together in the Church they did and therefore what is coming together v. 17. coming to the Church v. 18. coming to one place v. 19. is coming together to eat v. 33. Accordingly it was the Custom of the Church from the Apostles times thus to communicate upon the Lord's day Pliny in his Epistle to the Emperor Trajan Soliti sunt stato die ante lucem convenire c. Ep. l. 10. Ep. 97. tells him That he found nothing to alledge against the Christians but their Obstinacy in their Superstition and that is was their Custom to meet together on a set day before it was light and to bind themselves by the Sacrament to do no evil Now this Epistle was writ only Six Years after the Death of the Evangelist Saint John. And Justin M. who wrote but Fifty Years after his death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apol. 2. p. 98 99. thus speaks On Sunday all the Christians in the City or Country meet together because that is the day of our Lord's Resurrection and then we have read unto us the Writings of the Prophets and Apostles this done the President makes an Oration to the Assembly to exhort them to imitate and do the things they heard then we all join in Prayer and after that we celebrate the Sacrament and they that are willing and able give their Alms c. Fourthly § 4 This may be further proved from the Church's Testimony and from the plain Expressions of the Fathers who flourished in the first and purest Ages of the Church For to this Effect Century the first besides the words of Clemens Romanus already mentioned the Apostle Barnabas saith of the Apostles and Christians in the General 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sect. 15. We keep the eighth day a Festival in which our Jesus rose from the dead Century the Second I have produced the plain Testimonies of Ignatius Justin M. Irenaeus Dionysius of Corinth Melito Sardensis Century the Third I have produced already the Testimony of Clemens of Alexandria to which add that of Tertullian who saith in his Apology Diem folis laetitiae indulgemus Cap. 16. Sunday is the Festival of us Christians And in his Book Ad Nationes That they did rejoice upon that day Solem Christianorum deum aestimant quod innotuerit nos die solis c. Lib. 1. cap. 13. and that this was a thing so well known to the Heathens that hence they took occasion to conjecture That the Sun was the God of Christians Neque enim Resurrectio Domini semel in anno non semper post septem dies celebratur In Esa Hom. 6. Hom. 7. in Exod. fol. 41. Ep. 38. Ed. Ox. p. 75. that of Origen That the Resurection of our Lord is not celebrated annually only but every seventh day which therefore in opposition to the Jews he calls Dominica nostra The Christians Lord's day And that of Cyprian That Aurelius Dominico legit reads on tâ—â— Lord's day Centuny the Fourth Epiphanus informs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expos fid cap. 22. That the Holy Catholick Church keeps every Lord's day as a Festival In a word no Church no single Writer ever represented this as a new or introduced Practice but do continually speak of it as the constant Practice of the Christian Church We never read that any of the converted Jews though they retained the Jewish Sabbath ever disputed the Observation of the first day of the week in honour of our Lord And therefore as the Reverend Bishop Bramhal truly saith Pag. 918. To question now whether there was a formal precept for that which all the Christian World hath obeyed ever since Christ's time and shall obey until his Second Coming is a strange degree of Folly. And that this may be farther evident I add this second Proposition That the Apostles had Commission from the Lord Christ § 5 Prop. 2. or were directed by his Spirit to ordain and chuse this day to be employed in the publick Exercise of Christian piety and in remembrance of the Resurrection of our Lord. For First Christ did Commission his Apostles to teach the Churches all his Doctrine and to deliver them all his Commands and Orders which concerned their Duty and his Service for thus he delivers his Commission to them All Authority is committed to me in Heaven and Earth Matth. 28.18 Go therefore and disciple all Nations teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you John 20.21 He also saith unto them That as my Father sent me so send I you and surely the Father sent him who was Lord of the Sabbath with full Commission to change and alter it and substitute another day in lieu thereof Accordingly the Apostles exercised this Power they founded Churches they delivered to them the Doctrines and Commands of Christ they setled Church Officers Orders and Discipline and surely then they had Commission also to settle the time to be appointed for the Service of their Lord and Master When therefore they began to practise the Observation of the first day of the Week they only did what their Commission from the Lord impowered them to do Secondly That the Apostles were directed by the Holy Ghost to set apart this day for Holy Worship or to appoint Church Meetings on this Day and therefore that this was done by a Divine Authority appears from this That their Determinations touching smaller Matters and which were only â—porary are by themselves ascribed to the Holy Ghost thus when Saint Paul gives his advice in respect of the present necessity touching a single Life though he confesseth he had no express from Christ touching that matter yet he ascribes this Counsel to the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. 7.40 For I think saith he I have the Spirit of Christ Again the same Apostle speaking of the Directions which he gave concerning their Church Meetings and their Behaviour in them saith 1 Cor. 14.37 If any man think himself to be a Prophet or Spiritual let him acknowledge that the things I write unto you are the Commandments of the Lord. The same must therefore be much more acknowledged of things of so high a nature as that is which they delivered to be observed by the Universal Church they being equally Appointed and Authorized to instruct them in Discipline and in Matters of Divine Worship as in matters of Doctrine and as well by Word as by Epistle and therefore as well in the Observation of the time appointed for the Worship of their Lord as in the due Regulation of it when they came together The same Saint Paul professeth 1 Cor. 11.23 That he had received from the Lord what he delivered to the Church of Corinth touching the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and when he speaks of one particular concerning which he had no precept from Christ he saith expresly This speak I not the Lord 1 Cor. 7.12 if then the practice touching the Observation of
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this behalf Moreover this expression was in use among the Jews of that Age as appears from that saying of the Book of Maccabees 2 Maccab. 15.18 The care they took for their Wives and Children c. was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in least account with them their principal fear being for the Holy Temple whence it appears that our Translation of this Phrase is very suitable to the Language of the Apostles and of the Age in which they lived and consequently to the true meaning of these Words 2dly The Apostle here makes no distinction of parts of the Sabbath to be retained and other parts to be abolished if therefore no Man should condemn us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for not observing part of a Sabbath then no Man should condemn us for not observing the Rest enjoined on that day that being eminently part of the Sabbath 3dly If 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word in part can only be referred to the Sacrifices offered on the Sabbath then must it only relate to the Sacrifices of the New Moons and other Feasts to which it more immediately is joined whereas it is acknowledged not only that the Sacrifices offered then but even the whole New Moons and Feasts were part of that hand-writing which was blotted out and shadows of things future and Solemnities for not observing any part of which the Christian was not to be censured or condemned and therefore this must be affirmed also of the whole Sabbath Festival 4thly There is not one Example in the whole sacred writ in which it can be shewed that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie the Sacrifices offered on the Sabbath day in distinction from the other Duties of the Day whence evident it is That this Exposition of the words is groundless Besides had the Apostle intended by these words only to signifie That no Man should condemn the Christians for not offering Sacrifice on that day what Reason could there be why he should not have plainly said so rather than signifie his mind in Terms so much offensive to the Jews as seeming to declare the Abrogation of their whole Sabbath and to misguide the Christian into such an apprehension Surely had the Apostle embraced the Sabbatarian Doctrine he would not have afforded so great occasion to others to reject it But against this Argument the Sabbatarians thus Object That the Sabbath here mentioned is said to be a shadow of things future Object 1 but the Seventh day Sabbath was a sign of a thing past viz. of the Creation of the World. That the Sabbath was not as the Objection without Ground Answer affirms A Sign but a Feast Instituted in Commemoration of the Creation of the World proves not that it was not a shadow also of things future for the Passover was the memorial of God's Mercy in passing over the Houses of Israel when he smote the Aegyptians the Feast of Tabernacles was a memorial that their Fathers dwelt in Tents and Tabernacles Pentecost was a memorial of the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai the Feast of unleavened Bread was celebrated in memory of their Passing out of Aegypt with their Dough unleavened and of their deliverance from the Afflictions they endured in Aegypt if therefore notwithstanding the Institution of these Feasts in memory of what was past it is acknowledged by all Christians that they were shadows of good things to come the Seventh day Sabbath may be both And whereas it is by the Sabbatarians said That the seventh day Sabbath seems not to be a shadow of any Blessing which we at present do enjoy by Christ it may be Answered 1. That this Expression of the Apostle doth not necessarily import that the things mentioned here were shadows which related to things future but only that comparatively to those future things which were to be prescribed and taught by Christ and his Religion they were shadows 2. This Objection seems to contradict the very Words of the Apostle Apostolo responde si potes qui vacationem istius diei umbram futuri esse tesâ—â—tur Contra Faustum l. and therefore what Saint Austin said to Faustus is very proper here Answer thou the Apostle if thou canst who witnesseth That resting on the Sabbath day was a shadow of that which was to come Even the Ancient Jews acknowledged That their Sabbath was a shadow of the Age of the Messiah this being their Assertion That the Sabbath was given as a Type of the Holam Habba or the Age to come by which they understand the Age of the Messiah whence in the Epistle to the Hebrews the World to come doth clearly signifie the Gospel Age and this they gathered from these Expressions of the Prophet Isaiah Ch. 66.23 which say That it shall come to pass that from one New Moon and from one Sabbath to another shall all flesh come to worship before the Lord which say the Jews is spoken of that Age to come which shall be all Sabbath In signo data sunt Judaeorum populo Iren. l. 4. c. 30. Ita Iren. l. 4. c. 30. Barnabas Ep. §. 15. Orig Hom. 23. in Numer f. 136. August l. 4. De Gen. ad lit c. 11. Clemens Alex. Strom. l. 4. p. 477. Orig. Hom. 23. in Num. f. 136. Machar Hom. 35. Greg. Nyssen Hom. 7. in Eccles Tom. 1. p. 440. Cyril Alex. in cap 6. Amosi p. 315. Sabbata perseverantiam totius diei erga deum deservitionis edocebant Iren. lib. 4. cap. 30. Just M. in Dial. cum Tryph. p. 229. c. Tertull. advers Jud. c. 4. And all the Ancient Fathers do with one Voice declare That the Jewish Sabbath was Typical and figured the Spiritual Rest which Righteous Persons should enjoy by Christ and their Spiritual Ceasing from the Works of Sin and that we always ought to be employed in God's Service Fourthly § 13 The Fathers with one Voice Assert That the Sabbath was ceremonial and that the Christians or at least the Gentile Converts were not obliged to observe it Justin M. Asserts That after the Appearing of the Son of God we have no need to observe the Sabbath Lib. 4. c. 30. Irenaeus That it doth not Justifie and that the Ancient Patriarchs pleased God without the Observation of it Adv. Jud. c. 4. Tertullian That the Observation of it was Temporary and that it was blotted out like as Circumcision and other Rites of the Old Law. The Council of Laodicea declares That Christians ought not to Rest on the Sabbath Can. 29. but work on it preferring before it the Lord's day Epiphanius saith That our Lord did his Miracles on the Sabbath and commanded the Impotent Man to take up his Bed on that day to insinuate that the Sabbath was to be dissolved Haer. 30. Ebion §. 32. vid. Haer. 66. c. 82. that hence the Apostles knew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Sabbath was dissolved that it was dissolved by the Coming of Christ the Great
Sabbath who gives us Rest from our Sins Catech 4. p. 38. Saint Cyril of Jerusalem tells his Catechist That all Observation of Sabbaths is to be rejected It would be endless to recite all that the Fathers say upon this Subject but if we do consider how constantly the Fathers teach That the Patriarchs and pious Men before the promulgation of the Law of Moses observed not the Sabbath how generally they teach that it was a shadow of good things to come by Christ and that our Saviour both by his Miracles performed upon that day and by his Contests with the â—harisees designed to insinuate the dissolution of it we can no longer doubt the Judgment of the Ancients in this Matter To proceed then to Answer the Objections of the Sabbatarians § 14 First Mr. M. Objects Object 1 That God Blessed the Seventh day and Sanctified it because in that and not in any other §. 9. p. 205. he had rested from all his Work Gen. 2. And then enquires How comes this Blessing given to no other day among the Seven but given to the Seventh day only to be lost who took away the Sanctification of it given by God himself and given for a Reason which is as obliging now as ever To this I Answer Answ That to Bless and Sanctifie the Seventh day doth only signifie to set apart that day for his peculiar Worship or as the Badge and Sign by which the People who owned Jehovah for their God should be distinguished from all other People and by which He should also be disting uished from all other Gods by a Work peculiar to himself for it being the Custom of all Nations and of all Religions to set apart some day or time as Sacred for the Worship of their Gods and in that time to Solemnize their Worship by the Commemoration or the imitation of some peculiar Actions for which they were Honoured God would have this to be the Sign of His peenliar People the Resting on the Sabbath day in Token that they owned him as the Creator of the World by imitation of the Rest he took when he had made it This God himself declares by saying Exod. 31.15 16. The Children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath to observe it through their Generations for a perpetual Covenant It is a sign betwixt me and the Children of Israel for ever for in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth and on the seventh day he Rested that is Now that the Seed of Abraham are come to be my People in Covenant they shall keep the Seventh day as a Sign that they are Consecrated to the Service of the Creator of the World and that they own him as their God. Ezek. 20.12 Hence are these Sabbaths said to be given to be a sign betwixt God and them that they might know he was the Lord that sanctified them and God commands them to observe them Exod. 31.13 that they might know he was the Lord that sanctified them that is did consecrate and separate them from all other Nations to be his own peculiar People Hence also was it that till God had made of Abraham a great Nation till he had freed this Nation from that Bondage they were under to the Aegyptians who would not let them rest from Work and chosen them to be his own peculiar People He laid not this injunction on them for even the very Sabbath day before that mentioned by Moses to be observed by them as a day of Rest Exod. 16.1 Neh. 9.14 they marched a wearisom Journey and came at Night to the Wilderness of Sin and therefore Nehemiah saith That God made known to them his Holy Sabbath by the hand of Moses his Servant that is then did he set a part that day to be a day to be observed by them in Honour of him Accordingly the Christian Fathers generally teach That none of the Patriarchs did keep the Sabbath nor do we find from Adam to Joseph the least mention of the Observation of it though we find frequent mention of all other Acts and Requisits of their Religious Worship of their Groves and Oratories their Priests and Altars their Sacrifices and Oblations Prayers Vows Thanksgivings and after Abraham of their Circumcision the Book of Genesis is partly spent in giving an account of the Travels of these Patriarchs from one place to another and yet it addeth not one word of their resting any where because it was the Sabbath day Now doth it not seem strange that such a solemn Command should have been given to Adam and all Mankind as some conceive it was and not the least Print or Token of the Observation of it to be found for Two thousand Years And whereas some Object those Words of Moses Object This is that which the Lord hath said Exod. 16.23 To morrow is the Rest of the Holy Sabbath to the Lord and thence Collect that God had before Moses given a Command touching the Observation of that day It may be Answered That the word is is wanting in the Hebrew and so the Words may thus be rendred This is that which the Lord hath said To morrow shall be the Rest of the Holy Sabbath to the Lord and so they will accord exactly with those other Scriptures which tell us That the Sabbath was made known to the Jews not by Abraham or Joseph but by the Hands of Moses Ezek. 20.10 12. that God caused them to go forth out of the Land of Aegypt and then gave them his Sabbaths to be a sign between him and them whereas the Sign of the Covenant between him and Abraham was only that of Circumcision Now from all these Considerations it seems evident that the import of those Words of Moses in Genesis the Second Wherefore the Lord blessed the seventh day and hallowed it is only this God made the World in Six days and rested the Seventh which was the Reason that when he chose to himself a peculiar People he made that the day they were to set apart for his Service that so they might acknowledge him whom they served to be the Creator of the World. And Because on the same Day God overthrew Pharaoh and his Host in the Red Sea See Mr. Mede Disc 15. p. 56. and by that Action compleated his Deliverance of his People from Aegyptian Bondage therefore he gives that as a farther Reason of the Observance of that Day Deut. 5.15 saying Remember that thou wast a Servant in the Land of Aegypt and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence with a mighty hand and with a stretched out arm therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day Hence therefore 1. We see sufficient cause why this Command should be inserted into the Decalogue with as much Ceremony and Solemnity as the others were although it were not Moral as to the Nature of it it being so far Moral with respect unto the end of
its Observance viz. The owning the Creator of Heaven and Earth as their peculiar God in opposition to all Heathen Deities that upon this depended the performance of all the other Duties which belong to the First Table For 't was this Institution which continually brought this Fundamental Article to their Remembrance that the God they Worshipped was the Creator of the World they could not ask themselves why they thus rested but this must come into their Minds this could not come into their Minds but they must be inclined to despise all the old Heathen Deities the Sun Moon and Stars and the whole Earth as being all the Creatures of their Great Jehovah Wherefore this Precept having such strict Affinity with the other Three which were unquestionably intended to remove the Kinds the Objects the Signs and Instruments of Idolatry and keep them close to the sole Worship of the True Jehovah might very well find place among the Precepts of the Decalogue 2. Hence also may we see sufficient Reason for the strict Charge God gave for Observation of the Sabbath for the severest Punishments which he inflicted on the Violaters of it and for the Promises he made of signal Blessings to the Observers of it viz. Because the Observation of this day tended so fully to establish the great Foundation of the Law of Moses That Jehovah the Creator of the World was their God in Covenant and because it was a most effectual Bar against the Old Idolatry of the World which chiefly did consist in Worshipping the whole or else some parts of Heaven and Earth on which account we find God often mentioning these things together the keeping of the Sabbath and the fleeing from Idolatry Levit. 19.3 4. as in these words Ye shall keep my Sabbath I am the Lord your God turn you not to Idols nor make to your selves molten Gods Levit. 26.1 2. I am the Lord your God. And in these following You shall make no Idols nor graven Images nor shall you set up an Image of Stone in the Land to bow down unto it for I am the Lord your God ye shall keep my Sabbaths Lastly Because the Violation of this Law was a virtual denial of the Creation of the World and consequently of that God who made it and gave them this Temptation to Worship the Heavenly Beings that they were eternal Accordingly we find the Jews usually committing both these Sins at once Idolatry to wit and violation of the Sabbath as in those Words They polluted my Sabbaths Ezek. 20.16 for their Hearts went after their Idols and in those of the Author of the Book of Maccabees Many of the Israelites consented to the Religion of Antiochus 1 Mac. 1.43 and sacrified unto Idols and prophaned the Sabbath Since then the Observation of this Day was of so great moment for preservation of them from that Idolatry to which they were so prone and the neglect of it put them in so great danger of returning to it Surely we may discern sufficient Reason of the Severities and Promises forenamed and of the frequent Charges given for the strict Observance of it 3. Hence also may we see the plainest Reason for the non-Obligation of the seventh day Sabbath now Because that Reason of the Institution of it which concerned their Freedom from Aegyptian Bondage was peculiar to the Jews and therefore never could concern the Christian The other Reason Assigned by God that it might be a Sign between God and them that they were his peculiar People and that he was the Lord that sanctified them must also cease upon their ceasing to be his peculiar People and to have any more Relation to him as their God in Covenant Yea seeing God hath now cast off that very People to whom he gave the Sabbath for a Sign and as Josephus truly saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Law peculiar to that Nation and that dispensation it seems to be a kind of Judaism and as it were a virtual revolting to the Mosaick Dispensation to be still out of Conscience Observers of the Rest which was peculiar to that Law and Nation If it be here enquired Object whether the Reason of the Observation of the Seventh day assigned in the Fourth Commandment viz. Because God rested on that day doth not remain and equally concern all Christians I Answer No. For 1. Answ it seems a vulgar Error to conceive that God did chiefly and primarily command the Jews to rest upon the Seventh day in imitation of his Rest there being nothing moral or nothing in the Light of Nature which could induce them to imitate him in this matter any more than in the Work of the Six days preceeding in which God worked which was so far from laying any necessary Obligation on them to work upon those days that God himself established many other Festivals as a perpetual Ordinance in which they were obliged to cease from Labour on those Days on which he Worked Wherefore the great design of God in requiring them to Rest upon that day as he did was this that by so doing they might acknowledge as by a Sign and Pledge That they did Worship and own him as their God in Covenant who was the sole Creator of the World according to these Words of God to Moses Speak thou unto the Children of Israel saying Ex. 31.13.14 Verily my Sabbaths ye shall keep for it is a sign betwixt me and you throughout your Generations that you may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctifie you You shall keep the Sabbath therefore for it is Holy unto you Wherefore the Children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath to observe the Sabbath throughout their Generations for a perpetual Covenant It is a sign between me and the Children of Israel for ever for in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth and on the seventh day he Rested Now hence it follows That God neither did nor could agreeably to his Design Command the Gentiles then or before to observe the seventh day in imitation of his Resting for then the doing this by his own Nation could be no sign betwixt him and the Jews that they were his peculiar People because it was according to this Supposition the common duty of all other Nations The Gentile Christians therefore never were obliged to observe this rest by virtue of the fourth Commandment and being also not obliged to it by any Precept Evangelical it cannot be in them any act of Christian Obedience but rather must be deemed the Fruit of Jewish Superstition so to do Secondly Answ 2 I add that the injunction of this Rest upon a reason which remains and which doth in the General concern all Christians will not inferr the Obligation of the Christian to observe the Rest commanded for that Reason it being very common in the Law of Moses to require the Observation of Ceremonial Precepts for Reasons which remain and which do equally concern all Christians Lev.
