did through Fear of running his Fate Paralip ad Abbat Vrsperg p. 448. Ed. Bas 1569. whence one of their Writers tells us they were wont to say Sic dicerem in Scholis sed tamen maneat inter nos diversum sentio Thus would I speak in the Schools but keep it secret I think otherwise Let us then seriously consider how much the Church of Rome for these Five last Centuries hath out-done all that ever Heathen or Arian Persecutors have attempted in her Severities towards those whom she is pleased to call Hereticks That 1. She hath taken the greatest Care for the Discovering and apprehending them authorizing by her papal Bulls Const Innocent 4. c. 19. Clem 4. Cons 13. l. 18. Concil To. 11. p. 606. imperial Constitutions her canon Law and her conciliar Definitions Inquisitors Arch-Bishops Bishops Abbots c. to require the Magistrates Assistance in enquiring after and apprehending Hereticks and enabling these Inquisitors c. Consil Const Sess 45. Bin. To. 7. p. 1121. to tender a corporeal Oath to all suspect of Heresy that is of holding any thing in Contradiction to the Doctrine of the Roman Church to answer to such Questions as they shall propose for clearing of themselves and to condemn them as Hereticks if they do not thus purge themselves Decretal l. 5. Tit. 7. c. 5. Concil Lat. 4. Can. 3 That she gives them Power to require the Magistrates Assistance in enquiring after and apprehending Hereticks and to engage by Oath all Earls Barons Rectors and Consuls and the whole Neighbourhood efficaciously to assist the Church according to their Power in this Work and to endeavour to give Notice of such Persons and secure them 2ly Const Fred. 2. Concil T. 11. p 622. Ludov. 7. Ib. p. 423. Concil Lat. 4. Can. 3. lat 3. cap. 23. That she obliges all secular Powers to extirpate them and all their Favorites upon the pain of Excommunication loss of their Dominions and being deemed Favourers of Hereticks and doth encourage all Men to fight against and labour to destroy them by the Promise of Remission of Sins and a great Reward hereafter 3ly That she hath decreed Concil lat 3. c. 27. Quartum can 3. Constan Sess 45. Bin. T. 7. p. 1121. Const Freder 2. Concil T. 11. p. 619 621. Ludov 7. p. 423. That they shall suffer Excommunication with all the Consequences of it loss of Goods and when imprisoned any Punishment which doth not diminish their Members or endanger their Death and that after Sentence passed upon them they shall be punished with Death and want of Christian Burial 4ly That for the Execution of these Punishments Const Innocent 4. Clem. 4. Alex. 4. decretal l. 5. T. 2. c. 9 11. Concil Tolos c. 7. Albiens c. 7. Concil T. 11. p. 428 723. vide ibid. p 698 726 727. without Delay or Relaxation or enquiry into the Justice of them all Governours shall have a Copy of those Laws and shall abolish all that contradict them and at their Entrance on their Government shall swear to execute them and such as will not execute them or are remiss in doing it shall lose their Office have their Jurisdiction interdicted and be proceeded against as Favourers of Hereticks Again let us seriously consider farther 1. That it was in those Ages deemed Heresy to contradict the Doctrine of the Roman Church Sess 45. Edit 1499. or in the Language of the Council of Constance de fidei Articulis aliter sentire aut docere quam Sancta Romana Ecclesia Vniversalis praedicat to think or teach otherwise of the Articles of Faith than the Holy Roman or universal Church preacheth and observes 2ly That when Transubstantiation was established in the Fourth Council of Lateran then were also made the severe and sanguinary Decrees now mentioned against Hereticks to force Men against all the Evidence of Sense and Reason to profess that Article 3ly That the Council of Constance having established the Practice of Communion in one kind for a Law Sess 45. it concludes with a Decree enacting all the aforesaid Punishments against Hereticks viz. Against those who believe not the Supream Authority of the Pope over the Church the Infallibility of general Councils the Doctrine of Transubstantiation the Lawfulness of Communion in one kind the necessity of auricular Confession the Power of the Pope to conferr Indulgences the lawfulness of venerating Reliques and the Images of Saints c. 4ly That in these persecuting Ages Men were afraid to profess what they believed or to oppose themselves against the Torrent of their Adversaries Libro sine Tirulo Epist 11. Epist de Egressu ex Babylone p. 177. thus Petrarch declares That he durst scarcely speak the Truth for fear of Enemies Clemangis That Men followed the erring Herd willingly embracing false things for true and desiring rather to be mad with the multitude than to be wise alone with danger and derision Erasmus confesseth That there were some things received in the Church quae magno Religionis Christianae bono mutarentur which to have changed would tend to the great good of the Church but being desired to put his helping Hand to the Work he saith per alios ego fieri malim quam per me I had rather others should do this than my self And that 1. Out of fear that by attempting it he might create a Tumult and Sedition in the Church which saith he I so much abhor ut veritas etiam displiceat seditiosa that even Truth purchased by Sedition is displeasing to me 2. Out of the sense of the great hazzard he should run and the little hopes he had of good success I should be more free saith he Apud Hottinger Hist Eccl. Sect. 16. Part. 2 p. 24 25 29 could I see hopes of success but dementiae est tibi perniciem accersire si nulli prosis it is madness to destroy my self when I cannot profit any by it I say whosoever weighs these things will be convinced that by these cruel methods great Errors might prevail without much contradiction and many Ancient but decryed Truths might lie concealed and stifled in the breasts of Learned Men expecting a more favourable opportunity to bring them forth For if the severity of Heathen and Arian Persecutions had such sad Effects upon so many in the most pious and learned Ages of the Church whilst they continued to be exercised these R. Cruelties being confessedly exercised for almost Five whole Centuries might easily engage the generality of Men in the more Ignorant and Vicious Ages of the Church to own the corrupt Doctrines and Practices her Governors had introduced or to abstain at least from making any free and publick opposition to them To conclude These being the chief Causes which naturally tend to the Introduction of new Practices and Doctrines viz. 1. False Rules and Measures used for Disquisition of the Truth from which it is not to be wonder'd that false Conclusions
Paul 's Expression by commending themselves and their Doctrine to the Consciences of all Men. To shew the Prevalence of Men of Reputation in Matters of this Nature If as the Romanists do generally confess the Doctrine of the Millennium obtained almost generally in the Church from the Relation of one Papias a Man of very slender Intellectuals If as Eusebius informs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 39. most of the Churchmen embraced that Sentiment by his Authority pleading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great Antiquity of the Man If one Agrippinus as they also tell us could prevail over all Africa to receive Hereticks by Baptism If Origen could deserve to be condemned in the Fifth and the Sixth Synods as an Heretick and yet whilst he lived Hieron in Verbo Origenes Socrat Hist Eccl. l. 4. c. 26. Hieron Prolog in l. 2. com in Micham Pamphil. Apol. Orig. praefat in libr. nom Hebr. T. 3. f. 12. could by his Learning and his Piety prevail to be had summo in honore in the highest Reputation to obtain after his Death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 great Glory throughout all the Christian World insomuch that he was very grateful cunctis prudentibus to all wise Men and did for many Years obtain the Title of Magister Ecclesiae The Master or Teacher of the Church If the Authority of Jerom could prevail to have his Translation of the Old Testament received against the Judgment of the Universal Church If one St. Austin could introduce into the Church the Belief of the Ascension of the Blessed Virgin though none of the Fathers who had as good Opportunity to know and as much Reason to believe it spake one Tittle of it I say if all these things are so how can it be conceived a thing incredible That Popes Patriarchs and Councils and other Persons of great Authority and Vogue in their respective Ages should have had like Influence to introduce new Doctrines and Practices into the Church under pretence of Piety or the Authority of Scriptures or the Holy Fathers or some like plausible Account Theodor. Lector l. 2. p 566. Niceph. Hist Eccl. l. 15. c. 18. Why might not Petrus Gnaphaeus Patriarch of Antioch bring Invocation of Saints into the Prayers of the Church in the Fifth Century Pope Gregory introduce Purgatory in the Sixth Boniface the Third Paulus Diac. de Gest Longobard l. 4. c. 11. obtain from Phocas the Title of Caput omnium Ecclesiarum The Head of the Universal Church in the Seventh The Second Nicene Council introduce Image-Worship in the Eighth Paschasius give Rise to Transubstantiation in the Ninth Lombard and Hugo de S to Victore fix the Number of Seven Sacraments in the Twelfth And Pope Hadrian the Third introduce the Adoration of the Host in the Thirteenth Century Again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 12. Soz. H. Eccl. l. 1. c. 23. If one Paphnutius could by his Reason and Authority prevail with the First Nicene Council to rescind their intended Decree touching the Celibacy of Priests If Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople could abolish the Custom of repairing to an established Penitentiary for the disclosing secret Sins and that with the ensuing Approbation of almost all the Catholick Bishops of the Church In a Word if so many Practices and Customs relating to the Discipline and to the Sacraments of the Church could be entirely altered and rejected in the following Ages as is here partly proved and by the Learned on both sides confessed why might not other Practices and Doctrines which obtained in the more pure and early Ages of the Church run the same Fate and by the same Authority and Methods be discarded For as it is judiciously observed by the Lord Faulkland when the Reasons offered for or against a Practice have in them some Appearance of Truth or Probability as they may have to many Persons though they be not valid when the Persons Authorizing or Approving them are of great Authority or Credit in the Church as they may be especially in darker Ages and yet be subject to great Errors and when the People upon whom these Doctrines or Practices are pressed have either a great Veneration and Esteem for those that press them or a great Dread of them then meet together most of those things which tend to work Perswasion or prevail for an Assent unto the Doctrine and a Compliance with the Practice recommended Seeing then Not. in Concil Clar. Can. 28. conc To. 10. p. 582. as Petrus de Marca doth inform us the Approbation of the half Communion by Thomas Aquinas made others certatim amplecti hanc sententiam to embrace greedily the same Opinion why might not others of as good Authority and Credit be instrumental to produce like Changes in other Constitutions of the Church Fourthly § 10 Old Doctrines and Practices might easily be changed and new obtain by reason of the corrupt Manners of the Clergy and by their Example of the People And that 1. Because such evil Practices deprive the Clergy of that Spiritual Wisdom and Divine Assistance which is their best Conducter into the Way of Truth and is their chief Preservative from dangerous Delusions and pernicious Errors Wisd 1.4 For as the Book of Wisdom saith Into a malicious Soul Wisdom will not enter nor dwell in the Body that is subject unto Sin. St. De Judicio dei To. 2. p. 393. Basil grievously laments the Discords and Contentions the perverse Doctrines and Opinions which had prevailed in his time amongst 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Rulers of the Church of God by which they verified the Prediction of St. Paul Acts 20.30 That from Christians themselves should proceed Men speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them And this he doth resolve into their Rejection of God their true and only King their Departure from the Laws of Christ and chusing rather to rule others in contradiction to the Commands of Christ than to be ruled by him By which things saith he they have render'd themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 394. unworthy of the Government of the Lord. Clemangis is still more express and Argumentative in this Particular Super Materia Conc. Gen. p. 71. For with them saith he is the Spirit those he directs and brings to a salutary End who have prepared for him within themselves an Habitation worthy of him and by good Works have render'd themselves worthy of his Inspiration and Visitation but how can he hear visit and enlighten them who are Adversaries to him and when they cannot do it in themselves endeavour to extinguish him in others and are inflamed not with the Fire of Love but with the Ardor of Ambition For with Hypocrites and self-Seekers the Holy Spirit is not wont to be present but to fly from them as his Enemies according to that saying of the Book of Wisdom the Holy Spirit of Discipline
she actually hath imposed false Doctrines and Practices as Apostolical Tradition 2. Because she hath no better Right to testifie in this Matter than the Eastern Churches § 2.3 Because her present Testimony contradicts the Testimony of the whole Church in general and of the Roman Church in particular in former Ages § 3. 1. Touching the number of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament 2. Of the Authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews 3. Of the number of the Sacraments 4. Of Concomitance 5. Of pronouncing part of the Mass in a low Voice 6. Of the Veneration of Images 7. Of Communion in one Kind 8. Of her Twelve new Articles 9. Of the no necessity of giving the Eucharist to Infants Ibid. 4. Because this Doctrine makes Scripture Reason and Antiquity not only useless but pernicious to us § 4. More Instances of the Contradiction betwixt the Decrees of the Ancient Catholick Church and of the present Church of Rome 1st In the Decree of the Trent Council touching the Freedom of the Blessed Virgin from Actual Sin § 5. 2dly In the permission that Church gives to eat things Strangled and Blood § 6. In punishing Men with Death for their Religion § 7. In not breaking the Bread they distribute not permitting the Communicants to carry it home not Consecrating it with a loud Voice § 8. In the Matter of the Immaculate Conception though not conciliarly defined § 9. Seven Corollaries from this Instance § 10. MOreover § 1 for farther Explication of this Question let it be noted Dist 4. That by the word Tradition when we allow what can be proved by it to be in Matters of Faith a Doctrine or a Revelation derived from the Apostles in matters of Government of Discipline or practice an Apostolical Ordinance or Institution we mean not the Tradition of the present Church and much less the Tradition of the Church of Rome and her Adherents Charity Maint ch 2. §. 14. but we mean with Mr. Knot Such a Tradition which involves an evidence of Fact and from Hand to Hand from Age to Age bringing us up to the Times and Persons of the Apostles Id quod in Ecclesia Universa omnibus retro temporibus servatum est merito ab Apostolis creditur institutum De verbo Dei non scripto l. 4 c. 9. and our Saviour himself cometh to be confirmed by all those Miracles and other Arguments by which they proved their Doctrine to be true or such a Practice as the Church hath observed in all past Ages according to the Third Rule of Bellarmine for the discerning Apostolical Traditions and such an Article of Faith as all the Doctors of the Church by common consent have always testified to have descended from Apostolical Tradition Such is the Tradition which St. Basil insists upon for the use of the Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Spirit in the Doxology of the Church viz. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. de Spiritu Sancto c. 29. which was customarily used in the Churches from the first Preaching of the Gospel to that very time and of such Traditions we say with him Ibid. That it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 suitable to the Apostles Doctrine to continue in them Praefat. in libr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such is the Tradition of which Origen speaks when he saith That only is to be believed as Truth which in nothing disagreeth from the Tradition Ecclesiastical that is The praedicatio per successionis ordinem ab Apostolis tradita usque ad praesens in Ecclesiis permanens preaching delivered down by order of Succession from the Apostles and to this present time continued in the Churches This is the Tradition of which St. Cap. 8. Austin speaks in his Book De utilitate credendi viz. of the Tradition quae ab ipso Christo per Apostolos ad nos usque manavit Cap. 10. which came down from Christ by his Apostles to that present time which à Majoribus nostris tradita ad nos usque servata est being delivered by our Ancestors hath been preserved to our times and which is Cap. 14. celebritate consensione vetustate roborata strengthened with a general Fame Consent and Antiquity And this is also the Authority he meaneth when he saith I should not have believed the Gospel nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae moveret Authoritas unless the Authority of the Catholick Church had moved me For he informs us That he speaks of that Authority which was Contr. Epist Man. quam vocant Fundament c. 4. Miraculis inchoata vetustate firmata begun by Miracles and confirmed by Antiquity And this must of necessity be meant by that Tradition which is the Foundation of an Article of Faith for Faith must be a matter of Divine Revelation and therefore must proceed from Christ or his Apostles from whom alone all Revelations of the Christian Faith have issued the Churches Business being to Believe to Preach and Testifie not to enlarge or shorten to alter or diversisie the Faith by them delivered to her and what they taught her as a thing necessary to be believed or practised by all Christians must consequently be so believed taught and practised through all future Ages provided that they walk according to their Rule Common c. ◠Hence saith Vincentius Lirinensis Hoc est vere proprieque Catholicum quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus That is truly Catholick Doctrine which was held in all places all times and by all Persons Sess 4. And accordingly the Trent Council and the Roman Doctors pretend to have received those Doctrines in which they differ from us partly from Scripture and partly from Tradition derived from the Apostles to their days But here begins the difference betwixt us § 2 1. That they will have the Testimony of the present Church to be an Evidence sufficient of the Tradition of the Church of former Ages and will maintain this way of Arguing to be good The present Church of Rome and they who hold Communion with her deliver such and such Doctrines as Traditions received from the Apostles and handed down from them thoughout all Ages and by all true Christian Churches to this present Age and therefore they undoubtedly are such We on the contrary say That we have clear unquestionable Evidence from Scripture and Church-History that many of the Doctrines imposed upon us by the Church of Rome as Apostolick Doctrines and Traditions were not received but rather were condemned and abhorred by the former Ages of the Church of Christ in general and in particular by that of Rome and this hath been already proved in the instance of their Latin Service the Veneration of Images and Communion in one Kind whence it demonstratively follows that this proposition is contrary to plain matter of Fact. Again What better reason can be given for this Consequence viz. The present Church of Rome with her Adherents deliver
the Sabbath Day Answered § 16. His fourth Objection That in Christ Jesus nothing avails but keeping the Commandments of God Answered § 17. His fifth Objection from the Words of Christ Pray that your flight be not on the Sabbath day Answered § 18. IN this Discourse I have endeavoured to shew in what Sence we admit of Tradition as a sufficient Evidence of the Truth of what we do believe or practise And have demonstrated That in those things which we receive upon her Testimony the Romanists cannot pretend unto a like Tradition for any of their Doctrines Two things they farther do object against us as instances of things necessary to be believed which yet say they have no Foundation in the Holy Scriptures and therefore must be believed only on the account of Tradition or the Authority of the Church viz. First The Observation of the Lord's Day and the liberty we take in working on the Sabbath and not observing it as a day set apart unto the Service of the Creator of the World. Secondly The Baptism of Infants of which what Mr. M. offers is sufficiently considered in the following Treatise and the practice hath of late been fully justified from Scripture and Tradition jointly by Three learned Treatises to which I shall referr the Reader Mr. Walker's Modest Plea for Infants Baptism The Case of Infants Baptism Dr. Still Rational Account Part. 1. cap. 4. Touching the first particular I shall Discourse at present in this Preface and shew in opposition to Mr. Mumford that we have sufficient Ground from Scripture for observing the Lord's Day and not observing of the Sabbath Day and that as far as we depend upon Tradition in these Points the Romanists can shew no like Tradition for their Tenets To begin with the first of these particulars That the Lord's Day is by all Christians to be observed as a Religious Festival will be made good from these Considerations First That it is mentioned in the Scripture as a known Festival Day a Day which bore Christ 's Name a Day on which the Christians did assemble for the performance of Sacred and Religious Worship Secondly That it was perpetually and universally observed as such by the Catholick Church including the times of the Apostles And First That it is mentioned in Scripture as a known Festival Day a Day which bore Christ's Name a Day on which the Christians did assemble for the performance of Religious Worship will appear 1st From that Expression of St. John § 2 Rev. i. 10. I was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day For explication of which words observe first That the Name Lord in the New Testament doth ordinarily signifie the Lord Christ for God the Father having committed all Authority into his Hands he by so doing made him as Saint Peter saith both Lord and Christ Act. ij 36. and therefore by this name he is distinguished from God the Father in these words 1 Cor. viij 6. There is one God the Father of whom are all things and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things And again 1 Cor. xij 5 6. There are differences of Administrations but the same Lord diversities of Operations but the same God Wherefore by the Lord's Day here mentioned we cannot reasonably understand the Jewish Sabbath that being not the Day of the Lord Christ or a Day instituted in Memorial of him but a Day sanctified to Jehovah who is in the New Testament stiled God the Father or absolutely God and by that phrase distinguished from the Lord Christ Moreover the Sabbath is in Scripture sometime said to be a Day Holy to the Lord but it is never stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord's Day either in Scripture or in the Records of the three first Centuries and therefore we can have no reason to believe Saint John intended the Jewish Sabbath by that Phrase 2dly Whereas Saint John to denote the time when he received his Vision saith It was on the Lord's Day It follows that this Day must be a Day well known otherwise he could not by this note sufficiently declare the Time when he received his Vision Since then the first Day of the Week and that alone was by the Christians of the first Ages stiled the Lord's Day and known to them familiarly by that Name it is rational to conclude That the Apostle by this Phrase did understand the first Day of the Week For Confirmation of this Argument it is observable that some Copies read that Passage of Saint Paul to the Corinthians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. xvi 2. On the first Day of the Week being the Lord's Day let every one lay by in store Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. ad Manes Et ad Trallian §. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 4. c. 23. Euseb H. Eccl. l. 4. c. 26. who lived Thirty Years in the Apostles Days speaks thus That Christians must no longer Sabbatize but keep the Lord's Day in which our Life sprang up by him Dionysius Bishop of Corinth who flourished in the second Century writes thus This day being the Lord's Day we keep it Holy. Melito Bishop of Sardis who flourished in the same Century composed a Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Lord's Day and another of the Paschal Solemnity clearly distinguishing the one from the other Justin M. Qu. Resp Qu. 115. Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons in his Book of the Paschal Solemnity declares That Christians did not on the Lord's Day which was a Symbol of their Resurrection bend the Knee Clemens of Alexandria calls the Eighth day Contra Cels l. 8. p. 392. De Cor. Mil. c. 3. Cyp. Ep. 38. Ed. Ox. p. 75. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord's day Origen among the Christian Festivals enumerates the Lord's day the Easter and the Pentecostal Festival Tertullian saith Dominico die jejunium nefas ducimus vel de geniculis adorare We judge it wickedness to kneel on the Lord's day and then he adds That on the Easter and the Penticostal Festival we enjoy the same freedom And indeed the thing was so notorious even to the Heathen World that it was usual with them to put this Question to the Martyrs Dominicum servasti Hast thou observed the Lord's day To which their usual Answer was Christianus sum intermittere non possum I am a Christian and cannot cease to do it And that Dominicum agere which is sometimes the Phrase imports not to celebrate the Lord's Supper but to observe the Lord's day is evident from Clemens of Alexandria Strom. 7. p. 744. who tells us That the true Gnostick doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make that day truly the Lord's day by casting away every evil thought and celebrating the Resurrection of Christ Now from these Passages it is clear That the Easter Festival could not be here intended by Saint John that being never stiled by the Ancients absolutely the Lord's day but always
