evident from History and the Confessions of the Romish Doctors Com in Dan. 14. That as Lyranus saith In Ecclesia aliquando sit deceptio populi in Miraculis factis a Sacerdotibus The Priests of that Church sometimes deceived the People with Miracles Non obscurum est quot opiniones invectae sunt in Orbem per homines ad suum quaestum callidos confictorum miraculorum praesidio p. 188. Cap. 11. §. 11. De purg l. 1. c. 11. quarta Ratio De Sanctorum Beat. l. 1. c. 19. accedant l. 2. c. 12. Argument quartum De Sacr. Euch. l. 3. c. 8. postremum de poenit l. 3. c. 12. quarta Ratio done by them for temporal Advantage That according to the Passage cited by the Lord Faulkland from Erasmus or Sr. Thomas Moor many Opinions have been brought into the World by Men cunning to promote their Profit by the means of feigned Miracles I have already proved from the Testimonies of Romish Writers That by such Miracles they do endeavour to confirm their Doctrines we need no other Witness than their Bellarmine who proves Purgatory from the Apparition of Souls declaring they were in that Place That Saints are to be invoked and Images to be worshipped from the Miracles performed upon the Invocation of the First and the Worship of the Second The corporeal Presence of our Lord in the Sacrament and the jus divinum of Auricular Confession from the same Topick And yet some of their Writers have seen just Reason to confess that some of the Miracles produced to confirm these Articles In sum part 4. qu. 11. Art. 4. §. 3. were either humane or diabolical Impostures Thus Alexander of Hales saith That Flesh appeared in the Sacrament interdum humana procuratione interdum operatione Diabolica sometimes by humane Procurement and sometimes by Procurement of the Devil In Can. Miss lect 49. f. 127. b. And Gabriel Biel doth acknowledge that Miracles are done to Men who run to Images sometimes by the Operation of Devils to deceive those inordinate Worshippers God permitting it and their Infidelity exacting it And the same Verdict may with great Reason be passed upon all the rest they appearing in the World not only after that time when the Fathers tell us Miracles were ceased or not to be regarded and when they said the Power of working Miracles was to be given up to Satan but also after that the Goths the Vandals Longobards Franks and Saxons and other barbarous Nations had over-run the West and brought in a Deluge of most horrid Ignorance this dark and dubious Conjuncture was the very Season when these Romish Miracles began to swarm and fly abroad Then do we hear from Pope Gregory Gregory of Tours Bede and others of the Apparitions of sad Souls to acquaint others with their sad Condition underneath craving for Help from the Prayers Pilgrimages and Masses of the Living a Charity which neither Moses nor the Prophets Jesus Christ or his Apostles ever thought fit to mention or prescribe Then do we hear from the Second Nicene Council from Gregory of Tours and other later Writers of Images bleeding smiling or mourning as Occasion required Then do we read in Paulus Diaconus Paschasius and other Patrons of Transubstantiation of Flesh and Blood and of a little Child appearing in the consecrated Elements Now had such Miracles been truly wrought by divine Power and Assistance upon these Occasions they would have more especially been then performed when the Gift of Miracles continued in the Church and was confessedly common among Christians and done for Confirmation of the Faith and for Conviction of the Vnbeliever they being then more necessary for those great Ends for which they were at first designed nor would the Writers of the first Four Ages have been less careful to mention and appeal unto them than are the Romanists at present whose Histories are stuffed up with them especially they would have mentioned them in those Discourses and Apologies which were design'd on purpose to confirm the Christian Faith from the miraculous Operations done by Christians they being not less zealous to promote the Glory of their Lord the Interests of Christianity the Credit of their Institutions and the true Honour of their Saints than Romish Priests Whereas from the beginning of Christianity to the Days of Constantine we do not find in all the genuine Records of Antiquity one tittle of this Nature They are indeed very copious in relating the miraculous Cures and Operations then performed (a) Clem. Recogn l. 5. §. 36. Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 13 p. 34. Iren. l. 2. c. 57. by Imposition of Hands (b) Tertull. ad Scap. c. 4. by anointing of the Sick with Oil (c) Just M. Apol. 1. p. 45. Dial. 247. Iren. l. 2. c. 56 57. Orig. in Cels l. 1. p. 7 20. by Prayer and invocation of the Name of Jesus (d) Just M. Dial. p. 302. Orig. l. 7. p. 334. Lact. l. 4. c. 27. by adjuration of evil Spirits by his Name but of miraculous Apparitions of Souls from Purgatory of Flesh and Blood appearing visibly in the Eucharist of Miracles performed at the Adoration of Images or at auricular Confession they speak not one Word these being Miracles designed for other Ends and reserved for times more worthy of them Thirdly Errors in Doctrine or in Practice Sect. 9 might exceedingly prevail by reason of the great Authority the Vogue and Reputation of those Men who either first began or else gave Countenance to them when begun by others St. Paul well understood what an Inlet to Schisms Contentions and Divisions it would be for Men to cry up Paul Apollo Cephas 1 Cor. i. 12. iv 6. and to be puffed up for one against another and therefore he endeavours to prevent that Evil in the Church of Corinth and in most of his Epistles he is constrained to magnify his Office 2 Cor. c. 10 11 12. and to commend himself in opposition to those false Apostles and deceitful Workers who made it their Business to depress his Authority and to procure Credit and Admiration to themselves It was the great Opinion which the Jews had both of the Scribes and Pharisees which caused them so readily to embrace and superstitiously to Reverence and stiffly to retain those Superstitions and Traditions by which they render'd vain God's Worship and made void his Law. Vide Cap. 11. §. 7. They saith Josephus had the popular Applause as being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most worthy of Credit in the Peoples Judgment and the best Interpreters of their Laws Mr. Wake 's Second Def. Part 1. p. 81. And we at present see how great a Grief it is to some that our Ministers are in the best Sence popular by living so as to deserve the good Opinion and preaching so as to deserve Attention from the People and gaining Reputation to their Doctrine by their Sincerity as well as Learning or in St.
