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 Greek And that their Versions of the New Testament where they vary Graecis cedere oportere non dubium est must yield to the Greek Copies is without doubt St. Jerom in his Epistle to Lucinius saith Ep. Tom. 1. f. 69. b. That he had Translated most of the Old Testament according to the Hebrew and that he had Translated the New according to the Authority of the Greek Ut enim veterum librorum fides de Hebraeis voluminibus examinanda est ita novorum Graeci sermonis normam desiderat For as the Truth of the Books of the Old Testament is to be examined by the Hebrew so is the Truth of the Books of the New Testament to be examined by the Rule of the Greek In his Epistle to Sunia and Fretela he tells them Tom. 3. f. 28. a. That as in the New Testament if at any time a Question arise among the Latins and there is a diversity among the Copies recurrimus ad fontem Graeci sermonis we recurr to the Greek the Original Language in which the New Testament was writ so in the Old Testament if there be a diversity between the Greek and Latin Copies ad Hebraicam recurrimus veritatem Ep. Tom. 3. f. 10. b. we recurr to the Hebrew Verity In his Epistle to Damasus he saith That he had at his command Translated the Four Evangelists codicum Graecorum emendatâ collatione mending the former Versions by the Collation of the Greek Copies it being the desire of Damasus that because the Latin Copies differed he would shew quae sunt illa quae cum Graeca consentiunt veritate which best agreed with the true Copies of the Greek and indeed saith he If we must trust to the Latin Copies let them who think so say to which for they are almost all different one from the other surely the Scripture of the New Testament being writ in Greek when that differs in the Latin Tongue uno de fonte quaerendum we must have recourse to the Fountain Now by the way they who speak so expresly of the Hebrew and the Greek Verity by which the truth of the Latin Copies is to be examined shew that the Decree of Trent that the vulgar Latin Sess 4. pro Authentica haberetur should in all Readings Disputations Preachings and Expositions be received as authentick and that no Man should dare under any pretence to reject it agrees with Antiquity after their usual manner by way of Opposition and flat Contradiction to it though in this matter I confess they are the more excusable seeing as Espenceus saith In 1 Tim. c. 3. it rendred any of the Latins suspicious to know Greek and it was almost Heretical to know the Hebrew Tongue And as Melchior Chanus doth inform us The School-men for Four hundred Years Loc. Com. l. 2. c. 12. p. 108. retained only the Latin Edition quippe linguae Graecae Hebraicae non habuerunt peritiam because they had no skill in Greek or Hebrew Thirdly § 10 That the Books of the New Testament have been handed down unto us uncorrupted in the necessaries and substantials of Christian Faith and Manners we conclude from Reason grounded upon matter of Fact delivered and testified by the Doctors of the Vniversal Church and we receive them as such from the rational Evidence which Tradition affords in this Case Whence we collect 1. That the Apostles and Holy Spirit which did assist them in inditing of this Canon for the Church's use could not be wanting in causing them to be transmitted to those Christians for whose use they were indited because they could not be wanting to pursue the end for which they were endited Besides that they were actually thus committed to them is the Tradition of the whole Christian World which owned and cited read and received them for such from the Apostles Days as is apparent from the Epistles of Clement Polycarp Ignatius and others who were contemporary with the Apostles and from the works of Justin M. Irenaeus and many others of the Second Century They were read also by the Jews as Trypho doth confess and by the very Heathens at the invitation of the Christians For our Doctrines and Writings saith Justin M. Apol. 1. p. 52. Apol. 2. p. 7. are such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as all Men are permitted to read and if you will vouchsafe to look into them you may learn these things for we do not only read them our selves Ibid. p. 82. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but we bring them to you to peruse knowing that they will be acceptable to all that read them Apol. c. 31. We our selves do not suppress them saith Tertullian and many Accidents do put them into the Hands of Strangers They were attested to by the Sufferings of the Primitive Christians who rather chose to suffer Death than to deliver up these Books which Sufferings they could have no Temptation to endure besides their full Conviction that they were as they always stiled them Passio S. Felicis saepius Deifici libri Scripturae deificae Books which instructed them to lead a Divine Life and which their Persecutors could have had no Temptation to suppress and burn had they not known them to have been the Records of the Christian Faith with which their Faith must live or perish Moreover they contained things of the highest moment and which it was their chiefest interest to be well assured of they being the sole Ground and matter of their support under their sharpest Trials and of their future Hopes and therefore Writings they were concerned to get and hear and read and keep Add to this that they very early were translated into other Languages into the Syriack by apostolical Men saith the Tradition of the Eastern Churches by Men of great Antiquity who lived before the Canon was established as is apparent from their neglecting to translate the controverted Books of the New Testament into the Latin and other Languages Praeleg in Bibl. polyglott 13. p. 91. saith Bishop Walton From the Beginning as we may rationally conjecture seeing the Church of Rome and other Churches which understood not Greek were founded in the Apostles Days or quickly after nor could it rationally be supposed that they were without the Scriptures long Especially if we consider That it was part of their Lord's day Exercise saith Justin Martyr Apol. 2. p. 98. to read the Writings of the Apostles As for the Books themselves we find them mostly written to whole Churches Nations 1 Cor. i. 1. 2 Pet. i. 1. or the whole World of Christians To all that called upon the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place who could not easily have received them had the Apostles by whom they were at first converted given no sufficient indication of them They were Books which could not have been spread abroad as they were in the Apostles Names whilst they were living unless the Apostles had endited them
