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
in 2. ad Tim. p. 155. Or Espencaeus a Romanist confessing that they defended it daemonum Spectris muliebribus Somniis with diabolical Apparitions and old Wife's Dreams especially when as he there saith this we see in the very Synod which approves and urgeth in confirmation of it the Tale of Constantine's Leprosy and of his Baptism by Pope Sylvester Def. Constant contr Baril c. 10 11. adversus Spalat c. 65. p. 458 459. and of the Images of Paul and Peter produced then to him the Tale of the Image sent to Agbarus of the Passion of the Image of Christ at Beryth and that infamous Tale of the old Fornicating Monk all confuted and exposed by Learned Crakanthorp and a late * Cap. 5. p. 22 23. excellent Discourse of the Second Nicene Council If Irenaeus could so early pretend to a Testimony of all the Elders of the Church of Asia for a matter of apparent falshood if others in the Second and Third Century could frame a contrary Doctrine from such a weak allusion to a Prophetick Saying I hope the saying of One or Two Doctors in the following Ages cannot be reasonably supposed to amount to any certain proof of the Traditions or Doctrines derived from the Apostles And if their Testimonies in such Cases in which they are most properly Testators or Relaters of Church History and of Traditions received from the Elders of the Church prove so uncertain and so alien from Truth less Credit must be given to them in those Articles of Faith or Doctrines of Manners in which they only give their Judgment without pretending to Apostolical Tradition for the Truth of what they say The Patrons of Oral Tradition confessing and declaring that they rely not on them as Doctors and Divines but as Witnesses of Tradition only Moreover it is the constant Opinion of the Fathers § 6 since the Fourth Century that our Saviour twice penetrated with his Body through the Doors where the Disciples were assembled Joh. 20.19 26. Vid Maldonat in locum because he came twice to them saith St. John The Doors being shut and stood in the midst of them Whereas 't is evident that this Phrase doth not inferr this Penetration any more than my saying I came into the College the Gates being shut imports that with my Body I pierced through the College Gates It doth not in the least inforce us to conclude that our Lord did not by his power open the Doors or come in any other way And whosoever seriously considers the circumstances of the Text will find good Reason to believe that Christ did not thus penetrate through the Doors as they imagined for the Apostle doth inform us ver 20. that Christ when he was come among them shewed them his Hands and his Feet he therefore purposely appeared to convince them that he was risen in the same Body in which he Suffered and which he laid down in the Sepulchre They saith St. Luke were troubled at his Appearance Luk. xxiv 38 39. and thought that they had seen a Spirit to remove which Imagination our Lord speaks to them thus Why are ye troubled and why do such Reasonings rise up in your Hearts see my Hands and my Feet that it is I my self handle me and see for a Spirit hath not Flesh and Bones as you see I have St. John informs us that his second Appearance when the Doors were shut was designed particularly to convince St. Thomas of the same Truth and to confirm the Resurrection of his proper Body to him He speaks thus Reach hither thy Finger Joh. â—x 27. and behold my Hands and reach hither thy Hand and thrust it into my Side and be not faithless but believing whereas had Christ penetrated with his Body through the Doors at both these Appearances and so had entred in to them after the manner not of a Body but a Spirit he had done that which must have stagger'd their Faith at the same time that he designed to confirm them in it For notwithstanding any thing they seemed to see or feel they could not well believe he had true Flesh and Bones and was no Spirit had they believed and known he even then had thus penetrated through their Doors and therefore had done that which only Spirits and no true Flesh and Bones could do And if you here referr this Action with the Fathers to Christ's Almighty Power why might not his Disciples if they did the like mistrust that by the self-same power he who did this might make that Body which appeared to them seem to have Flesh and Bones and Prints of Wounds when it had not When our Roman Doctors shall have answered this Scruple Pseudo-Justin Nazianz. Chrysostom St. Jerom Austin Euthymius Apud Maldonatum in Matth. xxviij 2. I shall pay greater Reverence to the Authority of the Fathers of the Fourth and the ensuing Centuries touching this matter but till then I shall continue as much to Scruple Christ's penetration with his Body through the Doors as I do that other fine Invention of some of the same Fathers that our Lord's Body at his Resurrection penetrated through the Stone of the Sepulchre But besides all these Instances there are two celebrated in Church-History which are abundantly sufficient to discover the uncertainty of the pretences to Tradition in such Cases even according to the Judgment of most Learned Romanists The First is the known Story of the Phoenix § 7 that solitary Bird which hath no other of its Kind and which is propagated only by a Worm arising out of its burnt Ashes P. 34 35. De Resur Carn c. 13. Catech. 18. p. 213 214. Ancorat c. 85. as is related in the first Century by Clemens Romanus in his Epistle to the Corinthians which used to be publickly read in the Church By Tertullian in the Third Century In the Fourth Century by Cyril of Jerusalem who saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clemens and many others did relate it and bids us not disbelive it Epiphanius not only introduceth it as a thing whose Fame had come to many of the Faithful but he triumphs over the Jews with this Question Physic c. 11. Why should you not believe our Lord's Resurrection in Three days 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when a Bird was restored to Life in Three Days St. Ambrose saith De fide Resur p. 39. vide etiam Hexam l. 5. c. 23. in Ps 118. p. 565. Hoc relatione crebra Scripturarum Authoritate cognovimus We know this by frequent Relation and by the Authority of the Scriptures which he saith as being of the number of those Fathers who applied that Saying of the Psalmist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Just shall flourish as a Palm-Tree Ps xcij. 12. to this Bird because the same Greek word signifies both a Palm-Tree and a Phoenix Dion p. 49. Renasci Constat apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 47. b. L. 5. c. 7. p. 246. Carmen de
she actually hath imposed false Doctrines and Practices as Apostolical Tradition 2. Because she hath no better Right to testifie in this Matter than the Eastern Churches § 2.3 Because her present Testimony contradicts the Testimony of the whole Church in general and of the Roman Church in particular in former Ages § 3. 1. Touching the number of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament 2. Of the Authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews 3. Of the number of the Sacraments 4. Of Concomitance 5. Of pronouncing part of the Mass in a low Voice 6. Of the Veneration of Images 7. Of Communion in one Kind 8. Of her Twelve new Articles 9. Of the no necessity of giving the Eucharist to Infants Ibid. 4. Because this Doctrine makes Scripture Reason and Antiquity not only useless but pernicious to us § 4. More Instances of the Contradiction betwixt the Decrees of the Ancient Catholick Church and of the present Church of Rome 1st In the Decree of the Trent Council touching the Freedom of the Blessed Virgin from Actual Sin § 5. 2dly In the permission that Church gives to eat things Strangled and Blood § 6. In punishing Men with Death for their Religion § 7. In not breaking the Bread they distribute not permitting the Communicants to carry it home not Consecrating it with a loud Voice § 8. In the Matter of the Immaculate Conception though not conciliarly defined § 9. Seven Corollaries from this Instance § 10. MOreover § 1 for farther Explication of this Question let it be noted Dist 4. That by the word Tradition when we allow what can be proved by it to be in Matters of Faith a Doctrine or a Revelation derived from the Apostles in matters of Government of Discipline or practice an Apostolical Ordinance or Institution we mean not the Tradition of the present Church and much less the Tradition of the Church of Rome and her Adherents Charity Maint ch 2. §. 14. but we mean with Mr. Knot Such a Tradition which involves an evidence of Fact and from Hand to Hand from Age to Age bringing us up to the Times and Persons of the Apostles Id quod in Ecclesia Universa omnibus retro temporibus servatum est merito ab Apostolis creditur institutum De verbo Dei non scripto l. 4 c. 9. and our Saviour himself cometh to be confirmed by all those Miracles and other Arguments by which they proved their Doctrine to be true or such a Practice as the Church hath observed in all past Ages according to the Third Rule of Bellarmine for the discerning Apostolical Traditions and such an Article of Faith as all the Doctors of the Church by common consent have always testified to have descended from Apostolical Tradition Such is the Tradition which St. Basil insists upon for the use of the Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Spirit in the Doxology of the Church viz. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. de Spiritu Sancto c. 29. which was customarily used in the Churches from the first Preaching of the Gospel to that very time and of such Traditions we say with him Ibid. That it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 suitable to the Apostles Doctrine to continue in them Praefat. in libr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such is the Tradition of which Origen speaks when he saith That only is to be believed as Truth which in nothing disagreeth from the Tradition Ecclesiastical that is The praedicatio per successionis ordinem ab Apostolis tradita usque ad praesens in Ecclesiis permanens preaching delivered down by order of Succession from the Apostles and to this present time continued in the Churches This is the Tradition of which St. Cap. 8. Austin speaks in his Book De utilitate credendi viz. of the Tradition quae ab ipso Christo per Apostolos ad nos usque manavit Cap. 10. which came down from Christ by his Apostles to that present time which à Majoribus nostris tradita ad nos usque servata est being delivered by our Ancestors hath been preserved to our times and which is Cap. 14. celebritate consensione vetustate roborata strengthened with a general Fame Consent and Antiquity And this is also the Authority he meaneth when he saith I should not have believed the Gospel nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae moveret Authoritas unless the Authority of the Catholick Church had moved me For he informs us That he speaks of that Authority which was Contr. Epist Man. quam vocant Fundament c. 4. Miraculis inchoata vetustate firmata begun by Miracles and confirmed by Antiquity And this must of necessity be meant by that Tradition which is the Foundation of an Article of Faith for Faith must be a matter of Divine Revelation and therefore must proceed from Christ or his Apostles from whom alone all Revelations of the Christian Faith have issued the Churches Business being to Believe to Preach and Testifie not to enlarge or shorten to alter or diversisie the Faith by them delivered to her and what they taught her as a thing necessary to be believed or practised by all Christians must consequently be so believed taught and practised through all future Ages provided that they walk according to their Rule Common c. ◠Hence saith Vincentius Lirinensis Hoc est vere proprieque Catholicum quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus That is truly Catholick Doctrine which was held in all places all times and by all Persons Sess 4. And accordingly the Trent Council and the Roman Doctors pretend to have received those Doctrines in which they differ from us partly from Scripture and partly from Tradition derived from the Apostles to their days But here begins the difference betwixt us § 2 1. That they will have the Testimony of the present Church to be an Evidence sufficient of the Tradition of the Church of former Ages and will maintain this way of Arguing to be good The present Church of Rome and they who hold Communion with her deliver such and such Doctrines as Traditions received from the Apostles and handed down from them thoughout all Ages and by all true Christian Churches to this present Age and therefore they undoubtedly are such We on the contrary say That we have clear unquestionable Evidence from Scripture and Church-History that many of the Doctrines imposed upon us by the Church of Rome as Apostolick Doctrines and Traditions were not received but rather were condemned and abhorred by the former Ages of the Church of Christ in general and in particular by that of Rome and this hath been already proved in the instance of their Latin Service the Veneration of Images and Communion in one Kind whence it demonstratively follows that this proposition is contrary to plain matter of Fact. Again What better reason can be given for this Consequence viz. The present Church of Rome with her Adherents deliver
