Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
christian_n apostle_n church_n creed_n 1,331 5 10.2664 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A85088 Two treatises The first, concerning reproaching & censure: the second, an answer to Mr Serjeant's Sure-footing. To which are annexed three sermons preached upon several occasions, and very useful for these times. By the late learned and reverend William Falkner, D.D. Falkner, William, d. 1682.; Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707.; Sturt, John, 1658-1730, engraver. 1684 (1684) Wing F335B; ESTC R230997 434,176 626

There are 15 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

alwaies preserved from alteration and change yea even at Rome notwithstanding this way of delivery wherein the following Generation have received their Language from their Fathers yet if they who conversed there in the Apostles times were now alive they would discern such alteration of speech and even in speaking mens names that they would not be able to understand their present language and if they can shew no greater security for the delivery of their Doctrine than of their Language that also may be as much changed notwithstanding their help of Tradition And it may be further observed that those Languages which in this way of Traditional Learning are grosly corrupted and even lost such as Hebrew Greek and Latin yet in Books and Writings they are faithfully preserved which shews Writings more sure keepers or preservers of words and civil things than this way of Tradition is It would be needless to shew that in Writings and civil behaviour there is as great variation in some few successions of Generations for this is sufficiently known to all observing men § 3 4. He applies this to Christianity and saith So Children get by degrees notions of God Christ Saviour Hell Virtue and Vice and are shewn how to say Grace and Prayers afterwards they become acquainted with the Ten Commandments Creed Sacraments forms of Prayer and other practices of Christianity the actions and carriages of the elder guiding the younger to frame their lives to several virtues by the Doctrine delivered in words as Faith Hope Charity Prayer c To this I answer That Children do indeed by degrees learn the Notions of God c. But this Tradition alone is not that which guides them here but also the Scriptures and Ancient Writers are of great use as they inable the Teachers of the foregoing Generation to guide them more faithfully Indeed in the way of this Tradition alone some general signification of words which concern matters of Faith may probably be delivered as that God signifies him whom we are to worship reverence serve and obey and such like But more particular notions of these matters of Religion as they may be sometimes preserved aright so where is no other way of preservation than this Tradition they may be very corruptly and dangerously delivered It is certain that Noah knew the true God and taught his Children concerning him and in his daies and since their Posterity increased to great multitudes and yet having only this way of Tradition they were so far corrupted in their knowledge of God that they owned Creatures yea the lowest of Creatures for God and thereby lost the knowledge of the true God and yet even the Gentiles who worshipped other things instead of God pretended that this they received by this way of Tradition and this was their great Argument why they should not receive Christianity because their Ancestors had delivered to them that way of Worship they then used in Heathenism Clemens Alexand. in his Admonition to the Gentiles brings them in speaking thus We must not reject those things which were delivered to us from our Fathers and almost all the Fathers who write against Gentilism industriously shew the vanity of this their plea. The saying of Prayers and Grace aright depends much upon the preservation of the true Notions of God and Christ and the knowledge of Duties and Promises and therefore if there be any corruption in the delivery of those things it is like to be also in the performance of these actions of Prayer and saying Grace in which case will the carriages and practices of the elder Christians be corrupted But he sayes they learn the Creed ten Commandments and forms of Prayer The Creed is indeed a good preservative of the chief Articles of our Belief Had it not been for this Form and some other like it received in the Church which because written and in stinted words is more of kin to the way of Scripture delivery than to other delivery by Oral Tradition it is like these points of Faith might have been rejected or lost among them who only hold unto the way of that Tradition The ten Commandments are likewise a sure preservative of that which God requires in them from man but these are the words of Scripture Neither the Creed nor the ten Commandments concern the Controversie of Tradition as it is disowned by Protestants otherwise than to observe the way whereby the certainty of them is conveyed unto us and thus we do assert that we are more certain of the Creed by its being committed to Writing and comprized in a fixed form of words and being every way agreeable to Scripture than any can be by way of delivery from Father to Son only by word of mouth in all successions of Generations and the same certainty we have of the ten Commandments by their being in the Scripture Records and being likewise delivered in writing which is the way which even Papists make use of as well as others What he adds of Sacraments and forms of Prayer these are like to guide men aright where the notions of Religion concerning them are preserved intire but if there be a corruption in Religion these things as soon as others may be depraved as indeed they are in the Romish Church where though the Creed and the Commandments do deliver much truth yet are they somewhat perverted by Traditional Expositions nor can they secure from the delivery of many other corruptions In § 5. He desires us to consider How the Primitive Faithful were inured to Christianity e're the Books of Scripture were written or communicated We know this then was by the preaching of the Apostles among them who had the inspiration of God to guide them and were unerrable deliverers and yet even they in this preaching made very great use of the Books of the Old Testament to prevail with men to receive the Doctrines of Jesus But I shall further mind him that the Christians at Rome in the Primitive state of that Church before they had any written Scripture of the New Testament thought it requisite for the inuring themselves to Christianity to obtain some Writings Apostolical concerning whom Eusebius writes thus At Rome the light of Religion did so shine upon the minds of these hearers of Peter that they thought it not sufficient to content themselves with once hearing him nor with the unwritten Doctrine of the Divine preaching but with all manner of perswasions they did earnestly desire Mark who followed Peter that by writing he would leave them a memorial of that Doctrine which was then delivered to them by words nor did they desist until he did perform it and this was the cause of the writing that which is called The Gospel according to Mark. He likewise relates That when the Apostle knew what was done by the revelation of the Spirit he was pleased with the forwardness of the men and by his Authority confirmed the Writing that it might be read in the Churches
found in them And it is considerable that the ancient Bishops of Rome owned not nor claimed any such Authority nor was any such given to them by the Primitive Church To this purpose it may be observed from (l) Epiph. Her 42. Epiphanius that when Marcion being excommunicated by his own Father a pious Bishop for his debauchery went to Rome and desired there to be received into Communion he was told there by those Elders yet alive who were the Disciples of the Apostles that they could not receive him without the permission of his Reverend Father there being one Faith and one Concord they could not act contrary to their Fellow Ministers And this was agreeable to the Rules and Canons of the ancient Church whereby it was ordained (m) Can. Ap. 12. that if any excommunicate person should be received in another City whither he should come not having commendatory Letters he who received him should be himself also under excommunication And the novel Romish Notion of all other Bishops so depending on the Roman as to derive their power and authority from him is so contrary to the sense of the ancient Church that (n) Hieron Ep. ad Evagrium S. Hierome declares ubicunque fuerit Episcopus five Romae five Eugubii ejusdem meriti ejusdem est sacerdotii omnes Apostolorum successores sunt wheresoever there was a Bishop whether at Rome or at Gubio he is of the same worth and the same Priesthood they are all Successors of the Apostles 20. and prejudicial to other Churches and to Religion it self However the Romish Church upon this encroachment and false pretence claims a power to receive appeals from any other Churches And this oft proves a great obstacle to the Government and discipline of those Churches and an heavy and burdensome molestation to particular persons by chargeable tedious and dilatory prosecutions and is a method also of exhausting the treasures of other Churches and Kingdoms to gratifie ambitious avarice But even the (o) c. 6. qu. 3. scitote Canon Law declares the great reasonableness that every Province where there is ten or eleven Cities and a King should have a Metropolitan and other Bishops and that all causes should be judged and determined by them among themselves and that no Province ought to be so much debased and degraded as to be deprived of such a Judicature Indeed the Canon Law doth here for the sake of the Roman See exempt such cases from this judgement where those who are to be judged enter an appeal which is much different from the appeal the ancient Church allowed (p) Conc. Constant c. 6. to a more General Council after the insufficient hearing of a Provincial one But in truth this right of ordering and judging what is fit in every Province is not only the right of that particular Church or Country or Kingdom but where they proceed according to truth and goodness it is the right of God and the Christian Religion which is above all contrary authority of any other and ought not to be violated thereby And appeals from hence (pp) Cod. ean Eccl. Afr. c. 28. The Romanists Schismatical even to Rome were anciently prohibited in Africa 21. And the Schismatical uncharitableness of them at Rome towards other Churches deserves here to be mentioned This widens divisions and discords and perpetuates them by declaring an irreconcileable opposition to peace and truth They excommunicate them as Hereticks who discerning their right and their duty will not submit themselves to their usurpations and embrace their errors and to them they hereupon deny the hopes of Salvation Thus they deal with them who stedfastly hold to the Catholick faith and to all the holy rules of the Christian life and practice delivered by the Apostles and received by the Primitive Church and who also embrace that Catholick charity and Unity that they own Communion with all the true and regular members of the Christian Church and would with as much joy communicate with the Roman Church her self if she would make her Worship and Communion and the terms of it free from sin as the Father in the Gospel embraced his returning Son But this is the crime of such Churches that while they hold fast the Apostolical Faith and Order they reject the novel additional doctrines introduced by the Church of Rome and they submit not to her usurped authority in not doing what in duty to God they ought to do in imbracing the right wayes of truth 22. Their unjust excommunications hurt not others But the excommunicating such persons and Churches doth no hurt to them who undeservedly lie under this unjust censure but the effect of the censure may fall on them who thus excommunicate For they who reject the Communion of them who are true and orderly Members of the Church Catholick do divide themselves from that Communion To this sense is that received rule (q) c. 24. qu. 3. c. si habes c. certum illicita excommunicatio non laedit eum qui notatur sed eum à quo notatur and this was declared by (r) in Balsamon p. 1096. Nicon to be agreeable to the Canons And the excellency and power of the true Catholick Doctrine and the purity thereof is so much to be preferred before the authority of any persons whomsoever who oppose it that that which the ancient Canons (ſ) Conc. Sardic c. 17. established was very fit and just that if any Bishops and consequently any other persons were ejected from their own Churches or suffered any censures unjustly for their adhering to the Catholick Faith and profession they ought still to be received in other Churches and Cities with kindness and love And whereas there were Canons of the Church which allowed not Bishops to reside in other Churches and Dioceses these Fathers at Sardica dispense with that Rule in such a case as this and thereby declare their fense to be That the observation of Canonical establishments must give place where the higher duties of respect to the Christian Faith and Charity were concerned 23. but only themselves When the Scribes and Pharisees condemned the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles for Heresie and cast them who received it out of the Church the Christians were nevertheless the true members of the Church but they who rejected them were not so And when the Donatists would allow none but their own party to belong to the Church they thereby cast themselves out of the Catholick Communion as Schismaticks And when they at Rome so far follow their steps as to confine the Christian Communion to themselves or to a particular Church especially such an one as so greatly swerves from the truth and purity of the Christian Religion Sect. II. this is in effect to deny that Article of our Creed concerning the Holy Catholick Church And since Charity and Vnity are of so great concernment in Christianity on that account also they are none
