An Enquiry whether oral tradition or the sacred writings be the safest conservatory and conveyance of divine truths, down from their original delivery, through all succeeding ages in two parts.

PART. II. Sacred Scriptures are the safest Conservatory, and Conveyance of Divine Truths down from their Original Delivery through succeeding Ages.

CHAP. I.

SECT. I.

IF we may collect the Judgment of Mankind from their Practice, we may believe, that in the Conveyance of Matters of Mo∣ment to Posterity, they judge the Precedence due to Writings about Oral Tradition; because they so com∣monly

commit things of that na∣ture to Books, tho' they know the Books themselves must be trusted with Tradition and Providence. How much more should this Practice take place in Religion, which concerns Men as highly, as their Blessedness does! And besides common Practice, there's great reason, why the wri∣ting things (especially Religious Do∣ctrines, and Practices) should be preferr'd to the hazarding them un∣der the Custody of Oral Tradition; That rather than This being the surest means of their preservation. For,

1. It is much less difficult, because there is much less requir'd, to keep a Book safe, and to hand it from one Generation to another, than to preserve a great many of Opinions and Senses of that Book, and to transmit them from Age to Age unalter'd. To the former, meer plain honesty, and an easie care are suf∣ficient. Here's no need of much Apprehension, and Memory, and of a constant Care and Diligence to teach Posterity; here's no necessity of Posterities scrupulous attention to

teaching Fathers, and of an happy docility, or promptness to learn, and all this through a long series of Ages. But these Punctilios (as has been shew'd before) are necessa∣ry to a faithful and unerring com∣municating of Truths to after-A∣ges in the way of Oral Tradition; therefore there is the more of dif∣ficulty, and consequently the more likelihood of miscarriage.

2ly. Books, if kept safe, do faith∣fully preserve what is deposited with them. Their Memory (if I may so speak) never fails them; there's no need of an operous care to teach them, or rather to remember them, what their Authors once told them, committed to them. They warp not with the Times, in which they are extant, tho' through several Generations. They are not subject to levity and wantonness of Judgment; nor to rebound from one extremi∣ty to another; not to a sequaci∣ousness after Men, whose Parts ren∣der them remarkable. They are not temptable by Hopes, or Fears. To be read, and to be accepted of, is

their worst Avarice or Ambition: Nor does the Paper or Parchment look the paler at a Rack or a Gib∣bet; or the Characters fly thence upon Persecution. A Prison can't scare them, they are us'd to con∣finement, to a Chain (it may be) in a Library. Thus it is with Books. But Oral Traditioners are expos'd to all those inconveniences (as has been before manifested,) whence their Traditions are infected with an an∣swerable craziness. Therefore for this second, together with the first reason, Writings, Books, are the far less obnoxious; the more safe Con∣veyance. And what has been said of Writings in general, is much more true particularly of the Sacred Scriptures.

Object. Against what has been de∣livered there may lye some seem∣ing prejudice. It may be objected, that Writings have their fates, as well as their Authors. They are not exempt from either a total pe∣rishing by the oscitancy and careles∣ness of the Owners, or by violence from Enemies. Or at least they

are liable to corruption; and that either wilful, and out of design (as, speaking of Holy Scriptures, by Hereticks); or through the igno∣rance, or negligence of Transcribers. Whence it will follow, that not∣withstanding the comparative easi∣ness of transmitting Writings, and the Fidelity of them, if preserv'd; yet they may be ravish'd by vio∣lence from their Possessors, how ho∣nest soever they be; or they may be lost by them, if they should prove careless; or they may be adultera∣ted upon one account, or another. And so Writings may not be pre∣serv'd, or not preserv'd sincere and entire.

Answ. That losses and decays, alterations and suppositiousness, have been incident to Writings, is con∣fess'd. Yet how many have escap'd injury, through long tracts of time have arrived safe with us, some plenty of them in Libraries does manifest; for there have been (more or less) Lovers of Learning and Antiquity, who have been Guar∣dians to these Orphans. And Lear∣ned

Men have Methods (as Trial by Chronology, and the Customs and Modes of each Age; insight into the Style and Genius of an Au∣thor; Collation of Copies, with o∣thers) by which to distinguish the Spurious from the Genuine Works; and to right the Genuine by requi∣site Emendations. And of such kind of reliefs Scriptures are capable, as well as other Writings. But we shall see, that they have a much greater advantage, and are secur'd, above all Writings else, by peculiar Protections, and have been blessed with a special safety.

SECT. II.

Sacred Scriptures may be sup∣pos'd to have been in danger from 1. Malice and Design. 2ly. From Ca∣sualty and Neglect. And to have been in danger,

1. From Malice and Design of profest and publick Enemies. 2ly. Of pretended Friends, I mean, He∣ticks.

1. The open and profess'd Ene∣mies of the Holy Scripture design'd, and labour'd for, their extinction. As no Professors of any Religion were ever so persecuted by the oppositi∣on and fury of the World, as Jews first, and then the Christians; so the Scriptures, in Sympathy with them, have been expos'd to great hazards, but yet have survived them.

When the Chaldeans had over-run Judea, wasted and plunder'd the Towns; ransack'd and destroy'd the Metropolis, Jerusalem; had rifled, and ruined the Temple; when they, who had escap'd Slaughter, were carried away Captive into a strange Land, and the Captivity there last∣ed 70 years. Whenas amidst all these hurries, Ʋrim and Thummim, the Ark, the Pot of Manna, the Rod of Aaron; whenas these 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, holy and choice Rarities of that People, and all their Glory sunk in the Deluge of an universal devasta∣tion: Yet the Holy Scriptures, which then were, triumph'd over all these Calamities, (tho' the Copies were

then but few, in comparison of what they were afterwards.) For soon after the return from Captivity, and reedification of the Temple, (a) Ezra, —also Joshua and Bani,—caus'd the People to understand the Law; and the People stood in their place. So they read in the Book of the Law of God distinctly, and.—

Some time after this, under the Tyranny of Antiochus, The (b) Books of the Law which were found, were rent in pieces, and burnt with fire. And wheresoever was found with any the Book of the Testament; or if any con∣sented to the Law, the King's Com∣mandement was, that they should put him to Death. Notwithstanding this Persecution, the Holy Book out-liv'd this Scrutiny and Cruel∣ty.

In the Times of Christianity, in the Reign of (c) Dioclesian, there was an Imperial Edict, that the Churches should be demolish'd, and the Holy Scripture should be burn'd; and tho' some were so base, as to betray the Divine Books to the E∣nemy (who thence were call'd Tra∣ditores;)

yet they weathered out this Storm also.

Next to an invisible Divine Hand defending them, so many were the Copies of the Sacred Books (especi∣ally after the Jews return from Baby∣lon; and more after the Gospel had been Preached and entertain'd in the World;) and likewise so zea∣lously did both Jews and Christians concern themselves in them, that the Enemies might as soon have rooted out of the World the whole Generations of Jews and Christians, as the Bibles.

2ly. For the same reasons, that there should be a Depravation of of Holy Scripture, by Additions, Substractions, or Alterations in any thing material, as to Faith and Life; that there should be any design'd, and successful Adulteration of them by Hereticks, is not well conceivable. For so ma∣ny were the Scriptures in their Originals; so very numerous were their (a) Translations, diffus'd throughout the World,

where there were Christians; that if Hereticks did raze out some passages, or foist in others, in any way corrupt the Text, they could do so but in some Copies, and in the Places where they came. But that they should succeed in a cor∣ruption of all the Books, or of the greater part of them, is not imagi∣nable. Especially, whenas the Scriptures were so continually, and diligently read by all Christians. So that such Impostures must needs have been soon discover'd, and warn∣ing been giuen to Christians to be∣ware of the Cozenage. For this purpose we have the Suffrages of Card. Bellarmine, and of Sixtus Se∣nensis.

Although (says the (a) Cardinal) the Hereticks have endea∣voured to deprave many things, (he means in the Scriptures) yet there were never wanting Catholicks, who detected those Adulterations, and permitted not the Sacred Books to be

corrupted. (b) And Six∣tus Senensis, quo∣ting St. August. tells us, that, though all Fathers had conspir'd to deprive themselves and others of the Truth of the Scrip∣tures; (which none can imagine) yet they could not have corrupted all the Books every where.

How hard it was to corrupt the Holy Scripture without detection, and an Alarm to the Christian world, perhaps some guess may be made by the unsuccessfulness of such an At∣tempt on Books much inferior to them. For when the Papists had set a design on foot (and proceed∣ed some way in it) of Purging the Writings of the antient Fathers, and of some moderate Authors, the Dishonesty soon appeared, and was complain'd of.

SECT. III.

It can't be thought, that through Casualty, or supine negligence the

Scriptures should expire, should be suffered to be a Prey to Moths, Mould, and Worms; to linger away in a Consumption, or to be embezeled in Vulgar, and Sordid uses, such as (a) Martial warns his Book against. For that which doth most envigor. Mens Care and Industry for the preservation of a thing, is their high value, especially Religious Ve∣neration for it; and such, Jews and Christians have had for the Scriptures, because known by them to be Sa∣cred, to be the Divine Oracles, and the Contents of them to be of E∣ternal Consequence to them.

The Jews, to whom pertaineth the giving of the Law, were most accu∣rately diligent in keeping the Re∣velations, given to them, most en∣tire. (b) Card. Bellarmine quotes Philo, affirming;

That for above 2000 years, even to his Time, not one word had been chang'd in the Law; and that any Jew would dye an hundred times, rather than consent to any such change. He adds out of Johannes Isaac, that the latter Jews adore the Law

ut Numen, as a Deity; and if it chanc'd to fall on the ground, bid a Fast for expiation of the mischance.