the 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
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
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
do Baptize The Synod at Tyre saith the same thing The Council of Constantinople under Menna stiles it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The holy Symbol into which we were all Baptized Basilicus and Maurus in two several Edicts confirmed the same Nicene Creed with these words Evagr. Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 4 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That it was the Creed into which they and all the Believers before them were Baptized St. Jerom writing against the Luciferians calls the Apostles Creed the Faith of the Church which Lucifer se die Baptismatis servanturum promiserat had promised to keep at the day of his Baptism Theodoret saith Ep. 145. Tom. 3. p. 1023. We require those who come every Year to Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to learn the Faith expounded at Nice Ep. 97. ad Mon. Palaest c. 8. p. 637. Pope Leo saith of it That it is the Confession which pronouncing before many Witnesses Sacramentum Baptismi suscipimus we receive the Sacrament of Baptism and that it was the Symbol Ep. 24. ad Flav. c. 1. 2. quod per totum mundum omnium regenerandorum voce depromitur which was pronounced by all that were Baptized throughout the World. After this time we find one of these two Symbols required to be rehearsed in the baptismal Offices either by those who came to be Baptized or by their Sureties Pag. 39. as is evident from the Ordo Romanus were it is required to be pronounced at Baptism in Greek and Latin. De Eccles Off. l. 2. c. 21 22. From the Treatise of Isidore Hispalensis where it is called the Symbol quod competentes recipiunt which they who were prepared for Baptism received and learn'd Lib. 1. c. 27. From the Treatise of Rabanus Maurus of the Institution of the Clergy which saith That before the Catechumen was brought to Baptism Apostolicae fidei ei ostenditur Symbolum the Apostles Symbol was shewed to him and he was asked whether he believed it From the Degrees of Ivo which say Part. 81. 90. c. 223. That Baptizandis traditur salutare symbolum the wholesome Symbol is delivered to those that are to be Baptized De consecr Dist 4. c. 155 156 158 c. From the Canon Law compiled by Gratian were we find many Canons to the same effect And lastly from the form of Baptism still retain'd in the Roman Church 4. § 7 The same Tradition teacheth That the Creed used in the Church till the Nicene Council and that of Nice as the true Explication of it were by the whole Church of Christ for many Centuries esteemed and embraced and taught to others as the whole system of all things necessary to be believed by Christians in order to Salvation or as a perfect Summary or Rule of the meer Articles of Christian Faith. Irenaeus in the second Century having cited the Creed of the whole Church which with unanimous consent she preached taught and delivered L. 1. c. 1. p. 42. as having but one Mouth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the truth preached by the Church and which the Church dispersed through the World Cap. 2. Cap. 4. received from the Apostles and their Disciples the one and the same Faith which the Church retained throughout the whole World. The Tradition of the Apostles manifested in the whole World Lib. 3. cap. 3. Ibid. p. 234. and to be seen in every Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the one and only truth which she received from the Apostles and delivered to others I say he speaking of this Creed this Faith this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this preaching of the truth declares That he who among the Governors of the Church was the most able Speaker could say no other things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 1. cap. 2. for none of them was above his Master nor could he who was infirm in Speech lessen the Tradition for the Faith being one and the same neither did he who was most able to speak of it exceed nor he who spake least of it diminish it And as a farther Witness of this matter he brings in Polycarp attesting Lib. 3. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That he received this truth from the Apostles and this only Tertullian producing a like Creed of his times De praescrip Haer. cap. 37. which he declares to be that Rule which the Church received from the Apostles De Resur Car. cap. 18. and the Apostles from Christ the unum apud omnes edictum Dei the one Edict of God which hangs up among all Christians that is saith Rigaltius on the place The Symbol of the Christian Faith. De Virg. Veland cap. 1. I say having produced this Creed he stiles it Regulam fidei unam omnino solam immobilem irreformabilem That Rule which is entirely one and which alone is unmoveable and not to be reformed that is which admits not novitatem correctionis of any new Correction as other things belonging to the Church's Discipline might do This Rule saith he we having once believed De praescrip Haer. c. 8. nihil desideramus ultra credere hoc enim prius credimus non esse quod ultra credere debeamus desire to believe nothing more for this we first believe that we ought to be believe nothing more that knowing this Cap. 14. there is no need of seeking after other things quia quod debeas nosti because in it we know all that we ought to know the only Article to be believed besides it being this aliud non esse credendum Cap. 9. Cap. 14. that nothing else is to be believed this being regula fidei quae salvum facit the Rule of Faith which brings Salvation Origen in his Book of Principles lays down this Rule Let the ecclesiastical Preaching delivered by order of Succession from the Apostles and to this present time continuing in the Churches Proem in libr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be observed Adding That we ought to know this that the Holy Apostles preaching the Faith of Christ did manifestly deliver even to those who were most slow in Inquisition of divine Knowledge quaecunque necessaria crediderunt omnibus credentibus all things which they believed necessary for all Believers and then he runs over the Articles of the Apostles Creed as they were then received in the Church of God and saith These are the form of those things quae per praedicationem Apostolicam manifeste traduntur which are manifestly delivered by the Preaching of the Apostles St. Cyril calls this Creed Catech. 4. p. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The teaching of the Faith and the instruction of the Catechist in the Doctrines of the Church Adding That the Church had in few words comprized 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Catech. 5. p. 44. the whole Doctrine of Faith and advising his Catechist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to keep the Faith alone delivered to him by the Church
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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
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
the Apostles understood not or neglected if they did not fulfil them but hid some of the Light that is of the Word of God and Sacramenti Christi of the Doctrine of Christ. Whereas saith he it was incredibile vel ignorasse Apostolos plenitudinem praedicationis vel non omnem ordinem Regulae nobis edidiffe that eitheir the Apostles were ignorant of any thing they were to preach or that they did not perfectly reveal the Rule of Faith to all He also shews That the Church did not alter what she had received from the Apostles because the Rule of Faith was one and the same in all Churches of Christ they being all one Chap. 20. ejusdem Sacramenti una traditione by having the same Tradition of the same Rule of Faith and because they did in eadem fide conspirare agree in the same Faith this Rule this Creed mentioned Chapter the Thirteenth must therefore be according to Tertullian the fulness of the Apostles preaching the entire Rule of Faith they preached to all or else according to him the Apostles must be ignorant or unfaithful and his ensuing Argument That all succeeding Churches agreed in this Rule as in the Tessera Hospitalitatis the Signal of Friendship Ibid. that it was one and the same among them all and that they who were not by Original Apostolical Churches were yet Apostolical because they did conspire with them that were so in the Belief of this Faith is a farther demonstration that this Creed was the entire Faith delivered by the Apostles and taught by all Churches since otherwise Tertullian's Argument must be false for he expresly undertakes to prove that the Apostles delivered to the Churches the entire Rule of Faith and that the Churches did faithfully transmit to posterity the whole Faith they received from them and that because they all transmitted the Apostles Creed mentioned Chapter the Thirteenth had not then that contained the whole Christian Faith owned then by all the Orthodox as such Tertullian had given up the Cause unto the Hereticks for they might have replied upon him as do the Romanists to us that the Apostles delivered many other Traditions as necessary to be believed as those contained in the Creed and that these were the Doctrines which they owned and Tertullian rejected Hence then our Demonstration from these words of Tertullian is invincible All Christians conspired in this that this Rule of his contained the whole Faith received from the Apostles beyond which nothing was necessary to be believed whosoever could produce this Creed they received into Communion pro consanguinitate doctrinae because agreeing with them in the Faith and whosoever pretended to any Articles of Faith not mentioned in this Creed they confuted them by saying they had no such Article in the Creed and therefore the Apostles Chap. 32 33. nihil tale docuerunt taught no such thing and rejected them ob diversitatem Sacramenti as holding a Faith different from that of the Church Now how is it likely that so many and so great Churches should erre in one Faith The Errors of the Churches had there been any in delivering their entire Rule of Faith must needs have varied but that which amongst them all was one and the same must be a sure Tradition and then the Doctrines of the Roman Creed must be rejected as not taught by the Apostles and as different from the Churches Faith. Mr. M. Ibid. Lo here plain Protestantism in the highest point proved and approved by all Christians within Two hundred Years after Christ The same Doctrine is delivered Chapter the Nineteenth and the Twentieth Pag. 429 430. on which Mr. M. insists Sect. 20. Num. 4. for there he tells us That our Lord sent his Twelve Apostles eandem doctrinam ejusdem fidei nationibus promulgare to preach the same Doctrine of Faith to the Nations and so to plant Churches in every City from which other Churches received traducem fidei femina doctrinae the Tradition of their Faith and the Seeds of Doctrine and embracing of it became all Apostolical by receiving the same Rule of Faith. Hence therefore saith he we prescribe against the Hereticks Hinc igitur dirigimus praescriptionem Cap. 21. for if our Lord sent his Apostles to preach we must receive no other Preachers of the Faith than he appointed now what they preached ought not to be otherwise proved than by the same Churches which they planted eis praedicando tam vivâ quod aiunt voce quam per Epistolas postea by preaching to them by word of mouth and afterwards by their Epistles And if so 't is manifest saith he that Doctrine is to be accounted true which conspires with the Apostolical Churches whence Faith had its Original and that is to be rejected which contradicts that Faith it remains therefore uti demonstremus an haec nostra doctrina cujus Regulam supra edidimus de Apostolorum traditione censeatur ex hoc ipso an caeterae de mendacio veniunt that we demonstrate whether our Doctrine the Rule of which we have laid down Chapter the Thirteenth derives from the Tradition of the Apostles and consequently whether all others be not false He therefore doth again declare That the Creed mentioned by him there is the entire Rule of Faith and that by which we may discern who hold the Truth and who teach Falshood And argues thus All the Apostolical Churches have delivered this Creed as that entire Doctrine which they received from the Apostles and all the Hereticks say the contrary therefore their Doctrine must be rejected and that of the Apostolick Churches be received as the Truth Mark here Pag. 429. to use the words of Mr. M. how the first ground on which we are to stand as upon a ground most advantageous for gaining the victory against Error and purchasing triumph to Truth is the Tradition of this Creed of the Apostles as the entire Rule of Faith for by that alone we assuredly know whether our Doctrine of which the Rule is given Chapter the Thirteenth came from Apostolical Tradition from this Rule of Faith delivered by the Apostles by word of Mouth and by their Writings and then by Tradition delivered down by successive practice of all Churches to which Churches Tertullian here expresly sends us will be discovered that only Tradition of the Rule of Faith in which totum Christianae fidei Sacramentum all the Mysteries of Christian Faith are contained And thus Tertullian goes on pressing his Adversary meerly by the Tradition of this Creed as the entire Rule of Faith and this way and only this way he prescribes that we ought to shew what Christ and his Apostles taught Fifthly § 9 Hence we return an Answer to that demand so often but so vainly made What Catalogue have you of Fundamental Articles of Faith For here is a Catalogue of them recommended to the whole World of Christians by so great Authority as may well be esteemed
