the Greek And that their Versions of the New Testament where they vary Graecis cedere oportere non dubium est must yield to the Greek Copies is without doubt St. Jerom in his Epistle to Lucinius saith Ep. Tom. 1. f. 69. b. That he had Translated most of the Old Testament according to the Hebrew and that he had Translated the New according to the Authority of the Greek Ut enim veterum librorum fides de Hebraeis voluminibus examinanda est ita novorum Graeci sermonis normam desiderat For as the Truth of the Books of the Old Testament is to be examined by the Hebrew so is the Truth of the Books of the New Testament to be examined by the Rule of the Greek In his Epistle to Sunia and Fretela he tells them Tom. 3. f. 28. a. That as in the New Testament if at any time a Question arise among the Latins and there is a diversity among the Copies recurrimus ad fontem Graeci sermonis we recurr to the Greek the Original Language in which the New Testament was writ so in the Old Testament if there be a diversity between the Greek and Latin Copies ad Hebraicam recurrimus veritatem Ep. Tom. 3. f. 10. b. we recurr to the Hebrew Verity In his Epistle to Damasus he saith That he had at his command Translated the Four Evangelists codicum Graecorum emendatâ collatione mending the former Versions by the Collation of the Greek Copies it being the desire of Damasus that because the Latin Copies differed he would shew quae sunt illa quae cum Graeca consentiunt veritate which best agreed with the true Copies of the Greek and indeed saith he If we must trust to the Latin Copies let them who think so say to which for they are almost all different one from the other surely the Scripture of the New Testament being writ in Greek when that differs in the Latin Tongue uno de fonte quaerendum we must have recourse to the Fountain Now by the way they who speak so expresly of the Hebrew and the Greek Verity by which the truth of the Latin Copies is to be examined shew that the Decree of Trent that the vulgar Latin Sess 4. pro Authentica haberetur should in all Readings Disputations Preachings and Expositions be received as authentick and that no Man should dare under any pretence to reject it agrees with Antiquity after their usual manner by way of Opposition and flat Contradiction to it though in this matter I confess they are the more excusable seeing as Espenceus saith In 1 Tim. c. 3. it rendred any of the Latins suspicious to know Greek and it was almost Heretical to know the Hebrew Tongue And as Melchior Chanus doth inform us The School-men for Four hundred Years Loc. Com. l. 2. c. 12. p. 108. retained only the Latin Edition quippe linguae Graecae Hebraicae non habuerunt peritiam because they had no skill in Greek or Hebrew Thirdly § 10 That the Books of the New Testament have been handed down unto us uncorrupted in the necessaries and substantials of Christian Faith and Manners we conclude from Reason grounded upon matter of Fact delivered and testified by the Doctors of the Vniversal Church and we receive them as such from the rational Evidence which Tradition affords in this Case Whence we collect 1. That the Apostles and Holy Spirit which did assist them in inditing of this Canon for the Church's use could not be wanting in causing them to be transmitted to those Christians for whose use they were indited because they could not be wanting to pursue the end for which they were endited Besides that they were actually thus committed to them is the Tradition of the whole Christian World which owned and cited read and received them for such from the Apostles Days as is apparent from the Epistles of Clement Polycarp Ignatius and others who were contemporary with the Apostles and from the works of Justin M. Irenaeus and many others of the Second Century They were read also by the Jews as Trypho doth confess and by the very Heathens at the invitation of the Christians For our Doctrines and Writings saith Justin M. Apol. 1. p. 52. Apol. 2. p. 7. are such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as all Men are permitted to read and if you will vouchsafe to look into them you may learn these things for we do not only read them our selves Ibid. p. 82. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but we bring them to you to peruse knowing that they will be acceptable to all that read them Apol. c. 31. We our selves do not suppress them saith Tertullian and many Accidents do put them into the Hands of Strangers They were attested to by the Sufferings of the Primitive Christians who rather chose to suffer Death than to deliver up these Books which Sufferings they could have no Temptation to endure besides their full Conviction that they were as they always stiled them Passio S. Felicis saepius Deifici libri Scripturae deificae Books which instructed them to lead a Divine Life and which their Persecutors could have had no Temptation to suppress and burn had they not known them to have been the Records of the Christian Faith with which their Faith must live or perish Moreover they contained things of the highest moment and which it was their chiefest interest to be well assured of they being the sole Ground and matter of their support under their sharpest Trials and of their future Hopes and therefore Writings they were concerned to get and hear and read and keep Add to this that they very early were translated into other Languages into the Syriack by apostolical Men saith the Tradition of the Eastern Churches by Men of great Antiquity who lived before the Canon was established as is apparent from their neglecting to translate the controverted Books of the New Testament into the Latin and other Languages Praeleg in Bibl. polyglott 13. p. 91. saith Bishop Walton From the Beginning as we may rationally conjecture seeing the Church of Rome and other Churches which understood not Greek were founded in the Apostles Days or quickly after nor could it rationally be supposed that they were without the Scriptures long Especially if we consider That it was part of their Lord's day Exercise saith Justin Martyr Apol. 2. p. 98. to read the Writings of the Apostles As for the Books themselves we find them mostly written to whole Churches Nations 1 Cor. i. 1. 2 Pet. i. 1. or the whole World of Christians To all that called upon the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place who could not easily have received them had the Apostles by whom they were at first converted given no sufficient indication of them They were Books which could not have been spread abroad as they were in the Apostles Names whilst they were living unless the Apostles had endited them
Euseb H. Eccl. l. 3. c. 10. We have only Twenty two Books which deserve belief among us and then he reckons them up as doth our Article adding that the Books written from the time of Artaxerxes to their days were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not so worthy to be credited From Christ and his Apostles Luk. xxiv 27. for the Gospel of St. Luke informs us That Christ beginning from Moses expounded to two of his Disciples in all the Scriptures the things concerning him and also that all things concerning him were written in the Law of Moses vers 44. and in the Prophets and in the Psalms that is in those Books which by the Jews are stiled Hagiographa The Apostles in their Epistles teach 2 Tim. iij. 15. That all Scripture is of Divine Inspiration and that Timothy from a Child had known them and yet he doubtless only knew the Canon then received by the Jews 2 Pet. i. 21. they add That the whole Scripture was a word of Prophecy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apud Euseb l. 3. c. 10. Genebrard Chron. ad An. 3640. Jansen ad cap. 48. Ecclus the Prophecy of Men moved by the Holy Ghost Now Josephus doth inform us That after the Days of Artaxerxes the Jews had no certain Succession of Prophets and it is confessed by many Romanists That from Malachy to John they had no Prophets In the Second Century Onesimus requesteth of Melito § 3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 4. cap. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. Bishop of Sardis a perfect Catalogue of the Books of the Old Testament whereupon this Bishop being to take a Journey into the East went to the place where those things were done and preached 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. ibid. and learning thence the exact number of them he sent their Names to Onesimus numbring them just as our Sixth Article doth And of this Catalogue Eusebius saith That it contained all the Books of the Old Testament which the Church owned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. and that he thought it necessary to preserve this Catalogue of them in writing to Posterity Here then we find upon the first enquiry after the Death of the Apostles a Catalogue exactly formed from the East and from Jerusalem agreeing with the Judgment of the whole Church of God and as exactly with the judgment of the Church of England In the Third Century Origen informs us § 4 That we must not be ignorant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Psal 1. Ed. Huet T. 1. p. 40 41. that the Canonical Books of the Old Testament are Twenty two according to the number of the Jewish Letters and then he reckons them exactly as we do adding That as these Letters are an Introduction to knowledge and divine Wisdom so these Twenty two Books are an Introduction to the Wisdom of God this saith he is the Tradition of the Jews The Tradition of the Church in the Fourth Century unanimously concurrs with the Article of the Church of England in all the Catalogues then given of the Books of the Old Testament § 5 Eusebius of Caesarea the Metropolis of Palestine who not only hath preserved the Catalogues of Melito and Origen but also doth approve them and saith They were the Books of the Old Testament received by the consent of all and of which he thought necessary to preserve the Catalogue in writing to posterity L. 4. c. 6. elsewhere saith That he is not able exactly to reckon the Governors of the Tribe of Judah that ruled the Jewish Nation after Zorobabel Demonst Evang l. 8. c. 2. p. 368. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because that from his time to that of our Saviour's there was no divine Book written Athanasius in his Festival Epistle gives the same Catalogue which we receive and having finished it he saith Ad Ruffinum Tom. 2. p. 39. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In these are comprehended the Books of the Old Testament The same Archbishop of Alexandria in his Book stiled a Synopsis of the Holy Scriptures tells us the number of the Books of the Old Testament are Twenty two Ibid. p. 58. and he there reckons them up according to our Article St. Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem speaks to his Catechumen thus Know thou studiously 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Church the Books of the Old Testament read the divine Scriptures the Twenty two Books of the Old Testament interpreted by the Seventy Interpreters Catech. 4. cap. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 36 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by all confessed to be divine Meditate upon these Twenty two Books of the Old Testament and be careful to remember them as I name them and then he reckons them up exactly as we do Epiphanius Bishop of Salamine in the Island of Cyprus in his Book of Weights and Measures Tom. 2. p. 161 162. doth in like manner inform us That the number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament is Twenty two and then he reckons them up as our Article doth St. Cap. 3. Basil Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia in his Philocalia puts this Question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Why are the divine Books Twenty two and answers it as Origen had done before him Gregory Nazianzen in his Treatise upon this very subject of the true genuine Books of Scripture Concil Oxon. Tom. 2. part 1. p. 179. declares That the Historical Books of the Old Testament are Twelve and the Metrical are Five and the Prophetical Five and then he names them all according to our Article Amphilochius in his Canonical Epistle to Selcucus gives us the same account of them Apud Balsamon p. 1083. with this only difference that the Book of Esther is said to be not so generally received for Canonical as the rest St. Jerom in several places of his works is so clearly for us that our Article is founded on his Judgment who often tells us That the Canonical Books of the Old Testament are Twenty two or if you will reckon Ruth and the Lamentations as distinct Books Tom. 3. f. 6. a. Ibid. f. 3. a. T. 1. f. 41. a. Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. they are Four and twenty In his Preface to the Book of Kings in his Epistle to Paulinus to Laeta and in divers places of his other works he is expresly of the same Judgment Ruffinus having numbered the Books of the Old Testament as we do adds That in these Books the Fathers did comprize tha◠number of the Books of the Old Testament St. Hilary saith Prolog Expla in Psalmos That the number of the Books of the Old Testament are Twenty two according to the number of the Hebrew Letters and having reckoned them up as we do saith These compleat the number of the Twenty two Books The Council of Laodicea Decrees Can. 59. That only the Canonical Books shall be read