This Bellarm. relates, and this is one of his five Arguments, why it is not to be conceiv'd, that ever the Jews should have corrupted the Old Testament, out of Malice to the Christians, as the mistake of some is. The admirable and stupen∣dious Care and Industry (as Heinsius calls it) of the Masorites is known; who numbred every Verse, Word, and Letter: And this they intend∣ed as Sepimentum Legis, a Mound, or Fence of the Law against Al∣terations.

The Jews had not a greater, and more Sacred Estimation of the Law, than the Christians had for both Law and Gospel, particularly the Fa∣thers.

1. Their great laboriousness in the Study and Explication of the Sacred Writings, in their many Comments, and Homilies, is an indication of their incomparable Honour for them. In which work they did so abound, that suppose the Bibles should be lost

(which is suppos'd only, not grant∣ed) far the greater part (rather the whole) might be recovered out of their Comments, Homilies, and occasional Citations in their other Writings. As this is an Argument of their singular Honour for the Scrip∣tures, so it is a providential relief, and supernumerary way of retrieve of them, supposing the loss of them.

2ly. The Fathers high estimation and reverence for the Scriptures, are legible in Expressions concerning them, and Deferences to them.

Irenaeus thus begins his third Book: We have not known the disposition of our Salvation by others, than those by whom the Gospel came unto us; which indeed they then preach'd, but after∣wards by the Will of God delivered it to us in the Scriptures, as the future Foundation and Pillar of our Faith. Afterwards, in the end of the 66th. Chap. of his 4th. Book; He bids all Hereticks, (and principally the Marcionit••••, and those who were like them, saying, That the Prophecies came from another God) read dili∣gently the Gospel which was delivered

by the Apostles to us, and read diligent∣ly the Prophets, and you will find every Action, every Doctrine, and every Suf∣fering of our Lord delivered in them.

Tertullian against Hermogenes, C. 23. I adore the fulness of the Scrip∣ture.—Let Hermogenes, and his, shew that it is written. If it be not written. let him dread the Woe, which pertains to them, who add, or detract.

Athanasius, in his Oration against the Gentiles, says: That the Scrip∣tures are enough for manifestation of the Truth.

St. Jerom. on Ps. 98. Every thing that we assert, we must shew from the Holy Scripture.

All things which concern Faith and Manners, are found in the plain places of Scripture; according to St. Augustine, in the 9th. Chap. of his 2d. Book of Christian Doctrine.

These are some (amongst others) of the Father's reverential acknow∣ledgments; their full and clear de∣positions for Holy Scriptures sufficiency for, and Prerogative of, being the sole Rule of Faith; and in this Point they speak like as very Protestants,

as those who form'd the (a) 6th. Article of the Church of England. And these passages, so plainly proving their so su∣perlative esteem of the Holy Scriptures, do infer their most exact diligence and watchfulness for their conservation and safety. And this is sufficient for my purpose in this Section. But withal too I have gain'd an Argument for my main design (viz. The Testimony of the Fathers;) forasmuch as between Ho∣ly Scriptures being the safest Con∣veyance of Divine Truths through∣out all Ages, and Scriptures being the sole Rule of Faith, there is so necessary a Connexion.

And because the Romanists like∣wise allege the Fathers to give Countenance to Oral Tradition, there∣fore the Testimony of the Fathers in our case shall be farther considered of. And,

1. I will appeal to any ingenious Reader of them, whether the pas∣sages which the Romanists cite out of the Fathers on the behalf of Tra∣dition, and seemingly the most di∣minutive of Scripture, do in any measure come near to such a course Character of it; as that it is a Black Gospel; an Ink Theology, (a) dead Characters, Waxen-natur'd, and plia∣ble to the Daedalean Fancies of the in∣genious Moulders of new Opinions. If Mens thoughts may be judg'd of by their words, sure the Fathers and Ro∣manists Sentiments of the Scriptures were very divers.

2ly. Seeing there is a seeming con∣tradiction of the Fathers to them∣selves (because they are urg'd by both the disagreeing Parties,) it will be fitting to enquire, whether there may not be a reconciliation of them to each other, and of some of them to themselves. For this end I sup∣pose a good means would be: 1. See∣ing the Fathers sometimes speak of Scripture without mention of Tradi∣on, at other times speak of Tradition, not mentioning Scripture; to exa∣mine

how they deliver their Sense, when they express themselves of Scripture and Tradition jointly, and comparatively of one with the o∣ther. 2ly. To see, whether their appearingly most favourable expressions of Tradition may not be very well construed in a subordination of Tra∣dition to Scripture, very consistent∣ly with Scriptures Precedence to it.

1. Of the Fathers speaking of Scripture, and Tradition conjointly. I will begin with St. Cyprian, in his Epistle to Pompey. Being prest with Tradition, he answers, Whence is this Tradition? Descends it from our Lord's and his Gospel's Autho∣rity; or comes it from the Commands of the Apostles, and their Epistles? God declares, that those things should be done, which are written; saying to Joshua, The Book of the Law shall not depart from thy Mou••h, but thou shalt meditate in it day and night; that thou mayest observe to do all things written in it. Likewise our Lord sending his Apostles, Commands all Nations to be Baptized, and to be taught, that they observe all things, whatsoever

he had Commanded.—What obsti∣nacy, what presumption is it, to prefer humane Tradition to the Divine Dispose or Command; and not to consider, that God is angry and in wrath, when hu∣mane Tradition disregards and dissolves Divine Commands? As God warns and speaks by the Prophet Isaiah, &c. And toward the end of the Epistle, —And this it behoves God's Priests to do at this time, keeping the Divine Commands, that if Truth have declin'd and fail'd in any respect, we go back to the source of the Evangelical and Apostolical Tradition, and let the man∣ner of our Actings take their rise thence, whence their Order and Origin rose.

The preference of Scripture to Tradition by this antient Father, is so plain and undeniable, that it is reply'd, St. Cyprian's Testimony was writ by him to defend an Error;—and therefore no wonder, if (as Bellar∣mine says) more errantium ratio∣cinetur, he discours'd after the rate of those that err; that is, assumes false grounds to build his Error on. Letter of Thanks, p. 124.

But this is a mean Evasion. For tho' Cyprian was indeed in an Er∣ror, and did mistake in his discourse; yet it can't be affirm'd with proba∣bility, or Charity to such a Saint, and Martyr; that to gratifie a private Opinion he would affront so Sacred and Catholick a Principle, as the Rule of Christian Faith, and degrade Tradition from being such, if he had indeed believed it to be so.

Yet if this should be granted to our Adversaries, the consequence would be their inconvenience. For why might not more do the same, which St. Cyprian did? and if some Fathers might desert Tradition, and flye to Scripture, meerly to serve a Turn, for defence of an Opinion, which they could not maintain other∣wise; why may it not be as well said, that other Fathers might baulk Scripture, and advance Tradition; and for the same end, viz. to sup∣port some Doctrine, or Doctrines, which else must have fallen? And upon this it would follow, (beside the imputation of inconstancy, and

shifting to the Fathers) that we must be at much uncertainty, what truly was the Judgment of the Fathers concerning the Rule of Faith; and that therefore the quotations out of them must in a great part be insignificant for this purpose.

St. Basil, in his Tract, call'd; Questions compendiously unfolded, or answered; says, It is necessary and consonant to Reason, that every Man learn that which is needful out of the Holy Scripture, both for the ful∣ness of godliness, and lest they ac∣custom themselves to humane Tradi∣tions.

'Tis acknowledged by (a) Bellar∣mine, that this Author admits not Traditions unwritten; but then he says, it is not certainly manifest, whether these Questions were the great Basil's, or rather Eustathius's of Sebastia. Yet the same (b) Bel∣larmine confidently quotes them as St. Basils for Auricular Confession. So that it may seem, that the Que∣stions were before scrupled at, only because they spoke in behalf of Scrip∣ture against Tradition, and against

venial sins; which is manifest Par∣tiality.

But I shall bring a Testimony of St. Basil, which Bellarmine himself would own to be St. Basils; who in his Book of the true Faith thus Discourses: If God be faithful in all his sayings, his Words, and Works, they remaining for ever, and being done in Truth and Equity; it must be an evident signe of Infidelity and Pride, if any one shall reject what is written, and introduce what is not written. This is a manifest Prelation of what is written, i. e. Holy Scriptures to what is unwritten, i. e. Tradition, which Bellarm. calls the unwritten word of God, in the Title to his 4^th Book, De verbo Dei.

When St. (a) Au∣gust. was willing to wave the Council of Nice to Maximinus, and to retire to a Decision of the Catholick Cause by Scripture; certainly that great Person judg'd Scripture without Tradi∣on to be sufficient to

prove an Article of Faith; or else he betrayed the Cause by appealing to a Medium, which could not evince it. For either the Nicene Coun∣cil decreed the Consubstantiality of the Son with the Father by Scrip∣ture without Tradition, (and then we have above three hundred ve∣nerable Fathers on our side) or if they defin'd it in the strength of Tradition without Scripture, or by Tra∣dition sensing Scripture; then St. Au∣gust. parting with the Council of Nice, proceeding upon Tradition on∣ly, or upon Tradition sensing Scrip∣ture, left himself nothing, or but the Letter of Scripture (which ac∣cording to our Adversaries, wants all the properties of a Rule of Faith; Sure Footing. p. 29) to manage his Cause with.

