Doctrines of the Church of Rome are not received by Tradition from Father to Son since in this matter the Sons have generally entertained a Doctrine their Fathers either knew nothing of or plainly contradicted and that is now become pious and consonant to Ecclesiastical Worship which in St. Bernard's time was Ep. 174. praesumpta novitas Mater temeritatis soror superstitionis filia levitatis A bold Novelty the Mother of Rashness the Sister of Superstition the Daughter of Levity 5. Hence doth it follow that even by the Authority of the heads of the Vniversal Church men may be forbidden under pain of Damnation to Assert the Ancient Doctrine of the Church and may have liberty to contradict it Yea that in the judgment of a great R. Council received by the French as General and bearing that title in all Editions of the Councils that may be agreeable to the Catholick Faith to Reason and to Holy Scripture which is repugnant to the Ancient Doctrine of the Church Catholick for Eight whole Centuries 6. Hence is it manifest that the Trent Council hath given liberty to all her Members to hold that which is opposite to an universal constant unopposed Tradition of the Church for many Ages that is that she hath left them at their liberty to hold the Ancient Faith or hold the contrary 7. Hence it appears that in the Church of Rome Feasts may be instituted in which all men shall be exhorted to praise God for a thing which perhaps never was and of the truth of which none of her Members can be certain certitudine fidei with the certainty of Faith all of them being by this Church permitted to believe the contrary CHAP. III. Fifthly We distinguish betwixt Traditions which though not written in Scripture are left on Record in the Ecclesiastical writings of the first and purest Ages of the Church and such as are so purely Oral Traditions as that we find no footsteps of them in the Three first Centuries much less any assurance they had then any general Reception of the first kind is the Canon of Scripture of the Old Testament mentioned in our Sixth Article § 1. This is proved from the Jews § 2. From the Christians of the Second Century § 3. Of the Third Century § 4. From almost all the celebrated Writers of the Fourth Century § 5. Where also it is observed 1. That these Fathers profess to deliver that Catalogue of them which they had received from Tradition § 6. And that the Books which they rejected as Apocryphal were so reputed by the Church § 7. That the Catalogue they produced was that received not only by the Jews but Christians § 8. That they made it to prevent mistakes § 9. That they represent the Books contained in their Catalogue as the Fountain of Salvation the rest as insufficient to confirm Articles of Faith § 10. The same Tradition still continued to the Sixteenth Century § 11. What the Roman Doctors must do if they would shew a like Tradition for any of their Tenets § 12. The unreasonableness of their pretences to Tradition in this Article Ibid. The Attempts of Mr. M. and J. L. to prove their Canon from the Council of Carthage the Testimony of St. Austin the Decrees of Pope Innocent and Gelasius are Answered § 13. The Tradition touching the Books of the New Testament where it is proved 1. That the Four Evangelists the Acts the Thirteen Epistles of St. Paul the First of Peter and of John were always owned as Canonical by all Orthodox Christians § 14. 2. That it cannot be necessary to Salvation to be assured that the Books formerly controverted belong to the Canon § 15. 3. That we cannot be assured of the true Canon of the New Testament from the Testimony of the Latin Church § 16. 4. That there is not the like necessity that the controverted Books should have been generally received from the beginning as that all necessary Articles of Christian Faith and Manners should be then generally received § 17. That we have cause sufficient to own as Canonical the Books once controverted is proved 1. in the General § 18. 2. In Particular touching the Apocalypse § 19. And the Epistle to the Hebrews § 20. Touching the Epistle of St. James the Second of Peter the Second and Third of John the Epistle of St. Jude § 21. No Orthodox Persons dobuted of them after the Fourth Century § 22. The Romanists cannot prove their Doctrines by any like Traditions and in particular not by such a Tradition as proves the Apocalypse Canonical § 23. The Objection of Mr. M. Answered § 24. AGain § 1 the word Tradition may be applied to signifie either such things as are not written in the Scripture Dist 5. though they are left on Record in the Ecclesiastical writings of the first and purest Ages Vocatur Doctrina non scripta non ea quae nusquam scripta est sed quae non est scripta a primo Autore Bellarm. de verbo Dei non scripto l. 4. c. 2. and from them handed down unto us in the writings of succeeding Ages or else to signifie such things as are said only to be delivered by word of Mouth but cannot by the Records of preceding Ages be proved to have been received as Doctrines generally maintained or practices always observed in the Church of Christ of the first sort is the Tradition of the Canon of Scripture of the Apostles Symbol as a perfect Summary of Doctrines necessary to be believed the Observation of the Lord's Day the Superiority of Bishops over Presbyters the Ordination of Presbyters and Deacons by Bishops only and the like we having full and pregnant evidence from the first Records of Antiquity unto this present time of all these things and whatsoever can be proved by a like Tradition touching a necessary Article of Christian Faith we are all ready to receive but those pretended Traditions of the Roman Church which by no Records of Antiquity can be made appear to have been constantly received by the Church as Apostolical Traditions we have just Reason to reject as being without Ground so stiled For Instance First We receive the Canon of the Scriptures of the Old Testament mentioned in our Sixth Article because it is by written Tradition handed down unto us from the Jews from Christ and his Apostles and from their Successors in the Church and we reject the Canon of the Old Testament imposed upon us by the Fourth Session of the Trent Council partly because we find a clear Tradition both virtually by all who say the Canon of the Old Testament is only that we own and expresly by those who say the others which we stile Apocrypha belong not to the Canon And 1. § 2 We receive our Canon from the Ancient Jews to whom were committed the Oracles of God for their Josephus saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 1. contra Apion
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
A TREATISE OF TRADITIONS PART I. Imprimatur Liber cui titulus A Treatise of Traditions Part I. June 5. 1688. Guil. Needham R R. in Christo P. ac D. D. Wilhelmo Archiep. Cant. a Sacr. Domest A TREATISE OF TRADITIONS PART I. Where it is proved That we have Evidence sufficient from TRADITION I. That the Scriptures are the Word of God. II. That the Church of England owns the true Canon of the Books of the Old Testament III. That the Copies of the Scripture have not been corrupted IV. That the Romanists have no such Evidence for their Traditions V. That the Testimony of the present Church of Rome can be no sure Evidence of Apostolical Tradition VI. What Traditions may securely be relyed upon and what not LONDON Printed by J. Leake for Awnsham Churchill at the Black Swan in Ave-Mary Lane MDCLXXXVIII THE PREFACE The Contents This Proposition That the Doctrines and pretended Traditions of the Western Church could not be introduced by her Members in following Ages but must be derived to them from the Fountain of Tradition is proved false 1. By plain Instances of matters of Fact § 1. 2ly From the false Doctrines and Traditions which generally obtained in the Jewish Church § 2. 3ly From the Prediction of a general Defection from the Faith in the times of Antichrist § 3. 4ly Because this Assertion doth oblige us to account the Fathers of the primitive Ages either Knaves or Fools § 4. 5ly Because it renders all our Search into Antiquity not only superfluous but dangerous § 5. Corruptions in Doctrine or Practice might take their Rise 1st From Mistakes touching the Sence of Scripture § 6. 2ly By leaving of the Scripture and setting up the Fathers as the Rule of Faith § 7. 3ly By flying to Miracles and Visions for the establishment of Doctrines and Opinions § 8. 4ly By reason of the great Authority and Reputation of those Men who first began or else gave Countenance unto them § 9. 5ly By reason of the corrupt Manners of the Clergy § 10. 6ly By reason of the great Ignorance both of the Clergy and the People § 11. 7ly By reason of the Violence and Persecution used to force Men to a Compliance with the prevailing Doctrines or a concealment of their Sentiments to the contrary § 12. This Corruption confessed by the Writers of the dark Ages of the Church § 13. THAT which the Romanists of late have chiefly urged in favour of their present Doctrines and Traditions is That the Traditions which they now embrace as such the Doctrines which they own as Articles of Christian Faith could never have obtained such Credit in the Church or been so generally received throughout the Western Churches as they were before the Reformation had they not been from the Beginning handed down to them as Apostolical Traditions and Doctrines received by the Universal Church of Christ Now the Vanity and Falshood of this Presumption is here shewed by many Instances of plain matter of Fact § 1 demonstrating that what they of Rome at present hold for Apostolical Tradition or as an Article of Christian Faith was generally rejected in former Ages by the whole Church of Christ or at the least by the prevailing and the major part of her Church Guides And whereas it is represented by them as a thing impossible That the Western Church or the prevailing Body of it should in one Age imbrace what they in the foregoing did reject or in this Age reject what in the former they embraced Examples are produced here demonstrating that this hath actually happened in the Instance of eating things strangled and Blood Chap. 2. §. 6. which the whole Western Church abominated in the Eleventh Century and yet did practise in the Twelfth and following Ages In the Instance of the immaculate Conception denyed by the Western Church till the Thirteenth Century Ibid. §. 9. and almost generally received in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries In the Instance of the Canonical and Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament in which the Learned of the Western Church accorded with us in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries Chap. 3. §. 2.11 and yet did Anathematize our Doctrine in the Sixteenth In the Instance of the Angels falling in love with Women Chap. 12. §. 8. asserted generally in the first Four Centuries and rejected in the Fifth to omit many other Instances sufficient to convince us that what the Romanists so confidently offer to prove their Church could not be guilty of such Innovations is only like to the Attempt of Zeno to prove against plain matter of Fact that there could be no Motion But for the farther manifestation of the Vanity of this new way of Arguing a facto ad jus from what they do at present practise and believe to what they ought to do and practise or from their present Faith to an Assurance that the same Faith was always held in all preceeding Ages of the Church I shall First Shew the evil and pernicious Consequences of this way of arguing Secondly I shall point out the Ways and Methods by which these Doctrines and Practices might have prevailed in the Church and yet be nothing less than Apostolical or truly Primitive The evil Consequences of this way of Arguing are First § 2 That it gives the Jews a great Advantage against the Truth and certainty of Christian Faith for they might have then argued and still may with as much Plausibility against our Lord 's Disciples and the first Christian Converts from this very Topick as do the Romanists against the Protestants For might they not say of the very Doctrines and Traditions which they had generally received at our Saviour 's Advent and which he did so peremptorily condemn and caution his Disciples to beware of That they received them from their Fore-Fathers who received them from theirs and who must either have joined in mistaking their Ancestors or in intending to deceive their Posterity of which two things neither is credible Might not they say That the Traditions which they had then embraced were derived from Moses and that their Fore-Fathers handed them down from him to them and that the then present general Reception of them was a sufficient Evidence that they were not Inventions of that or any of the preceeding Ages but Doctrines and Practices derived to them from the first Fountain of Tradition Might they not have asked in what Year and Age those false Traditions and Doctrines entered first among them and whether then their whole Church must not have conspired to tell a lye Might they not have bid them consider the Notoriousness of the Lye and the Damage ensuing from it to themselves and their dearest Pledges and how rare a thing it is to find a Man much less a considerable Number of them who would venture upon such a Wickedness Might they not have added that their Church and People were scattered about almost through every Nation
historical Traditions shewed 1. In the Instance of our Lord's Birth Clauso utero § 4. Of his Age § 5. Of the penetration of his Body through the Doors and the Stone of the Sepulchre § 6. Of the Story of the Phoenix § 7. And of the Cells of the Seventy Interpreters § 8. Observe 3dly That we contend not with the Church of Rome touching Ecclesiastical Traditions concerning Ceremonials and unnecessary Observations but only touching necessary Rules of Faith and Manners § 9. FOR the right stating of this Question let it be considered 1. § 1 That we acknowledge That a Doctrine is neither more or less the Word of God for being written or unwritten for that Word which our Saviour spake unto the Jews was for a time unwritten and yet was nevertheless the Word of God because not written We also say there is no reason to dispute Whether the written or unwritten Word of God when equally known to be so is most to be relied on For the Word of God being therefore believed because known to us to be the Word of God must equally be believed in that Case whether it be written or unwritten Concil Trid. Sess 4. We do not therefore quarrel with the Church of Rome for saying That the Traditions which proceeded from the Mouth of Christ or his Apostles speaking by the Holy Spirit and preserved by a continual Succession in the Catholick Church are with the same Reverence and pious Affection to be received as what they writ But only desire them to prove the things which they affirm and we deny to have been thus delivered and then we promise to receive them as the Truths of Christ. And because Mr. M. hath the Confidence to say P. 397 398. That our Ministers usually so confound the Business that they make their Auditors even to startle when they tell them that we hold Tradition equal to Scripture whereas if they meant to deal really they should say what the Truth is that we do indeed equalize Tradition to Scripture and that we have all reason to do so To let him see how little reason he had to accuse us of corrupt Dealing in this Matter I will faithfully transcribe the Assertions of our most able Writers touching this Point Sect. 16. n. 20. Archbishop Laud declares That the Voice and Tradition of that Church which included in it Apostles Disciples and such as had immediate Revelation from Heaven was Divine and the Word of God from them is of like validity written or delivered Bishop Taylor owns Duct Dubit §. 2. c. 3. p. 484. That Tradition would be of the same use as Scripture is if the Tradition were from Christ and his Apostles and were as Certain as Vniversal as Credible as that is by which we are told that Scripture is the Word of God. We willingly grant saith Mr. Chillingworth Chap. 3. §. 45. vid. Chap. 2. §. 53 88. the Church to be as Infallible in her Traditions as the Scripture is if they be as Vniversal as the Tradition of the undoubted Books of Scripture is And again The Tradition of the Church you say must teach us what is Scripture and we are willing to believe it Answer to the Jes p. 35. Rat. p. 168 210 216. and now if you make it good unto us that the same Tradition down from the Apostles hath delivered from Age to Age and from Hand to Hand any Interpretation of any Scripture we are ready to embrace that also So also Bishop Vsher and Doctor Stillingfleet in his Rational Account frequently And therefore R. H. Guid. Disc 3. c. 11. p. 157. who was better acquainted with our Writings than Mr. M. declares That Protestants acknowledge a sufficient certainty of the Tradition concerning Scripture and consequently concerning all the Articles of Christian Faith that are built on Scripture upon which ground also they freely grant N. B. That if any other point wherein they dissent from Catholicks can be proved by as Universal a Tradition as that of the Scriptures they will subscribe to it We therefore manifestly do agree with Chrysostom Oecumenius and Theophylact when they say That the things delivered by the Mouth of the Apostles Oecum in 2. Thess ij 15. Chrysost ibid. Theophylact and by their Writings are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both worthy of Observation That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both equally deserve to be credited when we have equal certainty of both and therefore these passages are vainly cited against us by Mr. M. Let him once prove that the same Tradition tells us That the Apostles delivered the Points in Controversy betwixt us and the Church of Rome as Divine Verities by word of Mouth only and we are all his Humble Servants But alas he knows how vain and how impossible an attempt this would be § 2 and therefore thinks it better boldly to assert what he can never prove by saying P. 399. That our best and only assurance that the Scripture is the Word of God is that all the Christian world saith so but the same Tradition which tells us this tells us also that the Apostles delivered these and these Points to us as Divine Verities by word of Mouth viz. All the Traditions received as Apostolical in the Roman Church Now to reflect a little on this false Assertion and to expose this way of Arguing 1. Put it into the Mouth of a Jew and it thus pleads for those Traditions which our Lord condemned and by which they condemned him The best and only Assurance which you Jewish Christians can have that the Scripture of the Old Testament is the Word of God is that all the Jews say so but the same Tradition which tells us this tells us also That Moses and the Prophets delivered these and these Points to us as Divine Verities by word of Mouth which your Jesus rejected as vain Worship and as the Doctrines of Men 1 Pet. 1.18 and your St. Peter mentions as Traditions received from our Fathers though he stiles them vain you therefore must have equal Reason to receive those Traditions which condemn your Jesus and shew he could not be the true Messiah as to own those Scriptures of the Old Testament which say you Prophesied of him 2. Though we grant the Attestation of the whole Christian World to be a very good assurance of any necessary Article of Christian Faith yet have we more assurance that the Scriptures are the Word of God than so As 1. The necessity that the Christian Revelation should be preserved in some Records and the assurance that we have that it hath been preserved to us in no other The necessity I say that the Christian Revelation should be preserved in some Records for if St. Paul thought it necessary to write to the Church of Rome Rom. xv 15. 2 Cor. i. 13. to put them in remembrance of the Grace given to him as also to send in writing
ad Judaeorum codices amplexata est The Church of Rome hath given Patronage to the Censure of Jerom by leaving the Version of the Septuagint which had obtained in the whole Church Catholick and Embracing the Version of Jerom made new according to the Books of the Jews If then the Heathenish Story of the Phoenix could obtain such Credit among the Primitive Fathers as to be gain-said by none but Maximus If the Jewish Fiction of the Cells obtained still greater Credit being only questioned by St. Jerom what Security can we have that other Stories of like Nature are of unquestionable Credit If the sole Assertion of St. Jerom is patronized by the Church of Rome against the constant Judgment of the whole Catholick World if his Translation from the Hebrew which when he made it first was generally Condemned and Censured and for which some charged him with Heresy and all with Innovation Ruffinus ei notam Haereseos impingebat Erasm Arg. Apol. Hierom. adv Ruff. Ep. Tom. 2. f. 82. b. is now made Canonical must not the Church of Rome have changed her Judgment Must she not have rejected the Sentence of the whole Church Catholick of the Five first Ages and given us just Reason to use the same Liberty if we were minded so to do in any other Instance of like Nature For further Explication of this Question § 9 let it be observed that we contend not with the Church of Rome about Ecclesiastical Traditions touching Ceremonials Qu. 4. Dist 3. unnecessary Observations and Constitutions Ecclesiastical such as are the Cross in Baptism Trine Immersion the Renunciation of Satan and his Pomps the Unction of the Baptized Persons the Words used at the Consecration of that and of the other Sacrament the Kiss of Charity the Lent Fast the Worship of God towards the East Prayer standing on the Lord's Day c. but only touching necessary Rules of Faith and Manners In matters of the first kind we say in the words imposed upon St. De Spiritu Sancto c. 27. Basil That the Practice of the Church is sufficient though we cannot tell 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from what Scripture we derive these practices but in Matters of Faith we say with the true St. Basil De vera pia fide p. 386. treating upon the Articles of Christian Faith That it is the property of a faithful Steward to deliver nothing to his fellow Servants as part of holy Faith but what is committed to him by his good Lord i. e. what he hath learned from the Holy Scriptures That it is a manifest falling from the Faith and an argument of Pride either to reject any thing that is written or to superinduce any thing that is not written our Lord having said My Sheep hear my Voice Vid. Chap. 10. That the Apostle vehemently forbids that any thing should be added to § 5 or taken from the divinely inspired Scriptures which are Christ's Will and Testament Of matters of the first kind we say with Tertullian De Cor. Milit. cap. 2. that they are such as we think fit to be received and observed in any Church which shall enjoin them sine ullius scripturae instrumento solius traditionis titulo exinde consuetudinis patrocinio Vpon the sole account of Tradition and Custom though Scripture hath said nothing of them In matters of the second kind we say with the same Tertullian L. de praescript c. 15. Cap. 38. Adv. Hermog c. 22. Ep. 118. ad Jan. cap. 5. p. 558. None can discourse of the things of Faith but from the Holy Scriptures That none can have the Integrity of Doctrine without the integrity of those Instruments that what the Scriptures are we are and that we adore the fullness of the Scriptures If the Question were of the first as v. g. Whether on Holy Thursday we should offer in the Morning and after Supper too or fast the Evening and then offer we answer to that Question with St. Austin Si quid horum totum per orbem frequentat Ecclesia If the whole Church doth any thing of this nature it is insolent madness to dispute whether it ought to be done for this is to dispute and trouble the Church about a thing of nought and so to discover an unpeaceable and ungovernable temper of mind Or if the Question were Whether the Sacrament is to be received fasting or not we think it fit to be concluded by the practice of the Vniversal Church Ep. 118. ad Jan. c. 6. p. 559. not contradicted by our Lord's Precepts nor repugnant to Faith or Manners For in such cases St. Austin saith Emendari oportet quod perperam fiebat That which was ill done ought to be amended Cap. 5. ibid. and that none should vary from our Lord's Command But if the Question be of Articles of Faith and necessary Rules of Manners we say with the same St. Austin De Bono Vid. cap. 1. Tom. 4. p. 1018. Wherefore should I teach thee any thing more than that we read in the Apostle for the Holy Scripture fixeth the Rule of our Doctrine lest we should attempt to known more and again If any one I will not say if we Sive de Christo five de ejus Ecclesia sive de quacunque alia re quae pertinet ad fidem vitamque nostram si Angelus de coelo vobis annunciaverit praeterquam quod in Scripturis legalibus evangelicis accepistis Anathema sit De lit Petil l. 3. c. 6. no way to be compared to him who said Though we but if an Angel from Heaven should preach unto you either concerning Christ or his Church or any other thing which belongs to our Faith or Life besides what you have received in the Legal and Evangelical Scriptures let him be accursed In a word the Kiss of Charity the Office of the Diaconess the breaking of the Bread distributed and Baptism by immersion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cap. 20. which are all Ceremonies and Constitutions mentioned in Holy Scripture Prayer standing on the Lord's Day commanded by the first General Council of Nice Prayer towards the East the Consecration of one Loaf for all the Communicants carrying home the Eucharist to omit many things of a like nature were all of them Customs received generally in the next Age to the Apostles and yet now generally disused by the present Church of Rome which therefore cannot justly blame others for disuse of any Customs of like nature CHAP. II. Fourthly For Explication of the Question observe That the Tradition we admit is the Tradition of all past Ages and not that of the present Church and much less of the Church of Rome § 1. This also is the Tradition pleaded by Origen St. Basil and St. Austin and which 't is suitable to Reason to allow Ibid. The Testimony of the present Church of Rome and her Adherents can be no sure Evidence of true Apostolical Tradition 1. Because
by Jew and Gentile Heretick and Orthodox even in those times in which and in those places where they first appeared and by those Persons who immediately before received others as the true and genuine Copies of the Word of God. Lastly § 14 That these Records of the Will of God have not been so corrupted as to cease to be a certain Rule of Faith and Manners we argue from the Providence of God inducing us to judge that the Books thus delivered to us by the Church as genuine are truly so for nothing seems more inconsistent with divine Wisdom and Goodness than to inspire his Servants to write the Scripture as a Rule of Faith and Manners for all future Ages and to require the Belief of the Doctrines the practice of the Rules of Life plainly contained in it and yet to suffer this divinely inspired Rule to be insensibly corrupted in things necessary to Faith or Practice who can imagine that God who sent his Son out of his Bosom to declare this Doctrine and his Apostles by the Assistance of the Holy Spirit to indite and preach it and by so many Miracles confirm it to the World should suffer any wicked Persons to corrupt and alter any of those terms on which the Happiness and Welfare of Mankind depended This sure can be conceived Rational by none but such as think it not absurd to say That God repented of his good Will and Kindness to Mankind in the vouchsafing of the Gospel to them That he so far maligned the good of future Generations that he suffered wicked Men to rob them of all the benefit intended to them by this Declaration of his Will. For since those very Scriptures which have been received for the Word of God and used by the Church as such from the first Ages of it pretend to be the terms of our Salvation Scriptures indited by Men commissionated from Christ and such as did avouch themselves Apostles by the Will of God and his Command for the delivery of the Faith of Gods Elect and for the knowledge of the Truth which is after Godliness in hopes of Life eternal they must be what they do pretend to be the Word of God or Providence must have permitted such a Forgery as rendereth it impossible for us to perform our Duty in order to Salvation for if the Scripture of the New Testament should be corrupted in any essential requisite of Faith or Manners it must cease to make us wise unto Salvation and so God must have lost the end which he intended in inditing of it Again when we consider that in the Jewish Church the Scriptures were until the coming of Christ in very corrupt Times and amongst very corrupt Persons preserved so entire that Christ sends the Jews to them to learn Religion declares that they have Moses and the Prophets and both our Lord and his Disciples confuted and instructed the Scribes and Pharisees and Jews out of them without the least intimation of any corruption that had happened to them we have still greater reason to judge the New Testament sincere since we cannot rationally suppose Providence less careful of the New Testament than of the Old. If against this Argument it be Objected Object that we find by the Citations of the Ancients and by Old Manuscripts that there was a difference betwixt their Copies of the Scripture and those we now use I answer 1. That this is no certain Argument of any such difference seeing the Citation of the Ancients might differ thus by the failure of their Memory it being frequently their Custom to cite the Scriptures from their Memory without inspection of the Book moreover we find by Ocular Demonstration that these various Lectures make no considerable variation in matters of Faith or Manners or if one Text which asserts a substantial Doctrine be variously read so that the matter is thence dubious there are others which assert it without that Variety If then no Writing whilst the Apostles lived could pass for Apostolical and yet destroy or contradict the Faith they taught if their immediate Successors could not be ignorant of what the Apostles committed to them to be read and taught us the Records of their Faith and Doctrine nor would they be induced to deliver that for such which they believed not to be so if neither they could universally conspire to effect this thing nor can it rationally be thought that Providence would suffer them to do so 'T is morally impossible these Writings should be forged or corrupted in matters of Concern or Moment If therefore Mr. § 15 M. will make good his Assertion that they have the same means to shew that their Traditions are true that is truly descended from the Apostles that we have to shew the Copies of the Scripture which we use are not corrupted in substantials he must first own what we have proved of these Copies to be true of his Traditions viz. That they cannot be proved to be true from the Infallibility of the Church and that in any doubt concerning the Truth of them we must have recourse to the Original and Fountain of Tradition not to the Judgment of the present Age as in the proof of the true Copies all Parties are agreed that we must have recourse to Ancient Manuscripts And to the Fountains of the Greek and Hebrew Secondly He must shew what we have done touching the Scriptures concerning his pretended Traditions viz. That these Traditions were owned cited read and received as Apostolical Traditions from the Apostles Days that Jews and Heathens were acquainted with them that they were attested to by the Sufferings of the Primitive Martyrs that they were such as the Apostles desired to leave in writing and which they did so leave according to the Will of God and consequently were not oral Traditions that they were universally acknowledged and consented to by Men of different perswasions preserved in their Originals to succeeding Ages transcribed by Christians for their private and their publick use esteemed by them as their Digests and as deifying Traditions believed by all Christians to be divine and as the Records of their Hopes and Fears that they were carefully sought after and riveted in their minds and constantly rehearsed in their Assemblies by Men whose work it was to read and preach them and to exhort to the performance of those Duties they enjoined that they were frequent in the Writings and often cited in the Confessions and Apologies the Comments Homilies Discourses and Epistles of the Ancient Worthies as also in the Objections of their Adversaries to whose view they still lay open And lastly he must prove they were Traditions which the good Providence of God was as much concerned to keep entire and uncorrupt as to preserve those Scriptures so which by the Will of God were written to be the Pillar and Foundation of the Christian Faith and when we see this task performed we shall be more enclined to admit of the pretended Traditions
to them the Doctrine of the Apostles pretending to have received it as it were by Tradition from the Apostles Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 28. When they had the boldness to affirm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That all the Ancients and even the Apostles taught the same things which they did and that what they delivered was afterwards corrupted by the Orthodox I say that in their Discourses against these Hereticks they should not once endeavour to stop their mouths by telling them what were indeed the Doctriens and Traditions received from the Apostles what were the things revealed to them by the Apostles but should still keep these necessary Traditions which the Church of Rome now teacheth as received from them secret not saying one word of them no not when they in confutation of these pretences of the Hereticks declare what was the Rule of Faith and the Tradition received from the Apostles and preserved by all the Apostolick Churches is so incredible as nothing can be more except this vain Imagination That these very Fathers should concurr with these Hereticks as do some others in this Assertion That saving Truth could not be known from Scripture by them who were ignorant of Tradition as being not delivered down to Posterity by writing but by word of Mouth and yet at the same time should say Lib. 3. c. 1. as Irenaeus doth in his Discourse against them That the Apostles first Preached the Gospel and after by the Will of God delivered it unto us in the Scriptures to be hereafter the Foundation and Pillar of our Faith. And as Eusebius doth Lib. 5. c. 18. That the pretences of the Hereticks unto Tradition might be probable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did not the Holy Scriptures contradict them And as St. Jerom That those things which they feign to have received as Tradition In Hagg. c. 1. fol. 102. a. absque authoritate testimoniis Scripturarum percutit gladius Dei without the Authority and Testimonies of the Scripture the Sword of God doth smite for what is this but to talk like us Northern Hereticks for to quarrel with Men for appealing from Scriture as obscure and insufficient to decide our Controversies without the Suffrage of Oral Tradition to alledge Scripture as a sufficient evidence that others vainly did pretend unto it to reject what others do pretend to have received from Tradition because it wanteth the Authority and Testimony of the Holy Scriptures whatsoever it may pass for in these ancient Fathers is one of those very things for which we are proclaimed Hereticks In a word That there should be unwritten Traditions necessary to be believed unto Salvation and neither the Creed of the Greek nor of the Latin Church make the least mention of any of them That a Creed should be made perhaps at Gentilly in the Seventh Century and to obtain the better credit should be called the Creed of Athanasius That this Creed should inform us in the beginning That whosoever will be saved before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholick Faith threatning that he shall perish everlastingly who doth not keep this Faith entire and whole that therefore in the next words it should say and the Catholick Faith is this and should conclude in these Expressions This is the Catholick Faith and yet leave out almost as many necessary Articles of Christian Faith as it contained That the principal written Traditions which in comparison needed it not should be put together into a Creed but that the unwritten ones which needed it very much should be quite left out and never thought of to that purpose till about Fifteeen hundred Years after and that the Ancients Tertullian St. Basil Eusebius and others speaking expresly and professedly of Traditions not contained in Holy Scripture should reckon up many unnecessary things and never mention in their Catalogues one of these necessary Traditions That in their Treatises of Christian Faith and Christian Doctrine and of Ecclesiastical Opinions and their Instructions of the Catechized the Fathers should say nothing the Persons who were to be instructed in all the Doctrines of the Christian Faith should hear nothing of all these Articles and yet they should be throughout all Ages of the Christian World so necessary that no Salvation could be had without them these I confess are truly R. Catholick that is incredible Assertions and if we must give credit to them we must do it upon Tertullian's Ground Credo quia est impossibile Because it is impossible they should be true CHAP. VII The Novelty of the R. Doctrines farther proved First from the general Tradition of the Church that the Four Gospels and the Scriptures comprized all that was necessary to be believed or done by Christians this proved 1. in general § 1. 2. From the particular account Tradition gives us of the Writings of the Four Evangelists § 2. Inference this Tradition shews That to preserve a Doctrine safe to Posterity 't was not sufficient to receive it by Oral Tradition unless it were written § 3. Secondly This is proved from the general Tradition of the whole Church of Christ that the Apostles or the Nicene Symbol was a compleat summary of all things necessary to be believed by Christians § 4. Where it is shewed that the Apostles delivered to their Converts a System or a form of Words Ibid. That this form was delivered to all Churches and was for substance the same with that which afterwards was stiled the Apostles Creed § 5. That Christians were received into the Church by Baptism on the profession of this Faith § 6. That it was taught as the entire System of things necessary to be believed § 7. That it was esteemed a Test of Orthodoxy by which they prescribed to Hereticks § 8. That this whole Summary of Christian Faith was evidently contained in Scripture § 9. And that notwithstanding they unanimously stiled it a Tradition § 10. MOreover That the Articles of Faith owned by the Church of Rome and imposed upon all who hold Communion with her to be believed and owned as such under the penalty of Anathema to him who doth believe or say the contrary were not received from Christ or his Apostles either by unwritten Tradition or by traditional Interpretation of the Holy Scriptures or any portion of them to that sence from whence it may be certainly concluded that they were in the Scriptures mentioned or owned by the ancient Church as Articles of Christian Faith or as things necessary to be believed or practised by all Christians will be exceeding evident from these Considerations v. g. First § 1 From that plain and general Tradition of the Church of Christ that all which the Apostles preach'd and taught their Converts by word of mouth as either necessary to be believed or practised they afterwards at their desire committed unto writing and deliver'd to them in the Gospel and the Holy Scriptures This in the
laying this only in those places as the Foundation of the Faith and so going on to other Countries to convert them and surely then the Successors of the Apostles did not doubt but that these Gospels did with sufficient fulness and perspicuity contain the necessary Articles of Christian Faith. Thirdly Of St. Luke the Follower of St. Paul Lucas quod ab illo praedicabatur Evangelium in libro condidit l. 3. c. 1 Irenaeus informs us That he writ in a Book that Gospel which was preached by him he adds That St. Paul neglected not to teach the whole Counsel of God Cap. 14. and that St. Luke neglected not to write what St. Paul had taught and thence inferrs against the Hereticks that they could not pretend to know what was not taught by Paul or was not written by St. Luke Fourthly St. John saith the Tradition of the Ancients was importuned by all the Asiaticks and by the Embassies of many others to write his Gospel and his great care in Composing it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Haer. 51. §. 6. Theoph. proem in Joh. say they was to speak of those necessary things which they had pretermitted who writ before him or of the Deity of Christ which Ebion Cerinthus and other Hereticks denied and the other Evangelists had not so fully spoken to The Martyrology of Timothy Bishop of Ephesus adds That the other Evangelists were brought to him Apud Phot. Cod. 254. p. 1403. containing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The salutary Passion the Miracles and Doctrines of our Lord and that he digested them in order and added his own to them Here then from this Tradion it is plain and obvious to observe First § 3 That it was constantly supposed and looked on by all Christians as a thing most certain that to preserve a Doctrine safe unto posterity to keep it sure and certain 't was not sufficient for them to hear it by the Ear or to receive it by Tradition though from the mouth of an Apostle but that 't was requisite in order to that end that what they heard should be committed to writing that so it might be both to them and others the Pillar and the Ground of Truth Why else do they declare that those things which are only spoken and not written quickly vanish and thence inferr That if the Evangelists intended the Salvation of Posterity they must have written what they preached Why do they say it was necessary for the Apostles when they were about to leave their Converts to commit what they taught in writing to them Why was it that they could not be contented Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the unwritten teaching of the divine Doctrine or in the Romish phrase with the infallible way of oral Tradition but did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 desire with all earnestness St. Mark to give them a Digest or Memorial in writing of that Doctrine they had received by word of mouth And why was Peter so delighted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with this desire of the Christians which was a plain renouncing of oral Tradition and a preferring of the written word before it Secondly Hence it is obvious to observe That oral Tradition being thus subject to failure and miscarriage the Wisdom of our God and Saviour thought fit that what was preached by the Apostles should be committed unto writing that it might be unto posterity the Pillar and the Ground of Truth Hence Lib. 3. c. 1. saith Irenaeus they by the Will of God writ the Scriptures for this end They saith St. Austin writ what they knew by the dictates of their Head. He commanded the Apostles to write and what things should be written were chosen doubtless by the Holy Ghost whose Pen-men the Apostles were Proem in Matth. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was the pleasure of Christ or his Apostles saith Theophylact that the Gospel should be writ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Christians being taught the Truth from them might neither be perverted by Heresies or corrupted in manners Thirdly Hence also it is evident That the things chosen by our Lord and his Apostles and by the Holy Spirit to be written were such as seemed to their Wisdom sufficient for the Salvation of Believers that they contained all which our Lord would have us read concerning what he did or said all that truth which was needful to preserve us from Heresie in Doctrine or Corruption in Manners the whole state or system of the Christian Faith which whosoever did retain could not want Faith even when he wanted Teachers all that St. Peter preached the Foundations of Faith the whole Council of God the salutary Doctrines of our Lord all that was necessary to be known 2. § 4 This will be still more evident from that unquestionable Tradition of the whole Church of Christ for many Centuries that the Apostles Creed as it was first delivered and as it was afterwards explained by that of Nice was a compleat and perfect Summary of all things simply necessary to be believed by Christians That the Apostles and first Preachers of the Christian Faith comprized the Fundamentals of their Doctrine in some Creed System or form of words we learn not only from the Tradition of the Church but also from many passages of Scripture which mention Luk. i. 4. Heb. v. 12. Heb. vi 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the words of their Catechism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the elementary Principles of the Oracles of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word of the beginning of Christ or the Foundation upon which Christians grew up unto perfection Rom. xij 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Analogy of Faith according to which all the Dispensers of the word must frame their Doctrine 1 Tim. iij. 15 16. 2 Tim. i. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mystery of Godliness to be preserved in and by the Church the Pillar and the Ground of Truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a form of sound words which was delivered to and must be held by all Christians in Faith and Love verse 14. or a brief Summary of the things which were to be believed by all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the good depositum or Summary of Christian Doctrine committed to the trust of others or agreed on by the Apostles to be taught by all 2 Tim. ij 2. and which also was by them to be committed to faithful Men able to instruct others in it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jud. iij. Philip. i. 27. The Faith once and at once delivered to the Saints which they must hold in a good Conscience and earnestly contend for 2. § 5 That this Creed System or Summary of Faith was by the Apostles delivered to all Churches and was for substance that which is now called the Apostles Creed is also evident from the Tradition of the Church of Christ Irenaeus saith It is the Faith which the Church received
