she actually hath imposed false Doctrines and Practices as Apostolical Tradition 2. Because she hath no better Right to testifie in this Matter than the Eastern Churches § 2.3 Because her present Testimony contradicts the Testimony of the whole Church in general and of the Roman Church in particular in former Ages § 3. 1. Touching the number of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament 2. Of the Authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews 3. Of the number of the Sacraments 4. Of Concomitance 5. Of pronouncing part of the Mass in a low Voice 6. Of the Veneration of Images 7. Of Communion in one Kind 8. Of her Twelve new Articles 9. Of the no necessity of giving the Eucharist to Infants Ibid. 4. Because this Doctrine makes Scripture Reason and Antiquity not only useless but pernicious to us § 4. More Instances of the Contradiction betwixt the Decrees of the Ancient Catholick Church and of the present Church of Rome 1st In the Decree of the Trent Council touching the Freedom of the Blessed Virgin from Actual Sin § 5. 2dly In the permission that Church gives to eat things Strangled and Blood § 6. In punishing Men with Death for their Religion § 7. In not breaking the Bread they distribute not permitting the Communicants to carry it home not Consecrating it with a loud Voice § 8. In the Matter of the Immaculate Conception though not conciliarly defined § 9. Seven Corollaries from this Instance § 10. MOreover § 1 for farther Explication of this Question let it be noted Dist 4. That by the word Tradition when we allow what can be proved by it to be in Matters of Faith a Doctrine or a Revelation derived from the Apostles in matters of Government of Discipline or practice an Apostolical Ordinance or Institution we mean not the Tradition of the present Church and much less the Tradition of the Church of Rome and her Adherents Charity Maint ch 2. §. 14. but we mean with Mr. Knot Such a Tradition which involves an evidence of Fact and from Hand to Hand from Age to Age bringing us up to the Times and Persons of the Apostles Id quod in Ecclesia Universa omnibus retro temporibus servatum est merito ab Apostolis creditur institutum De verbo Dei non scripto l. 4 c. 9. and our Saviour himself cometh to be confirmed by all those Miracles and other Arguments by which they proved their Doctrine to be true or such a Practice as the Church hath observed in all past Ages according to the Third Rule of Bellarmine for the discerning Apostolical Traditions and such an Article of Faith as all the Doctors of the Church by common consent have always testified to have descended from Apostolical Tradition Such is the Tradition which St. Basil insists upon for the use of the Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Spirit in the Doxology of the Church viz. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. de Spiritu Sancto c. 29. which was customarily used in the Churches from the first Preaching of the Gospel to that very time and of such Traditions we say with him Ibid. That it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 suitable to the Apostles Doctrine to continue in them Praefat. in libr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such is the Tradition of which Origen speaks when he saith That only is to be believed as Truth which in nothing disagreeth from the Tradition Ecclesiastical that is The praedicatio per successionis ordinem ab Apostolis tradita usque ad praesens in Ecclesiis permanens preaching delivered down by order of Succession from the Apostles and to this present time continued in the Churches This is the Tradition of which St. Cap. 8. Austin speaks in his Book De utilitate credendi viz. of the Tradition quae ab ipso Christo per Apostolos ad nos usque manavit Cap. 10. which came down from Christ by his Apostles to that present time which à Majoribus nostris tradita ad nos usque servata est being delivered by our Ancestors hath been preserved to our times and which is Cap. 14. celebritate consensione vetustate roborata strengthened with a general Fame Consent and Antiquity And this is also the Authority he meaneth when he saith I should not have believed the Gospel nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae moveret Authoritas unless the Authority of the Catholick Church had moved me For he informs us That he speaks of that Authority which was Contr. Epist Man. quam vocant Fundament c. 4. Miraculis inchoata vetustate firmata begun by Miracles and confirmed by Antiquity And this must of necessity be meant by that Tradition which is the Foundation of an Article of Faith for Faith must be a matter of Divine Revelation and therefore must proceed from Christ or his Apostles from whom alone all Revelations of the Christian Faith have issued the Churches Business being to Believe to Preach and Testifie not to enlarge or shorten to alter or diversisie the Faith by them delivered to her and what they taught her as a thing necessary to be believed or practised by all Christians must consequently be so believed taught and practised through all future Ages provided that they walk according to their Rule Common c. ◠Hence saith Vincentius Lirinensis Hoc est vere proprieque Catholicum quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus That is truly Catholick Doctrine which was held in all places all times and by all Persons Sess 4. And accordingly the Trent Council and the Roman Doctors pretend to have received those Doctrines in which they differ from us partly from Scripture and partly from Tradition derived from the Apostles to their days But here begins the difference betwixt us § 2 1. That they will have the Testimony of the present Church to be an Evidence sufficient of the Tradition of the Church of former Ages and will maintain this way of Arguing to be good The present Church of Rome and they who hold Communion with her deliver such and such Doctrines as Traditions received from the Apostles and handed down from them thoughout all Ages and by all true Christian Churches to this present Age and therefore they undoubtedly are such We on the contrary say That we have clear unquestionable Evidence from Scripture and Church-History that many of the Doctrines imposed upon us by the Church of Rome as Apostolick Doctrines and Traditions were not received but rather were condemned and abhorred by the former Ages of the Church of Christ in general and in particular by that of Rome and this hath been already proved in the instance of their Latin Service the Veneration of Images and Communion in one Kind whence it demonstratively follows that this proposition is contrary to plain matter of Fact. Again What better reason can be given for this Consequence viz. The present Church of Rome with her Adherents deliver
nor a Decree received into the Code of Canons by the Vniversal Church as was the contrary Decree of the Council of Laodicea nor were the men that made it likely to judge better what were the Books of the Old Testament received as Canonical than all the Writers now produced for our Canon they whom we have produced as our Witnesses being either men who lived upon or near the place where the Canon of the Old Testament was published and known or travelled many of them thither and one of them on purpose to learn exactly the number of those Books And surely it is too ridiculous to imagine that it should in the Fifth Century be better known in Africa what Books of the Old Testament were Canonical than at Jerusalem Caesarea Alexandria or any of the Eastern Churches Moreover This Canon of the Council of Carthage in the Roman Code lately set forth by Paschasius Quesnel hath only Tobit and Judith and two Books of Esdras of all the Apocryphal Books now Canonized at Rome nor in the Collection of Cresconius Can. 299. an African Bishop is there any mention of the Books of Macchabees or Baruch nor in the Edition of it by Balsamon so that this cannot be a proof that the Trent Canon was received then And lastly 't is true they stile the Books there mentioned Canonical but this may only be in that large Sence in which those Books were sometimes called so which were read in the Church though they were not sufficient to confirm matters of Faith as may be argued from the Reason which they give us why they stiled them Canonical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Balsam in can 27. Concil Carthag viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because we have from the Fathers received these Books to be read in the Church and from the Gloss of Balsamon upon it who to know what Books were Canonical in the strict Sence sends us to the Council of Laodicea Athanasius Nazianzen and Amphilochius who all declared against the Apocrypha and to the last Canon of the Apostles which leaves out most of them And whereas it is added that the Canons of the Council of Carthage were established in the Sixth General Council held in Trullo let it be noted First That at other times the Romanists will by no means admit this Council Can. 36. Can. 13. Can. 55. because it equals the Bishop of Constantinople with him of Rome forbids Priests to be separated from their Wives condemns the received Customs of the Church of Rome and prescribes contrary Laws to her but now because they hope their Forlorn Cause may have some small advantage by it they give it the Title of a General Council Note 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 2. That this Synod in the same Canon in which it confirms the Council of Carthage confirms also the Canons of the Council of Laodicea together with the Canonical Epistles of Athanasius Nazianzen and Amphilochius which number the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as we do rejecting the rest with us as Apocryphal when therefore the Fathers in the Synod confirm the Canons of the Council of Carthage they must either contradict themselves by contradicting the Council of Laodicea and these Canonical Epistles now mentioned and by them equally confirmed or else they must believe that this Canon of the Council of Carthage did not declare these controverted Books to be properly Canonical or divine Scripture but only in that larger sence in which that Name was given to Ecclesiastical Books thought worthy to be read in the Church Fifthly Whereas Mr. M. and J. L. farther assert That after these Books were declared Canonical by Pope Innocent and the Council of Carthage all cited these Books as Scripture none pertinaciously dissented from this Decree no Catholick ever doubted of them we are bound to thank them for their kindness to us in these words in which they plainly have renounced their Title to almost all the best Writers of the Christian World who as the Reverend Dr. Cousins hath demonstrated through every Century till the very Year of the Session of the Trent Council not only doubted of but plainly