means be intreated to sit down so saith the Historian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Bishop even begged of him to sit down and ease himself upon a Royal Throne that was there placed purposely for him but he would by no means use it But what was his reason why would he not sit did he chuse to stand barely out of courtesie and complement to the Bishop or the whole Assembly did he stand barely to evidence his Humility and Condescension towards his People No himself gives us another reason for it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To stand whilst we hear the Oracles of God is no more then what Religion it self commands us Such was the Judgment and such was the Practice of this renowned and glorious Emperour And yet lest this expression of Reverence towards the Word of God should prove too short some higher ones have been used I remember what Cornelius à Lapide saith of Charles Borromaeus Bishop of Milan Sacram Scripturam ultimis vitae suae annis non nisi nudo capite flexis genibus venerabundus lectitavit he read not the Holy Scripture no not in his Old age but with a bare head and a bended knee Such hath been the Devotion of Saints in former Ages and other Churches but how stands the case with us this day What high Esteem what inward Veneration have we for God's Holy Word Alas 't is but sad to consider that the generality of Christians do commonly reade and hear the Word with lesse regard then the profane Sinner reads his Romance or Play-book We hear the Sermon as if it were but an ordinary Discourse trivial in it self and of no great Concern to us 'T is certain that the looseness of our deportment and carriage in the House of God where the Scriptures are solemnly read and preached is an infallible Symptom of our great Irreverence and doth most surely betray the cursed Indifference and Slightness of our spirits But let us remember what our Saviour himself commands us Take heed how ye hear 'T is impossible to hear with too much Caution we cannot reade with too great Reverence and amongst many Reasons this is one That blessed Word which we reade and hear is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of Christ V. Since the whole Scripture is undoubtedly the Word of Christ let us consider how much to blame the Roman Church is in equalling their Traditions to it yea and in preferring them before it too That the Roman Church should endeavour by all possible means to keep up and vigorously assert the Credit of their Traditions we cannot wonder because they have no other way to maintain several Doctrines of theirs which they are loath to part with and yet can never prove them by the Written Word Their Doctrines of Indulgences and Purgatory are so advantageous to them that Chemnitius hath adventured to say Coelum potiùs quà m Purgatorium sibi eripi paterentur They would rather part with Heaven then with Purgatory And since this Doctrine is so dear to them who can blame them for magnifying those Traditions of theirs by which alone this and several other gainful Doctrines of their Church are countenanced and supported What a great Esteem they have for their Traditions we learn from their own Authours Methinks Cornelius à Lapide ventures somewhat high when he tells us Lex Tradita aequè obligat atque Lex Scripta The Traditional Law doth oblige as much as the Written That of Aquinas saith the same Traditiones Religione unà cum Scripturis sunt tenendae Traditions are to be observed with the self-same Veneration as the Scriptures themselves But what need I mention particular persons when the Conventicle of Trent which being approved by the Pope is owned by them as the Representative Body of their whole Church hath proclaimed their Determination in this matter to all the World by this Expression Traditiones ac Scripturas ipsas pari pietatis affectu reverentiâ suscipit ac veneratur SS Synodus Tridentina The Holy Council of Trent doth receive and reverence such and such Traditions with the self-same Respect and Devotion which it hath for the Scriptures themselves This Expression of those few Romish Bishops that were now convened at Trent sounds somewhat high and yet methinks Bellarmine as if he were above the Council and willing to shew himself rather Pope then Cardinal outgoeth the Canon of Trent and braves it thus Quaedam sunt Traditiones majores quoad Obligationem quà m quaedam Scripturae There are some Traditions that lay upon us a greater Obligation then some parts of the Written Word It were worth the while to enquire a little what those Traditions should be that are more binding then Scripture it self We cannot reasonably imagine that such a man as Bellarmine that Illustrissimus Cardinalis should be so fond of any Traditions that are merely Ecclesiasticall as to tell the world that the Church or any Member thereof stands more obliged by these then by such and such Texts of Law or Gospell No 't is the ingenuous Confession of this Illustrious Cardinall that Ecclesiasticall Traditions are nothing else but Consuetudines quaedam antiquae vel à Praelatis vel à Populo inchoatae quae paulatim tacito Consensu populorum vim Legis obtinuerunt certain ancient Customes begun either by the Prelates or the People which by degrees through the People's tacit Consent obtained the force of Laws And certainly that such Traditions as are acknowledged to be from men whether the Laiety or the Clergy Councils or Popes should ever be thought more binding then such and such Portions of Scripture which the whole Christian Church doth own and confess to be the infallible Word of God should not easily be affirmed We must therefore grant that those Traditions which Bellarmine asserts to be more obliging then some Portions of Scripture must be of at least an equall Authority with the written Word which cannot be maintained without plain and equall Proofs that such Traditions are Divine or Apostolicall That our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles might doe many Miracles that are not written we are not afraid to grant That our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles might preach many Sermons and deliver several Discourses which are not upon Record we are not unwilling to acknowledg There might indeed be severall Sayings of our Lord 's omitted by the Evangelists as well as that mentioned by St. Paul Remember the words of our Lord Jesus how he said It is more blessed to give then to receive Lorinus observes Non exstat in Evangeliis ista Sententia sed Apostolorum one circumferebatur This Sentence of our Blessed Saviour's is nowhere recorded in the Gospel but was delivered by his Apostles by orall Tradition And perhaps that other Sentence ascribed to Christ though nowhere written in our Bibles might notwithstanding be his too Nunquam laeti sitis nisi cùm fratrem vestrum videritis in Charitate
Be never merry but onely then when ye see your Brother in Charity These and some few more Sentences not found in Sacred Writ are imputed to our Blessed Saviour and so is that too by some to Christ by others to some Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Be skilfull Exchangers which words are styled in Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Apostolicall expression And the truth is that the Apostles might receive from Christ betwixt his Resurrection and Ascension directions to ordain Rites and Ceremonies that concerned the Administration of God's publick Worship and the exteriour Discipline of the Church and that these Orders and Determinations of his touching the Circumstances of God's Service were delivered to their Successours by word of mouth and were not presently registred we are not forward nor indeed any whit concerned to deny But withall the Church of Rome stands much obliged to prove and that with clear Evidence and unquestionable Authority that those present Traditions of theirs which they do so stifly contend for equall to and in some cases prefer before the written Word are indeed those very Traditions which were recommended to the Church by Christ or his Apostles This I confess the Romanists do pretend and promise to doe but if they fail what then 'T is the confident expression of Bellarmine Non est Audaciae aequare aliquid non scriptum Verbo Scripto 'T is no sawcy thing at all to equall something unwritten to that Word which is written nor doth he think that expression of his too bold Traditio sola sufficit Scripturae non sufficiunt Tradition alone is enough but the Scriptures alone are not sufficient Methinks such persons are much obliged to prove that these Traditions of theirs are indeed of Divine Authority since they have a greater esteem for them then for the known and sure Word of God For if it should happen that these Traditions which are so highly magnified should be found and proved the bare Inventions of men those persons would appear somewhat too bold and sawcy indeed who have preferred them before the certain and infallible Decrees of Heaven This Aquinas well understood and therefore knew himself concerned to maintain the Divine Authority of those Traditions whereof he doth thus pronounce Verbum Dei bifariam dividitur in Scripturam Traditiones The Word of God is twofold Scripture and Tradition Thus Bellarmine too who styles Tradition Verbum Dei non scriptum the unwritten Word of God And their Conventicle of Trent saith that their Traditions were vel ore tenus à Christo vel à Spiritu Sancto dictatae delivered immediately by Christ's own mouth or dictated by his Holy Spirit Thus doth the Church of Rome pretend a full and Divine Authority for several Traditions which they hold though not recorded in our Bibles And if this Assertion of theirs in favour of their Traditions can be proved with as convincing Arguments as those whereby the Authority of the Scripture is confirmed we shall with equall Respect even as the Romanists do embrace them both For though it be certain that the committing of the Word of God to Ink and Paper was an excellent means to preserve it entire and to secure it and us from Frauds Cheats and Falsifications yet the Members of the Reformed Churches have not so far lost their Religion and Reason as once to imagine that the bare writing of the Scripture should create and give it that Authority which is inherent in it Insomuch that if any Traditionall Doctrine or Practice that is now taught and used in the Roman Church can be sufficiently proved to have been originally delivered by Christ or his Apostles we shall as readily believe and doe it as any thing else whatsoever that is required or delivered in any part of the Written Word But if bold and confident Affirmations be enough to justifie Unwritten Doctrines and Vsages what Religion what Sect what Heresie will want such and such Pretences to plead for the Vindication of it self 'T is well known that the very Heathens pretended that as Plato words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Disposition and Institution of their Laws such especially as concerned their Religion how absurd soever was from God It is the observation of Bellarmine himself In Alcorano passim legimus ipsum Alcoranum de Coelo à Deo missum It was it seems the pretence of that grand Impostour Mahomet that even his Alcoran came down from Heaven and was dictated by God Eusebius tells us that Menander who was indeed but a Sorcerer and the real disciple of Simon Magus did pretend himself to be sent from Heaven And that famous Heretick Cerinthus whose very presence made St. John fly out of the Bath who was an Enemy to the written Word of God did make his Followers believe that he received his Doctrines though detestable enough by Revelation from Angels But what sober person gave any credit to him And what if the case stand thus with the Roman Church what if those Traditions which they father upon Christ and his Apostles were indeed none of theirs Sure we are it was so with those superstitious Jews who in our Saviour's time owned and stifly maintained as the Papists now do a twofold Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a written Law and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an unwritten Law or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secondary Laws 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hearings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Law in the mouth and generally styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Traditions These Traditions they received from the great Synagogue that Synagogue derived them from the Prophets the Prophets from the Elders the Elders from Joshua Joshua from Moses and Moses himself from God so they pretended But notwithstanding these fair Insinuations and plausible Pretences of theirs to render their superstitious Rites and Customes the more acceptable to the ignorant and credulous Multitude what was indeed their true Original we learn from Christ and his Evangelists who style them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Traditions of the Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Traditions of the Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Traditions of men and our Blessed Saviour speaking to the Pharisees calleth them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your Traditions not Moses his not the Prophets not God's but your own And as it was thus in the Jewish Church so may it well be in the Roman too 't is very probable that many Traditions which there are ascribed to Christ and his Apostles might deduce their Original from some other hand Such counterfeit Traditions do we reade of that were obtruded upon the Church in the Apostles names very early indeed even whilst the Apostles themselves were yet alive So much doth that expression of St. Paul seem to intimate We beseech you brethren that ye be not troubled neither by word nor by letter as from us Grotius tells us Multi fabricabant Epistolas sub Apostolorum nomine There were many
even in that Age that framed Epistles in the Apostles names and ascribed their false Doctrines unto them The same trick several Hereticks used in succeeding Ages Clemens Alexandrinus tells us that Basilides one of those Hereticks who were justly styled Borboritae Coenosi though he broached most detestable Doctrines yet had the Impudence to affirm that he learnt them from Glaucias whom he pretended to be the Interpreter of St. Peter 'T is also recorded that Marcion in the Second Age of the Church who was justly styled by Polycarp Primogenitus Diaboli the First-born of the Devil though he affirmed a Plurality of Gods though he denied that our Blessed Saviour was as Ignatius expresseth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though he denied the Verity of Christ's Humane nature and consequently the Reality of his Sufferings yet he had the face to brag that he received these abominable Doctrines from the Disciples of St. Matthias And certainly if such damnable Heresies were broached thus early and pretended to be received from Apostolicall Tradition we have no cause so easily to comply with such and such Doctrines of the Romish Church which have no warrant in the Written Word barely because they assert them to be of Divine Originall But since an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will not doe since bare Affirmations in matters of such great Concern will not be accepted the Champions of the Roman Religion find themselves necessitated to produce some Proofs which they pretend to be Great ones too And amongst them all I meet with none that offers more fair then Bellarmine whose Pretensions are so plausible that if he prove an honest man and make good his word this whole Dispute will be over and I dare engage that the Reformed Churches will pay the self-same Respect to Traditions which the Pope and his Council of Trent do give them For thus he tells us Traditiones eas tantùm recipimus pro Apostolicis quas firmis Testimoniis Antiquorum probare possumus esse Apostolicas We receive no Traditions for Apostolicall but such alone which by the firm Testimonies of the Ancients we can prove to be such indeed The Testimonies urged by Bellarmine and other Catholicks in behalf of their Traditions are drawn from Scriptures Popes Councils and Fathers each of which we shall examine I. The Champions of the Roman Faith do pretend to prove their Traditions by several Texts of the Written Word the chief whereof are these 1. That Expression of our Blessed Saviour to his Apostles recorded by the Evangelist is one I have yet many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now Hence Bellarmine argueth thus Constat Dominum multa dixisse quae non sunt scripta 'T is evident that our Lord spake many things that are not written But it will be no injury to Bellarmine's reputation if we do not count him infallible since he was and would be no more then a Cardinall having begged of God as some say that he might never be Pope lest perhaps he might probably be damned too being it seems of the same mind with Marcellus the Second who said Non video quomodo qui altum hunc locum tenet salvari possit I do not see how the man that holds this high place can possibly be saved But let us view his Argument Christ said I have yet