idolaters and Mahometans, and do daily decrease. What thinks Mr S. of all this? Have thofe Chriftian nations which are turned Mahometans and Pagans, failed in their faith or not? If they have, I expect from him clear instances of more that have failed in propagating their kind.

7. But befides thofe who have totally apoftatized from Christianity, hath not the whole Greek church, with the Jacobites and Neftorians, and all thofe other fects which agree with and depend upon these, and which, taken together, are manifoldly greater than the Roman church; I fay, have not all thefe renounced tradition for feveral ages? And here, in Europe, hath not a great part of Poland, Hungary, both Germanies, France, and Switzerland; have not the kingdoms of Great Britain, Denmark, Sweden, and a confiderable part of Ireland, in Mr S.'s opinion, deferted tradition? If I fhould once fee a whole nation fail, because no body would marry, and contribute to the propagation of mankind, and fhould find this fullen humour to prevail in feveral nations, and to overfpread valt parts of the world, I fhould then in good earnest think it poffible for mankind to fail; unless I could fhew it impoffible for other nations to do that which I fee fome to have done, who were e. very whit as unlikely to have done it. So that whatever caufe he aligns of herefy, as pride, ambition, luft, (p. 67.) or any other vice or intereft, if these can take place in whole nations, and make them renounce tradition, then where is the " efficacy of the caufes to preferve "faith indeficiently entire in any?" for the demonftration holds as ftrongly for all Chriftians as for any.

§8. Secondly, From thefe grounds it would follow, that no Chriftian can live wickedly; because the end of faith being a good life, the arguments of hope and fear muft in all reafon be as powerful and efficacious caufes of a good life, as of a true belief. And that his demonftration proves the one as much as the other, will be evident from his own reafoning: for he argues in this manner, p. 62. "Good is the proper object of the will. "Good propofed makes the will to defire that good, and

confequently the known means to obtain it. Now, "infinite goods and harms fufficiently propofed, are of "their own nature incomparably more powerful caufes VOL. III. F f

"to

"

to carry the will, than temporal ones. Since, then, "when two caufes are counterpoifed, the leffer, when "it comes to execution, is no caufe as to the fubfift66 ence of that effect; it follows, that there is no cause "to move the wills of a world of believers to be willing to do that which they judge would lofe themselves "and their pofterity infinite goods, and bring them infinite harm, &c. in cafe a fufficient propofal or appli "cation be not wanting:" which he tells us, p. 65. is not wanting; because Chriftianity urged to execu. <tion, gives its followers a new life and a new nature; "than which a nearer application cannot be imagined." Doth not this argument extend to the lives of Chriftians as well as their belief? So that we may as well infer from thefe grounds, that it is impoffible that those who profefs Chriftianity fhould live contrary to it, as that they fhould fail to deliver down the doctrine of Christ ; because whatever can be an inducement and temptation to any man to contradict this doctrine by his practice, may equally prevail upon him to falfify it. For why fhould men make any more fcruple of damning themfelves and their pofterity, by teaching them falfe doctrines, than by living wicked lives? which are equally pernicious with heretical doctrines, not only upon account of the bad influence which fuch examples of fathers and teachers are like to have upon their scholars ; but likewife they are one of the ftrongest arguments in the world to perfuade them, that their teachers do not themselves believe that religion which they teach; for, if they did, they would live according to it. Why fhould any man think, that thofe arguments of hope and fear which will not prevail upon the generality of Christians to make them live holy lives, fhould be fo neceffarily efficacious to make them fo much concerned for the prefervation of a right belief? Nay, we have great reason to believe, that fuch perfons will endeavour, as much as may be, to bend and accommodate their belief to their lives. And this is the true fource of thofe innovations in faith for which we challenge the church of Rome; which any man may eafily difcern, who will but confider how all their new doctrines are fitted to a fecular intereft, and the gratifying of that inordinate ap

petite after riches and dominion which reigns in the court of Rome, and in the upper part of the clergy of that church.

SECT. IV. The fecond anfwer to his demonftration.

1.Econdly, The main grounds of his demonftration are apparently falfe. For,

SE

ift, This demonftration fuppofeth, that the generali ty of Chriftian parents, in all ages, perfectly understood the doctrine of Chrift, and did not mistake any part of it; that they remembered it perfectly, and that they were faithful and diligent to inftruct their children in it: which is as contrary to experience, as that the genera lity of Chriftians are knowing and honeft. It fuppofeth likewife, that this doctrine, and every substantial part of it, was received and remembered by the generality of children as it was taught, and was understood perfectly by them without the leaft material mistake. So he tells us, p. 53. that "the fubftance of faith comes clad in "fuch plain matters of fact, that the most stupid man