By these Testimo∣nies it is plain, it cannot be; that the Fathers should ex∣press themselves (a) so highly of Scripture, only so far as help'd and sens'd by Tradi∣dition;

because, as to the Being a Rule of Faith, the Fathers separate Tradition from Scripture, and set Scripture by it self.

Much more it is far from being (a) impossible, that the Fathers should hold Scripture, not inter∣preted by Tradition, to be the Rule of Faith, which yet is affirm'd. And the Reason gi∣ven is as weak as the Affirmation is untrue. For if the Scripture, not inter∣preted by Tradition, could not be held to be the Rule of Faith, because He∣reticks adhering stifly to it, as the Rule or Root of Faith, could not be held as Hereticks; then, nor could Tradition be held to be the Rule of Faith, because Hereticks (as the (b) Gnosticks, and others) sticking to Tradition, as their Rule, could not be held as Hereticks. There's a manifest parity of these Discourses, and the latter is as concluding as the former.

But it is to accumulate injuries upon Scripture; because the mistakes and perversness of Men abuse it by false glosses, and compell'd de∣ductions, therefore to judge it fit, it should forfeit its Authority. Our blessed Lord, who so condemn'd the Jewish Traditions, held the Scrip∣ture of the Old Testament to be the Jew's Rule of Faith; and the Sadduces, who denied the Resur∣rection, sure were held by him to be Hereticks; and yet they disclam'd Tradition, and adher'd stifly to Scrip∣ture only, as the Root or Rule of Faith.

Certainly, it is the impress and appointment from God, which consti∣tute a Rule of Faith, make it to be such; and Men prove Hereticks, when they wilfully wrong, pervert, and wrest it; but 'tis wonderful, that Hereticks acknowledging it to be the Rule of Faith (i. e. paying to it what is due to it), or a pre∣tence that it favours their Errors, (which is a slander of it) should un∣make it a Rule of Faith, render it impossible to be held to be such.

2ly. In enquiry about the second thing propos'd, it must be consider'd, that the word [Tradition] has more acceptions than one: And that Tra∣dition may be used to different Persons, at different times, in a di∣vers manner, and to several ends.

1. Tradition is taken sometimes (both in Scripture and Ecclesiasti∣cal Writers) not for Oral delive∣ry of Opinions and Practices to Po∣sterity; but for what is deliver'd by Writing, and even in the Sacred Scriptures. The Jew's Law and Rites are said to be such, (a) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which Moses Tradition'd; and yet they were a part of the Old Testament. St. Paul (b) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, delivered to the Christians, (which he had also received) that Christ dyed for our Sins, which was but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, according to the Scriptures (c) St. Basil says, that our Baptisme in the Name of the Fa∣ther, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is according to the very Tradition of our Lord; and yet this

is (a) written, with St. (b) Cyprian, that is an holy Tradition, which is either com∣manded in the Gos∣pel, or is contained in the Epistles, and Acts of the Apostles.

2ly. It is observed, that some of the Fathers had to do with such Hereticks, as denied the Scriptures, some part of them at the least, and set up other writings in stead of them. In dealing with such, those Fathers were forc'd to have recourse to Tradition, that so they might dis∣pute with their Ad∣vesaries on such a Principle, as they would allow, and this in way of conde∣scention. 'T was thus with (c) Ire∣naeus in his Contest with the Gnosticks.

Who (says he) when they are ar∣gued against out of the Scriptures,

accuse the very Scriptures them∣selves; as if they were not right, nor were of Authority sufficient; and because their Sense is various and uncertain; and because the Truth cannot be found in them by those who are ignorant of Tra∣dition.

This made Irenaeus in op∣position to their fictitious Tradi∣tion, and pretended living Voice, ex∣press himself the more respectful∣ly of such Tradition, as had brought down the Orthodox Doctrine from the Apostles, in the several Churches. Not that he preferr'd Tradition to Scripture; for what his Judgment was of Scripture, we have seen be∣fore; and 'tis the observation of (a) Erasmus, that he fights against the Hereticks solis scripturarum prae∣sidiis, by the sole aid of Scriptures, i. e. Scriptures were his chief Wea∣pons; and that if he took up Tra∣dition, 'twas but occasionally upon the froward impudence of his Adversa∣ries.

3. We must distinguish of Times. The Gospel was Preached, before it was Written: It was written too,

one part after another. And when the whole was written, the Copies could not presently be many, and dispersed to all Christians, especial∣ly the more new and remoto Con∣verts. Nay, and had the Gospel never been written, then the Church must have been satisfied (if such the pleasure of God had been) with an Oral Tradition. Hence (a) Irenaeus might say: what if the Apostles had not indeed left the Scrip∣tures to us, would it not have behoov'd us to follow the Order of Tradition, which they had delivered to them, to whom they committed the Churches; to which Ordination do assent many Nations of Barbarians, which believe in Christ, having Salvation written in their hearts, without Characters or Ink, by the Spi∣rit, and diligently keeping antient Tra∣dition. This (I say) Irenaeus might with reason write, especially against those, (b) who consented neither to Scriptures, nor Tradi∣tion (i. e. such as de∣scended

from the Apostles.) But when as the whole Scriptures were long since written, and plentifully Communicated to the Christian world, the Case is quite alter'd.

Besides, the nearer things are to their Origin, they are the more genuine and sincere; but, at the far∣ther remove they are from it, the more they are in danger of changes and decays. Tradition must be con∣ceiv'd to have been much more pure at the distance of an hundred, or an hundred and fifty, or two or three hundred years, from the A∣postles (and therefore then might be more rationally argued from, in some cases,) than after 7, 8, or 9 hundred years; in which revo∣lution of so many more Ages, and after intercurrencies of many more accidents, Tradition may be more suspected of that consumptiveness, and of those changes, which Time brings upon all things; and there∣fore an Argument from it would be much more infirm.

Farther yet, besides Oral, the Fa∣thers of the more Primitive Times,

might have written Traditions; such Records to prove, that such a Do∣ctrine, or Doctrines, were profess'd by Apostolical Men, by Holy Mar∣tyrs, and Confessors, successively to that present Age, as were then ex∣tant, but are pe∣rish'd since. (a) Ter∣tullian speaks of the very Authentick Let∣ters of the Apo∣stles, which were even then preser∣ved in the Churches. So that the Fathers might with the more safety trust, and allege Tradition's suffrage, than we can, who live so incomparably farther off from the Apostles Days, than they did; it being very like∣ly, that in such a far longer space of time, the more contingencies have interpos'd to disturb the clearness of Commerce between them and us.

4ly. Proofs may be brought in a divers manner, and for different uses. St. Paul quoted Heathenish Poets, as well as the Law, and the

Prophets. 'Tis usual, where the Subject is properly manageable upon the stock of Reason, yet to argue likewise from Testimony, to call in the concurring Judgment of others. In Religion, Protestants do not be∣lieve the Fathers to be infallible, and yet it has been usual with them to cite them, both in Homi∣letique Discourses, and in Pole∣mique Writings. Testimony, tho' it be not apodictical, yet it is plausible. Example in point of Opinion, as well as of Practice is much gaining upon many; is not alone commonly bet∣ter understood, but more prevalent too, than Reason, with many Capa∣cities. And when 'tis the Testimo∣ny of many (as Tradition is) it causes those of an opposite Opini∣on to appear the more singular in their Persuasion; and singularity is not of the best Credit. So then the Fathers might (on some occa∣sions) use Tradition's Authority (the general consent of Christians in some Truth, for one or more A∣ges) yet not demonstratively, but to∣pically; somewhat the more to re∣press

or to disparage in other's Opinion, the importunity of a petu∣lant Adversary; to shame a contu∣macious Heretick (not, as is said, Sure Footing, p. 140, to declare that the rejecting Tradition, and ad∣hering to Scripture, made him an Heretick); or they might urge it to the more tractable, as a probable motive to assent; tho' not as a Rule of Faith, yet as such a persuasive, as might be an occasion of Belief, and the better dispose the Soul toward Faith and Assurance: Yet still sup∣posing Holy Scriptures to be the pro∣per and ultimate basis of Christian Faith; and that such Traditions were consonant to them, and not over-ru∣ling of them.

I believe, that these considerations may be useful for the construction of the Fathers in such passages, wherein they make the most ho∣nourable mention of Tradition; and to shew, that notwithstanding such a mention of Tradition, yet they might yield to Scripture the Supre∣macy in the regulation of Christian Faith, especially whenas they speak

so reverently of Scripture in other places of their Works; nay, and give them the Precedence, when they compare the one with the other.

And thus (if after a digression, yet I think not an impertinent one) I have proved the Father's unque∣stionable Care and Diligence in pre∣servation of the Holy Scriptures, by their Religious and unparallell'd esteem and veneration for them.

SECT. IV.

3ly. The Holy Scriptures are se∣cur'd by God's especial Protection of them. Reason suggests; that as there is a God, a Supreme, and first Cause, who made the world, and also pro∣vides for the welfare of his great Workmanship; so that the Divine Providence does mainly watch over those Creatures, on which God has imprinted the fairest Characters of his Power, Wisdom, and Good∣ness: Such a Creature is Man. And this Divine Providence is the Ca∣tholick Sanctuary of Mankind. Af∣ter all Mens own projectings and

labours, here is their last and surest repose. They can't with a rational comfort Trade, Travel, Eat, Sleep, but with a sober hope of the Di∣vine help and benediction. For if Divine Providence smile not, all Mens wisest Counsels, and stoutest Endeavours will be successless: They may go forth, and never return home; their Table may be a Snare, and their Sleep Death, more than in a Metaphor.