many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now What then The Cardinall thus infers 'T is evident that our Lord spake many things which are not written MethinKs this Consequence is not necessary nor can be proved from this Text at least I have yet many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now All that can be gathered from this Text is onely this That our Lord did not speak at this time several matters which he had to say to his Apostles because they were not then fit to receive them Yea but the Cardinall farther adds Illa quae promittebat Dominus se dicturum dixit haud dubiè post Resurrectionem suam Those things which our Lord promised that he himself would say without all doubt he did say after his Resurrection and that St. Luke doth testifie thus He shewed himself alive to his Apostles after his passion by many infallible proofs being seen of them forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God Whether these things which our Blessed Saviour delivered to his Apostles were afterwards recorded by them or not can neither be proved nor denied by any solid and certain Arguments except it can first be infallibly known what his several Discourses were St. Chrysostom tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ at his several Apparitions to his Disciples after his Resurrection spake words that savoured not of man but of the Spirit But whether any of these words were written this general expression of St. Chrysostome's leaves us uncertain still But mark another The Text saith He gave commandments to the Apostles But what Commands might they be were any of them written or were they all afterwards delivered to the Church by Tradition What the great one was St. Chrysostom tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Go and teach all nations c. and that to be sure is found upon Record But the Truth is that expression of Grotius is undeniable Multa dedit Praecepta quae hîc reticentur Christ gave the Apostles many Commands which the Evangelist in that place hath not set down but can the Romanists make it out that no Evangelist no Apostle hath set them down elsewhere I grant indeed that if Lorinus have guessed right at the Subject matter of our Saviour's private discourses with his Apostles after his Resurrection there is little or nothing of it in our Bibles for concerning Christ's talk with his Disciples this man as becomes a Jesuit indeed giveth us his Opinion thus Exposuit Authoritatem summi Pastoris Hierarchiam totam Ecclesiasticam formas ritúsque Sacramentorum ac inprimis Sacrificii Missae cultum Invocationem Sanctorum Dies festos c. He declared the Authority of the Pope the whole Hierarchy of the Church the forms and rites of the Sacraments and especially the Sacrifice of the Masse Invocation of Saints the Observation of Holy-days c. 'T is well guessed bold Jesuite but are these indeed the Doctrines which our Blessed Saviour as Bellarmine saith promised to teach his Apostles after his Resurrection are these indeed the Lessons of which Christ said to his Disciples Ye cannot bear them now The truth is neither Christ himself nor any of his Apostles could have born such Lessons at any time whatever But certain it is those Doctrines which the Apostles could not have well born before Christ's Passion and were therefore adjourned till after his Resurrection were and must needs be of another nature indeed what they were in particular cannot certainly be known Thus St. Austine Quaenam ista sunt quae Ipse
non dixit temerarium est velle praesumere dicere To affirm what those things were which Christ himseIf did not now declare were rash and bold Quis nostrûm dicat ista vel illa sunt Who of us can tell whether it were this or that And yet for all this whatever St. Austine thinks that Jesuite Maldonate as if he knew what Christ was pleased as yet to conceal tells us with more of Confidence then Truth Dicimus ex hoc loco constare Christum non omnia dixisse quae ad salutem nostram putabat pertinere idémque fecisse Spiritum Sanctum credendum c. From the warrant of this Text we do affirm that Christ told not his Disciples whatever he thought pertinent to our Salvation and that the Holy Ghost did not afterwards doe it neither we have cause to believe Nay to make way for Ecclesiastical Traditions and the Pope's Authority to create new Articles of Faith he makes bold to adde thus much Idem ab Apostolis factum ut non omnia scripta multa etiam nè vivâ voce traderent The same thing was done by the Apostles too insomuch that they did not deliver all matters of Salvation in their Writings no nor many so much as by word of mouth 'T is strange to think into what Absurdities and Contradictions the Romanists do run themselves that they may justify those Doctrines and Practices which they are loath to part with For this Jesuite Maldonate declares his opinion that there are some matters of Salvation that were neither taught by Christ nor by his Spirit nor by his Apostles either by Writing or Tradition and yet Cardinal Bellarmine doth positively affirm that the Church of Rome holds no Doctrines maintains no Traditions save onely such as they can clearly prove to be from Christ or his Apostles But as to those forenamed Discourses wherein our Blessed Saviour did privately instruct his Apostles and whereupon the Roman Church doth mightily ground their Doctrine of Tradition though it cannot be certainly discovered what was the very Subject and particular Arguments of our Saviour's frequent Talk with his Disciples at his several Apparitions to them after his Resurrection yet perhaps some probable guesses may be given and accordingly several Conjectures are offered us by Interpreters So Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. What were those many things which Christ had to say to his Apostles which they could not bear He answers thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. It was the design of our Blessed Saviour to teach his Disciples the utter abolition of the Ceremoniall Law and the Mosaicall Ordinances So St. Chrysostom guesseth too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Whether our Saviour speaks of the Abrogation of the Law c. And to this Christ might well refer when he said I have yet many things to say but ye cannot bear them now considering how hard it was for them who were Jews and the professed disciples of Moses to embrace a new Religion and quit the Principles of that wherein they had been born and bred Nor indeed had this Discourse as yet been seasonable because the Ceremoniall Law was not abrogated till the Sacrifice Death and Passion of Christ which then was not actually accomplished But besides this Guesse of Origen's and Chrysostom's St. Austine gives us some ground for another when he tells us Mori pro Christo nondum idonei erant Apostoli The Apostles were not as yet fit and strong enough to die for Christ Which expression giveth us a fair Intimation of St. Austine's Judgment concerning our Saviour's words I have many things yet to say but about what probably about their Sufferings and Martyrdom but saith Christ ye cannot bear them now But why not now Surely it was now a time of trouble and sorrow with them their hearts were almost broken already with the consideration of their dear Master's approaching Death and Passion and therefore saith St. Austine Nunquid debuit illis ovibus dici in illo Tentationis articulo quòd certare usque ad mortem pro veritate oportebat pro Christi nomine vel Doctrina sanguinem fundere Was it seasonable for Christ to tell his Apostles in this juncture of time and hour of Temptation since as yet they were but as sheep infirm and weak that they must expect to shed their bloud and suffer death for the Truths Doctrines and Name of Christ No our Saviour was pleased to reserve these Lessons that as yet might have seemed too harsh as Origen words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a fitter Opportunity namely the time after his own Passion and Resurrection That these Opinions of Origen Chrysostom and Austine concerning the matter of our Saviour's personall Discourses with his Apostles betwixt his Resurrection and Ascension which the Romanists urge for their Traditions are but conjecturall we do acknowledge but withall we do avouch that they are ten times more probable then that of Lorinus For that the many things which the Apostles could not yet bear and therefore Christ did not deliver till after his Resurrection should be such as concerned the Abolition of the Mosaicall Law or the Disciples own Sufferings rather then the Authority of the Romane Bishop the Invocation of Saints and other superstitious Doctrines and Practices now taught and used in the Roman Church as delivered by Christ in his forenamed private Discourses with his Apostles is much more consonant to Christian Religion humane Reason and the Authority of the written Word And if so if we may take the Judgment of Origen Chrysostom and Austine whose Opinions in this matter are countenanced by Holy Writ rather then the Judgment of Lorinus whose Opinion in this case the Scriptures themselves oppose though there be in this business no Certainty on either side yet if we have fairer Probabilities on our part then the Romanists have on theirs if it be more likely that the many things which Christ had to say before his Passion but did not for prudentiall considerations actually declare till after his Resurrection might concern as the forenamed Fathers probably thought the Abrogation of the Jewish Religion the Calling of the Gentiles and the Martyrdom of his Apostles rather then those unwarrantable Traditions for which the Romanists do now contend how then comes Bellarmine to assert that they are not written But upon the whole matter the Truth is this Since 't is altogether impossible to find out what those many things were which Christ had to teach his Disciples before his Death but did not doe it because as yet they could not bear them till after his Resurrection 't is equally impossible to prove that they are or are not registred But if the Romanists are of another mind and will undertake by infallible Testimonies to demonstrate to us what were the particular matters of our Saviour's severall Discourses at the time of his severall Apparitions to his Apostles before his Ascension then will we also
undertake to demonstrate with equall evidence when and by what Apostles whatever he so delivered stands recorded And till the Roman Church shall make this out certain we are that those words of our Blessed Saviour I have yet many things to say assisted with those of St. Luke he spake of the kingdom of God prove not the thing for which our Adversaries urge them namely That there were severall necessary Doctrines delivered by Christ to his Apostles after his Resurrection that are nowhere found in the written Word of God 2. But since these forenamed Texts will not doe their desired work the Champions of the Trent Faith who are resolved to endeavour the Justification of every Article maintained and concluded on by that illegal Conventicle of a few suborned packed and titular Bishops are obliged to try some other if possibly they can find the least Countenance for their Traditions in Sacred Writ There is another expression of the Evangelist St. John that is often urged as a Text that will doe their businesse indeed and thus it runs Many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his Disciples which are not written in this Book No 't is observed of St. John by one of the Greek Fathers that he wrote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 many of Christ's Sermons but few of his Miracles For 't is certain that his Gospel at the request of the Bishops of Asia and in opposition to the Gnosticks and other Hereticks was written last upon which score he did advisedly passe by those Miracles which were already recorded by the other Evangelists and so might well tell the world thus Many other signs truly did Jesus which are not written in this Book And withall 't is observable that the Evangelist doth not mention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 other Doctrines but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 other Miracles which are not written in his Gospel But what then what Evidence gives this to those Traditions about matters of Faith and Manners which the Roman Church pretends to be as necessary to Salvation as those great Doctrines of Christ and his Apostles which are clearly found in the written Word I remember that St. Chrysostom and some other Interpreters do restrain this expression of the Evangelist to those Miracles onely which Christ wrought after his Resurrection Many other signs truly did Jesus Here Theophylact puts the Question thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What Miracles were those which the Evangelist here speaks of were they such as our Saviour wrought publickly and before his Passion He answers thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Saint Chrysostom conjectures too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It seems to me that the Evangelist means those Miracles which were done by our Saviour after his Resurrection and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 onely for the sake of his Disciples And methinks this Conjecture of St. Chrysostom Theophylact and others hath a very fair foundation in the Text it self which tells us Many other signs did Jesus which are not written in this Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the presence not of the multitude but of the Disciples and probably the Disciples onely and that with a design to confirm his Apostles who had been too incredulous in the faith of his Resurrection And certainly if these Miracles of Christ were wrought in private before his Disciples and for their sakes onely to be as Theophylact styles them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Evidences and Proofs of his Resurrection to remove their personall doubts to satisfie their Curiosity and to establish their Faith 't is not easy to imagine that the omission of some of these Miracles by all the Evangelists should any way countenance the Traditions of the Roman Church nor prejudice the Faith of the Vniversall which hath otherwise such abundant Testimonies of Christ's Resurrection from the written Word that it cannot need the Assistence and Supplement of Traditions for its Confirmation in that or indeed in any other Article of its Belief And as for those mighty Works of wonder which were publickly wrought by our Blessed Saviour to prove his Commission from God and to confirm the Divinity of that new Religion which he was then to introduce into the world that they were not all written we do easily grant There might be several Miracles done by Christ which St. John and the other Evangelists thought fit to passe by ut minimè necessaria saith Grotius as things no way necessary to be recorded For although our Blessed Saviour being desirous to doe good where-ever he came and being willing to convince the whole Jewish Nation that he was indeed the true Messias had frequent occasions to work various Miracles because he went to severall places and conversed amongst severall companies where he met with divers objects of Mercy and various persons that were to be brought over to his new Religion yet we do affirm that any one Miracle of his being rightly considered and duly weighed had been enough to have satisfied all its Spectatours that the Person and Doctrine of Christ were both approved and sent by God And this blessed effect some one single Miracle did sometimes produce When Christ had raised Lazarus from the dead we are immediately told upon that Many of the Jews which came to Mary and had seen the things which Jesus did believed on him And if so if one Miracle were sufficient to secure that End for which all Miracles were wrought 't is sure that we have enough recorded What though the Apostles did not register all the Miracles of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one by one and with all those Circumstances that did attend them St. John saith they could not doe it If they should be written every one I suppose that even the world it self could not contain the books that should be written But what then are we obliged to run to unwritten Traditions are we bound to believe the Truth of all those Miracles which as some say Christ wrought in Egypt when he was but a Child as much as those which he wrought in Israel when he was a Man and thereby shewed himself to be the Son of God too Are we no more bound to believe the miraculous Stories of the Four Evangelists then that related by Sozomen who tells us that when Christ in his Infancy was entring into Hermopolis there stood near the way an exceeding high tree which as our Saviour passed by did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bow down his branches to the very ground and thereby owned and made obeisance to its Lord Of this Miracle Maldonate saith Meritò Traditio videri potest 'T is a Story that well deserves the name of a Tradition and Sozomen saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Story and some other miraculous ones too about the same Tree are testified by the Inhabitants of Egypt and Palestine But are we therefore obliged to believe them with the same credit which we give to the Gospel No though all