are plainly opposite to the Doctrines Practices and Traditions formerly received and approved in the Church of Christ and this they do believe so firmly that they rather chuse to suffer loss of Life and all the Comforts of it than own these Doctrines of the Church of Rome as Apostolical Traditions Moreover whereas it is no Man's Interest to make the World believe there was such a City as London if there was no such place in being it is the Interest of the whole Church of Rome to set up this pretence to Infallibility in the General that finding it disclaimed by other Churches she with some Colour may pretend unto it and 't is the Interest of the Roman Clergy as much to stickle for the Truth of her pretended Traditions as it was the Interest of Demetrius and his Fellow Artists to avouch to the Ephesians They might be truly Gods which were made by Hands and that the Image of Diana truly fell down from Jupiter since otherwise their Craft would be set at nought And as it was the Interest of the Master of the Pythonisse to be angry with St. Paul for casting out the Evil Spirit from her because thereby his Hopes of Gain was gone For if Men will not receive their Traditions as the Truths of God they cannot Lord it over their Consciences nor drain their Purses nor give Laws at pleasure to the Christian World but must be put to the hard task of proving what they would have us take upon their Words And Fourthly Whereas he that doubteth whether there be such a City as London may repair unto it to be convinced by ocular demonstration whither shall he repair who doubteth of the Truth of the Traditions of the Church of Rome for Satisfaction in that Matter Will you send him to Scripture You have already told him he cannot know what is Scripture what Copies and what Texts are uncorrupted what Translation of it is Authentick but by the Church and also that when he knows all this he cannot understand the meaning of the Scriptures in places disputable and variously sensed as you know those are by which you prove both the Churches Infallibility and the Pretences of the Roman Church to be Infallible Will you send him with Mr. P. 360. M. To the unanimous Consent and Tradition of our Church that is the Church of Rome what is this but to bid him believe that Self-evident which he thinks evidently false to believe the Church of Rome to be Infallible in her Traditions and then he will not doubt of her Infallibility or to turn Roman Catholick and then he will no longer be a Protestant Will you add with him That what is proposed by the Tradition of such a Church is evidently credible Ibid. and sufficient to beget an infallible assent Is it not then matter of Amazement that so many Millions of Persons throughout the World endowed with intellectuals as piercing and accomplished with all Abilities which their Adversaries can boast of yea who many of them have strong temporal motives to incline them to embrace the Romish Traditions and all the miseries which Papal Tyranny can inflict to awaken them into a serious consideration of all the Evidence that can be offered for them and who are Men seriously industrious to attain Salvation and Men who know they must perish everlastingly if they resist the Truth clearly propounded to them I say is it not matter of Amazement that so many persons so qualified should from Generation to Generation so unanimously reject what is evidently credible and able to beget within them an infallible assent yea that they should dispute and write many Books against it though they could never do so but they must contradict what is self-Evident What is this but in effect to say All Protestants always were are and must be whilst they continue Protestants resolved to be damned and as obstinate as the very Devil in doing what they know must tend to their eternal Condemnation Will you send him to the Vniversal Church either by it you mean only the R. Church and her Adherents or you do not if you do you again send him to the Church of Rome if you do not you must renounce that Article of Faith which all your Clergy stand by Oath obliged to defend viz. the Roman Catholick Church and with it your Pretences to Infallibility on the account of any of these Promises which do confessedly belong only unto the Vniversal Church of Christ CHAP. XII Mr. M ' s. Fifth Assertion That all Catholicks ever held that for true which was owned by the Vniversal Church of their times and rejected the contrary as an Error answered by way of Concession § 1. First That this is absolutely true in reference to Doctrines and Practices truly necessary to the Being of a Church But Secondly That this is with Lirinensis to be restrained to the Fundamentals of Faith is proved 1st from Scripture 2dly from Reason § 2. Thirdly From Instances as First That of the Administration of the Sacrament to Infants which they generally practised both in the Eastern and the Western Churches § 3. They declared this Practice to be necessary § 4. That they speak not this of such a participation of the Body and Blood of Christ as may be had in Baptism but plainly of the Puriticipation of the Eucharist § 5. Inferences hence 1. To prove the Definition of the Trent Council touching this Matter actually False 2ly That the Practice or Doctrine of the Church in any Age is no true Evidence of Tradition or the right Interpretation of Holy Scripture 3ly That Mr. M ' s. Argument for Prayer for the Dead from Tradition is not convincing § 6. 2. From the Opinion of the Fathers That it was not lawful for a Christian to swear at all § 7. 3ly From their Opinion That good Angels were transported with the Love of Women and got Gyants of them § 8. 4ly From their Opinion That it was unlawful for any Clergyman to engage himself in Secular Affairs § 9. Or to go from one Church or Diocess to another § 10. 3ly When whole Churches and Nations differ and Heresies prevail the Fathers say we are for finding out the Truth to have Recourse only to Scripture and to primitive Tradition § 11. A full Answer to Mr. M ' s. Argument for Tradition from the Ancient Custom of praying for the Dead shewing on what Accounts the Ancients did it what Reason we have not to do it That the Prayers for them used by the Church of Rome are Novelties and that those used by the Ancients were perfectly destructive of the Roman Purgatory § 12. MR. § 1 M. saith That whatsoever was held by the Vniversal Church P. 367 368. was without farther Question held for true and the contrary to it was ever rejected as an Error Neither will you ever find a Catholick who ever had the Boldness to say that the Church of
under Heaven Act. 2.5 and all received the same Traditions and Doctrines which were condemned by our Lord and his Disciples and that it was incredible that Churches so dispersed through many Countries and Nations should agree together to affirm a Falshood for a Truth Now to this way of Arguing I desire to know what Answer can be given but by shewing by what ways such Opinions actually might have spread among them though not originally received and proving from their own Scriptures and Writers That these Opinions were not always held among them and if this way be good when used by Christians against them it must be as good when used by Protestants against Papists if this Plea be sophistical when put into the Mouth of an unbelieving Jew it must be as sophistical when it proceedeth from the Mouth of Papists I have not been so fortunate as to meet with any direct Answer to this Argument only to the Argument urged from the actual Condemnation of our Lord as an Impostor by the Sanhedrim That no Submission no blind Obedience could be due to the Church Guides then ruling in the Jewish Church The Guide of Controversies Disc of the necessity of Ch. Guides c. 3. §. 25. p. 17. Confer avec M. Claude p. 183 184 185. and the Bishop of Meaux thus answer That the Messias coming with Miracles and manifested by the other Two Persons of the Trinity by the Father with a Voice from Heaven commanding to hear him and by the Holy Ghost seen descending on him as also by the Baptist was now from henceforth to be received as the supreme Legislator and nothing to be admitted from others or from the Sanhedrim it self contradictory to what he taught which high Court therefore now for the Accomplishment of his necessary Sufferings was permitted by God to be the greatest Enemy of Truth and guided therein not by Gods but a Satanical Spirit of whose Doctrines therefore our Lord often warned the People to beware The Bishop of Meaux adds nothing considerable to this Answer and is plainly baffled by his learned Adversary Mr. Claude to whose Works I remit the Reader Now First Is it not wonderful to see how these Men say and unsay pronounce a thing impossible in one Case and in another like unto it confess it actually done We shew them That in the Jewish Church such false Traditions had generally prevail'd as tended to evacuate the Law of God render his Worship vain and to engage them to reject the true Messiah and yet they were received as Doctrines of their great Prophet Moses handed down to them by oral Tradition that infallible Preserver of Truth True say they the Church Guides were then permitted by God to be the greatest Enemies of Truth and guided therein not by Gods but a Satanical Spirit add now to this That the Doctrines and Traditions of these Men found general Reception in the Jewish Church And will it not hence follow That Doctrines taught Traditions introduced by the greatest Enemies of Truth and by Men acted not by the Spirit of God but that of Satan may generally prevail to be received as true Doctrines and Traditions derived from prophetical Authority and fit to be assented to received and practised by all Secondly Did these Traditions and false Doctrines against which our Saviour cautioned them begin then only to spring up among them when our Saviour appeared with his Miracles when at his Baptism the Holy Ghost descended visibly upon him and God gave Testimony to him by a Voice from Heaven If so you see that even the whole Jewish Church though scattered throughout the World might all at once embrace Traditions of such evil and pernicious Consequences though they before had never heard one tittle of them and so not only in the Compass of one Age but of Three Years at farthest new and pernicious Doctrines might generally obtain in the whole Jewish Church and why not also in the Western Churches within the compass of Eight hundred Years But that these Doctrines of the Scribes and Pharisees these Traditions which they had received touching Christ's temporal Kingdom and touching the personal Appearance of the Tisbite to be his Fore-runner and touching the Expositions of the Law condemned by Christ were not of so late Date as our Lord's Baptism and Entrance upon his prophetick Office is evident beyond Dispute from what I have discoursed already from Josephus Ch. 11. §. 7. asserting that they were received from the most ancient Jews from Epiphanius that they derived them from Moses from the mention of them in our Saviour 's time as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. xxviij 17. Gal. i. 14. Customs and Traditions received from their Fathers and from the great Incredibility that these things should so generally obtain to be received as Traditions in so short a time Besides we know the Expectation of their temporal King had alarm'd all the East before and their Tradition that Elias the Tisbite should come in Person to anoint him and be his Fore-runner must be as old as the Translation of the Septuagint These Doctrines and Traditions must be therefore taught whilst these Church Guides and Rulers were infallible in the Interpretation of the Scriptures and were true Judges of what they had received by Tradition if ever they were so or rather it must be apparent that they were not so because they generally had prevailed upon the People to receive Doctrines and Traditions of such fatal and pernicious Consequences and therefore all the specious Harangues the Papists make concerning the Impossibility that false Traditions and corrupt Doctrines should prevail amongst them must be as plausible when uttered by the Jew against the Christian as by the Papist against Protestants For v. g. where may they say will you produce the Men of former Ages who taxed the Jewish Church with such corrupt Traditions as your Jesus taxed them with or bid Men beware of the Doctrine of them who sate in Moses Chair or of those Scribes and Pharisees who had obtained so great Credit on the Account of Piety and Learning Do not you Christians own that we were once a right Vine the true and only Church of God till the Appearance and Baptism of your Jesus Who therefore can believe that God would suffer such dangerous Doctrines to prevail in his own Church and raise up no Church Guides except the Sadducees to contradict them until your Jesus and his Disciples undertook to be Reformers of it Where then had God a true Church in the World if not among the People of the Jews What other Church could Christ and his Disciples mention besides that whose Governors he taxed with voiding the Commandments of God and rendring his Worship vain because of some Traditions which they had received from their Fore-Fathers If then God suffered his Church to be all over-run with such a fatal Leprosy where was the watchful Eye of Providence Yea where the Care or Conscience of
those Guides of Souls he had set over them Did all our Pastors fall asleep at once or could they all conspire to deceive Posterity Thirdly R. H. The Guide of Controversies cannot be ignorant That as he says God then permitted the Sanhedrim to be the greatest Enemies of Truth for the Accomplishment of the Prophecies of the Old Testament so do we also say That God permitted these pernicious Doctrines to obtain in the Church of Rome for the Accomplishment of those Prophecies of the New Testament touching a great and almost general Apostacy which was to happen in the Days of the great Antichrist and in the time when all Tongues and Nations were to worship the Beast Now hence ariseth a Second Demonstration of the Falshood of this vain Presumption § 3 That no such Change can happen in the Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Christ as we pretend to for the Testimony of the Holy Scriptures the Doctrine of the Fathers and the Confessions of many learned Catholicks assure us that this shall actually happen in the times of Antichrist and what will then become of all the pretended Demonstrations That this cannot happen or can never happen And First Rev. xj 7-xij 6. The Scripture speaks expresly of the Slaughter of the Two Witnesses the Flight of the Women into the Desart and of the Worship which the whole World shall pay unto the Beast Where note That the Witnesses which represent the Church or her true Pastors are but Two and they at last are slain and that the Dominion of Antichrist is represented as over all Kingdoms Tongues and Nations and he is said to cause the Earth Chap. xiij 7 v. 16. and him that dwells therein to worship him and both small and great rich and poor bond and free to receive his Mark. The Fathers also assert that the Apostacy will then be so great Basil Ep. 71. p. 115. That the Lord will seem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wholly to have left his Churches That there shall be then Totius mundi seductio Hippol. de Consum mundi p. 4. a Seduction of the whole World That Cuncti accedent P. 41. atque adorabunt eum all shall come and worship the Beast That the Saints shall hide themselves P. 43 49 59. in montibus speluncis cavernis Terrae in the mountains dens and caverns of the Earth That all shall fall off from God and believe that Impostor That there shall be nec oblatio P. 48. nec suffitus nec cultus Deo gratus neither Oblation nor Incense nor any Worship acceptable to God no Eucharist no Liturgy no singing of Psalms or reading of the Scripture That there shall be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodor. Tom 3. Ep. 63. p. 937. Hieron in Sophon c. 2. f. 97. F. a general Apostacy That Regnante Antichristo redigenda sit Ecclesia in solitudinem in the Reign of Antichrist the Church will be brought to Solitude so that Christ coming shall scarce find Faith upon the Earth That in the time of Antichrist ecclesia non apparebit Aust Ep. 80. ad Hesyc p. 364. the Church shall not appear being eclipsed by the Persecutions of ungodly Men That Men shall ask whether the Gospel doth any where continue upon Earth Ephr. Syr. de consum Sâ—eculi Antichristo Col. An. 1603. p. 219. responsumque iri nusquam and it shall be answered no where And in this Assertion the Fathers are generally followed by the Romish Doctors De Pontif. Rom. l. 3. c. 7. §. denique let one Bellarmine speak for them all saying that Daniel plainly saith That in the times of Antichrist by reason of the Severity of Persecutions the publick and daily Sacrifice of the Church shall cease ubi omnium consensu loquitur de tempore Antichristi where by the consent of all he speaketh of the time of Antichrist This being then so clear a Revelation or Prediction of the Holy Ghost and our great Prophet must some time or other happen or both our Saviour and the Holy Spirit must be charged with lying Prophecies And being so unanimously and without controll delivered by the Holy Fathers the constant Tradition and the received Doctrine of the Church of Christ throughout all those Ages must be a constant Refutation of this idle Dream and their Pretences to Tradition must evidently be confuted by Tradition Thirdly § 4 This Method and Proceeding of the Romanists for finding out and judging of primitive Doctrines and Traditions were it admitted would force us to condemn the Writers of the Church from the beginning to the Tenth Twelfth or Fourteenth Centuries as the worst of Fools or Knaves for seeing it is manifest from their plain Words produced in great Plenty throughout those Ages that they speak as plainly in Condemnation of the Latin Service Communion in one Kind the Veneration of Images the Seven Sacraments the Trent Canon of the Books of the Old Testament and of many other Articles of Romish Faith which they pretend to have received from Tradition as any Protestant can do either they must have spoken all these things unwittingly for want of knowledge of what the Church maintained to the contrary throughout those Ages and then it cannot be avoided but they must pass for the most ignorant of Men and such as did not know the necessary Articles of Christian Faith received in their Times or else they must have taught and conveyed to Posterity those things against their Knowledge and the conviction of their Consciences and then it cannot be denied but that they were the worst of Knaves and whichsoever of these things be said it cannot be denied but they of all Men were the most unfit to convey down Tradition to Posterity For to render any Person a credible Testator or Witness of the Churches Faith and Practice Two things seem absolutely necessary 1. That he should have sufficient Knowledge of the Truth of what he testifies And 2ly That he should have Honesty sufficient to assure us that he would not wittingly deceive us in his Testimony for if we have just Reason to suspect either his want of Knowledge or Sincerity we must have reason to suspect his Testimony So that if either such Simplicity and Folly or such apparent Knavery as hath been mentioned can justly be imputed to the Authors of the Testimonies cited against the Doctrines fornamed of the Church of Rome it is extreamly manifest we have just Reason to suspect the Truth of all they might deliver to future Ages either as Doctrines or Practices received from their Predecessors Fourthly § 5 This Method of proceeding must render it a vain and fruitless thing to search into Antiquity to find what was the Doctrine of preceeding Ages Sexta nota est conspiratio in doctrina cum ecclesia antiqua De notis Eccles cap. 9. Bellarm. de eccl milit l. 4 c. 9. and consequently it must assure us that the Church of Rome doth
only trifle with us or impose upon us when she makes Agreement either in Doctrine or Practice with Antiquity a Note or Character by which we may discern the true Church from all who falsly do pretend unto that glorious Title for how can this be done Yea how is it attempted to be done by Roman Catholicks but by producing the Testimonies of all former Ages for such a Doctrine or Practice as they at present do maintain If therefore a like Number of plain Testimonies produced by us in all the Instances forenamed for the Antiquity of our Doctrines and Practices be not a Proof sufficient on our side why should it be on theirs If notwithstanding all these Evidences we must believe the contrary to what they clearly do import to have been still the Doctrine and Practice of all Ages past because it is at present the Doctrine of the Church of Rome to what end do we read Antiquity What Service can it do us unless to make us Hereticks or Scepticks For of what can we be certain or assured by the reading of it if that may be false and heretical which through so many Ages is so plainly fully and frequently delivered as the clearest Truth To proceed then to my second Vndertaking viz. To shew how such a Change in Doctrine and in Practice might happen in the Western Church as well as in the East or other places First Corruptions in Doctrine or in Practice § 6 might have been introduced by mistaking of the Sense of Scripture This Account Origen gives of the diversity of Opinions and Sects which sprang up early among Christians and multiplied together with them In Celsum l. 3. p. 118. viz. That they had their Original from hence That Men did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 diversly interpret those Scriptures which they all held to be Divine Vigilius ascribes these Sects L 2. contra Eutych and this diversity of Opinions to the same Original viz. That the Virtue of the heavenly Words was defiled vitio malae intelligentiae by a misunderstanding of them and by taking them non secundum qualitatem sui sensus not according to the tenor of their Sence as Truth required but by diverting them to other Matters To this the Fathers do ascribe not only the Miscarriage of Hereticks but even the Slips and Errors of those pious Persons who had gone before them which say they happened to them by reading of the Scriptures carelesly and not with so much Diligence and Circumspection as they should have used Thus Theodoret upon occasion of that Mistake of almost all the Fathers of the Four first Centuries imagining that the Sons of God which went in to the Daughters of Men were Angels saith Qu. 47. in Gen. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That it was their careless reading of the holy Scriptures which made many thus to erre and all the Fathers with one Voice ascribe the Heresies of their times partly to their perverting and partly to their deserting of the Holy Scriptures and therefore for preventing of the like Mistakes they do not send them to an infallible Interpreter nor do they hence conclude him necessary as some others do but only do advise them to read the Scriptures with more Care Exactness and Scrutiny with Prayer Chrys Hom. 17. in Matth. p. 124. Basil Tom. 1. l. 2. de Bapt. q. 4. Orig. dial contr Marc. p. 70. Athan. de incar verbi T. 1. p. 110. Love and Desire of the Truth with a pure Soul and care to walk according to the Rules of Christian Vertue assuring those who do thus seek That according to our Lord's Promise Theodoret in 3. Rom. 8. they shall find the Truth Chrysost Hom. 35. in Joh. T. 2. P. 799. vid. T. 3. P. 1. Tom. 5. p. 829. it being not the Obscurity but the Ignorance of Scripture which makes men obnoxious to Heresies as shall by God's Assistance be fully proved elsewhere And whosoever doth consider that many of the Fathers came immediately from Heathenism to read the Scriptures That they insisted most on the Old Testament of which they did not understand the Language and of which they had only an imperfect or corrupt Translation and that they took the liberty to allegorize and to give mystical Interpretations of them as their luxuriant Phancies led them to it will not think it strange that so many extravagant Interpretations of the holy Scriptures should drop from their Pens Cypr. Ep. 63. p. 149. That they should tell us that Noah 's being drunk with Wine was Sacramentum figura Dominicae passionis A Sacrament and Figure of our Saviour's Passion That (a) Just M. Dial cum Tryph. p. 349. Clem. Alex. Strom. 6. p. 669. Orig. in Cels l. 5. p. 236. Com. in Joh. To. 2. Ed. Huet p. 48. Euseb demonstr l. 4. c. 9. p. 157. God not only permitted the Gentiles to worship the Sun Moon and Stars but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gave them the Sun Moon and Stars to be worshiped that they might not be wholly Atheists That when our Lord threatned to the disobedient Jews (b) Iren. l. 4. c. 23. Tertull adv Jud. c. 11 13. Cypr. adv Jud. l. 2. c. 20. Lactant. l. 4. c. 18. Epiphan Haer. 24. §. 9. Athanas de incarn verbi p. 47 90. Orat. 3. contr Arian p. 386. Ruffin apud Hieron T. 4. F. 49 Non video cur dubitare debeamus id illum de Christo scripsisse August contr Faust Manich. l. 16. c. 22.23 Deut. 28.66 thy Life shall hang in doubt before thee And thou shalt have no Assurance of thy Life he meant that Jesus Christ should be crucified before their Eyes That they should from those Words of the Psalmist Psal 45.1 (c) Quidam superstitiose magis quam vere ex persona patris arbitrantur intelligi Hieron ep ad Damasum Tom. 3. F. 45. B. Quidam ex persona patris dictum intelligi volunt Ep. ad Principium Virg. ibid. F. 37. A. viz. Alexander Episc Alex. Socr. Hist Eccl. l. 1 c. 6. Athanas To. 1. p. 134 170. c. 427. D. 510. c. 517. D. 538 c. 549 550 565. D. Marcellus apud Epiph. Haer. 72. §. 2. My Heart hath indited a good Matter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 infer the eternal Generation of the Son That some of them so early Mal. 3.1 should imagine that the (d) Orig. in Joh. Tom. 5. ed. Huet p. 77. Cyril com in 1 Joh. 6. Baptist was an Angel not a Man because the Prophet Malachi said Behold I send my Angel before his Face And that when John the Baptist sent this (e) Manda mihi ad infernum descensurus sum utrum te Inferis debeam nunciare qui nunciavi superis Hieron in loc Ep. T. 3. F. 54. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. com in Reg. p. 34. l. contr Marcion p. 37. Chrysost Hom. in Matth. 37. p. 247. Ruffin apud Hieron To. 4. p. 49. Theophyl in 11.
Matth. p. 58. in luc 7. p. 351. Nazianzen in Orat. Funebr Basil in hanc sententiam Meliori non inventa maxima pars Veterum Auctorum concesserunt Maldonate in Matth. xi 2. viz. Ambrosius Eusebius Emissenus Julianus Pomerius Venantius Gregorius Question to our Lord Matth. 11.3 Art thou he that shall come or look we for another they should thus interpret it That St. John being to go down to Hell or Hades should send to ask whether he should go before him thither and preach him there as he had done on Earth Matth. 16.23 That when Christ said to Peter Get thee behind me Satan thou art an Offence to me they out of a Reverence to St. Peter should make him say to (f) Multi putant quod non Petrus correptus est sed adversarius Spiritus qui haec dicere Apostolum suggerebat Hieron in Matth. xvj 23. Hilarius in locum Theophylact. in Marc. 8. p. 232. Peter only come thou after me and to the Devil Satan thou art an Offence unto me That when the same St. Peter denied his Master Matth. 26.72 saying I know not the Man they should excuse and bring him off with this quaint Equivocation (g) Scio quosdam pij affectus erga Petrum locum hunc ita interpretatos ut dicerent Petrum non Deum negasse sed hominem esse-sensum nescio hominem quia scio Deum Hieron in locum Vide Maldonatum ibid. Nescio hominem quia scio Deum I know not the Man for I know him to be God not considering with St. Jerom That by thus attempting to excuse the Disciple they gave the lye to his Master who had foretold his Denial That from those Words of Christ Joh. 8.44 (h) Vide Origen in Joh. Tom. 23. ed. Huet T. 2. p. 308. Huetii notas p. 34. Epiph. Haer. 40. n. 5 6. Haer. 38. §. 4 5. Ammon caten in c. 8. Joh. p. 238. Cyril Alex. in locum p 559. Author quaest V. N. Test apud August c. 90 98. Hieron in Isa c. 14 F. 36 e. The Devil is a Lyar and the Father of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they should conclude that the Devil had a Father and that he was either Cain or Judas That to avoid the vain Cavils of the Marcionites and Manichees they should say That (i) Iren. l. 3. c. 7. Tertul. l. 5. adv Marcion c. xj Chrysost Theod. Photius apud Oecum Theophylact in locum August contr Faust Manichaeum l. 22. c. 2. 9. the God of this World mentioned 2 Cor. iv 4. was not the Devil but the true God And from these Words of the Apostle (k) Illud dici potest quod Paulus non tam maledixerit eis quam oraverit pro illis ut eas partes corporis perderent per quas delinquere cogebantur Hieron in locum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret Oecum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. in locum Gal. 5.12 I wish they were cut off that trouble you they should gather that the Apostle desired that the Abettors of the legal Ceremonies and Circumcision might be gelt To omit infinite Passages of the like Nature Nor can it reasonably be doubted that the Doctrine of the Millennium of the necessity of communicating Infants of the Appearance of Enoch and the Tisbite at our Lord's Second coming of the nearness of the End of the World of our Lord 's Preaching but one Year after his Baptism of the Angels conversing with Women had all their Rise from the mistaken Interpretations of the Holy Scripture why therefore might not the Mistake of that Passage of St. 1 Cor. 3.15 Paul They shall be saved but so as by Fire give the rise to Purgatory That of the same Apostle Magnum Sacramentum Eph. 5.32 This is a great Mystery but I speak of Christ and the Church advance Marriage into a Sacrament the mistake of that Promise of an happy Resurrection to the true Members of Christ's Church Matth. 16.18 The Gates of Hades shall not prevail against it be made to countenance her Infallibility and so in other Cases of like Nature Sure I am that Communion in one Kind the Latin Service the Veneration of Images could never have obtained in the Church had not those Scriptures which so plainly do condemn them been miserably wrested by late Ages from their proper Sence and the received Interpretation which the whole Christian World had put upon them for Six hundred or a Thousand Years and why they might not as well wrest the Scriptures to establish some of their Doctrines as they have done it for the avoiding that Condemnation of them which is so clear in other Scriptures that he who runs may read it I am not able to discern Secondly § 7 Corruptions in Doctrine and Practice might easily prevail by altering or leaving of that Rule of Faith and Manners God had given them and acting by other Rules or Principles which in themselves are insufficient to establish any Article of Christian Faith for a false Rule must of necessity give false Directions both in Faith and Manners where the Principle is false the Conclusion from it must be so and where the Foundation is corrupted the Building cannot be firm now this we find done 1. By setting up the Fathers as the Rules of Faith the * Basil Ep. 62.67.70.349 Nazianz. Orat. 19 21 23 29. Pillars and the Grounds of Faith as some of them are often stiled This Method of proceeding as it is expresly contrary to our Lord 's Injunction to call no Man Father upon Earth in that presumptuous Sence in which the Jewish Rabbi's did affect that Title Matth. xxiij 6 10. John vj. 45. because one is our Father in Heaven and all that come to Christ are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taught of God the Father and one is our Guide and Master Christ 1 Joh. ij 27. from whom we Christians have received an Unction and need not that any one should teach us but as that Spirit in the Word doth teach us all things So is it as repugnant to the Mind and the Prescriptions of those Holy Men who frequently declare That both they and their Brethren were subject to Error That Errarunt in fide tam Graeci quam Latini (a) Hieron Ep. ad Pam. Ocean To. 2 F. 69. Both the Greek and the Latin Fathers erred in the Faith That therefore others were (b) Aug. l. 11. Contr. Faust c. 5. at liberty when they read or heard them to approve what they liked and to reject what they conceived not to be right in them and warn us (c) Cyril Hieros Catech. 4. p. 30. not to believe what they say unless we find it demonstrated out of the Holy Scriptures To (d) Orig. Hom. 2. in Ezek. F. 135. B. observe diligently when the Pastor deceived them and when he spake things true and pious there being
say they in our writings (e) Aug. de Orig an l. 4. c. 1. l. de bono persev c. 21. many things quae possent justo judicio culpari which justly may be blamed so that we would have no man so to embrace all our Sayings as to follow them save only in those things in which they do perceive they have not erred if then their sayings be of any credit and Authority 't is evident from their assertions that they ought not to be admitted as the Rule of faith as being men subject unto like ignorance and errors with us and if their sayings be of no credit much less can they be own'd as the pillars and the ground of truth and yet I find this doctrine laid down expresly by a concealed Heretick Sergius the Patriarch of Constantinople in his Epistle to Cyril where he saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Sexto Ep. ad Cyrum episcop Concil To. 6. p. 918. the doctrines of the Fathers are a Law to the universal Church and that we are bound to follow them and to hold all that they have written to the least tittle and evident it is That even from the Fifth Century the sayings of the Fathers began to be had in great Reputation and about the Eighth to be as it were Authentick and Articles of Faith were canvassed and determined both in the Second Nicene Council and in that of Florence chiefly by the pretended Sayings of the Holy Fathers to whose Testimony you very rarely if at all shall find this just Exception made That they were Men of like Infirmities and subject to like Errors as we are One Athanasius or Basil one Nazianzen or Nyssen one Chrysostom and Theodoret in the Eastern Church one Hilary and Ambrose St. Austin Jerom and St. Gregory in the Western Churches have for these six last Centuries signified as much or more than a St. Peter or St. Paul an Apostle or Evangelist and a sed contra Augustinus or sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit through the whole Summs and the whole Body of the Schoolmen hath passed for the Decision of a Question touching Faith or Manners How easy was it then for Errors to come in under the Vmbrage of these venerable Names especially if we consider how many spurious Pieces had usurped their Names which the great Ignorance of latter Ages could not distinguish from their genuine Works how many of their genuine works were horribly corrupted and how fruitful many of those Fathers were in there inventions and how positive they sometimes are in delivering that as the doctrine of the whole Church which was nothing less For instance who that reads St. Austin disputing against the Pelagians could doubt if he believed him that the Doctrine of the Imputation of Original Sin was universally received by all Christians and that on this account the whole Church Baptized Infants and yet Petavius iuforms us Dogm Theol. To. 4. pt 2. l. 14. c. 2. Haeret. Fabul l. 5. c. 18. p. 292. Quid festinat innocens aetas ad remissionem peccatorum Tertul. de Bapt. c. 18. that the Greek Fathers scarcely spake any thing about it yea in that very Age Theodoret expresly denies it putting the Question thus If this be the only work of Baptism to cleanse from Sin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 why do we Baptize Children who are not guilty of it and in his Comment on Rom. 5.13 He adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That every one dies for his own Sin and not for that of his Fore fathers Chrysostom on the same place saith In v. 19. To. 3. Hom. 10. p. 73. That for us to be mortal on the occasion of the Sin of Adam is no absurdity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but how can it be that by his Transgression another should become a Sinner for if he did not personally sin Cap. 1. neither could he deserve Punishment Gennadius in his Book of Ecclesiastical Doctrines which passeth still among the Works of St. Austin placeth this as one That that Holy Spirit proceedeth from the Father and Son. Michael Psellus on the contrary saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cap. Theol. c. 10. p. 157. the Holy Catholick Church teacheth that the Spirit proceedeth only from the Father L. 2. c. 1. but not from the Son. To omit many other Instances collected by the learned Dally in that elaborate Treatise of the Use of the Fathers which makes it needless to discourse further on this Head For if the true Fathers were not only subject to many and great Errors in their private Sentiments but also unto manifold Mistakes touching the Doctrine of the Catholick Church if many of their Works have been unhappily corrupted and many spurious Pieces have been imposed upon them so that instead of their Authority Men often have relyed on an Impostor an ignorant Monk or perhaps an Heretick how easy was it in the dark Ages of the Church for Errors to come in at this Door when too much Veneration was by all given to them and their Dictates passed for Oracles Again § 8 New Doctrines and Practices might obtain by flying from the Scriptures to Miracles and Visions for the Establishment of Doctrines and Opinions in the Church That a prevailing Power doth attend these miraculous Operations even when they are performed only by Satan and his Ministers we shall be fully convinced if we consider that our Lord foretold of the false Prophets and false Christs that should come after him they should work Signs and Miracles so great as to deceive Matth. 24.23 if it were posible the very Elect. St. 2 Thes 2.9 Paul that the Apostacy of the Great Antichrist and his Followers should be effected by the coming of Satan with all power Signs Rev. 13.13 14. and lying Wonders St. John of the Apocalyptick beast that he should do great Signs and deceive the Inhabitants of the Earth by the Signs given him to do that at the first appearance of Christianity the Heathens did oppose it from this topick viz. The Signs and Wonders which had been performed by their Heathen Deities saying Frustra tantum arrogas Christo In vain you arrogate so much to Christ for we have often known that other Gods have given Medicines to and healed the Infirmities of many so the Heathen in (a) Arnob. l. 1. p. 28. Arnobius so (b) Apud Orig. l. 8. p. 407 416 417. Celsus so (c) Apud Minut p. 7. Caelius and comparing the Miracles of Apollonius Tyanaeus and of Apuleus with those of Christ (d) Lact. l. 5 c. 3. Aug. Ep. 4. Hieronim apud Euseb p. 512. Quorum majora contendunt esse opera And contending they were greater than any done by him That (e) Acts 8.9 10. Just in Apol 2. p. 69. Cyril Hier. cat 6. p. 53 54 c. Simon Magus mightily prevailed by them and obtained almost where-ever he came to be worshipped as a
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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
Paul 's Expression by commending themselves and their Doctrine to the Consciences of all Men. To shew the Prevalence of Men of Reputation in Matters of this Nature If as the Romanists do generally confess the Doctrine of the Millennium obtained almost generally in the Church from the Relation of one Papias a Man of very slender Intellectuals If as Eusebius informs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 39. most of the Churchmen embraced that Sentiment by his Authority pleading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great Antiquity of the Man If one Agrippinus as they also tell us could prevail over all Africa to receive Hereticks by Baptism If Origen could deserve to be condemned in the Fifth and the Sixth Synods as an Heretick and yet whilst he lived Hieron in Verbo Origenes Socrat Hist Eccl. l. 4. c. 26. Hieron Prolog in l. 2. com in Micham Pamphil. Apol. Orig. praefat in libr. nom Hebr. T. 3. f. 12. could by his Learning and his Piety prevail to be had summo in honore in the highest Reputation to obtain after his Death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 great Glory throughout all the Christian World insomuch that he was very grateful cunctis prudentibus to all wise Men and did for many Years obtain the Title of Magister Ecclesiae The Master or Teacher of the Church If the Authority of Jerom could prevail to have his Translation of the Old Testament received against the Judgment of the Universal Church If one St. Austin could introduce into the Church the Belief of the Ascension of the Blessed Virgin though none of the Fathers who had as good Opportunity to know and as much Reason to believe it spake one Tittle of it I say if all these things are so how can it be conceived a thing incredible That Popes Patriarchs and Councils and other Persons of great Authority and Vogue in their respective Ages should have had like Influence to introduce new Doctrines and Practices into the Church under pretence of Piety or the Authority of Scriptures or the Holy Fathers or some like plausible Account Theodor. Lector l. 2. p 566. Niceph. Hist Eccl. l. 15. c. 18. Why might not Petrus Gnaphaeus Patriarch of Antioch bring Invocation of Saints into the Prayers of the Church in the Fifth Century Pope Gregory introduce Purgatory in the Sixth Boniface the Third Paulus Diac. de Gest Longobard l. 4. c. 11. obtain from Phocas the Title of Caput omnium Ecclesiarum The Head of the Universal Church in the Seventh The Second Nicene Council introduce Image-Worship in the Eighth Paschasius give Rise to Transubstantiation in the Ninth Lombard and Hugo de S to Victore fix the Number of Seven Sacraments in the Twelfth And Pope Hadrian the Third introduce the Adoration of the Host in the Thirteenth Century Again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 12. Soz. H. Eccl. l. 1. c. 23. If one Paphnutius could by his Reason and Authority prevail with the First Nicene Council to rescind their intended Decree touching the Celibacy of Priests If Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople could abolish the Custom of repairing to an established Penitentiary for the disclosing secret Sins and that with the ensuing Approbation of almost all the Catholick Bishops of the Church In a Word if so many Practices and Customs relating to the Discipline and to the Sacraments of the Church could be entirely altered and rejected in the following Ages as is here partly proved and by the Learned on both sides confessed why might not other Practices and Doctrines which obtained in the more pure and early Ages of the Church run the same Fate and by the same Authority and Methods be discarded For as it is judiciously observed by the Lord Faulkland when the Reasons offered for or against a Practice have in them some Appearance of Truth or Probability as they may have to many Persons though they be not valid when the Persons Authorizing or Approving them are of great Authority or Credit in the Church as they may be especially in darker Ages and yet be subject to great Errors and when the People upon whom these Doctrines or Practices are pressed have either a great Veneration and Esteem for those that press them or a great Dread of them then meet together most of those things which tend to work Perswasion or prevail for an Assent unto the Doctrine and a Compliance with the Practice recommended Seeing then Not. in Concil Clar. Can. 28. conc To. 10. p. 582. as Petrus de Marca doth inform us the Approbation of the half Communion by Thomas Aquinas made others certatim amplecti hanc sententiam to embrace greedily the same Opinion why might not others of as good Authority and Credit be instrumental to produce like Changes in other Constitutions of the Church Fourthly § 10 Old Doctrines and Practices might easily be changed and new obtain by reason of the corrupt Manners of the Clergy and by their Example of the People And that 1. Because such evil Practices deprive the Clergy of that Spiritual Wisdom and Divine Assistance which is their best Conducter into the Way of Truth and is their chief Preservative from dangerous Delusions and pernicious Errors Wisd 1.4 For as the Book of Wisdom saith Into a malicious Soul Wisdom will not enter nor dwell in the Body that is subject unto Sin. St. De Judicio dei To. 2. p. 393. Basil grievously laments the Discords and Contentions the perverse Doctrines and Opinions which had prevailed in his time amongst 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Rulers of the Church of God by which they verified the Prediction of St. Paul Acts 20.30 That from Christians themselves should proceed Men speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them And this he doth resolve into their Rejection of God their true and only King their Departure from the Laws of Christ and chusing rather to rule others in contradiction to the Commands of Christ than to be ruled by him By which things saith he they have render'd themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 394. unworthy of the Government of the Lord. Clemangis is still more express and Argumentative in this Particular Super Materia Conc. Gen. p. 71. For with them saith he is the Spirit those he directs and brings to a salutary End who have prepared for him within themselves an Habitation worthy of him and by good Works have render'd themselves worthy of his Inspiration and Visitation but how can he hear visit and enlighten them who are Adversaries to him and when they cannot do it in themselves endeavour to extinguish him in others and are inflamed not with the Fire of Love but with the Ardor of Ambition For with Hypocrites and self-Seekers the Holy Spirit is not wont to be present but to fly from them as his Enemies according to that saying of the Book of Wisdom the Holy Spirit of Discipline