divers of the Romish Communion (g) Cassand Consult de mer. interces Sanctorum They pretend that they only desire their prayers But 1. It is unknown to us that they know our desires advocationis Christi officio obscurato Sanctos atque imprimis Virginem Mariam in illius locum substituerunt that the Office of Christs Advocateship being obscured by them they substituted the Saints and principally the Virgin Mary in his place 4. But the most considerable men who write in defence of this practice declare that they only invocate the Saints to obtain the assistance of their prayers but First If this was true and no more was either intended by the Church of Rome or practised by its members yet there is no assurance that particular Saints departed know our particular wants and supplications and desires and much more may they be unacquainted with that inward devoutness and pious temper of soul which doth qualifie men for the obtaining the favour of God and his heavenly blessings And a wise man would not think it reasonable to place any considerable dependance in a special case upon the care and assistance of such a friend who is at a distance from him and of whom he hath no sufficient ground of confidence that he knows any thing either of his need or of his special desire from him The ways assigned by the Romanists to declare how the Saints departed are acquainted with things here below especially so far as to discern the special motions of the minds of all particular persons are but expressions of great words without evidence and the speculum Trinitatis may as well serve to shew that the Angels in glory were from the beginning of their confirmation in happiness acquainted with all things future by seeing the face of our heavenly Father when yet our Lord declares they knew not the time of the day of Judgement as that the Saints in glory have such a clear understanding of things and persons in this world Now if they understand not our requests and desires supplications directed to them are not only imprudent but an abuse of Religious Worship by employing a considerable portion of it and of our devotion therein about that which at least signifies nothing but is wholly useless and to no purpose And to perform acts of Religion upon the uncertain supposition of this being true of which we can have no certain knowledge and there is much to be said against it is to shew our selves too forward to run the hazard of being guilty of this miscariage 5. And whereas God and his Gospel doth instruct men Our Religion gives no direction for such prayers in the parts and duties of Religion but hath given neither direction nor encouragement to the invocation of Angels or Saints departed or to perform any Religious Worship to them it is no duty incumbent on men to make such addresses to them and in this case concerning the object of Religious worship it is not their due to receive what is not our duty to perform And we may reasonably fear lest God should account our giving such honour to those glorified creatures in Heaven as to acknowledge them to know the desires of the hearts of men and addressing our selves to them thereupon to be a misplacing that honour which is only due to himself and our blessed Saviour and this might bring us under his displeasure And when I consider how frequently the Apostle desires the prayers of the Christian Churches on earth and directs them to pray for one another and to send to the Elders of the Church to obtain their prayers I cannot but think that he would have been as forward to have directed Christians to seek for the prayers of Saints departed of which he speaks nothing if he had accounted that to be lawful and useful and from hence it may seem highly probable if not certain that the Souls departed do not understand and are not particularly affected with the requests and desires of men here below Besides this though I conceive holy Angels may be frequently present in the Assemblies of the Christian Church I cannot think it allowable though I had special assurance of their presence at any particular time to direct the acts of publick worship in that case sometimes to God and Christ and sometimes to them in the same gesture of adoration and especially in the use of such words of address to the Angels however they be understood as may fitly be applied to Christ For this would give too much of that homage to the Servant which is due unto the Lord. 6. 〈◊〉 greatly honour the Saints departed But we who do not direct our prayers and Religious supplications to Saints departed have a high honour for them endeavouring to follow their good examples praising God for them and hoping to be hereafter with them in the mansions of glory And since their goodness and love is not diminished but increased by their departure and they are still members of the same body I esteem them to have affectionate desires of the good of men upon Earth and especially of pious men who are fellow-members with them And I account it one great priviledge that I enjoy from the Communion of Saints that by reason of membership with the same body I have an interest in the Religious supplications of all the truly Catholick part of the diffusive Church Militant upon Earth and in the holy Services of the triumphant part thereof in Heaven I can also willingly admit what (h) Cyp. de Mortalitate Magnus illic nos charorum numerus expectat parentum fratrum filiorum copiosa turba adhuc de nostra salute sollicita S. Cyprian sometimes expresseth that departed friends have a particular desire of the good of their surviving relations and what in another place he recommends (i) Epist 57. ad Cornel. The Papists do directly pray for blessings to the Saints that departing Christians continue their affectionate sense of and prayers for the distressed part of the Church on Earth But upon the foregoing considerations this will not warrant Religious addresses to be directed to these Saints 7. Secondly The petitions used in the Romish Church in their supplications to the Saints do plainly express more than their desiring them to pray for them I shall not insist on the high extravagances in divers Books of Devotions and in the Offices formerly used in some particular Churches as that in the Missale sec usum Sarum to the Virgin Mary (k) In Nativit B. Matiae Potes enim cuncta ut mundi Regina jura Cum nato omnia decernis in soecla Thou canst do all things as the Queen of the World and thou with thy Son determinest all rights for ever which with many expressions of as high a nature place a further confidence in the Saints and expectation from them than meerly to be helped by their prayers But I shall instance in two or three
these things But that which is here to be enquired and examined is Whether the Sacrament of the Eucharist ought not according to the institution of Christ and by his authority to be administred in both kinds 15. That Christ did institute this Sacrament against Christs Institution in both kinds of Bread and Wine is so plain from the words of its Institution that this is acknowledged in the (d) Ubi sup c. 1. Council of Trent And that he gave a particular command to all Communicants to receive the Cup seems plainly owned in one of the Hymns of the Roman Church (e) Sacris c. in Brev. Ro. in festo Corp. Christ Dedit fragilibus corporis ferculum Dedit tristibus sanguinis poculum Dicens Accipite quod trado vasoulum Omnes ex eo bibite Sic Sacrificium istud instituit He gave the entertainment of his body to the Frail to the Sad he gave the Cup of his blood saying Take this Cup which I deliver drink ye all of it Thus did he institute that Sacrifice These expressions have a particular respect to that Command concerning the Cup Matt. 26 27. Drink ye all of it And it may be further observed that those words in the Institution Do this in remembrance of me are a Precept which hath special respect to the receiving both the kinds both the Bread and the Cup. For though I acknowledge these words Do this to establish the whole Institution that as (f) Cyp. Ep. 63. S. Cyprian expresseth their sense ut hoc faciamus quod fecit Dominus ab eo quod Christus docuit fecit non recedatur that we should do what our Lord did and should not depart from what Christ taught and did Yet these words have a more especial regard to the distribution or participation of the Sacrament For Do this c. in S. Luke and S. Paul comes in the place of take eat c. in S. Matt. and S. Mark and in these words of S. Paul Do this as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of me the words as oft as ye drink it do plainly import thus much that the Command do this in that place doth peculiarly respect the receiving the Cup. 16. This Institution of Christ was anciently even in the Church of Rome acknowledged to be so fair a Rule to all Christians that from hence (g) de Consecrat di 2. c. 7. Cum omne Pope Julius undertook to correct the various abuses which had in some places been entertained Insomuch that he declares against delivering the Bread dipt in the Cup upon this reason because it is contrary to what is testified in the Gospels concerning the Master of truth who when he commended to his Apostles his Body and his Blood Seorsum panis seorsum calicis commendatio memoratur his Recommendation of the Bread and of the Cup is related to be each of them separate and distinct And that the Apostolical Church did give the Cup to the Laity is plain from the Apostles words to the Corinthians where he useth this as an Argument to all particular Christians against communicating in any Idolatrous Worship 1 Cor. 10.21 ye cannot drink the Cup of the Lord and the Cup of Devils And the same will appear manifest from other expressions hereafter mentioned And the Council of Trent (h) Sess 21. c. 2. owns that from the beginning of Christianity the Sacrament was given in both kinds But they following much the steps of the Council of Constance account neither the Institution of Christ nor the practice of the ancient Church to be in this case any necessary guide but they declare the custom then received to be changed upon just reasons 17. But that the Argument from the Institution and Command of Christ might be eluded and a Mist cast before the Sun divers Romanists and particularly (i) de Euchar l. 4. c. 25. which binds all Communicants Bellarmine declare that Christs command drink ye all of it was given to the Apostles only and not to all Communicants To which I answer 1. That the Apostles at the time of the Institution of this Sacrament were not consecrating but communicating and therefore the Command given to them as receiving the Sacrament is a rule for Communicants Which binds all Communicants and can by no reason be restrained to the consecrating Priest And indeed the ancient Church made no such distinction in this case between Priest and People but acknowledged as (k) Chrys Hom. 18. in 2 Epist ad Corinth S. Chrysostome expresseth it that the same Body is appointed for all and the same Cup And agreeable hereunto are the Articles of the Church of England which declare (l) Art 30. that both the parts of the Lord's Sacrament by Christ's Ordinance and Commandment ought to be ministred to all Christian men alike 2. That this device