One manner of a spirit? (and yet this they affirm concerning 66 Now, the proper and neceffary confequence of this doctrine is, to take away all certainty, and especially the certainty of fenfe. For if that which my fight, and tafte, and touch, do all affure me to be a little piece of wafer, may, notwithstanding this, be flesh and blood, even the whole body of a man; then, notwithstanding the greatest affurance that fenfe can give me, that any thing is this or that, it may be quite another thing from what fenfe reported it to be. If fo, then farewel the infallibility of tradition, which depends upon the certainty of fenfe. And, which is a worfe confequence, if this doctrine be admitted, we can have no fufficient affurance, that the Chriftian doctrine is a divine revelation for the affurance of that depending npon the affurance we have of the miracles faid to be wrought for the confirmation of it, and all the affurance we can have of a miracle depending upon the certainty of our fenfes, it is very plain, that that doctrine which takes away the certainty of sense, does in so doing overthrow the certainty of Christian religion. And what can be more vain, than to pretend, that a man may be affured, that fuch a doctrine is revealed by God, and confequently true, which if it be true, a man can have no affurance at all of any divine revelation? Surely nothing is to be admitted by us as certain, which being admitted, we can be certain of nothing. It is a wonder, that any man who confiders the natural confequences of this doctrine, can be a Papist, unless he have attained to Mr. Creffy's pitch of learning; who, fpeaking of the difficult arguments wherewith this doctrine was preffed, fays plainly, (Exomol. c. 73. §7.), "I muft anfwer freely and ingenuously, that I have not learned to an"fwer fuch arguments, but to defpife them." And, if' this be a good way, whenever we have a mind to believe any thing, to fcorn thofe objections against it which we cannot folve; then Chriftian religion hath no advantage above the vileft enthufiafms; and a Turk may maintain Mahomet and his Alcoran, in opposition to Chrift and his doctrine, against all that Grotius, or any other, hath faid, if he can but keep his countenance, and gravely fay, "I have not learned to answer fuch arguments, but to defpife them." 66 10. I will add one inftance more in another kind, to fhew the uncertainty of oral and practical traditions and that shall be the tradition concerning Pope Joan; than which scarce any thing was ever more generally received in the hiftorical kind. Many and great authors affirm it, as teftifiers of the general fame. None ever denied it till the reformers had made use of it to the difadvantage of Popery. Since that time, not only Papifts deny it, but feveral of our own writers cease to believe it. Phil. Bergomenfis tells the ftory thus: "Anno "858, John, the 7th Pope, &c. The tradition is, that "this perfon was a woman, &c." Here is an oral tradition. He concludes thus: "In deteftation of whose 66 filthinefs, and to perpetuate the memory of her name, "the Popes, even to this day, going on proceffion with "the people and clergy, when they come to the place "of her travail, &c. in token of abomination, they turn from it, and go a by-way; and, being past that 66 Kk 2 "deteftable 46 66 ་ 66 ·་ $6 66 66 "deteftable place, they return into the way, and finish "their proceffion." Here is one practical tradition. And, for avoiding of the like mifcarriages, it was decreed, that no one fhould thereafter be admitted into St. Peter's chair, priufquam per foratam fedem futuri Pontificis genitalia ab ultimo Diacono Cardinale attrecta61 rentur." Here is another with a witnefs. Sabellicus relates the fame, (Ennead. 9. l. 1.); and moreover fays, that "this porphyry chair was, in his time, to be feen in the Pope's palace." He adds indeed, that Platina thinks, that this tradition of Pope Joan was not faithfully delivered to pofterity. But however, (fays he), fuch a tradition there is concerning the first practical tradition." Platina fays, that "he may not deny it." For the fecond, he thinks "the chair rather defigned for a stool, for another ufe, &c." He concludes, Thefe things which I have related are commonly reported, yet from uncertain and obfcure authors therefore I refolved (fays he) briefly and nakedly to fet them down, left I fhould feem too obftinately and pertinaciously to have omitted that which "almost all affirm." It is no wonder, that he fays the authors of this report were uncertain and obfcure, fince fo very few writ any thing in that age. But, fuppofe none had writ of it, fo long as he acknowledges it to have been a general oral tradition, attested by a folemn and conftant practice, it has, according to Mr.S.'s principles, greater certainty than if it had been brought down to us by a hundred books written in that very age. So that here is an oral and practical tradition, continued, we are fure, for fome hundreds of years, preferved and propagated by a folemn practice