Be never merry but onely then when ye see your Brother in Charity These and some few more Sentences not found in Sacred Writ are imputed to our Blessed Saviour and so is that too by some to Christ by others to some Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Be skilfull Exchangers which words are styled in Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Apostolicall expression And the truth is that the Apostles might receive from Christ betwixt his Resurrection and Ascension directions to ordain Rites and Ceremonies that concerned the Administration of God's publick Worship and the exteriour Discipline of the Church and that these Orders and Determinations of his touching the Circumstances of God's Service were delivered to their Successours by word of mouth and were not presently registred we are not forward nor indeed any whit concerned to deny But withall the Church of Rome stands much obliged to prove and that with clear Evidence and unquestionable Authority that those present Traditions of theirs which they do so stifly contend for equall to and in some cases prefer before the written Word are indeed those very Traditions which were recommended to the Church by Christ or his Apostles This I confess the Romanists do pretend and promise to doe but if they fail what then 'T is the confident expression of Bellarmine Non est Audaciae aequare aliquid non scriptum Verbo Scripto 'T is no sawcy thing at all to equall something unwritten to that Word which is written nor doth he think that expression of his too bold Traditio sola sufficit Scripturae non sufficiunt Tradition alone is enough but the Scriptures alone are not sufficient Methinks such persons are much obliged to prove that these Traditions of theirs are indeed of Divine Authority since they have a greater esteem for them then for the known and sure Word of God For if it should happen that these Traditions which are so highly magnified should be found and proved the bare Inventions of men those persons would appear somewhat too bold and sawcy indeed who have preferred them before the certain and infallible Decrees of Heaven This Aquinas well understood and therefore knew himself concerned to maintain the Divine Authority of those Traditions whereof he doth thus pronounce Verbum Dei bifariam dividitur in Scripturam Traditiones The Word of God is twofold Scripture and Tradition Thus Bellarmine too who styles Tradition Verbum Dei non scriptum the unwritten Word of God And their Conventicle of Trent saith that their Traditions were vel ore tenus à Christo vel à Spiritu Sancto dictatae delivered immediately by Christ's own mouth or dictated by his Holy Spirit Thus doth the Church of Rome pretend a full and Divine Authority for several Traditions which they hold though not recorded in our Bibles And if this Assertion of theirs in favour of their Traditions can be proved with as convincing Arguments as those whereby the Authority of the Scripture is confirmed we shall with equall Respect even as the Romanists do embrace them both For though it be certain that the committing of the Word of God to Ink and Paper was an excellent means to preserve it entire and to secure it and us from Frauds Cheats and Falsifications yet the Members of the Reformed Churches have not so far lost their Religion and Reason as once to imagine that the bare writing of the Scripture should create and give it that Authority which is inherent in it Insomuch that if any Traditionall Doctrine or Practice that is now taught and used in the Roman Church can be sufficiently proved to have been originally delivered by Christ or his Apostles we shall as readily believe and doe it as any thing else whatsoever that is required or delivered in any part of the Written Word But if bold and confident Affirmations be enough to justifie Unwritten Doctrines and Vsages what Religion what Sect what Heresie will want such and such Pretences to plead for the Vindication of it self 'T is well known that the very Heathens pretended that as Plato words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Disposition and Institution of their Laws such especially as concerned their Religion how absurd soever was from God It is the observation of Bellarmine himself In Alcorano passim legimus ipsum Alcoranum de Coelo à Deo missum It was it seems the pretence of that grand Impostour Mahomet that even his Alcoran came down from Heaven and was dictated by God Eusebius tells us that Menander who was indeed but a Sorcerer and the real disciple of Simon Magus did pretend himself to be sent from Heaven And that famous Heretick Cerinthus whose very presence made St. John fly out of the Bath who was an Enemy to the written Word of God did make his Followers believe that he received his Doctrines though detestable enough by Revelation from Angels But what sober person gave any credit to him And what if the case stand thus with the Roman Church what if those Traditions which they father upon Christ and his Apostles were indeed none of theirs Sure we are it was so with those superstitious Jews who in our Saviour's time owned and stifly maintained as the Papists now do a twofold Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a written Law and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an unwritten Law or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secondary Laws 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hearings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Law in the mouth and generally styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Traditions These Traditions they received from the great Synagogue that Synagogue derived them from the Prophets the Prophets from the Elders the Elders from Joshua Joshua from Moses and Moses himself from God so they pretended But notwithstanding these fair Insinuations and plausible Pretences of theirs to render their superstitious Rites and Customes the more acceptable to the ignorant and credulous Multitude what was indeed their true Original we learn from