Next, Religion tells us, that God has designed, and prepar'd for Man an everlasting Blessedness, and de∣termin'd of the due Qualifications of Man for that Blessedness; and it is agreed, that in the Sacred Scriptures God has revealed Himself concerning both. These Scriptures are the lively Image of God, the faire Copy of his Will, a bright Express of his Truth and Holiness, a Perspective into his Mind, and into many of his secret Counsels; authentick Records of the many and glorious manifestations of the Divine Wisdom, Power, Good∣ness, Mercy, and Justice, in ma∣king,

governing all things, and in the Salvation of Sinners.

From the dictates of Reason then, and much more of Religion, it is consequent, that God has an espe∣cial Care, that the Scriptures be safe, on which he has impressed so much of himself; which were (a) written, that we might believe, and believing have life; and which were (b) writ∣ten for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope; but how could they attain those ends, if they should pe∣rish? if this light were extinguish'd, how much in the dark, and forlorne would Man be!

This peculiar watchfulness of God over the Scriptures is acknowledged by the Romanists. (c) Sixtus Senensis at∣tributes the pre∣served incorruptness of the sacred Text, to the Will of God. And Bellarmine (d) argues from the

Divine Providence for the preserva∣tion of the Old Testament from any injury by the Jews. Indeed, he entitles Tradition likewise to Gods special care, as the (a) principal cause of its pretended safety. And this is a Confession, that God is in a particular man∣ner the Guardian of that, by which he communicates his Mind and Pleasure to Man; (for such a thing, i. e. The unwrit∣ten word of God, he held Tradition to be.) But certainly Tradition can't lay a just claim to such an interest in Divine Providence, as the Scrip∣ture.

1. For first, besides what I have before prov'd, to the just diminu∣tion of Oral Tradition; there was a providential dismission of it, and choice of Scripture, to be the Convey∣ance of Gods revealed Will to his Church through successive Ages. For whenas Oral Tradition had been in use for that purpose before the Flood, and some while after it, and great had been the untrustiness of

it; at the length, God writ his Law Himself, and commanded what was written to be kept with a great religious care. Afterwards, as Mo∣ses, the Prophets, and Hagiogra∣phers were inspir'd, their Revela∣tions were written, so far as was necessary to the Church's Edifica∣tion. And when the People were in danger of seduction, and it be∣hoved them to seek to their God for instruction; they were sent (not Children to their Traditioning Fa∣thers; but) to the Law, and to the Testimony; and they were told, that those who spoke not according to that word, it was, because there was no light in them. Yes, and when the Church was generally corrupted, and therefore Tradition had not done its Duty, the Churches relief was (not from the living voice of testi∣fying Fathers, but) from the Scrip∣ture, according to whose Canon a∣buses were reformed. And for this Reformation, and because in it he perform'd the words of the Law, which were written in the Book, that Hilkiah the Priest found in the

house of the Lord; Josiah stands renowned in Sacred Story with this Character; Like unto him there was no King before him, that turned to the Lord with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, accor∣ding to all the Law of Moses, &c.

This way of securing Revelati∣ons by writing was continued under the Gospel; as we have them in the Evangelists, the Epistles, the Acts, and the Revelation. And this course was as needful under the Gospel, as under the legal Oeconomy, if not more. For it being intended by God, that the Gospel should be propagated be∣yond the narrow Confines of Judaea (where the Scriptures of the Old Testament had lodg'd for hundreds of years) through∣out the World, and among so many Nations of such different Com∣plexions, Customs, and Interests; there was the more danger it should be disguis'd, if it had been com∣mitted to the frailty of an Oral Tra∣dition; as we know, that the more Mouths Relations pass through, the more subject they are to alterations

from their primitive truth; through the ignorance, mistakes, prejudices, prepossessions, or wilfulness of the Relators. Whereas a Writing, being preserved, is a perpetual standard, by which to correct any such chan∣ges; for in these, Truth would be most likely still to appear in its first Integrity.

Thus I have shew'd, how that af∣ter an experienc'd unsuccessfulness of Oral Conveyance, God appoint∣ed another way, and so ordered it, that Law and Gospel should be written. Now, if after, and not∣withstanding such a Provision, yet it should be God's intent, that Oral Tradition only should have the pre∣rogative to sense Scripture, and that Faith should be lastly resolved into Oral Tradition; and therefore that This, not Scripture, should be the only Rule of Faith; it must needs seem strange, and unaccountable to a∣any rational Christian, how it should come to pass, that in the Sacred Scriptures there should be so many,

and such high (a) Enco∣miums of them; that our Saviour should bid the Jews, (b) search the Scriptures; should tell them, they (c) err'd, not knowing the Scriptures, (d) should dispute with, and baffle them out of the Scriptures; and by them (e) confirm his Disciples in the Truth; that his Apostles should proceed in the same manner with the Jews: That the (f) Beraeans should be commended for searching the Scrip∣tures daily, whereupon many of them believed; that St. Paul should mention it to Timothy, (g) as an encouragement or engagement of him to continue in the things he had learned; that he from a Child had known the holy Scriptures; and that he should pre∣sently add a description of Scripture, than which a more full one sure can't be us'd of the Rule of Faith, viz. That it is able to make wise un∣to Salvation, through the Faith which is in Christ Jesus; that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for

correction, for instruction in righte∣ousness; that the Man of God may be perfect, throughly furnish'd unto all good works: I say, it is mighty strange, that Scripture should be thus magnified, and yet none of all this should be said there of Tradi∣tion: Nay, that either Tradition should be mentioned with disgrace, as when our Saviour (a) condemns the Jew's Traditions of their Elders; and St. Paul (b) warns the Colossians to beware, lest any Man spoile them, —after the Tradition of Men;— or where the word is found, yet that the sense of it should not be useful to our Adversaries purpose; which that it might be, it must be sufficient to prove, that there was more delivered by the Apostles, than was written; and that what was so delivered was a necessary Point of Faith. But when St. Paul praises the Corinthians, that they (c) kept the Ordinances, or Traditions, as he delivered them; when he tells them, he had received that, which also he de∣livered to them; when he exhorts the Thessalonians (d) to hold the Tra∣ditions,

which they had been taught, whether by word, or (says he) our Epistle; when he commands them (a) to withdraw themselves from every Brother that walks disorderly, and not after the Tradition which he received from the Apostle; there is nothing (I say) in these places, which will necessarily infer, that more was de∣livered by the Apostles, than was, or is written, and that what was so delivered was a necessary Point of Faith, through all Ages.

Why now, it is a wonder, that if God (tho' he provided his Church with the Holy Scriptures, yet) pleas'd to enstate Oral humane Tra∣dition in the great Office of sensing Scripture, and of being the only Rule of Faith; He did not so order it, that Scripture should modestly ac∣knowledge its Superior, but rather let Scripture carry away all the ho∣nour from it.

2ly. A second reason, why O∣ral Tradition can't plead so strong a Title to a protection by the Di∣vine Providence, as Scripture, is this. God's Providence does ordinarily

co-operate with, and prosper means answerably to their comportment with, and likelihood to reach the end intended. Now it has been be∣fore demonstrated, how weak and uncertain Tradition is; how fix'd and able Writings are, to conserve Truths once delivered; and therefore 'tis rational to believe, that the Divine Aid does much rather assist to the preservation of Divine Truths by the Holy Scriptures, than by Oral Tra∣dition; the former being much more servicable to the promoting such an end, than the latter.

Hitherto I have prov'd the con∣tinued preservation of Holy Scrip∣ture from proper Causes of such an Effect; causes ministerial, and su∣preme; humane care and vigilancy, and Divine special Providence.

SECT. V.

4ly. Scripture's Preservation is manifest from the Event. Such have been the happy success of Divine Providence's watchfulness, and of humane Care and Diligence, that Chri∣stians

do generally consent in this; that the Holy Scriptures are de facto continued safe, and pure to us in all things, which are necessary to be believed, and to be practised, for the obtainment of Everlasting Hap∣piness.

The Church of Rome professes to have the Scriptures, and the Trent Council has defin'd the Vulgar La∣tin to be those Genuine, Authentick Scriptures. How true that Deter∣mination was for the Authentickness of the Vulgar Latin Bibles, is not necessary for me to enquire; 'tis enough for me, that they acknow∣ledge a preserved Integrity of the present Scriptures.

So that there is not a Tenent, which we have more strong induce∣ment to believe, upon the account even of Tradition, than that the Divine Books (the Scriptures, which we have) are indeed the Word of God, and have been faithfully deri∣ved to us from the beginning; there being no Tradition more universal for any Point than for this great important Truth; tho' Christians

may run wide from each other in other matters, yet they close in this Center.

I conclude then, seeing that the Holy Scriptures are much more fit to keep the Truths committed to them safe, than Oral Tradition, if they be preserved; (as has been prov'd) and likewise that the Holy Scriptures are preserv'd (as is gene∣rally confess'd, and even by our Ad∣versaries); it must follow, that not Oral Tradition, but the sacred Scrip∣tures are the surest and safest way of Conveyance of Divine Truths down from their Original delivery unto us; which to demonstrate was the scope of this Undertaking.

CHAP. II. Objections answer'd.

SECT. I.

THere remain some things, which perhaps may be appre∣hended to reflect on the Prelation I have given to Scripture above Oral Tradition, in the point of preserva∣tion, which next shall be conside∣red.