of the Fopes, clergy, and people of Rome, in their proceffions, and by a notorious cuftom at the election of every Pope; and in a matter of fo great importance to their religion, (the honour of the fee of Rome, and the uninterrupted fucceflion from St. Peter, being fo nearly concerned in it), that, had it been falfe, they had been obliged, under pain of damnation, not only not to have promoted it, but to have used all means to have difcovered the falfity of it. Therefore Mr. S. is bound, by his own principles, either to allow it for a truth, or elfe to give an account account when and how it began; which may possibly be made out by "we metaphyficians," (as he ftyles himfelf and his fcientifical brethren, p. 340.): but I affure him it is past the skill of note-book learning, p. 337. SECT. X. The fourth answer to his fecond demonftra tion. § 1. IT is not the present perfuafion of the church of Rome, nor ever was, that their faith hath defcended to them by oral tradition as the fole rule of it. And this being proved, the fuppofition upon which his demonftration is built, falls to the ground. And for the proof of this, I appeal to that decree of the council of Trent, (Decret. primum quartæ feff.), in which they declare, that because the "Christian faith "and difcipline are contained in written books and un"written traditions, &c. therefore they do receive and "honour the books of fcripture, and alfo tradition, pari 66 pietatis affectu ac reverentia, with equal pious affecti"6 on and reverence;" which I understand not how thofe do who fet afide the fcripture, and make tradition the fole rule of their faith. And confonantly to this decree, the general doctrine of the Romish church is, that fcripture and tradition make up the rule of faith. So the Roman catechifm, (fet forth by order of the council of Trent), fays, (in prefat.), that "the fum of the do"&trine delivered to the faithful is contained in the word "of God, which is distributed into scripture and tradi"tion." Bellarmine (De verbo Dei, &c. l. 4. c. 12.) fpeaks to the fame purpose, that "the fcripture is a rule "of faith, not an entire, but partial one. The entire "rule is the word of God, which is divided into two partial rules, fcripture and tradition." According to this, the adequate rule of faith is the word of God, which is contained partly in fcripture, and partly in the tradition of the church. And that fcripture is looked upon by them as the principal rule and primary foundation of their faith, and tradition as only supplying the defects of fcripture, as to fome doctrines and rites not contained in fcripture, must be evident to any one that has been converfant in the chief of their controverfial divines.. Bellarmine, 66 Kk 3 Bellarmine, (De verbo Dei non fcripto. l. 4. c. 9.), where he gives the marks of a divine tradition, fpeaks to this purpofe, that that which they call a divine tradition, is fuch a doctrine or rite as is not found in fcripture, but embraced by the whole church; and for that reason believed to have defcended from the Apoftles. And he tells us farther, (ibid. c. 11.), that the Apostles committed all to writing which was commonly and publickly preached; and that all things are in fcripture which men are bound to know and believe explicitly: but then he fays, that there were other things which the Apoftles did not commonly and publickly teach; and thefe they did not commit to writing, but delivered them only by "word of mouth to the Prelates and Priests, and per"fect men of the church." And these are the Apoftolical traditions he fpeaks of. Cardinal Perron fays, (Reply, obfervat. 3. c. 4.), that "the fcripture is the foundation of the Chriftian doctrine, either mediately "or immediately. And that the authority of unwrit.66 ten tradition is founded in general on these sentences "of the Apoftle, Hold the traditions, &c. 2 Theff.ii. 15.; Mr. again, The things which thou hast heard of me among many witneffes, commit to faithful men, &c." 2 Tim. ii. 2. And that "the authority of the church to pre"ferve, and efpecially to declare thefe, is founded in "this propofition, viz. That the church is the pillar and "ground of truth," 1 Tim. iii. 15. So that, according to him, the primary rule of faith is the fcripture," in "which the authority of tradition is founded." Knott (Charity maintained, c. 2. §1.) fays exprefsly, "We acknowledge the holy fcripture to be a molt per"fect rule, for as much as a writing can be a rule; 26 we only deny that it excludes either divine tradition, "though it be unwritten; or an external judge, to keep, "to propofe, to interpret it, &c." So that, according to him, fcripture is a perfect rule; only it does not exclude unwritten tradition, &c. By which that he does not understand, as Mr. S. does, a concurrent oral tradition of all the fame doctrines which are contained in fcripture, but other doctrines not therein contained, is plain from what he fays elsewhere, (Reply to Mr. Chillingworth, c. 2. $170.), "We do not diftinguish tra "dition |