Christ and his Evangelists who style them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Traditions of the Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Traditions of the Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Traditions of men and our Blessed Saviour speaking to the Pharisees calleth them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your Traditions not Moses his not the Prophets not God's but your own And as it was thus in the Jewish Church so may it well be in the Roman too 't is very probable that many Traditions which there are ascribed to Christ and his Apostles might deduce their Original from some other hand Such counterfeit Traditions do we reade of that were obtruded upon the Church in the Apostles names very early indeed even whilst the Apostles themselves were yet alive So much doth that expression of St. Paul seem to intimate We beseech you brethren that ye be not troubled neither by word nor by letter as from us Grotius tells us Multi fabricabant Epistolas sub Apostolorum nomine There were many
non dixit temerarium est velle praesumere dicere To affirm what those things were which Christ himseIf did not now declare were rash and bold Quis nostrûm dicat ista vel illa sunt Who of us can tell whether it were this or that And yet for all this whatever St. Austine thinks that Jesuite Maldonate as if he knew what Christ was pleased as yet to conceal tells us with more of Confidence then Truth Dicimus ex hoc loco constare Christum non omnia dixisse quae ad salutem nostram putabat pertinere idémque fecisse Spiritum Sanctum credendum c. From the warrant of this Text we do affirm that Christ told not his Disciples whatever he thought pertinent to our Salvation and that the Holy Ghost did not afterwards doe it neither we have cause to believe Nay to make way for Ecclesiastical Traditions and the Pope's Authority to create new Articles of Faith he makes bold to adde thus much Idem ab Apostolis factum ut non omnia scripta multa etiam nè vivâ voce traderent The same thing was done by the Apostles too insomuch that they did not deliver all matters of Salvation in their Writings no nor many so much as by word of mouth 'T is strange to think into what Absurdities and Contradictions the Romanists do run themselves that they may justify those Doctrines and Practices which they are loath to part with For this Jesuite Maldonate declares his opinion that there are some matters of Salvation that were neither taught by Christ nor by his Spirit nor by his Apostles either by Writing or Tradition and yet Cardinal Bellarmine doth positively affirm that the Church of Rome holds no Doctrines maintains no Traditions save onely such as they can clearly prove to be from Christ or his Apostles But as to those forenamed Discourses wherein our Blessed Saviour did privately instruct his Apostles and whereupon the Roman Church doth mightily ground their Doctrine of Tradition though it cannot be certainly discovered what was the very Subject and particular Arguments of our Saviour's frequent Talk with his Disciples at his several Apparitions to them after his Resurrection yet perhaps some probable guesses may be given and accordingly several Conjectures are offered us by Interpreters So Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. What were those many things which Christ had to say to his Apostles which they could not bear He answers thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. It was the design of our Blessed Saviour to teach his Disciples the utter abolition of the Ceremoniall Law and the Mosaicall Ordinances So St. Chrysostom guesseth too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Whether our Saviour speaks of the Abrogation of the Law c. And to this Christ might well refer when he said I have yet many things to say but ye cannot bear them now considering how hard it was for them who were Jews and the professed disciples of Moses to embrace a new Religion and quit the Principles of that wherein they had been born and bred Nor indeed had this Discourse as yet been seasonable because the Ceremoniall Law was not abrogated till the Sacrifice Death and Passion of Christ which then was not actually accomplished But besides this Guesse of Origen's and Chrysostom's St. Austine gives us some ground for another when he tells us Mori pro Christo nondum idonei erant Apostoli The Apostles were not as yet fit and strong enough to die for Christ Which expression giveth us a fair Intimation of St. Austine's Judgment concerning our Saviour's words I have many things yet to say but about what probably about their Sufferings and Martyrdom but saith Christ ye cannot bear them now But why not now Surely it was now a time of trouble and sorrow with them their hearts were almost broken already with the consideration of their dear Master's approaching Death and Passion and therefore saith St. Austine Nunquid debuit illis ovibus dici in illo Tentationis articulo quòd certare usque ad mortem pro veritate oportebat pro Christi nomine vel Doctrina sanguinem fundere Was it seasonable for Christ to tell his Apostles in this juncture of time and hour of Temptation since as yet they were but as sheep infirm and weak that they must expect to shed their bloud and suffer death for the Truths Doctrines and Name of Christ No our Saviour was pleased to reserve these Lessons that as yet might have seemed too harsh as Origen words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a fitter Opportunity namely the time after his own Passion and Resurrection That these Opinions of Origen Chrysostom and Austine concerning the matter of our Saviour's personall Discourses with his Apostles betwixt his Resurrection and Ascension which the Romanists urge for their Traditions are but conjecturall we do acknowledge but withall we do avouch that they are ten times more probable then that of Lorinus For that the many things which the Apostles could not yet bear and therefore Christ did not deliver till after his Resurrection should be such as