Obj. 1. The (a) ma∣ny variae lectiones, di∣vers Readings, may seem to some a reason to question Scripture's descent to us in a sufficient Purity. But,

Answ. 1. 'Tis a question, whether all those which go under the name of Divers Readings, do truly deserve that Title. For I conceive, that not every Translation of the Bible (in whole, or in part); by whom∣soever,

and from whencesoever, (as suppose) by some very uncer∣tain, or justly suspected Author; or not from the Originals, but from some Versions of them; no, nor that every Copy of the Bible (in the O∣riginal Languages) found any where, or whether of convenient Antiquity or not, are sitting to Minister mat∣ter for various Readings of the Sa∣cred Text; i. e. are such, as me∣rit to be considered by Learned Men, and may put them to the stand sometimes, which is the truest. Certainly, none (if any Translations at all) but such as are immediately from the Originals, have been per∣form'd by Authors of repute; or (if their Persons are not known) who give in the work no jealousie of their Integrity; none but Copies of sufficient Antiquity are consi∣derable for such a purpose. And if such a course, and some other cations were us'd; it may be a great part of the Army of almost innumerable variae Lectiones would be disbanded.

2ly. But let them stand as they are mustred by some; they are not so for∣midable, as to (a) bring the whole Book in∣to doubt; and doubt∣less the excellent Lord Primate (b) Ʋsher was more Good and Learned than to think so; tho' perhaps he might judge the Printing of them to be less con∣venient, (not as if they were ratio∣nally conclusive of any thing really disadvantageous to Scripture, but) lest the Atheistical, or the weak, might take an occasion from them to dis∣parage the Scripture; which care to avoid the ministring occasion of scandal to others in Religious mat∣ters, has ever been the wariness of the good and prudent. But as for these di∣vers Readings; (c) some of the most curious Collecters of them have not dis∣cern'd any alteration

made by them in the Scripture, which may wrong Faith or Man∣ners.

(a) And the Re∣verend Arch-Bishop Ʋsher (before na∣med) confesses, and venerates the Divine Care; in that (tho' he believed the Sep∣tuagint Translation widely to differ from the Original Hebrew Text, and had no Opinion of it, as a ground even of (b) various Rea∣ings; yet) there is no such material difference between the Hebrew Text, and even that version, as may injure the Faith ne∣cessary to Salvation.

Our Adversaries, tho' they know of those numerous (as they say) va∣riae lectiones, yet notwithstanding scru∣ple not to profess to have the Ge∣nuine Scriptures, (as was said before) or if they have not, if they have been careless in a matter of so grand

moment as the Conservation of Holy Writ entire, how should we trust to their fidelity in other things of less Consequence, who yet claim to be the most credible Traditioners in the world?

SECT. II.

Ob. 2. If it should be thought a Ground to suspect the care of the Church, and of Providence over Scripture; that, (d) 1. some Books of the New Testament are account∣ed now Canonical, which Anciently were not reputed so. 2. That some Books (commonly called the A∣pocrypha) are controverted, whether they belong to the Canon of the Old Testament, or not; it is answered.

1. That it is no wonder, if all the Books of the New Testament were not presently generally received by all Christians, who in, especially after, the Apostles days, had multiplied into very great numbers; and liv'd dis∣pers'd in divers places, and very re∣mote from each other. Time was re∣quired for all Christendom truly to

inform themselves of a business of so great weight; but the reception of these Books (never doubted of by all Christians; rather doubted of, than rejected by some) was early enough to satisfy any sober expectation. The Council of Laodicea, which was had in so much reverence and esteem, by those of elder ages, that the Canons of it were received into the Code of the Universal Church, was held Anno Dom. 364. The Bishops then assembled together, (e) declare in the last Canon, what Books of the Old and New Testament were to be read publickly, and to be held as Canoni∣cal, and they only. And among those of the New Testament are reckoned the Epistles before men∣tioned in the Margent. The Apocalypse indeed is omitted; but it was omit∣ted only, not rejected, it was forborn to be named, because their Custom was not usually to read it in publick, for the special Mysteriousness of it. (a)

(a) Bellarmine giv's a large account of the At∣testations yielded to all these Books, and to each of them; not alone by the Laodicean Council, but some others also, and by several Fathers likewise, both be∣fore and after that Council.

Indeed after some Debates about them by some in the early days of Christianity, they were entertain'd by the Church without contradicti∣on.

2. The Controversy between us and the Romanists about the Canon of the Old Testament has in it no great difficulty, it seems to be a plain case.

Those Arguments, by which (b) Bellarmine proves, that the Jews did not corrupt the Hebrew Text, do as strongly conclude, that they did not shorten the Hebrew Canon; for this latter would have been as great a fault in them, as the former, rather a greater, and would have been more difficult for them to have effected. Also (c) Bellarmine acknowledges,

that the Book of Baruch is not found in the Hebrew Bibles; that the frag∣ments of Daniel, i. e. The Hymn of the three Children; the History of Susanna, and of Bell and the Dragon; that the Books of Tobit, Judith, the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, and of the Macchabees, are not own'd by the Jews. Or if he had not con∣fessed so much, there is evidence sufficient from the (a) Jews themselves, that (b) they never owned more Books, as Di∣vine and Canonical, than the Protestants do; and likewise the Greek Church agree with the Pro∣testants in rejecting the Apocrypha.

How then the Roman great Propug∣nators of Tradition, consistently even with that very Principle, adopt more Books into the Canon, than the Jews ever own'd, is not by me conceive∣able. For to the Jews were committed the Oracles of God; they, above all in the

world, best knew what was com∣mitted to them; they did carefully preserve (as is seen before), and deliver to Posterity; and Posterity could honestly come by no more than what was delivered to them: I do not foresee, what exception can justly lie against this procedure. Therefore that Bellarmine should say, tho' the Jews rejected these Books, yet the (a) Ca∣tholick Church (he means the Christian); and par∣ticularly the Trent Coun∣cil received them as part of the Canon of the Old Testament, is exceeding strange, and a Riddle to me. Seeing that they have no countenance from the most Primitive, general, and long-liv'd Tradition of the Jewish Church. And this is enough to satisfie a ratio∣nal Christian, and to refute our Ad∣versaries, even by their own Princi∣ple.

But yet, nor is it true, that there has been a truly Catholick recepti∣on of those Books, as Canonical, even by the Christian Church. It

is (a) evinc'd by a continued series of sufficient Testimo∣nies, from the first Ages of the Chri∣stian Church, thro' the several Centu∣ries, unto the Council of Trent; that the Books which the Protestants call Apocryphal, were judg'd to be such by Christians. Now, that the Coun∣cil of Trent, above 1500 years af∣ter Christ, and a fragment of Chri∣stendom, should vote the Apocryphal Books to be entertain'd with a ve∣neration equal to what Christians have for the unquestionable Scrip∣tures, was a boldness which was great enough, but can lay no Ob∣ligation upon Christians.

The result of the Discourse fore∣going, concerning the Books of the Old and New Testament, is this. 1. Seeing the Books of the New Testament were never doubted of, much less rejected, by all, were so early receiv'd by all. 2ly. Seeing the Jewish Church never (for so many hundred years) admitted more Books

into the Canon, than Protestants do, likewise that the Christian Church did from the beginning distinguish between the Canonical and Apocry∣phal Books (as has been the con∣current Testimony of the most consi∣derable Members of it, in its se∣veral Ages.) Forasmuch (I say) that so it is; there can lie no ra∣tional Objection against the sufficient care of the Divine Providence, or the Churches diligence, in the pre∣servation of the Holy Scriptures; up∣on supposal of which, it can justly be pretended, that Christians must be uncertain about the Integrity of the Scripture Canon.

I might add, that suppos•• there were a much more considerable un∣certainty concerning the truly Ca∣nonical Books of Scripture, both of the Old and New Testament, than there is; yet there would be a fair Salvo for the care of Divine Providence, and for the security of Christians necessary Belief and Pra∣ctice.

For I humbly conceive, that if 1. The Books of the New Testa∣ment,

at the first not generally re∣ceiv'd, were still as controversible, yet we should not be at a loss for any Article of Faith; there being, in the Books never disputed of, e∣nough to establish it. Or, 2ly. Were it so, that it were altogether doubt∣ful, whether the Books call'd Apo∣cryphal, were not as truly the word of God, as those styl'd Canonical; perhaps, yet there is no Doctrine, which can be prov'd from those Apocryphal Books, contrary to what we maintain against our Adver∣saries. But this is Supernumerary, and might be untrue, without any preju∣dice to what I have discours'd in this Section.

SECT. III.

Obj. 3. Whereas I have said, that the safe descent of Divine Truths is so greatly provided for, because they are treasur'd up in the Holy Writings; it may be perhaps reply'd, that Oral Tradition is not destitute of this 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Advantage also. For one means which Bellarmine alledges of the preservation of Oral Traditions, is Scriptura, writing them in the antient Records of the Church. Therefore he says, that (a) a Do∣ctrine is called unwritten; (b) not because it is no where written, because it was

not written by the first Author, but,

Ans. 1. The Adversaries, I have to deal with, talk of Oral Tradition, as a Plenipotent thing, which is a support to itself, and needs not the prop of a Pen; is it self a spring of perpe∣tuity to itself; and therefore, that the being written must be an acciden∣tal, and no necessary Preservative of it.

This sure is the importance of se∣veral passages concerning it; viz. (a) Christian Tradition, rightly under∣stood, is nothing, but the Living voice of the Catholick Church essential as De∣livering. (b) None can in reason oppose the Authority of Fathers, or Councils against Tradition. (c) No Authority from any History, or Testimonial wri∣ting is valid against the force of Tra∣dition. So that Oral Tradition, is it seems, so far from a want of assistance from any writings whatsoever, that it is their strength, and over-rules them.