nor a Decree received into the Code of Canons by the Vniversal Church as was the contrary Decree of the Council of Laodicea nor were the men that made it likely to judge better what were the Books of the Old Testament received as Canonical than all the Writers now produced for our Canon they whom we have produced as our Witnesses being either men who lived upon or near the place where the Canon of the Old Testament was published and known or travelled many of them thither and one of them on purpose to learn exactly the number of those Books And surely it is too ridiculous to imagine that it should in the Fifth Century be better known in Africa what Books of the Old Testament were Canonical than at Jerusalem Caesarea Alexandria or any of the Eastern Churches Moreover This Canon of the Council of Carthage in the Roman Code lately set forth by Paschasius Quesnel hath only Tobit and Judith and two Books of Esdras of all the Apocryphal Books now Canonized at Rome nor in the Collection of Cresconius Can. 299. an African Bishop is there any mention of the Books of Macchabees or Baruch nor in the Edition of it by Balsamon so that this cannot be a proof that the Trent Canon was received then And lastly 't is true they stile the Books there mentioned Canonical but this may only be in that large Sence in which those Books were sometimes called so which were read in the Church though they were not sufficient to confirm matters of Faith as may be argued from the Reason which they give us why they stiled them Canonical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Balsam in can 27. Concil Carthag viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because we have from the Fathers received these Books to be read in the Church and from the Gloss of Balsamon upon it who to know what Books were Canonical in the strict Sence sends us to the Council of Laodicea Athanasius Nazianzen and Amphilochius who all declared against the Apocrypha and to the last Canon of the Apostles which leaves out most of them And whereas it is added that the Canons of the Council of Carthage were established in the Sixth General Council held in Trullo let it be noted First That at other times the Romanists will by no means admit this Council Can. 36. Can. 13. Can. 55. because it equals the Bishop of Constantinople with him of Rome forbids Priests to be separated from their Wives condemns the received Customs of the Church of Rome and prescribes contrary Laws to her but now because they hope their Forlorn Cause may have some small advantage by it they give it the Title of a General Council Note 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 2. That this Synod in the same Canon in which it confirms the Council of Carthage confirms also the Canons of the Council of Laodicea together with the Canonical Epistles of Athanasius Nazianzen and Amphilochius which number the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as we do rejecting the rest with us as Apocryphal when therefore the Fathers in the Synod confirm the Canons of the Council of Carthage they must either contradict themselves by contradicting the Council of Laodicea and these Canonical Epistles now mentioned and by them equally confirmed or else they must believe that this Canon of the Council of Carthage did not declare these controverted Books to be properly Canonical or divine Scripture but only in that larger sence in which that Name was given to Ecclesiastical Books thought worthy to be read in the Church Fifthly Whereas Mr. M. and J. L. farther assert That after these Books were declared Canonical by Pope Innocent and the Council of Carthage all cited these Books as Scripture none pertinaciously dissented from this Decree no Catholick ever doubted of them we are bound to thank them for their kindness to us in these words in which they plainly have renounced their Title to almost all the best Writers of the Christian World who as the Reverend Dr. Cousins hath demonstrated through every Century till the very Year of the Session of the Trent Council not only doubted of but plainly did reject these Books as uncanonical in the strict acceptation of the Word declaring that they read and cited them indeed as Books containing good instruction but not as properly Canonical or as sufficient to confirm any Article of Christian Faith. Lastly The Testimony of St. Austin in his Book of Christian Doctrine is so inconsistent with his other works and so fully answered by the Reverend Dr. Consins Can. 7. that it is needless to say any thing distinctly to it To proceed therefore to the Books of the New Testament § 14 observe First That the four Gospels the Acts of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 25. l. 6. c. 25. the Thirteen Epistles of St. Paul the First Epistle of St. Peter and the First of St. John were always 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confessed by all true Christians to be sacred Books of the New Testament and their Authority was never questioned by any person of the whole Church of God. Now sure we have unquestionable certainty of such Books as have been handed down to us by the Tradition of all Ages of the Church inserted into all her Catalogues cited by all her Writers as Books of a Divine Authority and of which never any doubt was made by any Member of the Church of God. Secondly § 15 Observe That it cannot be necessary to Salvation to have an absolute assurance of those Books of the new Testament which have been formerly Controverted by whole Churches as well as private Doctors of the Church for either these Churches had sufficient certainty that the Books which they rejected were Canonical or they had not if they had how could they be true Churches who rejected part of their Rule of Faith when known to be so If they had not it seems not necessary that we at present should be certain of them for why may not we go to Heaven without this assurance as well as they of former Ages Thirdly § 16 There can be no assurance of the true Canon of the Books of the New Testament from the Testimony of the Romish or the Latin Church in any Age because she in some Ages hath rejected from the Canon that Epistle to the Hebrews Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 20. which she now receives It was rejected in the Third Century by Cajus Presbyter of Rome by Tertullian in the same Century who also in his Book Cap. 20. de pudicitia insinuates that it was not received as Canonical by some other Churches Origen in his Epistle to Africanus having cited a passage from the Eleventh Chapter of this Epistle adds That it is probable some being pressed with it Pag. 232. may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 embrace the Sentence of them who reject this Epistle as
the Roman Church were in this case opposite to Scripture and the plainest Reason And as St. Basil doth to Amphilochius in the same case Can. 47. Eos qui Romae sunt non ea in omnibus observare quae sunt ab origine tradita Ep. 75. p. 220. Though you and the Romans hold the contrary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet ought our Sentence to take place And as Firmilian expresly doth That 't is usual with them of Rome to vary from Apostolical Tradition Could so many Fathers so many Churches so many Councils have not only practised in opposition to the Doctrines and Customs of that Church but also have condemned them in such opprobrious Terms as they have done Cyp. Ep. 69. p. 185. Ep. 73. p. 206 208 210. Ep. 74. p 212 c. pronouncing the Assertors of them Prevaricators in matters both of Faith and Truth Betrayers of the Church Enemies to Christians Friends and Abettors of Hereticks Men who did plead their Cause and partake with them in their Sins Men who did null evacuate destroy the Baptism of the Church and give up the Spouse of Christ to Adulterers Fifthly § 25 Hence it is manifest That in that Age they verily believed that what had passed for Apostolical Tradition in the Church of Rome and her Adherents might be no such matter that both that Church and her Abettors might impose upon their fellow Christians in pretending to it and that there lay no Obligation on other Churches to comply with them in such matters as they delivered for Apostolical Tradition For otherwise how could it happen that so many populous Churches so many Councils so many famous Bishops that Athanasius Optatus St. Basil Cyril of Jerusalem all great Assertors of true Apostolical Tradition should declare so plainly and expresly against this practice of the Church of Rome that Firmilian should declare Neminem tam stultum esse qui hoc credat Apostolos tradidisse Ep. 75. p. 219. Nemo infamare Apostolos debeat quasi illi Haereticorum Baptisinata probaverint Ep. 74. p. 211. No Man could be so Foolish as to believe the Apostles had delivered any such thing that St. Cyprian should say That this pretence of Romanists was manifestly false and tended to blaspheme the Reputation of the Blessed Apostles that the Africans should not only reject this pretended Apostolical Tradition in the opprobrious Terms forementioned but should declare so oft in Council that the contrary Doctrine descended from Evangelical Authority and Apostolical Tradition Vid. Supra and was confirmed by the Divine Law and the Holy Scriptures How lastly could it happen that all the other Churches excepting that of Rome were all at Peace and still maintained Communion with these Opposers and Traducers of this pretended Tradition and did not blame them in the least on this account but rather interceded with the Roman Bishop to lay aside his Fury and entertain Communion and Friendship with these Churches as they did Sixthly Hence it appears that in that Age they thought not Custom or Tradition though practised by the Church of Rome and by the major part of Christians any certain Rule of Manners but thought themselves obliged sometimes to vary from it and that they might have Truth and Reason and Scripture on their sides against it that it concerned them to examine then whether the Custom they were required to follow had its rise from Christ and his Apostles and could be proved from their Writings and if not to reject it For in this matter they declare Non esse consuetudine praescribendum Cypr. Ep. 71. p. 194. sed ratione vincendum Their Adversaries were not to prescribe to them from Custom but to convince them by reason St. Paul having taught every one not to adhere pertinaciously to what he had once imbibed Pag. 195. but willingly to embrace any thing which he found better or more profitable That 't was in vain when Men were overcome by reason Ep. 73. p. 203. to oppose Custom to it as if Custom were better than Truth and that were not rather to be followed which was revealed for the better by the Holy Spirit that Non semper errandum Ibid. p. 208. quia aliquando erratum est We must not always erre because we once have done so Ep. 74. p. 215. that Custom without Truth was only old Error and vainly was preferred before it that the Truth being manifested Concil Carth. apud Cypr. p. 236 240 241. Custom was to yield to it that no Man ought to preferr Custom to Reason and Truth that Christ being Truth we ought rather to follow that than Custom that it was obstinacy and presumption Cypr. Ep. 74. p. 212. humanam traditionem divinae dispositioni anteponere to preferr humane Tradition to divine Orders and not to consider that God is angry when humane Tradition evacuates divine Precepts that when it was said to them let nothing be innovated Ibid. p. 211. but that which was delivered be observed it was to be enquired unde est ista traditio whence is that Tradition Whether from the Authority of Christ and the Gospel the commands and Epistles of the Apostles and if in Evangelio praecipitur Ib. p. 215. aut in Apostolorum Epistolis aut Actubus continetur it were commanded in the Gospel or contained in the Acts or Epistles of the Apostles then was it to be observed and that when Truth shook and staggered we were to have recourse to the Head and Original of Divine Tradition ad originem dominicam Evangelicam Apostolicam Traditionem to the Gospel and Apostolical Tradition Lastly Hence it is evident § 26 That in those early times Tradition Apostolical and from the beginning must falsly be pretended by Great Men and Churches even in a matter of continual practice and occurrence in the Church of God for here you see it was pretended for the Admission of Hereticks without Baptism by Pope Stephen and his Church and the fame Tradition Apostolical and from the beginning was pretended for the opposite Doctrine by Firmilian and St. Basil and their Party and yet the Church did in the following Ages declare against the Pretences of them both If then in these plain matters of Fact and of continual practice Tradition did so fail both the Pretenders to it must it not be more apt to fail in matters of meer Speculation If by Tradition these Churches could not truly tell what their Forefathers did how should they by it tell assuredly in all things what they held since that could only be made known unto them by their Words and Actions if actually they handed down unto posterity for a traditionary Practice that which was not truly so why might they not also hand that down to them as a traditionary Doctrine which was nothing less than so CHAP. V. Eightly We distinguish also betwixt Traditions which appear from Reason to be such as ought to be received and
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.