concerned the Abolition of the Mosaicall Law or the Disciples own Sufferings rather then the Authority of the Romane Bishop the Invocation of Saints and other superstitious Doctrines and Practices now taught and used in the Roman Church as delivered by Christ in his forenamed private Discourses with his Apostles is much more consonant to Christian Religion humane Reason and the Authority of the written Word And if so if we may take the Judgment of Origen Chrysostom and Austine whose Opinions in this matter are countenanced by Holy Writ rather then the Judgment of Lorinus whose Opinion in this case the Scriptures themselves oppose though there be in this business no Certainty on either side yet if we have fairer Probabilities on our part then the Romanists have on theirs if it be more likely that the many things which Christ had to say before his Passion but did not for prudentiall considerations actually declare till after his Resurrection might concern as the forenamed Fathers probably thought the Abrogation of the Jewish Religion the Calling of the Gentiles and the Martyrdom of his Apostles rather then those unwarrantable Traditions for which the Romanists do now contend how then comes Bellarmine to assert that they are not written But upon the whole matter the Truth is this Since 't is altogether impossible to find out what those many things were which Christ had to teach his Disciples before his Death but did not doe it because as yet they could not bear them till after his Resurrection 't is equally impossible to prove that they are or are not registred But if the Romanists are of another mind and will undertake by infallible Testimonies to demonstrate to us what were the particular matters of our Saviour's severall Discourses at the time of his severall Apparitions to his Apostles before his Ascension then will we also
Apostolicall Institution But however though the Church of Rome may pretend but cannot prove for one St. Chrysostom is not enough Apostolicall Tradition for such and such Doctrines and Practices of theirs yet what Authority from Christ or his Apostles can they plead for those Articles of their new Creed which their Pope Pius the Fourth hath impiously imposed upon the Church of Christ and added to that received Nicene Creed as if it were of equall Credit even with that and to be believed upon penalty of Damnation When St. Paul delivered such and such Traditions to the Christian Church he tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I received of the Lord but could Pope Pius say as much of his and can the present Church of Rome say as much of theirs when in their new-found Creed they teach us to say I profess that there are truly and properly Seven Sacraments of the new Law instituted by Christ Do they indeed gather this Article of their Faith as we do all those in the three received Creeds from clear Testimonies of Holy Writ or do they collect this Doctrine and number of their Seven Sacraments as their Patriarch of Venice is said to have done from that particular expression of St. Andrew when he told his Lord There is a lad here which hath five loaves and two fishes When they require us to say I profess that there is a true proper and propitiatory Sacrifice offered to God in the Masse for the Quick and the Dead do they indeed father this Tradition upon St. Paul who saith Christ was once offered and again Christ by one offering hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified Again when they teach us to say I profess that in the Eucharist the Bread and the Wine and why not their Water too are transubstantiated into the body and bloud of Christ do they ground this Tradition upon the words of Consecration This is my Body when Scotus himself who was one of their own great Champions hath told the world that the words of Christ do not necessarily import it and that Transubstantiation for which Bellarmine indeed corrects him was no Article of Faith till the Lateran Council When they teach us to say I acknowledge that under one Kind whole and perfect Christ and the true Sacrament is received do they ground that Doctrine upon a Canon established by the Council of Constance or upon the Example and Command of our Blessed Saviour who delivered both the Elements to all his Communicants and gave them this express injunction concerning the Cup in particular Drink ye all of this And that this Command of our Blessed Saviour was observed in the Primitive Church where the Minister according to Christ s own Example delivered the Consecrated Cup to all the Communicants is evident from the Testimony of the most early Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Ignatius and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. saith Dionysius there was then one Cup distributed to all And if this were the known Practice of the Primitive Church what ancient Tradition can the Roman Church produce for their Communion in one Kind onely Again when they bid us say I do constantly hold that there is a Purgatory do they derive this Tradition from the writings of Plato who mentions three Receptacles for departed Souls or from those Expressions of Prophets or Apostles which say of all departed Saints They rest from their labours and of all departed Sinners They shall be turned into hell Once more when they would have us believe that Saints and Angels are to be worshipped that there is a Veneration lawfully paid to the very Reliques of Saints to the Crosse of Christ to the Images of the Virgin Mary c. do they ground this Tradition upon the Second Commandment which they could as willingly blot out of their Bibles as they have done out of some of their Catechisms or upon any Expression of St. Paul both which do flatly condemn the Worshipping of any Creature No 't is well observed by Calvin Sub Traditionum titulo includunt omnes crassas abominationes manifesto Dei Verbo contrarias The Romanists under the name of Traditions do include all their grosse Abominations which are directly contrary to the Word of God and so are far enough from being those traditionall Doctrines or any whit like them of Faith and Worship that are recommended by St. Paul who imposed not any Belief or Practice upon the Church but what was as himself words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Scriptures But 2. 