A reply to Mr. J.S. his 3d. appendix containing some animadversions on the book entituled, A rational account of the grounds of Protestant religion. By Ed. Stillingfleet B.D.

Postscript.

SIR,

SInce the dispatch of the for∣mer Papers, I have met with another Treatise, wherein I find my self concerned, writ∣ten by the author of Fiat Lux, the Title whereof is Diaphanta: I am afraid the Title affrights you; for I assure you it is the most formidable thing in his whole Book. But the man is a very modest man and huge∣ly different from Mr. S's. humor; for he is so far from offering to demon∣strate

the grounds of faith; that all he pretends to in the title of his book, i•• to excuse Catholick Religion against the opposition of several Adversaries. What fault I pray hath the Catholick Religi∣on committed, that it must now come to be excused inst••ad of being defend∣ed? But when I look into that part which concerns my self, I presently understand the meaning of it, which is not to excuse Catholick Religion, but themselves, for not being able to de∣fend it. For he very ingenuously tells us, that faith is firm and constant, though all his talk for it be miserably weak: i. e. he is sure they have an excellent Religion, though he knows not what to say for it; and their faith is a very good faith, but it hath not yet had the good fortune to be un∣derstood by them. For he acknow∣ledges, that as often as they dispute, they are beyond the business, (so may any one believe, who reads their late books,) which is in effect to say, there is no way left of disputing any longer with adversaries about their faith; on∣ly they must believe it stoutly them∣selves;

but it is to no purpose to of∣fer to defend it. Nay, it doth their faith a great deal of mischief; for, saith he, in reading controversies we see not so much the nature of the faith, as the wit of him who opposes or defends it. From whence we may easily gather what unspeakable mischief they do their cause by writing for it. By which expressions we may guess, at what a low ebbe the defence of their faith is among them: for the way now taken to defend it, is by disowning the defenders of it, and by saying, that they only vent their own opini∣ons; and though we confute them never so much, yet their faith holds good still. Was ever a good cause driven to such miserable shifts as these are, especially among those who pretend to wit and learning? One, he saith, T. C. vents a private opini∣on of his own, and it is not a pin matter whether it stand or fall; ano∣ther, he saith, the same of I. S. a third of J. V. C. and yet for all this, their religion is very firm and sure, and they all at perfect agreement

about it. Is this the victory over me Mr. S. mentions to be so easie a thing? I see that by the same figure Mr. S. calls his way of arguing de∣monstration, running out of the field shall be accounted conquering. For I never saw any person do it more openly then this author does. For he plainly confesses, that his Catholick Gentleman went quite besides his busi∣ness, that he built upon indefensible principles, that his theological ratioci∣nation was indeed pretty, but too weak to hold. And are not we hugely too blame, if we do not cry up such migh∣ty Conquerors as these are? Truly Sir, I expect the very same answer should be returned to your book; that Mr. S's. argument, is a pretty theologi∣cal ratiocination; and that your answer is not unwitty: but though that way will not hold, another will. Thus when they are beaten off Infallibility, they run to Tradition: and when they are again beaten off Tradition, then back again to Infallibility. So that the short of all their answers is, though such a one cannot defend our faith, yet I

can; though I cannot, yet the fai•• ••s firm and constant still. I wonder what their Superiors think of this ••ay of proceeding among them; we ••hould imagine if they be so weak ••s they say themselves, they had much ••etter keep them from appearing ••broad and exposing their cause so ••idiculously to contempt. But it may ••e, they think their faith is the bet∣••er as well as their devotion, for their ••gnorance: and that it would be a ••ighty disparagement to their cause, ••or such silly people to be able to de∣••end it. It is enough for them to ••dmire it themselves, and to say as ••heir common people use to do, though ••hey cannot defend it, yet there are ••ome that can. And although it ••ay be no particular person can do ••, yet their cause is able to defend •• self. But for all that I can see, by ••ck kind of answers, the intention of ••hem, is, to intreat us, not to tri∣••mph over the weakness of their pre∣••nt Writers, but to wait till the ••ause it self thinks fit to write. And

when it doth so, they may expect further answer; but it were a grea•• piece of cruelty for us to hasten the•• ruine, who fall so fast before us b•• each others Pens.

FINIS.

Notes

• p. 210.
• p. 2••9.