11.52 Mark 6.34 and then did vain Traditions and corrupt Interpretations of the Scriptures mightily prevail St. Basil in his Epistle to Gregory the Divine tells him there was little Help to be expected from the Pride of the Western Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who neither knew the Truth nor will endure to learn it but being prepossessed with Lyes and false Suspicions they do now as they did before in the Case of Marcellus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contending with those who shew them the Truth and stablishing Heresy by themselves And again I would write saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to their Head but only enigmatically touching Ecclesiastical Affairs Ep. 10. p. 54. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for they neither know the Truth of our Affairs nor do they take the Way to learn it And agreeably to this Complaint we find the Arians in the Council of Ariminum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret. Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 16. deceiving the Western Bishops because of their Simpleness and the Historians telling us That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were bubbled by them into a Subscription Sozomen informs us of the Three hundred Western Bishops met at Milan Hist Eccles l 4. c. 9. that they consented to the Deposition of Athanasius through Fear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Fraud or Ignorance of what they were about And in the general Theodoret informs us that the Arians made it their Business Hist Eccles l. 2. c. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to gull the Western Bishops by reason of their Simplicity Again That Ignorance in the People renders them easy to receive any thing which is imposed upon them as Matter of Revelation or Devotion or under the venerable Name of a Tradition of the Church a Doctrine of the Holy Fathers or a Definition of a Council will be evident if we consider that being once bereft of the Assistance of the Holy Scriptures they have no Principle left them by which they can examine no Judgment to discern the Truth or Falshood of any thing which comes proposed to them under these specious Colours and so they are not qualified to judge of or in Capacity to discover the Cheats thus put upon them Accordingly we find that in the Times of Ignorance the People were carried away after dumb Idols 1 Cor. 12.2 even as they were led and were cajol'd into the most superstitious vile unnatural and cruel Practices under the semblance of paying their religious Worship to their Heathen Deities Now of the prodigious Ignorance of those Ages in which most of the Romish Doctrines were introduced or else conciliarly were established and so advanced from Opinions and Practices permitted in some places to Articles of Faith and Rules of Manners we cannot reasonably doubt when we find the Second Nicene Council making a Canon That he who was promoted to a Bishoprick should be well acquainted with his Psalter that so he might be able to instruct his Clergy in it and that the Metropolitan should strictly examine whether he were sufficient to read the Canons Conc. Nic. 2. Can. 2. the Gospel the Epistle and the rest of the Scriptures discreetly and not imperfectly Cent. 9. when the Enquiry made by the Bishops in their Visitations was 1. Regino de Eccl. Discipl p. 28 29. Whether the Priest did pleniter intelligere fully understand the Exposition of the Creed and the Lords Prayer 2. Si bene intelligat Whether he well understood the Prayers the Preface and the Canon of the Mass Si Epistolam Evangelium bene legere possit Whether he could well read the Epistle and Gospel And when Baluzius saith ea erat saeculi istius infelicitas Not. in Regin p. 540. ut necesse erat Presbyteros ab Episcopis interrogari utrum bene legere possent the Infelicity of that Age made it necessary for the Bishop to ask whether the Priests knew how to read well and that this happened not only to the inferiour Clergy sed etiam in illis interdum qui ad summum Sacerdotium eligebantur but sometimes also to them who were chosen to the Office of Bishops as Carolus Calvus and the Bishops of the Council of Valence complain when good Learning perished almost throughout Europe Cent. 11. p. 152. Cent. 12. Barbarity prevailing every where saith Balaeus When all the Priests had abandoned the Scriptures appointed for Man's Salvation and were blind Guides De Praedest lib. Arbitrio l. 2. going before the Blind to Perdition saith Honorius Augustodunensis When the Bishops Priests and Ministers of the Church were ignorant almost of all things and the Waldenses carried the Vogue among the People by their Learning and were admitted by the Priests to preach publickly In Collect. de vrb Tolos Cent. 13. not that they approved their Opinions but because they were inferiour to them in Learning saith Jacobus de Riberia When he that had learned nothing became a Teacher of others and though he were like the sounding Brass and tinkling Cymbal usurped the Office of a Teacher being an unprofitable Trunk and a dumb Idol and they who were ignorant of the Holy Scriptures usurped that Burthen of Dignity which they could not bear saith Petrus Blesensis Ep. 23. When there neither appeared Piety or Learning in the Clergy saith William Bishop of Paris Lib. de Collat. benefic Cent. 14. When the Pope appointed to almost all ecclesiastical Dignities Men ignorant of the Holy Scriptures Idiots and Unlearned who knew not the Language of the People over whom they presided Defensor pacis l. 2. c. 24. p. 354 355 356. When not one among Ten of the Bishops Arch-Bishops Patriarchs of Provinces were sufficiently instructed in Divinity saith Marsilius of Padua When the Church was eclipsed with the black Mist of Ignorance De planctu Eccl l. 2. cap. 5. 20. Cent. 15. When the Bishops ordained Men whom they knew to be unlearned and unfit and being Idiots suffered themselves to be made Bishops saith Alvarus When it often happened through the Defect Negligence and deceit of them to whom by the Bishops A. D. 1473. apud Bin. To. 8. p. 1053. cap. 3. was committed the Examination of Persons to be ordained that Men Unlearned and altogether Ignorant were presented as fit to the Bishops and so ordained by them saith the Council of Toledo When such Men were admitted to the Priesthood and other Holy Orders as were Idiots Unlearned and scarce able to read though way wardly and without Understanding not knowing when they read or prayed whether they blessed God or blasphemed him When the Church was stock'd with ignorant and wicked Men De corrupto statu Eccl. c. 11 12 13 25. and no Man learned in the Scriptures was advanced to great Dignities When the Parish-Priests could not read and scarce knew A from B and knew not the Words much less the Things they read saith Clemangis Declarat de
should arise Or 2. True Rules misapplied and misconstrued and therefore actually false to them who thus mistake the Purpose of them 3. The Admiration of the Persons and the Reverence of the Authority of Men subject to like Mistakes and Errors with us 4. The Advantages we may obtain by the promoting of some Doctrines the Tendency they have to the gratifications of our Avarice our Pride and love of Empire and other sinful lusts 5. The Corruptions in our Manners which dispose and fit us for Delusions 6. That Ignorance and Negligence in reference to Sacred things which rendereth us an easy prey to the Deluders subtilty 7. Lastly The Force and Terror and Torments and Punishments which may be used to affright us into an outward and Hypocritical profession of what we do not from our hearts believe or a concealment of our inward Sentiments I Say these being the chief inducements to a change in Doctrine or in Practice and all these things so palpably and frequently concurring to the establishment of the New Doctrines and the supposed Traditions of the Church of Rome what wonder is it that they should so mightily obtain in the dark Ages of the World and by those methods carry all before them And truly 't is so evident that upon the concurrence of those circumstances the true Faith might decay and Error might be introduced in the Western Churches that the Historians Carol. Mag. Cent. 8. and Writers of those dark and evil Ages do confess it actually was so That the Priests brought into the Church such Doctrines as were never known to Christ and his Apostles Rolwink ad A. Christi 884. That this was tempus pessimum in quo defecit sanctus veritates diminutae sunt a filiis hominum the worst of times in which the Holy man failed and Truth was diminished from the sons of men Baron A. D. 912. Carthus fasciculo temporum ad A. 1000. That the Ancient Traditions were then proscribed That the Christian Faith extreamly did begin to fail and decline from its former vigor neither the Sacraments nor Ecclesiastical Rites being observed Apol. Clerus Leod. A.D. 1066 Matth. Paris in Hen. 3. ad A.D. 1237. p. 438. Alvar. Pelag. de planctu Eccl. l. 2. c. 5. Cent. 14. That the Holy Philosophy by the subtile interpretation of Sycophants began to be corrupted poluted violated with human Inventions and old wives Fables That the spark of Faith began to wax exceeding cold and was almost reduced to ashes so that it scarce did sparkle That the Church was eclipsed with the black mist of Ignorance Iniquity and Error That they did not only not receive sound Doctrine but bitterly persecuted all that resisted the madness of their wills Clemang de Egressu ex Bab. p. 177. Cent. 15. And that following the erring herd men willingly embraced false things for true That the variety of Pictures and Images occasioned Idolatry in the Simple That Apocryphal Scriptures Gerson de defect Eccles Virorum 30. idem de direct Cordis Consid 16. Hymns and Prayers were brought into the Church to the great hurt of Christian faith That there was much Superstition in the Worship of Saints and many Observations without all ground or reason Credulity in believing things concerning the Saints reported in the uncertain Legends of their Lives Ibid. Consid 29 30. dubious opinions of obtaining Pardon and Remission of Sins by saying so many Pater Nosters in such a Church before such an Image as if in the Scripture and Authentick Writings of Holy Men there were not sufficient directions for all Acts of Piety and Devotion without these fabulous and frivolous additaments That sundry lewd assertions Dial. Apol. Judicium de Can. Const prejudicial to the States of Kings and Princes could not be condemned in the Council of Constance though many great ones much urged their condemnation by reason of a mighty Faction which prevailed in it Ibid. That exorbitant Abuses and Errors which were crept into the Church found no amendment nor was a Reformation in things concerning Faith Card. Camer de Squal Ecoles p. 34. and Religion Doctrine and Manners to be expected till the Secular Powers took it in hand That Pagan Abuses and Diabolical Superstitions were so many at Rome that they could not well be imagined Cent. 16. That they were fallen with one consent from Religion to Superstition Bishop of Bitonto and Espencaeus Vide Supra from Faith to Infidelity from Christ to Antichrist That there was such a neglect of the Word as made it necessary that Faith should perish That the Faith and Religion Preached by Christ and settled afterwards by his Apostles and cultivated by their Epistles is so different a thing from that Christianity that is now professed and taught at Rome that if these Holy Men should be sent again by God into the world they would take more pains to confute this Gallimaufry than ever they did to preach down the Traditions of the Pharisees Machiavil Epist ad Zanob Buon Delmont before his works in English or the Fables and Idolatry of the Gentiles and would in probability suffer a New Martyrdom under the Vicar of Christ for the same Doctrine which once animated the Heathen Tyrants against them He that desires to read more of the Confessions made by the few comparatively learned of these Ages of the corruptions both in doctrine and manners and the prodigious ignorance which then obtained may find more than enough in a book Styled Catalogus testium veritatis and Morney 's Mystery of Iniquity OF TRADITION The State of the Question CHAP. I. 1. It is acknowledged that a Doctrine is neither more or less the Word of God for being written or unwritten § 1. 2dly It is proved That the assurance which we have that Scripture is the Word of God is greater than can be produced for any pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome The Grounds of this assurance are 1. The necessity that the Word of God should be preserved in some Records and the certainty we have that actually it was so 2. That the Records of the New Testament averr That they were written by the Servants and Apostles of our Lord whose Names they by a general and uncontrouled Tradition bear and so by Men assisted with the Holy Ghost and writing the Commandments of the Lord. 3. That the matter of them is worthy of the God of Heaven to reveal 4. That they were owned read and appealed to as such by all Christians 5. The Jews and Heathens made their Objections against Christianity out of them and attempted the ruine of the Christian Faith by destroying them and that none of these particulars agree to the Traditions of the Church of Rome rejected by us § 2. For farther Explication of the Question observe 2dly That our Dispute with the Church of Rome is chiefly about doctrinal and not historical Traditions § 3. The uncertainty of
she actually hath imposed false Doctrines and Practices as Apostolical Tradition 2. Because she hath no better Right to testifie in this Matter than the Eastern Churches § 2.3 Because her present Testimony contradicts the Testimony of the whole Church in general and of the Roman Church in particular in former Ages § 3. 1. Touching the number of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament 2. Of the Authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews 3. Of the number of the Sacraments 4. Of Concomitance 5. Of pronouncing part of the Mass in a low Voice 6. Of the Veneration of Images 7. Of Communion in one Kind 8. Of her Twelve new Articles 9. Of the no necessity of giving the Eucharist to Infants Ibid. 4. Because this Doctrine makes Scripture Reason and Antiquity not only useless but pernicious to us § 4. More Instances of the Contradiction betwixt the Decrees of the Ancient Catholick Church and of the present Church of Rome 1st In the Decree of the Trent Council touching the Freedom of the Blessed Virgin from Actual Sin § 5. 2dly In the permission that Church gives to eat things Strangled and Blood § 6. In punishing Men with Death for their Religion § 7. In not breaking the Bread they distribute not permitting the Communicants to carry it home not Consecrating it with a loud Voice § 8. In the Matter of the Immaculate Conception though not conciliarly defined § 9. Seven Corollaries from this Instance § 10. MOreover § 1 for farther Explication of this Question let it be noted Dist 4. That by the word Tradition when we allow what can be proved by it to be in Matters of Faith a Doctrine or a Revelation derived from the Apostles in matters of Government of Discipline or practice an Apostolical Ordinance or Institution we mean not the Tradition of the present Church and much less the Tradition of the Church of Rome and her Adherents Charity Maint ch 2. §. 14. but we mean with Mr. Knot Such a Tradition which involves an evidence of Fact and from Hand to Hand from Age to Age bringing us up to the Times and Persons of the Apostles Id quod in Ecclesia Universa omnibus retro temporibus servatum est merito ab Apostolis creditur institutum De verbo Dei non scripto l. 4 c. 9. and our Saviour himself cometh to be confirmed by all those Miracles and other Arguments by which they proved their Doctrine to be true or such a Practice as the Church hath observed in all past Ages according to the Third Rule of Bellarmine for the discerning Apostolical Traditions and such an Article of Faith as all the Doctors of the Church by common consent have always testified to have descended from Apostolical Tradition Such is the Tradition which St. Basil insists upon for the use of the Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Spirit in the Doxology of the Church viz. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. de Spiritu Sancto c. 29. which was customarily used in the Churches from the first Preaching of the Gospel to that very time and of such Traditions we say with him Ibid. That it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 suitable to the Apostles Doctrine to continue in them Praefat. in libr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such is the Tradition of which Origen speaks when he saith That only is to be believed as Truth which in nothing disagreeth from the Tradition Ecclesiastical that is The praedicatio per successionis ordinem ab Apostolis tradita usque ad praesens in Ecclesiis permanens preaching delivered down by order of Succession from the Apostles and to this present time continued in the Churches This is the Tradition of which St. Cap. 8. Austin speaks in his Book De utilitate credendi viz. of the Tradition quae ab ipso Christo per Apostolos ad nos usque manavit Cap. 10. which came down from Christ by his Apostles to that present time which à Majoribus nostris tradita ad nos usque servata est being delivered by our Ancestors hath been preserved to our times and which is Cap. 14. celebritate consensione vetustate roborata strengthened with a general Fame Consent and Antiquity And this is also the Authority he meaneth when he saith I should not have believed the Gospel nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae moveret Authoritas unless the Authority of the Catholick Church had moved me For he informs us That he speaks of that Authority which was Contr. Epist Man. quam vocant Fundament c. 4. Miraculis inchoata vetustate firmata begun by Miracles and confirmed by Antiquity And this must of necessity be meant by that Tradition which is the Foundation of an Article of Faith for Faith must be a matter of Divine Revelation and therefore must proceed from Christ or his Apostles from whom alone all Revelations of the Christian Faith have issued the Churches Business being to Believe to Preach and Testifie not to enlarge or shorten to alter or diversisie the Faith by them delivered to her and what they taught her as a thing necessary to be believed or practised by all Christians must consequently be so believed taught and practised through all future Ages provided that they walk according to their Rule Common c. ◠Hence saith Vincentius Lirinensis Hoc est vere proprieque Catholicum quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus That is truly Catholick Doctrine which was held in all places all times and by all Persons Sess 4. And accordingly the Trent Council and the Roman Doctors pretend to have received those Doctrines in which they differ from us partly from Scripture and partly from Tradition derived from the Apostles to their days But here begins the difference betwixt us § 2 1. That they will have the Testimony of the present Church to be an Evidence sufficient of the Tradition of the Church of former Ages and will maintain this way of Arguing to be good The present Church of Rome and they who hold Communion with her deliver such and such Doctrines as Traditions received from the Apostles and handed down from them thoughout all Ages and by all true Christian Churches to this present Age and therefore they undoubtedly are such We on the contrary say That we have clear unquestionable Evidence from Scripture and Church-History that many of the Doctrines imposed upon us by the Church of Rome as Apostolick Doctrines and Traditions were not received but rather were condemned and abhorred by the former Ages of the Church of Christ in general and in particular by that of Rome and this hath been already proved in the instance of their Latin Service the Veneration of Images and Communion in one Kind whence it demonstratively follows that this proposition is contrary to plain matter of Fact. Again What better reason can be given for this Consequence viz. The present Church of Rome with her Adherents deliver
esse potest the true Catholick Faith without which no man can be saved whereas it is here proved that the whole Church of Christ in general and in particular the Roman Church believed that the Apostles and the Nicene Creed contained all the Articles of the Christian Faith. 9. Concil Trid. Sess 21. can 4. The present Roman Church pronounceth an Anathema on those who say the Eucharist is necessary to Children before they come to Years of Discretion that is on Pope Innocent Chap. 12. Sect. 3 4 5. Pope Pelagius and the whole Church of Christ for Six hundred Years And truly if the Tradition or the Doctrine of the present Church of Rome § 4 must be the Rule by which alone we are to judge of the Tradition Practice and Doctrines of the whole Church of Christ throughout all Ages if we lie under any Obligation to determine thus That this is the Practice the Tradition the Doctrine of the present Roman Church therefore this was the Doctrine the Practice the Tradition of all former Ages of the Christian Church then all the Reason God hath given us and all the Learning which we can with all our industry acquire from Scripture and all the Testimonies of the Fathers and Church Writers could we shew them throughout Fifteen Centuries Canon of Script as Dr. Cousins hath done declaring themselves fully in opposition to the Church of Rome I say if the Declarations of the Church of Rome must wholly over-rule us in these matters all the knowledge we can acquire from Scripture Reason or the Fathers is not worth one Straw we may even burn all our Books of Antiquity our Fathers and Church History yea and our Bibles too and lay aside our useless Reason for whatsoever service these things may do to Holy Church they can do none to us The reading of these Authors the use of Reason to discern betwixt good and evil right and wrong true and false in Christian Practices and Doctrines must be the most pernicious things in which we can be exercised for sure I am no Man of honest Conscience and sound Judgment can read the Scriptures and the Fathers carefully but he must very strongly be tempted by his Reason to suspect and must in many things seem absolutely certain that Apostolical Tradition cannot be known by the Tradition of the present Church of Rome yea that many of her present Traditions Doctrines and Practices are evidently and unquestionably repugnant to the Traditions Practices and Doctrines of the Apostles and the whole Church of Christ for Six Eight Ten Twelve or Fourteen Centuries To add some farther Instances to these § 5 I have already mentioned Sess 6. can 23. Ecclesia tenet de Beata Virgine quod ex speciali Dei privilegio in tota vita peccata omnia etiam venialia vitaverit The Church of Rome now holds saith the Trent Council that the Blessed Virgin was through her whole Life free from venial Sin and yet such is the Evidence of Truth to the contrary that many Doctors of the Roman Church are even forced to confess that this Determination is contrary to the common Judgment of the Fathers In John ij Maldonate speaks thus Among the Ancient Fathers I find very few who either do not openly say or obscurely signifie that the Blessed Virgin was guilty of some Fault or Error And though some have endeavoured saith Petavius to mollifie the Sayings of the Fathers De Incar l. 14. c. 1. sect 7. yet their endeavour is vain Nam adeo disertam continent cujusque modi delicti significationem ut aliorsum detorqueri se minime patiuntur For their Sayings do so expresly import the signification of some guilt that they cannot be wrested to another sence and that they had good reason to make these Confessions will be apparent from these Citations following Our Lord saith Irenaeus L. 3. c. 18. p. 277. repellens ejus intempestivam festinationem repelling her unseasonable hastiness said to her Woman what have I to do with thee In the Third Century Tertullian expresly charges her with incredulity for he declares L. de came Christi cap. 7. That our Lord Christ therefore denied his Mother and his Brethren saying Who is my Mother and my Brethren because his Brethren did not believe in him and because Mater non adhaesit illi his Mother did not cleave unto him In this place saith he appears incredulitas eorum the unbelief of them that when he was Preaching the Word of Life and healing of Diseases and Sins his Relations stood without and were so far from harkening to him that they did rather interrupt and call him from so good a Work and will Apelles say That Christ unworthily used these words Ad percutiendam infidelitatem foris stantium To smite the incredulity of them who stood without Origen upon Luke asks what that Sword was which Simeon foretold of saying it should pass through her Heart and answers that it is manifestly written Hom. 17. s 102. b. That in the time of our Lord's Passion all the Apostles should be scandalized and saith he can we think that the Apostles being Scandalized Mater Domini a scandalo fuerit immunis the Mother of our Lord could be free from Scandal If she suffered no Scandal Jesus did not suffer pro peccatis ejus for her Sins but if all sinned and fell short of the Glory of God being justified freely by his Grace utique Maria illo tempore scandalizata est then doubtless Mary also at that time was scandalized And this is that which Simeon here Prophesieth saying Tuam ipsius animam pertransibit infidelitatis gladius ambiguitatis mucrone serieris the Sword of Infidelity shall pass through thy own Soul and thou shalt be smitten with the Sword of doubtfulness In the Fourth Century St. Basil saith That Simeon here prophesieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Mary her self thus Tom. 3. Ep. 317. p. 310. 311. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There shall be some fluctuation even in thy Soul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some doubting touching the Lord this is the Sword but after this Scandal which shall happen to Mary and the Disciples of our Lord he presently will minister a Medicine and confirm their Hearts in the Faith of Christ Moveover he makes this Scandal of the Blessed Virgin necessary upon this account That Christ was to taste Death for all to be the propitiation for the World and to justifie all Men by his Blood. In Psalm 118. St. Hilary declares That at the Day of Judgment that incessant Fire is to be endured in quo subeunda sunt gravia illa expiandae a peccatis animae supplicia in which are to be suffered those heavy Punishments designed for the expiating of the Soul from Sin and that then the Sword shall go through the Soul of Mary and if saith he even Dei virgo illa in judicii severitatem ventura est that
Virgin-Mother of God must come into the Severity of Judgment who dares wish to be judged by God. In the Fifth Century St. Chrysostom informs us That both our Lord's Brethren In Matt. Hom. 27. p. 191. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 44. p. 287. and his Mother 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 laboured under some humane infirmity being desirous of vain Glory that she was guilty of vain Glory that both She and his Brethren were guilty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of an excessive Love of Honour and that therefore our Lord blamed them and that because they came to him as a meer Man and out of vain Glory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he casts out the Disease not reproaching but correcting them and that he gave her a reproof very becoming him P. 639. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and profitable to her In his Twenty first Homily on St. John he charges her with being guilty of hindering the things of God and interrupting of her Son in Spiritual things Consider saith he what a thing it was for her when the People stood about him and were desirous to hear him and his Instructions were propounded to them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. for her to come to draw him from his Exhortations to speak in private with him and not so much as to vouchsafe to come in to him therefore he saith who is my Mother not dispising her that begat him but doing her much profit and not permitting her to think so meanly of him Cyril of Alexandria saith That the Passion of our Lord which happen'd so unexpectedly Tom 4. p. 1064 1065 1066. Vid. eundem orat in occursum Domini p. 391. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 1064. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did likely scandalize her and put her somewhat besides her self into indecent Passions For doubt not saith he but she had some such reasonings within her self as these I conceived him who is now laugh'd at on the Cross perhaps he was deceived in saying he was the true Son of God. He saying I am the Life how should he then be Crucified How was he taken in the Snares of his Murtherers How is it that he prevailed not against the Machinations of his Persecutors Why doth not he who restored Lazarus to Life and filled all Judaea with his Miracles descend now from the Cross 'T is very probable that the Women kind being ignorant of the Mystery might fall into such apprehensions as these were We speak not these things out of vain Conjectures as it may seem to some but we are moved to suspect these things of the Mother of our Lord by what is written for that sharp brunt of Passion which cast her mind into absurd Imaginations is that which Simeon calls a Sword. Nor saith he is it to be wondered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 1065. if a Woman should thus slide at the apprehension of our Lords Passion seeing St. Peter who was preferred before the rest of the Apostles was scandalized at it And lastly he declares P. 1066. That Christ did therefore commit her to the care of the Evangelist St. John because he saw that she had fallen by scandal at his Passion and was filled with disorder in her Apprehensions that he might rightly declare unto her the profoundness of the Mystery The Author of the Questions of the Old and New Testament which passeth under the Name of Austin saith Qu. 73. That Simeon spake unto her thus A Sword shall pass through thy own Soul to signifie this to her that even she in morte Domini dubitaret should doubt when she saw the Death of Christ though she should be confirmed by his Resurrection Here therefore is a Tradition of the Church built upon the received Sence of Scripture for three whole Centuries no Father contradicting in the least what was so fully and perspicuously delivered in those Ages and yet if we must credit the present Church of Rome the contrary to this Tradition and to this received Interpretation of those Scriptures on which they grounded this Tradition must be an Article of Faith received throughout all Ages of the Church Again the Decree of the Apostles § 6 which commands the Gentiles to abstain from things strangled and from Blood Act. 15. was conceived by the generality of Christians for a Thousand Years to be obliging to all Christians The Canon of the Apostles saith Can 63. That if any Bishop Presbyter or Deacon or any other of the Clergy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth eat Flesh with the Life-Blood in it or what is killed by a Beast or dieth of it self let him be deposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this the Law hath forbidden if he be a Lay-man let him be separated from Communion In the Second Century the Christians were accused of eating Infants and Feasting upon humane Flesh and Blood now to this Accusation the constant Answer of the Christians was that of Blandina in Eusebius Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 1. p. 159. How should they eat such things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who do not think it lawful to eat the Blood of Beasts Paedag. l. 2. c. 1. p. 149. And Clemens of Alexandria declares That God forbad things strangled or dying of themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 3. c. 3. p. 228. for it is not lawful to touch them and that it is not lawful for Men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to touch Blood. In the Third Century to the like Accusation of the Heathens Tertullian returns this Answer Apol. c. 9. That they might be ashamed to object to them the eating humane Blood qui nec Animalium quidem sanguinem in Epulis esculentis habemus who used not to eat the Blood of Beasts least they should be defiled with any Blood received into their Bowels P. 34. Octavius saith We Christians are so far from eating humane Blood ut nec edulium pecorum sanguinem in cibis noverimus Contra Celsum l. 8. p. 396 397. that we eat not the Blood of Beasts we are forbid to eat things strangled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Blood being not separated from them saith Origen that we may not be fed with the Food of Daemons and hence we learn the reason of the precept 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning abstinence from Blood. In the Fourth Century was held the Council of Gangra against the Eustathians some of whom held cibos carnium tanquam illicitos repudiandos esse that Flesh was to be refused as unlawful where they pronounce Anathema to any person who condemns those that eat Flesh Can. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 excepting only such as ate Blood or things offered to Idols or strangled from which Exception it is evident that they held it sit to condemn them who did taste of Blood or of things strangled Now this Canon is in the Code of the Universal Church and is one of them which were Confirmed in the General Council of
Chalcedon Can 1. Can. 2. and afterwards by that in Trullo and therefore was allowed by the whole Church of God. St. Cyril of Jerusalem instructs his Catecumen That the Apostles and James the Bishop of Jerusalem had writ a Catholick Epistle to the Gentiles to teach them to abstain from things offered to Idols things strangled and from Blood and then he adds Catech. 4. p. 34. c. de cibis That they who licked up the Blood of Beast and spared not to eat things strangled were like to wild Beasts and Dogs these saith he are the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Institutions touching Meats which it behoves you to observe In the Fifth Century St. Jerom declares In Ezek. 45. p. 245. That according to the Letter the Decree contained in the Fifteenth of the Acts obligeth every Christian not to eat the Flesh of any dead Sheep or Cattle quorum nequaquam sanguis effusus est whose Blood is not poured forth And Chrysostom on the place saith These Constitutions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though they concern the Body yet are they necessary to be kept In the Sixth Century the Second Council of Orleans declares A. D. 536. can 20. That they who eat of that which is choaked by any Disease or Chance or killed by the bitings of Beasts shall be excluded from the Communion of the Church and if any person after this diligent Sanction Can. 22. doth not observe these things reos se divinitatis pariter fraternitatis judicio futuros esse cognoscant let them know they shall be guilty both in the Judgment of God and of the Brotherhood In the Seventh Century this was Decreed by the Sixth General Council held in Trullo in these words Can. 67. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Holy Scripture hath commanded us to abstain from Blood things strangled and from Fornication he therefore who attempts to eat the Blood of any Creature any way if he be a Clerk let him be deposed Cap. 18 19. if he be a Lay-man let him be Excommunicated In the Penitential of Theodorus Archbishop of Canterbury we have this Rule prescribed Hast thou eaten that which died of it self or was torn by Beasts thou must do penance Forty Days if thou hast eaten Blood thou must do likewise Now of this Theodorus Rabanus doth inform us Ep. ad Humbert apud Regin de discip Eccl. l. 2. c. 200. That he was fully instructed in the Customs both of the Eastern and the Western Churches and that he could be ignorant of nothing which was then observed by the Greeks or Romans and therefore we may rationally conclude that what he thus prescribed was only that which was observed both in the East and Western Churches In the Eigth Century Gregory the Third who was made Pope A. Can. poenit c. 30. D. 731. puts this among his penitential Canons That he who hath eaten that which died of it self if he did this ignorantly shall do Penance Twenty Days if knowingly Forty Days And Bede informs us That he who comes to penance must be asked Can. de diversis causis c. 14. Whether he had eaten that which died of it self or was torn by Beasts and if so he must do Penance Forty Days and the like must be done by him who hath eaten Blood. Novel 58. Bals in Syn. Trull can 67. Leo the Emperor made a Law to punish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those who did eat any kind of Blood. In the Ninth Century Regino doth not only produce out of the Penitentials the same Canons against eating things strangled and Blood De discipl Eccles l. 2. c. 369 373. De discipl Eccles l. 2. c. 374. but adds moreover that admonendi sunt fideles ut nullus praesumat sanguinem manducare the Faithful are to be admonished that none of them do presume to eat Blood for this was forbidden in the beginning when first God gave Men liberty to eat Flesh and it is also forbidden in the New Testament where things strangled and Blood are compared with Fornication and Idolatry to teach us quantum piaculum sit sanguinem comedere what an heinous thing it is to eat Blood. In the Eleventh Century Humbertus plainly shews that this was then esteemed unlawful both in the Eastern and the Western Churches Apud Baron Tom. 11. p. 986. For we saith he of the West do not defend against you Greeks the eating of things strangled and Blood Antiquam enim consuetudinem seu traditionem Majorum retinentes nos quoque haec abominamur For retaining the ancient Custom or Tradition of our Ancestors we also do abominate these things imposing grievous Penance upon them who do this without great peril of Life and this we do especially quia antiquas consuetudines traditiones Majorum quae non sunt contra fidem leges Apostolicas arbitramur because we judge the Ancient Customs and Traditions of our Ancestors which are not opposite to the Faith to be Apostolical Laws And yet when Transubstantiation was once fully established in the West as it was in the Twelfth and the beginning of the Thirteenth Centuries then they perceived they could no longer with any truth assert as did the Ancient Fathers that they did ab humano sanguine cavere abstain from eating humane Blood but believing they did eat Blood with the Flesh in the Sacrament they gave all Men liberty to do it elsewhere Whence Balsamon in the Twelfth Century speaks thus In Can. 67. Concil Trull 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Latins do indifferently eat things strangled and if in this instance that which in the Eleventh Century was by the Western Churches held in abomination and worthy of most grievous Penances as being opposite both to the Laws of the Apostles and the Traditions of the Ancients might in the next Century be generally allowed and practised as a thing indifferent why might not a like change happen in the same Church in a like space of time touching the Doctrine of the corporeal Presence or any other Article of Christian Faith. Thirdly § 7 The Ancient Church unanimously and constantly declared it was a thing plainly repugnant to Scripture and to true Religion and proper unto Hereticks to punish any man with death for his Religion or his Heresie and she refused Communion with them that did so And 1. They declared this practice opposite to our Lord's precept Not to gather up the Tares by themselves Matth. xiij 29 30. but let them both grow together till the Harvest He introduceth his Servants saying Wilt thou that we pluck up the Tares that he might tell them saith St. Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Locum that it was unlawful to cut them off He forbids Wars and Blood and Slaughters to be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it is not lawful to cut off the Heretick Christ here forbids not to stop their Mouths restrain and hinder their boldness of Discourse dissolve
Euseb H. Eccl. l. 3. c. 10. We have only Twenty two Books which deserve belief among us and then he reckons them up as doth our Article adding that the Books written from the time of Artaxerxes to their days were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not so worthy to be credited From Christ and his Apostles Luk. xxiv 27. for the Gospel of St. Luke informs us That Christ beginning from Moses expounded to two of his Disciples in all the Scriptures the things concerning him and also that all things concerning him were written in the Law of Moses vers 44. and in the Prophets and in the Psalms that is in those Books which by the Jews are stiled Hagiographa The Apostles in their Epistles teach 2 Tim. iij. 15. That all Scripture is of Divine Inspiration and that Timothy from a Child had known them and yet he doubtless only knew the Canon then received by the Jews 2 Pet. i. 21. they add That the whole Scripture was a word of Prophecy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apud Euseb l. 3. c. 10. Genebrard Chron. ad An. 3640. Jansen ad cap. 48. Ecclus the Prophecy of Men moved by the Holy Ghost Now Josephus doth inform us That after the Days of Artaxerxes the Jews had no certain Succession of Prophets and it is confessed by many Romanists That from Malachy to John they had no Prophets In the Second Century Onesimus requesteth of Melito § 3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 4. cap. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. Bishop of Sardis a perfect Catalogue of the Books of the Old Testament whereupon this Bishop being to take a Journey into the East went to the place where those things were done and preached 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. ibid. and learning thence the exact number of them he sent their Names to Onesimus numbring them just as our Sixth Article doth And of this Catalogue Eusebius saith That it contained all the Books of the Old Testament which the Church owned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. and that he thought it necessary to preserve this Catalogue of them in writing to Posterity Here then we find upon the first enquiry after the Death of the Apostles a Catalogue exactly formed from the East and from Jerusalem agreeing with the Judgment of the whole Church of God and as exactly with the judgment of the Church of England In the Third Century Origen informs us § 4 That we must not be ignorant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Psal 1. Ed. Huet T. 1. p. 40 41. that the Canonical Books of the Old Testament are Twenty two according to the number of the Jewish Letters and then he reckons them exactly as we do adding That as these Letters are an Introduction to knowledge and divine Wisdom so these Twenty two Books are an Introduction to the Wisdom of God this saith he is the Tradition of the Jews The Tradition of the Church in the Fourth Century unanimously concurrs with the Article of the Church of England in all the Catalogues then given of the Books of the Old Testament § 5 Eusebius of Caesarea the Metropolis of Palestine who not only hath preserved the Catalogues of Melito and Origen but also doth approve them and saith They were the Books of the Old Testament received by the consent of all and of which he thought necessary to preserve the Catalogue in writing to posterity L. 4. c. 6. elsewhere saith That he is not able exactly to reckon the Governors of the Tribe of Judah that ruled the Jewish Nation after Zorobabel Demonst Evang l. 8. c. 2. p. 368. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because that from his time to that of our Saviour's there was no divine Book written Athanasius in his Festival Epistle gives the same Catalogue which we receive and having finished it he saith Ad Ruffinum Tom. 2. p. 39. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In these are comprehended the Books of the Old Testament The same Archbishop of Alexandria in his Book stiled a Synopsis of the Holy Scriptures tells us the number of the Books of the Old Testament are Twenty two Ibid. p. 58. and he there reckons them up according to our Article St. Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem speaks to his Catechumen thus Know thou studiously 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Church the Books of the Old Testament read the divine Scriptures the Twenty two Books of the Old Testament interpreted by the Seventy Interpreters Catech. 4. cap. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 36 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by all confessed to be divine Meditate upon these Twenty two Books of the Old Testament and be careful to remember them as I name them and then he reckons them up exactly as we do Epiphanius Bishop of Salamine in the Island of Cyprus in his Book of Weights and Measures Tom. 2. p. 161 162. doth in like manner inform us That the number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament is Twenty two and then he reckons them up as our Article doth St. Cap. 3. Basil Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia in his Philocalia puts this Question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Why are the divine Books Twenty two and answers it as Origen had done before him Gregory Nazianzen in his Treatise upon this very subject of the true genuine Books of Scripture Concil Oxon. Tom. 2. part 1. p. 179. declares That the Historical Books of the Old Testament are Twelve and the Metrical are Five and the Prophetical Five and then he names them all according to our Article Amphilochius in his Canonical Epistle to Selcucus gives us the same account of them Apud Balsamon p. 1083. with this only difference that the Book of Esther is said to be not so generally received for Canonical as the rest St. Jerom in several places of his works is so clearly for us that our Article is founded on his Judgment who often tells us That the Canonical Books of the Old Testament are Twenty two or if you will reckon Ruth and the Lamentations as distinct Books Tom. 3. f. 6. a. Ibid. f. 3. a. T. 1. f. 41. a. Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. they are Four and twenty In his Preface to the Book of Kings in his Epistle to Paulinus to Laeta and in divers places of his other works he is expresly of the same Judgment Ruffinus having numbered the Books of the Old Testament as we do adds That in these Books the Fathers did comprize tha◠number of the Books of the Old Testament St. Hilary saith Prolog Expla in Psalmos That the number of the Books of the Old Testament are Twenty two according to the number of the Hebrew Letters and having reckoned them up as we do saith These compleat the number of the Twenty two Books The Council of Laodicea Decrees Can. 59. That only the Canonical Books shall be read