of Antiquity ascribed by some to Athanasius by others to Theodoret to Maximus to Etherius we have one brief but full Discourse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against them who judge of Truth only by multitude Athanas Tom. 2. p. 293. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where the Author first tells us that he is to combat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against a false Assertion that the Authors of it are Objects of Pity or Commiseration that they fled to this miserable Refuge only for want of Reason on their side and even confessed their being vanquished that multitude was proper to fright a Man but by no means to perswade him that in the concernments of this World we do not much regard it and much less should we be moved by it in heavenly Matters to recede from the Testimonies of the Scriptures and the agreeing Sentiments of the Ancients that our Lord had told us That many are called but few chosen That streight was the Gate which leadeth unto Life and few there be that find it And that every wise Man would rather be of the number of those few P. 291. than of that number which goes in the broad way For had any Man lived in the days of Stephen would he not rather have been of his side alone than of the side of the multitude which rose up against him Had not Phineas boldly opposed himself to the prevailing multitude the Plague had not ceased nor had the rest been saved Was it not better to fly with Noah to the Ark than with the multitude to perish in the deluge to go alone with Lot from Sodom than with the multitude to perish there We indeed venerate the multitude but then it is a multitude 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which flies not examination but which affordeth demonstration 2dly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apud Athanas To. 2. p. 325. They add That they ought not to be called upon to yield a blind assent to the Dictates of other Men without using their own Judgments to consider and enquire What is possible what is suitable or unsuitable what acceptable to God what is congruous to Nature what consonant to Truth what accords with the Mystery what is agreeable to piety They have accordingly left us a Discourse in opposition to those Men who required them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 simply to believe their Dictates without considering what was fit or unfit to be embraced informing us That this was of many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 326. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 horrible Doctrines the worst which Satan had invented to lead Men into dangerous Deceits That it was the Doctrine of Men who imperiously commanded all Men to follow their Dictates and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to believe without Reason and called that Faith which was an assent without trial to things unstable and undemonstrated That it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the rise of Error and of all Evils the Doctrine of all Hereticks who declined the Examination that they might avoid the consutation of their Doctrines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That according to it no Man could find the way of Truth or avoid the precipice of Error That according to it we being asked to yield assent to the unproved Doctrines of Hereticks and Heathens should consent to do so P. 327. Whereas if we examine what we are required to believe we shall have full assurance of the Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither believing without reason nor speaking without Faith. Ninthly They say that it must be acknowledged that they had rationally cast off the Customs and Traditions of their Fore-fathers because they could discover wherein they had generally erred Praepar Evang l. 4. c. 4. For thus Eusebius speaks If we can shew that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all the Heathens and Barbarians which were before our Saviours time did not know the true God but either worshipped those which were no Gods or evil Spirits it must be then confessed that we acted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by a true and righteous Judgment when we became 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Revolters from the Superstition of our Fore-fathers If therefore we not only can but actually have shewed in the forementioned particulars that the Church of Rome hath generally erred then must it also be acknowledged that our Separation from her was the result of Truth and Righteousness Tenthly They lastly say Arnob. l. 2. P. 95. That their Religion must be Ancient because it consisted in the Worship of the Supream God Quo non est antiquius quicquam than whom nothing is more Ancient And in like manner we declare our positive Religion must be Ancient because it consists of the Articles delivered in the Scriptures of the New Testament and in the Symbol of the Apostles and taught by the Four first Centuries we therefore in like manner do conclude with them as to all the positive Articles of our Religion Non ergo quod sequimur novum est sed nos sero addicimus quidnam sequi oporteat That what we follow is not New though 't was but lately that we learned that it was that and that alone we ought to follow Now by impartial consideration of these particulars I leave any Man of Reason to judge whose Religion is most suitable in the general Grounds of it to the Sentiments of Antiquity whether we Protestants plead any thing against those of Rome which the ancient Christians did not also plead against the Heathens and whether the most plausible Objections of the Romanists against us be not fully answered by what these Fathers say in the defence of common Christianity against the Hereticks and Heathens 4thly Mr. M. adds Object 4 That all those who had been instructed by the Apostles before Scripture was written P. 322 340. converted and instructed Thousands who never had heard any Apostle preach and all these believed on the Authority of the then present Church P. 415. That from the preaching of Christ unto the finishing of the Canon and the divulging of the same in such Languages as all Nations understood very many Years passed and all the true Believers in Christ's Church were governed by Tradition only R. H. doth also tell us That God besides Guide of Controv Disc 2. ch 5. §. 44. and before the New Testament Scriptures left these Doctrines sufficiently revealed to the then appointed Ecclesiastical Guides from whom both the present People and the future Successors of those Guides both were and might rationally know they were to learn them and so had there been no Scriptures might to this Day by meer Tradition have learn'd them sufficiently for their Salvation First Reply 1 To this I answer That Mr. M. is much out when he talks of Seventy or Eighty Years before those Scriptures were written which were to be the future Rule of Christians for the Gospel of St.
Matthew was writ saith the Tradition of the Fathers Theoph. proem in Matth. Athan. Synops p. 155. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eight Years after our Lords Ascension Mark writ his Gospel whilst St. Peter lived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ten Years after our Lords Assumption saith Theophylact. St. Luke writ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fifteen Years after our Lords Ascension Proem in Luc. say Dorotheus and Theophylact. St. John 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thirty two Years after our Lords Ascension saith the same Theophylact. Chap. 7. §. 2. Now these Gospels as I before have proved were by the General Tradition of the whole Church of Christ esteemed sufficiently to contain that Christian Doctrine which the Apostles taught and purposely to have been written to preserve it entire to Posterity Secondly This Argument is wholly overthrown by this one Observation That the Apostles in their Preaching declare that they spake only what was written in the Books of the Old Testament or might be clearly gathered thence When they undertook to prove any Article of Christian Faith they proved it from the Scriptures of the Old Testament When they reasoned with others to bring them to the Faith they did it from the same Scriptures Acts 26.22 1 Cor. 15.2 3 4. saying none other Things than those which the Prophets and Moses did say should come When they would have their Proselytes confirmed in the Christian Faith 2 Pet. 1.19 they send them to this more sure Word of Prophecy encouraging them to take heed to it as to a Light that shineth in a dark Place And declaring that those very Scriptures which Timothy had known from a Child 2 Tim. 3.15 that is before one Book of the New Testament was written were able through Faith in Christ or the Belief that Jesus is the Messiah promised in them to make him Wise unto Salvation 16 17. That they were profitable for Doctrine and Instruction in Righteousness for Reproof for Correction that the Man of God may be perfect both as to his own Practice Obadiah paraph in locum and his teaching others throughly furnished to every good Work. If then before the Scriptures of the New Testament were written these inspired Persons taught their Converts out of the Old Testament and sent them thither to learn the Truth of what they said and bad them have Recourse unto those Writings as being able to make them Wise unto Salvation and as being more certain and more to be heeded than that Voice from Heaven of which they themselves testified Doubtless when they themselves by the same Spirit had indited the New Testament they must be more concerned that they should be guided by that written Word then also it is evident that they did not invite Men to believe meerly on the Authority or Oral Tradition of the then present Church nor practised any thing whence it might be concluded that after Ages by meer Tradition might be sufficiently instructed in the things which concerned their eternal Welfare Nay they sufficiently declared the contrary by chusing to adhere themselves and call on others to adhere to what was taught concerning the Messiah in the Old Testament when Tradition was so fresh their Authority so fully was confirmed by Miracles and they to whom they spake had the inspired Apostles in any matter of Dispute or Controversy to repair unto Thirdly St. Luke informs us § 15 that he received his Gospel by Tradition Luke 1.2 4. and that he had committed it to Writing that his Theophilus might know 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Certainty of those Doctrines in which he had been formerly instructed clearly insinuating that he conceived the written Word a means of adding certainty to what was only taught by Word of Mouth Accordingly Eusebius informs us that he was necessitated to write his Gospel that he might give us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 24. a firm Account of those things which he had learned from his Conversation with St. Paul and with the rest of the Apostles Church History saith of St. Matthew Euseb ibid. That he was constrained to write his Gospel that by so doing he might supply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the want of his own Presence with them and that when he was by Persecution separated from them Opus imperf in Matth. praefat his Converts might not want the Doctrine of Faith but wheresoever they were might retain Totius fidei statum the entire form of Faith. The san Tradition doth inform us See Chap. 7. §. 1 2. That the First Christian Converts when they had heard the Apostles preach the Christian Faith would not be satisfied with receiving it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Oral Teaching but earnestly requested to have it left in Writing with them That the believing Jews Petierunt Matthaeum ut omnium verborum operum Christi conscriberet eis historiam To write the History of all Christ's Words and Works that they might have a compleat System of their Faith. That the Romans earnestly desired Mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to leave in Writing a Memorial of the Doctrine delivered to them by word of Mouth and never would desist till they had obtained it and that it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the light of Piety which would not suffer them to rest satisfied with the Oral Tradition of the Faith that by the same perswasion Hieron Prolog in Matth. Euseb H. Eccl. l. 3. c. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his familiar Acquaintance of all the Bishops of Asia and the Ambassies of many Churches St. John who before had spent all his time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Oral Preaching was at last moved to write his Gospel The same Tradition adds That the Apostles having preached the Gospel committed it to Writing to be the Pillar and the Ground of Faith to future Ages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Anchors and Foundations of our Faith Athan. Synops p. 61. Theophylact. proem in Mat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That from these Scriptures being taught the truth we might not be drawn aside by the Falshoods of Heresies And lastly That if they had not left in Writing what they preached Orig. Dial. contr Marcion p. 59. they had preached Salvation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only to them who heard them Preach and should have had no care of Posterity because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things only orally delivered would quickly vanish there being no demonstration of their Truth Which words as they expresly do confute the certainty of Doctrines only delivered to Posterity by word of Mouth so the forementioned Traditions do sufficiently inform us what was the Judgment of the ancient Church in this Affair viz. That to ascertain those Christians who were taught the principles of their Religion it was necessary that should be written which they had been taught that they could not well otherwise supply their absence or leave to their Disciples an
are plainly opposite to the Doctrines Practices and Traditions formerly received and approved in the Church of Christ and this they do believe so firmly that they rather chuse to suffer loss of Life and all the Comforts of it than own these Doctrines of the Church of Rome as Apostolical Traditions Moreover whereas it is no Man's Interest to make the World believe there was such a City as London if there was no such place in being it is the Interest of the whole Church of Rome to set up this pretence to Infallibility in the General that finding it disclaimed by other Churches she with some Colour may pretend unto it and 't is the Interest of the Roman Clergy as much to stickle for the Truth of her pretended Traditions as it was the Interest of Demetrius and his Fellow Artists to avouch to the Ephesians They might be truly Gods which were made by Hands and that the Image of Diana truly fell down from Jupiter since otherwise their Craft would be set at nought And as it was the Interest of the Master of the Pythonisse to be angry with St. Paul for casting out the Evil Spirit from her because thereby his Hopes of Gain was gone For if Men will not receive their Traditions as the Truths of God they cannot Lord it over their Consciences nor drain their Purses nor give Laws at pleasure to the Christian World but must be put to the hard task of proving what they would have us take upon their Words And Fourthly Whereas he that doubteth whether there be such a City as London may repair unto it to be convinced by ocular demonstration whither shall he repair who doubteth of the Truth of the Traditions of the Church of Rome for Satisfaction in that Matter Will you send him to Scripture You have already told him he cannot know what is Scripture what Copies and what Texts are uncorrupted what Translation of it is Authentick but by the Church and also that when he knows all this he cannot understand the meaning of the Scriptures in places disputable and variously sensed as you know those are by which you prove both the Churches Infallibility and the Pretences of the Roman Church to be Infallible Will you send him with Mr. P. 360. M. To the unanimous Consent and Tradition of our Church that is the Church of Rome what is this but to bid him believe that Self-evident which he thinks evidently false to believe the Church of Rome to be Infallible in her Traditions and then he will not doubt of her Infallibility or to turn Roman Catholick and then he will no longer be a Protestant Will you add with him That what is proposed by the Tradition of such a Church is evidently credible Ibid. and sufficient to beget an infallible assent Is it not then matter of Amazement that so many Millions of Persons throughout the World endowed with intellectuals as piercing and accomplished with all Abilities which their Adversaries can boast of yea who many of them have strong temporal motives to incline them to embrace the Romish Traditions and all the miseries which Papal Tyranny can inflict to awaken them into a serious consideration of all the Evidence that can be offered for them and who are Men seriously industrious to attain Salvation and Men who know they must perish everlastingly if they resist the Truth clearly propounded to them I say is it not matter of Amazement that so many persons so qualified should from Generation to Generation so unanimously reject what is evidently credible and able to beget within them an infallible assent yea that they should dispute and write many Books against it though they could never do so but they must contradict what is self-Evident What is this but in effect to say All Protestants always were are and must be whilst they continue Protestants resolved to be damned and as obstinate as the very Devil in doing what they know must tend to their eternal Condemnation Will you send him to the Vniversal Church either by it you mean only the R. Church and her Adherents or you do not if you do you again send him to the Church of Rome if you do not you must renounce that Article of Faith which all your Clergy stand by Oath obliged to defend viz. the Roman Catholick Church and with it your Pretences to Infallibility on the account of any of these Promises which do confessedly belong only unto the Vniversal Church of Christ CHAP. XII Mr. M ' s. Fifth Assertion That all Catholicks ever held that for true which was owned by the Vniversal Church of their times and rejected the contrary as an Error answered by way of Concession § 1. First That this is absolutely true in reference to Doctrines and Practices truly necessary to the Being of a Church But Secondly That this is with Lirinensis to be restrained to the Fundamentals of Faith is proved 1st from Scripture 2dly from Reason § 2. Thirdly From Instances as First That of the Administration of the Sacrament to Infants which they generally practised both in the Eastern and the Western Churches § 3. They declared this Practice to be necessary § 4. That they speak not this of such a participation of the Body and Blood of Christ as may be had in Baptism but plainly of the Puriticipation of the Eucharist § 5. Inferences hence 1. To prove the Definition of the Trent Council touching this Matter actually False 2ly That the Practice or Doctrine of the Church in any Age is no true Evidence of Tradition or the right Interpretation of Holy Scripture 3ly That Mr. M ' s. Argument for Prayer for the Dead from Tradition is not convincing § 6. 2. From the Opinion of the Fathers That it was not lawful for a Christian to swear at all § 7. 3ly From their Opinion That good Angels were transported with the Love of Women and got Gyants of them § 8. 4ly From their Opinion That it was unlawful for any Clergyman to engage himself in Secular Affairs § 9. Or to go from one Church or Diocess to another § 10. 3ly When whole Churches and Nations differ and Heresies prevail the Fathers say we are for finding out the Truth to have Recourse only to Scripture and to primitive Tradition § 11. A full Answer to Mr. M ' s. Argument for Tradition from the Ancient Custom of praying for the Dead shewing on what Accounts the Ancients did it what Reason we have not to do it That the Prayers for them used by the Church of Rome are Novelties and that those used by the Ancients were perfectly destructive of the Roman Purgatory § 12. MR. § 1 M. saith That whatsoever was held by the Vniversal Church P. 367 368. was without farther Question held for true and the contrary to it was ever rejected as an Error Neither will you ever find a Catholick who ever had the Boldness to say that the Church of