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
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
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
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
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
general Postea per dei voluntatem in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futurum Iren. lib. 3. cap. 1. the Fathers do expresly say declaring That the Apostles first preached the Gospel and afterwards by the Will of God delivered the same Gospel which they preached to us in the Scripture to be for future Ages the Pillar and the Ground of Truth The Marcionites owned the Writings of St. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dial. contra Marcion p. 59. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. but rejected the Evangelists St. Matthew and St. John. Against them therefore Origen doth in the person of Eutropius dispute after this manner Did these Apostles preach the Gospel with writing or without writing what they preached Marc. Without writing Eutrop. Is it probable they preached Salvation only to them that heard them and had no regard to them that were to come after as must be supposed if they writ not that Doctrine of Salvation which they preached for those things which are spoken and not written do presently vanish St. Austin is express for the same Doctrine for having told us That our Lord Jesus according to the saying of St. John Did many things which were not written He adds Tr. 49. in Joh. Tom. 9. p. 355. Electa sunt autem quae scriberentur ea quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur That they chose out of them those things to be written which they conceived sufficient for the Salvation of Believers Quicquid enim ille de suis factis dictis nos legero voluit hoc scribendum illis tamquam suis manibus imperavit De consensu Evangelist lib. 1. cap. 35. Again He saith the same St. Austin who sent the Prophets before his descent sent also the Apostles after his Ascention of all whom he was the Head wherefore it must not be said that he writ nothing seeing his Members writ that which they knew by the Dictates of their Head for whatsoever he would have us read concerning what he did or said he commanded his Apostles as being his Amanuenses to write down Now seeing all they were to teach was only his Sayings and Commands they who stood thus engaged to write all that he would have us read of his Sayings must write all that was needful to be known in order to Mens Salvation for all this sure the Saviour of the World would have us read all this 't was therefore necessary for them to write that we might read Because that Heresies would afterwards break in upon the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Proem in Matth. and the Manners of Christians would be corrupted saith Theophylact it pleased the Apostles to write the Gospels that from thence being taught the Truth we might not be perverted by the Falshood of Heresie nor be corrupted in our Manners Now sure what is sufficient to preserve us from Heresie in Doctrine and from Corruption in Manners must plainly and fully contain all things necessary to be believed that we may not be Hereticks and to be done that we may not be wicked To proceed to the particular accounts the Ancients give us of the inditing of every Gospel in particular § 2 Eusebius informs us of St. Matthew that the Tradition was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 24. That he was necessitated to write for having first preached to the Hebrews as he was about to go to others commiting his Gospel to writing in his own Language he supplied by writing their want of his Presence from whom he went. St. Chrysostom saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Matth. Hom. 1. pag. 3. They had it by Tradition that the believing Jews desired St. Matthew to leave those things in writing which he had delivered by word of mouth to them and that in compliance with this request he writ his Gospel in the Hebrew Tongue Sicut referunt Matthaeum conscribere Evangelium causa compulit talis cum facta fuisset in Pal. persecutio ut carentes forte doctoribus fidei non carerent doctrina petierunt Matthaeum ut omnium verborum operum Christi conscriberet eis Historiam ut ubicunque essent futuri totius secum haberent sidei statum Praefat. The Author of the imperfect Comment on St. Matthew who passeth under the same name delivereth the Tradition thus That St. Matthew was compelled to write his Gospel upon this account That when a grievous Persecution arose in Palaestin so that they were in danger to be separated from each other that wanting Teachers they might not want the Doctrine of Faith they desired Matthew to write for them the History of all the Words and Works of Christ that so wherever they should be hereafter they might have with them totius fidei statum the whole form of Faith. The Tradition concerning the Gospel of St. Mark runs thus That when the Hearers of St. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 15. Peter had been illuminated by his Doctrine They were so affected with it as not to be contented with hearing of it all at once or with the unwritten Teaching or oral Tradition of the heavenly Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. but with all manner of Exhortations did entreat St. Mark the Follower of St. Peter that he would leave them in writing a digest or memorial of the Doctrine delivered to them by word of Mouth and that they never ceased till they had obtained their requests and that thus they were the causes of writing the Gospel of St. Mark This Eusebius relates from the Tradition of Clemens of Alexandria and Papias Bishop of Hierapolis The words of Clemens he gives thus Clemens in the same Book puts down the Tradition of the ancient Presbyters touching the Order of the Gospels which is to this effect Peter preaching the Word publickly at Rome and speaking the Gospel by the Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 14. many that were present intreated Mark to write what he spake as being one who had long followed him and remembred the things spoken and that thereupon Mark having writ the Gospel gave it to those who desired it And of the same Mark Papias saith Euscbius relates That he took especial care to say nothing that was false and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 3. c. 38. to leave nothing out of his Gospel he had heard from Peter Moreover Eusebius farther informs us from the same Authors that St. Mark going afterwards to Alexandria preached there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 16. the Gospel which he had written And that the first Successors of the Apostles leaving their Countries did the work of Evangelists to them who had not as yet heard of the Christian Faith to whom they preached Christ and delivered the Writings of the Holy Evangelists 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 3. c. 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
Lib. 1. c. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Apostles and their Disciples The true and life-giving Faith quam ab Apostolis Ecclesia percepit distribuit filiis suis Lib. 3. c. 1. Apol. c. 47. which the Church received from the Apostles and distributes to her Sons It saith Tertullian is the Rule of Truth quae venit à Christo transmissa per comites ejus which came from Christ and was by his Companions handed down to us De praescrip Cap. 9. Cap. 14. Cap. 21. Epist ad Jov. Tom. p. 246 247. Pag. 501. Epist 81. The Institution of Christ which all Nation ought to believe Regula à Christo instituta The Rule prescribed by Christ and which the Churches received from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ This saith Athanasius is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Divine and Apostolical Faith which was preached from the beginning It is saith Cyril of Jerusalem the Tradition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Holy and Apostolick Faith. Is is saith Ambrose the Symbol of the Faith of the Apostles which Symbol the Church of Rome keeps undefiled Ruffinus in his Exposition of this Symbol saith Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 46. That their Ancestors left to them this Tradition that the Apostles being to depart one from the other did first agree upon this as the Rule of what they afterwards should preach and determined hanc credentibus dandam esse regulam this should be given as a Rule to Believers and as an Index of their Faith by which he should be known qui Christum vere secundùm Apostolicas regulas praedicaret who preached Christ truly according to the Rules of the Apostles It is saith Austin De Temp. Serm. 181. To. 10. p. 984. certa Regula Fidei the sure Rule of Faith which the Apostles delivered And then he proceeds almost in the very words of Ruffinus De Off. Eccles l. 2. c. 22. to declare That this was the Tradition of the Ancients Isidore Hispalensis saith Tali ratione institutum majores nostri dixerunt Our Ancestors have said that the Apostles Creed was instituted after this manner and then he goes on in the very words of Ruffinus to the end of that Chapter De instit Cler. l. 1. c. 27. l. 2. c. 56. Rabanus Maurus also hath transcribed the same words and in them brought down the Tradition to the Ninth Century And to return to the Age following Ruffinus Pope Leo tells us Ep. 96. This is the short and perfect Confession of the Symbol which is signed with the twelve Sentences of the Apostles Praefat. ad Expos Symb. Apost Apud Ivon decret part 1. c. 35 36. Venantius Fortunatus in the Sixth Century informs us That this is the Symbol which they among themselves wholesomely made by the assistance of the Holy Spirit It is saith venerable Bede the Symbol of Faith delivered by the Apostles 3. It is also evident from Tradition § 6 that Christians were received into the Church by Baptism on the profession of this Faith or that this only was the Faith which they required them to believe and to profess at Baptism Justin Martyr saith only in the general That as many as believed Apol. 2. p. 93. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the things which were said and taught by Christians were true were admitted by Baptism among the number of Christians But Irenaeus his Cotemporary L. 1. c. 1. p. 40. gives us the Creed delivered by the Apostles and says it was the undeclinable Rule of Truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Christian received by Baptism and the preaching of that Truth by which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church illuminates all that are willing to come to the knowledge of the Truth L. 7. c. 40 41. The Apostolical Constitutions tell the Priest what the Catechist who is to be Baptized must renounce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the things which cencern his being Listed among Christians Now they are these I rank my self among the Souldiers of Christ and I believe I am Baptized into the one unbegotten only true God c. And after he hath made profession of this Creed he is to be Anointed and Baptized Can. 46. The Council of Laodicea saith That they who are to be Baptized must first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 learn the Faith and recite it to the Bishop or his Presbyter The Seventy eighth Canon of the Sixth General Council saith the same thing Now what it is to learn the Faith we know from all the Fathers of those times who do with one consent inform us that the Catechists were prepared for Baptism by being taught the Creed the Symbol or the Rule of Faith delivered and taught by the Apostles and afterwards explained by that of Nice or of Constantinople and that they were Baptized into the profession of this Creed Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 18. Sozomen and Gelasius inform us that a plain Lay-man and Confessor undertook to confute a Philosopher in the Council of Nice Gelas Cyz l. 2. c. 13. And that he did this by repeating of his Creed saying to the Philosopher There is one God who having made all things sustained them by his Word and holy Spirit This word O Philosopher we adore knowing him to be the Son of God and believing that for our Redemption he was incarnate of a Virgin and was born and was made Man and that by his Death and Passion on the Cross he delivered us from eternal condemnation and by his Resurrection he purchased for us Life eternal whom being ascended into Heaven we hope that he will come again to be judge of all our Actions And that the Philosopher answering 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Syn. Const sub Menna Act 5. Bin. Tom. 4. P. 78 82. He believed this the Confessor bid him then follow him to the Church to be Baptized at which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Nicene Synod rejoiced From both which Instances we learn what was the Symbol into which Christians were Baptized when that Council met and which they owned as sufficient for that end Eusebius Caesariensis speaks thus of his own Creed approved by the Nicene Council As we have received from the Bishops that were before us Socr. Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 8. p 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both when we were Catechized and when we received Baptism and as we have learned from the Scriptures and as we have both believed and taught when we were made Priests and Bishops so believing at present we declare this our Faith unto you The Council of Constantinpole confirms the Nicene Confession of Faith as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodor. Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 9. being most ancient and annexed to Baptism Con. Constant sub Menna Act. 5. Bin. Tom. 4. p. 78 87 85. 91 96. The Synod of Jerusalem says it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Holy Symbol into which we were Baptized and
It is saith Hilary Ad. Const Aug. p. 342. 343. the safest course to retain that first and only Evangelical Faith confessed in Baptism and to innovate nothing in it And this he affirms in opposition to the New Creeds so frequent in his Days 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orat. 52. init Ep. ad Epictet Tom. 1. p. 582. a. Epist ad Afric Episc p. 932. The Creed of Nice saith Nazianzen is a short Boundary and Rule of Christian Wisdom It is saith Athanasius sufficient for the destruction of all Impiety 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and for the confirmation of the true Faith in Christ for the destruction of every wicked Heresie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and for confirmation of the ecclesiastical Doctrine The Synod held at Sardis defined That nothing farther should be written of the Faith but that all Men should rest contented with the Faith confessed at Nice Athanas Ep. ad Antioch p. 576. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it was in nothing defective and because if any other Faith should be composed that might be looked upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as imperfect St. De tempore Serm. 115 119 131 Austin saith That the Catholick Faith is made known to the Faithful in the Creed that this Creed is Comprehensio fidei nostrae atque perfectio The comprehension and perfection of our Faith that it is Plenitudo credentium totum continens compendio brevitatis confirmans onnes perfectione credendi The fulness of Believers comprising the whole of their Faith in a compendious brevity Ep. 84. Tom. 3. p. 961. and confirming all in perfect Faith. Theodoret writes to the Bishops of Cilicia that they would require their People tokeep the Nicene Faith entire and undefiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as compendiously teaching the Evangelical and Apostolical Doctrine Damasus closeth his Symbol which for substance is the same with that of Nice Apud Hieron Tom. 4. f. 44. in these expressions Haec crede haec retine believe and retain these things Subject thy Soul to this Faith and thou shalt obtain Life and a reward from Christ which shews he thought this Faith sufficient for that end Ibid. f. 46. Ruffinus informs us that according to the request of Pope Laurence he was to compose something de fide secundum Symboli traditionem of the Faith delivered in the Symbol And of this he declares That it was norma praedicationis the Rule of the Apostles preaching the Rule which they composed credentibus dandam to be delivered to Believers fidei suae indicium the index of their Faith. Petrus Chrysologus saith Serm. 57 58 59 60 61. That it is salutis symbolum vitae symbolum forma fidei credulitatis norma fides quam credimus docemus the symbol of Life and Salvation Ep. 27. ad Pulcher c. 4. p. 492. the Rule of Faith the Faith which we believe and teach Pope Leo That it is a short perfecta confessio and perfect Confession of the Catholick Faith. The Great Council of Chalcedon saith of the Faith of Nice Act. 5. in fine That it sufficeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the perfect knowledge and confirmation of Piety Theodor. Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 15. The Synod of Ariminum That it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an exact Rule of Faith that of Sardis That nothing was to be added to it Apud Athanas Ep. ad Antioch P. 576. Id. de Synod Arim. Selsach p. 876 878. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because nothing was wanting to it that of Sirmium adds That there was no need of running to Synods that of Nice Having done all things for the Catholick Church a Synod to which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all Men assented and all Men judged it sufficient The Ordo Romanus or old Roman Liturgy saith Apud Hittorp p. 38 39. This is that Faith qua credentes justificati sumus by which believing we are justified salutaris sides the saving Faith which the Holy Spirit dictated to the Masters of the Church The summ of our Faith which as they had received so they delivered it unto them Isidore Hispalensis saith of the Apostles Creed De Eccl. Officiis l. 2. c. 22. That they appointed it to be given to Believers as a Rule that it contained few words but in them were contained omnia Sacramenta all the Articles of Faith that they who could not read the Scriptures retaining in their Heart these things might have sufficient and saving knowledge that it contains the Confession of the Trinity and the Vnity of the Church Orig. l. 6. c 19. omne Christiani dogmatis Sacramentum and the whole Christian Doctrine that this Symbol of Faith and the Lord's Prayer Sentent l. 1. c. 21. parvulis Ecclesiae sufficit ad coelorum regna capessenda sufficed to bring the little ones of the Church to the Kingdom of Heaven De Eccles Off. l. 1. c. 16. And of the Nicene Creed he adds That it speaks de omni parte fidei of every part of Faith. Rabanus Maurus in his Book of the Institution of the Clergy Lib. 2. c. 56. transcribes the forecited words of Isidore Regino in the same Century saith That all who come to Penance De Eccl. Discipl l. 1 c. 272. or to receive the Sacrament must be able to recite the Creed and the Lord's Prayer for in the one is contained the Christian Faith in the other we are taught what we are to pray for and that no Man in these matters must pretend the slowness of his Vnderstanding or defect of Memory for these things are so short as that the dullest Man may learn them and yet they are tam magna ut qui eorum scientiam pleniter capere potuer it sufficere ea sibi credatur in salutem so great that whosoever fully understands them will find them sufficient for his Salvation Moreover Ruffinus Isidore and Rabanus Maurus do inform us that the Apostles made this the sign by which he should be known who preached Christ truly secundum Apostolicas literas according to the directions of the Apostles from those deceitful Workers who did not preach him integris traditionum lineis according to the integrity of Tradition Accordingly 5. Observe § 8 That these Fathers do constantly assert this Symbol to be a Test of Orthodoxy and that by which they did prescribe against all Hereticks proving their Doctrines to be new and such as ought to be rejected as being not contained in this Symbol or this Rule of Faith. Irenaeus in his Book against Heresies declares Lib. 3. cap. 3. that it is sola vera vivifica fides the only true and life-giving Faith which the Church received from the Apostles and distributes to her Children That even without arguing we might exactly discern the firmness of the Truth preached by the Church Lib. 1. c. 1. and the falseness of the Heretical perswasions there being nothing of them
p. 165. Syn. Sard. apud Athan. Ep. ad Afric Episc p. 941. Because this venerable Symbol saith the General Council of Chalcedon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sufficeth to the perfect knowledge of the Truth and as the Bishop of Ephesus well notes upon that place It is manifest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing is wanting to what is perfect they also said there was no need of adding any thing to it because it was sufficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the Subversion of every wicked Heresy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to overthrow all the most ungodly Heresies and that it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Inscription as upon a Pillar against all Heresies 2dly Because they would not alter the Tradition they had received from their Forefathers We saith Cyril in the General Council of Ephesus have taken this care that nothing should be added to Apud Concil Flor Sess 5. Bin. Ibid. p. 589. or altered in the Nicene Symbol as being mindful of him that said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Remove not the ancient Bounds which thy Fathers have set 3dly Because they would not give occasion to any to suspect their Faith imperfect or that any Article of Faith was wanting in the Creeds already made Thus the Synod of Sardis decreed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apud Athan. Ep. ad Antioch p. 576. That nothing more should be written touching the Faith but that all should rest satisfied with the Faith confessed by the Nicene Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it was deficient in nothing and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 least that of Nice should be esteemed imperfect and a pretence should be given to as many as will to write and define touching the Faith. Theodoret H. Eccl. l. 2. c. 15. The Orthodox Fathers in the Council of Ariminum professed That they were Children of the Nicene Fathers but if say they we should dare to take away any thing from what they have written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or add any thing to it we should be spurious Children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being Accusers of what they did who delivered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an exact Rule of Faith. And again they declare it Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a dangerous thing to add any thing or take any thing from the Nicene Creed because if either of these things should be done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Enemies would have liberty to do what they would Pag. 951. And Athanasius in his Epistle to John and Antiochus his Presbyters commands them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to reject them who would say more or less than was contained in that Creed Apud Concil Flor. Sess 8. Bin. Ibid. p. 627. And the Bishop of Ephesus well argues That we can suffer nothing by keeping to the same Faith which the divine Fathers confessed and believed since none but mad Men can accuse it of imperfection Secondly § 2 Hence it demonstratively follows that these Creeds must be a perfect digest of all things necessary to be believed now and throughout all succeeding Ages of the World for how can it be necessary for any Christian to have more in his Creed than the Apostles and the Christians of the Four first Centuries had May the Churches of after-Ages make