would serve as effectually if it were considerable to take away the Bread with the Cup from the people that so no part of Christ's Institution should belong to them 3. The Command of Christ with the reason annexed Matt. 26.27 28. Drink ye all of it for this is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the Remission of Sins doth give sufficient light to discern to whom this Precept is designed to wit to all them who desire to partake in the Communion of the blood of the New Testament for the Remission of sins and that is to all Communicants in that Sacrament 4. S. Paul 1 Cor. 11.25 26. plainly applys Christ's Command concerning the Cup to all who come to the Holy Communion in that after the rehearsal of that part of the Institution concerning the Cup he immediately says to the Corinthians For as oft as yet eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew the Lord's Death till he come And he re-inforceth this Command of partaking of the Cup indefinitely to all who are to Communicate v. 28. Let a Man not only the Priest examine himself and so let him eat of this Bread and drink of this Cup. 18. But here the Council of Trent acquaints us with a claim of the Churches authority and power in the Sacrament (m) Ubi sup c. 2. in dispensatione Sacramentorum salva illorum substantia statuere vel mutare to appoint and change things in dispensing the Sacraments still preserving their substance And they seem to intimate that the Communion in both kinds No power of the Church can take away the Cup from the People is not of the substance of the Sacrament because whole Christ and all necessary grace is contained under one kind But 1. If by being of the substance of the Sacrament we mean all that is enjoined by Christ's Precept and is necessary for the right administration of the Sacrament according to his Institution The use of both kinds is proved to be of this nature and therefore to change this
and its freedom from sin And the ancient Ecclesiastical Writers give large and high commendations thereof Polycarp saith (n) Ep. ad Philip. p. 16. that he who hath charity is free from all sin which hath some affinity with those words of the Apostle Rom. 13.8 he that loveth another hath fulfilled the Law And Origen speaks of the Christian man as being pure from sin (o) Cont. Cels l. 3. p. 148 149. and having left off to sin which is of like nature with not continuing any longer therein Rom. 6.2 as having departed from a vicious wicked and impure life And the Christian life is a perfect life as it greatly outdoth the practice of evil men and is in it self excellent and contains a resemblance of God Mat. 5 44-48 and as it is guided by the fear of God and directed to the eschewing evil and doing what is just and good Job 1.1 Psal 37.37 11. And every true Christian doth and must perform all the necessary conditions in the Gospel-Covenant for acceptance with God and obtaining Salvation or otherwise he can never be saved And the practice of Faith and true holiness the subduing lusts and evil affections and being renewed after God is included in these conditions But the terms and conditions of the Gospel-Covenant are not the same thing but must be differently considered from the rules of duty which the Gospel injoins For a constant practice of every duty towards God and man and a careful performance of every moral precept without any transgression thereof is injoined more highly under the Gospel than ever it was before But the conditions of the Gospel-Covenant are upon more mild and gentle terms of grace than were contained under the foregoing Dispensations for they admit and approve true uprightness and sincerity of obedience though there may some failings and imperfections attend it and they allow of repentance and promise mercy and pardon to those offenders who are truly penitent So that the rules of duty considered in their large extent do so far shew what we are obliged to perform that whensoever we fail in the least part thereof we thereupon need the benefit of the pardoning mercy of God and the atonement and expiation of our Saviour to which when we discern our failing in the exercise of self-reflexion we are to apply our selves according to the directions of the Gospel with a pious and penitent behaviour But the great and necessary conditions of the Gospel and the Covenant of grace contain those things which are of such indispensable necessity to be performed and observed by us that the mercy of God will never accept of those who neglect them nor will it pardon the omission thereof Such conditions under the Gospel Revelation are the embracing the Christian Faith the diligent exercise of a holy life and under the sense of our failings an humble address to God through Christ for his mercy pardon and supplies of further grace with penitential exercises 12. And in the best of men who exercise themselves diligently in piety and the discharge of a good conscience there may be many things wherein they fail and come short of the exact performance of what they ought to do And therefore our Saviour taught his Disciples ordinarily to pray forgive us our Trespasses and appointed that petition to be part of that prayer which he directed and commanded them to use Upon which words of the Lords Prayer (p) Cyp. de Orat. Dom. S. Cyprian observes how every one is hereby taught and instructed that he offends every day when he is commanded daily to pray for the pardon of his sins And he observes also how constant a need every person hath of seeking for and obtaining pardon for his failings in that upon this account our Lord urgeth the necessity of our constant care of forgiving others because otherwise our heavenly Father will not forgive us and therefore he gives this as a rule to be always practised whensoever we pray Mark 11.25 When ye stand praying forgive if ye have ought against any that your Father also which is in Heaven may forgive you your trespasses And from the consideration of the Lords Prayer (q) Aug. Ep. 89. S. Austin well observes that if the Christian state here were so far perfect as to be free from all offences our Saviour would never have taught such a Prayer to his Church to be constantly used by his Disciples when they pray and even by the Apostles themselves And in the Institution of the Lords Supper our Saviour tendred the Sacrifice of his Body and Blood to be received by Christians in the continued administration of that Ordinance for the remission of sins All which doth manifest that Christian life and Gospel-obedience which is accepted upon the conditions of the Covenant of grace is not an absolute sinless obedience though it doth include a real purity of heart and integrity of conversation And the pious Christian is sometimes called perfect with respect to that excellency to which he hath attained Phil. 3.15 16. and yet at the said time in a different sense is not acknowledged to be perfect Phil. 3.12 by reason of the defects which are still remaining Hence the Holy Scriptures oft speak to this purpose that in many things we offend all and that there is no man that lives and sins not and that if we say we have no sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us 13. And we further assert and acknowledge that in the Christian state there is also a perfection by way of comparison in them who have arrived to greater degrees and a more eminent height and growth in Christian graces and vertues than others and this excellent state is very desirable and ought to be diligently endeavoured by every pious man But no such persons either will or can truly say that henceforth they have no need of any interest in the mercy of God for the forgiving their failings or in the benefits of Christ's Merits and Sacrifice for obtaining thereby pardon and remission But (r) Ep. ad Eph. p. 18. Philad p. 41. Ed. Vos Ignatius when ready to lay down his life by Martyrdom acknowledged his imperfection And (Å¿) Paed. l. 1. c. 2. Clemens Alexandrinus describes the Christian that his failings must be as little as is possible and he must strive against all disorders of affections and disown all customs of sin and it is an excellent thing to be free from all fault but this is the state of God The imperfections of such men as Asa and Job and others who are called perfect are noted in the Scripture And that same Epistle in which S. John speaks so much of him that is born of God that he sins not as having rejected a vicious and evil life and being set free from the service thereof he also declares against him who saith he hath no sin 1 Joh. 1.8 directs confession of sin v. 9. and speaking concerning
of this Principle of making Scripture our Rule that if any Christians should live under such a Power as this Author speaks of should be a self-condemning tyranny over mens consciences if in this case Subjects make Scripture their Rule they must live in patience meekness peace humility and subjection to the Higher Powers and it must be from pride wrath passion malice and refusing to be subject all which are directly contrary to the Scriptures that all Rebellion against Government must proceed Whence amongst the Primitive Christians where the Laws of their Persecutors commanded them the worship of a Deity and yet punished them for worshipping the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and Christ his Son with the holy Spirit which is the only God and the Christians knew there was none else and punished them for not worshipping as Gods them whom they knew were no gods yet in this case the Christian Principles which the Scripture delivers kept them in all loyal subjection to their Governours If this Principle of making Scripture every where our Rule both as to Faith and Life be prevalent as it will guide us aright into the truth so it will end all quarrels silence all animosities and contentions and would reduce the world to such a perfect state of quiet peace friendship and love as never yet flourished upon the face of the Earth § 5. He tells us The use of this Discourse is to conclude the deserters of the way of Tradition to be very few to which he hath received our answer § 3. and the Cause laid to preserve Traditionary Christians is far more steady than that laid to preserve mankind I have answered his comparison of Tradition and Propagation § 1. But if he will be so confident as to tell his Reader that the way of Tradition is as surely supported as the Propagation of mankind I would only advise him to be so ingenuous as to speak plainly out his meaning and say that as in mankind the causes for keeping intire the nature of man are such that no company in the World ever pretended themselves to be of the nature of man who really were not so the way to preserve Tradition is such that no Society of men ever did pretend to have received and held this truth when indeed they had it not and if he would thus do he might amuse his Reader but would never deceive him having before told him that there have been many Hereticks in the World and that even amongst these the way of continuing Heresie is the propagating of it by the way of Tradition An Answer to his eighth Discourse shewing that uninterruptedness of Tradition is not proved à posteriori § 1. HE declares That he will trie to conclude the indeficiency of Tradition from such an effect as can only spring from Traditions indeficiency of its Cause § 2. he saith this seems needless against Protestants who yield the points of Faith we agree in to have come down by this way of Tradition He presseth therefore from Protestants a candid Answer to these Queries 1. Was not the Trinity Incarnation and all other Points in which we agree held in all Ages since Christ by Gods Church 2. Whether seeing those points were held ever of Faith Fathers did not actually teach Children so or the former Age the latter if so they came down by Tradition 3. By what virtue did Tradition perform this and whether the same virtue was not as powerful to bring down other things had any such been 4. Is there not a necessary connexion between such a constant cause and its formal effect so that if its formal effect be those Points received as delivered ever the proper Cause must be an ever-delivery But because he fears the Protestant will flie off here he will follow his designed method Sure he rather supposed the Protestant could easily baffle these fancies than that he would flie from such shadows To the 1. Qu. I answer That if we indeed understand by Gods Church that number of Christians who have intirely and constantly held all the Principles of Christian Religion they must needs have held these great truths likewise But many have pretended to be Gods Church who held them not Nor hath this belief been alwaies