libr. Regum Tom. 3. f. 6. a. say That the Canonical Books of the Old Testament are Twenty four which say they from St. Jerom St. John in his Revelations introduceth under the Name of the Twenty four Elders Dr. Cous p. 131 133. P. 147. P. 152. P. 164 178 196. so in the Sixth Century Primasius and Leontius in the Eighth Century Venerable Bede in the Ninth Century Ambrosius Ausbertus in the Twelfth Century Peter Abbot of Celle in the Fifteenth Century Thomas Anglicus and in the Sixteenth Frances Georgius Now manifest it is even from the very number here assigned of Twenty two or Twenty four Canonical Books that all these Authors must exclude those Books we call Apocrypha from the Canon and it is still more evident from their own Words in which they expresly say P. 133. These are the Books received the Books put into the Canon by the Church P. 151. P. 157 194. P. 197. the Books received by the Church and Canonized The whole Canon which the Church receives and which was handed down unto them by the Authority of the Ancients And of those which we stile Apocryphal they say Ibid. P. 151. These are the Books which are contradicted and not received by the Church The Books of the Old Testament which are not received by the Church P. 152 162 177. P. 158 159 163 169 175 The Books which are read indeed sed non scribuntur non habentur in Canone sed leguntur ut scripta patrum as are the Writings of the Fathers but are not put into the Canon non reputantur in Canone are not reputed to belong unto it The Books which the Church reads and permits for Devotion and the instruction of Manners but thinks not their Authority sufficient ad confirmandam Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum Authoritatem P. 166 173 176 191 193. to confirm the Authority of Ecclesiastical Doctrines The Books which are not to be received ad confirmandum aliquid in fide to confirm any Article of Faith. The Contents of which she obligeth no man to believe P. 189 190. nor doth she judge him guilty of disobedience or infidelity who receives them not Concerning which the Church receives the Testimony of St. Jerom as most Sacred P. 194. who did undoubtedly exclude them from the Canon To whom say they the Church Catholick is much indebted upon this account P. 199. and to whose sence the sayings both of Councils and Fathers are to be reduced Books with whose Authority no Man was pressed Books P. 202. P. 174 188. Lastly which were not genuine but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Spurious and Apocryphal which the Christian Church doth not receive P. 166 201. pari Authoritate or pari veneratione with the like Authority or Veneration with which she doth receive the Holy Scriptures Now hence the Doctors of the Church of Rome may learn what it is they are to do § 12 if they would prove any of their Doctrines to have descended to them by a like Tradition with that of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament viz. they must prove they were owned in the New Testament were delivered as Traditions by the Apostles and all the Ancient Bishops and Governors of the Church They must produce express Testimonies of Christian Writers in all Ages asserting That the Church received such a Doctrine and that they in delivering of it followed the Tradition of the Church and their Fore-Fathers and saying That the contrary Doctrine was not received by the Church They must shew That even from the first Ages of the Church Christians were solicitous to enquire what were the Apostolical Traditions not left in writing to the Church that upon this enquiry they found that these Traditions were of such a certain number neither more nor less that they thought it necessary to preserve them by writing Catalogues of all such Traditions as were received or owned as such by Christians That this Catalogue of Traditions was delivered to them by the Primitive Fathers as they had been received by the whole Church and that they had received them from Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word That they took care to leave this Catalogue of Traditions because some persons dared to mix Apocryphal Traditions with Divine and that they made it out of necessity to prevent mistakes in this matter and for the Instruction of those who received the first Rudiments of the Faith that they might know out of what Fountains to draw the Waters of Tradition They must produce from the first Four Centuries Testimonies of this nature from Fathers living in most places where there were any Christians and Testimonies uncontrouled throughout those Centuries And seeing one of these Traditions viz. that which concerneth the Canonical Books of the Old Testament is expresly contrary to a Tradition delivered and handed down to us with all these circumstances they must prove that in this matter Tradition hath plainly delivered Contradictions throughout Four whole Centuries which being done we cannot chuse but think her Testimony is Infallible Hence also we may see what an unparallell'd confidence they shew when in their Disputations the Romanists are bold to say and lay the stress of their whole certainty of Faith upon this Proposition That they hold the same Doctrine to day which was delivered yesterday and so up to the time of our Saviour seeing it is as clear as the Sun that the Books of the Old Testament which they now hold for Sacred and Canonical were for Fifteen whole Centuries together declared not to belong unto the Canon but excluded from it by the Church And this will be still more apparent by considering what the Authors of the Question of Questions § 13 and of The Papist Misrepresented and Represented say touching this matter Mr. M. saith Sect. 19. n. 6. p. 410. That when it was grown doubtful in the Church whether such and such Books were part of the Canon of Scripture the Tradition which recommended these Books was examined in the Third Council of Carthage and there all the Books of the R. Canon were found to be recommended to the Church by a true and Authentical Tradition and therefore we embrace them as the Word of God. And again Sect. 3. n. 12. p. 84 85 86. As yet the Church of Christ had not defined which Books were God's true word which not wherefore then it was free to doubt of such Books us were not admitted by such a Tradition of the Church as was evidently so universal that it was clearly sufficient to ground an infallible belief but in the days of St. Austin the Third Council of Carthage A. 397. examined how sufficient the Tradition of the Church was which recommended these Books for Scripture about which there was so much doubt and contrariety of Opinion and they found all the Books contained in our Canon of which you account so many Apocryphal to have been recommended by a Tradition sufficient
And amongst these he reckons the Seven Catholick Epistles of the Apostles Pag. 59. comprised in one Volume which he calls the Sixth Volume of the New Testament Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul comprised in the Seventh Volume and in the Eighth the Revelation of St. John of which he testisieth that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 60. shewed and judged to be his by the Ancient and holy Fathers led by the Spirit of God And then concludes Pag. 61. These are the Canonical Books of the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as it were the first fruits Anchors and supports of our Faith. St. Cyril is another who professeth to write his Catalogue from the Church and to hand down the Canonical Books as she received them from the Apostles the Ancient Bishops and Governors of the Church and he among the Canonical Books of the New Testament reckons the Seven Catholick Epistles and Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul leaving out only the Apocalypse The Council of Laodicea reckons them exactly as St. Cyril doth leaving out with him the Apocalypse not that they question its Authority but because they reckon up only the Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which ought to be read in the Churches Cyril Catech. 4. p. 38. Concil Laod. Can. 60. among which the Apocalypse was not because it is so very Mystical and accordingly the Council concludes their Canon thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Books we have received from the Fathers to be read in the Church and yet they do command that nothing should be read there but Canonical Scripture Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. Ruffinus declares he reckoned the Volumes of the New Testament as they were delivered to the Church of Christ secundum majorum Traditionem and according to the Tradition of the Ancients and then he accounts Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul Seven Catholick Epistles and the Apocalypse saying Haec sunt quae patres intra Canonem concluserunt These are the Books which the Father 's put into the Canon Can. 27. The Council of Carthage undertaking to reckon up the Canonical Books of the New Testament enumerates Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul Two of Peter Three of John One of James and One of Jude and the Apocalypse of St. John as received from the Fathers St. Jerom reckons the Canonical Books of the New Testament after the same manner only saying That the Epistle to the Hebrews was by most shut out of the number of the Epistles written by St. Paul that is some in his time conceived St. Barnabas others St. Clemens either did interpret it from the Hebrew or write it either from the Mouth or from the Notions of St. Paul but then he adds Ep. Tom. 3. f. 13. That the whole Greek Church and some of the Latins did receive it That all the Eastern Churches and all the Churches which used the Greek Tongue did Anciently own it as the Epistle of St. Paul and that he also owned both that and the Apocalypse not respecting the Custom of his present Age but following the Authority of the Ancient Writers who cited Testimonies from both not as sometimes they are wont to do from Apocryphal Books but as from Canonical Scripture And good reason had he to say 1. § 19 Lib. 3. c. 24. That he received the Apocalypse on the Authority of the Ancients when Eusebius expresly declares That a judgment might easily be passed of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Testimony of the Ancients Athanasius that it was determined Synop. p. 60. and demonstrated to be his by the Ancient and Holy Fathers led by the Spirit of God. And indeed Ep. ad C. §. 