in the Church and then this Council reckons up the Canonical Books as we do leaving out of their account those which we call Apocryphal Now this Canon being received into the Codex Canonum-Ecclesiae universalis or the Code of the Canons received by the whole Church it must have the force of an Oecumenical Synod and give us the concurring judgment of the whole Church of God on our side And yet for farther confirmation of this matter let these few things be noted First That these Fathers generally say § 6 they deliver these Catalogues as they received them by Tradition and as they were delivered to them by the Fathers and as they were received by the whole Church of Christ * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanasius in his Pascal Epistle speaks thus Because some dare to mix Apocryphal Books with the divine Scriptures of which we are fully assured from the Tradition of them to the Fathers by them who were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word It seemed good to me being exhorted to it by the Orthodox Brethren and having learnt them from the beginning in order to declare which are the Canonical Books delivered as such by Tradition and believed to be of divine Inspiration St. Hilary saith Prolog Expla in Psalmos That they were thus computed secundum Traditiones veterum according to the Traditions of the Ancients These saith St. Cyril are the Books you learn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Church and which we read publickly in the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Catech. 4. p. 37. The Apostles and the ancient Bishops and Governors of the Church who delivered these as the Canonical Books were much wiser than you thou therefore being a Son of the Church do not transgress her Laws or go beyond her Rules Quae secundum majorum Traditionem Ecclesiis Christitradita What are the Volumes of the Old and the New Testament which according to the Tradition of the Ancients are believed to be inspired by the Holy Ghost and delivered to the Churches of Christ It seems convenient saith Russinus here evidently to declare as we have received them from the Monuments of the Fathers and having reckoned up the Books of the Old Testament proceeding to the Books of the New Testament he adds Haec nobis a patribus tradita sunt Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. a. These are the Books which the Father 's comprized in the Canon these things are delivered to us by the Fathers Note § 7 Secondly That of the Books which we reject and call Apocryphal they also teach that as such they were rejected by the Church that though the Church permitted them to be read yet did she not receive them into the Catalogue of the Holy Scriptures or use them to confirm any Article of Christian Faith and that they spake of them as Books without the Canon Thus Athanasius in his Paschal Epistle saith That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for more exactness sake Apud Balsam p. 921. I add this necessary advertisement 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That besides these Books of the Old and New Testament now mentioned as divine Scripture there be other Books which are not put into the Canon which are yet appointed by the Fathers to be read to those who first come to be Catechized in the way of Piety to wit The Wisdom of Solomon the Wisdom of Syrach and Esther and Judith and Tobias and the Book called the Doctrine of the Apostles and Pastor these are read and not to be despised the others are put into the Canon Tom 2. p. 58 59. The very same words he repeats in his Compendium of the Holy Scripture where also afterwards he reckons the Four Books of Macchabees and the History of Susanna among the Books contradicted Baruch and the additions to Daniel among the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament Catech. 4. p. 38. St. Cyril having cited the Canon we receive as that which was delivered to the Church by the Apostles and ancient Governors of the Church adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let all the rest which are extro-canonical be placed in a second Order Gregory Nazianzen having given an account of Twenty two Books of the Old Testament saith You have them all Ubi Supra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that all besides them are not Genuine After his Catalogue delivered from the Tradition of the Fathers Sunt alii libri non Canonici sed Ecclesiastici a majoribus appellati Quae omnia legi quidem in Ecclesia voluerunt non tamen proferriad authoritatem ex his fidei confirmandam Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. Ruffinus saith You must know that there be other Books which are not Canonical but called by our Ancestors Ecclesiastical as the Wisdom of Solomon the Wisdom of the Son of Syrach Tobit Judith and the Books of Macchabees which they were willing to have read in the Church but not to have produced to confirm Doctrines of Faith the rest they called Apocryphal and would not have read in the Church These things are delivered to us by the Fathers Praefat. in librum Regum Tom 3. f. 6. St. Jerom saith he made his Catalogue ut scire valeamus quicquid extra hos est inter Apocrypha esse ponendum that we might know that all besides these Twenty two are to be deemed Apocryphal He adds Praef. in Esdr Neh. ibid. f. 7 8. That the Books which are not received by the Hebrews are to be rejected by us Christians and that the Church indeed Reads them but receives them not into the Canons Note Thirdly § 8 That they declare not only that these are the Books received into the Canon by the Jews but by the Christians also that they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synops Tom. 2. p. 55. the entire Scripture of us Christians saith Athanasius All the Books delivered by the Apostles and ancient Governors of the Church and by the Church to others saith St. Cyril Ubi Supra All the Books delivered to the Church of Christ saith Ruffinus That as for others which we stile Apocryphal Ecclesia nescit Apocrypha Tom. 3. f. 7. a. f. 9. a. the Church owns them not Ecclesia inter Canonicas Scripturas non recipit The Church receives them not among the Canonical Scriptures saith St. Jerom. Note Fourthly § 9 That they declare that they made this Enumeration of these Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of necessity to prevent mistakes in this Matter and for the good of the Church and that Men might know out of what Fountains they were to draw the Waters of Life Having made mention of the Hereticks saith Athanasius as of Dead persons Apud Balsam p. 920 921. and of our selves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as having the Holy Scriptures for Life and because I fear least some harmless Men through their Simplicity and Ignorance may be deceived by
the subtile Craftiness of Men and being deceived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the ambiguity of the word true Books which signifies either only such as are read in the Church or such as also are put into the Canon may begin to be conversant in others therefore I intreat you to bear with me if by way of remembrance I write of those things which you know already because of the necessity of so doing and the Benefit of it to the Church Amphilochius and Nazianzen say Ubi Supra It behoves the Christian to learn this that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every Book is not safe which has the venerable Name of Scripture for some are False and Adulterate some of a middle Nature and some Canonical and therefore say they will we number every one of the inspired Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that you may clearly learn which they are These saith Ruffinus are the Traditions of the Fathers touching the Canonical Books Ad instructionem eorum qui prima sibi Ecclesiae ac fidei Elementa suscipiunt ut sciant ex quibus sibi fontibus verbi dei haurienda sunt pocula Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. those are the Books which are read in the Church though not Canonical nor sufficient to confirm any Doctrine of Faith and the other are Apocryphal Scriptures which she would not have read and these things I thought fit in this place to signifie for the instruction of those who receive the first Rudiments of Faith Ut scire valeamus quicquid extra hos est inter Apocrypha esse ponendum Tom. 3. f 6. a. that they may know out of what Fountains they must receive the word of God. This Catalogue I have made saith Jerom that you may be able to know that the rest are Apocryphal Note § 10 Fithly That they represent these as the Fountains of Salvation which are diligently to be read and studied by all and as for the rest some of them say that though they were read in the Church not for confirmation of Faith but instruction of Manners yet private Persons should not read them Thus Athanasius having given us the Protestants Canon both of the Old and New Testament he adds These are the Fountains of Salvation so that he who thirsteth let him be satiated with the Oracles contained in them Apud Balsam p. 922. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in these alone is contained the Doctrine of Godliness let no Man add any thing to them nor take any thing from them of these our Lord spake when he said to the Pharisees You erre not knowing the Scriptures and when he exhorted the Jews to search the Scriptures P. 36 37. Learn of the Church saith Cyril to his Catechumen which are the Books of the Old and the New Testament and read none of the Apocrypha for why shouldst thou trouble thy self 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about controverted Books who knowest not those which are by all acknowledged read these Twenty two Books of the Old Testament study them only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and have nothing to do with the Apocrypha and having given us the same Catalogue of the Books of the New Testament excepting only the Revelations he saith Whatsoever is not read in the Church do not thou read St. Jerom in his Epistle to Paulinus having reckoned up the Books of the Old and the New Testament as we do saving that he saith The Epistle to the Hebrews is by many not reckoned as St. Paul 's saith I intreat thee dear Brother Tom. 3. f. 3. b. to be conversant among these to meditate of them nihil aliud nosse nihil quaerere to know to enquire after nothing else In his Epistle to Laeta touching the Education of her Daughter he gives this Admonition let her shun all Apocryphal Books Caveat omnia Apocrypha c. Tom. 1. f. 21. and if at any time she will read them not for the truth of Doctrine but for Reverence of the Signs let her know they are not their Books whose Titles they bear that there be many ill things in them that it requireth great Wisdom to seek Gold among Dirt. Thus have we in one Century Eusebius of Caesarea the Metropolis of Palaestine Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem § 11 Amphilochius Bishop of Iconium the Metropolis of Lycaonia Nazianzen and St. Basil in Cappadocia Athanasius Patriarch of Alexandria Ruffinus Priest of Aquileia in Italy Hilary of Poictiers in France Jerom who lived in Rome France Dalmatia Syria Palaestine who travelled into Cyprus Aegypt Alexandria conversed with all the learned Persons of his Age and lastly the Council of Laodicea received generally through the Christian World deposing their plain Testimonies for the Canon of the Old Testament received by Protestants and as unanimously condemning that of the Trent Council since owned by the Church of Rome And confident I am that the greatest searchers into Ecclesiastical Antiquity cannot produce one Council nor one Testimony of any Father throughout these Four Centuries who purposely treating of or declaring the exact number of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament doth not either expresly exclude or at least omit all or most of all those Books which we stile Apocryphal and which by the New Canon made at Trent Sess 4. are pronounced Canonical and that with an Anathema to every Christian who pro sacris Canonicis non susceperit receives them not as Sacred and Canonical And if all this be not sufficient whosoever will peruse Doctor Cousin's Canon of Scripture will find the same Tradition still continued to future Ages And that the number of the Books of the Old Testament were either expresly or equivalently declared to be those and those only which we receive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 4. in Gen. p. 20. For Century the Fifth St. Chrysostom lays it down as a thing confessed by lla that all the divine Books of the Old Testament were from the beginning writ in the Hebrew Tongue Theodoret twice mentions the sacred and saving Scriptures of the Old Testament In Cant. Cantic p. 985 1077. Cous p. 132. P. 142. P. 145. P. 151 152. P. 154. P. 158 159 161 163. without addition of one of the Apocryphal The number of them is declared to be Twenty two Century the Sixth by Anastasius in the Seventh Century by Isidore in the Eighth Century by Damasus in the Ninth Century by Nicephorus and Agobardus in the Eleventh Century by Giselbertus in the Twelfth Century by Hugo de Sancto Victore Richardus de Sancto Victore by Petrus Comestor John Belith and by John of Salisbury P. 166. P. 174 178. P. 179 188 192 197. in the Thirteenth Century by the Ordinary Gloss in the Fourteenth Century by Nicephorus Calistus and Joannes Armachanus in the Fifteenth Century by Thomas Waldensis Dionysius Carthusianus and Erasmus Others numbring Ruth and Lamentations as Two Books distinct from Judges and Jeremy Prol. Gal. in
libr. Regum Tom. 3. f. 6. a. say That the Canonical Books of the Old Testament are Twenty four which say they from St. Jerom St. John in his Revelations introduceth under the Name of the Twenty four Elders Dr. Cous p. 131 133. P. 147. P. 152. P. 164 178 196. so in the Sixth Century Primasius and Leontius in the Eighth Century Venerable Bede in the Ninth Century Ambrosius Ausbertus in the Twelfth Century Peter Abbot of Celle in the Fifteenth Century Thomas Anglicus and in the Sixteenth Frances Georgius Now manifest it is even from the very number here assigned of Twenty two or Twenty four Canonical Books that all these Authors must exclude those Books we call Apocrypha from the Canon and it is still more evident from their own Words in which they expresly say P. 133. These are the Books received the Books put into the Canon by the Church P. 151. P. 157 194. P. 197. the Books received by the Church and Canonized The whole Canon which the Church receives and which was handed down unto them by the Authority of the Ancients And of those which we stile Apocryphal they say Ibid. P. 151. These are the Books which are contradicted and not received by the Church The Books of the Old Testament which are not received by the Church P. 152 162 177. P. 158 159 163 169 175 The Books which are read indeed sed non scribuntur non habentur in Canone sed leguntur ut scripta patrum as are the Writings of the Fathers but are not put into the Canon non reputantur in Canone are not reputed to belong unto it The Books which the Church reads and permits for Devotion and the instruction of Manners but thinks not their Authority sufficient ad confirmandam Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum Authoritatem P. 166 173 176 191 193. to confirm the Authority of Ecclesiastical Doctrines The Books which are not to be received ad confirmandum aliquid in fide to confirm any Article of Faith. The Contents of which she obligeth no man to believe P. 189 190. nor doth she judge him guilty of disobedience or infidelity who receives them not Concerning which the Church receives the Testimony of St. Jerom as most Sacred P. 194. who did undoubtedly exclude them from the Canon To whom say they the Church Catholick is much indebted upon this account P. 199. and to whose sence the sayings both of Councils and Fathers are to be reduced Books with whose Authority no Man was pressed Books P. 202. P. 174 188. Lastly which were not genuine but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Spurious and Apocryphal which the Christian Church doth not receive P. 166 201. pari Authoritate or pari veneratione with the like Authority or Veneration with which she doth receive the Holy Scriptures Now hence the Doctors of the Church of Rome may learn what it is they are to do § 12 if they would prove any of their Doctrines to have descended to them by a like Tradition with that of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament viz. they must prove they were owned in the New Testament were delivered as Traditions by the Apostles and all the Ancient Bishops and Governors of the Church They must produce express Testimonies of Christian Writers in all Ages asserting That the Church received such a Doctrine and that they in delivering of it followed the Tradition of the Church and their Fore-Fathers and saying That the contrary Doctrine was not received by the Church They must shew That even from the first Ages of the Church Christians were solicitous to enquire what were the Apostolical Traditions not left in writing to the Church that upon this enquiry they found that these Traditions were of such a certain number neither more nor less that they thought it necessary to preserve them by writing Catalogues of all such Traditions as were received or owned as such by Christians That this Catalogue of Traditions was delivered to them by the Primitive Fathers as they had been received by the whole Church and that they had received them from Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word That they took care to leave this Catalogue of Traditions because some persons dared to mix Apocryphal Traditions with Divine and that they made it out of necessity to prevent mistakes in this matter and for the Instruction of those who received the first Rudiments of the Faith that they might know out of what Fountains to draw the Waters of Tradition They must produce from the first Four Centuries Testimonies of this nature from Fathers living in most places where there were any Christians and Testimonies uncontrouled throughout those Centuries And seeing one of these Traditions viz. that which concerneth the Canonical Books of the Old Testament is expresly contrary to a Tradition delivered and handed down to us with all these circumstances they must prove that in this matter Tradition hath plainly delivered Contradictions throughout Four whole Centuries which being done we cannot chuse but think her Testimony is Infallible Hence also we may see what an unparallell'd confidence they shew when in their Disputations the Romanists are bold to say and lay the stress of their whole certainty of Faith upon this Proposition That they hold the same Doctrine to day which was delivered yesterday and so up to the time of our Saviour seeing it is as clear as the Sun that the Books of the Old Testament which they now hold for Sacred and Canonical were for Fifteen whole Centuries together declared not to belong unto the Canon but excluded from it by the Church And this will be still more apparent by considering what the Authors of the Question of Questions § 13 and of The Papist Misrepresented and Represented say touching this matter Mr. M. saith Sect. 19. n. 6. p. 410. That when it was grown doubtful in the Church whether such and such Books were part of the Canon of Scripture the Tradition which recommended these Books was examined in the Third Council of Carthage and there all the Books of the R. Canon were found to be recommended to the Church by a true and Authentical Tradition and therefore we embrace them as the Word of God. And again Sect. 3. n. 12. p. 84 85 86. As yet the Church of Christ had not defined which Books were God's true word which not wherefore then it was free to doubt of such Books us were not admitted by such a Tradition of the Church as was evidently so universal that it was clearly sufficient to ground an infallible belief but in the days of St. Austin the Third Council of Carthage A. 397. examined how sufficient the Tradition of the Church was which recommended these Books for Scripture about which there was so much doubt and contrariety of Opinion and they found all the Books contained in our Canon of which you account so many Apocryphal to have been recommended by a Tradition sufficient
nor a Decree received into the Code of Canons by the Vniversal Church as was the contrary Decree of the Council of Laodicea nor were the men that made it likely to judge better what were the Books of the Old Testament received as Canonical than all the Writers now produced for our Canon they whom we have produced as our Witnesses being either men who lived upon or near the place where the Canon of the Old Testament was published and known or travelled many of them thither and one of them on purpose to learn exactly the number of those Books And surely it is too ridiculous to imagine that it should in the Fifth Century be better known in Africa what Books of the Old Testament were Canonical than at Jerusalem Caesarea Alexandria or any of the Eastern Churches Moreover This Canon of the Council of Carthage in the Roman Code lately set forth by Paschasius Quesnel hath only Tobit and Judith and two Books of Esdras of all the Apocryphal Books now Canonized at Rome nor in the Collection of Cresconius Can. 299. an African Bishop is there any mention of the Books of Macchabees or Baruch nor in the Edition of it by Balsamon so that this cannot be a proof that the Trent Canon was received then And lastly 't is true they stile the Books there mentioned Canonical but this may only be in that large Sence in which those Books were sometimes called so which were read in the Church though they were not sufficient to confirm matters of Faith as may be argued from the Reason which they give us why they stiled them Canonical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Balsam in can 27. Concil Carthag viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because we have from the Fathers received these Books to be read in the Church and from the Gloss of Balsamon upon it who to know what Books were Canonical in the strict Sence sends us to the Council of Laodicea Athanasius Nazianzen and Amphilochius who all declared against the Apocrypha and to the last Canon of the Apostles which leaves out most of them And whereas it is added that the Canons of the Council of Carthage were established in the Sixth General Council held in Trullo let it be noted First That at other times the Romanists will by no means admit this Council Can. 36. Can. 13. Can. 55. because it equals the Bishop of Constantinople with him of Rome forbids Priests to be separated from their Wives condemns the received Customs of the Church of Rome and prescribes contrary Laws to her but now because they hope their Forlorn Cause may have some small advantage by it they give it the Title of a General Council Note 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 2. That this Synod in the same Canon in which it confirms the Council of Carthage confirms also the Canons of the Council of Laodicea together with the Canonical Epistles of Athanasius Nazianzen and Amphilochius which number the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as we do rejecting the rest with us as Apocryphal when therefore the Fathers in the Synod confirm the Canons of the Council of Carthage they must either contradict themselves by contradicting the Council of Laodicea and these Canonical Epistles now mentioned and by them equally confirmed or else they must believe that this Canon of the Council of Carthage did not declare these controverted Books to be properly Canonical or divine Scripture but only in that larger sence in which that Name was given to Ecclesiastical Books thought worthy to be read in the Church Fifthly Whereas Mr. M. and J. L. farther assert That after these Books were declared Canonical by Pope Innocent and the Council of Carthage all cited these Books as Scripture none pertinaciously dissented from this Decree no Catholick ever doubted of them we are bound to thank them for their kindness to us in these words in which they plainly have renounced their Title to almost all the best Writers of the Christian World who as the Reverend Dr. Cousins hath demonstrated through every Century till the very Year of the Session of the Trent Council not only doubted of but plainly did reject these Books as uncanonical in the strict acceptation of the Word declaring that they read and cited them indeed as Books containing good instruction but not as properly Canonical or as sufficient to confirm any Article of Christian Faith. Lastly The Testimony of St. Austin in his Book of Christian Doctrine is so inconsistent with his other works and so fully answered by the Reverend Dr. Consins Can. 7. that it is needless to say any thing distinctly to it To proceed therefore to the Books of the New Testament § 14 observe First That the four Gospels the Acts of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 25. l. 6. c. 25. the Thirteen Epistles of St. Paul the First Epistle of St. Peter and the First of St. John were always 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confessed by all true Christians to be sacred Books of the New Testament and their Authority was never questioned by any person of the whole Church of God. Now sure we have unquestionable certainty of such Books as have been handed down to us by the Tradition of all Ages of the Church inserted into all her Catalogues cited by all her Writers as Books of a Divine Authority and of which never any doubt was made by any Member of the Church of God. Secondly § 15 Observe That it cannot be necessary to Salvation to have an absolute assurance of those Books of the new Testament which have been formerly Controverted by whole Churches as well as private Doctors of the Church for either these Churches had sufficient certainty that the Books which they rejected were Canonical or they had not if they had how could they be true Churches who rejected part of their Rule of Faith when known to be so If they had not it seems not necessary that we at present should be certain of them for why may not we go to Heaven without this assurance as well as they of former Ages Thirdly § 16 There can be no assurance of the true Canon of the Books of the New Testament from the Testimony of the Romish or the Latin Church in any Age because she in some Ages hath rejected from the Canon that Epistle to the Hebrews Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 20. which she now receives It was rejected in the Third Century by Cajus Presbyter of Rome by Tertullian in the same Century who also in his Book Cap. 20. de pudicitia insinuates that it was not received as Canonical by some other Churches Origen in his Epistle to Africanus having cited a passage from the Eleventh Chapter of this Epistle adds That it is probable some being pressed with it Pag. 232. may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 embrace the Sentence of them who reject this Epistle as
being not writ by Paul. Now who they were who in this Century did upon this account reject it we learn more plainly from the Writers of the following Century For Eusebius informs us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 20. even in his time some of the Romans did reject it as being none of the Apostles Upon which place Valesius notes That it was the Custom of Eusebius to call all the Latins Romans and observes that Ruffinus thus Interprets this very passage Scio apud Latinos de ea quae ad Hebraeos inscribitur haberi dubitationem L. 3. c. 3. I know that the Latins doubt of the Epistle to the Hebrews The same Eusebius informs us Ep. ad Dard. Ep. Tom. 3. f. 24. a. that others did reject it with the Roman Church St. Jerom frequently affirms That eam Latina consuetudo non recipit the Latin Church did not receive it among the Canonical Scriptures Here then we see that they rejected for Two Centuries what afterwards they did unanimously receive as part of the Canon of the New Testament and so her Judgment alone can give us no assurance of the Books of the New Testament because through two whole Centuries she actually erred in her Judgment of them Hence also I inferr that the Church of Christ knew of no Obligation laid upon her in a division of Church Rulers touching any matter Exhort ad Martyr p. 232. to adhere to the Pope and Church of Rome and those which sided with them For in this very Case Origen in the Third Century offers to demonstrate against her that this was truly the Epistle of St. Paul And Jerom bluntly says Although the Latins do reject it yet do I receive it Tom. 3. f. 24. with the Greeks nequaquam hujus temporis consuetudinem sed veterum Scriptorum authoritatem sequens not following the Custom of this time among the Latins but the Authority of ancient Writers Fourthly I add § 17 That there is not the like necessity that any of these controverted Books should be received from the beginning by all Christians as Canonical as that the necessary Articles of Christian Faith and Manners should be received by all Christians For 1. The necessary Articles of Christian Faith and Rules of Christian Life were preached universally to all and so there was no time when any Christian could be ignorant of them without his own fault but the Epistles controverted were only sent to private Christians as the Second and Third Epistles of St. John or to the Churches of the Jews and therefore might with reason for some time be doubted of by other Churches of the Gentiles this being not a weakening but confirmation of our Faith that the first Christians were so careful to see sufficient Evidence before they would receive even the least Epistle into the Canon of the Scripture 2. No Christian Church could need to be told by any other what were the necessary Articles of Christian Faith or Rules of Life since they must always know the Christian Faith and be obliged to practise the Rules of Christian Piety and must be taught them by their Church Guides but 't is not thus with reference to these Epistles for being writ to a particular Society of Christians it was sufficient that this Society could shew De praescript c. 36. as saith Tertullian Authenticas literas corum the Authentick Letters of those Apostles which indited them and could testifie to those who doubted as St. Austin saith De Doctrin Christian l. 2. c. 8. quod ab ipsis Epistolas accipere meruerunt that they received these Epistles from them and read and owned them as their genuine Works when-ever this was done they who before did question them must have sufficient ground to own them as parts of the true Canon and till they had this Evidence they reasonably might continue to doubt of them 3. It is evident from the second Observation that the assured knowledge that these Epistles are Canonical cannot be necessary to Salvation the necessary Doctrines of Christian Faith being according to the general Tradition of the whole Church of Christ Chap. 7. §. 4 5 6 c. Ibid. § 2 3. comprised in the Apostles Creed and all the necessary Rules of Christian Piety being according to the same Tradition fully comprised in the Four Evangelists whereas the actual knowledge of all necessary Articles of Christian Faith and Rules of Christian Conversation must be always necessary there being no possibility of knowing or of doing acceptably the Will of God without them It will not therefore follow because such matters of Fact may for a time be doubtful in the Church matters of Faith may be so that because Churches may be Orthodox and reject some part of the Canon for a Season they may be Orthodox though they reject some necessary Article of Christian Faith. The Romanist I hope will not admit of these Conclusions The Greek Church might reject the Apocalypse and yet be Orthodox ergo she might reject the Trinity and yet be Orthodox The Latin Churches for a Season might reject the Epistle to the Hebrews without blame ergo they might reject the Resurrection of the Body without blame The whole Church did not formerly receive those Books into the Canon of the New Testament she now receives Ergo the whole Church did not formerly embrace those Articles of Faith which now she holds and yet all these conclusions are as good as those the Roman Doctors usually make for receiving all the Articles of Faith imposed at present by the Church of Rome as the Conditions of Communion upon her Testimony that they are such because we do receive the Canon of the New Testament from the Tradition of the Church Fifthly We shall see cause sufficient to embrace as certain § 18 and unquestionable that Canon of the New Testament we now receive notwithstanding any doubts some of the Ancients had touching some lesser portions of it if we consider 1. That most of the Fathers of the Fourth Century who give us Catalogues of the Scripture Canon and they especially who tell us they in making of it followed the suffrage of the Church and the Tradition of the Fathers do accord in giving of that very Catalogue we now receive and owning all those Catholick Epistles which were sometime controverted thus for instance Apud Balsamon p. 922. Athanasius reckoneth the Books of the New Testament as we do numbering as appertaining to the Canon Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul Seven Catholick Epistles and the Apocalypse and saying These are the Fountains of Salvation let no man add unto them or take from them And yet he doth profess to reckon them as they delivered them who were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word and as they by Tradition came down to him In his Synopsis he undertakes to reckon up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Canonical Books of the New Testament defined to be such
And amongst these he reckons the Seven Catholick Epistles of the Apostles Pag. 59. comprised in one Volume which he calls the Sixth Volume of the New Testament Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul comprised in the Seventh Volume and in the Eighth the Revelation of St. John of which he testisieth that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 60. shewed and judged to be his by the Ancient and holy Fathers led by the Spirit of God And then concludes Pag. 61. These are the Canonical Books of the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as it were the first fruits Anchors and supports of our Faith. St. Cyril is another who professeth to write his Catalogue from the Church and to hand down the Canonical Books as she received them from the Apostles the Ancient Bishops and Governors of the Church and he among the Canonical Books of the New Testament reckons the Seven Catholick Epistles and Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul leaving out only the Apocalypse The Council of Laodicea reckons them exactly as St. Cyril doth leaving out with him the Apocalypse not that they question its Authority but because they reckon up only the Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which ought to be read in the Churches Cyril Catech. 4. p. 38. Concil Laod. Can. 60. among which the Apocalypse was not because it is so very Mystical and accordingly the Council concludes their Canon thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Books we have received from the Fathers to be read in the Church and yet they do command that nothing should be read there but Canonical Scripture Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 51. Ruffinus declares he reckoned the Volumes of the New Testament as they were delivered to the Church of Christ secundum majorum Traditionem and according to the Tradition of the Ancients and then he accounts Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul Seven Catholick Epistles and the Apocalypse saying Haec sunt quae patres intra Canonem concluserunt These are the Books which the Father 's put into the Canon Can. 27. The Council of Carthage undertaking to reckon up the Canonical Books of the New Testament enumerates Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul Two of Peter Three of John One of James and One of Jude and the Apocalypse of St. John as received from the Fathers St. Jerom reckons the Canonical Books of the New Testament after the same manner only saying That the Epistle to the Hebrews was by most shut out of the number of the Epistles written by St. Paul that is some in his time conceived St. Barnabas others St. Clemens either did interpret it from the Hebrew or write it either from the Mouth or from the Notions of St. Paul but then he adds Ep. Tom. 3. f. 13. That the whole Greek Church and some of the Latins did receive it That all the Eastern Churches and all the Churches which used the Greek Tongue did Anciently own it as the Epistle of St. Paul and that he also owned both that and the Apocalypse not respecting the Custom of his present Age but following the Authority of the Ancient Writers who cited Testimonies from both not as sometimes they are wont to do from Apocryphal Books but as from Canonical Scripture And good reason had he to say 1. § 19 Lib. 3. c. 24. That he received the Apocalypse on the Authority of the Ancients when Eusebius expresly declares That a judgment might easily be passed of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Testimony of the Ancients Athanasius that it was determined Synop. p. 60. and demonstrated to be his by the Ancient and Holy Fathers led by the Spirit of God. And indeed Ep. ad C. §. 34. Dial. cum Tryph p. 308. Pag. 373 477 128 347 376 480 486 500 503. Lib. 5. c. 30. p. 485. Pag. 201. 528. Tom. 5. in Joh. Hom. 7. in Jos pag. 269 270 411 510 c. De opere Elem p. 202. de bono pat p. 219. Hist Eccl. l. 4.24 Ibid. c. 26. Lib. 5. c. 18. p. 186. Lib. 7. c. 25. it is cited in the First Century by Clemens Romanus as a Prophetical Writing In the Second Century by Justin Martyr as a Book writ by John one of Christ's Twelve Apostles By Irenaeus in the same Century as the Revelation of John the Disciple of the Lord the Revelation of St. John and he declares it was written by him pene sub nostro saeculo almost in our Age at the end of the Reign of Domitian It is mentioned in the Third Century as holy Scripture and a Prophetick Vision by Clemens of Alexandria as the Revelation of that John who lay in the bosom of our Lord by Origen it is mentioned by Tertullian as the Prophecy the Revelation the Vision of the Apostle John in above Twenty places by St. Cyprian as that Revelation in which we hear our Saviour's Voice and in which he speaks to us Eusebius informs us That Melito Bishop of Sardis writ upon the Revelation of St. John that Theophilus Bishop of Antioch owned it and cited from it many Testimonies Now both these flourished in the middle of the Second Century That Hippolitus the Disciple of Irenaeus did the same And that Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria professed That he durst not reject it by reason of the multitude of Christians who had a veneration for it and that he owned it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the work of an holy Man inspired of God. And judge now whether he had not sufficient ground to say this matter might be decided by the Testimonies of the Ancients That this Book was refused by Marcion the Heretick Contra Marcion l. 4. c. 5. Haer. 51 54. Haer. 30. we learn from Tertullian that it was rejected by the Alogians and Theodosian Hereticks we learn from Epiphanius and St. Austin and that when some Orthodox Christians began to dislike the Doctrine of the Millennium they began also to dispute some the Author of this Book ascribing it to another John Presbyter at Ephesus and others the Authority of it because they could not answer the Testimony produced from the Twentieth Chapter in favour of the Saints Reign on Earth a Thousand Years But then their Arguments against it are only taken from some vain and weak Imaginations of their own Brains as v. g. That St. John here names himself which in his Gospel and Epistles he never doth by which Argument we must reject either the Lamentations or the Book of Jeremy 2. Because he doth not use the same Expressions here as he did there that is in a Prophetick Stile as in a Doctrinal on which account Ecclesiastes and the Canticles cannot be writ by the same Author And 3. Because he writes here better Greek than elsewhere which if so may be because he writes not to the Jews but to the Asiaticks or after he had more conversed with them who spake that Language in its Purity As for those who ascribe
this Revelation to an unknown Presbyter whose Name was John rather than to that Apostle who conversed so long among these Churches they may be easily confuted from this peculiar description of that John who was the Author of this Book Rev. i. 9. he being that John who was banished into the Isle of Patmos for the Word of God Vers 2. and the Testimony of the Truth and who bare record of the Word of God and the Testimony of Jesus Christ and of all things which he saw which are peculiar to this Apostle of our Lord. 2. § 20 St. Jerom also had good reason to own the Epistle to the Hebrews to be written or at the least composed or indited by St. Paul on the Authority of the Ancient Writers Apud Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 3. Sect. 12 17 36 43. L. 3 c. 38. Catalo Script verbo Paulus Pag. 247 439. Pag. 53 362 384 514 515 645. Lib. 3. p. 143. Lib. 7. p. 351. Philocal p 10 17. Dial. contra Marc. p. 114. Ep. ad Afric p 232. Seeing as Origen informs us the ancient Christians did not rashly when they delivered it as the Epistle of St. Paul and as Eusebius saith Saint Paul's Fourteen Epistles were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 known and manifest to the whole Christian World. We find it very often cited by Clemens Romanus the Companion and co-worker of St. Paul in his Epistle to the Church of Corinth in which as Eusebius and St. Jerome Note he hath put many notions which are in that Epistle and used many Expressions word for word taken thence In the Second Century it is cited by Irenaeus as a Book written by the Spirit of God and in the close of that Century or the beginning of the next it is Six times cited by Clemens Alexandrinus under the Name of the Apostle Paul or of Divine Scripture Origen saith That the Apostle Paul writ Fourteen Epistles he cites it as the Epistle of St. Paul in his Third and Seventh Book against Celsus in his Philocalia in his Dialogue against Marcian in his Exhortation to Martyrdom in his Epistle to Africanus he undertakes to demonstrate that it was his against such as doubted of it and in his Fifth Tome upon John he declares That the things contained in it are admirable Vid. Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. and no whit inserior to those which were confessedly writ by the Apostles and that whatsoever Church received it as such was upon that account to be commended That this is the Epistle of St. Paul was in the Fourth Century denyed by the Arians because they were not able to resist the Conviction it affords in the First Chapter of our Lord's Divinity On which account Theodoret speaks thus Proem in Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They ought at least to revere the length of time in which the Children of the Church have read this Epistle in the Churches for from the time that the Churches of God have enjoyed the writings of the Apostles they have reaped the Benefit of this Epistle to the Hebrews or if this be not sufficient to perswade them they should hearken to Eusebius of whom they boast as of the Patron of their Doctrines for he confessed this was St. Paul's Epistle Proem in Ep. ad Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and he declared that all the Ancients had the same Opinion of it That they of Rome and other Latins did for a while reject this Epistle will not much weaken this Tradition if we consider 1. That this Epistle was not writ to them but to the Hebrews who as we are informed by Eusebius Embraced it with delight 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 25. That it was rejected by them not that they had any thing to say against it but because they could not answer the Arguments which the Novatian Schismaticks among them produced from the Sixth and Tenth Chapter of this Epistle against receiving lapsed Penitents into the Church whence as Philastrius informs us they rejected it Haer. 88. as thinking it was depraved by the Hereticks or 3. Because it wants his Name which he concealed saith Jerom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Catal. Script Eccl. verbo Paulus because his Name would render it less acceptable to the Hebrew Converts who were offended at his Doctrine of the Exemption of the Gentile Converts from Circumcision and the Observation of the Law saith Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Proem in Ep. ad Hebr. because he was made an Apostle not of the Circumcision but of the Gentiles 4. Because it differs in stile from the rest of his Epistles as indeed it ought to do being writ to the Hebrews accustomed to the Hellenistick Stile but of this the Ancients give this double reason That it was writ by St. Paul in Hebrew translated by others into Greek or because St. Clemens Barnabas or St. Luke did Ibid. Apud Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 25. sententias Pauli proprio ornare sermone write down the the Sentences of Paul in their own Words saith Jerom and gave 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Phrase and the Contexture saith Origen to to the things spoken by St. Paul. The Second and Third Epistles of Saint John § 21 and that of Jude are so short that it is needless to insist upon it that the Second Epistle of Saint John is cited by Irenaeus and Clemens Alexandrinus in the Second L. 1. c. 13. p. 94. Strom. 2. De carne Christi c. 24. Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 24. Apud Cypr. p. 242. De cultu foeminar p. 151. by Tertullian Dionysius of Alexandria and the Council of Carthage in the Third Century and the Epistle of Jude under his Name by Tertullian Concerning the Epistle of St. James the Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of St. Jude let it be noted in the general that Eusebus informs us they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 25. Petrus duabus Epistolarum suarum personat tubis Jacobus quoque Judas f. 156. know to most of the Ancients That they are all expresly owned by Origen in his Seventh Honily upon Joshua Of the Epistle of Jude in particular St. Jerom saith That though it was rejected for a while because it cited a passage from the Apocryphal Book of Enoch Catal. Script Eccl. verbo Judas tamen authoritatem vetustate jam usu meruit inter sanctas Scripturas computatur it deserved Authority from its Antiquity and constant use in the Church and is reckoned among the holy Scriptures Sect. 10 12 17 30. Sess 5. The Catholick Epistle of James is cited by Clemens Romanus four several times by Ignatius in his Genuine Epistle to the Ephesians by Origen in his Thirteenth Homily upon Genesis Lib. 3. c. 25. Lib. 2. c. 22. Eusebius saith It was known to most and publickly read in
most Christian Churches Saint Jerom that in process of time it obtained Authority Estius notes That they who before doubted of it in the Fourth Century embraced the Opinion of them who received it Praefat. in Epist Jacobi and that from thence no Church no Ecclesiastical Writer is found who ever doubted of it but on the contrary all the Catalogues of the Books of Holy Scripture published by General or Provincial Councils Roman Bishops or other Orthodox Writers number it among Canonical Scriptures quae probatio ad certam fidem faciendam cuique Catholico sufficere debet which proof must give sufficient certainty of it to any Catholick The Second Epistle of St. Peter Pag. 58. Apud Cypr. Ep. 75. p. 220. is cited by Origen against Marcian under the Name of Peter Firmilion saith That both Paul and Peter in suis Epistolis Haereticos execrati sunt ut eos evitemus monuerunt in their Epistles condemned Hereticks and admonished us to avoid them which is done by Saint Peter only in this Epistle Eusebius saith That it was commemorated by many and that they who did not reckon it Canonical yet held it very useful on which account Lib. 3. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was much studied with other Scriptures The same Eusebius informs us That his First Epistle was always owned by all Christians and thence we may have full assurance of the Truth of this Epistle for there are not saith the Reverend Doctor Hammond greater Evidences of any Epistles being written by the acknowledged Author of it than these Cap. 1. v. 1. The Title of Simon Peter an Apostle of Jesus Christ The Voice which came from Heaven saying vers 17 18. This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased we heard when we Peter and John and James were with him in the Holy Mount this second Epistle beloved I write unto you that you may be mindful of the Commandments of us the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour Cap. 3. v. 1 2. All which are certain Demonstrations That Simon Peter the Apostle of our Lord who was with him in Mount-Tabor and there heard the Voice forementioned and who writ the First Epistle to the Twelve Tribes dispersed writ this also Note Lastly That after the Fourth Century § 22 there appears not the least intimation that any of these Books were any longer doubted of by any Orthodox Professor of the Christian Faith they being all received and reckoned as Canonical by the Councils and Fathers who mentioned the Canon of the New Testament Now from these premisses there is just ground to make this Inference and Conclusion That seeing most of the Catalogues of the Fourth Century given by Councils or by Fathers and all the Catalogues of the Fifth Century unquestionably assure us that what was once controverted by some few was afterwards unanimously received by all the Church of God we are sufficiently assured of the true Canon of the Books of the New Testament The evidence now produced even of these controverted Books being sufficient both in the judgment of all Catholicks and of all Christians who on these grounds alone receive them as such to assure us that they are Canonical Scripture for by what reason can any Man evince that ought to be rejected from the Canon which always was received as Canonical by the greatest part of the Church Catholick and being accurately enquired into by those who once were Doubters found such an uncontroulled reception through the whole Church diffused as stifled through all future Ages the least appearance of a doubt Hence then the Roman § 23 Doctors may discern what it is they have to do if they do undertake to shew us such a Tradition for those Roman Doctrines we reject as hath been shew'd for the Controverted Books of the New Testament And 1. It must be owned by them that it cannot be necessary to Salvation to believe or have an absolute assurance that these are true and Apostolical Traditions and therefore Haec est fides extra quam salus esse non potest This is the Catholick Faith without which there is no Salvation must be excluded from the Roman Creed 2. It must be also owned that the pretented Traditions of the present R. Church were for some Centuries controverted and rejected by whole Churches Orthodox and Apostolical and which were as such owned and embraced by all Christians and that some of them were or at least might have been for the first Four Centuries disowned by the Church of Rome as was one of these controverted Books and consequently it must be owned that she could not then be received as Mater Magistra omnium Ecclesiarum the Mother and Mistress of all Churches 3. It must be proved that there was the same necessity that these controverted Books should be known and received from the beginning by all Christians as that the necessary Traditions and Articles of Christian Faith should be so 4. It must be proved that these Traditions were always owned and mentioned as Divine and Apostolical Traditions by many Orthodox Churches and Fathers and even when controverted were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acknowledged by most of the Church Guides To instance in the Apocalypse which Mr. M. on all occasions singles out as a Book whose Authenticalness cannot be better proved than their Traditions let him shew us any such Testimonies from the First Second and Third Centuries for the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome as we have shewed for the Apocalypse any one that saith of them as Denys of Alexandria doth of the Apocalypse That he durst not reject it by reason of the multitude of Christians who had a veneration for it let him produce the plain Testimonies of the Fathers that the Truth of these Traditions may be decided by the Testimonies of the Ancients that they owned them as Apostolical by virtue of their Testimony that the Ancient and Holy Fathers led by the Spirit of God gave Testimony to them and that they were the Traditions of holy Men inspired by God All these things have been said of the Apocalypse in the Four first Centuries and when Mr. M. can produce any thing of the like nature evidence and strength for any one of his Traditions we will own it as Divine and Apostolical Here then we see the greatest and the plainest difference betwixt the Traditions we receive and own and those pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome which we reject For 1. The Traditions we receive are Traditions handed down in writing to us throughout all Ages of the Church unto this present time the Traditions we reject are only presumptive Traditions such as the Church of Rome presumes to be so but yet they have no Footsteps in the Ancient Records of the Church of Christ which is a demonstration that they falsly do presume they are Traditions for as we could have no just reason to believe those which we own to be