in the Church and then this Council reckons up the Canonical Books as we do leaving out of their account those which we call Apocryphal Now this Canon being received into the Codex Canonum-Ecclesiae universalis or the Code of the Canons received by the whole Church it must have the force of an Oecumenical Synod and give us the concurring judgment of the whole Church of God on our side And yet for farther confirmation of this matter let these few things be noted First That these Fathers generally say § 6 they deliver these Catalogues as they received them by Tradition and as they were delivered to them by the Fathers and as they were received by the whole Church of Christ * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanasius in his Pascal Epistle speaks thus Because some dare to mix Apocryphal Books with the divine Scriptures of which we are fully assured from the Tradition of them to the Fathers by them who were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word It seemed good to me being exhorted to it by the Orthodox Brethren and having learnt them from the beginning in order to declare which are the Canonical Books delivered as such by Tradition and believed to be of divine Inspiration St. Hilary saith Prolog Expla in Psalmos That they were thus computed secundum Traditiones veterum according to the Traditions of the Ancients These saith St. Cyril are the Books you learn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Church and which we read publickly in the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Catech. 4. p. 37. The Apostles and the ancient Bishops and Governors of the Church who delivered these as the Canonical Books were much wiser than you thou therefore being a Son of the Church do not transgress her Laws or go beyond her Rules Quae secundum majorum Traditionem Ecclesiis Christitradita What are the Volumes of the Old and the New Testament which according to the Tradition of the Ancients are believed to be inspired by the Holy Ghost and delivered to the Churches of Christ It seems convenient saith Russinus here evidently to declare as we have received them from the Monuments of the Fathers and having reckoned up the Books of the Old Testament proceeding to the Books of the New Testament he adds Haec nobis a patribus tradita sunt Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. a. These are the Books which the Father 's comprized in the Canon these things are delivered to us by the Fathers Note § 7 Secondly That of the Books which we reject and call Apocryphal they also teach that as such they were rejected by the Church that though the Church permitted them to be read yet did she not receive them into the Catalogue of the Holy Scriptures or use them to confirm any Article of Christian Faith and that they spake of them as Books without the Canon Thus Athanasius in his Paschal Epistle saith That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for more exactness sake Apud Balsam p. 921. I add this necessary advertisement 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That besides these Books of the Old and New Testament now mentioned as divine Scripture there be other Books which are not put into the Canon which are yet appointed by the Fathers to be read to those who first come to be Catechized in the way of Piety to wit The Wisdom of Solomon the Wisdom of Syrach and Esther and Judith and Tobias and the Book called the Doctrine of the Apostles and Pastor these are read and not to be despised the others are put into the Canon Tom 2. p. 58 59. The very same words he repeats in his Compendium of the Holy Scripture where also afterwards he reckons the Four Books of Macchabees and the History of Susanna among the Books contradicted Baruch and the additions to Daniel among the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament Catech. 4. p. 38. St. Cyril having cited the Canon we receive as that which was delivered to the Church by the Apostles and ancient Governors of the Church adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let all the rest which are extro-canonical be placed in a second Order Gregory Nazianzen having given an account of Twenty two Books of the Old Testament saith You have them all Ubi Supra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that all besides them are not Genuine After his Catalogue delivered from the Tradition of the Fathers Sunt alii libri non Canonici sed Ecclesiastici a majoribus appellati Quae omnia legi quidem in Ecclesia voluerunt non tamen proferriad authoritatem ex his fidei confirmandam Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. Ruffinus saith You must know that there be other Books which are not Canonical but called by our Ancestors Ecclesiastical as the Wisdom of Solomon the Wisdom of the Son of Syrach Tobit Judith and the Books of Macchabees which they were willing to have read in the Church but not to have produced to confirm Doctrines of Faith the rest they called Apocryphal and would not have read in the Church These things are delivered to us by the Fathers Praefat. in librum Regum Tom 3. f. 6. St. Jerom saith he made his Catalogue ut scire valeamus quicquid extra hos est inter Apocrypha esse ponendum that we might know that all besides these Twenty two are to be deemed Apocryphal He adds Praef. in Esdr Neh. ibid. f. 7 8. That the Books which are not received by the Hebrews are to be rejected by us Christians and that the Church indeed Reads them but receives them not into the Canons Note Thirdly § 8 That they declare not only that these are the Books received into the Canon by the Jews but by the Christians also that they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synops Tom. 2. p. 55. the entire Scripture of us Christians saith Athanasius All the Books delivered by the Apostles and ancient Governors of the Church and by the Church to others saith St. Cyril Ubi Supra All the Books delivered to the Church of Christ saith Ruffinus That as for others which we stile Apocryphal Ecclesia nescit Apocrypha Tom. 3. f. 7. a. f. 9. a. the Church owns them not Ecclesia inter Canonicas Scripturas non recipit The Church receives them not among the Canonical Scriptures saith St. Jerom. Note Fourthly § 9 That they declare that they made this Enumeration of these Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of necessity to prevent mistakes in this Matter and for the good of the Church and that Men might know out of what Fountains they were to draw the Waters of Life Having made mention of the Hereticks saith Athanasius as of Dead persons Apud Balsam p. 920 921. and of our selves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as having the Holy Scriptures for Life and because I fear least some harmless Men through their Simplicity and Ignorance may be deceived by
the subtile Craftiness of Men and being deceived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the ambiguity of the word true Books which signifies either only such as are read in the Church or such as also are put into the Canon may begin to be conversant in others therefore I intreat you to bear with me if by way of remembrance I write of those things which you know already because of the necessity of so doing and the Benefit of it to the Church Amphilochius and Nazianzen say Ubi Supra It behoves the Christian to learn this that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every Book is not safe which has the venerable Name of Scripture for some are False and Adulterate some of a middle Nature and some Canonical and therefore say they will we number every one of the inspired Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that you may clearly learn which they are These saith Ruffinus are the Traditions of the Fathers touching the Canonical Books Ad instructionem eorum qui prima sibi Ecclesiae ac fidei Elementa suscipiunt ut sciant ex quibus sibi fontibus verbi dei haurienda sunt pocula Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. those are the Books which are read in the Church though not Canonical nor sufficient to confirm any Doctrine of Faith and the other are Apocryphal Scriptures which she would not have read and these things I thought fit in this place to signifie for the instruction of those who receive the first Rudiments of Faith Ut scire valeamus quicquid extra hos est inter Apocrypha esse ponendum Tom. 3. f 6. a. that they may know out of what Fountains they must receive the word of God. This Catalogue I have made saith Jerom that you may be able to know that the rest are Apocryphal Note § 10 Fithly That they represent these as the Fountains of Salvation which are diligently to be read and studied by all and as for the rest some of them say that though they were read in the Church not for confirmation of Faith but instruction of Manners yet private Persons should not read them Thus Athanasius having given us the Protestants Canon both of the Old and New Testament he adds These are the Fountains of Salvation so that he who thirsteth let him be satiated with the Oracles contained in them Apud Balsam p. 922. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in these alone is contained the Doctrine of Godliness let no Man add any thing to them nor take any thing from them of these our Lord spake when he said to the Pharisees You erre not knowing the Scriptures and when he exhorted the Jews to search the Scriptures P. 36 37. Learn of the Church saith Cyril to his Catechumen which are the Books of the Old and the New Testament and read none of the Apocrypha for why shouldst thou trouble thy self 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about controverted Books who knowest not those which are by all acknowledged read these Twenty two Books of the Old Testament study them only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and have nothing to do with the Apocrypha and having given us the same Catalogue of the Books of the New Testament excepting only the Revelations he saith Whatsoever is not read in the Church do not thou read St. Jerom in his Epistle to Paulinus having reckoned up the Books of the Old and the New Testament as we do saving that he saith The Epistle to the Hebrews is by many not reckoned as St. Paul 's saith I intreat thee dear Brother Tom. 3. f. 3. b. to be conversant among these to meditate of them nihil aliud nosse nihil quaerere to know to enquire after nothing else In his Epistle to Laeta touching the Education of her Daughter he gives this Admonition let her shun all Apocryphal Books Caveat omnia Apocrypha c. Tom. 1. f. 21. and if at any time she will read them not for the truth of Doctrine but for Reverence of the Signs let her know they are not their Books whose Titles they bear that there be many ill things in them that it requireth great Wisdom to seek Gold among Dirt. Thus have we in one Century Eusebius of Caesarea the Metropolis of Palaestine Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem § 11 Amphilochius Bishop of Iconium the Metropolis of Lycaonia Nazianzen and St. Basil in Cappadocia Athanasius Patriarch of Alexandria Ruffinus Priest of Aquileia in Italy Hilary of Poictiers in France Jerom who lived in Rome France Dalmatia Syria Palaestine who travelled into Cyprus Aegypt Alexandria conversed with all the learned Persons of his Age and lastly the Council of Laodicea received generally through the Christian World deposing their plain Testimonies for the Canon of the Old Testament received by Protestants and as unanimously condemning that of the Trent Council since owned by the Church of Rome And confident I am that the greatest searchers into Ecclesiastical Antiquity cannot produce one Council nor one Testimony of any Father throughout these Four Centuries who purposely treating of or declaring the exact number of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament doth not either expresly exclude or at least omit all or most of all those Books which we stile Apocryphal and which by the New Canon made at Trent Sess 4. are pronounced Canonical and that with an Anathema to every Christian who pro sacris Canonicis non susceperit receives them not as Sacred and Canonical And if all this be not sufficient whosoever will peruse Doctor Cousin's Canon of Scripture will find the same Tradition still continued to future Ages And that the number of the Books of the Old Testament were either expresly or equivalently declared to be those and those only which we receive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 4. in Gen. p. 20. For Century the Fifth St. Chrysostom lays it down as a thing confessed by lla that all the divine Books of the Old Testament were from the beginning writ in the Hebrew Tongue Theodoret twice mentions the sacred and saving Scriptures of the Old Testament In Cant. Cantic p. 985 1077. Cous p. 132. P. 142. P. 145. P. 151 152. P. 154. P. 158 159 161 163. without addition of one of the Apocryphal The number of them is declared to be Twenty two Century the Sixth by Anastasius in the Seventh Century by Isidore in the Eighth Century by Damasus in the Ninth Century by Nicephorus and Agobardus in the Eleventh Century by Giselbertus in the Twelfth Century by Hugo de Sancto Victore Richardus de Sancto Victore by Petrus Comestor John Belith and by John of Salisbury P. 166. P. 174 178. P. 179 188 192 197. in the Thirteenth Century by the Ordinary Gloss in the Fourteenth Century by Nicephorus Calistus and Joannes Armachanus in the Fifteenth Century by Thomas Waldensis Dionysius Carthusianus and Erasmus Others numbring Ruth and Lamentations as Two Books distinct from Judges and Jeremy Prol. Gal. in
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
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
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
