than
that
Tradition
giveth
God
his
Being
;
for
God
and
his
word
are
reciprocally
related
,
and
must
both
be
honoured
or
abused
togegether
.
And
as
he
liveth
will
he
avenge
these
blasphemies
against
his
revealed
Truth
,
as
against
himself
.
It
is
but
vain
repetition
for
the
Discourser
to
tell
us
,
That
they
sleight
and
undervalue
only
Scriptures-letter
as
used
to
hammer
out
a
Faith
by
wordish
skills
;
He
hath
been
told
the
sence
of
Scripture
is
inspired
,
and
innate
,
wherein
are
fixed
the
Principles
of
faith
,
not
upon
any
words
of
men
:
But
this
sence
cuts
the
sinews
of
the
Romish
Faith
;
which
makes
the
man
and
his
Assistants
to
storm
,
and
bespatter
it
as
the
Issue
of
wordish
skills
,
and
cause
of
a
Bedlam
of
new
Sects
in
England
.
Let
them
go
on
so
to
reproach
Gods
word
;
Ignorance
of
the
Scripture
breeds
error
and
not
the
true
knowledge
of
it
,
which
guides
to
Truth
and
Life
.
They
have
Bedlams
enough
of
Sects
and
Orders
in
the
Romish
Territories
,
which
are
the
proper
Off-spring
of
their
Tradition
,
their
labour
might
be
better
spent
in
curing
them
which
they
never
mean
to
do
:
for
Spiritual
madness
is
the
health
of
Popish
Religion
.
He
closeth
with
a
Sarcastical
Reflexion
on
a
mighty
Man
of
talk
,
who
might
say
,
This
is
an
excellent
way
to
bring
all
into
their
Churches
hands
.
If
ever
there
can
be
a
more
mighty
man
of
talk
,
and
lesse
of
reason
than
this
Discourser
,
let
the
brand
lye
upon
him
;
but
this
surely
he
w
ll
not
deny
,
that
his
design
by
these
discourses
is
to
perswade
wits
to
visit
Rome
,
and
bewitch
them
with
his
Tr●dition
.
This
success
would
rejoyce
him
more
than
to
hear
his
Books
were
so
much
sought
after
.
But
God
hath
given
forth
that
light
,
which
will
frustrate
his
design
.
Yet
he
concludes
confidently
,
till
letter
and
sence
of
Scripture
can
be
proved
knowable
,
as
to
build
faith
on
by
any
other
way
than
this
of
Tradition
,
(
that
is
Popish
)
he
cannot
hinder
his
Inferences
,
neither
will
any
be
ever
able
to
confute
his
discourse
.
We
shall
shut
up
too
with
th●s
short
reply
.
1.
Tradition
meerly
Popish
hath
been
proved
Apostatical
from
Christ
,
therefore
defective
enough
.
2.
The
letter
and
sence
of
Scripture
have
been
made
knowable
for
faith
,
to
build
on
,
primarily
from
heaven
,
secondarily
by
Tradition
Scriptural
as
well
as
oral
,
more
faithful
than
any
from
Rome
.
3.
His
Inferences
therefore
vanish
whether
he
hinder
them
or
not
;
And
if
after
all
this
,
his
Discourse
be
not
confuted
,
we
leave
it
to
the
judicious
and
impartial
Reader
to
judge
.
Hitherto
he
hath
shewed
his
strength
for
support
of
the
Indefectiveness
of
Popish
Tradition
from
Christ
,
(
which
he
may
conceive
impregnable
)
but
wise
men
see
to
be
but
a
Paper-fortification
,
that
can
endure
no
solid
rational
charge
aga●nst
it
.
Yet
before
he
ends
he
hath
something
to
say
for
himself
,
for
his
Romish
Cathol●cks
and
to
the
Protestants
.
1.
For
himself
,
he
saith
,
his
discourses
are
the
very
sense
of
the
Romish
Church
in
its
Representative
,
the
Trent
Council
.
Whether
it
be
so
or
not
it
matters
not
much
with
us
,
as
to
the
C●use
;
But
he
speaks
not
true
,
for
his
doctrin
,
and
the
Trent-decree
do
vastly
differ
in
the
terms
,
however
he
being
born
so
long
after
his
Fathers
were
de●d
,
undertakes
an
hard
task
to
express
their
minds
so
farr
disson●nt
unto
their
words
.
Let
him
answer
it
to
his
Superiors
.
2.
His
Romish
Catholicks
he
vindicates
and
commends
for
adhering
f●st
to
the
Rule
of
Tradition
when
the
Breach
(
as
he
calleth
it
)
was
in
England
;
And
hereby
the
most
vulgar
of
them
is
ascertain'd
that
they
are
in
the
truth
by
common
sense
,
and
Gods
goodness
requireth
no
more
of
them
,
but
so
to
receive
their
Tradition
,
which
is
a
certain
means
to
judge
,
they
should
be
Papists
and
not
Protestants
,
&c.
