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
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
those Guides of Souls he had set over them Did all our Pastors fall asleep at once or could they all conspire to deceive Posterity Thirdly R. H. The Guide of Controversies cannot be ignorant That as he says God then permitted the Sanhedrim to be the greatest Enemies of Truth for the Accomplishment of the Prophecies of the Old Testament so do we also say That God permitted these pernicious Doctrines to obtain in the Church of Rome for the Accomplishment of those Prophecies of the New Testament touching a great and almost general Apostacy which was to happen in the Days of the great Antichrist and in the time when all Tongues and Nations were to worship the Beast Now hence ariseth a Second Demonstration of the Falshood of this vain Presumption § 3 That no such Change can happen in the Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Christ as we pretend to for the Testimony of the Holy Scriptures the Doctrine of the Fathers and the Confessions of many learned Catholicks assure us that this shall actually happen in the times of Antichrist and what will then become of all the pretended Demonstrations That this cannot happen or can never happen And First Rev. xj 7-xij 6. The Scripture speaks expresly of the Slaughter of the Two Witnesses the Flight of the Women into the Desart and of the Worship which the whole World shall pay unto the Beast Where note That the Witnesses which represent the Church or her true Pastors are but Two and they at last are slain and that the Dominion of Antichrist is represented as over all Kingdoms Tongues and Nations and he is said to cause the Earth Chap. xiij 7 v. 16. and him that dwells therein to worship him and both small and great rich and poor bond and free to receive his Mark. The Fathers also assert that the Apostacy will then be so great Basil Ep. 71. p. 115. That the Lord will seem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wholly to have left his Churches That there shall be then Totius mundi seductio Hippol. de Consum mundi p. 4. a Seduction of the whole World That Cuncti accedent P. 41. atque adorabunt eum all shall come and worship the Beast That the Saints shall hide themselves P. 43 49 59. in montibus speluncis cavernis Terrae in the mountains dens and caverns of the Earth That all shall fall off from God and believe that Impostor That there shall be nec oblatio P. 48. nec suffitus nec cultus Deo gratus neither Oblation nor Incense nor any Worship acceptable to God no Eucharist no Liturgy no singing of Psalms or reading of the Scripture That there shall be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodor. Tom 3. Ep. 63. p. 937. Hieron in Sophon c. 2. f. 97. F. a general Apostacy That Regnante Antichristo redigenda sit Ecclesia in solitudinem in the Reign of Antichrist the Church will be brought to Solitude so that Christ coming shall scarce find Faith upon the Earth That in the time of Antichrist ecclesia non apparebit Aust Ep. 80. ad Hesyc p. 364. the Church shall not appear being eclipsed by the Persecutions of ungodly Men That Men shall ask whether the Gospel doth any where continue upon Earth Ephr. Syr. de consum Sâ—eculi Antichristo Col. An. 1603. p. 219. responsumque iri nusquam and it shall be answered no where And in this Assertion the Fathers are generally followed by the Romish Doctors De Pontif. Rom. l. 3. c. 7. §. denique let one Bellarmine speak for them all saying that Daniel plainly saith That in the times of Antichrist by reason of the Severity of Persecutions the publick and daily Sacrifice of the Church shall cease ubi omnium consensu loquitur de tempore Antichristi where by the consent of all he speaketh of the time of Antichrist This being then so clear a Revelation or Prediction of the Holy Ghost and our great Prophet must some time or other happen or both our Saviour and the Holy Spirit must be charged with lying Prophecies And being so unanimously and without controll delivered by the Holy Fathers the constant Tradition and the received Doctrine of the Church of Christ throughout all those Ages must be a constant Refutation of this idle Dream and their Pretences to Tradition must evidently be confuted by Tradition Thirdly § 4 This Method and Proceeding of the Romanists for finding out and judging of primitive Doctrines and Traditions were it admitted would force us to condemn the Writers of the Church from the beginning to the Tenth Twelfth or Fourteenth Centuries as the worst of Fools or Knaves for seeing it is manifest from their plain Words produced in great Plenty throughout those Ages that they speak as plainly in Condemnation of the Latin Service Communion in one Kind the Veneration of Images the Seven Sacraments the Trent Canon of the Books of the Old Testament and of many other Articles of Romish Faith which they pretend to have received from Tradition as any Protestant can do either they must have spoken all these things unwittingly for want of knowledge of what the Church maintained to the contrary throughout those Ages and then it cannot be avoided but they must pass for the most ignorant of Men and such as did not know the necessary Articles of Christian Faith received in their Times or else they must have taught and conveyed to Posterity those things against their Knowledge and the conviction of their Consciences and then it cannot be denied but that they were the worst of Knaves and whichsoever of these things be said it cannot be denied but they of all Men were the most unfit to convey down Tradition to Posterity For to render any Person a credible Testator or Witness of the Churches Faith and Practice Two things seem absolutely necessary 1. That he should have sufficient Knowledge of the Truth of what he testifies And 2ly That he should have Honesty sufficient to assure us that he would not wittingly deceive us in his Testimony for if we have just Reason to suspect either his want of Knowledge or Sincerity we must have reason to suspect his Testimony So that if either such Simplicity and Folly or such apparent Knavery as hath been mentioned can justly be imputed to the Authors of the Testimonies cited against the Doctrines fornamed of the Church of Rome it is extreamly manifest we have just Reason to suspect the Truth of all they might deliver to future Ages either as Doctrines or Practices received from their Predecessors Fourthly § 5 This Method of proceeding must render it a vain and fruitless thing to search into Antiquity to find what was the Doctrine of preceeding Ages Sexta nota est conspiratio in doctrina cum ecclesia antiqua De notis Eccles cap. 9. Bellarm. de eccl milit l. 4 c. 9. and consequently it must assure us that the Church of Rome doth
esse potest the true Catholick Faith without which no man can be saved whereas it is here proved that the whole Church of Christ in general and in particular the Roman Church believed that the Apostles and the Nicene Creed contained all the Articles of the Christian Faith. 9. Concil Trid. Sess 21. can 4. The present Roman Church pronounceth an Anathema on those who say the Eucharist is necessary to Children before they come to Years of Discretion that is on Pope Innocent Chap. 12. Sect. 3 4 5. Pope Pelagius and the whole Church of Christ for Six hundred Years And truly if the Tradition or the Doctrine of the present Church of Rome § 4 must be the Rule by which alone we are to judge of the Tradition Practice and Doctrines of the whole Church of Christ throughout all Ages if we lie under any Obligation to determine thus That this is the Practice the Tradition the Doctrine of the present Roman Church therefore this was the Doctrine the Practice the Tradition of all former Ages of the Christian Church then all the Reason God hath given us and all the Learning which we can with all our industry acquire from Scripture and all the Testimonies of the Fathers and Church Writers could we shew them throughout Fifteen Centuries Canon of Script as Dr. Cousins hath done declaring themselves fully in opposition to the Church of Rome I say if the Declarations of the Church of Rome must wholly over-rule us in these matters all the knowledge we can acquire from Scripture Reason or the Fathers is not worth one Straw we may even burn all our Books of Antiquity our Fathers and Church History yea and our Bibles too and lay aside our useless Reason for whatsoever service these things may do to Holy Church they can do none to us The reading of these Authors the use of Reason to discern betwixt good and evil right and wrong true and false in Christian Practices and Doctrines must be the most pernicious things in which we can be exercised for sure I am no Man of honest Conscience and sound Judgment can read the Scriptures and the Fathers carefully but he must very strongly be tempted by his Reason to suspect and must in many things seem absolutely certain that Apostolical Tradition cannot be known by the Tradition of the present Church of Rome yea that many of her present Traditions Doctrines and Practices are evidently and unquestionably repugnant to the Traditions Practices and Doctrines of the Apostles and the whole Church of Christ for Six Eight Ten Twelve or Fourteen Centuries To add some farther Instances to these § 5 I have already mentioned Sess 6. can 23. Ecclesia tenet de Beata Virgine quod ex speciali Dei privilegio in tota vita peccata omnia etiam venialia vitaverit The Church of Rome now holds saith the Trent Council that the Blessed Virgin was through her whole Life free from venial Sin and yet such is the Evidence of Truth to the contrary that many Doctors of the Roman Church are even forced to confess that this Determination is contrary to the common Judgment of the Fathers In John ij Maldonate speaks thus Among the Ancient Fathers I find very few who either do not openly say or obscurely signifie that the Blessed Virgin was guilty of some Fault or Error And though some have endeavoured saith Petavius to mollifie the Sayings of the Fathers De Incar l. 14. c. 1. sect 7. yet their endeavour is vain Nam adeo disertam continent cujusque modi delicti significationem ut aliorsum detorqueri se minime patiuntur For their Sayings do so expresly import the signification of some guilt that they cannot be wrested to another sence and that they had good reason to make these Confessions will be apparent from these Citations following Our Lord saith Irenaeus L. 3. c. 18. p. 277. repellens ejus intempestivam festinationem repelling her unseasonable hastiness said to her Woman what have I to do with thee In the Third Century Tertullian expresly charges her with incredulity for he declares L. de came Christi cap. 7. That our Lord Christ therefore denied his Mother and his Brethren saying Who is my Mother and my Brethren because his Brethren did not believe in him and because Mater non adhaesit illi his Mother did not cleave unto him In this place saith he appears incredulitas eorum the unbelief of them that when he was Preaching the Word of Life and healing of Diseases and Sins his Relations stood without and were so far from harkening to him that they did rather interrupt and call him from so good a Work and will Apelles say That Christ unworthily used these words Ad percutiendam infidelitatem foris stantium To smite the incredulity of them who stood without Origen upon Luke asks what that Sword was which Simeon foretold of saying it should pass through her Heart and answers that it is manifestly written Hom. 17. s 102. b. That in the time of our Lord's Passion all the Apostles should be scandalized and saith he can we think that the Apostles being Scandalized Mater Domini a scandalo fuerit immunis the Mother of our Lord could be free from Scandal If she suffered no Scandal Jesus did not suffer pro peccatis ejus for her Sins but if all sinned and fell short of the Glory of God being justified freely by his Grace utique Maria illo tempore scandalizata est then doubtless Mary also at that time was scandalized And this is that which Simeon here Prophesieth saying Tuam ipsius animam pertransibit infidelitatis gladius ambiguitatis mucrone serieris the Sword of Infidelity shall pass through thy own Soul and thou shalt be smitten with the Sword of doubtfulness In the Fourth Century St. Basil saith That Simeon here prophesieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Mary her self thus Tom. 3. Ep. 317. p. 310. 311. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There shall be some fluctuation even in thy Soul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some doubting touching the Lord this is the Sword but after this Scandal which shall happen to Mary and the Disciples of our Lord he presently will minister a Medicine and confirm their Hearts in the Faith of Christ Moveover he makes this Scandal of the Blessed Virgin necessary upon this account That Christ was to taste Death for all to be the propitiation for the World and to justifie all Men by his Blood. In Psalm 118. St. Hilary declares That at the Day of Judgment that incessant Fire is to be endured in quo subeunda sunt gravia illa expiandae a peccatis animae supplicia in which are to be suffered those heavy Punishments designed for the expiating of the Soul from Sin and that then the Sword shall go through the Soul of Mary and if saith he even Dei virgo illa in judicii severitatem ventura est that
Chalcedon Can 1. Can. 2. and afterwards by that in Trullo and therefore was allowed by the whole Church of God. St. Cyril of Jerusalem instructs his Catecumen That the Apostles and James the Bishop of Jerusalem had writ a Catholick Epistle to the Gentiles to teach them to abstain from things offered to Idols things strangled and from Blood and then he adds Catech. 4. p. 34. c. de cibis That they who licked up the Blood of Beast and spared not to eat things strangled were like to wild Beasts and Dogs these saith he are the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Institutions touching Meats which it behoves you to observe In the Fifth Century St. Jerom declares In Ezek. 45. p. 245. That according to the Letter the Decree contained in the Fifteenth of the Acts obligeth every Christian not to eat the Flesh of any dead Sheep or Cattle quorum nequaquam sanguis effusus est whose Blood is not poured forth And Chrysostom on the place saith These Constitutions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though they concern the Body yet are they necessary to be kept In the Sixth Century the Second Council of Orleans declares A. D. 536. can 20. That they who eat of that which is choaked by any Disease or Chance or killed by the bitings of Beasts shall be excluded from the Communion of the Church and if any person after this diligent Sanction Can. 22. doth not observe these things reos se divinitatis pariter fraternitatis judicio futuros esse cognoscant let them know they shall be guilty both in the Judgment of God and of the Brotherhood In the Seventh Century this was Decreed by the Sixth General Council held in Trullo in these words Can. 67. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Holy Scripture hath commanded us to abstain from Blood things strangled and from Fornication he therefore who attempts to eat the Blood of any Creature any way if he be a Clerk let him be deposed Cap. 18 19. if he be a Lay-man let him be Excommunicated In the Penitential of Theodorus Archbishop of Canterbury we have this Rule prescribed Hast thou eaten that which died of it self or was torn by Beasts thou must do penance Forty Days if thou hast eaten Blood thou must do likewise Now of this Theodorus Rabanus doth inform us Ep. ad Humbert apud Regin de discip Eccl. l. 2. c. 200. That he was fully instructed in the Customs both of the Eastern and the Western Churches and that he could be ignorant of nothing which was then observed by the Greeks or Romans and therefore we may rationally conclude that what he thus prescribed was only that which was observed both in the East and Western Churches In the Eigth Century Gregory the Third who was made Pope A. Can. poenit c. 30. D. 731. puts this among his penitential Canons That he who hath eaten that which died of it self if he did this ignorantly shall do Penance Twenty Days if knowingly Forty Days And Bede informs us That he who comes to penance must be asked Can. de diversis causis c. 14. Whether he had eaten that which died of it self or was torn by Beasts and if so he must do Penance Forty Days and the like must be done by him who hath eaten Blood. Novel 58. Bals in Syn. Trull can 67. Leo the Emperor made a Law to punish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those who did eat any kind of Blood. In the Ninth Century Regino doth not only produce out of the Penitentials the same Canons against eating things strangled and Blood De discipl Eccles l. 2. c. 369 373. De discipl Eccles l. 2. c. 374. but adds moreover that admonendi sunt fideles ut nullus praesumat sanguinem manducare the Faithful are to be admonished that none of them do presume to eat Blood for this was forbidden in the beginning when first God gave Men liberty to eat Flesh and it is also forbidden in the New Testament where things strangled and Blood are compared with Fornication and Idolatry to teach us quantum piaculum sit sanguinem comedere what an heinous thing it is to eat Blood. In the Eleventh Century Humbertus plainly shews that this was then esteemed unlawful both in the Eastern and the Western Churches Apud Baron Tom. 11. p. 986. For we saith he of the West do not defend against you Greeks the eating of things strangled and Blood Antiquam enim consuetudinem seu traditionem Majorum retinentes nos quoque haec abominamur For retaining the ancient Custom or Tradition of our Ancestors we also do abominate these things imposing grievous Penance upon them who do this without great peril of Life and this we do especially quia antiquas consuetudines traditiones Majorum quae non sunt contra fidem leges Apostolicas arbitramur because we judge the Ancient Customs and Traditions of our Ancestors which are not opposite to the Faith to be Apostolical Laws And yet when Transubstantiation was once fully established in the West as it was in the Twelfth and the beginning of the Thirteenth Centuries then they perceived they could no longer with any truth assert as did the Ancient Fathers that they did ab humano sanguine cavere abstain from eating humane Blood but believing they did eat Blood with the Flesh in the Sacrament they gave all Men liberty to do it elsewhere Whence Balsamon in the Twelfth Century speaks thus In Can. 67. Concil Trull 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Latins do indifferently eat things strangled and if in this instance that which in the Eleventh Century was by the Western Churches held in abomination and worthy of most grievous Penances as being opposite both to the Laws of the Apostles and the Traditions of the Ancients might in the next Century be generally allowed and practised as a thing indifferent why might not a like change happen in the same Church in a like space of time touching the Doctrine of the corporeal Presence or any other Article of Christian Faith. Thirdly § 7 The Ancient Church unanimously and constantly declared it was a thing plainly repugnant to Scripture and to true Religion and proper unto Hereticks to punish any man with death for his Religion or his Heresie and she refused Communion with them that did so And 1. They declared this practice opposite to our Lord's precept Not to gather up the Tares by themselves Matth. xiij 29 30. but let them both grow together till the Harvest He introduceth his Servants saying Wilt thou that we pluck up the Tares that he might tell them saith St. Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Locum that it was unlawful to cut them off He forbids Wars and Blood and Slaughters to be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it is not lawful to cut off the Heretick Christ here forbids not to stop their Mouths restrain and hinder their boldness of Discourse dissolve
Doctrines of the Church of Rome are not received by Tradition from Father to Son since in this matter the Sons have generally entertained a Doctrine their Fathers either knew nothing of or plainly contradicted and that is now become pious and consonant to Ecclesiastical Worship which in St. Bernard's time was Ep. 174. praesumpta novitas Mater temeritatis soror superstitionis filia levitatis A bold Novelty the Mother of Rashness the Sister of Superstition the Daughter of Levity 5. Hence doth it follow that even by the Authority of the heads of the Vniversal Church men may be forbidden under pain of Damnation to Assert the Ancient Doctrine of the Church and may have liberty to contradict it Yea that in the judgment of a great R. Council received by the French as General and bearing that title in all Editions of the Councils that may be agreeable to the Catholick Faith to Reason and to Holy Scripture which is repugnant to the Ancient Doctrine of the Church Catholick for Eight whole Centuries 6. Hence is it manifest that the Trent Council hath given liberty to all her Members to hold that which is opposite to an universal constant unopposed Tradition of the Church for many Ages that is that she hath left them at their liberty to hold the Ancient Faith or hold the contrary 7. Hence it appears that in the Church of Rome Feasts may be instituted in which all men shall be exhorted to praise God for a thing which perhaps never was and of the truth of which none of her Members can be certain certitudine fidei with the certainty of Faith all of them being by this Church permitted to believe the contrary CHAP. III. Fifthly We distinguish betwixt Traditions which though not written in Scripture are left on Record in the Ecclesiastical writings of the first and purest Ages of the Church and such as are so purely Oral Traditions as that we find no footsteps of them in the Three first Centuries much less any assurance they had then any general Reception of the first kind is the Canon of Scripture of the Old Testament mentioned in our Sixth Article § 1. This is proved from the Jews § 2. From the Christians of the Second Century § 3. Of the Third Century § 4. From almost all the celebrated Writers of the Fourth Century § 5. Where also it is observed 1. That these Fathers profess to deliver that Catalogue of them which they had received from Tradition § 6. And that the Books which they rejected as Apocryphal were so reputed by the Church § 7. That the Catalogue they produced was that received not only by the Jews but Christians § 8. That they made it to prevent mistakes § 9. That they represent the Books contained in their Catalogue as the Fountain of Salvation the rest as insufficient to confirm Articles of Faith § 10. The same Tradition still continued to the Sixteenth Century § 11. What the Roman Doctors must do if they would shew a like Tradition for any of their Tenets § 12. The unreasonableness of their pretences to Tradition in this Article Ibid. The Attempts of Mr. M. and J. L. to prove their Canon from the Council of Carthage the Testimony of St. Austin the Decrees of Pope Innocent and Gelasius are Answered § 13. The Tradition touching the Books of the New Testament where it is proved 1. That the Four Evangelists the Acts the Thirteen Epistles of St. Paul the First of Peter and of John were always owned as Canonical by all Orthodox Christians § 14. 2. That it cannot be necessary to Salvation to be assured that the Books formerly controverted belong to the Canon § 15. 3. That we cannot be assured of the true Canon of the New Testament from the Testimony of the Latin Church § 16. 4. That there is not the like necessity that the controverted Books should have been generally received from the beginning as that all necessary Articles of Christian Faith and Manners should be then generally received § 17. That we have cause sufficient to own as Canonical the Books once controverted is proved 1. in the General § 18. 2. In Particular touching the Apocalypse § 19. And the Epistle to the Hebrews § 20. Touching the Epistle of St. James the Second of Peter the Second and Third of John the Epistle of St. Jude § 21. No Orthodox Persons dobuted of them after the Fourth Century § 22. The Romanists cannot prove their Doctrines by any like Traditions and in particular not by such a Tradition as proves the Apocalypse Canonical § 23. The Objection of Mr. M. Answered § 24. AGain § 1 the word Tradition may be applied to signifie either such things as are not written in the Scripture Dist 5. though they are left on Record in the Ecclesiastical writings of the first and purest Ages Vocatur Doctrina non scripta non ea quae nusquam scripta est sed quae non est scripta a primo Autore Bellarm. de verbo Dei non scripto l. 4. c. 2. and from them handed down unto us in the writings of succeeding Ages or else to signifie such things as are said only to be delivered by word of Mouth but cannot by the Records of preceding Ages be proved to have been received as Doctrines generally maintained or practices always observed in the Church of Christ of the first sort is the Tradition of the Canon of Scripture of the Apostles Symbol as a perfect Summary of Doctrines necessary to be believed the Observation of the Lord's Day the Superiority of Bishops over Presbyters the Ordination of Presbyters and Deacons by Bishops only and the like we having full and pregnant evidence from the first Records of Antiquity unto this present time of all these things and whatsoever can be proved by a like Tradition touching a necessary Article of Christian Faith we are all ready to receive but those pretended Traditions of the Roman Church which by no Records of Antiquity can be made appear to have been constantly received by the Church as Apostolical Traditions we have just Reason to reject as being without Ground so stiled For Instance First We receive the Canon of the Scriptures of the Old Testament mentioned in our Sixth Article because it is by written Tradition handed down unto us from the Jews from Christ and his Apostles and from their Successors in the Church and we reject the Canon of the Old Testament imposed upon us by the Fourth Session of the Trent Council partly because we find a clear Tradition both virtually by all who say the Canon of the Old Testament is only that we own and expresly by those who say the others which we stile Apocrypha belong not to the Canon And 1. § 2 We receive our Canon from the Ancient Jews to whom were committed the Oracles of God for their Josephus saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 1. contra Apion