but never to Tradition the Prophets do exhort them for their direction to repair to the Law Esai 8.20.34.16 Mal. 4.4 and to the Testimonies to the Book of the Lord. To remember the Law of Moses which he commanded them in Horeb for all Israel with the Statutes and Judgments as their only certain Rule and Direction Now that the ordinary Succession of Prophets was to cease from the Days of Malachy to the Times of Christ whereas had Oral Tradition also been their Rule the Prophets must have had like reason to call upon them to remember that Moreover God only calls upon them by Moses To do all the Words of this Law which are written in this Book and promiseth his Favour and Acceptance of them upon that account saying If thou shalt hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God Deut. 30.9 10. Vers 15. to keep his Commandments and Statutes which are written in this Book of the Law I will rejoice over thee for Good. See I have set before thee this day life and good and death and evil And David speaketh thus unto King Solomon 1 Kings 2.3 Keep the Charge of the Lord thy God to walk in his ways to keep his Statutes and his Commandments and his Judgments and his Testimonies as it is written in the Law of Moses that thou maist prosper in all that thou dost and whithersoever thou turnest thy self If then the Observation of what was written in the Law of Moses was sufficient to procure Life Favour Prosperity and Acceptance with God surely this written Law must be a perfect Rule and must sufficiently contain all that was needful to be believed or done unto those ends Hence is the King commanded to write him a Copy of this Law in a Book that he might learn to fear the Lord God Deut. 17.18 19. and to keep all the words of this Law and these Statutes to do them and to perform the words of the Covenant which are written in this Book 2 Chron. 34.31 is to keep God's Commandments his Testimonies and his Statutes with all the Soul and with all the Heart Whereas had Oral Tradition been any part of their Rule they must have been obliged equally to observe what was delivered by it and all God's Statutes and Commandments could not be written in this Book as it is so expresly and frequently declared that they were Our Saviour in like manner bids them Search the Scriptures Joh. 3.39 because they thought in them they had eternal Life in which apprehension had they been deceived as they must have been provided that there was another Law of Oral Tradition given to lead them unto Life eternal our Saviour doubtless would have informed them of this dangerous Error which yet he was so far from doing that when a Lawyer puts the Question to him What shall I do that I may inherit eternal Life Luk. 10.25 26. he Answers What is written in the Law how readest thou This do and thou shalt live Luk. 16.29 And sends the Jews to Moses and the Prophets that by hearing them they might avoid the coming to the Place of Torments but neither he nor his Disciples do ever send them to Tradition or speak one word in approbation of it which is sufficient Evidence that they knew nothing of this Rule of Mr. M. 2dly § 6 The Traditions concerning Doctrines generally believed and Practices needful to be performed among them after the Law was written by Moses and after God had given them a Charge upon the ceasing of the Succession of his Prophets to remember and stick close unto it I say the Traditions which obtained in the Jewish Church as far as we have any certain intimation of them were such as tended to the evacuating of the Law of Moses to the renouncing of the true Messiah and to the introduction of vain Worship and superstitious Observances whence it demonstratively appears that Oral Tradition was not then a certain Rule nor could the Jewish Nation be obliged by divine Precept to receive it as such To make this Evident consider 1. That our Saviour often sends the Jews to Scripture to Moses and the Prophets but never to Tradition 2. That he still represents the great Asserters of Tradition in the Jewish Nation Matth. 15.14.23.16 17 19. Mat. 15.10 11. to wit their Elders Scribes and Pharisees as blind Guides leading of the Blind as Fools and Blind confuteth their Traditions though generally received before all the People Mark 7. Mat. 12.7 Matth. 15.13 justifies his Disciples in the neglect and violation of them pronounces them Plants which his Father had not planted and therefore such as should be rooted up 3dly He plainly tells them That by these Traditions they did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transgress make void Mark. 7.10 and null the Commandment of God. He shews this by plain Instances in their evacuating the Fifth Commandment by their Traditions in observing and enjoining such Traditions touching the Observation of the Sabbatick Rest Matth. 12.7 Matth. 12.12 Luk. 6.9 Mark 3.5 Luke 13.15 Matth. 23.16 23. as contradicted that great Law of God I will have mercy and not sacrifice and made it unlawful to do good and preserve Life upon that day and which sufficiently demonstrated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the blindness of their Minds and their Hypocrisie and in absolving them from their Oaths out of an ignorance so Gross as knew not they were virtually made to God. He also charges them that by thus teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of Men Matth. 15.9 they rendered God's Worship vain 4thly It is extreamly evident that by virtue of some of these Traditions they rejected the true Messiah and stood obliged by them so to do For First It is most certain that the Jews had a Tradition generally received among them That their Messiah should be a Temporal Prince that at his Coming he should restore the Kingdom to Israel he should subdue the Nations under them and should erect a Temporal Dominion in the Jewish Nation over all their Enemies Trypho the Jew declares to Justin M. That Dial. p. 249. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Scriptures do compel us to expect a great and glorious Messiah who shall receive as the Son of Man from the ancient of Days an everlasting Kingdom In Celsum l. 2. p. 78. not such a mean despised one as was your Jesus The Jews saith Origen say That their Prophets represent their Messiah to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a great Person and a Potentate and Lord of the whole Earth and of all the Heathens and their Armies De Bello Jud. l. 6. c. 31. Josephus confesseth there was an obscure Oracle found in their S. Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That about that time one of Judea should govern the World. Suetonius and Tacitus say In Vespas c 4. Hist l. 5. That it was in the whole East Vetus constans opinio ut
A TREATISE OF TRADITIONS PART I. Imprimatur Liber cui titulus A Treatise of Traditions Part I. June 5. 1688. Guil. Needham R R. in Christo P. ac D. D. Wilhelmo Archiep. Cant. a Sacr. Domest A TREATISE OF TRADITIONS PART I. Where it is proved That we have Evidence sufficient from TRADITION I. That the Scriptures are the Word of God. II. That the Church of England owns the true Canon of the Books of the Old Testament III. That the Copies of the Scripture have not been corrupted IV. That the Romanists have no such Evidence for their Traditions V. That the Testimony of the present Church of Rome can be no sure Evidence of Apostolical Tradition VI. What Traditions may securely be relyed upon and what not LONDON Printed by J. Leake for Awnsham Churchill at the Black Swan in Ave-Mary Lane MDCLXXXVIII THE PREFACE The Contents This Proposition That the Doctrines and pretended Traditions of the Western Church could not be introduced by her Members in following Ages but must be derived to them from the Fountain of Tradition is proved false 1. By plain Instances of matters of Fact § 1. 2ly From the false Doctrines and Traditions which generally obtained in the Jewish Church § 2. 3ly From the Prediction of a general Defection from the Faith in the times of Antichrist § 3. 4ly Because this Assertion doth oblige us to account the Fathers of the primitive Ages either Knaves or Fools § 4. 5ly Because it renders all our Search into Antiquity not only superfluous but dangerous § 5. Corruptions in Doctrine or Practice might take their Rise 1st From Mistakes touching the Sence of Scripture § 6. 2ly By leaving of the Scripture and setting up the Fathers as the Rule of Faith § 7. 3ly By flying to Miracles and Visions for the establishment of Doctrines and Opinions § 8. 4ly By reason of the great Authority and Reputation of those Men who first began or else gave Countenance unto them § 9. 5ly By reason of the corrupt Manners of the Clergy § 10. 6ly By reason of the great Ignorance both of the Clergy and the People § 11. 7ly By reason of the Violence and Persecution used to force Men to a Compliance with the prevailing Doctrines or a concealment of their Sentiments to the contrary § 12. This Corruption confessed by the Writers of the dark Ages of the Church § 13. THAT which the Romanists of late have chiefly urged in favour of their present Doctrines and Traditions is That the Traditions which they now embrace as such the Doctrines which they own as Articles of Christian Faith could never have obtained such Credit in the Church or been so generally received throughout the Western Churches as they were before the Reformation had they not been from the Beginning handed down to them as Apostolical Traditions and Doctrines received by the Universal Church of Christ Now the Vanity and Falshood of this Presumption is here shewed by many Instances of plain matter of Fact § 1 demonstrating that what they of Rome at present hold for Apostolical Tradition or as an Article of Christian Faith was generally rejected in former Ages by the whole Church of Christ or at the least by the prevailing and the major part of her Church Guides And whereas it is represented by them as a thing impossible That the Western Church or the prevailing Body of it should in one Age imbrace what they in the foregoing did reject or in this Age reject what in the former they embraced Examples are produced here demonstrating that this hath actually happened in the Instance of eating things strangled and Blood Chap. 2. §. 6. which the whole Western Church abominated in the Eleventh Century and yet did practise in the Twelfth and following Ages In the Instance of the immaculate Conception denyed by the Western Church till the Thirteenth Century Ibid. §. 9. and almost generally received in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries In the Instance of the Canonical and Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament in which the Learned of the Western Church accorded with us in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries Chap. 3. §. 2.11 and yet did Anathematize our Doctrine in the Sixteenth In the Instance of the Angels falling in love with Women Chap. 12. §. 8. asserted generally in the first Four Centuries and rejected in the Fifth to omit many other Instances sufficient to convince us that what the Romanists so confidently offer to prove their Church could not be guilty of such Innovations is only like to the Attempt of Zeno to prove against plain matter of Fact that there could be no Motion But for the farther manifestation of the Vanity of this new way of Arguing a facto ad jus from what they do at present practise and believe to what they ought to do and practise or from their present Faith to an Assurance that the same Faith was always held in all preceeding Ages of the Church I shall First Shew the evil and pernicious Consequences of this way of arguing Secondly I shall point out the Ways and Methods by which these Doctrines and Practices might have prevailed in the Church and yet be nothing less than Apostolical or truly Primitive The evil Consequences of this way of Arguing are First § 2 That it gives the Jews a great Advantage against the Truth and certainty of Christian Faith for they might have then argued and still may with as much Plausibility against our Lord 's Disciples and the first Christian Converts from this very Topick as do the Romanists against the Protestants For might they not say of the very Doctrines and Traditions which they had generally received at our Saviour 's Advent and which he did so peremptorily condemn and caution his Disciples to beware of That they received them from their Fore-Fathers who received them from theirs and who must either have joined in mistaking their Ancestors or in intending to deceive their Posterity of which two things neither is credible Might not they say That the Traditions which they had then embraced were derived from Moses and that their Fore-Fathers handed them down from him to them and that the then present general Reception of them was a sufficient Evidence that they were not Inventions of that or any of the preceeding Ages but Doctrines and Practices derived to them from the first Fountain of Tradition Might they not have asked in what Year and Age those false Traditions and Doctrines entered first among them and whether then their whole Church must not have conspired to tell a lye Might they not have bid them consider the Notoriousness of the Lye and the Damage ensuing from it to themselves and their dearest Pledges and how rare a thing it is to find a Man much less a considerable Number of them who would venture upon such a Wickedness Might they not have added that their Church and People were scattered about almost through every Nation
historical Traditions shewed 1. In the Instance of our Lord's Birth Clauso utero § 4. Of his Age § 5. Of the penetration of his Body through the Doors and the Stone of the Sepulchre § 6. Of the Story of the Phoenix § 7. And of the Cells of the Seventy Interpreters § 8. Observe 3dly That we contend not with the Church of Rome touching Ecclesiastical Traditions concerning Ceremonials and unnecessary Observations but only touching necessary Rules of Faith and Manners § 9. FOR the right stating of this Question let it be considered 1. § 1 That we acknowledge That a Doctrine is neither more or less the Word of God for being written or unwritten for that Word which our Saviour spake unto the Jews was for a time unwritten and yet was nevertheless the Word of God because not written We also say there is no reason to dispute Whether the written or unwritten Word of God when equally known to be so is most to be relied on For the Word of God being therefore believed because known to us to be the Word of God must equally be believed in that Case whether it be written or unwritten Concil Trid. Sess 4. We do not therefore quarrel with the Church of Rome for saying That the Traditions which proceeded from the Mouth of Christ or his Apostles speaking by the Holy Spirit and preserved by a continual Succession in the Catholick Church are with the same Reverence and pious Affection to be received as what they writ But only desire them to prove the things which they affirm and we deny to have been thus delivered and then we promise to receive them as the Truths of Christ. And because Mr. M. hath the Confidence to say P. 397 398. That our Ministers usually so confound the Business that they make their Auditors even to startle when they tell them that we hold Tradition equal to Scripture whereas if they meant to deal really they should say what the Truth is that we do indeed equalize Tradition to Scripture and that we have all reason to do so To let him see how little reason he had to accuse us of corrupt Dealing in this Matter I will faithfully transcribe the Assertions of our most able Writers touching this Point Sect. 16. n. 20. Archbishop Laud declares That the Voice and Tradition of that Church which included in it Apostles Disciples and such as had immediate Revelation from Heaven was Divine and the Word of God from them is of like validity written or delivered Bishop Taylor owns Duct Dubit §. 