and vehement in declaring his and our freedom from the legal Ceremonies saith notwithstanding that to the Jew he became as a Jew 1 Cor. 9.20 that he might gain the Jews to them that were under the Law as under the Law that he might gain them that were under the Law and therefore his example in these cases will as much prove that we are to observe the Law of Moses and the Jewish Customs as that we are obliged to keep the Jewish Sabbath Mr. M. farther adds §. 17. Obj. 4. p 210. 1 Cor. 7.19 That St. Paul tells us that in Christ Jesus neither Circumcision availeth any thing nor Uncircumcision but the keeping of the Commandments of God of which the Sanctification of the seventh day was one Answ To which I answer that here he plainly begs the Question which is only this Whether the Saturday under the Christian Oeconomy be still by God's Commandment to be observed as a day of Rest and contradicts the plainest declaration of our Lord and the whole Christian Church that it was Ceremonial a shadow of things to come a temporary precept which laid no obligation on the Christian Mr. M. closeth with the common Sabbatarian Objection §. 18. Obj. 5. p. 211. That Christ foretelling the destruction of Jerusalem which was to happen forty years after his Resurrection when all the Ceremonial Laws belonging to the Jews were abrogated bids his Disciples pray their flight might not be in the Winter or on the Sabbath-day Mat. 24.20 that they might avoid the profanation of that day whereas if that Commandment had been Ceremonial and then abrogated they might have fled upon that day as well as upon any other and could not by so doing have profaned it Answ 1. To this I Answer first That these words of Christ cannot be rationally deemed to import that he advised them to pray their flight might not be on the Sabbath because he thought such flying then a sinful action or a profanation of that day seeing he so expresly hath declar'd the contrary Mark 3.4 saying that it was lawful to save life upon the Sabbath-day and that in all such cases God would have mercy and not Sacrifice Mat. 12.7 that the Rest of that day might be violated to preserve the life of a Beast and much more to preserve the life of man that the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath and therefore man might wave the Rest required on that day when it was for his good to do so Having then so oft and so expresly taught his Disciples that it was lawful to fly for saving of their lives upon that day he could not use these words to intimate the contrary 2ly Tho' it were lawful even when the Fourth Commandment was still in force to flee upon that day from danger and travel upon case of urgent necessity yet many of the Jews thought otherwise esteeming this an intolerable profanation of the Sabbath persecuting and condemning our Lord for teaching the contrary If therefore his Disciples or other Christians should have been compell'd to flee upon that day they might have been molested and persecuted by their own Superstitious Nation and so had cause to pray their flight might not be on the sabbath-Sabbath-day And 3ly The believing Jews adhered stiffly to the observance of the Jewish Rites and consequently to the observance of the Rest commanded on the Jewish Sabbath till the destruction of Jerusalem and thought themselves obliged so to do and therefore Christ might well advise them knowing that they would still retain these apprehensions to pray their flight might not fall out upon that day And tho' it cannot be expected that we should know the Reasons of all his actions yet might he still permit the Christians to continue under this apprehension of their obligation to observe the Law of Moses that so the unbelieving Jews might be the less offended at them and so might be more ready to embrace the Christian faith and because he knew the time would shortly come when the Temple should be destroyed and they should thereby be convinced that the Rites confined to that Temple were abolished OF TRADITION CHAP. VI. That there is no Evidence of Traditions for the Doctrines of the Church of Rome is proved 1. Because there is no mention of them in the ancient Councils the Codex canonum Ecclesiae universalis the Discourses of the Ancients Church Government and Discipline or in their Rituals § 1. 2. Because we find no mention of their Articles of Faith in the Creeds Enchriidions Compendiums of Christian Doctrine and Ecclesiastical Opinions or in the catechistical Discourses of the ancient Fathers § 2. 3. Because the Fathers of the first Ages were very careful and concerned to preserve the Traditions of the Apostles truly so called and so esteemed by them and had occasion to mention them by reason of the pretences of the Hereticks of their Times to Tradition and yet they have not been concerned to preserve the pretended traditionary Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome § 3. HANING thus Stated the Question in these propositions I come now to shew that there is no Evidence of Tradition for any much less for all those Doctrines of the Church of Rome which she hath put into her Creed and hath required all her Clorgy to believe and teach as that true Catholick Faith without which no Man can be saved For First § 1 Had they this Evidence concerning the Exercise of the papal Jurisdiction over all Christians the practice of auricular Confession and Indulgences of Prayer to Saints and Angels of Veneration of Images of performing the publick Services of Prayer Singing Reading in a Tongue not understood by the People I say had they that evidence of Apostolical Tradition for these things it would be as notorious that these Doctrines were handed down by the Catholick Church throughout all Ages to this present as it is of other matters of continual practice viz. The Lord's Day Assemblies the Ordination of Presbyters and Deacons by Bishops the Government of the Church by them the Observation of the Easter Festival Baptizing by Trine Immersion the mixture of Wine with Water in the Sacrament c. For all these matters are therefore evident in the Tradition of the Church because being continually practised by her Members they had continual occasion to speak of them in their Discourses of Church Government and Church Assemblies and of the Sacraments of the Church and made numerous Constitutions about them they all appear in their most ancient Rituals in the Accounts they give us of their Assemblies and of their practice when Assembled and in their ancient Councils the Primitive Writers mention them upon all Occasions they draw Arguments and Conclusions from them and shew the Reasons why such establishments were made by the Apostles The like we see now practised in the Roman Church touching the Novelties now mentioned since they have
Traditions did we not find them thus handed down to us in these Writings so can we have no reason to receive the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome because they are not handed down unto us in this manner But saith Mr. M. Before we can know true Books § 24 and true Copies of Books from false P. 407 408. we must first know true Tradition from false that we assuredly may say these are the true Books of Scripture these are the true Copies of those Books because true Tradition commends them for such these be false Books or false Copies of true Books because the Tradition which commends these is false tell me the means by which infallibly the true Tradition in this point may be known from the false and that very means I will assign in other points to know true Tradition from false This Objection I retort thus Resp before we can know true Tradition from false we must know true Faith from false for true Tradition is only the Tradition of the Faithful that is of those who do entirely believe all the necessary Articles of Christian Faith and if I must first know this Faith before I can know true Tradition I cannot need Tradition to instruct me in the Christian Faith. Again tell me the means by which I may know true Faith antecedently to Tradition and the very same means will I assign to know the Faith of Protestants without it 2. This Argument in the Mouth of an unbelieving Jew that lived in the Days of Christ and his Apostles pleads as strongly for the vain Traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees and the whole Jewish Nation rejected by our Lord and his Apostles as for the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome v. g. you send us to Moses and the Prophets to learn the true Messiah and from these Scriptures you attempt to prove your Jesus is the Messiah promised to the Jews but before you can know whether the Books you cite be the true Books of Moses and the Prophets and the Copies you have of them be true Copies you must know true Tradition from false tell me then the means by which infallibly the true Tradition in this Point may be known from the false and that very means will I assign to prove the Traditions of the Jewish Church rejected by your Lord and his Apostles to be true Whatsoever Answer Mr. M. can return to this Objection will be as applicable to his own 3. To this demand I answer That where the Tradition deriveth from the Fountain of Tradition and can be proved by written Testimonies to have done so And 2ly that where it is a Tradition not of a matter of Fact but Faith and passeth down without controul and contradiction of any that were then and after owned by other Churches as true Christian Brethren And 3ly where it can be proved irrational and absurd that the Tradition could have so long and generally obtained without just ground of being owned as such there the Tradition ought to be embraced as true When therefore Mr. M. hath proved the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome to have these Three Characters of true Tradition we shall have equal reason to admire his Parts as we have now to wonder at his Confidence but they who can believe Impossibilities may be allowed to undertake them CHAP. IV. Sixthly We distinguish betwixt Traditions touching purely Doctrinals or divine Revelations touching Articles of Faith and Matters of Practice in the first the Fathers have been subject to mistake in Doctrines not Fundamental as appears 1. From the Doctrine of the Mellennium delivered in the Second and Third Centuries as a Tradition received from Christ and his Apostles § 1. As a thing of which they were certain Ibid. 2. As a Doctrine proved from variety of Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament which could say they receive no other sence § 2.3 As a Doctrine denied only by Hereticks or such as were deceived by them § 3. It was embraced by the greatest number of Christians and Church Guides delivering it not as Doctors only but Testators § 4. Hence the uncertainty of such Traditions is demonstrated and the falshood of the pretended Tradition for Invocation of Saints § 5. 2ly A like mistake is proved from the general Doctrine of the Fathers of the four first Centuries that the Day of Judgment was nigh at hand § 6. And that the time of Antichrists coming was at hand § 7. That the World should end after Six thousand Years that is according to their computation Five hundred Years after our Saviour's Advent § 8. The Inferences hence Ibid. In matters of practice we distinguish Seventhly betwixt such as have been generally received without contest in the purest Ages of the Church and such as have been contested and disowned by Orthodox Churches or Members of the Church and that we cannot depend with certainty on the latter is proved 1. From the Contest betwixt P. Victor and the Asiaticks touching the Easter Festival in which it is observed 1. That the greatest part of the Christian World consented in judgment with Victor and his Synod § 9.2 That they who with him kept this Feast on the Lord's Day pleaded an Apostolical Tradition for that Practice § 10. 3. That they who kept it with the Jews pleaded the same Tradition and with greater Evidence § 11. 4. That when the Pope endeavoured by terrifying Letters to affright them from their practice all the Asiaticks and Neighbouring Provinces refused to hearken to him and condemned him for it § 12. 5. That hereupon Victor attempted to Excommunicate them and commanded others to have no Communion with them § 13. 6. That notwithstanding this injunction all the other Churches held Communion with them and sharply reprehended Victor as a disturber of the Church's Peace § 14. Inferences hence shewing the Falshood of the Fundamental Rule of the Guide of Controversies and the uncertainty of Tradition § 15. Which is farther proved from the Contest betwixt P. Stephen and St. Cyprian and the Asiaticks touching the Baptizing of Hereticks where 't is observed 1. That the Opinion of Stephen was for the Baptizing of no Hereticks no not those who were not Baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost that of St. Cyprian for the Baptizing of all Hereticks and Schismaticks § 16. 2. That Pope Stephen proceeded to an Excommunication of his Brethren upon this account and a refusal of Communion with them and so did Pope Xystus and Dionysius after him whereas they of Africa judged no Man who differed from them § 17. 3. Observe that the Opinion of the Africans and other Eastern Churches was asserted by many Christian Doctors Churches and Councils and was of long continuance after this dispute § 18. 4. Observe that as Pope Stephen pretended to Apostolical and Original Tradition for his Opinion so did the contrary Party for their Opinion § 19. 5. That
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
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
the Lord's Day had been of the same nature we may suppose the Apostles would not have failed to inform the Christian Churches That this was their own Constitution not the Lord 's which since they did not we may presume that they in this as well as other things did only what they received from the Lord. And lastly the Apostle doth command the Christians to observe the Traditions which they had received 2 Thess 2.15 whether by Word or by Epistle and therefore must command them to observe that day which by Tradition from the Apostles was certainly delivered to them But against these Arguments it is Objected Object That we read in Scripture of many things ordained by the Apostles which are now laid aside viz. The Kiss of Charity the Love-Feast the Anointing with Oil the abstaining from things strangled and from blood and therefore cannot rationally conclude the Lord 's day ought to be observed perpetually and unalterably because it was ordained by those Apostles who were assisted by the Holy Ghost To this I Answer Answ That Apostolical Constitutions which concern the whole Church must be esteemed invariable and perpetual if they have these Conditions First That they were made upon such Grounds and Reasons as equally concern the whole Church of all Ages and there hath happened since no alteration of Circumstances which made it reasonable then to observe what now we have no Reason to perform v. g. The Anointing of the Sick was a Ceremony annexed to the extraordinary Gift of Healing which ceasing this Appendix of it ceased with it not by any repeal of the Church but by expiration as all the Constitutions of Saint Paul touching the use of Tongues did with the failure of that Gift The Law which obliged the Gentile to abstain from things Strangled and Blood was designed only to avoid offending the weak Jew there being therefore none such now nor any hopes remaining of their Conversion by this Abstinence that Law must cease not by a positive repeal but by cessation of the Cause or Reason of it according to those known Rules Sublatâ causâ tollitur effectus ratio legis est lex Take away the Cause and the Effect ceaseth Secondly When they are not about some lesser Ceremonies or Circumstances which in tract of time may become subject to abuse and hindrance to a greater good and for that reason may be dispensed with and abrogated by the Church by virtue of that general Rule of doing all things to Edification but about Matters of great Moment such as concern the Service of our Great Master and the time to be set apart for the performance of it For Instance touching the Kiss of Charity all that Saint Paul or Peter have delivered concerning it is this That some times or other Christians should testifie their mutual affection to each other by a Kiss and that this Kiss be not a wanton or dissembling one but an Holy one or a true Kiss of Charity and in this sence 't is still continued among Christians Moreover 't is of it self a thing indifferent and only good as 't is an indication of true Charity and therefore is equivalently continued by all Acts of Christian Charity The Love Feasts were designed for the Refreshment of the Poor by what the Rich brought to the Holy Sacrament to be eaten by them at that Feast of Love and since it after happened through the looseness of Christians that great Disorders were committed in those Feasts they being made occasions not of Divisions only but of Intemperance and Drunkenness they were universally disused in the Fourth Century and converted into a more unexceptionable Charity to be distributed among the Poor according to that never failing Rule That where the abuse is greater than the use of a Ceremony if the intended use may be obtained other wife Abusus tollit usum the abuse makes it reasonable to cease the usage of that Rite Thirdly If they have been universally neceived through the whole Christian World from the Apostles times unto our daies not that the neglect of this Observation by any Church in any Age or Ages could have rendered this Ordinance invalid or not obliging to Posterity but because the continuance of it from the time of its first Practice or Institution to this present moment is a just Presumption that all Christians have been always satisfied and well assured of their Obligation to comply with it and that no Christians can have any cause to vary from it Now all these three particulars here meet For 1. This Christian Festival hath always been observed in all place◠and throughout all Ages of the Church 2. It was observed by all Christians for these very Reasons 1st That as the Jews by Observation of the Sabbath professed to own the Lord of the Creation for their God and themselves to be his Servants so they by Observation of the Lord Christ might own him as their Lord and Master who was the Lord of the New Creation 2dly As they observed their Sabbath in Commemoration of the Blessings procured to them by the Creation so the Christians observed the day of our Lord's Resurrection in thankful Remembrance of the inestimable Blessings procured and consigned to them by it Non Dominicum diem timerent enim ne Christiani viderentur Now sure this solemn Act of owning Jesus for our Lord on which account Tertullian says The Heathens feared to observe the Lord's Day is a Duty of the highest moment and surely the Blessings partly purchased partly confirmed to us by our Lord's Resurrection must as well deserve a day to be employed in solemn and in grateful commemoration of them as the Mercies which the Creation did conferr upon Mankind and so this Constitution must be concerning Matters of great Moment And 3dly These are never failing Reasons and such as render it as necessary now to observe this day and will do so for ever and no Man ever can refuse the Observation of this day without being careless to own Christ for his Lord or to return Thanks for the Benefits of his Resurrection or without opposing yea condemning the Wisdom of the Apostles and the whole Christian World to this very day Moreover This Assertion is confirmed by the concurring suffrage of the Ancient Fathers for Justin M. Apol. 2. p. 99. speaking of the Observation of this day saith That our Lord arising from the dead 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taught these things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De laudibus Constant p. 664. Eusebius saith That Christ hath prescribed to all the Inhabitants of the World by Sea and Land that coming together into one place they should celebrate as a Festival the Lord's day In time past saith Athanasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De Sement p. 1060. the Sabbath was of great account which Solemnity the Lord translated to the Lord's day nor do we set light by it without his Authority In a word So Athanas Serm.