'T is urged by the Roman Church that St. Paul and other Apostles too delivered some unwritten Traditions to their immediate Successours which concerned the external Discipline Order Policy Rites and Ceremonies of the Church Well and who denieth it not Calvin who though he were a great opposer of superfluous and burthensome Ceremonies doth yet grant thus much Paulus Ecclesiae Corinthiacae primus fundator Itstitutis piis honestis eam formaverat ut decenter ordine illic agerentur omnia St. Paul who was the first Founder of the Church of Corinth did so form it with pious and laudable Institutions that all things there might be transacted without the least Indecency or Disorder So runs that written and well-known Rule of his Let all things be done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decently and in order But besides this Rule that he hath left upon Record he farther tells them The rest will I set in order when I come And what he did or enjoyned to be done in pursuance of this Promise perhaps might be never written But as Calvin demands Quid hoc ad insulsas Ceremoniarum nugas quae visuntur in Papatu quid hoc ad Superstitionem plusquam Judaicam What 's all this to the insipid and foolish Ceremonies of the Roman Church how doth this justifie those Superstitions of theirs that are more then Jewish So numerous are their Ceremonies that I cannot imagine what St. Austine would have said had he lived in our times who thus complained of his own Religionem servilibus oneribus premunt ut tolerabilior sit conditio Judaeorum c. The Condition of the Jews in respect of burthensom Ceremonies was more tolerable then that of Christians I remember Bellarmine reckons up no less then twenty two Ceremonies used in the Roman Church in the Administration of Baptism and tells us that they are all of Apostolicall Institution or at least of great Antiquity some of which are these Exorcisms Salt Spittle Chrism the Wax-taper the white Apparrell and the Kisse c. And as to the Sacrament of the Eucharist the same Bellarmine tells us Apostoli legem condunt ut sumatur ante omnes alios cibos nimirum à jejunis the Apostles established a Law that it should be receiv'd before all other food that is by persons fasting And yet that Rule of St. Paul which the Romanists can never satisfactorily answer stands
Christ's Miracles are not written yet there are enough recorded to confirm our Faith so St. John assures us These are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christs the Son of God and that believing ye might have life through his name And methinks since the Evangelists have written as St. Chrysostom doth express and affirm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so many of Christ's Miracles as are a sufficient ground of Faith such a Faith as will undoubtedly save us we need not run to Traditions for more But however though the Evangelists have omitted such and such of our Saviour's Miracles yet that is no proof that they have also omitted such and such material Doctrines of his that are necessary to Faith Manners and Salvation which must therefore be supplied as the Roman Church pretends by such and such unwritten Traditions But yet 3. There are some other Scriptures urged by our Adversaries which they hope and make poor ignorant souls believe will infallibly doe their work such Texts wherein Traditions are not onely mentioned but in express terms recommended and enjoyned too That of St. Paul is one Stand fast and hold the traditions which ye have been taught whether by word or our epistle The observation of Traditions is that which St. Paul doth here require and elsewhere commend too I praise you brethren that ye keep 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the traditions as I delivered them to you Hoc loco se armant Papistae ad tuendas suas Traditiones saith Calvin The Papists arm themselves with this Text to defend their Traditions So doth Cornelius à Lapide who saith but without a warrant Hinc manifestè sequitur non omnia quae fidem mores spectant esse scripta sed multa vivâ voce tradidisse Paulum Apostolos 'T is evident from hence that all things which concern Faith and Manners were not written but that St. Paul and other Apostles did deliver many things by word of mouth And thus Estius observes out of Theophylact whose words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'T is clear from this Text that St. Paul and other Apostles delivered many things which they committed not to writing and thence Estius doth thus infer Locus hic palà m facit pro Traditionibus non scriptis iisque necessariò tenendis This place is a clear Evidence for unwritten Traditions and proves it necessary to observe them In answer to this Text we shall enquire into these three things 1. We shall enquire what Traditions St. Paul here means what their nature was whether they concerned matters of Faith and any such Points as are necessary to Salvation or whether they respected such things onely as concerned Order and Decency the exteriour Discipline and Government of the Church Let us view the words again and consider what St. Chrysostom thinks concerning them I praise you brethren that ye remember me in all things and keep the traditions c. Here St. Chrysostom puts this Question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What all things doth the Apostle mean He answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Paul's discourse had been about not wearing of long hair and not being covered in the Church and for their observation of his Traditions in these matters onely doth he now commend them So thinks St. Chrysostom and learned Grotius is of the same mind too who tells us Hîc significat Praecepta quaedam pertinentia ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Paul