Matth. p. 58. in luc 7. p. 351. Nazianzen in Orat. Funebr Basil in hanc sententiam Meliori non inventa maxima pars Veterum Auctorum concesserunt Maldonate in Matth. xi 2. viz. Ambrosius Eusebius Emissenus Julianus Pomerius Venantius Gregorius Question to our Lord Matth. 11.3 Art thou he that shall come or look we for another they should thus interpret it That St. John being to go down to Hell or Hades should send to ask whether he should go before him thither and preach him there as he had done on Earth Matth. 16.23 That when Christ said to Peter Get thee behind me Satan thou art an Offence to me they out of a Reverence to St. Peter should make him say to (f) Multi putant quod non Petrus correptus est sed adversarius Spiritus qui haec dicere Apostolum suggerebat Hieron in Matth. xvj 23. Hilarius in locum Theophylact. in Marc. 8. p. 232. Peter only come thou after me and to the Devil Satan thou art an Offence unto me That when the same St. Peter denied his Master Matth. 26.72 saying I know not the Man they should excuse and bring him off with this quaint Equivocation (g) Scio quosdam pij affectus erga Petrum locum hunc ita interpretatos ut dicerent Petrum non Deum negasse sed hominem esse-sensum nescio hominem quia scio Deum Hieron in locum Vide Maldonatum ibid. Nescio hominem quia scio Deum I know not the Man for I know him to be God not considering with St. Jerom That by thus attempting to excuse the Disciple they gave the lye to his Master who had foretold his Denial That from those Words of Christ Joh. 8.44 (h) Vide Origen in Joh. Tom. 23. ed. Huet T. 2. p. 308. Huetii notas p. 34. Epiph. Haer. 40. n. 5 6. Haer. 38. §. 4 5. Ammon caten in c. 8. Joh. p. 238. Cyril Alex. in locum p 559. Author quaest V. N. Test apud August c. 90 98. Hieron in Isa c. 14 F. 36 e. The Devil is a Lyar and the Father of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they should conclude that the Devil had a Father and that he was either Cain or Judas That to avoid the vain Cavils of the Marcionites and Manichees they should say That (i) Iren. l. 3. c. 7. Tertul. l. 5. adv Marcion c. xj Chrysost Theod. Photius apud Oecum Theophylact in locum August contr Faust Manichaeum l. 22. c. 2. 9. the God of this World mentioned 2 Cor. iv 4. was not the Devil but the true God And from these Words of the Apostle (k) Illud dici potest quod Paulus non tam maledixerit eis quam oraverit pro illis ut eas partes corporis perderent per quas delinquere cogebantur Hieron in locum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret Oecum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. in locum Gal. 5.12 I wish they were cut off that trouble you they should gather that the Apostle desired that the Abettors of the legal Ceremonies and Circumcision might be gelt To omit infinite Passages of the like Nature Nor can it reasonably be doubted that the Doctrine of the Millennium of the necessity of communicating Infants of the Appearance of Enoch and the Tisbite at our Lord's Second coming of the nearness of the End of the World of our Lord 's Preaching but one Year after his Baptism of the Angels conversing with Women had all their Rise from the mistaken Interpretations of the Holy Scripture why therefore might not the Mistake of that Passage of St. 1 Cor. 3.15 Paul They shall be saved but so as by Fire give the rise to Purgatory That of the same Apostle Magnum Sacramentum Eph. 5.32 This is a great Mystery but I speak of Christ and the Church advance Marriage into a Sacrament the mistake of that Promise of an happy Resurrection to the true Members of Christ's Church Matth. 16.18 The Gates of Hades shall not prevail against it be made to countenance her Infallibility and so in other Cases of like Nature Sure I am that Communion in one Kind the Latin Service the Veneration of Images could never have obtained in the Church had not those Scriptures which so plainly do condemn them been miserably wrested by late Ages from their proper Sence and the received Interpretation which the whole Christian World had put upon them for Six hundred or a Thousand Years and why they might not as well wrest the Scriptures to establish some of their Doctrines as they have done it for the avoiding that Condemnation of them which is so clear in other Scriptures that he who runs may read it I am not able to discern Secondly § 7 Corruptions in Doctrine and Practice might easily prevail by altering or leaving of that Rule of Faith and Manners God had given them and acting by other Rules or Principles which in themselves are insufficient to establish any Article of Christian Faith for a false Rule must of necessity give false Directions both in Faith and Manners where the Principle is false the Conclusion from it must be so and where the Foundation is corrupted the Building cannot be firm now this we find done 1. By setting up the Fathers as the Rules of Faith the * Basil Ep. 62.67.70.349 Nazianz. Orat. 19 21 23 29. Pillars and the Grounds of Faith as some of them are often stiled This Method of proceeding as it is expresly contrary to our Lord 's Injunction to call no Man Father upon Earth in that presumptuous Sence in which the Jewish Rabbi's did affect that Title Matth. xxiij 6 10. John vj. 45. because one is our Father in Heaven and all that come to Christ are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taught of God the Father and one is our Guide and Master Christ 1 Joh. ij 27. from whom we Christians have received an Unction and need not that any one should teach us but as that Spirit in the Word doth teach us all things So is it as repugnant to the Mind and the Prescriptions of those Holy Men who frequently declare That both they and their Brethren were subject to Error That Errarunt in fide tam Graeci quam Latini (a) Hieron Ep. ad Pam. Ocean To. 2 F. 69. Both the Greek and the Latin Fathers erred in the Faith That therefore others were (b) Aug. l. 11. Contr. Faust c. 5. at liberty when they read or heard them to approve what they liked and to reject what they conceived not to be right in them and warn us (c) Cyril Hieros Catech. 4. p. 30. not to believe what they say unless we find it demonstrated out of the Holy Scriptures To (d) Orig. Hom. 2. in Ezek. F. 135. B. observe diligently when the Pastor deceived them and when he spake things true and pious there being
say they in our writings (e) Aug. de Orig an l. 4. c. 1. l. de bono persev c. 21. many things quae possent justo judicio culpari which justly may be blamed so that we would have no man so to embrace all our Sayings as to follow them save only in those things in which they do perceive they have not erred if then their sayings be of any credit and Authority 't is evident from their assertions that they ought not to be admitted as the Rule of faith as being men subject unto like ignorance and errors with us and if their sayings be of no credit much less can they be own'd as the pillars and the ground of truth and yet I find this doctrine laid down expresly by a concealed Heretick Sergius the Patriarch of Constantinople in his Epistle to Cyril where he saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Sexto Ep. ad Cyrum episcop Concil To. 6. p. 918. the doctrines of the Fathers are a Law to the universal Church and that we are bound to follow them and to hold all that they have written to the least tittle and evident it is That even from the Fifth Century the sayings of the Fathers began to be had in great Reputation and about the Eighth to be as it were Authentick and Articles of Faith were canvassed and determined both in the Second Nicene Council and in that of Florence chiefly by the pretended Sayings of the Holy Fathers to whose Testimony you very rarely if at all shall find this just Exception made That they were Men of like Infirmities and subject to like Errors as we are One Athanasius or Basil one Nazianzen or Nyssen one Chrysostom and Theodoret in the Eastern Church one Hilary and Ambrose St. Austin Jerom and St. Gregory in the Western Churches have for these six last Centuries signified as much or more than a St. Peter or St. Paul an Apostle or Evangelist and a sed contra Augustinus or sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit through the whole Summs and the whole Body of the Schoolmen hath passed for the Decision of a Question touching Faith or Manners How easy was it then for Errors to come in under the Vmbrage of these venerable Names especially if we consider how many spurious Pieces had usurped their Names which the great Ignorance of latter Ages could not distinguish from their genuine Works how many of their genuine works were horribly corrupted and how fruitful many of those Fathers were in there inventions and how positive they sometimes are in delivering that as the doctrine of the whole Church which was nothing less For instance who that reads St. Austin disputing against the Pelagians could doubt if he believed him that the Doctrine of the Imputation of Original Sin was universally received by all Christians and that on this account the whole Church Baptized Infants and yet Petavius iuforms us Dogm Theol. To. 4. pt 2. l. 14. c. 2. Haeret. Fabul l. 5. c. 18. p. 292. Quid festinat innocens aetas ad remissionem peccatorum Tertul. de Bapt. c. 18. that the Greek Fathers scarcely spake any thing about it yea in that very Age Theodoret expresly denies it putting the Question thus If this be the only work of Baptism to cleanse from Sin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 why do we Baptize Children who are not guilty of it and in his Comment on Rom. 5.13 He adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That every one dies for his own Sin and not for that of his Fore fathers Chrysostom on the same place saith In v. 19. To. 3. Hom. 10. p. 73. That for us to be mortal on the occasion of the Sin of Adam is no absurdity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but how can it be that by his Transgression another should become a Sinner for if he did not personally sin Cap. 1. neither could he deserve Punishment Gennadius in his Book of Ecclesiastical Doctrines which passeth still among the Works of St. Austin placeth this as one That that Holy Spirit proceedeth from the Father and Son. Michael Psellus on the contrary saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cap. Theol. c. 10. p. 157. the Holy Catholick Church teacheth that the Spirit proceedeth only from the Father L. 2. c. 1. but not from the Son. To omit many other Instances collected by the learned Dally in that elaborate Treatise of the Use of the Fathers which makes it needless to discourse further on this Head For if the true Fathers were not only subject to many and great Errors in their private Sentiments but also unto manifold Mistakes touching the Doctrine of the Catholick Church if many of their Works have been unhappily corrupted and many spurious Pieces have been imposed upon them so that instead of their Authority Men often have relyed on an Impostor an ignorant Monk or perhaps an Heretick how easy was it in the dark Ages of the Church for Errors to come in at this Door when too much Veneration was by all given to them and their Dictates passed for Oracles Again § 8 New Doctrines and Practices might obtain by flying from the Scriptures to Miracles and Visions for the Establishment of Doctrines and Opinions in the Church That a prevailing Power doth attend these miraculous Operations even when they are performed only by Satan and his Ministers we shall be fully convinced if we consider that our Lord foretold of the false Prophets and false Christs that should come after him they should work Signs and Miracles so great as to deceive Matth. 24.23 if it were posible the very Elect. St. 2 Thes 2.9 Paul that the Apostacy of the Great Antichrist and his Followers should be effected by the coming of Satan with all power Signs Rev. 13.13 14. and lying Wonders St. John of the Apocalyptick beast that he should do great Signs and deceive the Inhabitants of the Earth by the Signs given him to do that at the first appearance of Christianity the Heathens did oppose it from this topick viz. The Signs and Wonders which had been performed by their Heathen Deities saying Frustra tantum arrogas Christo In vain you arrogate so much to Christ for we have often known that other Gods have given Medicines to and healed the Infirmities of many so the Heathen in (a) Arnob. l. 1. p. 28. Arnobius so (b) Apud Orig. l. 8. p. 407 416 417. Celsus so (c) Apud Minut p. 7. Caelius and comparing the Miracles of Apollonius Tyanaeus and of Apuleus with those of Christ (d) Lact. l. 5 c. 3. Aug. Ep. 4. Hieronim apud Euseb p. 512. Quorum majora contendunt esse opera And contending they were greater than any done by him That (e) Acts 8.9 10. Just in Apol 2. p. 69. Cyril Hier. cat 6. p. 53 54 c. Simon Magus mightily prevailed by them and obtained almost where-ever he came to be worshipped as a
Doctrines of the Church of Rome are not received by Tradition from Father to Son since in this matter the Sons have generally entertained a Doctrine their Fathers either knew nothing of or plainly contradicted and that is now become pious and consonant to Ecclesiastical Worship which in St. Bernard's time was Ep. 174. praesumpta novitas Mater temeritatis soror superstitionis filia levitatis A bold Novelty the Mother of Rashness the Sister of Superstition the Daughter of Levity 5. Hence doth it follow that even by the Authority of the heads of the Vniversal Church men may be forbidden under pain of Damnation to Assert the Ancient Doctrine of the Church and may have liberty to contradict it Yea that in the judgment of a great R. Council received by the French as General and bearing that title in all Editions of the Councils that may be agreeable to the Catholick Faith to Reason and to Holy Scripture which is repugnant to the Ancient Doctrine of the Church Catholick for Eight whole Centuries 6. Hence is it manifest that the Trent Council hath given liberty to all her Members to hold that which is opposite to an universal constant unopposed Tradition of the Church for many Ages that is that she hath left them at their liberty to hold the Ancient Faith or hold the contrary 7. Hence it appears that in the Church of Rome Feasts may be instituted in which all men shall be exhorted to praise God for a thing which perhaps never was and of the truth of which none of her Members can be certain certitudine fidei with the certainty of Faith all of them being by this Church permitted to believe the contrary CHAP. III. Fifthly We distinguish betwixt Traditions which though not written in Scripture are left on Record in the Ecclesiastical writings of the first and purest Ages of the Church and such as are so purely Oral Traditions as that we find no footsteps of them in the Three first Centuries much less any assurance they had then any general Reception of the first kind is the Canon of Scripture of the Old Testament mentioned in our Sixth Article § 1. This is proved from the Jews § 2. From the Christians of the Second Century § 3. Of the Third Century § 4. From almost all the celebrated Writers of the Fourth Century § 5. Where also it is observed 1. That these Fathers profess to deliver that Catalogue of them which they had received from Tradition § 6. And that the Books which they rejected as Apocryphal were so reputed by the Church § 7. That the Catalogue they produced was that received not only by the Jews but Christians § 8. That they made it to prevent mistakes § 9. That they represent the Books contained in their Catalogue as the Fountain of Salvation the rest as insufficient to confirm Articles of Faith § 10. The same Tradition still continued to the Sixteenth Century § 11. What the Roman Doctors must do if they would shew a like Tradition for any of their Tenets § 12. The unreasonableness of their pretences to Tradition in this Article Ibid. The Attempts of Mr. M. and J. L. to prove their Canon from the Council of Carthage the Testimony of St. Austin the Decrees of Pope Innocent and Gelasius are Answered § 13. The Tradition touching the Books of the New Testament where it is proved 1. That the Four Evangelists the Acts the Thirteen Epistles of St. Paul the First of Peter and of John were always owned as Canonical by all Orthodox Christians § 14. 2. That it cannot be necessary to Salvation to be assured that the Books formerly controverted belong to the Canon § 15. 3. That we cannot be assured of the true Canon of the New Testament from the Testimony of the Latin Church § 16. 4. That there is not the like necessity that the controverted Books should have been generally received from the beginning as that all necessary Articles of Christian Faith and Manners should be then generally received § 17. That we have cause sufficient to own as Canonical the Books once controverted is proved 1. in the General § 18. 2. In Particular touching the Apocalypse § 19. And the Epistle to the Hebrews § 20. Touching the Epistle of St. James the Second of Peter the Second and Third of John the Epistle of St. Jude § 21. No Orthodox Persons dobuted of them after the Fourth Century § 22. The Romanists cannot prove their Doctrines by any like Traditions and in particular not by such a Tradition as proves the Apocalypse Canonical § 23. The Objection of Mr. M. Answered § 24. AGain § 1 the word Tradition may be applied to signifie either such things as are not written in the Scripture Dist 5. though they are left on Record in the Ecclesiastical writings of the first and purest Ages Vocatur Doctrina non scripta non ea quae nusquam scripta est sed quae non est scripta a primo Autore Bellarm. de verbo Dei non scripto l. 4. c. 2. and from them handed down unto us in the writings of succeeding Ages or else to signifie such things as are said only to be delivered by word of Mouth but cannot by the Records of preceding Ages be proved to have been received as Doctrines generally maintained or practices always observed in the Church of Christ of the first sort is the Tradition of the Canon of Scripture of the Apostles Symbol as a perfect Summary of Doctrines necessary to be believed the Observation of the Lord's Day the Superiority of Bishops over Presbyters the Ordination of Presbyters and Deacons by Bishops only and the like we having full and pregnant evidence from the first Records of Antiquity unto this present time of all these things and whatsoever can be proved by a like Tradition touching a necessary Article of Christian Faith we are all ready to receive but those pretended Traditions of the Roman Church which by no Records of Antiquity can be made appear to have been constantly received by the Church as Apostolical Traditions we have just Reason to reject as being without Ground so stiled For Instance First We receive the Canon of the Scriptures of the Old Testament mentioned in our Sixth Article because it is by written Tradition handed down unto us from the Jews from Christ and his Apostles and from their Successors in the Church and we reject the Canon of the Old Testament imposed upon us by the Fourth Session of the Trent Council partly because we find a clear Tradition both virtually by all who say the Canon of the Old Testament is only that we own and expresly by those who say the others which we stile Apocrypha belong not to the Canon And 1. § 2 We receive our Canon from the Ancient Jews to whom were committed the Oracles of God for their Josephus saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 1. contra Apion
libr. Regum Tom. 3. f. 6. a. say That the Canonical Books of the Old Testament are Twenty four which say they from St. Jerom St. John in his Revelations introduceth under the Name of the Twenty four Elders Dr. Cous p. 131 133. P. 147. P. 152. P. 164 178 196. so in the Sixth Century Primasius and Leontius in the Eighth Century Venerable Bede in the Ninth Century Ambrosius Ausbertus in the Twelfth Century Peter Abbot of Celle in the Fifteenth Century Thomas Anglicus and in the Sixteenth Frances Georgius Now manifest it is even from the very number here assigned of Twenty two or Twenty four Canonical Books that all these Authors must exclude those Books we call Apocrypha from the Canon and it is still more evident from their own Words in which they expresly say P. 133. These are the Books received the Books put into the Canon by the Church P. 151. P. 157 194. P. 197. the Books received by the Church and Canonized The whole Canon which the Church receives and which was handed down unto them by the Authority of the Ancients And of those which we stile Apocryphal they say Ibid. P. 151. These are the Books which are contradicted and not received by the Church The Books of the Old Testament which are not received by the Church P. 152 162 177. P. 158 159 163 169 175 The Books which are read indeed sed non scribuntur non habentur in Canone sed leguntur ut scripta patrum as are the Writings of the Fathers but are not put into the Canon non reputantur in Canone are not reputed to belong unto it The Books which the Church reads and permits for Devotion and the instruction of Manners but thinks not their Authority sufficient ad confirmandam Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum Authoritatem P. 166 173 176 191 193. to confirm the Authority of Ecclesiastical Doctrines The Books which are not to be received ad confirmandum aliquid in fide to confirm any Article of Faith. The Contents of which she obligeth no man to believe P. 189 190. nor doth she judge him guilty of disobedience or infidelity who receives them not Concerning which the Church receives the Testimony of St. Jerom as most Sacred P. 194. who did undoubtedly exclude them from the Canon To whom say they the Church Catholick is much indebted upon this account P. 199. and to whose sence the sayings both of Councils and Fathers are to be reduced Books with whose Authority no Man was pressed Books P. 202. P. 174 188. Lastly which were not genuine but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Spurious and Apocryphal which the Christian Church doth not receive P. 166 201. pari Authoritate or pari veneratione with the like Authority or Veneration with which she doth receive the Holy Scriptures Now hence the Doctors of the Church of Rome may learn what it is they are to do § 12 if they would prove any of their Doctrines to have descended to them by a like Tradition with that of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament viz. they must prove they were owned in the New Testament were delivered as Traditions by the Apostles and all the Ancient Bishops and Governors of the Church They must produce express Testimonies of Christian Writers in all Ages asserting That the Church received such a Doctrine and that they in delivering of it followed the Tradition of the Church and their Fore-Fathers and saying That the contrary Doctrine was not received by the Church They must shew That even from the first Ages of the Church Christians were solicitous to enquire what were the Apostolical Traditions not left in writing to the Church that upon this enquiry they found that these Traditions were of such a certain number neither more nor less that they thought it necessary to preserve them by writing Catalogues of all such Traditions as were received or owned as such by Christians That this Catalogue of Traditions was delivered to them by the Primitive Fathers as they had been received by the whole Church and that they had received them from Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word That they took care to leave this Catalogue of Traditions because some persons dared to mix Apocryphal Traditions with Divine and that they made it out of necessity to prevent mistakes in this matter and for the Instruction of those who received the first Rudiments of the Faith that they might know out of what Fountains to draw the Waters of Tradition They must produce from the first Four Centuries Testimonies of this nature from Fathers living in most places where there were any Christians and Testimonies uncontrouled throughout those Centuries And seeing one of these Traditions viz. that which concerneth the Canonical Books of the Old Testament is expresly contrary to a Tradition delivered and handed down to us with all these circumstances they must prove that in this matter Tradition hath plainly delivered Contradictions throughout Four whole Centuries which being done we cannot chuse but think her Testimony is Infallible Hence also we may see what an unparallell'd confidence they shew when in their Disputations the Romanists are bold to say and lay the stress of their whole certainty of Faith upon this Proposition That they hold the same Doctrine to day which was delivered yesterday and so up to the time of our Saviour seeing it is as clear as the Sun that the Books of the Old Testament which they now hold for Sacred and Canonical were for Fifteen whole Centuries together declared not to belong unto the Canon but excluded from it by the Church And this will be still more apparent by considering what the Authors of the Question of Questions § 13 and of The Papist Misrepresented and Represented say touching this matter Mr. M. saith Sect. 19. n. 6. p. 410. That when it was grown doubtful in the Church whether such and such Books were part of the Canon of Scripture the Tradition which recommended these Books was examined in the Third Council of Carthage and there all the Books of the R. Canon were found to be recommended to the Church by a true and Authentical Tradition and therefore we embrace them as the Word of God. And again Sect. 3. n. 12. p. 84 85 86. As yet the Church of Christ had not defined which Books were God's true word which not wherefore then it was free to doubt of such Books us were not admitted by such a Tradition of the Church as was evidently so universal that it was clearly sufficient to ground an infallible belief but in the days of St. Austin the Third Council of Carthage A. 397. examined how sufficient the Tradition of the Church was which recommended these Books for Scripture about which there was so much doubt and contrariety of Opinion and they found all the Books contained in our Canon of which you account so many Apocryphal to have been recommended by a Tradition sufficient