There is yet more said, (d) Oral Tradition is a Rule, not to the learned only, but also to the unlearned, to any vuloar enquirer; therefore it must not

rest on Books for its Authentickness; for the unlearned and vulgar enquirers have not ability to read, to examine, to understand Books; accordingly 'tis said, that the Tradition of the (a) pre∣sent Church is to be believ'd.

There is something to the same purpose in another (b) Author, who has form'd his Book Dialogue-wise. After the Master had read his Scho∣lar a Lecture about Tradition; the Scholar asks him, Sir, It seems a mat∣ter of great study, not easily to be over∣come, except by very learned men, to know, or to find out a constant Traditi∣on, as to read all the Fathers, Litur∣gies, or Councils—. Is it not therefore sufficient Testimony of this, if the present Catholick Church universal∣ly witnesses it to be so? To this the Master, after some premises, answers, It must by necessary consequence be con∣cluded, the Testimony of any age (he means, any present age) to be suffici∣ent. And after a while, he closes thus, This surely convinces the Testimo∣ny of any age to be sufficient. Thus (whatsoever just exception this Di∣vinity is expos'd unto, yet) it ap∣pears

by the Authors quoted, that there are some such, as I have to do with in this work, who maintain a self-sufficiency in Oral Tradition; and that though it may have, yet it can sustain it self without the aid of Books.

2. Let it be, that Oral Tradition has help from Scripture, from wri∣ting; yet, upon a Scrutiny it will be found, that in the last issue this re∣lief will be insufficient, so far, at the least, as to priviledge Oral Tradition to be the Rule of Faith. For, 1. Were their writings, the Conservatories of Tradition, written by persons mov'd by the Holy Ghost, or not? If not, (and I suppose, our adversaries will not affirm they were) then these wri∣tings have a great disadvantage of the Holy Scriptures, which we profess to be the Canon of our Faith; as great a disadvantage as must be be∣tween Books written by them, who could not err, and those written by them, who might err; from whence it would follow, that what is contain'd in the one, must be true; that the Contents of the other, may be true, yet

too they may be false, there may be that reported in them, as deliver'd by Christ and his Apostles, which yet was not delivered by them. But, 2. Were there Ecclesiastical Monu∣ments of unquestionable credit, and which did from Christ and his A∣postles, through each age, exacty and fully declare to us the con∣sentient Doctrines and Practices of the universal Church, it would be very material, and we should much rejoice in it; but the case is other∣wise.

For some while, there were very few (if any) writings, save the Holy Scripture, which come to our hands. Justin Martyr is said to be the first Father, whose works have survived to this day. There are some Books, which pretend to an early date, which yet are judg'd to be supposititious; some of them judged to be so by the Romanists themselves, others proved to be such by the (a) Protestants.

For the first 300 years (as there was no compleat Ecclesiastical Histo∣ry, so) the Fathers now extant, were but few; and their Works too be∣ing

calculated for the times in which they lived, reach not the controver∣sies, which for many years past, and at this day, exercise, and trouble Christendom. This paucity of the Records of the first ages (a) Card. Perron acknowledg∣es, and does imply their insufficiency for setling Catholick Faith; when as he would have recourse made for this pur∣pose unto the 4th. and 5th. Centuries, because then there were most writers. Tho against this, the learned Is. Ca∣saubon excepts; and justly, forasmuch as it must be presum'd, that the stream of Tradition ran pu∣rest, nearest to its Fountain.

The Fathers after the first 300 years did often mix their own pri∣vate sentiments with the Doctrines of the Church. Nor do the Fathers

express themselves so, as that we may clearly distinguish, when they writ as Doctors, and when as Wit∣nesses; when they deliver their own private Sense, and when the Sense of the Church; and if of the Church, whether it be of the Church uni∣versal, or of some particular Church? some, who have diligently perus'd their Writings, judge it not easy to find any such constant 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. It is confess'd by (a) a Romanist, that the Fathers speak sometimes as Witnesses of what the Church held in their days, and sometimes as Doctors; and so it is often hard to distinguish, how they deliver their Opinions, be∣cause sometimes they press Scripture or Reason, as Doctors, and sometimes to confirm a known Truth. So that he, who seeks Tradition in the Fathers, and to convince it by their Testimony, takes an hard task upon him, if he go rigo∣rously to work, and have a cunning Critick to his Adversary. So then, Tradition must in a good measure be at a loss for succour from the Fathers Writings.

I conclude then, that Books, Writings have not given such advan∣tages to Oral Tradition, as to ren∣der it the safest and most certain Conveyance of Divine Truths; but this Dignity and Trust is due to Holy Scriptures only; which having been at the first penn'd by Persons assisted by the Divine infallible Spi∣rit, are stamp'd with an Authori∣ty transcendent to all humane Au∣thority, Oral, or Written; which have been witness'd to by the concurrent Testimony of the Church, in each intermediate Age, since the Primi∣tive Times; and which are at this day generally agreed upon, as the true Word of God, by Christians, tho' in other things, it may be some of their Heads may stand as oppositely, as those of Sampson's Foxes.

SECT. IV.

There remains a Cavil, or two, rather than Objections, which shall have a dispatch also.

1. We are told, that by deserti∣on of Oral Tradition, and adherence to Scripture we do cast our selves upon a remediless ignorance even of Scripture. (a) [Tradition establish'd, the Church is provided of a certain and infallible Rule to interpret Scrip∣ture's Letter by, so as to arrive cer∣tainly at Christ's Sense, &c.] And e contrà, (b) without Tradition, both Letter and Sense of Scripture is un∣certain, and subject to dispute.] A∣gain, (c) [As for the certainty of the Scriptures signisicancy,—no∣thing is more evident, than that this is quite lost to all, in the uncer∣tainty of the Letter.]

2ly. It is suggested, that the course we take, is an Enemy to the Churches Peace. (d)

[The many Sects, into which our miserable Country is distracted, issue from this Principle, viz. The making Scriptures Letter the Rule of our Faith.]

By these passages it is evident, that this Author will have it, that Protestants have nothing, but the Letter of Scriptures, dead Chara∣cters

to live upon; and that upon this he charges their utter uncer∣tainty in the interpretation of Scrip∣tures, and their distractions.

Answ. But Protestants, when they affirm, That Scripture is the safest and most certain Conveyance of Divine Truths; and that con∣sequently it is the only Rule of Faith, do mean Scriptures Letter and Sense both, or the Sense notified by the Words and Letter. And therefore the Author might have spar'd his Proof of this conclusion, i. e. That Scriptures Letter wants all the—pro∣perties belonging to a Rule of Faith: It was needless (I say) to prove this to Protestants. Well, but let Protestants mean, and affirm what they will; have only the Letter of Scripture, and not the Sense of it, because they admit not of Oral Tra∣dition to Sense it. Scripture (it seems) is such a Riddle, that there is no un∣derstanding it, except we plough with their Heifer; and likewise without Tradition's caement we shall always be a pieces, and at variance amongst our selves. But,

1. As to the certainty of Scrip∣ture's Sense; is Scripture (in ear∣nest) so utterly obscure? Will their Author say so of the Histories of Livie, or Tacitus; or of the Phi∣losophical Writings of Plato, and Aristotle; or of Euclid's Elements? Could not God speak clearly, and intelligibly to Men (as Men have done), and that in matters of the greatest consequence to them? or would he not do so? The Asser∣tion of the one, would impeach his Wisdom; of the other, his mercy and kindness to Souls.

And if Scriptures leave us so quite in the dark, why do they call themselves a Light, a Lamp; say, that they enlighten the Eyes, and make wise the simple? Were the Books of the Old Testament, the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles of the New Testament (in the respective times in which they were writ) in themselves unintelligible by them, to whom, and for whose Souls health they were writ? If they were so,

then they were useless and vain: And Oral Tradition could not ex∣pound them, which was not in Be∣ing, when those Books were first, written; for That deals with the Ages following the first, conveys what was at the first delivered un∣to Posterity. Did God then write only to amaze his Church?

'Tis acknowledged, that there are several 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 things hard to be understood (which it might please God should be, partly to win the greater veneration to the Scrip∣tures, for what is obvious and presently seen through is in the more danger of contempt; partly for the exercise of Christian's In∣dustry, Humility, and Charity to∣wards each other, on occasion of dissent.) But howsoever, the Scrip∣tures are not so lock'd up, but that a comp••tent diligence, and a Beraean 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or readiness of mind, may be a Key to them, may open them in all Points necessary to Salvation. And if in other things we remain

ignorant or not so certain, we may well bear with it, while we are yet but in viâ and not com∣prehensores; on our way unto, but have not yet reach'd perfection.

That, which makes the noise of Scriptur's obscurity the more loud, is, that Men are apt to look upon the many subtilties of the Schooles, and Niceties of Polemick Writers, as Articles of Faith; and that men have more mind to fathom depths, and to humour their curiosity (for which end, I believe, the Scriptures were not intended), and hence, are ever racking the Scriptures and vexing the Sacred Text; than to exercise themselves in a sober un∣derstanding of what is sufficiently plain, and in a consciencious pra∣ctise of the Holy Rules of Life, which are evident enough. If Chri∣stians would more seriously apply themselves to these two things, they would find in the Scriptures employment enough, and they would

be more contented with their diffi∣culties.