de Resurrect Tom. 2 p. 277. Ambros Ep. 83. Psalm 118.24 the Fathers generally apply that Passage of the Psalmist This is the Day which the Lord hath made let us be glad and rejoice in it to the Lord's day as made or Instituted by the Lord and Consecrated or Sanctified by his Resurrection Others of them say That the Observation of the Lord's Day was an Apostolical Tradition and that they kept it as an Holy Day Hesuch in Levit c. 9. Leo. Ep. 11. Ed. Quesnel p. 436. Apostolorum sequentes traditionem following the Tradition of the Apostles The Apostles and Apostolical Men having decreed Dominicum diem religiosâ solennitate habendum That the Lord's day was Religiously to be celebrated And surely it is enough to satisfie all Conscientious Christians in the Observation of this Day that it was consecrated to the Service of our Lord either by Christ himself or his Apostles and as such hath been celebrated ever since by the perpetual practice of the whole Church Catholick especially if we consider what excellent Names these ancient Observers of it have ascribed unto it and what great Dignities they have put upon it calling it the Queen of Days the Princess and the Principal of Days a Royal Day higher than the highest the first Fruits of the Days whereas had they conceived it only an humane Ordinance it could not have deserved these Titles above other Daies ordained by the Church In fine how dangerous it is to say That the publick Exercise of Christian Religion should depend upon so weak a Foundation as humane Authority which may alter its own Constitutions and is subject to manifold Errors I leave to the prudent and judicious Reader to consider Let then the Romanists shew three Texts of Scripture expounded constantly in that sence by the whole Church § 6 which confirms any of their Doctrines let them shew us the Names of any of those Practices of theirs which we condemn in Scripture and the Fathers of the first Centuries let them give clear evidence from their Writings that such Practices were received in the Apostles daies throughout the Christian World no Church no Christian Writer ever excepting against them or mentioning them as newly introduced Customs let them shew us plain Expressions from them declaring that they were instituted either by Christ or his Apostles and that they practised them Illorum sequentes traditionem in compliance with their Tradition and then we shall no longer question or condemn them Having thus Answered Mr. M ' s. Argument against the sufficiency of the Scripture from this Head I retort it thus That is necessary to be done to Salvation § 7 which left undone Pag. 204. causeth Damnation but the observation of the Sunday commanding the abstaining from all servile Works if neglected or left undone brings Damnation therefore to observe in this manner the Sunday is a thing necessary to Salvation and yet this point is so far from being clearly put down in Tradition that standing meerly to the sole judgment of it we can clearly shew more Declarations for the lawfulness of working on the Sunday than for the unlawfulness thereof The Canon of the Council of Laodicea only saith Can. 29. That Christians shall rest on the Lord's Day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if they can well knowing that it was not possible for many of them so to do some of them being Servants to Pagan Masters some condemned to labour in the Mines and toil in Gallies when their Lords required them and yet we find not in all Ecclesiastical History those Christians ever then refused to labour upon this account and therefore Balsamon upon this Canon saith That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they did not enjoin this as a thing necessary but added If they could let them do it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for if any one work on the Lord's day out of Poverty or any other necessity he will not be condemned And Zonaras on the same Canon adds That the Civil Law commands all without excuse to rest upon the Lord's day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 excepting Husbandmen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it permits them to work on the Lord's day provided that they find no other day so fit foâ— their work That which he saith touching the Civil Law Cod. Just l. 2. Cod. de feriis is evident from that Law of Constantine where commanding all men to rest on the Lord's day he excepts Rural Labours in which delay may be very prejudicial to them Enchirid Tit. 4. which Law Hermenopulus gives us thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 On the Lord's day and other Festivals let the Judges and others rest excepting only Husbandmen and none of the Fathers of the Church living in those daies or in the following Centuries reproved these Laws or spake any thing to signifie that they esteemed them Prophane Epitaph Paulae ad Eustoch f. 64. On the contrary Saint Jerom tells us That Paula with all the Virgins and Widows that lived at Bethlehem in a Cloyster with her repaired to the Church on the Lord's Day Aâ—que inde pariter revertentes instabant operi distributo and returning thence they all fell to their work and made Clothes for themselves or others And lastly § 8 let it be observed that though I verily believe this day to be of Divine Institution and jure positivo to be observed yet am I far from thinking that it is necessary to Salvation so to do and much less to abstain wholly from working that day or that if any Church should rather think it fit to keep another day in Honour of our Lord or that if any Christians should think as some of the Ancient Fathers seem to have done that under the Gospel Dispensation there was no difference of daies but that the Christian should observe every day as a Spiritual Sabbath they should be damned or even Unchurched for that Opinion And therefore this is like unto most other Instances urged by Mr. M. impertinent and such as reacheth not unto the Question viz. Whether the Scripture be deficient in any thing that 's necessary to be believed or practised to Salvation To proceed to the Second Question touching our Freedom from any Obligation to observe the Sabbath injoined in the Fourth Commandment I say that though Tradition seems not sufficiently to do it Scripture affords sufficient Evidence that the Observation of the Seventh day from the Creation was only a ceremonial Precept and therefore not obliging to the Christian that is the Observation of the Seventh day from the Creation as a day wholly to be set apart for rest from bodily Labour according to the Fourth Commandment was not enjoined by a Moral Law or by a Law commanding what is naturally good antecedently to the Command of the Lawgiver or which can be resolved into any Principle or Dictates of the Law of Nature imprinted in Mens Hearts at the Creation but that it was a Law which only
to them the Doctrine of the Apostles pretending to have received it as it were by Tradition from the Apostles Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 28. When they had the boldness to affirm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That all the Ancients and even the Apostles taught the same things which they did and that what they delivered was afterwards corrupted by the Orthodox I say that in their Discourses against these Hereticks they should not once endeavour to stop their mouths by telling them what were indeed the Doctriens and Traditions received from the Apostles what were the things revealed to them by the Apostles but should still keep these necessary Traditions which the Church of Rome now teacheth as received from them secret not saying one word of them no not when they in confutation of these pretences of the Hereticks declare what was the Rule of Faith and the Tradition received from the Apostles and preserved by all the Apostolick Churches is so incredible as nothing can be more except this vain Imagination That these very Fathers should concurr with these Hereticks as do some others in this Assertion That saving Truth could not be known from Scripture by them who were ignorant of Tradition as being not delivered down to Posterity by writing but by word of Mouth and yet at the same time should say Lib. 3. c. 1. as Irenaeus doth in his Discourse against them That the Apostles first Preached the Gospel and after by the Will of God delivered it unto us in the Scriptures to be hereafter the Foundation and Pillar of our Faith. And as Eusebius doth Lib. 5. c. 18. That the pretences of the Hereticks unto Tradition might be probable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did not the Holy Scriptures contradict them And as St. Jerom That those things which they feign to have received as Tradition In Hagg. c. 1. fol. 102. a. absque authoritate testimoniis Scripturarum percutit gladius Dei without the Authority and Testimonies of the Scripture the Sword of God doth smite for what is this but to talk like us Northern Hereticks for to quarrel with Men for appealing from Scriture as obscure and insufficient to decide our Controversies without the Suffrage of Oral Tradition to alledge Scripture as a sufficient evidence that others vainly did pretend unto it to reject what others do pretend to have received from Tradition because it wanteth the Authority and Testimony of the Holy Scriptures whatsoever it may pass for in these ancient Fathers is one of those very things for which we are proclaimed Hereticks In a word That there should be unwritten Traditions necessary to be believed unto Salvation and neither the Creed of the Greek nor of the Latin Church make the least mention of any of them That a Creed should be made perhaps at Gentilly in the Seventh Century and to obtain the better credit should be called the Creed of Athanasius That this Creed should inform us in the beginning That whosoever will be saved before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholick Faith threatning that he shall perish everlastingly who doth not keep this Faith entire and whole that therefore in the next words it should say and the Catholick Faith is this and should conclude in these Expressions This is the Catholick Faith and yet leave out almost as many necessary Articles of Christian Faith as it contained That the principal written Traditions which in comparison needed it not should be put together into a Creed but that the unwritten ones which needed it very much should be quite left out and never thought of to that purpose till about Fifteeen hundred Years after and that the Ancients Tertullian St. Basil Eusebius and others speaking expresly and professedly of Traditions not contained in Holy Scripture should reckon up many unnecessary things and never mention in their Catalogues one of these necessary Traditions That in their Treatises of Christian Faith and Christian Doctrine and of Ecclesiastical Opinions and their Instructions of the Catechized the Fathers should say nothing the Persons who were to be instructed in all the Doctrines of the Christian Faith should hear nothing of all these Articles and yet they should be throughout all Ages of the Christian World so necessary that no Salvation could be had without them these I confess are truly R. Catholick that is incredible Assertions and if we must give credit to them we must do it upon Tertullian's Ground Credo quia est impossibile Because it is impossible they should be true CHAP. VII The Novelty of the R. Doctrines farther proved First from the general Tradition of the Church that the Four Gospels and the Scriptures comprized all that was necessary to be believed or done by Christians this proved 1. in general § 1. 2. From the particular account Tradition gives us of the Writings of the Four Evangelists § 2. Inference this Tradition shews That to preserve a Doctrine safe to Posterity 't was not sufficient to receive it by Oral Tradition unless it were written § 3. Secondly This is proved from the general Tradition of the whole Church of Christ that the Apostles or the Nicene Symbol was a compleat summary of all things necessary to be believed by Christians § 4. Where it is shewed that the Apostles delivered to their Converts a System or a form of Words Ibid. That this form was delivered to all Churches and was for substance the same with that which afterwards was stiled the Apostles Creed § 5. That Christians were received into the Church by Baptism on the profession of this Faith § 6. That it was taught as the entire System of things necessary to be believed § 7. That it was esteemed a Test of Orthodoxy by which they prescribed to Hereticks § 8. That this whole Summary of Christian Faith was evidently contained in Scripture § 9. And that notwithstanding they unanimously stiled it a Tradition § 10. MOreover That the Articles of Faith owned by the Church of Rome and imposed upon all who hold Communion with her to be believed and owned as such under the penalty of Anathema to him who doth believe or say the contrary were not received from Christ or his Apostles either by unwritten Tradition or by traditional Interpretation of the Holy Scriptures or any portion of them to that sence from whence it may be certainly concluded that they were in the Scriptures mentioned or owned by the ancient Church as Articles of Christian Faith or as things necessary to be believed or practised by all Christians will be exceeding evident from these Considerations v. g. First § 1 From that plain and general Tradition of the Church of Christ that all which the Apostles preach'd and taught their Converts by word of mouth as either necessary to be believed or practised they afterwards at their desire committed unto writing and deliver'd to them in the Gospel and the Holy Scriptures This in the
entire System of the Christian Faith than by committing it to Writing that Piety should not permit even the Romans to rest satisfied without such written Monuments of what they had been taught or to conceive it was sufficient that they had received it by Tradition and that the Wisdom of the Holy Ghost instructed the Apostles to commit to writing that which they had Preached by Word of Mouth that so it might become to future Ages the Pillar and the Ground of Truth and a sufficient Antidote against the Heresies which afterwards prevailed in the Church Euseb H. Eccl. l. 3. c. 37. And that the zeal of the first Successors of Christian Faith imployed it self as much in leaving to their Converts throughout all the World 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Writings of the Holy Gospels as in preaching Christ unto them In Answer to Mr. M's Fourth Reason for the Infallibility of Tradition I grant P. 354. That a Tradition made as credible to any Man as it may be made credible to one who never saw London that there is such a City as London and that it is the head Town of England will be a good and a sufficient Proof that the Traditions of the Church of Rome are true and that upon such Evidence afforded it will be most unreasonable to question the Truth of them but then I think it is the vainest thing imaginable for any person to attempt to prove them from a like Tradition For doth Mr. M. know of any Man whoever doubted that there was such a City as London or that it was the head Town of England Did he ever read or hear of any large Discourses any Testimonies brought from ancient Records or Traditions from Divine Revelation or from Reason to prove there was or could be no such Capital City in England Can he produce as many Eye and Ear Witnesses that the Traditions of the Church of Rome are truly Apostolical as may be easily produced for such a City Let Mr. M. once prove that the Traditions of the Romish Church were always generally received by all Mankind and that none ever had the Confidence to Question the Truth of any of them Let him prove them from Myriads of Eye Witnesses who saw them writ by the Apostles or Primitive Professors of Christianity as plainly as ever any Man saw London or as many Ear Witnesses hearing the Apostles preaching these Traditions as ever heard this Capital City mentioned by those who saw it Let him prove them by as many persons who writ to the Apostles concerning these Traditions as have writ to London and by as many who resorted to the Apostles to learn these Traditions as have resorted to this City by as many Books describing these Traditions in the very Age in which they are supposed to have been delivered as there are Books which in this Age make mention of the City of London and by as many Canons of the Primitive Church relating to these Traditions as there are Statutes and Discourses relating to the City Trade and Government of London And I will then acknowledge That it is impudent impious and blasphemous Impiety to doubt the Truth of these Traditions Mr. M. indeed supposeth That it is as evidently credible that God hath revealed such and such Verities as it is credible by humane Tradition that there is such a City as London but this he never undertakes to prove as knowing that it was an easier matter to suppose it P. 355 356. And then he adds That the very self same Tradition tells me that the same God who revealed by his Apostles so many other Verities to his Church did also reveal by the same Apostles to the same Church that this Church was to be heard as the Mistress of Truth with whom he would ever be present suggesting to her all Truth and never permitting the Gates of Hell to prevail against her that he placed her as a Pillar and Ground of Truth giving her such Pastors as should secure her Children from being tossed to and fro with every Wind of Doctrine and consequently this same Tradition tells me God hath revealed this Verity of her being Infallible in proposing any Point for Divine Faith. Now Reply First Mr. M. is miserably out in this Discourse for not one of these Revelations here mentioned whatsoever is the import of them have descended to us by Oral Tradition but are all of them contained in Scripture as far as they are truly cited Secondly Whereas the Evidence that there is such a City as London is so great that never any Body could deny or question it that the Church is Infallible in propounding any Point of Faith not clearly revealed in the Holy Scripture or that there are indeed any such Points of Faith is at present and hath been formerly denied by many Myriads of learned and pious Men whose worldly Interest it is and was to believe that true which they deny to be so and whose rejoicement it would be to find it true and that none of the places here produced prove this Infallibility or by the Primitive Professors of Christianity were esteemed to prove it they have unanimously held and do at present hold Thirdly Ibid. Whereas he saith He did see with his Eyes that she viz. the Church of God did propose her Traditions for Verities received from God. Let it be noted That Mr. M. confounds the Church of Rome and the Church of God excluding all the Protestants the Greek Church and the Eastern Christians not subject to the Pope from that Church out of which there is no Salvation which I hope is not so evident as that there is such a City as London for it is not the whole Church but that of Rome which claims this Infallibility and on that account proposeth her Traditions for Verities received from God. Now then let us return to our Capital City of London and we shall find the whole Nation though of different Parties Interests and Judgments agreeing that there is in England such a Capital City as London but yet we find half the whole Christian World utterly denying many Traditions of the Church of Rome to be Verities received from God and in particular that of the Pope's Supremacy without which the Church of Rome neither doth nor can pretend to be the whole Church Catholick Now this denial of her pretended Traditions by so many Churches professing a like Veneration for those Traditions which are truly Primitive must prove as strongly that the Traditions of the Church of Rome are falsly so called as her Assertion can be supposed to prove them Divine Verities Again whereas there are no universally received Records which give us the least cause to doubt whether there be such a City as London c. the Records of the Scriptures Councils and Fathers of the Church cause many Myriads to believe the Doctrines and Practices peculiar to the Roman Church are so far from being Apostolical Traditions that they
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not to swear either in Falshood or in Truth but only to say yea yea and nay nay Gregory Nazianzen observes that an Oath is forbidden 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only to us Christians In the Fifth Century St. Chrysostom is very copious on this Subject In Matth. 5.34 For he informs us that it was said to them of old Thou shalt not forswear thy self but speak the Truth when thou swearest but Christ commanded not to swear at all 2. That to keep us farther from swearing by God he saith Swear not by Heaven which is his Throne 3. That Christ by saying What is more than this cometh of Evil meaneth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 swearing not forswearing for it is a thing confessed and no Man needs to learn it That false swearing is of Evil nor is it only more than yea and nay but contrary to them 4. That though swearing was allowed by the Law yet was it evil because it was allowed only by reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Weakness of them who received the Law to keep them from swearing by Idols And 5. That though then it were not evil yet now is it evil and very evil after so much Philosophy 6. That we must not pretend that we swear truly Hom. 15. in Gen. p 96. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it is not lawful to swear true or false let us therefore keep our Mouths pure from Oaths 7. That if we reverence nothing else we should reverence that Gospel we hold forth when we bid Men swear for opening it you will find Tom. 6. Statu ar Orat. 15. p. 565. saith he Swear not at all and dost thou make that Law an Oath which forbiddeth thee to swear When therefore thou art about to adjure any one restrain thy self P. 566. and say to him who is about to swear What shall I do God hath forbid me to adjure he now restrains me and this will be sufficient for the Honour of the Lawgiver for thy Security and to affright him who is about to Swear We find saith Theodoret in the Laws of the Gospel Qu. 37. in Geu p. 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Swearer though he swears true to be of the Portion of the Devil He swears himself That he would not the Death of a Sinner Ep. 78. p. 949. Tom. 4. Dial. 1. p. 23. Fab. Haer. l. 5. c. 16. Adv. Graecos Serm. 9. p. 621. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who forbids others to swear And again He that forbids others to swear interposeth an Oath The Old Law saith the same Theodoret forbids Perjury 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the New forbids an Oath Our Lord making Laws about Oaths 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wholly forbids them If thou art a Christian saith Isidore Pelusiota L. 1. Ep. 155. and under the good Pastor obey his Voice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commanding thee not to swear at all and if we must not swear neither must we exact an Oath God saith St. Jerom permitted the Jews as being Children to swear as he permitted them to offer Sacrifice not that they did well in it In Matth. 5. but that it was better to swear by God than Idols Evangelica autem veritas non recipit juramentum but the Evangelical Truth permits not an Oath In Zach. 8. f. 115. b. And again Our Lord commandeth in the Gospel Ut non juretis penitus That you swear not at all Jussit salvator noster ut Christiani homines non jurarent De Gubern dei l. 3. p. 88. Act. Concil Const Act. 1. Tom. 2. p. 129. Our Lord saith Salvian commanded that Christian Men should not swear And the Council of Constantinople under the Patriarch Flavianus adds That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are commanded by our Saviour Christ not to swear Now here I ask Whether all these plain Testimonies be sufficient to prove that it was once the Doctrine of this whole Church of Christ That swearing was wholly unlawful and forbidden by those Words of Christ on which they bottom this Assertion If this be granted then seeing it is evident that the present Church holds and by her Practice doth approve the contrary Doctrine it must be granted that her present Belief or Practice can be no just Evidence or Proof of what was the Belief and Practice of all the former Ages But if these Testimonies give not sufficient Evidence that this was then their Faith and the received Interpretation of the Text then let the Romanists permit us to deny their Doctrines and Traditions till they have proved them to be primitive by more clear numerous and early Testimonies and we ask no more For then they vainly must attempt to prove that any Text in Controversy betwixt us and them hath by Tradition been interpreted against the Protestants it being certain that no such Testimonies can be produced for that Sence of any Scripture which we Protestants reject and if the Fathers after so many plain and frequent Attestations might practise and believe the contrary to the plain import of their Words in this particular why not in other Matters also And to what purpose is it to confirm a Doctrine or bottom an Assertion upon Two or Three Citations from those Fathers who are not to be credited it seems in what may be confirmed from Fifty of their plainest Testimonies and by the Suffrage of a General Council Thirdly Apol. 1. p. 55. p. 44. It was the current Doctrine of the Fathers for Three whole Centuries That the good Angels were transported with the Love of Women and begat Children of them which are those we now call Daemons or evil Spirits These are the very Words of Justin Martyr who flourished in the Second Century Adv. Haer. l. 4. c. 70. p. 412. Paedag. l. 3. c. 2. Strom. l. 3. p. 450. l. 5. p. 550. Irenaeus who flourished in the same Century saith That Angeli transgressores commixti fuerunt eis the Angels which transgressed mixed with them And Clemens of Alexandria thrice informs us that they fell from Heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through Incontinence and Love of Women In the Third Century Athenagoras informs us Legat. pro. Christianis p. 27 28. That some of the Angels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lusting after Virgins and being overcome of the Flesh begat Gyants of them and that these Angels and the Souls of these Gyants are the Daemons which wander about the World. And in saying this I speak 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing saith he without Testimony but only expound De Virg. vel c. 7. de cult faem l. 1. c. 2. de Idol cap. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is mentioned by the Prophets Tertullian saith That they rushed down from Heaven Ad Filias hominum to the Daughters of Men and thence he calls them Desertors of God and Amatores Faeminarum lovers of Women St. Cyprian twice informs us De Idol van p.
