the chief Subject and Matter of the most materiall Passages that are found therein See this again in three Particulars First Christ is the grand subject Matter of the Law St. Paul tells us the Law was our Schoolmaster but what Lessons doth it teach us the Text answers the Law was our Schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ 't is evident that Christ was taught even by the Law Thus Calvin In tota Ceremoniarum Pompa quicquid oculis ingerebatur id quasi notam Christi impressam habebat Whatever Ceremonies the Law commanded they were so many Types and Representations of Christ And that Christ was indeed the Person concerned and aimed at in the Law it seems very evident from that expression which St. Paul borrows from the Psalmist In the volume of the Book it is written of me c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the head of the Book But what book doth he mean Saint Augustine answers librum Psalmorum the Book of Psalms But that cannot well be because the Psalms in David's time were not yet collected into a Book St. Hierom therefore expounds it thus In the volume of the Book i. e. In principio Genesis In the beginning of Genesis But if not so if St. Hierom were mistaken in the particular Text to which the Psalmist referreth yet we have all reason to believe that he meant the writings of Moses for as Ludovicus Cappellus rightly observes in David's age there was scarce any other part of God's Word yet written praeter Pentateuchum besides the Pentateuch and perhaps that of Job And to confirm this Interpretation of the Text 't is observed by severall Authours that the five Books of Moses were usually styled by the Jews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Muis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Cappellus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Book i. e. the chief and most excellent Book But whether the Psalmist and after him St. Paul do particularly mean these Books of Moses or not 't is sure enough that our Blessed Saviour was much concerned in them So much doth he himself expresly tell the Jews Moses wrote of me It was one great Argument whereby our Blessed Saviour did convince the Jews of gross Hypocrisy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Christ Ye do stoutly contend that ye believe the Writings of Moses and doe what he commands but indeed there is no such matter for had ye believed Moses ye would have believed me were ye indeed his Disciples ye would have been mine too for he wrote of me And that he did so indeed is farther cleared from that Discourse which our Blessed Saviour had upon the day of his Resurrection with the two Disciples upon the way The Text saith he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself but whence took he the first rise and ground of his Discourse the Text answers thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beginning from Moses So then 't is evident that Moses who was the Pen-man of the Law was the first Pen-man of the Gospel too he was an Evangelist as well as a Prophet and although he represented Christ as Grotius words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by symbolicall Types and Figures though his Doctrine of the Messias was involved and wrapt up as Dionysius phraseth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in sacred Veils yet sure we are the Matter of his Writings is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as Law 2. Christ is the great and principall Subject of the Prophets too The miraculous Conception the wonderfull Nativity the holy Life the ignominious Death the honourable Buriall the stupendious Resurrection the glorious Ascension and Session of Christ at God's right hand and his coming again to Judgement are all recorded by the Prophets Insomuch that it seems very strange that the Jews who had long expected their Messias should not discover Christ to be the man St. Paul tells us They that dwell at Hierusalem and their Rulers knew him not But what made them to be thus ignorant The reason follows thus They knew not the voices of the Prophets the Text imports that whosoever knows the Prophets must needs know the Messias too which is a convincing argument that they wrote about him The Evangelists do often tell us that such and such Passages relating to Christ such and such Circumstances that did attend his Life and Death were signal Accomplishments of such and such Predictions What expression more frequent then this Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the Prophet Yea if it were fulfilled then was it spoken too if there was an Accomplishment there must be a Prophecie too And the truth is the Prediction is often urged as the great reason of the Event in several Passages that relate to Christ Thus St. Matthew All this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophet And thus our Saviour himself seems to argue All things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and in the Prophets and in the Psalms concerning me Whatever stands written in the Prophets we find accomplished in the Evangelists his very Death of all things in the world the most unlikely could not be excepted Thus it must be the Son of man must suffer and die but why so he tells us The Son of man goeth as it is written of him written where and by whom St. Peter answers God beforehand had shewed by the mouth of all his Prophets that Christ should suffer 'T is evident from these and many more like expressions that Christ and the things of Christ were the great Argument the principal Subject nay the onely Theme upon which the Vniversality of the Prophets did both speak and write 3. Christ is the great Subject of the Evangelists and Apostles too What is the grand Argument of