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.

AN ENQUIRY: Whether Oral Tradition, or the Sacred Writings be the safest Conservatory and Conveyance of, &c. (Book 1)

PART I. (Book 1)

CHAP. I. Of Tradition in general.

SECT. I.

MAN is an active, capaci∣ous Creature; fitted for, and desirous of know∣ledge; and furnish'd with variety of means for the acquisition of it. In general, we come to know things in a two-fold manner.

1. By the use, and upon the strength of our own Faculties, by our Senses, whose Sensations, when frequent and uniform, we call Ex∣perience; by (a far more sublime Principle) our Reason, which judges of, corrects, and improves what is receiv'd by the Senses; forms sim∣ple Apprehensions, of them makes Pro∣positions, and of Propositions Syl∣logisms; i. e. discourses and elicites one Knowledge out of another. A great many Notions, Propositions, and Discourses, relating to some comprehending Subject, and cast in∣to a Method, are call'd a Science, or an Art, according to the Nature of the Subject, and the Scope in treating of it.

2. We attain to knowledge by Intelligence from others, being content to see with their Eyes, and to hear with their Ears. And here the more easie Task is well to understand the In∣formation given by others, and which we take upon Trust from them. The Knowledge and Assent yielded to thing, on this account, and relying thus on Testimony, is called Faith, or

Belief; which is different answera∣bly to the diversity of Testimonies.

1. Testimony is Divine, or that of God: And this has such a transcen∣dent Prerogative; that when once it is sufficiently clear, that God has indeed affirm'd a thing to be, or not to be; the Understanding may, and ought to acquiesce in such an Affir∣mation without any hesitancy. For God cannot lye, either ignorantly, or knowingly; because He is of infinite knowledge and veracity.

2. Testimony is humane, or that of Man; and the Credit of this is ex∣ceedingly below that of the former. 'Tis not alone possible, but too or∣dinarily experienc'd, that Man is himself deceiv'd, and then deceives others; nay, often knowingly, and designedly deceives. Therefore Belief must be yielded to Humane Testimony, with some suspence, and good wariness Yet even Humane Testimony de∣serves and has a considerable Re∣putation: For it is of great Ʋse, and of some Necessity to Mankind.

Now, Tradition (considered, not materially, or as the thing deliver∣ed; but as to what it formally in∣cludes)

is Testimony: For the Assent which it begets, is Belief; as Science and Opinion, are the Effect of Ar∣gumentation, Demonstrative and To∣pical respectively. And whereas Testi∣mony may be of one, or more Persons; and of more Persons, at the same time, or in times following one the other: Tradition is an Aggregation of Testi∣monies in a Succession, and dependance of one upon the other: It is the delivery of a thing down from one Age to another, in a way of Witnessing. By which it is distinguish'd from such a descent of Opinions and Practices; in which they of the former, and of the following Age (perhaps) O∣pine or Practise the same thing: But they do so for Reasons taken from the thing it self; and not meerly because the former Age told the next Age, that the Age before them did so Opine or Practise. But Tradition imports, an express'd or imply'd, and a successive witnessing con∣cerning a thing by Fathers to their Children, and that as received from their Fathers; and so on, unto the O∣rigine of the thing witnessed to.

SECT. II.

Testimony and Tradition (which is a Branch of it) may be suppos'd to be us'd or alledged to a double purpose.

1. We may suppose it Appeal'd to as a Judge or Rule, defining con∣cerning the Natures of Things, and the Verity of Propositions relating to them: As whether such and such Propositions, which concern Philoso∣phy, or Mathematicks, in Aristotle, or Euclide, be true or false; or whe∣ther the Christian be the true Reli∣gion, (meerly because Christians af∣firm it to be so.) In the Applicati∣on of it, Humane Testimony and Tradition, is not so concluding a Medium. The Determination, or Sen∣tence of it is less valid, (unless, where there is a concurrent general At∣testation of Mankind;) nor is it so necessary (except where some peculiar occasion obliges to trust anothers Cre∣dibility; as the case is of young Learners of a Science, to the Noti∣ons and Genius of which they are Strangers.) I said,

