Images de page
PDF
ePub

66

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

"come?" Again, p. 30. "If God Almighty hath in all "forts and manners provided his church, that the may enlighten every man in his way that goeth the way of a man; then let every man confider which is the fit way for himself, and what in other matters of that 66 way he accounteth evidence. And if there be no in"tereft in his foul to make him loth to believe what in "another matter of the like nature he doth not stick at, "or heavy to practise what he fees clearly enough, L "fear not his choice." Once more, directing a man in his fearch after rational fatisfaction in matters of religion, he hath this paffage, p. 46. "Besides this, he must have "this care, that he feek what the nature of the subject can yield; and not as those physicians, who, when "they have promifed no less than immortality, can at "laft only reach to fome confervation of health or youth " in fome fmall degree: fo I could with the author to "well affure himself, first that there is poffibly an infallibility, before he be too earneft to be contented withi nothing lefs. For what if human nature fhould not "be capable of fo great a good ? Would he therefore "think it fitting to live without any religion, because he "could not get fuch a one as himself defired, though "with more than a man's wish? Were it not rational "to fee, whether, among religions, fome one have not "fuch notable advantages over the reft, as in reason it "might feem human nature might be contented withal? "Let him caft his account with the dearest things he "hath, his own or friends lives, his eftate, his hope of pofterity, and fee upon what terms of advantage he "is ready to venture all thefe; and then return to reli"gion, and fee whether, if he do not venture his foul upon the like, if it be truly reafon, or fome other not "confeffed motive, which withdraws him. For my own

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

66

cr

[ocr errors]

part, as I doubt not of an infallibility, fo I doubt not "but, fetting that afide, there be thofe excellencies "found on the Catholic party which may force a man to prefer it, and to venture all he hath upon it, be"fore all other religions and fects in the world. Why "then may not one who, after long fearching, findeth no infallibility, reft hirnfelf on the like, fuppofing man's 66 nature affords no better?"

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

Are not thefe fair conceffions, which the evidence and force of truth have extorted from thefe authors? fo that it feems that that which Mr S. calls a civil piece of Atheiftry, (Letter to his anfwerer, p. 5.), is advanced in moft exprefs words by his best friends; and therefore I hope he will (as he threatens) "be fmart with them in oppofition to fo damnable and fundamental an error." And whenever he attempts this, I would intreat him to remember, that he hath thefe two things to prove: 1. That no evidence but demonftration can give a man fufficient affurance of any thing. 2. That a bare poffi bility that a thing may be otherwife, is a rational caufe of doubting, and a wife ground of fufpenfe. Which when he hath proved, I fhall not grudge him his infallibility.

SECT. V. That fcripture is fufficient to convince the most acute adverfaries, and that it is fufficiently certain.

[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]

"T"

[ocr errors]

HE laft part of this third difcourfe endeavours to fhew, "That the fcripture is not convictive "of the moft obftinate and acute adverfaries." As for the obftinate, he knows my mind already. Let us fee why the moft acute adverfary may not be convinced by fcripture: "Becaufe, (as he objects, p. 28.), 1. We can not be certain that this book is God's word, becaufe of the many strange abfurdities and herefies in the open letter as it lies; as that God hath hands and feet, "&c. and because of the contradictions in it." To which I have already returned an answer. 2. Because (as he faith, p. 31.) we cannot be certain of the truth of the letter in any particular text, that it was not "foifted in, or fome way altered in its fignificativeness; and if it be a negative propofition, that the particle not was not inferted; if affirmative, not left out." And if we pretend to be certain of this, he demands our demontration for it, p. 31. But how unreasonable this demand is, I hope I have fufficiently thewn. And to thew it yet farther, I afk him, How their church knows that the particle not was not left out of any text in which it is not found in their copies? I know he hath a ready anfwer, viz. by oral tradition. But this (according to

[ocr errors]

him, p. 116.) only reaches to "fcripture's letter, fo far as it is coincident with the main body of Christian "doctrine;" concerning the reft of fcripture, it is impoffible (according to his own principles) that they should have any fecurity that the particle not was not unduly inferted, or left out, by the tranfcribers. Nay, as to thofe texts of fcripture which fall in with the main body of Christian doctrine, I demand his demonstration, that the particle not was not unduly inferted or left out, not only in thofe texts, but also in the oral tradition of the doctrines coincident with the fenfe of those texts. If he fay, it was impoffible any age fhould confpire to leave out or infert the particle not in the oral tradition; fo fay I it was that they thould confpire to leave it out of the written text: but then I differ from him thus far, that I do not think this naturally impoffible, fo as that it can rigorously be demonftrated; but only morally impoffible, fo that no body hath any reafon to doubt of it; which, to a prudent man is as good as a demonstration. Pyrrho himself never advanced any principle of fcepticifm beyond this, viz. That men ought to question the credit of all books, concerning which they cannot demonftrate as to every fentence in them, that the particle not was not inferted, if it be affirmative; or left out, if it be negative. If fo much be required to free a man from reasonable doubting concerning a book, how happy are they that have attained to infallibility? What he faith (p. 32.) concerning the varia lectiones of fcripture, hath already had a fufficient answer.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