to ground Faith upon For on this ground they proceeded in defining all the Books in our Canon to be Canonical Pope Innocent the First A. D. 402. St. Austin P. Gelasius A. D. 492. confirm the same Canon and the Sixth General Council celebrated A. D. 680. confirms the Council of Carthage and the true Canon is again set forth in the Council of Florence A. 1438. And after these Declarations of the Council of Carthage and Pope Innocent no one pertinaciously dissented from the Canon but such as Protestants themselves confess to be Hereticks J. L. adds That Gregory Nazianzen acknowledged them Canonical and St. Ambrose Lib. de Jacob vitâ beatâ and that since the Churches Declaration no Catholick ever doubted of them Now for Answer to these things let it be noted First That whereas they are pleased to say that it was till the time of the Third Council of Carthage that is till the Fifth Century doubtful and undetermined in the Church whether these Books were Canonical or not because the Church had not then declared them so they by just consequence must grant that the Apostles and all the Ancient Bishops of the Church for Four Centuries knew nothing of the Roman Canon for had they known the Books contested to be Canonical we cannot doubt but they would have delivered them to the Church as such as well as those which we receive and which saith Eusebius were received by the consent of all Lib. 4. c. 26. We therefore are contented to be no wiser than they were and rather chuse to hearken to that advice of Cyril of Jerusalem Read the Twenty two Books of the Old Testament and have nothing to do with the Apocrypha 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the Apostles and ancient Bishops the Rulers of the Church who delivered these Twenty two Books as the Canon were wiser than those that came after them we therefore being Sons of the Church in compliance with his advice will not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 break over the bounds which they have set us especially considering they so expresly have informed us that they delivered this Catalogue of the Twenty two Canonical Books of the Old Testament as they received them from Tradition Obs 1. That they made this Enumeration of them to prevent mistakes in this matter for the good of the Church and that Men might know out of what Fountains to draw the Water of Life and might clearly learn which were Canonical Obs 4. And as the Canon received and owned not only by the Jewish but the Christian Church Obs 3. Secondly The falshood of these bold Assertions hath been shewed sufficiently in what hath been discoursed upon this subject for had the Authority of the Books we stile Apocryphal been undetermined had the true Canon of the Books of the Old Testament been doubtful in the Church till the Fifth Century why did Athanasius think it necessary to advertise Christians that the Books which we reject were not Canonical St. Cyril That they were out of the Canon Nazianzen That they were not Genuine Ruffinus That our Ancestors held them not Canonical not sufficient to confirm Doctrines of Faith St. Jerom That the Church deemed them Apocryphal and received them not into the Canon Why do they add that these things we delivered to them by the Fathers and by them recorded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for more exactness sake and to prevent mistakes Had the Canon of the Books of the Old Testament been till then doubtful and undetermined in the Church why was the Canon produced by Melito Bishop of Sardis judged so exact a Canon of the Books of the Old Testament why do the Fathers of the four first Centuries with one accord declare that the number of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament if Ruth were added to Judges and the Lamentations to Jeremiah Can. 59. were but Twenty two if reckoned separately Twenty four why is it that the Council of Laodicea having said that Christians in the Church ought to read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only the Canonical Books of the Old and the New Testament reckons up the Cononical Books of the Old Testament as we do excluding all that we call Apocrypha as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 books not contained in the Canon Moreover this Canon was received into the Code of Canons of the Vniversal Church both by the East and West the Canons of this Council were confirmed by the fourth General Council of Chalcedon Can. 1. Can. 2. Novel 131. by the Sixth General Council of Trullo by the Imperial Law of the Emperor Justinian and so must give us the Sence and Definition of the whole Church touching this matter Thirdly If that may be doubtful and undetermined in the Church which is so positively asserted so expresly and frequently declared in a matter of Fact as this hath been for the first Four Centuries then I hope we may be permitted to pronounce all those New Articles which the Church of Rome hath added to the Creed doubtful and undetermined in the first Four Centuries at least till they can give us better proof that they were then received than hath been here produced for this Canon and then I think they will be no great Gainers by this false Assertion And sure I am they cannot here pretend Tradition handed down from Father to Son from all the Christians of one Age to all the Christians of the next unless it be asserted that all those Fathers and this whole Council spake these things in a flat opposition to what they had been taught by their Fore-fathers touching the Canonical Books of the Old Testament so that this instance is a full confutation of that idle Dream Fourthly Whereas these Authors have produced some few Testimonies from the Fifth Century in favour of their Canon Let it be noted first That J. L. hath been told already Answ p. 82 83. that neither Gregory nor St. Ambrose have any thing pertinent to his purpose in the places cited and this he by his silence seemeth to confess As for the pretended Definition of Pope Innocent the First made saith J. L. A. D. 370. Cap. 11. p. 22. Schol. Hist p. 118 180 188. though he was only made Bishop of Rome A. D. 402. Bishop Cousins hath proved it to be Spurious as he hath also fully proved the pretended Decree of the Council of Florence to be Bishop Pearson Vindiciae Epist Ignat. part 1. c. 4. a p. 44. ad p. 54. And another Bishop of our Church of unquestionable Credit among all learned Men hath proved beyond all possibility of Contradiction that the Decree ascribed to Gelasius is also Spurious so that we have nothing left to consider but the judgment of St. Austin the Council of Carthage and the pretended confirmation of it Now to these I say Fifthly That were these Testimonies exactly for the Canon of the Church of Rome yet here is neither a Decree of any General Council
nor a Decree received into the Code of Canons by the Vniversal Church as was the contrary Decree of the Council of Laodicea nor were the men that made it likely to judge better what were the Books of the Old Testament received as Canonical than all the Writers now produced for our Canon they whom we have produced as our Witnesses being either men who lived upon or near the place where the Canon of the Old Testament was published and known or travelled many of them thither and one of them on purpose to learn exactly the number of those Books And surely it is too ridiculous to imagine that it should in the Fifth Century be better known in Africa what Books of the Old Testament were Canonical than at Jerusalem Caesarea Alexandria or any of the Eastern Churches Moreover This Canon of the Council of Carthage in the Roman Code lately set forth by Paschasius Quesnel hath only Tobit and Judith and two Books of Esdras of all the Apocryphal Books now Canonized at Rome nor in the Collection of Cresconius Can. 299. an African Bishop is there any mention of the Books of Macchabees or Baruch nor in the Edition of it by Balsamon so that this cannot be a proof that the Trent Canon was received then And lastly 't is true they stile the Books there mentioned Canonical but this may only be in that large Sence in which those Books were sometimes called so which were read in the Church though they were not sufficient to confirm matters of Faith as may be argued from the Reason which they give us why they stiled them Canonical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Balsam in can 27. Concil Carthag viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because we have from the Fathers received these Books to be read in the Church and from the Gloss of Balsamon upon it who to know what Books were Canonical in the strict Sence sends us to the Council of Laodicea Athanasius Nazianzen and Amphilochius who all declared against the Apocrypha and to the last Canon of the Apostles which leaves out most of them And whereas it is added that the Canons of the Council of Carthage were established in the Sixth General Council held in Trullo let it be noted First That at other times the Romanists will by no means admit this Council Can. 36. Can. 13. Can. 55. because it equals the Bishop of Constantinople with him of Rome forbids Priests to be separated from their Wives condemns the received Customs of the Church of Rome and prescribes contrary Laws to her but now because they hope their Forlorn Cause may have some small advantage by it they give it the Title of a General Council Note 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 2. That this Synod in the same Canon in which it confirms the Council of Carthage confirms also the Canons of the Council of Laodicea together with the Canonical Epistles of Athanasius Nazianzen and Amphilochius which number the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as we do rejecting the rest with us as Apocryphal when therefore the Fathers in the Synod confirm the Canons of the Council of Carthage they must either contradict themselves by contradicting the Council of Laodicea and these Canonical Epistles now mentioned and by them equally confirmed or else they must believe that this Canon of the Council of Carthage did not declare these controverted Books to be properly Canonical or divine Scripture but only in that larger sence in which that Name was given to Ecclesiastical Books thought worthy to be read in the Church Fifthly Whereas Mr. M. and J. L. farther assert That after these Books were declared Canonical by Pope Innocent and the Council of Carthage all cited these Books as Scripture none pertinaciously dissented from this Decree no Catholick ever doubted of them we are bound to thank them for their kindness to us in these words in which they plainly have renounced their Title to almost all the best Writers of the Christian World who as the Reverend Dr. Cousins hath demonstrated through every Century till the very Year of the Session of the Trent Council not only doubted of but plainly did reject these Books as uncanonical in the strict acceptation of the Word declaring that they read and cited them indeed as Books containing good instruction but not as properly Canonical or as sufficient to confirm any Article of Christian Faith. Lastly The Testimony of St. Austin in his Book of Christian Doctrine is so inconsistent with his other works and so fully answered by the Reverend Dr. Consins Can. 7. that it is needless to say any thing distinctly to it To proceed therefore to the Books of the New Testament § 14 observe First That the four Gospels the Acts of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 25. l. 6. c. 25. the Thirteen Epistles of St. Paul the First Epistle of St. Peter and the First of St. John were always 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confessed by all true Christians to be sacred Books of the New Testament and their Authority was never questioned by any person of the whole Church of God. Now sure we have unquestionable certainty of such Books as have been handed down to us by the Tradition of all Ages of the Church inserted into all her Catalogues cited by all her Writers as Books of a Divine Authority and of which never any doubt was made by any Member of the Church of God. Secondly § 15 Observe That it cannot be necessary to Salvation to have an absolute assurance of those Books of the new Testament which have been formerly Controverted by whole Churches as well as private Doctors of the Church for either these Churches had sufficient certainty that the Books which they rejected were Canonical or they had not if they had how could they be true Churches who rejected part of their Rule of Faith when known to be so If they had not it seems not necessary that we at present should be certain of them for why may not we go to Heaven without this assurance as well as they of former Ages Thirdly § 16 There can be no assurance of the true Canon of the Books of the New Testament from the Testimony of the Romish or the Latin Church in any Age because she in some Ages hath rejected from the Canon that Epistle to the Hebrews Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 20. which she now receives It was rejected in the Third Century by Cajus Presbyter of Rome by Tertullian in the same Century who also in his Book Cap. 20. de pudicitia insinuates that it was not received as Canonical by some other Churches Origen in his Epistle to Africanus having cited a passage from the Eleventh Chapter of this Epistle adds That it is probable some being pressed with it Pag. 232. may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 embrace the Sentence of them who reject this Epistle as
And amongst these he reckons the Seven Catholick Epistles of the Apostles Pag. 59. comprised in one Volume which he calls the Sixth Volume of the New Testament Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul comprised in the Seventh Volume and in the Eighth the Revelation of St. John of which he testisieth that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 60. shewed and judged to be his by the Ancient and holy Fathers led by the Spirit of God And then concludes Pag. 61. These are the Canonical Books of the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as it were the first fruits Anchors and supports of our Faith. St. Cyril is another who professeth to write his Catalogue from the Church and to hand down the Canonical Books as she received them from the Apostles the Ancient Bishops and Governors of the Church and he among the Canonical Books of the New Testament reckons the Seven Catholick Epistles and Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul leaving out only the Apocalypse The Council of Laodicea reckons them exactly as St. Cyril doth leaving out with him the Apocalypse not that they question its Authority but because they reckon up only the Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which ought to be read in the Churches Cyril Catech. 4. p. 38. Concil Laod. Can. 60. among which the Apocalypse was not because it is so very Mystical and accordingly the Council concludes their Canon thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Books we have received from the Fathers to be read in the Church and yet they do command that nothing should be read there but Canonical Scripture Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. Ruffinus declares he reckoned the Volumes of the New Testament as they were delivered to the Church of Christ secundum majorum Traditionem and according to the Tradition of the Ancients and then he accounts Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul Seven Catholick Epistles and the Apocalypse saying Haec sunt quae patres intra Canonem concluserunt These are the Books which the Father 's put into the Canon Can. 27. The Council of Carthage undertaking to reckon up the Canonical Books of the New Testament enumerates Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul Two of Peter Three of John One of James and One of Jude and the Apocalypse of St. John as received from the Fathers St. Jerom reckons the Canonical Books of the New Testament after the same manner only saying That the Epistle to the Hebrews was by most shut out of the number of the Epistles written by St. Paul that is some in his time conceived St. Barnabas others St. Clemens either did interpret it from the Hebrew or write it either from the Mouth or from the Notions of St. Paul but then he adds Ep. Tom. 3. f. 13. That the whole Greek Church and some of the Latins did receive it That all the Eastern Churches and all the Churches which used the Greek Tongue did Anciently own it as the Epistle of St. Paul and that he also owned both that and the Apocalypse not respecting the Custom of his present Age but following the Authority of the Ancient Writers who cited Testimonies from both not as sometimes they are wont to do from Apocryphal Books but as from Canonical Scripture And good reason had he to say 1. § 19 Lib. 3. c. 24. That he received the Apocalypse on the Authority of the Ancients when Eusebius expresly declares That a judgment might easily be passed of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Testimony of the Ancients Athanasius that it was determined Synop. p. 60. and demonstrated to be his by the Ancient and Holy Fathers led by the Spirit of God. And indeed Ep. ad C. §. 34. Dial. cum Tryph p. 308. Pag. 373 477 128 347 376 480 486 500 503. Lib. 5. c. 30. p. 485. Pag. 201. 528. Tom. 5. in Joh. Hom. 7. in Jos pag. 269 270 411 510 c. De opere Elem p. 202. de bono pat p. 219. Hist Eccl. l. 4.24 Ibid. c. 26. Lib. 5. c. 18. p. 186. Lib. 7. c. 25. it is cited in the First Century by Clemens Romanus as a Prophetical Writing In the Second Century by Justin Martyr as a Book writ by John one of Christ's Twelve Apostles By Irenaeus in the same Century as the Revelation of John the Disciple of the Lord the Revelation of St. John and he declares it was written by him pene sub nostro saeculo almost in our Age at the end of the Reign of Domitian It is mentioned in the Third Century as holy Scripture and a Prophetick Vision by Clemens of Alexandria as the Revelation of that John who lay in the bosom of our Lord by Origen it is mentioned by Tertullian as the Prophecy the Revelation the Vision of the Apostle John in above Twenty places by St. Cyprian as that Revelation in which we hear our Saviour's Voice and in which he speaks to us Eusebius informs us That Melito Bishop of Sardis writ upon the Revelation of St. John that Theophilus Bishop of Antioch owned it and cited from it many Testimonies Now both these flourished in the middle of the Second Century That Hippolitus the Disciple of Irenaeus did the same And that Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria professed That he durst not reject it by reason of the multitude of Christians who had a veneration for it and that he owned it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the work of an holy Man inspired of God. And judge now whether he had not sufficient ground to say this matter might be decided by the Testimonies of the Ancients That this Book was refused by Marcion the Heretick Contra Marcion l. 4. c. 5. Haer. 51 54. Haer. 30. we learn from Tertullian that it was rejected by the Alogians and Theodosian Hereticks we learn from Epiphanius and St. Austin and that when some Orthodox Christians began to dislike the Doctrine of the Millennium they began also to dispute some the Author of this Book ascribing it to another John Presbyter at Ephesus and others the Authority of it because they could not answer the Testimony produced from the Twentieth Chapter in favour of the Saints Reign on Earth a Thousand Years But then their Arguments against it are only taken from some vain and weak Imaginations of their own Brains as v. g. That St. John here names himself which in his Gospel and Epistles he never doth by which Argument we must reject either the Lamentations or the Book of Jeremy 2. Because he doth not use the same Expressions here as he did there that is in a Prophetick Stile as in a Doctrinal on which account Ecclesiastes and the Canticles cannot be writ by the same Author And 3. Because he writes here better Greek than elsewhere which if so may be because he writes not to the Jews but to the Asiaticks or after he had more conversed with them who spake that Language in its Purity As for those who ascribe
this Revelation to an unknown Presbyter whose Name was John rather than to that Apostle who conversed so long among these Churches they may be easily confuted from this peculiar description of that John who was the Author of this Book Rev. i. 9. he being that John who was banished into the Isle of Patmos for the Word of God Vers 2. and the Testimony of the Truth and who bare record of the Word of God and the Testimony of Jesus Christ and of all things which he saw which are peculiar to this Apostle of our Lord. 2. § 20 St. Jerom also had good reason to own the Epistle to the Hebrews to be written or at the least composed or indited by St. Paul on the Authority of the Ancient Writers Apud Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 3. Sect. 12 17 36 43. L. 3 c. 38. Catalo Script verbo Paulus Pag. 247 439. Pag. 53 362 384 514 515 645. Lib. 3. p. 143. Lib. 7. p. 351. Philocal p 10 17. Dial. contra Marc. p. 114. Ep. ad Afric p 232. Seeing as Origen informs us the ancient Christians did not rashly when they delivered it as the Epistle of St. Paul and as Eusebius saith Saint Paul's Fourteen Epistles were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 known and manifest to the whole Christian World. We find it very often cited by Clemens Romanus the Companion and co-worker of St. Paul in his Epistle to the Church of Corinth in which as Eusebius and St. Jerome Note he hath put many notions which are in that Epistle and used many Expressions word for word taken thence In the Second Century it is cited by Irenaeus as a Book written by the Spirit of God and in the close of that Century or the beginning of the next it is Six times cited by Clemens Alexandrinus under the Name of the Apostle Paul or of Divine Scripture Origen saith That the Apostle Paul writ Fourteen Epistles he cites it as the Epistle of St. Paul in his Third and Seventh Book against Celsus in his Philocalia in his Dialogue against Marcian in his Exhortation to Martyrdom in his Epistle to Africanus he undertakes to demonstrate that it was his against such as doubted of it and in his Fifth Tome upon John he declares That the things contained in it are admirable Vid. Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. and no whit inserior to those which were confessedly writ by the Apostles and that whatsoever Church received it as such was upon that account to be commended That this is the Epistle of St. Paul was in the Fourth Century denyed by the Arians because they were not able to resist the Conviction it affords in the First Chapter of our Lord's Divinity On which account Theodoret speaks thus Proem in Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They ought at least to revere the length of time in which the Children of the Church have read this Epistle in the Churches for from the time that the Churches of God have enjoyed the writings of the Apostles they have reaped the Benefit of this Epistle to the Hebrews or if this be not sufficient to perswade them they should hearken to Eusebius of whom they boast as of the Patron of their Doctrines for he confessed this was St. Paul's Epistle Proem in Ep. ad Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and he declared that all the Ancients had the same Opinion of it That they of Rome and other Latins did for a while reject this Epistle will not much weaken this Tradition if we consider 1. That this Epistle was not writ to them but to the Hebrews who as we are informed by Eusebius Embraced it with delight 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 25. That it was rejected by them not that they had any thing to say against it but because they could not answer the Arguments which the Novatian Schismaticks among them produced from the Sixth and Tenth Chapter of this Epistle against receiving lapsed Penitents into the Church whence as Philastrius informs us they rejected it Haer. 88. as thinking it was depraved by the Hereticks or 3. Because it wants his Name which he concealed saith Jerom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Catal. Script Eccl. verbo Paulus because his Name would render it less acceptable to the Hebrew Converts who were offended at his Doctrine of the Exemption of the Gentile Converts from Circumcision and the Observation of the Law saith Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Proem in Ep. ad Hebr. because he was made an Apostle not of the Circumcision but of the Gentiles 4. Because it differs in stile from the rest of his Epistles as indeed it ought to do being writ to the Hebrews accustomed to the Hellenistick Stile but of this the Ancients give this double reason That it was writ by St. Paul in Hebrew translated by others into Greek or because St. Clemens Barnabas or St. Luke did Ibid. Apud Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. sententias Pauli proprio ornare sermone write down the the Sentences of Paul in their own Words saith Jerom and gave 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Phrase and the Contexture saith Origen to to the things spoken by St. Paul. The Second and Third Epistles of Saint John § 21 and that of Jude are so short that it is needless to insist upon it that the Second Epistle of Saint John is cited by Irenaeus and Clemens Alexandrinus in the Second L. 1. c. 13. p. 94. Strom. 2. De carne Christi c. 24. Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 24. Apud Cypr. p. 242. De cultu foeminar p. 151. by Tertullian Dionysius of Alexandria and the Council of Carthage in the Third Century and the Epistle of Jude under his Name by Tertullian Concerning the Epistle of St. James the Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of St. Jude let it be noted in the general that Eusebus informs us they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 25. Petrus duabus Epistolarum suarum personat tubis Jacobus quoque Judas f. 156. know to most of the Ancients That they are all expresly owned by Origen in his Seventh Honily upon Joshua Of the Epistle of Jude in particular St. Jerom saith That though it was rejected for a while because it cited a passage from the Apocryphal Book of Enoch Catal. Script Eccl. verbo Judas tamen authoritatem vetustate jam usu meruit inter sanctas Scripturas computatur it deserved Authority from its Antiquity and constant use in the Church and is reckoned among the holy Scriptures Sect. 10 12 17 30. Sess 5. The Catholick Epistle of James is cited by Clemens Romanus four several times by Ignatius in his Genuine Epistle to the Ephesians by Origen in his Thirteenth Homily upon Genesis Lib. 3. c. 25. Lib. 2. c. 22. Eusebius saith It was known to most and publickly read in