Testament to pass by the History of Tobit Judith and the Maccabees quia non sunt de Canone apud Hebraeos nec apud Christianos because they neither are esteemed Canonical by Jews nor Christians yea St. Jerom saith in his Prologue That inter Apocrypha cantantur the Church Chants them among the Apocrypha I therefore saith he first intend to write on the whole Canonical Scripture and then super istos alios qui communiter ponuntur in bibliis quamvis non sint de Canone upon those and other Books which are commonly put in our Bibles though they belong not to the Canon Moreover the Third and Fourth of Esdras he passeth over without Notes for the same Reason On the Thirteenth of Daniel he Notes thus The History of Susanna ought to be put inter libros Bibliae non Canonicos among the Books of the Bible which are not Canonical and in his Notes on the Fourteenth Chapter he saith of the History of Bell and the Dragon ponitur inter Scripturas non Canonicas it is put among those Scriptures which are not Canonical after the History of Susanna Now had not Lyra mentioned the Judgment of the Church touching these Books yet these Expressions in Comments of so great Credit in the Church sufficiently shew that this was then a Doctrine well received in the Church of Rome Antoninus Florentinus in his Historical Summs acknowledgeth only Twenty-two Canonical Books of the Old Testament Cent. 15. Sum. Hist part 1. Tit. 3. c. 4. c. 6. §. 12. saying in General of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and the Maccabees that Ecclesia recipit the Church receives them as true and profitable though not as of force in matters of Faith Unde forte habent Authoritatem talem qualem habent dicta istorum doctorum approbata ab Ecclesia Sum. Theol. part 3. Tit. 18. c. 6. §. 2. and in particular of Ecclesiasticus that it is receptus ab Ecclesia ad legendum non tamen Authenticus est ad probandum ea quae veniunt in contentionem fidei received by the Church to be read but is not Authentical to prove things doubtful in the Faith. Alphonsus Tostatus saith of the Six debated Books Praefat. in Matth. qu. 2. That they are not put into the Canon by the Church nor doth she regularly command them to be read or to be received or judge them disobedient who do not receive them For Ecclesia non est certa de Auctoribus eorum the Church is not certain of the Authors of them yea she knoweth not an spiritu sancto inspirati whether they were indited by Men inspired of the Holy Spirit and so she obliges no Man ad necessariò credendum id quod ibi habetur to yield necessary assent to what they do contain Enarrat praefat in l. paralip q. 7. And elsewhere Though saith he these Apocryphal Books be joined with others of the Bible and read in the Church none of them is of such Authority ut ex eo Ecclesia arguat ad probandam aliquam veritatem quantum ad hoc non recipit eos that the Church proves any truth out of them for as to that she doth not receive them Dionysius Carthusianus saith Praefat. in Gen. Art. 4. The Books of the Old Testament are Twenty-two as saith St. Jerom in his Prologue before the Kings and having reckoned them up Five Legal Eight Historical Nine Hagiographa he adds Hos libros vocant Canonicos alios vero Apocryphos These Books are called by Divines Canonical the rest Apocryphal In the Sixteenth Century Franciscus Ximenius reckons those Books of the Old Testament which were extant only in Greek Cent. 16. as Bibl. Complut Praef. ad Lect. Libri extra Canonem quos Ecclesia potius ad aedificationem populi quam ad auctoritatem Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum confirmandam recipit Books out of the Canon which the Church receives rather for Edification of the People than for confirmation of Ecclesiastical Doctrines Erasmus having numbered the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as we do In expos Symb. Apost Decal Catech. 4. vers finem Ed. Antver 1533. concludes thus Intra hunc numerum conclusit priscorum Authoritas Vet. Test volumina The Authority of the Ancients comprized the Volumes of the Old Testament of whose Truth it was not lawful to doubt within this number Johannes Ferus having told us that the Apocryphal Books were Nine In exam Ordinand he adds That olim in Ecclesia Apocryphi publicè non recitabantur nec quisquam Authoritate eorum premebatur anciently the Apocryphal Books were not read publickly nor was any Man pressed with their Authority Sebastian Munster in his Preface to the Old Testament and in the Chapter of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament numbers them exactly as we do and then he saith Intra hunc numerum concluserunt Hebraei prisci Christiani volumina veteris Testamenti Both the Hebrews and the ancient Christians comprized the Volumes of the Old Testament within this number but now the other which he reckons as we do excepting only the Song of the Three Children are received in usum Ecclesiasticum into the use of the Church Moreover from the Ninth Century in which the Ordinary Gloss upon the Bible was begun by Strabus to the Sixteenth they did not only number the Canonical and reject the Apocryphal Books as we do but they did it chiefly for the very reason that is assigned in our Article viz. among others the Authority of St. Jerom Card. Cajetan Praefat. super Josuam ad Clem. 7. declaring That Sancto Hieronymo universa Ecclesia Latina plurimum debet propter discretos ab eodem libros Canonicos à non Canonicis The universal Church is very much beholding to St. Jerom not only because he noted what Parts where added to the Books of the Old Testament or were but doubtful Appendixes but also for separating the Canonical from the uncanonical Books That the Church received those Books which he received and rejected those which he rejected That Consonat Hieronymus cus maxima habetur fides in Ecclesia is inquam Hieronymus in Prologo Galeato inter Canonicos libros V. Testamenti hosce duntaxat enumerat Firmiter tamen haerendum credo sententiae Hieronymi Cujus Autoritas me movit ne multo altius quam a suo tempore de librorum horum ordine disputarem cum illis floruerit temporibus quae doctis hominibus abundabant multa ex Gestis veterum Theologorum legerit quae nunc periere peritissimus quoque suit Graecae Hebraicae literaturae demum ejus testimonium ab Ecclesia pro sanctissimo habeatur Picus Mirand de fide ordinc credendi Theorem 5. Com. in libr. Hist V. Test In primum cap. Matth. ad v. 12. Testimonium Hieronymi quoad hoc ut Sacrosanctum habetur in Ecclesiâ as to this Matter the Church held his Testimony to
A TREATISE OF TRADITIONS PART I. Imprimatur Liber cui titulus A Treatise of Traditions Part I. June 5. 1688. Guil. Needham R R. in Christo P. ac D. D. Wilhelmo Archiep. Cant. a Sacr. Domest A TREATISE OF TRADITIONS PART I. Where it is proved That we have Evidence sufficient from TRADITION I. That the Scriptures are the Word of God. II. That the Church of England owns the true Canon of the Books of the Old Testament III. That the Copies of the Scripture have not been corrupted IV. That the Romanists have no such Evidence for their Traditions V. That the Testimony of the present Church of Rome can be no sure Evidence of Apostolical Tradition VI. What Traditions may securely be relyed upon and what not LONDON Printed by J. Leake for Awnsham Churchill at the Black Swan in Ave-Mary Lane MDCLXXXVIII THE PREFACE The Contents This Proposition That the Doctrines and pretended Traditions of the Western Church could not be introduced by her Members in following Ages but must be derived to them from the Fountain of Tradition is proved false 1. By plain Instances of matters of Fact § 1. 2ly From the false Doctrines and Traditions which generally obtained in the Jewish Church § 2. 3ly From the Prediction of a general Defection from the Faith in the times of Antichrist § 3. 4ly Because this Assertion doth oblige us to account the Fathers of the primitive Ages either Knaves or Fools § 4. 5ly Because it renders all our Search into Antiquity not only superfluous but dangerous § 5. Corruptions in Doctrine or Practice might take their Rise 1st From Mistakes touching the Sence of Scripture § 6. 2ly By leaving of the Scripture and setting up the Fathers as the Rule of Faith § 7. 3ly By flying to Miracles and Visions for the establishment of Doctrines and Opinions § 8. 4ly By reason of the great Authority and Reputation of those Men who first began or else gave Countenance unto them § 9. 5ly By reason of the corrupt Manners of the Clergy § 10. 