2. c. 3. p. 484. That Tradition would be of the same use as Scripture is if the Tradition were from Christ and his Apostles and were as Certain as Vniversal as Credible as that is by which we are told that Scripture is the Word of God. We willingly grant saith Mr. Chillingworth Chap. 3. §. 45. vid. Chap. 2. §. 53 88. the Church to be as Infallible in her Traditions as the Scripture is if they be as Vniversal as the Tradition of the undoubted Books of Scripture is And again The Tradition of the Church you say must teach us what is Scripture and we are willing to believe it Answer to the Jes p. 35. Rat. p. 168 210 216. and now if you make it good unto us that the same Tradition down from the Apostles hath delivered from Age to Age and from Hand to Hand any Interpretation of any Scripture we are ready to embrace that also So also Bishop Vsher and Doctor Stillingfleet in his Rational Account frequently And therefore R. H. Guid. Disc 3. c. 11. p. 157. who was better acquainted with our Writings than Mr. M. declares That Protestants acknowledge a sufficient certainty of the Tradition concerning Scripture and consequently concerning all the Articles of Christian Faith that are built on Scripture upon which ground also they freely grant N. B. That if any other point wherein they dissent from Catholicks can be proved by as Universal a Tradition as that of the Scriptures they will subscribe to it We therefore manifestly do agree with Chrysostom Oecumenius and Theophylact when they say That the things delivered by the Mouth of the Apostles Oecum in 2. Thess ij 15. Chrysost ibid. Theophylact and by their Writings are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both worthy of Observation That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both equally deserve to be credited when we have equal certainty of both and therefore these passages are vainly cited against us by Mr. M. Let him once prove that the same Tradition tells us That the Apostles delivered the Points in Controversy betwixt us and the Church of Rome as Divine Verities by word of Mouth only and we are all his Humble Servants But alas he knows how vain and how impossible an attempt this would be § 2 and therefore thinks it better boldly to assert what he can never prove by saying P. 399. That our best and only assurance that the Scripture is the Word of God is that all the Christian world saith so but the same Tradition which tells us this tells us also that the Apostles delivered these and these Points to us as Divine Verities by word of Mouth viz. All the Traditions received as Apostolical in the Roman Church Now to reflect a little on this false Assertion and to expose this way of Arguing 1. Put it into the Mouth of a Jew and it thus pleads for those Traditions which our Lord condemned and by which they condemned him The best and only Assurance which you Jewish Christians can have that the Scripture of the Old Testament is the Word of God is that all the Jews say so but the same Tradition which tells us this tells us also That Moses and the Prophets delivered these and these Points to us as Divine Verities by word of Mouth which your Jesus rejected as vain Worship and as the Doctrines of Men 1 Pet. 1.18 and your St. Peter mentions as Traditions received from our Fathers though he stiles them vain you therefore must have equal Reason to receive those Traditions which condemn your Jesus and shew he could not be the true Messiah as to own those Scriptures of the Old Testament which say you Prophesied of him 2. Though we grant the Attestation of the whole Christian World to be a very good assurance of any necessary Article of Christian Faith yet have we more assurance that the Scriptures are the Word of God than so As 1. The necessity that the Christian Revelation should be preserved in some Records and the assurance that we have that it hath been preserved to us in no other The necessity I say that the Christian Revelation should be preserved in some Records for if St. Paul thought it necessary to write to the Church of Rome Rom. xv 15. 2 Cor. i. 13. to put them in remembrance of the Grace given to him as also to send in writing
such a Doctrine for Apostolical Tradition and therefore so it is than of this other which plainly contradicts it The Greek and Eastern Churches with their Adherents teach such and such Doctrines opposite to the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome as Doctrines delivered to them from the Apostles and from the former Ages of the Church of Christ and therefore they are truly such For these Churches never pretended to have made any Reformation but that they since the days of the Apostles have kept safe and sound as Barlaam saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Traditions of the Catholick Church The Oriental Patriarchs in the Council of Florence allow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Concil Flor. §. 3. c. 3. that others should be their Vicars and that they would assent to what was done in that Council provided that they acted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Traditions of the Holy Oecumenical Synods and the Holy Doctors of the Church and that nothing were added to or taken from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or was innovated in the Faith. The Legats of Iberia in the same Council speak thus to the Pope 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Hist Concil Flor. S. 9. c. 12. Our Church preserveth whatsoever she hath received from the Doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Tradition of the Holy Apostles and the Oecumenical Synods and the Holy Doctors of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and she hath not at all deviated from their Doctrine nor added to or taken away any thing from it The Greeks in the Florentine Council shew their zeal Sess 5. apud Bin. Tom. 8. p. 589. that nothing should be added to or taken from the Faith because they were not to change the Old Land-marks which their Fathers had set P. 596. And they approve that Decree of the Second Nicene Council 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If any Man make void any Ecclesiastical Tradition written or unwritten let him be Anathema Such Reason had Barlaam to say That among them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing by them was more esteemed than the Tradition of the Catholick Church Thirdly If the belief § 3 and declaration of the present Church of Rome and her adherents be a sufficient Evidence of the Tradition of all former Ages and what she now averrs to be Tradition Apostolical must always have been so and what she now denies to be Tradition must never have been so then many things must be derived from Primitive and Apostolical Tradition and yet must not be so for the Church of Rome cannot be more infallible in declaring in this present Age what is Tradition than she was in all past Ages they being once the present Age. And yet it is exceeding certain that the present Church of Rome with her Adherents holds many things to be Traditions Apostolical which in the former Ages were by her and by the whole Church Catholick declared to be no such matter and that she holdeth many things to be no Traditions truly Primitive and Apostolical which she and others who consented with her formerly declared to be true Primitive and Apostolical Traditions as will be evident by these ensuing Instances 1. She holds at present all the Books of the Old Testament enumerated in the Fourth Session of the Trent Council to have been handed down as Canonical Scriptures continuâ Successione in Catholica Ecclesia by continual Succession of the Catholick Church whereas I shall hereafter prove that for the Four first Centuries and from the Sixth to the Fourteenth she and all other Churches held some of them to be Apocryphal or Vncanonical 2. Ibid. Sess 4. She holds at present That it is a Tradition preserved by continual Succession in the Church Catholick that the Canonical Epistles of St. Paul are Quatuordecem Fourteen and that the Epistle to the Hebrews is Canonical See Chap. 3. Sect. 16. whereas formerly she and other Western Churches agreeing with her in that matter did not receive the Epistle to the Hebrews as Canonical and consequently could not believe that the Church Catholick did by continual Succession hold that the number of St. Paul's Canonical Epistles were Fourteen 3. Concil Trid. Sess 7. Can. 1. She pretends at present Apostolicis Traditionibus atque aliorum consiliorum patrum consensui inhaerendo Adhering to Apostolical Tradition and the Consent of Fathers and of Councils to define That the Sacraments of the New Law instituted by Christ Jesus and truly and properly so called are neither more nor less than Seven Treat of Latin Serv. praef p. 5 6 7 8. Sess 13. cap. 3. and yet it hath been lately proved that from the days of Gregory the Great or from the Sixth to the Twelfth Century she declared the contrary 4. She holds at present That semper haec fides in Ecclesia Dei fuit This was the Faith perpetually received in the Church that by virtue of Concomitance the Body of Christ in the Sacrament is under the Species of Wine and his Blood under the Species of Bread and his Soul under both and that this is the Doctrine quam semper Catholica Ecclesia retinuit which the Catholick Church being taught by Christ and his Apostles Treat of Com. in one Kind c. 7. §. 5 6 7. and the Holy Spirit hath always retained and yet it hath been fully proved that to the Tenth Century she taught the contrary 5. She holds at present That the Roman Institution to pronounce some things in the Mass with a low and others with a loud voice Ibid. c. 5. §. 1. Tr. of Lat. Serv. c. 16. p. 69. proceeded ex Apostolica Doctrina Traditione from the Apostolical Tradition and Discipline whereas it hath been proved that formerly she taught the contrary 6. It is the present Tradition of the Romish Church Concil Trid. Sess 25. and her Adherents That the Veneration and Honorary Worship of Images is suitable to the Tradition Catholicae Apostolicae Ecclesiae of the Catholick and Apostolick Church Treat of the Veneration of Images whereas this hath been proved contrary to the Ancient Tradition of the whole Church of Christ in general and of that of Rome in particular 7. The present Church of Rome pretends following ipsius Ecclesiae judicium consuetudinem Sess 21. c. 1. the Custom and Judgment of the Church to declare and teach That Laicks and Clerks not consecrating are not obliged to receive the Sacrament in both Kinds whereas it hath been proved that for a Thousand Years the contrary was both the Judgment and Custom of the whole Church in general Treat of Com. in one Kind and of that of Rome in particular 8. The present Church of Rome declares touching her new Creed containing Twelve New Articles neither comprized in nor deducible from the Apostles or the Nicene Creed that it contains Ch. 7. §. 4.10 veram Catholicam fidem extra quam nemo salvus
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
most Christian Churches Saint Jerom that in process of time it obtained Authority Estius notes That they who before doubted of it in the Fourth Century embraced the Opinion of them who received it Praefat. in Epist Jacobi and that from thence no Church no Ecclesiastical Writer is found who ever doubted of it but on the contrary all the Catalogues of the Books of Holy Scripture published by General or Provincial Councils Roman Bishops or other Orthodox Writers number it among Canonical Scriptures quae probatio ad certam fidem faciendam cuique Catholico sufficere debet which proof must give sufficient certainty of it to any Catholick The Second Epistle of St. Peter Pag. 58. Apud Cypr. Ep. 75. p. 220. is cited by Origen against Marcian under the Name of Peter Firmilion saith That both Paul and Peter in suis Epistolis Haereticos execrati sunt ut eos evitemus monuerunt in their Epistles condemned Hereticks and admonished us to avoid them which is done by Saint Peter only in this Epistle Eusebius saith That it was commemorated by many and that they who did not reckon it Canonical yet held it very useful on which account Lib. 3. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was much studied with other Scriptures The same Eusebius informs us That his First Epistle was always owned by all Christians and thence we may have full assurance of the Truth of this Epistle for there are not saith the Reverend Doctor Hammond greater Evidences of any Epistles being written by the acknowledged Author of it than these Cap. 1. v. 1. The Title of Simon Peter an Apostle of Jesus Christ The Voice which came from Heaven saying vers 17 18. This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased we heard when we Peter and John and James were with him in the Holy Mount this second Epistle beloved I write unto you that you may be mindful of the Commandments of us the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour Cap. 3. v. 1 2. All which are certain Demonstrations That Simon Peter the Apostle of our Lord who was with him in Mount-Tabor and there heard the Voice forementioned and who writ the First Epistle to the Twelve Tribes dispersed writ this also Note Lastly That after the Fourth Century § 22 there appears not the least intimation that any of these Books were any longer doubted of by any Orthodox Professor of the Christian Faith they being all received and reckoned as Canonical by the Councils and Fathers who mentioned the Canon of the New Testament Now from these premisses there is just ground to make this Inference and Conclusion That seeing most of the Catalogues of the Fourth Century given by Councils or by Fathers and all the Catalogues of the Fifth Century unquestionably assure us that what was once controverted by some few was afterwards unanimously received by all the Church of God we are sufficiently assured of the true Canon of the Books of the New Testament The evidence now produced even of these controverted Books being sufficient both in the judgment of all Catholicks and of all Christians who on these grounds alone receive them as such to assure us that they are Canonical Scripture for by what reason can any Man evince that ought to be rejected from the Canon which always was received as Canonical by the greatest part of the Church Catholick and being accurately enquired into by those who once were Doubters found such an uncontroulled reception through