1. 'Tis less valid. For things do often so much retire themselves, and require such a quickness and disen∣gagedness of Understanding, to penetrate them; and withal there is not alone a common shortness of mens Reason, but such an exposed∣ness also to biassing disadvantages, as render men much unqualified for Deferences, and the final Ʋmpirage of the Natures of Things, and of the Truth concerning them. Besides, there is scarce an Opinion, but is countenanced by so many Votes; that if meer Testimony must sway a man's Judgment, he must believe all, and consequently Contradictions; or he must believe none. And as there is inconvenience; so,

2. There's no such necessity to try the Natures of the Things at this Bar. For Man has an enquiring and discursive Power, which being care∣fully exercised, and improved, is able to pierce unto things, and to discover them even in their retire∣ments. And each Science, Faculty, and Art, have their respective Prin∣ciples, Hypotheses, and Axioms, by

which the truth of things in each may be examined; and unto which matters in controversie may be, and usually are devolved.

And Men commonly think it their Right to have a Liberty to discuss things, and the Judgment of others concerning them: Because tho' a Man be fallible as well as others, and may be far inferior to others in natural and acquired Abilities; yet he may be better satisfied con∣cerning his own diligence and freedom from Prepossession, Passion and In∣terest, than he can be of anothers; every Man being best acquainted with the temper and secrets of his own Soul.

2. Humane Testimony and Tra∣dition, may be alledg'd (which is it's proper Verge) in point of Fact, and as deposing about the Existence of Things; and that they are or have been: As that there were such Learn∣ed Men, as Aristotle and Euclide; that they were the Authors of such Writings, as are entitled to them: Or, that there were such Persons as Christ, and those who published

and propagated his Religion in the World; and that the Books which contain the Mysteries of the Chri∣stian Religion, did come from those first Preachers and Propagators of it. Against Testimony and Tradi∣tion, in the use of it, there lye not those Exceptions, as did in the former consideration of it. For,

1. It is much more easie for Men to ascertain themselves about the Quòd sit, and that things are in mat∣ters of Fact; than to sound the Na∣tures of Things; to descry their co∣herences with, and dependences on each other; how far they may be affirm'd of, and infer'd from one a∣nother. 'Tis far more discernable, that some Seas ebb and slow, and in what time; than what the true Cause is of that reciprocal motion; that such and such Propositions are in Aristotle or Euclide, than to under∣stand the just meaning of them; or (which is more) the truth of them when understood. Very Sense suf∣fices to satisfie in the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and that such things are without the labour of the Understanding, and any operose

Discourse. Now, where is the more easiness of knowing things, there is the less liableness to mistakes: And a less liableness to, and therefore a less probability of mistake in others, is one reason why (caeteris paribus) to give credit to their Intelligence the more securely.

2. Mankind is forc'd to content themselves with Information from Testimony in multitudes of Things, which their Curiosity, or the Exi∣gency of their Affairs do engage them to be satisfied in, and yet their own Sense or Reason can give no prospect of them.

Those many who never cross'd, nor saw the Seas, must trust others Relation; that there are such places, as Paris, Rome, Constantinople, both the Indies; where these places lye, and what their circumstances are. The reason why Men believe that they were born in such a year; on, or about such a day; and therefore that they are of such an Age; that they were Baptiz'd, and that such is their Name; is, that they are told so. 'Tis not possible to come ac∣quainted

with Times past: and with the divers Revolutions, and Events of the numerous Ages before we were born, otherwise than by Testi∣mony from History. If we would sa∣tisfie our selves, whether the Books in our possession, are indeed the Works of the Authors, whose Names they bear; that, which we must have recourse to, is; that these Books have been, and are witnessed to, are generally reputed to be those Au∣thors Works; i. e. there's a general Tradition for it.

For the two Reasons given, it is plain; that there is both a com∣parative safety, and likewise a ne∣cessity (in a considerable measure) of reliance upon others Testimony, and common Tradition, in many things.

SECT. III.

Notwithstanding what has been said on the behalf of Testimony and Tradition; yet they are not such an Oracle, that their Responses must be receiv'd indiscriminately, and with∣out

wary Examination. Though, where they well cannot mistake, or deceive; or there's little, or no temptation to misrepresent things; they may be trusty, yet both Writ∣ten, and Oral Tradition are often guilty of no small failures. Of the two, Oral Tradition is subject to the more shortness and uncertainty. It is ordinary for Reports to pass from one to another, to have a general Vogue; and yet to be very false. 'Tis usual for Stories, which might be true enough in the first Relation of them, yet after they have tra∣velled through many Mouths, to be so much altered from what they were at the first, that they look like one of Ovid's Metamorphoses. There are Traditions from Fathers, which yet the Posterity have not Faith e∣nough, or more Wisdom than to believe. It will be found upon due Consideration, that, as when a Man hears others talking at a good di∣stance from him, only a noise, and now and then a word or two come to his Ears, the Articulation of the rest being lost by the way;

insomuch that little, if any thing is understood of what is said: So that from past and remote Ages, there arrive down to us but meer generals; confus'd and very short notices of things; and the Credit of those too comes weakned with acknowledged∣ly fabulous, or suspected intermix∣tures; especially is this true of those Antiquities, which meer Oral Tradi∣tion wafts to us.