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
judgment adding that he therefore embraced this Doctrine Because he chose not to follow Men or their Doctrines Pag. 306. but God and telling Trypho That if the Jews had met with any who did not confess this Pag. 307. but blasphemed the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob he was not to esteem them Christians though they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For I and all Christians that are entirely Orthodox do know there will be a Resurrection of the Flesh and a thousand Years in Jerusalem built adorn'd and enlarged as the Prophets Ezekiel Esaias and others have confessed Now by comparing of these words with what before was spoken by him of the Gnosticks and the following branches of that Heresie the Marcionites the Valentinians Basilidians and Saturnilians p. 253. it will be evident that Justin M. speaks here especially of them For 1. There you will find him saying of those Hereticks That they taught Men to Blaspheme the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. And here That some of them who did not own the Millennium were Men who dared to Blaspheme the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. 2. There you will find them expresly stiled the Marcionites Valentinians Basilidians and Saturnilians Here you will find them generally described by this character That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they say there is no Resurrection of the Dead but that as soon as they die 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their Souls were received into Heaven as Irenaeus before noted of those deniers of the Millennium and as is certainly true of all the Hereticks here mentioned Danaeus in Aug. de Haeres c. 22. f. 100. b. Dan. ibid. c. 4. f. 60. b. Ibid. cap. 11. f. 79. a. for the Marcionites denied the Resurrection of the Flesh and held That the Soul only should be saved Basilides denied The Resurrection of the Flesh The Saturnilians said That there would be no Resurrection of the Flesh because the Body would not be saved The Valentinians denied the Resurrection of the Flesh saying That our Souls only not our Bodies were redeemed by Christ Moreover he promises to write a Book against these Deniers of the Millennium which what it should be except his Book against Heresie in general or against Marcion in particular I would gladly know 3. There he declares that true Christians did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in nothing Communicate with these Men as knowing they were Atheists i. e. wicked ungodly and unjust and here he forbids Trypho 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to account them Christians saying they no more deserved that Name than the Sadducees and other Hereticks amongst the Israelites deserved the Name of Jews Now let it be considered 1. § 4 That this Doctrine was owned in the first Ages of the Church by the greatest number of the Christian Clergy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 H. Eccl. l. 3 c. 39. In Jer. 19. Proem in lib. 18. Com. in Esa as is confessed by Euscbius that by the confession of St. Jerom Multi Ecclesiasticorum virorum Martyrum ista dixerunt Many Ecclesiastical Men and Martyrs had asserted it before his time and that even in his days it was the Doctrine quam nostrorum plurima sequitur multitudo which a great multitude of Christians followed that it was received not only in the Eastern parts of the Church by Papias Justin Irenaeus Nepos Apollinaris Methodius but also in the West and South by Tertullian Cyprian Victorinus Lactantius and Severus and if we may credit Gelasius Cyzicenus by the first Nicene Council 2. That these Men taught this Doctrine not as Doctors only but as Witnesses of the Tradition which they had received from Christ and his Apostles and which was taught them by the Elders the Disciples of Christ which pass among the Romanists for Authentick marks of Apostolical Tradition 3. That they pretend to ground it upon numerous and manifest Testimonies both of the Old and New Testament and speak of them as Texts which could admit no other meaning and which they knew to have this meaning and then let any Romanist shew any thing of a like nature for any Article pretended by the Church of Rome to be derived from Tradition to them Now if the Scriptures thus Interpreted for these Two Centuries with so much confidence and assurance § 5 if a Tradition of this early date delivered by Men of such great Reputation from the Disciples of our Lord and from the Seniors of the Church may yet be Scriptures falsly Interpreted Traditions falsly said to be received from the Apostles or the Rulers of the Church Semijudaei Hier. in Esa 60. f. 100. b. Praefat. in lib. 18. f. 107. Ridiculi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in cap. 66. v. 22. and they who thus Interpreted them might be looked upon as Judaizing as Men whose God was their Belly as Men who loved their Belly and their Lusts and as Ridiculous which Epithetes St. Jerom freely doth bestow upon the Assertors of the Millennary Doctrine how much more reason must we have to doubt of those Interpretations of Scripture and those Traditions which are now represented as true Traditions and true Interpretations of the Scripture by the Roman Church If that which once passed for the Doctrine of all Christians that were Orthodox A. D. 373. n. 14. Vitanda est istiusmodi explanatio imo Haeresis In Jer. 19. f. 137. b. may pass in after Ages for Heresie as saith Baronius the Doctrine of the Millennium was pronounced by Damasus and as St. Jerom seems in his invective stile to call it and that which Hereticks then chiefly held must be now held of all who would not be accounted Hereticks sure what is Orthodox in one Age may become Heresie in the succeeding Ages or else the Church of Rome can be no certain judge either of what is Orthodox or Heretical Sure they may be ashamed to ask us any more how Errors could come into their Church and no beginning of them known till they can tell us the beginning of this Error And lastly if the Fathers of the purest Ages could be so easily cozened by Papias a Man of no Judgment in this Matter as some of them assert why might they not be cheated by such half witted Men in Twenty other Matters why not by Twenty other Men of as weak Parts And what assurance can we have of any other thing in which Tradition is pretended on the account of Testimonies less Primitive less plain less numerous than these were If they who had matters at Second-hand from the Apostles could be thus mistaken in a Tradition on which they founded their future Hopes and Expectations must they not much more be subject to like mistakes in matters of meer Speculation and Opinion Moreover hence we have a demonstration of the Falshood of the pretended Tradition of the Church of Rome touching the Invocation of Saints Sess 25. for that according to the Trent Council
of them will be the Six thousandth Year so Irenaeus His Scholar Hyppolitus in the fore-cited passage saith the same thing Vide Sixt. Senen Bibl. Sanctae l. 5. annot 190. Lib. 7. c. 25. Eustathius in his Hexaemeron and the Author of the Question and Answers passing under the Name of Justin Martyr Lactantius Hilary and Jerom are all of the same mind and hence Lactantius took the confidence to say in his time It could not be above Two hundred Years before the World would have an end St. Cyprian De Exhort Mart. p. 168. That Sex millia annorum jam fere complentur the Six thousand Years are almost compleated And St. Jerom Ep. ad Gerontium de Monogamia Tom. 1. f. 33. b. when he heard of the taking of Rome by Alaricus the Goth crys out Qui tenebat de medio fit non intelligimus Antichristum appropinquare He who hinder'd is taken out of the way and do we not consider that Antichrist is at hand And this Opinion Disert de Mart fortitud §. 21.24 as it is well noted by the Learned Mr. Dodwell they collected from the Prophetick writings and from the Phrase of the last Days so frequent in the Scripture and from those Expressions which mention our Lord's coming to destroy Jerusalem as at hand And yet we have already lived long enough to see the falseness of this Doctrine and so to be convinced that in these matters the Church Guides were not Infallible Interpreters of Scripture nor Aâ—thentick derivers of Tradition down to future Ages And which is in this matter more observable 2 Thes ij 6. the Apostle plainly had foretold them what it was that hindered this appearance of the Man of Sin and yet 't is manifest that they retained not what he told them Nor hath the Church of future Ages been able to inform us nor can our pretenders to Infallibility tell us with any certainty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 V. 6. what was the hindrance which St. Paul there meant and his Thessalonians then knew for that they did know it we are sure because it is written But what it was none of them knew because it was unwriten The Church that infallible Oracle and excellent keeper of Tradition hath lost this and many more Traditions that is discourses of our Lord and his Apostles by word of mouth because they were not written And therefore blessed be the goodness of that God who seeing what an unfaithful keeper of Traditions the Church was took order that what his wisdom saw necessary for us to know and practise should be written 2. Dist 7 In matters of Practice we distinguish betwixt such practices as have been generally received and owned without contest from the first and purest Ages of the Church as the Observation of the Lord's Day the Ordination of Presbyters by Bishops and such as have been matter of long contest and in which the Tradition pleaded by some hath been as evidently disowned by others as good Members of the Church as they and that we have no sufficient Reason to depend much on such pretences to Tradition will appear from the dispute betwixt Pope Victor and the Asiatick Bishops about the observation of the Easter Festival of which let it be Noted First § 9 That Pope Victor and the R. Church kept the Easter Festival on the Lord's Day only whereas the Asiaticks and some few Churches with them did celebrate that Festival on the Fourteenth Day of March on whatsoever Day of the Week that happend whence sometimes it fell out that some Christians were Feasting and rejoicing when others were observing their Lent Fast For this cause Synods met in divers places and particularly a R. Synod which decreed with Victor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That all with one consent should keep the Easter Festival on the Lord's Day And consonant to this was the Practice and Judgment of many other Churches for that this Festival should be by them observed on the same day was determined by St. Irenaeus who presided in France by Theophilus Bishop of Caesarea by Narcissus Bishop of Jerusalâ—m and the Priests subject to them by the Bishops of Pontus in a Synod where Palma presided and by the Churches of the Province of Osdroena And the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 23. saith Eusebius was the Eunanimous determination of most other Bishops and Churches of the Christian World. And though the Asiatick Churches kept this Feast upon the Fourteenth Day of March yet was the contrary practice observed saith the same Eusebus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the whole World beside So that 't is evident the much major part of the Church concurred in practice with the Pope and judged it reasonable and expedient to observe this Festival upon the Lord's Day only And of this their determination they sent Letters to all the Churches round about and consequently to all the Asiatick Churches Secondly Observe That according to Eusebius § 10 they who kept this Feast upon the Lord's Day did it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from a Tradition Apostolical Eccl. Hist l. 5. c. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. c. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 5. c. 17. p. 258. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the Bishops of Palestine spake much of the Tradition touching the Paschal Feast descending down unto them by succession from the Apostles The Constitutions stiled Apostolical command all Christians to take especial care that they observe the Paschal Feast only on the Lord's Day and forbid them to celebrate it any longer with the Jews And the Fifth and Sixty second of those Canons which pass under the same stile forbid all Bishops Priests or Deacons under the penalty of deposition to celebrate the Paschal Feast before the vernal Equinox or to Feast with the Jews Thirdly Observe That notwithstanding these Assertions § 11 the Evidence that they who did observe this Festival when the Jews celebrated their Paschal Feast followed the Practice and Tradition of the Apostles seems more strong and cogent For even Eusebius confesseth that they who celebrated this Festival with the Jews Lib. 5. cap. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. told the very names of the Apostles from whom they received this Tradition and of their Successors who handed down this practice to them declaring that it was thus celebrated before them by Philip and John the Apostles of our Lord by Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna Thraseas Bishop of Eumenia by Papirius Melito and Sagaris and by seven Bishops Predecessors to Polycrates who all observed it as they did All these who in the first or second Centuries did very laudably perform the office of a Bishop and who had many of them extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kept the Paschal Feast saith Polycrates upon the Fourteenth Day according to the Gospel in nothing varying from what they had received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
the God of Israel was an evil God and not the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and they denied the truth of our Saviour's Manhood and the Resurrection of the Flesh Secondly Observe That the Opinion of St. Cyprian and those who in Africa and elsewhere adhered to him Dicimus omnes omnino Haereticos Schismaticos c. Ep. 69. p. 180. was this That all Persons who only were Baptized by Hereticks were to be admitted into the Church by Baptism St Cyprian Bishop of Carthage thought Hist Eccl. lib. 7. cap. 3. Apud Cypr. Ep. 75. pag. 221. Omnes Schismaticos Haereticos qui ad Ecclesiam conversi sunt Baptizari Apud Cypr. p. 231. saith Eusebius that being first purged from their Error they ought to be admitted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no otherwise than by Baptism Not only the Cataphrygae saith Firmilian but caeteri quique Haeretici all other Hereticks whatsoever are deprived of the Power of Baptism In the Council of Carthage consisting of Eighty five Bishops assembled out of Africa Numidia and Mauritania Novatus a Thamugade defines according to the Testimony of the Scriptures and the Decree of our Collegs of Blessed Memory That all Schismaticks and Hereticks who are converted to the Church should be Baptized Januarius a Lambese saith According to the Authority of the Holy Scriptures I decree Haereticos omnes Baptizandos that all Hereticks shall be Baptized and so admitted into the Church Repudiandum esse omne omnino Baptisma quod sit extra Ecclesiam constitutum Firm. apud Cypr. Ep. 75. pag. 226. The Council of Iconium decreed That all Baptism was to be rejected that was celebrated out of the Church That of Synnada That no Baptism was to be found amongst Hereticks which were out of the Church Apud Haereticos nullum Baptisma reperiri and that therefore returning to the Church they ought to be Baptized in it Thirdly Observe That Pope Stephen § 17 in prosecution of this Quarrel or Dispute proceeded to a Separation of himself from and a refusal of Communion with his Brethren both in the Southern and the Eastern Churches who declared for the Baptism of Hereticks returning to the Bosom of the Church Pope Stephen saith Dionysius to Pope Xystus writ to me Apud Eusebium Hist Eccl. l. 7. c. 5. as you do and for the same Cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as one who would not communicate with Helin Firmilian or any of the Bishops of Cilicia Cappadocia Galatia or of the Neighbouring Regions because they Rebaptized Hereticks In many other Provinces saith Firmilian many things do vary Rumpens adversus vos pacem Ep. 75. apud Cypr. p. 228. but yet for these things they do not depart from the Peace and Vnity which yet Pope Stephen hath been bold to do breaking that Peace which all his Ancestors have preserved with you in mutual Love and Honour And turning his Discourse to him he speaks thus How great Sin hast thou heaped upon thy self quando te à tot gregibus scidisti by cutting off thy self from so many Flocks Siquidem ille est vere Schismaticus qui sea Communione Ecclesiasticae unitatis Apostatum fecerit Ibid. Sacerdotes Dei abstinendos putat Deceive not thy self for thou hast cut thy self off from them he being indeed the Schismatick who makes himself an Apostate from the Communion of Ecclesiastical Vnity and whilst thou thinkest thy self able to separate all from thee thou only hast separated thy self from all St. Cyprian saith Ep. 74. Pag. 214. That he had passed his Judgment for the Excommunication of the Priests of God who kept the Truth of Christ and the Unity of the Church St. Austin also doth affirm Stephanus non solum non rebaptizabat Haereticos verum etiam hoc facientes Excommunicandos fore decernebat Libr. de Baptismo contra Petil. cap. 14. pag. 504. That Pope Stephen judged they should be Excommunicated who endeavoured to pull down the Ancient Custom of receiving Hereticks without Baptism Fourthly Observe That after the Death of Stephen Pope Xystus his immediate Successor asserted the same Doctrine and was as vehement as he for the Exclusion of all those from Church Communion who did oppose it For Xystus with Philemon and Dionysius two Roman Presbyters wrote Letters to Dionysius of Alexandria declaring That they would not communicate with them who held that Hereticks were to be admitted into the Church by Baptism Apud Euseb Ibid. This will appear from the Letter of Dionysius to Pope Xystus where having told him that his Predecessor Pope Stephen had written to him that he would not Communicate with them for this very reason he adds That he had written formerly both to Philemon and Dionysius of Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb H. Eccl. l. 7. c. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who were before of the same judgment with Pope Stephen as they were now of the same mind with Xystus and who writ to him about the same things Whence it is evident that Xystus the succeeding Pope Philemon and Dionysius Presbyters of Rome persisted in this Resolution not to Communicate with those who held That Hereticks were to be received into the Church by Baptism and seeing Dionysius who was of the same judgment succeeded Xystus it follows that three Succeeding Popes had then defined that Article Fifthly § 18 Observe That the Opinion and Practice of the Africans and many Eastern Churches was asserted by very many Christian Doctors Churches and Councils It was the Opinion of Tertullian Sine dubio non habent De Baptism c. 15. Apud nos Haereticus etiam per Baptisma veritatis utroque homine purgatus admittitur De pudicitia Cap. 19. that Hereticks had no Baptism and this saith he is without doubt It was the Doctrine of Agrippinus and of St. Cyprian in the same Century In Aegypt it was the Doctrine of Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria In Asia of Firmilian Bishop of Caesarea In Cilicia of Helen Bishop of Tarsis In the Fourth Century it was the Doctrine of Optatus Lib. 4 5. who frequently asserts Apud ipsos non esse Sacramenta That the Hereticks had no Sacraments Orat. 3. Contr. Arian p. 413. Of Athanasius who declares the Arians Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wholly vain and unprofitable That the Baptism given by them was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alien from the Truth though they used the name of the Father and the Son because they found them written Ibid. 13. for not he who simply calls him Lord gives true Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but he who with the names holds the true Faith. Hence our Saviour gave not commission to Baptize any how but first to Teach that by teaching aright Faith might be obtained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. and with Faith might be added the Consecration of Baptism and of other Hereticks he faith
is exceeding evident that his Opinion was by the Church of God condemned both in General and in Particular Moreover it was the Judgment of Pope Stephen That the Baptism of Hereticks though administred only in the name of Christ and not of the whole Sacred Trinity was valid and not to be reiterated when they returned into the Bosom of the Church This is apparent from these words of Cyprian No Man to circumvent the Christian Truth should oppose the Name of Christ and say in nomine Jesu Christi ubicunque quomodocunque Baptizati gratiam Baptismi sunt consecuti Ep. 73. p. 205. that wheresoever howsoever Men are Baptized in the Name of Christ they obtain the Grace of Baptism And again Since after the Resurrection the Apostles being sent by our Lord to the Gentiles are commanded to Baptize them in the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost how do some say That out of the Church yea against the Church a Gentile may obtain Remission of Sins Ibid. p. 206. modo in nomine Jesu Christi ubicunque quomodocunque Baptizatum wheresoever and howsoever he be Baptized provided it be done in the name of the Lord Jesus when Christ himself commands the Gentiles to be Baptized in plena adunata Trinitate into the whole and united Trinity If then that be the Truth which usually is affirmed that the Ancients did admit the Baptism of those Hereticks who Baptized in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and nulled their Baptism who Baptized not into the Sacred Trinity then must they plainly have condemned the Doctrine of Pope Stephen and his Abettors But though some of the Ancients seem to speak after this manner and to assert this Doctrine as is evident from the Apology made for the Baptism of the Novatians in St. Cyprian That they did Ep. 69. p. 183. eandem legem tenere quam Catholica Ecclesia teneat eodem Symbolo quo nos Baptizare eundem nosse deum patrem eundem filium Christum eundem Spiritum Sanctum use the same Symbol with Catholicks in Baptism and Baptized into the same Sacred Trinity And from the Canon of the first Council of Arles which Decrees That they should be admitted by Imposition of Hands only who were Baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost yet the Opinion of the Ancient Church seems rather to have been this that their Baptism alone was to be admitted who both Baptized into and believed aright touching the Sacred Trinity as the Novatians did This St. Basil doth expresly teach saying Ad Amphil. can 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Ancients judged that Baptism valid which in nothing differed from the Faith. And therefore having told us That the Baptism of the Encratitae the Saccophori and Apotactites was rejected by the Church he adds And let them not say we are Baptized into the Father Can. 47. Son and Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who make God the Author of Evil. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orat. 3. contr Arian p. 413. And Athanasius condemns the Baptism of the Arians though they named the Father and Son because they saw them in the Form of Baptism delivered in the Scripture seeing they did not conceive aright of them nor retain the right Faith adding That as the Manichees the Phrygae the Samosatenians pronounced the right Names and yet were Hereticks so the Arians though they recited the Names and Words of Baptism deluded them who received Baptism from them Again St. Cyprian and his party in Africa held the Baptism not only of Hereticks but Schismaticks to be void and in particular of the Novatians his words are these Ep. 69. p. 180. Dicimus omnes omnino Haereticos Schismaticos nihil habere potestatis ac juris propter quod Novatianus nec debet nec potest excipi We say that no Heretick or Schismatick hath any power or right to Baptize and therefore Novatian should not and cannot be excepted And again Ibid. p. 183. Audet quisquam dicere aquam Baptismi salutarem communem cum Schismaticis esse posse Ep. 72. p. 196. Dares any one say That Schismaticks can have the salutary Water of Baptism The same he Asserts in several other places and the Fathers of the Council held under him do often say Baptisma quod dant Haeretici Schismatici non est verum Pag. 231. ter 232. bis 236. bis that the Baptism of Hereticks and Schismaticks is not true and that both returning to the Church were to be admitted by Baptism Now in this indeed he differed from the received Opinion of the Church 〈◊〉 Amphil. can 1. to whom it seemed good saith Basil to reject the Baptism of Hereticks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but to receive that of Schismaticks 2dly Whereas St. Cyprian and his party held the Baptism of all Hereticks to be void we find the Church did afterwards judge that some Hereticks should be admitted into the Church by Baptism and that others should be received only by Imposition of Hands 'T is therefore evident That the Church equally disallowed both their Assertions and decided the Controversie against them both and did as much condemn Pope Stephen's Traditum est as St. Cyprian's Scriptum est the Pope's Appeal to Tradition as the Bishop of Carthage's to Scripture Now the Corollaries which naturally do result from these Ten Observations are as follow First § 22 Hence we learn That the Latins though comparatively Ancient are not much to be relied upon in giving an account of matters in which their Church is concerned and in which they differed from the Eastern Churches For to omit St. Commen c. 9. Austin the Account Vincentius Lirinensis gives of this matter is as full of Errors as of Sentences for he averrs that Agrippinus was the first of 1 all Men who against the 2 Divine Canon against the 3 Rule of the Vniversal Church against the 4 Sence of all his own fellow Priests against the 5 Customs and 6 Institutions of the Ancients Rebaptizandum esse censebat judged for Rebaptization and that 7 all men disclaimed the novelty of the thing and 8 all the Priests every were resisted it but above all Pope Stephen who said Nihil innovandum nisi quod traditum est Nothing must be innovated but that which was delivered us to be retained that retenta est igitur Antiquitas explosa novitas hereupon Antiquity was retained and novelty exploded In which few words are no less than Eight gross mistakes as will appear by comparing these words with the Testimonies above cited In Ep. 70. p. â—89 And as it is truly observed by the Oxford Commentator upon Cyprian That the Eastern Writers were in rebus Occidentalium Hospites Strangers in things which concerned the West so is it as true that the Western Writers were many of them Strangers to the true State of Matters in the East Secondly § 23
Whereas the Church declared against Pope Stephen That in this matter of the Rebaptizing Hereticks the various Customs which had obtained were to be permitted without breach of Communion and Christian Peace that the Custom of every Region was to be followed and the obtaining practice to be submitted to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Orders sake that it was to be done or left undone suitably 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to what should generally be ordered concerning it Hence in all matters of this indifferency and obscurity Ad Amphil. can 1. De unit fidei c. 19. in which saith Basil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing plainly is declared we admit that saying of St. Austin That Hereticks must be received as the Church receives them there being as he adds no clear Example to be produced from Scripture either way and with him we acknowledge Contr. Crescon l. 1. c. 33. That the Truth of Scripture is held by us when we do that which doth please the Church because we know from Scripture that God is the God of Order not of Confusion and that in matters of this indifferency that of the Apostle 1 Cor. xiv 33. 1. Cor. xi 16. We have no such Custom neither the Churches of God must cut off farther matter of Contention but then in Articles of Christian Faith we with the same St. Austin say De peccat mer. remiss l. 2. c. 36. Credo quod hinc divinorum eloquiorum clarissima Authoritas fuisset si homo illud sine dispendio salutis ignorare non possit We believe that the Authority of the Divine Oracles would have been most clear had the matter been such of which we could not have been ignorant without loss of Salvation Moreover though St. Austin doth acknowledge that no Example could be produced from Scripture in this Case yet he pretendeth Scripture for the right and lawfulness of the said Practice For saith he That I may not seem De Bapt. contr Donatistas l. 10. c. 6. Tom. 7. p. 379. humanis Argumentis id agere to prove the Right of receiving Hereticks without Baptism only by humane Arguments ex Evangelio profero certa documenta I produce certain proofs out of the Gospel to shew how rightly this was determined by the Church And again having said Ibid. l. 4. c. 7. p. 419. We follow that which the Custom of the Church always held and a plenary Council hath confirmed he adds That bene perspectis ex utroque latere Scripturarum Testimoniis potest etiam dici quod veritas declaravit Tot tantisque S. Scripturarum testimoniis l. 5. c. 4. Divinarum Scripturarum d◠cumentis l. 6. c. 1. hoc sequimur weighing well the Testimonies of Scripture on both sides it may also be said that we follow that which Truth hath declared From whence and many other places of his works it is evident that even in hae obscurissima quaestione in this most obscure Question as he often stiles it he recurrs for matter of Right to Scripture and weighs it in the Balance of the Sanctuary Thirdly § 24 Hence it is evident beyond all doubt that the Church of that Age in which this Controversie happened knew nothing or at least believed nothing of the New Rule of R. H. That in Judges subordinate dissenting all Christians must adhere to the Superior in those of the same Order and Dignity to the major part since all these Africans and Orientals not only take the liberty to dissent from what the Pope and all the Churches which adher'd to him held as Apostolical Tradition but also to condemn it as a thing contrary to the plain evidence of Scripture and to decree the contrary should be observed and practised For had such a Rule been then received and owned by the Church of Christ could all the Christian Churches besides that of Rome have still maintain'd Communion with those Southern and those Eastern Churches who did so resolutely oppose and flatly contradict this Rule Could they have thus condemned Pope Stephen of violating the Churches Peace and unity for acting consonantly to this Rule by renouncing Communion with them who were provided that this Rule be true manifest Schismaticks Could St. Denys of Alexandria have told the Pope he durst not by acting contrary to the Decrees made at Iconium and Synnada provoke those Churches to Contention if doing so had only been to act according to a Rule always received and owned by the Church of Christ Could St. Basil have judged it best for every one to follow herein the Custom of their own Country in opposition to this Rule Could Firmilian have charged the Pope with Schism Could Cyprian and the Council of Carthage have charged him with Tyranny for pressing a received Rule in the whole Church These sure are demonstrations that this pretended Rule is like the rest of Popish Doctrines a Rule with which the Ancient Church of Christ was not acquainted Fourthly Hence evident it is That all the Churches of that Age knew nothing of the Pope's Supremacy nothing of any Obligation laid upon them to conform to the Doctrines Decrees and Customs of the Roman Church and her adherents and lastly nothing of that pretended Law that Synods were not to assemble and make Canons without consulting of his Holiness Since all these Synods made these Canons either without his Knowledge or else in opposition to Unusquisque Episcoporum quod putat faciat c. Ep. 73. p. 210. and condemnation of the Decrees and Customs both of the Pope and Church of Rome and others told him They thought themselves obliged notwithstanding all his Threats to act according to their Sentence and durst not rescind it Had they believed the Pope's Supremacy in that Age would they have declared so freely as St. Cyprian doth Neque enim quisquam nostrum Episcopum se Episcoporum constituit aut tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem collegas suos adigit Apud Cypr. p. 229. Apud Cypr. Ep. 75. p. 217 218 225 227 228. for the Liberty of every Bishop to act as he saw fit in this matter and said that he was only to give account to God of his proceedings Could they with the Council of Carthage have esteemed it such a tyrannical Matter for the Pope to act as Bishop of Bishops Could Firmilian have accused him so pertly of Inhumanity Insolence and Boldness in this Case Could he have judged him a downright Schismatick for acting as he did Could all the forementioned Bishops so freely have reproved him and dissented from him and judged it their Duty rather to adhere to the decisions of Provincial Synods than to his Determination Could they have thought themselves obliged to adhere to the Decrees Ubique a S. Scripturis declaratum est Baptisma Haereticorum non esse verum Ep. 7. the Doctrines or Customs of the Roman Church and yet declare as doth St. Cyprian and his Africans That the Decrees and Practice of
the Roman Church were in this case opposite to Scripture and the plainest Reason And as St. Basil doth to Amphilochius in the same case Can. 47. Eos qui Romae sunt non ea in omnibus observare quae sunt ab origine tradita Ep. 75. p. 220. Though you and the Romans hold the contrary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet ought our Sentence to take place And as Firmilian expresly doth That 't is usual with them of Rome to vary from Apostolical Tradition Could so many Fathers so many Churches so many Councils have not only practised in opposition to the Doctrines and Customs of that Church but also have condemned them in such opprobrious Terms as they have done Cyp. Ep. 69. p. 185. Ep. 73. p. 206 208 210. Ep. 74. p 212 c. pronouncing the Assertors of them Prevaricators in matters both of Faith and Truth Betrayers of the Church Enemies to Christians Friends and Abettors of Hereticks Men who did plead their Cause and partake with them in their Sins Men who did null evacuate destroy the Baptism of the Church and give up the Spouse of Christ to Adulterers Fifthly § 25 Hence it is manifest That in that Age they verily believed that what had passed for Apostolical Tradition in the Church of Rome and her Adherents might be no such matter that both that Church and her Abettors might impose upon their fellow Christians in pretending to it and that there lay no Obligation on other Churches to comply with them in such matters as they delivered for Apostolical Tradition For otherwise how could it happen that so many populous Churches so many Councils so many famous Bishops that Athanasius Optatus St. Basil Cyril of Jerusalem all great Assertors of true Apostolical Tradition should declare so plainly and expresly against this practice of the Church of Rome that Firmilian should declare Neminem tam stultum esse qui hoc credat Apostolos tradidisse Ep. 75. p. 219. Nemo infamare Apostolos debeat quasi illi Haereticorum Baptisinata probaverint Ep. 74. p. 211. No Man could be so Foolish as to believe the Apostles had delivered any such thing that St. Cyprian should say That this pretence of Romanists was manifestly false and tended to blaspheme the Reputation of the Blessed Apostles that the Africans should not only reject this pretended Apostolical Tradition in the opprobrious Terms forementioned but should declare so oft in Council that the contrary Doctrine descended from Evangelical Authority and Apostolical Tradition Vid. Supra and was confirmed by the Divine Law and the Holy Scriptures How lastly could it happen that all the other Churches excepting that of Rome were all at Peace and still maintained Communion with these Opposers and Traducers of this pretended Tradition and did not blame them in the least on this account but rather interceded with the Roman Bishop to lay aside his Fury and entertain Communion and Friendship with these Churches as they did Sixthly Hence it appears that in that Age they thought not Custom or Tradition though practised by the Church of Rome and by the major part of Christians any certain Rule of Manners but thought themselves obliged sometimes to vary from it and that they might have Truth and Reason and Scripture on their sides against it that it concerned them to examine then whether the Custom they were required to follow had its rise from Christ and his Apostles and could be proved from their Writings and if not to reject it For in this matter they declare Non esse consuetudine praescribendum Cypr. Ep. 71. p. 194. sed ratione vincendum Their Adversaries were not to prescribe to them from Custom but to convince them by reason St. Paul having taught every one not to adhere pertinaciously to what he had once imbibed Pag. 195. but willingly to embrace any thing which he found better or more profitable That 't was in vain when Men were overcome by reason Ep. 73. p. 203. to oppose Custom to it as if Custom were better than Truth and that were not rather to be followed which was revealed for the better by the Holy Spirit that Non semper errandum Ibid. p. 208. quia aliquando erratum est We must not always erre because we once have done so Ep. 74. p. 215. that Custom without Truth was only old Error and vainly was preferred before it that the Truth being manifested Concil Carth. apud Cypr. p. 236 240 241. Custom was to yield to it that no Man ought to preferr Custom to Reason and Truth that Christ being Truth we ought rather to follow that than Custom that it was obstinacy and presumption Cypr. Ep. 74. p. 212. humanam traditionem divinae dispositioni anteponere to preferr humane Tradition to divine Orders and not to consider that God is angry when humane Tradition evacuates divine Precepts that when it was said to them let nothing be innovated Ibid. p. 211. but that which was delivered be observed it was to be enquired unde est ista traditio whence is that Tradition Whether from the Authority of Christ and the Gospel the commands and Epistles of the Apostles and if in Evangelio praecipitur Ib. p. 215. aut in Apostolorum Epistolis aut Actubus continetur it were commanded in the Gospel or contained in the Acts or Epistles of the Apostles then was it to be observed and that when Truth shook and staggered we were to have recourse to the Head and Original of Divine Tradition ad originem dominicam Evangelicam Apostolicam Traditionem to the Gospel and Apostolical Tradition Lastly Hence it is evident § 26 That in those early times Tradition Apostolical and from the beginning must falsly be pretended by Great Men and Churches even in a matter of continual practice and occurrence in the Church of God for here you see it was pretended for the Admission of Hereticks without Baptism by Pope Stephen and his Church and the fame Tradition Apostolical and from the beginning was pretended for the opposite Doctrine by Firmilian and St. Basil and their Party and yet the Church did in the following Ages declare against the Pretences of them both If then in these plain matters of Fact and of continual practice Tradition did so fail both the Pretenders to it must it not be more apt to fail in matters of meer Speculation If by Tradition these Churches could not truly tell what their Forefathers did how should they by it tell assuredly in all things what they held since that could only be made known unto them by their Words and Actions if actually they handed down unto posterity for a traditionary Practice that which was not truly so why might they not also hand that down to them as a traditionary Doctrine which was nothing less than so CHAP. V. Eightly We distinguish also betwixt Traditions which appear from Reason to be such as ought to be received and
such as want the Evidence of Reason to assure us of their Truth of the latter kind is the Tradition that Enoch and Elias are to appear as Christ's Fore-runners at the Day of Judgment § 1. This Tradition is very ancient and found no Contradiction in the Church § 2. It was also the general Tradition of the Jews that Elias was to come in Person before the first coming of their Messiah Ibid. And yet this is not countenanced but plainly is confuted by the Scriptures § 3. The promise in Malachy belongs not to Christ's Second but to his first Advent Ibid. The Elias there promised was not Elias in Person but John the Baptist § 4. The Objections against this Assertion answered Ibid. Two Corollaries 1. That Tradition is not always a sure Interpreter of Scripture 2. That Oral Tradition is not of absolute certainty in matters of Speculation § 5 6. The Tradition of the Superiority of Bishops over Presbbyters may be relied upon because it is strengthened by Reason § 7. So also is the Tradition of the true Copies of Scripture where note 1. That we cannot know the Scriptures are not corrupted from the Infallibility of the Jewish or the Christian Church § 8 9. But we may know from Reason grounded upon Scripture 1st That the Scriptures were committed pure to the Christian Church § 10. 2dly That the immediate succeeding Age could want no assurance of their Purity whilst the Autographae were extant § 11. 3dly That these Records being so generally dispersed could not be then corrupted § 11. 4ly That the whole Church would not and part of them could not corrupt them § 13. 5ly That the Providence of God would not permit them to be corrupted in Substantials § 14. No like proof can be given that the pretended Traditions of the Church of Rome have been thus handed down unto us § 15. The Objection of Mr. Mumford is answered § 16. WE distinguish betwixt Traditions which can be made appear by Reason to be such as ought to be received Dist 8. and which we therefore think our selves obliged to receive and such as cannot by Reason be proved to have derived from the Apostles though they appeared very early in the Church Of the first Nature are the Traditions of the Canon of Scripture of the Copies handed down to us without Corruption in any necessary Articles of Christian Faith of the Observation of the Lord's Day c. Of the Second Order are the Traditions of the Millennary Doctrine of the Appearance of Enoch and Elias the Tisbite as the Forerunners of the Day of Judgment And of Traditions of this Nature we say we have no Ground sufficient to receive them as Articles of Christian Faith or Apostolical Traditions The Appearance of Enoch and Elias § 1 then to resist the Seduction of Antichrist and to be slain by him is delivered thus De Resur Carnis c. 22. Enoch and Helias are saith Tertullian Translated caeterum morituri reservantur ut Antichristum sanguine suo extinguant but they are reserved to die and shed their Blood for the Extinction of Antichrist This saith Petrus Alexandrinus is In Chronico 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Apoc. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Tradition of the Church That Enoch is to come in the last Days with Helias to resist Antichrist It is saith Aretas unanimously received by the Church from Tradition that Enoch and Elias the Tisbite are to come The Tradition of the Advent of the Tisbite is as old as Justin Martyr § 2 Dial. cum Tryph. p. 268. and hath been constantly believed in the Church from that time till the Reformation that of Enoch's coming with him is as old as Tertullian it generally obtained in the following Centuries and found no Contradiction from any of the Writers of those times and yet I find no ground at all for this Tradition concerning Enoch For the Two Witnesses in the Revelations are not described like Enoch and Elias but like Moses and Elias Rev. xi 6. it being said They have Power to shut Heaven that it Rain not in the Days of their Prophecy which Elijah did and have Power over Waters to turn them into Blood and to smite the Earth with all Plagues as often as they will which we know Moses did but there is nothing in the description of these Witnesses relating in the least to Enoch As for Elias let it be considered First That it was the general Tradition of the Jewish Nation that Elias the Tisbite was to come in Person as the Forerunner of the Messiah of the Jews that he in Person was to Anoint him and make him known unto the People that before the Advent of the Son of David Elias was to come to Preach concerning him This is the Import of the Question of St. Joh. i. 21. Matt. xvij 10. Mal. iv 5. John Art thou Elias and of the Saying of the Scribes Elias must first come and restore all things of the Interpretation of the Seventy Behold I send unto you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elias the Tisbite and of that Saying of the Son of Syrach Elias was ordained for reproofs in their times Ecclus xliij 10. to pacifie the wrath of the Lord's Judgment before it break into fury and to turn the Heart of the Father to the Son and to restore the Tribes of Jacob. And suitably to these Assertions Trypho the Jew declares That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dial. p. 268. all we Jews expect Elias to Anoint Christ at his coming Secondly Observe That it was the general Tradition of the Writers of the Christian Church even from the Second Century that Elias the Tisbite is to come in person before our Lord's Second Advent to prepare Men for it This Opinion of the coming of Elias In Tetull de resur carn c. 22. Not. in Orig. p. 41. c. 1. tradit tota Patrum antiquitas all the ancient Fathers have delivered saith De la Cerda Constans est patrum omniumque consensu receptissima Ecclesiae opinio It is the constant and most received Opinion of the Church and all the Fathers saith Huetius Constantissima semper fuit Christianorum opinio It was always the most constant Opinion of Christians In Mat. xi 14. That Elias was to come before the Day of Judgment saith Maldonate It is saith Mr. Mede well known Disc 25. p. 48. that all the Fathers were of this Opinion He is to come saith Petrus Alexandrinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Tradition of the Church saith Arethas Caesariensis In Apoc. 11. According to the unanimously received Opinion of the Church And yet if we may credit either the Angel or our Blessed Lord § 3 the Prophecy on which the Jews built this Tradition was fulfilled in John the Baptist And if we may believe the Ancient Fathers they built their Tradition on those words of Christ Elias cometh first and restoreth