most Christian Churches Saint Jerom that in process of time it obtained Authority Estius notes That they who before doubted of it in the Fourth Century embraced the Opinion of them who received it Praefat. in Epist Jacobi and that from thence no Church no Ecclesiastical Writer is found who ever doubted of it but on the contrary all the Catalogues of the Books of Holy Scripture published by General or Provincial Councils Roman Bishops or other Orthodox Writers number it among Canonical Scriptures quae probatio ad certam fidem faciendam cuique Catholico sufficere debet which proof must give sufficient certainty of it to any Catholick The Second Epistle of St. Peter Pag. 58. Apud Cypr. Ep. 75. p. 220. is cited by Origen against Marcian under the Name of Peter Firmilion saith That both Paul and Peter in suis Epistolis Haereticos execrati sunt ut eos evitemus monuerunt in their Epistles condemned Hereticks and admonished us to avoid them which is done by Saint Peter only in this Epistle Eusebius saith That it was commemorated by many and that they who did not reckon it Canonical yet held it very useful on which account Lib. 3. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was much studied with other Scriptures The same Eusebius informs us That his First Epistle was always owned by all Christians and thence we may have full assurance of the Truth of this Epistle for there are not saith the Reverend Doctor Hammond greater Evidences of any Epistles being written by the acknowledged Author of it than these Cap. 1. v. 1. The Title of Simon Peter an Apostle of Jesus Christ The Voice which came from Heaven saying vers 17 18. This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased we heard when we Peter and John and James were with him in the Holy Mount this second Epistle beloved I write unto you that you may be mindful of the Commandments of us the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour Cap. 3. v. 1 2. All which are certain Demonstrations That Simon Peter the Apostle of our Lord who was with him in Mount-Tabor and there heard the Voice forementioned and who writ the First Epistle to the Twelve Tribes dispersed writ this also Note Lastly That after the Fourth Century § 22 there appears not the least intimation that any of these Books were any longer doubted of by any Orthodox Professor of the Christian Faith they being all received and reckoned as Canonical by the Councils and Fathers who mentioned the Canon of the New Testament Now from these premisses there is just ground to make this Inference and Conclusion That seeing most of the Catalogues of the Fourth Century given by Councils or by Fathers and all the Catalogues of the Fifth Century unquestionably assure us that what was once controverted by some few was afterwards unanimously received by all the Church of God we are sufficiently assured of the true Canon of the Books of the New Testament The evidence now produced even of these controverted Books being sufficient both in the judgment of all Catholicks and of all Christians who on these grounds alone receive them as such to assure us that they are Canonical Scripture for by what reason can any Man evince that ought to be rejected from the Canon which always was received as Canonical by the greatest part of the Church Catholick and being accurately enquired into by those who once were Doubters found such an uncontroulled reception through the whole Church diffused as stifled through all future Ages the least appearance of a doubt Hence then the Roman § 23 Doctors may discern what it is they have to do if they do undertake to shew us such a Tradition for those Roman Doctrines we reject as hath been shew'd for the Controverted Books of the New Testament And 1. It must be owned by them that it cannot be necessary to Salvation to believe or have an absolute assurance that these are true and Apostolical Traditions and therefore Haec est fides extra quam salus esse non potest This is the Catholick Faith without which there is no Salvation must be excluded from the Roman Creed 2. It must be also owned that the pretented Traditions of the present R. Church were for some Centuries controverted and rejected by whole Churches Orthodox and Apostolical and which were as such owned and embraced by all Christians and that some of them were or at least might have been for the first Four Centuries disowned by the Church of Rome as was one of these controverted Books and consequently it must be owned that she could not then be received as Mater Magistra omnium Ecclesiarum the Mother and Mistress of all Churches 3. It must be proved that there was the same necessity that these controverted Books should be known and received from the beginning by all Christians as that the necessary Traditions and Articles of Christian Faith should be so 4. It must be proved that these Traditions were always owned and mentioned as Divine and Apostolical Traditions by many Orthodox Churches and Fathers and even when controverted were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acknowledged by most of the Church Guides To instance in the Apocalypse which Mr. M. on all occasions singles out as a Book whose Authenticalness cannot be better proved than their Traditions let him shew us any such Testimonies from the First Second and Third Centuries for the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome as we have shewed for the Apocalypse any one that saith of them as Denys of Alexandria doth of the Apocalypse That he durst not reject it by reason of the multitude of Christians who had a veneration for it let him produce the plain Testimonies of the Fathers that the Truth of these Traditions may be decided by the Testimonies of the Ancients that they owned them as Apostolical by virtue of their Testimony that the Ancient and Holy Fathers led by the Spirit of God gave Testimony to them and that they were the Traditions of holy Men inspired by God All these things have been said of the Apocalypse in the Four first Centuries and when Mr. M. can produce any thing of the like nature evidence and strength for any one of his Traditions we will own it as Divine and Apostolical Here then we see the greatest and the plainest difference betwixt the Traditions we receive and own and those pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome which we reject For 1. The Traditions we receive are Traditions handed down in writing to us throughout all Ages of the Church unto this present time the Traditions we reject are only presumptive Traditions such as the Church of Rome presumes to be so but yet they have no Footsteps in the Ancient Records of the Church of Christ which is a demonstration that they falsly do presume they are Traditions for as we could have no just reason to believe those which we own to be
of them will be the Six thousandth Year so Irenaeus His Scholar Hyppolitus in the fore-cited passage saith the same thing Vide Sixt. Senen Bibl. Sanctae l. 5. annot 190. Lib. 7. c. 25. Eustathius in his Hexaemeron and the Author of the Question and Answers passing under the Name of Justin Martyr Lactantius Hilary and Jerom are all of the same mind and hence Lactantius took the confidence to say in his time It could not be above Two hundred Years before the World would have an end St. Cyprian De Exhort Mart. p. 168. That Sex millia annorum jam fere complentur the Six thousand Years are almost compleated And St. Jerom Ep. ad Gerontium de Monogamia Tom. 1. f. 33. b. when he heard of the taking of Rome by Alaricus the Goth crys out Qui tenebat de medio fit non intelligimus Antichristum appropinquare He who hinder'd is taken out of the way and do we not consider that Antichrist is at hand And this Opinion Disert de Mart fortitud §. 21.24 as it is well noted by the Learned Mr. Dodwell they collected from the Prophetick writings and from the Phrase of the last Days so frequent in the Scripture and from those Expressions which mention our Lord's coming to destroy Jerusalem as at hand And yet we have already lived long enough to see the falseness of this Doctrine and so to be convinced that in these matters the Church Guides were not Infallible Interpreters of Scripture nor Aâ—thentick derivers of Tradition down to future Ages And which is in this matter more observable 2 Thes ij 6. the Apostle plainly had foretold them what it was that hindered this appearance of the Man of Sin and yet 't is manifest that they retained not what he told them Nor hath the Church of future Ages been able to inform us nor can our pretenders to Infallibility tell us with any certainty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 V. 6. what was the hindrance which St. Paul there meant and his Thessalonians then knew for that they did know it we are sure because it is written But what it was none of them knew because it was unwriten The Church that infallible Oracle and excellent keeper of Tradition hath lost this and many more Traditions that is discourses of our Lord and his Apostles by word of mouth because they were not written And therefore blessed be the goodness of that God who seeing what an unfaithful keeper of Traditions the Church was took order that what his wisdom saw necessary for us to know and practise should be written 2. Dist 7 In matters of Practice we distinguish betwixt such practices as have been generally received and owned without contest from the first and purest Ages of the Church as the Observation of the Lord's Day the Ordination of Presbyters by Bishops and such as have been matter of long contest and in which the Tradition pleaded by some hath been as evidently disowned by others as good Members of the Church as they and that we have no sufficient Reason to depend much on such pretences to Tradition will appear from the dispute betwixt Pope Victor and the Asiatick Bishops about the observation of the Easter Festival of which let it be Noted First § 9 That Pope Victor and the R. Church kept the Easter Festival on the Lord's Day only whereas the Asiaticks and some few Churches with them did celebrate that Festival on the Fourteenth Day of March on whatsoever Day of the Week that happend whence sometimes it fell out that some Christians were Feasting and rejoicing when others were observing their Lent Fast For this cause Synods met in divers places and particularly a R. Synod which decreed with Victor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That all with one consent should keep the Easter Festival on the Lord's Day And consonant to this was the Practice and Judgment of many other Churches for that this Festival should be by them observed on the same day was determined by St. Irenaeus who presided in France by Theophilus Bishop of Caesarea by Narcissus Bishop of Jerusalâ—m and the Priests subject to them by the Bishops of Pontus in a Synod where Palma presided and by the Churches of the Province of Osdroena And the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 23. saith Eusebius was the Eunanimous determination of most other Bishops and Churches of the Christian World. And though the Asiatick Churches kept this Feast upon the Fourteenth Day of March yet was the contrary practice observed saith the same Eusebus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the whole World beside So that 't is evident the much major part of the Church concurred in practice with the Pope and judged it reasonable and expedient to observe this Festival upon the Lord's Day only And of this their determination they sent Letters to all the Churches round about and consequently to all the Asiatick Churches Secondly Observe That according to Eusebius § 10 they who kept this Feast upon the Lord's Day did it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from a Tradition Apostolical Eccl. Hist l. 5. c. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. c. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 5. c. 17. p. 258. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the Bishops of Palestine spake much of the Tradition touching the Paschal Feast descending down unto them by succession from the Apostles The Constitutions stiled Apostolical command all Christians to take especial care that they observe the Paschal Feast only on the Lord's Day and forbid them to celebrate it any longer with the Jews And the Fifth and Sixty second of those Canons which pass under the same stile forbid all Bishops Priests or Deacons under the penalty of deposition to celebrate the Paschal Feast before the vernal Equinox or to Feast with the Jews Thirdly Observe That notwithstanding these Assertions § 11 the Evidence that they who did observe this Festival when the Jews celebrated their Paschal Feast followed the Practice and Tradition of the Apostles seems more strong and cogent For even Eusebius confesseth that they who celebrated this Festival with the Jews Lib. 5. cap. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. told the very names of the Apostles from whom they received this Tradition and of their Successors who handed down this practice to them declaring that it was thus celebrated before them by Philip and John the Apostles of our Lord by Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna Thraseas Bishop of Eumenia by Papirius Melito and Sagaris and by seven Bishops Predecessors to Polycrates who all observed it as they did All these who in the first or second Centuries did very laudably perform the office of a Bishop and who had many of them extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kept the Paschal Feast saith Polycrates upon the Fourteenth Day according to the Gospel in nothing varying from what they had received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
the God of Israel was an evil God and not the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and they denied the truth of our Saviour's Manhood and the Resurrection of the Flesh Secondly Observe That the Opinion of St. Cyprian and those who in Africa and elsewhere adhered to him Dicimus omnes omnino Haereticos Schismaticos c. Ep. 69. p. 180. was this That all Persons who only were Baptized by Hereticks were to be admitted into the Church by Baptism St Cyprian Bishop of Carthage thought Hist Eccl. lib. 7. cap. 3. Apud Cypr. Ep. 75. pag. 221. Omnes Schismaticos Haereticos qui ad Ecclesiam conversi sunt Baptizari Apud Cypr. p. 231. saith Eusebius that being first purged from their Error they ought to be admitted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no otherwise than by Baptism Not only the Cataphrygae saith Firmilian but caeteri quique Haeretici all other Hereticks whatsoever are deprived of the Power of Baptism In the Council of Carthage consisting of Eighty five Bishops assembled out of Africa Numidia and Mauritania Novatus a Thamugade defines according to the Testimony of the Scriptures and the Decree of our Collegs of Blessed Memory That all Schismaticks and Hereticks who are converted to the Church should be Baptized Januarius a Lambese saith According to the Authority of the Holy Scriptures I decree Haereticos omnes Baptizandos that all Hereticks shall be Baptized and so admitted into the Church Repudiandum esse omne omnino Baptisma quod sit extra Ecclesiam constitutum Firm. apud Cypr. Ep. 75. pag. 226. The Council of Iconium decreed That all Baptism was to be rejected that was celebrated out of the Church That of Synnada That no Baptism was to be found amongst Hereticks which were out of the Church Apud Haereticos nullum Baptisma reperiri and that therefore returning to the Church they ought to be Baptized in it Thirdly Observe That Pope Stephen § 17 in prosecution of this Quarrel or Dispute proceeded to a Separation of himself from and a refusal of Communion with his Brethren both in the Southern and the Eastern Churches who declared for the Baptism of Hereticks returning to the Bosom of the Church Pope Stephen saith Dionysius to Pope Xystus writ to me Apud Eusebium Hist Eccl. l. 7. c. 5. as you do and for the same Cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as one who would not communicate with Helin Firmilian or any of the Bishops of Cilicia Cappadocia Galatia or of the Neighbouring Regions because they Rebaptized Hereticks In many other Provinces saith Firmilian many things do vary Rumpens adversus vos pacem Ep. 75. apud Cypr. p. 228. but yet for these things they do not depart from the Peace and Vnity which yet Pope Stephen hath been bold to do breaking that Peace which all his Ancestors have preserved with you in mutual Love and Honour And turning his Discourse to him he speaks thus How great Sin hast thou heaped upon thy self quando te à tot gregibus scidisti by cutting off thy self from so many Flocks Siquidem ille est vere Schismaticus qui sea Communione Ecclesiasticae unitatis Apostatum fecerit Ibid. Sacerdotes Dei abstinendos putat Deceive not thy self for thou hast cut thy self off from them he being indeed the Schismatick who makes himself an Apostate from the Communion of Ecclesiastical Vnity and whilst thou thinkest thy self able to separate all from thee thou only hast separated thy self from all St. Cyprian saith Ep. 74. Pag. 214. That he had passed his Judgment for the Excommunication of the Priests of God who kept the Truth of Christ and the Unity of the Church St. Austin also doth affirm Stephanus non solum non rebaptizabat Haereticos verum etiam hoc facientes Excommunicandos fore decernebat Libr. de Baptismo contra Petil. cap. 14. pag. 504. That Pope Stephen judged they should be Excommunicated who endeavoured to pull down the Ancient Custom of receiving Hereticks without Baptism Fourthly Observe That after the Death of Stephen Pope Xystus his immediate Successor asserted the same Doctrine and was as vehement as he for the Exclusion of all those from Church Communion who did oppose it For Xystus with Philemon and Dionysius two Roman Presbyters wrote Letters to Dionysius of Alexandria declaring That they would not communicate with them who held that Hereticks were to be admitted into the Church by Baptism Apud Euseb Ibid. This will appear from the Letter of Dionysius to Pope Xystus where having told him that his Predecessor Pope Stephen had written to him that he would not Communicate with them for this very reason he adds That he had written formerly both to Philemon and Dionysius of Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb H. Eccl. l. 7. c. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who were before of the same judgment with Pope Stephen as they were now of the same mind with Xystus and who writ to him about the same things Whence it is evident that Xystus the succeeding Pope Philemon and Dionysius Presbyters of Rome persisted in this Resolution not to Communicate with those who held That Hereticks were to be received into the Church by Baptism and seeing Dionysius who was of the same judgment succeeded Xystus it follows that three Succeeding Popes had then defined that Article Fifthly § 18 Observe That the Opinion and Practice of the Africans and many Eastern Churches was asserted by very many Christian Doctors Churches and Councils It was the Opinion of Tertullian Sine dubio non habent De Baptism c. 15. Apud nos Haereticus etiam per Baptisma veritatis utroque homine purgatus admittitur De pudicitia Cap. 19. that Hereticks had no Baptism and this saith he is without doubt It was the Doctrine of Agrippinus and of St. Cyprian in the same Century In Aegypt it was the Doctrine of Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria In Asia of Firmilian Bishop of Caesarea In Cilicia of Helen Bishop of Tarsis In the Fourth Century it was the Doctrine of Optatus Lib. 4 5. who frequently asserts Apud ipsos non esse Sacramenta That the Hereticks had no Sacraments Orat. 3. Contr. Arian p. 413. Of Athanasius who declares the Arians Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wholly vain and unprofitable That the Baptism given by them was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alien from the Truth though they used the name of the Father and the Son because they found them written Ibid. 13. for not he who simply calls him Lord gives true Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but he who with the names holds the true Faith. Hence our Saviour gave not commission to Baptize any how but first to Teach that by teaching aright Faith might be obtained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. and with Faith might be added the Consecration of Baptism and of other Hereticks he faith
from the Deifying Scriptures from Evangelical Authority and Apostolical Tradition that they decreed for it according to the Testimony Authority and Commands of the Holy and Divine Scriptures Ninthly Observe That these Africans and Orientals differed from their Brethren without condemning or censuring of them or breaking of the Peace or Unity of the Church on this account or separating from Communion with those Christian Bishops who thought fit to do otherwise We saith St. * Propter Haereticos cum Collegis Coepiscopis nostris non contendimus cum quibus divinam concordiam dominicam pacem tenemus Ep. 73. p. 210. Cyprian as much as in us lies do not contend with our Colleages and Fellow Bishops about Hereticks we hold a sacred Concord and the Lord's Peace with them Qua in re nec nos vim cuiquam facimus nec legem damus Ep. 72. p. 198. we prescribe to no Body we prejudge no Man but leave every Bishop to the Liberty of his Will to do what he thinks best in this matter we force no Man Ep. 69. p. 188. we give Law to no Man. The Preface of the Council of Carthage assembled under Cyprian runs thus It remains that every one of us speak his judgment in this Matter judging no Man nor a jure communionis aliquem Apud Cypr. p. 229. si diversum senserit amoventes separating any Man from our Communion who thinketh otherwise St. Basil excellently declares himself in the matter of the Cathari that because there were different Opinions in the Church concerning the validity of their Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 1. the custom of every Region was to be followed And of the Encratites he saith that it was his Opinion that they ought to be Baptized but then he adds That if this would be any impediment to the Order of the Church in that Matter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb H. Eccl. l. 7. c. 5. the Custom which had obtained any where was to be observed This excellent Temper then prevailed in all the Churches of God for Dionysius of Alexandria in his Epistle to Pope Stephen saith That all the Churches notwithstanding this difference were at Peace and Concord and thence entreats him to consider the weight of the Affair he had begun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by refusing to Communicate with them who admitted Hereticks into the Church by Baptism praying him to disist from it and telling him that for his part he durst not provoke so many Churches Ibid. c. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to strife and contention by subverting their Decrees The Council of Carthage Apud Cypr. p. 229. Neque enim quisquam nostrum Episcopum se Episcoporum constituit aut Tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem collegas suos adigit Ibid. in reference to this Action of Pope Stephen speaks thus We pass our Sentence in this matter judging no Man or separating no Man from our Communion who thinks otherwise for none of us makes himself a Bishop of Bishops nor endeavours by tyrannical Terror to compel his Colleages to a necessity of Obedience Ep. 74. p. 210 214. St. Cyprian accuses him of Pride or Vnadvisedness and acting as a Friend of Hereticks and an Enemy of Christians for thinking it fit to Excommunicate God's Priests on this account Firmilian declares That he acted inhumanely Per illius inhumanitatem effectum est c. Apud Cypr. Ep. 75. pag. 225. Cum tot Episcopis per totum mundum diffensisse pacem cum singulis vario discordiae genere rumpentem modo cum orientalibus modo vobiscum qui in meridie Ep. 75. p. 228. by being at Dissention with so many Bishops throughout the World and breaking the Peace with every one of them by various kinds of Discord with those of the East by pronouncing them Excommunicate and with those of the South by not vouchsasing to speak with the Bishops sent to him nor permitting others to receive them into their Houses and by dividing the Fraternity for the sake of Heretieks which various kind of Discord had Valesius well observed he would not against so great evidence have denied that Stephen did as much as in him lay separate or in the Language of the Council of Carthage amovere a jure communionis expel from right of Communion those who differed from him it being hence evident that he Excommunicated the one and vouchsafed not to speak with the other Tenthly § 21 Whereas the Roman Doctors usually say that Stephen's traditum est prevailed against the opposite Opinion of the Eastern and the Southern Churches and that the case was after by the Church determined for Pope Stephen against Cyprian this is a great mistake for neither the Opinion of P. Stephen nor of St. Cyprian prevailed but they were both rejected by the Church of Christ and that which was the mean betwixt them was embraced For 1. Whereas Pope Stephen with his Church determined That no Hereticks should be Baptized from whatsoever Heresie they came into the Bosom of the Church or Contra Petil. de unico Baptismo c. 14. as St. Austin saith Baptismum Christi in nullo iterandum esse censebat He held that the Baptism of Christ was to be repeated on no Heretick whatsoever The Ninteenth Canon of the Nicene Council saith That if the Paulianists do fly into the Bosom of the Church we will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they by all means be Baptized again The Council of Laodicea commandeth Bishops and Presbyters to Baptize Can. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 them who returned from the Heresie of the Cataphrygae or the Montanists Can. 7. The General Council of Constantinople speaks thus Them who come to us from Hereticks we admit after this manner the Arians Macedonians Sabbatians Novatians Quartodecimans the Cathari and Apollinarians without Baptism but the Eunomians the Montanists Sabellians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all other Hereticks we receive as Gentiles we Catechise them and for a long time make them hear the Scripture Can. 95. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and then we Baptize them The General Council in Trullo repeats the same Decree in the same words and then adds That we admit by Baptism likewise the Manichees Valentinians and Marcionites and other Hereticks of like nature Ad Amphil. Can. 47. St. Basil determines That the Encratitae the Saccaphori and the Apotactites were to be rebaptized Now all these Canons are approved by the following Synods Can. 1. that of the Second Nicene Council and the Eighth Council of Constantinople and so we cannot doubt but that they both believed and practised accordingly Since then we are assured from so many Testimonies that Pope Stephen would have all Hereticks whatsoever admitted at their return into the Church without Baptism and in particular from the Testimony of St. Ep. 74. p. 214. that he admitted of the Baptism of Marcion Valentinus and Apelles it