St. Matthew's Gospel the very first Verse thus informs us The Book of the generation of Jesus Christ Zegerus tells us Hoc ceu Titulo totius rei summam omnémque Evangelicae hujus Narrationis praesignat Historiam The Evangelist in this short Title informs us what is the Summe and Argument of his whole Discourse and that is saith Clarius tota Servatoris Vita the whole Life of our Blessed Saviour Indeed Erasmus affirms Hic Titulus non est universi Argumenti This Title which St. Matthew doth here prefix before his Gospell doth not comprehend the Summe of his whole Book and Grotius contends that it is but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a partiall Inscription referring onely to Christ's Originall But however what we want in the Title we have in the Book which from the beginning to the end contains nothing else but the Conception Nativity Life Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ And as for St. Mark who as St. Austin observes did little more then epitomize St. Matthew's Gospell he thus enters upon his work The beginning of the Gospell of Jesus Christ And that this is indeed Operis
Titulus the Title of his whole Book which comprehends the summe of all his following Discourse and sheweth that his design was to treat of nothing else but Christ is the acknowledgement of Erasmus who denieth St. Matthew's Title so to be and doe And what is the Subject Matter of St. Luke's Gospel himself acquaints his friend Theophilus The former Treatise have I made of all that Jesus began both to doe and teach Partitus est omnem Christi Vitam in Facta Doctrinam saith Erasmus St. Luke doth here divide the whole Life of Christ into the Miracles which he wrought and the Sermons which he preached and tells Theophilus that these two were the great Contents of his former Book Thus Grotius Haec verba brevem Evangelii descriptionem continent These words contain a short description of St. Luke's whole Gospel and shew that Christ is the Subject of it And as for the Acts of the Apostles Quid aliud est quà m Evangelii pars saith Erasmus What is it else but a part of the Gospel What contains it but an History of what the Apostles did and suffered upon the Account of Christ And what Saint John our fourth Evangelist treats of the very first line of his Gospel tells us In the beginning was the Word 'T is but one Word that makes up his whole Book and that Word is Christ So then 't is clear enough that Christ is the onely Subject of all four Gospels but what do the Epistles treat of St. Matthew Mark Luke and John do write of Jesus but what doth St. Paul doe 'T is sure that no Apostle preached no Apostle wrote so much as he but what 's his Subject The Text answers He preached Jesus himself confirms it We preach not our selves but Christ And as he preached so he wrote too 't is easily seen that in all his Epistles there are but few Passages to be found that do not one way or other relate to Christ So that upon the whole matter we may safely say as Maldonate doth Tota Scriptura Christum loquitur The whole Scripture speaks of Christ So Cornetius à Lapide too Tota Scriptura pro Argumento suo habet Christum tota circa Christum versatur All the Bible the Old Testament and the New Moses and the Prophets the Evangelists and the Apostles do all treat of Christ as Christ is the Authour of all Scriptures so is he their great Subject matter too And if so we may well conclude that the whole Bible is what the Text styles it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of Christ And since 't is so these Inferences will undeniably follow I. That the Scriptures have in them more of Excellence Wisedom Purity and Holiness then any or all other Writings whatsoever Indeed there may be and certainly is somewhat of worth in many other books besides 't is possible sometimes to find Gold among rubbish and a Jewel may lie upon a dunghill That there are many things of great use in Humane nay in Heathenish Authours no sober person that reads and understands them will deny So excellent are the Writings of Plato that I find him styled alter Moses a second Moses and the Ancients commonly surname him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plato the Divine Such are the Morals of Plutarch a man styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Venus of all Philosophy that it was judged the fittest book to be preserved if all books were to be burnt but one Nay so choise an Authour is that very Poet Homer that Dionysius calleth him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most Divine And methinks that little Poem of Pythagoras deserves its name and those few lines of his are justly styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Verses of Gold What great use may be made of Heathenish Moralists Historians and Poets we learn from those great Examples and learned men the Primitive Fathers Justine Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Epiphanius c. and amongst the Latins Tertullian Austine Hierom Cyprian Lactantius and many others who overthrew the Idolatry of the Gentiles and convinced the Nations of their abominable Superstitions and Practices by the clear Testimonies of their own Writers And in so doing these great Luminaries of the Christian Church did but follow the Example of St. Paul who to convince Pagans and Infidels took Arguments from their own Authours and translated some Verses of Callimachus Epimenides Menander and Aratus into the Word of God and thereby made them sacred And doubtless there is a great truth in that expression of Scultetus Fructuosè ancillantur Sacris c. The Testimonies of Humane Authours do contribute a great deal towards the Confirmation of many Truths and the better understanding of the Oracles of God