6ly By reason of the great Ignorance both of the Clergy and the People § 11. 7ly By reason of the Violence and Persecution used to force Men to a Compliance with the prevailing Doctrines or a concealment of their Sentiments to the contrary § 12. This Corruption confessed by the Writers of the dark Ages of the Church § 13. THAT which the Romanists of late have chiefly urged in favour of their present Doctrines and Traditions is That the Traditions which they now embrace as such the Doctrines which they own as Articles of Christian Faith could never have obtained such Credit in the Church or been so generally received throughout the Western Churches as they were before the Reformation had they not been from the Beginning handed down to them as Apostolical Traditions and Doctrines received by the Universal Church of Christ Now the Vanity and Falshood of this Presumption is here shewed by many Instances of plain matter of Fact § 1 demonstrating that what they of Rome at present hold for Apostolical Tradition or as an Article of Christian Faith was generally rejected in former Ages by the whole Church of Christ or at the least by the prevailing and the major part of her Church Guides And whereas it is represented by them as a thing impossible That the Western Church or the prevailing Body of it should in one Age imbrace what they in the foregoing did reject or in this Age reject what in the former they embraced Examples are produced here demonstrating that this hath actually happened in the Instance of eating things strangled and Blood Chap. 2. §. 6. which the whole Western Church abominated in the Eleventh Century and yet did practise in the Twelfth and following Ages In the Instance of the immaculate Conception denyed by the Western Church till the Thirteenth Century Ibid. §. 9. and almost generally received in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries In the Instance of the Canonical and Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament in which the Learned of the Western Church accorded with us in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries Chap. 3. §. 2.11 and yet did Anathematize our Doctrine in the Sixteenth In the Instance of the Angels falling in love with Women Chap. 12. §. 8. asserted generally in the first Four Centuries and rejected in the Fifth to omit many other Instances sufficient to convince us that what the Romanists so confidently offer to prove their Church could not be guilty of such Innovations is only like to the Attempt of Zeno to prove against plain matter of Fact that there could be no Motion But for the farther manifestation of the Vanity of this new way of Arguing a facto ad jus from what they do at present practise and believe to what they ought to do and practise or from their present Faith to an Assurance that the same Faith was always held in all preceeding Ages of the Church I shall First Shew the evil and pernicious Consequences of this way of arguing Secondly I shall point out the Ways and Methods by which these Doctrines and Practices might have prevailed in the Church and yet be nothing less than Apostolical or truly Primitive The evil Consequences of this way of Arguing are First § 2 That it gives the Jews a great Advantage against the Truth and certainty of Christian Faith for they might have then argued and still may with as much Plausibility against our Lord 's Disciples and the first Christian Converts from this very Topick as do the Romanists against the Protestants For might they not say of the very Doctrines and Traditions which they had generally received at our Saviour 's Advent and which he did so peremptorily condemn and caution his Disciples to beware of That they received them from their Fore-Fathers who received them from theirs and who must either have joined in mistaking their Ancestors or in intending to deceive their Posterity of which two things neither is credible Might not they say That the Traditions which they had then embraced were derived from Moses and that their Fore-Fathers handed them down from him to them and that the then present general Reception of them was a sufficient Evidence that they were not Inventions of that or any of the preceeding Ages but Doctrines and Practices derived to them from the first Fountain of Tradition Might they not have asked in what Year and Age those false Traditions and Doctrines entered first among them and whether then their whole Church must not have conspired to tell a lye Might they not have bid them consider the Notoriousness of the Lye and the Damage ensuing from it to themselves and their dearest Pledges and how rare a thing it is to find a Man much less a considerable Number of them who would venture upon such a Wickedness Might they not have added that their Church and People were scattered about almost through every Nation
in the Church and then this Council reckons up the Canonical Books as we do leaving out of their account those which we call Apocryphal Now this Canon being received into the Codex Canonum-Ecclesiae universalis or the Code of the Canons received by the whole Church it must have the force of an Oecumenical Synod and give us the concurring judgment of the whole Church of God on our side And yet for farther confirmation of this matter let these few things be noted First That these Fathers generally say § 6 they deliver these Catalogues as they received them by Tradition and as they were delivered to them by the Fathers and as they were received by the whole Church of Christ * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanasius in his Pascal Epistle speaks thus Because some dare to mix Apocryphal Books with the divine Scriptures of which we are fully assured from the Tradition of them to the Fathers by them who were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word It seemed good to me being exhorted to it by the Orthodox Brethren and having learnt them from the beginning in order to declare which are the Canonical Books delivered as such by Tradition and believed to be of divine Inspiration St. Hilary saith Prolog Expla in Psalmos That they were thus computed secundum Traditiones veterum according to the Traditions of the Ancients These saith St. Cyril are the Books you learn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Church and which we read publickly in the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Catech. 4. p. 37. The Apostles and the ancient Bishops and Governors of the Church who delivered these as the Canonical Books were much wiser than you thou therefore being a Son of the Church do not transgress her Laws or go beyond her Rules Quae secundum majorum Traditionem Ecclesiis Christitradita What are the Volumes of the Old and the New Testament which according to the Tradition of the Ancients are believed to be inspired by the Holy Ghost and delivered to the Churches of Christ It seems convenient saith Russinus here evidently to declare as we have received them from the Monuments of the Fathers and having reckoned up the Books of the Old Testament proceeding to the Books of the New Testament he adds Haec nobis a patribus tradita sunt Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. a. These are the Books which the Father 's comprized in the Canon these things are delivered to us by the Fathers Note § 7 Secondly That of the Books which we reject and call Apocryphal they also teach that as such they were rejected by the Church that though the Church permitted them to be read yet did she not receive them into the Catalogue of the Holy Scriptures or use them to confirm any Article of Christian Faith and that they spake of them as Books without the Canon Thus Athanasius in his Paschal Epistle saith That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for more exactness sake Apud Balsam p. 921. I add this necessary advertisement 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That besides these Books of the Old and New Testament now mentioned as divine Scripture there be other Books which are not put into the Canon which are yet appointed by the Fathers to be read to those who first come to be Catechized in the way of Piety to wit The Wisdom of Solomon the Wisdom of Syrach and Esther and Judith and Tobias and the Book called the Doctrine of the Apostles and Pastor these are read and not to be despised the others are put into the Canon Tom 2. p. 58 59. The very same words he repeats in his Compendium of the Holy Scripture where also afterwards he reckons the Four Books of Macchabees and the History of Susanna among the Books contradicted Baruch and the additions to Daniel among the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament Catech. 