Christ's Miracles are not written yet there are enough recorded to confirm our Faith so St. John assures us These are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christs the Son of God and that believing ye might have life through his name And methinks since the Evangelists have written as St. Chrysostom doth express and affirm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so many of Christ's Miracles as are a sufficient ground of Faith such a Faith as will undoubtedly save us we need not run to Traditions for more But however though the Evangelists have omitted such and such of our Saviour's Miracles yet that is no proof that they have also omitted such and such material Doctrines of his that are necessary to Faith Manners and Salvation which must therefore be supplied as the Roman Church pretends by such and such unwritten Traditions But yet 3. There are some other Scriptures urged by our Adversaries which they hope and make poor ignorant souls believe will infallibly doe their work such Texts wherein Traditions are not onely mentioned but in express terms recommended and enjoyned too That of St. Paul is one Stand fast and hold the traditions which ye have been taught whether by word or our epistle The observation of Traditions is that which St. Paul doth here require and elsewhere commend too I praise you brethren that ye keep 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the traditions as I delivered them to you Hoc loco se armant Papistae ad tuendas suas Traditiones saith Calvin The Papists arm themselves with this Text to defend their Traditions So doth Cornelius à Lapide who saith but without a warrant Hinc manifestè sequitur non omnia quae fidem mores spectant esse scripta sed multa vivâ voce tradidisse Paulum Apostolos 'T is evident from hence that all things which concern Faith and Manners were not written but that St. Paul and other Apostles did deliver many things by word of mouth And thus Estius observes out of Theophylact whose words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'T is clear from this Text that St. Paul and other Apostles delivered many things which they committed not to writing and thence Estius doth thus infer Locus hic palà m facit pro Traditionibus non scriptis iisque necessariò tenendis This place is a clear Evidence for unwritten Traditions and proves it necessary to observe them In answer to this Text we shall enquire into these three things 1. We shall enquire what Traditions St. Paul here means what their nature was whether they concerned matters of Faith and any such Points as are necessary to Salvation or whether they respected such things onely as concerned Order and Decency the exteriour Discipline and Government of the Church Let us view the words again and consider what St. Chrysostom thinks concerning them I praise you brethren that ye remember me in all things and keep the traditions c. Here St. Chrysostom puts this Question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What all things doth the Apostle mean He answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Paul's discourse had been about not wearing of long hair and not being covered in the Church and for their observation of his Traditions in these matters onely doth he now commend them So thinks St. Chrysostom and learned Grotius is of the same mind too who tells us Hîc significat Praecepta quaedam pertinentia ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Paul by his Traditions doth here mean nothing else but certain Rules which he had formerly delivered to the Corinthians concerning Decency and Order And if these be the Traditions in the Text pray who gainsayeth them Not the Church of England no nor the Calvinists neither for doth not Calvin himself thus acknowledg Ego autem non nego quin aliquae fuerint Apostolorum Traditiones non scriptae sed non concedo fuisse Doctrinae partes nee de rebus ad Salutem necessariis Quid igitur quae pertinerent ad Ordinem Politiam I deny not but that there were some Apostolical Traditions unwritten but I do not grant them to be matters of Doctrine and necessary to Salvation But what were they then why such as concerned Order and Government And the truth is that these Traditions mentioned by St. Paul in the forenamed Texts were any other the Romanists can never prove and consequently gain no Advantage from them 2. We shall enquire whether these Traditions mentioned by St. Paul as delivered by word of mouth might not afterwards be written 'T is sure that the Traditions in the Text if as St. Chrysostom and Grotius have conjectured they were onely such as concerned Order and Decency and particularly about wearing of Hair and uncovering the Head in holy Assemblies they are recorded and that in the self-same Chapter too And 't is very possible that whatsoever in any other place St. Paul styles a Tradition might afterwards be written notwithstanding I remember Grotius tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est id quod docetur Whatsoever is taught whether by word or writing is called a Tradition 'T is used in both senses by the ancient Fathers yea and by the Apostles too Thus St. Cyprian Vnde est ista Traditio utrúmne de Dominica Evangelica Authoritate descendens an de Apostolorum Mandatis atque Epistolis veniens Whence is that Tradition comes it from the Authority of our Lord and his Gospel or from the Commands and Epistles of his Apostles 'T is evident by this expression that St. Cyprian acknowledgeth that though this or that be written yet it may be styled a Tradition notwithstanding So he farther explains himself a little after Si ergò aut in Evangelio praecipitur aut in Apostolorum Epistolis aut Actibus continetur observetur etiam haec sancta Traditio Let this holy Tradition also be observed if it be commanded in the Gospel or contained in the Epistles or Acts of the Apostles And that the self-same Truths which St. Paul and other Apostles preached to the world were afterwards written either by themselves or some body else is evident from that expression of Irenaeus Matthaeus in Hebraeis ipsorum linguâ scripturam edidit Evangelii cùm Petrus Paulus Romae evangelizarent fundarent Ecclesiam Post verò horum discessum Marcus discipulus Interpres Petri Ipse quae à Petro annunciata erant per scripta nobis tradidit Lucas autem sectator Pauli quod ab illo praedicabatur Evangelium in libro condidit The same thing is thus attested by Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. St. Matthew wrote his Gospel amongst the Jews in their own language whilst St. Peter and St. Paul preached and founded a Church at Rome And after their departure St. Mark who was the Disciple and Interpreter of St. Peter delivered in writing the things which St. Peter had preached St. Luke also who was the follower of St. Paul compiled in a Book
that Gospel which St. Paul had published So Irenaeus saith again Evangelium quod quidem tunc praeconiaverunt postea per voluntatem Dei in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt That Gospel which the Apostles had then preached they did afterwards deliver to us in the Scriptures and that by the will pleasure and command of God And doubtless St. Paul intimates as much in that expression of his Hold the traditions which ye have been taught whether by word or our epistle What he had formerly taught them by word of mouth and what he had already delivered in his former Epistle is here equally called a Tradition For the truth is the Substance of St. Paul's Sermons and Epistles the Subject matter of his Preaching and his Writing was all one This seems clear from that expression of his To write the same things to you to me indeed is not grievous but for you it is safe What same things doth he mean St. Hierom tells us Eadem repetere quae praesens dixeram To repeat the same things with my Pen which I delivered with my Tongue when I was present with you And thus did other Apostles and Evangelists too what they spake at one time that they wrote at another Thus dealt St. Luke with his dear friend Theophilus whom he first instructed by word of mouth but afterwards by writing So Theophylact tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I formerly catechized thee without writing but now by giving thee a written Gospel But what doth this written Gospel contain new lessons or old ones did St. Luke speak one thing and write another No the reason why he wrote Theophylact gives us thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I do by writing strengthen and secure thy mind lest it should forget what things had been formerly delivered by word of mouth So he tells us again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have therefore written thee a Gospel that thou mayest the more firmly remember and keep the things which thou hast been taught by word of mouth And that St. Paul dealt thus with the Churches to whom he preached and wrote we have ground enough to believe 't is more then probable that the self-same Traditions in all necessary points of Faith which he taught them by word of mouth at one time he also penned at another Methinks we may very rationally collect this from what St. Chrysostom saith concerning that speech of St. Paul ye keep the traditions as I delivered them to you Hence that Father thus infers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore at that time St. Paul delivered them many things without writing We grant it but withall we must observe St. Chrysostom's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then at that time an expression doubtless that hath little of savour in it if he doth not mean that what St. Paul did thus deliver by orall Tradition at one time he also wrote at another And although the Epistles of St. Paul being written to particular Churches or Persons upon particular matters in answer to such and such particular Questions and against such and such particular Opinions and Heresies he had not a fair occasion in every or perhaps in any one single Epistle to give an account of every thing relating to Christ and his Religion yet we do affirm that if we take all his Epistles collectively and together we shall find that the whole Summe of that Gospel which St. Paul preached to the world by word of mouth is so fully delivered in them that whosoever shall believe the Truths and perform the Duties contained in them though he know no Scripture besides shall certainly be saved Nor indeed was it necessary that St. Paul should undertake to set down the whole Doctrine of Christ in every or any one of his short Epistles since it was sometimes his command and might always be his just expectation that that Epistle which he wrote to one Church should be communicated to others also for their farther Information too And certainly if all the necessary Points and substantial Parts of that Religion which St. Paul preached to the world by word of mouth were afterwards recorded either by himself in his own Epistles or as Eusebius and Irenaeus testifie by St. Luke in his Gospel the Roman Church will never be able to justifie their unwritten Traditions those at least which they urge as necessary from any one Instance or Expression of St. Paul But 3. We shall enquire whether the Traditions now contended for in the Roman Church be the same or of a like nature with those the observation whereof St. Paul requires from the Thessalonians and commends in the Church of Corinth This Consideration is of great concern for if the Traditions of the Roman Church be of another kind if they shall prove to be the late and new Inventions of men not so much as thought of in the Apostles days the whole case is so altered that I do not see how it is possible for them to find the least Countenance from St. Paul For all that St. Paul doth either require or commend in this matter is the observation of those Traditions onely which he himself who was guided by God's infallible Spirit had delivered to such and such Churches they are his own words Ye keep the traditions as I delivered them and again Hold the traditions which ye have been taught by word or our epistle Here St. Hierom notes Quando sua vult teneri non vult extranea superaddi Whereas St. Paul commands them to observe his Traditions he doth in effect forbid them to introduce strange ones of their own Now whatever Traditions the Church of Rome pretends to have been delivered by St. Paul to the Churches of Christ without being written are of these two kinds 1. 'T is pretended that St. Paul and other Apostles too delivered some unwritten Traditions that concerned necessary Points of Faith Worship Manners and Rules of Righteousness Thus he tells the Corinthians I delivered unto you that which I also received how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures c. and again I received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread c. 'T is evident from these Texts that these Traditions which St. Paul delivered to the Church concerning matters of Faith and Worship he received from God and found them suitable to the written Word Now let us consider whether the present Traditions of the Roman Church about matters of Faith and Divine Service be such too if they are we oppose them not They tell us that the Observation of the Lord's day is an Apostolicall Tradition we contradict it not because we find ground for it in the written Word we also find it mentioned by the Primitive and early Fathers Ignatius if yet that Epistle of his be not corrupted tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Jewish Preparation
Apostolicall Institution But however though the Church of Rome may pretend but cannot prove for one St. Chrysostom is not enough Apostolicall Tradition for such and such Doctrines and Practices of theirs yet what Authority from Christ or his Apostles can they plead for those Articles of their new Creed which their Pope Pius the Fourth hath impiously imposed upon the Church of Christ and added to that received Nicene Creed as if it were of equall Credit even with that and to be believed upon penalty of Damnation When St. Paul delivered such and such Traditions to the Christian Church he tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I received of the Lord but could Pope Pius say as much of his and can the present Church of Rome say as much of theirs when in their new-found Creed they teach us to say I profess that there are truly and properly Seven Sacraments of the new Law instituted by Christ Do they indeed gather this Article of their Faith as we do all those in the three received Creeds from clear Testimonies of Holy Writ or do they collect this Doctrine and number of their Seven Sacraments as their Patriarch of Venice is said to have done from that particular expression of St. Andrew when he told his Lord There is a lad here which hath five loaves and two fishes When they require us to say I profess that there is a true proper and propitiatory Sacrifice offered to God in the Masse for the Quick and the Dead do they indeed father this Tradition upon St. Paul who saith Christ was once offered and again Christ by one offering hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified Again when they teach us to say I profess that in the Eucharist the Bread and the Wine and why not their Water too are transubstantiated into the body and bloud of Christ do they ground this Tradition upon the words of Consecration This is my Body when Scotus himself who was one of their own great Champions hath told the world that the words of Christ do not necessarily import it and that Transubstantiation for which Bellarmine indeed corrects him was no Article of Faith till the Lateran Council When they teach us to say I acknowledge that under one Kind whole and perfect Christ and the true Sacrament is received do they ground that Doctrine upon a Canon established by the Council of Constance or upon the Example and Command of our Blessed Saviour who delivered both the Elements to all his Communicants and gave them this express injunction concerning the Cup in particular Drink ye all of this And that this Command of our Blessed Saviour was observed in the Primitive Church where the Minister according to Christ s own Example delivered the Consecrated Cup to all the Communicants is evident from the Testimony of the most early Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Ignatius and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. saith Dionysius there was then one Cup distributed to all And if this were the known Practice of the Primitive Church what ancient Tradition can the Roman Church produce for their Communion in one Kind onely Again when they bid us say I do constantly hold that there is a Purgatory do they derive this Tradition from the writings of Plato who mentions three Receptacles for departed Souls or from those Expressions of Prophets or Apostles which say of all departed Saints They rest from their labours and of all departed Sinners They shall be turned into hell Once more when they would have us believe that Saints and Angels are to be worshipped that there is a Veneration lawfully paid to the very Reliques of Saints to the Crosse of Christ to the Images of the Virgin Mary c. do they ground this Tradition upon the Second Commandment which they could as willingly blot out of their Bibles as they have done out of some of their Catechisms or upon any Expression of St. Paul both which do flatly condemn the Worshipping of any Creature No 't is well observed by Calvin Sub Traditionum titulo includunt omnes crassas abominationes manifesto Dei Verbo contrarias The Romanists under the name of Traditions do include all their grosse Abominations which are directly contrary to the Word of God and so are far enough from being those traditionall Doctrines or any whit like them of Faith and Worship that are recommended by St. Paul who imposed not any Belief or Practice upon the Church but what was as himself words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Scriptures But 2. 