The Romanists have raised a cry of Scriptur's darkness upon another account, and out of Policy. For having embrac'd several Tenents and Practices, which Scripture does condemn, or not countenance (ei∣ther it is wholly silent of them, or they are but meer appearances there, which are snatch'd at); and yet it is inconsistent with their gran∣deur, or profit, or the affected reputation of an infallibility, to part with; they are faine to press Tradition to serve in their Wars, and for the defence of them. Thus they have first made a necessity, and then have invented a Remedy for it. But when all is done, the Remedy is more imaginary than real. For how unsure a Conveyance, and conse∣quently how weak a Proof Oral Tradition is in matters of Chri∣stian Faith and Practice, has been already evicted. So that if we must be ignorant of Scriptures Sense,

unless Oral Tradition bless us with the Exposition of it; and Scrip∣tures no farther a Light, than it is tinded at Tradition's Candle, we must sit still in much ignorance, or wander in great uncertainties; for that cannot relieve us, it is not that infallible Commentator it is pre∣tended to be.

2. To the upbraiding us with our Distractions, I reply,

1. Before the charge can be made good, that the choice of Scripture for our Canon was the cause of our many Differences, and that upon that pretence we should exchange Scrip∣ture for Oral Tradition, it must be suppos'd, that Oral Tradition is a sure and infallible clew to guide us out of the Labyrinth of Errors into the way of Truth and Peace (the contrary to which has been suffi∣ciently proved.) For otherwise, to leave Scripture, and to follow Tra∣dition, would be to relinquish a Guide, or Rule, which being in∣dited

by an unerring Spirit cannot mislead us; and to chuse one, which may and will carry us out of the way. Nor will the pretence of Ʋnity make amends for this. For true Chri∣stian Peace can't be otherwhere bottom'd, than on Truth; when, and so far as it is a Cement of Men to the disservice of Truth, it com∣mences Faction. Nor Reason, nor Religion allow, much less commend, an Agreement of Persons to err together.

2. They, who have the most amorously espoused Tradition, have also their many and great Diffe∣rences (as has been shew'd above) only through Fear in some, and Policy in the rest, they are hush'd up more, than amongst us, and so do better escape the observation and talk of the World. Nay, that Church may be justly arraigned as the guilty cause of that, which they call a great Schism, viz. The Separation of so many Churches from them (the Churches, call'd

Protestant) by their imposition of unlawful, and therefore impossi∣ble termes of Communion with them. And (a) Nilus tells the World, that their Imperiousness was the reason of the great Schism between the Greek, and the Latin Church.

Thus, as the Church of Traditioners have no few Dissentions among themselves, so they have given a beginning and continu∣ance to the quarrels between them, and a considerable part of Chri∣stendom.

3. Ther's no need of fetching our Distractions from the Rejection of Oral Tradition; there are are o∣ther true manifest Causes of them assignable.

Our Church once flourish'd with Peace (and that, without the aid of an Oral Tradition) whil'st the Re∣verend Bishops were suffered to go∣vern

it, and the Royal was able to countenance the Ecclesiastical Autho∣rity. But when the pious King, and blessed Martyr, was engag'd in, and diverted by, the turmoils of a Civil War, when Episcopacy was chang'd for Anarchy, when the Golden reins of Government in Church and State were broken, then begun and increas'd our Divisions and Cala∣mities. Unto which, it may be, there were some assisting Causes from without; some, who helped to kindle and to blow our Fires. And if the Roman Church should chance into the like afflicted State with ours, it would be obnoxious to the like Confusions. If the Mitre should be forsaken by the secular Crowned Heads, and a mutinying multitude should pull their Holy Father out of his infallible Chair; then 'tis not al∣together improbable, but that Chil∣dren would less heavken to testifying Fathers; but that there would be more Alumbrados, and the like Freaks might be acted among our Adversa∣ries, which tore our Church.

But withal, and speaking in general, Christians are too apt to fail in holy prudence, meekness, charity, and such pacifique virtues, thence arise too many breaches a∣mong them; and a want of these vir∣tues is incident to our Adversaries, as well as to Protestants (for they are Sons of Adam too,) only they are wiser in their Generation.

To conclude the Reply to the two last little Objections, and the whole Treatise: Eternal Blessed∣ness is our end; the means to at∣tain to that great end, are, right Believing, and holy Living. That which gives the Regulation to Christian Belief, and Life, is the revealed will of God. But because the Divine Revelations were de∣livered

at the distance of many Ages from us, therefore there is need of somthing, which may conduct them safe and entire to us; and that, which is the safest and most certain Conveyance of them to us, is, that fixed Standard or Rule, whence we are to take the measures of our Christian Faith and Practices. Such a Conveyance, and consequently such a Standard or Rule, I have prov'd, not Oral Tradition, but Holy Scripture, to be.

This being first establish'd, there may then then be consider'd the Perspicuity of this Rule (which is Scripture), and the Agreement, or Ʋnity of those, who adhere to it.

Here, 1. We may be sure, that this Rule is very sufficiently intelligible, and clear in all things necessary for our direction to our Blessedness: But then it must be left to Gods Pleasure, what diffi∣culties

and dubiousness he would mix with that sufficient plainness; and we ought to be thankful for what is plain in it, and not quar∣rel at the obscurities. 2ly. We may be certain, that this Rule and Conveyance of Divine Truths to us (there being so much Harmo∣ny in Truth) must be very apt (it must be its most genuine effect) to harmonize Christian's Judgments, and Affections, and to beget a peacea∣bleness of mutual Conversation; yet too it must be judg'd very possible, or rather more, that the folly and corruptions of Men may too much frustrate this its most na∣tural issue.

So that now, to conclude a thing this great Standard and Rule of Faith and Manners, because it pre∣tends to be the most plain; and also to make meer Ʋnity a Demon∣stration of the Truth, would be a crude way of Discourse. For first, a wrong way may be smooth and easy enough, perhaps more plain

than that, which leads a Man to his Home: Next, not Truth only, but likewise Interest may hold Men very fast together, and the Con∣science of its own guilt and feeble∣ness may prompt to Error to strengthen it self by the closest Confederacies.

FINIS.

Notes

• (a)

  Nehem. 8.6, 7, 8.
• (b)

  1 Mac. 1.56, 57, 58.
• (c)

  Petav. Ration. p. 241, 242.
• (a)

  Qui Script. in Grae∣cam linguam verterunt, nu∣merari possunt; Latini au∣tem Interpretes nullo mo∣do, &c.

  August. De Doctrinâ Christianâ. L. 2. C. 11.5.
• (a)

  Eisi multa depravare conati sunt haeretici; tamen nunquam defuerunt Catholici, qui eorum corruptelas dete••e∣rint, & non permiserint Libros sacr••s corrumpi, &c. De verbo Dei Lib. 2. Cap. 75. Et verò.
• (b)

  Quoniam (ut Augst. in∣qu••t) licèt omnes Fatres in hoc conspirâssent, ut seipsos, at{que} alios Scripturarum veritate privarent, (q••od imaginari non potest) non tamen po∣tuissent omnes undi{que} codi∣ces falsare, &c. Biblioth. Sanct. p. 727.
• (a)

  Ne thu∣ris piperis∣ve sis cucul∣lus. Lib. 3. Epig. 2.
• (b)

  De ver∣bo Dei, L. 2. C. 2. Hi Sigitur omissis.
• In Proleg. ad exercit. in novum Testam.
• (a)

  The words of the Article are these: Holy Scripture contains all things necessary to Salvation; so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be prov'd therby, is not to be requir'd of any Man, that it should be believ'd as an Article of Faith, or be thought requisite, or necessary to Sal∣vation. Evangel. nigrum. Atram. Theol.
• (a)

  Sure Footing. p. 194.
• (a)

  De amissi. gratiae. L. 1. C. 13.
• (b)

  De Pae∣nit. L. 3. C. 8.
• (a)

  Quid (inquam) O∣mousion nisi Ego & Pater unum sumus. Sed nunc nec ego Nicaenam synodum tibi, nec tu Arimineusem mihi de∣bes t••nquam praejudicaturus cbiitere. Scripturarum Au∣thoritatibus res cum re, cau∣sa cum causâ, ratio cum ra∣tione concertet. Contra Maxt. Lib. 3. Cap. 14.
• (a)

  Tho' some Fathers speak highly of Scripture, as that it contains all Faith, &c. It is first to be mark'd, whether they speak of Scripture sens'd, or as yet to be sens'd; and if the latter, by whom, &c. Sure Footing. p. 140.
• (a)

  'Tis impossible, they (i. e. the Fathers) should b••ld Scrip∣ture thus interpretable (i. e. by other means th••n by Tradition) the Rul•• of Faith; it being no∣torious, that m••st Hereticks against whom they writ, held it theirs. And so had they held Scripture thus interpreted the Rule of Faith, They could not have h••ld the Hereticks, since they adbered stifly to that Root or Rule of Faith, however they might err in many particu∣lar Tenents Ibid. p. 141.
• (b)

  See Ire∣naeus quo∣ted a little after.
• (a)

  Act. 6.14.
• (b)

  1 Cor. 15.3.
• (c)

  De Spi∣ritu Sto.
• (a)

  Matth. 28.19.
• (b)

  Si ergo aut in Evange∣lio praecipitur, aut in Apostelo∣rum Epistolis, aut Actibus, con∣tinetur, observetur etiam & haec sancta Traditio. In Ep. ad Pompeium.
• (c)

  Cum enim ex Scripturis arguuntur, in accusationem con∣vertuntur ipsarum Scriptura∣rum, quasi non rectà habeant, ne{que} sint ex autoritate, & quia variè sint dictae, & quia non possit ex his inveniri veritas ab his, qui nesciant Traditione••: Non enim per literas traditam illam, sed per vivam vocem; ob quam causam, &c. Adver∣sus baereses. Lib. 3. Cap. 2.
• (a)