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
did oblige the Jews and Jewish Proselytes to rest from Labour on that day laying no Obligation on the Christian so to do And First § 9 That this Command to observe the Seventh day from the Creation could be no Moral Precept obliging all Mankind is evident 1. From the Reasons there assigned of it Because God having made the World in six days rested the seventh and that therefore the Lord blessed the seventh day and hallowed it Now evident it is that no Man by the Light of Nature could discern that God imployed six days in the Creation of the World or that he rested on the seventh day only from his Labour no humane Reason could with any certainty inferr That because he rested from his Labour on this day we should rest also on it and so no Man without a Revelation could be acquainted with these Grounds for Observation of this day Moreover no Man by the Light of Nature could know that Time ought rather to be computed by Weeks or by the Number Seven than any other Number and much less that one day in seven precisely rather than in ten should be dedicated to God's Service this being neither a principle evident in it self nor derivable from any thing that is so and much less that the last of seven days should be kept holy rather than the first or any other of the seven no day being more holy than another by inherent Sanctity but only by God's free and arbitrary injunction to apply it or consecrate it to Religious Vses And sure God notwithstanding the Creation of the World in six days had he so pleased might have designed any of those days for his Religious Worship 4thly Such Precepts as are purely Moral and are injunctions of things good antecedently to the command can in no time or case be violated or transgressed whereas our Lord expresly hath declared That this Law touching the Sabbath in many cases might be violated And therefore Chrysostom observes That of those natural Laws Thou shalt not Kill or commit Adultery c. God gave no Reason because the Light of Nature taught them but when it pleased him to prescribe the Observation of the Sabbath day according to the Fourth Commandment he adds these Reasons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Stat. Orat. 12. Tom. 6. Ed. Savil. p. 542. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. in Ez. 30. because he rested on the seventh day from all his Work and because thou wast a Bondman in the Land of Aegypt as knowing this Commandment was not primogeneal nor made known to us by the dictate of our Consciences but was temporary and particular i. e. given only to the Jewish Nation according to those Words of Moses I have given you the Sabbath Exod. xvi 19. Secondly § 10 This clearly doth appear from that Defence our Saviour made of his Disciples when they were censured by the Pharisees for violating the Sabbath by plucking Ears of Corn Matth. xij and rubbing them for our Lord justifies their Action 1. by the Example of David and his Men vers 3. Who being hungry ate the shew Bread which by the Law of Moses was to be eaten only by the Priest Now in all Arguments à pari or taken from Example the Ground or the Foundation of them must be this In paribus par ratio the Reason is the same where the Case is so And so in Arguments drawn from such Actions the Cases must be still alike in all considerable Circumstances and so it will be in the Example here produced provided that the rest enjoined in the Fourth Commandment be Ceremonial for then the Case runs thus I and my Men and David and his Men being both hungry did that which was forbidden by a Ceremonial Law of Moses if therefore David and his Men were blameless I and my Disciples must be so But if the Rest enjoined by the Fourth Commandment had been Moral 't is evident the Cases could not be alike since David and his Men did only violate a Ceremonial Precept but Christ's Disciples did transgress a Moral Precept So that we stand obliged to confess the Rest enjoined by the Fourth Commandment was Ceremonial or that our Saviour 's Argument was unconcluding and unsound which it is Blasphemy to assert Again our Saviour Argues That his Disciples were not to be accused of doing evil Vers 7 though they did not observe the Rest required on the Sabbath day because God had declared he will have mercy and not Sacrifice that is he will have works of Mercy which are Moral Duties to be preferred before Sacrifices which are but Ceremonials the feeding of the hungry Body must therefore be compared to works of Mercy the violating the Rest prescribed by the Fourth Commandment is that which is compared to Offering Sacrifice Since then the Law concerning Sacrifices most certainly was Ceremonial the Law concerning the Sabbatick Rest must be so also Secondly § 11 This may be fairly gathered from these Words of the Apostle Paul to the Galatians Argum. 2 Gal. 4.10 11. You observe days and months and times and years I am afraid of you least I may have laboured among you in vain Whereobserve First That the days and months the times and years here mentioned are only Jewish days and times as will appear first from the scope of the Apostles which is to shew the Christian Gentiles were exempt from any Obligation to observe the Law of Moses for this being the chief design of that Epistle the days forbidden here must be the days and times commanded by the Law of Moses 2dly By Observation of those days and times c. they are here said to be willing to return again to the service of weak and beggarly Elements Now these Elements to which they are said to have been in Bondage are the Mosaick Ceremonies v. 3 and 4. For we saith he when we were Children were in Bondage to the Elements of the World but when the fulness of time was come God sent to redeem those that were under the Law from any farther Bondage to it Secondly Observe That the Months Times and Years here mentioned do comprehend all other Jewish Festivals besides the Sabbath for the Months signifie their New Noons the Times the set times of going up to Jerusalem the Years their solemn Anniversary Feasts which constantly returned at such a time of Year or after such a period of Years and therefore the Days here mentioned can only signifie the Sabbath Days observed by the Jews and so Saint Jerom and Saint Chrysostom interpret the Place Thirdly Observe That the Jewish Sabbath or the Day of Rest appointed by the Fourth Commandment is certainly the seventh day from the Creation as is evident 1. From the Reason there assigned You shall keep the Sabbath for in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth and rested the seventh day 2. That was the day which the Lord Blessed and Sanctified if therefore that be abrogated and not to
19.10 vers 30. vers 37. v. g. Thou shalt not glean thy Vineyard neither shalt thou gather every Grape of thy Vineyard but thou shalt leave them for the Poor I am the Lord thou shalt Reverence my Sanctuary I am the Lord. You shall observe all my Statutes and all my Judgments and do them I am the Lord. Now God is still the Lord of Christians but hence it will not follow that they are obliged to observe these Ceremonial Precepts enjoined for Reasons still remaining and equally concerning Christians it therefore cannot rationally be concluded that Christians are obliged to observe the Rest enjoined in the Fourth Commandment because it is commanded for a Reason that doth still remain 4. Hence we may easily discern the Reason why the Christians still observed one day in Seven and also why they chose to observe the first day of the Week and not the last For when Christianity began it had two sorts of Adversaries to encounter viz. The unbelieving Jews and the Idolatrous Gentiles and therefore as a Testimony against the Heathens who worshipped false Gods that is the Gods who made not Heaven and Earth they chose one day in seven to signifie they worshipped the true God and the Creator of all things But then they chose the first of these seven days to testifie against the Jews that they worshipped this God not now as one in Covenant with the Jews or as their Redeemer out of Egypt but as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and through him our most loving Father and to own themselves the Servants of that God who on the morning of that day vanquished Satan the Spiritual Pharaoh and redeemed us from our Spiritual thraldom by raising Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead begetting us instead of an Earthly Canaan to an Inheritance incorruptible in the Heavens Dr. Spencer de Legibus Hebr. Mr. Mede Disc 15. this account of this change of the day I have borrowed from two very Learned and Ingenious men and for the further illustration and confirmation of it lot it be observed 1. That the Jews never worshipped God or put up their addresses to him under the name of Father as we Christians by our Lord are taught and commanded to do in these words When you pray say Our Father this being as the Apostle hath observed the peculiar privilege of Christians above the Jews Rom. 8.15 that we have not received as they the spirit of bondage unto fear but the spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Father They were it is confessed Children also Gal. 4.1 4. but nothing differing from servants as being Children in their Minority and so in bondage to the Rudiments of the world whereas we having received through faith in Christ Jesus the Adoption of Sons God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts crying Abba Father It is the saying of the Jews that a servant cannot say unto his Lord Abba this being a word proper to a Son and only used by natural or adopted Sons we being therefore all the Children of God and his adopted Sons through faith in Christ Jesus Joh. 1.12 Gal. 3.26 we have through him received this privilege to address our selves unto him by the name of Abba or our Father and yet more certainly is it peculiar to the Christian to own him as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ which is his usual name in the New Testament and to address unto him in and by that Name 2ly Observe that the Resurrection of our Lord Christ is generally ascribed in the New Testament to God the Father and when our Lord declares that he had power to lay down his life Joh. 10.18 and take it up again he adds immediately This Commandment have I received of my Father Hence doth the Holy Ghost assure us that God the Father said unto him Thou art my Son Act. 13.33 this day have I begotten thee for this as well as other reasons that he had raised him from the dead and that He was declared to be the Son of God with power Rom. 1.4 by his raising him from the dead 3ly Observe that our Lord's Resurrection is represented as the Great foundation of all the mercies derived to us from our Saviour as being that by which they were compleated or confirmed to us 1 Pet. 3 21. Our Baptism doth save us saith St. Peter through the Refurrection of Christ Jesus Our freedom from condemnation is ascribed rather unto his Resurrection than his death as in that question Rom. 8.34 Who is he that condemns us it is Christ that died yea rather that is risen again Our Justification is ascribed to it Rom. 4.25 For Christ was delivered for our offences and rose again for our justification From it derives our hope of Glory 1 Pet. 1.3 for we are begotten to a lively hope through the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus from the dead of an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled reserved in the Heavens for us In a word 't is the foundation of our whole faith 1 Cor. 15.14 for if Christ be not risen then our faith is vain Since then these blessings so far exceeding those of the Creation or of the Jews deliverance from Egypt were procured to us by the Resurrection of our Lord Ephes 1.19 which was effected 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the operation of the strength of the power of God the Father since he became the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and through him our Father by raising him from the Dead there seems great reason why this day should be appointed as the day in which the Christian should acknowledge himself a Worshipper of God his Father through our Lord Jesus Christ Moreover this day being peculiarly stiled the Lords-day it is highly probable it was observed by Christians primarily in honour of our Lord Jesus Christ and through him to the Glory of God the Father to whom our prayers our praises and spiritual sacrifices are offer'd on that day through Christ And for Illustration of this matter let it be observed 1. That the times of the Messiah were still represented by the Jews under the Notion of Holam Habba or the world to come and the work of the Messiah as a new Creation or a Creation of new Heavens and a new Earth The Lord God shall slay ye and call his servants by another name Isa 65.15 17. Isa 66.22 For behold I create new Heavens and a new Earth and the former shall not be remembred nor come into my mind Accordingly Heb. 2.5 the Author to the Hebrews stiles this new Dispensation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the world to come and they who then enjoy'd the Gift of Miracles or other extraordinary operations are said to have tasted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the powers of the world to come Heb. 6.5 And the Renovation of Christians by this Dispensation is represented as a new Creation wrought
by Christ Ephes 2.10 for we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus to good words He hath abolished the Law of Commandments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ver. 15. that he might create those two the Jew and Gentile into one new man in himself so that now if any man be in Christ Jesus he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a new Creation 2 Cor. 5.17 old things are pass'd away that all things might become new in him for in Christ Jesus nothing availeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gal. 6.15 but this new Creation 2ly Observe that this new World and new Creation Hieron Theodoret in Isa 9.6 Euseb dem Evan. l. 7 p. 336 as it was made by Christ so is it immediately subjected to him He by the Septuagint was stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Prince of Peace the Father of the Age to come to him and not unto the Angels Heb. 2.5 Ver. 8 9. hath God subjected this world to come He hath crown'd him with Glory and Honour and set him over the works of his own hands and hath put all things in subjection under his feet Joh. 5.23 Phil. 2.10 11. declaring that he will have all men honour the Son even as they honour the Father and determining that at the Name of Jesus every knee should bow and every tongue should confess that Jesus was the Lord to the Glory of God the Father Moreover this power he received at the Resurrection having then Mat. 28.18 as he saith all power both in Heaven and Earth committed to him being then saith the Apostle Peter made both Lord and Christ Act. 2.36 and exalted to be a Prince and a Saviour whence he is said to be the first born from the dead Col. 1.10 that he might be in all things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the preeminent 3ly Observe that Christians are represented in the New Testament as those who do succeed the Jews in all their Covenant-Relations Rom. 11.19 They being broken off from the true Olive and we grafted in and being therefore a chosen Generation a peculiar people a Royal Priesthood an Holy Nation to shew forth the vertues of him who called us from darkness to light 1 Pet. 2 9. and from the power of Satan unto God. This Covenant-Relation they enjoy by virtue of that Jesus who is the Mediator of a better Covenant and who gave himself for us that he might redeem us Tit. 2.14 and purifie us to himself a peculiar people In fine the vertues for which we are to celebrate his Praises are our Redemption by him from the wrath to come from the curse of the Law from the power of Satan from the dominion of sin our Adoption our receiving of the spirit by which we are enabled to cry Abba Father and as a consequent of that our being heirs of Glory and all these mercies as I have observed already were confirmed by and were compleated to us at his Resurrection If then in this Oeconomy there be a new world and a new Creation a new Lord to whom this world is subject and who is to be honoured and worshipped as the former was tho' to the honour of the former if there be a new Covenant established in his blood and by which he hath purified to himself a peculiar people if to this Lord all power both in Heaven and Earth is given by the Creator of the World unto this very end that all men might thus honour him if this Lord hath procured for us a Redemption from the power of Sin and Satan much more valuable than the Redemption of the Jewish Nation from Egyptian thraldom if by his Resurrection we are all begotten to the lively hope of a much better Canaan is there not cause sufficient for the Translation of the Day appointed for the celebration of the mercies of the old Creation and of deliverance from the Jewish thraldom and the agnizing of the Author of it as the Lord that sanctified them to a day appointed for Celebration of the new Creation and the deliverance accomplished by it and the acknowledging the Author of it as the Christians Lord Is there not cause sufficient why Christians should observe the day on which their Lord did triumph over their spiritual Pharaoh redeem'd them from spiritual thraldom begot them to a lively hope of a Spiritual Canaan â—nd by the observation of it should profess that they are Christians and 〈◊〉 that Jesus who is Lord of all things Can we refuse to give this honour to the Son who is by God's appointment to be honoured as the Father and whom we do thus worship to the Glory of God the Father Mr. M. in behalf of the Sabbatarians Objects § 15. Obj. 2. §. 9. p. 207 208. Mat. 19.17 18. Mark 10.19 Luk. 18.20 That ouâ— Lord said to one enquiring of him What good thing shall I do to have eternal life if thou wilt enter into life keep the Commandments and when he still enquired of him which Commandments did clearly explicate himself to mean all the Commandments of the Decalogue given by Moses whence he insers That the Author of our new Law with his own mouth required no less the keeping of this Commandment of the Saturday Sabbath as necessary for our entrance into life everlasting than the keeping any other Commandment Answ 1. This Assertion is expresly false and manifestly contradicts the Text for in none of these Evangelists doth our Lord mention the Commandments of the first Table of which that of the Sabbath is one but only doth enumerate those which belonged to the second 2ly His Inference is also-false for Christ there speaks not of what was necessary to Salvation to be observed by the Christian after his Resurrection but of what was necessary then to be observed by the Jew speaking there to a Jewish Governour who was acquainted already with the Law of which he spake and had observ'd it from his Youth Mr. M. Objects That St. Paul preached every Saturday §. 16. Obj. 3. Act. 18. p 209. for he disputed in the Synagogue every Sabbath Answ 1. To this I answer first That this Apostle hath declared that the seventh-day Sabbath was part of that hand-writing of Ordinances which Christ took away and was a shadow of good things exhibited by Christ and so he plainly did discharge the Christian from observation of the Rest required by the fourth Commandment on the Sabbath day 2ly That He or any of his Brethren preached the Gospel in the Jewish Synagogues upon that day can be no evidence that they esteemed the Rest required on that day obliging to the Christian but only that they prudentially complied with Jews and Proselytes in coming to their Assemblies on that day that so they might have more familiar access unto them and better opportunity to instruct them in the Christian faith and therefore in pursuance of the same good end St. Paul who was most free