'T is urged by the Roman Church that St. Paul and other Apostles too delivered some unwritten Traditions to their immediate Successours which concerned the external Discipline Order Policy Rites and Ceremonies of the Church Well and who denieth it not Calvin who though he were a great opposer of superfluous and burthensome Ceremonies doth yet grant thus much Paulus Ecclesiae Corinthiacae primus fundator Itstitutis piis honestis eam formaverat ut decenter ordine illic agerentur omnia St. Paul who was the first Founder of the Church of Corinth did so form it with pious and laudable Institutions that all things there might be transacted without the least Indecency or Disorder So runs that written and well-known Rule of his Let all things be done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decently and in order But besides this Rule that he hath left upon Record he farther tells them The rest will I set in order when I come And what he did or enjoyned to be done in pursuance of this Promise perhaps might be never written But as Calvin demands Quid hoc ad insulsas Ceremoniarum nugas quae visuntur in Papatu quid hoc ad Superstitionem plusquam Judaicam What 's all this to the insipid and foolish Ceremonies of the Roman Church how doth this justifie those Superstitions of theirs that are more then Jewish So numerous are their Ceremonies that I cannot imagine what St. Austine would have said had he lived in our times who thus complained of his own Religionem servilibus oneribus premunt ut tolerabilior sit conditio Judaeorum c. The Condition of the Jews in respect of burthensom Ceremonies was more tolerable then that of Christians I remember Bellarmine reckons up no less then twenty two Ceremonies used in the Roman Church in the Administration of Baptism and tells us that they are all of Apostolicall Institution or at least of great Antiquity some of which are these Exorcisms Salt Spittle Chrism the Wax-taper the white Apparrell and the Kisse c. And as to the Sacrament of the Eucharist the same Bellarmine tells us Apostoli legem condunt ut sumatur ante omnes alios cibos nimirum à jejunis the Apostles established a Law that it should be receiv'd before all other food that is by persons fasting And yet that Rule of St. Paul which the Romanists can never satisfactorily answer stands
that sometimes he dropped from his Pen some things that did not well consist with the written Word of God The Scriptures tell us that there is One Baptism accordingly the Council of Carthage thus defined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptism ought not to be administred the second time no not to Hereticks so Arsenius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Persons baptized by Hereticks must not be baptized again Such was the Judgment of Fathers and Councils and yet St. Cyprian was of his mind who said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If Baptism be at first administred by such Hereticks as deny the great Articles of the Christian Faith as they in Nazianzene did the Divinity of the Holy Ghost then give me a second Washing And although Bellarmine tell us that St. Austine excuseth Cyprian from being an Heretick yet sure we are he did not excuse him from being in an Errour for thus he saith Cyprianum aliter sensisse de Baptismo quà m Forma Consuetudo habet Ecclesiae in suis in Concilii literis invenitur That Cyprian did not think of Baptism as the Church doth 't is clear both from the Council's Letters and his own too And if St. Cyprian might erre about Baptism why not about the Eucharist too when he saith Debet Aqua Vino misceri Water must be mingled with the Sacramental Wine If Cyprian were mistaken about the Government of the Church when he said Ipsa plebs maximè habet potestatem vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi The very common people have the chief Power to chuse good Bishops or refuse bad ones why might he not be mistaken about the Ceremonies of Baptism when he said Vngi necesse est eum qui Baptizatus sit c. 'T is necessary that every person who is Baptized should be Anointed too If St. Cyprian might be and certainly was in an Errour in one case what security have we but that he may be mistaken in some other matters too We can never admit all the Doctrines and Usages received in the Roman Church to be of Apostolicall Authority though countenanced by St. Cyprian's Testimony except we shall first forget that even Donatus and his Followers did shelter themselves and their erroneous Opinions under the name and Patronage of the same St. Cyprian too And truly we cannot wonder that Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Tertullian Cyprian and other good men before and after them were overseen in some Particulars since out of that great Respect and deserved Veneration which they had for the Apostles themselves and their immediate Successours they became too prone without any strict Examination to give credit to such Traditions which were either delivered to them by word of mouth or contained in any such Writings as bore the Apostles names or were pretended to be derived from Apostolical men That there were such forged Writings sent abroad into the world and that very early too several Authours have informed us Thus St. Austine Non defuerunt qui sub Apostolorum nominibus multa confingerent c. Some there were who forged many things in the Apostles names so he And in that Edition of the Septuagint printed at Basil by John Hervagius I find the Lives of the Evangelists and Apostles written by Sophronius prefixed before their respective Gospels and Epistles where in the Life of St. Peter there is mention made of several Writings wherein St. Peter was concerned either as the Authour or at least as the Subject matter of them and thus they are named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first was inscribed The Acts of St. Peter the second was named The Gospel of St. Peter c. Of all these the Writer of his Life passeth this Judgment 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They are all rejected as Apocryphal Writings And yet in the Life of St. James there is mention of a Book entitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Gospel according to the Hebrews a Book saith the Authour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Origen often used And certainly if Origen and other Fathers did reade and believe such Apocryphal books we cannot wonder that they fell into some absurd Opinions and have transmitted to posterity such fond Traditions as are far from being Apostolicall I remember St. Paul tells us that Christ after his Resurrection was seen of James and upon what occasion Christ was pleased to appear singly to St. James alone that forenamed counterfeit Gospel thus informs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. James had sworn that he would not taste one morsel of Bread from that hour wherein Christ died till he should see him risen from the dead again Upon this score saith the Authour of that Book Christ appeared to him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and taking bread and having given thanks he brake it and giving it to St. James the Just said My brother eat thy bread for the Son of man is risen from the dead c. So inconsistent is this Tradition in its several Circumstances with the written Word that Estius himself styles it Narrationem fabulosam a fabulous Narration and Lorinus confesseth Hanc Historiam non admittit Augustinus St. Austine doth not admit this Story and yet Estius observes that St. Hierom doth use some other Passages of that false Gospel wherein this Tale is recorded And what need I mention those other counterfeit Gospels of St. Thomas St. Bartholomew and Nicodemus What need I mention the forged Acts of St. Andrew and that pretended Epistle of St. Paul to the Laodiceans the true one if yet there were ever any such being acknowledged by Bellarmine to be lost What should I mention that Protevangelium fathered upon St. James and yet full of such Traditions as are no way reconcilable with Christ and his Apostles St. Luke tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things c. Theophylact here puts the Question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who were these many that thus undertook to write the Gospel He answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were false Apostles and he tells us farther 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Many even then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the Grace and Spirit of God wrote several counterfeit Gospels as the Gospel according to the Egyptians the Gospel of the Twelve c. And certainly albeit those good men the Fathers of the Church out of too much Credulity and Veneration shewed towards their Predecessours were pleased to give so much Credit to those spurious Writings which deserved rather to be expunged then believed as to transcribe something of them into their own Works and thereby transmit them to Posterity yet all such Passages derived from uncertain and deservedly-suspected Authours can be no more authentick nor claim any greater Authority then the Originals from which they were borrowed And as for some other things which the Fathers wrote upon their
was the day of Christ's Passion their Sabbath of his Buriall and our Lord's day of his Resurrection 'T is mentioned by Tertullian who saith Die Dominico jejunium nefas ducimus To fast on the Lord's day we count it sin 'T is mentioned by Nazianzene who styles it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 'T is from the great Probabilities given us in the written Word and the pregnant Testimonies of Antiquity that the Reformed Church doth observe this Tradition which concerns the Lord's day with greater strictness then the Roman They tell us again that the Baptism of Infants is an Apostolicall Tradition we are so far from contradicting them that we do not onely practise it our selves but maintain it against all Opposers because 't is mightily countenanced in Sacred Writ and commended to us by all Antiquity I remember Dionysius the Areopagite if he that goeth under that name be indeed the man tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Children who were yet uncapable to understand the Mysteries of the Gospel were made partakers of Divine Regeneration and saith that the Church observed this Practice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being taught so to doe by ancient Tradition Accordingly Nazianzene thus adviseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Hast thou an Infant let him be sanctified from his Infancy And so St. Cyprian and other Bishops give their Judgments Prohiberi non debet Infans qui recèns natus c. The Infant that is but newly born must not be debarred from Baptism Whoever denied this was condemned by the Church and accordingly the Council of Carthage which consisted of two hundred and seventeen Fathers passed this Sentence upon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whosoever denieth that little Children newly dropped from their Mothers Womb ought to be baptized let him be Accursed These and the like Authorities do induce us to believe that the Baptism of Infants though no-where in plain terms commanded in Scripture is yet a Divine Tradition and upon that well-grounded Confidence our Church doth as constantly practise and as strongly defend it as ever theirs did or can do They tell us again that the Institution of our Christian Festivals and the observation of Lent are Apostolicall Traditions Well though they will find it a difficult task to prove them such though the first Institution of Lent is by some ascribed to Telesphorus and though about the observation thereof there was and that very early too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doubts and various opinions as Irenaeus and Eusebius tell us yet because our Christian Fasts and Festivals are very suitable to Scripture-Rules and were observed as great helps to and expressions of their Devotion and Piety by our religious Ancestours and indeed the Universality of the Christian Church we do readily embrace and practise both But when our Adversaries press upon us under the notion of Apostolicall Traditions many things of Faith and Worship defined in their late Conventicle of Trent though altogether unknown to the first and purest Ages of the Christian Church and contrary to the written Words we find reason to lie under the Anathema's and Excommunication of the Roman Church rather then to comply witâ— it in those Doctrines and Practices of theirs whicâ— are so exceeding far from being Apostolicalâ—â— They tell us indeed that their Veneration 〈◊〉 Saints is practised juxta Catholicae Apostolicae Ecclesiae usum à primaevis Christianae Religionis temporibus receptum according to the use of the Catholick and Apostolick Church and was received from the beginning of the Christian Faith whereas the Invocation of Saints now practised in the Roman Church is not mentioned by any of the Fathers till above two hundred years after Christ and consequently cannot be imagined to be an Apostolical Tradition And as for the Roman Custom of Praying for the dead by the Practice whereof in former Ages they would fain establish their Doctrine of Purgatory and that especially to keep up the credit of their dear Indulgences though we find this excess of groundless and uselesse Charity used in the Christian Church and that somewhat early too though St. Cyprian in the third Century mentions Oblatio pro Dormitione Deprecatio nomine defunctorum though Tertullian in the same Century mentions Oblationes pro defunctis nay more though Dionysius the Areopagite who if he be the man lived in the first Century tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The holy Priest makes an holy Prayer for or over the dead yet none of all these do assert this Practice to have had its Originall from any Divine or Apostolicall Tradition as the Roman Church contends Tertullian indeed concerning this and some other Practices used in his time confesseth thus Si legem expostules Scripturarum nullam invenies If you require a Scripture-command for this and that there is none to be found upon which score he ascribes these things to Tradition but whence that Tradition took its rise he doth not tell us But the truth is St. Chrysostom doth who in the behalf of persons deceased in the Guilt of sin exhorts his hearers thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let us assist and succour them to our utmost power But what can surviving persons doe for the relief of departed Sinners he answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let us both pray for them our selves and beseech others to doe so too And that the Dead should be particularly remembred in the Prayers of the Church at the celebration of the Lord's Supper he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was ordained by the Apostles and that not in vain And that this Practice spred and continued in the Church after St. Chrysostom's time is evident from that expression of St. Austine Non parva est universae Ecclesia Authoritas quae in hac consuetudine claret ubi in precibus Sacerdotis quae Domino Deo ad ejus Altare funduntur locum suum habet etiam commendatio Mortuorum 'T is clear indeed from these words that to remember the dead in their most solemn Prayers at the celebration of the Eucharist was grown in St. Austine's time the generall Custom of the Church but that this Custom had its Originall from the Apostles he doth not say Nor indeed could this be the Institution of the Apostles that there should be a particular Commemoration of the dead and a solemn form of Prayer put up to God on their behalf at the administration of the Lord's Supper if that Observation be true which Chemnitius ascribes to St. Hierom St. Gregory and others in these words Apostolos ad solam Orationem Dominicam celebrâsse actionem Mysteriorum Divinorum If this be so that the Apostles themselves used no other Prayer but the Lord 's alone at their Celebration of the Eucharist how can it be imagined that those solemn Supplications which in after-times were made for the dead at the Altar should be of