4. p. 38. St. Cyril having cited the Canon we receive as that which was delivered to the Church by the Apostles and ancient Governors of the Church adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let all the rest which are extro-canonical be placed in a second Order Gregory Nazianzen having given an account of Twenty two Books of the Old Testament saith You have them all Ubi Supra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that all besides them are not Genuine After his Catalogue delivered from the Tradition of the Fathers Sunt alii libri non Canonici sed Ecclesiastici a majoribus appellati Quae omnia legi quidem in Ecclesia voluerunt non tamen proferriad authoritatem ex his fidei confirmandam Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. Ruffinus saith You must know that there be other Books which are not Canonical but called by our Ancestors Ecclesiastical as the Wisdom of Solomon the Wisdom of the Son of Syrach Tobit Judith and the Books of Macchabees which they were willing to have read in the Church but not to have produced to confirm Doctrines of Faith the rest they called Apocryphal and would not have read in the Church These things are delivered to us by the Fathers Praefat. in librum Regum Tom 3. f. 6. St. Jerom saith he made his Catalogue ut scire valeamus quicquid extra hos est inter Apocrypha esse ponendum that we might know that all besides these Twenty two are to be deemed Apocryphal He adds Praef. in Esdr Neh. ibid. f. 7 8. That the Books which are not received by the Hebrews are to be rejected by us Christians and that the Church indeed Reads them but receives them not into the Canons Note Thirdly § 8 That they declare not only that these are the Books received into the Canon by the Jews but by the Christians also that they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synops Tom. 2. p. 55. the entire Scripture of us Christians saith Athanasius All the Books delivered by the Apostles and ancient Governors of the Church and by the Church to others saith St. Cyril Ubi Supra All the Books delivered to the Church of Christ saith Ruffinus That as for others which we stile Apocryphal Ecclesia nescit Apocrypha Tom. 3. f. 7. a. f. 9. a. the Church owns them not Ecclesia inter Canonicas Scripturas non recipit The Church receives them not among the Canonical Scriptures saith St. Jerom. Note Fourthly § 9 That they declare that they made this Enumeration of these Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of necessity to prevent mistakes in this Matter and for the good of the Church and that Men might know out of what Fountains they were to draw the Waters of Life Having made mention of the Hereticks saith Athanasius as of Dead persons Apud Balsam p. 920 921. and of our selves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as having the Holy Scriptures for Life and because I fear least some harmless Men through their Simplicity and Ignorance may be deceived by
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
to ground Faith upon For on this ground they proceeded in defining all the Books in our Canon to be Canonical Pope Innocent the First A. D. 402. St. Austin P. Gelasius A. D. 492. confirm the same Canon and the Sixth General Council celebrated A. D. 680. confirms the Council of Carthage and the true Canon is again set forth in the Council of Florence A. 1438. And after these Declarations of the Council of Carthage and Pope Innocent no one pertinaciously dissented from the Canon but such as Protestants themselves confess to be Hereticks J. L. adds That Gregory Nazianzen acknowledged them Canonical and St. Ambrose Lib. de Jacob vitâ beatâ and that since the Churches Declaration no Catholick ever doubted of them Now for Answer to these things let it be noted First That whereas they are pleased to say that it was till the time of the Third Council of Carthage that is till the Fifth Century doubtful and undetermined in the Church whether these Books were Canonical or not because the Church had not then declared them so they by just consequence must grant that the Apostles and all the Ancient Bishops of the Church for Four Centuries knew nothing of the Roman Canon for had they known the Books contested to be Canonical we cannot doubt but they would have delivered them to the Church as such as well as those which we receive and which saith Eusebius were received by the consent of all Lib. 4. c. 26. We therefore are contented to be no wiser than they were and rather chuse to hearken to that advice of Cyril of Jerusalem Read the Twenty two Books of the Old Testament and have nothing to do with the Apocrypha 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the Apostles and ancient Bishops the Rulers of the Church who delivered these Twenty two Books as the Canon were wiser than those that came after them we therefore being Sons of the Church in compliance with his advice will not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 break over the bounds which they have set us especially considering they so expresly have informed us that they delivered this Catalogue of the Twenty two Canonical Books of the Old Testament as they received them from Tradition Obs 1. That they made this Enumeration of them to prevent mistakes in this matter for the good of the Church and that Men might know out of what Fountains to draw the Water of Life and might clearly learn which were Canonical Obs 4. And as the Canon received and owned not only by the Jewish but the Christian Church Obs 3. Secondly The falshood of these bold Assertions hath been shewed sufficiently in what hath been discoursed upon this subject for had the Authority of the Books we stile Apocryphal been undetermined had the true Canon of the Books of the Old Testament been doubtful in the Church till the Fifth Century why did Athanasius think it necessary to advertise Christians that the Books which we reject were not Canonical St. Cyril That they were out of the Canon Nazianzen That they were not Genuine Ruffinus That our Ancestors held them not Canonical not sufficient to confirm Doctrines of Faith St. Jerom That the Church deemed them Apocryphal and received them not into the Canon Why do they add that these things we delivered to them by the Fathers and by them recorded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for more exactness sake and to prevent mistakes Had the Canon of the Books of the Old Testament been till then doubtful and