only trifle with us or impose upon us when she makes Agreement either in Doctrine or Practice with Antiquity a Note or Character by which we may discern the true Church from all who falsly do pretend unto that glorious Title for how can this be done Yea how is it attempted to be done by Roman Catholicks but by producing the Testimonies of all former Ages for such a Doctrine or Practice as they at present do maintain If therefore a like Number of plain Testimonies produced by us in all the Instances forenamed for the Antiquity of our Doctrines and Practices be not a Proof sufficient on our side why should it be on theirs If notwithstanding all these Evidences we must believe the contrary to what they clearly do import to have been still the Doctrine and Practice of all Ages past because it is at present the Doctrine of the Church of Rome to what end do we read Antiquity What Service can it do us unless to make us Hereticks or Scepticks For of what can we be certain or assured by the reading of it if that may be false and heretical which through so many Ages is so plainly fully and frequently delivered as the clearest Truth To proceed then to my second Vndertaking viz. To shew how such a Change in Doctrine and in Practice might happen in the Western Church as well as in the East or other places First Corruptions in Doctrine or in Practice § 6 might have been introduced by mistaking of the Sense of Scripture This Account Origen gives of the diversity of Opinions and Sects which sprang up early among Christians and multiplied together with them In Celsum l. 3. p. 118. viz. That they had their Original from hence That Men did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 diversly interpret those Scriptures which they all held to be Divine Vigilius ascribes these Sects L 2. contra Eutych and this diversity of Opinions to the same Original viz. That the Virtue of the heavenly Words was defiled vitio malae intelligentiae by a misunderstanding of them and by taking them non secundum qualitatem sui sensus not according to the tenor of their Sence as Truth required but by diverting them to other Matters To this the Fathers do ascribe not only the Miscarriage of Hereticks but even the Slips and Errors of those pious Persons who had gone before them which say they happened to them by reading of the Scriptures carelesly and not with so much Diligence and Circumspection as they should have used Thus Theodoret upon occasion of that Mistake of almost all the Fathers of the Four first Centuries imagining that the Sons of God which went in to the Daughters of Men were Angels saith Qu. 47. in Gen. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That it was their careless reading of the holy Scriptures which made many thus to erre and all the Fathers with one Voice ascribe the Heresies of their times partly to their perverting and partly to their deserting of the Holy Scriptures and therefore for preventing of the like Mistakes they do not send them to an infallible Interpreter nor do they hence conclude him necessary as some others do but only do advise them to read the Scriptures with more Care Exactness and Scrutiny with Prayer Chrys Hom. 17. in Matth. p. 124. Basil Tom. 1. l. 2. de Bapt. q. 4. Orig. dial contr Marc. p. 70. Athan. de incar verbi T. 1. p. 110. Love and Desire of the Truth with a pure Soul and care to walk according to the Rules of Christian Vertue assuring those who do thus seek That according to our Lord's Promise Theodoret in 3. Rom. 8. they shall find the Truth Chrysost Hom. 35. in Joh. T. 2. P. 799. vid. T. 3. P. 1. Tom. 5. p. 829. it being not the Obscurity but the Ignorance of Scripture which makes men obnoxious to Heresies as shall by God's Assistance be fully proved elsewhere And whosoever doth consider that many of the Fathers came immediately from Heathenism to read the Scriptures That they insisted most on the Old Testament of which they did not understand the Language and of which they had only an imperfect or corrupt Translation and that they took the liberty to allegorize and to give mystical Interpretations of them as their luxuriant Phancies led them to it will not think it strange that so many extravagant Interpretations of the holy Scriptures should drop from their Pens Cypr. Ep. 63. p. 149. That they should tell us that Noah 's being drunk with Wine was Sacramentum figura Dominicae passionis A Sacrament and Figure of our Saviour's Passion That (a) Just M. Dial cum Tryph. p. 349. Clem. Alex. Strom. 6. p. 669. Orig. in Cels l. 5. p. 236. Com. in Joh. To. 2. Ed. Huet p. 48. Euseb demonstr l. 4. c. 9. p. 157. God not only permitted the Gentiles to worship the Sun Moon and Stars but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gave them the Sun Moon and Stars to be worshiped that they might not be wholly Atheists That when our Lord threatned to the disobedient Jews (b) Iren. l. 4. c. 23. Tertull adv Jud. c. 11 13. Cypr. adv Jud. l. 2. c. 20. Lactant. l. 4. c. 18. Epiphan Haer. 24. §. 9. Athanas de incarn verbi p. 47 90. Orat. 3. contr Arian p. 386. Ruffin apud Hieron T. 4. F. 49 Non video cur dubitare debeamus id illum de Christo scripsisse August contr Faust Manich. l. 16. c. 22.23 Deut. 28.66 thy Life shall hang in doubt before thee And thou shalt have no Assurance of thy Life he meant that Jesus Christ should be crucified before their Eyes That they should from those Words of the Psalmist Psal 45.1 (c) Quidam superstitiose magis quam vere ex persona patris arbitrantur intelligi Hieron ep ad Damasum Tom. 3. F. 45. B. Quidam ex persona patris dictum intelligi volunt Ep. ad Principium Virg. ibid. F. 37. A. viz. Alexander Episc Alex. Socr. Hist Eccl. l. 1 c. 6. Athanas To. 1. p. 134 170. c. 427. D. 510. c. 517. D. 538 c. 549 550 565. D. Marcellus apud Epiph. Haer. 72. §. 2. My Heart hath indited a good Matter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 infer the eternal Generation of the Son That some of them so early Mal. 3.1 should imagine that the (d) Orig. in Joh. Tom. 5. ed. Huet p. 77. Cyril com in 1 Joh. 6. Baptist was an Angel not a Man because the Prophet Malachi said Behold I send my Angel before his Face And that when John the Baptist sent this (e) Manda mihi ad infernum descensurus sum utrum te Inferis debeam nunciare qui nunciavi superis Hieron in loc Ep. T. 3. F. 54. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. com in Reg. p. 34. l. contr Marcion p. 37. Chrysost Hom. in Matth. 37. p. 247. Ruffin apud Hieron To. 4. p. 49. Theophyl in 11.
Paul 's Expression by commending themselves and their Doctrine to the Consciences of all Men. To shew the Prevalence of Men of Reputation in Matters of this Nature If as the Romanists do generally confess the Doctrine of the Millennium obtained almost generally in the Church from the Relation of one Papias a Man of very slender Intellectuals If as Eusebius informs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 39. most of the Churchmen embraced that Sentiment by his Authority pleading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great Antiquity of the Man If one Agrippinus as they also tell us could prevail over all Africa to receive Hereticks by Baptism If Origen could deserve to be condemned in the Fifth and the Sixth Synods as an Heretick and yet whilst he lived Hieron in Verbo Origenes Socrat Hist Eccl. l. 4. c. 26. Hieron Prolog in l. 2. com in Micham Pamphil. Apol. Orig. praefat in libr. nom Hebr. T. 3. f. 12. could by his Learning and his Piety prevail to be had summo in honore in the highest Reputation to obtain after his Death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 great Glory throughout all the Christian World insomuch that he was very grateful cunctis prudentibus to all wise Men and did for many Years obtain the Title of Magister Ecclesiae The Master or Teacher of the Church If the Authority of Jerom could prevail to have his Translation of the Old Testament received against the Judgment of the Universal Church If one St. Austin could introduce into the Church the Belief of the Ascension of the Blessed Virgin though none of the Fathers who had as good Opportunity to know and as much Reason to believe it spake one Tittle of it I say if all these things are so how can it be conceived a thing incredible That Popes Patriarchs and Councils and other Persons of great Authority and Vogue in their respective Ages should have had like Influence to introduce new Doctrines and Practices into the Church under pretence of Piety or the Authority of Scriptures or the Holy Fathers or some like plausible Account Theodor. Lector l. 2. p 566. Niceph. Hist Eccl. l. 15. c. 18. Why might not Petrus Gnaphaeus Patriarch of Antioch bring Invocation of Saints into the Prayers of the Church in the Fifth Century Pope Gregory introduce Purgatory in the Sixth Boniface the Third Paulus Diac. de Gest Longobard l. 4. c. 11. obtain from Phocas the Title of Caput omnium Ecclesiarum The Head of the Universal Church in the Seventh The Second Nicene Council introduce Image-Worship in the Eighth Paschasius give Rise to Transubstantiation in the Ninth Lombard and Hugo de S to Victore fix the Number of Seven Sacraments in the Twelfth And Pope Hadrian the Third introduce the Adoration of the Host in the Thirteenth Century Again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 12. Soz. H. Eccl. l. 1. c. 23. If one Paphnutius could by his Reason and Authority prevail with the First Nicene Council to rescind their intended Decree touching the Celibacy of Priests If Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople could abolish the Custom of repairing to an established Penitentiary for the disclosing secret Sins and that with the ensuing Approbation of almost all the Catholick Bishops of the Church In a Word if so many Practices and Customs relating to the Discipline and to the Sacraments of the Church could be entirely altered and rejected in the following Ages as is here partly proved and by the Learned on both sides confessed why might not other Practices and Doctrines which obtained in the more pure and early Ages of the Church run the same Fate and by the same Authority and Methods be discarded For as it is judiciously observed by the Lord Faulkland when the Reasons offered for or against a Practice have in them some Appearance of Truth or Probability as they may have to many Persons though they be not valid when the Persons Authorizing or Approving them are of great Authority or Credit in the Church as they may be especially in darker Ages and yet be subject to great Errors and when the People upon whom these Doctrines or Practices are pressed have either a great Veneration and Esteem for those that press them or a great Dread of them then meet together most of those things which tend to work Perswasion or prevail for an Assent unto the Doctrine and a Compliance with the Practice recommended Seeing then Not. in Concil Clar. Can. 28. conc To. 10. p. 582. as Petrus de Marca doth inform us the Approbation of the half Communion by Thomas Aquinas made others certatim amplecti hanc sententiam to embrace greedily the same Opinion why might not others of as good Authority and Credit be instrumental to produce like Changes in other Constitutions of the Church Fourthly § 10 Old Doctrines and Practices might easily be changed and new obtain by reason of the corrupt Manners of the Clergy and by their Example of the People And that 1. Because such evil Practices deprive the Clergy of that Spiritual Wisdom and Divine Assistance which is their best Conducter into the Way of Truth and is their chief Preservative from dangerous Delusions and pernicious Errors Wisd 1.4 For as the Book of Wisdom saith Into a malicious Soul Wisdom will not enter nor dwell in the Body that is subject unto Sin. St. De Judicio dei To. 2. p. 393. Basil grievously laments the Discords and Contentions the perverse Doctrines and Opinions which had prevailed in his time amongst 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Rulers of the Church of God by which they verified the Prediction of St. Paul Acts 20.30 That from Christians themselves should proceed Men speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them And this he doth resolve into their Rejection of God their true and only King their Departure from the Laws of Christ and chusing rather to rule others in contradiction to the Commands of Christ than to be ruled by him By which things saith he they have render'd themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 394. unworthy of the Government of the Lord. Clemangis is still more express and Argumentative in this Particular Super Materia Conc. Gen. p. 71. For with them saith he is the Spirit those he directs and brings to a salutary End who have prepared for him within themselves an Habitation worthy of him and by good Works have render'd themselves worthy of his Inspiration and Visitation but how can he hear visit and enlighten them who are Adversaries to him and when they cannot do it in themselves endeavour to extinguish him in others and are inflamed not with the Fire of Love but with the Ardor of Ambition For with Hypocrites and self-Seekers the Holy Spirit is not wont to be present but to fly from them as his Enemies according to that saying of the Book of Wisdom the Holy Spirit of Discipline
it seems generally to have prevailed in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries yet doth it plainly seem to contradict the Testimony of the Holy Scriptures which teach That when the days of her Purification were accomplished Luk. ij 22 23 Puram aperiens vulvam according to the Law of Moses they brought him to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord as it is written in the Law of the Lord Every Male that openeth the Womb shall be called holy to the Lord. L. 4. c. 66. In partu suo nupsit ipsa patefacti corp lege Lib. de Carne Christi c. 23. vid. etiam c. 4. 20. Hom. 14. in Lucam Tom. 2. f. 101. According to the import of which Scripture Irenaeus doth expresly teach That our Lord at his Birth opened the Womb of the Virgin. Tertullian adds That she was a Virgin as not having known Man but was no Virgin quantum a partu at her teeming her Womb being then opened according to that saying Every Male that openeth the Womb c. Origen That Matris domini to tempore vulva reserata est quo partus editus the Womb of the Mother of our Lord was opened when she brought forth her Son. Clemens of Alexandria evidently shews that this was in his time only the saying of some Men attending to the Fable of the false Gospel of St. James That the Midwives after her delivery found by Inspection that she was a Virgin and that others held the contrary for saith he It seemed to many and yet seemeth that Mary was by the Birth of her Son a Woman properly delivered of a Child though she was not Strom. l. 7. p. 756. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Woman properly delivered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for some say that being inspected by the Midwives after the Birth of her Son she was found a Virgin. De Incarn l. 14 cap. 6. §. 1. He respects saith Petavius the Old Wife's Tale invented by some idle Trifler which we find in Suidas and in the Proto-Evangelium S. Jacobi which I could wish he had no otherwise related than by way of Contempt and Derision Thus we learn upon what Grounds this was believed by him against the Opinion of many others St. Basil grounds this Opinion upon another Story of like nature De human Christi Gener. Tom. 1. p. 509. The Story of Zacharias saith he proves that the Virgin Mary was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an entire Virgin for it is derived to us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from Tradition that Zacharias was slain between the Porch and the Altar for saying Qui hujusmodi Traditioni non credunt that Mary was a Virgin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the Birth of our Lord. Origen delivers the same thing in the like words In Matt. Hom. 26. f. 49. b. In Matth. 23.35 Venit ad nos Traditio quaedam Such a Tradition hath come down to us And Theophylact 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We have it from Tradition and yet Origen in the same place confesseth that this Tradition was not believed by others In locum and Jerom saith That it came Ex Apocryphorum Somniis From apocryphal Dreams and adds That Quia de scripturis non habet autoritatem eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur Because it hath no Authority from Scripture it is as easily condemned as approved of And thus we see the rise of this Tradition which afterwards prevailed over the Christian World. 3ly § 5 That our Lord lived above Fourty if not to Fifty Years Sicut Evangelium omues seniores testantur qui in Asia apud Joannem Discipulum Domini convenerunt id ipsum tradidisse eis Joannem L. 2. c. 39. is the express Assertion of Irenaeus and for this he produceth the Testimony of the Gospel and of all the Elders of the Church who met S. John the beloved Disciple of our Lord in Asia and declared that he delivered to them the same thing yea saith he some of them saw not only John but the rest of the Apostles and heard the same things from them testantur de hujusmodi Relatione and testifie the truth of the Relation To say with Feuardentius upon the place that he might have had this from Papias is a very unlikely thing for he speaks not of the Testimony of one Man but of all the Seniors not of Men who had never seen the Apostles as Papias had not but of them who had he cites not Papias as in the Case of the Millennium he did here therefore is a solemn Declaration of a Tradition received from the Mouth of the Apostles and attested by all the Seniors and yet so far from being in the Gospel as is pretended that by the Gospel it may be evidently confuted so far from being owned as such in after Ages that upon a very slight Ground even the saying of the Prophet Isaiah Vid. Feuard in Iren. p. 46. 188. That Christ was sent to Preach the Acceptable Year of the Lord many of the Fathers took up a contrary Opinion that our Lord Suffered in the Fifteenth Year of Tiberius and preached One Year only When Jesus came to his Baptism saith Clemens of Alexandria 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Strom. 1. p. 340. he was about Thirty Years old and that he was to Preach but One Year is thus written He sent me to Preach the Acceptable Year of the Lord this both the Prophet and the Gospel according to the plain meaning of the Words averr say some in Origen Hom. 32. in Luk. f. 111. That our Lord Preached the Gospel but one Year and that on this account it was said Cap. 8. that he was sent to Preach the Acceptable Year of the Lord. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L 1. c. 1. p. 16. Tertullian in his Book against the Jews saith That Christ suffered annos habens quasi triginta being about Thirty Years Old. Lactantius Africanus and others cited by Feuardentius say the same And yet this was no better than an Opinion first invented by the Gnosticks as we learn from Irenaeus and for which they produced the same Text and 't is as easily confuted by the Enumeration of the Passovers our Saviour Celebrated after his Baptism and before his Death Now if a Tradition could so generally obtain in the Fifth Century which had its rise from Fabulous Legends and Apocryphal Dreams against plain Words of Scripture and plain Assertions of the Fathers living in the former Centuries as that of our Lords coming out of the Womb of the Virgin without opening of it did why might not other Traditions pretended by some later Councils and the Church of Rome be of like nature Why may we not credit the Council of Frankford In lib. Carol. p. 3. c. 30. declaring that the Second Nicene Council for their pretended Tradition of Image-Worship had recourse ad Apocryphas quasdam risu dignas naenias to Apocryphal and Ridiculous Tales Comment
in 2. ad Tim. p. 155. Or Espencaeus a Romanist confessing that they defended it daemonum Spectris muliebribus Somniis with diabolical Apparitions and old Wife's Dreams especially when as he there saith this we see in the very Synod which approves and urgeth in confirmation of it the Tale of Constantine's Leprosy and of his Baptism by Pope Sylvester Def. Constant contr Baril c. 10 11. adversus Spalat c. 65. p. 458 459. and of the Images of Paul and Peter produced then to him the Tale of the Image sent to Agbarus of the Passion of the Image of Christ at Beryth and that infamous Tale of the old Fornicating Monk all confuted and exposed by Learned Crakanthorp and a late * Cap. 5. p. 22 23. excellent Discourse of the Second Nicene Council If Irenaeus could so early pretend to a Testimony of all the Elders of the Church of Asia for a matter of apparent falshood if others in the Second and Third Century could frame a contrary Doctrine from such a weak allusion to a Prophetick Saying I hope the saying of One or Two Doctors in the following Ages cannot be reasonably supposed to amount to any certain proof of the Traditions or Doctrines derived from the Apostles And if their Testimonies in such Cases in which they are most properly Testators or Relaters of Church History and of Traditions received from the Elders of the Church prove so uncertain and so alien from Truth less Credit must be given to them in those Articles of Faith or Doctrines of Manners in which they only give their Judgment without pretending to Apostolical Tradition for the Truth of what they say The Patrons of Oral Tradition confessing and declaring that they rely not on them as Doctors and Divines but as Witnesses of Tradition only Moreover it is the constant Opinion of the Fathers § 6 since the Fourth Century that our Saviour twice penetrated with his Body through the Doors where the Disciples were assembled Joh. 20.19 26. Vid Maldonat in locum because he came twice to them saith St. John The Doors being shut and stood in the midst of them Whereas 't is evident that this Phrase doth not inferr this Penetration any more than my saying I came into the College the Gates being shut imports that with my Body I pierced through the College Gates It doth not in the least inforce us to conclude that our Lord did not by his power open the Doors or come in any other way And whosoever seriously considers the circumstances of the Text will find good Reason to believe that Christ did not thus penetrate through the Doors as they imagined for the Apostle doth inform us ver 20. that Christ when he was come among them shewed them his Hands and his Feet he therefore purposely appeared to convince them that he was risen in the same Body in which he Suffered and which he laid down in the Sepulchre They saith St. Luke were troubled at his Appearance Luk. xxiv 38 39. and thought that they had seen a Spirit to remove which Imagination our Lord speaks to them thus Why are ye troubled and why do such Reasonings rise up in your Hearts see my Hands and my Feet that it is I my self handle me and see for a Spirit hath not Flesh and Bones as you see I have St. John informs us that his second Appearance when the Doors were shut was designed particularly to convince St. Thomas of the same Truth and to confirm the Resurrection of his proper Body to him He speaks thus Reach hither thy Finger Joh. â—x 27. and behold my Hands and reach hither thy Hand and thrust it into my Side and be not faithless but believing whereas had Christ penetrated with his Body through the Doors at both these Appearances and so had entred in to them after the manner not of a Body but a Spirit he had done that which must have stagger'd their Faith at the same time that he designed to confirm them in it For notwithstanding any thing they seemed to see or feel they could not well believe he had true Flesh and Bones and was no Spirit had they believed and known he even then had thus penetrated through their Doors and therefore had done that which only Spirits and no true Flesh and Bones could do And if you here referr this Action with the Fathers to Christ's Almighty Power why might not his Disciples if they did the like mistrust that by the self-same power he who did this might make that Body which appeared to them seem to have Flesh and Bones and Prints of Wounds when it had not When our Roman Doctors shall have answered this Scruple Pseudo-Justin Nazianz. Chrysostom St. Jerom Austin Euthymius Apud Maldonatum in Matth. xxviij 2. I shall pay greater Reverence to the Authority of the Fathers of the Fourth and the ensuing Centuries touching this matter but till then I shall continue as much to Scruple Christ's penetration with his Body through the Doors as I do that other fine Invention of some of the same Fathers that our Lord's Body at his Resurrection penetrated through the Stone of the Sepulchre But besides all these Instances there are two celebrated in Church-History which are abundantly sufficient to discover the uncertainty of the pretences to Tradition in such Cases even according to the Judgment of most Learned Romanists The First is the known Story of the Phoenix § 7 that solitary Bird which hath no other of its Kind and which is propagated only by a Worm arising out of its burnt Ashes P. 34 35. De Resur Carn c. 13. Catech. 18. p. 213 214. Ancorat c. 85. as is related in the first Century by Clemens Romanus in his Epistle to the Corinthians which used to be publickly read in the Church By Tertullian in the Third Century In the Fourth Century by Cyril of Jerusalem who saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clemens and many others did relate it and bids us not disbelive it Epiphanius not only introduceth it as a thing whose Fame had come to many of the Faithful but he triumphs over the Jews with this Question Physic c. 11. Why should you not believe our Lord's Resurrection in Three days 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when a Bird was restored to Life in Three Days St. Ambrose saith De fide Resur p. 39. vide etiam Hexam l. 5. c. 23. in Ps 118. p. 565. Hoc relatione crebra Scripturarum Authoritate cognovimus We know this by frequent Relation and by the Authority of the Scriptures which he saith as being of the number of those Fathers who applied that Saying of the Psalmist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Just shall flourish as a Palm-Tree Ps xcij. 12. to this Bird because the same Greek word signifies both a Palm-Tree and a Phoenix Dion p. 49. Renasci Constat apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 47. b. L. 5. c. 7. p. 246. Carmen de