the whole Church diffused as stifled through all future Ages the least appearance of a doubt Hence then the Roman § 23 Doctors may discern what it is they have to do if they do undertake to shew us such a Tradition for those Roman Doctrines we reject as hath been shew'd for the Controverted Books of the New Testament And 1. It must be owned by them that it cannot be necessary to Salvation to believe or have an absolute assurance that these are true and Apostolical Traditions and therefore Haec est fides extra quam salus esse non potest This is the Catholick Faith without which there is no Salvation must be excluded from the Roman Creed 2. It must be also owned that the pretented Traditions of the present R. Church were for some Centuries controverted and rejected by whole Churches Orthodox and Apostolical and which were as such owned and embraced by all Christians and that some of them were or at least might have been for the first Four Centuries disowned by the Church of Rome as was one of these controverted Books and consequently it must be owned that she could not then be received as Mater Magistra omnium Ecclesiarum the Mother and Mistress of all Churches 3. It must be proved that there was the same necessity that these controverted Books should be known and received from the beginning by all Christians as that the necessary Traditions and Articles of Christian Faith should be so 4. It must be proved that these Traditions were always owned and mentioned as Divine and Apostolical Traditions by many Orthodox Churches and Fathers and even when controverted were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acknowledged by most of the Church Guides To instance in the Apocalypse which Mr. M. on all occasions singles out as a Book whose Authenticalness cannot be better proved than their Traditions let him shew us any such Testimonies from the First Second and Third Centuries for the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome as we have shewed for the Apocalypse any one that saith of them as Denys of Alexandria doth of the Apocalypse That he durst not reject it by reason of the multitude of Christians who had a veneration for it let him produce the plain Testimonies of the Fathers that the Truth of these Traditions may be decided by the Testimonies of the Ancients that they owned them as Apostolical by virtue of their Testimony that the Ancient and Holy Fathers led by the Spirit of God gave Testimony to them and that they were the Traditions of holy Men inspired by God All these things have been said of the Apocalypse in the Four first Centuries and when Mr. M. can produce any thing of the like nature evidence and strength for any one of his Traditions we will own it as Divine and Apostolical Here then we see the greatest and the plainest difference betwixt the Traditions we receive and own and those pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome which we reject For 1. The Traditions we receive are Traditions handed down in writing to us throughout all Ages of the Church unto this present time the Traditions we reject are only presumptive Traditions such as the Church of Rome presumes to be so but yet they have no Footsteps in the Ancient Records of the Church of Christ which is a demonstration that they falsly do presume they are Traditions for as we could have no just reason to believe those which we own to be
Traditions did we not find them thus handed down to us in these Writings so can we have no reason to receive the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome because they are not handed down unto us in this manner But saith Mr. M. Before we can know true Books § 24 and true Copies of Books from false P. 407 408. we must first know true Tradition from false that we assuredly may say these are the true Books of Scripture these are the true Copies of those Books because true Tradition commends them for such these be false Books or false Copies of true Books because the Tradition which commends these is false tell me the means by which infallibly the true Tradition in this point may be known from the false and that very means I will assign in other points to know true Tradition from false This Objection I retort thus Resp before we can know true Tradition from false we must know true Faith from false for true Tradition is only the Tradition of the Faithful that is of those who do entirely believe all the necessary Articles of Christian Faith and if I must first know this Faith before I can know true Tradition I cannot need Tradition to instruct me in the Christian Faith. Again tell me the means by which I may know true Faith antecedently to Tradition and the very same means will I assign to know the Faith of Protestants without it 2. This Argument in the Mouth of an unbelieving Jew that lived in the Days of Christ and his Apostles pleads as strongly for the vain Traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees and the whole Jewish Nation rejected by our Lord and his Apostles as for the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome v. g. you send us to Moses and the Prophets to learn the true Messiah and from these Scriptures you attempt to prove your Jesus is the Messiah promised to the Jews but before you can know whether the Books you cite be the true Books of Moses and the Prophets and the Copies you have of them be true Copies you must know true Tradition from false tell me then the means by which infallibly the true Tradition in this Point may be known from the false and that very means will I assign to prove the Traditions of the Jewish Church rejected by your Lord and his Apostles to be true Whatsoever Answer Mr. M. can return to this Objection will be as applicable to his own 3. To this demand I answer That where the Tradition deriveth from the Fountain of Tradition and can be proved by written Testimonies to have done so And 2ly that where it is a Tradition not of a matter of Fact but Faith and passeth down without controul and contradiction of any that were then and after owned by other Churches as true Christian Brethren And 3ly where it can be proved irrational and absurd that the Tradition could have so long and generally obtained without just ground of being owned as such there the Tradition ought to be embraced as true When therefore Mr. M. hath proved the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome to have these Three Characters of true Tradition we shall have equal reason to admire his Parts as we have now to wonder at his Confidence but they who can believe Impossibilities may be allowed to undertake them CHAP. IV. Sixthly We distinguish betwixt Traditions touching purely Doctrinals or divine Revelations touching Articles of Faith and Matters of Practice in the first the Fathers have been subject to mistake in Doctrines not Fundamental as appears 1. From the Doctrine of the Mellennium delivered in the Second and Third Centuries as a Tradition received from Christ and his Apostles § 1. As a thing of which they were certain Ibid. 2. As a Doctrine proved from variety of Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament which could say they receive no other sence § 2.3 As a Doctrine denied only by Hereticks or such as were deceived by them § 3. It was embraced by the greatest number of Christians and Church Guides delivering it not as Doctors only but Testators § 4. Hence the uncertainty of such Traditions is demonstrated and the falshood of the pretended Tradition for Invocation of Saints § 5. 2ly A like mistake is proved from the general Doctrine of the Fathers of the four first Centuries that the Day of Judgment was nigh at hand § 6. And that the time of Antichrists coming was at hand § 7. That the World should end after Six thousand Years that is according to their computation Five hundred Years after our Saviour's Advent § 8. The Inferences hence Ibid. In matters of practice we distinguish Seventhly betwixt such as have been generally received without contest in the purest Ages of the Church and such as have been contested and disowned by Orthodox Churches or Members of the Church and that we cannot depend with certainty on the latter is proved 1. From the Contest betwixt P. Victor and the Asiaticks touching the Easter Festival in which it is observed 1. That the greatest part of the Christian World consented in judgment with Victor and his Synod § 9.2 That they who with him kept this Feast on the Lord's Day pleaded an Apostolical Tradition for that Practice § 10. 3. That they who kept it with the Jews pleaded the same Tradition and with greater Evidence § 11. 4. That when the Pope endeavoured by terrifying Letters to affright them from their practice all the Asiaticks and Neighbouring Provinces refused to hearken to him and condemned him for it § 12. 5. That hereupon Victor attempted to Excommunicate them and commanded others to have no Communion with them § 13. 6. That notwithstanding this injunction all the other Churches held Communion with them and sharply reprehended Victor as a disturber of the Church's Peace § 14. Inferences hence shewing the Falshood of the Fundamental Rule of the Guide of Controversies and the uncertainty of Tradition § 15. Which is farther proved from the Contest betwixt P. Stephen and St. Cyprian and the Asiaticks touching the Baptizing of Hereticks where 't is observed 1. That the Opinion of Stephen was for the Baptizing of no Hereticks no not those who were not Baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost that of St. Cyprian for the Baptizing of all Hereticks and Schismaticks § 16. 2. That Pope Stephen proceeded to an Excommunication of his Brethren upon this account and a refusal of Communion with them and so did Pope Xystus and Dionysius after him whereas they of Africa judged no Man who differed from them § 17. 3. Observe that the Opinion of the Africans and other Eastern Churches was asserted by many Christian Doctors Churches and Councils and was of long continuance after this dispute § 18. 4. Observe that as Pope Stephen pretended to Apostolical and Original Tradition for his Opinion so did the contrary Party for their Opinion § 19. 5. That
was done 2. We shall be more convinced that this was not performed by Conspiracy or by a joint consent of Christians to make so great an alteration in that form of Government which the Apostles had established if we consider 1. The general agreement of all Churches in this matter since not one single Church or Corner of the world can be produced in which this Government did not obtain For how can we imagine that in a time when no General Council could meet to appoint it and when there was no Christian Prince to set it forward on a political Account and when by reason of the heat of Persecution and the distance of Christian Churches there was so little commerce and intercourse between them from the Churches of Armenia and Persia in the East to those of Spain in the West from the African Churches in the South to our British Churches in the North this constitution should have been universally received and submitted to if it had not been established by the Apostles or the first Founders of those Churches 2. If we consider how much it did concern all Christians that such an Innovation should not obtain among them and tamely be submitted to For all the people were obliged to know the Governors to whom they were by Scripture commanded to submit and so they could not yield to this supposed Innovation without the greatest danger to their Souls The Presbyters if they had by the Apostles been advanced to the highest Power would not so meekly have submitted to an Authority usurped over them but either out of a just Zeal for asserting their Freedom or out of Indignation at the insolence of the usurping Bishops or out of an unwillingness to submit and obey which is natural to most Men they would have asserted their Equality 3. This will be farther evident if we consider that even the persons thus exalted could have then no motive or temptation to accept of this advancement for Men do not usually desire a change but upon prospect of some ease or temporal Advantage much less when they perceive the Change is only like to add to their trouble and encrease their danger now this was really the case of the first Christian Bishops they being still exposed to the sharpest fury of their Persecutors and commonly begun with first in any storm that was raised against the Church their Labours also were very great for the care of the Flock lay on them and they were unwearied in the discharge of their Pastoral Care can we then reasonably think that they should be so fond of so much toil and peril as to violate the Institution of the Blessed Jesus or his Apostles to obtain it Let any reasonable Person duly weigh these things and ask his Conscience whether it can be really perswaded that such an early Innovation could generally have prevailed in the Church of God. Such also is the Evidence that we pretended to § 8 touching the Canon of Scripture and that those Books have not been so corrupted or depraved as not to be sufficient Rules of Christian Faith or Manners Concerning this matter let it be considered First That we have the true Canon of the Old Testament and that the Books of the Old Testament are not corrupted we cannot know from the Infallibility of the Jewish Church or her Traditions for when she handed down these Scriptures to the Christians as the pure word of their inspired Prophets she was not Infallible but actually had renounced her true Messiah and judged him an Impostor and had embraced such false Traditions as did engage her so to do So that if Chap. 14. p. 29. according to the Author of Popery Misrepresented As the Jews received the Books of the Old Testament from the Jewish Church and the Christians also so also were they to receive from her the sence of them the Jews if not the Christians also were obliged to reject our Saviour as an Impostor and one who taught and acted contrary to their Law and their Traditions Secondly § 9 That the Books of the New Testament are not corrupted or forged we cannot know from the Infallibility of the Christian Church The Reason is because the Infallibility of the Church is so far from being a proof of Scriptures incorruption that no proof can be pretended for it but uncorrupted places of Scripture For if any man should attempt to prove the