did reject these Books as uncanonical in the strict acceptation of the Word declaring that they read and cited them indeed as Books containing good instruction but not as properly Canonical or as sufficient to confirm any Article of Christian Faith. Lastly The Testimony of St. Austin in his Book of Christian Doctrine is so inconsistent with his other works and so fully answered by the Reverend Dr. Consins Can. 7. that it is needless to say any thing distinctly to it To proceed therefore to the Books of the New Testament § 14 observe First That the four Gospels the Acts of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 25. l. 6. c. 25. the Thirteen Epistles of St. Paul the First Epistle of St. Peter and the First of St. John were always 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confessed by all true Christians to be sacred Books of the New Testament and their Authority was never questioned by any person of the whole Church of God. Now sure we have unquestionable certainty of such Books as have been handed down to us by the Tradition of all Ages of the Church inserted into all her Catalogues cited by all her Writers as Books of a Divine Authority and of which never any doubt was made by any Member of the Church of God. Secondly § 15 Observe That it cannot be necessary to Salvation to have an absolute assurance of those Books of the new Testament which have been formerly Controverted by whole Churches as well as private Doctors of the Church for either these Churches had sufficient certainty that the Books which they rejected were Canonical or they had not if they had how could they be true Churches who rejected part of their Rule of Faith when known to be so If they had not it seems not necessary that we at present should be certain of them for why may not we go to Heaven without this assurance as well as they of former Ages Thirdly § 16 There can be no assurance of the true Canon of the Books of the New Testament from the Testimony of the Romish or the Latin Church in any Age because she in some Ages hath rejected from the Canon that Epistle to the Hebrews Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 20. which she now receives It was rejected in the Third Century by Cajus Presbyter of Rome by Tertullian in the same Century who also in his Book Cap. 20. de pudicitia insinuates that it was not received as Canonical by some other Churches Origen in his Epistle to Africanus having cited a passage from the Eleventh Chapter of this Epistle adds That it is probable some being pressed with it Pag. 232. may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 embrace the Sentence of them who reject this Epistle as
libr. Regum Tom. 3. f. 6. a. say That the Canonical Books of the Old Testament are Twenty four which say they from St. Jerom St. John in his Revelations introduceth under the Name of the Twenty four Elders Dr. Cous p. 131 133. P. 147. P. 152. P. 164 178 196. so in the Sixth Century Primasius and Leontius in the Eighth Century Venerable Bede in the Ninth Century Ambrosius Ausbertus in the Twelfth Century Peter Abbot of Celle in the Fifteenth Century Thomas Anglicus and in the Sixteenth Frances Georgius Now manifest it is even from the very number here assigned of Twenty two or Twenty four Canonical Books that all these Authors must exclude those Books we call Apocrypha from the Canon and it is still more evident from their own Words in which they expresly say P. 133. These are the Books received the Books put into the Canon by the Church P. 151. P. 157 194. P. 197. the Books received by the Church and Canonized The whole Canon which the Church receives and which was handed down unto them by the Authority of the Ancients And of those which we stile Apocryphal they say Ibid. P. 151. These are the Books which are contradicted and not received by the Church The Books of the Old Testament which are not received by the Church P. 152 162 177. P. 158 159 163 169 175 The Books which are read indeed sed non scribuntur non habentur in Canone sed leguntur ut scripta patrum as are the Writings of the Fathers but are not put into the Canon non reputantur in Canone are not reputed to belong unto it The Books which the Church reads and permits for Devotion and the instruction of Manners but thinks not their Authority sufficient ad confirmandam Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum Authoritatem P. 166 173 176 191 193. to confirm the Authority of Ecclesiastical Doctrines The Books which are not to be received ad confirmandum aliquid in fide to confirm any Article of Faith. The Contents of which she obligeth no man to believe P. 189 190. nor doth she judge him guilty of disobedience or infidelity who receives them not Concerning which the Church receives the Testimony of St. Jerom as most Sacred P. 194. who did undoubtedly exclude them from the Canon To whom say they the Church Catholick is much indebted upon this account P. 199. and to whose sence the sayings both of Councils and Fathers are to be reduced Books with whose Authority no Man was pressed Books P. 202. P. 174 188. Lastly which were not genuine but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Spurious and Apocryphal which the Christian Church doth not receive P. 166 201. pari Authoritate or pari veneratione with the like Authority or Veneration with which she doth receive the Holy Scriptures Now hence the Doctors of the Church of Rome may learn what it is they are to do § 12 if they would prove any of their Doctrines to have descended to them by a like Tradition with that of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament viz. they must prove they were owned in the New Testament were delivered as Traditions by the Apostles and all the Ancient Bishops and Governors of the Church They must produce express Testimonies of Christian Writers in all Ages asserting That the Church received such a Doctrine and that they in delivering of it followed the Tradition of the Church and their Fore-Fathers and saying That the contrary Doctrine was not received by the Church They must shew That even from the first Ages of the Church Christians were solicitous to enquire what were the Apostolical Traditions not left in writing to the Church that upon this enquiry they found that these Traditions were of such a certain number neither more nor less that they thought it necessary to preserve them by writing Catalogues of all such Traditions as were received or owned as such by Christians That this Catalogue of Traditions was delivered to them by the Primitive Fathers as they had been received by the whole Church and that they had received them from Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word That they took care to leave this Catalogue of Traditions because some persons dared to mix Apocryphal Traditions with Divine and that they made it out of necessity to prevent mistakes in this matter and for the Instruction of those who received the first Rudiments of the Faith that they might know out of what Fountains to draw the Waters of Tradition They must produce from the first Four Centuries Testimonies of this nature from Fathers living in most places where there were any Christians and Testimonies uncontrouled throughout those Centuries And seeing one of these Traditions viz. that which concerneth the Canonical Books of the Old Testament is expresly contrary to a Tradition delivered and handed down to us with all these circumstances they must prove that in this matter Tradition hath plainly delivered Contradictions throughout Four whole Centuries which being done we cannot chuse but think her Testimony is Infallible Hence also we may see what an unparallell'd confidence they shew when in their Disputations the Romanists are bold to say and lay the stress of their whole certainty of Faith upon this Proposition That they hold the same Doctrine to day which was delivered yesterday and so up to the time of our Saviour seeing it is as clear as the Sun that the Books of the Old Testament which they now hold for Sacred and Canonical were for Fifteen whole Centuries together declared not to belong unto the Canon but excluded from it by the Church And this will be still more apparent by considering what the Authors of the Question of Questions § 13 and of The Papist Misrepresented and Represented say touching this matter Mr. M. saith Sect. 19. n. 6. p. 410. That when it was grown doubtful in the Church whether such and such Books were part of the Canon of Scripture the Tradition which recommended these Books was examined in the Third Council of Carthage and there all the Books of the R. Canon were found to be recommended to the Church by a true and Authentical Tradition and therefore we embrace them as the Word of God. And again Sect. 3. n. 12. p. 84 85 86. As yet the Church of Christ had not defined which Books were God's true word which not wherefore then it was free to doubt of such Books us were not admitted by such a Tradition of the Church as was evidently so universal that it was clearly sufficient to ground an infallible belief but in the days of St. Austin the Third Council of Carthage A. 397. examined how sufficient the Tradition of the Church was which recommended these Books for Scripture about which there was so much doubt and contrariety of Opinion and they found all the Books contained in our Canon of which you account so many Apocryphal to have been recommended by a Tradition sufficient