by his Traditions doth here mean nothing else but certain Rules which he had formerly delivered to the Corinthians concerning Decency and Order And if these be the Traditions in the Text pray who gainsayeth them Not the Church of England no nor the Calvinists neither for doth not Calvin himself thus acknowledg Ego autem non nego quin aliquae fuerint Apostolorum Traditiones non scriptae sed non concedo fuisse Doctrinae partes nee de rebus ad Salutem necessariis Quid igitur quae pertinerent ad Ordinem Politiam I deny not but that there were some Apostolical Traditions unwritten but I do not grant them to be matters of Doctrine and necessary to Salvation But what were they then why such as concerned Order and Government And the truth is that these Traditions mentioned by St. Paul in the forenamed Texts were any other the Romanists can never prove and consequently gain no Advantage from them 2. We shall enquire whether these Traditions mentioned by St. Paul as delivered by word of mouth might not afterwards be written 'T is sure that the Traditions in the Text if as St. Chrysostom and Grotius have conjectured they were onely such as concerned Order and Decency and particularly about wearing of Hair and uncovering the Head in holy Assemblies they are recorded and that in the self-same Chapter too And 't is very possible that whatsoever in any other place St. Paul styles a Tradition might afterwards be written notwithstanding I remember Grotius tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est id quod docetur Whatsoever is taught whether by word or writing is called a Tradition 'T is used in both senses by the ancient Fathers yea and by the Apostles too Thus St. Cyprian Vnde est ista Traditio utrúmne de Dominica Evangelica Authoritate descendens an de Apostolorum Mandatis atque Epistolis veniens Whence is that Tradition comes it from the Authority of our Lord and his Gospel or from the Commands and Epistles of his Apostles 'T is evident by this expression that St. Cyprian acknowledgeth that though this or that be written yet it may be styled a Tradition notwithstanding So he farther explains himself a little after Si ergò aut in Evangelio praecipitur aut in Apostolorum Epistolis aut Actibus continetur observetur etiam haec sancta Traditio Let this holy Tradition also be observed if it be commanded in the Gospel or contained in the Epistles or Acts of the Apostles And that the self-same Truths which St. Paul and other Apostles preached to the world were afterwards written either by themselves or some body else is evident from that expression of Irenaeus Matthaeus in Hebraeis ipsorum linguâ scripturam edidit Evangelii cùm Petrus Paulus Romae evangelizarent fundarent Ecclesiam Post verò horum discessum Marcus discipulus Interpres Petri Ipse quae à Petro annunciata erant per scripta nobis tradidit Lucas autem sectator Pauli quod ab illo praedicabatur Evangelium in libro condidit The same thing is thus attested by Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. St. Matthew wrote his Gospel amongst the Jews in their own language whilst St. Peter and St. Paul preached and founded a Church at Rome And after their departure St. Mark who was the Disciple and Interpreter of St. Peter delivered in writing the things which St. Peter had preached St. Luke also who was the follower of St. Paul compiled in a Book
publickly in the Churches But although these Councils deserved this great Respect as keeping close to the Word of God yet other Councils which the Roman Church makes much of did not so That Councils may possibly erre and recede from Scripture-Rules St. Hierom declared his Judgment in that Expression of his cited by Chemnitius Spiritûs Sancti Doctrina est quae Canonicis literis prodita est contra quam siquid statuant Concilia nefas duco That is the sure Doctrine of the Holy Ghost which is delivered in the Canonical Writings against which if Councils determine this or that I count it wicked And did not their famous Council of Constance when three Popes were upon the stage at once John set up by the Italians Gregory by the French and Benedict by the Spaniards define contrary to the Word of God not to mention the case of John Husse and Jerom of Prague when they forbad all Priests under the Penalty of Excommunication to administer the Eucharist in both Kinds to the Laiety And was not this Canon so contrary to the general Custom of Antiquity that we must either grant the Primitive Church to have been mistaken in their old universal Practices or else this Council to have been erroneous in this new Constitution Indeed the Roman Church doth very well approve the Council of Constance in their Sacrilegious Decree which robs the People of half the Sacrament but I remember the Roman Church doth also condemn the self-same Council for that Definition of theirs whereby they robbed the Pope of more then half his Authority For when the Council of Constance had passed their Judgment and declared that the Authority of Councils is superiour to that of Popes and when the Council of Basil had ratified and solemnly confirmed the same Assertion in opposition to these two Councils the last not then dissolved Engenius the Fourth calleth a Council at Florence which by a contrary Vote sets the Pope above the Council So then here is Council against Council Canon against Canon directly contradicting one another in the self same matter and since 't is so we have all reason to conclude either that some of these Councils were in an Errour or else that all Logicians are certainly so who tell us that two contrary Propositions though possibly both may be false yet both can never be true together But the truth is 't is observed that there was such Ambition such Animosities and Factions discovered in several Councils that were convened in several Centuries that Gregory Nazianzene had he lived in later Ages might have had far more just occasion for those Complaints of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I never saw an happy Issue of any