undetermined in the Church why was the Canon produced by Melito Bishop of Sardis judged so exact a Canon of the Books of the Old Testament why do the Fathers of the four first Centuries with one accord declare that the number of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament if Ruth were added to Judges and the Lamentations to Jeremiah Can. 59. were but Twenty two if reckoned separately Twenty four why is it that the Council of Laodicea having said that Christians in the Church ought to read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only the Canonical Books of the Old and the New Testament reckons up the Cononical Books of the Old Testament as we do excluding all that we call Apocrypha as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 books not contained in the Canon Moreover this Canon was received into the Code of Canons of the Vniversal Church both by the East and West the Canons of this Council were confirmed by the fourth General Council of Chalcedon Can. 1. Can. 2. Novel 131. by the Sixth General Council of Trullo by the Imperial Law of the Emperor Justinian and so must give us the Sence and Definition of the whole Church touching this matter Thirdly If that may be doubtful and undetermined in the Church which is so positively asserted so expresly and frequently declared in a matter of Fact as this hath been for the first Four Centuries then I hope we may be permitted to pronounce all those New Articles which the Church of Rome hath added to the Creed doubtful and undetermined in the first Four Centuries at least till they can give us better proof that they were then received than hath been here produced for this Canon and then I think they will be no great Gainers by this false Assertion And sure I am they cannot here pretend Tradition handed down from Father to Son from all the Christians of one Age to all the Christians of the next unless it be asserted that all those Fathers and this whole Council spake these things in a flat opposition to what they had been taught by their Fore-fathers touching the Canonical Books of the Old Testament so that this instance is a full confutation of that idle Dream Fourthly Whereas these Authors have produced some few Testimonies from the Fifth Century in favour of their Canon Let it be noted first That J. L. hath been told already Answ p. 82 83. that neither Gregory nor St. Ambrose have any thing pertinent to his purpose in the places cited and this he by his silence seemeth to confess As for the pretended Definition of Pope Innocent the First made saith J. L. A. D. 370. Cap. 11. p. 22. Schol. Hist p. 118 180 188. though he was only made Bishop of Rome A. D. 402. Bishop Cousins hath proved it to be Spurious as he hath also fully proved the pretended Decree of the Council of Florence to be Bishop Pearson Vindiciae Epist Ignat. part 1. c. 4. a p. 44. ad p. 54. And another Bishop of our Church of unquestionable Credit among all learned Men hath proved beyond all possibility of Contradiction that the Decree ascribed to Gelasius is also Spurious so that we have nothing left to consider but the judgment of St. Austin the Council of Carthage and the pretended confirmation of it Now to these I say Fifthly That were these Testimonies exactly for the Canon of the Church of Rome yet here is neither a Decree of any General Council
most Christian Churches Saint Jerom that in process of time it obtained Authority Estius notes That they who before doubted of it in the Fourth Century embraced the Opinion of them who received it Praefat. in Epist Jacobi and that from thence no Church no Ecclesiastical Writer is found who ever doubted of it but on the contrary all the Catalogues of the Books of Holy Scripture published by General or Provincial Councils Roman Bishops or other Orthodox Writers number it among Canonical Scriptures quae probatio ad certam fidem faciendam cuique Catholico sufficere debet which proof must give sufficient certainty of it to any Catholick The Second Epistle of St. Peter Pag. 58. Apud Cypr. Ep. 75. p. 220. is cited by Origen against Marcian under the Name of Peter Firmilion saith That both Paul and Peter in suis Epistolis Haereticos execrati sunt ut eos evitemus monuerunt in their Epistles condemned Hereticks and admonished us to avoid them which is done by Saint Peter only in this Epistle Eusebius saith That it was commemorated by many and that they who did not reckon it Canonical yet held it very useful on which account Lib. 3. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was much studied with other Scriptures The same Eusebius informs us That his First Epistle was always owned by all Christians and thence we may have full assurance of the Truth of this Epistle for there are not saith the Reverend Doctor Hammond greater Evidences of any Epistles being written by the acknowledged Author of it than these Cap. 1. v. 1. The Title of Simon Peter an Apostle of Jesus Christ The Voice which came from Heaven saying vers 17 18. This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased we heard when we Peter and John and James were with him in the Holy Mount this second Epistle beloved I write unto you that you may be mindful of the Commandments of us the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour Cap. 3. v. 1 2. All which are certain Demonstrations That Simon Peter the Apostle of our Lord who was with him in Mount-Tabor and there heard the Voice forementioned and who writ the First Epistle to the Twelve Tribes dispersed writ this also Note Lastly That after the Fourth Century § 22 there appears not the least intimation that any of these Books were any longer doubted of by any Orthodox Professor of the Christian Faith they being all received and reckoned as Canonical by the Councils and Fathers who mentioned the Canon of the New Testament Now from these premisses there is just ground to make this Inference and Conclusion That seeing most of the Catalogues of the Fourth Century given by Councils or by Fathers and all the Catalogues of the Fifth Century unquestionably assure us that what was once controverted by some few was afterwards unanimously received by all the Church of God we are sufficiently assured of the true Canon of the Books of the New Testament The evidence now produced even of these controverted Books being sufficient both in the judgment of all Catholicks and of all Christians who on these grounds alone receive them as such to assure us that they are Canonical Scripture for by what reason can any Man evince that ought to be rejected from the Canon which always was received as Canonical by the greatest part of the Church Catholick and being accurately enquired into by those who once were Doubters found such an uncontroulled reception through the whole Church diffused as stifled through all future Ages the least appearance of a doubt Hence then the Roman § 23 Doctors may discern what it is they have to do if they do undertake to shew us such a Tradition for those Roman Doctrines we reject as hath been shew'd for the Controverted Books of the New Testament And 1. It must be owned by them that it cannot be necessary to Salvation to believe or have an absolute assurance that these are true and Apostolical Traditions and therefore Haec est fides extra quam salus esse non potest This is the Catholick Faith without which there is no Salvation must be excluded from the Roman Creed 2. It must be also owned that the pretented Traditions of the present R. Church were for some Centuries controverted and rejected by whole Churches Orthodox and Apostolical and