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
was done 2. We shall be more convinced that this was not performed by Conspiracy or by a joint consent of Christians to make so great an alteration in that form of Government which the Apostles had established if we consider 1. The general agreement of all Churches in this matter since not one single Church or Corner of the world can be produced in which this Government did not obtain For how can we imagine that in a time when no General Council could meet to appoint it and when there was no Christian Prince to set it forward on a political Account and when by reason of the heat of Persecution and the distance of Christian Churches there was so little commerce and intercourse between them from the Churches of Armenia and Persia in the East to those of Spain in the West from the African Churches in the South to our British Churches in the North this constitution should have been universally received and submitted to if it had not been established by the Apostles or the first Founders of those Churches 2. If we consider how much it did concern all Christians that such an Innovation should not obtain among them and tamely be submitted to For all the people were obliged to know the Governors to whom they were by Scripture commanded to submit and so they could not yield to this supposed Innovation without the greatest danger to their Souls The Presbyters if they had by the Apostles been advanced to the highest Power would not so meekly have submitted to an Authority usurped over them but either out of a just Zeal for asserting their Freedom or out of Indignation at the insolence of the usurping Bishops or out of an unwillingness to submit and obey which is natural to most Men they would have asserted their Equality 3. This will be farther evident if we consider that even the persons thus exalted could have then no motive or temptation to accept of this advancement for Men do not usually desire a change but upon prospect of some ease or temporal Advantage much less when they perceive the Change is only like to add to their trouble and encrease their danger now this was really the case of the first Christian Bishops they being still exposed to the sharpest fury of their Persecutors and commonly begun with first in any storm that was raised against the Church their Labours also were very great for the care of the Flock lay on them and they were unwearied in the discharge of their Pastoral Care can we then reasonably think that they should be so fond of so much toil and peril as to violate the Institution of the Blessed Jesus or his Apostles to obtain it Let any reasonable Person duly weigh these things and ask his Conscience whether it can be really perswaded that such an early Innovation could generally have prevailed in the Church of God. Such also is the Evidence that we pretended to § 8 touching the Canon of Scripture and that those Books have not been so corrupted or depraved as not to be sufficient Rules of Christian Faith or Manners Concerning this matter let it be considered First That we have the true Canon of the Old Testament and that the Books of the Old Testament are not corrupted we cannot know from the Infallibility of the Jewish Church or her Traditions for when she handed down these Scriptures to the Christians as the pure word of their inspired Prophets she was not Infallible but actually had renounced her true Messiah and judged him an Impostor and had embraced such false Traditions as did engage her so to do So that if Chap. 14. p. 29. according to the Author of Popery Misrepresented As the Jews received the Books of the Old Testament from the Jewish Church and the Christians also so also were they to receive from her the sence of them the Jews if not the Christians also were obliged to reject our Saviour as an Impostor and one who taught and acted contrary to their Law and their Traditions Secondly § 9 That the Books of the New Testament are not corrupted or forged we cannot know from the Infallibility of the Christian Church The Reason is because the Infallibility of the Church is so far from being a proof of Scriptures incorruption that no proof can be pretended for it but uncorrupted places of Scripture For if any man should attempt to prove the Scriptures uncorrupted because that Church says so which is Infallible I would demand of him seeing the Infallibility of the Church is not self-evident and seeing Infallibility is a Prerogative which no Man can pretend to but from God's Assistance and therefore no Man can be sure of that Assistance but from God's free Promise how shall I be assured of her Infallibility If he say from Scripture promising it unto her I would ask how shall I be assured that the Scriptures are not corrupted in those places and if to this it be answered From the Church's Infallibility is it not evident that he runs in a Circle proving the Scripture's incorruption by the Church's Infallibility and the Church's Infallibility by the Scripture's incorruption Moreover this is further evident from the Tradition Practice and Acknowledgment of the whole Church of Christ for to inform us in any controverted Text which is the Reading to be owned as true her Doctors never have sent us to Oral Tradition or the infallible Assistance of the Church but always to the readings of former Ancient Authors and to the Inspection of ancient Manuscripts and Versions and have declared what in it self is manifest and owned by all that ever treated on this Subject That there is no other way whereby we can attain to any knowledge or assurance in this matter Thus Sixtus Quintus in his Preface to his Bible In hac Germani Textus pervestigatione satis perspicue inter omnes constat nullum esse certius ac firmius Argumentum quam Antiquorum probatorum codicum Latinorum fidem tells us That in Pervestigation of the true and genuine Text it was perspicuous to all Men that there was no Argument more firm and certain than the Faith of ancient Latin Books Let any Man peruse all Commentators Ancient and Modern of what Perswasion soever and he will be convinced of their unanimous concurrence in this Assertion Thus St. Austin tells us That the Latins have need of Two other Tongues for obtaining the knowledge of the Divine Scriptures viz. De Doctr. Christ l. 2. c. 11. de Civ Dei l. 15. c. 13. the Hebrew and the Greek Ut ad exemplaria praecedentia recurratur si quam dubitationem attulerit Latinorum Interpretum infinita varietas That if any doubt should arise from the great variety of Latin Versions they might recurr to the Greek or Hebrew Originals That the Latin Versions of the Old Testament where it is necessary Chap. 14 15. Graecorum Authoritate emendandi sunt are to be corrected by the Authority of
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
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
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
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
their own Salvation may learn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 3. c. 3. the Character of his Faith and the Declaration of the Truth so plain and simple was the Faith of those first Ages that the whole Faith and Truth of Christ was thought to be contained there where is not the least intimation of one Article of the Romish Faith. The Faith received from the Apostles saith Irenaeus the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 keeps with the greatest care and preaches and teaches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 1. c. 23. and by Tradition hands it down as he himself there doth by giving us a written Copy of all the Articles of Faith received by the universal Church from the Apostles beyond which the most learned Bishop taught nothing as being not above his Master nor did the meanest Christian believe less the Faith and Tradition of it being one and the same in all places Now not to insist upon the inference which plainly follows hence that none of the R. Articles could be then esteemed Articles of Faith received from the Apostles Tradition there being nothing at all of them in the Epistles of Ignatius writ on purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for confirmation of the Christian Churches in the Tradition of the Apostles against the Hereticks or in that of Polycarp though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most sufficient for declaration of the Truth nor in Irenaeus when purposely laying down for confutation of the Hereticks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 1. c. 1. p. 42. The Faith Preached by the Church Cap. 2. the exposition of the Truth which the Church having received from the Apostles keeps and of those things belonging ad Fidem Traditiones Cap. 3. to Faith and Traditions in which the Christian Church unanimously doth consent I say not to insist at present on so plain an inference Nothing can be more natural than to collect that had they known of any other Articles of Faith delivered to them from the Apostles only by word of Mouth they would have taken at least equal care for the propagation of them also to posterity Inasmuch therefore as the common Sense of Mankind agrees to this That Records are a more certain means of conveighing Truth to posterity than Report and Men would be more apt to believe that the Apostles said what themselves wrote than that they said what they did not write and what only comes down by hearsay from them surely the Fathers of the Church had they known of these Supernumerary Traditions of the Roman Church in compliance with the Example and Advice of St. Ignatius would have committed them to writing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the better security of them and would have thought that very fit which he declared to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very necessary for conservation of Apostolical Tradition Surely they would have taken all the care imaginable that these unwritten Doctrines might not lose their credit by being long unwritten for they were not ignorant of that great truth of Origen Dial. contra Marcion p. 59. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which only is delivered by word of Mouth quickly vanisheth as having no certainty They therefore had they known of such Traditions necessary to be believed would not have left it to an half witted Papias to run up and down to gather up these Hear-says from them who had conversed with the Apostles and to digest them in a Book of which they were so careless as to preserve us nothing but Euseb H. Eccl. l. 3. c. 38. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some idle Fables which he related 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as coming to him from unwritten Tradition and by which he deceived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most of the Church Guides but would of purpose have written Books to secure the conveighance of them to posterity and to prevent the future Cheats that such bold and half witted Men might have put upon them with false pretensions to Antiquity or to Tradition Even Eutropius the Heathen Dial. contra Marcion p. 59. could argue against Marcion That it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exceeding Foolish to conceive those who were sent to preach the Gospel should do it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without committing what they Preached to writing for it is probable saith he that they preached or declared this Salvation to them only who heard them and had no care the Knowledge of it should descend to Posterity as had they only preached 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without writing they must have done And may not we in like manner argue against these latter Marcionites That had the Fathers of the Age following the Apostles observed and known that some points of necessary Faith had not been touched in any of their Writings it is highly probable that they by handing of them down in writing would have taken care the knowledge of them should descend unto posterity and would have formally and with one voice declared that whereas the inspired Preachers and Publishers of their Religion had committed to Writing some Articles of the Christian Faith but had not in those writings expressed others which were of equal necessity to be believed it is therefore to prevent all false pretenders to these Traditions Apostolical declared defined and made known to future Ages that these and these alone are Doctrines of this kind delivered orally by the Apostles to the Church to be preserved and taught to future Generations When even in the first Ages of the Church they had to do with Hereticks who when their Doctriens were confuted out of Scripture Cum enim ex Scripturia arguuntur in accusationem convertuntur ipsarum Scripturarum quasi non recte habeant neque sunt ex Authoritate quia varie sunt dictae quia non posset ex his inveniri veritas ab his qui nesciunt traditionem Iren. l. 3. c. 2. as are the Doctrines of the Church of Rome instead of answering the Arguments produced by the Fathers of the Church from Scripture accused the Scriptures of Obscurity and Insufficiency saying That they were spoken variously or so as to admit of divers Senses and that from them the Truth could not be known by them who were ignorant of Tradition non enim per literas traditam illam sed per vivam vocem this Truth being delivered not by writing but by word of Mouth When these Hereticks pleaded for their Doctrines not found in Scripture Apostolos non omnia omnibus revelâsse Tertull. de praescript c. 25. quaedam enim palam universis quaedam secreto paucis demandâsse That the Apostles revealed not all things to all Men but some things they delivered openly and to all some things secretly and to few Hieron in Es 19. fol. 40. b. When they vaunted that they were Filii sapientum qui ab initio Doctrinam nobis Apostolicam tradiderunt The Sons of the wise Men who from the beginning delivered
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cap. 4. in the institution of Faith delivered to the Church and that hanc tenentes regulam holding to this Rule how many and various soever were their Doctrines Ibid. c. 19. we might easily shew their deviation from the truth Cap. 3. In his Third Book he confutes them from the same Topick viz. this Tradition of the Rule of Faith visible in all Churches and preserved in all the Bishops of them succeeding the Apostles declaring That nihil tale docuerunt neque cognoverunt quale ab his deliratur in their account of the Tradition received from the Apostles and the Faith preached to Men they taught no such thing as the deliriums of these Hereticks And he informs us that Polycarp had converted many of these Hereticks to the Church by declaring this was the only Truth which he received from the Apostles And in his Fourth Chapter repeating again this Creed he saith It is that which even the Barbarians who had not the Scriptures preserving in their Hearts would stop their Ears against and sufficiently repel ea quae ab Haereticis adinventa sunt the Inventions of the Hereticks Tertullian also lays down this Creed as the Foundation of the Christian Faith and confutes all the Hereticks because their Doctrines were later than this Creed and were not contained in it He begins his Discourse of Prescription against the Hereticks with this Foundation Nobis nihil ex arbitrio nostro inducere licet cap. 6. That Christians could induce no new thing that they had the Apostles for the Authors of their Doctrines who themselves induced nothing of their own sed acceptam à Christo disciplinam fideliter nationibus adsignaverunt but faithfully delivered to the Nations the Doctrine they received from Christ Cap. 8. And whereas the Hereticks objected that Saying of our Lord Seek and ye shall find and thence pretended that they by seeking had found their Doctrines in the Scripture though they pretended also to Tradition for them and especially for the interpretation of Scripture as Irenaeus hath informed us Unum utique certum aliquid institutum esse a Christo quod credere omnino debeant Nationes idcirco quaerere ut possint cum invenerint credere Cap. 9. to this Tertullian answers That true it was they were to search the Scriptures for their Rule of Faith and prove it thence but then they also were to believe that when they had found that there aliud non esse credendum ideoque nec requirendum that nothing more was to be believed and therefore nothing more was to be inquired after Cap. 8 9. besides those things which they believed were the matters of their Faith and that otherwise there would be no end of seeking nec statio credendi nor any boundary of Faith Let us seek therefore saith he Cap. 12 13. idque duntaxat quod salva regula fidei potest in quaestionem devenire but that only which may be inquired after so as that the Rule of Faith be safe Then he lays down the Creed as that Rule and declares Cap. 14. That knowing this we need seek no more because we know all that we need to know He adds that the Apostles receiving a command to teach and to baptize planted Churches in all Cities whence other Churches Semina Doctrinae mutuatae sunt Cap. 20. borrowed the Seeds of their Doctrine and that all these Churches were one first and Apostolical not by virtue of any Roman Unity but by the Union of Peace and brotherly Affection and per ejusdem Sacramenti unam traditionem by shewing the same Creed which when they journeyed to any other Church was Cap. 21. Contesseratio Hospitalitatis the League of Hospitality And then he adds Hins igitur dirigimus praescriptionem Hence therefore we direct our prescription i. e. From the very Faith and Symbol which the Apostles preaching to the Churches delivered to them in which Rule we find nothing of the New Doctrines of the Hereticks and so are sure they belong not to the Faith but are to be rejected ob diversitatem Sacramenti Cap. 33. as being different from our Creed And by these Examples we may learn by the way what Dionysius Bishop of Corinth did when as Eusebius informs us Hist Eccl. l. 4. c. 23. He combating the Heresie of the Marcionites 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stuck to the Canon of Truth viz. that he confuted them as doth Irenaeus and Tertullian by appealing to the Apostles Symbol or Rule of Faith left to the Churches Now here I appeal to any indifferent Reader whether the Arguments of Irenaeus and Tertullian against the Hereticks of their Times be not to this effect The Tradition of the Faith is manifect to all the World you may see and hear it in all Christian Churches where this Symbol is recited in which nihil tale docuerunt they taught nothing like to those New Heresies they therefore are to be rejected And I desire any Man to tell me whether this Argument be not stronger in the mouth of Protestants The Apostles Symbol the Rule of Faith here mentioned by Irenaeus and Tertullian contain nothing of the Romish Articles therefore they are to be rejected whether this be not our way of prescribing against the Church of Rome that her Creed as distinct from ours is new not a tittle of it not any thing like it was delivered in the Rule of Faith the Symbol the Tradition of Christian Doctrine taught say these men by Christ by his Apostles received from the beginning by all Apostolical Churches and for Ten Centuries at least declared to have been the whole and perfect Rule of Christian Faith and by our Catechism said to contain All the Articles of the Christian Faith. 6. § 9 Let it be noted that all these Fathers do unanimously teach That this whole Symbol Summary and Rule of Faith was most apparently contained in Scripture that it was gathered out of Scripture and when they taught it to their Catechists they proved every Article of it from the holy Scriptures Irenaeus saith expresly Lib. 3. c. 3. That they who would might learn the Apostolical Tradition of the Church ex ipsa Scriptura from the Scripture it self the Doctrine which the Apostles preached being afterwards delivered in the holy Scriptures to be the Pillar and the Ground of Faith. Apol. c. 47. Tertullian saith of it That it is antiquitas praestructa divinae literaturae antiquity built upon the divine Scriptures That as for this Rule of Faith we are to search the Scriptures for it De praescript c. 9. Cap. 15. and seek until we find it there That quaerendum est donec inveneris credendum ubi inveneris and that no man can speak of Matters of Faith nisi ex literis fidei but from the Holy Scriptures St. Cyril adds that it is the Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confirmed by all the Scripture and
follows that the Supremacy of the Pope the Celibacy of Priests the Invocation of Saints the Veneration of Images and Reliques the true and proper Sacrifice of the Mass the Doctrine of Transubstantiation of Concomitance and Communion in one Kind of Purgatory Indulgences Reading the Service in a Tongue unknown the Seven Sacraments the Necessity of the Priests Intention to the validity of a Sacrament must be so far contained in the Nicene Creed as to be only Explications and Interpretations of the same Articles of Faith or it must be confessed that they are no necessary Articles of Christian Faith and since the Greeks did in that Council plead that nothing was to be added by any after-Councils to the Nicene Faith and the Latins in effect did own that nothing should be added to it but only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 644 645. another Exposition suitable to the Truth contained in it which was not so much an Addition as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Explication of the same thing they both exclude the Addition of these Articles unless that can be proved which never can be rationally attempted That they are only Explications of the Nicene Faith as the Addition of Filioque to it was declared to be And since we Protestants do acquiesce in the Nicene Faith it follows by the concession of the Latins that in respect to us there was no need for after Councils to be concerned for any other Faith. 2dly The Fathers who made or who embraced this boundary of Christian Faith expresly add That there is no necessity of adding any thing unto it with respect to Hereticks because it is sufficient of it self for the aversion of all Heresies Thus in that great dispute which was between the Aâ—ians and the Orthodox about adding something to the Nicene Faith or making other Creeds besides it Epist ad Epict. Tom. 1. p. 581 582. Athanasius gives his Judgment That the vain talk of all the Hereticks that ever were was baffled and made to cease by the Faith confessed at Nice according to the Holy Scriptures and that this Faith was sufficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the overthrow of all Impiety and that no other Synod ought to be named in the Catholick Church but that for the Confusion of them it being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mark of victory over all Heresie and especially over that of Arius And this demonstratively follows from their constant Doctrine that these Creeds fully do contain all Doctrines of Faith necessary to be believed by all Christians for seeing Heresie must be an Error of Faith in matters necessary to be believed because it otherwise could be no damnable Error there can be no Heresie which is not a denial of something necessary to be believed that therefore which sufficiently instructs me in all things necessary to be believed must also fortifie me sufficiently against all Heresie 3dly This unfolding making plain better interpreting the Faith being that which only can be done by farther Declaration of the Sence of some Article of Faith than formerly was made unto the Church it is already baffled by the Refutation of the former Plea and it is plainly inconsistent with the Pretences of our new Patrons of Tradition for either the Father taught the Son this better Interpretation and made plain this Sence of the Article or he did not if he did there was no need of doing this by any Council if he did not then it is evident that the Son if he believes this Sence and this Interpretation believes somewhat which he received not by Tradition from his Father and so it must be certain that he may believe another sence of that Article than his Father taught and so in any other Article viz. another sence of the Real Presence of the Pope's Supremacy c. Thirdly § 3 Hence it must follow That no Man who doth heartily believe these Creeds and the immediate Doctrines plainly contained in them or evidently deduced from them can deserve to be anathematized or be excluded from the Communion of Christians for not believing any other simple Article of Faith for then he must deserve to be excluded for a thing unnecessary to be believed by Christians He may indeed deserve to be excluded upon other Grounds from the external Communion of the Church as v. gr for irregularity of Life or violating the Church's Peace but cannot justly be excluded for want of Christian Faith. Fourthly § 4 Hence it must follow That all those Councils which have anathematized their fellow Christians for such Doctrines as are not in these Creeds nor can be evidently inferred from them have been so far from being Infallible that they have actually erred And all those Churches who have rejected others from Communion with them upon the same account have acted Schismatically because they excluded others from Communion without just Ground It being therefore manifest that the Church of Rome hath added to the Nicene Creed these following Articles I. That the Pope of Rome is the Successor of St. Peter and the Vicar of Jesus Christ II. That the Roman is the Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church the Mother and Mistress of all Churches III. That to her therefore doth belong to judge of the true Sence and Interpretation of Scripture and that the Sence which she imposeth on them is to be received as true IV. That there be Seven Sacraments of the New Law instituted by Jesus Christ and which conferr Grace viz. Baptism Confirmation the Eucharist Penance Extream Vnction Orders Matrimony V. That in the Mass a true proper and propitiatory Sacrifice is offered for the Living and the Dead VI. That in the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist there is made a Conversion of the whole Substance of Bread into Christ's Body and the whole Substance of Wine into his Blood and so the Body and the Blood of Christ is there substantially present together with his Soul and his Divinity VII That under one Species only whole and entire Christ and a true Sacrament is taken VIII That there is a Purgatory and that the Souls detained there are helped by the Prayers of the Faithful IX That the Saints reigning with Christ are to be Prayed to and their Reliques to be Venerated X. That the Images of Christ the Blessed Virgin and of other Saints are to be Honoured and to have due Veneration given to them XI That Christ left a Power of Indulgences to his Church and that their use is most wholesome to Christian People XII That all the Rites used by the Roman Church in Administration of her Sacraments are to be admitted And lastly That this is the true Catholick Faith without which no Man can be saved I say It being manifest that the Church of Rome hath added all these Articles of Faith unto the Creeds forementioned and by the Church declared to be a perfect digest of the Articles of Christian Faith it follows that they must all be evidently proved to be
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
Tradition they followed them at that Weapon and by producing the Tradition of their Creed and Rule of Faith containing nothing of their New Doctrines they stopp'd their Mouths giving them nevertheless to understand Lib. 3. c. 1. That the Rule of Faith was by the Will of God not only preached to but afterwards delivered to them in the Scriptures to be the Pillar and the Ground of Truth and that the Parables which they by their ridiculous Interpretations adapted to their purposes Lib. 2. c. 46. were to be understood according to this Rule of Truth and according to those things which were perspicuously revealed in Scripture and that then they would not be Interpreted to a dangerous Sence From which things thus explained we learn 1. That no Man can discourse of Matters of Faith but from the Scriptures 2. That these Scriptures were written by the Will of God to be the Pillar and the Ground of Truth to following Ages 3. That if we do interpret the ambiguous Places of them by the plain and with Analogy to the Rule of Faith contained in the Creed we cannot dangerously erre Secondly § 6 Hence it is easie to demonstrate the certainty and full assurance which the Protestant hath for all his necessary Articles of Faith. He having for his Creeds which saith his Catechism contain all the Articles of Christian Faith all the same Grounds of assurance which any Roman Catholick or any Christian can pretend to viz. present acknowledged Profession and Tradition Oral of the present Church and 2ly of all the Churches of the Roman Communion and of all other Christian Churches 3ly The Profession and Oral Tradition of all Churches throught all Christian Ages Times and Places and even of all the Apostles who were saith this Tradition the Authors jointly of that Creed which bears their name 4ly The Writings of the Fathers and of General Councils who assure us that the Creeds they handed down unto us contained the Apostolical Faith the one and same Truth they had been taught the only the entire the perfect Faith of all Christians to which nothing was to be added as well as nothing to be taken from it Lastly the written word of God in which they say this whole Faith is expresly and in words contained in which it may be found and from which it may be proved to the capacity of the meanest Catechist Whereas nothing of this nature can be shewed in Confirmation of the Faith of Romanists Thirdly § 7 Hence also we may learn how Christianity was handed down the same for Substance and Essentials as it was from the beginning by Tradition as the Ancients understood the word viz. by the continual practice of the Church delivering the Summary and Rule of Faith which she received from the Apostles to all her Members to be learnt by heart or to be written not in Ink but in the fleshly Tables of their Hearts and then confirming all the Articles contained in it by the holy Scriptures See Ch. 7. §. 7 8 c. and sending her Members to it to learn the Truth of what the Church had taught them This is saith Irenaeus the Tradition which we have received from the Apostles the Summary of Faith the preaching of the Truth the immoveable Rule of Truth delivered to Christians at their Baptism and by which the Church enlightens all who come unto the Truth And this saith he the Apostles first preached and afterwards delivered in the Holy Scriptures and so they say all Fourthly § 8 Hence it is easie to discern how the R. Doctors impose upon their Readers when they urge the Sayings of Irenaeus and Tertullian for the establishing of their Traditions or the asserting such Traditions as the Rule of Faith which neither are contained in Scripture nor the Apostles Creed when it is evident beyond exception that the Tradition which they speak of is that of the Apostles Creed and of the necessary Articles of the Christian Faith contained in Scripture Q. of Questions p. 345. Thus Mr. M. triumphs in those words of Irenaeus What if the Apostles had not left us the Scriptures must we not have followed that Order of Tradition which they delivered to those to whose charge they left the Churches to be Govern'd To this Order of Tradition many Barbarous Nations do assent who have believed in Christ without any Writings keeping diligently the ancient Tradition not Traditions as Mr. M. deceitfully Translates Now let it be observed That the Tradition here mentioned is only vetus Apostolorum Traditio Lib. 3. c. 4. the old Tradition of the Apostles the belief of one God maker of Heaven and Earth and so on to the end of the Apostles Creed and this will be the clearest Demonstration against the Roman Church imaginable for if we must have followed this Order of Tradition had we been distitute of Scripture we must have absolutely rejected all the Articles of Romish Faith. Mr. M. Ibid. That Irenaeus did believe that the Tradition left by the Apostles was a sufficient Ground of divine Faith is true L. 3. c. 3 4. but then it is as true that he believed that this Tradition was entirely contained in the Rule of Faith he there lays down that it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same and only Truth which was delivered by the Apostles that it rendered them who believed this only Wise and acceptable to God and fully armed against all Heresies De praescrip c. 28. Tertullian doth indeed put the Question How is it likely that so many and so great Churches should erre in one Faith. Among many events there is not every where one issue Q. of Quest p. 400. The Errors of the Churches must needs have varied but that which amongst many is found one is not mistaken but delivered Audeat ergo aliquis dicere eos errasse qui tradiderunt De praescrip c. 28 29. Dare then any one say they erred who delivered that one and the same thing But then this is so far from being plain Popery as Mr. M. vainly boasts that it effectually and at one blow Ibid. De Virg. Veland c. 1. De praescrip c. 13. destroys it for having laid down his own Rule immovable and admitting no Novelty no Addition and delivered this Rule in words at length ut hinc quid defendamus profiteamur as a profession of that entire Faith he undertook to defend against the Hereticks and beyond which nothing was needful to be known he proceeds to shew that the Apostles in delivering this as the entire Rule of Faith were not deficient in teaching any thing which was needful to be believed This he proves Chapter the Twenty-sixth because Christ commanded that what they heard in Secret they should publish in the Light and on the House top and that they should not hide the Light under a Bushel but set it on a Candlestick that it might shine to all in the House these Precepts either
all Creatures who suffered truly in the Flesh died a true bodily death rose again with a true Resurrection of his Plesh and a true resuming of his Soul in which he shall come to judge the quick and the dead It also is to be enquired of him Whether he believes one and the same God to be the Author of the Old and New Testament that is of the Law Prophets and Apostles and that the Devil was not made wicked by Nature but by his own Will whether he believes the Resurrection of that Flesh which dies and not another whether he believes a future judgment and that every one shall receive according to the things which they have done in the Flesh Punishments or Glory whether he doth not disapprove of Marriage nor condemn Second Marriages nor condemn eating of Flesh whether he Communicates with reconciled Penitents and believes that all Sins both Original and Actual are remitted in Baptism and that no Man can be saved out of the Catholick Church Cum in his omnibus examinatus inventus fuer it plene instructus When by Examination he is found fully instructed in all these things let him be ordained Bishop c. These were all the Doctrines of Faith required to be known or held by the Bishop in the 4th Century And this continued to be the Rule of his Examination and the whole Faith required to be professed by him at his Ordination till the Thirteenth Century as you may learn from the Pag. 97 98. interrogatio de credulitate Episcopi question touching the Faith of a Bishop in the Ordo Romanus which form of Examination they profess to have received from the ancient Institution of the Holy Fathers and especially from the Council of Carthage From the Council of Nantes Can. 11. and from Regino in the Ninth Century De Disc Eccl. lib. 1. cap. 443. who transcribe this Canon of the Council of Carthage as containing the form qualiter Episcopus ordinandus examinabitur How a Bishop that is to be ordained shall be examined Decret part 5. c. 62 l. 1. c. 8. Dist 23. c. 2. As also doth Ivo in the Eleventh Barchardus in the Twelfth and Gratian in the Thirteenth Century These therefore from the Fourth to the Thirteenth Century were reputed all the Articles of Christian Faith in which it was thought necessary that a Bishop should be instructed and if he did assert these things he was thought fully instructed in the Documents of Christian Faith. And to shew the Concord of the Eastern with the Western Churches in these matters § 3 let it be considered that Theodoret having given an account of Heretical Fables in Four Books he proceeds Cap. 4. p. 262. Book the Fifth to Discourse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Doctrines of the Church and to lay before us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Evangelical Doctrine that by comparing it with that of the Hereticks we may discern the difference betwixt Light and Darkness perfect Health and mortal Sickness and then he proceeds to give us all the Doctrines contained in this Form of Examination but not one of the Articles which they of Rome have added to the Nicene Creed In his First Chapter he speaks of God the Father the Creator of all things and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ In the Second Of his only begotten Son co-essential and co-eternal with the Father In the Third Of the Holy Spirit of the same Nature and Substance with them both In the Fourth Of the Creation of all things by the Father with the Son and Holy Ghost In the Eighth Of the Devil asserting that he had not his wickedness from his Creator but his own perverse will. In the Eleventh Of the Incarnation of our Lord that he took flesh of the Virgin Mary had a reasonable Soul united to it and so became God and Man in one Person That he took a true Body chap. 12. A true Soul ch 13. A perfect humane Nature ch 14. That he raised up the same Flesh in which he suffer'd ch 15. That the same God was Author of the Old and New Testament ch 17. That Baptism procures the Remission of all our old Sins ch 18. That there would be a Resurrection of that very Body which was corrupted and dissolved ch 19. And a future Judgment where every one shall receive according to what he hath done in the Body ch 20. That this shall be at our Lord's Second coming to judge the quick and the dead ch 22. That Matrimony was to be allowed ch 25. yea Second Marriages ch 26. That the wounds received after Baptism might be healed ch 28. That the Church forbids not the use of Flesh ch 29. And here concluding his Discourse concerning Ecclesiastical Doctrines respecting Faith and Manners he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These are the Doctrines of the Holy Spirit which we must always follow preserving this Rule of them immovable And that you may be sure that Scripture was the Church's Rule that taught her all these things he doth not only call these Doctrines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Doctrines of the Gospel and often say in his Discourse upon them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 249 250 259 262 275 304. These things we have been taught by the Holy Scriptures the Holy Scripture is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Teacher of these things but concludes his Discourse of the Doctrinals of the Church thus P. 304. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Doctrines the Church hath received from divine Men the Prophets and Apostles and their Successors these then were in his Age reputed all the Doctrines of Christian Faith and they were all conceived clearly to be contained in and proved from the Holy Scriptures their Faith then did not differ in one Article from that of Protestants nor did they differ from them in assigning Scripture as the Rule of Faith. And 4ly § 4 This will be farther evident from the consideration of the most Eminent Fathers of the Church who have employed their Time and Labour in refuting Hereticks For they still lay down the Apostles or the Nicene Creed as the Foundation of their Faith and the entire belief of Christians and speak of other Doctrines as such in which they were at liberty to exercise their parts and curiosity but were by no means to obtrude them as Articles of Christian Faith. Thus Irenaeus having given us the Faith which the Apostles delivered to the Church Lib. 1. cap. 4. and which she did through the whole World profess without Addition or Diminution he proceeds to shew That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church retaining one and the same Faith throughout the World they exercised their knowledge about other matters to explain the dispensation of God towards Men his long suffering both towards Men and fallen Angels to enquire why one and the same God made some things Temporal others Eternal some Heavenly and some Earthly things why being invisible he
therefore though we have used other words in our controversial Discourses against Hereticks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. e. yet now that a Confession of the sound Faith and simple manifestation of it lies before us we will temper our stile accordingly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 387. c. explaining it more simply and properly and doing only that which may instruct you according to that saying of the Apostle To give a reason of your Faith. Now Pag 389. b. c. saith he in doing this we neither have ability nor leasure to collect all that is said in Scripture of the Father Son and Holy Ghost but we hope saith he to satisfie your Consciences as to the manifestation of our knowledge in the holy Scriptures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and your full assurance of Faith by those few things we shall select out of the Holy Scriptures And after this long Protestant Preface comes a Creed owned by all Protestants in these words P. 389. d. e. We believe therefore and confess one only true and Good God and Father Almighty of whom are all things the God and Father of our Lord and God Jesus Christ And we believe one only begotten Son of God our Lord and God Jesus Christ the only true God by whom all things both visible and invisible were made and by whom all things consist who in the beginning was with God and was God and after was according to the Scriptures seen on Earth and conversed with Men who being in the Form of God coveted not to be in the World like to God but emptied himself and taking upon him the Form of a Servant by his Nativity of a Virgin and being found in fashion as a Man he fulfilled all things which were written of and concerning him according to the command of the Father being Obedient even to Death the Death of the Cross and being raised again the Third Day from the Dead according to the Scriptures P. 390. a. he was seen by his holy Disciples and the rest as it is written and he ascended into the Heavens and sitteth at the Right-hand of the Father from whence he comes at the end of the World to raise up all and to give to every one according to his Work when the Righteous shall be taken up into Life Eternal and the Kingdom of Heaven but the wicked shall be condemned to everlasting Punishment where their Worm dieth not and the Fire is not quenched and we believe one Holy Ghost and Comforter by whom we are sealed unto the Day of Redemption the Spirit of Truth and of Adoption in whom we cry Abba Father who distributeth and worketh in us the Gifts given of God to every one to profit withal as he willeth who teacheth and brings to our Remembrance all things which he hath heard from the Son. The Good Spirit who Guides us into all Truth and confirmeth all Believers in true and exact Knowledge in pious Worship and spiritual Adoration and in the true Confession of God the Father his only Son our Lord and God Jesus Christ and of himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This we think this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Rule of Holy Men. P. 392. And I beseech you laying aside all curious Questions P. 391. and indecent strifes about words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to rest contented with the things spoken by Holy Men and by the Lord himself and to withdraw your selves from them that are alien from the Evangelical and Apostolical Faith the Apostle having said That if an Angel from Heaven preach to you any other Doctrine besides that which we have preached unto you let him be accursed and having warned you to withdraw from every one who walks disorderly and not according to the Tradition which you have received from us So that according to St. Basil this Creed is the Tradition received from the Apostles the Evangelical and Apostolical Faith the Rule of Faith to which nothing is to be superadded besides which nothing to be preached as any portion of the Rule of Faith and this whole Faith expresly is contained in Scripture and is delivered in the words of Scripture Laurentius sends an Epistle to St. Austin to know of him Quid sequendum maximè Enchir. c. 4. quid propter diversas principaliter Haereses sit fugiendum What was chiefly to be followed and what by reason of the diversity of Heresies was principally to be avoided quod certum propriumque fidei Catholicae fundamentum what was the sure and proper Foundation of the Christian Faith In Answer to this Enquiry he receives a Treatise from St. Cap. 3. Austin containing 122. Chapters in which he undertakes to teach him what he was to believe to love and hope for and in the general he tells him Cap. 6. that it is easie to instruct him in these three particulars nam ecce tibi Symbolum dominica oratio in his duobus tria illa intuere Cap. 7. for behold the Symbol and the Lord's Prayer in these two see these three things Faith believes Hope and Charity prays and then he goes on to a particular Discourse on all these Heads not speaking throughout all those numerous Chapters of one Article of the Romish Faith excepting only when Chapter the 69. he speaks of Purgatory Fire as of a doubtful and uncertain thing and Chapter 109. he utterly confounds it by laying down for certain That during the time betwixt the Death of Christians and the last Resurrection of their Bodies their Souls are kept in hidden Receptacles as they by reason of the Actions done in their Life time became worthy of Rest or Misery One thing there is still more considerable that when the Arian Heresie sprung up and even in the time and at the Session of the Nicene Council this was still produced as the Faith of the Apostolick Church the Rule of Faith the Faith which they had learned from the Scriptures and had received at Baptism and on account of which they challenged to be owned as Orthodox by all their Christian Brethren Alexander Bishop of Alexandria in his Epistle to his Namesake of Constantinople recites his Creed with this Preface Apud Theodor Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so we believe as it seemed good to the Apostolick Church viz. We believe in one only unbegotten Father and in one Lord Jesus Christ his only begotten Son. Besides this pious Faith of the Father and the Son We confess as the Holy Scriptures teach us one Holy Ghost the Sanctifier of Holy Men under the Old Testament and of the divine Teachers of the New and one only Catholick and Apostolick Church inexpugnable by the World and triumphing over all the wicked Insurrections of the Heterodox after this we confess the Resurrection of the Dead of which our Lord Jesus Christ was the first fruits who indeed and not in appearance only took his Body from the God-bearing Virgin