the Roman Church were in this case opposite to Scripture and the plainest Reason And as St. Basil doth to Amphilochius in the same case Can. 47. Eos qui Romae sunt non ea in omnibus observare quae sunt ab origine tradita Ep. 75. p. 220. Though you and the Romans hold the contrary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet ought our Sentence to take place And as Firmilian expresly doth That 't is usual with them of Rome to vary from Apostolical Tradition Could so many Fathers so many Churches so many Councils have not only practised in opposition to the Doctrines and Customs of that Church but also have condemned them in such opprobrious Terms as they have done Cyp. Ep. 69. p. 185. Ep. 73. p. 206 208 210. Ep. 74. p 212 c. pronouncing the Assertors of them Prevaricators in matters both of Faith and Truth Betrayers of the Church Enemies to Christians Friends and Abettors of Hereticks Men who did plead their Cause and partake with them in their Sins Men who did null evacuate destroy the Baptism of the Church and give up the Spouse of Christ to Adulterers Fifthly § 25 Hence it is manifest That in that Age they verily believed that what had passed for Apostolical Tradition in the Church of Rome and her Adherents might be no such matter that both that Church and her Abettors might impose upon their fellow Christians in pretending to it and that there lay no Obligation on other Churches to comply with them in such matters as they delivered for Apostolical Tradition For otherwise how could it happen that so many populous Churches so many Councils so many famous Bishops that Athanasius Optatus St. Basil Cyril of Jerusalem all great Assertors of true Apostolical Tradition should declare so plainly and expresly against this practice of the Church of Rome that Firmilian should declare Neminem tam stultum esse qui hoc credat Apostolos tradidisse Ep. 75. p. 219. Nemo infamare Apostolos debeat quasi illi Haereticorum Baptisinata probaverint Ep. 74. p. 211. No Man could be so Foolish as to believe the Apostles had delivered any such thing that St. Cyprian should say That this pretence of Romanists was manifestly false and tended to blaspheme the Reputation of the Blessed Apostles that the Africans should not only reject this pretended Apostolical Tradition in the opprobrious Terms forementioned but should declare so oft in Council that the contrary Doctrine descended from Evangelical Authority and Apostolical Tradition Vid. Supra and was confirmed by the Divine Law and the Holy Scriptures How lastly could it happen that all the other Churches excepting that of Rome were all at Peace and still maintained Communion with these Opposers and Traducers of this pretended Tradition and did not blame them in the least on this account but rather interceded with the Roman Bishop to lay aside his Fury and entertain Communion and Friendship with these Churches as they did Sixthly Hence it appears that in that Age they thought not Custom or Tradition though practised by the Church of Rome and by the major part of Christians any certain Rule of Manners but thought themselves obliged sometimes to vary from it and that they might have Truth and Reason and Scripture on their sides against it that it concerned them to examine then whether the Custom they were required to follow had its rise from Christ and his Apostles and could be proved from their Writings and if not to reject it For in this matter they declare Non esse consuetudine praescribendum Cypr. Ep. 71. p. 194. sed ratione vincendum Their Adversaries were not to prescribe to them from Custom but to convince them by reason St. Paul having taught every one not to adhere pertinaciously to what he had once imbibed Pag. 195. but willingly to embrace any thing which he found better or more profitable That 't was in vain when Men were overcome by reason Ep. 73. p. 203. to oppose Custom to it as if Custom were better than Truth and that were not rather to be followed which was revealed for the better by the Holy Spirit that Non semper errandum Ibid. p. 208. quia aliquando erratum est We must not always erre because we once have done so Ep. 74. p. 215. that Custom without Truth was only old Error and vainly was preferred before it that the Truth being manifested Concil Carth. apud Cypr. p. 236 240 241. Custom was to yield to it that no Man ought to preferr Custom to Reason and Truth that Christ being Truth we ought rather to follow that than Custom that it was obstinacy and presumption Cypr. Ep. 74. p. 212. humanam traditionem divinae dispositioni anteponere to preferr humane Tradition to divine Orders and not to consider that God is angry when humane Tradition evacuates divine Precepts that when it was said to them let nothing be innovated Ibid. p. 211. but that which was delivered be observed it was to be enquired unde est ista traditio whence is that Tradition Whether from the Authority of Christ and the Gospel the commands and Epistles of the Apostles and if in Evangelio praecipitur Ib. p. 215. aut in Apostolorum Epistolis aut Actubus continetur it were commanded in the Gospel or contained in the Acts or Epistles of the Apostles then was it to be observed and that when Truth shook and staggered we were to have recourse to the Head and Original of Divine Tradition ad originem dominicam Evangelicam Apostolicam Traditionem to the Gospel and Apostolical Tradition Lastly Hence it is evident § 26 That in those early times Tradition Apostolical and from the beginning must falsly be pretended by Great Men and Churches even in a matter of continual practice and occurrence in the Church of God for here you see it was pretended for the Admission of Hereticks without Baptism by Pope Stephen and his Church and the fame Tradition Apostolical and from the beginning was pretended for the opposite Doctrine by Firmilian and St. Basil and their Party and yet the Church did in the following Ages declare against the Pretences of them both If then in these plain matters of Fact and of continual practice Tradition did so fail both the Pretenders to it must it not be more apt to fail in matters of meer Speculation If by Tradition these Churches could not truly tell what their Forefathers did how should they by it tell assuredly in all things what they held since that could only be made known unto them by their Words and Actions if actually they handed down unto posterity for a traditionary Practice that which was not truly so why might they not also hand that down to them as a traditionary Doctrine which was nothing less than so CHAP. V. Eightly We distinguish also betwixt Traditions which appear from Reason to be such as ought to be received and
was done 2. We shall be more convinced that this was not performed by Conspiracy or by a joint consent of Christians to make so great an alteration in that form of Government which the Apostles had established if we consider 1. The general agreement of all Churches in this matter since not one single Church or Corner of the world can be produced in which this Government did not obtain For how can we imagine that in a time when no General Council could meet to appoint it and when there was no Christian Prince to set it forward on a political Account and when by reason of the heat of Persecution and the distance of Christian Churches there was so little commerce and intercourse between them from the Churches of Armenia and Persia in the East to those of Spain in the West from the African Churches in the South to our British Churches in the North this constitution should have been universally received and submitted to if it had not been established by the Apostles or the first Founders of those Churches 2. If we consider how much it did concern all Christians that such an Innovation should not obtain among them and tamely be submitted to For all the people were obliged to know the Governors to whom they were by Scripture commanded to submit and so they could not yield to this supposed Innovation without the greatest danger to their Souls The Presbyters if they had by the Apostles been advanced to the highest Power would not so meekly have submitted to an Authority usurped over them but either out of a just Zeal for asserting their Freedom or out of Indignation at the insolence of the usurping Bishops or out of an unwillingness to submit and obey which is natural to most Men they would have asserted their Equality 3. This will be farther evident if we consider that even the persons thus exalted could have then no motive or temptation to accept of this advancement for Men do not usually desire a change but upon prospect of some ease or temporal Advantage much less when they perceive the Change is only like to add to their trouble and encrease their danger now this was really the case of the first Christian Bishops they being still exposed to the sharpest fury of their Persecutors and commonly begun with first in any storm that was raised against the Church their Labours also were very great for the care of the Flock lay on them and they were unwearied in the discharge of their Pastoral Care can we then reasonably think that they should be so fond of so much toil and peril as to violate the Institution of the Blessed Jesus or his Apostles to obtain it Let any reasonable Person duly weigh these things and ask his Conscience whether it can be really perswaded that such an early Innovation could generally have prevailed in the Church of God. Such also is the Evidence that we pretended to § 8 touching the Canon of Scripture and that those Books have not been so corrupted or depraved as not to be sufficient Rules of Christian Faith or Manners Concerning this matter let it be considered First That we have the true Canon of the Old Testament and that the Books of the Old Testament are not corrupted we cannot know from the Infallibility of the Jewish Church or her Traditions for when she handed down these Scriptures to the Christians as the pure word of their inspired Prophets she was not Infallible but actually had renounced her true Messiah and judged him an Impostor and had embraced such false Traditions as did engage her so to do So that if Chap. 14. p. 29. according to the Author of Popery Misrepresented As the Jews received the Books of the Old Testament from the Jewish Church and the Christians also so also were they to receive from her the sence of them the Jews if not the Christians also were obliged to reject our Saviour as an Impostor and one who taught and acted contrary to their Law and their Traditions Secondly § 9 That the Books of the New Testament are not corrupted or forged we cannot know from the Infallibility of the Christian Church The Reason is because the Infallibility of the Church is so far from being a proof of Scriptures incorruption that no proof can be pretended for it but uncorrupted places of Scripture For if any man should attempt to prove the Scriptures uncorrupted because that Church says so which is Infallible I would demand of him seeing the Infallibility of the Church is not self-evident and seeing Infallibility is a Prerogative which no Man can pretend to but from God's Assistance and therefore no Man can be sure of that Assistance but from God's free Promise how shall I be assured of her Infallibility If he say from Scripture promising it unto her I would ask how shall I be assured that the Scriptures are not corrupted in those places and if to this it be answered From the Church's Infallibility is it not evident that he runs in a Circle proving the Scripture's incorruption by the Church's Infallibility and the Church's Infallibility by the Scripture's incorruption Moreover this is further evident from the Tradition Practice and Acknowledgment of the whole Church of Christ for to inform us in any controverted Text which is the Reading to be owned as true her Doctors never have sent us to Oral Tradition or the infallible Assistance of the Church but always to the readings of former Ancient Authors and to the Inspection of ancient Manuscripts and Versions and have declared what in it self is manifest and owned by all that ever treated on this Subject That there is no other way whereby we can attain to any knowledge or assurance in this matter Thus Sixtus Quintus in his Preface to his Bible In hac Germani Textus pervestigatione satis perspicue inter omnes constat nullum esse certius ac firmius Argumentum quam Antiquorum probatorum codicum Latinorum fidem tells us That in Pervestigation of the true and genuine Text it was perspicuous to all Men that there was no Argument more firm and certain than the Faith of ancient Latin Books Let any Man peruse all Commentators Ancient and Modern of what Perswasion soever and he will be convinced of their unanimous concurrence in this Assertion Thus St. Austin tells us That the Latins have need of Two other Tongues for obtaining the knowledge of the Divine Scriptures viz. De Doctr. Christ l. 2. c. 11. de Civ Dei l. 15. c. 13. the Hebrew and the Greek Ut ad exemplaria praecedentia recurratur si quam dubitationem attulerit Latinorum Interpretum infinita varietas That if any doubt should arise from the great variety of Latin Versions they might recurr to the Greek or Hebrew Originals That the Latin Versions of the Old Testament where it is necessary Chap. 14 15. Graecorum Authoritate emendandi sunt are to be corrected by the Authority of
either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Great Lord's day or the Paschal Lord's day and being constantly in those first Ages distinguished from and in their enumeration of their Festivals opposed to the Lord's day Moreover the Easter Feast seemeth not to have been so Ancient as the Apostles Vision for then it would have been observed uniformly as the Lord 's day was whereas the Eastern and the Western Churches differed much about it and that very difference demonstrates that the Lord 's day was the more ancient because the Question was Whether the Eastern Festival should be kept on the Lord's day only or on the day of the Full-Moon as by the Jews it was on what day of the Week soever that did happen And whereas Mr. M. asks P. 207. How prove you that it was not Christmas or Ascention day I Answer 1st That we have no Evidence from Antiquity that either of these Festivals were then observed much less that they were then known to the Christian World under that Appellation 2dly The common Consent of all Interpreters and the perpetual Practice of the Church in all Ages from Saint John to Ignatius his Scholar and so downwards to this day do give the name of the Lord's day to Sunday and to no other Festival of the Church Weekly or Annual sufficiently instructs us what Saint John understood by the Lord's day 3dly Observe That whatsoever in the Scripture hath the Lord's Name and Subscription on it as the Lord's Temple the Lord's Offerings the Lord's People the Lord's Priests was consecrated to the Service of Jehovah the Lord of the Old Creation wherefore the day which had so early the Name and Superscription of the Lord Christ upon it must be supposed to be Holy to the Lord of the New Creation and consecrated to his Service For as the Jewish Sabbath being called the Lord 's Sabbath or the Sabbath of Jehovah was by that Title known to be a day Sanctified to Jehovah as Creator so this day being called the Lord 's day is by this Note as certainly known to be a day consecrated to the Service of the Lord Christ And as the Lord 's Supper is stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Supper of the Lord the Sacramental Table 1 Cor. xi 20. x. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Table of the Lord the Sacramental Wine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Cup of the Lord either because the Sacrament was instituted immediately by the Lord Christ to be observed to his Second Coming Or Secondly Because it was appointed for the remembrance of the Lord 's Death and Passion till that time even so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord's day must be so called for one of these two Reasons or for both viz. Because it was enjoined by Christ or by Directions given to his Apostles to command the Observation of it as a Day to be devoted to the Service of our Lord Christ or because it was by the Apostles so observed in memory of our Lords Resurrection and was from them received as a day to be observed for all future Generations of the Church And that this day was certainly observed by the Apostles and by the Christians who lived in their daies in Honour of our Lord is evident from what hath been already proved For if it were then known to Christians by the Name of the Lord's day and if so be the Lord's day must import a day that is consecrated to the Service of the Lord 't is clear that they must then observe it as such or act against the knowledge of their Duty if when Saint John received this Vision it were known to be a day devoted to the Service of the Lord Christ it must be known to be thus consecrated to his Service by some who had Authority sufficient so to do that is at least by those Apostles and Rulers to whom Christ had committed the Guidance of his Church and the determination of that outward Worship he required from his Disciples What they thus consecrated to his Service must be devoted either by virtue of their positive Institution or by their practice only if by virtue of their Institution then is it granted that this day is of Divine and Apostolical Institution if by their Practice only yet is it granted that this day was constantly observed by those Apostles who were assisted in their Actions by the Holy Ghost that 't was by their Example commended to the practice of all Christians and therefore be alone can alter this Apostolical Tradition who better knows the mind of Christ than they did and is more able to discern what Service is well pleasing to him than they were Secondly § 2 This Practice will sufficiently appear from other Scriptures which either presuppose or else directly shew this was a day observed in the Apostles time Saint Paul in his Epistle to the Church of Corinth writeth thus Now concerning the Collection for the Saints as I have ordained for the Churches of Galatia 1 Cor. xvi 1 2. so do ye 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the first day of the week let every man lay by him in store as God hath prospered him that there be no gathering when I come Where observe First That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth certainly signifie the first day of the Week the day of our Lord's Resurrection from the dead for the Four Evangelists do with one Voice averr That our Lord Jesus did arise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first day of the week Matth. 28.1 Mark 16.2 Luke 24.1 John 20.1 Nor can this reasonably be doubted by any who believe the Scriptures Moreover Saint Mark doth clearly so interpret the Phrase for the Sabbath being over saith he Mary Magdalene and others came 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 early the first day of the week and found Christ risen and v. 9. he adds That Christ was risen early 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is by the consent of all Interpreters upon the first day of the week Saint Luke observes Luke 23.56 That they rested on the Sabbath day according to the Commandment and then adds That they came unto the Sepulchre 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on the first day of the week Secondly This may be Argued from the succeeding Practice of the Church which in compliance with this Precept still offer'd their Alms upon this Day for Justin M. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apol 2. p. 98 99. who flourished in the next Age to the Apostles tells the Heathen Emperor in his Apology That 't was the Custom of Christians to meet on the Lord's day to Pray to hear the Word to receive the Sacrament and then saith he they who are rich and willing give what they think fit and what is thus collected is laid up in the hands of the President who distributes it to Orphans and Widows and other Christians Locuples dives es dominicum observare te credis qui