we have a great Encouragement from that Expression of Tertullian Constat omnem Doctrinam quae cum Ecclesiis Apostolicis Matricibus Originalibus Fidei conspiret veritati deputandam id sine dubio tenentem quod Ecclesiae ad Apostolis Apostoli à Christo Christus à Deo accepit c. 'T is manifest that every Doctrine which agreeth with the Apostolick Churches which were the Wombs and Originals of Faith must be esteemed a Truth as holding that which those Churches received from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ and Christ from God So that whatsoever Traditions the Church of Rome can prove to be Apostolical by an unanimous Consent of all the ancient learned and holy Bishops and Doctours who from Age to Age have governed and taught the Church though such Traditions are no-where recorded in the written Word yet being obliged by the universal Testimony of all Antiquity to esteem them Apostolical Institutions and consequently no-way repugnant to Holy Writ we shall most readily receive and practise them upon the very first Conviction For so great a respect hath the Church of England for all her pious Forefathers in Christ that she doth most chearfully follow their Example in every thing that is convenient and laudable and doth pay to venerable Antiquity all that imaginable Reverence which is consistent with that inviolable Rule she walks by which is the written Word of God But 2. Although we are thus ready to embrace all those Doctrines and Practices which can be recommended to us by the general Consent and Approbation of Antiquity yet the Testimonies of such and such particular Fathers which the Romanists produce for the justification of their unwritten Traditions we cannot think our selves obliged to accept nor is it safe to comply with them in all Points whatsoever 'T is the great Prerogative of the Scripture alone to deserve and require our Assent to every thing that is there delivered by every particular Prophet Evangelist and Apostle When once we do but clearly understand the meaning of Divine Revelations and comprehend what such and such a Text doth import there is no room for any farther Scrutiny or Examination but all our business is to believe and practise Thus stands the case with the Word of God every line whereof is of unquestionable Authority but as for the Writings of men how holy or learned soever but not infallibly guided by God's unerring and holy Spirit we have ground enough in all Points and matters of Controversie which the Scriptures do not clearly determine to pause a while suspend our faith and not immediately to give too quick an Assent to such and such Assertions till we have taken mature Advice and deliberately considered what is the matter of such and such Propositions that relate to the Worship of God Points of Faith or other Concerns of the Church as well as who it is that recommends them And for this we have several Reasons 1. That the whole Church of God in after-Ages should without all farther Examination give an immediate Assent to all Propositions Principles Conclusions Doctrines or Practices which are laid down recorded or recommended in the Works of such and such ancient Fathers is a thing which those Fathers themselves did never doe or expect The truth is to give a firm and quick Credit to every thing which such or such a person hath said were an instance of such a Respect as the best of men cannot deserve nor did the best of the Fathers ever require or shew We are in this to imitate St. Austine who told St. Hierom thus Alios Scriptores praeter Canonicos ità lego ut quantâlibet Sanctitate Doctrinâve praepolleant non ideo verum putem quia Ipsi ità senserunt sed quia mihi vel per illos Authores Canonicos vel probabili ratione quà d à vero non abhorreat persuadere potuerunt When I reade any Authours that are not Canonicall how holy or learned soever I do not presently grant this or that to be a truth barely because those Authours thought so c. And as he reserved to himself this liberty of dissent when he found just cause from other mens Writings so did he as willingly allow the same liberty to all other persons who should become the Readers of his So he tells his friend Fortunatianus Talis ego sum in Scriptis aliorum tales volo esse Intellectores meorum Such am I in other mens Works and such would I have other men be in mine But how is that he tells us Neminem velim sic amplecti omnia mea ut me sequatur nisi in iis quibus me non errare perspexerit I would have no man so to credit what I write as immediately to comply with my Judgment except it be in those things onely wherein he perceives me to be in the right 'T is a Golden Rule which he elsewhere gives us Audi dicit Dominus non dicit Donatus aut Rogatus aut Vincentius aut Hilarius aut Ambrosius aut Augustinus sed dicit Dominus Hear and believe not every thing which such and such a man saith but what God saith So then though perhaps we may dissent in some particular matters not determined in the written Word from such and such particular Fathers though we have entred our Dislike and do solemnly protest against some Expressions that have unwarily dropped from some of their Pens yet since these good men have declared themselves to be no-way injured or affronted thereby we do not need or if we did we should not matter a Pardon from his Holiness who wants indeed some better Evidences to confirm the Validity of his Indulgencies and make them saleable in English Markets But 2. To comply with every thing that such and such a Father hath asserted and to receive all their Testimonies indifferently as undoubted Truths is a thing so gross and irrational that even our Adversaries of Rome themselves will not doe it 'T is indeed very usual with them to exclaim against us as persons that have no Reverence for Antiquity but reject the Fathers and tread them under foot but the truth is if it be a fault to dissent from ancient Writers in any thing whatever if our refusal to subscribe to their Opinions in all matters of Controversie may be interpreted as a Contempt done to those excellent Persons from whom in some things we disagree then do we retort this Argument upon our Adversaries and having a just ground of Recrimination we do tell and can easily prove to the world that if this be indeed our Crime it is certainly theirs too That the Church of Rome doth give an universal Assent to whatsoever all the Fathers have written will not be imagined by any person who considers what the Jesuits and other Doctours who well understood the Sense of that Church and durst not openly contradict it have left upon Record I remember that expression of Bellarmine who being urged
THE GRAND PRESVMPTION Of the ROMAN CHURCH In Equalling their own TRADITIONS TO THE Written Word OF GOD. By FRANCIS GREGORY D. D. Rectour of Hambleton in the County of Bucks and one of his Sacred MAJESTIE's Chaplains in Ordinary LONDON Printed by E. Flesher for R. Royston Bookseller to the King 's most Sacred Majesty 1675. THE GRAND PRESVMPTION OF THE ROMAN CHURCH In Equalling their own Traditions to th◠Written Word of God Col. 3.16 Let the Word of Christ dwell in you richly c. T Is the Observation of St. Chrysostom and an undoubted Truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All the Epistles of St. Paul are sacred but yet there is something more then ordinary in those Epistles of his which were written and sent to such and such Churches or Persons when he was in his Bonds whereof this to the Colossians was one Theophylact reckons up five severall Epistles written by St. Paul whilst he was a Prisoner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Epistle to the Ephesians to Philemon to Timothy to the Philippians and this to the Colossians were written by St. Paul when he was in Bonds That this Epistle was certainly written at Rome we learn from its ancient Postscript which is confirm'd by the express Testimony of Oecumenius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Paul sent this Epistle from Rome And that it was one of the latest we gather from St. Chrysostom who saith that the Apostle wrote it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 towards the End of his Preaching so late that Chronologers place it in the sixtieth year of Christ Who these Colossians were and in what Region of the world their City stood we learn from severall Authours 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so St. Chrysostom and after him Theophylact 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Oecumenius Colosse was a City of Phrygia now called Chona as is evident in that Laodicea was within its Neighbourhood This City Herodotus styles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Great and Xenophon calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prosperous thriving rich so great and so rich that Pliny reckoning up Phrygiae oppida celeberrima the most famous Towns of Phrygia counts this for one In this renowned City the Gospel was planted by Epaphras which being done the Devil according to his usuall manner raised up such and such Hereticks to subvert it Thus Theophylact 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was a certain wicked Opinion spred amongst them and what that was he tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They supposed that Man hath access to God and the Father not by the Son but by the Angels But besides this heterodox and monstrous Opinion Theodoret saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They had many Greek and Jewish Observations mingling Heathenish Philosophy with Christianity reducing the abrogated Ceremonies of the Law and confounding Christ with Moses The consideration of these erroneous Opinions and Practices which Epaphras had made known to St. Paul did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 move the Apostle to write this Epistle wherein besides the Proem and the Epilogue he layeth down 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great Doctrines and Principles of Faith he also gives them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such and such morall Instructions and Rules of life And because it was impossible for him in one short Epistle to illustrate or comprehend 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the whole entire Systeme and Body of Christianity in all its distinct and particular branches he therefore refers them to that comprehensive and perfect Rule the written Word of God as being sufficient to arm them against all Heresies to confirm them in the Faith and guide them in their Conversation and that 's the business of the Text Let the word of Christ dwell c. The words contain a necessary Exhortation given indeed immediately to that Church whereunto St. Paul wrote and directed this Epistle but designed and intended for all Churches yea and Persons too where the Gospel is or shall be preached for ever We have in them three things considerable 1. The Matter or Object of that Endeavour and Study to which the Apostle doth invite us and that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word of Christ But what 's that Cornelius à Lapide answers thus Doctrina Evangelium Christi 'T is the Doctrine and Gospel of Christ and thus Calvin who tells us Vult Doctrinam Evangelii illis esse familiarem The Apostle would have the Doctrine of the Gospel to be familiar to them Estius expounds it thus Fides seu Doctrina Christi the Faith or Doctrine of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Instructions the Doctrines the Admonitions whereby Christ teacheth us so Theophylact Our learned Davenant extends the Expression farther and takes in the Old Testament too Evangelium vel Doctrina Scripturarum St. Paul means either the Gospel or the whole Doctrine of the Scriptures Accordingly St. Chrysostom here tells the Laiety 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Paul permits you to reade the Scriptures So that by the word of Christ in the Text we may very well understand both the Testament which Latitude of Interpretation is countenanced by some Manuscripts which reade it as Grotius observes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word not of Christ but of God And so the Arabick Version Sermo Dei the Word of God even the whole Sacred Writ 2. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Manner which the Apostle prescribes and every man must observe in his reading and studying the Word of Christ 'T is thus expressed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let it dwell What 's that Nè patiamini Verbum Dei quasi peregrinum foris stare sed intromittatur in domicilium Cordis vestri saith our excellent Davenant Do not suffer the Word of Christ to stand without doors like a stranger but admit it into the inward man and when once 't is received keep it fast nunquam ex animis vestris abeat let it never go out of your minds so Grotius 'T is the Observation of St. Chrysostom and Theophylact 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Paul doth not barely say Let the word of Christ be in you but let it dwell and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 richly i. e. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in great abundance 'T is not enough to acquaint our selves with a few Passages onely but we are concerned to study Prophetas Apostolos Evangelistas saith Bishop Davenant the Prophets the Apostles the Evangelists even the whole written Word of God 3. The Persons whom St. Paul doth thus exhort to reade study and familiarly acquaint themselves with the Word of Christ The Text saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let the Word of Christ dwell in you But who are they Certainly the self-same persons to whom he directs his whole Epistle and that stands thus inscribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the Saints and faithfull brethren in Christ which are at Colosse The Expression takes in not Archippus
not the Bishop not their Ministers onely but the common people even all that professed the Faith of Christ too The first thing considerable in the Text and which alone I shall here handle is the Matter or Object of that Study whereunto St. Paul doth here invite the Colossians and all Christians whatsoever and that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of Christ the Law and the Gospel Moses and the Prophets the Evangelists and the Apostles the Old Testament and the New Now that whatsoever is contained in any of these most certainly is and may therefore most justly be styled The Word of Christ is evident upon a twofold ground 1. Christ is the Efficient Cause of all the Scripture each of the Testaments hath him for its Authour See this distinctly in three Particulars First Christ is the Great and undoubted Authour of the Law The Evangelist indeed tells us The Law was given by Moses but how that was Origen tells us who thus distinguisheth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We understand that the Law was given by Moses but not from him Doubtless Origen means the same thing which Erasmus thus expresseth Moses Legis Author non fuit Moses was not the Authour of that Law no Castalio tells us Quòd Lex data est Divini fuit Beneficii The giving of the Law was from the Kindness of God As for Moses 't is said he received the lively Oracles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith St. Chrysostom he received the Law from another and so proved not the Legislator to establish and make the Law but a Minister an Herauld a Scribe to receive proclaim and write it So that Ebion that pestilent Heretick had no reason to think Moses who is said to have given the Law to be upon that score a greater man then Christ But although the first Promulgation and Delivery of the Law upon Mount Sinai cannot possibly be ascribed unto Moses yet it seems very clearly to be attributed unto Angels Thus St. Paul For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast c. What word was that Theophylact tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Apostle means either the Decalogue or generally all Commands dispensed by Angels under the Old Testament Thus St. Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Decalogue the Commandments Lex Mosis the Law of Moses so Grotius And of this Law the Apostle doth elsewhere thus affirm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was ordained by Angels How so Ministerio Angelorum by the Ministery of Angels so Clarius 'T is the observation of Grotius that the Law was pronounced by some one of the Angels others attending round about him And that the Law was indeed delivered by some one single Angel we learn from that of St. Stephen This is that Moses who was in the church in the wilderness with the angel that spake to him in the mount Sina 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Angel the expression imports that it was some one particular Angel who pronounced the Law But what and who this Angel was 't is somewhat uncertain Grotius saith it was unus ex praecipuis Angelis one of the chiefest Angels it was such an Angel as was counted worthy to represent the person and bear the name of God So Moses tells us God spake all these words And as Moses gives him this glorious Title so doth this Angel himself assume and own it I am the Lord thy God c. And that he was so indeed the people believed The Lord our God hath shewed us his glory and we have heard his voice we have seen this day that God doth talk with man c. From these expressions several Interpreters do gather that this Angel who delivered the Law was the Second Person in the Trinity whose various Appearances under the Old Testament were nothing else but as St. Austine calls them Symbola Praeludia Incarnationis the Symbols Tokens and Essays of his Incarnation This is that which Nazianzene confidently affirms Filium Dei in Monte Sina cum Mose locutum esse scimus That the Son of God upon Mount Sina did discourse with Moses is a thing that we know And to this purpose doth St. Chrysostom expound that passage of St. Stephen He was in the wilderness with the angel What Angel means he St. Chrysostom answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'T is the Son of God whom he calleth an Angel and again a little after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the expression sheweth that the Angel who appeared to Moses was the Angel of the great Counsel and who is that Dionysius the Areopagite answers thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jesus himself And indeed that it was some Person of the Blessed Trinity that delivered the Law was the Opinion not onely of Philo the Jew but of St. Cyprian Justine Martyr Tertullian and some other Fathers of the Christian Church who affirmed with one consent revera fuisse Deum that it was God indeed But let us admit the Opinion of these learned and pious men to be a mistake and that of St. Dionysius to be a Truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Scriptures teach us that the Divine Law was handed to us by Angels so Josephus too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our most excellent Doctrines and most holy Precepts were delivered to us by Angels Well suppose it be certain that Angels properly so called had to doe with the delivery of the Law yet this doth no way hinder but that Christ may be and surely is the Legislatour still for whatever this Angel whoever he was delivered upon Mount Sina was the Dictate of God So the same Authours tell us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Law was given by God so Dionysius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Law was delivered by Angels who had learn'd and received it from God so Josephus And what Person of the Godhead it was Saint Austine thus informs us Quemadmodum Verbum Dei quod est Christus loquitur in Propheta sic in Angelo loquitur As the Word of God which is Christ speaks in a Prophet so doth he speak in an Angel too I remember Caelius Rhodiginus tells us that the Law-givers of the Nations were very ambitious to make their Subjects believe that all the Laws which they established were derived from some Deity or other Thus Trismegistus fathered his Laws upon Mercury Draco and Solon theirs upon Minerva Zamolxis his upon Vesta Plato his upon Jupiter and Apollo Numa his upon Egeria c. Now that Divine Honour which they sought for their Laws ours hath which undoubtedly is the Law of a God or as my Text words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word of Christ that Glorious Law-giver with whom those of this World whom Seneca mentions for the wisest Solon Lycurgus Zaleucus Charondas c. are not once to be named Secondly All the Prophecies of the Old Testament have Christ for their
Authour too 'T is certain that those Holy men who delivered the Prophecies of the Old Testament to the Jewish Church were inspired from Heaven and hence it is that the Scripture styles a Prophet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a man of God i. e. a man commissioned authorized and informed by God St. Peter tells us No prophecie of the Scripture is of any private interpretation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of private incitation so our learned Hammond renders it the expression imports that the Prophets were not suae mentis sed Divini Consilii Interpretes as Cameron words it they did not reveal their own minds but God's Thus St. Paul God spake by the Prophets they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men carried acted and taught by God And what Person of the Trinity it was that inspired these Prophets St. Peter tells us Holy men spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost Thus Ezekiel The Spirit of the Lord fell upon me and said unto me Speak Thus saith the Lord c. There was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Cameron the Spirit of God did invade seise and enter the Prophets of old and upon that score those Messages which they delivered and left upon record are commonly styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Holy Writings or as Dionysius calleth them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Discourses Sermons or Words of God And as the Prophecies of these Holy men with a respect to the whole Trinity are indeed the Word of God so likewise with a more particular Appropriation to the Second Person they may be justly styled according to the expression in the Text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word of Christ For that this Blessed Spirit by whom these Prophets were infallibly taught and guided in all their Messages is indeed the Spirit of Christ 't is an Article of our Christian Faith delivered to us both in the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds For although the Title that was expresly given the Spirit by the ancient Fathers of the Greek Church in the Creeds of Nicaea and Constantinople were onely this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Spirit that proceeds from the Father yet that it was their constant belief that the Spirit did also proceed from the Son our excellent Bishop Pearson hath undeniably evinced from several expressions of Epiphanius who thus affirms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Spirit of God is the Spirit of the Father and the Spirit of the Son too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he is from the Father and from the Son and that doubtless not onely as he was anciently termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 receiving from the Father and the Son but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proceeding too And this Procession of the Spirit from the Son though the Scripture doth no-where deliver in expresse and open terms yet it doth virtually contain and justly warrant it For as he is styled the Spirit of the Father so is he as plainly styled the Spirit of the Son too so St. Paul God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son And as he is styled the Spirit of God so is he styled the Spirit of Christ too thus the same St. Paul If any man have not the Spirit of Christ c. So then 't is evident that this Blessed Spirit by whom the Prophets of old were inspired and acted is indeed the Spirit of Christ So much St. Peter doth yet farther assure us The Spirit of Christ which was in the Prophets c. And methinks if that Holy Spirit by whose immediate Inspiration all the Prophets did speak and write were and is the Spirit of Christ we may easily grant that every Truth which these Prophets by the Guidance of this Spirit have delivered and left upon record is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word of Christ Thirdly The New Testament hath Christ for its Authour too 'T is often styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Gospel of Christ St. Paul calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Gospel of the Son and well he may for all the Sermons recorded by the four Evangelists are the Sermons of this Son all the mighty works registred in these severall Gospels are the Miracles of this Son all the Promises that are anywhere delivered by St. Matthew Mark Luke or John are the Promises of this Son and whatever Truth we find mentioned by any one or all the Evangelists 't is the Doctrine of this Son Thus St. Paul God hath spoken to us by his Son c. Under the Law God spake by Angels and Prophets that were his Servants but under and in the Gospel he hath spoke more immediately by Christ Who is his Son And as the main Passages recorded by the four Evangelists were thus immediately delivered by Christ in his own Person so likewise those holy men who were Amanuenses Dei the Secretaries and Pen-men of the Spirit to write what our Saviour did and preached and so to transmit his Truths his Commands and his Miracles to all succeeding Ages were provided and raised by Christ too So that Text informs us He gave some Apostles and some Evangelists c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He gave c. but who is that Idem ipse Christus so Estius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so St. Chrysostom 't is Christ 't is the Son that gave But what did he give 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apostles such as St. Paul Silas Barnabas c. to preach the Gospel and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Evangelists 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so St. Chrysostom he gave St. Matthew and others to write the Gospel and by so doing to convey it sincere pure and incorrupt to all Generations And this doth Saint Paul acknowledge By Christ we have received Grace and Apostleship hence doth St. Peter style himself thus Peter an Apostle of Jesus Christ c. Christ himself was known by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Apostle of his Father but St. Peter and St. Paul were His. And as these Apostles received their severall Commissions from Christ so were they careful to preach those very Doctrines which Christ himself had taught them Thus St. Paul I have received of the Lord that which I delivered unto you Non confinxi pro Ingenio meo c. saith Cameron St. Paul did not invent but receive what Truths he preached and wrote they were not the Issues of his own Brain but the Revelations and Dictates of Christ And if so if the Evangelists and Apostles who preached and penned the whole New Testament were not onely raised by Christ but infallibly taught by his Spirit too we may conclude that this holy Gospell which was published and registred by these inspired Persons is indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word of Christ But 2. The Scriptures are and may be justly styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word of Christ not onely as he is the Authour of the whole but also as he is
Titulus the Title of his whole Book which comprehends the summe of all his following Discourse and sheweth that his design was to treat of nothing else but Christ is the acknowledgement of Erasmus who denieth St. Matthew's Title so to be and doe And what is the Subject Matter of St. Luke's Gospel himself acquaints his friend Theophilus The former Treatise have I made of all that Jesus began both to doe and teach Partitus est omnem Christi Vitam in Facta Doctrinam saith Erasmus St. Luke doth here divide the whole Life of Christ into the Miracles which he wrought and the Sermons which he preached and tells Theophilus that these two were the great Contents of his former Book Thus Grotius Haec verba brevem Evangelii descriptionem continent These words contain a short description of St. Luke's whole Gospel and shew that Christ is the Subject of it And as for the Acts of the Apostles Quid aliud est quà m Evangelii pars saith Erasmus What is it else but a part of the Gospel What contains it but an History of what the Apostles did and suffered upon the Account of Christ And what Saint John our fourth Evangelist treats of the very first line of his Gospel tells us In the beginning was the Word 'T is but one Word that makes up his whole Book and that Word is Christ So then 't is clear enough that Christ is the onely Subject of all four Gospels but what do the Epistles treat of St. Matthew Mark Luke and John do write of Jesus but what doth St. Paul doe 'T is sure that no Apostle preached no Apostle wrote so much as he but what 's his Subject The Text answers He preached Jesus himself confirms it We preach not our selves but Christ And as he preached so he wrote too 't is easily seen that in all his Epistles there are but few Passages to be found that do not one way or other relate to Christ So that upon the whole matter we may safely say as Maldonate doth Tota Scriptura Christum loquitur The whole Scripture speaks of Christ So Cornetius à Lapide too Tota Scriptura pro Argumento suo habet Christum tota circa Christum versatur All the Bible the Old Testament and the New Moses and the Prophets the Evangelists and the Apostles do all treat of Christ as Christ is the Authour of all Scriptures so is he their great Subject matter too And if so we may well conclude that the whole Bible is what the Text styles it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of Christ And since 't is so these Inferences will undeniably follow I. That the Scriptures have in them more of Excellence Wisedom Purity and Holiness then any or all other Writings whatsoever Indeed there may be and certainly is somewhat of worth in many other books besides 't is possible sometimes to find Gold among rubbish and a Jewel may lie upon a dunghill That there are many things of great use in Humane nay in Heathenish Authours no sober person that reads and understands them will deny So excellent are the Writings of Plato that I find him styled alter Moses a second Moses and the Ancients commonly surname him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plato the Divine Such are the Morals of Plutarch a man styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Venus of all Philosophy that it was judged the fittest book to be preserved if all books were to be burnt but one Nay so choise an Authour is that very Poet Homer that Dionysius calleth him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most Divine And methinks that little Poem of Pythagoras deserves its name and those few lines of his are justly styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Verses of Gold What great use may be made of Heathenish Moralists Historians and Poets we learn from those great Examples and learned men the Primitive Fathers Justine Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Epiphanius c. and amongst the Latins Tertullian Austine Hierom Cyprian Lactantius and many others who overthrew the Idolatry of the Gentiles and convinced the Nations of their abominable Superstitions and Practices by the clear Testimonies of their own Writers And in so doing these great Luminaries of the Christian Church did but follow the Example of St. Paul who to convince Pagans and Infidels took Arguments from their own Authours and translated some Verses of Callimachus Epimenides Menander and Aratus into the Word of God and thereby made them sacred And doubtless there is a great truth in that expression of Scultetus Fructuosè ancillantur Sacris c. The Testimonies of Humane Authours do contribute a great deal towards the Confirmation of many Truths and the better understanding of the Oracles of God And if there be such a worth in the writings of other Authours who were but Men what value shall we set upon the Scripture which is the undoubted Word of God If the Laws of Solon be choise what is the Law of Moses If the Ethicks of Aristotle Epictetus Hierocles Cicero Seneca and many others be excellent what then are the Proverbs of Solomon If the Discourses of Plato be Heavenly what then are the Sermons of Christ Nay if the Epistles of St. Austine St. Hierom St. Bernard and other Fathers be even Divine what are St. Paul's then Remember other Writings are but the Writings of Men but these are God's other Books at best contain but the word of such and such a Saint whereas our Bible contains 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of Christ II. That every man stands obliged readily and firmly to believe whatever the Scriptures contain and assert to be a Truth I remember St. Paul demands of Agrippa Believest thou the Prophets and our Blessed Saviour himself demands of Martha Believest thou this Certainly were not man grown strangely sottish such demands as these would have no place and yet methinks 't is a stranger Question which Christ put to the Jews How shall ye believe my words But what should hinder Is it possible for man to pretend any reason why the words of Christ should be so much as once suspected So great is his Authority so unquestionable is his Veracity that his bare affirmation is a sure ground of Faith Thus the Evangelist The man believed the word But what moved him so to doe the Text answers and assigns this Reason of his faith The man believed the word that Jesus had spoken And such is every word which our Bibles contain 't is the Word of Jesus and upon that score if we are the Disciples of Jesus we stand obliged to doe what his other Disciples formerly did They believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said The truth is the whole Scripture is nothing else but a Systeme of Words and Sentences which Jesus hath said and caused to be written and if so there is not a Verse there is not a Line to be found but requires and