and who in the end of the Ages conversing among Men for the abolishing of Sin was Crucified and dying rose again from the Dead ascended into the Heavens and sitteth at the Right-hand of Majesty These things we teach and preach 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These are the Doctrines of the Church received from the Apostles Whereas had the Apostles delivered any other Doctrines of Faith 't is evident these were but some of them and therefore that those others ought to have been mentioned by one who says these things on purpose to declare his Orthodoxy and satisfie all other Christians that he entirely embraced the true Christian Faith. Gennadius hath a Treatise in which he doth designedly discourse of Ecclesiastical Doctrines omitting nothing that I can remember which then obtained in the Latin Church and yet in that whole Treatise he hath not given the least hint of one of the New Articles contained in the Creed of Pius the Fourth but on the contrary he in the General declares That the Faith received in Baptism is Cap. 52. fides Ecclesiae the Church's Faith. And whereas in the Church of Rome auricular and secret Confession is made necessary to the Receiving of the Sacrament He Hortor prius publica poenitentia satisfacere Cap. 53. speaking not one word of that doth say expresly If any Person after Baptism hath committed mortal Sins I exhort him first to make satisfaction by publick Penance and so being reconciled by the Judgment of the Priest to Communicate if he would not receive the Sacrament to his own Condemnation And whereas they now teach That pious Souls go hence to Purgatory Omnium sanctorum animae cum Christo sunt exeuntes de corpore ad Christum vadunt c. 78. to suffer for their Venial Sins he positively declares That since the Ascension of our Lord into Heaven the Souls of all Saints are with Christ and departing from the Body go to Christ Moreover he declares That a Clerk is not to be Ordained who hath had Two Wives after Baptism Cap. 72. or who hath had one who was a Concubine and not a Matron or who was married to a Widow to one Divorced or a Whore or who hath Maim'd himself or received Vsury but he saith not one word of not receiving him to Ordination who is not a Virgin or doth not promise to contain or who is not Divorced from his Matron 'T is therefore evident that then none of these New Articles had obtained in the Latin Church CHAP. X. That Romanists have in the General confessed the Novelty of many of their Doctrines § 1. And in particular 1st Of the Integrity and sufficiency of Holy Scripture as to all necessary Articles of Christian Faith § 2. 2dly Of their Canon of the Old Testament § 3. As is proved from the Sixth to the Sixteenth Century Ibid. 3dly Of the Right of Princes to call General Councils § 4. 4thly Of the Fallibility of Councils § 5. Of Purgatory § 6. Of Indulgences § 7. Of the Veneration of Images § 8. Of Invocation of Saints § 9. Of Latin Service § 10. Of the Seven Sacraments in general § 11. Of the Sacrament of Confirmation § 12. Of auricular Confession § 13. Of Extream Vnction § 14. Of Marriage § 15. Of Transubstantiation § 16. Of Communion in one Kind § 17. Of the true propitiatory Sacrifice of the Mass § 18. Of the Celibacy of Priests § 19. TO these clear Evidences of the Novelty of the pretended Apostolical Traditions of the Church of Rome I proceed now to add the plain and the ingenuous Confession of some of the most able and learned Members of that Church who either in the General have owned that many of these Traditions were not Apostolical and Primitive or handed down to them throughout all Ages of the Church of Christ or in particular confess that many of those Doctrines which by that Church are now imposed as Articles of Christian Faith either began to be asserted or imposed in after-Ages or were disputed and questioned denied or condemned or at the least not mentioned in some of the preceeding Ages of the Church And First § 1 In the General this hath been tacitly confessed by the Learned and Ingenuous Author of the Nouvelle Bibliotheque or the New Library of the Ecclesiastical Writers of the first three Centuries For when he gives us the Abridgment of the Doctrine of those Ages he mentions not among them any or scarcely any of the present and contested Doctrines of the Church of Rome He saith indeed Ils n' ont point douté que l' Eucharistie ne fut le Corps le sang de J. C. They doubted not that the Eucharist was the Body and the Blood of Christ and they called it by that Name But he durst not say as in his Abridgment of the Doctrine of the Fourth Century To. 2. p. 949 950. he doth Ils ont enseigne clairement que le pain le vin de l'Eucharistie étoient changez au Corps au Sang de Jesus Christ They clearly taught that the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist were changed into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ much less that they believed that this was such a change as did annihilate the substance of the Bread and Wine He therefore in effect confesseth that during these Three Ages he could find no Footsteps of the R. Doctrines The Author of the Book stiled Onus Ecclesiae saith the Doctrines of the Wicklevists were these 1. That the Pope was not Superior to other Bishops 2. That there was no Purgatory Fire 3. That it was a vain thing to Pray for the Dead 4. That auricular Confession was not necessary 5. That the Communion was to be received in both Kinds And these Quae plerique Scholastici secuti sunt cap. 18. §. 7. saith he are Sophisms which most of the Schoolmen delighting in logical Tattle and loving strange Opinions followed He further adds that Huss and Jerom of Prague held That the universal Church consisted not in Rome or in the Pope but in the body of the Elect An haec vel alia eorum dogmata fuerint novae vanitatis vel Evangelicae Antiquitatis nescio Ibid. and that Men might be saved who were not subject to the Church of Rome concluding thus Whether these or other of their Doctrines were new Vanities or of Evangelical Antiquity Epist l. 6. p. 245. I know not Erasmus in his Epistle to Martin Luther gives him to understand That there were in England Men of the greatest Note who esteemed very well of his Writings Ut quisque vir est optimus ita illius Scriptis minime offendi Ep. l. 12. p. 400. and Men at Loven who bore the same Affection to them In his Epistle Cardinali Moguntino This saith he I observe that the better any Man is the less he is offended with Luther 's Writings In his Letter
Truth of Faith is sufficiently explained In the same Article our Church having reckoned up the Books of the Old Testament which she esteemed Canonical Art. 6. and which by both Churches are recieved as such she adds the other Books as Hierom saith The Church doth read for Example of Life and Instruction of Manners but yet doth not apply them to establish any Doctrine Such are these following The Third Book of Esdras The Fourth Book of Esdras The Book of Tobias The Book of Judith The rest of the Book of Esther The Book of Wisdom Jesus the Son of Syrach Baruch the Prophet The Song of the Three Children The Story of Susanna Of Bell and the Dragon The Prayer of Manasses The First Book of Maccabees The Second Book of Maccabees Of all which excepting only the Third and Fourth Books of Esdras and the Prayer of Manasses the Council of Trent saith Whosoever shall not receive them as Sacred and Canonical Sess 4. let him be Anathema And yet this Determination is so apparently repugnant to the Doctrine of the Ancient Church that Mr. Du Pin a Doctor of the Faculty of Divinity in Paris and his Majesty's Professor Royal in Philosophy hath entirely given up this Cause unto the Protestants For 1. Whereas it is confessed by all the Learned of both Churches that we in this distinction betwixt Books of the Old Testament Canonical and Apocryphal or not Canonical exactly follow the Canon and the Judgment of the Jews Tom. 1. dissert praelim p. 51. from whom the Christians received the Books of the Old Testament He also saith The Christian Antiquity for the Books of the Old Testament hath followed the Canon of the Jews that no others were cited in the New Testament but those which belonged to the Canon of the Jews That the first Catalogues of Canonical Books made by Ecclesiastical Authors both Greek and Latin comprehend no others in the Canon P. 612 613. In his Abridgment of the Doctrine of the Three first Centuries he saith expresly That the Christians of those times owned no other Canonical Books of the Old Testament but those which belonged to the Canon of the Hebrews and that they sometimes cited the Apocryphal Books but never put them in the number of Canonical Books And whereas Mr. M. and J. L. have had the confidence to say Mr. M. p. 85 86. That after the Declarations of the Council of Carthage Pope Innocent and Gelasius c. no one ever pertinaciously dissented from it but such as Protestants themselves do confess to be Hereticks J.L. c. xi p. 23. until the days of Luther Or that no Catholick after the Church's Declaration in the Year 419. ever doubted of them Qui depuis les decisions des Conciles de Carthage de Rome la Declaration d'Innocent I. n'ont compte que vingt deux ou vingt quatre livres Canoniques de l'Ancien Testament Tom. 1. Diss praelim p. 60. Mr. Du Pin having produced the express words of Gregory the Great after that time to the contrary adds in flat contradiction to them these ensuing words We ought to make the same reflection on all the other Ecclesiastical Authors Greek and Latin which we have produced who After the Decisions of the Council of Carthage and of Rome and the Declaration of Innocent the First have counted only Two or Four and twenty Books of the Old Testament which makes it evident that these Definitions were not yet followed by all Authors and by all Churches till such time as this Matter was fully determined by the definition of the Council of Trent And indeed § 3 the Truth of this Confession is as clear as the Light For as Mr. M. and J. L. confess Vid c. 3. §. 13. Lib. 1. de verbo Dei. c. 20. S. ad alterum That the Canon of Scripture was not defined till the Fifth Century As Bellarmine acknowledgeth That Melito Epiphanius Hilarius Hieronymus Ruffinus in expounding the Canon of the Old Testament followed the Hebrews not the Greeks De locis Theol. l. 2. c. 11. Sect. Quid Ecclesiâ—sticum As Canus excuseth Ruffinus for rejecting with us the Apocrypha because he did it in eo tempore quo res nondum erat definita when this thing was not defined on which account saith he we also do excuse the rest and so all these men virtually confess that there was no Tradition of the Church against us during those Ages So in the following Centuries even till the time that the Trent Council met approved Authors do declare the Doctrine of the Church to have been still according to the Doctrine of this Article and contrary to the Definition of the Trent Council For In the Western Church Primasius a Bishop of the African Church saith Cent. 6. In Apocalyps cap. 4. The Books of the Old Testament of Canonical Authority which we receive N. B. are Twenty-four which St. John insinuated by the Twenty-four Wings Leontius Bizantinus having said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De Sectis Act. 2. Let us reckon up the Books received by the Church he adds That the Books of the Old Testament are Twenty-two and concludes thus These are the Books Canonized in the Church of which they that belong to the Old Testament are all received by the Hebrews In the Ninth Century Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople Cent. 9. undertakes to reckon up the divine Scriptures which were received and Canonized in the Church and of these in the Old Testament he numbers only Twenty-two as we do Canon Scrip. Chron. p. ult Quibuscontradicitur non recipiuntur ab Ecclesia Bibl. H. Eccl. de vitis Pontif. and among the Books contradicted and not received in the Church he puts the Maccabees Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Esther Judith Susanna and Tobit Anastasius the Keeper of the Library of the Church of Rome among the Books which are contradicted and not received by the Church reckons the Maccabees Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Susanna Judith and Tobit In the Twelfth Century Peter Mauricius Cent. 12. Abbot of Clugny in his Epistle against the Petrobusians tells them they ought of necessity to receive the whole Canon which is received by the Church and then having reckoned up the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as we do he adds That after these Authentick Books of the Holy Scripture Restant post hos Authentiâ—os sex non reticendi libri sapientia c. Pag. 25. c. de Autor Vet. Test there be Six not to be concealed viz. the Books of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and both the Books of Maccabees Hugo de Sancto Victore saith Sunt praeterea alii quidem libri ut sapientia Solomonis c. Qui leguntur quidem sed non scribuntur in Canone de scripturis scriptoribus Sacris Cap 6 Prolog in l. de Sacram c 7 And the division he says is made Authoritate universalis Eccl. Didasc l. 4. c. 1.2 Richardus
Testament to pass by the History of Tobit Judith and the Maccabees quia non sunt de Canone apud Hebraeos nec apud Christianos because they neither are esteemed Canonical by Jews nor Christians yea St. Jerom saith in his Prologue That inter Apocrypha cantantur the Church Chants them among the Apocrypha I therefore saith he first intend to write on the whole Canonical Scripture and then super istos alios qui communiter ponuntur in bibliis quamvis non sint de Canone upon those and other Books which are commonly put in our Bibles though they belong not to the Canon Moreover the Third and Fourth of Esdras he passeth over without Notes for the same Reason On the Thirteenth of Daniel he Notes thus The History of Susanna ought to be put inter libros Bibliae non Canonicos among the Books of the Bible which are not Canonical and in his Notes on the Fourteenth Chapter he saith of the History of Bell and the Dragon ponitur inter Scripturas non Canonicas it is put among those Scriptures which are not Canonical after the History of Susanna Now had not Lyra mentioned the Judgment of the Church touching these Books yet these Expressions in Comments of so great Credit in the Church sufficiently shew that this was then a Doctrine well received in the Church of Rome Antoninus Florentinus in his Historical Summs acknowledgeth only Twenty-two Canonical Books of the Old Testament Cent. 15. Sum. Hist part 1. Tit. 3. c. 4. c. 6. §. 12. saying in General of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith and the Maccabees that Ecclesia recipit the Church receives them as true and profitable though not as of force in matters of Faith Unde forte habent Authoritatem talem qualem habent dicta istorum doctorum approbata ab Ecclesia Sum. Theol. part 3. Tit. 18. c. 6. §. 2. and in particular of Ecclesiasticus that it is receptus ab Ecclesia ad legendum non tamen Authenticus est ad probandum ea quae veniunt in contentionem fidei received by the Church to be read but is not Authentical to prove things doubtful in the Faith. Alphonsus Tostatus saith of the Six debated Books Praefat. in Matth. qu. 2. That they are not put into the Canon by the Church nor doth she regularly command them to be read or to be received or judge them disobedient who do not receive them For Ecclesia non est certa de Auctoribus eorum the Church is not certain of the Authors of them yea she knoweth not an spiritu sancto inspirati whether they were indited by Men inspired of the Holy Spirit and so she obliges no Man ad necessariò credendum id quod ibi habetur to yield necessary assent to what they do contain Enarrat praefat in l. paralip q. 7. And elsewhere Though saith he these Apocryphal Books be joined with others of the Bible and read in the Church none of them is of such Authority ut ex eo Ecclesia arguat ad probandam aliquam veritatem quantum ad hoc non recipit eos that the Church proves any truth out of them for as to that she doth not receive them Dionysius Carthusianus saith Praefat. in Gen. Art. 4. The Books of the Old Testament are Twenty-two as saith St. Jerom in his Prologue before the Kings and having reckoned them up Five Legal Eight Historical Nine Hagiographa he adds Hos libros vocant Canonicos alios vero Apocryphos These Books are called by Divines Canonical the rest Apocryphal In the Sixteenth Century Franciscus Ximenius reckons those Books of the Old Testament which were extant only in Greek Cent. 16. as Bibl. Complut Praef. ad Lect. Libri extra Canonem quos Ecclesia potius ad aedificationem populi quam ad auctoritatem Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum confirmandam recipit Books out of the Canon which the Church receives rather for Edification of the People than for confirmation of Ecclesiastical Doctrines Erasmus having numbered the Canonical Books of the Old Testament as we do In expos Symb. Apost Decal Catech. 4. vers finem Ed. Antver 1533. concludes thus Intra hunc numerum conclusit priscorum Authoritas Vet. Test volumina The Authority of the Ancients comprized the Volumes of the Old Testament of whose Truth it was not lawful to doubt within this number Johannes Ferus having told us that the Apocryphal Books were Nine In exam Ordinand he adds That olim in Ecclesia Apocryphi publicè non recitabantur nec quisquam Authoritate eorum premebatur anciently the Apocryphal Books were not read publickly nor was any Man pressed with their Authority Sebastian Munster in his Preface to the Old Testament and in the Chapter of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament numbers them exactly as we do and then he saith Intra hunc numerum concluserunt Hebraei prisci Christiani volumina veteris Testamenti Both the Hebrews and the ancient Christians comprized the Volumes of the Old Testament within this number but now the other which he reckons as we do excepting only the Song of the Three Children are received in usum Ecclesiasticum into the use of the Church Moreover from the Ninth Century in which the Ordinary Gloss upon the Bible was begun by Strabus to the Sixteenth they did not only number the Canonical and reject the Apocryphal Books as we do but they did it chiefly for the very reason that is assigned in our Article viz. among others the Authority of St. Jerom Card. Cajetan Praefat. super Josuam ad Clem. 7. declaring That Sancto Hieronymo universa Ecclesia Latina plurimum debet propter discretos ab eodem libros Canonicos à non Canonicis The universal Church is very much beholding to St. Jerom not only because he noted what Parts where added to the Books of the Old Testament or were but doubtful Appendixes but also for separating the Canonical from the uncanonical Books That the Church received those Books which he received and rejected those which he rejected That Consonat Hieronymus cus maxima habetur fides in Ecclesia is inquam Hieronymus in Prologo Galeato inter Canonicos libros V. Testamenti hosce duntaxat enumerat Firmiter tamen haerendum credo sententiae Hieronymi Cujus Autoritas me movit ne multo altius quam a suo tempore de librorum horum ordine disputarem cum illis floruerit temporibus quae doctis hominibus abundabant multa ex Gestis veterum Theologorum legerit quae nunc periere peritissimus quoque suit Graecae Hebraicae literaturae demum ejus testimonium ab Ecclesia pro sanctissimo habeatur Picus Mirand de fide ordinc credendi Theorem 5. Com. in libr. Hist V. Test In primum cap. Matth. ad v. 12. Testimonium Hieronymi quoad hoc ut Sacrosanctum habetur in Ecclesiâ as to this Matter the Church held his Testimony to
almost in all the ancient Councils As to the Second Part of this Article § 5 which teacheth That General Councils may Erre and sometimes have erred even in things pertaining to God P. 295. the same Author there tells us That Communis est doctorum opinio Concilia etiam Generalia errare posse in rebus quae fidem aut mores ad salutem non necessarios concernunt It is the common Judgment of their Doctors that even general Councils may erre in Matters of Faith and Manners which are not necessary to Salvation And whereas our Church infers that therefore things ordained by them as necessary to Saelvation have neither Strength nor Authority unless it may be declared nisi ostendi possint unless it can be shewed that they be taken out of Holy Scripture This Author saith these last Words of the Article Sententiam veterum omnium fere modernorum declarant declare that which was the Doctrine of the Ancients and of almost all the modern Doctors That in the time of Ocham the Church was divided in this Point some holding that a General Council Haeretica potest labe aspergi might be guilty of Heresy and much more of Error some That it could not thus be guilty and that the Doctrine of the Fallibility of General Councils was afterwards maintained by many eminent Doctors of the Church De formali objecto fidei Tr. 5. c. 19 20 21. is fully proved by Baronius against Turnbal so that I shall reserve the farther Prosecution of this Matter to its proper place viz. The Discussion of the Doctrine of the Infallibility of Councils Our Church in her Twenty second Article asserts § 6 That the Romish Doctrine concerning Purgatory Pardons Worshipping and Adoration as well of Images as of Relicks and also Invocation of Saints is a fond thing vainly seigned and grounded upon no Warrant of Scripture but rather repugnant to the Word of God And that these Doctrines were not derived to them from Apostolical Tradition their own Writers do ingeniously confess For 1. Concerning Purgatory Alphonsus de Castro declares That in Veteribus de Purgatorio fere nulla De Haeres l. 8. Tit. de Indulg potissimum apud Graecos Scriptores mentio est In the Ancients and especially the Greek Writers there is scarce any mention of Purgatory whence it comes to pass Contr. Luther Artic. 18. that to this very day it is not received in the Greek Church Apud priscos amongst the Ancients saith our Fisher Bishop of Rochester It was not at all or very rarely mentioned nor is it to this Day believed by the Greek Church Let him who pleaseth read the Commentaries of the ancient Greeks and he will find I suppose that they speak not at all or very rarely of it Sed neque Latini simul omnes sed sensim hujus rei veritatem conceperunt Nor did the Latins altogether but leisurely perceive the Truth of this Matter And then he adds Cum igitur purgatorium tam sero cognitum ac receptum universae Ecclesiae fuerit quis jam de Indulgentiis mirari potest quia in principio nascentis Ecclesiae nullus fuerit earum usus Since therefore Purgatory was so lately known to and received by the Universal Church who can wonder that in the Primitive Church there was no use of Indulgences In Cath. Rom. pacif apud Forb consid Mod. p. 264. Father Barns acknowledgeth that the Punishment of Purgatory is a thing quae nec ex Scripturis nec Patribus nec Conciliis deduci potest firmiter which can neither be firmly proved from Scripture the Fathers or Councils And that Opposita sententia eis conformior videtur the contrary Sentence seems more agreeable to them Wicelius saith Meth. Concord Eccles c. 8. Tit. Funus Ibid. p. 259 260. That though there should be some places of Purgation to receive naked Souls yet doth it not become grave and wise Men so certainly to define those things which Scriptures have not expressed nec Antiquorum traditio nor the Tradition of the Ancients hath expounded Erasmus saith Operum Tom. 1. p. 685. q. There be many things about which not only contentious but even learned and pious Men did doubt of old as St. Austin with others doubted long about Purgatory That it was only a private Assertion and not an Article of Faith generally received in the Twelfth Century Chronic. l. 8. c. 26. is evident from these Words of Otho Frisingensis viz. That there is apud Inferos in the infernal Regions a Place of Purgatory wherein such as are to be saved are either troubled only with Darkness or decocted with the Fire of Expiation some affirm Nor can I tell what to make of that saying of Paschasius if it doth not shew that he believeth the contrary for saith he our Lord saith he that eateth my Flesh hath eternal Life ideo dicens habet quia mox anima carne soluta intrat in vitae promptuaria De Corp. Sang. Domini c. 19. ubi Sanctorum Animae requiescunt saying in the Present Tense he hath because the Soul being loosed from the Flesh presently enters into those Receptacles of Life where the Spirits of Saints do rest Secondly § 7 Concerning Pardons or Indulgences their Novelâ—y is still confessed more freely Inter omnes res de quibus in hoc opere disputamus nulla est quam minus aperte S. Literae prodiderunt de qua minus vetusti Scriptores dixerint neque tamen hac occasione contemnendae sunt quod earum usus in Ecclesia videatur sero receptus quoniam multa sunt posterioribus nota quae vetusti illi Scriptores prorsus ignoraverunt nam de transubstantiatione panis in Corpus Christi rara est in Antiquis Scriptoribus mentio de Purgatorio fere nulla potissimum apud Graecos Scriptores qua de causa usque in hodiernum Diem purgatorium non est a Graecis creditum Quid ergo mirum si ad hunc modum contigerit de indulgentiis ut apud Priscos nulla sit de eis mentio praecipue quod tunc magis fervebat Christianorum charitas ut parum esset opus indulgentiis quapropter non est mentio ulla indulgentiarum De Haer. l. 8. Tit. de Indulgentiis De invent rer l. 8. c. 1. p. 325. Part. 1. Sum. Tit. 10. c. 3. In 4. Sentent dist 20. q. 3. h. Alphonsus Castro saith That among all the things of which he disputed in his Book against Heresies there was nothing of which the Scripture spake less plainly de qua minus vetusti Scriptores dixerint and of which the Ancient Writers had said less Many saith Polydore Virgil from Roffensis may perhaps be moved not to trust to Indulgences quod earum usus in Ecclesia videatur recentior admodum sero apud Christianos repertus because the use of them in the Church seems new and very lately received among Christians To whom I answer That
Latina Ecclesia Presbyteris licuisse uti conjugio That even in the Latin Church it was sometimes Lawful for Priests to use Matrimony Scotus confesseth that it is very true Sent. 4. dist 37. qu. 1. Art. 1. That Secundum consuetudinem primitivae Ecclesiae according to the Constitution of the primitive Church it was lawful to use Matrimony contracted before Orders Cap. 4. De invent rerum l. 5. c. 4. p. 344. Clictovaeus in his Discourse of the Celebacy of Priests and Polydore Virgil do with one Voice affirm That Pope Syricius who held that See A.D. 387. was the first who imposed the Law of Celebacy on the Clergy It remains saith Cassander That this Law should be relaxed to those who shall hereafter be ordained Et more veteris Ecclesiae Consult Art. 23. p. 199. huc usque Orientalium Ecclesiarum And that after the Custom of the Ancient Church and of the Eastern Churches to this Day Honest Husbands should be admitted to the Ministry of the Church and out of the Time of their Ministry should be allowed the use of their Wives according to the Canon of the Sixth General Synod Wicelius in his Via Regia Apud Calixt de conjug cler p. 457. declares that the Marriage of Priests was unforbidden In primitiva Christi Ecclesia tam Orientis quam Occidentis in the Primitive Church both of East and West and that it agrees not only with the Gospel but also cum Veterum Synodorum Constitutionibus cum exemplis Veteris Ecclesiae with the Constitutions of Ancient Synods with the Examples of the Ancient Church yea even with the Examples of the Church of Rome such as she was Five hundred Years ago CHAP. XI Answer is given to the Arguments of Mr. M. for the Infallibility of Tradition as v. g. 1. That the World had no other Rule for the first Two thousand Years § 1. Answered 1st by shewing that this proves not the thing in Question which is not Whether nothing can come down unto us by Tradition but Whether in long tract of time Men may not add to the Traditions which truly they received others which falsly they pretend to be such and Whether pretences to Tradition may not be justly scrupled when ancient Records not only do say nothing of but plainly contradict them Ibid. 2dly That this Argument contradicts the Tradition of the Jews touching the Precepts of Noah only imposed upon the World before and of the Christians generally teaching Men were then guided by the Law not of Tradition but of nature § 2. The Instances contained in this Argument considered § 3. 3dly It is proved that both the Antediluvians and they who lived after the Flood were very prone to Idolatry and that God therefore would not trust them with any positive Precepts but such as were Recorded in a written Law § 4. Mr. M ' s. Second Argument That for above Two thousand Years more from Moses to Christ 's time the Church was governed partly by Writing and partly by Tradition Answ 1. The contrary is proved both from the Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament § 5. 2. That the Traditions which obtained in the Jewish Church were such as tended to the Evacuation of the Law of Moses the Introduction of vain Worship and the renouncing of the true Messiah § 6. This is farther demonstrated from the Scriptures of the New Testament and Josephus § 7. Mr. M's Third Argument That when the Scriptures were given to the Jewish Church all other Nations were guided only by Tradition and yet had many true Believers among them as Job c. Answ 1. That the Scripture manifestly declares that the Heathens generally were guilty of Idolatry and that God had given them a Law not of Tradition but of Nature § 8.2 That Job and his Friends believed in one God not by Tradition but the Light of Nature according to the Fathers § 9.3 That when Christianity appeared the great Plea of the Heathens for it was Tradition which they pleaded after the manner of the Romanists § 10. The Answer of the Christians to this Plea is a full Justification of the Protestants and a demonstration that they were not Roman Catholicks in this Matter § 11. For 1st They represent it as the greatest folly to preferr Custom before Reason 2ly They add That their Ancestors were prone to receive Fables and monstrous Opinions for Truths which also Romanists confess of the Writers of their Histories 3dly That this was the Rise of all their Errors that they followed their Fathers without consulting Truth 4thly That they who pleaded Antiquity were themselves the greatest Innovators 5thly That there was a time when the Heathen Religion was New Ibid. In defence of their own Proceedings they declare 1st That it is the property of wise Men not to be enslaved to their former Opinions 2dly That their Adversaries ought not to run them down with prescription or the belief of their Ancestors but fairly come to the Merits of the Cause § 12. 3dly That they ought not to be run down with multitude that being no mark of the true Religion 4thly That they ought not to be called to yield a blind assent to the dictates of other Men without using their own Judgments 5thly That their Separation from their fore-Fathers must be acknowledged Just and Righteous because they could shew wherein they had erred Lastly That their Religion was not New but only it was lately that they knew it to be the true and old Religion § 13. Obj. 4. That before the New Testament was written and divulged all Christians were governed by Tradition only § 14. Answ 1. That the Four Gospels which were always judged sufficiently to contain the Christian Doctrine were writ soon after the Preaching of the Gospel 2. That till then the Apostles Preached only out of the Old Testament and exhorted their Hearers to attend to it as their Rule Ibid. 3. That the Tradition of the Primitive Church declared it necessary that Scriptures should be written to be to us a Rule of Faith § 15. Mr. M ' s. Fourth Argument that the Traditions of the Church of Rome may be as fully proved as it can be proved to one that never saw London that there is such a City and that it is the Capital City of this Kingdom shewed to be highly vain § 16. HAving thus shewed the uncertainty of Tradition in many Cases and proved that the Doctrines of the Church of Rome have not descended by Tradition from the Apostles or the Primitive Church I now proceed to Answer what Mr. M. doth offer to prove the certainty of Oral Tradition in the General and of some Romish Doctrines in Particular And § 1 1. Mr. M. saith That all the Faith which true Believers had in those Two thousand Years before the Scriptures of the Old Testament were written Pag. 335. had no other Ground than the Revelation of God as proposed
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
in the dark Ages of the Western Church gave the Rise to her Errors We therefore do exhort them in the Words of Justin Martyr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cohort ad Graec. p. 15. Not without trial to assent to the Errors of their Fore-fathers nor presently to think that true which they mistaking delivered to them for Tradition Fourthly They retorted the Objection saying That if it were a Fault Arnob. p. 91. A veteribus institutis in alias res novas migrare to quit their ancient Institutions for things new it was as well their fault as ours That whereas they objected to the Christians Divortium ab institutis majorum Tert. ad Nation cap. 10. their departure from the Institutions of their Ancestors they communicated with them in the same Crime For Exclusa a vobis Antiquitas you though you plead Antiquity against us have your selves cast it off Totam Authoritatem majorum vestra Authoritas dejecit Your own Authority hath destroyed or overthrown the whole Authority of the Ancients and we see even whilst you urge it against us Per omnia corruptam imo deletam in vobis Antiquitatem Antiquity wholly corrupted and even extinguished amongst you which is the constant Plea of Protestants that they desert the Roman Church only as far as she hath palpably deserted the pure and Ancient Church of Christ they separate from her only in those things in which she hath most plainly separated from the Faith and Discipline of ancient Rome and the whole Church of Christ and this hath been so demonstratively proved in the Article of the true Canon of Scripture by Bishop Cousins of the Pope's Supremacy by Doctor Barrow in the Articles of Service in Latin Veneration of Images Communion in one Kind the Seven Sacraments in Three late Treatises designed to prove the Fallibility of Romish Councils by their actually false Decrees that none of the Disputers of the Church of Rome have dared yet to meddle with them and thereby give us good Assurance who know they want not will to do it that they cannot Answer them The like hath excellently been performed in all the other controverted Articles if not to the Conviction yet to the Silencing of our Adversaries Fifthly They constantly tell the Heathens That there was a time when their Religion was New and when their Gods began to be so that this being so Arnob. l. 2. p. 92 93. Cum de novitate loquimini Religionum nostrarum vestrae vobis in mentem non veniunt when they spake of the Novelty of the Christian Faith they forgat the Novelty of their own Religion our Religion say you P. 94. was not Four hundred Years ago and your Gods say we were not Two thousand Years ago Now is it not shameful and impudent in you Quod agere te videas in eo alterum reprehendere to reprehend another for what you do your selves and to object that as a Crime to others which may be retorted on your selves Since then we as constantly affirm and have as fully proved That there was a time when the Religion of the Church of Rome was new in the contested Articles That Christianity had gone through several Centuries before any of them were received as Articles of Christian Faith That many of them have been introduced since the Ninth Century may we not also add that therefore Romanists forget their own Religion when they Charge ours with Novelty and reprehend that in us which they themselves are truly guilty of Sixthly § 12 In defence of their Proceedings against this Objection they declare That it was the property of Wise Men Theodo Serm. 1. contr Graec p. 477. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be enslaved to their former Opinions nor to be bound to follow the Customs of their Fathers but to seek the Truth wheresoever they could find it That every Man ought in those things especially which concern the manner of his living to trust to his own judgment and rather to depend on his own Senses in seeking out the truth than as if he himself were bereft of Reason Lact. l. 2. c. 7. P. 273. Credentem alienis erroribus decipi to be deceived by giving credit to the Errors of others God having given reason to him sufficient to find out the Truth Athan. contr Gent. p. 32 33. And speaking of the way of Truth they tell them That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there needs no-nothing but our selves to come to an exact knowledge and comprehension of it If you ask them by what internal Principle we may arrive at this knowledge they Answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That it is every Mans Soul and the faculty of Reason in it If you enquire by what external Directions this Mind must be assisted Ibid. p. 1. they reply They must 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 find the Truth from the Divine Oracles That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are of themselves sufficient for the Declaration of the Truth and that even an Heathen Macarius might learn it there Now this is plainly sending us to our private Reason and Apprehension of the Sense of Scriptures to find out the Truth and to assure us That it is an act of Wisdom in us not to be enslaved to our former Opinions nor bound up by the Customs of our Fore-fathers from searching after Truth wheresoever we can find it Seventhly They add That the Heathens ought not to prejudge and run them down with this Prescription or by objecting to them their revolt A Religione majorum from the Religion of their Ancestors but fairly ought to come unto the merits of the Cause Lib. 2. p. 90. Causam convenit ut inspiciatis non factum nec quid reliquimus opponere sed secuti quid simus potissimum contueri You are not saith Arnobius to condemn us for the Fact without enquiring whether we had not a just Cause for doing it nor object to us what we have left without considering what we have embraced in lieu of it for what hinders why as others who invented Falshoods delivered them to Posterity Sic nos qui verum invenimus posteris meliora tradamus so we who have found the Truth may deliver better things to Posterity Which Passages are a full Answer to all the French Rhetorick touching the Prejugez legitimes comre les Calvinistes Eighthly In particular against this manner of prejudging § 13 which is now become almost the only Refuge of the Romanists they say 1st That they ought not to be run down with multitude that Religion could not be proved true because it had many Followers or false because it had but few Assertors Arnob. l. 3. ab initio and that even the Christian Religion could neither be proved nor disproved upon this account and that this vain pretence of Heathens had already been answered by the Christians mille modis a thousand ways and refuted by most cogent Reasons And indeed among the Relicks
of Antiquity ascribed by some to Athanasius by others to Theodoret to Maximus to Etherius we have one brief but full Discourse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against them who judge of Truth only by multitude Athanas Tom. 2. p. 293. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where the Author first tells us that he is to combat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against a false Assertion that the Authors of it are Objects of Pity or Commiseration that they fled to this miserable Refuge only for want of Reason on their side and even confessed their being vanquished that multitude was proper to fright a Man but by no means to perswade him that in the concernments of this World we do not much regard it and much less should we be moved by it in heavenly Matters to recede from the Testimonies of the Scriptures and the agreeing Sentiments of the Ancients that our Lord had told us That many are called but few chosen That streight was the Gate which leadeth unto Life and few there be that find it And that every wise Man would rather be of the number of those few P. 291. than of that number which goes in the broad way For had any Man lived in the days of Stephen would he not rather have been of his side alone than of the side of the multitude which rose up against him Had not Phineas boldly opposed himself to the prevailing multitude the Plague had not ceased nor had the rest been saved Was it not better to fly with Noah to the Ark than with the multitude to perish in the deluge to go alone with Lot from Sodom than with the multitude to perish there We indeed venerate the multitude but then it is a multitude 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which flies not examination but which affordeth demonstration 2dly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apud Athanas To. 2. p. 325. They add That they ought not to be called upon to yield a blind assent to the Dictates of other Men without using their own Judgments to consider and enquire What is possible what is suitable or unsuitable what acceptable to God what is congruous to Nature what consonant to Truth what accords with the Mystery what is agreeable to piety They have accordingly left us a Discourse in opposition to those Men who required them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 simply to believe their Dictates without considering what was fit or unfit to be embraced informing us That this was of many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 326. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 horrible Doctrines the worst which Satan had invented to lead Men into dangerous Deceits That it was the Doctrine of Men who imperiously commanded all Men to follow their Dictates and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to believe without Reason and called that Faith which was an assent without trial to things unstable and undemonstrated That it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the rise of Error and of all Evils the Doctrine of all Hereticks who declined the Examination that they might avoid the consutation of their Doctrines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That according to it no Man could find the way of Truth or avoid the precipice of Error That according to it we being asked to yield assent to the unproved Doctrines of Hereticks and Heathens should consent to do so P. 327. Whereas if we examine what we are required to believe we shall have full assurance of the Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither believing without reason nor speaking without Faith. Ninthly They say that it must be acknowledged that they had rationally cast off the Customs and Traditions of their Fore-fathers because they could discover wherein they had generally erred Praepar Evang l. 4. c. 4. For thus Eusebius speaks If we can shew that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all the Heathens and Barbarians which were before our Saviours time did not know the true God but either worshipped those which were no Gods or evil Spirits it must be then confessed that we acted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by a true and righteous Judgment when we became 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Revolters from the Superstition of our Fore-fathers If therefore we not only can but actually have shewed in the forementioned particulars that the Church of Rome hath generally erred then must it also be acknowledged that our Separation from her was the result of Truth and Righteousness Tenthly They lastly say Arnob. l. 2. P. 95. That their Religion must be Ancient because it consisted in the Worship of the Supream God Quo non est antiquius quicquam than whom nothing is more Ancient And in like manner we declare our positive Religion must be Ancient because it consists of the Articles delivered in the Scriptures of the New Testament and in the Symbol of the Apostles and taught by the Four first Centuries we therefore in like manner do conclude with them as to all the positive Articles of our Religion Non ergo quod sequimur novum est sed nos sero addicimus quidnam sequi oporteat That what we follow is not New though 't was but lately that we learned that it was that and that alone we ought to follow Now by impartial consideration of these particulars I leave any Man of Reason to judge whose Religion is most suitable in the general Grounds of it to the Sentiments of Antiquity whether we Protestants plead any thing against those of Rome which the ancient Christians did not also plead against the Heathens and whether the most plausible Objections of the Romanists against us be not fully answered by what these Fathers say in the defence of common Christianity against the Hereticks and Heathens 4thly Mr. M. adds Object 4 That all those who had been instructed by the Apostles before Scripture was written P. 322 340. converted and instructed Thousands who never had heard any Apostle preach and all these believed on the Authority of the then present Church P. 415. That from the preaching of Christ unto the finishing of the Canon and the divulging of the same in such Languages as all Nations understood very many Years passed and all the true Believers in Christ's Church were governed by Tradition only R. H. doth also tell us That God besides Guide of Controv Disc 2. ch 5. §. 44. and before the New Testament Scriptures left these Doctrines sufficiently revealed to the then appointed Ecclesiastical Guides from whom both the present People and the future Successors of those Guides both were and might rationally know they were to learn them and so had there been no Scriptures might to this Day by meer Tradition have learn'd them sufficiently for their Salvation First Reply 1 To this I answer That Mr. M. is much out when he talks of Seventy or Eighty Years before those Scriptures were written which were to be the future Rule of Christians for the Gospel of St.