but never to Tradition the Prophets do exhort them for their direction to repair to the Law Esai 8.20.34.16 Mal. 4.4 and to the Testimonies to the Book of the Lord. To remember the Law of Moses which he commanded them in Horeb for all Israel with the Statutes and Judgments as their only certain Rule and Direction Now that the ordinary Succession of Prophets was to cease from the Days of Malachy to the Times of Christ whereas had Oral Tradition also been their Rule the Prophets must have had like reason to call upon them to remember that Moreover God only calls upon them by Moses To do all the Words of this Law which are written in this Book and promiseth his Favour and Acceptance of them upon that account saying If thou shalt hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God Deut. 30.9 10. Vers 15. to keep his Commandments and Statutes which are written in this Book of the Law I will rejoice over thee for Good. See I have set before thee this day life and good and death and evil And David speaketh thus unto King Solomon 1 Kings 2.3 Keep the Charge of the Lord thy God to walk in his ways to keep his Statutes and his Commandments and his Judgments and his Testimonies as it is written in the Law of Moses that thou maist prosper in all that thou dost and whithersoever thou turnest thy self If then the Observation of what was written in the Law of Moses was sufficient to procure Life Favour Prosperity and Acceptance with God surely this written Law must be a perfect Rule and must sufficiently contain all that was needful to be believed or done unto those ends Hence is the King commanded to write him a Copy of this Law in a Book that he might learn to fear the Lord God Deut. 17.18 19. and to keep all the words of this Law and these Statutes to do them and to perform the words of the Covenant which are written in this Book 2 Chron. 34.31 is to keep God's Commandments his Testimonies and his Statutes with all the Soul and with all the Heart Whereas had Oral Tradition been any part of their Rule they must have been obliged equally to observe what was delivered by it and all God's Statutes and Commandments could not be written in this Book as it is so expresly and frequently declared that they were Our Saviour in like manner bids them Search the Scriptures Joh. 3.39 because they thought in them they had eternal Life in which apprehension had they been deceived as they must have been provided that there was another Law of Oral Tradition given to lead them unto Life eternal our Saviour doubtless would have informed them of this dangerous Error which yet he was so far from doing that when a Lawyer puts the Question to him What shall I do that I may inherit eternal Life Luk. 10.25 26. he Answers What is written in the Law how readest thou This do and thou shalt live Luk. 16.29 And sends the Jews to Moses and the Prophets that by hearing them they might avoid the coming to the Place of Torments but neither he nor his Disciples do ever send them to Tradition or speak one word in approbation of it which is sufficient Evidence that they knew nothing of this Rule of Mr. M. 2dly § 6 The Traditions concerning Doctrines generally believed and Practices needful to be performed among them after the Law was written by Moses and after God had given them a Charge upon the ceasing of the Succession of his Prophets to remember and stick close unto it I say the Traditions which obtained in the Jewish Church as far as we have any certain intimation of them were such as tended to the evacuating of the Law of Moses to the renouncing of the true Messiah and to the introduction of vain Worship and superstitious Observances whence it demonstratively appears that Oral Tradition was not then a certain Rule nor could the Jewish Nation be obliged by divine Precept to receive it as such To make this Evident consider 1. That our Saviour often sends the Jews to Scripture to Moses and the Prophets but never to Tradition 2. That he still represents the great Asserters of Tradition in the Jewish Nation Matth. 15.14.23.16 17 19. Mat. 15.10 11. to wit their Elders Scribes and Pharisees as blind Guides leading of the Blind as Fools and Blind confuteth their Traditions though generally received before all the People Mark 7. Mat. 12.7 Matth. 15.13 justifies his Disciples in the neglect and violation of them pronounces them Plants which his Father had not planted and therefore such as should be rooted up 3dly He plainly tells them That by these Traditions they did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transgress make void Mark. 7.10 and null the Commandment of God. He shews this by plain Instances in their evacuating the Fifth Commandment by their Traditions in observing and enjoining such Traditions touching the Observation of the Sabbatick Rest Matth. 12.7 Matth. 12.12 Luk. 6.9 Mark 3.5 Luke 13.15 Matth. 23.16 23. as contradicted that great Law of God I will have mercy and not sacrifice and made it unlawful to do good and preserve Life upon that day and which sufficiently demonstrated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the blindness of their Minds and their Hypocrisie and in absolving them from their Oaths out of an ignorance so Gross as knew not they were virtually made to God. He also charges them that by thus teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of Men Matth. 15.9 they rendered God's Worship vain 4thly It is extreamly evident that by virtue of some of these Traditions they rejected the true Messiah and stood obliged by them so to do For First It is most certain that the Jews had a Tradition generally received among them That their Messiah should be a Temporal Prince that at his Coming he should restore the Kingdom to Israel he should subdue the Nations under them and should erect a Temporal Dominion in the Jewish Nation over all their Enemies Trypho the Jew declares to Justin M. That Dial. p. 249. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Scriptures do compel us to expect a great and glorious Messiah who shall receive as the Son of Man from the ancient of Days an everlasting Kingdom In Celsum l. 2. p. 78. not such a mean despised one as was your Jesus The Jews saith Origen say That their Prophets represent their Messiah to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a great Person and a Potentate and Lord of the whole Earth and of all the Heathens and their Armies De Bello Jud. l. 6. c. 31. Josephus confesseth there was an obscure Oracle found in their S. Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That about that time one of Judea should govern the World. Suetonius and Tacitus say In Vespas c 4. Hist l. 5. That it was in the whole East Vetus constans opinio ut
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 laying the first Foundations of Christianity and so they needed Miracles to prove what they pretended to receive from God but as for us now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We introduce nothing of our selves but only speak those things which we received from them and we go not about to perswade Men by our own Reasonings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but from the Holy Scriptures and afford Men assurance of the things that we say from the Miracles that were then done by those who did indite the Scriptures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and for this Cause Miracles are not now done Now this is the very Answer of the Protestants when by the Romanists they are called upon to shew their Miracles and it strikes Confusion upon this Pretence of that Church accusing them of new Doctrines if they have any which are now to be confirmed by Miracles 2ly The Fathers add that Miracles having thus ceased the Devil was to set up by them to draw Men off from the true Faith to Infidelity or to corrupt that Truth God had already stablished by sufficient Miracles Hom. in Matth. ad Huet p. 265. 266. Thus Origen declareth of the Man of Sin That he was to appear for the Deception of those that should perish with all Power Signs and lying Wonders and all deceivableness of Unrighteousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 immitating all the Miracles done for the confirmation of the Truth The Author of the imperfect Commentary on St. Matthew saith That at the beginning of Christianity true Prophets were known from false by this That the Signs done by the First were profitable those done by the other were unprofitable but seeing now the time will come ut etiam ex parte bona faciendorum Signorum Diabolo detur potestas Hom. 19 p. 75. That the Power of working good Signs shall be given to the Devil we must enquire whether the Sign be necessary or unnecessary as to the time for if Christ did his Miracles propter confirmationem infidelium for Confirmation of Unbelievers manifestum est quia modo cum nullus sit infidelis faciendorum miraculorum necessitas non est it is manifest that now that there is no Unbeliever amongst us there is no Necessity of doing Miracles And again Formerly saith he Christians did Miracles full not of Admiration only but Advantage and by these true Christians were known from false Hom. 49 p. 173. nunc autem signorum operatio omnino levata est magis autem apud eos invenitur qui falsi sunt Christiani fieri ficta But now the working of Miracles is wholly minished and the doing of feigned ones is chiefly found amongst false Christians as St. Peter in Clement saith Antichristo enim plena signorum faciendorum est danda potestas for the full Power of doing Miracles is to be given to Antichrist And a third time upon those Words False Christs and Prophets shall arise and work great Signs he Comments thus P. 178. They shall work not vain and unprofitable Signs as the Ministers of Satan were wont to do but great full and profitable Signs quae sancti facere solent which the Saints used to do for whilst saith he there was a calling Men from Infidelity to Faith the Servants of Christ did Miracles because these Testimonies were a sign of their divine Vocation that the Truth of their Doctrine might be commended by Miracles but this Calling ceasing the Seduction calling Men back from Faith to Infidelity will begin and then saith he tradenda sunt Seductionis adjutoria Diabolo id est potestas faciendorum signorum the Instruments of Seduction that is the Power of working Signs is to be given up to the Devil that by Signs and Prodigies he may commend his Lyes for Truth And therefore now we must not take notice of Mens Miracles but their Fruits a good Conversation Hom. 19. p. 74 77. and a true Confession and enquire si confessio ejus conveniat cum Scripturis if his Confession agree with the Scriptures for if so he is a good Christian otherwise he is a false one In Deut. q. 12. Quaecunquetalia fiunt ideo sunt approbanda quia in Catholica fiunt non ideo ipsa manifestatur Catholica quia haec in ea fiunt de Vnit Eccl. c. 16. And in like manner Theodoret instructs us Not to regard the Miracles of Men when they teach 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things contrary to Godliness And St. Austin frequently appeals from them to the Scripture for finding out the true Church saying These Wonders do not manifest the Church is Catholick wherein they are performed but the Holy Scriptures let then the Donatists shew us their Scriptures for these are the Strength and Firmness of our Cause 3ly They teach that therefore God had forewarned us not to regard and not to be deceived by them or to look upon them as sufficient to establish any new Doctrine For saith St. Austin if some Miracles be wrought by Hereticks magis cavere debemus we ought to be the more cautious because our Lord Christ having said that there should come Deceivers who should work such Miracles as to deceive if it were possible Lib. de Vnit Eccl. c. 16. the very Elect he adds by way of vehement Commendation this Behold I have foretold you whence the Apostle admonishing us saith now the Spirit manifestly teacheth that in the later times some shall depart from the Faith giving heed to seducing Spirits doctrinis Daemoniorum and to Doctrines of Daemons The same St. Austin in his Thirteenth Treatise upon the Gospel of St. John brings in the Donatists objecting thus Pontius wrought a Miracle Donatus prayed and God answered him from Heaven And his Reply to it is this Contra istos To. 9. p. 122. ut sic loquar mirabilarios cautum me fecit Deus meus My God hath cautioned me against those Miracle-Mongers by saying in the later times false Prophets shall arise doing Signs and Wonders Behold I have foretold you therefore our Bridegroom hath warned us quia Miraculis decipi non debemus that we ought not to be deceived by Miracles And in his Second Book on the Sermon of our Lord upon the Mount he saith Our Lord hath admonished us not to be deceived with such things conceiving the invisible Wisdom to be there where we see a visible Miracle saying many shall say in that Day Lord have we not in thy Name cast out Devils and done many wondrous Works Let such a one read what the Magicians of Aegypt did against Moses To. 4. p. 1172 1173. or what our Lord saith of the false Prophets If any one shall say unto you here is Christ believe him not for many false Christs and false Prophets shall arise and do mighty Signs And yet that Miracles pretended to be done after these times are urged to countenance and have been used to introduce and promote Romish Doctrines and Practices is
it seems generally to have prevailed in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries yet doth it plainly seem to contradict the Testimony of the Holy Scriptures which teach That when the days of her Purification were accomplished Luk. ij 22 23 Puram aperiens vulvam according to the Law of Moses they brought him to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord as it is written in the Law of the Lord Every Male that openeth the Womb shall be called holy to the Lord. L. 4. c. 66. In partu suo nupsit ipsa patefacti corp lege Lib. de Carne Christi c. 23. vid. etiam c. 4. 20. Hom. 14. in Lucam Tom. 2. f. 101. According to the import of which Scripture Irenaeus doth expresly teach That our Lord at his Birth opened the Womb of the Virgin. Tertullian adds That she was a Virgin as not having known Man but was no Virgin quantum a partu at her teeming her Womb being then opened according to that saying Every Male that openeth the Womb c. Origen That Matris domini to tempore vulva reserata est quo partus editus the Womb of the Mother of our Lord was opened when she brought forth her Son. Clemens of Alexandria evidently shews that this was in his time only the saying of some Men attending to the Fable of the false Gospel of St. James That the Midwives after her delivery found by Inspection that she was a Virgin and that others held the contrary for saith he It seemed to many and yet seemeth that Mary was by the Birth of her Son a Woman properly delivered of a Child though she was not Strom. l. 7. p. 756. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Woman properly delivered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for some say that being inspected by the Midwives after the Birth of her Son she was found a Virgin. De Incarn l. 14 cap. 6. §. 1. He respects saith Petavius the Old Wife's Tale invented by some idle Trifler which we find in Suidas and in the Proto-Evangelium S. Jacobi which I could wish he had no otherwise related than by way of Contempt and Derision Thus we learn upon what Grounds this was believed by him against the Opinion of many others St. Basil grounds this Opinion upon another Story of like nature De human Christi Gener. Tom. 1. p. 509. The Story of Zacharias saith he proves that the Virgin Mary was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an entire Virgin for it is derived to us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from Tradition that Zacharias was slain between the Porch and the Altar for saying Qui hujusmodi Traditioni non credunt that Mary was a Virgin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the Birth of our Lord. Origen delivers the same thing in the like words In Matt. Hom. 26. f. 49. b. In Matth. 23.35 Venit ad nos Traditio quaedam Such a Tradition hath come down to us And Theophylact 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We have it from Tradition and yet Origen in the same place confesseth that this Tradition was not believed by others In locum and Jerom saith That it came Ex Apocryphorum Somniis From apocryphal Dreams and adds That Quia de scripturis non habet autoritatem eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur Because it hath no Authority from Scripture it is as easily condemned as approved of And thus we see the rise of this Tradition which afterwards prevailed over the Christian World. 3ly § 5 That our Lord lived above Fourty if not to Fifty Years Sicut Evangelium omues seniores testantur qui in Asia apud Joannem Discipulum Domini convenerunt id ipsum tradidisse eis Joannem L. 2. c. 39. is the express Assertion of Irenaeus and for this he produceth the Testimony of the Gospel and of all the Elders of the Church who met S. John the beloved Disciple of our Lord in Asia and declared that he delivered to them the same thing yea saith he some of them saw not only John but the rest of the Apostles and heard the same things from them testantur de hujusmodi Relatione and testifie the truth of the Relation To say with Feuardentius upon the place that he might have had this from Papias is a very unlikely thing for he speaks not of the Testimony of one Man but of all the Seniors not of Men who had never seen the Apostles as Papias had not but of them who had he cites not Papias as in the Case of the Millennium he did here therefore is a solemn Declaration of a Tradition received from the Mouth of the Apostles and attested by all the Seniors and yet so far from being in the Gospel as is pretended that by the Gospel it may be evidently confuted so far from being owned as such in after Ages that upon a very slight Ground even the saying of the Prophet Isaiah Vid. Feuard in Iren. p. 46. 188. That Christ was sent to Preach the Acceptable Year of the Lord many of the Fathers took up a contrary Opinion that our Lord Suffered in the Fifteenth Year of Tiberius and preached One Year only When Jesus came to his Baptism saith Clemens of Alexandria 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Strom. 1. p. 340. he was about Thirty Years old and that he was to Preach but One Year is thus written He sent me to Preach the Acceptable Year of the Lord this both the Prophet and the Gospel according to the plain meaning of the Words averr say some in Origen Hom. 32. in Luk. f. 111. That our Lord Preached the Gospel but one Year and that on this account it was said Cap. 8. that he was sent to Preach the Acceptable Year of the Lord. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L 1. c. 1. p. 16. Tertullian in his Book against the Jews saith That Christ suffered annos habens quasi triginta being about Thirty Years Old. Lactantius Africanus and others cited by Feuardentius say the same And yet this was no better than an Opinion first invented by the Gnosticks as we learn from Irenaeus and for which they produced the same Text and 't is as easily confuted by the Enumeration of the Passovers our Saviour Celebrated after his Baptism and before his Death Now if a Tradition could so generally obtain in the Fifth Century which had its rise from Fabulous Legends and Apocryphal Dreams against plain Words of Scripture and plain Assertions of the Fathers living in the former Centuries as that of our Lords coming out of the Womb of the Virgin without opening of it did why might not other Traditions pretended by some later Councils and the Church of Rome be of like nature Why may we not credit the Council of Frankford In lib. Carol. p. 3. c. 30. declaring that the Second Nicene Council for their pretended Tradition of Image-Worship had recourse ad Apocryphas quasdam risu dignas naenias to Apocryphal and Ridiculous Tales Comment
the Africans passed a severe Judgment on the Assertors of the contrary Opinion though they refused not Communion with them § 20. 6. That neither Stephen 's Opinion nor Saint Cyprian 's prevailed but the Church went a middle Way betwixt both § 21. Inferences 1. Hence it appears that the Doctors of the Western Churches are no good Judges of the Practices of the East § 22. 2. That in Matters of this obscurity the Custom of each Church is to be followed without breach of Peace § 23. 3. That in those Ages they knew nothing of the Pope's Supremacy or the Rule of the Guide of Controversies § 24. 4. That they belived what passed for Apostolical Tradition in the Church of Rome might be no such thing § 25. And Lastly That even in those early times Tradition Apostolical must falsly be pretended by great and many Churches § 26. FUrthermore we distinguish betwixt Traditions touching Points purely Doctrinal Dist 6th or Divine Revelations which concern matters of meer Belief as the Doctrine of the Millennium of the time of the Day of Judgment of Antichrist and what did hinder his Appearance and the like and Traditions touching points of Practice such as were the Observation of the Lord's Day the Superiority of Bishops over Presbyters the Ordination of Presbyters and Deacons by Bishops c. Touching the first kind we say That it is no sufficient evidence that they were Doctrines received from the Apostles that they have been asserted by after-Ages to be such it being evident both from Church History and the Confessions both of Protestants and Papists that in these matters the Fathers have been subject to mistakes in Doctrines not belonging to the Fundamentals of the Christian Faith but touching matters of Practice we say That we are ready to receive all such Traditions as have that Evidence that they were generally practised from the first and purest Ages of the Church which we are able to produce for observation of the first Day of the Week the Superiority of Bishops over Presbyters the Ordination of Presbyters and Deacons by Bishops and the like To give some Instances of the first kind First The Doctrine of the Millennium § 1 or the Reign of Saints on Earth a Thousand Years is now rejected by all Roman Catholicks and by the greatest part of Protestants and yet it passed amongst the best of Christians for Two hundred and Fifty Years for a Tradition Apostolical and as such is delivered by many Fathers of the Second and Third Century who speak of it as the Tradition of our Lord and his Apostles and of all the Ancients that lived before them who tell us the very words in which it was delivered the Scriptures which were then so Interpreted and say that it was held by all Christians that were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exactly Orthodox And 1. this is delivered by the Fathers of the Second and Third Centuries as a Tradition received from the Mouth of Christ and his Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 3. c. 39. Eusebius confesseth That Papias declared it to be the Doctrine of our Saviour handed down to him by unwritten Tradition Lib. 5. c. 33. Euseb H. Eccl. lib. 3. c. 39. Now of this Papias Irenaeus saith That he was an Hearer of St. John the Author of the Revelations He himself professeth that he only followed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 them who taught the Truth and who related 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Commands given by Christ himself and coming from the Truth it self 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. That he received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the words of the Apostles from those who followed them or conversed with them and only writ the things he had well learned and well remembred Eusebius moreover adds That his Relation touching the Tradition of the Millennium prevailed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with most of the Clergy that lived after him to entertain it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dial cum Tryph. p. 308. Justin Martyr speaking of the same Doctrine premiseth That he chose not to follow the Doctrines of Men but of God and the Doctrines delivered by him and then he adds That there was a Man among them named John one of Christ's Twelve Apostles who in his Revelations had foretold that the Faithful should reign with Christ a Thousand Years in Jerusalem Lib. 5. cap. 33. and that our Lord Christ said the same thing Presbyteri meminerunt qui Joannem Discipulum Domini viderunt audisse se ab illo quemadmodum de temporibus illis docebat Dominus Ibid. Irenaeus adds That the Seniors who saw St. John the Disciple of the Lord remembred how they had heard him say that he had heard our Lord Christ teach this Doctrine and then he doth repeat the very words in which Christ taught thus and tells us that he had them also from Papias the Friend of Polycarp Cap. 36. Hanc esse ad ordinationem dispositionem eorum qui salvuntur dicunt Presbyteri Apostolorum Discipuli ibid. adding That this according to the Seniors the Disciples of the Apostles is the Ordinance and the appointment concerning those that shall be saved and that our Lord taught this when he promised to drink New Wine with his Disciples in the Kingdom of God Hanc Ezechiel novit Apostolus Joannes vidit qui apud fidem nostram est novae Prophetiae sermo testatur Adv. Marcion l. 3. c. 24. and St. Paul when he said That the Creature should be freed from the Bondage of Corruption into the liberty of the Sons of God. As for the Kingdom promised to us after the Resurrection for a Thousand Years Ezechiel knew it saith Tertullian the Apostle John saw it and the new Word of Prophecy which we believe gives Testimony of it And if Gelasius Cyzicenus may be credited this was the Doctrine delivered by the Nicene Council in these words We expect new Heavens and new Earth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Hist Concil Nic. l. 2. c. 30. according to the Scriptures at the Appearance of the Kingdom of our Great God and Saviour Jesus Christ and then as Daniel saith the Saints of the most High shall receive a Kingdom and the Earth shall be pure and holy which David by the Eye of Faith foreseeing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith I believe to see the Goodness of the Lord in the Land of the Living and the Son of David Blessed are the Meek for they shall inherit the Earth These things we have established from the Ecclesiastical Constitutions most diligently framed by the Holy Fathers 2. They speak of this not as a probable Opinion but as a thing which they were certainly assured of We know saith Justin Martyr Dial. cum Trypk p. 307. the Resurrection of the Flesh and the Thousand Years in Jerusalem Predicta benedictio sine contradictione