And amongst these he reckons the Seven Catholick Epistles of the Apostles Pag. 59. comprised in one Volume which he calls the Sixth Volume of the New Testament Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul comprised in the Seventh Volume and in the Eighth the Revelation of St. John of which he testisieth that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 60. shewed and judged to be his by the Ancient and holy Fathers led by the Spirit of God And then concludes Pag. 61. These are the Canonical Books of the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as it were the first fruits Anchors and supports of our Faith. St. Cyril is another who professeth to write his Catalogue from the Church and to hand down the Canonical Books as she received them from the Apostles the Ancient Bishops and Governors of the Church and he among the Canonical Books of the New Testament reckons the Seven Catholick Epistles and Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul leaving out only the Apocalypse The Council of Laodicea reckons them exactly as St. Cyril doth leaving out with him the Apocalypse not that they question its Authority but because they reckon up only the Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which ought to be read in the Churches Cyril Catech. 4. p. 38. Concil Laod. Can. 60. among which the Apocalypse was not because it is so very Mystical and accordingly the Council concludes their Canon thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Books we have received from the Fathers to be read in the Church and yet they do command that nothing should be read there but Canonical Scripture Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. Ruffinus declares he reckoned the Volumes of the New Testament as they were delivered to the Church of Christ secundum majorum Traditionem and according to the Tradition of the Ancients and then he accounts Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul Seven Catholick Epistles and the Apocalypse saying Haec sunt quae patres intra Canonem concluserunt These are the Books which the Father 's put into the Canon Can. 27. The Council of Carthage undertaking to reckon up the Canonical Books of the New Testament enumerates Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul Two of Peter Three of John One of James and One of Jude and the Apocalypse of St. John as received from the Fathers St. Jerom reckons the Canonical Books of the New Testament after the same manner only saying That the Epistle to the Hebrews was by most shut out of the number of the Epistles written by St. Paul that is some in his time conceived St. Barnabas others St. Clemens either did interpret it from the Hebrew or write it either from the Mouth or from the Notions of St. Paul but then he adds Ep. Tom. 3. f. 13. That the whole Greek Church and some of the Latins did receive it That all the Eastern Churches and all the Churches which used the Greek Tongue did Anciently own it as the Epistle of St. Paul and that he also owned both that and the Apocalypse not respecting the Custom of his present Age but following the Authority of the Ancient Writers who cited Testimonies from both not as sometimes they are wont to do from Apocryphal Books but as from Canonical Scripture And good reason had he to say 1. § 19 Lib. 3. c. 24. That he received the Apocalypse on the Authority of the Ancients when Eusebius expresly declares That a judgment might easily be passed of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Testimony of the Ancients Athanasius that it was determined Synop. p. 60. and demonstrated to be his by the Ancient and Holy Fathers led by the Spirit of God. And indeed Ep. ad C. §. 34. Dial. cum Tryph p. 308. Pag. 373 477 128 347 376 480 486 500 503. Lib. 5. c. 30. p. 485. Pag. 201. 528. Tom. 5. in Joh. Hom. 7. in Jos pag. 269 270 411 510 c. De opere Elem p. 202. de bono pat p. 219. Hist Eccl. l. 4.24 Ibid. c. 26. Lib. 5. c. 18. p. 186. Lib. 7. c. 25. it is cited in the First Century by Clemens Romanus as a Prophetical Writing In the Second Century by Justin Martyr as a Book writ by John one of Christ's Twelve Apostles By Irenaeus in the same Century as the Revelation of John the Disciple of the Lord the Revelation of St. John and he declares it was written by him pene sub nostro saeculo almost in our Age at the end of the Reign of Domitian It is mentioned in the Third Century as holy Scripture and a Prophetick Vision by Clemens of Alexandria as the Revelation of that John who lay in the bosom of our Lord by Origen it is mentioned by Tertullian as the Prophecy the Revelation the Vision of the Apostle John in above Twenty places by St. Cyprian as that Revelation in which we hear our Saviour's Voice and in which he speaks to us Eusebius informs us That Melito Bishop of Sardis writ upon the Revelation of St. John that Theophilus Bishop of Antioch owned it and cited from it many Testimonies Now both these flourished in the middle of the Second Century That Hippolitus the Disciple of Irenaeus did the same And that Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria professed That he durst not reject it by reason of the multitude of Christians who had a veneration for it and that he owned it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the work of an holy Man inspired of God. And judge now whether he had not sufficient ground to say this matter might be decided by the Testimonies of the Ancients That this Book was refused by Marcion the Heretick Contra Marcion l. 4. c. 5. Haer. 51 54. Haer. 30. we learn from Tertullian that it was rejected by the Alogians and Theodosian Hereticks we learn from Epiphanius and St. Austin and that when some Orthodox Christians began to dislike the Doctrine of the Millennium they began also to dispute some the Author of this Book ascribing it to another John Presbyter at Ephesus and others the Authority of it because they could not answer the Testimony produced from the Twentieth Chapter in favour of the Saints Reign on Earth a Thousand Years But then their Arguments against it are only taken from some vain and weak Imaginations of their own Brains as v. g. That St. John here names himself which in his Gospel and Epistles he never doth by which Argument we must reject either the Lamentations or the Book of Jeremy 2. Because he doth not use the same Expressions here as he did there that is in a Prophetick Stile as in a Doctrinal on which account Ecclesiastes and the Canticles cannot be writ by the same Author And 3. Because he writes here better Greek than elsewhere which if so may be because he writes not to the Jews but to the Asiaticks or after he had more conversed with them who spake that Language in its Purity As for those who ascribe
Truth of Faith is sufficiently explained In the same Article our Church having reckoned up the Books of the Old Testament which she esteemed Canonical Art. 6. and which by both Churches are recieved as such she adds the other Books as Hierom saith The Church doth read for Example of Life and Instruction of Manners but yet doth not apply them to establish any Doctrine Such are these following The Third Book of Esdras The Fourth Book of Esdras The Book of Tobias The Book of Judith The rest of the Book of Esther The Book of Wisdom Jesus the Son of Syrach Baruch the Prophet The Song of the Three Children The Story of Susanna Of Bell and the Dragon The Prayer of Manasses The First Book of Maccabees The Second Book of Maccabees Of all which excepting only the Third and Fourth Books of Esdras and the Prayer of Manasses the Council of Trent saith Whosoever shall not receive them as Sacred and Canonical Sess 4. let him be Anathema And yet this Determination is so apparently repugnant to the Doctrine of the Ancient Church that Mr. Du Pin a Doctor of the Faculty of Divinity in Paris and his Majesty's Professor Royal in Philosophy hath entirely given up this Cause unto the Protestants For 1. Whereas it is confessed by all the Learned of both Churches that we in this distinction betwixt Books of the Old Testament Canonical and Apocryphal or not Canonical exactly follow the Canon and the Judgment of the Jews Tom. 1. dissert praelim p. 51. from whom the Christians received the Books of the Old Testament He also saith The Christian Antiquity for the Books of the Old Testament hath followed the Canon of the Jews that no others were cited in the New Testament but those which belonged to the Canon of the Jews That the first Catalogues of Canonical Books made by Ecclesiastical Authors both Greek and Latin comprehend no others in the Canon P. 612 613. In his Abridgment of the Doctrine of the Three first Centuries he saith expresly That the Christians of those times owned no other Canonical Books of the Old Testament but those which belonged to the Canon of the Hebrews and that they sometimes cited the Apocryphal Books but never put them in the number of Canonical Books And whereas Mr. M. and J. L. have had the confidence to say Mr. M. p. 85 86. That after the Declarations of the Council of Carthage Pope Innocent and Gelasius c. no one ever pertinaciously dissented from it but such as Protestants themselves do confess to be Hereticks J.L. c. xi p. 23. until the days of Luther Or that no Catholick after the Church's Declaration in the Year 419. ever doubted of them Qui depuis les decisions des Conciles de Carthage de Rome la Declaration d'Innocent I. n'ont compte que vingt deux ou vingt quatre livres Canoniques de l'Ancien Testament Tom. 1. Diss praelim p. 60. Mr. Du Pin having produced the express words of Gregory the Great after that time to the contrary adds in flat contradiction to them these ensuing words We ought to make the same reflection on all the other Ecclesiastical Authors Greek and Latin which we have produced who After the Decisions of the Council of Carthage and of Rome and the Declaration of Innocent the First have counted only Two or Four and twenty Books of the Old Testament which makes it evident that these Definitions were not yet followed by all Authors and by all Churches till such time as this Matter was fully determined by the definition of the Council of Trent And indeed § 3 the Truth of this Confession is as clear as the Light For as Mr. M. and J. L. confess Vid c. 3. §. 13. Lib. 1. de verbo Dei. c. 20. S. ad alterum That the Canon of Scripture was not defined till the Fifth Century As Bellarmine acknowledgeth That Melito Epiphanius Hilarius Hieronymus Ruffinus in expounding the Canon of the Old Testament followed the Hebrews not the Greeks De locis Theol. l. 2. c. 11. Sect. Quid Ecclesiâ—sticum As Canus excuseth Ruffinus for rejecting with us the Apocrypha because he did it in eo tempore quo res nondum erat definita when this thing was not defined on which account saith he we also do excuse the rest and so all these men virtually confess that there was no Tradition of the Church against us during those Ages So in the following Centuries even till the time that the Trent Council met approved Authors do declare the Doctrine of the Church to have been still according to the Doctrine of this Article and contrary to the Definition of the Trent Council For In the Western Church Primasius a Bishop of the African Church saith Cent. 6. In Apocalyps cap. 4. The Books of the Old Testament of Canonical Authority which we receive N. B. are Twenty-four which St. John insinuated by the Twenty-four Wings Leontius Bizantinus having said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De Sectis Act. 2. Let us reckon up the Books received by the Church he adds That the Books of the Old Testament are Twenty-two and concludes thus These are the Books Canonized in the Church of which they that belong to the Old Testament are all received by the Hebrews In the Ninth Century Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople Cent. 9. undertakes to reckon up the divine Scriptures which were received and Canonized in the Church and of these in the Old Testament he numbers only Twenty-two as we do Canon Scrip. Chron. p. ult Quibuscontradicitur non recipiuntur ab Ecclesia Bibl. H. Eccl. de vitis Pontif. and among the Books contradicted and not received in the Church he puts the Maccabees Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Esther Judith Susanna and Tobit Anastasius the Keeper of the Library of the Church of Rome among the Books which are contradicted and not received by the Church reckons the Maccabees Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Susanna Judith and Tobit In the Twelfth Century Peter Mauricius Cent. 12. Abbot of Clugny in his Epistle against the Petrobusians tells them they ought of necessity to receive the whole Canon which is received by the Church and then having reckoned up the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as we do he adds That after these Authentick Books of the Holy Scripture Restant post hos Authentiâ—os sex non reticendi libri sapientia c. Pag. 25. c. de Autor Vet. Test there be Six not to be concealed viz. the Books of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and both the Books of Maccabees Hugo de Sancto Victore saith Sunt praeterea alii quidem libri ut sapientia Solomonis c. Qui leguntur quidem sed non scribuntur in Canone de scripturis scriptoribus Sacris Cap 6 Prolog in l. de Sacram c 7 And the division he says is made Authoritate universalis Eccl. Didasc l. 4. c. 1.2 Richardus