34. Dial. cum Tryph p. 308. Pag. 373 477 128 347 376 480 486 500 503. Lib. 5. c. 30. p. 485. Pag. 201. 528. Tom. 5. in Joh. Hom. 7. in Jos pag. 269 270 411 510 c. De opere Elem p. 202. de bono pat p. 219. Hist Eccl. l. 4.24 Ibid. c. 26. Lib. 5. c. 18. p. 186. Lib. 7. c. 25. it is cited in the First Century by Clemens Romanus as a Prophetical Writing In the Second Century by Justin Martyr as a Book writ by John one of Christ's Twelve Apostles By Irenaeus in the same Century as the Revelation of John the Disciple of the Lord the Revelation of St. John and he declares it was written by him pene sub nostro saeculo almost in our Age at the end of the Reign of Domitian It is mentioned in the Third Century as holy Scripture and a Prophetick Vision by Clemens of Alexandria as the Revelation of that John who lay in the bosom of our Lord by Origen it is mentioned by Tertullian as the Prophecy the Revelation the Vision of the Apostle John in above Twenty places by St. Cyprian as that Revelation in which we hear our Saviour's Voice and in which he speaks to us Eusebius informs us That Melito Bishop of Sardis writ upon the Revelation of St. John that Theophilus Bishop of Antioch owned it and cited from it many Testimonies Now both these flourished in the middle of the Second Century That Hippolitus the Disciple of Irenaeus did the same And that Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria professed That he durst not reject it by reason of the multitude of Christians who had a veneration for it and that he owned it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the work of an holy Man inspired of God. And judge now whether he had not sufficient ground to say this matter might be decided by the Testimonies of the Ancients That this Book was refused by Marcion the Heretick Contra Marcion l. 4. c. 5. Haer. 51 54. Haer. 30. we learn from Tertullian that it was rejected by the Alogians and Theodosian Hereticks we learn from Epiphanius and St. Austin and that when some Orthodox Christians began to dislike the Doctrine of the Millennium they began also to dispute some the Author of this Book ascribing it to another John Presbyter at Ephesus and others the Authority of it because they could not answer the Testimony produced from the Twentieth Chapter in favour of the Saints Reign on Earth a Thousand Years But then their Arguments against it are only taken from some vain and weak Imaginations of their own Brains as v. g. That St. John here names himself which in his Gospel and Epistles he never doth by which Argument we must reject either the Lamentations or the Book of Jeremy 2. Because he doth not use the same Expressions here as he did there that is in a Prophetick Stile as in a Doctrinal on which account Ecclesiastes and the Canticles cannot be writ by the same Author And 3. Because he writes here better Greek than elsewhere which if so may be because he writes not to the Jews but to the Asiaticks or after he had more conversed with them who spake that Language in its Purity As for those who ascribe
from the Deifying Scriptures from Evangelical Authority and Apostolical Tradition that they decreed for it according to the Testimony Authority and Commands of the Holy and Divine Scriptures Ninthly Observe That these Africans and Orientals differed from their Brethren without condemning or censuring of them or breaking of the Peace or Unity of the Church on this account or separating from Communion with those Christian Bishops who thought fit to do otherwise We saith St. * Propter Haereticos cum Collegis Coepiscopis nostris non contendimus cum quibus divinam concordiam dominicam pacem tenemus Ep. 73. p. 210. Cyprian as much as in us lies do not contend with our Colleages and Fellow Bishops about Hereticks we hold a sacred Concord and the Lord's Peace with them Qua in re nec nos vim cuiquam facimus nec legem damus Ep. 72. p. 198. we prescribe to no Body we prejudge no Man but leave every Bishop to the Liberty of his Will to do what he thinks best in this matter we force no Man Ep. 69. p. 188. we give Law to no Man. The Preface of the Council of Carthage assembled under Cyprian runs thus It remains that every one of us speak his judgment in this Matter judging no Man nor a jure communionis aliquem Apud Cypr. p. 229. si diversum senserit amoventes separating any Man from our Communion who thinketh otherwise St. Basil excellently declares himself in the matter of the Cathari that because there were different Opinions in the Church concerning the validity of their Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 1. the custom of every Region was to be followed And of the Encratites he saith that it was his Opinion that they ought to be Baptized but then he adds That if this would be any impediment to the Order of the Church in that Matter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb H. Eccl. l. 7. c. 5. the Custom which had obtained any where was to be observed This excellent Temper then prevailed in all the Churches of God for Dionysius of Alexandria in his Epistle to Pope Stephen saith That all the Churches notwithstanding this difference were at Peace and Concord and thence entreats him to consider the weight of the Affair he had begun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by refusing to Communicate with them who admitted Hereticks into the Church by Baptism praying him to disist from it and telling him that for his part he durst not provoke so many Churches Ibid. c. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to strife and contention by subverting their Decrees The Council of Carthage Apud Cypr. p. 229. Neque enim quisquam nostrum Episcopum se Episcoporum constituit aut Tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem collegas suos adigit Ibid. in reference to this Action of Pope Stephen speaks thus We pass our Sentence in this matter judging no Man or separating no Man from our Communion who thinks otherwise for none of us makes himself a Bishop of Bishops nor endeavours by tyrannical Terror to compel his Colleages to a necessity of Obedience Ep. 74. p. 210 214. St. Cyprian accuses him of Pride or Vnadvisedness and acting as a Friend of Hereticks and an Enemy of Christians for thinking it fit to Excommunicate God's Priests on this account Firmilian declares That he acted inhumanely Per illius inhumanitatem effectum est c. Apud Cypr. Ep. 75. pag. 225. Cum tot Episcopis per totum mundum diffensisse pacem cum singulis vario discordiae genere rumpentem modo cum orientalibus modo vobiscum qui in meridie Ep. 75. p. 228. by being at Dissention with so many Bishops throughout the World and breaking the Peace with every one of them by various kinds of Discord with those of the East by pronouncing them Excommunicate and with those of the South by not vouchsasing to speak with the Bishops sent to him nor permitting others to receive them into their Houses and by dividing the Fraternity for the sake of Heretieks which various kind of Discord had Valesius well observed he would not against so great evidence have denied that Stephen did as much as in him lay separate or in the Language of the Council of Carthage amovere a jure communionis expel from right of Communion those who differed from him it being hence evident that he Excommunicated the one and vouchsafed not to speak with the other Tenthly § 21 Whereas the Roman Doctors usually say that Stephen's traditum est prevailed against the opposite Opinion of the Eastern and the Southern Churches and that the case was after by the Church determined for Pope Stephen against Cyprian this is a great mistake for neither the Opinion of P. Stephen nor of St. Cyprian prevailed but they were both rejected by the Church of Christ and that which was the mean betwixt them was embraced For 1. Whereas Pope Stephen with his Church determined That no Hereticks should be Baptized from whatsoever Heresie they came into the Bosom of the Church or Contra Petil. de unico Baptismo c. 14. as St. Austin saith Baptismum Christi in nullo iterandum esse censebat He held that the Baptism of Christ was to be repeated on no Heretick whatsoever The Ninteenth Canon of the Nicene Council saith That if the Paulianists do fly into the Bosom of the Church we will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they by all means be Baptized again The Council of Laodicea commandeth Bishops and Presbyters to Baptize Can. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 them who returned from the Heresie of the Cataphrygae or the Montanists Can. 7. The General Council of Constantinople speaks thus Them who come to us from Hereticks we admit after this manner the Arians Macedonians Sabbatians Novatians Quartodecimans the Cathari and Apollinarians without Baptism but the Eunomians the Montanists Sabellians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all other Hereticks we receive as Gentiles we Catechise them and for a long time make them hear the Scripture Can. 95. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and then we Baptize them The General Council in Trullo repeats the same Decree in the same words and then adds That we admit by Baptism likewise the Manichees Valentinians and Marcionites and other Hereticks of like nature Ad Amphil. Can. 47. St. Basil determines That the Encratitae the Saccaphori and the Apotactites were to be rebaptized Now all these Canons are approved by the following Synods Can. 1. that of the Second Nicene Council and the Eighth Council of Constantinople and so we cannot doubt but that they both believed and practised accordingly Since then we are assured from so many Testimonies that Pope Stephen would have all Hereticks whatsoever admitted at their return into the Church without Baptism and in particular from the Testimony of St. Ep. 74. p. 214. that he admitted of the Baptism of Marcion Valentinus and Apelles it