which were as such owned and embraced by all Christians and that some of them were or at least might have been for the first Four Centuries disowned by the Church of Rome as was one of these controverted Books and consequently it must be owned that she could not then be received as Mater Magistra omnium Ecclesiarum the Mother and Mistress of all Churches 3. It must be proved that there was the same necessity that these controverted Books should be known and received from the beginning by all Christians as that the necessary Traditions and Articles of Christian Faith should be so 4. It must be proved that these Traditions were always owned and mentioned as Divine and Apostolical Traditions by many Orthodox Churches and Fathers and even when controverted were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acknowledged by most of the Church Guides To instance in the Apocalypse which Mr. M. on all occasions singles out as a Book whose Authenticalness cannot be better proved than their Traditions let him shew us any such Testimonies from the First Second and Third Centuries for the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome as we have shewed for the Apocalypse any one that saith of them as Denys of Alexandria doth of the Apocalypse That he durst not reject it by reason of the multitude of Christians who had a veneration for it let him produce the plain Testimonies of the Fathers that the Truth of these Traditions may be decided by the Testimonies of the Ancients that they owned them as Apostolical by virtue of their Testimony that the Ancient and Holy Fathers led by the Spirit of God gave Testimony to them and that they were the Traditions of holy Men inspired by God All these things have been said of the Apocalypse in the Four first Centuries and when Mr. M. can produce any thing of the like nature evidence and strength for any one of his Traditions we will own it as Divine and Apostolical Here then we see the greatest and the plainest difference betwixt the Traditions we receive and own and those pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome which we reject For 1. The Traditions we receive are Traditions handed down in writing to us throughout all Ages of the Church unto this present time the Traditions we reject are only presumptive Traditions such as the Church of Rome presumes to be so but yet they have no Footsteps in the Ancient Records of the Church of Christ which is a demonstration that they falsly do presume they are Traditions for as we could have no just reason to believe those which we own to be
Truth of Faith is sufficiently explained In the same Article our Church having reckoned up the Books of the Old Testament which she esteemed Canonical Art. 6. and which by both Churches are recieved as such she adds the other Books as Hierom saith The Church doth read for Example of Life and Instruction of Manners but yet doth not apply them to establish any Doctrine Such are these following The Third Book of Esdras The Fourth Book of Esdras The Book of Tobias The Book of Judith The rest of the Book of Esther The Book of Wisdom Jesus the Son of Syrach Baruch the Prophet The Song of the Three Children The Story of Susanna Of Bell and the Dragon The Prayer of Manasses The First Book of Maccabees The Second Book of Maccabees Of all which excepting only the Third and Fourth Books of Esdras and the Prayer of Manasses the Council of Trent saith Whosoever shall not receive them as Sacred and Canonical Sess 4. let him be Anathema And yet this Determination is so apparently repugnant to the Doctrine of the Ancient Church that Mr. Du Pin a Doctor of the Faculty of Divinity in Paris and his Majesty's Professor Royal in Philosophy hath entirely given up this Cause unto the Protestants For 1. Whereas it is confessed by all the Learned of both Churches that we in this distinction betwixt Books of the Old Testament Canonical and Apocryphal or not Canonical exactly follow the Canon and the Judgment of the Jews Tom. 1. dissert praelim p. 51. from whom the Christians received the Books of the Old Testament He also saith The Christian Antiquity for the Books of the Old Testament hath followed the Canon of the Jews that no others were cited in the New Testament but those which belonged to the Canon of the Jews That the first Catalogues of Canonical Books made by Ecclesiastical Authors both Greek and Latin comprehend no others in the Canon P. 612 613. In his Abridgment of the Doctrine of the Three first Centuries he saith expresly That the Christians of those times owned no other Canonical Books of the Old Testament but those which belonged to the Canon of the Hebrews and that they sometimes cited the Apocryphal Books but never put them in the number of Canonical Books And whereas Mr. M. and J. L. have had the confidence to say Mr. M. p. 85 86. That after the Declarations of the Council of Carthage Pope Innocent and Gelasius c. no one ever pertinaciously dissented from it but such as Protestants themselves do confess to be Hereticks J.L. c. xi p. 23. until the days of Luther Or that no Catholick after the Church's Declaration in the Year 419. ever doubted of them Qui depuis les decisions des Conciles de Carthage de Rome la Declaration d'Innocent I. n'ont compte que vingt deux ou vingt quatre livres Canoniques de l'Ancien Testament Tom. 1. Diss praelim p. 60. Mr. Du Pin having produced the express words of Gregory the Great after that time to the contrary adds in flat contradiction to them these ensuing words We ought to make the same reflection on all the other Ecclesiastical Authors Greek and Latin which we have produced who After the Decisions of the Council of Carthage and of Rome and the Declaration of Innocent the First have counted only Two or Four and twenty Books of the Old Testament which makes it evident that these Definitions were not yet followed by all Authors and by all Churches till such time as this Matter was fully determined by the definition of the Council of Trent And indeed § 3 the Truth of this Confession is as clear as the Light For as Mr. M. and J. L. confess Vid c. 3. §. 13. Lib. 1. de verbo Dei. c. 20. S. ad alterum That the Canon of Scripture was not defined till the Fifth Century As Bellarmine acknowledgeth That Melito Epiphanius Hilarius Hieronymus Ruffinus in expounding the Canon of the Old Testament followed the Hebrews not the Greeks De locis Theol. l. 2. c. 11. Sect. Quid Ecclesiâ—sticum As Canus excuseth Ruffinus for rejecting with us the Apocrypha because he did it in eo tempore quo res nondum erat definita when this thing was not defined on which account saith he we also do excuse the rest and so all these men virtually confess that there was no Tradition of the Church against us during those Ages So in the following Centuries even till the time that the Trent Council met approved Authors do declare the Doctrine of the Church to have been still according to the Doctrine of this Article and contrary to the Definition of the Trent Council For In the Western Church Primasius a Bishop of the African Church saith Cent. 6. In Apocalyps cap. 4. The Books of the Old Testament of Canonical Authority which we receive N. B. are Twenty-four which St. John insinuated by the Twenty-four Wings Leontius Bizantinus having said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De Sectis Act. 2. Let us reckon up the Books received by the Church he adds That the Books of the Old Testament are Twenty-two and concludes thus These are the Books Canonized in the Church of which they that belong to the Old Testament are all received