Observe Families, one would think, that considering the love which Men have for their Native Soil, the par∣ticular place of their Birth and Ha∣bitation; for their Inheritance, and for the Stock, of which they are Branches; Young Persons should be much inquisitive from their Fathers, and Fathers should delight to Story to their Children, the Circumstances pertaining to these things. Yet of∣ten (excepting some general Infor∣mations) comparatively little News is brought of such concerns, and of par∣ticulars, which hapned but three or four Generations off; further than they can be certified from Registries, Deeds, and the like Writings:

'Tis not unusual for Persons to en∣quire of the Church-Book, how Old they are.

Books deserve care; they are a relief of Mortality; in them the Dead Authors do in some manner survive themselves, and continue use∣ful to the world, after they have left it. Yet what a multitude of these has Tradition suffered to pe∣rish, to be buried as well as their Authors; nothing to be left of them, except (as an Epitaph) the Titles of them! Of many there remains no more than some fragmenta, some scat∣ter'd Limbs, as 'twere of a mangled Body. Several Books are father'd up∣on certain Authors, of whom they have, it may be, no more than the Name. Divers are more or less cor∣rupted; some so much depraved, ut samnium in ipso samnio quaeratur, that the Books may be search'd for in the very Books, and scarce found.

Hence it follows, that Tradition is not so careful a preserver of it's Deposita, as it should be; not so faith∣ful a Relater of Things past, as that it should be thought irrefragable;

and that Belief should be subjected to it promiscuously and without choice. Therefore there must be something else, and beyond it, which may in∣struct us how to distinguish of Testi∣monies and Traditions; which to mistrust, or to reject; and which to believe.

This Director is Reason; which in it's Debate and Decision of the due Credibility of Testimonies and Traditions, and of the deserv'd pre∣cedence of one to the other, proceeds upon the Circumstances of the Testi∣fiers, and their qualifications. These (in general) are, 1. A sufficient know∣ledge of the things attested to: 2ly. Such Honesty and Integrity, as may encline the Testifiers to relate things as they know them to be. Some of the particular Rules or Cautions, in the accepting Testimonies may be, 1. The More the Testifiers are, the stronger the Testimony is, and the More are to be preferr'd to the Fewer (supposing a Parity of Cir∣cumstances:) 2ly. Forasmuch as ge∣nerals, and the substance of things, are commonly more easily knowable,

and remembred, than Particulars and minuter Circumstances, there∣fore Testimony may be more safely credited in the former than in the latter. 3ly. Because Integrity is least to be suspected or question'd, when not under temptation by Interest; therefore the Testimony of clear, and uninteressed Witnesses may be the more confidently admitted: 4ly. The nearer the Testifiers liv'd to the Times, in which what is witnessed to, was spoken or done, the more valuable their Testimo∣ny is, for the greater the remove is from what is Evidenced to, the more accidents might intervene for the clouding and misrepresentation of it.

By this it appears, that Reason's Court is the Soveraign Judicatory, where lies the last Appeal; here it being to be determin'd concerning the competency and validness of the Testimony or Tradition.

So much of Tradition in general (whose so near alliance to Testimo∣ny at large makes them much to agree in their use and force;) what it is; in what matter most proper∣ly

useful and argumentative: It's Ef∣ficacy, and yet it's Failures, into what it is lastly resolv'd; where the relief lyes against a deception by it in it's Ʋntrustiness.

I shall proceed next to consider Tradition, Oral Tradition, more par∣ticularly, and distinctly, and as apply'd to Religion.

CHAP. II. Of Oral Tradition, as it is ap∣ply'd to Religion; and there, what is allow'd to it, what de∣ny'd.

SECT. I.