ad tempora regni pertinet Lib. 5. c. 33. Manifestissime cap. 34. The Benediction doth without contradiction belong to the times of the Kingdom saith Irenaeus And again These promises do most manifestly signifie the Banquet of the Creature which God hath promised to give them in the Kingdom of the just And a third time Sine Controversia dicta sunt c. 35. These and other things are without Controversie spoken as things which are to happen in the Resurrection of the Just 3. They confidently cite § 2 as plain Assertors of this Doctrine the Prophets of the Old Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 307. Lib. 5. c. 34. Lib. 7. c. 26. and the Sayings of our Lord and his Apostles in the New. This Thousand Years saith Justin Martyr the Prophets Esaias and Ezekiel and others do confess Esaias manifestly declares saith Irenaeus that there shall be such joy in the Resurrection of the Just Ezekiel saith the same thing and so doth Daniel The Testimony of the Prophets touching this matter are so many saith Lactantius that it would be infinite to collect them Propter hoc beatus dicebat miles l. 5. c. 32. That our Lord referred to it when he promised that the meek should inherit the Earth is the Assertion of Irenaeus and the forementioned Testimony of the Nicene Council and also when he said Thou shalt be recompensed at the Resurrection of the Just Cap. 33. saith the same Irenaeus and when he promised to them who left Lands Houses Parents Brethren and Children for his sake That they should have an hundred fold now in this life Lib. 5. c. 33. Ibid. so Irenaeus and St. Cyprian when he said to his Disciples I will not henceforth drink of the Fruit of the Vine till I drink it new with you in my Father's Kingdom When to that Question of St. Peter's Ex occasione hujus sententiae quidam introducunt mille annos post resurrectionem Hierom in Matth. 19.28 Peter's We have left all and followed thee what shall we have he answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the new and Second State the Resurrection of the Just when the Son of Man sitteth on the Throne of his Glory you also shall sit upon Twelve Thrones judging the Twelve Tribes of Israel And when having corrected their mistakes about this matter he adds Ye are they who have continued with me in my Temptation and I appoint to you a Kingdom as my Father hath appointed to me that you may eat and drink at my Table in my Kingdom this saith Justin Martyr Pag. 312. is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Mystery of our Regeneration They cite to the same purpose that testimony of St. Paul Rom. 8.21 saying That the creature shall be delivered from the bondage of Corruption into the glorious Liberty of the Sons of God which Liberty is in the next Verse stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iren. l. 5.32 34. the Redemption of the Body from that Death to which it was subject through the disobedience of Adam and with which will be also a Redemption of the creature from that Curse which the Earth suffered for his sake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 308. Pag. 307. Lib. 5. c. 35. They cite to the same purpose that passage of St. Peter who saith One day is with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day and this we know saith Justin M. that these words do relate to the Millennium Again when Esaias saith We look for new Heavens and new Earth hemeans saith Justin M. the Promise of the Millennium These things saith Irenaeus are without controversie spoken of the Resurrection in quâ regnabunt justi in terrà in which the Just shall reign on Earth Lastly As for the Author of the Revelations they all with one consent declare he speaks expresly of it and indeed he seems to do it so expresly that when in the Third Century some Christians began to dislike this Opinion they began also to question the Authority of this Book which never was before doubted of by any Christian Fourthly Observe that these Fathers do expresly teach § 3 That this Doctrine of the Millennium was denied chiefly by Hereticks and such as were deceived by them Quoniam transferuntur quorundam sententiae ab Haereticis sermonibus Lib. 5. c. 32. Haeretici enim despicientes psalmationem Dei non suscipientes salutem carnis suae Lib. 5 c. 31. thus Irenaeus in the Preface of his Discourse upon this Subject saith he found it necessary to speak of it Because some Mens Opinions were perverted by the Speeches of the Hereticks and they understood not the appointment of God and the Mystery of the Resurrection of the Just and of the Kingdom And again he saith That some of those who are thought to have believed aright do go beyond the order of the promotion of the Just and know not the methods of their training up or being exercised to incorruption having in themselves Heretical sences of this matter For the Hereticks despising the formation of God i. e. the Body framed by him and not receiving the Salvation of their Flesh or not believing that it shall be saved say That as soon as they are dead they transcend the Heavens and the Maker of them and go to that Mother or Father which they have feigned to themselves they therefore who reject as much as in them lies all Resurrection of the Flesh what wonder is it if they know not the order of the Resurrection which order with the method by which we are exercised to incorruption and the enjoyment of God he afterwards declares to be this Cap. 32. That our first Resurrection is principium incorruptelae per quod Regnum qui digni fuerint assuescunt capere deum the beginning of incorruption by living in which Kingdom they who are worthy so to do by little and little do accustom themselves to enjoy God. Cap. 35. And that the Just Man thus raised verè praemeditabitur incorruptelam augebitur vigebit in Regni temporibus ut fiat capax Gloriae Patris shall truly exercise or fit himself for incorruptibility and increase and flourish in the times of that Kingdom Cap. 36. that he may be made capable of the Glory of the Father And a third time That Man being renewed vigente ad incorruptelam ut non possit jam veterascere and making such progress to incorruption that he cannot now wax Old tunc qui digni fuerint coelorum conversatione illuc transibunt id est in Coelos then they who are worthy shall ascend to Heaven Justin M. being asked by Trypho whether he believed That Jerusalem should be rebuilt Pag. 306. and the Christians should be gathered together there with Christ and the Patriarchs and Prophets Answers thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have before confessed unto thee that I and many others are of this
depends upon this Supposition That as to their Souls they are at present una cum Christo regnantes aeterna felicitate in Coelo fruentes now reigning with Christ and enjoying eternal felicity in Heaven and so admitted already to the Beatifick Vision whereas both Justin Martyr and Irenaeus assert this Doctrine was proper to the formentioned Hereticks they were the Men who said that when Men died Pag. 307. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Iren. l. 5. c. 31. simulatque mortui fuerint dicunt se supergredi coelos ire ad eum qui ab ipsis affingitur patrem their Souls went directly to Heaven and passed above the material Heavens to the Father These Fathers also add That men were first to reign with Christ on Earth Tertullian Origen Ambrose Clem. Romanus Chrysoftom Theodoret Oecumenius Theophylact St. Bernard Stapleton Defens Eccl. Author lib. 1. c. 2. Lactantius Victorinus Prudentius Aretas Euthymius Fr. Pegna direct inquis part 2. c. 21. and so to accustom and fit themselves to reign with Him in Heaven to receive first their Bodies sic venire in conspectum Dei and so to be admitted into the Presence of God and that this was the Doctrine of most of the Ancients is confirmed by their own Writers how therefore could they have any received Tradition that the Saints were to be invoked as reigning now with Christ and being admitted into Heaven and enjoying the Vision of God Moreover § 6 it was the Doctrine of the four Ages next to the Apostles or of the four first Centures that the Day of Judgment was near at Hand and that the World should only last till the destruction of the Roman Empire Lib. 1. vis 3. Thus Hermas to that Question Whether the consummation of all things were at hand § 8 Answers That the end should be when the Tower was Built and perfected sed cito consummabitur and that this would quickly be In proximo est Adventus Domini The coming of our Lord draws nigh saith Tertullian De Spectac c. 30. upon which place De la Cerde notes That all the Fathers spake thus of the Day of Judgment We pray saith the same Tertullian for the Emperors Vim maximam vniverso orbi imminentem Apol. c. 32. and for the State i. e. continuance of the Empire because we know the conflagration of the World which is now imminent and the close of it which threatneth the worst of Evils is retarded by the continuance of the Roman Empire And again we pray for the Emperor Cap. 39. pro statu saeculi pro rerum queite pro mora finis for the continuance of the Age for the quiet posture of Affairs and the delay of the end of the World which shews they thought it was then near And a third time Ad Scap. c. 2. We wish well to the Roman Empire for while the World continueth it shall stand St. Cyprian tells Pope Cornelius That Christi cito approquinquabit adventus Ep. 57. Ed. Ox. Ep. 63. p. 157. Christs coming would soon draw nigh In his Epistle to Caecilius he declares that secundus ejus adventus nobis appropinquat Quoniam in fine atque consummatione mundi Antichristi tempus infestum appropinquare nunc coepit Praefat de Exhort Martyr his second coming to us was near and in his Book of Exhortation to Martyrdom he gives this account of his Writing viz. That he did it because now in the end of the World the time of Antichrist began to approach and Fortunatus had defired him to write something to strengthen the Brethren It also was the general Opinion of the Church § 7 that Antichrist was to come at the close of the World and it was also generally believed that Antichrist was at hand Tertullian declares De fuga in persecut c. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 7. Ep. 59. p. 139. Ep. 58. p. 120. Scire debetis pro certo credere tenere occasum faeculi atque Antichristi tempus appropinquasse Ibid. Antichristum jam instare that Antichrist was even then ready to appear Judas a Christian Writer That he was to come in the time of the Emperor Severus St. Cyprian saith That he was now appearing that his Advent was at hand that Christians ought to know and certainly believe and hold that the Day of Trouble mentioned Matthew the 24th began to fall upon their Heads that the end of the World and the time of Antichrist drew near It also was the general Opinion of the Fathers that our Lord was born in the Year of the World 5500 § 8 and that the World should end or be renewed in the Year 6000. That our Lord was Born in the Year 5500 or 5508 or 5509 as the Greeks commonly compute Apud Phot. Cod. 202. p. 525. you may learn from Hippolytus who as Photius notes placed the coming of Antichrist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Five hundred Years after Christ because then the Six thousand years from the Creation of the World being expired the World would end The Fathers who were of this Opinion were very many and * Petav. in Epiph. Haer. 66. n. 50. Feuardentius in Iren. l. 5. c. 28. magni nominis of great repute say Petavius and Sixtus Senensis l. 5. Annot. 190. And they pretended to derive this from plain Texts of Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pseudo Just q. 71. Ambros in Gal. 4.4 Oecum in 1 Joh. 2.18 Hier. in Mich. 4. Epiph. Haer. 66. §. 50. such as When the fulness of time was come In the last Days he spake to us by his Son On whom the ends of the Ages are come Now is the last hour which saith St. Jerom if you divide the whole Six thousand Years of the worlds duration into Twelve parts according to the Twelve hours of the Day must be the last Five hundred Years of them It also was a Doctrine almost generally received among the most Ancient Fathers that the World should end or be renewed after 6000 years 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sect. 15. This Barnabas expresly teacheth in his Epistle saying Attend my Children what he saith that expression he finished in Six Days signifies this That God will finish all things in Six thousand Years for that a Day with him is a Thousands Years he himself testifieth saying A Day shall be as a Thousand Years Wherefore Children in Six days that is in Six thousand years shall all things be Consummated In as many Days as the World was made Quotquot enim diebus hic factus est mundus tot millenis annis consummatur si enim dies Domini quase mille anni c. lib. 5. c. 28. in so many Thousand Years it is consummated for if as the Prophecy saith the Day of the Lord is as a Thousand Years and in six Days were all things made which were made it is manifest that the consummation
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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
all things which words do not establish but with the greatest Evidence destroy this vain Tradition And First That the words of Malachy Mal. iv 5 6. Behold I will send you Elijah the Prophet c. cannot be understood of our Lord's Second Coming to pass Judgment on the World will be exceeding Evident from these considerations 1. That this Forerunner was to come the Lord there mentioned to follow before the Ruine of the Jewish Temple this is evident from these words Behold I will send my Messenger Mal. iij. 1 2. and he shall prepare my way before me and the Lord whom ye seek shall suddenly come to his Temple For that the Messenger in this Third Chapter is the same with Elijah the Prophet in the Fourth Chapter will be apparent 1. From the Office of this Messenger which was to come before the Face of the Lord or to be his Forerunner as the Elijah mentioned Chapter the ourth was to be and as John Baptist was 2. From the Consideration of the work he was to do Mal. iij. 1. This Messenger being to prepare the way before him as the Elijah promised also was to do by turning the Hearts of the Fathers to the Children and of the Disobedient to the Wisdom of the Just And as the Angel doth inform us that the Baptist should do for saith the Angel He shall go before him in the Spirit and Power of Elias to turn the Hearts of the Fathers to the Children and of the Disobedient to the Wisdom of the Just to make ready a People prepared for the Lord. 3. Luk. i. 17. From the consideration of the Day of his Coming mentioned Chapter the Third as a Day so dreadful that few could abide it or stand when he appeareth by reason of the Severity of the Judgments which should then befal them vers 2. And Chapter the Fourth as a Day great and terrible Since then the Lord here mentioned was to come suddenly seeing he was to come to hi◠Temple 't is certain that the Day of his coming was to be before the Temple was destroyed and therefore could not be the Day of Judgment 4. This will be further evident from the Consideration of the persons to whom this Messenger and this Elijah were both sent Chap. iij. 1. for the Messenger was sent to them who then sought for the Lord and delighted in the Messenger of the Covenant vers 3. vers 4. he was to be his Messenger who was to purifie the Sons of Levi to make the Offerings of Judah and Jesusalem pleasant to the Lord. He therefore was a Messenger peculiarly sent to them to reprove them for their Sins and to declare unto them such things as concerned them and not such things as were common to the whole World. Accordingly Elijah the Prophet was sent to them that fear'd his name Chap. iv v. 2. to them who were obliged to remember the Law of Moses vers 4. which he commanded to him in Horeb for all Israel This Day of Terror therefore must be chiefly that which did concern that Nation And lastly This Elias was to come to call Men to Conversion and Repentance for which was a fit Season at our Lord's first coming whereas at his second coming there will be no time for Repentance but for the Destribution of Rewards and Punishments He was to come to turn the Hearts of the Fathers c least God should smite the Earth Becherem i. e. the Inhabitants of Judah with Destruction so that the Ruine threatned here might be prevented by Repentance and Conversion whereas the general Day of Judgment cannot be thus prevented but will certainly come in the appointed time The only Objection that is considerable against this Assertion Object is That the Day spoken of Chapter iv vers 5. is represented as a dreadful Day which seemeth proper to the Day of Judgment whereas the Day of Christ's first coming is not so called but rather an Acceptable Day and a Day of Salvation To this I Answer Answ That the Day of our Lord's first coming considered as reaching to the Destruction of Jerusalem was indeed a very dreadful and terrible Day Thus in the Prophet Joel we read of a Day of the Lord described in the same Expressions Joel ij 31. The Sun shall be turned into Darkness and the Moon into Blood before the great and terrible Day of the Lord come and yet St. Peter speaking of what was done after our Lord's Ascention and citing these very words saith Acts ij 16. This was that which was spoken by the Prophet Joel Moreover our Blessed Lord speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem and of the miseries that should befal that very Generation saith Luk. xxi 22. Mat. xxiv 21. These shall be the days of Vengeance such days of Tribulation as never were from the beginning of the World and never shall be afterwards Yea Vid Dr. Pocock in Mal. 3. v. 2. the Tradition of the Jews doth in their Talmud make mention of such great Afflictions which should happen in the days of their Messiah unto Israel that happy should he be who did not see them Which notwithstanding this day might well be stiled an Acceptable Day a Day of Salvation to them who received our Jesus as their Saviour believed in him and obeyed his Sayings according to the words of the Prophet Malachy Behold the Day cometh which shall burn as an Oven c. Mal. iv 1 2. but to you that fear my name shall the Sun of Righteousness arise with healing in his Wings Whence after this most terrible description our Lord speaks thus to his Disciples Luk. xxi 18 19. vers 28. Be not ye terrified when these things shall happen in Patience possess your Spirits for there shall not one Hair of your Heads perish when these things come to pass then look up and lift up your Heads for your Redemption draweth nigh Secondly That the Elias of whom the Prophet Malachy speaks § 4 was not the Tisbite or that it is not there asserted that he who in the Reign of Ahab was carried into Heaven should be in person sent as the Fore-runner of our Lord's second Advent will be evident from these Considerations 1. Because Elias the Tisbite came not upon the Errands mentioned there to prepare the way of the Lord or turn the Hearts of the Disobedient to the Wisdom of the Just before the ruin of Jurusalem and the destruction of the Temple as the Elijah promised by the Prophet was to do and did 2. 'T is certain that the Messenger described by the Prophet as the Fore-runner of the Lord and of his Day was John the Baptist for so our Saviour doth expresly teach us saying This John is he of whom it is written Matth. xi 10. Luk. vij 27 28. Behold I send my Messeger before thy Face to prepare thy way before thee There hath not risen among Men a greater Prophet