living cannot poffibly be ignorant of it." But whether this be reasonable to be fuppofed or no, may easily be determined, not only from every man's own experience of the world, but from a more advantageous inftance of the experience of the first age of Christianity. Was there ever a more knowing and diligent teacher of this doctrine than our Saviour and yet his difciples fell into many mistakes concerning it: fo that, in order to the certain propagating of it, the wisdom of God thought it requifite to endue even those who had learned this doctrine from himself, with an infallible fpirit, by which they might be led into all truth, and fecured from error ́ and mistake; which had been unneceffary, had it been impoffible for them to mistake this doctrine. The Apostles, who taught the world by an infallible fpirit, and with infinitely more advantage than ordinary parents can teach their children; yet in all the churches which they planted, they found Chriftians very apt to mistake and pervert their doctrine, as appears by their frequent com. plaints in most of their epiftles. Nay, the Apoftle chargeth the generality of the Hebrews with fuch a degree of

Ff2

dul.

dulnefs and ftupidity, that after fitting time and means of inftruction, they were ftill ignorant of the very principles of Chriftianity. So he tells them, chap. v. 11. 12. that when for the time they ought to be teachers of others, they had need that one should teach them again which be the firft principles of the oracles of God. And St Hierom (adverf. Lucifer.) tells us, that "the primitive churches were "tainted with many grofs errors, whilft the Apostles

were alive, and the blood of Chrift yet warm in Ju"dea." But it may be there have been better teachers fince, and children are more apt to learn now then men were then. Who knows how the world may be changed?

§2. 2dly, This demonftration fuppofeth the hopes and fears which Chriftian religion applies to mens minds, to be certain and neceffary caufes of actual will in men, to adhere to the doctrine of Chrift; and confequently, that they muft neceffarily adhere to it. That he fuppo feth them to be neceffary, I have his own word for it; for he tells us, p. 74. that he hath endeavoured to "demonftrate the indefectibleness of tradition, as the

proper and neceffary effect of thofe caufes which pre"ferve and continue tradition on foot ;" and what those causes are, he told us before, p. 60. that " they "are hopes and fears ftrongly applied." But I hope, that the indefectiblenefs of tradition cannot be a neceffary effect of the ftrong application of thofe hopes and fears, unless thofe hopes and fears be a neceffary cause of that effect. And indeed this is fufficiently implied in his faying, that "they are the caufes of actual will in "Chriftians to adhere to tradition." For if these causes of actual will be conftant (as he must fuppofe) then they are certain, and neceffary, and infallible caufes of adhering to this doctrine: for whatever is in act, is neceffary while it is fo; and if it be conftantly in act, the effect is always neceffary. But what a wild fuppofition is this, that moral motives and arguments working upon a free principle, the will of man, do neceffarily produce their effect? Is it neceffary, that the hopes of heaven and the fears of hell fhould keep Chriftians conftant to the doctrine of Christ? and is it not as neceffary, that these arguments fhould prevail upon them to the practice of it? It is in vain to go about to demon

ftrate,

ftrate, that all men must be good, who have fufficient arguments propounded to them, when experience tells us the contrary. Nay, it is in reafon impoffible, that moral arguments fhould be of a neceffary and infallible: efficacy; becaufe they are always propounded to a free agent, who may chufe whether he will yield to them or not. Indeed it is always reasonable, that men fhould yield to them; and if they be reasonable, they will but fo long as they are free, it can never be infallibly certain that they will. And if men be not free, it is no virtueat all in them to be wrought upon by thefe arguments. For what virtue can it be in any man, to entertain the Christian doctrine, and adhere to it, and live accordingly, if he does all this neceffarily; that is, whether he will or no; and can no more chufe whether he will do fo or not, than whether he will fee the light when the fun fhines upon his open eyes, or whether he will hear as found when all the bells in the town are ringing in his ears; or (to ufe Mr S.'s own fimilitudes, p. 53.) whether he will feel heat, cold, pain, pleasure, or any other "material quality that affects his fenfes ?" We fee: then how unreasonable his fuppofitions are; and yet, without thefe grounds, his demonstration falls: for, if it be poffible that Chriftians may mistake or forget the doctrine of Chrift, or any part of it, or be defective in diligence to inftruct others in it; or if it be poffible that the will of man, which is free, may not be neceffarily and infallibly fwayed by the arguments of hope and fear: then it is poffible that tradition may fail. And is not this a good demonftration, which fupports itfelf upon fuch principles, as do directly affront the conftant experienc and the clearest reason of mankind?

§ 3. And here I cannot but take notice, how inconfift ent he is to himself in laying the grounds of tradition's certainty. In one part of his book he tells us, p. 53. that "tradition hath for its bafis the beft nature in the "univerfe, that is, man's; not according to his moral "part, defectible by reafon of original corruption; nor yet his intellectuals, darkly groping in the purfuit of fcience, &c. but according to thofe faculties in him, perfectly and neceffarily fubject to the operations and "ftrokes of nature, that is, his eyes, ears, handling,

F £3

and