de Sancto Victore excerpt l. 2. c. 9. That all the Books of the Old Testament are Twenty-two and that there are besides other Books as the Wisdom of Solomon the Book of Jesus the Son of Syrach Judith Tobias and the Books of Mâ—câ—abees sed non scribuntur in Canone but they are not written in the Canon and this he very frequently repeats Richardus de Sancto Victore saith in like manner That the Books of the Old Testament are Twenty-two alii non habentur in Canone others are not put into the Canon though they are read by us as are the Writings of the Fathers and these Books are Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and the Maccabees John Beleth having reckoned up the Books of the Old Testament and told us they were Twenty-two he after saith expresly De div Officiis c. 60 62. That Tobit the Maccabees Philo and the Son of Syrach were Apocrypha and that hos quatuor quidem non recipit Ecclesia the Church receiveth not these four John of Salisbury in Answer to the Question put to him Ep. 172. Edit Paris 1611. p. 279. Quem credam numerum esse librorum V. N. Testamenti What he believed to be the number of the Books of the Old and the New Testament P. 281. saith That following Catholicae Ecclesiae Doctorem Hieronymum St. Jerom as the most approved Doctor of the Catholick Church in this matter he undoubtedly believed them to be Twenty-two And then of the Books of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Judith Tobias and the Maccabees he saith Non reputantur in Canone They are not reckoned in the Canon and having added to this account the number of the Books of the New Testament he concludes of them both thus Et hunc quidem numerum esse librorum qui in S. Scripturarum Canonem admittuntur celebris apud Ecclesiam P. 282. indubitata traditio est And that this is the number of the Books which are admitted into the Canon of the Holy Scriptures is what the celebrated and undoubted Tradition of the Church declares The Ordinary Gloss received in this Cent. 13. De libris Bibliae Canonicis non Canonicis and in the following Ages with the general Approbation of the Schools and all the Doctors of the Western Church declareth 1. That the Canonical Books of the Old Testament are only Twenty-two and having reckoned them up in this order viz. Five Books of Moses Eight of the Prophets and Nine Hagiographa he adds That quicquid extra hos est ut dicit Hieronymus inter Apocrypha est ponendum What Books soever there be besides relating to the Old Testament they ought according to St. Jerom to be put among the Apocrypha particularly before the Books of Tobit Judith Wisdom Ecclesiasticus and the Maccabees he saith Here begins a Book qui non est in Canone or qui non est de Canone Ibid. which belongs not to the Canon And again Isti sunt libri qui non sunt in Canone These are the Books which are not in the Canon and which the Church admits as good and useful but not as Canonical He also giveth his Advertisement Ibid. That the Chapters added to Esther and to Daniel are not in the Canon so that in all things he perfectly accordeth with the Church of England 2. As for those Books which are not Canonical he informs us That Ecclesia eos legit permittit the Church reads and permits them to be read by the Faithful for Devotion and Information of Manners but she doth not think their Authority sufficient to prove what is doubtful or matter of dispute or to confirm Ecclesiastical Doctrines And this 3. because there is as much difference betwixt Books Canonical and not Canonical as betwixt what is certain and what is dubious betwixt Books written by the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost and Books indited they knew not when or by whom And 4. He professes to have made this distinction and exact numeration of the Books which did and which did not belong unto the Canon because there were many who because they did not spend much time in studying the Scriptures existimabant omnes libros qui in Biblia continentur pari veneratione esse reverendos thought with the Trent Council all the Books contained in the Bible were to be received with a like Veneration not knowing how to distinguish betwixt Books Canonical and not Canonical In the Fourteenth Century Brito a Friar Minorite put forth his Exposition of the Prologues of St. Jerom upon the Bible which were usually joined to the Ordinary Gloss and are still extant in the Works of Nicholas Lyra and in his Exposition of the Prologue upon Joshua he informs us That according to the Hebrews the Books of the Old Testament are divided into the Law the Prophets and the Hagiographa the Law containing Five Books the Prophets Eight and the Hagiographa Nine that the Books of Judith the Maccabees of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus the Third and Fourth of Esdras and the Book of Tobit Apocryphi dicuntur Quia vero de veritate istorum librorum non dubitatur ab Ecclesia recipiuntur are called Apoorvphal because the Authors of them are not known though they are received of the Church as not doubting the truth of them In his Exposition on the Prologue upon Kings he tells us That the Prologue of St. Jerom was useful ut sciamus librorum Canonis Apocryphorum distinctionem that we might by it know the distinction betwixt the Canonical and Apocryphal Books and that it defends the Holy Scripture against them who introduce the Apocryphal Books for Hagiographa or sacred Writings And in his Exposition upon his Prologue before Daniel he saith Continet liber iste Apocrypham partem Historiam Susannae Hymnum puerorum Belis Draconisque fabulas This Book containeth something Apocryphal viz. The History of Susanna the Song of the Three Children and the Fables of Bell and the Dragon Now this being a work of so great Credit as to be joined to the Gloss and commonly received as Lyra saith must give us the prevailing Judgment of that Age. Nicholas Lyra in his Preface upon Tobit saith That by the favour of God he having writ super libros S. Scripturae Canonicos on the Canonical Books of Scripture from Genesis to the Revelations intended by the same Grace of God super alios scribere qui non sunt Canonici to write upon others which were not Canonical and which are only received in the Church for Instruction of Manners not being by her thought sufficient to confirm doubtful Matters Now these saith he according to St. Jerom in his Prologue on the Kings are Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Judith Tobias and the Maccabees Baruch and the Second of Esdras as he saith in his Prologues to those Books In the beginning of his Notes upon Esra he renews all this saying That he intended though Commenting upon the Historical Books of the Old
Testament to pass by the History of Tobit Judith and the Maccabees quia non sunt de Canone apud Hebraeos nec apud Christianos because they neither are esteemed Canonical by Jews nor Christians yea St. Jerom saith in his Prologue That inter Apocrypha cantantur the Church Chants them among the Apocrypha I therefore saith he first intend to write on the whole Canonical Scripture and then super istos alios qui communiter ponuntur in bibliis quamvis non sint de Canone upon those and other Books which are commonly put in our Bibles though they belong not to the Canon Moreover the Third and Fourth of Esdras he passeth over without Notes for the same Reason On the Thirteenth of Daniel he Notes thus The History of Susanna ought to be put inter libros Bibliae non Canonicos among the Books of the Bible which are not Canonical and in his Notes on the Fourteenth Chapter he saith of the History of Bell and the Dragon ponitur inter Scripturas non Canonicas it is put among those Scriptures which are not Canonical after the History of Susanna Now had not Lyra mentioned the Judgment of the Church touching these Books yet these Expressions in Comments of so great Credit in the Church sufficiently shew that this was then a Doctrine well received in the Church of Rome Antoninus Florentinus in his Historical Summs acknowledgeth only Twenty-two Canonical Books of the Old Testament Cent. 15. Sum. Hist part 1. Tit. 3. c. 4. c. 6. §. 12. saying in General of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and the Maccabees that Ecclesia recipit the Church receives them as true and profitable though not as of force in matters of Faith Unde forte habent Authoritatem talem qualem habent dicta istorum doctorum approbata ab Ecclesia Sum. Theol. part 3. Tit. 18. c. 6. §. 2. and in particular of Ecclesiasticus that it is receptus ab Ecclesia ad legendum non tamen Authenticus est ad probandum ea quae veniunt in contentionem fidei received by the Church to be read but is not Authentical to prove things doubtful in the Faith. Alphonsus Tostatus saith of the Six debated Books Praefat. in Matth. qu. 2. That they are not put into the Canon by the Church nor doth she regularly command them to be read or to be received or judge them disobedient who do not receive them For Ecclesia non est certa de Auctoribus eorum the Church is not certain of the Authors of them yea she knoweth not an spiritu sancto inspirati whether they were indited by Men inspired of the Holy Spirit and so she obliges no Man ad necessariò credendum id quod ibi habetur to yield necessary assent to what they do contain Enarrat praefat in l. paralip q. 7. And elsewhere Though saith he these Apocryphal Books be joined with others of the Bible and read in the Church none of them is of such Authority ut ex eo Ecclesia arguat ad probandam aliquam veritatem quantum ad hoc non recipit eos that the Church proves any truth out of them for as to that she doth not receive them Dionysius Carthusianus saith Praefat. in Gen. Art. 4. The Books of the Old Testament are Twenty-two as saith St. Jerom in his Prologue before the Kings and having reckoned them up Five Legal Eight Historical Nine Hagiographa he adds Hos libros vocant Canonicos alios vero Apocryphos These Books are called by Divines Canonical the rest Apocryphal In the Sixteenth Century Franciscus Ximenius reckons those Books of the Old Testament which were extant only in Greek Cent. 16. as Bibl. Complut Praef. ad Lect. Libri extra Canonem quos Ecclesia potius ad aedificationem populi quam ad auctoritatem Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum confirmandam recipit Books out of the Canon which the Church receives rather for Edification of the People than for confirmation of Ecclesiastical Doctrines Erasmus having numbered the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as we do In expos Symb. Apost Decal Catech. 