And if there be such a worth in the writings of other Authours who were but Men what value shall we set upon the Scripture which is the undoubted Word of God If the Laws of Solon be choise what is the Law of Moses If the Ethicks of Aristotle Epictetus Hierocles Cicero Seneca and many others be excellent what then are the Proverbs of Solomon If the Discourses of Plato be Heavenly what then are the Sermons of Christ Nay if the Epistles of St. Austine St. Hierom St. Bernard and other Fathers be even Divine what are St. Paul's then Remember other Writings are but the Writings of Men but these are God's other Books at best contain but the word of such and such a Saint whereas our Bible contains 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of Christ II. That every man stands obliged readily and firmly to believe whatever the Scriptures contain and assert to be a Truth I remember St. Paul demands of Agrippa Believest thou the Prophets and our Blessed Saviour himself demands of Martha Believest thou this Certainly were not man grown strangely sottish such demands as these would have no place and yet methinks 't is a stranger Question which Christ put to the Jews How shall ye believe my words But what should hinder Is it possible for man to pretend any reason why the words of Christ should be so much as once suspected So great is his Authority so unquestionable is his Veracity that his bare affirmation is a sure ground of Faith Thus the Evangelist The man believed the word But what moved him so to doe the Text answers and assigns this Reason of his faith The man believed the word that Jesus had spoken And such is every word which our Bibles contain 't is the Word of Jesus and upon that score if we are the Disciples of Jesus we stand obliged to doe what his other Disciples formerly did They believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said The truth is the whole Scripture is nothing else but a Systeme of Words and Sentences which Jesus hath said and caused to be written and if so there is not a Verse there is not a Line to be found but requires and
undertake to demonstrate with equall evidence when and by what Apostles whatever he so delivered stands recorded And till the Roman Church shall make this out certain we are that those words of our Blessed Saviour I have yet many things to say assisted with those of St. Luke he spake of the kingdom of God prove not the thing for which our Adversaries urge them namely That there were severall necessary Doctrines delivered by Christ to his Apostles after his Resurrection that are nowhere found in the written Word of God 2. But since these forenamed Texts will not doe their desired work the Champions of the Trent Faith who are resolved to endeavour the Justification of every Article maintained and concluded on by that illegal Conventicle of a few suborned packed and titular Bishops are obliged to try some other if possibly they can find the least Countenance for their Traditions in Sacred Writ There is another expression of the Evangelist St. John that is often urged as a Text that will doe their businesse indeed and thus it runs Many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his Disciples which are not written in this Book No 't is observed of St. John by one of the Greek Fathers that he wrote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 many of Christ's Sermons but few of his Miracles For 't is certain that his Gospel at the request of the Bishops of Asia and in opposition to the Gnosticks and other Hereticks was written last upon which score he did advisedly passe by those Miracles which were already recorded by the other Evangelists and so might well tell the world thus Many other signs truly did Jesus which are not written in this Book And withall 't is observable that the Evangelist doth not mention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 other Doctrines but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 other Miracles which are not written in his Gospel But what then what Evidence gives this to those Traditions about matters of Faith and Manners which the Roman Church pretends to be as necessary to Salvation as those great Doctrines of Christ and his Apostles which are clearly found in the written Word I remember that St. Chrysostom and some other Interpreters do restrain this expression of the Evangelist to those Miracles onely which Christ wrought after his Resurrection Many other signs truly did Jesus Here Theophylact puts the Question thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What Miracles were those which the Evangelist here speaks of were they such as our Saviour wrought publickly and before his Passion He answers thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Saint Chrysostom conjectures too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It seems to me that the Evangelist means those Miracles which were done by our Saviour after his Resurrection and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 onely for the sake of his Disciples And methinks this Conjecture of St. Chrysostom Theophylact and others hath a very fair foundation in the Text it self which tells us Many other signs did Jesus which are not written in this Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the presence not of the multitude but of the Disciples and probably the Disciples onely and that with a design to confirm his Apostles who had been too incredulous in the faith of his Resurrection And certainly if these Miracles of Christ were wrought in private before his Disciples and for their sakes onely to be as Theophylact styles them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Evidences and Proofs of his Resurrection to remove