the narrow way to Life more narrow than our Saviour his Apostles and the Fathers left it When the whole Church hath so expresly taught that this Faith was sufficient for the perfect knowledge of the Truth that in it nothing was deficient may others yet come after them and by adding as many more Articles no way pretending to be explications of the former Faith remove the ancient Bounds which our Fathers have set Yea when the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. xx 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 20. who profess that they revealed the whole Council of God unto the Churches and kept back nothing needful for Salvation delivered this as the only Rule of Faith and their Successors handed it down unto posterity as that to which nothing was to be added beyond which nothing was to be believed as an Article of Faith shall after Ages come and add as many more Articles as necessary to be believed unto Salvation as those which they delivered and damn all those who do refuse to own them as such Moreover what reason can any Man give why any person should not be saved now by the same Faith which was sufficient for Salvation in the days of the Apostles and the first four Centuries Are we wiser than they or are our Doctors more Learned or more Faithful Is there another Covenant made with the Church since their Days Are other terms of Salvation since made or is God less merciful to us than he was to them Is not the famous Rule of Lirinensis this Quod ab omnibus quod ubique quod semper That which was always and every where believed of all that is the Rule of Faith And must it not hence follow that there can be no New Article no Declaration obliging us to believe any thing which was not always matter of the Christian Faith If you would palliate the matter by this specious pretence That though the Church can make no Articles of Faith which never were revealed by the Apostles she may declare those that want sufficient Declaration is it not Nonsense to say What always was believed wanteth sufficient Declaration that is it wanteth what is necessary to render it an Article of Faith or a thing fit to be believed Did the Apostles know that Article which you say wants sufficient Declaration to be a necessary Article of Faith or no Did the Compilers of the Nicene or Constantinopolitan Creed did all those Ages who asserted the perfection of these Creeds as to all matters of the Christian Faith know it or no If not then must they teach they knew not what or their Successors without a new Revelation could not know it if they did know it and declare it What farther Declaration could it need unless the Church after that Declaration lost a necessary Article of Faith delivered to her If they knew it but did not declare it they must be charged with concealing some necessary part of the Gospel or if it were unnecessary why may not others still conceal it and not afflict and clog the Faith of Christians with unnecessary things If you say with the Latins in the Council of Florence Apud Bin. Concil To. 8. p. 649. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If all Men would acquiesce in the Faith defined there would be no need to be concerned for any other besides that of Nice but by reason of Mens deviation from the Right Line to bye and crooked false and erroneous ways it is necessary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to unfold and interpret better the same Faith and to make plain the way of Truth To this I reply That here the Cause is given up to Protestants for hence it
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
Matthew was writ saith the Tradition of the Fathers Theoph. proem in Matth. Athan. Synops p. 155. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eight Years after our Lords Ascension Mark writ his Gospel whilst St. Peter lived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ten Years after our Lords Assumption saith Theophylact. St. Luke writ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fifteen Years after our Lords Ascension Proem in Luc. say Dorotheus and Theophylact. St. John 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thirty two Years after our Lords Ascension saith the same Theophylact. Chap. 7. §. 2. Now these Gospels as I before have proved were by the General Tradition of the whole Church of Christ esteemed sufficiently to contain that Christian Doctrine which the Apostles taught and purposely to have been written to preserve it entire to Posterity Secondly This Argument is wholly overthrown by this one Observation That the Apostles in their Preaching declare that they spake only what was written in the Books of the Old Testament or might be clearly gathered thence When they undertook to prove any Article of Christian Faith they proved it from the Scriptures of the Old Testament When they reasoned with others to bring them to the Faith they did it from the same Scriptures Acts 26.22 1 Cor. 15.2 3 4. saying none other Things than those which the Prophets and Moses did say should come When they would have their Proselytes confirmed in the Christian Faith 2 Pet. 1.19 they send them to this more sure Word of Prophecy encouraging them to take heed to it as to a Light that shineth in a dark Place And declaring that those very Scriptures which Timothy had known from a Child 2 Tim. 3.15 that is before one Book of the New Testament was written were able through Faith in Christ or the Belief that Jesus is the Messiah promised in them to make him Wise unto Salvation 16 17. That they were profitable for Doctrine and Instruction in Righteousness for Reproof for Correction that the Man of God may be perfect both as to his own Practice Obadiah paraph in locum and his teaching others throughly furnished to every good Work. If then before the Scriptures of the New Testament were written these inspired Persons taught their Converts out of the Old Testament and sent them thither to learn the Truth of what they said and bad them have Recourse unto those Writings as being able to make them Wise unto Salvation and as being more certain and more to be heeded than that Voice from Heaven of which they themselves testified Doubtless when they themselves by the same Spirit had indited the New Testament they must be more concerned that they should be guided by that written Word then also it is evident that they did not invite Men to believe meerly on the Authority or Oral Tradition of the then present Church nor practised any thing whence it might be concluded that after Ages by meer Tradition might be sufficiently instructed in the things which concerned their eternal Welfare Nay they sufficiently declared the contrary by chusing to adhere themselves and call on others to adhere to what was taught concerning the Messiah in the Old Testament when Tradition was so fresh their Authority so fully was confirmed by Miracles and they to whom they spake had the inspired Apostles in any matter of Dispute or Controversy to repair unto Thirdly St. Luke informs us § 15 that he received his Gospel by Tradition Luke 1.2 4. and that he had committed it to Writing that his Theophilus might know 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Certainty of those Doctrines in which he had been formerly instructed clearly insinuating that he conceived the written Word a means of adding certainty to what was only taught by Word of Mouth Accordingly Eusebius informs us that he was necessitated to write his Gospel that he might give us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 24. a firm Account of those things which he had learned from his Conversation with St. Paul and with the rest of the Apostles Church History saith of St. Matthew Euseb ibid. That he was constrained to write his Gospel that by so doing he might supply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the want of his own Presence with them and that when he was by Persecution separated from them Opus imperf in Matth. praefat his Converts might not want the Doctrine of Faith but wheresoever they were might retain Totius fidei statum the entire form of Faith. The san Tradition doth inform us See Chap. 7. §. 1 2. That the First Christian Converts when they had heard the Apostles preach the Christian Faith would not be satisfied with receiving it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Oral Teaching but earnestly requested to have it left in Writing with them That the believing Jews Petierunt Matthaeum ut omnium verborum operum Christi conscriberet eis historiam To write the History of all Christ's Words and Works that they might have a compleat System of their Faith. That the Romans earnestly desired Mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to leave in Writing a Memorial of the Doctrine delivered to them by word of Mouth and never would desist till they had obtained it and that it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the light of Piety which would not suffer them to rest satisfied with the Oral Tradition of the Faith that by the same perswasion Hieron Prolog in Matth. Euseb H. Eccl. l. 3. c. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his familiar Acquaintance of all the Bishops of Asia and the Ambassies of many Churches St. John who before had spent all his time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Oral Preaching was at last moved to write his Gospel The same Tradition adds That the Apostles having preached the Gospel committed it to Writing to be the Pillar and the Ground of Faith to future Ages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Anchors and Foundations of our Faith Athan. Synops p. 61. Theophylact. proem in Mat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That from these Scriptures being taught the truth we might not be drawn aside by the Falshoods of Heresies And lastly That if they had not left in Writing what they preached Orig. Dial. contr Marcion p. 59. they had preached Salvation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only to them who heard them Preach and should have had no care of Posterity because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things only orally delivered would quickly vanish there being no demonstration of their Truth Which words as they expresly do confute the certainty of Doctrines only delivered to Posterity by word of Mouth so the forementioned Traditions do sufficiently inform us what was the Judgment of the ancient Church in this Affair viz. That to ascertain those Christians who were taught the principles of their Religion it was necessary that should be written which they had been taught that they could not well otherwise supply their absence or leave to their Disciples an
are plainly opposite to the Doctrines Practices and Traditions formerly received and approved in the Church of Christ and this they do believe so firmly that they rather chuse to suffer loss of Life and all the Comforts of it than own these Doctrines of the Church of Rome as Apostolical Traditions Moreover whereas it is no Man's Interest to make the World believe there was such a City as London if there was no such place in being it is the Interest of the whole Church of Rome to set up this pretence to Infallibility in the General that finding it disclaimed by other Churches she with some Colour may pretend unto it and 't is the Interest of the Roman Clergy as much to stickle for the Truth of her pretended Traditions as it was the Interest of Demetrius and his Fellow Artists to avouch to the Ephesians They might be truly Gods which were made by Hands and that the Image of Diana truly fell down from Jupiter since otherwise their Craft would be set at nought And as it was the Interest of the Master of the Pythonisse to be angry with St. Paul for casting out the Evil Spirit from her because thereby his Hopes of Gain was gone For if Men will not receive their Traditions as the Truths of God they cannot Lord it over their Consciences nor drain their Purses nor give Laws at pleasure to the Christian World but must be put to the hard task of proving what they would have us take upon their Words And Fourthly Whereas he that doubteth whether there be such a City as London may repair unto it to be convinced by ocular demonstration whither shall he repair who doubteth of the Truth of the Traditions of the Church of Rome for Satisfaction in that Matter Will you send him to Scripture You have already told him he cannot know what is Scripture what Copies and what Texts are uncorrupted what Translation of it is Authentick but by the Church and also that when he knows all this he cannot understand the meaning of the Scriptures in places disputable and variously sensed as you know those are by which you prove both the Churches Infallibility and the Pretences of the Roman Church to be Infallible Will you send him with