4. vers finem Ed. Antver 1533. concludes thus Intra hunc numerum conclusit priscorum Authoritas Vet. Test volumina The Authority of the Ancients comprized the Volumes of the Old Testament of whose Truth it was not lawful to doubt within this number Johannes Ferus having told us that the Apocryphal Books were Nine In exam Ordinand he adds That olim in Ecclesia Apocryphi publicè non recitabantur nec quisquam Authoritate eorum premebatur anciently the Apocryphal Books were not read publickly nor was any Man pressed with their Authority Sebastian Munster in his Preface to the Old Testament and in the Chapter of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament numbers them exactly as we do and then he saith Intra hunc numerum concluserunt Hebraei prisci Christiani volumina veteris Testamenti Both the Hebrews and the ancient Christians comprized the Volumes of the Old Testament within this number but now the other which he reckons as we do excepting only the Song of the Three Children are received in usum Ecclesiasticum into the use of the Church Moreover from the Ninth Century in which the Ordinary Gloss upon the Bible was begun by Strabus to the Sixteenth they did not only number the Canonical and reject the Apocryphal Books as we do but they did it chiefly for the very reason that is assigned in our Article viz. among others the Authority of St. Jerom Card. Cajetan Praefat. super Josuam ad Clem. 7. declaring That Sancto Hieronymo universa Ecclesia Latina plurimum debet propter discretos ab eodem libros Canonicos à non Canonicis The universal Church is very much beholding to St. Jerom not only because he noted what Parts where added to the Books of the Old Testament or were but doubtful Appendixes but also for separating the Canonical from the uncanonical Books That the Church received those Books which he received and rejected those which he rejected That Consonat Hieronymus cus maxima habetur fides in Ecclesia is inquam Hieronymus in Prologo Galeato inter Canonicos libros V. Testamenti hosce duntaxat enumerat Firmiter tamen haerendum credo sententiae Hieronymi Cujus Autoritas me movit ne multo altius quam a suo tempore de librorum horum ordine disputarem cum illis floruerit temporibus quae doctis hominibus abundabant multa ex Gestis veterum Theologorum legerit quae nunc periere peritissimus quoque suit Graecae Hebraicae literaturae demum ejus testimonium ab Ecclesia pro sanctissimo habeatur Picus Mirand de fide ordinc credendi Theorem 5. Com. in libr. Hist V. Test In primum cap. Matth. ad v. 12. Testimonium Hieronymi quoad hoc ut Sacrosanctum habetur in Ecclesiâ as to this Matter the Church held his Testimony to
say they in our writings (e) Aug. de Orig an l. 4. c. 1. l. de bono persev c. 21. many things quae possent justo judicio culpari which justly may be blamed so that we would have no man so to embrace all our Sayings as to follow them save only in those things in which they do perceive they have not erred if then their sayings be of any credit and Authority 't is evident from their assertions that they ought not to be admitted as the Rule of faith as being men subject unto like ignorance and errors with us and if their sayings be of no credit much less can they be own'd as the pillars and the ground of truth and yet I find this doctrine laid down expresly by a concealed Heretick Sergius the Patriarch of Constantinople in his Epistle to Cyril where he saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Sexto Ep. ad Cyrum episcop Concil To. 6. p. 918. the doctrines of the Fathers are a Law to the universal Church and that we are bound to follow them and to hold all that they have written to the least tittle and evident it is That even from the Fifth Century the sayings of the Fathers began to be had in great Reputation and about the Eighth to be as it were Authentick and Articles of Faith were canvassed and determined both in the Second Nicene Council and in that of Florence chiefly by the pretended Sayings of the Holy Fathers to whose Testimony you very rarely if at all shall find this just Exception made That they were Men of like Infirmities and subject to like Errors as we are One Athanasius or Basil one Nazianzen or Nyssen one Chrysostom and Theodoret in the Eastern Church one Hilary and Ambrose St. Austin Jerom and St. Gregory in the Western Churches have for these six last Centuries signified as much or more than a St. Peter or St. Paul an Apostle or Evangelist and a sed contra Augustinus or sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit through the whole Summs and the whole Body of the Schoolmen hath passed for the Decision of a Question touching Faith or Manners How easy was it then for Errors to come in under the Vmbrage of these venerable Names especially if we consider how many spurious Pieces had usurped their Names which the great Ignorance of latter Ages could not distinguish from their genuine Works how many of their genuine works were horribly corrupted and how fruitful many of those Fathers were in there inventions and how positive they sometimes are in delivering that as the doctrine of the whole Church which was nothing less For instance who that reads St. Austin disputing against the Pelagians could doubt if he believed him that the Doctrine of the Imputation of Original Sin was universally received by all Christians and that on this account the whole Church Baptized Infants and yet Petavius iuforms us Dogm Theol. To. 4. pt 2. l. 14. c. 2. Haeret. Fabul l. 5. c. 18. p. 292. Quid festinat innocens aetas ad remissionem peccatorum Tertul. de Bapt. c. 18. that the Greek Fathers scarcely spake any thing about it yea in that very Age Theodoret expresly denies it putting the Question thus If this be the only work of Baptism to cleanse from Sin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 why do we Baptize Children who are not guilty of it and in his Comment on Rom. 5.13 He adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That every one dies for his own Sin and not for that of his Fore fathers Chrysostom on the same place saith In v. 19. To. 3. Hom. 10. p. 73. That for us to be mortal on the occasion of the Sin of Adam is no absurdity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but how can it be that by his Transgression another should become a Sinner for if he did not personally sin Cap. 1. neither could he deserve Punishment Gennadius in his Book of Ecclesiastical Doctrines which passeth still among the Works of St. Austin placeth this as one That that Holy Spirit proceedeth from the Father and Son. Michael Psellus on the contrary saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cap. Theol. c. 10. p. 157. the Holy Catholick Church teacheth that the Spirit proceedeth only from the Father L. 2. c. 1. but not from the Son. To omit many other Instances collected by the learned Dally in that elaborate Treatise of the Use of the Fathers which makes it needless to discourse further on this Head For if the true Fathers were not only subject to many and great Errors in their private Sentiments but also unto manifold Mistakes touching the Doctrine of the Catholick Church if many of their Works have been unhappily corrupted and many spurious Pieces have been imposed upon them so that instead of their Authority Men often have relyed on an Impostor an ignorant Monk or perhaps an Heretick how easy was it in the dark Ages of the Church for Errors to come in at this Door when too much Veneration was by all given to them and their Dictates passed for Oracles Again § 8 New Doctrines and Practices might obtain by flying from the Scriptures to Miracles and Visions for the Establishment of Doctrines and Opinions in the Church That a prevailing Power doth attend these miraculous Operations even when they are performed only by Satan and his Ministers we shall be fully convinced if we consider that our Lord foretold of the false Prophets and false Christs that should come after him they should work Signs and Miracles so great as to deceive Matth. 24.23 if it were posible the very Elect. St. 2 Thes 2.9 Paul that the Apostacy of the Great Antichrist and his Followers should be effected by the coming of Satan with all power Signs Rev. 13.13 14. and lying Wonders St. John of the Apocalyptick beast that he should do great Signs and deceive the Inhabitants of the Earth by the Signs given him to do that at the first appearance of Christianity the Heathens did oppose it from this topick viz. The Signs and Wonders which had been performed by their Heathen Deities saying Frustra tantum arrogas Christo In vain you arrogate so much to Christ for we have often known that other Gods have given Medicines to and healed the Infirmities of many so the Heathen in (a) Arnob. l. 1. p. 28. Arnobius so (b) Apud Orig. l. 8. p. 407 416 417. Celsus so (c) Apud Minut p. 7. Caelius and comparing the Miracles of Apollonius Tyanaeus and of Apuleus with those of Christ (d) Lact. l. 5 c. 3. Aug. Ep. 4. Hieronim apud Euseb p. 512. Quorum majora contendunt esse opera And contending they were greater than any done by him That (e) Acts 8.9 10. Just in Apol 2. p. 69. Cyril Hier. cat 6. p. 53 54 c. Simon Magus mightily prevailed by them and obtained almost where-ever he came to be worshipped as a