their personall doubts to satisfie their Curiosity and to establish their Faith 't is not easy to imagine that the omission of some of these Miracles by all the Evangelists should any way countenance the Traditions of the Roman Church nor prejudice the Faith of the Vniversall which hath otherwise such abundant Testimonies of Christ's Resurrection from the written Word that it cannot need the Assistence and Supplement of Traditions for its Confirmation in that or indeed in any other Article of its Belief And as for those mighty Works of wonder which were publickly wrought by our Blessed Saviour to prove his Commission from God and to confirm the Divinity of that new Religion which he was then to introduce into the world that they were not all written we do easily grant There might be several Miracles done by Christ which St. John and the other Evangelists thought fit to passe by ut minimè necessaria saith Grotius as things no way necessary to be recorded For although our Blessed Saviour being desirous to doe good where-ever he came and being willing to convince the whole Jewish Nation that he was indeed the true Messias had frequent occasions to work various Miracles because he went to severall places and conversed amongst severall companies where he met with divers objects of Mercy and various persons that were to be brought over to his new Religion yet we do affirm that any one Miracle of his being rightly considered and duly weighed had been enough to have satisfied all its Spectatours that the Person and Doctrine of Christ were both approved and sent by God And this blessed effect some one single Miracle did sometimes produce When Christ had raised Lazarus from the dead we are immediately told upon that Many of the Jews which came to Mary and had seen the things which Jesus did believed on him And if so if one Miracle were sufficient to secure that End for which all Miracles were wrought 't is sure that we have enough recorded What though the Apostles did not register all the Miracles of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one by one and with all those Circumstances that did attend them St. John saith they could not doe it If they should be written every one I suppose that even the world it self could not contain the books that should be written But what then are we obliged to run to unwritten Traditions are we bound to believe the Truth of all those Miracles which as some say Christ wrought in Egypt when he was but a Child as much as those which he wrought in Israel when he was a Man and thereby shewed himself to be the Son of God too Are we no more bound to believe the miraculous Stories of the Four Evangelists then that related by Sozomen who tells us that when Christ in his Infancy was entring into Hermopolis there stood near the way an exceeding high tree which as our Saviour passed by did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bow down his branches to the very ground and thereby owned and made obeisance to its Lord Of this Miracle Maldonate saith Meritò Traditio videri potest 'T is a Story that well deserves the name of a Tradition and Sozomen saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Story and some other miraculous ones too about the same Tree are testified by the Inhabitants of Egypt and Palestine But are we therefore obliged to believe them with the same credit which we give to the Gospel No though all
his Greatness Splendour and Magnificence that Doctrine which asserts his Power to dispense with Vows Oaths and in several cases with Matrimonial Contracts either to allow or null them that Doctrine which assigns him a Power more then ordinarily Ministeriall to pardon Sin and deliver whom he will from Purgatory c. makes for his Wealth and fills his Bags apace And if so if these and other Doctrines do bring in such a Revenue to the Roman Bishop and many more of his Church too 't is very likely that they will be so kind to themselves as to plead for those Traditions by which alone those Doctrines can be maintained That the Bishops of Rome have the usual Infirmities of other men and may perhaps fail now and then in matters of Morall Concern I think no man denieth 'T is a bug word that Baronius speaks of Pope Vigilius whom he calleth a Thief a Brigand c. and 't is no great Commendation which Bellarmine gives of John the Twenty third when he doth acknowledge him to have been a man vitae dissolutae of a loose and dissolute Conversation so dissolute that fifty three severall Articles that concerned his Manners for in Points of Faith the Pope though an Heretick must not be thought to erre were exhibited against him in the Council of Constance and proved by sufficient Testimonies These two Instances not to name the Sorceries and Treasons of Gregory the Seventh nor the Concubine of Nicholas the Third and to passe by the late pretty stories of Donna Olympia who governed the Roman Chair as Themistocles his little Son ruled Athens are more then enough to evidence that even his Holinesse himself may erre in point of Morality And since other Vices are incident to the Bishops of Rome why should we think it impossible for them to be a little tainted sometimes with those small Infirmities of Covetousness Pride and Ambition Though St. Bernard indeed might tell his friend Pope Eugenius Apostolis interdicitur Dominatus Christ forbad his Apostles to exercise any Despotick Power at least over one another yet perhaps Boniface the Eighth might have in him some little remainders of unmortified Pride which might prevail with him to accept the Title from others yea and to style himself too Mundi Dominum the Lord of the World And though Alexander the Fifth who professed himself a rich Bishop a poor Cardinall but a mere