Mr. P. 360. M. To the unanimous Consent and Tradition of our Church that is the Church of Rome what is this but to bid him believe that Self-evident which he thinks evidently false to believe the Church of Rome to be Infallible in her Traditions and then he will not doubt of her Infallibility or to turn Roman Catholick and then he will no longer be a Protestant Will you add with him That what is proposed by the Tradition of such a Church is evidently credible Ibid. and sufficient to beget an infallible assent Is it not then matter of Amazement that so many Millions of Persons throughout the World endowed with intellectuals as piercing and accomplished with all Abilities which their Adversaries can boast of yea who many of them have strong temporal motives to incline them to embrace the Romish Traditions and all the miseries which Papal Tyranny can inflict to awaken them into a serious consideration of all the Evidence that can be offered for them and who are Men seriously industrious to attain Salvation and Men who know they must perish everlastingly if they resist the Truth clearly propounded to them I say is it not matter of Amazement that so many persons so qualified should from Generation to Generation so unanimously reject what is evidently credible and able to beget within them an infallible assent yea that they should dispute and write many Books against it though they could never do so but they must contradict what is self-Evident What is this but in effect to say All Protestants always were are and must be whilst they continue Protestants resolved to be damned and as obstinate as the very Devil in doing what they know must tend to their eternal Condemnation Will you send him to the Vniversal Church either by it you mean only the R. Church and her Adherents or you do not if you do you again send him to the Church of Rome if you do not you must renounce that Article of Faith which all your Clergy stand by Oath obliged to defend viz. the Roman Catholick Church and with it your Pretences to Infallibility on the account of any of these Promises which do confessedly belong only unto the Vniversal Church of Christ CHAP. XII Mr. M ' s. Fifth Assertion That all Catholicks ever held that for true which was owned by the Vniversal Church of their times and rejected the contrary as an Error answered by way of Concession § 1. First That this is absolutely true in reference to Doctrines and Practices truly necessary to the Being of a Church But Secondly That this is with Lirinensis to be restrained to the Fundamentals of Faith is proved 1st from Scripture 2dly from Reason § 2. Thirdly From Instances as First That of the Administration of the Sacrament to Infants which they generally practised both in the Eastern and the Western Churches § 3. They declared this Practice to be necessary § 4. That they speak not this of such a participation of the Body and Blood of Christ as may be had in Baptism but plainly of the Puriticipation of the Eucharist § 5. Inferences hence 1. To prove the Definition of the Trent Council touching this Matter actually False 2ly That the Practice or Doctrine of the Church in any Age is no true Evidence of Tradition or the right Interpretation of Holy Scripture 3ly That Mr. M ' s. Argument for Prayer for the Dead from Tradition is not convincing § 6. 2. From the Opinion of the Fathers That it was not lawful for a Christian to swear at all § 7. 3ly From their Opinion That good Angels were transported with the Love of Women and got Gyants of them § 8. 4ly From their Opinion That it was unlawful for any Clergyman to engage himself in Secular Affairs § 9. Or to go from one Church or Diocess to another § 10. 3ly When whole Churches and Nations differ and Heresies prevail the Fathers say we are for finding out the Truth to have Recourse only to Scripture and to primitive Tradition § 11. A full Answer to Mr. M ' s. Argument for Tradition from the Ancient Custom of praying for the Dead shewing on what Accounts the Ancients did it what Reason we have not to do it That the Prayers for them used by the Church of Rome are Novelties and that those used by the Ancients were perfectly destructive of the Roman Purgatory § 12. MR. § 1 M. saith That whatsoever was held by the Vniversal Church P. 367 368. was without farther Question held for true and the contrary to it was ever rejected as an Error Neither will you ever find a Catholick who ever had the Boldness to say that the Church of
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
it seems generally to have prevailed in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries yet doth it plainly seem to contradict the Testimony of the Holy Scriptures which teach That when the days of her Purification were accomplished Luk. ij 22 23 Puram aperiens vulvam according to the Law of Moses they brought him to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord as it is written in the Law of the Lord Every Male that openeth the Womb shall be called holy to the Lord. L. 4. c. 66. In partu suo nupsit ipsa patefacti corp lege Lib. de Carne Christi c. 23. vid. etiam c. 4. 20. Hom. 14. in Lucam Tom. 2. f. 101. According to the import of which Scripture Irenaeus doth expresly teach That our Lord at his Birth opened the Womb of the Virgin. Tertullian adds That she was a Virgin as not having known Man but was no Virgin quantum a partu at her teeming her Womb being then opened according to that saying Every Male that openeth the Womb c. Origen That Matris domini to tempore vulva reserata est quo partus editus the Womb of the Mother of our Lord was opened when she brought forth her Son. Clemens of Alexandria evidently shews that this was in his time only the saying of some Men attending to the Fable of the false Gospel of St. James That the Midwives after her delivery found by Inspection that she was a Virgin and that others held the contrary for saith he It seemed to many and yet seemeth that Mary was by the Birth of her Son a Woman properly delivered of a Child though she was not Strom. l. 7. p. 756. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Woman properly delivered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for some say that being inspected by the Midwives after the Birth of her Son she was found a Virgin. De Incarn l. 14 cap. 6. §. 1. He respects saith Petavius the Old Wife's Tale invented by some idle Trifler which we find in Suidas and in the Proto-Evangelium S. Jacobi which I could wish he had no otherwise related than by way of Contempt and Derision Thus we learn upon what Grounds this was believed by him against the Opinion of many others St. Basil grounds this Opinion upon another Story of like nature De human Christi Gener. Tom. 1. p. 509. The Story of Zacharias saith he proves that the Virgin Mary was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an entire Virgin for it is derived to us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from Tradition that Zacharias was slain between the Porch and the Altar for saying Qui hujusmodi Traditioni non credunt that Mary was a Virgin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the Birth of our Lord. Origen delivers the same thing in the like words In Matt. Hom. 26. f. 49. b. In Matth. 23.35 Venit ad nos Traditio quaedam Such a Tradition hath come down to us And Theophylact 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We have it from Tradition and yet Origen in the same place confesseth that this Tradition was not believed by others In locum and Jerom saith That it came Ex Apocryphorum Somniis From apocryphal Dreams and adds That Quia de scripturis non habet autoritatem eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur Because it hath no Authority from Scripture it is as easily condemned as approved of And thus we see the rise of this Tradition which afterwards prevailed over the Christian World. 3ly § 5 That our Lord lived above Fourty if not to Fifty Years Sicut Evangelium omues seniores testantur qui in Asia apud Joannem Discipulum Domini convenerunt id ipsum tradidisse eis Joannem L. 2. c. 39. is the express Assertion of Irenaeus and for this he produceth the Testimony of the Gospel and of all the Elders of the Church who met S. John the beloved Disciple of our Lord in Asia and declared that he delivered to them the same thing yea saith he some of them saw not only John but the rest of the Apostles and heard the same things from them testantur de hujusmodi Relatione and testifie the truth of the Relation To say with Feuardentius upon the place that he might have had this from Papias is a very unlikely thing for he speaks not of the Testimony of one Man but of all the Seniors not of Men who had never seen the Apostles as Papias had not but of them who had he cites not Papias as in the Case of the Millennium he did here therefore is a solemn Declaration of a Tradition received from the Mouth of the Apostles and attested by all the Seniors and yet so far from being in the Gospel as is pretended that by the Gospel it may be evidently confuted so far from being owned as such in after Ages that upon a very slight Ground even the saying of the Prophet Isaiah Vid. Feuard in Iren. p. 46. 188. That Christ was sent to Preach the Acceptable Year of the Lord many of the Fathers took up a contrary Opinion that our Lord Suffered in the Fifteenth Year of Tiberius and preached One Year only When Jesus came to his Baptism saith Clemens of Alexandria 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Strom. 1. p. 340. he was about Thirty Years old and that he was to Preach but One Year is thus written He sent me to Preach the Acceptable Year of the Lord this both the Prophet and the Gospel according to the plain meaning of the Words averr say some in Origen Hom. 32. in Luk. f. 111. That our Lord Preached the Gospel but one Year and that on this account it was said Cap. 8. that he was sent to Preach the Acceptable Year of the Lord. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L 1. c. 1. p. 16. Tertullian in his Book against the Jews saith That Christ suffered annos habens quasi triginta being about Thirty Years Old. Lactantius Africanus and others cited by Feuardentius say the same And yet this was no better than an Opinion first invented by the Gnosticks as we learn from Irenaeus and for which they produced the same Text and 't is as easily confuted by the Enumeration of the Passovers our Saviour Celebrated after his Baptism and before his Death Now if a Tradition could so generally obtain in the Fifth Century which had its rise from Fabulous Legends and Apocryphal Dreams against plain Words of Scripture and plain Assertions of the Fathers living in the former Centuries as that of our Lords coming out of the Womb of the Virgin without opening of it did why might not other Traditions pretended by some later Councils and the Church of Rome be of like nature Why may we not credit the Council of Frankford In lib. Carol. p. 3. c. 30. declaring that the Second Nicene Council for their pretended Tradition of Image-Worship had recourse ad Apocryphas quasdam risu dignas naenias to Apocryphal and Ridiculous Tales Comment
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