being not writ by Paul. Now who they were who in this Century did upon this account reject it we learn more plainly from the Writers of the following Century For Eusebius informs us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 20. even in his time some of the Romans did reject it as being none of the Apostles Upon which place Valesius notes That it was the Custom of Eusebius to call all the Latins Romans and observes that Ruffinus thus Interprets this very passage Scio apud Latinos de ea quae ad Hebraeos inscribitur haberi dubitationem L. 3. c. 3. I know that the Latins doubt of the Epistle to the Hebrews The same Eusebius informs us Ep. ad Dard. Ep. Tom. 3. f. 24. a. that others did reject it with the Roman Church St. Jerom frequently affirms That eam Latina consuetudo non recipit the Latin Church did not receive it among the Canonical Scriptures Here then we see that they rejected for Two Centuries what afterwards they did unanimously receive as part of the Canon of the New Testament and so her Judgment alone can give us no assurance of the Books of the New Testament because through two whole Centuries she actually erred in her Judgment of them Hence also I inferr that the Church of Christ knew of no Obligation laid upon her in a division of Church Rulers touching any matter Exhort ad Martyr p. 232. to adhere to the Pope and Church of Rome and those which sided with them For in this very Case Origen in the Third Century offers to demonstrate against her that this was truly the Epistle of St. Paul And Jerom bluntly says Although the Latins do reject it yet do I receive it Tom. 3. f. 24. with the Greeks nequaquam hujus temporis consuetudinem sed veterum Scriptorum authoritatem sequens not following the Custom of this time among the Latins but the Authority of ancient Writers Fourthly I add § 17 That there is not the like necessity that any of these controverted Books should be received from the beginning by all Christians as Canonical as that the necessary Articles of Christian Faith and Manners should be received by all Christians For 1. The necessary Articles of Christian Faith and Rules of Christian Life were preached universally to all and so there was no time when any Christian could be ignorant of them without his own fault but the Epistles controverted were only sent to private Christians as the Second and Third Epistles of St. John or to the Churches of the Jews and therefore might with reason for some time be doubted of by other Churches of the Gentiles this being not a weakening but confirmation of our Faith that the first Christians were so careful to see sufficient Evidence before they would receive even the least Epistle into the Canon of the Scripture 2. No Christian Church could need to be told by any other what were the necessary Articles of Christian Faith or Rules of Life since they must always know the Christian Faith and be obliged to practise the Rules of Christian Piety and must be taught them by their Church Guides but 't is not thus with reference to these Epistles for being writ to a particular Society of Christians it was sufficient that this Society could shew De praescript c. 36. as saith Tertullian Authenticas literas corum the Authentick Letters of those Apostles which indited them and could testifie to those who doubted as St. Austin saith De Doctrin Christian l. 2. c. 8. quod ab ipsis Epistolas accipere meruerunt that they received these Epistles from them and read and owned them as their genuine Works when-ever this was done they who before did question them must have sufficient ground to own them as parts of the true Canon and till they had this Evidence they reasonably might continue to doubt of them 3. It is evident from the second Observation that the assured knowledge that these Epistles are Canonical cannot be necessary to Salvation the necessary Doctrines of Christian Faith being according to the general Tradition of the whole Church of Christ Chap. 7. §. 4 5 6 c. Ibid. § 2 3. comprised in the Apostles Creed and all the necessary Rules of Christian Piety being according to the same Tradition fully comprised in the Four Evangelists whereas the actual knowledge of all necessary Articles of Christian Faith and Rules of Christian Conversation must be always necessary there being no possibility of knowing or of doing acceptably the Will of God without them It will not therefore follow because such matters of Fact may for a time be doubtful in the Church matters of Faith may be so that because Churches may be Orthodox and reject some part of the Canon for a Season they may be Orthodox though they reject some necessary Article of Christian Faith. The Romanist I hope will not admit of these Conclusions The Greek Church might reject the Apocalypse and yet be Orthodox ergo she might reject the Trinity and yet be Orthodox The Latin Churches for a Season might reject the Epistle to the Hebrews without blame ergo they might reject the Resurrection of the Body without blame The whole Church did not formerly receive those Books into the Canon of the New Testament she now receives Ergo the whole Church did not formerly embrace those Articles of Faith which now she holds and yet all these conclusions are as good as those the Roman Doctors usually make for receiving all the Articles of Faith imposed at present by the Church of Rome as the Conditions of Communion upon her Testimony that they are such because we do receive the Canon of the New Testament from the Tradition of the Church Fifthly We shall see cause sufficient to embrace as certain § 18 and unquestionable that Canon of the New Testament we now receive notwithstanding any doubts some of the Ancients had touching some lesser portions of it if we consider 1. That most of the Fathers of the Fourth Century who give us Catalogues of the Scripture Canon and they especially who tell us they in making of it followed the suffrage of the Church and the Tradition of the Fathers do accord in giving of that very Catalogue we now receive and owning all those Catholick Epistles which were sometime controverted thus for instance Apud Balsamon p. 922. Athanasius reckoneth the Books of the New Testament as we do numbering as appertaining to the Canon Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul Seven Catholick Epistles and the Apocalypse and saying These are the Fountains of Salvation let no man add unto them or take from them And yet he doth profess to reckon them as they delivered them who were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word and as they by Tradition came down to him In his Synopsis he undertakes to reckon up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Canonical Books of the New Testament defined to be such
this Revelation to an unknown Presbyter whose Name was John rather than to that Apostle who conversed so long among these Churches they may be easily confuted from this peculiar description of that John who was the Author of this Book Rev. i. 9. he being that John who was banished into the Isle of Patmos for the Word of God Vers 2. and the Testimony of the Truth and who bare record of the Word of God and the Testimony of Jesus Christ and of all things which he saw which are peculiar to this Apostle of our Lord. 2. § 20 St. Jerom also had good reason to own the Epistle to the Hebrews to be written or at the least composed or indited by St. Paul on the Authority of the Ancient Writers Apud Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 3. Sect. 12 17 36 43. L. 3 c. 38. Catalo Script verbo Paulus Pag. 247 439. Pag. 53 362 384 514 515 645. Lib. 3. p. 143. Lib. 7. p. 351. Philocal p 10 17. Dial. contra Marc. p. 114. Ep. ad Afric p 232. Seeing as Origen informs us the ancient Christians did not rashly when they delivered it as the Epistle of St. Paul and as Eusebius saith Saint Paul's Fourteen Epistles were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 known and manifest to the whole Christian World. We find it very often cited by Clemens Romanus the Companion and co-worker of St. Paul in his Epistle to the Church of Corinth in which as Eusebius and St. Jerome Note he hath put many notions which are in that Epistle and used many Expressions word for word taken thence In the Second Century it is cited by Irenaeus as a Book written by the Spirit of God and in the close of that Century or the beginning of the next it is Six times cited by Clemens Alexandrinus under the Name of the Apostle Paul or of Divine Scripture Origen saith That the Apostle Paul writ Fourteen Epistles he cites it as the Epistle of St. Paul in his Third and Seventh Book against Celsus in his Philocalia in his Dialogue against Marcian in his Exhortation to Martyrdom in his Epistle to Africanus he undertakes to demonstrate that it was his against such as doubted of it and in his Fifth Tome upon John he declares That the things contained in it are admirable Vid. Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. and no whit inserior to those which were confessedly writ by the Apostles and that whatsoever Church received it as such was upon that account to be commended That this is the Epistle of St. Paul was in the Fourth Century denyed by the Arians because they were not able to resist the Conviction it affords in the First Chapter of our Lord's Divinity On which account Theodoret speaks thus Proem in Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They ought at least to revere the length of time in which the Children of the Church have read this Epistle in the Churches for from the time that the Churches of God have enjoyed the writings of the Apostles they have reaped the Benefit of this Epistle to the Hebrews or if this be not sufficient to perswade them they should hearken to Eusebius of whom they boast as of the Patron of their Doctrines for he confessed this was St. Paul's Epistle Proem in Ep. ad Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and he declared that all the Ancients had the same Opinion of it That they of Rome and other Latins did for a while reject this Epistle will not much weaken this Tradition if we consider 1. That this Epistle was not writ to them but to the Hebrews who as we are informed by Eusebius Embraced it with delight 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 25. That it was rejected by them not that they had any thing to say against it but because they could not answer the Arguments which the Novatian Schismaticks among them produced from the Sixth and Tenth Chapter of this Epistle against receiving lapsed Penitents into the Church whence as Philastrius informs us they rejected it Haer. 88. as thinking it was depraved by the Hereticks or 3. Because it wants his Name which he concealed saith Jerom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Catal. Script Eccl. verbo Paulus because his Name would render it less acceptable to the Hebrew Converts who were offended at his Doctrine of the Exemption of the Gentile Converts from Circumcision and the Observation of the Law saith Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Proem in Ep. ad Hebr. because he was made an Apostle not of the Circumcision but of the Gentiles 4. Because it differs in stile from the rest of his Epistles as indeed it ought to do being writ to the Hebrews accustomed to the Hellenistick Stile but of this the Ancients give this double reason That it was writ by St. Paul in Hebrew translated by others into Greek or because St. Clemens Barnabas or St. Luke did Ibid. Apud Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. sententias Pauli proprio ornare sermone write down the the Sentences of Paul in their own Words saith Jerom and gave 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Phrase and the Contexture saith Origen to to the things spoken by St. Paul. The Second and Third Epistles of Saint John § 21 and that of Jude are so short that it is needless to insist upon it that the Second Epistle of Saint John is cited by Irenaeus and Clemens Alexandrinus in the Second L. 1. c. 13. p. 94. Strom. 