Scriptures uncorrupted because that Church says so which is Infallible I would demand of him seeing the Infallibility of the Church is not self-evident and seeing Infallibility is a Prerogative which no Man can pretend to but from God's Assistance and therefore no Man can be sure of that Assistance but from God's free Promise how shall I be assured of her Infallibility If he say from Scripture promising it unto her I would ask how shall I be assured that the Scriptures are not corrupted in those places and if to this it be answered From the Church's Infallibility is it not evident that he runs in a Circle proving the Scripture's incorruption by the Church's Infallibility and the Church's Infallibility by the Scripture's incorruption Moreover this is further evident from the Tradition Practice and Acknowledgment of the whole Church of Christ for to inform us in any controverted Text which is the Reading to be owned as true her Doctors never have sent us to Oral Tradition or the infallible Assistance of the Church but always to the readings of former Ancient Authors and to the Inspection of ancient Manuscripts and Versions and have declared what in it self is manifest and owned by all that ever treated on this Subject That there is no other way whereby we can attain to any knowledge or assurance in this matter Thus Sixtus Quintus in his Preface to his Bible In hac Germani Textus pervestigatione satis perspicue inter omnes constat nullum esse certius ac firmius Argumentum quam Antiquorum probatorum codicum Latinorum fidem tells us That in Pervestigation of the true and genuine Text it was perspicuous to all Men that there was no Argument more firm and certain than the Faith of ancient Latin Books Let any Man peruse all Commentators Ancient and Modern of what Perswasion soever and he will be convinced of their unanimous concurrence in this Assertion Thus St. Austin tells us That the Latins have need of Two other Tongues for obtaining the knowledge of the Divine Scriptures viz. De Doctr. Christ l. 2. c. 11. de Civ Dei l. 15. c. 13. the Hebrew and the Greek Ut ad exemplaria praecedentia recurratur si quam dubitationem attulerit Latinorum Interpretum infinita varietas That if any doubt should arise from the great variety of Latin Versions they might recurr to the Greek or Hebrew Originals That the Latin Versions of the Old Testament where it is necessary Chap. 14 15. Graecorum Authoritate emendandi sunt are to be corrected by the Authority of
by Jew and Gentile Heretick and Orthodox even in those times in which and in those places where they first appeared and by those Persons who immediately before received others as the true and genuine Copies of the Word of God. Lastly § 14 That these Records of the Will of God have not been so corrupted as to cease to be a certain Rule of Faith and Manners we argue from the Providence of God inducing us to judge that the Books thus delivered to us by the Church as genuine are truly so for nothing seems more inconsistent with divine Wisdom and Goodness than to inspire his Servants to write the Scripture as a Rule of Faith and Manners for all future Ages and to require the Belief of the Doctrines the practice of the Rules of Life plainly contained in it and yet to suffer this divinely inspired Rule to be insensibly corrupted in things necessary to Faith or Practice who can imagine that God who sent his Son out of his Bosom to declare this Doctrine and his Apostles by the Assistance of the Holy Spirit to indite and preach it and by so many Miracles confirm it to the World should suffer any wicked Persons to corrupt and alter any of those terms on which the Happiness and Welfare of Mankind depended This sure can be conceived Rational by none but such as think it not absurd to say That God repented of his good Will and Kindness to Mankind in the vouchsafing of the Gospel to them That he so far maligned the good of future Generations that he suffered wicked Men to rob them of all the benefit intended to them by this Declaration of his Will. For since those very Scriptures which have been received for the Word of God and used by the Church as such from the first Ages of it pretend to be the terms of our Salvation Scriptures indited by Men commissionated from Christ and such as did avouch themselves Apostles by the Will of God and his Command for the delivery of the Faith of Gods Elect and for the knowledge of the Truth which is after Godliness in hopes of Life eternal they must be what they do pretend to be the Word of God or Providence must have permitted such a Forgery as rendereth it impossible for us to perform our Duty in order to Salvation for if the Scripture of the New Testament should be corrupted in any essential requisite of Faith or Manners it must cease to make us wise unto Salvation and so God must have lost the end which he intended in inditing of it Again when we consider that in the Jewish Church the Scriptures were until the coming of Christ in very corrupt Times and amongst very corrupt Persons preserved so entire that Christ sends the Jews to them to learn Religion declares that they have Moses and the Prophets and both our Lord and his Disciples confuted and instructed the Scribes and Pharisees and Jews out of them without the least intimation of any corruption that had happened to them we have still greater reason to judge the New Testament sincere since we cannot rationally suppose Providence less careful of the New Testament than of the Old. If against this Argument it be Objected Object that we find by the Citations of the Ancients and by Old Manuscripts that there was a difference betwixt their Copies of the Scripture and those we now use I answer 1. That this is no certain Argument of any such difference seeing the Citation of the Ancients might differ thus by the failure of their Memory it being frequently their Custom to cite the Scriptures from their Memory without inspection of the Book moreover we find by Ocular Demonstration that these various Lectures make no considerable variation in matters of Faith or Manners or if one Text which asserts a substantial Doctrine be variously read so that the matter is thence dubious there are others which assert it without that Variety If then no Writing whilst the Apostles lived could pass for Apostolical and yet destroy or contradict the Faith they taught if their immediate Successors could not be ignorant of what the Apostles committed to them to be read and taught us the Records of their Faith and Doctrine nor would they be induced to deliver that for such which they believed not to be so if neither they could universally conspire to effect this thing nor can it rationally be thought that Providence would suffer them to do so 'T is morally impossible these Writings should be forged or corrupted in matters of Concern or Moment If therefore Mr. § 15 M. will make good his Assertion that they have the same means to shew that their Traditions are true that is truly descended from the Apostles that we have to shew the Copies of the Scripture which we use are not corrupted in substantials he must first own what we have proved of these Copies to be true of his Traditions viz. That they cannot be proved to be true from the Infallibility of the Church and that in any doubt concerning the Truth of them we must have recourse to the Original and Fountain of Tradition not to the Judgment of the present Age as in the proof of the true Copies all Parties are agreed that we must have recourse to Ancient Manuscripts And to the Fountains of the Greek and Hebrew Secondly He must shew what we have done touching the Scriptures concerning his pretended Traditions viz. That these Traditions were owned cited read and received as Apostolical Traditions from the Apostles Days that Jews and Heathens were acquainted with them that they were attested to by the Sufferings of the Primitive Martyrs that they were such as the Apostles desired to leave in writing and which they did so leave according to the Will of God and consequently were not oral Traditions that they were universally acknowledged and consented to by Men of different perswasions preserved in their Originals to succeeding Ages transcribed by Christians for their private and their publick use esteemed by them as their Digests and as deifying Traditions believed by all Christians to be divine and as the Records of their Hopes and Fears that they were carefully sought after and riveted in their minds and constantly rehearsed in their Assemblies by Men whose work it was to read and preach them and to exhort to the performance of those Duties they enjoined that they were frequent in the Writings and often cited in the Confessions and Apologies the Comments Homilies Discourses and Epistles of the Ancient Worthies as also in the Objections of their Adversaries to whose view they still lay open And lastly he must prove they were Traditions which the good Providence of God was as much concerned to keep entire and uncorrupt as to preserve those Scriptures so which by the Will of God were written to be the Pillar and Foundation of the Christian Faith and when we see this task performed we shall be more enclined to admit of the pretended Traditions
the Sabbath Day Answered § 16. His fourth Objection That in Christ Jesus nothing avails but keeping the Commandments of God Answered § 17. His fifth Objection from the Words of Christ Pray that your flight be not on the Sabbath day Answered § 18. IN this Discourse I have endeavoured to shew in what Sence we admit of Tradition as a sufficient Evidence of the Truth of what we do believe or practise And have demonstrated That in those things which we receive upon her Testimony the Romanists cannot pretend unto a like Tradition for any of their Doctrines Two things they farther do object against us as instances of things necessary to be believed which yet say they have no Foundation in the Holy Scriptures and therefore must be believed only on the account of Tradition or the Authority of the Church viz. First The Observation of the Lord's Day and the liberty we take in working on the Sabbath and not observing it as a day set apart unto the Service of the Creator of the World. Secondly The Baptism of Infants of which what Mr. M. offers is sufficiently considered in the following Treatise and the practice hath of late been fully justified from Scripture and Tradition jointly by Three learned Treatises to which I shall referr the Reader Mr. Walker's Modest Plea for Infants Baptism The Case of Infants Baptism Dr. Still Rational Account Part. 1. cap. 4. Touching the first particular I shall Discourse at present in this Preface and shew in opposition to Mr. Mumford that we have sufficient Ground from Scripture for observing the Lord's Day and not observing of the Sabbath Day and that as far as we depend upon Tradition in these Points the Romanists can shew no like Tradition for their Tenets To begin with the first of these particulars That the Lord's Day is by all Christians to be observed as a Religious Festival will be made good from these Considerations First That it is mentioned in the Scripture as a known Festival Day a Day which bore Christ 's Name a Day on which the Christians did assemble for the performance of Sacred and Religious Worship Secondly That it was perpetually and universally observed as such by the Catholick Church including the times of the Apostles And First That it is mentioned in Scripture as a known Festival Day a Day which bore Christ's Name a Day on which the Christians did assemble for the performance of Religious Worship will appear 1st From that Expression of St. John § 2 Rev. i. 10. I was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day For explication of which words observe first That the Name Lord in the New Testament doth ordinarily signifie the Lord Christ for God the Father having committed all Authority into his Hands he by so doing made him as Saint Peter saith both Lord and Christ Act. ij 36. and therefore by this name he is distinguished from God the Father in these words 1 Cor. viij 6. There is one God the Father of whom are all things and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things And again 1 Cor. xij 5 6. There are differences of Administrations but the same Lord diversities of Operations but the same God Wherefore by the Lord's Day here mentioned we cannot reasonably understand the Jewish Sabbath that being not the Day of the Lord Christ or a Day instituted in Memorial of him but a Day sanctified to Jehovah who is in the New Testament stiled God the Father or absolutely God and by that phrase distinguished from the Lord Christ Moreover the Sabbath is in Scripture sometime said to be a Day Holy to the Lord but it is never stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord's Day either in Scripture or in the Records of the three first Centuries and therefore we can have no reason to believe Saint John intended the Jewish Sabbath by that Phrase 2dly Whereas Saint John to denote the time when he received his Vision saith It was on the Lord's Day It follows that this Day must be a Day well known otherwise he could not by this note sufficiently declare the Time when he received his Vision Since then the first Day of the Week and that alone was by the Christians of the first Ages stiled the Lord's Day and known to them familiarly by that Name it is rational to conclude That the Apostle by this Phrase did understand the first Day of the Week For Confirmation of this Argument it is observable that some Copies read that Passage of Saint Paul to the Corinthians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. xvi 2. On the first Day of the Week being the Lord's Day let every one lay by in store Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. ad Manes Et ad Trallian §. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 4. c. 23. Euseb H. Eccl. l. 4. c. 26. who lived Thirty Years in the Apostles Days speaks thus That Christians must no longer Sabbatize but keep the Lord's Day in which our Life sprang up by him Dionysius Bishop of Corinth who flourished in the second Century writes thus This day being the Lord's Day we keep it Holy. Melito Bishop of Sardis who flourished in the same Century composed a Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Lord's Day and another of the Paschal Solemnity clearly distinguishing the one from the other Justin M. Qu. Resp Qu. 115. Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons in his Book of the Paschal Solemnity declares That Christians did not on the Lord's Day which was a Symbol of their Resurrection bend the Knee Clemens of Alexandria calls the Eighth day Contra Cels l. 8. p. 392. De Cor. Mil. c. 3. Cyp. Ep. 38. Ed. Ox. p. 75. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord's day Origen among the Christian Festivals enumerates the Lord's day the Easter and the Pentecostal Festival Tertullian saith Dominico die jejunium nefas ducimus vel de geniculis adorare We judge it wickedness to kneel on the Lord's day and then he adds That on the Easter and the Penticostal Festival we enjoy the same freedom And indeed the thing was so notorious even to the Heathen World that it was usual with them to put this Question to the Martyrs Dominicum servasti Hast thou observed the Lord's day To which their usual Answer was Christianus sum intermittere non possum I am a Christian and cannot cease to do it And that Dominicum agere which is sometimes the Phrase imports not to celebrate the Lord's Supper but to observe the Lord's day is evident from Clemens of Alexandria Strom. 7. p. 744. who tells us That the true Gnostick doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make that day truly the Lord's day by casting away every evil thought and celebrating the Resurrection of Christ Now from these Passages it is clear That the Easter Festival could not be here intended by Saint John that being never stiled by the Ancients absolutely the Lord's day but always