I Come now nearer to the Que∣stion, which being mov'd both of Oral Traditions, and of the Sacred Writings, Trustiness, and Certainty of Conveyance of Divine Truths, &c. I shall give them a distinct Considera∣tion.

And first I shall enquire: How sure and safe an immediate Conserva∣tory and Conveyance Oral Tradition is of Divine Truths (more speculative, or more immediately practical, fun∣damental, or others) down from their first delivery to the Church through succeeding Ages.

And before further procedure; it is granted, that Oral Tradition is

of use in Religion; yet not so much solitary, and by it self, as in conjuncti∣on with Tradition Written.

1. It is yielded, that tho' there be many (a) 1.1 inter∣nal 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or Ar∣guments clear in the Scriptures them∣selves, whereby we may be sufficiently assur'd, that they were breath'd from a Divine Spirit, and are truly the Word of God. Yet as to the particular and just number of those Sacred Books; every Verse and Sentence in them, whether they be more or fewer; we have no better Exter∣nal and Ministerial assurance, than the Constant, and Recorded Testimo∣ny of the Catholick Church, from one Generation to another, which is a Witness and Keeper of Holy Writ.

2ly. It is confess'd, that there are many particular Truths, which have had the universal, continued Pro∣fession, and Oral Attestation of the

Christian Church from the Primi∣tive to the present Times.

3ly. It is not deny'd, but that if there had been no Scriptures, yet Oral Tradition might have derived some Truths to Posterity.

4ly. Let any Points be recom∣mended to us by so large an Appro∣bation, and Certificate from Tra∣dition, as Sacred Scriptures have, and we shall receive them with all be∣seeming regard. But then,

1. We deny, that Oral Tradition is sufficient to preserve to us, and to ascertain us of the several parti∣cular Truths, which concern Chri∣stian Belief and Practice, together with the Sense of the Sacred Books.

2ly. Tho' there are several Di∣vine Truths, which have had the universal, and continued Profession of the Church; yet we deny, it would have been so happy, if there had been no Scriptures.

3ly. Though there had been no Scriptures, Oral Tradition might have sent down some Truths to Posteri∣ty: But they would have been but few, and those too blinded with er∣roneous

Appendages; most would have been lost; as in Hurricanes, and a∣mong Rocks and Sands, some Ves∣sels may weather it out, yet shatter'd, but how many Perish!

4ly. As to the last thing; sure, our Adversaries can't justly charge us with the contrary; there being no Point maintained by them, and deny'd by us, which has so ample a Re∣commendation.

But I shall resume the first Con∣cession, and the annex'd Denyal, and shall add: That there is a great diffe∣rence between Tradition's Testifica∣tion concerning the Scriptures; and Tradition's conserving the many Di∣vine Truths, and Sense of them, and the safe transmitting them to all succeeding times. We may rely up∣on Tradition for the former, which is a more general thing, and in which Tradition was less obnoxious to Er∣ror; and yet not trust it for the latter, which abounds in such a va∣riety of Particulars, in which there is the greater liableness to mistake and failance. The difference I urge may be illustrated thus;

Suppose, one informs me of a Guide in my Journey; I credit and accept of that Information, and thank the Informant. But I rest no farther on him; but follow the Guide in the several Stages of my Journey. Or suppose, one directs me to a very Honest Man, and a ve∣ry knowing Witness in my Cause: When he has done so, it is not He, but the Witness, on whom I must depend for a success in my Suit: Nay, if the Witness should chance to de∣pose against him, I may rationally believe him, and he can't refuse the Evidence because he himself, recom∣mended him to me, as a very credible Deponent.

The Application is obvious. The Church's Tradition testifies, * 1.2 that the Scriptures are the Oracles of God. These Oracles of God are a Guide, a Wit∣ness, in the things of God, and which belong to Man's Salvation: They af∣firm so much of themselves; and be∣cause they are Divine Oracles, and testified by the Church so to be, they must be believed by us in that Claim. Why now, tho' we owe and pay Thanks

to the Church's Tradition for the Preservation of Holy Scriptures, and Direction of Us to Them; yet we are not therefore bound to resign our Faith universally to the Tradition of the Church; but we may trust our selves with Scriptures Guidance, and Testimony in all particular Matters of Faith and Practice. Yes, and if these Scriptures Witness against the Church's Tradition, against some Opinions, and Practices of it, for which Tradition is pretended; we ought to believe the Scriptures; and Tradition can't fairly decline the Te∣stimony, tho' against it self.