Phoen. Tom. 4. f. 54. Synesius saith That by the coming of this Bird the Aegyptians measured 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Circuit of their Times he coming as the Story saith once only in Five hundred Years Ruffinus in his Symbol mentions this as a thing certain The Constitutions stiled Apostolical The Verses which pass under the Name of Lactantius The Epistle under the Name of Jerome to Praesidius say the same thing And yet this Story is deservedly now rejected by the best Writers of the Church of Rome Const Apost Lact. ubi sup Epiph. Hieron ibid. And whosoever considers the Heathenism mixed with it viz. That this Bird comes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Altar of the Sun and doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pray to the Sun and when she is to be consumed she goes to the Priest of Heliopolis and enters with him into the Temple that the new Bird which ariseth out of her Ashes Epiph. Phys c. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saluteth the same Pagan Priest and taking up the Bones of her Consumed Parent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lays them upon the Altar of the Sun. I say Whosoever well considers of these things Not. in Clem. P. 90. will find sufficient cause to say with Cotelerius Mirum cunctis Christianis non suboluisse fraudem ob Paganismum fabellae permistum It is to be wondered that the Paganism mixed with this Fable discovered not the Cheat unto all Christians The Second is the Story of the Cells of the Septuagint § 8 in which they are said to have been severally placed when they Translated the Old-Testament from the Hebrew into Greek and yet to have performed this Translation all in the same words This Justin Martyr having related useth these words Exhort ad Graec. p. 13 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These things we report to you Gentiles not as Fables or as seigned Stories but as a received Tradition delivered to us by the Inhabitants of the Place L. 3. c. 25. Irenaeus having told the same History concludes thus Firma est non ficta quae secundum nos est sides manifestam ostensionem habens ex his Scripturis Our Faith is firm and not seigned having manifest demonstration from these Scriptures Strom. 1. P. 342. Catech. 4. p. 37. De Mensur p. 160 161 163. Clemens Alexandrinus St. Cyril of Jerusalem and Epiphanius among the Greek Fathers expresly affirm the same thing touching these Cells or their Interpretation of Scripture in the very same words though separated one from the other Tertullian speaks De sententiae Communione Apol. c. 18. Of this conspiring in their Sentiments as an Evidence of a divine Providence assisting them And St. De C.D. l. 18. c. 42 43. Austin is express both for their separate Interpretation and their exact Agreement in the words And all these Fathers hence conclude that this Interpretation was performed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. Spiritu codem assistente qui in Prophetis erat quando illa dixerunt by divine Power and Inspiration by the same Holy Spirit which enabled the Prophets to indite these Scriptures And they who do not speak expresly of these Circumstances do notwithstanding generally acknowledge that their Interpretation was Prophetical and Divine Eusebius saith Praepar Evan. L. 8. c. 1. That it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Interpretation ordered by God it was done by them saith St. Hilary Prolog in Psalm p. 635. Spirituali Coelesti scientia with Spiritual and Heavenly Knowledge Praefat. in Psalm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not without Divine Inspiration saith Theodoret and that by reason of the great Symphony which was in their Interpretations And yet these things delivered with so great consent of Ancient Fathers and contradicted only by Saint Jerom who upon that account hardly escaped their Censure are now rejected by the most learned Romanists as false and incredible De verbo Dei l. 2. c. 6. §. haec sententia For as for the Story of the Cells Bellarmine saith That the Jews might easily impose on Justin Martyr Fabulam à se confictam a Fable feigned by themselves and it might as easily happen that aliqui posteriores fidem habuerint Justino Notae in Epiph de Mens Pond p. 378. That some succeeding Fathers should give credit unto Justin That Story of the Cells saith Petavius aegre admodum fidem obtinet is scarcely credible Mr. Du Pin declares Nov. Biblioth part 1. dissert praelim p. 82 88. This is une fiction des Juifs to which the Fathers above-named yielded their assent F. Simon saith That all which the Fathers have said of the Seventy Interpreters excepting some few things seigned afterwards by the Jews were taken out of Aristaeus Disq Crit. c. 15. p. 109. whom all judicious Criticks now judge Spurious and having objected against himself Patrum omnium Autoritatem the Authority of all the Fathers he answers That we are not so much in this matter to consider Ibid. quid a Patribus dictum fuerit what the Fathers said as what Reasons they had to say so and that Jerom did not scruple to oppose himself contra communem Patrum sententiam against the common Opinion of the Fathers about the Cells to Laugh at Justin for it as a simple Man and to say roundly Nescio quis primus auctor Septuaginta Cellulas mendacio suo exstruxit I know not who was the first Author of the Lye. As for the Second Point touching their Inspiration Parum abfuit quin ab Ecclesia tanquam Novator ejiceretur C. 16. p. 129 130. or Divine Assistance in this work he confesseth that Vossius in that Assertion that they were thus inspired Sibi consentientes habet Patres omnes si unum exceperis Hieronymum Had all the Fathers on his side excepting Jerom and as for him he narrowly escaped being cast out of the Church as an Innovator for denying it and yet saith he the Judgment of St. Jerom and the Grave Authors of our Age is to be preferred C. 14. p. 115. for the Fathers being only skill'd in Greek and Latin de rebus sibi incognitis quidquam certi definire non potuerunt could say nothing certain of things unknown to themselves indeed saith he in matters of Faith the consent of the Doctors of the Church hath in it something of Divine C. 16. p. 130. at ille cordatus non est nec religiosus but he is not sincere or Religious who in things which are not of Faith fears to depart from the Sentence of the Fathers and had rather believe other Mens Writings than his own Eyes and Experience And he concludes with these remarkable Words C. 14. p. 116. Censurae Hieronymi Patronam se praebuit Ecclesia Romana dum relicta Septuaginta Interpretum Versione quae per tot annos universum orbem catholicum sola occupaverat Hieronymianam recens cusam
Virgin-Mother of God must come into the Severity of Judgment who dares wish to be judged by God. In the Fifth Century St. Chrysostom informs us That both our Lord's Brethren In Matt. Hom. 27. p. 191. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 44. p. 287. and his Mother 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 laboured under some humane infirmity being desirous of vain Glory that she was guilty of vain Glory that both She and his Brethren were guilty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of an excessive Love of Honour and that therefore our Lord blamed them and that because they came to him as a meer Man and out of vain Glory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he casts out the Disease not reproaching but correcting them and that he gave her a reproof very becoming him P. 639. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and profitable to her In his Twenty first Homily on St. John he charges her with being guilty of hindering the things of God and interrupting of her Son in Spiritual things Consider saith he what a thing it was for her when the People stood about him and were desirous to hear him and his Instructions were propounded to them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. for her to come to draw him from his Exhortations to speak in private with him and not so much as to vouchsafe to come in to him therefore he saith who is my Mother not dispising her that begat him but doing her much profit and not permitting her to think so meanly of him Cyril of Alexandria saith That the Passion of our Lord which happen'd so unexpectedly Tom 4. p. 1064 1065 1066. Vid. eundem orat in occursum Domini p. 391. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 1064. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did likely scandalize her and put her somewhat besides her self into indecent Passions For doubt not saith he but she had some such reasonings within her self as these I conceived him who is now laugh'd at on the Cross perhaps he was deceived in saying he was the true Son of God. He saying I am the Life how should he then be Crucified How was he taken in the Snares of his Murtherers How is it that he prevailed not against the Machinations of his Persecutors Why doth not he who restored Lazarus to Life and filled all Judaea with his Miracles descend now from the Cross 'T is very probable that the Women kind being ignorant of the Mystery might fall into such apprehensions as these were We speak not these things out of vain Conjectures as it may seem to some but we are moved to suspect these things of the Mother of our Lord by what is written for that sharp brunt of Passion which cast her mind into absurd Imaginations is that which Simeon calls a Sword. Nor saith he is it to be wondered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 1065. if a Woman should thus slide at the apprehension of our Lords Passion seeing St. Peter who was preferred before the rest of the Apostles was scandalized at it And lastly he declares P. 1066. That Christ did therefore commit her to the care of the Evangelist St. John because he saw that she had fallen by scandal at his Passion and was filled with disorder in her Apprehensions that he might rightly declare unto her the profoundness of the Mystery The Author of the Questions of the Old and New Testament which passeth under the Name of Austin saith Qu. 73. That Simeon spake unto her thus A Sword shall pass through thy own Soul to signifie this to her that even she in morte Domini dubitaret should doubt when she saw the Death of Christ though she should be confirmed by his Resurrection Here therefore is a Tradition of the Church built upon the received Sence of Scripture for three whole Centuries no Father contradicting in the least what was so fully and perspicuously delivered in those Ages and yet if we must credit the present Church of Rome the contrary to this Tradition and to this received Interpretation of those Scriptures on which they grounded this Tradition must be an Article of Faith received throughout all Ages of the Church Again the Decree of the Apostles § 6 which commands the Gentiles to abstain from things strangled and from Blood Act. 15. was conceived by the generality of Christians for a Thousand Years to be obliging to all Christians The Canon of the Apostles saith Can 63. That if any Bishop Presbyter or Deacon or any other of the Clergy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth eat Flesh with the Life-Blood in it or what is killed by a Beast or dieth of it self let him be deposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this the Law hath forbidden if he be a Lay-man let him be separated from Communion In the Second Century the Christians were accused of eating Infants and Feasting upon humane Flesh and Blood now to this Accusation the constant Answer of the Christians was that of Blandina in Eusebius Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 1. p. 159. How should they eat such things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who do not think it lawful to eat the Blood of Beasts Paedag. l. 2. c. 1. p. 149. And Clemens of Alexandria declares That God forbad things strangled or dying of themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 3. c. 3. p. 228. for it is not lawful to touch them and that it is not lawful for Men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to touch Blood. In the Third Century to the like Accusation of the Heathens Tertullian returns this Answer Apol. c. 9. That they might be ashamed to object to them the eating humane Blood qui nec Animalium quidem sanguinem in Epulis esculentis habemus who used not to eat the Blood of Beasts least they should be defiled with any Blood received into their Bowels P. 34. Octavius saith We Christians are so far from eating humane Blood ut nec edulium pecorum sanguinem in cibis noverimus Contra Celsum l. 8. p. 396 397. that we eat not the Blood of Beasts we are forbid to eat things strangled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Blood being not separated from them saith Origen that we may not be fed with the Food of Daemons and hence we learn the reason of the precept 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning abstinence from Blood. In the Fourth Century was held the Council of Gangra against the Eustathians some of whom held cibos carnium tanquam illicitos repudiandos esse that Flesh was to be refused as unlawful where they pronounce Anathema to any person who condemns those that eat Flesh Can. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 excepting only such as ate Blood or things offered to Idols or strangled from which Exception it is evident that they held it sit to condemn them who did taste of Blood or of things strangled Now this Canon is in the Code of the Universal Church and is one of them which were Confirmed in the General Council of
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
being not writ by Paul. Now who they were who in this Century did upon this account reject it we learn more plainly from the Writers of the following Century For Eusebius informs us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 20. even in his time some of the Romans did reject it as being none of the Apostles Upon which place Valesius notes That it was the Custom of Eusebius to call all the Latins Romans and observes that Ruffinus thus Interprets this very passage Scio apud Latinos de ea quae ad Hebraeos inscribitur haberi dubitationem L. 3. c. 3. I know that the Latins doubt of the Epistle to the Hebrews The same Eusebius informs us Ep. ad Dard. Ep. Tom. 3. f. 24. a. that others did reject it with the Roman Church St. Jerom frequently affirms That eam Latina consuetudo non recipit the Latin Church did not receive it among the Canonical Scriptures Here then we see that they rejected for Two Centuries what afterwards they did unanimously receive as part of the Canon of the New Testament and so her Judgment alone can give us no assurance of the Books of the New Testament because through two whole Centuries she actually erred in her Judgment of them Hence also I inferr that the Church of Christ knew of no Obligation laid upon her in a division of Church Rulers touching any matter Exhort ad Martyr p. 232. to adhere to the Pope and Church of Rome and those which sided with them For in this very Case Origen in the Third Century offers to demonstrate against her that this was truly the Epistle of St. Paul And Jerom bluntly says Although the Latins do reject it yet do I receive it Tom. 3. f. 24. with the Greeks nequaquam hujus temporis consuetudinem sed veterum Scriptorum authoritatem sequens not following the Custom of this time among the Latins but the Authority of ancient Writers Fourthly I add § 17 That there is not the like necessity that any of these controverted Books should be received from the beginning by all Christians as Canonical as that the necessary Articles of Christian Faith and Manners should be received by all Christians For 1. The necessary Articles of Christian Faith and Rules of Christian Life were preached universally to all and so there was no time when any Christian could be ignorant of them without his own fault but the Epistles controverted were only sent to private Christians as the Second and Third Epistles of St. John or to the Churches of the Jews and therefore might with reason for some time be doubted of by other Churches of the Gentiles this being not a weakening but confirmation of our Faith that the first Christians were so careful to see sufficient Evidence before they would receive even the least Epistle into the Canon of the Scripture 2. No Christian Church could need to be told by any other what were the necessary Articles of Christian Faith or Rules of Life since they must always know the Christian Faith and be obliged to practise the Rules of Christian Piety and must be taught them by their Church Guides but 't is not thus with reference to these Epistles for being writ to a particular Society of Christians it was sufficient that this Society could shew De praescript c. 36. as saith Tertullian Authenticas literas corum the Authentick Letters of those Apostles which indited them and could testifie to those who doubted as St. Austin saith De Doctrin Christian l. 2. c. 8. quod ab ipsis Epistolas accipere meruerunt that they received these Epistles from them and read and owned them as their genuine Works when-ever this was done they who before did question them must have sufficient ground to own them as parts of the true Canon and till they had this Evidence they reasonably might continue to doubt of them 3. It is evident from the second Observation that the assured knowledge that these Epistles are Canonical cannot be necessary to Salvation the necessary Doctrines of Christian Faith being according to the general Tradition of the whole Church of Christ Chap. 7. §. 4 5 6 c. Ibid. § 2 3. comprised in the Apostles Creed and all the necessary Rules of Christian Piety being according to the same Tradition fully comprised in the Four Evangelists whereas the actual knowledge of all necessary Articles of Christian Faith and Rules of Christian Conversation must be always necessary there being no possibility of knowing or of doing acceptably the Will of God without them It will not therefore follow because such matters of Fact may for a time be doubtful in the Church matters of Faith may be so that because Churches may be Orthodox and reject some part of the Canon for a Season they may be Orthodox though they reject some necessary Article of Christian Faith. The Romanist I hope will not admit of these Conclusions The Greek Church might reject the Apocalypse and yet be Orthodox ergo she might reject the Trinity and yet be Orthodox The Latin Churches for a Season might reject the Epistle to the Hebrews without blame ergo they might reject the Resurrection of the Body without blame The whole Church did not formerly receive those Books into the Canon of the New Testament she now receives Ergo the whole Church did not formerly embrace those Articles of Faith which now she holds and yet all these conclusions are as good as those the Roman Doctors usually make for receiving all the Articles of Faith imposed at present by the Church of Rome as the Conditions of Communion upon her Testimony that they are such because we do receive the Canon of the New Testament from the Tradition of the Church Fifthly We shall see cause sufficient to embrace as certain § 18 and unquestionable that Canon of the New Testament we now receive notwithstanding any doubts some of the Ancients had touching some lesser portions of it if we consider 1. That most of the Fathers of the Fourth Century who give us Catalogues of the Scripture Canon and they especially who tell us they in making of it followed the suffrage of the Church and the Tradition of the Fathers do accord in giving of that very Catalogue we now receive and owning all those Catholick Epistles which were sometime controverted thus for instance Apud Balsamon p. 922. Athanasius reckoneth the Books of the New Testament as we do numbering as appertaining to the Canon Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul Seven Catholick Epistles and the Apocalypse and saying These are the Fountains of Salvation let no man add unto them or take from them And yet he doth profess to reckon them as they delivered them who were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word and as they by Tradition came down to him In his Synopsis he undertakes to reckon up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Canonical Books of the New Testament defined to be such
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