to Cardinal Campejus he speaks thus Videham ut quisque esset integerrimis moribus Evangelicae puritati proximus ita minime infensum Luthero Lib. 14. p. 446. I heard excellent Men of approved Doctrine and Religion rejoice that they met with that Man's Books and I saw that as any man was more upright in his Life or nearer to Evangelical purity he was the less offended with Luther And in the same Epistle he adds Pag. 448. that he conceived it not convenient presently to be incensed against a Man with whose Writings so many excellent Governors so many Learned and pious Men were delighted L. 15. p. 492. In his Epistle to Godeschallus he saith That he did not defend him even then cum non decessent maximi Theologi qui non vererentur affirmare nihil esse in Luthero quin per probatos Authores posset defendi when the greatest Divines were not afraid to affirm that there was nothing in Luther which might not be defended by approved Authors And lastly he himself declares Hausit pleraque ex veteribus Epist l. 14. p. 447. That Luther gathered most of his Tenets from the Ancients and that had he named the Ancients from whom he had them he would have avoided much of that envy which then lay upon him To proceed to the particular Controversies in the Order in which they are mentioned in the Articles of Religion subscribed by our Clergy Holy Scripture saith our Sixth Article § 2 containeth all things necessary to Salvation so that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby is not required of any Man that it should be believed as an Article of Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to Salvation So that besides the same Art. 21. the Church ought not to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of Salvation Agreeably to this Article the Bishop of Rhodes disputing with the Greeks in the Council of Florence speaks thus in the behalf of the Western Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bin. Tom. 8. Concil Florent Sess 7. p. 609. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. I desire you Greeks to satisfie me in this Question Doth not the Gospel perfectly contain the Doctrine of Christian Faith Surely saith he the Reverence you bear to it will not permit you to affirm that the Faith is not perfectly contained there And that is true and not denied by us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. which the Bishop of Ephesus said That the Fathers had inclosed the Gospel and the Holy Scripture so that it should by no means be lawful to add to them And whereas the the Bishop of Ephesus had said That the Evangelists did not forbid that any thing should be added to what they had written This saith he with his leave cannot be said of Holy Scripture for the Apostle Paul saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gal. i. 9. If any Man preach any thing besides what you have received let him be Anathema And St. John in the end of his Revelations saith If any one add to these things God shall add to him the Plagues which are written in this Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. Sess 8. p. 630. Nicenus also on the part of the Greeks saith We draw all divine Doctrines from the Fountains of the Holy Scriptures which are the principles and the foundations of our Faith to which nothing ever was or ever shall be added by us or any other Christian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Flor. Sess 25. p. 783. Time was saith the Archbishop of Nice in his Oration made at that time and place when the Church the Spouse of God was without spot or wrinkle viz. when we made more account of the simple and not curious Faith delivered as it lay in the Gospel and regarding that superfluous and talkative Divinity which is the fruit of our own Reasonings less than the Sacred Oracles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we attend only to what was written delighting in the things spoken by the Holy Spirit and being compacted in one by them So that it seems by these plain words that both the East and West were then of the same Judgment with the Church of England in this Article It is declared saith John Gerson by the Authority of Dionysius Declaratur ex Authoritate Dionysii dicentis nihil audendum dicere de divinis nisi quae nobis a Scriptura S. tradita sunt quoniam Scriptura nobis tradita est tanquam Regula sufficiens infallibilis pro regimine totius Ecclesiastici corporis Lib. de Exam. Doctr. secunda parte princip consid 1. That we must not dare to say any thing of Divine Things but that which is delivered to us from the Holy Scriptures of which the Reason is That the Scripture is delivered to us as a Rule sufficient and infallible for the Government of the whole Ecclesiastical Body and Members of it to the End of the World. The Holy Scripture saith Gabriel Biel is according to B. Gregory In Can. Miss Lect. 71. f. 200. Edit 1510. as the Mouth of God quia per eam loquitur Deus omnia quae vult a nobis fieri because by it God speaketh all things which he would have done by us Gregory the Great saith Molinaeus asserts Asserit Haereseos labe inquinatos qui extra S. Scripturas aliquid docent aut proferunt c. Lib. de Concil Trid. §. 17. That they are infected with the filth of Heresie who teach or produce any thing beyond the Holy Scriptures I mean in those things which appertain to the Substance of Faith and Doctrine The Sorbon Doctor who set forth the French Testament printed at Mons A. D. 1672. informs us Praeface 1 2. That St. Austin considered the Holy Scripture as the Treasure of Divinity and as the Source of all those Truths which a Man ought to know for the Edification of himself or the Instruction of others And speaking of the mixture of profound places with those which are proportioned to the capacity of the most simple he saith That which ought to comfort us in this obscurity is that according to St. Augustin the Holy Scripture proposeth to us all that is necessary for the conduct of our Life in a manner easie and intelligible that it explicates and clears up it self by speaking that clearly in some places which it saith obscurely in others The Guide of Controversies saith Guid. Disc 2. §. 40. n. 2. That as for the sufficiency or the entireness of the Scriptures for the containing of all those Points of Faith which are simply necessary of all Persons to be believed for attaining Salvation Catholicks deny it not And for this he cites among many other R. Doctors this saying of Aquinas In doctrina Christi 22. qu. 1. Art. 9. Apostolorum he means Scripta veritas fidei est sufficienter explicata In the written Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles the
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
almost in all the ancient Councils As to the Second Part of this Article § 5 which teacheth That General Councils may Erre and sometimes have erred even in things pertaining to God P. 295. the same Author there tells us That Communis est doctorum opinio Concilia etiam Generalia errare posse in rebus quae fidem aut mores ad salutem non necessarios concernunt It is the common Judgment of their Doctors that even general Councils may erre in Matters of Faith and Manners which are not necessary to Salvation And whereas our Church infers that therefore things ordained by them as necessary to Saelvation have neither Strength nor Authority unless it may be declared nisi ostendi possint unless it can be shewed that they be taken out of Holy Scripture This Author saith these last Words of the Article Sententiam veterum omnium fere modernorum declarant declare that which was the Doctrine of the Ancients and of almost all the modern Doctors That in the time of Ocham the Church was divided in this Point some holding that a General Council Haeretica potest labe aspergi might be guilty of Heresy and much more of Error some That it could not thus be guilty and that the Doctrine of the Fallibility of General Councils was afterwards maintained by many eminent Doctors of the Church De formali objecto fidei Tr. 5. c. 19 20 21. is fully proved by Baronius against Turnbal so that I shall reserve the farther Prosecution of this Matter to its proper place viz. The Discussion of the Doctrine of the Infallibility of Councils Our Church in her Twenty second Article asserts § 6 That the Romish Doctrine concerning Purgatory Pardons Worshipping and Adoration as well of Images as of Relicks and also Invocation of Saints is a fond thing vainly seigned and grounded upon no Warrant of Scripture but rather repugnant to the Word of God And that these Doctrines were not derived to them from Apostolical Tradition their own Writers do ingeniously confess For 1. Concerning Purgatory Alphonsus de Castro declares That in Veteribus de Purgatorio fere nulla De Haeres l. 8. Tit. de Indulg potissimum apud Graecos Scriptores mentio est In the Ancients and especially the Greek Writers there is scarce any mention of Purgatory whence it comes to pass Contr. Luther Artic. 18. that to this very day it is not received in the Greek Church Apud priscos amongst the Ancients saith our Fisher Bishop of Rochester It was not at all or very rarely mentioned nor is it to this Day believed by the Greek Church Let him who pleaseth read the Commentaries of the ancient Greeks and he will find I suppose that they speak not at all or very rarely of it Sed neque Latini simul omnes sed sensim hujus rei veritatem conceperunt Nor did the Latins altogether but leisurely perceive the Truth of this Matter And then he adds Cum igitur purgatorium tam sero cognitum ac receptum universae Ecclesiae fuerit quis jam de Indulgentiis mirari potest quia in principio nascentis Ecclesiae nullus fuerit earum usus Since therefore Purgatory was so lately known to and received by the Universal Church who can wonder that in the Primitive Church there was no use of Indulgences In Cath. Rom. pacif apud Forb consid Mod. p. 264. Father Barns acknowledgeth that the Punishment of Purgatory is a thing quae nec ex Scripturis nec Patribus nec Conciliis deduci potest firmiter which can neither be firmly proved from Scripture the Fathers or Councils And that Opposita sententia eis conformior videtur the contrary Sentence seems more agreeable to them Wicelius saith Meth. Concord Eccles c. 8. Tit. Funus Ibid. p. 259 260. That though there should be some places of Purgation to receive naked Souls yet doth it not become grave and wise Men so certainly to define those things which Scriptures have not expressed nec Antiquorum traditio nor the Tradition of the Ancients hath expounded Erasmus saith Operum Tom. 1. p. 685. q. There be many things about which not only contentious but even learned and pious Men did doubt of old as St. Austin with others doubted long about Purgatory That it was only a private Assertion and not an Article of Faith generally received in the Twelfth Century Chronic. l. 8. c. 26. is evident from these Words of Otho Frisingensis viz. That there is apud Inferos in the infernal Regions a Place of Purgatory wherein such as are to be saved are either troubled only with Darkness or decocted with the Fire of Expiation some affirm Nor can I tell what to make of that saying of Paschasius if it doth not shew that he believeth the contrary for saith he our Lord saith he that eateth my Flesh hath eternal Life ideo dicens habet quia mox anima carne soluta intrat in vitae promptuaria De Corp. Sang. Domini c. 19. ubi Sanctorum Animae requiescunt saying in the Present Tense he hath because the Soul being loosed from the Flesh presently enters into those Receptacles of Life where the Spirits of Saints do rest Secondly § 7 Concerning Pardons or Indulgences their Novelâ—y is still confessed more freely Inter omnes res de quibus in hoc opere disputamus nulla est quam minus aperte S. Literae prodiderunt de qua minus vetusti Scriptores dixerint neque tamen hac occasione contemnendae sunt quod earum usus in Ecclesia videatur sero receptus quoniam multa sunt posterioribus nota quae vetusti illi Scriptores prorsus ignoraverunt nam de transubstantiatione panis in Corpus Christi rara est in Antiquis Scriptoribus mentio de Purgatorio fere nulla potissimum apud Graecos Scriptores qua de causa usque in hodiernum Diem purgatorium non est a Graecis creditum Quid ergo mirum si ad hunc modum contigerit de indulgentiis ut apud Priscos nulla sit de eis mentio praecipue quod tunc magis fervebat Christianorum charitas ut parum esset opus indulgentiis quapropter non est mentio ulla indulgentiarum De Haer. l. 8. Tit. de Indulgentiis De invent rer l. 8. c. 1. p. 325. Part. 1. Sum. Tit. 10. c. 3. In 4. Sentent dist 20. q. 3. h. Alphonsus Castro saith That among all the things of which he disputed in his Book against Heresies there was nothing of which the Scripture spake less plainly de qua minus vetusti Scriptores dixerint and of which the Ancient Writers had said less Many saith Polydore Virgil from Roffensis may perhaps be moved not to trust to Indulgences quod earum usus in Ecclesia videatur recentior admodum sero apud Christianos repertus because the use of them in the Church seems new and very lately received among Christians To whom I answer That