one Synod whatsoever which did not rather augment then remedy Evils Upon which score he thus resolves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If I may but write the Truth my purpose is to decline all Conventions of Bishops whatsoever But what is his Reason 'T is clear enough that this excellent Person did highly esteem the Council of Nice for he doth not onely call it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Holy Council but he also tells us that those three hundred and eighteen Bishops were such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom the Holy Ghost had brought together and as for the Council of Constantinople the Argument of his Epistle to Procopius tells us that he himself was magna Concilii pars a very great man in it and if so what occasion had he to write such unkind things of Councils Himself informs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was so much Dissension and such Ambition in them as was beyond expression And certainly if such an eminent Person as Gregory Nazianzene who was deservedly styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Great Theologue or Divine of that Age found cause enough to blame some early Councils of those Times had he lived to see the Decrees and Canons established by the several Factions of later Conventions he would never have thought them as the Romanists contend to be Infallible True it is St. Austine tells us Concilia posteriora prioribus apud Posteros praeponuntur Men that live in later times are apt to prefer later Councils before those that are more ancient but what reason is there for it That of Justellus is certainly true concerning these later Councils Non sunt ejusdem fidei dignitatis cum prioribus illis Quatuor Oecumenicis c. They are not of the same Credit Faith and Honour with the Four first General Councils And if so since there are some just grounds of Suspicions and Jealousies concerning their Determinations who shall perswade us that they are Infallible But 2. What if it appear that Councils are not onely fallible but that they have been most miserably corrupted and forged too What sure warrant have we for such and such Practices not recommended in Sacred Writ from the Authority of Councils when such and such Constitutions Decrees and Canons have been ascribed to such and such Councils which indeed were never theirs We reade that Zosimus Bishop of Rome sent his Legats to the sixth Council of Carthage with Instructions to maintain the Primacy of the Roman Bishop as the onely Judge in cases of Controversies and Appeals and for that Prerogative of his they pretended a Canon of the first Nicene Council which was indeed a very fair Plea had it been true because the Acts of that Council were not onely confirmed by the Emperour but received by the universal Church What particular Canon of the Nicene Council was pleaded for the Primacy of the Roman Bishop Bellarmine tells us Habemus Nicaenum Concilium illum ipsum sextum Canonem c. We have on our side the Nicene Council and that very sixth Canon c. The Canon is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Design of this Canon was onely this that the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioch and all other Metropolitans should still govern the Churches within their respective Provinces as the Bishop of Rome was wont to govern those within his These being the express words and this being the undoubted Sense of the Canon the Council of Carthage answered Faustinus Philippus and Asellus who were the Pope's Legates that although they had strictly searched all Registers and examined the most authentick Copies of the Acts of the Nicene Council which they had received from Cyril Bishop of Alexandria and Atticus Bishop of Constantinople yet they could find nothing done by that Council to establish or countenance the Primacy of the Roman Bishop nor that the Bishops of Africa were obliged by any Canon of the Nicene Council to appeal and be subject to the See of Rome But the Primacy of the Pope being a Point of great Concern to the Roman Church and there being nothing more likely to establish it then the Authority of the Nicene Council which is received by the universal Church what greater Service could any man doe for the Bishop of
Rome then to prove his universal Preeminence over all other Bishops and Churches by some Act of that famous Council which no Church gainsayeth This is that which Bellarmine attempts and because he cannot doe it convincingly by the Canon as it is vulgarly read and expressed in the usual and publick Editions he produceth a private Copy and tells us that the Canon as it is commonly read is imperfect and ought thus to begin Ecclesia Romana semper habuit Primatum Mos autem perduret c. The Roman Church hath always had the Primacy c. One would think it strange that Bellarmine should adventure to make such an Addition to the Canon of so known and famous a Council but to justifie himself he tells us that this Canon was anciently so read and that about a thousand years ago it was thus translated out of the Greek Copies into Latine by a certain Abbot named Dionysius and that such a Copy was found in the Roman Library and that it was so read by Paschasianus the Legat of Pope Leo in the Council of Chalcedon and there approved But in desperate cases the old Rule must be observed Scelere tutandum est Scelus One Lie must be justified by another For 't is not easie to believe that the onely true Copy of the Acts of the Nicene Council and that in a Latine Translation too should be preserved at Rome nor is it easie to imagine that if there had been such an authentick Copy of that famous Council lodged at Rome it would have been permitted so long to have lain in the dark and never have been produced ti◠the Council of Chalcedon especially since the Interest of the Roman Bishop required the Production thereof to prove the same Prerogative above fifty years sooner For will any man believe that those Roman Bishops Zosimus and his Successour Boniface who claimed this