the Africans passed a severe Judgment on the Assertors of the contrary Opinion though they refused not Communion with them § 20. 6. That neither Stephen 's Opinion nor Saint Cyprian 's prevailed but the Church went a middle Way betwixt both § 21. Inferences 1. Hence it appears that the Doctors of the Western Churches are no good Judges of the Practices of the East § 22. 2. That in Matters of this obscurity the Custom of each Church is to be followed without breach of Peace § 23. 3. That in those Ages they knew nothing of the Pope's Supremacy or the Rule of the Guide of Controversies § 24. 4. That they belived what passed for Apostolical Tradition in the Church of Rome might be no such thing § 25. And Lastly That even in those early times Tradition Apostolical must falsly be pretended by great and many Churches § 26. FUrthermore we distinguish betwixt Traditions touching Points purely Doctrinal Dist 6th or Divine Revelations which concern matters of meer Belief as the Doctrine of the Millennium of the time of the Day of Judgment of Antichrist and what did hinder his Appearance and the like and Traditions touching points of Practice such as were the Observation of the Lord's Day the Superiority of Bishops over Presbyters the Ordination of Presbyters and Deacons by Bishops c. Touching the first kind we say That it is no sufficient evidence that they were Doctrines received from the Apostles that they have been asserted by after-Ages to be such it being evident both from Church History and the Confessions both of Protestants and Papists that in these matters the Fathers have been subject to mistakes in Doctrines not belonging to the Fundamentals of the Christian Faith but touching matters of Practice we say That we are ready to receive all such Traditions as have that Evidence that they were generally practised from the first and purest Ages of the Church which we are able to produce for observation of the first Day of the Week the Superiority of Bishops over Presbyters the Ordination of Presbyters and Deacons by Bishops and the like To give some Instances of the first kind First The Doctrine of the Millennium § 1 or the Reign of Saints on Earth a Thousand Years is now rejected by all Roman Catholicks and by the greatest part of Protestants and yet it passed amongst the best of Christians for Two hundred and Fifty Years for a Tradition Apostolical and as such is delivered by many Fathers of the Second and Third Century who speak of it as the Tradition of our Lord and his Apostles and of all the Ancients that lived before them who tell us the very words in which it was delivered the Scriptures which were then so Interpreted and say that it was held by all Christians that were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exactly Orthodox And 1. this is delivered by the Fathers of the Second and Third Centuries as a Tradition received from the Mouth of Christ and his Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 3. c. 39. Eusebius confesseth That Papias declared it to be the Doctrine of our Saviour handed down to him by unwritten Tradition Lib. 5. c. 33. Euseb H. Eccl. lib. 3. c. 39. Now of this Papias Irenaeus saith That he was an Hearer of St. John the Author of the Revelations He himself professeth that he only followed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 them who taught the Truth and who related 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Commands given by Christ himself and coming from the Truth it self 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. That he received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the words of the Apostles from those who followed them or conversed with them and only writ the things he had well learned and well remembred Eusebius moreover adds That his Relation touching the Tradition of the Millennium prevailed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with most of the Clergy that lived after him to entertain it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dial cum Tryph. p. 308. Justin Martyr speaking of the same Doctrine premiseth That he chose not to follow the Doctrines of Men but of God and the Doctrines delivered by him and then he adds That there was a Man among them named John one of Christ's Twelve Apostles who in his Revelations had foretold that the Faithful should reign with Christ a Thousand Years in Jerusalem Lib. 5. cap. 33. and that our Lord Christ said the same thing Presbyteri meminerunt qui Joannem Discipulum Domini viderunt audisse se ab illo quemadmodum de temporibus illis docebat Dominus Ibid. Irenaeus adds That the Seniors who saw St. John the Disciple of the Lord remembred how they had heard him say that he had heard our Lord Christ teach this Doctrine and then he doth repeat the very words in which Christ taught thus and tells us that he had them also from Papias the Friend of Polycarp Cap. 36. Hanc esse ad ordinationem dispositionem eorum qui salvuntur dicunt Presbyteri Apostolorum Discipuli ibid. adding That this according to the Seniors the Disciples of the Apostles is the Ordinance and the appointment concerning those that shall be saved and that our Lord taught this when he promised to drink New Wine with his Disciples in the Kingdom of God Hanc Ezechiel novit Apostolus Joannes vidit qui apud fidem nostram est novae Prophetiae sermo testatur Adv. Marcion l. 3. c. 24. and St. Paul when he said That the Creature should be freed from the Bondage of Corruption into the liberty of the Sons of God. As for the Kingdom promised to us after the Resurrection for a Thousand Years Ezechiel knew it saith Tertullian the Apostle John saw it and the new Word of Prophecy which we believe gives Testimony of it And if Gelasius Cyzicenus may be credited this was the Doctrine delivered by the Nicene Council in these words We expect new Heavens and new Earth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Hist Concil Nic. l. 2. c. 30. according to the Scriptures at the Appearance of the Kingdom of our Great God and Saviour Jesus Christ and then as Daniel saith the Saints of the most High shall receive a Kingdom and the Earth shall be pure and holy which David by the Eye of Faith foreseeing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith I believe to see the Goodness of the Lord in the Land of the Living and the Son of David Blessed are the Meek for they shall inherit the Earth These things we have established from the Ecclesiastical Constitutions most diligently framed by the Holy Fathers 2. They speak of this not as a probable Opinion but as a thing which they were certainly assured of We know saith Justin Martyr Dial. cum Trypk p. 307. the Resurrection of the Flesh and the Thousand Years in Jerusalem Predicta benedictio sine contradictione
such as want the Evidence of Reason to assure us of their Truth of the latter kind is the Tradition that Enoch and Elias are to appear as Christ's Fore-runners at the Day of Judgment § 1. This Tradition is very ancient and found no Contradiction in the Church § 2. It was also the general Tradition of the Jews that Elias was to come in Person before the first coming of their Messiah Ibid. And yet this is not countenanced but plainly is confuted by the Scriptures § 3. The promise in Malachy belongs not to Christ's Second but to his first Advent Ibid. The Elias there promised was not Elias in Person but John the Baptist § 4. The Objections against this Assertion answered Ibid. Two Corollaries 1. That Tradition is not always a sure Interpreter of Scripture 2. That Oral Tradition is not of absolute certainty in matters of Speculation § 5 6. The Tradition of the Superiority of Bishops over Presbbyters may be relied upon because it is strengthened by Reason § 7. So also is the Tradition of the true Copies of Scripture where note 1. That we cannot know the Scriptures are not corrupted from the Infallibility of the Jewish or the Christian Church § 8 9. But we may know from Reason grounded upon Scripture 1st That the Scriptures were committed pure to the Christian Church § 10. 2dly That the immediate succeeding Age could want no assurance of their Purity whilst the Autographae were extant § 11. 3dly That these Records being so generally dispersed could not be then corrupted § 11. 4ly That the whole Church would not and part of them could not corrupt them § 13. 5ly That the Providence of God would not permit them to be corrupted in Substantials § 14. No like proof can be given that the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome have been thus handed down unto us § 15. The Objection of Mr. Mumford is answered § 16. WE distinguish betwixt Traditions which can be made appear by Reason to be such as ought to be received Dist 8. and which we therefore think our selves obliged to receive and such as cannot by Reason be proved to have derived from the Apostles though they appeared very early in the Church Of the first Nature are the Traditions of the Canon of Scripture of the Copies handed down to us without Corruption in any necessary Articles of Christian Faith of the Observation of the Lord's Day c. Of the Second Order are the Traditions of the Millennary Doctrine of the Appearance of Enoch and Elias the Tisbite as the Forerunners of the Day of Judgment And of Traditions of this Nature we say we have no Ground sufficient to receive them as Articles of Christian Faith or Apostolical Traditions The Appearance of Enoch and Elias § 1 then to resist the Seduction of Antichrist and to be slain by him is delivered thus De Resur Carnis c. 22. Enoch and Helias are saith Tertullian Translated caeterum morituri reservantur ut Antichristum sanguine suo extinguant but they are reserved to die and shed their Blood for the Extinction of Antichrist This saith Petrus Alexandrinus is In Chronico 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Apoc. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Tradition of the Church That Enoch is to come in the last Days with Helias to resist Antichrist It is saith Aretas unanimously received by the Church from Tradition that Enoch and Elias the Tisbite are to come The Tradition of the Advent of the Tisbite is as old as Justin Martyr § 2 Dial. cum Tryph. p. 268. and hath been constantly believed in the Church from that time till the Reformation that of Enoch's coming with him is as old as Tertullian it generally obtained in the following Centuries and found no Contradiction from any of the Writers of those times and yet I find no ground at all for this Tradition concerning Enoch For the Two Witnesses in the Revelations are not described like Enoch and Elias but like Moses and Elias Rev. xi 6. it being said They have Power to shut Heaven that it Rain not in the Days of their Prophecy which Elijah did and have Power over Waters to turn them into Blood and to smite the Earth with all Plagues as often as they will which we know Moses did but there is nothing in the description of these Witnesses relating in the least to Enoch As for Elias let it be considered First That it was the general Tradition of the Jewish Nation that Elias the Tisbite was to come in Person as the Forerunner of the Messiah of the Jews that he in Person was to Anoint him and make him known unto the People that before the Advent of the Son of David Elias was to come to Preach concerning him This is the Import of the Question of St. Joh. i. 21. Matt. xvij 10. Mal. iv 5. John Art thou Elias and of the Saying of the Scribes Elias must first come and restore all things of the Interpretation of the Seventy Behold I send unto you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elias the Tisbite and of that Saying of the Son of Syrach Elias was ordained for reproofs in their times Ecclus xliij 10. to pacifie the wrath of the Lord's Judgment before it break into fury and to turn the Heart of the Father to the Son and to restore the Tribes of Jacob. And suitably to these Assertions Trypho the Jew declares That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dial. p. 268. all we Jews expect Elias to Anoint Christ at his coming Secondly Observe That it was the general Tradition of the Writers of the Christian Church even from the Second Century that Elias the Tisbite is to come in person before our Lord's Second Advent to prepare Men for it This Opinion of the coming of Elias In Tetull de resur carn c. 22. Not. in Orig. p. 41. c. 1. tradit tota Patrum antiquitas all the ancient Fathers have delivered saith De la Cerda Constans est patrum omniumque consensu receptissima Ecclesiae opinio It is the constant and most received Opinion of the Church and all the Fathers saith Huetius Constantissima semper fuit Christianorum opinio It was always the most constant Opinion of Christians In Mat. xi 14. That Elias was to come before the Day of Judgment saith Maldonate It is saith Mr. Mede well known Disc 25. p. 48. that all the Fathers were of this Opinion He is to come saith Petrus Alexandrinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Tradition of the Church saith Arethas Caesariensis In Apoc. 11. According to the unanimously received Opinion of the Church And yet if we may credit either the Angel or our Blessed Lord § 3 the Prophecy on which the Jews built this Tradition was fulfilled in John the Baptist And if we may believe the Ancient Fathers they built their Tradition on those words of Christ Elias cometh first and restoreth
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
general Postea per dei voluntatem in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futurum Iren. lib. 3. cap. 1. the Fathers do expresly say declaring That the Apostles first preached the Gospel and afterwards by the Will of God delivered the same Gospel which they preached to us in the Scripture to be for future Ages the Pillar and the Ground of Truth The Marcionites owned the Writings of St. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dial. contra Marcion p. 59. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. but rejected the Evangelists St. Matthew and St. John. Against them therefore Origen doth in the person of Eutropius dispute after this manner Did these Apostles preach the Gospel with writing or without writing what they preached Marc. Without writing Eutrop. Is it probable they preached Salvation only to them that heard them and had no regard to them that were to come after as must be supposed if they writ not that Doctrine of Salvation which they preached for those things which are spoken and not written do presently vanish St. Austin is express for the same Doctrine for having told us That our Lord Jesus according to the saying of St. John Did many things which were not written He adds Tr. 49. in Joh. Tom. 9. p. 355. Electa sunt autem quae scriberentur ea quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur That they chose out of them those things to be written which they conceived sufficient for the Salvation of Believers Quicquid enim ille de suis factis dictis nos legero voluit hoc scribendum illis tamquam suis manibus imperavit De consensu Evangelist lib. 1. cap. 35. Again He saith the same St. Austin who sent the Prophets before his descent sent also the Apostles after his Ascention of all whom he was the Head wherefore it must not be said that he writ nothing seeing his Members writ that which they knew by the Dictates of their Head for whatsoever he would have us read concerning what he did or said he commanded his Apostles as being his Amanuenses to write down Now seeing all they were to teach was only his Sayings and Commands they who stood thus engaged to write all that he would have us read of his Sayings must write all that was needful to be known in order to Mens Salvation for all this sure the Saviour of the World would have us read all this 't was therefore necessary for them to write that we might read Because that Heresies would afterwards break in upon the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Proem in Matth. and the Manners of Christians would be corrupted saith Theophylact it pleased the Apostles to write the Gospels that from thence being taught the Truth we might not be perverted by the Falshood of Heresie nor be corrupted in our Manners Now sure what is sufficient to preserve us from Heresie in Doctrine and from Corruption in Manners must plainly and fully contain all things necessary to be believed that we may not be Hereticks and to be done that we may not be wicked To proceed to the particular accounts the Ancients give us of the inditing of every Gospel in particular § 2 Eusebius informs us of St. Matthew that the Tradition was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 24. That he was necessitated to write for having first preached to the Hebrews as he was about to go to others commiting his Gospel to writing in his own Language he supplied by writing their want of his Presence from whom he went. St. Chrysostom saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Matth. Hom. 1. pag. 3. They had it by Tradition that the believing Jews desired St. Matthew to leave those things in writing which he had delivered by word of mouth to them and that in compliance with this request he writ his Gospel in the Hebrew Tongue Sicut referunt Matthaeum conscribere Evangelium causa compulit talis cum facta fuisset in Pal. persecutio ut carentes forte doctoribus fidei non carerent doctrina petierunt Matthaeum ut omnium verborum operum Christi conscriberet eis Historiam ut ubicunque essent futuri totius secum haberent sidei statum Praefat. The Author of the imperfect Comment on St. Matthew who passeth under the same name delivereth the Tradition thus That St. Matthew was compelled to write his Gospel upon this account That when a grievous Persecution arose in Palaestin so that they were in danger to be separated from each other that wanting Teachers they might not want the Doctrine of Faith they desired Matthew to write for them the History of all the Words and Works of Christ that so wherever they should be hereafter they might have with them totius fidei statum the whole form of Faith. The Tradition concerning the Gospel of St. Mark runs thus That when the Hearers of St. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 15. Peter had been illuminated by his Doctrine They were so affected with it as not to be contented with hearing of it all at once or with the unwritten Teaching or oral Tradition of the heavenly Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. but with all manner of Exhortations did entreat St. Mark the Follower of St. Peter that he would leave them in writing a digest or memorial of the Doctrine delivered to them by word of Mouth and that they never ceased till they had obtained their requests and that thus they were the causes of writing the Gospel of St. Mark This Eusebius relates from the Tradition of Clemens of Alexandria and Papias Bishop of Hierapolis The words of Clemens he gives thus Clemens in the same Book puts down the Tradition of the ancient Presbyters touching the Order of the Gospels which is to this effect Peter preaching the Word publickly at Rome and speaking the Gospel by the Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 14. many that were present intreated Mark to write what he spake as being one who had long followed him and remembred the things spoken and that thereupon Mark having writ the Gospel gave it to those who desired it And of the same Mark Papias saith Euscbius relates That he took especial care to say nothing that was false and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 3. c. 38. to leave nothing out of his Gospel he had heard from Peter Moreover Eusebius farther informs us from the same Authors that St. Mark going afterwards to Alexandria preached there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 16. the Gospel which he had written And that the first Successors of the Apostles leaving their Countries did the work of Evangelists to them who had not as yet heard of the Christian Faith to whom they preached Christ and delivered the Writings of the Holy Evangelists 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 3. c. 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
gathered out of them and that he would Catech. 4. p. 44 45. Pag. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Holy Scriptures give them the proof of every Article of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For saith he we must not deliver one tittle of the Mysteries of Faith without proof from the holy Scriptures nor would I have you to believe me barely saying these things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if you receive not a demonstration of them from the Holy Scriptures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the safety or security of our Faith is not to be had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but from the demonstrations of the holy Scriptures Athanasius saith It is a vain thing for men to run about pretending to desire Synods for the Faith De Syn. Arim. Seleuc. p. 873. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the holy Scripture is more sufficient than all Synods but if they must have Synods that of Nice is sufficient so that he who sincerely reads their Writings may by them learn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Religion towards Christ which is declared in the holy Scriptures And elsewhere he adds That the Faith of Nice was confessed Ep. ad Epictet p. 582. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the holy Scriptures Ruffinus confesseth That the Articles of the Creed ought to be proved Apud Hieron To. 4. f. 48. b. Hom. 1. de Symb. evidentibus divinae Scripturae testimoniis by evident Texts of Scripture Eucherius Lugdunensis saith That the Apostles Creed was gathered ex diversis voluminibus Scripturarum out of divers Volumes of the Scripture Isidore Hispalensis De Eccl. Off. l. 2. c. 22. De instit Cler. l. 2. c. 56. and Rabanus Maurus That the Apostles briefly did collect it from the holy Scriptures That they who could not read the Scriptures retaining these things in their Hearts might have knowledge sufficient to Salvation And Lastly It is observable § 10 That although they conspired to declare that this Creed and Rule of Faith was entirely contained in and gathered from the Scriptures yet did they as unanimously concurr to call it a Tradition delivered viva voce or by word of Mouth and written not in Paper but on the Tables of the Christian's heart because they generally required all that were to be Baptized to commit it to their Memory The Barbarians saith Irenaeus keeping diligently this Old Tradition Lib. 3. cap. 4. have this Doctrine written without Paper and Ink by the Spirit in their Hearts This the Apostles preached saith Tertullian De praescript c. 21. tam vivâ voce quam per Epistolas postea as well by oral Tradition as afterwards by their Epistles It is the Rule saith Cyril Catech. 4 p 44. which you must studiously keep 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not writing it in Paper but keeping the remembrance of it in your Heart Symb apud Hieron To 4. p 46 vide Crysol Serm. 62. and in your Meditation Our Fathers left it by Tradition saith Ruffinus that these things were required to be written not in Paper sed in credentium cordibus but in the Hearts of Believers It is the Symbol saith the Ordo Romanus which is not to be written in any matter subject to corruption Orig. l. 6. c. 19. sed paginis vestri cordis but in the pages of your Hearts in tabulis cordis carnalibus in the fleshly Tables of the heart says Isidore Hispalensis Rabanus Maurus and innumerable others Concil Brac. 2. can 1. Hence as the Councils of Laodicea Trullo and of Braga have determined it was to be learnt by all that came to be Baptized before the great Solemnity of Easter and they required a publick Repetition of it by the People as oft as they received the Holy Sacrament Concil Mo. gunt c. 45. Catech 5. p. 45. 2 Thess ij 14. And lastly hence St. Cyril doth press upon his Catechist the keeping of it in his Memory from that of the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hold the Traditions which you have been taught CHAP. VIII The Corollaries from these propositions touching the Creed are these 1. That these Symbols must contain all that the Apostles delivered as simply necessary to be believed of all Christians and all that the whole Catholick Church judged needful to be held in point of Faith § 1. 2ly That these Creeds must be a perfect digest of all things necessary to be believed now and throughout all succeeding Ages of the World § 2. 3ly That no Man who doth heartily believe these Creeds and the immediate Doctrines plainly contained in them or evidently deduced from them can deserve to be Anathematized or to be excluded from the Communion of Christians for not believing any other simple Article of Faith § 3. 4ly That all those Councils which have Anathematized their fellow Christians for such Doctrines as are not in these Creeds nor can be evidently inferr'd from any thing contained in them have actually erred § 4. 5ly That all the necessary Articles of Christian Faith are fully and perspicuously contained in Scripture according to the Doctrine of the whole Church of Christ § 5. Mr. M. 's Objection from Tertullian answered and retorted Ibid. 6ly That the Faith of Protestants in all their necessary Articles is most certain § 6. 7ly That in this Sence the Faith was handed down to us by Tradition viz. That this Creed which contains all the Essentials of it hath been thus handed down by it though by the same Tradition it was declared to be also fully contained in the Scripture § 7. 8ly That the Romanists impose upon us when they argue for Traditions neither contained in Scripture nor the Creed from the Sayings of Irenaeus and Tertullian and other Fathers which evidently relate to the Tradition of the Creed § 8. 9ly That here is a full Answer to the Catalogue of Fundamental Articles of Faith so oft demanded § 9. And to that other Question Where was your Religion before Luther § 10. The Reason why we still judge the Church of Rome a true Church § 11. NOW the Consequences which naturally result from this Tradition are sufficient to confirm the most important Arncles of the Faith of Protestants to clear up the most considerable Objections which are made against it and to confute and wholly over throw the Doctrines of the Romish Church For First If according to the Second Observation § 1 the Apostles delivered that which we call the Apostles Creed or something like it to all Churches if all the Christian Churches received such standing Rule of Faith from the Apostles and their Successors if according to the Third Observation all Christians were received into the Church by Baptism upon profession of this Faith and were admitted to the participation of the Eucharist upon the like profession if according to the Fourth Observation the Fathers of the Church have always owned these Creeds as perfect digests of all the necessary Articles