2. De carne Christi c. 24. Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 24. Apud Cypr. p. 242. De cultu foeminar p. 151. by Tertullian Dionysius of Alexandria and the Council of Carthage in the Third Century and the Epistle of Jude under his Name by Tertullian Concerning the Epistle of St. James the Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of St. Jude let it be noted in the general that Eusebus informs us they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 25. Petrus duabus Epistolarum suarum personat tubis Jacobus quoque Judas f. 156. know to most of the Ancients That they are all expresly owned by Origen in his Seventh Honily upon Joshua Of the Epistle of Jude in particular St. Jerom saith That though it was rejected for a while because it cited a passage from the Apocryphal Book of Enoch Catal. Script Eccl. verbo Judas tamen authoritatem vetustate jam usu meruit inter sanctas Scripturas computatur it deserved Authority from its Antiquity and constant use in the Church and is reckoned among the holy Scriptures Sect. 10 12 17 30. Sess 5. The Catholick Epistle of James is cited by Clemens Romanus four several times by Ignatius in his Genuine Epistle to the Ephesians by Origen in his Thirteenth Homily upon Genesis Lib. 3. c. 25. Lib. 2. c. 22. Eusebius saith It was known to most and publickly read in
c. 30. L. 3. de Origin An. c. 11. Ep. 126. de Orig An. l. 1. c. 9. 3. c. 13. Congerit testimonia Scripturrrum l. 1. contr Petit. c. 27. and of the Spirit no Man can enter into the Kingdom of God How often doth he prove the Necessity of it from those Scriptures which conclude them guilty of Original Sin How often doth he from Scripture pronounce them damned without it How often doth he conclude it from the Annlogy it bears to Circumcision and bring Congeriem Scripturarum an Heap of Scriptures to confirm it And after all this can it be rationally thought he should expresly teach in contradiction to his own constant Doctrine That nothing could be certainly alledged from Scripture to prove that Infants ought to be baptized Nor is there any thing more evident than that Mr. M. C. 32 33. here wretchedly imposeth on his Reader for in the place cited by him in his first Book against Cresconius he speaks not of the Baptism of Infants but of Hereticks as will be evident to all that will inspect the place In his Fourth Book of Baptism against the Donatists C. 24. in the place cited he speaks of this Point indeed but so as to assert That if any one In hac re Authoritatem divinam quaerat enquire after Divine Authority in this matter he may find what the Baptism of Infants will avail them De Gen. ad lit l. 10. c. 23. Ex circumcisione carnis from the Circumcision used under the Old Law. In the other Passage cited by Mr. M. he saith indeed That the Custom of the Church in baptizing Infants was not to be credited Nisi Apostolica esset traditio if it were not an Apostolical Tradition but doth not in the least insinuate that the Apostles left not this Tradition in their Writings Lastly Hence it is evident that the Practice of the Church is no true Ground for the Interpretation of the Holy Scripture seeing this Practice was built upon the Churches Interpretation of John vj. 53 54 56. in a Sence which that Scripture doth not bear Secondly § 7 According to the current Interpretation of our Saviour's Words I say unto you Swear not at all received in the Second Third Fourth and Fifth Centuries it was absolutely unlawful for a Christian to swear at all To this Effect we have in the Second Century the express Testimony of Justin Martyr Apol. 2. p. 36. D. Adv. Haer. l. 2. c. 56. p. 216. affirming that Christ commanded Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to swear at all but always to speak the Truth saying Swear not all c. Of Irenaeus who saith our Lord hath not only forbid us to swear falsly Sed nec jurare praecepit but hath commanded that we should not swear Clemens of Alexandria comparing the Christian Laws with those of Plato saith Strom. l. 5. p. 596. that of Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Avoid swearing in any thing agrees 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to our Lords Prohibition of an Oath And again Avoid saith he an Oath in Traffick Paedag. l. 3. c. 11. p. 255. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in other things for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes his Name in vain And Basilides Euseb Hist Eccl l. 6. c. 5. who suffered under the Persecution of Severus being urged by some of his fellow Souldiers to swear he confidently affirmed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was not lawful for him to swear at all for he was a Christian In the Third Century Origen observes Tract 25. in Matth. F. 47. B. that when our Lord speaks of Swearing Matth. xxiij he speaks unto the Jews and that Alioquin manifeste superius vetuit omnino jurare he had before manifestly forbid to swear at all And again I think that he who would live according to the Gospel ought not to adjure another for that which our Lord speaketh in the Gospel Hom. 35. in Matth. F. 82. A. Swear not at all and this Adjure not at all is alike Si enim jurare non licet quantum ad evangelicum Christi mandatum verum est quia nec adjurare alterum licet for if by Christ's Evangelical Precept we must not swear at all it is as true that 't is not lawful to impose an Oath on others De Idol c. 11. I omit to speak of Perjury saith Tertullian Quando ne jurare quidem liceat seeing it is not lawful to swear at all Amongst the Heads belonging to the Religious Discipline of Christians which Cyprian collected for the Instruction of Quirinus the Twelfth is this Non jurandum That Christians must not swear which he proves from Matth. v. 34. And to encourage Christians against Death he tells them De Mortal Ed Ox. p. 157. That it will be to them a Deliverance from many Evils they will be tempted to in this Life For saith he Compeller is jurare quod non licet thou wilt be compelled to swear which is not a thing lawful to be done In the Fourth Century Lactantius teacheth Epit. cap. 6. p. 744. That he who is of God and a Follower of Truth will never swear falsly least he seem to deride God Sed ne jurabit quidem nor will he swear at all Eusebius Demonst Evang l. 1. c. 6. p. 23. Praep. Evang. l. 1. c 4. p. 12. comparing the Laws of Moses with those of Christ saith Moses commanded not to swear falsly Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to swear at all And speaking of the Advantages of Christianity he reckons this as one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That they had learned from Christ not to swear at all St. Basil on that Passage of the Psalmist Who sweareth to his Neighbour In Ps 14. Tom. 1. p. 132 133. and deceives him not observes that here Permission is given to a perfect Man to swear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in the Gospel it is entirely forbid Here it is said He that swears to his Neighbour and deceives him not there I say unto you Swear not at all In his Epistle to Amphilochius he declares Can. 29. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Oath is wholly forbidden Tom 2. p. 383. and much more an Oath to do Evil. In his Asceticks he instructs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not to swear at all Tom. 3. Ep. 63. p. 97. nor to put his Money out to Vsury And speaking of Gregory Thaumaturgus he saith That he abstained from an Oath contenting himself with Yea and Nay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by reason of the Command of Christ Epiphanius expresly saith Haer. 19. Ossen §. 6. p. 44. That our Lord commanded not to swear by God himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor any other Oath it being of the Devil or at the least an evil thing to swear and that Christianity requires us Haer. 59. Cathar §. 7. p. 499. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 78. 〈◊〉
the Apostles understood not or neglected if they did not fulfil them but hid some of the Light that is of the Word of God and Sacramenti Christi of the Doctrine of Christ. Whereas saith he it was incredibile vel ignorasse Apostolos plenitudinem praedicationis vel non omnem ordinem Regulae nobis edidiffe that eitheir the Apostles were ignorant of any thing they were to preach or that they did not perfectly reveal the Rule of Faith to all He also shews That the Church did not alter what she had received from the Apostles because the Rule of Faith was one and the same in all Churches of Christ they being all one Chap. 20. ejusdem Sacramenti una traditione by having the same Tradition of the same Rule of Faith and because they did in eadem fide conspirare agree in the same Faith this Rule this Creed mentioned Chapter the Thirteenth must therefore be according to Tertullian the fulness of the Apostles preaching the entire Rule of Faith they preached to all or else according to him the Apostles must be ignorant or unfaithful and his ensuing Argument That all succeeding Churches agreed in this Rule as in the Tessera Hospitalitatis the Signal of Friendship Ibid. that it was one and the same among them all and that they who were not by Original Apostolical Churches were yet Apostolical because they did conspire with them that were so in the Belief of this Faith is a farther demonstration that this Creed was the entire Faith delivered by the Apostles and taught by all Churches since otherwise Tertullian's Argument must be false for he expresly undertakes to prove that the Apostles delivered to the Churches the entire Rule of Faith and that the Churches did faithfully transmit to posterity the whole Faith they received from them and that because they all transmitted the Apostles Creed mentioned Chapter the Thirteenth had not then that contained the whole Christian Faith owned then by all the Orthodox as such Tertullian had given up the Cause unto the Hereticks for they might have replied upon him as do the Romanists to us that the Apostles delivered many other Traditions as necessary to be believed as those contained in the Creed and that these were the Doctrines which they owned and Tertullian rejected Hence then our Demonstration from these words of Tertullian is invincible All Christians conspired in this that this Rule of his contained the whole Faith received from the Apostles beyond which nothing was necessary to be believed whosoever could produce this Creed they received into Communion pro consanguinitate doctrinae