follows 1. § 5 That the renowned Scribes and Doctors of the Jewish Church were all mistaken in their Interpretation of this place of Malachy That they and the whole Jewish Church had entertained a false Tradition in a matter of so great Consequence as the Fore-runner of their true Messiah for they all had embraced it as a Tradition That Elias was to come in Person before the first Appearance of the true Messiah Trypho apud Justin M. p. 268. they all interpreted that place of Malachy to that effect and thence concluded as they still obstinately do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That because Elias is not yet come in Person their Messiah was not come And yet this general Tradition of the Jewish Church gives no Assurance of the Truth of this Assertion or if it doth it must be then confessed that their Messiah is not yet come 2. Hence also we may learn how vainly Men pretend to absolute Certainty on the account of Oral Tradition for that Tradition was received as much as highly reverenced and regarded by the Scribes and Pharisees as by the Romanists I hope will easily be granted when we consider how zealous they were for the Customs and Traditions of the Fathers How they advanced the Tradition of the Elders even to the dissolution and making void the Law of God. And how frequent are such Maxims as these among them Vid. Leight in Matth. 15.2 The Words of the Scribes are more worthy than the Words of the Law and more weighty than the Words of the Prophets That the Words of the Elders are more weighty than the Words of the Prophets That they came from the Mouth of Moses as well as the written Law. That the written Law is narrow but the Traditional is longer than the Earth and broader than the Sea. And yet these Patrons of Tradition had not only generally received such Traditions as made void the Law of God but also such Traditions touching their Messiah his Fore-runner his temporal Kingdom his glorious Reign on Earth c. as gave Occasion to their Rejecting of him when he came If then the Jewish Church might pretend to oral Tradition as much as that of Rome and yet receive such Falshoods as Tradition which did evacuate the Law of God and cause them to reject their Saviour why may not they of Rome receive such Falshoods for Tradition as do evacuate the Law of Christ If the People were deceived and abused by following their Traditions why may not others be equally deceived in following the supposed Traditions of the Church of Rome 3. § 6 Hence also it will follow That the Tradition of the Doctors of the Christian Church can be no certain Evidence in Matters of meer Speculation or of Interpretation of Scripture that what they thus deliver is the Truth for they have generally taught from the third Century That Enoch is to come in the last days to resist Antichrist and be slain by him without the least appearance of any Ground for this Tradition And they have taught more generally even from the Second Century That Elias the Tisbite is to come in Person before our Saviour's second Advent and grounded this their Doctrine upon the Words of Malachy and of St. Matthew against the plain Assertion of our Lord and the most clear convincing Evidence that John the Baptist and he only was that Elias which according to the Prophecy of Malachy was to come as the Fore-runner of our Saviour In a word the Tradition of the Millennium of the Appearance of Enoch and Elias seem to have had their Rise from the Jewish Converts zealous of the Tradition of their Fathers and from them not from the Apostles to have gain'd Reputation in the Christian Church And the Tradition of Prayers for the Dead seems to have had the same Original But now if a Tradition hath been very ancient § 7 and can by Reason be demonstrated to have derived from the Apostles or to be worthy of Acceptation upon rational Grounds then it is sit to be embraced as such For Instance First We have it from Tradition That presently after the Apostles times all Churches were governed by Bishops presiding over Presbyters and Deacons as their lawful Governors whence we inferr we have just Reason to believe this form of Government was Apostolical since otherwise the Government left in all Churches by the Apostles must in the immediate following Age have been not only changed but corrupted every where But that in the frame and Substance of the established Government of the Church a thing always in use and practice there should be so suddain a Change so universal a Corruption in so short a time and that all Christians without the least Opposition that we read of De praescript c. 28. should conspire in this Corruption is a thing morally impossible For as Tertullian argues in like Case Variasse debuerat Error doctrinae Ecclesiarum quod autem apud omnes unum est non est erratum sed traditum What all Christian Churches did so early agree in practising Vniformly came not by Error but Tradition Moreover it is clearly proved by the most learned Bishop of Chester L. 2. c. 13 prima Assertio p. 157 c. That the Writers of the Second Century distinctly mention the several Orders of Bishops and their inferior Presbyters in the same Church and thereby give us Reason to conclude that this Disparity was generally setled in that Age. Now how improbable it is that either such a Change as must be here supposed were this an Innovation should happen unadvisedly or thorough Negligence or that the whole Church should have conspired so early to swerve from the established Order by placing Bishops above Presbyters without Complaint or the Resistance of any single Person that we hear of will appear if we consider 1. The Subjects of this Constitution viz. The Persons appointed by the Apostles to govern and preside in every Church they being constant Objects of every Persons common Sence seen in every Assembly imploy'd in every ecclesiastical Affair publick and private in which all Christians Sick or Well Living or Dying were concerned we may reasonably conceive that which some of the Apostles to gain upon the Jews did observe the Christian Feast of Easter on the Fourteenth Day of the Moon others might have mistaken this compliance as if the Apostles had judged that the fittest time for Christians of succeeding Ages to observe it in or that when they heard of an Elias to come before the terrible Day of the Lord or of the Reign of Christ on Earth a Thousand Years represented to St. John in a Vision they might mistake the genuine import of those Scriptures and of others of like nature but in a matter of this kind which was the daily object of the Senses of all Christians we cannot easily conceive how they could possibly mistake and not perceive that such a change was made if really it
the 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
obtained in that Church we find them got into their Rituals and Books of S. Offices Their Councils do consult about them make Canons and Decrees in favour of them Having then so frequent mention of these matters in the Councils Liturgies the Canons and the Constitutions of the Western Church in these last Ages why is it we have nothing of them in the Canons or Constitutions Apostolical or in the Code of Canons of the universal Church or of the Church of Africk where we have so frequent mention of all the other received Practices and Customs of the Church when Tertullian sets himself on purpose to enumerate those things which had obtained in the Church De Cor. c. 3. Traditionis titulo consuetudinis patrocinio under the specious Titles of Custom and Tradition why is it that he doth not mention one of these Romish Practices De Sp. Sancto c. 25 27. When St. Basil if that be his Work which bears his Name doth professedly discourse of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unwritten Customs which had obtained in the Church why is he wholly silent as to all these practices if equally owned by the Church as Apostolical Surely these things give us just reason to suspect that they were not acquainted with them and knew nothing of them Again had they the Evidence of Tradition § 2 that those points of Faith which in their Councils have been established and imposed upon us under an Anathema were handed down unto them from our Lord's Apostles had the Apostles and their Successors still taught all Christians the Doctrine of Concomitance and the sufficiency of one Species to make an entire Sacrament and to conveigh the whole benefit of the Sacrament Of the necessity of the intention of the Priest to make a Sacrament Of the number of the Sacraments that they are neither more nor less than Seven Of Marriage that it is a Sacrament properly so called and that by virtue of our Lord's Institution Of the Transubstantiation of the Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Christ Of the Oblation of a true propitiatory Sacrifice for the Dead and Living in the Mass Of a Purgatory or place in which the Souls of Pious Men do suffer Punishment and from which being afterwards relieved by the Prayers and good Works of the Faithful upon Earth they go to Heaven before the Day of Judgment had they informed all Christians That a Power of Indulgences is left by Christ unto his Church That Saints departed are to be Invoked and Images to be Venerated That the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church the Mother and Mistress of all Churches and That the Pope is the Vicar of our Lord Jesus upon Earth and that without the Belief of this Faith Salvation cannot be obtained and consequently never was obtained by any Christian I say had all these Articles descended to them from the Apostles through all Ages of the Christian Church they must be as notorious as any which have thus descended and which we can run up from Age to Age till we come to the Apostles For Instance they must have been as obvious to be found in all the Writings of the Fathers as the Tradition of the Apostles Creed the Canon of the Scripture the Writing of the Four Evangelists c. They also must have been as diligently taught as frequently inculcated as those things were as being no less necessary to Salvation than any Doctrine contained in the Scriptures or in the Creed of the Apostles We must have met with them in all their Summaries of Christian Doctrine of Ecclesiastical Doctrines and their Discourses writ on purpose to instruct others in the Articles of Christian Faith they would have been inserted into their Creeds as other necessary Articles were taught their Catechumens required of their Clergy at their admission to Holy Orders sent by their Patriarchs and Bishops in their circular Letters included in the Paschal Cycles as were the Rule of Faith the Christian Symbol and yet by diligent perusual of all these we can find no such matter in the Creeds Enchiridions Compendiums of Christian Doctrine the catechistical Discourses the Treatises of Faith and ecclesiastical Doctrines so frequent in the Writings of the five first Centuries and therefore have good reason to believe they were not then received or owned as Articles of Christian Faith. The Wisdom of the present Church of Rome yields a strong confirmation of this Argument for since their latter Councils have defined these Articles we find them Inserted into her Creed and her Trent Catechism contained in all the Writings of her Doctors touching the Articles of Christian Faith and of ecclesiastical Tradition required to be believed professed and taught by all her Clergy What therefore shall we think of all the Fathers of the five first Centuries was it out of want of love to Souls or care of their instruction in the necessary Articles of Christian Faith that they were wholly silent in these matters Why then may we not fear that they neglected to hand down unto Posterity other necessary Articles of Christian Faith Or was it out of ignorance that they were then necessary how then came Romanists to know by Tradition that they are necessary now Or if they wanted neither knowledge to discern all necessary Articles of Christian Faith nor will nor care to teach all they conceived to be such must it not follow that those Articles which in their numerous Discourses and Instructions on these Subjects are not so much as touched upon were not then owned as necessary Articles of the Christian Faith and therefore ought not now to be imposed or received as such Add to this § 3 that the Fathers of the first Ages were very careful and concerned to preserve the Traditions of the Apostles truly so called or so esteemed by them and to commit them unto writing to be the Testimonies of their Faith against the importunity of Hereticks to whom it was peculiar for the three first Centurtes to refuse tryal by the Scriptures only and to pretend unto some secret Traditions not contained in the Scriptures For the Great Ignatius going to his Martyrdom confirmed the Churches he arrived at with his Discourses requesting them in the first place to avoid the Heresies which were then springing up He exhorted them also Lib. 3. c. 35. saith Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to stand firm to the Tradition of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which for the greater certainty he having testified concerning it thought necessary to leave in writing and so endited his Epistles Papias Ibid c. 38. often naming the Apostles saith the same Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 puts down their Traditions And Polycarp saith Irenaeus not only testified what was the truth which he received from the Apostles and by that testimony converted many of the Hereticks but he also writ an Epistle to the Philippians from which they who are willing and desirous of
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
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