by the Hebrews In the Ninth Century Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople Cent. 9. undertakes to reckon up the divine Scriptures which were received and Canonized in the Church and of these in the Old Testament he numbers only Twenty-two as we do Canon Scrip. Chron. p. ult Quibuscontradicitur non recipiuntur ab Ecclesia Bibl. H. Eccl. de vitis Pontif. and among the Books contradicted and not received in the Church he puts the Maccabees Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Esther Judith Susanna and Tobit Anastasius the Keeper of the Library of the Church of Rome among the Books which are contradicted and not received by the Church reckons the Maccabees Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Susanna Judith and Tobit In the Twelfth Century Peter Mauricius Cent. 12. Abbot of Clugny in his Epistle against the Petrobusians tells them they ought of necessity to receive the whole Canon which is received by the Church and then having reckoned up the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as we do he adds That after these Authentick Books of the Holy Scripture Restant post hos Authentiâ—os sex non reticendi libri sapientia c. Pag. 25. c. de Autor Vet. Test there be Six not to be concealed viz. the Books of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and both the Books of Maccabees Hugo de Sancto Victore saith Sunt praeterea alii quidem libri ut sapientia Solomonis c. Qui leguntur quidem sed non scribuntur in Canone de scripturis scriptoribus Sacris Cap 6 Prolog in l. de Sacram c 7 And the division he says is made Authoritate universalis Eccl. Didasc l. 4. c. 1.2 Richardus
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
general Postea per dei voluntatem in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futurum Iren. lib. 3. cap. 1. the Fathers do expresly say declaring That the Apostles first preached the Gospel and afterwards by the Will of God delivered the same Gospel which they preached to us in the Scripture to be for future Ages the Pillar and the Ground of Truth The Marcionites owned the Writings of St. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dial. contra Marcion p. 59. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. but rejected the Evangelists St. Matthew and St. John. Against them therefore Origen doth in the person of Eutropius dispute after this manner Did these Apostles preach the Gospel with writing or without writing what they preached Marc. Without writing Eutrop. Is it probable they preached Salvation only to them that heard them and had no regard to them that were to come after as must be supposed if they writ not that Doctrine of Salvation which they preached for those things which are spoken and not written do presently vanish St. Austin is express for the same Doctrine for having told us That our Lord Jesus according to the saying of St. John Did many things which were not written He adds Tr. 49. in Joh. Tom. 9. p. 355. Electa sunt autem quae scriberentur ea quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur That they chose out of them those things to be written which they conceived sufficient for the Salvation of Believers Quicquid enim ille de suis factis dictis nos legero voluit hoc scribendum illis tamquam suis manibus imperavit De consensu Evangelist lib. 1. cap. 35. Again He saith the same St. Austin who sent the Prophets before his descent sent also the Apostles after his Ascention of all whom he was the Head wherefore it must not be said that he writ nothing seeing his Members writ that which they knew by the Dictates of their Head for whatsoever he would have us read concerning what he did or said he commanded his Apostles as being his Amanuenses to write down Now seeing all they were to teach was only his Sayings and Commands they who stood thus engaged to write all that he would have us read of his Sayings must write all that was needful to be known in order to Mens Salvation for all this sure the Saviour of the World would have us read all this 't was therefore necessary for them to write that we might read Because that Heresies would afterwards break in upon the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Proem in Matth. and the Manners of Christians would be corrupted saith Theophylact it pleased the Apostles to write the Gospels that from thence being taught the Truth we might not be perverted by the Falshood of Heresie nor be corrupted in our Manners Now sure what is sufficient to preserve us from Heresie in Doctrine and from Corruption in Manners must plainly and fully contain all things necessary to be believed that we may not be Hereticks and to be done that we may not be wicked To proceed to the particular accounts the Ancients give us of the inditing of every Gospel in particular § 2 Eusebius informs us of St. Matthew that the Tradition was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 24. That he was necessitated to write for having first preached to the Hebrews as he was about to go to others commiting his Gospel to writing in his own Language he supplied by writing their want of his Presence from whom he went. St. Chrysostom saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Matth. Hom. 1. pag. 3. They had it by Tradition that the believing Jews desired St. Matthew to leave those things in writing which he had delivered by word of mouth to them and that in compliance with this request he writ his Gospel in the Hebrew Tongue Sicut referunt Matthaeum conscribere Evangelium causa compulit talis cum facta fuisset in Pal. persecutio ut carentes forte doctoribus fidei non carerent doctrina petierunt Matthaeum ut omnium verborum operum Christi conscriberet eis Historiam ut ubicunque essent futuri totius secum haberent sidei statum Praefat. The Author of the imperfect Comment on St. Matthew who passeth under the same name delivereth the Tradition thus That St. Matthew was compelled to write his Gospel upon this account That when a grievous Persecution arose in Palaestin so that they were in danger to be separated from each other that wanting Teachers they might not want the Doctrine of Faith they desired Matthew to write for them the History of all the Words and Works of Christ that so wherever they should be hereafter they might have with them totius fidei statum the whole form of Faith. The Tradition concerning the Gospel of St. Mark runs thus That when the Hearers of St. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 15. Peter had been illuminated by his Doctrine They were so affected with it as not to be contented with hearing of it all at once or with the unwritten Teaching or oral Tradition of the heavenly Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. but with all manner of Exhortations did entreat St. Mark the Follower of St. Peter that he would leave them in writing a digest or memorial of the Doctrine delivered to them by word of Mouth and that they never ceased till they had obtained their requests and that thus they were the causes of writing the Gospel of St. Mark This Eusebius relates from the Tradition of Clemens of Alexandria and Papias Bishop of Hierapolis The words of Clemens he gives thus Clemens in the same Book puts down the Tradition of the ancient Presbyters touching the Order of the Gospels which is to this effect Peter preaching the Word publickly at Rome and speaking the Gospel by the Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 14. many that were present intreated Mark to write what he spake as being one who had long followed him and remembred the things spoken and that thereupon Mark having writ the Gospel gave it to those who desired it And of the same Mark Papias saith Euscbius relates That he took especial care to say nothing that was false and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 3. c. 38. to leave nothing out of his Gospel he had heard from Peter Moreover Eusebius farther informs us from the same Authors that St. Mark going afterwards to Alexandria preached there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 16. the Gospel which he had written And that the first Successors of the Apostles leaving their Countries did the work of Evangelists to them who had not as yet heard of the Christian Faith to whom they preached Christ and delivered the Writings of the Holy Evangelists 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 3. c. 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