Primacy from the sixth Council of Carthage would have been so far wanting to themselves as not to have produced such an authentick Copy which if clearly made out would have satisfied the Council ended the Controversie and established the Primacy of Rome by a Law True it is Faustinus the Pope's Legate produced in that Council his Commonitorium which he had from Rome pretending the Authority of the Nicene Fathers for the Primacy of the Pope and particularly in matters of Appeal but how little these Pretences were liked by the Council we may easily guess by that Answer which was returned by Alipius who was a great man there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It troubleth me that though we have examined the Greek Copies of the Nicene Council yet how it comes to pass I cannot tell we can by no means find any such thing as the Roman Bishop pretends and claims And so much did they certifie Pope Boniface himself in their Synodical Letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Having many Greek Copies before us we could not find what was intimated and demanded from Rome no not so much as in any one However that they might satisfie themselves and the Bishop of Rome too so much the better they thought fit to dispatch away their Letters to Cyril Bishop of Alexandria and Atticus Bishop of Constantinople desiring them to send over what Copies and Registers they had of the Nicene Council who accordingly did so For thus Cyril tells them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And thus Atticus too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'T is evident by these Expressions that these two Bishops sent over to the Council of Carthage the Acts Decrees and Canons of the Nicene Fathers entire uncorrupted and unquestionable And what 's the Issue do any one of these Copies agree with that of Rome No the Council having perused 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these true Copies sent this Message to Caelestinus who was now become Pope and had made the same Demands with Zosimus and Boniface 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We cannot find any such Canon as is pretended no not in the most authentick Copies that we have perused But the truth is that Copy of the Nicene Council mentioned by the Pope's Legate to the Council of Carthage was to the shame of the Roman See unworthily and basely corrupted and those words mentioned by Bellarmine Ecclesia Romana semper habuit Primatum were de novo how politickly soever yet knavishly enough added to the old Canon For 't is evident that the Council of Carthage resolved to alter nothing that had been defined by the Nicene Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which Expressions are enough to convince all reasonable men that this Council of Carthage had no inclination to change any but confirm all the Constitutions of the Nicene Fathers but as to that Canon which the Pope's Legate pretended requiring or allowing the African Clergy to appeal from their own Bishops to the Bishop of Rome they were so far from confirming this that they established an express Canon against it and thus it runs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Presbyters Deacons and other inferiour Clergy-men in whatever Causes they have let them not appeal to any Tribunal beyond the Sea i. e. as the Council expresly words it in their Letter to the Pope 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let them not appeal to the Bishop of Rome This Canon did so nettle the Roman Bishops that upon this occasion Boniface the Second told Eulalius Bishop of Carthage who had now unworthily submitted his Chair to the See of Rome that his Predecessour Aurelius St. Austine and above two hundred more learned and pious Bishops assembled in the Council of Carthage had denied Subjection to the Roman Bishop because they were as he impudently affirmed inspired and instigated by the Devil But as from this Determination of the Council of Carthage we may conclude that pretended Canon of the Nicene Bishops alleged by Faustinus in the Pope's behalf to be spurious and forged so may we reasonably infer as much from the consideration of its matter which is altogether untrue and evidently false For is it imaginable that so early a Council as that of Nice should acknowledge and ratifie the perpetual Primacy of the Roman Bishop since 't is notoriously known that the Primacy of the Roman Bishops was first derived from that bloudy Emperour Phocas and procured by the crafty Insinuations of Boniface the Third who magna cum contentione as Platina writes with much adoe procured but most willingly assumed to himself the Title of Vniversal Bishop and Head of all other Churches That it was not thus in former Ages we have the Confession of Gregory the Great who tells us Nullus unquam Praedecessorum meorum hoc tam prophano vocabulo uti consuevit None of all my Predecessours would ever assume to himself this profane Title and as for himself he was so far from owning it that he was the very first Bishop of Rome that styled himself Servus Servorum Dei the Servant of the Servants of
was the day of Christ's Passion their Sabbath of his Buriall and our Lord's day of his Resurrection 'T is mentioned by Tertullian who saith Die Dominico jejunium nefas ducimus To fast on the Lord's day we count it sin 'T is mentioned by Nazianzene who styles it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 'T is from the great Probabilities given us in the written Word and the pregnant Testimonies of Antiquity that the Reformed Church doth observe this Tradition which concerns the Lord's day with greater strictness then the Roman They tell us again that the Baptism of Infants is an Apostolicall Tradition we are so far from contradicting them that we do not onely practise it our selves but maintain it against all Opposers because 't is mightily countenanced in Sacred Writ and commended to us by all Antiquity I remember Dionysius the Areopagite if he that goeth under that name be indeed the man tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Children who were yet uncapable to understand the Mysteries of the Gospel were made partakers of Divine Regeneration and saith that the Church observed this Practice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being taught so to doe by ancient Tradition Accordingly Nazianzene thus adviseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Hast thou an Infant let him be sanctified from his Infancy And so St. Cyprian and other Bishops give their Judgments Prohiberi non debet Infans qui recèns natus c. The Infant that is but newly born must not be debarred from Baptism Whoever denied this was condemned by the Church and accordingly the Council of Carthage which consisted of two hundred and seventeen Fathers passed this Sentence upon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whosoever denieth that little Children newly dropped from their Mothers Womb ought to be baptized let him be Accursed These and the like Authorities do induce us to believe that the Baptism of Infants though no-where in plain terms commanded in Scripture is yet a Divine Tradition and upon that well-grounded Confidence our Church doth as constantly practise and as strongly defend it as ever theirs did or can do They tell us again that the Institution of our Christian Festivals and the observation of Lent are Apostolicall Traditions Well though they will find it a difficult task to prove them such though the first Institution of Lent is by some ascribed to Telesphorus and though about the observation thereof there was and that very early too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doubts and various opinions as Irenaeus and Eusebius tell us yet because our Christian Fasts and Festivals are very suitable to Scripture-Rules and were observed as great helps to and expressions of their Devotion and Piety by our religious Ancestours and indeed the Universality of the Christian Church we do readily embrace and practise both But when our Adversaries press upon us under the notion of Apostolicall Traditions many things of Faith and Worship defined in their late Conventicle of Trent though altogether unknown to the first and purest Ages of the Christian Church and contrary to the written Words we find reason to lie under the Anathema's and Excommunication of the Roman Church rather then to comply witâ— it in those Doctrines and Practices of theirs whicâ— are so exceeding far from being Apostolicalâ—â— They tell us indeed that their Veneration 〈◊〉 Saints is practised juxta Catholicae Apostolicae Ecclesiae usum à primaevis Christianae Religionis temporibus receptum according to the use of the Catholick and Apostolick Church and was received from the beginning of the Christian Faith whereas the Invocation of Saints now practised in the Roman Church is not mentioned by any of the Fathers till above two hundred years after Christ and consequently cannot be imagined to be an Apostolical Tradition And as for the Roman Custom of Praying for the dead by the Practice whereof in former Ages they would fain establish their Doctrine of Purgatory and that especially to keep up the credit of their dear Indulgences though we find this excess of groundless and uselesse Charity used in the Christian Church and that somewhat early too though St. Cyprian in the third Century mentions Oblatio pro Dormitione Deprecatio nomine defunctorum though Tertullian in the same Century mentions Oblationes pro defunctis nay more though Dionysius the Areopagite who if he be the man lived in the first Century tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The holy Priest makes an holy Prayer for or over the dead yet none of all these do assert this Practice to have had its Originall from any Divine or Apostolicall Tradition as the Roman Church contends Tertullian indeed concerning this and some other Practices used in his time confesseth thus Si legem expostules Scripturarum nullam invenies If you require a Scripture-command for this and that there is none to be found upon which score he ascribes these things to Tradition but whence that Tradition took its rise he doth not tell us But the truth is St. Chrysostom doth who in the behalf of persons deceased in the Guilt of sin exhorts his hearers thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let us assist and succour them to our utmost power But what can surviving persons doe for the relief of departed Sinners he answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let us both pray for them our selves and beseech others to doe so too And that the Dead should be particularly remembred in the Prayers of the Church at the celebration of the Lord's Supper he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was ordained by the Apostles and that not in vain And that this Practice spred and continued in the Church after St. Chrysostom's time is evident from that expression of St. Austine Non parva est universae Ecclesia Authoritas quae in hac consuetudine claret ubi in precibus Sacerdotis quae Domino Deo ad ejus Altare funduntur locum suum habet etiam commendatio Mortuorum 'T is clear indeed from these words that to remember the dead in their most solemn Prayers at the celebration of the Eucharist was grown in St. Austine's time the generall Custom of the Church but that this Custom had its Originall from the Apostles he doth not say Nor indeed could this be the Institution of the Apostles that there should be a particular Commemoration of the dead and a solemn form of Prayer put up to God on their behalf at the administration of the Lord's Supper if that Observation be true which Chemnitius ascribes to St. Hierom St. Gregory and others in these words Apostolos ad solam Orationem Dominicam celebrâsse actionem Mysteriorum Divinorum If this be so that the Apostles themselves used no other Prayer but the Lord 's alone at their Celebration of the Eucharist how can it be imagined that those solemn Supplications which in after-times were made for the dead at the Altar should be of