beggarly Pope might perhaps deserve that Character which St. Paul requires in a Bishop not greedy of filthy lucre yet what may we think of John the Twenty Third who was so covetous of Money and heaped up so much Treasure that he thought himself concerned to brand that man for an Heretick who should dare affirm that Christ and his Apostles had no Possessions in the World Now then if the Roman Bishops as well as other men may possibly so far forget themselves as to be guilty of Ambition and Avarice 't is not reasonable that we should admit their Testimony for the Justification of those Traditions wherein their own Advantage and Honour is so very much concerned they are Parties so mightily interessed in this Cause that there is ground enough to suspect their Evidence and to imagine that they will represent the matter not impartially as it really stands but with those favourable Constructions or false Glosses and Equivocations which an ambitious or covetous heart may probably suggest and a bad Cause doth certainly require But 2. Although the Testimony of the Roman Bishops should be admitted for the justification of their own Traditions should we be so kind as to accept their Evidence in a Cause which so deeply concerns themselves nay should we pass a candid interpretation upon it and suppose it to be impartial yet neither so would it doe their work nor prove firm sure and cogent See why upon a double ground 1. The Testimonies of several Roman Bishops especially those early ones who would indeed have been very credible Witnesses in any matter which concerns the Church have been counterfeited and notoriously forged Methinks we may use the same Consideration to invalidate the Testimony of any Roman Bishop which Bellarmine himself doth to weaken and take off the Evidence of a Roman Cardinall We find what horrid Crimes if Simony Heresie Sorcery and Adultery be such indeed are by several Authors laid to the Charge of Pope Gregory the Seventh And because these detestable Villanies do much reflect upon the Honour of the Roman See and do intrench too much upon that Fundamental Point of the Pope's Infallibility 't is the great endeavour of Bellarmine by all ways and means to wipe off this Guilt and to make the world believe that all these Vices objected against as he styles him an innocent Pope were but unworthy Reproaches and base Calumnies that were raised by Tilmannus and the Centuriatours out of a forged Book that was fathered indeed upon Cardinal Benno but was probably written so Bellarmine would have it by some Lutheran or other This kind of Argumentation we may justly retort upon the Roman Church who justifie their own Traditions and unjustly charge us with Heresie as having departed from the true Faith of the Primitive and Catholick Church and this they would fain prove by Testimonies produced out of some Writings which are ascribed to several ancient Bishops of Rome whereas 't is very certain that those Writings neither were nor could be theirs 'T is the great Honour of the Roman See that in the three first Centuries the Bishops who governed that Church were very choice and excellent Persons we reade that Thirty and one successive Bishops of theirs even from Linus to Sylvester if we except but Hyginus and Pius who lived under the kinder Empire of Antoninus Pius were Martyrs or Confessours at least The memory of these Champions and stout Assertours of the true Catholick Faith being precious and their Authority being venerable in the Church of Christ some well-wishers to the present Roman Church that there might be some pretence of great Antiquity for their superstitious Novelties have written such and such Epistles Constitutions and other Tracts in the names of these Primitive Roman Bishops which they have published and sent abroad into the world with as much confidence as if they were genuine and authentick indeed What Authority such Epistles have in the Roman Church we learn from Gratian who equals them to the Definitions of General Councils and is not ashamed to make St. Austine say that they are equal to the very written Word of God But St. Austine is so much wronged in being produced by Gratian as the Authour of such an intolerable Assertion that Bellarmine who for once hath something more of Modesty doth thus excuse it Deceptus est Gratianus ex depravato Codice quem ipse habuit beati Augustini Gratian was deceived by a corrupted Copy which he had of St. Austine's Works But however though Bellarmine dare not equal these Decretall Epistles
at the Pleasure of the Pope's Mercy and the Offender's Purse And methinks 't is strange that such a Tradition as this which can never be delivered from the just imputation of encouraging Vice should because mentioned by Origen and his Followers be declared Apostolicall and equalled to that written and sure Word of Christ from which it receives sufficient Confutations but nothing of Countenance whatever the Romish Church may pretend But alas Origen is but one of many that are cited as Patrons and Abettours of the Romish Traditions there is another Person as well as Origen who lived as Eusebius words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the very next Age to the Apostles whose Testimony is often urged in this matter too I mean Clemens Alexandrinus who flourished in the reign of Commodus and was the Scholar of Pantenus which two were the first that I meet with who delivered the Principles of Christian Religion in a Catecheticall way in publick Schools and for that deserve an Honour What Eusebius reports concerning this Clemens cannot be denied 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This man's Books are full of much excellent Learning so excellent that Chemnitius saith expresly of him