13. de Habit. virg p. 99. ed. Oxon. P. 29. Apud phot cod 234. That they fell from their heavenly Vigor Ad terrena contagia devoluti being debased to earthly Contagions They fell saith Minutius Terrenis cupiditatibus degravati being depressed by earthly Lust Methodius That they conversed with the Daughters of Men being taken with the Love of Flesh In the Fourth Century Lactantius saith L. 2. c. 14. p. 216 217. That the Devil tempted them to Vice Et Mulierum congressibus inquinavit and defiled them by Converse with Women and so being excluded from Heaven they became his Ministers and they who were begotten by them became terrestrial Daemons De praep Evang l 5. c. 4. de Noah Arca c. 4. Hi sunt immundi Spiritus malorum quae geruntur Auctores These saith he are the unclean Spirits which are the Authors of all Evil. The same Assertions may be found in Eusebius in St. Ambrose in Epiphanius Num. 21. L. 4 c. 26. Hist l. 1. c. 3. or some Author cited by him in his Sixty fourth Heresy by Pseudo Clemens in his Recognitions and by Sulpitius Severus Petavius in his Notes upon Epiphanius saith Fuit haec vetustissimorum Patrum fere omnium Sententia filios illos Dei qui Gen. 6. silias hominum adamasse dicuntur Angelos fuisse This was the Opinion of almost all the most Ancient Fathers That the Sons of God who are said in Genesis the Sixth to have loved the Daughters of Men were Angels Vetus fuit multorum gravissimorum Authorum opinio It was the ancient Opinion of many and very grave Authors saith Fevardentius on the forecited place of Irenaeus And yet First It deserves to be considered De C.D. l. 15. cap. 23. That they grounded this whole Fancy and Exposition partly upon that spurious Book of Enoch which saith St. Austin Continet istas gigantum fabulas contains those Fables of the Gyants and where In Joh. To 8. Ed. Huet p. 132. d. saith Origen it is said That Jared was begotten in the Days 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Descent of the Sons of God upon the Daughters of Men and partly upon the concurring Tradition of the Jews who had entertained the same Notion and Exposition of the Place as we may learn from their own Josephus and Philo Antiq. l 1. c. 4. p. 8. Philo de Gigant p. 284 285. who from the said Traditions tell us That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 many Angels of God conversing with Women begot insolent Children and Despisers of everything that was good as trusting to their own Strength Secondly Consider that in the very next Century this Fancy was run down in Terms very opprobrious and much reflecting upon the Ignorance and Oscitancy of the former Fathers That which makes most Men thus Ignorant saith Theodoret Quaest 47. in Gen. on the place is their careless reading of the Scriptures And there he also represents the Authors of the former Opinion In locum as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Men very stupid and such as had a Knock in their Cradles Chrysostom adds That they who affirm that these things were spoken not of Men but Angels were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 speakers of Blasphemy and then he proceeds Edit Sichardi p. 52 53. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to overturn or to confute the Fables of these Men. And in the very next Century Philastrius Brixiensis put this very Doctrine into the Catalogue of his Heresies saying Alia est Haeresis quae de gigantibus adserit quod Angeli miscuerunt se cum faeminis ante diluvium inde esse natos gigantes There is another Heresy which asserts touching the Gyants That Angels before the Flood conversed with Women and that of them were these Gyants begotten If then the Jewish Church received by Tradition a Doctrine so contrary to the very Nature of Angels and consequently to Truth it self If the Fathers of the first four Centuries were so easily imposed upon by their Traditions and their spurious Books as to embrace the same Opinion not only against Reason but as Theodoret St. Chrysostom and Austin have demonstrated against the Evidence of that very Text on which they grounded their Opinion which so expresly saith The Wickedness not of the Angels or their Off-spring but of Men was great and that all Flesh had corrupted their Ways and that God therefore had determined to punish not Daemons or the Ghosts of Gyants but the whole Earth by bringing of a Flood upon them If they I say could read so carelesly this Chapter as generally to interpret one Verse of it in Opposition to the plain Import of the whole If Lastly an Exposition so long and generally received till the beginning of the Fifth Century could in that very Century by by the greatest Fathers of the Church utterly rejected as Fabulous Blasphemous Heretical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and guilty of the utmost Folly then must it be extreamly evident 1. That Tradition in this matter could be no certain Rule unto the Jewish Church and therefore could not be Infallible 2. That the Fathers of the Christian Church have been imposed upon for some whole Centuries in this Affair by spurious Authors and by Jewish Fables and therefore they and the Fathers of any other Age must also be supposed subject to the like Mistakes in other Matters of like Nature 3. That they were prone on these Accounts to interpret Scriptures contrary to the plain Import of them and so cannot be owned as the Authentick Interpreters of Holy Writ 4. Hence also it is clear that what hath generally been received without any apparent Opposition in one Age may in the very next Age be as generally rejected with the greatest Scorn and Ignominy and pass for Blasphemy and Heresy Fourthly § 9 It anciently was held Unlawful for any Clergy-Man to engage himself in Secular Affairs For amongst the Sins which provoked God to Anger St. Cyprian reckons this De lapsis p. 123. Episcopos procuratores rerum secularium fieri That Bishops became Proctors in secular Affairs The Sixth Canon of the Apostles decrees That a Bishop Presbyter or Deacon shall be deposed if he take upon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worldly Cares The General Council of Chalcedon forbids all Bishops Clerks Can. 3. or Monks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to intermeddle with worldly Businesses Can. 11. The Second General Council of Constantinople having said That the sacred Canons deposed those Presbyters or Deacons who took upon them secular Governments or Cares ratifies the said Canons declaring That if any of them did thus imploy himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Trull Can. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Conc. Nic. 2. can 1. he should be expelled from the Clergy for according to the most true Words of our Saviour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No Man can serve Two Masters and yet what Church at present doth observe these Canons though they
to Cardinal Campejus he speaks thus Videham ut quisque esset integerrimis moribus Evangelicae puritati proximus ita minime infensum Luthero Lib. 14. p. 446. I heard excellent Men of approved Doctrine and Religion rejoice that they met with that Man's Books and I saw that as any man was more upright in his Life or nearer to Evangelical purity he was the less offended with Luther And in the same Epistle he adds Pag. 448. that he conceived it not convenient presently to be incensed against a Man with whose Writings so many excellent Governors so many Learned and pious Men were delighted L. 15. p. 492. In his Epistle to Godeschallus he saith That he did not defend him even then cum non decessent maximi Theologi qui non vererentur affirmare nihil esse in Luthero quin per probatos Authores posset defendi when the greatest Divines were not afraid to affirm that there was nothing in Luther which might not be defended by approved Authors And lastly he himself declares Hausit pleraque ex veteribus Epist l. 14. p. 447. That Luther gathered most of his Tenets from the Ancients and that had he named the Ancients from whom he had them he would have avoided much of that envy which then lay upon him To proceed to the particular Controversies in the Order in which they are mentioned in the Articles of Religion subscribed by our Clergy Holy Scripture saith our Sixth Article § 2 containeth all things necessary to Salvation so that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby is not required of any Man that it should be believed as an Article of Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to Salvation So that besides the same Art. 21. the Church ought not to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of Salvation Agreeably to this Article the Bishop of Rhodes disputing with the Greeks in the Council of Florence speaks thus in the behalf of the Western Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bin. Tom. 8. Concil Florent Sess 7. p. 609. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. I desire you Greeks to satisfie me in this Question Doth not the Gospel perfectly contain the Doctrine of Christian Faith Surely saith he the Reverence you bear to it will not permit you to affirm that the Faith is not perfectly contained there And that is true and not denied by us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. which the Bishop of Ephesus said That the Fathers had inclosed the Gospel and the Holy Scripture so that it should by no means be lawful to add to them And whereas the the Bishop of Ephesus had said That the Evangelists did not forbid that any thing should be added to what they had written This saith he with his leave cannot be said of Holy Scripture for the Apostle Paul saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gal. i. 9. If any Man preach any thing besides what you have received let him be Anathema And St. John in the end of his Revelations saith If any one add to these things God shall add to him the Plagues which are written in this Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. Sess 8. p. 630. Nicenus also on the part of the Greeks saith We draw all divine Doctrines from the Fountains of the Holy Scriptures which are the principles and the foundations of our Faith to which nothing ever was or ever shall be added by us or any other Christian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Flor. Sess 25. p. 783. Time was saith the Archbishop of Nice in his Oration made at that time and place when the Church the Spouse of God was without spot or wrinkle viz. when we made more account of the simple and not curious Faith delivered as it lay in the Gospel and regarding that superfluous and talkative Divinity which is the fruit of our own Reasonings less than the Sacred Oracles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we attend only to what was written delighting in the things spoken by the Holy Spirit and being compacted in one by them So that it seems by these plain words that both the East and West were then of the same Judgment with the Church of England in this Article It is declared saith John Gerson by the Authority of Dionysius Declaratur ex Authoritate Dionysii dicentis nihil audendum dicere de divinis nisi quae nobis a Scriptura S. tradita sunt quoniam Scriptura nobis tradita est tanquam Regula sufficiens infallibilis pro regimine totius Ecclesiastici corporis Lib. de Exam. Doctr. secunda parte princip consid 1. That we must not dare to say any thing of Divine Things but that which is delivered to us from the Holy Scriptures of which the Reason is That the Scripture is delivered to us as a Rule sufficient and infallible for the Government of the whole Ecclesiastical Body and Members of it to the End of the World. The Holy Scripture saith Gabriel Biel is according to B. Gregory In Can. Miss Lect. 71. f. 200. Edit 1510. as the Mouth of God quia per eam loquitur Deus omnia quae vult a nobis fieri because by it God speaketh all things which he would have done by us Gregory the Great saith Molinaeus asserts Asserit Haereseos labe inquinatos qui extra S. Scripturas aliquid docent aut proferunt c. Lib. de Concil Trid. §. 17. That they are infected with the filth of Heresie who teach or produce any thing beyond the Holy Scriptures I mean in those things which appertain to the Substance of Faith and Doctrine The Sorbon Doctor who set forth the French Testament printed at Mons A. D. 1672. informs us Praeface 1 2. That St. Austin considered the Holy Scripture as the Treasure of Divinity and as the Source of all those Truths which a Man ought to know for the Edification of himself or the Instruction of others And speaking of the mixture of profound places with those which are proportioned to the capacity of the most simple he saith That which ought to comfort us in this obscurity is that according to St. Augustin the Holy Scripture proposeth to us all that is necessary for the conduct of our Life in a manner easie and intelligible that it explicates and clears up it self by speaking that clearly in some places which it saith obscurely in others The Guide of Controversies saith Guid. Disc 2. §. 40. n. 2. That as for the sufficiency or the entireness of the Scriptures for the containing of all those Points of Faith which are simply necessary of all Persons to be believed for attaining Salvation Catholicks deny it not And for this he cites among many other R. Doctors this saying of Aquinas In doctrina Christi 22. qu. 1. Art. 9. Apostolorum he means Scripta veritas fidei est sufficienter explicata In the written Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles the
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