deserves our Faith See this especially in three Particulars 1. Since the whole Scripture is undoubtedly the Word of Christ we are obliged to believe it in all the matter of History which is contained therein There are indeed such and such Historicall Narrations found in the Prophets Evangelists and Apostles so strange and miraculous that were they found in any Book besides we might perhaps without any blame suspect the Writers Faith and warrantably suspend our own Did we reade in Herodotus what we reade in Moses that this glorious fabrick of Heaven and Earth was created without any more adoe then onely this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And God said Let there be this and that where is the man that barely upon such an Authority would believe it Had Plutarch written the Life of Moses as he did the Lives of Greeks and Romans had he recorded the wonderfull Works of God in Egypt at the Red Sea and in the Wilderness had he told us of a Rod that became a Serpent of Waters that were consolidated into a Wall of Rocks that were rarefied and melted into Wells of Bread dropped down from Heaven the Tast whereof was gratefull to the various Palates of every one that ate it or had Ovid told us and onely he or some other Authour like him that the whole World was once drowned with water and shall one day be burnt with fire that a Woman was turned into Salt that a King became a Beast and fed on grass like an Oxe had he told us that the Chariot of the Sun that wheels round the world with so strong and quick a Motion stood still at one time and went back at another or had some Humane Authour who is of the greatest Credit told us what the Prophet Daniel peremptorily doth namely that a man was cast into a Den of hungry Lions and yet remained untouched that three persons were thrown into a flaming Furnace that was heated seven times more then ordinary on purpose to consume them and yet remained not onely unburnt but even unsindged too or had any such Writer told us what the Evangelist doth The blind receive their sight the lame walk the lepers are cleansed the deaf hear the dead are raised up Such stories as these had they been delivered by any humane and vulgar Authour must needs have exceeded all the faith of the most credulous person which the whole World affords But although these Stories to carnall Reason may seem very strange and improbable though the matter of fact be in it self so hard and difficult that it doth rather discourage then induce us to believe them yet since we find these things expresly and clearly delivered in our most holy Writ since we find them strongly attested by Prophets Evangelists and Apostles we cannot with any shew of Reason without a great deal of guilt and sin not onely deny our Assent but even so much as suspend our Faith and that because the whole Scripture which contains these historicall Narrations how strange soever is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of Christ that Christ who did not will not can not lie 2. Since the whole Scripture is undoubtedly the Word of Christ we are obliged to believe it in all the Promises which it contains What those Promises are St. Peter tells us Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises The Promises of God are exceeding great in their number and exceeding precious in their nature too there is not any one amongst them but is of more reall value then the whole world besides so many so sweet so excellent are they that a poor humble soul who hath the greatest Interest in them scarce knoweth how to believe them as if they were too good to be true That an offended God upon the shedding of a few penitentiall Tears upon a little Humiliation Contrition and Reformation which cannot possibly make the least Satisfaction for those frequent Injuries which man hath done him should ever be so gracious as to promise him that signal and inestimable Blessing even the full Remission of all those Transgressions which would otherwise have certainly damned him for ever That upon the Submission of a Sinner God Almighty should promise to advance that Rebell to a Throne whom he might have justly laid in that infernall Gaol to be wrapped up in flames and chains of darkness and that for ever That upon some few Acts of such and such an inconsiderable service which adds nothing to the ever-blessed Majesty of Heaven the Great God should promise no less a Reward then an immortall Crown of Glory Certainly were such Promises as these reported by some mere man like our selves nay more were they delivered to us barely by an Angel from Heaven they would not easily be believed For when some dejected and contrite Soul doth seriously consider with it self the dreadfull nature of its Sin the worthlesness of its Repentance the manifold imperfections and small value even of its highest Services it can hardly enter into its head that the one should so easily be forgiven and the other so highly rewarded But although the Sinner from the sad apprehension of his own Guilt and his great Vnworthiness of those unvaluable Privileges which are the Subject matter of the grand Promises of the Gospell may find in himself just cause to fear their Performance yet when he seriously considers whose Promises they are and where they stand recorded he hath far greater reason to conclude their full Accomplishment St. Paul tels us He that hath promised is faithfull and again All the promises of God in Christ are Yea and Amen True it is Man is but a poor Worm a Sinner a Rebel unworthy to share in those glorious Promises that stand recorded in our Bibles but what then shall we take occasions from the Demerits of Man to suspect and question the Truth and Faithfulness of God We must acknowledge that Promises of Pardon Life eternal Blisse and Glory are such mighty things as pass our Vnderstanding but must they therefore exceed our Faith Methinks it should be as easie for us to believe them as it is to reade them Certainly if there be nothing too great for God to promise there is nothing too hard for God to doe whatever good words his Mercy hath made him speak his Power and his Truth confirms and for all this we have the Great Charter of Heaven a sure word of Prophecy even that blessed Security which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of Christ But 3. Since the whole Scripture is undoubtedly the Word of Christ we are obliged to believe it in all the Threatnings which it contains That the various Menaces recorded in Holy Writ are indeed most dreadfull things whosoever doth but reade them must presently acknowledg The Prophet tells us The soul that sinneth it shall die What a sad condition then is the incorrigible Sinner in The Psalmist tells us The wicked shall be
to the very written Oracles of God yet 't is clear enough that himself Baronius and others of the Roman Faith do use the Authority of these forged Epistles to countenance several Doctrines and Practices wherein the Reformed Church and theirs differ And yet for all this there are several learned Writers of the Roman Church who cannot but acknowledge that such and such Epistles Constitution Recognitions fathered upon their Primitive and Martyred Bishops are shrewdly suspected yea and clearly proved too to be false and counterfeit Thus Lorinus Verborum Domini liber tam est Apocryphus quà m in quibus memorantur Clementis Recognitiones The Book of our Lord's Words is as Apocryphall as the Recognitions of Clemens wherein that Book is mentioned He tells us indeed Clementis Constitutiones paulò majoris sunt fidei the Constitutions of Clemens are of a little more Credit But are these unquestionable no that he denieth Clementis libri Constitutionum non sunt usquequaque indubitatae Authoritatis The Constitutions of Clemens are not of an Authority that is undoubted altogether And what else can we think of those Decretal Epistles that are ascribed to Zephyrinus which contain things foolish ridiculous and false as that the Consecration of the Holy Cup must be in a vessel of Glasse onely that a Bishop must be accused before twelve Judges and that Evidence against him must be made by seventy two Witnesses How contrary is this not onely to Scripture but to those very Canons which are ascribed to the Apostles whereof this is one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And to the same purpose the Council of Nice too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Canons according to the Rules of St. Paul require the Testimony two or three Witnesses onely even against a Bishop whereas the pretended Decree of Zephyrinus demands seventy two and that with an Appeal to Rome which is enough to prove it false and forged Such a counterfeit Epistle too was the second of those two fathered upon Pontianus which begins thus Pontianus Sanctae Vniversalis Ecclesiae Episcopus Pontianus the Bishop of the Holy and Vniversal Church This Title in those early days unknown to the World being as yet not claimed nor assumed by any Roman Bishop but afterwards denied and decried by Gregory the Great gives us a fair and clear Evidence that this Epistle is counterfeit and written by some other hand as well as those of Fabianus Stephanus and some other succeeding Bishops with a design to pretend something of Antiquity for the defence of those unwarrantable Doctrines and Practices of the present Roman Church for which they can produce no fair and clear Evidence from the genuine and acknowledged writings of the most ancient Fathers And as for the Decrees Constitutions and Canons of the Bishops of Rome which have sate in that Chair since the time of Sylvester what security have we but that these also may have been changed corrupted and falsified according as the exigence of the Roman Church hath so required Bellarmine tells us that Pope Leo complained that whilst he himself was yet alive the Graecians had corrupted his Epistle to Flavianus and why might not the Latines for their own ends doe as much What reason have we to give credit to such and such Papal Decretals when Bellarmine himself being pressed with a Canon of Zacharias that made against him had little to say but this Zachariae Canon mihi valde suspectus est This Canon of Zacharias I do very much suspect And the truth is we are so much of his mind and have so much cause to be jealous that many Canons and Constitutions ascribed to such and such Bishops of Rome were indeed none of theirs but onely forged and counterfeited that we cannot upon their Authority admit those Doctrines and Practices for which we can find no warrant in the written Word of God But 2. The Testimony of Roman Bishops in the Cause of Traditions is not firm and sure because the Pope at least in matters of this nature notwithstanding their Pretence of his being Infallible may possibly be deceived himself and if so he may deceive us too 'T is the free Concession of Bellarmine and that as he saith wherein all Catholicks do agree Posse Pontificem etiam ut Pontificem cum suo coetu Consiliariorum vel cum Generali Concilio errare in Controversiis facti particularibus quae ex Informatione TestimoniÃsque hominum pendent That the Pope considered as Pope with his private or General Council may erre in particular matters of Fact which depend upon the Information and Testimonies of other men And that seems to be the Case in hand the business of Traditions is a matter of Fact and the whole Controversie under our present Disquisition is onely this Whether Christ delivered to his Apostles the Apostles to the Primitive Bishops they to their immediate Successours and so from Age to Age such and such particular Doctrines and Practices as are now contended for by the Roman Church So that the whole Question in hand being concerned about matters of Fact wherein they themselves acknowledge the Fallibility of the Pope we have little Reason to acquiesce in his Determinations and to be so well satisfied with his Testimony as to think our selves obliged thereby to believe and doe those things which the Scriptures do neither assert nor command But what if the Pope may erre in considerable Points of Faith too and become an Heretick are we obliged to believe his Testimony even then too Photius tells us that by the Canon-Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hereticks might not in any Judicature be admitted to bear witness against any Orthodox Christian within the Church And certainly if Heresie be a Crime of that nature as that it hath been thought enough to exclude or evacuate any man's Evidence in Civil Causes we shall have but little reason to admit any person that is as liable to Heresie as other men as an infallible Witnesse in matters of Spiritual and Sacred Concern And that several Bishops of Rome have been not onely shrewdly suspected but publickly accused and condemned too and that of the foulest Heresies 't is not to be denied by any man whose brow is not made of Brass 'T is recorded by several Authours and those of good name and credit that some Roman Bishops have been Monothelites some Montanists some Eutychians some Arrians yea and some downright Atheists too But the Charge being heavy against them and the Honour of the Roman See lying at stake and the Pope's Infallibility also being herein somewhat concerned we must enquire into the Witnesses and see that they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as deserve to be believed For so justly tender is the Christian Church of the reputation of her Bishops that she will not admit all persons whatsoever to bring in Evidence against them No the sixth Canon of the Second General Council forbids it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
with a Sentence of Tertullian against Zephyrinus who was Bishop of Rome had little else to reply but onely this Non esse omnino fidem habendam Tertulliano in hac parte Tertullian in this matter because Bellarmine did not like it is not at all to be believed No nor St. Chrysostom neither if he deliver any thing that contradicts the Romish Faith Alium scopulum vitare Lector debet nè Chrysostomum legens c. saith Maldonate The Reader must avoid another Rock lest perhaps reading St. Chrysostom he run into an Errour And as for those two great Worthies of the Christian Church St. Ambrose and St. Austine Lorinus did not think them infallible when he ventured to say Memoriâ lapsum oportet Ambrostum idémque statuendum de Augustino c. St. Ambrose forgot himself and so did St. Austine too Indeed whatsoever is delivered by Tertullian Chrysostom Ambrose Austine or any other ancient Father how agreeable soever it be to the written Word of God yet if it be inconsistent with the present Traditions and Practices of the Roman Church they will not grant it to be a Truth And if so if the Romanists themselves whenever their Interest doth so require do make so bold with the Fathers as to suspect their Judgments and deny their Authority methinks they should be so ingenuous as to allow us the same liberty of Dissent which they take to themselves If they dissent from Tertullian Chrysostom Ambrose Austine and other Fathers and that in those very matters wherein those Fathers have clearly dogmatically and designedly delivered their Judgments why may not we dissent from Clemens Alexandrinus Origen and some others especially in those things which they have onely rhetorically and accidentally mentioned and yet are now violently drawn forced and wrested to countenance those Articles of the Trent Faith whereof those Fathers did never dream But however what just ground we have to dissent from such and such particular Fathers in such and such particular cases especially in those Points now in Controversie betwixt the Reformed and Roman Church we shall shew in two Particulars 1. The first Reason and that which indeed our Adversaries may justly plead as well as we why we cannot think our selves obliged to comply with every particular Father in every particular thing which they have delivered is Because they were but Men and so might erre and indeed often did and some of them foully too 'T is very usuall with the Champions of the Roman Church to produce the Testimonies of severall persons who are men of great Name and Authority in the Church of God to justifie severall of those Traditions with which we can by no means comply I remember Bellarmine produces and cites Ignatius Dionysius Justin Martyr Irenaeus Origen Clemens and others for whom we have that signal Respect and Veneration which is justly due to their Piety Learning and Antiquity but withall we cannot forget that the very best of the Fathers were subject to Mistakes and Errours whereby they shewed themselves to be but men And the truth is we have so many and so sad Examples of Learned and Pious persons before us who have been miserably deceived by meer Pretensions of Antiquity that we shall not easily suffer our selves to be seduced by the same Delusions into the Belief and Practice of any Traditions except we can find in them what Irenaeus found in those mentioned by Polycarp 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Agreeableness to the written Word of God We cannot forget what great Mischiefs to the Church of God the Authority of Papias Origen and some