entire System of the Christian Faith than by committing it to Writing that Piety should not permit even the Romans to rest satisfied without such written Monuments of what they had been taught or to conceive it was sufficient that they had received it by Tradition and that the Wisdom of the Holy Ghost instructed the Apostles to commit to writing that which they had Preached by Word of Mouth that so it might become to future Ages the Pillar and the Ground of Truth and a sufficient Antidote against the Heresies which afterwards prevailed in the Church Euseb H. Eccl. l. 3. c. 37. And that the zeal of the first Successors of Christian Faith imployed it self as much in leaving to their Converts throughout all the World 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Writings of the Holy Gospels as in preaching Christ unto them In Answer to Mr. M's Fourth Reason for the Infallibility of Tradition I grant P. 354. That a Tradition made as credible to any Man as it may be made credible to one who never saw London that there is such a City as London and that it is the head Town of England will be a good and a sufficient Proof that the Traditions of the Church of Rome are true and that upon such Evidence afforded it will be most unreasonable to question the Truth of them but then I think it is the vainest thing imaginable for any person to attempt to prove them from a like Tradition For doth Mr. M. know of any Man whoever doubted that there was such a City as London or that it was the head Town of England Did he ever read or hear of any large Discourses any Testimonies brought from ancient Records or Traditions from Divine Revelation or from Reason to prove there was or could be no such Capital City in England Can he produce as many Eye and Ear Witnesses that the Traditions of the Church of Rome are truly Apostolical as may be easily produced for such a City Let Mr. M. once prove that the Traditions of the Romish Church were always generally received by all Mankind and that none ever had the Confidence to Question the Truth of any of them Let him prove them from Myriads of Eye Witnesses who saw them writ by the Apostles or Primitive Professors of Christianity as plainly as ever any Man saw London or as many Ear Witnesses hearing the Apostles preaching these Traditions as ever heard this Capital City mentioned by those who saw it Let him prove them by as many persons who writ to the Apostles concerning these Traditions as have writ to London and by as many who resorted to the Apostles to learn these Traditions as have resorted to this City by as many Books describing these Traditions in the very Age in which they are supposed to have been delivered as there are Books which in this Age make mention of the City of London and by as many Canons of the Primitive Church relating to these Traditions as there are Statutes and Discourses relating to the City Trade and Government of London And I will then acknowledge That it is impudent impious and blasphemous Impiety to doubt the Truth of these Traditions Mr. M. indeed supposeth That it is as evidently credible that God hath revealed such and such Verities as it is credible by humane Tradition that there is such a City as London but this he never undertakes to prove as knowing that it was an easier matter to suppose it P. 355 356. And then he adds That the very self same Tradition tells me that the same God who revealed by his Apostles so many other Verities to his Church did also reveal by the same Apostles to the same Church that this Church was to be heard as the Mistress of Truth with whom he would ever be present suggesting to her all Truth and never permitting the Gates of Hell to prevail against her that he placed her as a Pillar and Ground of Truth giving her such Pastors as should secure her Children from being tossed to and fro with every Wind of Doctrine and consequently this same Tradition tells me God hath revealed this Verity of her being Infallible in proposing any Point for Divine Faith. Now Reply First Mr. M. is miserably out in this Discourse for not one of these Revelations here mentioned whatsoever is the import of them have descended to us by Oral Tradition but are all of them contained in Scripture as far as they are truly cited Secondly Whereas the Evidence that there is such a City as London is so great that never any Body could deny or question it that the Church is Infallible in propounding any Point of Faith not clearly revealed in the Holy Scripture or that there are indeed any such Points of Faith is at present and hath been formerly denied by many Myriads of learned and pious Men whose worldly Interest it is and was to believe that true which they deny to be so and whose rejoicement it would be to find it true and that none of the places here produced prove this Infallibility or by the Primitive Professors of Christianity were esteemed to prove it they have unanimously held and do at present hold Thirdly Ibid. Whereas he saith He did see with his Eyes that she viz. the Church of God did propose her Traditions for Verities received from God. Let it be noted That Mr. M. confounds the Church of Rome and the Church of God excluding all the Protestants the Greek Church and the Eastern Christians not subject to the Pope from that Church out of which there is no Salvation which I hope is not so evident as that there is such a City as London for it is not the whole Church but that of Rome which claims this Infallibility and on that account proposeth her Traditions for Verities received from God. Now then let us return to our Capital City of London and we shall find the whole Nation though of different Parties Interests and Judgments agreeing that there is in England such a Capital City as London but yet we find half the whole Christian World utterly denying many Traditions of the Church of Rome to be Verities received from God and in particular that of the Pope's Supremacy without which the Church of Rome neither doth nor can pretend to be the whole Church Catholick Now this denial of her pretended Traditions by so many Churches professing a like Veneration for those Traditions which are truly Primitive must prove as strongly that the Traditions of the Church of Rome are falsly so called as her Assertion can be supposed to prove them Divine Verities Again whereas there are no universally received Records which give us the least cause to doubt whether there be such a City as London c. the Records of the Scriptures Councils and Fathers of the Church cause many Myriads to believe the Doctrines and Practices peculiar to the Roman Church are so far from being Apostolical Traditions that they
his Days did universally hold any thing that was an Error nor shall you ever read of any Catholick who refused to conform himself to the Vniversal Belief and Practice which was current in the whole Church of their times Now to this I answer That the Vniversal Church may be considered Two ways 1. In a State of Vnity within her self so that her Members do universally agree in the same Doctrine and Practice few or none dissenting from the common Doctrine of the Church or in that State in which her Members are unhappily divided by reason of the different Sentiments of many great and famous Churches which yet exclude not either Party from being Members of the Church Catholick as she hath always been since the great Rupture betwixt the East and West and as the West hath often been divided by reason of the great and lasting Schismes which have happened betwixt contending Popes and Emperors and betwixt Popes and Councils contending for Superiority 2. I add That this Agreement of the present Vniversal Church may either be in Doctrines and Practices necessary to the Being of a Church or else in Doctrines and Practices unnecessary on which the Being or the Welfare of the Church doth not depend Having premised these Distinctions I answer First That in Doctrines and Practices truly necessary to the Being of a Church the Agreement of the Vniversal Church is a sufficient Evidence that all such Doctrines and Practices derived from the Apostles because they were as necessary to be held throughout all formen Ages as in this And therefore in such Doctrines as were rejected by the Vniversal Church as Heresies Austin saith truly That it was sufficient Cause to reject them because the Church held the contrary De Haer. c. 90. they being such as did Oppugnare Regulam veritatis oppose her Rule of Faith or Symbol universally received And that it was sufficient to perswade any Man he ought not Aliquid horum in fidem recipere to embrace any of the Doctrines of Hereticks as Articles of Faith because the Church who could not be deficient in any point of necessary Faith did not receive them This way of Arguing negatively we therefore with St. Austin do allow The Vniversal Church knows no such Doctrine ergo it is no Article I am obliged to receive as any part of Christian Faith. The Vniversal Church of Christ knows no such Practice therefore it is no Practice necessary to be done by Christians But Secondly In Reference to such Doctrines or Practices on which the Being and the Welfare of the Church doth not depend I say the Agreement of the present Church can be no certain Argument either of the Truth of the Doctrine or of the Derivation either of the Doctrine or Practice from Apostolical Tradition And this seems very suitable even to the Rule of Lirinensis who having advised us to embrace that Sence of Scripture and those Tenets which were Ecclesiastical and universally received he saith this is especially to be observed in iis duntaxat Common c. 41. quaestionibus quibus totius Catholici dogmatis fundamenta nituntur In those Questions only on which depend the Foundations of the Catholick Faith. And this is also evident from Scripture Reason and Tradition First From Scripture which plainly doth inform us that the Rulers of the Jewish Church had taught for Doctrines the Commandments of Men and such Traditions as made void the Law of God and by which they taught others to transgress it and by which they deserved the Title of blind Guides leading the Blind And these Traditions were received and observed by all the Jews Mark 7.3 Gal. 1.14 Traditions of the Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Traditions received from their Fathers Customs which they who did not walk according to were thought to teach Apostasy from Moses Now if the whole Jewish Church of that Age might thus mistake in what she taught as Doctrines of the Scripture or Practices and Doctines received from Moses by Tradition why may not the Christian Church of this present Age or any other be subject to the like Mistakes in Doctrine or in Practice Again That the Doctrines of the Millenium of the Day of Judgment being nigh at hand of the Reservation of good Souls in some place different from the highest Heavens were very prevalent in the first Ages of the Church I have already proved Chap. 4. §. 1 2 3 4 5 6. though now they do as generally pass for Errors And the like may be easily proved of many Practices now wholly laid aside Quod autem instituitur praeter consuetudinem ut quasi observatio Sacramenti sit approbare non possum etiamsi multa hujusmodi propter nonnullarum vel sanctarum vel turbulentarum personarum scandala devitanda liberius improbare non audeo sed hoc nimis doleo quia tam multis praesumptionibus plena sunt omnia Epist ad Jan. 119. cap. 19. St. Austin in his Time complained That all things or places were filled with manifold Presumptions and that these Corruptions had so generally obtained that albeit he thought they ought to be redressed yet durst he not freely disprove them and if so many Superstitions were so publickly avowed and practised in his time and urged upon others by the greatest part of the Church and if so many Doctrines prevailed in the greatest part of the Church in former Ages which now pass for Errors why might they not generally do so What Reason can be given why the whole might not continue the true Church of Christ and hold these Doctrines and espouse these Practices as well as so great Parts of the Church continue true Parts of the Church and do so Thirdly It is evident from Church History that Doctrines and Practices have generally obtained in some Ages of the Church and passed for Apostolical Traditions which have in after Ages been discarded as v. g. First The Administration of the Eucharist to Infants and the principle upon which they did it viz. That without Baptism and the Supper of the Lord no Man could have Life eternal The Punick Christians saith St. Austin call Baptism Salvation To. 7. li. de pecc Merit Remiss c. 24. and the participation of Christs body Life Whence is this Nisi ex antiqua ut existimo Apostolica Traditione qua Ecclesiae Christi insitum tenent but from an Ancient and as I suppose Apostolical Tradition by which the Churches of Christ have this deeply setled in them That without Baptism and the Participation of the Lord's Supper no Man can attain to the Kingdom of God or to Life Eternal Whence he concludes That it is in vain to promise the Kingdom of God or Life Eternal to Children without both these Sacraments and that with the plainest Evidence provided that his Principle hold good Now of this Matter let it be considered That it was certainly the Practice of the whole Church of Christ for many Ages § 3
Anathematized St. Austin Pope Innocent Pelagius and the whole Church of Christ for Six whole Centuries Thirdly Hence it is evident that the Practice of the Church in any Century is no true Ground for the Interpretation of the Holy Scripture seeing this Practice of communicating Infants was built upon the Mistake of the Church of the Ages mentioned touching the true Sence of those Words Except you eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood you have no Life in you Fourthly Hence it is evident That if the present Church of any Age must be the infallible Judge of what is Tradition if what is generally received in any Age must be derived from the Apostles the Custom of giving the Sacrament to Children for the Remission of Sins and the obtaining Life must be an Apostolical Tradition it being generally received for Six Centuries and yet if the Church of Rome of the Three last Ages was the Judge of what deserved to be esteemed Tradition the self same Doctrine being then generally rejected by them could be no Apostolical Tradition Fifthly Hence Mr. M. may learn that his Proof of Prayer for the Dead and Infants Baptism from Tradition is not very weighty and convincing or if it be the Custom of communicating Infants must be Tradition Apostolical For changing only the Subject it will be easy to argue for it after the manner and in the Words of Mr. M. Let us take Two Traditions P. 401. the one confessed by you to be a true one the other indeed condemned by you but asserted by me to be no less true than the former because it is testified by as good a Tradition as the former and therefore either the former is not proved sufficiently by this Testimony or the latter is The First Tradition for Example sake is That of Baptizing Infants The Second That of the Communicating of Infants Of these Two I discourse thus Both these Points were recommended by the Apostles to the Primitive Church for divine Verities and Practices and so from hand to hand came most unquestionably delivered to the Twelfth Century Hence conformably to this Tradition P. 402. every where Christians baptized their little Children every where they gave them the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist but yet the communicating of them was the more frequent Practice because Children were baptized but once in their Lives but being once baptized they frequently received the Holy Sacrament Well now let us suppose that both these Traditions be called in Question whether they be faithfully delivered as Sacraments to be received by Children or rather whether that of Communicating Infants were some humane Invention Soss 21. Can. 4. or as the Trent Council hath determined A thing unnecessary to be received by Infants till they come to Years of Discretion Let us see whether this Tradition condemned by that Council with an Anathema cannot defend it self from Forgery as well as any Scripture questioned of being true Scripture P. 403. For Example the Apocalypse which was rejected by divers Ancient Catholicks whereas the Communion of Infants was never rejected by any Ancient Catholicks at all nor by any of them said to be unnecessary Amongst ancient Hereticks the Pelagians indeed said That it was not necessary to communicate them for the Remission of Sins but this is noted in them as a peculiar Heresy of their own by Pope Innocent by Pelagius by the Council of Carthage and by St. Austin who pronounceth against them That Infants ought to be communicated for the Remission of Sins And the same St. Austin saith The Church doth necessarily do this by the Tradition P. 404. as he fupposeth Apostolical received from her Ancestors He held therefore such Communion of Infants suitable to the Doctrine of the Church and Tradition And this Tradition is that which I now stand upon which indeed did shine in the Practice of the Primitive Church You shall scarcely find a Liturgy or Service Book used in the ancient Church which is not Witness of this Tradition though these Books were found in every Parish of Christendom in which Divine Service was almost daily said P. 405. St. Cyprian mentions it as the Practice of his Times In both these Points it is a strong Argument and as strong for Communicating as for Baptizing of Infants That no time can be named in which those Customs began No man can be thought of who could by humane Means and such Means as should not make a mighty Noise amongst those great Reverencers of Tradition draw all the World in so short a time after the Apostles P. 406. to follow Customs as Apostolical which in that Age in which they were first vented were evidently by every Man not only known but clearly seen to be new hatch'd Novelties and not Ancient and Apostolical Traditions This Man who broached this false Doctrine should have been put into the Catalogues of Hereticks by Epiphanius and St. Austin whereas they did not only not put down any such Hereticks but one of them puts down Pelagius for one because he taught the contrary Now if you speak of this Custom going downward until the Age in which it began to be denied by Roman Catholicks the Custom of Communicating Infants hath come down with such a full Stream that it drew all Countries in many Ages with it insomuch that every where but among a few late born Romanists the Pontificals the Books of Sacraments the Liturgies Eastern and Western all the Ritualists all the Books of Ecclesiastical Discipline P. 407. and even the Canon Law bears witness of it There was not a Country which abounded not with such Monuments and such Records the very strongest Proofs of assured Antiquity and unquestionable Tradition Thus I hope I have made good that Tradition shining in perpetual Practice from St. Cyprian to Pope Paschal the Second is a sure Relater of the Doctrine and Practice of the Church touching Communicating Infants whence you may clearly see that the Trent Council hath manifestly erred in this Matter and consequently was not Infallible for if they could be actually false in a Point so universally current they might bear Witness in many other Matters to false Doctrine and deny due Approbation to the true P. 196. L. 1. contr Crescon c. 33. Sixthly Hence we may learn how failly Mr. M. citeth St. Austin to prove That nothing for certain can be alledged out of Canonical Scriptures to prove that Infants ought to be baptized for is it possible That he who held it so manifest from Scripture that they ought to receive that Sacrament to which De peccat Merit l. 2. c. 27. saith he no Man hath right to come who is not first baptized should think there was no certain Proof from Scripture of their right to Baptism Moreover how often doth he prove their right to Baptism from that Passage of St. John Except he be born again of Water De peccat Merit l 1.
c. 30. L. 3. de Origin An. c. 11. Ep. 126. de Orig An. l. 1. c. 9. 3. c. 13. Congerit testimonia Scripturrrum l. 1. contr Petit. c. 27. and of the Spirit no Man can enter into the Kingdom of God How often doth he prove the Necessity of it from those Scriptures which conclude them guilty of Original Sin How often doth he from Scripture pronounce them damned without it How often doth he conclude it from the Annlogy it bears to Circumcision and bring Congeriem Scripturarum an Heap of Scriptures to confirm it And after all this can it be rationally thought he should expresly teach in contradiction to his own constant Doctrine That nothing could be certainly alledged from Scripture to prove that Infants ought to be baptized Nor is there any thing more evident than that Mr. M. C. 32 33. here wretchedly imposeth on his Reader for in the place cited by him in his first Book against Cresconius he speaks not of the Baptism of Infants but of Hereticks as will be evident to all that will inspect the place In his Fourth Book of Baptism against the Donatists C. 24. in the place cited he speaks of this Point indeed but so as to assert That if any one In hac re Authoritatem divinam quaerat enquire after Divine Authority in this matter he may find what the Baptism of Infants will avail them De Gen. ad lit l. 10. c. 23. Ex circumcisione carnis from the Circumcision used under the Old Law. In the other Passage cited by Mr. M. he saith indeed That the Custom of the Church in baptizing Infants was not to be credited Nisi Apostolica esset traditio if it were not an Apostolical Tradition but doth not in the least insinuate that the Apostles left not this Tradition in their Writings Lastly Hence it is evident that the Practice of the Church is no true Ground for the Interpretation of the Holy Scripture seeing this Practice was built upon the Churches Interpretation of John vj. 53 54 56. in a Sence which that Scripture doth not bear Secondly § 7 According to the current Interpretation of our Saviour's Words I say unto you Swear not at all received in the Second Third Fourth and Fifth Centuries it was absolutely unlawful for a Christian to swear at all To this Effect we have in the Second Century the express Testimony of Justin Martyr Apol. 2. p. 36. D. Adv. Haer. l. 2. c. 56. p. 216. affirming that Christ commanded Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to swear at all but always to speak the Truth saying Swear not all c. Of Irenaeus who saith our Lord hath not only forbid us to swear falsly Sed nec jurare praecepit but hath commanded that we should not swear Clemens of Alexandria comparing the Christian Laws with those of Plato saith Strom. l. 5. p. 596. that of Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Avoid swearing in any thing agrees 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to our Lords Prohibition of an Oath And again Avoid saith he an Oath in Traffick Paedag. l. 3. c. 11. p. 255. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in other things for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes his Name in vain And Basilides Euseb Hist Eccl l. 6. c. 5. who suffered under the Persecution of Severus being urged by some of his fellow Souldiers to swear he confidently affirmed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was not lawful for him to swear at all for he was a Christian In the Third Century Origen observes Tract 25. in Matth. F. 47. B. that when our Lord speaks of Swearing Matth. xxiij he speaks unto the Jews and that Alioquin manifeste superius vetuit omnino jurare he had before manifestly forbid to swear at all And again I think that he who would live according to the Gospel ought not to adjure another for that which our Lord speaketh in the Gospel Hom. 35. in Matth. F. 82. A. Swear not at all and this Adjure not at all is alike Si enim jurare non licet quantum ad evangelicum Christi mandatum verum est quia nec adjurare alterum licet for if by Christ's Evangelical Precept we must not swear at all it is as true that 't is not lawful to impose an Oath on others De Idol c. 11. I omit to speak of Perjury saith Tertullian Quando ne jurare quidem liceat seeing it is not lawful to swear at all Amongst the Heads belonging to the Religious Discipline of Christians which Cyprian collected for the Instruction of Quirinus the Twelfth is this Non jurandum That Christians must not swear which he proves from Matth. v. 34. And to encourage Christians against Death he tells them De Mortal Ed Ox. p. 157. That it will be to them a Deliverance from many Evils they will be tempted to in this Life For saith he Compeller is jurare quod non licet thou wilt be compelled to swear which is not a thing lawful to be done In the Fourth Century Lactantius teacheth Epit. cap. 6. p. 744. That he who is of God and a Follower of Truth will never swear falsly least he seem to deride God Sed ne jurabit quidem nor will he swear at all Eusebius Demonst Evang l. 1. c. 6. p. 23. Praep. Evang. l. 1. c 4. p. 12. comparing the Laws of Moses with those of Christ saith Moses commanded not to swear falsly Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to swear at all And speaking of the Advantages of Christianity he reckons this as one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That they had learned from Christ not to swear at all St. Basil on that Passage of the Psalmist Who sweareth to his Neighbour In Ps 14. Tom. 1. p. 132 133. and deceives him not observes that here Permission is given to a perfect Man to swear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in the Gospel it is entirely forbid Here it is said He that swears to his Neighbour and deceives him not there I say unto you Swear not at all In his Epistle to Amphilochius he declares Can. 29. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Oath is wholly forbidden Tom 2. p. 383. and much more an Oath to do Evil. In his Asceticks he instructs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not to swear at all Tom. 3. Ep. 63. p. 97. nor to put his Money out to Vsury And speaking of Gregory Thaumaturgus he saith That he abstained from an Oath contenting himself with Yea and Nay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by reason of the Command of Christ Epiphanius expresly saith Haer. 19. Ossen §. 6. p. 44. That our Lord commanded not to swear by God himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor any other Oath it being of the Devil or at the least an evil thing to swear and that Christianity requires us Haer. 59. Cathar §. 7. p. 499. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 78. 〈◊〉
were all confirmed and even ascribed to the Holy Spirit by the general Council held in Trullo and by the Second Nicene Council or who now thinks himself obliged by that Text to do so Fifthly Who knows not that anciently it was esteemed § 10 by the whole Church a thing unlawful for a Bishop Presbyter or any of the Clergy to go from one Church or Diocess to another The first Nicene Council declares That some Can. 15. who before their sitting had done this did it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against the Canon and decrees That for the future neither Bishop Priest or Deacon shall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 go from City to City Can 21. The Council of Antioch approved by the whole Church renews the same Decree The Council of Sardica represents the Attempt of such a Change as Can. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a most pernicious Custom to be pulled up by the Roots and as a Wickedness which deserved Translationes ab Ecclesia ad Majores apud Hilar. Frag. p. 437. Can. 1. Apud Athanas Apol. p. 744. Ep. 84. c. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be severely punished and therefore they declare That they who made such Changes should be excluded even from Lay-Communion and they object these Translations to the Arians as their great Crime The General Council of Chalcedon confirms all the Canons made touching this Matter by these Councils Pope Julius not only condemns this Transmigration but saith That he who practiseth it doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 despise the Station God hath given him Pope Leo adds That he who doth so shall not only be expell'd from the Chair he had invaded Sed carebit propria but shall be deprived of his own Pope Damasus declares That he will have no Communion with such Persons Moreover this Practice they condemn as Spiritual Adultery declaring That the Church to which the Bishop or the Priest is chosen is his Wife which therefore he cannot dismiss and take another without Adultery Thus the Synod of Alexandria accuse Eusebius of Nicomedia for going from Berytus to that City as having forfeited his Bishoprick and committed Adultery against the Import of that Precept Apud Athanas Apol. 2. p. 727. Art thou bound to Wife seek not to be loosed which if it be said of a Woman 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how much more of a Church of the same Bishoprick to which one being tied ought not to seek another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apud Binium Tom. 4. p. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 15. That he may not be found also an Adulterer according to the Holy Scriptures In the Synod under Mennas it was also laid to the Charge of Anthimus That having been Bishop of Trabisond he did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adulterously snatch that of Constantinople against the Ecclesiastical Laws and Canons Apud Regin de Eccles discipl l. 1. c. 250. Pope Calixtus from the same Scripture determines That if a Bishop or Priest leave his Church or Parish which is his Wife bound to him whilst he lives he commits Spiritual Adultery And suitably to the Determinations of so many Councils they who refused to be thus promoted were highly commended as observing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb de vita Constant l. 3. c. 61. the Commands of God and the Canons of the Apostles and the Church Thus when upon the Deposition of Eustathius Bishop of Antioch they would have preferred Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea to that See he refused the Offer Sozom. Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 19. because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Law of the Church forbad it and this Fact Constantine commended as acceptable to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb ibid. and agreeable to the Tradition of the Church But they who did transgress this Canon were removed from that See they were translated to though never so well deserving of the Church Thus Gregory Nazianzen though removed from Sasima to Constantinople by the Emperor though he had laboured so much in that Church to convert the Heathens he found there and hinder the Endeavours of the Hereticks yet the General Council of Constantinople observing saith Sozomen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 7. c. 7. the Laws of the Fathers and the Ecclesiastical Order took his Bishoprick from him no ways regarding the great Merits of the Person But who now in the Church of Christ regards these Canons of so many General Councils or looks upon it as a Crime to admit of or even sue for a Translation from a less Bishoprick to a greater It were easy to shew the like Difference betwixt the Practice and Judgment of the present Church and that of former Ages touching the corporal and pecuniary Punishments of Men for difference in Religion which they of former Ages most plainly disapproved of touching the Suffrage of the People being requisite to the Election of their Bishop which they expresly did assert disowning such pretended Bishops as wanted the Consent and Suffrage of the People to omit many other Instances which might be easily produced to shew that Doctrines and Practices have passed for currant and even Apostolical in former Ages which are now utterly rejected and disapproved of in this present Age. But Lastly though when the whole Church is unanimous § 11 nd all her Members do agree in the asserting any Doctrine as an Article of Christian Faith necessary to be owned by all Christians the Plea from the concurring Judgment of the Church is highly plausible and never ought without the clearest Evidence of Reason or of Scripture to be gainsaid nor hath the Church of England ever disowned any such Doctrine yet when whole Churches or Nations are divided in their Sentiments concerning any Doctrine and Number may be pleaded by both Parties then say we with the Fathers That we must have Recourse unto the Scriptures This is at present visibly the State and the Condition of the Church of Christ she agrees now in nothing but the Apostles and the Nicene Creed there is East against West and West against East Protestant against Papist and Papist against Protestant Now in this case the ancient Fathers of the Church declare it is our only safe and prudent Course to fly as doth the Church of England to the Holy Scriptures and to primitive Antiquity and say That a Necessity is laid upon us so to do Thus Hippolytus or whosoever is the Author of that Book which bears his Name having given an Account of the Prevalence which Antichrist shall have clearly insinuates That the best Preservative against him is P. 60. Scripturas audire to hear the Scriptures and that Christ will pronounce them Blessed who have done so And that they who do not Diligenter legere Scriptures P. 13. diligently read the Scriptures shall run up and down saying Where is Christ and shall not find him The
Author of the imperfect Work upon Matthew which passeth under the Name of Chrysostom speaking of the Times in which Heresy prevails Hom. 49. p 174. saith Then let them who are in Judaea fly to the Mountains that is Qui sunt Christiani conferant se ad Scripturas Let them who are Christians have Recourse to the Scriptures to the Writings of the Apostles and Prophets And why saith he doth Christ at this time command Omnes Christianos conferre se ad Scripturas all Christians to fly to the Scriptures Because saith he in this time since Heresy hath got the Churches there can be no Proof of true Christianity Neque refugium potest esse Christianorum aliud volentium cognoscere fldei veritatem nisi scripturae divinae the Christians who are desirous to know the true Faith can have no other Refuge but the Holy Scriptures Before there were many Ways of shewing which was the Church of Christ but now if Men be willing to discern her Nullo modo cognoscitur quae sit vera Ecclesia Christi nisi tantummodo per Scripturas the true Church of Christ can by no other way be known but only by the Scriptures for now all those things which are properly of Christ in truth these Heresies have in Schism they in like manner have Churches the Divine Scriptures Bishops the other Orders of the Clergy Baptism the Eucharist all other things and even Christ himself Now in the Confusion of so great Similitude he that is willing to know which is the true Church of Christ Unde cognoscat nisi tantummodo per Scripturas Whence can he know it but only by the Scriptures P. 175. Before it was known by Miracles who were true Christians and who false but now Signorum operatio omnino levata est the working of Miracles is intirely diminished and the working of feigned Miracles magis apud eos invenitur qui falsi sunt Christiani is chiefly found amongst those who are false Christians for the full Power of working Miracles is to be given to Antichrist The Church of Christ was formerly known by her Manners the Conversation of all or most of her Members being Holy but now Christians are like to or even worse than Hereticks He therefore who would know which is the true Church of Christ Unde cognoscat nisi tantummodo per Scripturas Whence can he know her but only by the Scriptures Whence our Lord knowing that there would be such a confusion of things in the last Days commands Ut Christiani qui sunt in Christianitate volentes firmitatem accipere fidei verae ad nullam rem fugiant nisi ad Scripturas That Christians who are willing to remain firm in the true Faith should fly to nothing but the Scriptures The true Chrysostom gives exactly the same Advice in the like Case for to that Enquiry What shall we say to the Greeks Hom. 33. in Act. Tom. 4. p. 799. There comes one of them and saith I would be a Christian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but I know not to whom I should join myself for there is much Contention Controversy and Tumult among you Christians What Opinion shall I chuse every one saith Truth is on my Side Whom shall I credit who know nothing of the Scriptures and hear them all pretending to them To this Inquiry Chrysostom answers This is much for us for did we say you must believe our Discourses thou had'st reason to be troubled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but since we say you must believe the Scriptures and they are plain and true 't is easy for you to pass your Judgment if any Man consents with them he is a Christian if he contradicts them he is far from this Rule Behold here the Heathen sent by St. Chrysostom to pass Judgment betwixt the Orthodox and all sorts of Hereticks from Scripture alone and told that it is easy for him so to do because the Scriptures are a plain Rule whereby to judge in Matters of this Nature But saith the Heathen one of you affirms That the Scripture saith thus the other That it speaketh otherwise interpreting it to another Sence But what of all this saith Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for hast thou not an Vnderstanding and a Judgment Where again the Heathen is supposed able by his own Judgment to discern who wrests who rightly doth interpret Scripture But how can I do this saith the Greek I know not how to judge of the Doctrines I come to be a Learner and you make me a Teacher If any one object thus saith Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we should ask him whether this be not Dissimulation and Pretence for if your Reason taught you to condemn Heathenism it may also teach you to judge betwixt us and Hereticks do not therefore dissemble or make Pretences 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for all things are easy Thou knowest what to do and leave undone do therefore what thou oughtest and with right Reason seek of God and he will fully reveal this to thee for he is no respecter of Persons it is not possible that he who heareth without Prejudice should not be perswaded P. 800. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for as if there were a Rule to which all things were to be adapted it would be easy to perceive who takes wrong Measures so is it here To this Rule you see viz. the Holy Scriptures even the Heathen is sent as to that which is sufficient to direct him to Christian Truth when there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 much Controversy and Contention amongst Christians concerning it Lastly Commonit c. 6. Vincentius Lirinensis lays down the same Rule For if the Contagio◠saith he though new endeavour to infect the whole Church as in the case of the Arians then whosoever would discern the Catholick Faith from Heretical Pravity must be careful to adhere to Antiquity C. 3 4 8 25 33 39 41. viz. To that Sence of Scripture which it is manifest our Ancestors held and must believe that without Doubtfulness which all in like manner with one consent held writ and taught openly frequently and perseveringly he being only firm in Faith who determines Id solum sibi tenendum credendumque quicquid universaliter antiquitùs Ecclesiam Catholicam tenuisse cognoverit That alone is to be held and believed by him which he knows the Catholick Church anciently held But when Schisms and Heresies have grown ancient in the Church and the Poison of them hath spread largely which say we is the present Case of the Church then saith he Nullo modo oportet nos nisi aut Sola si opus est Scripturarum Auctoritate convincere we ought only if need be to convince them by the Authority of Scripture or to shun them as being condemned Cap. 41. Jam antiquitus by ancient general Councils of Catholick Priests and when our Adversaries assault us with either of these two Weapons they will find us ready and able to defend
our selves Mr. Mumford shews that Prayer for the Dead is at least Object 6 as ancient as Tertullian and that from the Fourth Century P. 401-406 till the Reformation it generally obtained in the Church and is not this enough to prove it an Apostolical Tradition as St. Austin and some others represent it To this I have already returned one Answer by shewing Answer that Communicating Infants obtained in the same Century in which Tertullian lived Vide supra §. 6. and that from the Fourth to the Twelfth Century it was generally practised and held necessary for the Salvation of the Infant and yet the Trent Council hath declared That it was neither necessary nor Apostolical And there is one thing farther observable to compleat this Parallel That Pseudo-Dionysius in that very place where he discourses of Prayers for the Dead undertakes also to account for that other Custom Eccl. Hier. c. 7. §. 3. quae est de precib pro mortuis p. 417. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Administring not only Baptism but the most sacred Symbols of the Divine Communion to Children not capable of understanding Divine things That this was then done he saith expresly not only here P. 419. but in these following Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Priest also delivers to the Child the Sacred Symbols which his Paraphrast varies thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pachymeres p. 436. The Infant also partakes of the Mysteries And these things saith he our Masters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have brought down to us from an ancient Tradition so that the Practice as it was as early so was Tradition equally pretended for it Secondly It hath been lately shewed by the Judicious a Answer to the Jes ch 7. Bishop Vsher the searned b De poenis satisf l. 5. Dall and by the Author of a late excellent Treatise of c Sect. 1. Prayer for the Dead and Purgatory That the Ancients prayed for the Dead upon these Five Accounts 1. Dall ibid. c. 7. As believing the Doctrine of the Millenium or the Saints Reign on Earth a Thousand Years 2. Dall ib. Ush p. 232 c. As supposing that in the general Conflagration of the World at the last Day all should pass through the Fire and feel the Torment of it more or less 3. Dall ibid. c. 3 4 5 6. Ush ibid. As thinking that the Souls of just Persons departed were not to be admitted into the highest Heavens or the Fruition of Gods immediate Presence till the Resurrection but were till then reserved in Abraham's Bosom 4. Dall ibid. c. 9. As thinking That the Sentence was not instantly pronounced at the Day of their Death but was reserved to that of Judgment when the Just should have a publick Absolution and the full Crown of Righteousness awarded to them 5. Dall ib. c. 12. As furmising That even wicked Persons by their Prayers Alms and Oblations might receive Aut plenam Remissionem aut tolerabiliorem damnationem either a full Remission or a more tolerable Damnation And indeed I think it very difficult to name one Ancient Author by whom these Prayers are mentioned who held not one or more of these Opinions which might give Rise unto this Custom that of the Millenium and of the non-Admission of Souls into the highest Heavens being almost generally received in the Second Century in which we hear nothing of Prayers for the Dead Now all these Opinions are generally condemned and discarded by the Church of Rome and if they may reject all the apparent Grounds recorded in the Ancients of this Practice and censure the chief Reasons upon which they did it why may not the Tradition also be rejected as being founded upon precarious Doctrines which they themselves deny to be Apostolical Thirdly I answer That if by praying for the Dead Mr. M. only means the using of such Prayers as St. Paul made for Onesimus viz. 2 Tim. 1.18 That God would Grant him Mercy at that Day viz. The Day of Judgment or such as our Church useth in her Liturgy That God would deliver iâ— in the Hour of Death and in the Day of Judgment and that all they who are departed in the true Faith of God's Holy Name may at the Day of Recompence have their perfect Consummation and Bliss both in Body and Soul. I say if he intends this only it is no more than we our selves do by our Practice and Subscriptions own The Doctrine we deny 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 defin concil Florent apud Bin. Tom. 7. p. 851. p. 564. is that which is contained in the definition of the Florentive Council in these Words If those who have truly repented â—y in the Love of God before they have satisfied for their Sins of Commission and Omission by worthy Fruits of Penance their Souls are purged after Death by purgatory Punishments and that they may be relieved from those Punishments it is profitable for them to have the Aid of the 〈◊〉 viz. The Masses Prayers and Alms and other Acts of 〈◊〉 performed by the Faithful and that they being thus purged 〈◊〉 presently after received into Heaven and admitted to the immediate Vision of God. The Doctrine we deny is that which in the Trent Council is delivered â—â—â—us The Catholick Church instructed by the Holy Spirit 〈…〉 S. Courgils and in this General Synod taught from the Holy Scriptures Purgatorium esse animasque ibi detentas fidelium suffragijs potissimum vero Altaris acceptabili Sacrificio juvari Sess 25. and the ancient Tradition 〈…〉 â—â—ry and that 〈…〉 by the 〈…〉 the acceptable Sacrifice of the Altar which Sacrifico say they 〈…〉 the Tradition of the Apostles 〈…〉 the Sins Punishments Sed pro defunctis in Christo nondum ad plenum purgatis Sess 22. cap. 2. and Satisfactions of the Faithful living but also for the Dead is Christ not fully punged And therefore she defines That if any one say that after Justification the Fault of the Penitent is so remitted and the Guilt of eternal Punishment so blotted out Ut nullus remaneat reatus poenae temporalis exolvendae vel in hoc saeculo vel in futuro in purgatorio Sess 6. can 30. that there remains no Guilt of temporal Punishment to be suffered in this World or in the future in Purgatory before he can have admittance into the Kingdom of Heaven let him be Anathema Now to prove this Doctrine from the perpetual Tradition of the Church of Christ Mr. M. must not only prove the Antiquity of Prayer for the Dead which no body denies but 1. Apud Bin. Fom 7. p. 838. That some Soulsâ—â—dying in Christ or departing hence in the Love of God are detrained in Purgatory or as the Florentine Council doth exprels it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a place of Torments 2. That they are there detained to undergo some temporal Punishment for their Sins or to be fully purged from