together in the Church they did and therefore what is coming together v. 17. coming to the Church v. 18. coming to one place v. 19. is coming together to eat v. 33. Accordingly it was the Custom of the Church from the Apostles times thus to communicate upon the Lord's day Pliny in his Epistle to the Emperor Trajan Soliti sunt stato die ante lucem convenire c. Ep. l. 10. Ep. 97. tells him That he found nothing to alledge against the Christians but their Obstinacy in their Superstition and that is was their Custom to meet together on a set day before it was light and to bind themselves by the Sacrament to do no evil Now this Epistle was writ only Six Years after the Death of the Evangelist Saint John. And Justin M. who wrote but Fifty Years after his death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apol. 2. p. 98 99. thus speaks On Sunday all the Christians in the City or Country meet together because that is the day of our Lord's Resurrection and then we have read unto us the Writings of the Prophets and Apostles this done the President makes an Oration to the Assembly to exhort them to imitate and do the things they heard then we all join in Prayer and after that we celebrate the Sacrament and they that are willing and able give their Alms c. Fourthly § 4 This may be further proved from the Church's Testimony and from the plain Expressions of the Fathers who flourished in the first and purest Ages of the Church For to this Effect Century the first besides the words of Clemens Romanus already mentioned the Apostle Barnabas saith of the Apostles and Christians in the General 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sect. 15. We keep the eighth day a Festival in which our Jesus rose from the dead Century the Second I have produced the plain Testimonies of Ignatius Justin M. Irenaeus Dionysius of Corinth Melito Sardensis Century the Third I have produced already the Testimony of Clemens of Alexandria to which add that of Tertullian who saith in his Apology Diem folis laetitiae indulgemus Cap. 16. Sunday is the Festival of us Christians And in his Book Ad Nationes That they did rejoice upon that day Solem Christianorum deum aestimant quod innotuerit nos die solis c. Lib. 1. cap. 13. and that this was a thing so well known to the Heathens that hence they took occasion to conjecture That the Sun was the God of Christians Neque enim Resurrectio Domini semel in anno non semper post septem dies celebratur In Esa Hom. 6. Hom. 7. in Exod. fol. 41. Ep. 38. Ed. Ox. p. 75. that of Origen That the Resurection of our Lord is not celebrated annually only but every seventh day which therefore in opposition to the Jews he calls Dominica nostra The Christians Lord's day And that of Cyprian That Aurelius Dominico legit reads on tâ—â— Lord's day Centuny the Fourth Epiphanus informs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expos fid cap. 22. That the Holy Catholick Church keeps every Lord's day as a Festival In a word no Church no single Writer ever represented this as a new or introduced Practice but do continually speak of it as the constant Practice of the Christian Church We never read that any of the converted Jews though they retained the Jewish Sabbath ever disputed the Observation of the first day of the week in honour of our Lord And therefore as the Reverend Bishop Bramhal truly saith Pag. 918. To question now whether there was a formal precept for that which all the Christian World hath obeyed ever since Christ's time and shall obey until his Second Coming is a strange degree of Folly. And that this may be farther evident I add this second Proposition That the Apostles had Commission from the Lord Christ § 5 Prop. 2. or were directed by his Spirit to ordain and chuse this day to be employed in the publick Exercise of Christian piety and in remembrance of the Resurrection of our Lord. For First Christ did Commission his Apostles to teach the Churches all his Doctrine and to deliver them all his Commands and Orders which concerned their Duty and his Service for thus he delivers his Commission to them All Authority is committed to me in Heaven and Earth Matth. 28.18 Go therefore and disciple all Nations teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you John 20.21 He also saith unto them That as my Father sent me so send I you and surely the Father sent him who was Lord of the Sabbath with full Commission to change and alter it and substitute another day in lieu thereof Accordingly the Apostles exercised this Power they founded Churches they delivered to them the Doctrines and Commands of Christ they setled Church Officers Orders and Discipline and surely then they had Commission also to settle the time to be appointed for the Service of their Lord and Master When therefore they began to practise the Observation of the first day of the Week they only did what their Commission from the Lord impowered them to do Secondly That the Apostles were directed by the Holy Ghost to set apart this day for Holy Worship or to appoint Church Meetings on this Day and therefore that this was done by a Divine Authority appears from this That their Determinations touching smaller Matters and which were only â—porary are by themselves ascribed to the Holy Ghost thus when Saint Paul gives his advice in respect of the present necessity touching a single Life though he confesseth he had no express from Christ touching that matter yet he ascribes this Counsel to the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. 7.40 For I think saith he I have the Spirit of Christ Again the same Apostle speaking of the Directions which he gave concerning their Church Meetings and their Behaviour in them saith 1 Cor. 14.37 If any man think himself to be a Prophet or Spiritual let him acknowledge that the things I write unto you are the Commandments of the Lord. The same must therefore be much more acknowledged of things of so high a nature as that is which they delivered to be observed by the Universal Church they being equally Appointed and Authorized to instruct them in Discipline and in Matters of Divine Worship as in matters of Doctrine and as well by Word as by Epistle and therefore as well in the Observation of the time appointed for the Worship of their Lord as in the due Regulation of it when they came together The same Saint Paul professeth 1 Cor. 11.23 That he had received from the Lord what he delivered to the Church of Corinth touching the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and when he speaks of one particular concerning which he had no precept from Christ he saith expresly This speak I not the Lord 1 Cor. 7.12 if then the practice touching the Observation 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
under Heaven Act. 2.5 and all received the same Traditions and Doctrines which were condemned by our Lord and his Disciples and that it was incredible that Churches so dispersed through many Countries and Nations should agree together to affirm a Falshood for a Truth Now to this way of Arguing I desire to know what Answer can be given but by shewing by what ways such Opinions actually might have spread among them though not originally received and proving from their own Scriptures and Writers That these Opinions were not always held among them and if this way be good when used by Christians against them it must be as good when used by Protestants against Papists if this Plea be sophistical when put into the Mouth of an unbelieving Jew it must be as sophistical when it proceedeth from the Mouth of Papists I have not been so fortunate as to meet with any direct Answer to this Argument only to the Argument urged from the actual Condemnation of our Lord as an Impostor by the Sanhedrim That no Submission no blind Obedience could be due to the Church Guides then ruling in the Jewish Church The Guide of Controversies Disc of the necessity of Ch. Guides c. 3. §. 25. p. 17. Confer avec M. Claude p. 183 184 185. and the Bishop of Meaux thus answer That the Messias coming with Miracles and manifested by the other Two Persons of the Trinity by the Father with a Voice from Heaven commanding to hear him and by the Holy Ghost seen descending on him as also by the Baptist was now from henceforth to be received as the supreme Legislator and nothing to be admitted from others or from the Sanhedrim it self contradictory to what he taught which high Court therefore now for the Accomplishment of his necessary Sufferings was permitted by God to be the greatest Enemy of Truth and guided therein not by Gods but a Satanical Spirit of whose Doctrines therefore our Lord often warned the People to beware The Bishop of Meaux adds nothing considerable to this Answer and is plainly baffled by his learned Adversary Mr. Claude to whose Works I remit the Reader Now First Is it not wonderful to see how these Men say and unsay pronounce a thing impossible in one Case and in another like unto it confess it actually done We shew them That in the Jewish Church such false Traditions had generally prevail'd as tended to evacuate the Law of God render his Worship vain and to engage them to reject the true Messiah and yet they were received as Doctrines of their great Prophet Moses handed down to them by oral Tradition that infallible Preserver of Truth True say they the Church Guides were then permitted by God to be the greatest Enemies of Truth and guided therein not by Gods but a Satanical Spirit add now to this That the Doctrines and Traditions of these Men found general Reception in the Jewish Church And will it not hence follow That Doctrines taught Traditions introduced by the greatest Enemies of Truth and by Men acted not by the Spirit of God but that of Satan may generally prevail to be received as true Doctrines and Traditions derived from prophetical Authority and fit to be assented to received and practised by all Secondly Did these Traditions and false Doctrines against which our Saviour cautioned them begin then only to spring up among them when our Saviour appeared with his Miracles when at his Baptism the Holy Ghost descended visibly upon him and God gave Testimony to him by a Voice from Heaven If so you see that even the whole Jewish Church though scattered throughout the World might all at once embrace Traditions of such evil and pernicious Consequences though they before had never heard one tittle of them and so not only in the Compass of one Age but of Three Years at farthest new and pernicious Doctrines might generally obtain in the whole Jewish Church and why not also in the Western Churches within the compass of Eight hundred Years But that these Doctrines of the Scribes and Pharisees these Traditions which they had received touching Christ's temporal Kingdom and touching the personal Appearance of the Tisbite to be his Fore-runner and touching the Expositions of the Law condemned by Christ were not of so late Date as our Lord's Baptism and Entrance upon his prophetick Office is evident beyond Dispute from what I have discoursed already from Josephus Ch. 11. §. 