preserved in the Churches who once imbraced it since the Eastern Churches who before received the true Doctrine of Christ were drawn aside by the Arian infection and denied those points which shews Tradition not certainly enough to preserve these points in any particular Church To the 2. Qu. I answer That in the Church of God which ever held these points Fathers did teach their Children these Doctrines yet were they not only nor chiefly continued by the way of Oral Tradition For the Primitive Christians made Scripture their Rule as shall be after shewed from their Writings and Fathers taught Children chiefly then by what they read and received by the writings of the Scriptures And the Children of these Parents had not only their Parents teaching but they had also the Scriptures read among them and perused by them and by this means in the Primitive times were these Doctrines continued That the Apostolical Doctrine was continued in the Church chiefly from the Scriptures Irenaeus testifies even of those Primitive times Adversus Haeres lib. 4. c. 63. The Doctrine of the Apostles is the true knowledge which is come even unto us being kept without fiction by the most full handling of the Scriptures That Christians then received their instruction in the Church chiefly from Scriptures he likewise sheweth lib. 5. c. 20. where he exhorts to flie from the Opinion of the Hereticks and flie unto the Church and be brought up in its bosom and be nourished by the Lord's Scriptures For saith he the Paradise of the Church is planted in this World therefore the Spirit of God saith Ye shall eat food of every tree of the Paradise that is eat ye of every Scripture of the Lord. For very many more testimonies and those very clear I refer to what shall be purposely discoursed in answer to his consent of Authority Yea such was the esteem of the use of Scripture that in the Primitive times before their Children were taught matters of human literature they were instructed in the holy Scriptures Thus was Origen brought up Eus Hist Eccl. lib. 6. c. 3. and Eusebius Emissenus according to the common custom of their Country in like manner first learned the Scriptures Sozom. Hist Eccl. lib. 3. cap. 5. To his 3. Qu. Were it certain that these truths had been preserved by the way of Oral Tradition only in the true Church of God as indeed they have not been yet this is not by any such virtue in the way of Tradition as would secure the right delivery of all other things For this is wholly contingent in respect of Tradition depending upon this supposal that in such a Society it hath alwaies been rightly delivered and rightly received which
somewhat which may manifest the great evil of this uncharitable behaviour especially towards our Superiours and may be sufficient to warn men against it Such an undertaking as this is very agreeable to that particular Apostolical direction and precept of S. Paul who charged Titus in the work of his Ministry Tit. 3.1 2. to put men in mind to be subject to Principalities and Powers to obey Magistrates to be ready to every good work To speak evil of no man to be no brawlers but gentle shewing all meekness to all men Whatsoever esteem some persons will have of such instructions and truths as these are the Apostle with respect hereto commands Titus v. 8. these things I will that thou affirm constantly and further declares in the end of that verse these things are good and profitable unto men And it must needs be a fit season and very requisite to declare against any sin when it is grown to that height that men will openly avow it and become bold and confident in the practice of it without shame or regret And that what I shall speak of this Subject may be the more carefully regarded Some preparatory considerations proposed I shall in my entrance upon it take some notice which I shall afterward further pursue of the great hurt and danger of this sin and its being inconsistent with piety and true holiness and Religion The tongue S. James saith is an unruly evil full of deadly poyson Jam. 3.8 and therefore it is no little mischief which proceeds from the ill government thereof 4. Uncharitable reproaches are First 1. Reproaching is contrary to the highest and best examples set before us in the Scripture Unsuitable to the best and highest examples which the Scripture proposeth for our imitation and contrary and hateful to the wisest and most excellent persons But it is most reasonable for us to follow such examples since such persons who are of clearest knowledge and free from all passionate and sinful inclinations can most perfectly discern good and are fitly qualified to make the best choice But this disorder is so far opposite to true goodness that though rash men may not duly observe the evil thereof yet as an evident conviction of the great sinfulness contained therein especially in reproaching Governours S. Jude tells us that Michael the Archangel when contending with the Devil durst not bring against him a railing accusation Jude 9. And yet inconsiderate and passionate men dare venture on this sin without fear though a person of so great wisdom and knowledge as the Archangel durst not do it and though the Apostle and the Holy Ghost himself propose his example as a manifest condemnation of such transgressors And those pious Christians who have been best acquainted with the Spirit of Christianity have accounted as every man ought to do this instance to be of great force Hence (b) Hieron in Tit. c. 3. S. Hierome from this instance of the Archangel urgeth the necessity of a careful practice of that Christian duty to speak evil of no man And when S. Peter had observed what a daring presumption some evil men were arrived unto that they were not afraid to speak evil of Dignities he in like manner adds 2 Pet. 2.10 11. whereas Angels which are greater in power and might bring not railing accusations against them before the Lord and we should do the will of God on Earth as it is done by them in Heaven Agreeably to these we have the great example of our Lord and Saviour which is proposed for our imitation 1 Pet. 2.23 Who when he was reviled he reviled not again And besides these things we may discern how much the holy God disliketh and is displeased with this evil practice by his laws and precepts condemning it and by the threatnings he hath denounced and the punishments he will inflict upon those who are guilty of this sin but of these I shall discourse more hereafter 5. But this evil practice is very agreeable to the temper and disposition of the evil spirit and thereupon (c) Basil Ep. 75. Chrys Hom. de Diabol Tentat Andr. Caesar in Apoc c. 34. and is a great complyance with the Evil one ancient Writers have accounted the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a calumniator to have been very properly given to him For pride uncharitableness promoting mischief and departing from truth all which things are manifestly joyned together in this sin do make up very much of the nature of the evil one These things therefore are both pleasing to him and a considerable resemblance of him And indeed the Devil hath done a great part of his work in the world by this very practice and it becomes every Christian to detest the following his example and the carrying on his work The first transgression of mankind was occasioned by his misreporting and misrepresenting the intentions of Gods Government and his laws And one of the most effectual means whereby Satan hath hindred the greater progress of the Christian Religion especially in the Primitive times when Religion it self continued uncorrupt was by defaming both our holy Religion and them who heartily embraced it and by prevailing upon a great part of the world to believe much evil concerning it and entertain great prejudices against it To this end such calumnies were invented and spread abroad as that the assembling of Christians together to partake of the holy Eucharist were meetings to perpetrate villanies in murdering and eating of an Infant and practising uncleanness as many of the Writers of the first Ages have declared who have refuted such notorious slanders And the Christians themselves were aspersed as men of inflexible obstinacy and a perverse will and this even (d) Plin. Ep. l. 10. Ep. 97. Pliny chargeth them with who vindicates them from the forementioned crimes They were also reputed Atheists as (e) Just Apol. 2. Justin Martyr declares because they owned not the Gentile Idolatry And many other things of like nature might be added Whereas if Christianity had been generally represented and apprehended in its genuine excellencies its amiable purity and truth and its Divine Authority it would have commanded a more general submission among men But by the wiles of Satan and the malice of his instruments such calumnies were spread abroad that it was in its first manifestation every where spoken against Act. 28.22 6. Secondly 2. It is inconsistent with true Holiness The practice of this sin is inconsistent with true piety and integrity of heart For as the fruit shews the nature of the tree so an ill-governed tongue is a plain evidence of a corrupt heart and speaks passion and uncharitableness to prevail there where meekness and love should take place This our Lord testifies Mat. 12.34 35. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth good things and an evil man out of the evil treasure of
(f) Chrys Hom. in Ps 44. S. Chrysostome there is nothing shameful but sin and if all the world shall reproach thee and thou not reproach thy self there is no shame in all this But it is never safe to join with a multitude either in the doing or speaking evil And the state of every offender when the sin grows common is upon this account the more dangerous because he is hereby the more like to be encouraged in his sin and the more unlike to repent of it and sometimes he may be by this means so emboldned in evil as to think it strange that others run not to the same excess speaking evil of them And thus his case is like that of a man who is carried away with a fierce and violent stream which leaves but little hopes of his escaping drowning Wherefore it is as reasonable that men be careful to avoid spreading vices as that they should be cautious and fearful of infectious diseases 9. Thirdly This disorder is prone to prevail 3 It is a sin earnestly pursued by many who appear strict and zealous about Religion not only among men of careless and negligent tempers but also among them who are strict scrupulous and conscientious in matters of Religion Thus was our Master treated with infamous reproaches by them who were zealous for the honour of God Such were the Pharisees and the devouter sort of the Jewish Nation such was S. Paul himself before his conversion being exceeding zealous for the law and yet a blasphemer and injurious And such were those unbelieving Jews to whom S. Paul bears record that they had a zeal for God but not according to knowledge Rom. 10.2 These were members of the Jewish Church were strict in many things both of practice and opinion and were very earnest to make Proselytes And besides the other Sects of the Jews who all joyned together against our Lord the holy Scriptures represent none more vehement in their oppositions and reproaches than the Pharisees who as S. Paul declares were of the exactest and straitest Sect of the Jewish Religion Acts 26.5 And though Josephus sometimes prefer the Essens before them yet he also tells us that (g) Joseph de Bel. Jud. l. 1. c. 4. the Pharisees were reputed to be more Religious than other men and more strict in their interpretation of the laws But there was so much pride and passion mixed with their zeal that they were vehement against those who did not comply with them in laying a great stress upon such things wherein Religion was not concerned yea and upon those things al o which really tended to the undermining of true piety and they were eager against them who would inform them better and hence they set themselves in opposition against Christ and his Apostles 10. Misguided zeal inflameth passions and sharpneth tongues There is nothing that more sharpens the tongues of men against others than the mistaken principles of a misguided conscience which was that by which the Jews acted against the Saviour of the World both reviling and crucifying him Hence also before the great Apostle was a convert he thought he ought to do many things against the name of Jesus Act. 26.9 And hence the Apostles and other Christians were upbraided and ill intreated in that high degree that they that killed them thought they did God service Joh. 16.2 And hence divers Hereticks and those who were engaged in Errors and Schisms and divisions vented