de Resurrect Tom. 2 p. 277. Ambros Ep. 83. Psalm 118.24 the Fathers generally apply that Passage of the Psalmist This is the Day which the Lord hath made let us be glad and rejoice in it to the Lord's day as made or Instituted by the Lord and Consecrated or Sanctified by his Resurrection Others of them say That the Observation of the Lord's Day was an Apostolical Tradition and that they kept it as an Holy Day Hesuch in Levit c. 9. Leo. Ep. 11. Ed. Quesnel p. 436. Apostolorum sequentes traditionem following the Tradition of the Apostles The Apostles and Apostolical Men having decreed Dominicum diem religiosâ solennitate habendum That the Lord's day was Religiously to be celebrated And surely it is enough to satisfie all Conscientious Christians in the Observation of this Day that it was consecrated to the Service of our Lord either by Christ himself or his Apostles and as such hath been celebrated ever since by the perpetual practice of the whole Church Catholick especially if we consider what excellent Names these ancient Observers of it have ascribed unto it and what great Dignities they have put upon it calling it the Queen of Days the Princess and the Principal of Days a Royal Day higher than the highest the first Fruits of the Days whereas had they conceived it only an humane Ordinance it could not have deserved these Titles above other Daies ordained by the Church In fine how dangerous it is to say That the publick Exercise of Christian Religion should depend upon so weak a Foundation as humane Authority which may alter its own Constitutions and is subject to manifold Errors I leave to the prudent and judicious Reader to consider Let then the Romanists shew three Texts of Scripture expounded constantly in that sence by the whole Church § 6 which confirms any of their Doctrines let them shew us the Names of any of those Practices of theirs which we condemn in Scripture and the Fathers of the first Centuries let them give clear evidence from their Writings that such Practices were received in the Apostles daies throughout the Christian World no Church no Christian Writer ever excepting against them or mentioning them as newly introduced Customs let them shew us plain Expressions from them declaring that they were instituted either by Christ or his Apostles and that they practised them Illorum sequentes traditionem in compliance with their Tradition and then we shall no longer question or condemn them Having thus Answered Mr. M ' s. Argument against the sufficiency of the Scripture from this Head I retort it thus That is necessary to be done to Salvation § 7 which left undone Pag. 204. causeth Damnation but the observation of the Sunday commanding the abstaining from all servile Works if neglected or left undone brings Damnation therefore to observe in this manner the Sunday is a thing necessary to Salvation and yet this point is so far from being clearly put down in Tradition that standing meerly to the sole judgment of it we can clearly shew more Declarations for the lawfulness of working on the Sunday than for the unlawfulness thereof The Canon of the Council of Laodicea only saith Can. 29. That Christians shall rest on the Lord's Day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if they can well knowing that it was not possible for many of them so to do some of them being Servants to Pagan Masters some condemned to labour in the Mines and toil in Gallies when their Lords required them and yet we find not in all Ecclesiastical History those Christians ever then refused to labour upon this account and therefore Balsamon upon this Canon saith That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they did not enjoin this as a thing necessary but added If they could let them do it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for if any one work on the Lord's day out of Poverty or any other necessity he will not be condemned And Zonaras on the same Canon adds That the Civil Law commands all without excuse to rest upon the Lord's day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 excepting Husbandmen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it permits them to work on the Lord's day provided that they find no other day so fit foâ— their work That which he saith touching the Civil Law Cod. Just l. 2. Cod. de feriis is evident from that Law of Constantine where commanding all men to rest on the Lord's day he excepts Rural Labours in which delay may be very prejudicial to them Enchirid Tit. 4. which Law Hermenopulus gives us thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 On the Lord's day and other Festivals let the Judges and others rest excepting only Husbandmen and none of the Fathers of the Church living in those daies or in the following Centuries reproved these Laws or spake any thing to signifie that they esteemed them Prophane Epitaph Paulae ad Eustoch f. 64. On the contrary Saint Jerom tells us That Paula with all the Virgins and Widows that lived at Bethlehem in a Cloyster with her repaired to the Church on the Lord's Day Aâ—que inde pariter revertentes instabant operi distributo and returning thence they all fell to their work and made Clothes for themselves or others And lastly § 8 let it be observed that though I verily believe this day to be of Divine Institution and jure positivo to be observed yet am I far from thinking that it is necessary to Salvation so to do and much less to abstain wholly from working that day or that if any Church should rather think it fit to keep another day in Honour of our Lord or that if any Christians should think as some of the Ancient Fathers seem to have done that under the Gospel Dispensation there was no difference of daies but that the Christian should observe every day as a Spiritual Sabbath they should be damned or even Unchurched for that Opinion And therefore this is like unto most other Instances urged by Mr. M. impertinent and such as reacheth not unto the Question viz. Whether the Scripture be deficient in any thing that 's necessary to be believed or practised to Salvation To proceed to the Second Question touching our Freedom from any Obligation to observe the Sabbath injoined in the Fourth Commandment I say that though Tradition seems not sufficiently to do it Scripture affords sufficient Evidence that the Observation of the Seventh day from the Creation was only a ceremonial Precept and therefore not obliging to the Christian that is the Observation of the Seventh day from the Creation as a day wholly to be set apart for rest from bodily Labour according to the Fourth Commandment was not enjoined by a Moral Law or by a Law commanding what is naturally good antecedently to the Command of the Lawgiver or which can be resolved into any Principle or Dictates of the Law of Nature imprinted in Mens Hearts at the Creation but that it was a Law which only
Truth of Faith is sufficiently explained In the same Article our Church having reckoned up the Books of the Old Testament which she esteemed Canonical Art. 6. and which by both Churches are recieved as such she adds the other Books as Hierom saith The Church doth read for Example of Life and Instruction of Manners but yet doth not apply them to establish any Doctrine Such are these following The Third Book of Esdras The Fourth Book of Esdras The Book of Tobias The Book of Judith The rest of the Book of Esther The Book of Wisdom Jesus the Son of Syrach Baruch the Prophet The Song of the Three Children The Story of Susanna Of Bell and the Dragon The Prayer of Manasses The First Book of Maccabees The Second Book of Maccabees Of all which excepting only the Third and Fourth Books of Esdras and the Prayer of Manasses the Council of Trent saith Whosoever shall not receive them as Sacred and Canonical Sess 4. let him be Anathema And yet this Determination is so apparently repugnant to the Doctrine of the Ancient Church that Mr. Du Pin a Doctor of the Faculty of Divinity in Paris and his Majesty's Professor Royal in Philosophy hath entirely given up this Cause unto the Protestants For 1. Whereas it is confessed by all the Learned of both Churches that we in this distinction betwixt Books of the Old Testament Canonical and Apocryphal or not Canonical exactly follow the Canon and the Judgment of the Jews Tom. 1. dissert praelim p. 51. from whom the Christians received the Books of the Old Testament He also saith The Christian Antiquity for the Books of the Old Testament hath followed the Canon of the Jews that no others were cited in the New Testament but those which belonged to the Canon of the Jews That the first Catalogues of Canonical Books made by Ecclesiastical Authors both Greek and Latin comprehend no others in the Canon P. 612 613. In his Abridgment of the Doctrine of the Three first Centuries he saith expresly That the Christians of those times owned no other Canonical Books of the Old Testament but those which belonged to the Canon of the Hebrews and that they sometimes cited the Apocryphal Books but never put them in the number of Canonical Books And whereas Mr. M. and J. L. have had the confidence to say Mr. M. p. 85 86. That after the Declarations of the Council of Carthage Pope Innocent and Gelasius c. no one ever pertinaciously dissented from it but such as Protestants themselves do confess to be Hereticks J.L. c. xi p. 23. until the days of Luther Or that no Catholick after the Church's Declaration in the Year 419. ever doubted of them Qui depuis les decisions des Conciles de Carthage de Rome la Declaration d'Innocent I. n'ont compte que vingt deux ou vingt quatre livres Canoniques de l'Ancien Testament Tom. 1. Diss praelim p. 60. Mr. Du Pin having produced the express words of Gregory the Great after that time to the contrary adds in flat contradiction to them these ensuing words We ought to make the same reflection on all the other Ecclesiastical Authors Greek and Latin which we have produced who After the Decisions of the Council of Carthage and of Rome and the Declaration of Innocent the First have counted only Two or Four and twenty Books of the Old Testament which makes it evident that these Definitions were not yet followed by all Authors and by all Churches till such time as this Matter was fully determined by the definition of the Council of Trent And indeed § 3 the Truth of this Confession is as clear as the Light For as Mr. M. and J. L. confess Vid c. 3. §. 13. Lib. 1. de verbo Dei. c. 20. S. ad alterum That the Canon of Scripture was not defined till the Fifth Century As Bellarmine acknowledgeth That Melito Epiphanius Hilarius Hieronymus Ruffinus in expounding the Canon of the Old Testament followed the Hebrews not the Greeks De locis Theol. l. 2. c. 11. Sect. Quid Ecclesiâ—sticum As Canus excuseth Ruffinus for rejecting with us the Apocrypha because he did it in eo tempore quo res nondum erat definita when this thing was not defined on which account saith he we also do excuse the rest and so all these men virtually confess that there was no Tradition of the Church against us during those Ages So in the following Centuries even till the time that the Trent Council met approved Authors do declare the Doctrine of the Church to have been still according to the Doctrine of this Article and contrary to the Definition of the Trent Council For In the Western Church Primasius a Bishop of the African Church saith Cent. 6. In Apocalyps cap. 4. The Books of the Old Testament of Canonical Authority which we receive N. B. are Twenty-four which St. John insinuated by the Twenty-four Wings Leontius Bizantinus having said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De Sectis Act. 2. Let us reckon up the Books received by the Church he adds That the Books of the Old Testament are Twenty-two and concludes thus These are the Books Canonized in the Church of which they that belong to the Old Testament are all received by the Hebrews In the Ninth Century Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople Cent. 9. undertakes to reckon up the divine Scriptures which were received and Canonized in the Church and of these in the Old Testament he numbers only Twenty-two as we do Canon Scrip. Chron. p. ult Quibuscontradicitur non recipiuntur ab Ecclesia Bibl. H. Eccl. de vitis Pontif. and among the Books contradicted and not received in the Church he puts the Maccabees Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Esther Judith Susanna and Tobit Anastasius the Keeper of the Library of the Church of Rome among the Books which are contradicted and not received by the Church reckons the Maccabees Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Susanna Judith and Tobit In the Twelfth Century Peter Mauricius Cent. 12. Abbot of Clugny in his Epistle against the Petrobusians tells them they ought of necessity to receive the whole Canon which is received by the Church and then having reckoned up the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as we do he adds That after these Authentick Books of the Holy Scripture Restant post hos Authentiâ—os sex non reticendi libri sapientia c. Pag. 25. c. de Autor Vet. Test there be Six not to be concealed viz. the Books of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and both the Books of Maccabees Hugo de Sancto Victore saith Sunt praeterea alii quidem libri ut sapientia Solomonis c. Qui leguntur quidem sed non scribuntur in Canone de scripturis scriptoribus Sacris Cap 6 Prolog in l. de Sacram c 7 And the division he says is made Authoritate universalis Eccl. Didasc l. 4. c. 1.2 Richardus
Testament to pass by the History of Tobit Judith and the Maccabees quia non sunt de Canone apud Hebraeos nec apud Christianos because they neither are esteemed Canonical by Jews nor Christians yea St. Jerom saith in his Prologue That inter Apocrypha cantantur the Church Chants them among the Apocrypha I therefore saith he first intend to write on the whole Canonical Scripture and then super istos alios qui communiter ponuntur in bibliis quamvis non sint de Canone upon those and other Books which are commonly put in our Bibles though they belong not to the Canon Moreover the Third and Fourth of Esdras he passeth over without Notes for the same Reason On the Thirteenth of Daniel he Notes thus The History of Susanna ought to be put inter libros Bibliae non Canonicos among the Books of the Bible which are not Canonical and in his Notes on the Fourteenth Chapter he saith of the History of Bell and the Dragon ponitur inter Scripturas non Canonicas it is put among those Scriptures which are not Canonical after the History of Susanna Now had not Lyra mentioned the Judgment of the Church touching these Books yet these Expressions in Comments of so great Credit in the Church sufficiently shew that this was then a Doctrine well received in the Church of Rome Antoninus Florentinus in his Historical Summs acknowledgeth only Twenty-two Canonical Books of the Old Testament Cent. 15. Sum. Hist part 1. Tit. 3. c. 4. c. 6. §. 12. saying in General of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and the Maccabees that Ecclesia recipit the Church receives them as true and profitable though not as of force in matters of Faith Unde forte habent Authoritatem talem qualem habent dicta istorum doctorum approbata ab Ecclesia Sum. Theol. part 3. Tit. 18. c. 6. §. 2. and in particular of Ecclesiasticus that it is receptus ab Ecclesia ad legendum non tamen Authenticus est ad probandum ea quae veniunt in contentionem fidei received by the Church to be read but is not Authentical to prove things doubtful in the Faith. Alphonsus Tostatus saith of the Six debated Books Praefat. in Matth. qu. 2. That they are not put into the Canon by the Church nor doth she regularly command them to be read or to be received or judge them disobedient who do not receive them For Ecclesia non est certa de Auctoribus eorum the Church is not certain of the Authors of them yea she knoweth not an spiritu sancto inspirati whether they were indited by Men inspired of the Holy Spirit and so she obliges no Man ad necessariò credendum id quod ibi habetur to yield necessary assent to what they do contain Enarrat praefat in l. paralip q. 7. And elsewhere Though saith he these Apocryphal Books be joined with others of the Bible and read in the Church none of them is of such Authority ut ex eo Ecclesia arguat ad probandam aliquam veritatem quantum ad hoc non recipit eos that the Church proves any truth out of them for as to that she doth not receive them Dionysius Carthusianus saith Praefat. in Gen. Art. 4. The Books of the Old Testament are Twenty-two as saith St. Jerom in his Prologue before the Kings and having reckoned them up Five Legal Eight Historical Nine Hagiographa he adds Hos libros vocant Canonicos alios vero Apocryphos These Books are called by Divines Canonical the rest Apocryphal In the Sixteenth Century Franciscus Ximenius reckons those Books of the Old Testament which were extant only in Greek Cent. 16. as Bibl. Complut Praef. ad Lect. Libri extra Canonem quos Ecclesia potius ad aedificationem populi quam ad auctoritatem Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum confirmandam recipit Books out of the Canon which the Church receives rather for Edification of the People than for confirmation of Ecclesiastical Doctrines Erasmus having numbered the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as we do In expos Symb. Apost Decal Catech. 4. vers finem Ed. Antver 1533. concludes thus Intra hunc numerum conclusit priscorum Authoritas Vet. Test volumina The Authority of the Ancients comprized the Volumes of the Old Testament of whose Truth it was not lawful to doubt within this number Johannes Ferus having told us that the Apocryphal Books were Nine In exam Ordinand he adds That olim in Ecclesia Apocryphi publicè non recitabantur nec quisquam Authoritate eorum premebatur anciently the Apocryphal Books were not read publickly nor was any Man pressed with their Authority Sebastian Munster in his Preface to the Old Testament and in the Chapter of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament numbers them exactly as we do and then he saith Intra hunc numerum concluserunt Hebraei prisci Christiani volumina veteris Testamenti Both the Hebrews and the ancient Christians comprized the Volumes of the Old Testament within this number but now the other which he reckons as we do excepting only the Song of the Three Children are received in usum Ecclesiasticum into the use of the Church Moreover from the Ninth Century in which the Ordinary Gloss upon the Bible was begun by Strabus to the Sixteenth they did not only number the Canonical and reject the Apocryphal Books as we do but they did it chiefly for the very reason that is assigned in our Article viz. among others the Authority of St. Jerom Card. Cajetan Praefat. super Josuam ad Clem. 7. declaring That Sancto Hieronymo universa Ecclesia Latina plurimum debet propter discretos ab eodem libros Canonicos à non Canonicis The universal Church is very much beholding to St. Jerom not only because he noted what Parts where added to the Books of the Old Testament or were but doubtful Appendixes but also for separating the Canonical from the uncanonical Books That the Church received those Books which he received and rejected those which he rejected That Consonat Hieronymus cus maxima habetur fides in Ecclesia is inquam Hieronymus in Prologo Galeato inter Canonicos libros V. Testamenti hosce duntaxat enumerat Firmiter tamen haerendum credo sententiae Hieronymi Cujus Autoritas me movit ne multo altius quam a suo tempore de librorum horum ordine disputarem cum illis floruerit temporibus quae doctis hominibus abundabant multa ex Gestis veterum Theologorum legerit quae nunc periere peritissimus quoque suit Graecae Hebraicae literaturae demum ejus testimonium ab Ecclesia pro sanctissimo habeatur Picus Mirand de fide ordinc credendi Theorem 5. Com. in libr. Hist V. Test In primum cap. Matth. ad v. 12. Testimonium Hieronymi quoad hoc ut Sacrosanctum habetur in Ecclesiâ as to this Matter the Church held his Testimony to
be sacred yea the whole Church preferred it before any other account of this Matter given by either Pope Council or Father For saith Cajetan as to this matter ad limam Hieronymi reducenda sunt verba tam Conciliorum quam Doctorum the words of Councils and Doctors must be reduced to the Rule of St. Jerom. So that those Books which he rejects are not to be esteemed Canonical as that word importeth Books sufficient ad firmandum ca quae sunt fidei to confirm Articles of Faith but only as it signifies Books useful and aedificationem Ecclesiae for the Edification of the Church and with this distinction you may reconcile the difference betwixt him and St. Austin and betwixt the Councils of Carthage and of Laodicea Alphonsus Tostatus saith Magis credendum est Hieronymo quam Augustino maxime ubi agitur de veteri Testamento St. Jerom is to be credited especially in things belonging to the Old Testament and Histories before St. Austin for in this thing he exceeded all the Doctors of the Church The same Tostatus saith Ista distinctio facta est ab Ecclesia Universali quae concorditer tenet istam distinctionem factam ab Hieronymo nam ista tenebatur a Judaeis fidelibus fult postea continuata in Ecclesia Defens Part. 2. c. 22. That the Vniversal Church with one accord holds the distinction made by St. Jerom for that was held by the Faithful Jews before Christs Advent and was afterwards continued in the Church and hence it came to pass that there was never any Bible found in those times which had before it the Canon of Carthage the Catalogue of St. Austin or the Epistle of Pope Innocent or the Decree of Pope Gelasius whereas in all Manuscript and Printed Bibles the Prologue of St. Jerom stiled Galeatus was placed before them by a common and universal consent of the Latin Church to be a sure Index and Discrimination of the Apocryphal and Ecclesiastical Books from the Canonical And this is the true Reason why many of the forecited Authors speaking of the Apocryphal Books mention sometimes but Five or Six viz. Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Judith Tobit and the Book of Maccabees to wit because St. Jerom in his Prologue upon the Book of Kings mentions them only though in his Preface to the Book of Jeremy he rejects Baruch and in his Preface upon Daniel he rejects the History of Susanna the Song of the Three Children and the Fables of Bell and the Dragon and so do they who Comment on these Books by his Example and with respect unto his Judgment So that from what hath been discoursed it is exceeding evident against the confident Assertions of Mr. M. and J. L. That after the Fifth Century it was the General Opinion of the Church till the Sixteenth Century that the Canonical Books were only Two or Four and Twenty and that those Books we stile Apocryphal did not belong unto the Canon and were not of validity sufficient to confirm Articles of Christian Faith. Concerning General Councils our Church asserts Two Things 1. Art. 21. That they may not be called together without the commandment and will of Princes 2. That they may erre and sometimes have erred even in things pertaining unto God wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to Salvation have neither Strength nor Authority unless it may be declared that they be taken out of Holy Scripture Now touching the first Proposition That General Councils may not be called together without the Commandment and Will of Princes the Eastern Churches concurr in Judgment with us Sguropylus in his History of the Council of Florence saith That in their Synod held about the Vnion of the Eastern and the Western Churches they unanimously declared 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sect. 2. c. 8. That the Emperor according to his ancient Custom and Prerogative was to call Oecumenical Synods and no other was to do it And again The Emperor saith he Sect. 10. cap. 2. p 280. and the Greeks contended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it was the Previlege of the Emperor to call the Synod and upon that account his Name was placed first in it as was manifest from the Acts of the Councils The ablest Writers of the West say the same thing Cardinal Cusanus declares We must say touching a General Council De Concord Cath. l. 2. c. 2. f. 39. That the Authority of it doth not so depend on him that calls it that if the Pope do not call it it should be no Council quia tunc non fuissent omnia octa universalia Concilia firma quoniam per Imperatores congregabantur for then none of the Eight General Councils would be firm they being all called by the Emperors from whom the Bishop of Rome as other Patriarchs received by Letters missive a publick warning to come or send unto the Councils And again From what hath been discoursed it appears Lib. 3 c. 13. Imperatores sanctos congregationes Synodales universalium Conciliorum totius Ecclesiae semper fecisse That the Emperors did always call General Councils This saith he I have found to be true by perusing the Acts of all the General Councils to the Eighth inclusively And so I have read in the Gloss of Anastasius the Pope's Library-Keeper Quòd universales Synodos de omni terra Imperatores colligere soliti fuerunt That the Emperors were wont to Assemble General Councils Dum lego veteres Historias In reading of the ancient Histories I find not saith Aeneas Sylvius that Popes alone did call Councils Lib. 1. de Concil Basil p. 20. Lib. 3. Art. 1 q nor after in the time of Constantine and other Emperors quaesitus est magnopere Romani assensus Papae was the assent of the Pope of Rome much sought after Jacobatius informs us That à principio facultas congregandi concilia spectabat ad Imperatores the power of gathering Councils belonged to the Emperors from the beginning Lib. 1. c. 2. §. 2 3 4. Hist Eccles l. 5. in Prooem Richerius in his History of General Councils is very frequent in his full Assertions of this matter proving this clearly from those words of Socrates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Since that the Emperors became Christians the greatest Synods were and are held by their pleasure But it is needless to insist longer on this Head since Sancta Clara on this Article saith Pag. 294. Apol. 2. advers Ruff. f. 79. b. Where Erasinus saith Nota Lector olim Synodos Imperatorum jussu congregari solitas These words seem to be confirmed by the Authority of St. Jerom who rejects a Council with this Question Quis Imperator hanc Synodum jussit congregari What Emperor commanded the Assembling of that Synod As if he held the command of the Emperor to be necessary to that end sic observatum patet in omnibus fere conciliis veteribus and so 't is evident it was observed