Matthew was writ saith the Tradition of the Fathers Theoph. proem in Matth. Athan. Synops p. 155. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eight Years after our Lords Ascension Mark writ his Gospel whilst St. Peter lived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ten Years after our Lords Assumption saith Theophylact. St. Luke writ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fifteen Years after our Lords Ascension Proem in Luc. say Dorotheus and Theophylact. St. John 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thirty two Years after our Lords Ascension saith the same Theophylact. Chap. 7. §. 2. Now these Gospels as I before have proved were by the General Tradition of the whole Church of Christ esteemed sufficiently to contain that Christian Doctrine which the Apostles taught and purposely to have been written to preserve it entire to Posterity Secondly This Argument is wholly overthrown by this one Observation That the Apostles in their Preaching declare that they spake only what was written in the Books of the Old Testament or might be clearly gathered thence When they undertook to prove any Article of Christian Faith they proved it from the Scriptures of the Old Testament When they reasoned with others to bring them to the Faith they did it from the same Scriptures Acts 26.22 1 Cor. 15.2 3 4. saying none other Things than those which the Prophets and Moses did say should come When they would have their Proselytes confirmed in the Christian Faith 2 Pet. 1.19 they send them to this more sure Word of Prophecy encouraging them to take heed to it as to a Light that shineth in a dark Place And declaring that those very Scriptures which Timothy had known from a Child 2 Tim. 3.15 that is before one Book of the New Testament was written were able through Faith in Christ or the Belief that Jesus is the Messiah promised in them to make him Wise unto Salvation 16 17. That they were profitable for Doctrine and Instruction in Righteousness for Reproof for Correction that the Man of God may be perfect both as to his own Practice Obadiah paraph in locum and his teaching others throughly furnished to every good Work. If then before the Scriptures of the New Testament were written these inspired Persons taught their Converts out of the Old Testament and sent them thither to learn the Truth of what they said and bad them have Recourse unto those Writings as being able to make them Wise unto Salvation and as being more certain and more to be heeded than that Voice from Heaven of which they themselves testified Doubtless when they themselves by the same Spirit had indited the New Testament they must be more concerned that they should be guided by that written Word then also it is evident that they did not invite Men to believe meerly on the Authority or Oral Tradition of the then present Church nor practised any thing whence it might be concluded that after Ages by meer Tradition might be sufficiently instructed in the things which concerned their eternal Welfare Nay they sufficiently declared the contrary by chusing to adhere themselves and call on others to adhere to what was taught concerning the Messiah in the Old Testament when Tradition was so fresh their Authority so fully was confirmed by Miracles and they to whom they spake had the inspired Apostles in any matter of Dispute or Controversy to repair unto Thirdly St. Luke informs us § 15 that he received his Gospel by Tradition Luke 1.2 4. and that he had committed it to Writing that his Theophilus might know 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Certainty of those Doctrines in which he had been formerly instructed clearly insinuating that he conceived the written Word a means of adding certainty to what was only taught by Word of Mouth Accordingly Eusebius informs us that he was necessitated to write his Gospel that he might give us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 24. a firm Account of those things which he had learned from his Conversation with St. Paul and with the rest of the Apostles Church History saith of St. Matthew Euseb ibid. That he was constrained to write his Gospel that by so doing he might supply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the want of his own Presence with them and that when he was by Persecution separated from them Opus imperf in Matth. praefat his Converts might not want the Doctrine of Faith but wheresoever they were might retain Totius fidei statum the entire form of Faith. The san Tradition doth inform us See Chap. 7. §. 1 2. That the First Christian Converts when they had heard the Apostles preach the Christian Faith would not be satisfied with receiving it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Oral Teaching but earnestly requested to have it left in Writing with them That the believing Jews Petierunt Matthaeum ut omnium verborum operum Christi conscriberet eis historiam To write the History of all Christ's Words and Works that they might have a compleat System of their Faith. That the Romans earnestly desired Mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to leave in Writing a Memorial of the Doctrine delivered to them by word of Mouth and never would desist till they had obtained it and that it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the light of Piety which would not suffer them to rest satisfied with the Oral Tradition of the Faith that by the same perswasion Hieron Prolog in Matth. Euseb H. Eccl. l. 3. c. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his familiar Acquaintance of all the Bishops of Asia and the Ambassies of many Churches St. John who before had spent all his time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Oral Preaching was at last moved to write his Gospel The same Tradition adds That the Apostles having preached the Gospel committed it to Writing to be the Pillar and the Ground of Faith to future Ages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Anchors and Foundations of our Faith Athan. Synops p. 61. Theophylact. proem in Mat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That from these Scriptures being taught the truth we might not be drawn aside by the Falshoods of Heresies And lastly That if they had not left in Writing what they preached Orig. Dial. contr Marcion p. 59. they had preached Salvation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only to them who heard them Preach and should have had no care of Posterity because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things only orally delivered would quickly vanish there being no demonstration of their Truth Which words as they expresly do confute the certainty of Doctrines only delivered to Posterity by word of Mouth so the forementioned Traditions do sufficiently inform us what was the Judgment of the ancient Church in this Affair viz. That to ascertain those Christians who were taught the principles of their Religion it was necessary that should be written which they had been taught that they could not well otherwise supply their absence or leave to their Disciples an
were all confirmed and even ascribed to the Holy Spirit by the general Council held in Trullo and by the Second Nicene Council or who now thinks himself obliged by that Text to do so Fifthly Who knows not that anciently it was esteemed § 10 by the whole Church a thing unlawful for a Bishop Presbyter or any of the Clergy to go from one Church or Diocess to another The first Nicene Council declares That some Can. 15. who before their sitting had done this did it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against the Canon and decrees That for the future neither Bishop Priest or Deacon shall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 go from City to City Can 21. The Council of Antioch approved by the whole Church renews the same Decree The Council of Sardica represents the Attempt of such a Change as Can. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a most pernicious Custom to be pulled up by the Roots and as a Wickedness which deserved Translationes ab Ecclesia ad Majores apud Hilar. Frag. p. 437. Can. 1. Apud Athanas Apol. p. 744. Ep. 84. c. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be severely punished and therefore they declare That they who made such Changes should be excluded even from Lay-Communion and they object these Translations to the Arians as their great Crime The General Council of Chalcedon confirms all the Canons made touching this Matter by these Councils Pope Julius not only condemns this Transmigration but saith That he who practiseth it doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 despise the Station God hath given him Pope Leo adds That he who doth so shall not only be expell'd from the Chair he had invaded Sed carebit propria but shall be deprived of his own Pope Damasus declares That he will have no Communion with such Persons Moreover this Practice they condemn as Spiritual Adultery declaring That the Church to which the Bishop or the Priest is chosen is his Wife which therefore he cannot dismiss and take another without Adultery Thus the Synod of Alexandria accuse Eusebius of Nicomedia for going from Berytus to that City as having forfeited his Bishoprick and committed Adultery against the Import of that Precept Apud Athanas Apol. 2. p. 727. Art thou bound to Wife seek not to be loosed which if it be said of a Woman 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how much more of a Church of the same Bishoprick to which one being tied ought not to seek another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apud Binium Tom. 4. p. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 15. That he may not be found also an Adulterer according to the Holy Scriptures In the Synod under Mennas it was also laid to the Charge of Anthimus That having been Bishop of Trabisond he did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adulterously snatch that of Constantinople against the Ecclesiastical Laws and Canons Apud Regin de Eccles discipl l. 1. c. 250. Pope Calixtus from the same Scripture determines That if a Bishop or Priest leave his Church or Parish which is his Wife bound to him whilst he lives he commits Spiritual Adultery And suitably to the Determinations of so many Councils they who refused to be thus promoted were highly commended as observing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb de vita Constant l. 3. c. 61. the Commands of God and the Canons of the Apostles and the Church Thus when upon the Deposition of Eustathius Bishop of Antioch they would have preferred Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea to that See he refused the Offer Sozom. Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 19. because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Law of the Church forbad it and this Fact Constantine commended as acceptable to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb ibid. and agreeable to the Tradition of the Church But they who did transgress this Canon were removed from that See they were translated to though never so well deserving of the Church Thus Gregory Nazianzen though removed from Sasima to Constantinople by the Emperor though he had laboured so much in that Church to convert the Heathens he found there and hinder the Endeavours of the Hereticks yet the General Council of Constantinople observing saith Sozomen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 7. c. 7. the Laws of the Fathers and the Ecclesiastical Order took his Bishoprick from him no ways regarding the great Merits of the Person But who now in the Church of Christ regards these Canons of so many General Councils or looks upon it as a Crime to admit of or even sue for a Translation from a less Bishoprick to a greater It were easy to shew the like Difference betwixt the Practice and Judgment of the present Church and that of former Ages touching the corporal and pecuniary Punishments of Men for difference in Religion which they of former Ages most plainly disapproved of touching the Suffrage of the People being requisite to the Election of their Bishop which they expresly did assert disowning such pretended Bishops as wanted the Consent and Suffrage of the People to omit many other Instances which might be easily produced to shew that Doctrines and Practices have passed for currant and even Apostolical in former Ages which are now utterly rejected and disapproved of in this present Age. But Lastly though when the whole Church is unanimous § 11 nd all her Members do agree in the asserting any Doctrine as an Article of Christian Faith necessary to be owned by all Christians the Plea from the concurring Judgment of the Church is highly plausible and never ought without the clearest Evidence of Reason or of Scripture to be gainsaid nor hath the Church of England ever disowned any such Doctrine yet when whole Churches or Nations are divided in their Sentiments concerning any Doctrine and Number may be pleaded by both Parties then say we with the Fathers That we must have Recourse unto the Scriptures This is at present visibly the State and the Condition of the Church of Christ she agrees now in nothing but the Apostles and the Nicene Creed there is East against West and West against East Protestant against Papist and Papist against Protestant Now in this case the ancient Fathers of the Church declare it is our only safe and prudent Course to fly as doth the Church of England to the Holy Scriptures and to primitive Antiquity and say That a Necessity is laid upon us so to do Thus Hippolytus or whosoever is the Author of that Book which bears his Name having given an Account of the Prevalence which Antichrist shall have clearly insinuates That the best Preservative against him is P. 60. Scripturas audire to hear the Scriptures and that Christ will pronounce them Blessed who have done so And that they who do not Diligenter legere Scriptures P. 13. diligently read the Scriptures shall run up and down saying Where is Christ and shall not find him The