many contumelious and reproachful censures against the true Church and its members So did the Gnosticks Montanists Novatians Donatists and others anciently and all dividing Sects of later times 11. For instance the Donatists raised such high accusations against the true Christian Church as (h) Aug. Ep. 50. Ep. 162. passim to reject it from being a true Church and not to own any but themselves to be the Church of Christ and thereupon not only rebaptized all others who came to them but by savage cruelty and violence forced divers to be rebaptized Sect. III. And other reproachers but not in the like degree were embraced by the other Sects For all men who have pretended to Christianity till some late unreasonable notions in our present age which discard all obligation to visible and external Unity and publick communion in the offices of the Church have been sensible that they could never justifie their own departure from the Church unless they could lay some such thing to her charge as made their secession necessary Among these some were more fierce and furious who yielded their conscience to the service of their affections and passions as too many of late have done both in the Church of Rome and of other parties in our late unhappy times And when S. Austin with lamentations spake of the incursions of the Barbarous Nations into France Italy Spain and Egypt he thought the inhumane cruelties some of which he particularly mentions of the (i) Aug. Ep. 122. Sic vastant Ecclesias ut Barbarorum fortasse facta mitlora sunt Donatists and especially the Circumcelliones towards them who held communion with the Church were rather more savage than what was commited by those barbarous people And indeed no rage is fiercer than that which is enflamed by an irregular and disordered zeal And others who continue in a milder temper though they abstain from outrages yet by their misapprehensions are engaged in unreasonable censures of the Church and publick order and of the Rulers who appoint and establish it 12. But zeal when not governed by piety prudence truth and goodness and not allayed with meekness is like a fire violently breaking out in any part of a building which threatens the wasting and ruine of the whole And it is never safe to promote or entertain unjust reproaches raised even by zealous men when these very things though they may be popularly taking to engage a party yet are they a great blemish to their profession uncharitableness and rash censoriousness being a manifest evidence of the want of a true Religious temper wheresoever it prevails To this purpose S. James speaking of that man who is wise by the wisdom which descends from above or who is truly pious and Religious directs this wise and good man Jam. 3.13 to shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom And he then assures us that where there is bitter zeal or envying and strife this wisdom discendeth not from above but is earthly sensual and devilish v. 14 15. But the wisdom that is from above is first pure and then peaceable gentle and easie to be intreated or perswaded viz. to what is good just or reasonable SECT III. The monstrous and unreasonable strangeness of those censures which have been unjustly charged on the most innocent and excellent men and particularly on our blessed Lord and Saviour himself 1. The most infamous calumny sometimes raised against well deserving men IN sensible things
those who are guided by it meek and humble gentle and obedient which is so amiable a temper and so useful and beneficial to the World that the generality of mankind unless they offer violence to their reason and conscience cannot but think well of it And it would be of mighty advantage to the reforming the World if all who profess Christianity were so far Christians indeed that they would in these things manifest the life and power and excellency of their Religion 15. To this end it is directed in the Holy Scripture Now that the Holy Scriptures do direct and enjoin this submissive and awful carriage of inferiours towards all who are in Authority as a means for the bringing honour to our Religion and for the propagating it and making it more effectually prevalent amongst men is sufficiently evident both from S. Peter and S. Paul S. Peter 1 Pet. 2.12 gives the command to Christians who lived among Pagans by S. Peter having your conversation honest among the Gentiles that whereas they speak against you as evil doers they may by your good works which they shall behold glorifie God in the day of visitation Where he exhorts them so to live that they might win them who were yet strangers to the Christian Religion into an affection to it and esteem of it And as a particular means to effect this he adds in the next words Submit your selves therefore to every ordinance of man for the Lords sake whether it be to the King as Supreme c. So that this is here laid down as a first and principal direction and rule for the bringing credit and esteem to Christianity among the Gentiles And Estius (l) Estius in 1 Pet. 2.13 thinks not improbably that the Apostle the rather gives this precept to them for this end and purpose because the Jews from amongst whom most of the Christians to whom he wrote were Converted were ordinarily reputed perverse unruly and enemies to civil Government and thereupon both themselves and there Religion were the more disliked by the Gentiles 16. Indeed that particle Therefore which is of great weight in this Text is omitted and left out both in the various impressions of our last English Translation and in some other (m) The Geneva and Wicklef ' s. more ancient English Versions which yet is fully expressed in the Original by the general and almost universal consent of all ancient Copies agreeably to the scope of the Apostles discourse and therefore it ought to be restored in our Translation And after S. Peter v. 13 and 14. had commanded submission and dutiful respect to the King and other Governours he adds this argument to enforce the practice of this duty v. 15. For so is the will of God that with well-doing you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men In which words it is declared both that this respectful behaviour to Governours is of great use to take of those oppositions which the enemies of Christianity make against it and also that it is the will of God that Christians should carefully practise this duty which is a great branch of well-doing in order to the obtaining this end 17. To the same purpose S. Peter proceeds to require an humble subjection and obedience of Servants to their Masters v. 18. declaring v. 19. this is thank-worthy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or that which obtains both in the sight of God and man a favourable acceptance and good esteem so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 oft sigifies as Luk. 1.30 Chap. 2.52 Chap. 6.32 33 34. Act. 2.47 and this is the most proper sense of that word in this place and this brings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 glory and renown and deserves honour v. 20. And in this case as I (n) n. 9. above noted he sets before us the Example of Christ in a matter of so great usefulness to our Religion To the same end still this Apostle Chap. 3. v. 1 2. requires the submission of Wives to their Husbands as a means to bring over those Husbands to Christian piety who were not prevailed upon by the instruction of the word And here he requires that they shew a reverent behaviour v. 2. a quiet temper v. 4. and such a submission as includes the use of words and expressions of honour and respect and this is mentioned as well-doing v. 5 6. And indeed the power and force of Religion doth eminently appear in the pious performing the duties of Subjection for whilst pride and passion and inordinate affection puts men upon striving to be greatest and makes it an uneasie thing to them to be led and governed by others in a mean station conscience to God will make persons faithful and submissive in the most inferiour relations and willing to serve him with humility and meekness in the lowest condition in which God placeth them And this is in truth both a great and a good a generous and noble and even a divine temper of mind 18. and also by S. Paul From S. Peter I now proceed to S. Paul who discoursing Tit. 2.9 10. of the duty of Servants to their Masters though the relation of a Master doth not require so high a degree of honour and reverence as that of a Prince and Governour in great Authority doth yet the Apostle commands that Servants be exhorted to please them well in all things not answering again not purloyning but shewing all good fidelity that they may adorn the Doctrine of God our Saviour in all things Where he requires from Servants faithfulness and fidelity a submissive temper to please in all things and a meek Government of themselves as to their words and expressions not answering again and consequently not giving any passionate murmuring contumelious or other ill words and these duties are particularly required for the adorning the Doctrine of Christianity And it is somewhat to the same purpose that in the following Chapter the Apostle commands that men be put in mind to practise subjection to Magistrates and meekness towards all men Tit. 3.1 2. as manifesting thereby what an excellent effect the Christian Doctrine and Spirit rightly entertained hath on the lives of men For before that took place and was entertained the Apostle saith v. 3. We our selves were sometimes foolish disobedient deceived serving divers lusts and pleasures living in malice c. But v. 4 5 6. after the kindness and love of God our Saviour towards man appeared the washing of Regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost wrought a mighty change in this temper and conversation in order to the eternal happiness of men See also 1 Tim. 6.1 19 Cons 3. The example of Christ is intended to press upon all Christians this duty of meekness and the forbearing to reproach any others whomsoever and especially a reverent behaviour towards all who are over us though from them we might sustain real injuries And evil-speaking to reproach or revile others though it be upon provocation
Saints and the beloved City But such things cannot agree to the time of a thousand years after our Saviours second coming nor is there indeed any mention made in the foregoing Verses of Christs coming to Reign here upon Earth And therefore the Millenary Opinion was deservedly rejected and disclaimed by (e) Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. ult Eusebius as being against the true sense of the Prophetical Scriptures 4. But according to the Prophetick stile the living again of those who were dead yea so long dead that their bones were dry is an expression of a Church or State delivered out of affliction and calamity and advanced to a more prosperous and flourishing condition as is manifest from Ezek. 37.2 3 and v. 11 12 13 14. and Isai 26.19 and the continuing under a depressed state is expressed by being so dead as not to rise v. 14. And when the Church or the Saints of the most high are represented to possess the Dominion and Government of the World or that the Empire of the World should become Christian and the Rule and Government thereof be administred by them who professed Christianity this is signified by the Dominion of one like the Son of man and giving him a Kingdom Dan. 7.13 14. and the Saints of the most high possessing the Kingdom v. 18 22. and by being caught up to God and to his Throne Rev. 12.5 which are expressions of like import with that of reigning with Christ 5. But though this mistake of the Chiliasts had so far spread it self that it was entertained by many worthy men in the first ages of the Church I cannot think it to have had so universal a reception in that time as some very learned men are inclined to believe S. Hierome mentions Papias (f) de Script Eccl. in Pap. to be accounted to have given the first rise to this opinion and (g) Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eusebius speaks to the same purpose who also observes him to have been a man of good note and esteem but of a mean judgment and that while he was inquisitive concerning whatsoever he could learn to have been spoken by the Apostles and some Apostolical men he being too credulous delivered some things as Doctrines and Parables spoken by our Saviour which were fabulous In (h) Just Mart. Dial. cum Tryph. Justin Martyr there are plain expressions that himself and many other Christians embraced this Opinion of the Chiliasts but still it appears that he granted other Christians not to own this assertion And when (i) Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 7. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dionysius of Alexandria writing against the Book of Nepos an Egyptian Bishop which he had composed to maintain the opinion of the Chiliasts doth declare that this Opinion spread from Arsenoites had occasioned Schisms and defections in some whole Churches in those parts this is a plain evidence that the Churches of Egypt and those under Alexandria had remained free from receiving the error of the Chiliasts till the time of Nepos which was in the beginning of the third Century and divers of them also were soon reduced from it again by the labours and diligence of Dionysius as is expressed in the same place 6. But though this Opinion in its general consideration be an error manifest enough occasioned by the misunderstanding of the Prophetical expressions which suitably to the visions and representations they had of things is more Figurative and Emblematical than other parts of the Scriptures yet that which I chiefly aim at is a far worse superstructure which is built upon this foundation For there have been a furious and fierce sort of men who embracing this error have therewith espoused such pernicious Principles and Practices that the bare naming them is enough to shew them grossly inconsistent with Christianity whilst under a pretence of making way for Christs Kingdom they do in disorderly and unchristian methods set up themselves in opposition to other Governours These are of a seditious temper but are far from being governed by those Laws and Precepts of Christs Kingdom which injoin the necessity of peace and meekness and being subject These men when they think fit are for taking the Sword as was done by Venner and his Company to fight against the Government and Authority which they were bound to submit unto which besides the open Rebellion in resisting the higher Powers with a presumptuous and daring confidence Sect. III. shews such a cruel and bloody Spirit as is extremely contrary to the innocency gentleness and meekness of the Christian Religion These also were of that ambitious and haughty temper that whilst they made use of the name of Christ they attempted thereby to claim to themselves against all right the possession of Authority and rule opposing herein the order of the World the Ordinance of God and the Gospel rules of humility and obedience And this behaviour in all these particulars mentioned is so contrary to the plain Principles of humanity as well as of Christianity that it may be a convictive instance to let all men see into what strange and abominable miscarriages the prevalency of the wretched vanity of a wild Enthusiastick Spirit may misguide those men who are deluded thereby SECT III. Of Anabaptists 1. IN discoursing of those who are ordinarily among us called Anabaptists I shall take no notice of many evil Opinions and cruel Practices which those who go under that name have been guilty of especially in foregin Countries but shall confine my self wholly to the consideration of Anabaptism not in the strict notion of the word but as it is commonly understood amongst us And in this sense it especially includes Antipaedobaptism as denying Infant-Baptism and disowning the persons Baptized in their Infancy from being truly Baptized and thereby Members of the Church and asserting thereupon that it is necessary they should be re-baptized But the evil of this their opposition against the Baptism of Infants consisteth especially in three things 2. First In that the foundation of this Opinion is untrue and gives a false representation of the grace of God in the New Covenant For God by his grace doth receive Infants born in the Church to be under his Covenant and to partake of the benefits and blessings thereof and therefore they ought to be admitted to that Ordinance which is a Seal of that Covenant and contains a particular tender and application of the benefits thereof unto those who are duly qualified to receive them And since this Covenant owneth Infants to be Members of the Church of God they ought not to be debarred from the solemn admission thereunto When God made his Covenant with Abraham he extended it to him and to his Seed and whereas God then appointed Circumcision to be a token of this Covenant Gen. 17.11 and a Seal of the righteousness of faith Rom. 4.11 he still commanded that all the Males in their infancy should be
Communion thereof and therefore is deeply Schismatical and unpeaceable For they who assert those not to be owned right members of the Church who were Baptized in their infancy unless they be Baptized again do and must maintain that those Churches can be no true Churches of Christ whose members were Baptized only in their infancy and thereupon pass that heavy and unjust Censure upon the generality of all Christian Churches since the time of the first founding them that they are no true Churches Hence they are put upon rejecting the Communion of the true Catholick Christian Church and the setting up for new Churches in an high opposition to Charity and Unity and in an open and avowed practice of Universal Schism To this purpose Bullinger Calvin Zanchy Beza and other Protestant Writers have complained greatly of Anabaptists as laying a foundation of all disorder and confusion Indeed they described those Anabaptists they wrote of not only to hold this erroneous Opinion concerning Baptism it self but to be Enthusiasts and undervalue the Holy Scriptures to ingage in such Libertinism as to disallow the just authority of Magistrates and the setled Government of the Church to imbrace the Principles of Antinomianism with practices suitable thereto with other hurtful errors hence the Anabaptists were by (y) Explic. Catech. Par. 2. Qu. 74. Vrsin called a Sect quae sine dubio à Diabolo est excitata monstrum est execrabile ex variis haeresibus blasphemiis conflatum which saith he without doubt was raised by the Devil and is an execrable Monster made up of various Heresies and Blasphemies But this Principle of theirs concerning Baptism is such that thereby they cut themselves off from the Church or Body of Christ and its Communion and involve themselves in a very heavy sin and dangerous condition 16. And whatsoever may have any usefulness towards piety and goodness which any of these men may seem to aim at in a way of error and with a various mixture of other things hurtful and evil is provided for by us if good rules be carefully practised in a better manner and in a way of truth That every man ought to make Religion his own act and make a free and voluntary profession thereof and yield his hearty consent to ingage himself therein and in the practice thereof we assert to be very necessary in persons who are of age and capacity of understanding And though Infants cannot do this in their infant state yet their future obligation is then declared on their behalf and when they come to a sufficient age they are certainly bound to believe and to do what in their Baptism was promised and declared in their names And this is afterwards solemnly promised by themselves when in their younger years they are confirmed and they likewise in a sacred manner ingage themselves hereto when at a fuller age they receive the holy Communion and it would be of great advantage to the Church of God and the holy exercises of piety if these two offices were more generally seriously and devoutly attended upon Men also oblige themselves to the faith and duties of Religion by their whole profession of Christianity and all those acts whereby they own and declare themselves Christians and particularly in joining in all duties of Christian Worship Sect. IV. and professing the Creed or Christian Faith and the performance of what is thus undertaken runs through the whole practice of the Christian life The result of what I have said concerning Anabaptism is that the miscarriages therein contained are of a very great and weighty nature it being no small evil and sin to offend greatly against the truth and withal to confine and derogate from the grace of the Gospel-Covenant and the due extent of the Christian Church besides the comfort and incouragement of Christian Parents and to be so injurious to Infants as to deny them those means of grace which they have a right to partake of and which are useful to their Spiritual and eternal welfare in neglecting also what God establisheth and keeping off Infants from that solemn ingagement to God which he requireth and to undermine the very foundations of Peace and Unity in the Church SECT IV. Of Independents 1. IN discoursing of Independency and the Practices and Principles thereof I shall not search after all things that might be spoken to since in several things the Independents or Congregational Men differ from one another and alter their own Sentiments and it was the profession of those five chief Persons who espoused this Cause in the time of our Civil Wars and Confusions (a) Apologet. Narration not to make their present judgments and practices a binding Law to themselves for the future And therefore I shall consider only some things which are mainly essential to the Congregational way and are the chief distinguishing Characters of that Party and the things they mainly urge and contend for And I shall shew that these things are so far from being desirable or warrantable that they are chargeable with much evil And here I shall treat of three things First Of single Congregagations and the power thereof not being subject to any Superiour Government in the Church Secondly Of their gathering Churches out of Christian Churches by separation and modelling these by a particular Covenant with a private Congregation Thirdly Their placing the Governing Power and Authority of the Church in the People or major Vote of the Members of their Church 2. First Their asserting single Congregations not to be subject in matters of Ecclesiastical Order and Government to any higher Authority among men than what is exercised by themselves This is that Principle which denominates this party Independents Indeed some of themselves did at sometimes express their dislike of this Name and the Authors of the Apologetical Narration above mentioned called it the proud and insolent Title of Independency But as this Name is ordinarily owned by the Congregational men as in the end of their Preface to their Declaration of their Faith at the Savoy and very frequently elsewhere so the Answer to the Thirty two Questions from New England gives this account of it (b) Answer to 14. Qu. We do confess the Church is not so Independent but that it ought to depend on Christ but for dependency on men or other Churches or other subordination unto them in regard of Church-Government or power we know not of any such appointed by Christ in his Word And this they speak concerning a particular Congregation And whilst we assert that such Congregations ought to be under the inspection of Bishops or Superiour Governours in the Church and under the Authority of publickly established Rules and Canons of the Church and under the Government also of Princes and Secular Sanctions they of this way own no such higher Governing Power and Authority above that of a single Congregation 3. Concerning the Civil Magistrate they declare him bound (c) Decl. of