In tota Antiquitate habitus fuit vir celeberrimus In all Antiquity there was not a man so famous as he But yet for all that he fell into many strange and heterodox Opinions such I suppose as our Adversaries themselves will by no means allow He telleth us that our Blessed Saviour preached but one year onely that the Apostles being departed from the World preached to the Dead and converting some of them raised them to life again He countenanced the Tenets of Anabaptists that Christians ought not to swear nor implead one another before any Tribunal whatsoever He affirmed that if men who were once Baptized and enlightned fell into Sin God perhaps might grant them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 place of Repentance for once or twice but no more for ever and yet notwithstanding as if he had forgot himself and were not constant to his own Opinion he saith elsewhere that if men repent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is no place either in this world or in the next void of the Goodness of God And methinks if this excellent and learned Person were betrayed into such gross and absurd Opinions as are directly contrary to the written Word through those Traditions which had even thus early crept into the Church and were fathered upon St. Paul St. Peter and other Apostles we must beg and may justly expect our very Adversaries pardon if we still suspect that such and such Traditions mentioned by this Clemens are very far from being as Bellarmine contends Apostolicall But although Clemens Alexandrinus fell into such erroneous and fond Opinions that they have given the Church just occasion in doubtfull matters to like his Testimony so much the worse yet what hath Tertullian done to forfeit his Credit and so far to blemish his Reputation that the large Testimony which he also gives in the case of Traditions should be questioned too Tertullian was indeed a learned Preacher of the African Church a man that confuted Marcion and wrote excellent Apologies for the persecuted Saints of God a man that is styled by Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most famous of all the Latine Writers and yet notwithstanding when he treats of Religious matters not contained within our Bibles we have too much ground in some things to suspect his Judgment too and for so doing Bellarmine himself hath given us his own Example 'T is notoriously known that this Person of excellent Parts shewed himself to be but a son of Adam when not finding that Respect from the Roman Clergy which he might have expected through Discontent and Anger he miserably fell off from the Orthodox Christians and took up the detestable Opinions of that Phrygian Heretick Montanus What were the Opinions of this Montanus Apollonius in Eusebius tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. This was he that taught the world to dissolve that sacred bond of Wedlock this is he that taught his Disciples such and such Doctrines tanquam à Paracleto traditas saith Chemnitius as if he had received them from the Blessed Spirit of God this is he whom his Followers took to be the Paraclete but whom sober persons looked upon as Eusebius tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a man possessed and acted by the Devil who had two women Priscilla and Maximilla to be his Prophetesses And certainly if this Montanus were such a monstrous Villain 't is as well sad as strange to think that such a man as Tertullian was should ever be so much transported with Passion upon such and such Neglects or perhaps Indignities received from some Clergy-men at Rome as to make such a Defection from the true Faith as if for some Affronts received from some particular persons he meant to revenge himself upon the whole Christian Church by patronizing the cursed Doctrines of so vile an Heretick But however since 't is clear that he did so we are by no means bound to believe what indeed he himself doth never affirm that all those Traditions which we find recorded in his Writings are of Divine Originall because we have ground enough to suspect that he might receive some of them at least from Montanus or some other unwarrantable hand rather then from Apostles or Apostolicall men But may not St. Cyprian pass for an unquestionable Witness if Tertullian do somewhat fail Was not this Cyprian the renowned Bishop of Carthage the stout Champion of Christ's true Religion yea and his faithful Martyr too And doth not this eminent Person give Testimony to justifie some of those Traditions and to prove them Apostolicall which are now received in the Roman Church and yet have not the least Countenance from the written Word of God What Great St. Basil once said of Dionysius Alexandrinus may without any Affront or Injury to St. Cyprian's name be affirmed of him too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We do not admire whatever that man said but some things we condemn too We are of St. Austine's mind who writes thus of Cyprian Cypriani literas non ut Canonicas habeo sed ex Canonicis considero Quod in eis Divinarum Scripturarum Authoritati congruit cum laude ejus accipio quod autem non congruit cum pace ejus respuo I do not take St. Cyprian's Epistles to be Canonical but I judge of them according to those which are such indeed Whatever therein agreeth with the Authority of Divine Scriptures to his honour I do applaud but whatever agreeth not with his leave I do reject 'T is evident by this Expression that although St. Cyprian were indeed what Nazianzene thought fit to style him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great Name of the whole world though he were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great Champion of the Truth yet it was St. Austine's Judgment