than this John. Since then it is already proved that Elijah the Prophet in Malachy is the same person with the Messenger here mentioned it follows that he can beno other than the Baptist 3. Our Lord himself declares expresly that John the Baptist was that Elias who was for to come for when descending from the Mount Matth. xvij 9. he saith to his Disciples Tell no Man of the Vision till the Son of Man is risen from the dead they thinking suitably to their Tradition that this Elias who appeared in the Mount was visibly to appear among them to Anoint the Messiah in the sight of all the People and order all things belonging to his Advent ask this Question Seeing according to the Doctrine of the Scribes vers 10. Elias must first come and do these things why is it thou forbiddest us to speak of his Appearance To this Enquiry our Saviour Answers that it is very true there is a promise of an Elias to come and restore all things vers 11. But I say unto you the Elias promised 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath come already and the Scribes knew him not but did unto him whatsoever they would vers 12 13. And then it follows that his Disciples understood that he spake to them of John the Baptist They therefore understood what the Fathers did not and others will not learn from Christ's plain words that John the Baptist was the Elias promised as the Fore-runner of the great and terrible Day of the Lord whence it doth plainly follow that they who do not think John Baptist and he only was the Elias mentioned by the Prophet must mistake for our Lord plainly saying That that Elias of whom the Scribes made mention as the Forerunner of his Advent was already come and giving them no intimation that any other was to be expected after the coming of this one there can be no pretence from the Tradition of the Scribes or from the Saying of the Prophet to expect any other Moreover our Lord as if he had foreseen and had designed to confute this Jewish Fable speaks still more plainly thus Matth. xi 14. All the Prophets and the Law Prophesied until John and if you will receive i. e. attend to and believe it this is that Elias which was for to come by which words he most plainly teacheth that that Elias of whom the Prophets spake as of one for to come Vid. Pocock in locum was come already and makes it manifest that all that was in Malachy or any other Prophet spoken of Elias Luk. i. 16. was made good in the Baptist who came in the Power and Spirit of Elias and was to be understood of him alone as muchas if he had in express words asserted that he only was the Elias that was to come and they were not by virtue of any Prophecy to look for or expect another For thus our Saviour speaks The Prophet Malachy saith Matth. xi 10. Behold I send my Messenger before my Face now I assure you the Baptist is the very Person of whom this is written The same Prophet saith Behold I will send you Elias the Prophet c. whence your Scribes teach you to expect the personal Appearance of Elias the Tisbite as the Fore-runner of your Messiah but if you will receive the true Interpretation of those words from me St. verse 14. John the Baptist is that Elias which according to that Prophecy was to be his Fore-runner But against this plain Assertion of our Lord it is objected Object That in the Translation of the Seventy the words run thus Behold I will send you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elias the Tisbite which denotes Elias in person and cannot be applied to St. John the Baptist To this I answer That this Argument is of no force Answ because it is founded not on the Original but only on a Translation which is not Authentick 2. From this Translation it may be probably collected that this Imagination of the Appearance of the Tisbite obtained among the Jews but hence it will not follow that it was true any more than that the Doctrine of the Millennium and of Christ's Temporal Kingdom must be true because they where received by that Nation as such 3. Pocock p. 99. By the same Reason and Figurative way of speaking the Baptist may as well be called Elijah the Tisbite as Elijah the Prophet that only shewing the Country of that Prophet as the other doth his Office so that if the Baptist deserved to be called Elijah the Prophet because he came in the Spirit and Power of Elijah he must deserve to be called Elijah the Tisbite on the same account seeing Elijah the Prophet was Elijah the Tisbite It further is Objected Object 2 That John expresly denies that he was Elias for when the Jews from Jerusalem and the Priests and Levites sent to him saying Art thou Elias He said John i. 21. I am not If this Objection be of any force Answ it will also prove that John the Baptist was no Prophet for to the following Enquiry Art thou a Prophet he still answers No whereas our Saviour attested That he was a Prophet yea and more than a Prophet Matth. xi 9. and all the People so accounted of him Dr. Pocock Ibid. His meaning therefore only is I am not that Elias in person whom you expect nor am I such a Prophet as in the days of the Messiah you expect to rise from the Dead And thus Expositors tell us he chose to answer out of Modesty that he might not commend or bear witness of himself thinking it more convenient that Christ should thus bear witness of him than that he should ascribe so great a Dignity to himself Thirdly Object 3 It is Objected That after St. John was Beheaded our Saviour saith Elias truly shall first come and restore all things now how say they can this be spoken as a thing future of John Baptist then This therefore must be understood of some other Elias to come hereafter This is the Ground on which this Doctrine is established by Justin M. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 268. That our Lord taught it saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Elias shall come And in this he is followed by Theodoret and many of the Ancients After that our Lord had uttered these words Answ not in the future Matth. xvij 11. Mark ix 11. as the vulgar reads them but in the present Tense Elias cometh or Elias coming first restoreth all things He adds immediately of the same Elias Matth. xvij 12. of whom he had said He cometh or he shall come first that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he is now come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he indeed was come And again if you will receive it this Baptist is the Elias Matth xi 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who is for to come and when he had said these words then his
Disciples understood that he spake of John the Baptist that he meant him and no other when he speak of an Elias who was for to come So that the meaning of our Lord's words is plainly this true it is as the Scribes say Elias is to come before the Messiah and it is also true that John is that Elias which was when Malachy spake those words to come afterwards but was not yet to come when our Saviour spake of him but as he saith expresly Was already come though they who said Elias must first come knew him not when he was come And truly had our Lord spoken of one Elias viz. John the Baptist and the Prophet Malachy of another had Christ spoken of an Elias to come at his first Advent and the Prophet and the Scribes of one to come at his second Advent He had not answered his Disciples Question but deluded them And that the Elias here spoken of was to appear at our Lord's first coming is apparent from the Enquiry of the Disciples Why say the Scribes Elias must first come before the Son of Man for the Tradition of the Scribes was that Elias was to Anoint the Messiah and make him known unto the People And 't is as evident from our Lord's answer Elias cometh first i. e. before my Resurrection of which I now speak from this place therefore it never can be proved that any other under that Character is to appear before his second coming It further is Objected Object That the Elias mentioned by Malachy was To turn the Hearts of the Fathers to the Children and was according to our Saviour's acknowledgment to restore or set all things in Order which seemeth not to have been done by the Ministry of the Baptist who continued but a short time and did no such things as these words seem to imply it remains therefore that these words should be fulfilled by an Elias who shall be the Fore-runner of Christ's second Advent To this I Answer Answ That all who will not give the Lye unto the Angel sent to Zachary must be obliged to confess the Baptist did fulfil the Prophecy of Malachy for of the Baptist he thus speaks He shall be great before the Lord Luk. i. 15 16 17. and many of the Sons of Israel shall he turn unto the Lord for he shall go before him in the Spirit and Power of Elias to turn the Hearts of the Fathers to the Children and the Disobedient to the Wisdom of the Just to make ready a People prepared for the Lord If then John Baptist did not fulfil the words spoken by the Angel we must confess the Angel was deceived and Zachary deserved not the punishment he suffered for disbelieving of his Testimony But if he did fulfil these Sayings of the Angel he also must fulfil the words contained in the Prophet Malachy because the Angel speaketh in the very words of Malachy Again our Saviour acknowledging that an Elias was to come before him and restore all things adds that he who was to come to restore all things was already come and was the Baptist He therefore must have restored all things or it must be confessed he did not execute his Office or fulsil what was written of him Moreover the Holy Ghost by the Mouth of Zachary speaks thus concerning John Luk. i. 76. And thou Child shalt be called the Prophet of the Highest for thou shalt go before the Lord to prepare his way which is the very thing the Prophet Malachy declares to be the Office of his Messenger And whosoever shall consider what in the Gospel is said of John the Baptist and shall compare those things with what the Prophet Malachy and even the Scribes averr'd that the Elias promised should do will easily perceive all that was said or Prophesied concerning Elias was so punctually fulfilled by the Baptist as to cut off all further expectation of the completion of this Prophecy by any personal Appearance of Elias before our Saviour's second Advent For the Prophet saith Behold I will send Elias and the Gospel saith There was a Man sent from God whose Name was John and that this John was that Elias which was for to come Vid. Pocock p. 105. The Prophet saith of his Elias That he was to come before the Great and Terrible day of the Lord. And in the Gospel John is said to come when the Day of Wrath was coming when the Axe was laid to the Root of the Trees Matth. xxiv 2. and every Tree that brought not forth good Fruit was to be hewen down and cast into the Fire when he was now appearing Mat. xxiij 38. whose Fan was in his Hand to purge his Flour and gather the Wheat into his Barn and to burn up the Chaff with unquenchable Fire He came at the time when saith our Saviour Luk. xix 43. their House was to be left unto them desolate when the desolation of their City Luk. xix 43 44. Nation and Temple was irreversably at hand when the Enemies of Jerusalem were to cast a Trench about her and lay her even with the Ground and her Children within her Here it is said That this Elijah should turn the Hearts of the Fathers to the Children c. That he should Preach to Young and Old Conversion and Repentance and in the Gospel it is said of John That he should turn many of the Children of Israel to the Lord their God that he should turn the Hearts of the Fathers to their Children and of the Disobedient to the Wisdom of the Just Luk. iij. 3. Matth. iij. 5 6. that he preach'd to all the Baptism of Repentance and that with such success and good effect that Jerusalem and all Judea and all the Regions round about Jordan went out to him and were Baptized of him confessing their Sins that all the People Luk. vij 29. Matth. iij. 7. Luk. iij. 13 14. and the Publicans justified God being Baptized of John. So effectual was his Ministry that many of the Scribes and Pharises came to his Baptism and even the Souldiers and the Publicans to be instructed by him Vid. Dr. Pocock p. 105. He prevailed generally with the Jews to unite in one common Baptism that of Repentance and whereas the Tradition of the Scribes taught That Elias was to Anoint the Messiah and make him known to the People John did Baptize him and declare unto the People that he was the Lamb of God John i. 29. Matth. iij. 16. and at his Baptism by St. John he was anointed by the Holy Ghost What therefore better can agree than the Prophecy in Malachy and the matter of Fact in the Gospel What can be further requisite to shew that the Person who is characterized thus by the Prophet and who so punctually answered to that Character in the Gospel is one and the same Person and that no other ought to be expected by virtue of this Prophecy Now hence it
follows 1. § 5 That the renowned Scribes and Doctors of the Jewish Church were all mistaken in their Interpretation of this place of Malachy That they and the whole Jewish Church had entertained a false Tradition in a matter of so great Consequence as the Fore-runner of their true Messiah for they all had embraced it as a Tradition That Elias was to come in Person before the first Appearance of the true Messiah Trypho apud Justin M. p. 268. they all interpreted that place of Malachy to that effect and thence concluded as they still obstinately do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That because Elias is not yet come in Person their Messiah was not come And yet this general Tradition of the Jewish Church gives no Assurance of the Truth of this Assertion or if it doth it must be then confessed that their Messiah is not yet come 2. Hence also we may learn how vainly Men pretend to absolute Certainty on the account of Oral Tradition for that Tradition was received as much as highly reverenced and regarded by the Scribes and Pharisees as by the Romanists I hope will easily be granted when we consider how zealous they were for the Customs and Traditions of the Fathers How they advanced the Tradition of the Elders even to the dissolution and making void the Law of God. And how frequent are such Maxims as these among them Vid. Leight in Matth. 15.2 The Words of the Scribes are more worthy than the Words of the Law and more weighty than the Words of the Prophets That the Words of the Elders are more weighty than the Words of the Prophets That they came from the Mouth of Moses as well as the written Law. That the written Law is narrow but the Traditional is longer than the Earth and broader than the Sea. And yet these Patrons of Tradition had not only generally received such Traditions as made void the Law of God but also such Traditions touching their Messiah his Fore-runner his temporal Kingdom his glorious Reign on Earth c. as gave Occasion to their Rejecting of him when he came If then the Jewish Church might pretend to oral Tradition as much as that of Rome and yet receive such Falshoods as Tradition which did evacuate the Law of God and cause them to reject their Saviour why may not they of Rome receive such Falshoods for Tradition as do evacuate the Law of Christ If the People were deceived and abused by following their Traditions why may not others be equally deceived in following the supposed Traditions of the Church of Rome 3. § 6 Hence also it will follow That the Tradition of the Doctors of the Christian Church can be no certain Evidence in Matters of meer Speculation or of Interpretation of Scripture that what they thus deliver is the Truth for they have generally taught from the third Century That Enoch is to come in the last days to resist Antichrist and be slain by him without the least appearance of any Ground for this Tradition And they have taught more generally even from the Second Century That Elias the Tisbite is to come in Person before our Saviour's second Advent and grounded this their Doctrine upon the Words of Malachy and of St. Matthew against the plain Assertion of our Lord and the most clear convincing Evidence that John the Baptist and he only was that Elias which according to the Prophecy of Malachy was to come as the Fore-runner of our Saviour In a word the Tradition of the Millennium of the Appearance of Enoch and Elias seem to have had their Rise from the Jewish Converts zealous of the Tradition of their Fathers and from them not from the Apostles to have gain'd Reputation in the Christian Church And the Tradition of Prayers for the Dead seems to have had the same Original But now if a Tradition hath been very ancient § 7 and can by Reason be demonstrated to have derived from the Apostles or to be worthy of Acceptation upon rational Grounds then it is sit to be embraced as such For Instance First We have it from Tradition That presently after the Apostles times all Churches were governed by Bishops presiding over Presbyters and Deacons as their lawful Governors whence we inferr we have just Reason to believe this form of Government was Apostolical since otherwise the Government left in all Churches by the Apostles must in the immediate following Age have been not only changed but corrupted every where But that in the frame and Substance of the established Government of the Church a thing always in use and practice there should be so suddain a Change so universal a Corruption in so short a time and that all Christians without the least Opposition that we read of De praescript c. 28. should conspire in this Corruption is a thing morally impossible For as Tertullian argues in like Case Variasse debuerat Error doctrinae Ecclesiarum quod autem apud omnes unum est non est erratum sed traditum What all Christian Churches did so early agree in practising Vniformly came not by Error but Tradition Moreover it is clearly proved by the most learned Bishop of Chester L. 2. c. 13 prima Assertio p. 157 c. That the Writers of the Second Century distinctly mention the several Orders of Bishops and their inferior Presbyters in the same Church and thereby give us Reason to conclude that this Disparity was generally setled in that Age. Now how improbable it is that either such a Change as must be here supposed were this an Innovation should happen unadvisedly or thorough Negligence or that the whole Church should have conspired so early to swerve from the established Order by placing Bishops above Presbyters without Complaint or the Resistance of any single Person that we hear of will appear if we consider 1. The Subjects of this Constitution viz. The Persons appointed by the Apostles to govern and preside in every Church they being constant Objects of every Persons common Sence seen in every Assembly imploy'd in every ecclesiastical Affair publick and private in which all Christians Sick or Well Living or Dying were concerned we may reasonably conceive that which some of the Apostles to gain upon the Jews did observe the Christian Feast of Easter on the Fourteenth Day of the Moon others might have mistaken this compliance as if the Apostles had judged that the fittest time for Christians of succeeding Ages to observe it in or that when they heard of an Elias to come before the terrible Day of the Lord or of the Reign of Christ on Earth a Thousand Years represented to St. John in a Vision they might mistake the genuine import of those Scriptures and of others of like nature but in a matter of this kind which was the daily object of the Senses of all Christians we cannot easily conceive how they could possibly mistake and not perceive that such a change was made if really it