but never to Tradition the Prophets do exhort them for their direction to repair to the Law Esai 8.20.34.16 Mal. 4.4 and to the Testimonies to the Book of the Lord. To remember the Law of Moses which he commanded them in Horeb for all Israel with the Statutes and Judgments as their only certain Rule and Direction Now that the ordinary Succession of Prophets was to cease from the Days of Malachy to the Times of Christ whereas had Oral Tradition also been their Rule the Prophets must have had like reason to call upon them to remember that Moreover God only calls upon them by Moses To do all the Words of this Law which are written in this Book and promiseth his Favour and Acceptance of them upon that account saying If thou shalt hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God Deut. 30.9 10. Vers 15. to keep his Commandments and Statutes which are written in this Book of the Law I will rejoice over thee for Good. See I have set before thee this day life and good and death and evil And David speaketh thus unto King Solomon 1 Kings 2.3 Keep the Charge of the Lord thy God to walk in his ways to keep his Statutes and his Commandments and his Judgments and his Testimonies as it is written in the Law of Moses that thou maist prosper in all that thou dost and whithersoever thou turnest thy self If then the Observation of what was written in the Law of Moses was sufficient to procure Life Favour Prosperity and Acceptance with God surely this written Law must be a perfect Rule and must sufficiently contain all that was needful to be believed or done unto those ends Hence is the King commanded to write him a Copy of this Law in a Book that he might learn to fear the Lord God Deut. 17.18 19. and to keep all the words of this Law and these Statutes to do them and to perform the words of the Covenant which are written in this Book 2 Chron. 34.31 is to keep God's Commandments his Testimonies and his Statutes with all the Soul and with all the Heart Whereas had Oral Tradition been any part of their Rule they must have been obliged equally to observe what was delivered by it and all God's Statutes and Commandments could not be written in this Book as it is so expresly and frequently declared that they were Our Saviour in like manner bids them Search the Scriptures Joh. 3.39 because they thought in them they had eternal Life in which apprehension had they been deceived as they must have been provided that there was another Law of Oral Tradition given to lead them unto Life eternal our Saviour doubtless would have informed them of this dangerous Error which yet he was so far from doing that when a Lawyer puts the Question to him What shall I do that I may inherit eternal Life Luk. 10.25 26. he Answers What is written in the Law how readest thou This do and thou shalt live Luk. 16.29 And sends the Jews to Moses and the Prophets that by hearing them they might avoid the coming to the Place of Torments but neither he nor his Disciples do ever send them to Tradition or speak one word in approbation of it which is sufficient Evidence that they knew nothing of this Rule of Mr. M. 2dly § 6 The Traditions concerning Doctrines generally believed and Practices needful to be performed among them after the Law was written by Moses and after God had given them a Charge upon the ceasing of the Succession of his Prophets to remember and stick close unto it I say the Traditions which obtained in the Jewish Church as far as we have any certain intimation of them were such as tended to the evacuating of the Law of Moses to the renouncing of the true Messiah and to the introduction of vain Worship and superstitious Observances whence it demonstratively appears that Oral Tradition was not then a certain Rule nor could the Jewish Nation be obliged by divine Precept to receive it as such To make this Evident consider 1. That our Saviour often sends the Jews to Scripture to Moses and the Prophets but never to Tradition 2. That he still represents the great Asserters of Tradition in the Jewish Nation Matth. 15.14.23.16 17 19. Mat. 15.10 11. to wit their Elders Scribes and Pharisees as blind Guides leading of the Blind as Fools and Blind confuteth their Traditions though generally received before all the People Mark 7. Mat. 12.7 Matth. 15.13 justifies his Disciples in the neglect and violation of them pronounces them Plants which his Father had not planted and therefore such as should be rooted up 3dly He plainly tells them That by these Traditions they did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transgress make void Mark. 7.10 and null the Commandment of God. He shews this by plain Instances in their evacuating the Fifth Commandment by their Traditions in observing and enjoining such Traditions touching the Observation of the Sabbatick Rest Matth. 12.7 Matth. 12.12 Luk. 6.9 Mark 3.5 Luke 13.15 Matth. 23.16 23. as contradicted that great Law of God I will have mercy and not sacrifice and made it unlawful to do good and preserve Life upon that day and which sufficiently demonstrated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the blindness of their Minds and their Hypocrisie and in absolving them from their Oaths out of an ignorance so Gross as knew not they were virtually made to God. He also charges them that by thus teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of Men Matth. 15.9 they rendered God's Worship vain 4thly It is extreamly evident that by virtue of some of these Traditions they rejected the true Messiah and stood obliged by them so to do For First It is most certain that the Jews had a Tradition generally received among them That their Messiah should be a Temporal Prince that at his Coming he should restore the Kingdom to Israel he should subdue the Nations under them and should erect a Temporal Dominion in the Jewish Nation over all their Enemies Trypho the Jew declares to Justin M. That Dial. p. 249. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Scriptures do compel us to expect a great and glorious Messiah who shall receive as the Son of Man from the ancient of Days an everlasting Kingdom In Celsum l. 2. p. 78. not such a mean despised one as was your Jesus The Jews saith Origen say That their Prophets represent their Messiah to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a great Person and a Potentate and Lord of the whole Earth and of all the Heathens and their Armies De Bello Jud. l. 6. c. 31. Josephus confesseth there was an obscure Oracle found in their S. Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That about that time one of Judea should govern the World. Suetonius and Tacitus say In Vespas c 4. Hist l. 5. That it was in the whole East Vetus constans opinio ut