because agreeing with them in the Faith and whosoever pretended to any Articles of Faith not mentioned in this Creed they confuted them by saying they had no such Article in the Creed and therefore the Apostles Chap. 32 33. nihil tale docuerunt taught no such thing and rejected them ob diversitatem Sacramenti as holding a Faith different from that of the Church Now how is it likely that so many and so great Churches should erre in one Faith The Errors of the Churches had there been any in delivering their entire Rule of Faith must needs have varied but that which amongst them all was one and the same must be a sure Tradition and then the Doctrines of the Roman Creed must be rejected as not taught by the Apostles and as different from the Churches Faith. Mr. M. Ibid. Lo here plain Protestantism in the highest point proved and approved by all Christians within Two hundred Years after Christ The same Doctrine is delivered Chapter the Nineteenth and the Twentieth Pag. 429 430. on which Mr. M. insists Sect. 20. Num. 4. for there he tells us That our Lord sent his Twelve Apostles eandem doctrinam ejusdem fidei nationibus promulgare to preach the same Doctrine of Faith to the Nations and so to plant Churches in every City from which other Churches received traducem fidei femina doctrinae the Tradition of their Faith and the Seeds of Doctrine and embracing of it became all Apostolical by receiving the same Rule of Faith. Hence therefore saith he we prescribe against the Hereticks Hinc igitur dirigimus praescriptionem Cap. 21. for if our Lord sent his Apostles to preach we must receive no other Preachers of the Faith than he appointed now what they preached ought not to be otherwise proved than by the same Churches which they planted eis praedicando tam vivâ quod aiunt voce quam per Epistolas postea by preaching to them by word of mouth and afterwards by their Epistles And if so 't is manifest saith he that Doctrine is to be accounted true which conspires with the Apostolical Churches whence Faith had its Original and that is to be rejected which contradicts that Faith it remains therefore uti demonstremus an haec nostra doctrina cujus Regulam supra edidimus de Apostolorum traditione censeatur ex hoc ipso an caeterae de mendacio veniunt that we demonstrate whether our Doctrine the Rule of which we have laid down Chapter the Thirteenth derives from the Tradition of the Apostles and consequently whether all others be not false He therefore doth again declare That the Creed mentioned by him there is the entire Rule of Faith and that by which we may discern who hold the Truth and who teach Falshood And argues thus All the Apostolical Churches have delivered this Creed as that entire Doctrine which they received from the Apostles and all the Hereticks say the contrary therefore their Doctrine must be rejected and that of the Apostolick Churches be received as the Truth Mark here Pag. 429. to use the words of Mr. M. how the first ground on which we are to stand as upon a ground most advantageous for gaining the victory against Error and purchasing triumph to Truth is the Tradition of this Creed of the Apostles as the entire Rule of Faith for by that alone we assuredly know whether our Doctrine of which the Rule is given Chapter the Thirteenth came from Apostolical Tradition from this Rule of Faith delivered by the Apostles by word of Mouth and by their Writings and then by Tradition delivered down by successive practice of all Churches to which Churches Tertullian here expresly sends us will be discovered that only Tradition of the Rule of Faith in which totum Christianae fidei Sacramentum all the Mysteries of Christian Faith are contained And thus Tertullian goes on pressing his Adversary meerly by the Tradition of this Creed as the entire Rule of Faith and this way and only this way he prescribes that we ought to shew what Christ and his Apostles taught Fifthly § 9 Hence we return an Answer to that demand so often but so vainly made What Catalogue have you of Fundamental Articles of Faith For here is a Catalogue of them recommended to the whole World of Christians by so great Authority as may well be esteemed
sufficient to satisfie the curiosity of this inquiry here being Symbols delivered as the entire Summary of Articles of Christian Faith by the Consent of the Apostles the four first General Councils received by all Orthodox Christians of all Places and Ages as such for at least Six hundred Years here is as Irenaeus saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Tertullian Regula immobilis irreformabilis as the Greeks in the Council of Florence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Rule invariable unmovable unchangeable not to be shaken or reformed a Rule which say the Fathers Concil Hor. Apud Bin. Ses 5. Tom. 8. p. 590. admits of no diminution or addition this being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a secondary Foundation of Faith after the Symbol that it was not to be changed in the least saith the Bishop of Ephesus Whereas the Catalogue of Fundamentals in the Roman Church is still variable and increasing every new General Council having it in their power by defining any new Thing disputed in the Schools to advance it into a New Article of Faith. Sixthly § 10 Hence also we return a satisfactory Answer to that Question so captiously put unto us Where was your Church before Luther by saying that our Church was in all places of the World where these ancient Foundations were retained and not subverted by introducing Doctrines plainly opposite unto them our Church exactly is the same with that in Irenaeus and Tertullian's days and could undoubtedly have had with them free Communion by virtue of her Symbol yea if that which always was professed to be the entire Summary of Faith be sufficient when owned and Baptized into to render us of the same Church with them who so professed they may here find our Church where they will scarce find their own in all the Ages from the Apostles to the Tenth Century in the West and till the Reformation in the East For though our first Reformers in the Church of England differ'd a little from the Greek and Eastern Churches in some Rites and Practices yet were we one in Faith and so as far as it is needful for Sister Churches to be of one Church Concil Flor. apud Bin. To. 8. Sess 5. For they maintained stifly in the Council of Florence that the Nicene or Constantinopolitan Creed contained all the Articles of Christian Faith necessary to be believed or which were to be imposed on Christians and that it was lawful for no Man to add to or take from it or to propose another Faith Sess 5. p. 586. Pag. 580. that this was the Catholick Faith which ought to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one and the same among all Christians that in this Symbol of Faith nothing was by the Fathers permitted nothing put defectively nothing that wanted Correction or Addition Censura Orient Eccles Edit per Stanisl Socolovium c. 1. Atque hic quidem est ille verae incorruptae fidei thesaurus ab ipso spiritu sancto ne quid ex eo aut auferatur aut aliquid alienum adulterinum illi addatur sancte obsignatus haec est illa divina sanctissima perfecta ac universalis per orbem terrarum confusi populi Christiani tessera haec est illa communis confessio omnium sanctorum patrum hic est certissimus universae Christianae fidei limes quem in utrisque manibus complectentes quem ubique magna libertate alacritate confitentes velut quoddam coeleste integrum incorruptum nullaque parte contaminatum sanctorum divino numine afflatorum hominum depositum ad extremum usque finem vitae nostrae conservabimus Censur Orient Eccl. Edit per Stanislaum Socolovium Cap. 1. Apud Bin. Ibid. p. 580 577. In their Censure of the German Churches they set down the Constantinopolitan Creed as that Treasure of the true incorrupted Faith sacredly sealed by the Holy Ghost that nothing should be taken from it nothing alien or adulterine added to it as that Divine most Holy Perfect and universal Tessera of the Christian People diffused over all the World the most common Confession of all the Holy Fathers the most certain boundary of the whole Christian Faith and they declare That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this was the chief cause of the Schism betwixt them and the Western Churches that the Romans had added to the Nicene Creed there therefore was at that time no real difference betwixt them and us in the Symbol of our Faith and therefore nothing which could hinder our Affection to Her or Hers to us as a Sister Church with which was maintained and ought to be maintained the Union of Peace and Charity by reason of this universal Tessera of Christian People owned by both parties as the perfect Summary of their Faith. Lastly § 11 Hence you may see why the Divines of the Church of England acknowledge the Church of Rome still to continue a true Church and those in Communion with her as true parts of the Catholick Church visible though far from being only so because they are Baptized into this Faith alone and it is delivered to them even by the Church of Rome as the whole Catholick Faith the whole Faith necessary to Salvation For through the wonderful Providence of God it hath so happened Part. 1. c. 2. p. 13. that the Trent Catechism hath declared suitably to the Tradition of the Ancients that the Apostles made the Symbol which now bears their Name to be a form of Christian Faith to those whom they should call ad fidei unitatem to the Vnity of Faith and to be a mark of distinction betwixt false Brethren and those who verè Christo militiae Sacramento se obligarent truly did oblige themselves to Christ by the Sacrament of their Warfare And the Trent Council in prejudice to all her following Decrees hath also taught That Symbolum Apostolorum est principium illud in quo omnes qui fidem Christi profitentur necessario conveniunt ac Fundamentum Ecclesiae firmum ac unicum Sess 3. p. 7. the Symbol of the Apostles is that Principle in which all who profess the Faith do necessarily agree and it is the firm and only Foundation of the Church And at their Baptism of Infants and Adult Persons the Questions and Answers run thus Ritual Rom. de Bapt. parvul p. 13. de Baptismo Adult p. 28. Pr. What askest thou of the Church of God to which the Adult Person or the God-Father of the Infant replies I desire Faith. Pr. What will Faith procure for thee Godf. Life eternal And yet the God-Father of the Child or the Elect with the Adult Baptized when they come to repeat this Faith only recite the Apostles Creed and so they still retain the Ancient and Apostolick way of admitting Members into the Church as to matters of Faith required of them to be believed CHAP. IX The Novelty of the Romish Doctrines proved farther First from the Instructions given by the Church-Rulers to their Clergy what