  In Epist. nuncupato∣riâ Irenaeo praefixâ.
• (a)

  Quid antem si ne{que} Apostol•• quidem Scriptu∣ras reliquissent nobis, non∣ne oportebat, &c. Ad∣versus haer. L. 3. C. 4.
• (b)

  Evenitita{que} ne{que} Scripturis jam, ne{que} traditioni consentire eos. Idem. L. 3. C. 2.
• (a)

  Age jam qui voles curio∣sitatem melius exercere in ne∣gotlo Salutis tuae; percurre Ecclesias Apostolicas apud quas ipsae adhuc cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis praesidentur; apud quas ipsae Authenticae eorum literae recitantur; sonantes vo∣cem, & repraesentantes faciem uniuscujus{que} Tertul. de Prae∣scrip.
• (a)

  Ioh. 20. uit.
• (b)

  Rom. 15.4.
• (c)

  Ita velente Deo ut verae lectionis ••ntegr••tas, quam homi∣num velmalitia, vel negligentia cor••uperent in partibus, in totâ saltem Ecclesiasticorum codi um universitate serv••retur; ne Ec∣clesia Christi per aliquod tempus divinarum Scriptura••um integ∣ritate careret. Bibl. Sanct. p. 727.
• (d)

  De verbo Dei. L. 2. C. 2. Quintum & ultimum argumentum.
• (a)

  Cura ista non incumbit praecipue hominibus, sed Deo Praeter-providenti∣am Dei, quae est praecipua causa. — De verbo Dei non Scripto. Lib. 4. C. 12.
• Is. S. 19, 20.
• 2 Kin. 23, 24, 25.
• (a)

  Ps. 19.7, 8, 9, 10, 11. Ps. 119. passim. 2 Pet. 1.19, 20, 21. Eph. 6.17. Heb. 4.12.
• (b)

  Ioh. 5.39.
• (c)

  Matth. 22.29.
• (d)

  Matth. 22.42. Ioh. 10.34, 35, 36.
• (e)

  Luke 24.25, 26, 27.
• (f)

  Act. 17.11, 12.
• (g)

  2 Tim. 3.15, 16, 17.
• (a)

  Matth. 15.2, 3.
• (b)

  Col. 2.8.
• (c)

  1 Cor. 11.3.23.
• (d)

  2 Thes. 2.15.
• (a)

  2 Thes. 3.6.
• (a)

  Almost innumerable variae lectiones in it still controverted. Sure Fo••∣ting. p. 32.
• (a)

  Nay so many (variae lectiones) in the New Testa∣ment alone observed by one man, (my Lord Usher) that he durst not print them for fear of bring∣ing the whole Book into doubt. Sure Footing. Ibid.
• (b)

  Supposing he said so, as the Author of S••re Footing reports.
• (c)

  Dr. Br. Walton, late Lord B. of Ch. in Proleg. 7. ad Biblia Polyglort. Qui etiam citat in eundem sensum Lud. Ca∣pellum in Proleg. 6.
• (a)

  In quâ tamen tam longâ & latâ a textu criginario discessio∣ne divinam tecum providentiam agnoscimus, & suspicimus: quòd nulla extiterit tam damnosa in∣ter utros{que} textus differentia, ut rectam fidem, quae ad salutem est necessaria, labefactaret aut laederet. Jacobi Ʋsserii Armach. ad Ludov. Cappellum Epist.
• (b)

  —Haec mea senten∣tia perpetua fuit.—Ex qui∣busdam veterum interpretatio∣nibus excerpi aliquas posse va∣riantes te••tus Hebraici lectiones; ex vulgatâ Graecâ versione— nullas. Idem. Ibid.
• (d)

  The E∣pistle to the Hebrews. Of St. Jam. 2. Ep. of St. Peter. 2d. and 3d. Ep. of John. the Ep. Ju. the Reve∣lation.
• (e)

  Apud Caran∣zam.
• (a)

  More may be seen of this in the learn∣ed Dr. Cosins, late Bishop of Duresme; in his Scholastic. l History of the Canon of Scripture, pag. 60. 61.
• (a)

  De Verbo Dei. Lib. 1. c. 17, 18, 19. also Cap. 16. con∣cerning some little por∣tions of Holy Writ for∣merly controverted.
• (b)

  De Verbo Dei. L. 2. c. 2.
• (c)

  De Verbo Dei. Lib. 1. c. 8, 9, 10.
• (a)

  Josephus contra Apion. Lib. 1. p. 1036. 1037.
• (b)

  Primis Ordinis Canonica Volumina, quae sola apud He∣braeos in authoritate hahentur, Judaei, &c. Sixt. Senens. Bibl. Sanct. pag. 2. Certum est Li∣bros hosce (Apocryphos sc.) ab Ec∣clesià, sive Synagogâ Judaicà nunquam in Canonem censitos fu∣isse, tam ante Christi tempora, quàm post, in hunc usque diem. Sim. Episcopii Inst. Theolog. 226. P. Ricaut. Of the Greek Church.
• (a)

  Ecclesia Catholica Libros istos, ut caet ros, pro Sacris & Canonicis habet. De verbo Dei. Lib. 1. C. 10.
• (a)

  This deduction of Testi∣monies is largly and satisfacto∣rily made by the late Reverend Bishop of Duresme, Dr. Cosins, in his Scholastical History of the Canon of Scripture.
• After the Author had con∣futed by several Testimonies of the Antients the Canoni∣calness of the Books, called Apocryphal, he adds. Etsi in hac re longè superior est causa nostra, nullam tamen satis gra∣vem causam video, cur acriter de numero Canonicorum librorum cum Pontificiis digladiemur; & Apocryphos, quos illi in Canonem referre volunt, us{que} adeò aver semmr, quasi Fides & Religio Christiana propterea vacillatura sit, si illi in Canonem admittantur: Eisi enim non nego esse in iis quaedam, quae vel contradictionem, vel falsitatem, vel absurditatem manifestariam prae se ferant, & difficulter, aut cum iis quos Canonicos esse utrin{que} in confesse est, conciliari, aut cum historiae veritate, aut cum recta ratione in gratiam reduci possunt; tamen non modò nulla esse in tis credo; per quae dogmatis alicujus ad salutem necessarii veritas labefactari possit, sed & non pauciora esse in iis, mihi persuadeo, quae convellendis Pontificiorum erroribus faciunt, quam quae iis aut fulciendis aut stabiliendis servire possunt. Sim. Episcopii Instit. Theol. p. 227. Afterwards speaking of the Books of the New Testament, an∣tiently questioned, says he: Sive admittantur, sive non admittantur—Certissimum nihilominus manet, caeteris, qui extra controversiam omnem positi sunt, abundè satis contineri universam doctrinam, & religionem istam, quam Revelatio∣nem tertiam (intelligit, Religionem Christianam) esse di∣cimus. Nullus enim in istis omnibus controversiis est apicu∣lus, qui singulare aliquid habet inse, quod in aliis indubitatis desideratur, imò non abundè iis continetur, ad Religionis, & doctrinae Jesu Christi tum perfectionem, tum integritatem pertinens. Idem. Ibid. pag. 229.
• (a)

  De Ver∣bo Dei non Scripto. L. 4. C. 12.
• (b)

  Id••m. I∣bid Ch. 2.
• (a)

  Sure Foot. pag. 115.
• (b)

  Ibid. pag 101.
• (c)

  Ibid. pag. 103.
• (d)

  Ibid. pag. 56.
• (a)

  Ibid. pag. 203, 204.
• (b)

  En∣chirid. of Faith. pag. 14, 15.
• About 150 years after Christ.
• (a)

  Cook, in censu â quorundum Scriptorum. D. James's Bastardie of false Fa∣thers. Da∣ille.
• (a)

  Id autem esse tempus, quo quatuor prima Concilia Oecume∣nica includantur, a Constanti∣no Imp. ad Marcianum. Atque hoc vel propterea aequissimum esse, quia primorum seculorum paucis∣sima extant monumenta; illius vero temporis, quo Ecclesia praeci∣puè florebat, longe plurima, ut facile ex ejus aetatis Patribus, & eorum scriptis, fides ac di∣sciplina veteris Catholicoe possit agnosci Ita Perron. Sequitur Responsio Regis. Hoc postula∣tum parùm illis aequum videbi∣tur, &c. Apud Is. Casaubo∣num in Responsione ad Cardina∣lis Perronii Epistolam, pag. 38, 39, 40, 41, 42.
• (a)

  Rush∣worth. Di∣al. 3d. Sect. 13.
• (a)

  Sure Footing. P. 117.
• (b)

  Ibid. p. 98.
• (c)

  Ibid. p. 38.
• (d)

  Ibid. p. 40.
• Ps. 119.105.13••. Ps. 19.7, 8.
• (a)

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. pag. 21. 22.
• I think it seasonable to let my Reader know, that those Men so call'd (i. e. Alumb••ados) in Spain were no other, in most of their Tenents and Practises, than these our Quakers are now in England.—•• c••nfess, I am very destitute of Books at this time, to ••••ve the Reade•• so g••od an account of this b••••ness, as I could w••sh. All I can say of th•• at n••w is out of some F••••••••ch Books, where I find a l••rge ••••∣dict against them, containing their several Tenents, and ••••∣rers; where••f, &c.—〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••∣lumbrado•• of S••ain 〈…〉〈…〉 to be known, and talk'd 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the year of our Lord, 162••.— Dr. Meric. Ca••a••bon. T••••••∣tise of Euthusiasme. p. 17••, 174, 175.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ar••••t. Eth. ••.1. C. 8.