contained in the Apostles or the Nicene Creed or that the Church of Rome must be Schismatical in excluding from her Communion those who do not believe or yield assent unto them And thus I hope I have sufficiently shewed how this Tradition overthrows and fully doth confute the New Doctrines of the Church of Rome It now remains to shew how it confirms the Cause of Protestants and clears up the Objections which are made against it Now First § 5 Seeing according to this Tradition these Symbols as they are a perfect Summary of Christian Faith so are they fully and perspicuously contained in Scripture hence it demonstratively follows that according to the Doctrine and Tradition of the whole Church of Christ the summ of all the necessary Articles of Christian Faith must fully and perspicuously be contained in Holy Scripture and may be proved thence to the satisfaction of the meanest Catechist And consequently the Holy Scripture was by them esteemed a full and perspicuous Rule of Faith according to our Sixth Note in reference to all things necessary to be believed which is the Fundamental Article of Protestants But doth not Tertullian speak in General Object NB. of never disputing with Hereticks out of Scriptures only Q. of Quest p. 258 259. because this Scripture combate availeth for nothing but to the making either ones Stomach or ones Brains to turn and conclude generally We must not therefore appeal to Scriptures nor in our combate rely upon them in which either no Victory is to be obtained or a very uncertain one Tertullian here proposeth this Objection Answ That the Hereticks spake of the Scriptures V. c. 7. §. 8. and perswaded their Doctrines from the Scriptures and this he is so far from reprehending that he holds it a thing absolutely necessary to be done by all who would discourse of divine Matters It being impossible saith he aliunde de rebus fidei loqui De praescript cap. 15. quà m ex literis fidei to speak of Matters of Faith but from the Scriptures And therefore he not only owns that the Rule of Faith he pleaded for was first delivered by word of Mouth and after by the Writings of the Apostles but also to that Objection of the Hereticks Seek and ye shall find Cap. 9. he answers by granting that the Scriptures are to be searched and sought into for finding out the Truth contained in the Rule of Faith and that then nothing more respecting Faith is needful to be sought because they had found what they sought for then he proceeds to shew non admittendos eos ad ullam de Scripturis disputationem that the Hereticks were not to be admitted to dispute from Scriptures and that non sit cum illo disputandum he was not to be disputed with from Scripture for these following Reasons 1. Because ista Haeresis non recipit quasdam Scripturas those Hereticks received not some Scriptures viz. Iren. l. 1. c. 26. the Ebionites and Encratites rejected all St. Paul's Epistles and embraced only the Gospel of the Nazarens L. 3. c. 11. p. 258 259. Cerinthus allowed only the Gospel of St. Mark. Valentinus only that of St. John Marcion only that of Luke Ebion only that of Matthew 2. Because si quas recipit non recipit integras those Scriptures which they owned they received not entire but with additions and detractions as their cause required cutting off from them what most clearly made against then Heresies Thus of the Marcionites and the Lucianists and the Valentinians Origen confesseth That they did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Contra Celsum l. 2. p. 77. change and pervert the Gospel 3. Because if they admitted any Scriptures entire yet they corrupted them per diversas expositiones by adulterating the Sence of them and miserably distorting them to the upholding of their idle Dreams for saith Irenaeus they said their Doctrines were not perspicuously revealed in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 1. c. 1. p. 14. but by our Lord were mystically couched in Parables even so mystically that as you may see from the first to the Nineteenth Chapter of the First Book of Irenaeus it is enough to turn a Man's Stomach to read such Fooleries as v. gr They prove their thirty Aeones because our Saviour was Baptized when he was Thirty Years Old and from the Parable of the Labourers sent into the Vineyard some at the 1st 3d 6th 9th 11th C. 1. p. 10. hour of the Day which numbers put together make up Thirty Thus saith Irenaeus they endeavoured to adapt some of our Lord's Parables Pag. 32. and some Prophetical Expressions to their Doctrines that they might not seem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without any Testimony from Scripture but then saith he they miserably pervert the Order and the Series of Holy Scripture and deal with it as if one should take the Image of a King excellently made in Jewels and should deform it into the Face of a Dog or a Woolf. They pretended also that some of their Doctrines were received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from unwritten Traditions C. 1. p. 32. and to prove them they produced a multitude 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Apocryphal and adulterated Scriptures which they had feigned Lib. 1. c. 17. pretending for their recourse unto Tradition this Accusation of the Holy Scriptures Lib. 3. c. 2. That they were not right nor of Authority sufficient because they were spoken variously and that from them the Truth could not be found out by such as were ignorant of Tradition non enim per literas traditum illum sed per vivam vocem it being not delivered in writing but by Oral Tradition that is they were plain Papists as to this pretence Against such Men as these saith Tertullian the most skilful in the Scriptures will dispute in vain from Scripture cum nolunt agnoscere ea per quae revincuntur his nituntur quae falso composuerunt quae de ambiguitate coeperunt since they will not own that for Scripture by which they are refuted they will insist upon their Apocryphal Writings and those things which they ambiguously have conceived Ergo non ad Scripturas provocandum est and therefore we are not to provoke them to dispute out of Scriptures nor place our combate in those things in which no victory is to be obtained or a very uncertain one Let now any indifferent Reader judge whether Tertullian speaks in general against disputing with Hereticks out of Scripture as Mr. M. here confidently saith and not only of disputing against hanc Haeresin that very Heresie which had these Arts to delude what was brought against them from Scripture and appealed from it with the Papists to Oral Tradition And yet against these slippery Men Irenaeus and other of the Fathers first argued from Scriptures cum ex Scripturis arguebantur and when they had baffled them there and made them fly as Romanists now do unto
all Creatures who suffered truly in the Flesh died a true bodily death rose again with a true Resurrection of his Plesh and a true resuming of his Soul in which he shall come to judge the quick and the dead It also is to be enquired of him Whether he believes one and the same God to be the Author of the Old and New Testament that is of the Law Prophets and Apostles and that the Devil was not made wicked by Nature but by his own Will whether he believes the Resurrection of that Flesh which dies and not another whether he believes a future judgment and that every one shall receive according to the things which they have done in the Flesh Punishments or Glory whether he doth not disapprove of Marriage nor condemn Second Marriages nor condemn eating of Flesh whether he Communicates with reconciled Penitents and believes that all Sins both Original and Actual are remitted in Baptism and that no Man can be saved out of the Catholick Church Cum in his omnibus examinatus inventus fuer it plene instructus When by Examination he is found fully instructed in all these things let him be ordained Bishop c. These were all the Doctrines of Faith required to be known or held by the Bishop in the 4th Century And this continued to be the Rule of his Examination and the whole Faith required to be professed by him at his Ordination till the Thirteenth Century as you may learn from the Pag. 97 98. interrogatio de credulitate Episcopi question touching the Faith of a Bishop in the Ordo Romanus which form of Examination they profess to have received from the ancient Institution of the Holy Fathers and especially from the Council of Carthage From the Council of Nantes Can. 11. and from Regino in the Ninth Century De Disc Eccl. lib. 1. cap. 443. who transcribe this Canon of the Council of Carthage as containing the form qualiter Episcopus ordinandus examinabitur How a Bishop that is to be ordained shall be examined Decret part 5. c. 62 l. 1. c. 8. Dist 23. c. 2. As also doth Ivo in the Eleventh Barchardus in the Twelfth and Gratian in the Thirteenth Century These therefore from the Fourth to the Thirteenth Century were reputed all the Articles of Christian Faith in which it was thought necessary that a Bishop should be instructed and if he did assert these things he was thought fully instructed in the Documents of Christian Faith. And to shew the Concord of the Eastern with the Western Churches in these matters § 3 let it be considered that Theodoret having given an account of Heretical Fables in Four Books he proceeds Cap. 4. p. 262. Book the Fifth to Discourse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Doctrines of the Church and to lay before us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Evangelical Doctrine that by comparing it with that of the Hereticks we may discern the difference betwixt Light and Darkness perfect Health and mortal Sickness and then he proceeds to give us all the Doctrines contained in this Form of Examination but not one of the Articles which they of Rome have added to the Nicene Creed In his First Chapter he speaks of God the Father the Creator of all things and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ In the Second Of his only begotten Son co-essential and co-eternal with the Father In the Third Of the Holy Spirit of the same Nature and Substance with them both In the Fourth Of the Creation of all things by the Father with the Son and Holy Ghost In the Eighth Of the Devil asserting that he had not his wickedness from his Creator but his own perverse will. In the Eleventh Of the Incarnation of our Lord that he took flesh of the Virgin Mary had a reasonable Soul united to it and so became God and Man in one Person That he took a true Body chap. 12. A true Soul ch 13. A perfect humane Nature ch 14. That he raised up the same Flesh in which he suffer'd ch 15. That the same God was Author of the Old and New Testament ch 17. That Baptism procures the Remission of all our old Sins ch 18. That there would be a Resurrection of that very Body which was corrupted and dissolved ch 19. And a future Judgment where every one shall receive according to what he hath done in the Body ch 20. That this shall be at our Lord's Second coming to judge the quick and the dead ch 22. That Matrimony was to be allowed ch 25. yea Second Marriages ch 26. That the wounds received after Baptism might be healed ch 28. That the Church forbids not the use of Flesh ch 29. And here concluding his Discourse concerning Ecclesiastical Doctrines respecting Faith and Manners he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These are the Doctrines of the Holy Spirit which we must always follow preserving this Rule of them immovable And that you may be sure that Scripture was the Church's Rule that taught her all these things he doth not only call these Doctrines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Doctrines of the Gospel and often say in his Discourse upon them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 249 250 259 262 275 304. These things we have been taught by the Holy Scriptures the Holy Scripture is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Teacher of these things but concludes his Discourse of the Doctrinals of the Church thus P. 304. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Doctrines the Church hath received from divine Men the Prophets and Apostles and their Successors these then were in his Age reputed all the Doctrines of Christian Faith and they were all conceived clearly to be contained in and proved from the Holy Scriptures their Faith then did not differ in one Article from that of Protestants nor did they differ from them in assigning Scripture as the Rule of Faith. And 4ly § 4 This will be farther evident from the consideration of the most Eminent Fathers of the Church who have employed their Time and Labour in refuting Hereticks For they still lay down the Apostles or the Nicene Creed as the Foundation of their Faith and the entire belief of Christians and speak of other Doctrines as such in which they were at liberty to exercise their parts and curiosity but were by no means to obtrude them as Articles of Christian Faith. Thus Irenaeus having given us the Faith which the Apostles delivered to the Church Lib. 1. cap. 4. and which she did through the whole World profess without Addition or Diminution he proceeds to shew That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church retaining one and the same Faith throughout the World they exercised their knowledge about other matters to explain the dispensation of God towards Men his long suffering both towards Men and fallen Angels to enquire why one and the same God made some things Temporal others Eternal some Heavenly and some Earthly things why being invisible he
appeared to the Prophets in divers Shapes why many Covenants were made with Man and what was the Character of every Covenant why God concluded all Men under Vnbelief that he might have mercy upon all why the Word of God was made Flesh and suffered why Christ came only in the last times and of the end of all things and of things to come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to explicate other things mentioned in the Scripture But notwithstanding all these Enquiries the Churches Faith was still the same as being comprized in the forementioned Articles of the Apostles Creed Tertullian having laid down the same Rule in his Prescription against Hereticks Cap. 13 14. he reduceth all enquiries beyond this Rule libidini curiositatis to the lust of Curiosity and saith That we may better be ignorant in other things than Curiously concerned to know them whereas had there been as many more Articles of Christian Faith delivered by the Apostles and as necessary to be believed by all Christians as those which were contained in their Creed and Rule of Faith what ignorance or what unfaithfulness to Souls must they be guilty of who mention none of all these necessaries but virtually and in effect exclude them all from being so by thus declaring that all beyond this Rule did only serve to exercise our Wit our Curiosity our Knowledge concerning profound Mysteries which were no part of Faith and of which without detriment to the Christian Faith we might be ignorant Epiphanius having discoursed at large of all the Heresies of his time he closes his Discourse with an exposition of the Catholick Faith in which he speaks Of one God over all § 3. Of the Consubstantial Trinity by which all things were created § 14. Of the Birth of Christ of the Virgin Mary from whom he received a true Body and true Flesh Of his humane Soul and of the imion of both to his Divinity § 15. Of his Sufferings on the Cross in his humane Nature of his descent into Hell of his Resurrection of his Ascention into Heaven whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead § 17. Of the Resurrection of the same Body that died of the future Recompence according to what we have done in the Flesh of the Damnation of the Wicked and the future Happiness of the Just § 18. This saith he is the Faith of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 §. 19. Vid. etiam § 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these are the things which the one Catholick Church holds touching the Faith § 21. These things we have discoursed with as much brevity as we could of the Consubstantiality of the Father Son and Holy Ghost of the incarnation of Christ and of his final coming 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of the other Articles of Faith. These therefore in his time comprised all the Articles of the Christian Faith the Doctrines of the Catholick Church and therefore the New Roman Articles could be no parts of Christian Faith no Doctrines of the Church Catholick when Epiphanius flourished in it And upon account of this Symbol of Faith it is that he calls the Church and the way of Truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haer. 59. §. 12 13. The Kings High-way and calls them the Servants of God who do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 know this firm Rule or Canon and walk in this way of Truth 5ly § 5 This will abundantly appear from an impartial reflection on those Treatises which have been written by the Ancient Fathers at the request or the desire of others to be instructed in the Articles of Christian Faith. Thus when the Emperor Jovianus desired to learn of Athanasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Faith of the Catholick Church Athanasius tells him expresly To. 1. p. 245. That it was that Faith which was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confessed by the Nicene Fathers and that he might the better know it he sets down their Creed at length telling him moreover like a true Protestant That the true and pious Faith in Christ was manifest to all Pag. 246. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being known and read from the Holy Scriptures When some Monks had desired St. Basil to send to them De vera pia fide p. 385. a. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a written confessionof the holy Faith. In answer to this demand St. Basil lays down this as his Foundation That it is the property of a Faithful Minister to preserve those things Ibid. B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pure sincere and unadulterated which are commited to him by his Good Lord to be distributed to his fellow Servants I therefore saith he according to the Will of God will lay before you those things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which I have learnt from the divinely inspired Scripture This Fundamental position that it is the property of a Faithful Steward to deliver nothing to his fellow Servants as part of Holy Faith but what he hath learned from the Holy Scripture he confirms in these words Ibid. C.D. For if our Lord himself in whom were hid all the Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge said thus He the Father gave me a Commandment what I should say and speak and again The things which I speak as the Father hath told me so I speak And if the Holy Spirit spake nothing of himself but only spake those things which he had heard from him how much more is it as well safe as pious for us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to do and mind the same thing in the Name of the Lord Jesus Indeed Ibid. E. saith he when I conflict with Hereticks whose Footsteps I must follow I am compelled sometimes to use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expressions not found in Scripture though neither are they alien from the pious sence of Scripture P. 386. a. but now I have thought it most convenient to the common Scope of us and you to fulfil your command in the simplicity of the sound Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by saying those things which I have been taught from the divinely inspired Scripture abstaining from those Names and Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are not to be found expresly in the Holy Scripture For saith he if the Lord be Faithful in all his words if all his Commandments are Faithful and established for ever and done in Truth and Righteousness Ibid. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is a manifest falling from the Faith and a manifestation of Pride either to reject any thing that is written or to superinduce any thing that is not written our Lord having said My Sheep hear my Voice And the Apostle by an Example taken from Men viz. That if it be but a Man's Testament yet if it be confirmed no Man rejects or adds any thing unto it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. d. most vehemently forbids that any thing should be added to or taken from the divinely inspired Scriptures And