§ 2. In his fourth difcourfe he endeavours to fhew, (p. 33.), that "the fcripture is not certain in itself; and, confequently, not afcertained to us." 1, "Not certain, materially confidered, as confifting of fuch "and fuch characters; because books are liable to be "burnt, torn, blotted, worn out," p. 34. We grant it is not impoffible but that any, or all the books in the world, may be burnt but then we fay likewife, that a book fo univerfally difperfed may easily be preserved; though we have no affurance that God will preserve it, in cafe all men fhould be fo foolith or fo carelels as to en deavour to fuffer the abolition of it. But it feems the fcriptures cannot be a rule of faith, if they be liable to

any

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

any external accidents: and this he tells us, (p. 34.), Though it may feem a remote and impertinent excep"tion, yet to one who confiders the wife difpofitions of "divine providence, it will deferve a deep confidera"tion; because the falvation of mankind being the end "of God's making nature, the means to it should be more fettled, ftrong, and unalterable, than any other "piece of nature whatever." But, notwithstanding this wife reafon, this exception ftill feems to me both remote and impertinent for if this which he calls a reason be a truth, it will from thence neceffarily follow, not only that the doctrine of Chrift must be conveyed by fuch a means as is more unalterable than the course of nature, but alfo, by a clear parity of reason, that all the means of our falvation do operate towards the accomplishing of their end with greater certainty than the fire burns, or the fun fhines; which they can never do, unless they operate more neceffarily than any natural causes. How they can do fo upon voluntary agents, I defire Mr S. to inform me.

[ocr errors]

§3. He proceeds by a long harangue to fhew, p. 34that not only these material characters in themselves "are corruptible, but in complection with the caufes "actually laid in the world to preferve them entire ; "becaufe either thofe caufes are material, and then "they are alfo liable to continual alterations; or spi"ritual, that is, the minds of men, and from these we may with good reafon hope for a greater degree of conftancy than from any other piece of nature: which, by the way, is a very ftrange paradox, that the actions of voluntary agents have a greater certainty and conftancy in them than thofe of natural agents; of which the fall of angels and men, compared with the conti. nuance of the fun and ftars in their firft ftate, is a very good evidence.

.

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

§ 4. But he adds a caution, p. 35. "that they are perfectly unalterable from their nature, and unerrable, "if due circumstances be obferved; that is, if due propo"fals be made to beget certain knowledge, and due care "ufed to attend to fuch propofals." But who can warrant, that due propofals will always be made to men, and due care used by them? If these be uncertain, where

is the conftancy and unerrablenefs he talks fo much of? So that, notwithstanding the conftancy of this spiritual caufe, the mind of man, of preferving feriptures entire ; yet, in order to this, (as he tells us, p. 36.), so many

66

actions are to be done, which are compounded and "made up of an innumerable multitude of feveral par"ticularities to be observed, every of which may be "mistaken apart, each being a diftinct little action in its "fingle felf; fuch as is the tranfcribing of a whole book, "confifting of fuch myriads of words, fingle letters, and "titles or tops; and the feveral actions of writing over "each of thefe fo fhort and curfory, that it prevents diligence, and exceeds human care, to keep awake, "and apply distinct attentions to every of thefe diftin&t "actions.' "" Mr Rufhworth much undoes Mr S. in thefe minute cavils; for he tells us, (Dial. 2. § 7.), that "fuppofing an original copy of Chrift's words, written "by one of the Evangelifts in the fame language, let him "have fet down every word and fyllable; yet men con"verfant in noting the changes of meanings in words, "will tell us, that divers accents in the pronunciation "of them, the turning of the fpeaker's head or body "this or that way, &c. may fo change the fense of the "words, that they will feem quite different in writing "from what they were in fpeaking." I hope that oral and practical tradition hath been careful to preferve all thefe circumstances, and hath delivered down Christ's doctrine, with all the right traditionary accents, nods, and geftures, neceffary for the understanding of it; otherwife the omiffion of these may have fo altered the fenfe of it, that it may be now quite different from what it was at firft. But to answer Mr S. we do not pretend to be affured, that it is naturally impoffible that the fcriptures fhould have been corrupted or changed, but only to be fufficiently affured that they have not received any material alteration, from as good arguments as the nature of the fubject will bear. But if his reafon had not been very fhort and curfory, he might eafily have reflected, that o ral tradition is equally liable to all these contingencies: for it doth as much " prevent diligence, and exceed human care, to keep awake, and apply diftinct attentions "to the diftinct actions of fpeaking, as of writing."

[ocr errors]

And

« PrécédentContinuer »