others did in Primitive times That this Papias was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Disciple of the Apostles the Auditour of St. John the Companion of Polycarp is I think universally granted and that he received such and such Traditions from the Daughters of Philip the Evangelist at Hierapolis was as Eusebius tells us his own Assertion and yet for all that the same Historian informs us that this very man relying too much upon Tradition was so far surprized as to vent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strange Doctrines And if so shall we think our selves so far obliged to espouse and own all his Opinions because they are old ones as to become Chiliasts and to be imposed upon as Irenaeus himself and many more then were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from that Respect and Veneration which they had for his Antiquity And as for Origen whose Testimony the Church of Rome makes exceeding much of as a great Patron of some Traditions which are advantageous to them we do give him all that Respect which becomes him to receive and us to shew his learned Disputations against Celsus his Confutations of the Psycho-Pannuchists his Conviction and Conversion of Beryllus that Arrian Heretick his readiness to Martyrdom his labours in Preaching Catechizing and Writing have made his Name famous and his Memory venerable in the Church of God But withall had this excellent Person nothing of Errour to allay and stain his Glory Doth the Church of Rome indeed think us or themselves either obliged to embrace every Opinion as an undoubted Truth that hath the Patronage of Origen's Name What if Origen seem as our Adversaries contend to countenance their Doctrine of Purgatory which was doubtless the golden Dream and Invention of Plato must we therefore acknowledge it to be as certain a Truth as that there is an Heaven for Saints and an Hell for Sinners Why doth not Bellarmine give the same Credit to Origen when he discourseth of the Creation of many Worlds as when he discourseth of Purgatory I remember Photius mentions some Doctrines broached by Origen and afterwards promoted by Didymus and Evagrius that were his Followers which I hope the greatest Sticklers for the Roman Religion will not allow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They determined that there should be an end of Hell's endlesse Torments they taught that the very Devils themselves should one day be restored to their former Dignity These Opinions being so welcome to the worst of men grew apace but withall being so destructive to the Christian Religion Justinian the Emperour in the year 551. called the fifth Oecumenicall Council at Constantinople where this Errour of Origen and his Followers by the joynt Suffrages of one hundred and sixty five Bishops was exploded condemned and anathematized as being what Photius rightly calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Encouragement to all manner of Villany even the chief of those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wicked Opinions which were broached 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Origen when he was out of his wits as Nilus doth inform us And certainly that Doctrine of Purgatory for which the Testimony of Origen is so much urged by the Roman Church deserves the same Censure too as being a considerable Provocation to the Commission of those pleasing Sins the Punishment whereof how long or how short it shall be is according to their Doctrine
at the Pleasure of the Pope's Mercy and the Offender's Purse And methinks 't is strange that such a Tradition as this which can never be delivered from the just imputation of encouraging Vice should because mentioned by Origen and his Followers be declared Apostolicall and equalled to that written and sure Word of Christ from which it receives sufficient Confutations but nothing of Countenance whatever the Romish Church may pretend But alas Origen is but one of many that are cited as Patrons and Abettours of the Romish Traditions there is another Person as well as Origen who lived as Eusebius words it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the very next Age to the Apostles whose Testimony is often urged in this matter too I mean Clemens Alexandrinus who flourished in the reign of Commodus and was the Scholar of Pantenus which two were the first that I meet with who delivered the Principles of Christian Religion in a Catecheticall way in publick Schools and for that deserve an Honour What Eusebius reports concerning this Clemens cannot be denied 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This man's Books are full of much excellent Learning so excellent that Chemnitius saith expresly of him In tota Antiquitate habitus fuit vir celeberrimus In all Antiquity there was not a man so famous as he But yet for all that he fell into many strange and heterodox Opinions such I suppose as our Adversaries themselves will by no means allow He telleth us that our Blessed Saviour preached but one year onely that the Apostles being departed from the World preached to the Dead and converting some of them raised them to life again He countenanced the Tenets of Anabaptists that Christians ought not to swear nor implead one another before any Tribunal whatsoever He affirmed that if men who were once Baptized and enlightned fell into Sin God perhaps might grant them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 place of Repentance for once or twice but no more for ever and yet notwithstanding as if he had forgot himself and were not constant to his own Opinion he saith elsewhere that if men repent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is no place either in this world or in the next void of the Goodness of God And methinks if this excellent and learned Person were betrayed into such gross and absurd Opinions as are directly contrary to the written Word through those Traditions which had even thus early crept into the Church and were fathered upon St. Paul St. Peter and other Apostles we must beg and may justly expect our very Adversaries pardon if we still suspect that such and such Traditions mentioned by this Clemens are very far from being as Bellarmine contends Apostolicall But although Clemens Alexandrinus fell into such erroneous and fond Opinions that they have given the Church just occasion in doubtfull matters to like his Testimony so much the worse yet what hath Tertullian done to forfeit his Credit and so far to blemish his Reputation that the large Testimony which he also gives in the case of Traditions should be questioned too Tertullian was indeed a learned Preacher of the African Church a man that confuted Marcion and wrote excellent Apologies for the persecuted Saints of God a man that is styled by Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most famous of all the Latine Writers and yet notwithstanding when he treats of Religious matters not contained within our Bibles we have too much ground in some things to suspect his Judgment too and for so doing Bellarmine himself hath given us his own Example 'T is notoriously known that this Person of excellent Parts shewed himself to be but a son of Adam when not finding that Respect from the Roman Clergy which he might have expected through Discontent and Anger he miserably fell off from the Orthodox Christians and took up the detestable Opinions of that Phrygian Heretick Montanus What were the Opinions of this Montanus Apollonius in Eusebius tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. This was he that taught the world to dissolve that sacred bond of Wedlock this is he that taught his Disciples such and such Doctrines tanquam à Paracleto traditas saith Chemnitius as if he had received them from the Blessed Spirit of God this is he whom his Followers took to be the Paraclete but whom sober persons looked upon as Eusebius tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a man possessed and acted by the Devil who had two women Priscilla and Maximilla to be his Prophetesses And certainly if this Montanus were such a monstrous Villain 't is as well sad as strange to think that such a man as Tertullian was should ever be so much transported with Passion upon such and such Neglects or perhaps Indignities received from some Clergy-men at Rome as to make such a Defection from the true Faith as if for some Affronts received from some particular persons he meant to revenge himself upon the whole Christian Church by patronizing the cursed Doctrines of so vile an Heretick But however since 't is clear that he did so we are by no means bound to believe what indeed he himself doth never affirm that all those Traditions which we find recorded in his Writings are of Divine Originall because we have ground enough to suspect that he might receive some of them at least from Montanus or some other unwarrantable hand rather then from Apostles or Apostolicall men But may not St. Cyprian pass for an unquestionable Witness if Tertullian do somewhat fail Was not this Cyprian the renowned Bishop of Carthage the stout Champion of Christ's true Religion yea and his faithful Martyr too And doth not this eminent Person give Testimony to justifie some of those Traditions and to prove them Apostolicall which are now received in the Roman Church and yet have not the least Countenance from the written Word of God What Great St. Basil once said of Dionysius Alexandrinus may without any Affront or Injury to St. Cyprian's name be affirmed of him too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We do not admire whatever that man said but some things we condemn too We are of St. Austine's mind who writes thus of Cyprian Cypriani literas non ut Canonicas habeo sed ex Canonicis considero Quod in eis Divinarum Scripturarum Authoritati congruit cum laude ejus accipio quod autem non congruit cum pace ejus respuo I do not take St. Cyprian's Epistles to be Canonical but I judge of them according to those which are such indeed Whatever therein agreeth with the Authority of Divine Scriptures to his honour I do applaud but whatever agreeth not with his leave I do reject 'T is evident by this Expression that although St. Cyprian were indeed what Nazianzene thought fit to style him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great Name of the whole world though he were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great Champion of the Truth yet it was St. Austine's Judgment
God To style himself by this humble Title he took occasion from the Pride and Arrogance of John called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Patriarch of Constantinople which being at that time the Imperial Seat this John had took upon him the Title of Vniversal Bishop whereof Gregory thus complains O tempora ô mores Ecce destructae urbes eversa castra c. tamen Sacerdotes qui in pavimento cinere flentes jacere debuerunt Vanitatis sibi nomen expetunt novis prophanis vocabulis gloriantur With this Expression of Gregory the Great agreeth that of Vspergensis Rogatu Bonifacii Phocas constituit Sedem Romanae Apostolicae Ecclesiae Caput esse omnium Ecclesiarum nam antea Constantinopolitana Ecclesia se scribebat primam Omnium Phocas at the Request of Boniface ordained that the See of Rome should be Head of all Churches for before that time the Church of Constantinople did write herself the Prime of all Churches And if so how can it be imagined that the Primacy of the Roman Bishop should be acknowledged and granted as Bellarmine contends by the sixth Canon of the very first General Council No the certain truth is this Canon was unworthily corrupted in favour of the Roman Bishop and although our Adversaries cannot for shame acknowledge their own corrupting of Councils yet they cannot deny but that it hath been familiarly done by other persons Nay doubtless in some cases they themselves pretend the Corruption of Councils when in truth there was no such matter For if the Authority of such or such a Council be urged against the Roman Church and cannot otherwise be well escaped they have no other Shift to save themselves but onely to pretend that such and such a Canon which they cannot answer is false and counterfeit 'T is a certain Truth that their Pope Honorius was condemned for a downright Heretick by the sixth General Council which consisted of an hundred and seventy Fathers assembled at Constantinople so 't is recorded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith one The Council condemned Honorius and some other Assertours of the same Opinion as Hereticks that fought against God And that this Sentence was just Photius thus assures us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they brought them under a righteous Condemnation But will the Roman Church contentedly suffer any Bishop of theirs to be condemned branded and recorded for an arrant Heretick and plead nothing in his behalf What would then become of their dear Infallibility what would then become of Pope Agatho's Letter to the sixth General Council wherein he bragged that the Bishops of Rome never erred in Points of Faith Or will the Roman Church acknowledg that a General Council may be mistaken and that in a matter of so great Concern to themselves as they take the Infallibility of their Bishops to be 'T is a shrewd Dilemma that our Adversaries lie under in this case For if Honorius were certainly an Heretick their Infallibility ceaseth but if Honorius were no Heretick then may General Councils erre which the Roman Church is loath to grant Well to secure the Credit of Honorius and the Authority of that General Council which condemned him too Bellarmine invents this trick and tells us Erat Consuetudo Graecorum ferè ordinaria corrumpendi libros c. It was even the familiar Custom of the Grecians to corrupt the Copies of Councils And that it was so indeed in the case of Honorius he takes for granted Sine dubio Honorii nomen inter eos qui damnantur à sexta Synodo insertum esse ab aemulis Romanae Ecclesiae c. Without doubt the name of Honorius was inserted among those Hereticks whom the sixth Council condemned by some persons that bore no good will to the Roman Church Thus would the Cardinal make the world believe that what Canon soever spake any thing against a Bishop of his Church must certainly be corrupted and forged by the Grecians who as he intimates had no great Kindness for the Roman See And methinks if Bellarmine be real in what he saith if he did verily suspect that such and such Councils were indeed corrupted and forged by the Grecians as being disaffected to the Roman Church we have greater cause to be jealous that such and such Councils have been miserably corrupted and forged by the Latines who are sworn enemies to every Church which differs from their own For since 't is evident that they have made so bold with that famous Council of Nice as to falsifie a Canon of theirs we cannot think that they have so great a Veneration for any other Council besides but that they will corrupt and forge them even as oft as their Interest doth so require And since 't is thus since by the Confession of our Adversaries themselves such and such particular Fathers have strangely erred since the most Learned men of the Roman Church have acknowledged that even Popes and Councils have been if not mistaken in themselves yet basely corrupted by others we cannot think our selves obliged to accept the Authority and Testimonies of such Fathers Popes and Councils as sure and infallible Proofs of those Traditions which are now received in and recommended by the Roman Church though neither attested by the Vniversal Church nor warranted by the written Word of God And upon this score we can doe no less then wonder at the strange Confidence and unparallel'd Presumption of the Council of Trent and their Abettours who dare at least equal their own Traditions which stand upon such uncertain and slippery Grounds even to those Holy Scriptures which are universally owned and infallibly proved to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sure and undoubted Word of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 FINIS Chrysost ad Col. c. 1. v. 1. Theophyl in Argum. Epist ad Col. Oecum in Argum. Epist ad Col. Chrys ad Col. c. 1. v. 1. Chrys ad Col. c. 1. v. 2. Theophyl in locum eundem Oecum in locum eundem Theoph. in Argum. Epist ad Col. Theodoret. in Argum. Ep. ad Col. The◠Col. 1.2 Joh. 1.17 Origen in Joannem Erasm in Joann c. 1.17 Cast in Joann c. 1.16 Acts 7.38 Chrys in Joan 1.17 Theophylact. in locum Chrys in locum Galat. 3.19 Act. 7.38 Grot. in Heb. 2.2 Exod. 20.1 Deut. 5.24 Gregorius Naz. Orat. 49. Chrysostomus in Act. 7.30 Dionys Areop Coelest Hierarchiae c. 4. Dionys ubi supra Joseph l. 1.5 August Contra Adimantum c. 9. Cael. Rhodig l. 18. c. 19. Seneca Epist 9. Deut. 33.1 2 Pet. 1.20 Heb. 1.1 2 Pet. 1.21 Ezek. 11.5 Pearson on the Creed Epiphanius in Ancor Gal. 4.6 Rom. 8.9 1 Pet. 1.11 Rom. 1.9 Heb. 1.2 Ephes 4.11 Rom. 1.5 1 Pet. 1.1 1 Cor. 11.23 Gal. 3.24 Psalm 40.7 Joh. 5.46 Luk. 24.27 Act. 13.27 Matt. 1.22 Luk. 24.44 Matt. 26.54 Act. 3.18 Act. 1.1 Act. 9.20 2 Cor. 4.5 Maldon in Luc. 24.27 Cornel à Lap. in Heb. 10.7 COROLLARIES Cael. Rhodig Antiquit. l. 30. c.