therefore though we have used other words in our controversial Discourses against Hereticks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. e. yet now that a Confession of the sound Faith and simple manifestation of it lies before us we will temper our stile accordingly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 387. c. explaining it more simply and properly and doing only that which may instruct you according to that saying of the Apostle To give a reason of your Faith. Now Pag 389. b. c. saith he in doing this we neither have ability nor leasure to collect all that is said in Scripture of the Father Son and Holy Ghost but we hope saith he to satisfie your Consciences as to the manifestation of our knowledge in the holy Scriptures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and your full assurance of Faith by those few things we shall select out of the Holy Scriptures And after this long Protestant Preface comes a Creed owned by all Protestants in these words P. 389. d. e. We believe therefore and confess one only true and Good God and Father Almighty of whom are all things the God and Father of our Lord and God Jesus Christ And we believe one only begotten Son of God our Lord and God Jesus Christ the only true God by whom all things both visible and invisible were made and by whom all things consist who in the beginning was with God and was God and after was according to the Scriptures seen on Earth and conversed with Men who being in the Form of God coveted not to be in the World like to God but emptied himself and taking upon him the Form of a Servant by his Nativity of a Virgin and being found in fashion as a Man he fulfilled all things which were written of and concerning him according to the command of the Father being Obedient even to Death the Death of the Cross and being raised again the Third Day from the Dead according to the Scriptures P. 390. a. he was seen by his holy Disciples and the rest as it is written and he ascended into the Heavens and sitteth at the Right-hand of the Father from whence he comes at the end of the World to raise up all and to give to every one according to his Work when the Righteous shall be taken up into Life Eternal and the Kingdom of Heaven but the wicked shall be condemned to everlasting Punishment where their Worm dieth not and the Fire is not quenched and we believe one Holy Ghost and Comforter by whom we are sealed unto the Day of Redemption the Spirit of Truth and of Adoption in whom we cry Abba Father who distributeth and worketh in us the Gifts given of God to every one to profit withal as he willeth who teacheth and brings to our Remembrance all things which he hath heard from the Son. The Good Spirit who Guides us into all Truth and confirmeth all Believers in true and exact Knowledge in pious Worship and spiritual Adoration and in the true Confession of God the Father his only Son our Lord and God Jesus Christ and of himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This we think this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Rule of Holy Men. P. 392. And I beseech you laying aside all curious Questions P. 391. and indecent strifes about words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to rest contented with the things spoken by Holy Men and by the Lord himself and to withdraw your selves from them that are alien from the Evangelical and Apostolical Faith the Apostle having said That if an Angel from Heaven preach to you any other Doctrine besides that which we have preached unto you let him be accursed and having warned you to withdraw from every one who walks disorderly and not according to the Tradition which you have received from us So that according to St. Basil this Creed is the Tradition received from the Apostles the Evangelical and Apostolical Faith the Rule of Faith to which nothing is to be superadded besides which nothing to be preached as any portion of the Rule of Faith and this whole Faith expresly is contained in Scripture and is delivered in the words of Scripture Laurentius sends an Epistle to St. Austin to know of him Quid sequendum maximè Enchir. c. 4. quid propter diversas principaliter Haereses sit fugiendum What was chiefly to be followed and what by reason of the diversity of Heresies was principally to be avoided quod certum propriumque fidei Catholicae fundamentum what was the sure and proper Foundation of the Christian Faith In Answer to this Enquiry he receives a Treatise from St. Cap. 3. Austin containing 122. Chapters in which he undertakes to teach him what he was to believe to love and hope for and in the general he tells him Cap. 6. that it is easie to instruct him in these three particulars nam ecce tibi Symbolum dominica oratio in his duobus tria illa intuere Cap. 7. for behold the Symbol and the Lord's Prayer in these two see these three things Faith believes Hope and Charity prays and then he goes on to a particular Discourse on all these Heads not speaking throughout all those numerous Chapters of one Article of the Romish Faith excepting only when Chapter the 69. he speaks of Purgatory Fire as of a doubtful and uncertain thing and Chapter 109. he utterly confounds it by laying down for certain That during the time betwixt the Death of Christians and the last Resurrection of their Bodies their Souls are kept in hidden Receptacles as they by reason of the Actions done in their Life time became worthy of Rest or Misery One thing there is still more considerable that when the Arian Heresie sprung up and even in the time and at the Session of the Nicene Council this was still produced as the Faith of the Apostolick Church the Rule of Faith the Faith which they had learned from the Scriptures and had received at Baptism and on account of which they challenged to be owned as Orthodox by all their Christian Brethren Alexander Bishop of Alexandria in his Epistle to his Namesake of Constantinople recites his Creed with this Preface Apud Theodor Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so we believe as it seemed good to the Apostolick Church viz. We believe in one only unbegotten Father and in one Lord Jesus Christ his only begotten Son. Besides this pious Faith of the Father and the Son We confess as the Holy Scriptures teach us one Holy Ghost the Sanctifier of Holy Men under the Old Testament and of the divine Teachers of the New and one only Catholick and Apostolick Church inexpugnable by the World and triumphing over all the wicked Insurrections of the Heterodox after this we confess the Resurrection of the Dead of which our Lord Jesus Christ was the first fruits who indeed and not in appearance only took his Body from the God-bearing Virgin
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
whilst there was no Regard to Purgatory no Man looked after Indulgences which depend upon it Coeperunt igitur Indulgentiae postquam ad purgatorii cruciatus aliquandiu trepidatum est Indulgences therefore began after Men had for some time trembled at the Torments of Purgatory Concerning Indulgences saith Antoninus Florentinus We have nothing expresly in the Sacred Scripture Nec etiam ex dictis antiquorum Doctorum sed modernorum nor from the Sayings of the Ancient Doctors but of the Modern only Of Indulgences saith Durand few things can be said with any certainty because neither doth the Scripture speak expresly of them Sancti etiam Ambrosius Hilarius Augustinus Hieronymus minime loquuntur de Indulgentiis And St. Ambrose Hilary Austin and Jerom do in no wise speak of them Indeed I find not any of these Authors who pretend to derive them higher than the Stations of Gregory the Great who lived in the Sixth Century Concerning the Worship or Veneration of Images § 8 it hath been fully proved in a late Treatise of the Fallibility of the Church of Rome touching this Article First That when the Second Nicene Council taught That the Worship or Veneration of Images was to be received as a Tradition of the Apostles P. 4 5 6. and the Primitive Church this Assertion in the Eighth and the Ninth Centuries was rejected as a plain Falshood and on the contrary it was declared That they who endeavoured to introduce this practice brought into the Church New and unusual Customs without and against the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers and execrated by the Church of God and condemned by the Tradition of their Ancestors Secondly P. 61. §. 6. That from the Eighth to the Fifteenth Century this Doctrine of the Veneration and Worship of Images was rejected by very eminent Persons of the Western Church Thirdly That many learned Persons of the Church of Rome ingenuously have confessed P. 70. §. 3. either that in the Primitive Church they had no Images and did not regard them or that they paid no Veneration to them but rather disapproved and condemned it Church Govern. part 5. §. 117. to which I add these words of our late Oxford Writer viz. Thus much is granted that Images and so the Veneration or Worship of them were very seldom if at all used in the Christian Church for some of the first Centuries Concerning Invocation of departed Saints Altissiodorensis saith § 9 That multi dicunt In Sum. part 4. l. 3. tr 7. c. de Orat. q. 7. Ergo non vident quorum sunt orationes quas vident ergo inutile est orare ipsos Propter istas rationes consimiles dicunt multi Opinio Commun is quod nec nos oramus sanctos nec ipsi orant pro nobis nisi improprie Altissiod Sum. l. 3. Tract 8. c. 5. qu. 6. ult In Can. Miss Lect. 30. Vid. Bishop Usher 's Answer to the Jesuit pag. 452. many do say we pray not to them but improperly to wit because Oramus Deum ut Sanctorum merita nos juvent we pray to God that the Merits of the Saints may help us and in the Margent he saith that this was a common Opinion in his time And Gabriel Biel having propounded the Arguments against the Invocation of them adds That by these and the like Reasons not only the Hereticks of old but nonnulli nostro tempore Christiani decipiuntur some Christians of our times are deceived John Sharpe informs us That à quibusdam famosis verisimiliter aestimatur quod istiusmodi orationes in Eoclesia Dei superfluunt it was thought by some eminent Men that such Prayers were superfluous in the Church of God. Eckius saith Enchir. c. 15. That if the Apostles and Evangelists had taught that the Saints should be Worshipped it would have been objected to them as arrogance acsi ipsi post mortem gloriam istam quaesivissent as if they had sought for that Honour after their Death And Cardinal Perron ingenuously doth confess Replic l. 5. c. 19. That in the Writings of the Authors that approach nearest to the Age of the Apostles one shall find no Footsteps of the Custom of invoking Saints Moreover § 10 It is a thing saith our Twenty-fourth Article plainly repugnant to the Word of God and the Custom of the Primitive Church to have publick Prayer in the Church or to minister the Sacraments in a Tongue not understood of the People and that this was the Custom of the Primitive Church Treat of Latin Service c. 1. §. 2. hath in a late Treatise on this Subject been fully proved from the Confessions of the Romanists That they esteemed it necessary so to officiate is proved by the Testimonies of the Western Church till the Thirteenth Century Chap. 2. Chap. 5. §. 3. and from the Romish Commentators on the Fourteenth Chapter to the Romans To all which add the Confession of Lindanus Panopl l. 4. c. 78. That quae nunc passim cantantur non tam ad populi intelligentiam erudiendum quod priscos ubique spectasse indubitatum The things which are now every where sung in the Roman Church do not so much tend to instruct the People though without doubt that was the thing the Ancients every where respected The Church of England in her Twenty-fifth Article affirms § 11 1. There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel that is to say Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. 2. Those five commonly called Sacraments that is to say Confirmation Penance Orders Matrimony and Extream Vnction are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel nor have they the like nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lord's Supper for that they have not any visible Sign or Ceremony ordained of God. Accordingly Johannes a Munster in Vortilage confesseth Et in margine haec habet Saeculum duodecimum duo tantum agnovit Sacramenta Nobilis discurs prop. 3. That Theophylact Duo tantum agnovit Sacramenta acknowledged only two Sacraments There is no Controversie saith Cassander but that there are two Sacraments in which principally consisteth our Salvation whence it is that among the more ancient Writers the Sacraments properly so called are sometimes reckoned two sometimes three when Confirmation by Chrism is added to Baptism and sometimes four when the Body and Blood of Christ are reckoned as two Sacraments in which Sence that from the Sixth to the Twelfth Century they were reckoned only four Pref. to the Treat of Latin Serv. hath been fully proved elsewhere of the other Sacraments we read not that the Ancients comprehended them in any certain number Consult Cass Art. 13. p. 106 107. nec temere quenquam reperias ante P. Lombardum qui certum aliquem definitum Sacramentorum numerum statuerunt nor will you hardly find any one before Peter Lombard who assigned any certain and determinate number of the Sacraments From this Confession of the Novelty of
be proved by Holy Writ And that it cannot be proved from the perpetual Tradition of the Church is plainly and frequently confessed by R. Doctors For when Paschase and others broached that Opinion That the Sacrament was that very Body of Christ which was Born of the Virgin Mary Ed. Colon. 1551. p. 195. Bertram expresly teacheth That in saying this Sanctorum Scripta patrum contraire comprobantur they are proved to contradict the Sayings of the Holy Fathers Durandus of Troarn saith Apud Larroq Hist of the Sacrament p. 454. Ed. Ang. De Euch. l 3. c. 23. §. unum tamen That in the Ninth Century several opposed the Opinions of Paschase as Novelties which till then had not been heard of in the Church Bellarmine also confesseth That Scotus held that Transubstantiation was not an Article of Faith before the Lateran Council and they had reason so to say since he affirms 1. That the Church declared under Innocent the Third that this Sence was De veritate fidei a Truth belonging to the Faith In quart Sent. distin xi q. 3. lit g. Colloq Fontibell p. 16. and 2. That it was to be believed to be De substantia fidei hoc post istam declarationem solennem factam ab Ecclesia of the Substance of the Faith after that solemn Declaration made by the Church And Cardinal Perron acknowledgeth That the Opinion of Scotus was in this Sence true That before that Council Transubstantiation was not formally an Article of Faith that is as to the formality of publick Profession and as to any prohibition rendring him inexcusable who was ignorant of it In 4. Sent. dist xi q. 3. disp 42. §. 1. Yribarn saith expresly That in primitiva Ecclesia non erat de fide substantiam panis in Corpus Christi converti In the Primitive Church the Conversion of the Substance of the Bread into the Body of Christ was no Article of Faith. Alphonsus de Castro confesseth Adv. Haer. l. 8. tit de indulg That of the Transubstantiation of the Bread into Christ's Body Rara est in Antiquis Scriptoribus mentio the Ancients seldom do make mention Modest disc de Jes Angl. p. 13. Annot. in 1 Cor. vij And our English Jesuits acknowledge That the Fathers did not meddle with the matter of Transubstantiation Erasmus saith That in synaxi Transubstantiationem sero definivit Ecclesia it was late before the Church defined Transubstantiation and that for a long time it was sufficient to believe that the true Body of Christ was present whether under the consecrated Bread or any way whatsoever Bernard Gilpin in the Life of Bishop Tonstal saith P. 40 46. v. P. 33 42 48. That he had often heard that Bishop say that Innocent the Third did rashly in making Transubstantiation an Article of Faith when before it was free to think so or otherwise yea that he knew not what he did when he made it an Article of Faith. Holcot informs us That paucis tamen persuasum est Corpus Christi esse realiter in Sacramento Altaris sub speciebus panis vini Sent. l. 4. qu. 3. lit c. Few Men were perswaded that the Body of Christ was really in the Sacrament of the Altar under the Species of Bread and Wine In 4. Sent. dist◠xi q. 3. b. and Scotus tells us That to say that such things appertain unto the Faith is an occasion of turning all honest Men and almost all that follow natural Reason from the Faith and of hindering their conversion to the Faith and that a prophane Man or one that follows natural Reason would think this Doctrine a greater inconvenience than all the Articles of the Incarnation and saith he Mirum videtur quare in uno Articulo qui non est principalis Articulus fidei debeat talis intellectus asseri propter quem fides pateat contemptui omnium sequentium rationem it seems worthy of Admiration why such a Sence should be asserted in one Article which is no principal Article of Faith as rendreth the Faith Contemptible to all who follow Reason Our Thirtieth Article affirms § 17 That the Cup of the Lord is not to be denied to the Lay-People for both parts of the Lord's Sacrament by Christ's Ordinance and Commandment ought to be ministred to Christian Men alike and that this was the Doctrine of the whole Church of Christ to the Twelfth Century hath been demonstrated in a Treatise written upon that Subject Cassander also clearly testifies That the Oriental Church doth to this Day and that the Roman Church did for a Thousand Years In Art. 22. in the ordinary and solemn Administration of this Sacrament give both Kinds to all the Faithful and that they were induced to do so Instituto exemplo Christi by the Example and Institution of our Lord and that therefore it was no rash thing that all the best Catholicks who were conversant in the reading of the Divine and Ecclesiastical Writers and were moved by the Reasons there mentioned were extreamly desirous of the Cup and did vehemently contend that this salutary Sacrament of the Blood of Christ Epist 19. together with the Sacrament of his Body Juxta veterem multis saeculis perpetuatam universalis Ecclesiae consuetudinem in usum reducatur should be reduced to use according to the ancient Custom of the universal Church continued through many Ages The same Cassander saith Antiquioribus saeculis ad plenam legitimam solennem Communionem utriusque Sacramenti Corporis Sanguinis Domini participationem necessariam fuisse That in former Ages the participation of the Body and Blood of Christ was necessary to a full lawful and solemn Communion John Barus declares Cath. Rom. Pacif. Sect. 7. apud Forbes Consid Modest p. 429. That Communion in both Kinds is Scripturis Patribus universalis Ecclesiae consuetudini conformior more conform to Scriptures to the Fathers and to the Custom of the universal Church And George Wicelius saith That the Church of Rome did ill in intermitting the use of the Cup in publick Celebration of the Sacrament adding That Ejus rei cum nube quadam certissimorum Testium septi sumus In via Regia Apud Forbes Consid Modest p. 427. plerophoriam amplectimur omni secluso dubio being compassed with a Cloud of most certain Witnesses touching this matter we have that full assurance of it which excludes all doubt And even Thomas Aquinas teacheth In Cap. 11. Ep. 1. ad Cor. lect 5. q. That although whole Christ be under either Species yet is he not in vain tendered under both Species Quia hic est vetus usus hujus Sacramenti ut seorsim exhibeatur fidelibus Corpus Christi in cibum Sanguis in potum because this is the ancient use of this Sacrament That the Body of Christ should separately be given to the Faithful for meat and the Blood for drink In our Thirty-first Article §
Latina Ecclesia Presbyteris licuisse uti conjugio That even in the Latin Church it was sometimes Lawful for Priests to use Matrimony Scotus confesseth that it is very true Sent. 4. dist 37. qu. 1. Art. 1. That Secundum consuetudinem primitivae Ecclesiae according to the Constitution of the primitive Church it was lawful to use Matrimony contracted before Orders Cap. 4. De invent rerum l. 5. c. 4. p. 344. Clictovaeus in his Discourse of the Celebacy of Priests and Polydore Virgil do with one Voice affirm That Pope Syricius who held that See A.D. 387. was the first who imposed the Law of Celebacy on the Clergy It remains saith Cassander That this Law should be relaxed to those who shall hereafter be ordained Et more veteris Ecclesiae Consult Art. 23. p. 199. huc usque Orientalium Ecclesiarum And that after the Custom of the Ancient Church and of the Eastern Churches to this Day Honest Husbands should be admitted to the Ministry of the Church and out of the Time of their Ministry should be allowed the use of their Wives according to the Canon of the Sixth General Synod Wicelius in his Via Regia Apud Calixt de conjug cler p. 457. declares that the Marriage of Priests was unforbidden In primitiva Christi Ecclesia tam Orientis quam Occidentis in the Primitive Church both of East and West and that it agrees not only with the Gospel but also cum Veterum Synodorum Constitutionibus cum exemplis Veteris Ecclesiae with the Constitutions of Ancient Synods with the Examples of the Ancient Church yea even with the Examples of the Church of Rome such as she was Five hundred Years ago CHAP. XI Answer is given to the Arguments of Mr. M. for the Infallibility of Tradition as v. g. 1. That the World had no other Rule for the first Two thousand Years § 1. Answered 1st by shewing that this proves not the thing in Question which is not Whether nothing can come down unto us by Tradition but Whether in long tract of time Men may not add to the Traditions which truly they received others which falsly they pretend to be such and Whether pretences to Tradition may not be justly scrupled when ancient Records not only do say nothing of but plainly contradict them Ibid. 2dly That this Argument contradicts the Tradition of the Jews touching the Precepts of Noah only imposed upon the World before and of the Christians generally teaching Men were then guided by the Law not of Tradition but of nature § 2. The Instances contained in this Argument considered § 3. 3dly It is proved that both the Antediluvians and they who lived after the Flood were very prone to Idolatry and that God therefore would not trust them with any positive Precepts but such as were Recorded in a written Law § 4. Mr. M ' s. Second Argument That for above Two thousand Years more from Moses to Christ 's time the Church was governed partly by Writing and partly by Tradition Answ 1. The contrary is proved both from the Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament § 5. 2. That the Traditions which obtained in the Jewish Church were such as tended to the Evacuation of the Law of Moses the Introduction of vain Worship and the renouncing of the true Messiah § 6. This is farther demonstrated from the Scriptures of the New Testament and Josephus § 7. Mr. M's Third Argument That when the Scriptures were given to the Jewish Church all other Nations were guided only by Tradition and yet had many true Believers among them as Job c. Answ 1. That the Scripture manifestly declares that the Heathens generally were guilty of Idolatry and that God had given them a Law not of Tradition but of Nature § 8.2 That Job and his Friends believed in one God not by Tradition but the Light of Nature according to the Fathers § 9.3 That when Christianity appeared the great Plea of the Heathens for it was Tradition which they pleaded after the manner of the Romanists § 10. The Answer of the Christians to this Plea is a full Justification of the Protestants and a demonstration that they were not Roman Catholicks in this Matter § 11. For 1st They represent it as the greatest folly to preferr Custom before Reason 2ly They add That their Ancestors were prone to receive Fables and monstrous Opinions for Truths which also Romanists confess of the Writers of their Histories 3dly That this was the Rise of all their Errors that they followed their Fathers without consulting Truth 4thly That they who pleaded Antiquity were themselves the greatest Innovators 5thly That there was a time when the Heathen Religion was New Ibid. In defence of their own Proceedings they declare 1st That it is the property of wise Men not to be enslaved to their former Opinions 2dly That their Adversaries ought not to run them down with prescription or the belief of their Ancestors but fairly come to the Merits of the Cause § 12. 3dly That they ought not to be run down with multitude that being no mark of the true Religion 4thly That they ought not to be called to yield a blind assent to the dictates of other Men without using their own Judgments 5thly That their Separation from their fore-Fathers must be acknowledged Just and Righteous because they could shew wherein they had erred Lastly That their Religion was not New but only it was lately that they knew it to be the true and old Religion § 13. Obj. 4. That before the New Testament was written and divulged all Christians were governed by Tradition only § 14. Answ 1. That the Four Gospels which were always judged sufficiently to contain the Christian Doctrine were writ soon after the Preaching of the Gospel 2. That till then the Apostles Preached only out of the Old Testament and exhorted their Hearers to attend to it as their Rule Ibid. 3. That the Tradition of the Primitive Church declared it necessary that Scriptures should be written to be to us a Rule of Faith § 15. Mr. M ' s. Fourth Argument that the Traditions of the Church of Rome may be as fully proved as it can be proved to one that never saw London that there is such a City and that it is the Capital City of this Kingdom shewed to be highly vain § 16. HAving thus shewed the uncertainty of Tradition in many Cases and proved that the Doctrines of the Church of Rome have not descended by Tradition from the Apostles or the Primitive Church I now proceed to Answer what Mr. M. doth offer to prove the certainty of Oral Tradition in the General and of some Romish Doctrines in Particular And § 1 1. Mr. M. saith That all the Faith which true Believers had in those Two thousand Years before the Scriptures of the Old Testament were written Pag. 335. had no other Ground than the Revelation of God as proposed