dividing principle and practice can be justified before Christ himself For if Christ will say to them who neglect to express kindness and respect to the rest of his members In as much as ye did it not to one of the least of these ye did it not to me Matt. 25.45 May not they fear lest they hear the same who rashly and unjustly cast contempt reproach and disrespect upon that Church which he owneth as his and disown and reject its Communion 15. But this which they call gathering of Churches by taking to themselves those who either were or ought to have been under other Guides and Governours of the Church in a different but more justifiable way and order is indeed a making divisions in a setled Church and separations from it And this practce of division and separation is so greatly displeasing to the Holy Spirit of God that there are many earnest and vehement expressions in the Holy Scriptures against it To which purpose the Apostle beseecheth the Romans to mark them who cause divisions and offences contrary to the Doctrine they had received and avoid them Rom. 16.17 even them who by good words and fair speeches deceived the hearts of the simple Against such separations the ancient and Primitive Christians were very zealous as I have noted in (u) Libert Eccles B. 1. C. 1. Sect. 3. another place and so are also the generality of the Protestant Writers 16. Such a way of separation which in the phrase and language of the ancient Christians was expressed by a Presbyter contemning his own Bishop and having a separate Congregation and erecting another Altar or different Communion as to Sacramental administrations was severely censured in those early times of Christianity In that most ancient (x) Can. Ap. 31. collection of Canons such a Presbyter and as many of the Clergy as joined with him were sentenced to be deposed and the Laity to be Excommunicated after admonition The Code of Canons of the Universal Church further determine concerning a Presbyter or Deacon who shall thus separate (y) Cod. Can. Eccl. Univ. c. 85. that his deposition shall be without any way of return to his former honour and dignity in the Church and that if he persist in disturbing the Church he should be reduced by the Secular Power as being seditious And the African Code in this case declare (z) Cod. Eccl. Afr. c. 10 11. that such a Presbyter should be ejected from his place and that he should be anathematized and the inflicting this double punishment which was not usual in the Church for a single crime shews of how heinous a nature this offence was then accounted when the Primitive rules of discipline were received 17. Amongst such Protestant Writers as are most in esteem with our Dissenters Calvin asserts it to be certain (a) Calv. in 1 Cor. 11.9 that this stone is continually moved by the Devil that he might break the Unity of the Church and he purposely opposeth and smartly condemneth (b) Inst l. 4. c. 1. in Ps 26.5 all separation from a true Church where the Holy Sacraments are duly administred and the true rule of Religion is imbraced The (c) Synops pur Theol. Disp 40. n. 37 41 42. Leyden Professors account the erecting separate Assemblies in the breach of Communion by them who hold the foundation of the Faith and agree with the Church therein upon occasion of external indifferent Rites or particular miscarriages in manners to be properly Schismatical and that this is one of the works of the flesh and renders a Society impure and that it is not lawful to hold Communion with such a Schismatical Church to which purpose they urge many Texts of Scripture And Zanchy treating largely hereof doth (d) Zanch. Miscel de Eccles c. 7. particularly undertake to maintain that though there be some diversity of Doctrine but in things not fundamental though different ways of Rites and Ceremonies though there be vices in Ministers or corruptions in people or want of due care in rejecting offenders from the Communion he that shall separate from a true Church upon these pretences shall not saith he escape the wrath of God and ira Dei manet super illum the wrath of God abides upon that person 18. How far such separations from our Church are made use of by the Romanists to serve their interest might be shewed of many of their Authors But I shall content my self here to observe what was noted by one of our own (e) Camd. Annal. Eliz. an 1583. learned Historians Mr. Camden concerning the time of Queen Elizabeth That when in her Reign some of the Ministry in dislike of the Liturgy Order and Government of the Church templa adire recusarent plane schisma facerent did refuse to come to our publick Worship and manifestly made a Schism this was done Pontificiis plaudentibus multosque insuas partes pertrahentibus quasi nulla esset in Ecclesia Anglicana Vnitas the Papists rejoicing at it and drawing away many to their party as if there were no Vnity in the Church of England 19. I shall now examine their particular Covenant whereby they ingage themselves to walk together as constant members of that particular Society or Congregation to which they join themselves Now this Covenant in a way of separation is no other but a bond of division and was to that purpose invented by the Brownists And that it was their practice is (f) Apol. for Ch. Cov. p. 41 42 43 44. acknowledged by the Churches in New England Against which such things as these may be justly alledged 1. That this contradicts another of their avowed Positions That nothing not instituted of Christ ought to be received or submitted to as terms of Communion with a Church and some of them more largely declare that (g) Answer to 32. Qu. qu. ●8 particular Churches have no power to make Laws for themselves or their members but to observe the Laws of Christ and if any Church presume further they go beyond their Commission and it would be sin to be subject to such Laws But such a particular contract with a single Congregation especially a separating one was never any part of Christs Institution But because this other opinion of theirs is also erroneous it is of greater concernment to observe that this way of Covenanting is opposite to the Institution of Christ in that by division and separation it breaks the Unity of the Christian Church which Christ hath established to be one Church and one Body But the dividing the Church into several Independent Societies which is contrary to what the Institution of Christ appointeth is so much designed by this Covenant that some of themselves tell us (h) ibid. Answ to Qu. 8. without this kind of Covenanting we know not how it would be avoided but all Churches would be confounded into one Now this is as much as to say that Christ and his Apostles
appellation of Catholick they must be content with other names as Lutherans Zuinglians Protestants c. He who observes the former part of this Paragraph will find it to be an acknowledging all his former Discourse ineffectual for if the formerly mentioned Motives may want application if Discipline be neglected and false tenets may be taking if Governours be not vigilant than all the pretended security of truth being preserved in the way of Oral Tradition must depend upon the supposed goodness and care of such persons as are to administer the Discipline of the Church and since there have been many bad Councils it is certain there have been bad and careless Church Governours and there cannot any security be given that these Governours might not sometimes cherish the false Doctrines and oppose the true and thereby the more effectually destroy the way of Oral Tradition But though there may be defection from truth this Discourser here seems to venture to find a way how the deliverers of Tradition may be known I will now examine all his Characters above recited First They who forsake truth are not alwaies an inconsiderable number in respect of the other When the ten Tribes served the Calves in Dan and Bethel they were a greater number than those who remained to Worship at Jerusalem In Elijah's time it was in Israel but a small number in comparison of the whole that did not bow their knees to Baal In the time when Christ was first manifested in the flesh the Dissenters from the Scribes and Pharisees in their pernicious Doctrines were not the greater number and when Arianism most prevailed the greater part of the Christian Church did acknowledge and own it for truth so that if the greater number have oft imbraced false Doctrine in points of Faith there can be no evidence from such numbers which is the true Doctrine Secondly Nor can the Professors of the true Doctrine be known by standing upon an uninterrupted succession of Doctrine publickly attested if by this he understands as he must the Oral and not the Scriptural way of attesting though even in the latter some may stand upon having what they have not and so likewise in the former for by this Rule the Scribes and Phasees and Talmudists who stand upon a constant succession of their Doctrine from Moses and Ezra must be acknowledged to hold truth where they differ from and contradict the Apostles and Christians nor can there be any reason why standing upon Tradition from Christ should be a security for truth when standing upon Tradition from Moses who was a faithful deliverer was no security yea by this Rule as hath been before observed Paganism would be defended for a true Religion and the Jews worshipping of Baalim and in the Christian state the Heresie of Artemon denying the Divinity of Christ since all these pretended a right to the most publick and open way of Oral Tradition Thirdly Nor are they to be accounted for Hereticks who make use of Criticisms for though nothing more than common reason and capacity is necessary to understand the main Doctrines of Christian Faith yet if all the users of Critical Learning in matters of Religion or points of Faith were to be condemned for Hereticks then not only Learned Protestants but all the most eminent writers among the Papists must be accounted Hereticks yea and even all the Fathers who have left any Books to us of considerable bigness must be taken into the number Yea the blessed Apostle S. Paul made use of Critical observation against the leven of the false Apostles in the Churches of Galatia Gal. 3.16 To Abraham and his Seed were the promises made he saith not unto Seeds as of many but as of one And to thy Seed that is Christ Yet I suppose this Discourser will not dare to say that S. Paul was in the error or Heresie because he made use of Criticisms and his opposers in the truth who pleaded a successively delivered Doctrine amongst the Jews Fourthly Nor can the true receivers of Christian Doctrine be known by being called Catholicks for first though the name of a Catholick be deservedly honoured by Christians and the persons who truly answer that name yet it was not the name whereby the Apostles did first call them who held the true Christian Faith but they were called Christians yea some both of the Ancients and of the Learned Moderns assert that this name of Catholick was not at all in use in the Apostles daies however that which then was not the chief name commonly applied to them who hold the truth can by no shew of reason be proved to be now the Character to know which hold the true Faith Secondly is it necessary they must be called Catholicks by all men or only by themselves and men of their own way if it be sufficient that they of their own way call them Catholicks then even the Arians must be acknowledged to have held the truth who published their Confession in the presence of Constantius under the name of the Catholick Faith as is asserted by Athanasius De Synodis Arim. and Seleucia and by this Rule Papists indeed will come in but if this was enough who sees not that it would be in the power of any party of men to evidence to the world that their Heresies are truths by their declaring themselves by the name of Catholicks But if it be necessary that they must be generally called Catholicks by them who differ from them then it would likewise follow that it is in the power of the Adversaries of the truth to take away from the holders of truth that certain Character whereby they may be known to hold truth if they refuse to call these holders of truth by the name of Catholick and it will likewise follow that their holding of truth must be judged of by the opinions or words of opposers and not from their own Doctrines and Positions And yet by this Rule the Papists must not be owned for holders of the truth for Protestants do not generally give them the name of Catholicks nor acknowledge them to be truly such but to be Schismaticks We indeed oft call them by the name of Roman Catholicks or Pseudocatholicks and when ever any Protestants call them Catholicks they mean those who call themselves so and would be so owned in the same manner as our Saviour called the Scribes and Pharisees Builders saying he was the stone which the builders refused Thirdly Nor is it possible there should be any such latent virtue in the name Catholick to shew who hold the truth more than was in the Old Testament in being called the Children of the Prophets and the Covenant which God made with Abraham the followers of Moses and the Keepers of the Law which were terms applied to the unbelieving Jews in and after the times of Christ Fifthly Nor is it the mark of an Heretick to be called by some other appellation than that of Catholick for if