1.
That
Romish
Catholicks
did
adhere
at
that
time
unto
Popish-Tradition
we
grant
,
but
that
they
received
Tradition
Indefective
from
Christ
we
deny
.
2.
That
God
requireth
no
more
of
those
souls
,
than
to
receive
Popish
Tradition
in
order
to
their
salvation
,
is
both
Blasphemy
against
the
Lord
,
who
commands
all
to
search
the
Scriptures
,
that
therein
they
may
find
Christ
their
life
;
and
horrid
cruelty
to
those
poor
souls
so
to
perswade
them
to
persist
in
the
way
of
perdition
.
O
poor
sheep
committed
unto
such
Pastors
!
whose
doctrin
is
,
Ignorance
to
be
the
mother
of
Devotion
,
which
God
teacheth
to
be
the
high
way
to
destruction
.
3.
He
chargeth
the
Protestants
.
1.
To
be
Innovators
,
and
Renouncers
of
Tradition
.
2.
To
be
Persecutors
of
Romish
Catholicks
,
at
that
time
adhering
to
it
.
3.
That
they
chose
a
new
Rule
,
Scripture
privately
interpreted
.
4.
That
hereby
they
are
cut
off
from
the
Root
of
Faith
,
and
from
the
Church
:
The
guilt
of
which
Fact
neither
Humane
Authority
,
&c.
For
defense
,
we
say
,
1.
That
Protestants
in
the
year
1559.
and
many
years
before
,
did
not
renounce
that
Tradition
Scriptural
and
Oral
,
which
did
truly
and
indefectively
descend
from
Christ
;
neither
were
they
Innovators
of
that
Faith
:
But
they
renounced
Popish
Tradition
as
being
of
a
long
time
Apostatical
from
Christ
;
and
restored
the
use
of
Scriptures
,
and
preached
the
Everlasting
Gospel
from
thence
to
the
throwing
down
of
the
Romish
Babel
.
which
was
a
glorious
work
of
God
;
and
hath
been
carried
on
successfully
by
the
Men
of
God
to
this
day
;
For
which
they
will
be
had
in
everlasting
remembrance
.
2.
As
for
persecution
for
that
cause
,
of
holding
Tradition
,
we
find
none
,
If
for
maintaining
the
Popes
Supremacy
against
their
own
natural
Soveraign
,
or
other
traiterous
Attempts
any
suffered
,
this
was
farre
from
being
persecuted
for
Religion
.
3.
That
Protestants
then
chose
Scripture
privately
interpreted
,
as
a
new
Rule
of
Faith
,
is
a
slander
cast
upon
them
by
this
Discourser
and
his
Adherents
:
They
hold
Scripture
as
inspired
and
senced
by
God
only
,
which
is
no
private
Resolution
o●
Mans
:
neither
do
they
see
vanity
in
it
,
but
the
very
saving
Truth
of
God
,
in
Christs
Jesus
thereby
conveighed
wherein
they
rejoyce
and
will
rejoyce
.
4.
That
hereby
Protestants
are
cut
off
from
the
Root
of
Faith
,
or
the
Body
of
the
Church
,
which
is
Christs
,
is
an
Empty
Fable
;
the
Disputer
may
tell
his
simple
Papists
so
,
but
Scriptures-Assertors
know
,
they
have
hereby
more
rooting
in
Christ
,
and
so
more
real
Communion
with
his
Body
,
the
Church
,
being
separated
from
that
Adulteress
of
Rome
.
And
as
for
any
guilt
of
this
fact
,
they
need
no
Humane
Authority
,
Multitude
,
Prosperity
,
Continuance
,
nor
yet
any
Voluminous
wordish
Excuses
to
Efface
it
,
(
However
their
Apology
heretofore
given
out
is
unanswerable
by
any
Jesuitical
Accuser
)
But
God
himself
doth
justifie
them
by
his
own
Call
;
Revel
.
18.4
.
Come
out
of
her
,
my
People
,
that
ye
〈…〉
not
Partakers
of
her
sins
,
and
that
ye
receive
not
of
h●r
plagues
.
This
voice
they
obeye●
and
the
Lord
became
their
God
;
and
he
hath
owned
,
and
doth
own
this
Separation
from
that
Idolatress
at
this
day
.
O
that
this
voice
might
be
heard
in
the
ears
of
them
who
yet
are
sitting
in
the
Regions
of
darkness
,
and
valley
of
the
shadow
of
death
under
Romish
Tyranny
;
that
poor
souls
might
flie
from
Traditions
Snares
and
pits
made
to
destroy
them
:
For
they
,
Jam
.
2.8
.
who
observe
lying
vanities
,
forsake
their
own
mercy
.
Behold
the
End
of
this
Sure-Footing
.
FINIS
.