the Greek And that their Versions of the New Testament where they vary Graecis cedere oportere non dubium est must yield to the Greek Copies is without doubt St. Jerom in his Epistle to Lucinius saith Ep. Tom. 1. f. 69. b. That he had Translated most of the Old Testament according to the Hebrew and that he had Translated the New according to the Authority of the Greek Ut enim veterum librorum fides de Hebraeis voluminibus examinanda est ita novorum Graeci sermonis normam desiderat For as the Truth of the Books of the Old Testament is to be examined by the Hebrew so is the Truth of the Books of the New Testament to be examined by the Rule of the Greek In his Epistle to Sunia and Fretela he tells them Tom. 3. f. 28. a. That as in the New Testament if at any time a Question arise among the Latins and there is a diversity among the Copies recurrimus ad fontem Graeci sermonis we recurr to the Greek the Original Language in which the New Testament was writ so in the Old Testament if there be a diversity between the Greek and Latin Copies ad Hebraicam recurrimus veritatem Ep. Tom. 3. f. 10. b. we recurr to the Hebrew Verity In his Epistle to Damasus he saith That he had at his command Translated the Four Evangelists codicum Graecorum emendatâ collatione mending the former Versions by the Collation of the Greek Copies it being the desire of Damasus that because the Latin Copies differed he would shew quae sunt illa quae cum Graeca consentiunt veritate which best agreed with the true Copies of the Greek and indeed saith he If we must trust to the Latin Copies let them who think so say to which for they are almost all different one from the other surely the Scripture of the New Testament being writ in Greek when that differs in the Latin Tongue uno de fonte quaerendum we must have recourse to the Fountain Now by the way they who speak so expresly of the Hebrew and the Greek Verity by which the truth of the Latin Copies is to be examined shew that the Decree of Trent that the vulgar Latin Sess 4. pro Authentica haberetur should in all Readings Disputations Preachings and Expositions be received as authentick and that no Man should dare under any pretence to reject it agrees with Antiquity after their usual manner by way of Opposition and flat Contradiction to it though in this matter I confess they are the more excusable seeing as Espenceus saith In 1 Tim. c. 3. it rendred any of the Latins suspicious to know Greek and it was almost Heretical to know the Hebrew Tongue And as Melchior Chanus doth inform us The School-men for Four hundred Years Loc. Com. l. 2. c. 12. p. 108. retained only the Latin Edition quippe linguae Graecae Hebraicae non habuerunt peritiam because they had no skill in Greek or Hebrew Thirdly § 10 That the Books of the New Testament have been handed down unto us uncorrupted in the necessaries and substantials of Christian Faith and Manners we conclude from Reason grounded upon matter of Fact delivered and testified by the Doctors of the Vniversal Church and we receive them as such from the rational Evidence which Tradition affords in this Case Whence we collect 1. That the Apostles and Holy Spirit which did assist them in inditing of this Canon for the Church's use could not be wanting in causing them to be transmitted to those Christians for whose use they were indited because they could not be wanting to pursue the end for which they were endited Besides that they were actually thus committed to them is the Tradition of the whole Christian World which owned and cited read and received them for such from the Apostles Days as is apparent from the Epistles of Clement Polycarp Ignatius and others who were contemporary with the Apostles and from the works of Justin M. Irenaeus and many others of the Second Century They were read also by the Jews as Trypho doth confess and by the very Heathens at the invitation of the Christians For our Doctrines and Writings saith Justin M. Apol. 1. p. 52. Apol. 2. p. 7. are such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as all Men are permitted to read and if you will vouchsafe to look into them you may learn these things for we do not only read them our selves Ibid. p. 82. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but we bring them to you to peruse knowing that they will be acceptable to all that read them Apol. c. 31. We our selves do not suppress them saith Tertullian and many Accidents do put them into the Hands of Strangers They were attested to by the Sufferings of the Primitive Christians who rather chose to suffer Death than to deliver up these Books which Sufferings they could have no Temptation to endure besides their full Conviction that they were as they always stiled them Passio S. Felicis saepius Deifici libri Scripturae deificae Books which instructed them to lead a Divine Life and which their Persecutors could have had no Temptation to suppress and burn had they not known them to have been the Records of the Christian Faith with which their Faith must live or perish Moreover they contained things of the highest moment and which it was their chiefest interest to be well assured of they being the sole Ground and matter of their support under their sharpest Trials and of their future Hopes and therefore Writings they were concerned to get and hear and read and keep Add to this that they very early were translated into other Languages into the Syriack by apostolical Men saith the Tradition of the Eastern Churches by Men of great Antiquity who lived before the Canon was established as is apparent from their neglecting to translate the controverted Books of the New Testament into the Latin and other Languages Praeleg in Bibl. polyglott 13. p. 91. saith Bishop Walton From the Beginning as we may rationally conjecture seeing the Church of Rome and other Churches which understood not Greek were founded in the Apostles Days or quickly after nor could it rationally be supposed that they were without the Scriptures long Especially if we consider That it was part of their Lord's day Exercise saith Justin Martyr Apol. 2. p. 98. to read the Writings of the Apostles As for the Books themselves we find them mostly written to whole Churches Nations 1 Cor. i. 1. 2 Pet. i. 1. or the whole World of Christians To all that called upon the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place who could not easily have received them had the Apostles by whom they were at first converted given no sufficient indication of them They were Books which could not have been spread abroad as they were in the Apostles Names whilst they were living unless the Apostles had endited them
of the Church of Rome and to believe them as true and uncorrupt as are the Copies of the Holy Scripture But saith Mr. M. § 16 Pag. 399. When we believe that the Copies which we have now of these Books be not forged nor corrupted Copies but truly agree with the Originals given out by the Apostles we trust to the Tradition of all the after Churches that have been in every Age from the Apostles to this very present Church for it is as much in the Power of the Church in any one of these Ages to have thrust a false Copy into their Hand instead of a true one as to thrust a false Tradition into the Mouth of every Catholick every where in place of a true one This Argument in the mouth of a Jew Reply First pleading for those Traditions which were rejected by our Lord and his Apostles runs to this effect It was as much in the power of the Jewish Church to have thrust a false Copy into the Hands of the Jews instead of a true one as to thrust a false Tradition into the Mouth of every Jew every where instead of a true one if therefore their received Traditions actually were false as your Christ and his Apostles taught you can have no assurance of the Copies on which you depend for proving your Jesus to be the true Messiah are not false We say it is not in the power of any of the latter Ages Secondly to corrupt the Originals without corrupting not only all the written Manuscripts but also all the Writings of that Christian Church in which those Scriptures have been cited and all the Commentaries on them and all the Translations of them into all Languages 'T is therefore evidently false That it is as much in the Power of the Church in any one Age to have thrust a false Copy into the Hand of all Christians instead of a true one as to deceive them with a false Tradition instead of a true one No Protestant ever asserted or imagined that the whole Church was either willing or able Thirdly in any point of Doctrine to change at once and in one Age the true Tradition for a false No they unanimously say These Tares were sown by the Enemy whilst Men slept that they came in by degrees and insensibly got Ground by little and little in one Age the Dispute was raised the Opinion broached by some Man of Vogue and Credit in the next it passed for probable in the following Age for an Ecclesiastical Doctrine and in the next advanced into an Article of Faith. Thus for Example Images for the first Three Centuries were disregarded by all Christians the first thing they taught their Proselytes was to contemn them In the Fourth and Fifth Centuries they crept into some few Churches by way of Ornament and symbolical Representation In the Sixth and Seventh Centuries they begun to be received for Instruction and historical Commemoration In the Eighth Century in Italy and in the East they advanced to the Veneration of them though this Novelty met with great opposition in the East till the Tenth Century and in the West till the Thirteenth Century Communion in one Kind came in among some Monks in the Eleventh Century by reason of their negligence and rudeness which made their Governors not trust them with the Cup least they should spill it In the Twelfth Century it began to take place in minoribus Ecclesiis in lesser Churches The Approbation of Thomas Aquinas made it still more prevail in the Thirteenth Century and in the beginning of the Fifteenth Century it was established for a Law. FINIS A TREATISE OF TRADITIONS PART II. Imprimatur Liber cui Titulus A Treatise of Traditions Part II. July 12. 1688. Guil. Needham RR. in Christo P. ac D.D. Wilhelmo Archiep. Cant. a Sacr. Domest A TREATISE OF TRADITIONS PART II. Shewing the Novelty of the pretended Traditions of the Church of ROME as being I. Not mentioned by the Ancients of their Discourses of Traditions Apostolical truly so called or so esteemed by them Nor II. In their avowed Rule or Symbol of Faith. Nor III. In the Instructions given to the Clergy concerning all those things they were to teach the People Nor IV. In the Examination of a Bishop at his Ordination Nor V. In the Ancient Treatises designed to instruct Christians in all the Articles of their Faith. VI. From the Confessions of Romish Doctors WITH AN ANSWER to the Arguments of Mr. Mumford for Traditions And a Demonstration That the Heathens made the same Plea from Tradition as the Romanists do and that the Answer of the Fathers to it doth fully justifie the Protestants Jam primo quod in nos generali accusatione dirigitis divortium ab institutis majorum considerate etiam atque etiam ne vobiscum communicemus crimen istud ecce enim per omnia vitae ac disciplinae corruptam immo deletam in vobis antiquitatem recognosco Exclusa ubique antiquitas in negotiis in officiis totam auctoritatem majorum vestra auctoritas dejecti◠Tertullianus ad Nationes lib. 1. Cap. 10. LONDON Printed by J. Leake for Awnsham Churchill at the Black Swan in Ave-Mary Lane MDCLXXXIX THE PREFACE The Contents Shewing First That the Lord's Day is mentioned in Scripture as a known Festival Day a Day which bore Christ's Name and on which Christians did assemble for Religious Worship 1. From those words Rev. 1.10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day § 1. 2. From 1 Cor. xvi 2. § 2. 3. From Act. xx 7. § 3. 4. From the unanimous and uncontroulled Testimony of the Fathers from the first and purest Ages of the Church § 4. And shewing Secondly That the Apostles were commissionated from the Lord Christ or were directed by his Spirit to appoint this a day of publick Worship in Honour of our Lord and in remembrance of his Resurrection § 5. The Romanists can shew no such Tradition for any of the contested Doctrines § 6. Mr. M's Argument retorted against the sufficiency of Tradition to establish this Doctrine by shewing that there is no Tradition for abstaining wholly from servile Work upon that Day but rather the contrary § 7. The not observing of this Day through ignorance of our Obligation so to do is not destructive of Salvation § 8. The Command for remembring the Seventh Day from the Creation to rest upon it from all manner of Work was Ceremonial and not Moral this proved 1st From Reason § 9. 2dly From the Words and Actions of our Saviour § 10. 3dly From Gal. iv 10 11. § 11. 4thly From Col. ij 14 16 17. § 12. 5thly From the unanimous assertion of the Fathers § 13. Mr. M's first Objection from God's Blessing and Hallowing this Day Answered § 14. His second Objection from those Words of Christ If thou wilt enter into Life keep the Commandments Answered § 15. His third Objection That Saint Paul frequented Synagogues on
corbonam omnino non respicis De opere eleemos p. 203. as their Wants require Saint Cyprian also taxeth the Omission of this Duty on the Lord's day as a Fault in Rich and able Persons saying Thou art Wealthy and Rich and thinkest thou that thou observest the Lord's day who dost not at all respect the poor Man's Box Thirdly All the Ancient Commentators on this Place both Greek and Latin unanimously interpret this of the Lord 's day Ambrose and Primasius among the Latins Chrysostom Theodoret Oecumenius and Theophylact among the Greeks Secondly Observe that no good Reason can be given why the Apostle should limit the Collections of the Churches of Corinth and Galatia to the first day of the week but this That this day was appointed for the Worship of our Lord and so more fit for the performance of those Duties which concerned his distressed Members in those Times for as the works of Charity and Mercy are proper Duties of this day so doth this day contain a special motive in it to enlarge their Charley it being the day in which they were begotten to a lively Hope through the Resurrection of our Saviour and in which they constantly in those times participated of his precious Body and Blood and therefore having then received spiritual Things so plentifully from Christ must be more ready to impart of their temporals to his needy Servants Thirdly Observe that should the Text be rendered thus Let every one lay up against the first day of the week there would be some good reason for that Precept provided that it were a day appointed for the Service of Christ and the Assemblies of all Christian People for meeting thus together on that day they might then bring to the Assembly what they had treasured up against that time and then put it into the publick Bank as the Custom was in the first Ages of the Church and that they did so here at Corinth seems highly probable from the design of the Apostles Precept for he exhorts them to have their Charity ready that there might be no need of a Collection when he came whereas if they had kept their Charity in their own hands and not put it into the publick Stock there would still have been need of a Collection at his coming 2dly The Apostle might command to lay it up against that day to be then offered to the Lord because our Charity to his distressed Members is an Odor of a sweet smelling Savour Philip. 4.18 Act. 10.4 a Sacrifice well-pleasing to God a Duty fitly joined with our Prayers that so they may come up together as a memorial before God. Since therefore whether we translate the word 's upon the first day of the week or against the first day of the week no reason doth appear why Saint Paul should pitch upon that day had it not been the day of their assembling together the day on which they met to serve the Lord Christ we ought in reason to conclude it was so And if for the performance of this Work of Charity on the Lord's day Saint Paul thought fit to give his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or special Order can we suppose the day it self should be observed without appointment of the said Apostle or others of like power with him especially if we consider that Clemens the Contemporary of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epist ad Cor. §. 40. doth inform us That our Lord commanded our Oblations and Liturgies should be performed at times appointed and not disorderly but at those very times and seasons which he had ordained and thence concludes That they who offer their Oblations in those appointed Seasons are blessed and acceptable to God and that because they act agreeably to the Commandments of their Lord for if Christ himself gave Laws for the time when and the persons by whom he would have divine Offices performed as Clemens here doth plainly teach there is little doubt to be made but the Lord's day was his own Ordinance and if as he there adds These things were defined by his Sovereign Counsel that all things being done religiously according to his good Pleasure might be acceptable in his sight it follows that this time could not Religiously have been set apart for his Service or have been acceptable to him had it not been appointed by the Counsel of his Will so that although this Text doth not expresly command that the first Day of the Week should be observed as the Christians weekly Festival yet if we join with it the uniform Practice of the Primitive Church then and ever since they jointly prove that the first day of the Week was the weekly Festival of Christians at that time and strongly do imply or suppose that before this Apostolical Ordinance for these Collections on this Day there was another for the observation of the day it self for how could it have happened that all the Apostolical Churches throughout the World should from the beginning have accorded to make this day a weekly Festival unless they had been directed thus to do by the Apostles themselves by whom they were at first converted to the Christian Faith and with that Faith received this Institution 3dly We have another Scripture Act. xx 7. § 3 which fairly seemeth to conclude that the Apostles and the Christian Church did then observe this day and meet for the performance of Religious Worship on it for there it is expresly said That upon the first day of the Week when the Disciples came together to break Bread Paul preached unto them Where Note 1. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first day of the week was certainly the Lord's day as hath already been made manifest 2. Observe That on this day the Disciples were not summoned extraordinarily to come together that Saint Paul did not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 call them together as he did the Assembly of the Elders of the Church v. 17. but the Disciples were themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 met in their Synaxis or Assembly the Text informs us That Saint Paul carried with them seven days and in none of them have we any mention of an Assembly to this purpose but only on the first day of the week 3. Observe That they then met together to break Bread which Phrase doth signifie the sacred Action performed in celebration of the Holy Sacrament which 't was the Custom of the Primitive Christians to receive in all their Church Assemblies on the Lord's day 1 Cor. xi this the Apostle intimates when he complains of his Corinthians That they came together for the worse because when they came together in the Church there were Divisions among them so that they did not eat together of the Table of the Lord. Now thus to come together in one place saith he is not to eat the Lord's Supper i. e. it is not so to do it as the sacred Action ought to be performed this therefore when they came
be observed by Christians the day of Rest enjoined in the Fourth Commandment must be abolished which was the thing to be proved Thirdly § 12 This will be still more evident from those words of the same Apostle to the Colossians affirming Argum. 3 2 Coloss xiv 16 17. That Christ had blotted out the hand-writing of Ordinances which was contrary to us and had taken it out of the way nailing it to his Cross and making thence this Inference Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink or in respect of an holy day or of the New Moons or of the Sabbath days which are a shadow of things to come but the body is of Christ Where Note 1st That the hand-writing of Ordinances respecteth Ceremonial Orders for of them only can it be truly said That they were against us and were contrary to us as being Yokes of Bondage and Burthens grievous to be born that they were blotted out and cancelled and nailed to the Cross of Christ and that they were shadows of or shadows in respect of things to come 2dly When it is said Let no Man judge you in respect of these things the meaning clearly is Let no Man censure or condemn the Christian for not observing these New Moons Feasts or Sabbaths Hence then these Arguments result First No Man ought to condemn the Christian for not observing of the Jewish Sabbath because that Christ hath blotted out the hand-writing of ceremonial Ordinances which was against them therefore the Jewish Sabbath was a ceremonial Ordinance therefore 't is blotted out therefore the Christian is not obliged to observe it That which is joined with Meats and Drinks and with New Moons which are things confessedly Ceremonial no difference at all being observed by the Apostle as to their being named hand-writings things cancelled shadows or the like that must be ceremonial that which is a shadow of or in respect of things to come of which Christ by his Advent exhibited the Body that must be ceremonial that must be cancelled and abolished by Christ therefore the Jewish Sabbath must be abolished as being only ceremonial The Answers which the Sabbatarians return to this last Argument are these 1st Answer 1 That the Apostle meaneth here by Sabbaths not the weekly Sabbath of the Jews but the first and last days of the great Jewish Feasts which were by them observed as Sabbaths and are in Scripture sometimes stiled by that Name 1. Reply The Apostle having said before Let no Man condemn you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for not observing of the Jewish Festivals or any part thereof cannot be rationally supposed in the word Sabbaths following to forbid only the same thing 2. In the New Testament the word Sabbath or Sabbaths is used above sixty times and in Fifty six of those places it doth unquestionably signifie the Jewish weekly Sabbath and in the other places the whole week sith then the Sabbath in the New Testament is never used for the first and last days of the Jewish Feasts but ordinarily is there used for their weekly Sabbath we ought in reason to conclude it here importeth the same thing which it is used to signifie where it is mentioned in other places by the Holy Ghost and not conceive it here importeth that which it is never used to signifie in the New Testament that is we ought to judge is signifies the seventh day Sabbath and not the solemn days of the great Jewish Feasts 3. Where-ever the word Sabbath in the Old Testament is mentioned in conjunction with New Moons or Jewish Feasts it doth import the seventh day Sabbath distinctly and separately from all others as will appear from the perusal of all the places where these things are jointly mentioned as v. g. 2 Kings iv 23. Esa i. 13. Esa lxvi 23. Lament ij 6. Ezek. xlv 17. Ezek. xlvi 1. Hos ij 11. Amos viij 5. Being then here mentioned together with New Moons and Jewish Feasts 't is reasonable to conceive it signifies the same thing 4. The Sabbath day in the Old Testament is often contradistinguished to all other solemn Feasts and more particularly to New Moons and anniversary Feasts and therefore being here mentioned with them we may presume it cannot signifie them or any portion of them but rather that it doth import that Jewish Sabbath which in other places is put in opposition to them as for Example 1 Chron. xxiij 31. 2 Chron. ij 4. xxxi 3. Neh. x. 32 33. And lastly Moses having reckoned up the solemn Feasts Leviticus the 23 he adds v. 37 38. These are the Feasts of the Lord which you shall proclaim besides the Sabbath of the Lord seeing then the word Sabbath where-ever it is used in conjunction with New Moons or Feasts in the whole Book of God doth always signifie the Jewish weekly Sabbath we cannot doubt but in conjunction with them here it signifies the same seeing the word is often put in opposition to New Moons and solemn Feasts indefinitely taken what reason have we to conceive that in this place it should be taken for any part or portion of them Some Sabbatarians tell us Answ 2 That by Sabbath here the Apostle understandeth not the weekly but the yearly Sabbaths viz. the seven Years Sabbath and the Sabbath of the Year of Jubilee But the same Observations do confute this Gloss Reply for seeing the word Sabbath in the whole New Testament doth never signifie the yearly Sabbath but still the seventh day Sabbath or the whole week since the word Sabbath when it is joined with New Moons and Feasts as here it is doth always fignifie the seventh day Sabbath this Sabbatarian Gloss must be repugnant to that Sence in which the word is used by the Holy Ghost and therefore contrary to those Rules by which we are obliged to expound the Scripture 'T is Thirdly Answered Answ 3 That the Apostle saith not as the words are rendered Let no Man judge you in respect of a Feast but as they ought to be rendered Let no Man judge you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in part of a Feast New Moon or Sabbath whence they conclude that he intends not the whole Sabbath but that part of it which consisted in offering Sacrifices and this he calls a shadow or a hand-writing of Ordinances This Quarrel at the Translation of these Words is groundless Reply for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth as truly signifie on the account or on behalf or in respect as it doth signifie in part as when the same Apostle saith 2 Cor. 3.10 That which was made glorious had no glory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this respect by reason of the Glory that excelleth 2 Cor. 9.3 And again I have sent the Brethren least our boasting of you should be in vain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on this behalf 1 Pet. 4.16 And when Saint Peter saith If any Man suffer as a Christian let him not be ashamed but let him glorifie God 〈◊〉