to be in many things blameable more than the Papists at this day as dissimulation infidelity and the like which were the faults by Leo charged on the Manichees but not by Gelasius charged on them he writes of but still in that fault for which Gelasius condemns them he writes against the Papists at this day are altogether guilty of it that is in dividing the Sacrament or not receiving both Bread and Wine which he saith cannot be without great Sacriledge Nor can any here make a third reply upon any rational ground that it then was Sacrilegious to have administred only in one kind because the known practice and Canons of the Roman Church required administration in both kinds But since it hath in after times declared this practice mutable and ordered the Communion to be given only in one kind it is not now sacrilegious For this answer will not agree with the intent of these words and the Doctrine formerly received in the Roman Church The reason why Gelasius declared it great sacriledge to take this Sacrament in one kind alone is intimated sufficiently in this Canon not to refer to the Churches Constitution but the Sacraments Institution in that he calls both species or kinds one and the same Mysterie and sayes this one and the same Mysterie cannot be divided without grand sacriledge which is to referr us to the nature of the thing it self and its Institution as being not mutable Yea further the ancient Tradition of the Roman Church held as a Point of Doctrine that the Elements in the Eucharist ought to be administred according to what Christ instituted that is the Bread and Wine to be given to the Laity distinctly and separately because Christ gave them so then cannot this third Reply reconcile the present Doctrine of the Roman Church with what was formerly delivered To shew this I could produce many testimonies but shall only instance in Julius a Roman Bishop in a Canonical Epistle to the Bishops of Egypt recorded also in Gratian de Consecrat Dist 2. Cum omne Where he declares that he had heard of some who contrary to the Divine Orders and Apostolical Institutions consecrated Milk instead of Wine others who deliver to the people the Eucharist dipped For it is read in the truth of the Gospel Jesus took Bread and the Cup and having blessed it gave it to his Disciples But for that they gave the Eucharist dipped to the people they have received no testimony produced out of the Gospel in which he commends to us his body and his blood for the commendation is rehearsed separately of the Bread and separately of the Cup. In which words he makes Christs Institution a Rule by which he condemns other practices different from it and from this Institution he requires that both the Bread and the Cup be separately given and this even with reference to the Laity or as he speaks to the people to whom it was delivered and by this Rule he condemned the giving the Bread dipped in Wine whereas both should be given asunder so doth Gelasius by the same condemn the receiving only in one kind when it should be received in both All this considered the former Tradition of the Roman Church may from this instance appear to condemn the late Tradition as sacrilegious and therefore I may conclude that the same Tradition hath not been alwayes kept to as may appear by preserved Monuments out of which instances may be easily multiplied An Answer to his ninth Discourse shewing that the way of Oral Tradition in the Church hath not so much strength as other matters of Humane Authority § 1. BVt saith he some may say all this is nature if the Objector means reason wrought upon by Motives laid by Gods special goodness to bring man to bliss I wonder what else is supernaturality But this point is out of my road otherwise than to shew how Christian Tradition is strengthened above the greatest humane testimony whatever by those Motives which we rightly call assistances of the Holy Ghost Not to examine his Notion of supernaturality and the assistances of the Holy Ghost because they concern not the Discourse in hand I shall only tell him what Protestants or any other men who are true to reason would say to this Discourse and that is that what he hath said hitherto is of so low natural evidence and so far from reason that in this way the Christian can have no more evidence of the truth of Christian Religion than an Heathen may have of the truth of Paganism nor is there any such certainty in Tradition concerning the main Body of Christs Doctrine as is comparable to many other matters of humane testimony § 2 3. He observes the Mahometans Tradition for Mahomets existence will convey the truth thereof to the Worlds end if followed and Protestants acknowledge it hath had the force hitherto to be followed And the Tradition in the Church for the main Body of Christs Doctrine far exceeds that of the Turks for Mahomets existence because supposing the quality of the testifiers equal much greater multitudes in divers Countreys were testifiers of Christs Doctrine being converted by powerful Miracles than the few witnesses of Mahomets existence it is easier for those few Syrians or Arabians to conspire to a lye than for these Christians nor can Christians be so easily mistaken concerning Christian Doctrine In answer to this I in the first place grant That there is an Historical Traditionary certainty amongst the Turks concerning the existence of Mahomet and it is very reasonable that rather more should be allowed to the Tradition of Christians than of Mahometans But that it may truly appear how far Tradition may be relyed on for the conveyance of truth we must distinctly consider the matters delivered Of which some things there are which are not probably capable of mistake nor liable to be perverted and to receive a mixture of much falshood and have this advantage that the delivery of them from one to another doth still continue and no interest perswades the generality of men to deny or indeavour the concealing of them Now all these properties agree to the assertion of Mahomets existence amongst the Turks to the delivery of the Being of a God among the Gentiles to Moses being the great Prophet among the Jews and to Jesus being the Christ and I may add S Peter and S. Paul c. being his Apostles among the Christians thus the fame of a good or true Writer may be continued amongst Historians and in these things and many other such like I will grant it is not only possible but probable that Tradition may convey a certainty But there are other things lyable to mistake whence in many matters of common fame sufficiently known to the first Relater by the misapprehension of them who hear the relation the ordinary report is oft-times false or else 2. They are subject to be perverted or are concealed and not delivered which hath been
not to be allowed to argue from the Scriptures against the Church since they were not Christians and owned them not c. 15 16 17. And therefore it must first be inquired from whom the Scriptures were and by whom and to whom and when delivered all which would shew that they were for them who followed Christ and his Apostles in the Doctrine by them publickly delivered which these Hereticks pretended not to do Hence it appears that what Tertullian here writes is no way against the Doctrine of Protestants but in such a case as this was they would themselves assert the same Now though it is impossible the Scriptures should be either a directing Rule or a convincing to those persons who reject them yet in this Treatise Tertullian owns them as such to Christians who receive them and withal asserts them as necessary to the Faith as may appear from these particulars c. 22. He declares That they who receive not that Scripture the Acts of the Apostles cannot acknowledge that the Holy Ghost was sent to the Disciples nor can they prove how when and by what means the Body of Christs Church was instituted c. 33. He prescribes against the Hereticks from the Apostles Writings c. 36. He hath these words Run through the Churches of the Apostles amongst which their very Authentick Letters are recited sounding the voice and representing the face of every one of them What else is this but to equal the delivery by the Scriptures with that which was from the mouths of all the Apostles In the same Chapter he saith John the Apostle puts together the Law and the Prophets with the Evangelical and Apostolical Letters and thence tenders this Faith to us to drink in To add but one place more c. 38. He saith of the Hereticks As the corruption of the Doctrine could never succeed without the corruption of the instruments so we could not have the integrity of Doctrine without the integrity of those things by which the Doctrine is delivered then he adds What the Scriptures are we are we are from them from their beginning and then shews that the Church doth keep them perfect which the Hereticks do not Next he cites Tertullian de carne Christi where c. 2. He supposeth That upon this account Marcion did blot out so many original instruments that is Scriptures least the flesh of Christ should be proved By what Authority saith Tertullian I pray if thou be a Prophet foretel something if an Apostle preach it openly if an Apostolical man agree with the Apostles and then follow the words cited by this Author If thou be only a Christian believe what is delivered Where it is manifest these words referr not to recommend to us Oral Tradition but the Canon of Scripture Soon after he tells Marcion that he is not a Christian but once was and now hath rescinded what he then believed where follow the next words referred to by this Author By rescinding what thou hast believed thou provest that before thou didst rescind it that was otherwise which thou didst believe otherwise So it was delivered moreover what was delivered that was true as delivered by those whom it belonged to deliver c. which words are of the same nature with the former and further condemn his rescinding or cutting off from the Scriptures those things which he once believed and were faithfully delivered for rescindere is not here to renounce as this Discourser translates it but to cut off or mutilate which indeed proves that it was otherwise before and this is the same in sense with what he calls his rejecting some Scriptures c. 3. his blotting out ch 4. his taking them away c. 5. and the same with what in this 2. ch he a little before called his blotting out the instruments of Scripture where having propounded the question by what Authority he did it and continuing his Discourse on the same subject after these words of rescinding he gives this answer Thou hast done it by no right at all Yet further that in this Discourse de Carne Christi he intended the Scripture for his Rule of Faith may be proved from ch 6 where speaking of the Body which Angels appear in Whence it is saith he nothing is manifest concerning it because the Scripture doth not declare it c. 15. He urgeth against Valentinus seven Texts of Scripture all which declare Christ to be Man and saith these only ought to suffice for prescription to testifie his humane flesh and not spiritual c. c. 22. when he had used many other Scriptures he saith The Apostle determineth all this Controversie when he declares him to be Abrahams Seed and then cites Gal. 3. adding We who read and believe these things what kind of flesh may we or ought we to acknowledge in Christ surely none other than Abraham had In the last place this Discourser cites two passages of Tertullian against Marcion to prove that the present Church contains in it the true Doctrine of Christ Now if it did so in Tertullian's time it is no way consequent that any particular Church must do so now unless it be by delivery of the same Scriptures The first place he cites but names not the Book is lib. 4. cont Marc. l. 5. where Tertullian's design is to declare the Ecclesiastical Tradition in the Scriptures to be preferred before what Marcion tenders as his emending the Gospel and so confirms the Protestant Doctrine For having observed that Marcion rejects the other Evangelists and corrupteth Luke He saith in the end of the fourth ch From the times of Tiberius to Antonine we meet with Marcion as the first and only emender of the Gospel And he observes his emending confirms ours whilst he emends that which he found first then follow the words cited by this Authour In short If it be manifest that is the more true which was the former and that was the former which is from the beginning that from the beginning which is from the Apostles in like manner that will manifestly appear to be delivered from the Apostles which is accounted Sacred in the Churches of the Apostles In which words Tertullian designs to establish the Scripture-writings against the Heretical corruption Whence it follows Let us see what Milk the Corinthians drew from Paul to what Rule the Galatians were corrected What the Philippians Thessalonians and Ephesians read c. so that Tertullian sends to the Scriptures which may be read Another testimony he ventures at is lib. 1. cont Marc. and saith it is more express but indeed makes nothing at all for Oral Tradition For this first Book being written to prove one only God against Marcion who in a Treatise called his Antitheses endeavoured to shew that there was not the same God in the Old Testament and in the New He observes c. 20. that some said that Marcion did not innovate the Rule but set it right when it was corrupted c. 21. He sheweth the Apostles never delivered any such