7. asserting that they were received from the most ancient Jews from Epiphanius that they derived them from Moses from the mention of them in our Saviour 's time as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. xxviij 17. Gal. i. 14. Customs and Traditions received from their Fathers and from the great Incredibility that these things should so generally obtain to be received as Traditions in so short a time Besides we know the Expectation of their temporal King had alarm'd all the East before and their Tradition that Elias the Tisbite should come in Person to anoint him and be his Fore-runner must be as old as the Translation of the Septuagint These Doctrines and Traditions must be therefore taught whilst these Church Guides and Rulers were infallible in the Interpretation of the Scriptures and were true Judges of what they had received by Tradition if ever they were so or rather it must be apparent that they were not so because they generally had prevailed upon the People to receive Doctrines and Traditions of such fatal and pernicious Consequences and therefore all the specious Harangues the Papists make concerning the Impossibility that false Traditions and corrupt Doctrines should prevail amongst them must be as plausible when uttered by the Jew against the Christian as by the Papist against Protestants For v. g. where may they say will you produce the Men of former Ages who taxed the Jewish Church with such corrupt Traditions as your Jesus taxed them with or bid Men beware of the Doctrine of them who sate in Moses Chair or of those Scribes and Pharisees who had obtained so great Credit on the Account of Piety and Learning Do not you Christians own that we were once a right Vine the true and only Church of God till the Appearance and Baptism of your Jesus Who therefore can believe that God would suffer such dangerous Doctrines to prevail in his own Church and raise up no Church Guides except the Sadducees to contradict them until your Jesus and his Disciples undertook to be Reformers of it Where then had God a true Church in the World if not among the People of the Jews What other Church could Christ and his Disciples mention besides that whose Governors he taxed with voiding the Commandments of God and rendring his Worship vain because of some Traditions which they had received from their Fore-Fathers If then God suffered his Church to be all over-run with such a fatal Leprosy where was the watchful Eye of Providence Yea where the Care or Conscience of
to his Corinthians the things which they already read and did acknowledge and to write the same things which he had taught to his Philippians Phil. iij. 1 If St. Peter thought it needful to write unto the Jewish Converts to testify to them 1 Pet. v. 12. 2 Pet. iij. 1. 1 Jo. v. 13. that was the true Grace of God in which they stood and to stir up their sincere minds by way of Remembrance St. John that they might know they had eternal Life and might believe in the Son of God. Ver. 3. St. Jude to mind them of the Common Salvation If the Evangelist closeth his Gospel with these words These things were written that you might believe Joh. xx 31. and believing might have Life through his Name surely these persons would not but think it necessary that the essential Doctrines of Christianity should be written And who can think the Holy Spirit of God would have assisted them to indite these Gospels and Epistles had he conceived it needless that they should be written 2. We have the plain Assertions of the Authors of the New Testament that they were written by the Servants and the Apostles of the Lord by Men who declared that the things they writ were the Commandments of the Lord 1 Cor. xiv 37. 1 Pet. i. 18. by Men who preached the Gospel to them by the Assistance of the Holy Ghost sent down from Heaven and proved the Truth of what they said by mighty Signs and Miracles owned even by Jews and Heathens as well as by their Christian Converts 3. We find the matter of them worthy of the God of Heaven to reveal 4. We find them generally received as such by those who bore the Name of Christians however differing in other matters read daily in their Assemblies cited in all their Homilies and Sermons called their Digests and their God-making Books by appealing to which they confirmed their Doctrines and confuted their Adversaries and which they offered to be perused to the very Heathens And hence we have just reason to presume that they had Cause sufficient to believe them such 5. We also have the concurrent Testimony of Jews and Heathens citing them as such and thence making Objections against the Christian Faith and attempting to wrest them out of the Hands of Christians that so Christianity might be destroyed out of the World. And lastly We have good reason to suppose that Providence of God which was so highly interested in propagation of the Christian Faith and making of it known unto the World would not permit false Records of that Faith to be so early and generally imposed upon the Christian World. Let us then see it proved by Mr. M. that the matter of those Roman Traditions contained in their new Creed is worthy the God of Heaven to reveal and that we have like reason to suppose his Providence concerned about them let us see plain Assertions of the like Primitive Authority that they were delivered by Men assisted by the Holy Ghost and equal Miracles performed in confirmation of that Assertion let us see a like necessity that Christian Revelations should be handed down by word of Mouth a like general Reception of these Traditions throughout all Ages a like appearance of them in the Christian Writings or Citation of them by Jews or Heathens and when this Evidence hath been produced by Mr. M. we shall be ready to Embrace and own them also as the unwritten Word of God. But whosoever undertakes this Task will find some of these things imply a contradiction viz. That an Oral Tradition should be necessary to be Recorded or daily read in the Assemblies of Christians That it is upon the Matter confessed by Du Pin in his Abridgment of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Three first Centuries P. 605.613 that scarcely any mention of these supposed Traditions can be found in the Homilies or Writings of those Ages Moreover we find not in those Primitive Ages any mention of the Divine Original of these Traditions any appeal to them as such any confirmation of Christian Doctrine or confutation of their Adversaries by them nor any thing objected from them either by Jew or Gentile against the Christian Faith tho' since the time that we confess they came into the Church both Jew and Gentiles have been very forward to object as against other things so especially against Transubstantiation and the Veneration of Images and the Adoration of the Host. Lastly there appears no such real Excellency in them no such tendency to the advancement of true Holiness and Goodness as may convince us they are things worthy of the God of Heaven to reveal and which his Providence should be concerned to preserve and propagate throughout all Ages Moreover we distinguish betwixt Historical Traditions of the Primitive and succeeding Churches § 3 Dist 2. such as are the Tradition concerning the perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin the Birth of our Lord or his coming forth out of her Womb Clauso Vtero his coming to his Disciples the Doors being shut his Age the time of his preaching upon Earth and the like and Traditions touching Articles of Faith and Doctrines to be believed in Order to our being either sound Believers or good Christians Touching the first we say 1. That we have no occasion to dispute with them about some of these things and therefore what St. Basil saith of the perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin That though it would not be offensive unto Piety to say That afterwards she did the works of Matrimony her Virginity being only necessary till the Birth of Christ yet the Mystery being not concerned in it we leave it unregarded and unsearched into We say of other matters of this nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De humana Christi Gener. Tom. 1. p. 509. In Matth. Ed. Huet p. 223. we think it best not to search curiously into them though that of Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They who say these things would preserve the perpetual Virginity of Mary seems to insinuate that this was once but the Opinion of some Men. And they who were most zealous for it as was St. Jerom against Helvidius Ut haec quae scripta sunt non negamus ita ea quae non sunt scripta renuimus natum deum esse de virgine credimus quia legimus Mariam nupsisse post partum non credimus quia non legimus Tom. 2. f. 6. a. do it upon this Ground because the contrary is not written for thus he speaks As we deny not those things which are written so we refuse those things which are not written we believe our Lord to be Born of a Virgin because we read it we believe not that Mary was Married after her delivery because we read it not 2dly We add That as for the pretended Tradition § 4 that our Lord came out of the Womb of the Blessed Virgin without opening of it though
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