contained in the Apostles or the Nicene Creed or that the Church of Rome must be Schismatical in excluding from her Communion those who do not believe or yield assent unto them And thus I hope I have sufficiently shewed how this Tradition overthrows and fully doth confute the New Doctrines of the Church of Rome It now remains to shew how it confirms the Cause of Protestants and clears up the Objections which are made against it Now First § 5 Seeing according to this Tradition these Symbols as they are a perfect Summary of Christian Faith so are they fully and perspicuously contained in Scripture hence it demonstratively follows that according to the Doctrine and Tradition of the whole Church of Christ the summ of all the necessary Articles of Christian Faith must fully and perspicuously be contained in Holy Scripture and may be proved thence to the satisfaction of the meanest Catechist And consequently the Holy Scripture was by them esteemed a full and perspicuous Rule of Faith according to our Sixth Note in reference to all things necessary to be believed which is the Fundamental Article of Protestants But doth not Tertullian speak in General Object NB. of never disputing with Hereticks out of Scriptures only Q. of Quest p. 258 259. because this Scripture combate availeth for nothing but to the making either ones Stomach or ones Brains to turn and conclude generally We must not therefore appeal to Scriptures nor in our combate rely upon them in which either no Victory is to be obtained or a very uncertain one Tertullian here proposeth this Objection Answ That the Hereticks spake of the Scriptures V. c. 7. §. 8. and perswaded their Doctrines from the Scriptures and this he is so far from reprehending that he holds it a thing absolutely necessary to be done by all who would discourse of divine Matters It being impossible saith he aliunde de rebus fidei loqui De praescript cap. 15. quà m ex literis fidei to speak of Matters of Faith but from the Scriptures And therefore he not only owns that the Rule of Faith he pleaded for was first delivered by word of Mouth and after by the Writings of the Apostles but also to that Objection of the Hereticks Seek and ye shall find Cap. 9. he answers by granting that the Scriptures are to be searched and sought into for finding out the Truth contained in the Rule of Faith and that then nothing more respecting Faith is needful to be sought because they had found what they sought for then he proceeds to shew non admittendos eos ad ullam de Scripturis disputationem that the Hereticks were not to be admitted to dispute from Scriptures and that non sit cum illo disputandum he was not to be disputed with from Scripture for these following Reasons 1. Because ista Haeresis non recipit quasdam Scripturas those Hereticks received not some Scriptures viz. Iren. l. 1. c. 26. the Ebionites and Encratites rejected all St. Paul's Epistles and embraced only the Gospel of the Nazarens L. 3. c. 11. p. 258 259. Cerinthus allowed only the Gospel of St. Mark. Valentinus only that of St. John Marcion only that of Luke Ebion only that of Matthew 2. Because si quas recipit non recipit integras those Scriptures which they owned they received not entire but with additions and detractions as their cause required cutting off from them what most clearly made against then Heresies Thus of the Marcionites and the Lucianists and the Valentinians Origen confesseth That they did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Contra Celsum l. 2. p. 77. change and pervert the Gospel 3. Because if they admitted any Scriptures entire yet they corrupted them per diversas expositiones by adulterating the Sence of them and miserably distorting them to the upholding of their idle Dreams for saith Irenaeus they said their Doctrines were not perspicuously revealed in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 1. c. 1. p. 14. but by our Lord were mystically couched in Parables even so mystically that as you may see from the first to the Nineteenth Chapter of the First Book of Irenaeus it is enough to turn a Man's Stomach to read such Fooleries as v. gr They prove their thirty Aeones because our Saviour was Baptized when he was Thirty Years Old and from the Parable of the Labourers sent into the Vineyard some at the 1st 3d 6th 9th 11th C. 1. p. 10. hour of the Day which numbers put together make up Thirty Thus saith Irenaeus they endeavoured to adapt some of our Lord's Parables Pag. 32. and some Prophetical Expressions to their Doctrines that they might not seem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without any Testimony from Scripture but then saith he they miserably pervert the Order and the Series of Holy Scripture and deal with it as if one should take the Image of a King excellently made in Jewels and should deform it into the Face of a Dog or a Woolf. They pretended also that some of their Doctrines were received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from unwritten Traditions C. 1. p. 32. and to prove them they produced a multitude 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Apocryphal and adulterated Scriptures which they had feigned Lib. 1. c. 17. pretending for their recourse unto Tradition this Accusation of the Holy Scriptures Lib. 3. c. 2. That they were not right nor of Authority sufficient because they were spoken variously and that from them the Truth could not be found out by such as were ignorant of Tradition non enim per literas traditum illum sed per vivam vocem it being not delivered in writing but by Oral Tradition that is they were plain Papists as to this pretence Against such Men as these saith Tertullian the most skilful in the Scriptures will dispute in vain from Scripture cum nolunt agnoscere ea per quae revincuntur his nituntur quae falso composuerunt quae de ambiguitate coeperunt since they will not own that for Scripture by which they are refuted they will insist upon their Apocryphal Writings and those things which they ambiguously have conceived Ergo non ad Scripturas provocandum est and therefore we are not to provoke them to dispute out of Scriptures nor place our combate in those things in which no victory is to be obtained or a very uncertain one Let now any indifferent Reader judge whether Tertullian speaks in general against disputing with Hereticks out of Scripture as Mr. M. here confidently saith and not only of disputing against hanc Haeresin that very Heresie which had these Arts to delude what was brought against them from Scripture and appealed from it with the Papists to Oral Tradition And yet against these slippery Men Irenaeus and other of the Fathers first argued from Scriptures cum ex Scripturis arguebantur and when they had baffled them there and made them fly as Romanists now do unto
Holy Spirit dwelling in their Hearts They also add that this written Law was given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Constit Apost ibid. p. 349. to supply the defects of the Law of â—â—ature by that God who would not suffer them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be seduced clearly insinuating that Tradition without this written Law was not sufficient to supply the defects of that of Nature or to preserve them from Error As will be farther evident if we consider That both the Antediluvians and they who lived after the Flood and before the Writing of the Law of Moses had generally corrupted their ways and deviated from that Tradition which they undoubtedly received from Adam and from Noah touching the Worship of the true and only God. For even whilst Adam was alive In Gen. 4.26 and had not passed half his days Men began saith the Chaldee Paraphrast to prophane the Name of the Lord Ainsw in Gen. 4. v. 26. by ceasing to pray to him The Hebrew Doctors tell us That in the Days of Enosh the Sons of Adam erred with great Error and the Counsel of the Wise Men of that Age became Brutish and their Error was this They said forasmuch as God hath Created these Stars and Spheres to govern the World and set them on high and imparted honour to them and they are Ministers that Minister before him it is meet that Men should Laud and Glorifie and give them Honour for this is the Will of God that we magnifie and honour whomsoever he magnifies and honoureth When this thing was come up into their Hearts they began to build Temples to Stars and to offer Sacrifice to them and to Laud and Glorifie them with Words and to Worship before them that they might in their evil Opinion obtain favour of the Creator and this was the Root of Idolatry Ibid. And hence in the ancient Commentaries of the Hebrews the Age of Enosh is represented as a wicked Age. In the time of Enoch and before the death of Adam wickedness had mightily prevailed even among the Sons of God or Members of the Church for Enoch is mentioned as the only Man who adhered perfectly to God and of him it is said Wisd 4.10 Vers 11 14. That he lived among Sinners and that God took him away from among the wicked least their evil Example should corrupt his Righteous Soul. After his Assumption we find that Men had generally declined to iniquity that all Flesh had corrupted their Ways Gen. 6.12 excepting Noah and his Family that they had forsaken God and given up themselves to Idolatry saying to God Job 22.17 Depart from us and what can the Almighty do for us About an Hundred Years after the Flood they set themselves with one Consent to build the Tower of Babel in opposition to God and in which say the Hebrews Ainsw ibid. they designed an Idol Temple Nahor and Tharah the Progenitors of Abraham were Idolaters Gen. 31.30 53. and after the Call of Abraham they continued so to be In the Family of Isaac Esau and his Wives were a bitterness of Spirit to Isaac and Rebecca because they served God with strange Service saith the Jerusalem Tergum that is with Idolatry In the Family of Jacob Gen. 31.22 Gen. 35.2 Rebecca steals her Fathers Images In his House were worshippers of strange Gods and Retainers of Idols When the Israelites lived in Aegypt they so complied with their Rites Praepar Evang. l. 7. c. 28. saith Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as to forget the Piety of their Fore-fathers They learned in Aegypt Serm. 2. adv Graec. p. 492. saith Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to worship many Gods with them They committed Whoredom in Aegypt saith Ezekiel Ezek 23 2-19 they multiplied the Whoredoms they had committed in the Land of Aegypt Whence Joshua speaks thus unto them Josh 24.14 Put away the Gods which your Fathers served in Mesopotamia and in Aegypt Here then is Evidence sufficient First That the first Ages of the World were not abandoned only to the uncertainty of Tradition but were guided partly by the Light of Nature and partly by immediate Revelation Tradition being by Divine Wisdom judged a more imperfect Guide than the dim Light of Nature Secondly That when it pleased God to give his People Positive and ceremonial Laws he would by no means leave them to the uncertainty of Tradition but commanded that they should be written in a Book for a Memorial to and for a Testimony against them and should thence be read by and to them that they and the Generations to come might learn them And Thirdly That the Service of the one true God received by Tradition from Adam Enoch and others before the Flood from Noah Melchizedeck Abraham and the Patriarchs after the Flood was presently corrupted and utterly defaced by Idolatry to let us see how insufficient meer Tradition is since even in the Days and Lives of them who lived so long and who delivered this Fundamental Article of Worshipping the one true God unto their Off-spring they saw them running headlong to Idolatry and adding many corrupt Inventions and vain Imaginations of their own unto that Worship they had received by Tradition from them Secondly § 5 Object 2 Mr. M. adds That for above Two thousand Years more P. 415. P. 231. from Moses until Christ's time the Church was governed partly by Writing and partly by Tradition For the Jews had at least two undeniable Traditions For they knew only by Tradition what remedy was to be used to free their Female Children from Original Sin as also to free their Male Children in danger of Death before the Eighth Day This Remedy they knew and observed and were bound to know and observe and yet they infallibly knew it without having any Scripture expressing to them the knowledge of this Remedy or of their Obligation to use it or that it was so necessary for the Salvation of their Children whom they did believe to be in Original Sin and by that debarred from Salvation unless some Remedy were applyed Some Remedy surely was as necessary for the Female as Circumcision for the Male. Shew me this Remedy in Scripture 2. They truly believed some of those bloody Sacrifices to have been appointed to them by God for the expiation of their Sins but they could not believe truly that these Sacrifices could expiate their Sins by their own Virtue they believing then that these Sacrifices had their expiative Virtue from the Merits of Christ Shew me any Text in which this was then written 1. Reply That the Jewish Church until Christ's time was governed partly by Tradition or that Tradition was their partial Rule of Faith in reference to any necessary Doctrines or Rules of Manners will appear a vain Imagination if we consider that in the Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament they are still sent unto the written Word to learn their Duty
eo tempore Judaea profecti rerum potirentur an old and constant Opinion that some out of Judaea should obtain the Government of the World and that this Prophesie was contained Antiquis Sacerdotum literis in the ancient Writings of the Priests All the Disciples of our Lord did constantly expect this Temporal Kingdom till by the Holy Ghost's descent upon them they were informed better witness their Contests Matth. 18.1 Who should be the greatest in this Kingdom and the desire of the Sons of Zebedee to sit one at his Right-hand Matth. 20.21 and the other at his Left in it And when they were assembled after his Resurrection Act. 1.6 this was their Enquiry Lord wilt thou now restore the Kingdom to Israel It is therefore certain that this was the Tradition of the whole Jewish Church received from their Wise Men and grounded on the Scriptures of the Prophets as they did interpret them Secondly It was also a Tradition which generally obtained among the Jews That their Elias who was called the Tisbite was to appear in Person at the Advent of the true Messiah Justin M. Dial p. 268. and to anoint him to his Office. All we saith Trypho expect that Christ should be anointed by Elias who is for to come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and because Elias is not come I think that our Messiah is not come Thus was that place of Malachy translated by the Seventy Interpreters long before our Saviour's coming Mal. 4.5 behold I send unto you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elias the Tisbite before the great and glorious Day of the Lord come Accordingly the Scribes or the Expounders of the Law Mark 9.11 did with one Voice declare it was necessary that Elias should come first Thirdly It was the general Tradition of the Jews That the Law of Moses should be perpetually obliging to them and be observed even in the Days of the Messiah On this Presumption certainly it was that Christ's Disciples after his Resurrection were strict Observers of the Law of Moses for a considerable time and so were also the Generality of the Jewish Converts St. Peter was so nice in Observation of it as that till he was informed better by a Vision he thought such Meat was utterly unlawful as was forbidden by the Law so that he being in this Vision bid to slay and eat crys out as a Man tempted to an unlawful Act Acts 10.14 Not so Lord for I have never eaten any thing that is unclean Whence Origen well notes L. 2. Contr. Cels p. 56 57. That he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a long time kept the Jewish Customs according to the Law of Moses and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 living according to the Tradition of the Jews he contemned those who were not of the Jews and even when by this Vision he was prevailed upon to go unto Cornelius he begins his Speech to him thus Acts 10.28 You know that it is an unlawful thing for a Man that is a Jew to keep Company or come in to one of another Nation Acts 11.2 and when he had done it his Brethren call him to an Account and contend with him for it Acts 21.20 St. James gives an Account to Paul of the great Zeal that all the Jewish Converts had to the Law of Moses in these Words Thou seest Brother how many Thousand Jews there are which believe and they are all zealous of the Law. He farther tells him how much they were offended with him because they heard that he had taught that they were not obliged to Obedience to the Constitutions and Customs of the Jewish Law. And lastly doth exhort him to do what might be proper to cause them to believe That he also walked orderly and kept the Law. St. Jerome and Sulpitius inform us Chron. Euseb l. 2. c. 45. That Fifteen of the first Bishops of Jerusalem with their Flocks were all Observers of the Law of Moses and Origen That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. p. 56. they of the Jews who believed in Jesus left not their own Law. Moreover by the Unbelieving Jews nothing was more abhorred than the Thoughts of changing their Mosaick Customs Their Accusation against Stephen was this that he had said Acts 6.14 That the Messiah should change the Customs which Moses had delivered to them and this was in the Judgment of the High-Priest the Elders and the Scribes sufficient to prove him guilty of that capital Offence of Blasphemy On this Account they bring St. Paul before the Judgment-Seat of Gallio because say they he perswaded Men to Worship God Acts 18 1◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against or otherwise than was commanded by the Law of Moses And when he maketh his Apology unto the Jews of Rome for bearing of his Chain he doth it in these Words I have done nothing contrary to the Law Acts 28.17 or to the Customs of my Country Deut. 29.29 Levit. 3.17 Exod. 12.17 Now this Opinion they grounded chiefly upon those Places which seem to speak of the Perpetuity of those Statutes and say they shall be Ordinances to them for ever and consequently seem to inferr a Declaration from the Mouth of God that they should not be altered Lo here Three plain Traditions of the whole Jewish Church Two of which plainly tended to oblige them to renounce the true Messiah and the Third to blend Judaism with Christianity and to refuse to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles here therefore is a Threefold Demonstration not only of the Uncertainty but of the Falshood of the Traditions which obtained in the whole Church of God. For farther Demonstration of this Matter § 7 let it be considered First That the Traditions we have mentioned were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Traditions of the Elders Mark 7.3 Acts 28.17 Gal. 1.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Customs and Traditions of their Fathers they were the Traditions of them who sate in the Chair of Moses of the Interpreters of Scripture the Guides of the common People they were the Traditions of those Men who generally had obtained the Reputation of the greatest Knowledge and Exactness in the Law who did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Joseph de Bello Jud. l. 2. c. 12. Arch. l. 17. c. 3. most exactly interpret the Laws and declare the things belonging to them and who were by the Jews esteemed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more Pious than the rest so that if these were Foolish and Blind Guides they had no other to conduct them except those two pernicious Guides of Hereticks the Scripture and the use of Reason Secondly Observe that these Traditions were not taught only in our Saviour's Age but long before they being Customs and Traditions of their Fore-fathers The Asserters of them saith Josephus Antiq. l. 18. c. 2. were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most ancient of their Countrymen Epiphanius informs us That they pretended to