in the dark Ages of the Western Church gave the Rise to her Errors We therefore do exhort them in the Words of Justin Martyr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cohort ad Graec. p. 15. Not without trial to assent to the Errors of their Fore-fathers nor presently to think that true which they mistaking delivered to them for Tradition Fourthly They retorted the Objection saying That if it were a Fault Arnob. p. 91. A veteribus institutis in alias res novas migrare to quit their ancient Institutions for things new it was as well their fault as ours That whereas they objected to the Christians Divortium ab institutis majorum Tert. ad Nation cap. 10. their departure from the Institutions of their Ancestors they communicated with them in the same Crime For Exclusa a vobis Antiquitas you though you plead Antiquity against us have your selves cast it off Totam Authoritatem majorum vestra Authoritas dejecit Your own Authority hath destroyed or overthrown the whole Authority of the Ancients and we see even whilst you urge it against us Per omnia corruptam imo deletam in vobis Antiquitatem Antiquity wholly corrupted and even extinguished amongst you which is the constant Plea of Protestants that they desert the Roman Church only as far as she hath palpably deserted the pure and Ancient Church of Christ they separate from her only in those things in which she hath most plainly separated from the Faith and Discipline of ancient Rome and the whole Church of Christ and this hath been so demonstratively proved in the Article of the true Canon of Scripture by Bishop Cousins of the Pope's Supremacy by Doctor Barrow in the Articles of Service in Latin Veneration of Images Communion in one Kind the Seven Sacraments in Three late Treatises designed to prove the Fallibility of Romish Councils by their actually false Decrees that none of the Disputers of the Church of Rome have dared yet to meddle with them and thereby give us good Assurance who know they want not will to do it that they cannot Answer them The like hath excellently been performed in all the other controverted Articles if not to the Conviction yet to the Silencing of our Adversaries Fifthly They constantly tell the Heathens That there was a time when their Religion was New and when their Gods began to be so that this being so Arnob. l. 2. p. 92 93. Cum de novitate loquimini Religionum nostrarum vestrae vobis in mentem non veniunt when they spake of the Novelty of the Christian Faith they forgat the Novelty of their own Religion our Religion say you P. 94. was not Four hundred Years ago and your Gods say we were not Two thousand Years ago Now is it not shameful and impudent in you Quod agere te videas in eo alterum reprehendere to reprehend another for what you do your selves and to object that as a Crime to others which may be retorted on your selves Since then we as constantly affirm and have as fully proved That there was a time when the Religion of the Church of Rome was new in the contested Articles That Christianity had gone through several Centuries before any of them were received as Articles of Christian Faith That many of them have been introduced since the Ninth Century may we not also add that therefore Romanists forget their own Religion when they Charge ours with Novelty and reprehend that in us which they themselves are truly guilty of Sixthly § 12 In defence of their Proceedings against this Objection they declare That it was the property of Wise Men Theodo Serm. 1. contr Graec p. 477. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be enslaved to their former Opinions nor to be bound to follow the Customs of their Fathers but to seek the Truth wheresoever they could find it That every Man ought in those things especially which concern the manner of his living to trust to his own judgment and rather to depend on his own Senses in seeking out the truth than as if he himself were bereft of Reason Lact. l. 2. c. 7. P. 273. Credentem alienis erroribus decipi to be deceived by giving credit to the Errors of others God having given reason to him sufficient to find out the Truth Athan. contr Gent. p. 32 33. And speaking of the way of Truth they tell them That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there needs no-nothing but our selves to come to an exact knowledge and comprehension of it If you ask them by what internal Principle we may arrive at this knowledge they Answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That it is every Mans Soul and the faculty of Reason in it If you enquire by what external Directions this Mind must be assisted Ibid. p. 1. they reply They must 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 find the Truth from the Divine Oracles That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are of themselves sufficient for the Declaration of the Truth and that even an Heathen Macarius might learn it there Now this is plainly sending us to our private Reason and Apprehension of the Sense of Scriptures to find out the Truth and to assure us That it is an act of Wisdom in us not to be enslaved to our former Opinions nor bound up by the Customs of our Fore-fathers from searching after Truth wheresoever we can find it Seventhly They add That the Heathens ought not to prejudge and run them down with this Prescription or by objecting to them their revolt A Religione majorum from the Religion of their Ancestors but fairly ought to come unto the merits of the Cause Lib. 2. p. 90. Causam convenit ut inspiciatis non factum nec quid reliquimus opponere sed secuti quid simus potissimum contueri You are not saith Arnobius to condemn us for the Fact without enquiring whether we had not a just Cause for doing it nor object to us what we have left without considering what we have embraced in lieu of it for what hinders why as others who invented Falshoods delivered them to Posterity Sic nos qui verum invenimus posteris meliora tradamus so we who have found the Truth may deliver better things to Posterity Which Passages are a full Answer to all the French Rhetorick touching the Prejugez legitimes comre les Calvinistes Eighthly In particular against this manner of prejudging § 13 which is now become almost the only Refuge of the Romanists they say 1st That they ought not to be run down with multitude that Religion could not be proved true because it had many Followers or false because it had but few Assertors Arnob. l. 3. ab initio and that even the Christian Religion could neither be proved nor disproved upon this account and that this vain pretence of Heathens had already been answered by the Christians mille modis a thousand ways and refuted by most cogent Reasons And indeed among the Relicks
of Antiquity ascribed by some to Athanasius by others to Theodoret to Maximus to Etherius we have one brief but full Discourse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against them who judge of Truth only by multitude Athanas Tom. 2. p. 293. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where the Author first tells us that he is to combat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against a false Assertion that the Authors of it are Objects of Pity or Commiseration that they fled to this miserable Refuge only for want of Reason on their side and even confessed their being vanquished that multitude was proper to fright a Man but by no means to perswade him that in the concernments of this World we do not much regard it and much less should we be moved by it in heavenly Matters to recede from the Testimonies of the Scriptures and the agreeing Sentiments of the Ancients that our Lord had told us That many are called but few chosen That streight was the Gate which leadeth unto Life and few there be that find it And that every wise Man would rather be of the number of those few P. 291. than of that number which goes in the broad way For had any Man lived in the days of Stephen would he not rather have been of his side alone than of the side of the multitude which rose up against him Had not Phineas boldly opposed himself to the prevailing multitude the Plague had not ceased nor had the rest been saved Was it not better to fly with Noah to the Ark than with the multitude to perish in the deluge to go alone with Lot from Sodom than with the multitude to perish there We indeed venerate the multitude but then it is a multitude 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which flies not examination but which affordeth demonstration 2dly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apud Athanas To. 2. p. 325. They add That they ought not to be called upon to yield a blind assent to the Dictates of other Men without using their own Judgments to consider and enquire What is possible what is suitable or unsuitable what acceptable to God what is congruous to Nature what consonant to Truth what accords with the Mystery what is agreeable to piety They have accordingly left us a Discourse in opposition to those Men who required them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 simply to believe their Dictates without considering what was fit or unfit to be embraced informing us That this was of many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 326. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 horrible Doctrines the worst which Satan had invented to lead Men into dangerous Deceits That it was the Doctrine of Men who imperiously commanded all Men to follow their Dictates and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to believe without Reason and called that Faith which was an assent without trial to things unstable and undemonstrated That it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the rise of Error and of all Evils the Doctrine of all Hereticks who declined the Examination that they might avoid the consutation of their Doctrines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That according to it no Man could find the way of Truth or avoid the precipice of Error That according to it we being asked to yield assent to the unproved Doctrines of Hereticks and Heathens should consent to do so P. 327. Whereas if we examine what we are required to believe we shall have full assurance of the Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither believing without reason nor speaking without Faith. Ninthly They say that it must be acknowledged that they had rationally cast off the Customs and Traditions of their Fore-fathers because they could discover wherein they had generally erred Praepar Evang l. 4. c. 4. For thus Eusebius speaks If we can shew that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all the Heathens and Barbarians which were before our Saviours time did not know the true God but either worshipped those which were no Gods or evil Spirits it must be then confessed that we acted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by a true and righteous Judgment when we became 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Revolters from the Superstition of our Fore-fathers If therefore we not only can but actually have shewed in the forementioned particulars that the Church of Rome hath generally erred then must it also be acknowledged that our Separation from her was the result of Truth and Righteousness Tenthly They lastly say Arnob. l. 2. P. 95. That their Religion must be Ancient because it consisted in the Worship of the Supream God Quo non est antiquius quicquam than whom nothing is more Ancient And in like manner we declare our positive Religion must be Ancient because it consists of the Articles delivered in the Scriptures of the New Testament and in the Symbol of the Apostles and taught by the Four first Centuries we therefore in like manner do conclude with them as to all the positive Articles of our Religion Non ergo quod sequimur novum est sed nos sero addicimus quidnam sequi oporteat That what we follow is not New though 't was but lately that we learned that it was that and that alone we ought to follow Now by impartial consideration of these particulars I leave any Man of Reason to judge whose Religion is most suitable in the general Grounds of it to the Sentiments of Antiquity whether we Protestants plead any thing against those of Rome which the ancient Christians did not also plead against the Heathens and whether the most plausible Objections of the Romanists against us be not fully answered by what these Fathers say in the defence of common Christianity against the Hereticks and Heathens 4thly Mr. M. adds Object 4 That all those who had been instructed by the Apostles before Scripture was written P. 322 340. converted and instructed Thousands who never had heard any Apostle preach and all these believed on the Authority of the then present Church P. 415. That from the preaching of Christ unto the finishing of the Canon and the divulging of the same in such Languages as all Nations understood very many Years passed and all the true Believers in Christ's Church were governed by Tradition only R. H. doth also tell us That God besides Guide of Controv Disc 2. ch 5. §. 44. and before the New Testament Scriptures left these Doctrines sufficiently revealed to the then appointed Ecclesiastical Guides from whom both the present People and the future Successors of those Guides both were and might rationally know they were to learn them and so had there been no Scriptures might to this Day by meer Tradition have learn'd them sufficiently for their Salvation First Reply 1 To this I answer That Mr. M. is much out when he talks of Seventy or Eighty Years before those Scriptures were written which were to be the future Rule of Christians for the Gospel of St.
are plainly opposite to the Doctrines Practices and Traditions formerly received and approved in the Church of Christ and this they do believe so firmly that they rather chuse to suffer loss of Life and all the Comforts of it than own these Doctrines of the Church of Rome as Apostolical Traditions Moreover whereas it is no Man's Interest to make the World believe there was such a City as London if there was no such place in being it is the Interest of the whole Church of Rome to set up this pretence to Infallibility in the General that finding it disclaimed by other Churches she with some Colour may pretend unto it and 't is the Interest of the Roman Clergy as much to stickle for the Truth of her pretended Traditions as it was the Interest of Demetrius and his Fellow Artists to avouch to the Ephesians They might be truly Gods which were made by Hands and that the Image of Diana truly fell down from Jupiter since otherwise their Craft would be set at nought And as it was the Interest of the Master of the Pythonisse to be angry with St. Paul for casting out the Evil Spirit from her because thereby his Hopes of Gain was gone For if Men will not receive their Traditions as the Truths of God they cannot Lord it over their Consciences nor drain their Purses nor give Laws at pleasure to the Christian World but must be put to the hard task of proving what they would have us take upon their Words And Fourthly Whereas he that doubteth whether there be such a City as London may repair unto it to be convinced by ocular demonstration whither shall he repair who doubteth of the Truth of the Traditions of the Church of Rome for Satisfaction in that Matter Will you send him to Scripture You have already told him he cannot know what is Scripture what Copies and what Texts are uncorrupted what Translation of it is Authentick but by the Church and also that when he knows all this he cannot understand the meaning of the Scriptures in places disputable and variously sensed as you know those are by which you prove both the Churches Infallibility and the Pretences of the Roman Church to be Infallible Will you send him with Mr. P. 360. M. To the unanimous Consent and Tradition of our Church that is the Church of Rome what is this but to bid him believe that Self-evident which he thinks evidently false to believe the Church of Rome to be Infallible in her Traditions and then he will not doubt of her Infallibility or to turn Roman Catholick and then he will no longer be a Protestant Will you add with him That what is proposed by the Tradition of such a Church is evidently credible Ibid. and sufficient to beget an infallible assent Is it not then matter of Amazement that so many Millions of Persons throughout the World endowed with intellectuals as piercing and accomplished with all Abilities which their Adversaries can boast of yea who many of them have strong temporal motives to incline them to embrace the Romish Traditions and all the miseries which Papal Tyranny can inflict to awaken them into a serious consideration of all the Evidence that can be offered for them and who are Men seriously industrious to attain Salvation and Men who know they must perish everlastingly if they resist the Truth clearly propounded to them I say is it not matter of Amazement that so many persons so qualified should from Generation to Generation so unanimously reject what is evidently credible and able to beget within them an infallible assent yea that they should dispute and write many Books against it though they could never do so but they must contradict what is self-Evident What is this but in effect to say All Protestants always were are and must be whilst they continue Protestants resolved to be damned and as obstinate as the very Devil in doing what they know must tend to their eternal Condemnation Will you send him to the Vniversal Church either by it you mean only the R. Church and her Adherents or you do not if you do you again send him to the Church of Rome if you do not you must renounce that Article of Faith which all your Clergy stand by Oath obliged to defend viz. the Roman Catholick Church and with it your Pretences to Infallibility on the account of any of these Promises which do confessedly belong only unto the Vniversal Church of Christ CHAP. XII Mr. M ' s. Fifth Assertion That all Catholicks ever held that for true which was owned by the Vniversal Church of their times and rejected the contrary as an Error answered by way of Concession § 1. First That this is absolutely true in reference to Doctrines and Practices truly necessary to the Being of a Church But Secondly That this is with Lirinensis to be restrained to the Fundamentals of Faith is proved 1st from Scripture 2dly from Reason § 2. Thirdly From Instances as First That of the Administration of the Sacrament to Infants which they generally practised both in the Eastern and the Western Churches § 3. They declared this Practice to be necessary § 4. That they speak not this of such a participation of the Body and Blood of Christ as may be had in Baptism but plainly of the Puriticipation of the Eucharist § 5. Inferences hence 1. To prove the Definition of the Trent Council touching this Matter actually False 2ly That the Practice or Doctrine of the Church in any Age is no true Evidence of Tradition or the right Interpretation of Holy Scripture 3ly That Mr. M ' s. Argument for Prayer for the Dead from Tradition is not convincing § 6. 2. From the Opinion of the Fathers That it was not lawful for a Christian to swear at all § 7. 3ly From their Opinion That good Angels were transported with the Love of Women and got Gyants of them § 8. 4ly From their Opinion That it was unlawful for any Clergyman to engage himself in Secular Affairs § 9. Or to go from one Church or Diocess to another § 10. 3ly When whole Churches and Nations differ and Heresies prevail the Fathers say we are for finding out the Truth to have Recourse only to Scripture and to primitive Tradition § 11. A full Answer to Mr. M ' s. Argument for Tradition from the Ancient Custom of praying for the Dead shewing on what Accounts the Ancients did it what Reason we have not to do it That the Prayers for them used by the Church of Rome are Novelties and that those used by the Ancients were perfectly destructive of the Roman Purgatory § 12. MR. § 1 M. saith That whatsoever was held by the Vniversal Church P. 367 368. was without farther Question held for true and the contrary to it was ever rejected as an Error Neither will you ever find a Catholick who ever had the Boldness to say that the Church of
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