she actually hath imposed false Doctrines and Practices as Apostolical Tradition 2. Because she hath no better Right to testifie in this Matter than the Eastern Churches § 2.3 Because her present Testimony contradicts the Testimony of the whole Church in general and of the Roman Church in particular in former Ages § 3. 1. Touching the number of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament 2. Of the Authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews 3. Of the number of the Sacraments 4. Of Concomitance 5. Of pronouncing part of the Mass in a low Voice 6. Of the Veneration of Images 7. Of Communion in one Kind 8. Of her Twelve new Articles 9. Of the no necessity of giving the Eucharist to Infants Ibid. 4. Because this Doctrine makes Scripture Reason and Antiquity not only useless but pernicious to us § 4. More Instances of the Contradiction betwixt the Decrees of the Ancient Catholick Church and of the present Church of Rome 1st In the Decree of the Trent Council touching the Freedom of the Blessed Virgin from Actual Sin § 5. 2dly In the permission that Church gives to eat things Strangled and Blood § 6. In punishing Men with Death for their Religion § 7. In not breaking the Bread they distribute not permitting the Communicants to carry it home not Consecrating it with a loud Voice § 8. In the Matter of the Immaculate Conception though not conciliarly defined § 9. Seven Corollaries from this Instance § 10. MOreover § 1 for farther Explication of this Question let it be noted Dist 4. That by the word Tradition when we allow what can be proved by it to be in Matters of Faith a Doctrine or a Revelation derived from the Apostles in matters of Government of Discipline or practice an Apostolical Ordinance or Institution we mean not the Tradition of the present Church and much less the Tradition of the Church of Rome and her Adherents Charity Maint ch 2. §. 14. but we mean with Mr. Knot Such a Tradition which involves an evidence of Fact and from Hand to Hand from Age to Age bringing us up to the Times and Persons of the Apostles Id quod in Ecclesia Universa omnibus retro temporibus servatum est merito ab Apostolis creditur institutum De verbo Dei non scripto l. 4 c. 9. and our Saviour himself cometh to be confirmed by all those Miracles and other Arguments by which they proved their Doctrine to be true or such a Practice as the Church hath observed in all past Ages according to the Third Rule of Bellarmine for the discerning Apostolical Traditions and such an Article of Faith as all the Doctors of the Church by common consent have always testified to have descended from Apostolical Tradition Such is the Tradition which St. Basil insists upon for the use of the Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Spirit in the Doxology of the Church viz. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. de Spiritu Sancto c. 29. which was customarily used in the Churches from the first Preaching of the Gospel to that very time and of such Traditions we say with him Ibid. That it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 suitable to the Apostles Doctrine to continue in them Praefat. in libr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such is the Tradition of which Origen speaks when he saith That only is to be believed as Truth which in nothing disagreeth from the Tradition Ecclesiastical that is The praedicatio per successionis ordinem ab Apostolis tradita usque ad praesens in Ecclesiis permanens preaching delivered down by order of Succession from the Apostles and to this present time continued in the Churches This is the Tradition of which St. Cap. 8. Austin speaks in his Book De utilitate credendi viz. of the Tradition quae ab ipso Christo per Apostolos ad nos usque manavit Cap. 10. which came down from Christ by his Apostles to that present time which à Majoribus nostris tradita ad nos usque servata est being delivered by our Ancestors hath been preserved to our times and which is Cap. 14. celebritate consensione vetustate roborata strengthened with a general Fame Consent and Antiquity And this is also the Authority he meaneth when he saith I should not have believed the Gospel nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae moveret Authoritas unless the Authority of the Catholick Church had moved me For he informs us That he speaks of that Authority which was Contr. Epist Man. quam vocant Fundament c. 4. Miraculis inchoata vetustate firmata begun by Miracles and confirmed by Antiquity And this must of necessity be meant by that Tradition which is the Foundation of an Article of Faith for Faith must be a matter of Divine Revelation and therefore must proceed from Christ or his Apostles from whom alone all Revelations of the Christian Faith have issued the Churches Business being to Believe to Preach and Testifie not to enlarge or shorten to alter or diversisie the Faith by them delivered to her and what they taught her as a thing necessary to be believed or practised by all Christians must consequently be so believed taught and practised through all future Ages provided that they walk according to their Rule Common c. ◠Hence saith Vincentius Lirinensis Hoc est vere proprieque Catholicum quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus That is truly Catholick Doctrine which was held in all places all times and by all Persons Sess 4. And accordingly the Trent Council and the Roman Doctors pretend to have received those Doctrines in which they differ from us partly from Scripture and partly from Tradition derived from the Apostles to their days But here begins the difference betwixt us § 2 1. That they will have the Testimony of the present Church to be an Evidence sufficient of the Tradition of the Church of former Ages and will maintain this way of Arguing to be good The present Church of Rome and they who hold Communion with her deliver such and such Doctrines as Traditions received from the Apostles and handed down from them thoughout all Ages and by all true Christian Churches to this present Age and therefore they undoubtedly are such We on the contrary say That we have clear unquestionable Evidence from Scripture and Church-History that many of the Doctrines imposed upon us by the Church of Rome as Apostolick Doctrines and Traditions were not received but rather were condemned and abhorred by the former Ages of the Church of Christ in general and in particular by that of Rome and this hath been already proved in the instance of their Latin Service the Veneration of Images and Communion in one Kind whence it demonstratively follows that this proposition is contrary to plain matter of Fact. Again What better reason can be given for this Consequence viz. The present Church of Rome with her Adherents deliver
this Revelation to an unknown Presbyter whose Name was John rather than to that Apostle who conversed so long among these Churches they may be easily confuted from this peculiar description of that John who was the Author of this Book Rev. i. 9. he being that John who was banished into the Isle of Patmos for the Word of God Vers 2. and the Testimony of the Truth and who bare record of the Word of God and the Testimony of Jesus Christ and of all things which he saw which are peculiar to this Apostle of our Lord. 2. § 20 St. Jerom also had good reason to own the Epistle to the Hebrews to be written or at the least composed or indited by St. Paul on the Authority of the Ancient Writers Apud Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 3. Sect. 12 17 36 43. L. 3 c. 38. Catalo Script verbo Paulus Pag. 247 439. Pag. 53 362 384 514 515 645. Lib. 3. p. 143. Lib. 7. p. 351. Philocal p 10 17. Dial. contra Marc. p. 114. Ep. ad Afric p 232. Seeing as Origen informs us the ancient Christians did not rashly when they delivered it as the Epistle of St. Paul and as Eusebius saith Saint Paul's Fourteen Epistles were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 known and manifest to the whole Christian World. We find it very often cited by Clemens Romanus the Companion and co-worker of St. Paul in his Epistle to the Church of Corinth in which as Eusebius and St. Jerome Note he hath put many notions which are in that Epistle and used many Expressions word for word taken thence In the Second Century it is cited by Irenaeus as a Book written by the Spirit of God and in the close of that Century or the beginning of the next it is Six times cited by Clemens Alexandrinus under the Name of the Apostle Paul or of Divine Scripture Origen saith That the Apostle Paul writ Fourteen Epistles he cites it as the Epistle of St. Paul in his Third and Seventh Book against Celsus in his Philocalia in his Dialogue against Marcian in his Exhortation to Martyrdom in his Epistle to Africanus he undertakes to demonstrate that it was his against such as doubted of it and in his Fifth Tome upon John he declares That the things contained in it are admirable Vid. Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. and no whit inserior to those which were confessedly writ by the Apostles and that whatsoever Church received it as such was upon that account to be commended That this is the Epistle of St. Paul was in the Fourth Century denyed by the Arians because they were not able to resist the Conviction it affords in the First Chapter of our Lord's Divinity On which account Theodoret speaks thus Proem in Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They ought at least to revere the length of time in which the Children of the Church have read this Epistle in the Churches for from the time that the Churches of God have enjoyed the writings of the Apostles they have reaped the Benefit of this Epistle to the Hebrews or if this be not sufficient to perswade them they should hearken to Eusebius of whom they boast as of the Patron of their Doctrines for he confessed this was St. Paul's Epistle Proem in Ep. ad Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and he declared that all the Ancients had the same Opinion of it That they of Rome and other Latins did for a while reject this Epistle will not much weaken this Tradition if we consider 1. That this Epistle was not writ to them but to the Hebrews who as we are informed by Eusebius Embraced it with delight 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 25. That it was rejected by them not that they had any thing to say against it but because they could not answer the Arguments which the Novatian Schismaticks among them produced from the Sixth and Tenth Chapter of this Epistle against receiving lapsed Penitents into the Church whence as Philastrius informs us they rejected it Haer. 88. as thinking it was depraved by the Hereticks or 3. Because it wants his Name which he concealed saith Jerom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Catal. Script Eccl. verbo Paulus because his Name would render it less acceptable to the Hebrew Converts who were offended at his Doctrine of the Exemption of the Gentile Converts from Circumcision and the Observation of the Law saith Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Proem in Ep. ad Hebr. because he was made an Apostle not of the Circumcision but of the Gentiles 4. Because it differs in stile from the rest of his Epistles as indeed it ought to do being writ to the Hebrews accustomed to the Hellenistick Stile but of this the Ancients give this double reason That it was writ by St. Paul in Hebrew translated by others into Greek or because St. Clemens Barnabas or St. Luke did Ibid. Apud Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. sententias Pauli proprio ornare sermone write down the the Sentences of Paul in their own Words saith Jerom and gave 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Phrase and the Contexture saith Origen to to the things spoken by St. Paul. The Second and Third Epistles of Saint John § 21 and that of Jude are so short that it is needless to insist upon it that the Second Epistle of Saint John is cited by Irenaeus and Clemens Alexandrinus in the Second L. 1. c. 13. p. 94. Strom. 2. De carne Christi c. 24. Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 24. Apud Cypr. p. 242. De cultu foeminar p. 151. by Tertullian Dionysius of Alexandria and the Council of Carthage in the Third Century and the Epistle of Jude under his Name by Tertullian Concerning the Epistle of St. James the Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of St. Jude let it be noted in the general that Eusebus informs us they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 25. Petrus duabus Epistolarum suarum personat tubis Jacobus quoque Judas f. 156. know to most of the Ancients That they are all expresly owned by Origen in his Seventh Honily upon Joshua Of the Epistle of Jude in particular St. Jerom saith That though it was rejected for a while because it cited a passage from the Apocryphal Book of Enoch Catal. Script Eccl. verbo Judas tamen authoritatem vetustate jam usu meruit inter sanctas Scripturas computatur it deserved Authority from its Antiquity and constant use in the Church and is reckoned among the holy Scriptures Sect. 10 12 17 30. Sess 5. The Catholick Epistle of James is cited by Clemens Romanus four several times by Ignatius in his Genuine Epistle to the Ephesians by Origen in his Thirteenth Homily upon Genesis Lib. 3. c. 25. Lib. 2. c. 22. Eusebius saith It was known to most and publickly read in
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
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
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
the Apostles understood not or neglected if they did not fulfil them but hid some of the Light that is of the Word of God and Sacramenti Christi of the Doctrine of Christ. Whereas saith he it was incredibile vel ignorasse Apostolos plenitudinem praedicationis vel non omnem ordinem Regulae nobis edidiffe that eitheir the Apostles were ignorant of any thing they were to preach or that they did not perfectly reveal the Rule of Faith to all He also shews That the Church did not alter what she had received from the Apostles because the Rule of Faith was one and the same in all Churches of Christ they being all one Chap. 20. ejusdem Sacramenti una traditione by having the same Tradition of the same Rule of Faith and because they did in eadem fide conspirare agree in the same Faith this Rule this Creed mentioned Chapter the Thirteenth must therefore be according to Tertullian the fulness of the Apostles preaching the entire Rule of Faith they preached to all or else according to him the Apostles must be ignorant or unfaithful and his ensuing Argument That all succeeding Churches agreed in this Rule as in the Tessera Hospitalitatis the Signal of Friendship Ibid. that it was one and the same among them all and that they who were not by Original Apostolical Churches were yet Apostolical because they did conspire with them that were so in the Belief of this Faith is a farther demonstration that this Creed was the entire Faith delivered by the Apostles and taught by all Churches since otherwise Tertullian's Argument must be false for he expresly undertakes to prove that the Apostles delivered to the Churches the entire Rule of Faith and that the Churches did faithfully transmit to posterity the whole Faith they received from them and that because they all transmitted the Apostles Creed mentioned Chapter the Thirteenth had not then that contained the whole Christian Faith owned then by all the Orthodox as such Tertullian had given up the Cause unto the Hereticks for they might have replied upon him as do the Romanists to us that the Apostles delivered many other Traditions as necessary to be believed as those contained in the Creed and that these were the Doctrines which they owned and Tertullian rejected Hence then our Demonstration from these words of Tertullian is invincible All Christians conspired in this that this Rule of his contained the whole Faith received from the Apostles beyond which nothing was necessary to be believed whosoever could produce this Creed they received into Communion pro consanguinitate doctrinae because agreeing with them in the Faith and whosoever pretended to any Articles of Faith not mentioned in this Creed they confuted them by saying they had no such Article in the Creed and therefore the Apostles Chap. 32 33. nihil tale docuerunt taught no such thing and rejected them ob diversitatem Sacramenti as holding a Faith different from that of the Church Now how is it likely that so many and so great Churches should erre in one Faith The Errors of the Churches had there been any in delivering their entire Rule of Faith must needs have varied but that which amongst them all was one and the same must be a sure Tradition and then the Doctrines of the Roman Creed must be rejected as not taught by the Apostles and as different from the Churches Faith. Mr. M. Ibid. Lo here plain Protestantism in the highest point proved and approved by all Christians within Two hundred Years after Christ The same Doctrine is delivered Chapter the Nineteenth and the Twentieth Pag. 429 430. on which Mr. M. insists Sect. 20. Num. 4. for there he tells us That our Lord sent his Twelve Apostles eandem doctrinam ejusdem fidei nationibus promulgare to preach the same Doctrine of Faith to the Nations and so to plant Churches in every City from which other Churches received traducem fidei femina doctrinae the Tradition of their Faith and the Seeds of Doctrine and embracing of it became all Apostolical by receiving the same Rule of Faith. Hence therefore saith he we prescribe against the Hereticks Hinc igitur dirigimus praescriptionem Cap. 21. for if our Lord sent his Apostles to preach we must receive no other Preachers of the Faith than he appointed now what they preached ought not to be otherwise proved than by the same Churches which they planted eis praedicando tam vivâ quod aiunt voce quam per Epistolas postea by preaching to them by word of mouth and afterwards by their Epistles And if so 't is manifest saith he that Doctrine is to be accounted true which conspires with the Apostolical Churches whence Faith had its Original and that is to be rejected which contradicts that Faith it remains therefore uti demonstremus an haec nostra doctrina cujus Regulam supra edidimus de Apostolorum traditione censeatur ex hoc ipso an caeterae de mendacio veniunt that we demonstrate whether our Doctrine the Rule of which we have laid down Chapter the Thirteenth derives from the Tradition of the Apostles and consequently whether all others be not false He therefore doth again declare That the Creed mentioned by him there is the entire Rule of Faith and that by which we may discern who hold the Truth and who teach Falshood And argues thus All the Apostolical Churches have delivered this Creed as that entire Doctrine which they received from the Apostles and all the Hereticks say the contrary therefore their Doctrine must be rejected and that of the Apostolick Churches be received as the Truth Mark here Pag. 429. to use the words of Mr. M. how the first ground on which we are to stand as upon a ground most advantageous for gaining the victory against Error and purchasing triumph to Truth is the Tradition of this Creed of the Apostles as the entire Rule of Faith for by that alone we assuredly know whether our Doctrine of which the Rule is given Chapter the Thirteenth came from Apostolical Tradition from this Rule of Faith delivered by the Apostles by word of Mouth and by their Writings and then by Tradition delivered down by successive practice of all Churches to which Churches Tertullian here expresly sends us will be discovered that only Tradition of the Rule of Faith in which totum Christianae fidei Sacramentum all the Mysteries of Christian Faith are contained And thus Tertullian goes on pressing his Adversary meerly by the Tradition of this Creed as the entire Rule of Faith and this way and only this way he prescribes that we ought to shew what Christ and his Apostles taught Fifthly § 9 Hence we return an Answer to that demand so often but so vainly made What Catalogue have you of Fundamental Articles of Faith For here is a Catalogue of them recommended to the whole World of Christians by so great Authority as may well be esteemed