almost in all the ancient Councils As to the Second Part of this Article § 5 which teacheth That General Councils may Erre and sometimes have erred even in things pertaining to God P. 295. the same Author there tells us That Communis est doctorum opinio Concilia etiam Generalia errare posse in rebus quae fidem aut mores ad salutem non necessarios concernunt It is the common Judgment of their Doctors that even general Councils may erre in Matters of Faith and Manners which are not necessary to Salvation And whereas our Church infers that therefore things ordained by them as necessary to Saelvation have neither Strength nor Authority unless it may be declared nisi ostendi possint unless it can be shewed that they be taken out of Holy Scripture This Author saith these last Words of the Article Sententiam veterum omnium fere modernorum declarant declare that which was the Doctrine of the Ancients and of almost all the modern Doctors That in the time of Ocham the Church was divided in this Point some holding that a General Council Haeretica potest labe aspergi might be guilty of Heresy and much more of Error some That it could not thus be guilty and that the Doctrine of the Fallibility of General Councils was afterwards maintained by many eminent Doctors of the Church De formali objecto fidei Tr. 5. c. 19 20 21. is fully proved by Baronius against Turnbal so that I shall reserve the farther Prosecution of this Matter to its proper place viz. The Discussion of the Doctrine of the Infallibility of Councils Our Church in her Twenty second Article asserts § 6 That the Romish Doctrine concerning Purgatory Pardons Worshipping and Adoration as well of Images as of Relicks and also Invocation of Saints is a fond thing vainly seigned and grounded upon no Warrant of Scripture but rather repugnant to the Word of God And that these Doctrines were not derived to them from Apostolical Tradition their own Writers do ingeniously confess For 1. Concerning Purgatory Alphonsus de Castro declares That in Veteribus de Purgatorio fere nulla De Haeres l. 8. Tit. de Indulg potissimum apud Graecos Scriptores mentio est In the Ancients and especially the Greek Writers there is scarce any mention of Purgatory whence it comes to pass Contr. Luther Artic. 18. that to this very day it is not received in the Greek Church Apud priscos amongst the Ancients saith our Fisher Bishop of Rochester It was not at all or very rarely mentioned nor is it to this Day believed by the Greek Church Let him who pleaseth read the Commentaries of the ancient Greeks and he will find I suppose that they speak not at all or very rarely of it Sed neque Latini simul omnes sed sensim hujus rei veritatem conceperunt Nor did the Latins altogether but leisurely perceive the Truth of this Matter And then he adds Cum igitur purgatorium tam sero cognitum ac receptum universae Ecclesiae fuerit quis jam de Indulgentiis mirari potest quia in principio nascentis Ecclesiae nullus fuerit earum usus Since therefore Purgatory was so lately known to and received by the Universal Church who can wonder that in the Primitive Church there was no use of Indulgences In Cath. Rom. pacif apud Forb consid Mod. p. 264. Father Barns acknowledgeth that the Punishment of Purgatory is a thing quae nec ex Scripturis nec Patribus nec Conciliis deduci potest firmiter which can neither be firmly proved from Scripture the Fathers or Councils And that Opposita sententia eis conformior videtur the contrary Sentence seems more agreeable to them Wicelius saith Meth. Concord Eccles c. 8. Tit. Funus Ibid. p. 259 260. That though there should be some places of Purgation to receive naked Souls yet doth it not become grave and wise Men so certainly to define those things which Scriptures have not expressed nec Antiquorum traditio nor the Tradition of the Ancients hath expounded Erasmus saith Operum Tom. 1. p. 685. q. There be many things about which not only contentious but even learned and pious Men did doubt of old as St. Austin with others doubted long about Purgatory That it was only a private Assertion and not an Article of Faith generally received in the Twelfth Century Chronic. l. 8. c. 26. is evident from these Words of Otho Frisingensis viz. That there is apud Inferos in the infernal Regions a Place of Purgatory wherein such as are to be saved are either troubled only with Darkness or decocted with the Fire of Expiation some affirm Nor can I tell what to make of that saying of Paschasius if it doth not shew that he believeth the contrary for saith he our Lord saith he that eateth my Flesh hath eternal Life ideo dicens habet quia mox anima carne soluta intrat in vitae promptuaria De Corp. Sang. Domini c. 19. ubi Sanctorum Animae requiescunt saying in the Present Tense he hath because the Soul being loosed from the Flesh presently enters into those Receptacles of Life where the Spirits of Saints do rest Secondly § 7 Concerning Pardons or Indulgences their Novelâ—y is still confessed more freely Inter omnes res de quibus in hoc opere disputamus nulla est quam minus aperte S. Literae prodiderunt de qua minus vetusti Scriptores dixerint neque tamen hac occasione contemnendae sunt quod earum usus in Ecclesia videatur sero receptus quoniam multa sunt posterioribus nota quae vetusti illi Scriptores prorsus ignoraverunt nam de transubstantiatione panis in Corpus Christi rara est in Antiquis Scriptoribus mentio de Purgatorio fere nulla potissimum apud Graecos Scriptores qua de causa usque in hodiernum Diem purgatorium non est a Graecis creditum Quid ergo mirum si ad hunc modum contigerit de indulgentiis ut apud Priscos nulla sit de eis mentio praecipue quod tunc magis fervebat Christianorum charitas ut parum esset opus indulgentiis quapropter non est mentio ulla indulgentiarum De Haer. l. 8. Tit. de Indulgentiis De invent rer l. 8. c. 1. p. 325. Part. 1. Sum. Tit. 10. c. 3. In 4. Sentent dist 20. q. 3. h. Alphonsus Castro saith That among all the things of which he disputed in his Book against Heresies there was nothing of which the Scripture spake less plainly de qua minus vetusti Scriptores dixerint and of which the Ancient Writers had said less Many saith Polydore Virgil from Roffensis may perhaps be moved not to trust to Indulgences quod earum usus in Ecclesia videatur recentior admodum sero apud Christianos repertus because the use of them in the Church seems new and very lately received among Christians To whom I answer That
Latina Ecclesia Presbyteris licuisse uti conjugio That even in the Latin Church it was sometimes Lawful for Priests to use Matrimony Scotus confesseth that it is very true Sent. 4. dist 37. qu. 1. Art. 1. That Secundum consuetudinem primitivae Ecclesiae according to the Constitution of the primitive Church it was lawful to use Matrimony contracted before Orders Cap. 4. De invent rerum l. 5. c. 4. p. 344. Clictovaeus in his Discourse of the Celebacy of Priests and Polydore Virgil do with one Voice affirm That Pope Syricius who held that See A.D. 387. was the first who imposed the Law of Celebacy on the Clergy It remains saith Cassander That this Law should be relaxed to those who shall hereafter be ordained Et more veteris Ecclesiae Consult Art. 23. p. 199. huc usque Orientalium Ecclesiarum And that after the Custom of the Ancient Church and of the Eastern Churches to this Day Honest Husbands should be admitted to the Ministry of the Church and out of the Time of their Ministry should be allowed the use of their Wives according to the Canon of the Sixth General Synod Wicelius in his Via Regia Apud Calixt de conjug cler p. 457. declares that the Marriage of Priests was unforbidden In primitiva Christi Ecclesia tam Orientis quam Occidentis in the Primitive Church both of East and West and that it agrees not only with the Gospel but also cum Veterum Synodorum Constitutionibus cum exemplis Veteris Ecclesiae with the Constitutions of Ancient Synods with the Examples of the Ancient Church yea even with the Examples of the Church of Rome such as she was Five hundred Years ago CHAP. XI Answer is given to the Arguments of Mr. M. for the Infallibility of Tradition as v. g. 1. That the World had no other Rule for the first Two thousand Years § 1. Answered 1st by shewing that this proves not the thing in Question which is not Whether nothing can come down unto us by Tradition but Whether in long tract of time Men may not add to the Traditions which truly they received others which falsly they pretend to be such and Whether pretences to Tradition may not be justly scrupled when ancient Records not only do say nothing of but plainly contradict them Ibid. 2dly That this Argument contradicts the Tradition of the Jews touching the Precepts of Noah only imposed upon the World before and of the Christians generally teaching Men were then guided by the Law not of Tradition but of nature § 2. The Instances contained in this Argument considered § 3. 3dly It is proved that both the Antediluvians and they who lived after the Flood were very prone to Idolatry and that God therefore would not trust them with any positive Precepts but such as were Recorded in a written Law § 4. Mr. M ' s. Second Argument That for above Two thousand Years more from Moses to Christ 's time the Church was governed partly by Writing and partly by Tradition Answ 1. The contrary is proved both from the Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament § 5. 2. That the Traditions which obtained in the Jewish Church were such as tended to the Evacuation of the Law of Moses the Introduction of vain Worship and the renouncing of the true Messiah § 6. This is farther demonstrated from the Scriptures of the New Testament and Josephus § 7. Mr. M's Third Argument That when the Scriptures were given to the Jewish Church all other Nations were guided only by Tradition and yet had many true Believers among them as Job c. Answ 1. That the Scripture manifestly declares that the Heathens generally were guilty of Idolatry and that God had given them a Law not of Tradition but of Nature § 8.2 That Job and his Friends believed in one God not by Tradition but the Light of Nature according to the Fathers § 9.3 That when Christianity appeared the great Plea of the Heathens for it was Tradition which they pleaded after the manner of the Romanists § 10. The Answer of the Christians to this Plea is a full Justification of the Protestants and a demonstration that they were not Roman Catholicks in this Matter § 11. For 1st They represent it as the greatest folly to preferr Custom before Reason 2ly They add That their Ancestors were prone to receive Fables and monstrous Opinions for Truths which also Romanists confess of the Writers of their Histories 3dly That this was the Rise of all their Errors that they followed their Fathers without consulting Truth 4thly That they who pleaded Antiquity were themselves the greatest Innovators 5thly That there was a time when the Heathen Religion was New Ibid. In defence of their own Proceedings they declare 1st That it is the property of wise Men not to be enslaved to their former Opinions 2dly That their Adversaries ought not to run them down with prescription or the belief of their Ancestors but fairly come to the Merits of the Cause § 12. 3dly That they ought not to be run down with multitude that being no mark of the true Religion 4thly That they ought not to be called to yield a blind assent to the dictates of other Men without using their own Judgments 5thly That their Separation from their fore-Fathers must be acknowledged Just and Righteous because they could shew wherein they had erred Lastly That their Religion was not New but only it was lately that they knew it to be the true and old Religion § 13. Obj. 4. That before the New Testament was written and divulged all Christians were governed by Tradition only § 14. Answ 1. That the Four Gospels which were always judged sufficiently to contain the Christian Doctrine were writ soon after the Preaching of the Gospel 2. That till then the Apostles Preached only out of the Old Testament and exhorted their Hearers to attend to it as their Rule Ibid. 3. That the Tradition of the Primitive Church declared it necessary that Scriptures should be written to be to us a Rule of Faith § 15. Mr. M ' s. Fourth Argument that the Traditions of the Church of Rome may be as fully proved as it can be proved to one that never saw London that there is such a City and that it is the Capital City of this Kingdom shewed to be highly vain § 16. HAving thus shewed the uncertainty of Tradition in many Cases and proved that the Doctrines of the Church of Rome have not descended by Tradition from the Apostles or the Primitive Church I now proceed to Answer what Mr. M. doth offer to prove the certainty of Oral Tradition in the General and of some Romish Doctrines in Particular And § 1 1. Mr. M. saith That all the Faith which true Believers had in those Two thousand Years before the Scriptures of the Old Testament were written Pag. 335. had no other Ground than the Revelation of God as proposed
in the dark Ages of the Western Church gave the Rise to her Errors We therefore do exhort them in the Words of Justin Martyr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cohort ad Graec. p. 15. Not without trial to assent to the Errors of their Fore-fathers nor presently to think that true which they mistaking delivered to them for Tradition Fourthly They retorted the Objection saying That if it were a Fault Arnob. p. 91. A veteribus institutis in alias res novas migrare to quit their ancient Institutions for things new it was as well their fault as ours That whereas they objected to the Christians Divortium ab institutis majorum Tert. ad Nation cap. 10. their departure from the Institutions of their Ancestors they communicated with them in the same Crime For Exclusa a vobis Antiquitas you though you plead Antiquity against us have your selves cast it off Totam Authoritatem majorum vestra Authoritas dejecit Your own Authority hath destroyed or overthrown the whole Authority of the Ancients and we see even whilst you urge it against us Per omnia corruptam imo deletam in vobis Antiquitatem Antiquity wholly corrupted and even extinguished amongst you which is the constant Plea of Protestants that they desert the Roman Church only as far as she hath palpably deserted the pure and Ancient Church of Christ they separate from her only in those things in which she hath most plainly separated from the Faith and Discipline of ancient Rome and the whole Church of Christ and this hath been so demonstratively proved in the Article of the true Canon of Scripture by Bishop Cousins of the Pope's Supremacy by Doctor Barrow in the Articles of Service in Latin Veneration of Images Communion in one Kind the Seven Sacraments in Three late Treatises designed to prove the Fallibility of Romish Councils by their actually false Decrees that none of the Disputers of the Church of Rome have dared yet to meddle with them and thereby give us good Assurance who know they want not will to do it that they cannot Answer them The like hath excellently been performed in all the other controverted Articles if not to the Conviction yet to the Silencing of our Adversaries Fifthly They constantly tell the Heathens That there was a time when their Religion was New and when their Gods began to be so that this being so Arnob. l. 2. p. 92 93. Cum de novitate loquimini Religionum nostrarum vestrae vobis in mentem non veniunt when they spake of the Novelty of the Christian Faith they forgat the Novelty of their own Religion our Religion say you P. 94. was not Four hundred Years ago and your Gods say we were not Two thousand Years ago Now is it not shameful and impudent in you Quod agere te videas in eo alterum reprehendere to reprehend another for what you do your selves and to object that as a Crime to others which may be retorted on your selves Since then we as constantly affirm and have as fully proved That there was a time when the Religion of the Church of Rome was new in the contested Articles That Christianity had gone through several Centuries before any of them were received as Articles of Christian Faith That many of them have been introduced since the Ninth Century may we not also add that therefore Romanists forget their own Religion when they Charge ours with Novelty and reprehend that in us which they themselves are truly guilty of Sixthly § 12 In defence of their Proceedings against this Objection they declare That it was the property of Wise Men Theodo Serm. 1. contr Graec p. 477. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be enslaved to their former Opinions nor to be bound to follow the Customs of their Fathers but to seek the Truth wheresoever they could find it That every Man ought in those things especially which concern the manner of his living to trust to his own judgment and rather to depend on his own Senses in seeking out the truth than as if he himself were bereft of Reason Lact. l. 2. c. 7. P. 273. Credentem alienis erroribus decipi to be deceived by giving credit to the Errors of others God having given reason to him sufficient to find out the Truth Athan. contr Gent. p. 32 33. And speaking of the way of Truth they tell them That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there needs no-nothing but our selves to come to an exact knowledge and comprehension of it If you ask them by what internal Principle we may arrive at this knowledge they Answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That it is every Mans Soul and the faculty of Reason in it If you enquire by what external Directions this Mind must be assisted Ibid. p. 1. they reply They must 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 find the Truth from the Divine Oracles That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are of themselves sufficient for the Declaration of the Truth and that even an Heathen Macarius might learn it there Now this is plainly sending us to our private Reason and Apprehension of the Sense of Scriptures to find out the Truth and to assure us That it is an act of Wisdom in us not to be enslaved to our former Opinions nor bound up by the Customs of our Fore-fathers from searching after Truth wheresoever we can find it Seventhly They add That the Heathens ought not to prejudge and run them down with this Prescription or by objecting to them their revolt A Religione majorum from the Religion of their Ancestors but fairly ought to come unto the merits of the Cause Lib. 2. p. 90. Causam convenit ut inspiciatis non factum nec quid reliquimus opponere sed secuti quid simus potissimum contueri You are not saith Arnobius to condemn us for the Fact without enquiring whether we had not a just Cause for doing it nor object to us what we have left without considering what we have embraced in lieu of it for what hinders why as others who invented Falshoods delivered them to Posterity Sic nos qui verum invenimus posteris meliora tradamus so we who have found the Truth may deliver better things to Posterity Which Passages are a full Answer to all the French Rhetorick touching the Prejugez legitimes comre les Calvinistes Eighthly In particular against this manner of prejudging § 13 which is now become almost the only Refuge of the Romanists they say 1st That they ought not to be run down with multitude that Religion could not be proved true because it had many Followers or false because it had but few Assertors Arnob. l. 3. ab initio and that even the Christian Religion could neither be proved nor disproved upon this account and that this vain pretence of Heathens had already been answered by the Christians mille modis a thousand ways and refuted by most cogent Reasons And indeed among the Relicks
entire System of the Christian Faith than by committing it to Writing that Piety should not permit even the Romans to rest satisfied without such written Monuments of what they had been taught or to conceive it was sufficient that they had received it by Tradition and that the Wisdom of the Holy Ghost instructed the Apostles to commit to writing that which they had Preached by Word of Mouth that so it might become to future Ages the Pillar and the Ground of Truth and a sufficient Antidote against the Heresies which afterwards prevailed in the Church Euseb H. Eccl. l. 3. c. 37. And that the zeal of the first Successors of Christian Faith imployed it self as much in leaving to their Converts throughout all the World 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Writings of the Holy Gospels as in preaching Christ unto them In Answer to Mr. M's Fourth Reason for the Infallibility of Tradition I grant P. 354. That a Tradition made as credible to any Man as it may be made credible to one who never saw London that there is such a City as London and that it is the head Town of England will be a good and a sufficient Proof that the Traditions of the Church of Rome are true and that upon such Evidence afforded it will be most unreasonable to question the Truth of them but then I think it is the vainest thing imaginable for any person to attempt to prove them from a like Tradition For doth Mr. M. know of any Man whoever doubted that there was such a City as London or that it was the head Town of England Did he ever read or hear of any large Discourses any Testimonies brought from ancient Records or Traditions from Divine Revelation or from Reason to prove there was or could be no such Capital City in England Can he produce as many Eye and Ear Witnesses that the Traditions of the Church of Rome are truly Apostolical as may be easily produced for such a City Let Mr. M. once prove that the Traditions of the Romish Church were always generally received by all Mankind and that none ever had the Confidence to Question the Truth of any of them Let him prove them from Myriads of Eye Witnesses who saw them writ by the Apostles or Primitive Professors of Christianity as plainly as ever any Man saw London or as many Ear Witnesses hearing the Apostles preaching these Traditions as ever heard this Capital City mentioned by those who saw it Let him prove them by as many persons who writ to the Apostles concerning these Traditions as have writ to London and by as many who resorted to the Apostles to learn these Traditions as have resorted to this City by as many Books describing these Traditions in the very Age in which they are supposed to have been delivered as there are Books which in this Age make mention of the City of London and by as many Canons of the Primitive Church relating to these Traditions as there are Statutes and Discourses relating to the City Trade and Government of London And I will then acknowledge That it is impudent impious and blasphemous Impiety to doubt the Truth of these Traditions Mr. M. indeed supposeth That it is as evidently credible that God hath revealed such and such Verities as it is credible by humane Tradition that there is such a City as London but this he never undertakes to prove as knowing that it was an easier matter to suppose it P. 355 356. And then he adds That the very self same Tradition tells me that the same God who revealed by his Apostles so many other Verities to his Church did also reveal by the same Apostles to the same Church that this Church was to be heard as the Mistress of Truth with whom he would ever be present suggesting to her all Truth and never permitting the Gates of Hell to prevail against her that he placed her as a Pillar and Ground of Truth giving her such Pastors as should secure her Children from being tossed to and fro with every Wind of Doctrine and consequently this same Tradition tells me God hath revealed this Verity of her being Infallible in proposing any Point for Divine Faith. Now Reply First Mr. M. is miserably out in this Discourse for not one of these Revelations here mentioned whatsoever is the import of them have descended to us by Oral Tradition but are all of them contained in Scripture as far as they are truly cited Secondly Whereas the Evidence that there is such a City as London is so great that never any Body could deny or question it that the Church is Infallible in propounding any Point of Faith not clearly revealed in the Holy Scripture or that there are indeed any such Points of Faith is at present and hath been formerly denied by many Myriads of learned and pious Men whose worldly Interest it is and was to believe that true which they deny to be so and whose rejoicement it would be to find it true and that none of the places here produced prove this Infallibility or by the Primitive Professors of Christianity were esteemed to prove it they have unanimously held and do at present hold Thirdly Ibid. Whereas he saith He did see with his Eyes that she viz. the Church of God did propose her Traditions for Verities received from God. Let it be noted That Mr. M. confounds the Church of Rome and the Church of God excluding all the Protestants the Greek Church and the Eastern Christians not subject to the Pope from that Church out of which there is no Salvation which I hope is not so evident as that there is such a City as London for it is not the whole Church but that of Rome which claims this Infallibility and on that account proposeth her Traditions for Verities received from God. Now then let us return to our Capital City of London and we shall find the whole Nation though of different Parties Interests and Judgments agreeing that there is in England such a Capital City as London but yet we find half the whole Christian World utterly denying many Traditions of the Church of Rome to be Verities received from God and in particular that of the Pope's Supremacy without which the Church of Rome neither doth nor can pretend to be the whole Church Catholick Now this denial of her pretended Traditions by so many Churches professing a like Veneration for those Traditions which are truly Primitive must prove as strongly that the Traditions of the Church of Rome are falsly so called as her Assertion can be supposed to prove them Divine Verities Again whereas there are no universally received Records which give us the least cause to doubt whether there be such a City as London c. the Records of the Scriptures Councils and Fathers of the Church cause many Myriads to believe the Doctrines and Practices peculiar to the Roman Church are so far from being Apostolical Traditions that they