SECT. II.

But against this it is urg'd: That there can be no Arguing against Tra∣dition out of Scripture. The rea∣son is, * 1.3 because there can be no certain∣ty of Scripture without Tradition: This must first be supposed certain, before the Scripture can be held such. Therefore to argue against Tradition out of Scripture, is to discourse from what is (Tradition being disallow'd) un∣certain;

which can't be a solid way of Argumentation.

To this I reply: (Omiting, that Tradition is not the only means of our Certitude about Scripture,) That the Exception does not invalidate what I have said; for thus it is: We do confess to receive the Scrip∣tures upon the Church's universal Tradition; and we allow this Testi∣mony to be (in it's kind) very useful and sufficiently certain; and this cer∣tainty of Tradition, quoad hoc, for the Intelligencing us concerning Scripture, is supposed by us. But then we do, and may, argue from Scrip∣ture thus supposed certain, against Tradition, i. e. against what is uncer∣tain, or false in it, viz. Any such Points of Faith, or Practice; or such Senses of Scripture, as it would obtrude upon us; when as yet they are perhaps contrary to Scripture; and the Tradition is far short of being Ʋniversal; it may be, is very narrow, or feigned, rather than real. So that we do not proceed upon an Ʋncertainty, but upon what is cer∣tain by Ʋniversal Tradition (i.e. That

the Books of the Old and New Testament, in the Number that we have them, are the Holy Scriptures, and Oracles of God) against what is affirm'd, and can be prov'd by us, to be uncertain or false, in Tradition. As, in a like case: Scholars argue from what is true and clear in Rea∣son, against what is false or dubious, tho' it have Reason pretended for it: Thus discoursing from Reason against Reason; i. e. from what is really such, against what is such, but in name and appearance.

The sum and result of the Pre∣mises is this: That, as we do not take Tradition's Word for all the Doctrines or Practices, and Senses of Scripture, it would impose on us; though we accept of Tradition's Evidence concerning the Scriptures, as was in the beginning of this Chap∣ter acknowledg'd: So nor are we oblig'd to the former, by acknow∣ledgment of the latter.

Having stated what may be allow'd, and what is denyed to Oral Tradi∣tion: Next it shall be examin'd, what Reason and Experience suggest against its sureness and safety of Conveyance: and likewise (after that) what either can pretend on it's behalf.

CHAP. III. Reasons against the Certainty and Safety of Conveyance of Divine Truths by Oral Tra∣dition.

SECT. I.

IT is asserted; That the Body of the Faithful from Age to Age are the Traditioners of Divine Truths; * 1.4 that in reality Tradition, rightly un∣derstood, is the same thing materially with the living Voice and Practice of the whole Church essential, consisting of Pastors and Laiety.

Now, before Reason can acqui∣esce in a Tradition by Pastors and Laie∣ty, it must (according to what has been premis'd) be well satisfied in the fitness of the Testifiers.

The Qualifications of Persons for a due Testification (especially in so weighty a matter as Religion) are, 1. Good knowingness of Fathers, and Ancestors in Religion; as also due

care and diligence of Fathers in teaching their Children; together with good Apprehensions, Memory, and Tracta∣bleness in the Children and Poste∣rity. 2ly. Such a measure of In∣tegrity, through all descents, as may secure the successive Testifiers a∣gainst all temptations unto swerv∣ing from what they received from Fathers. Let these Qualifications be farther considered of.

1. The first Requisites are good Knowingness of Fathers, together with Care and Diligence; as also Apprehension, Memory, and Tracta∣bleness in Children; let us examine how far these may be found in the Laiety.

I believe, that the value and zeal for Religion in the first and golden Age of the Church made Fathers diligent to teach, and Youth to learn. But I doubt, that this Temper (as is incident to Religious Fervors) might cool afterwards; and that when Emperors became Christians, Ease and Prosperity might beget a restiveness, and neglect both in An∣cestors, and Posterity. How well

Fathers of Families did perform their part, and how docile Chil∣dren have been, throughout the ma∣ny hundred years before us, is out of our Ken. But if we may guess at times past (as there is often a likeness in some measure of the ways of Men in one Age, to those in another) by the times present, and nearer to us, it is to be wished, (I fear rather than it will be found) that all, or most Fathers and Go∣vernors of Families were such as Abraham, * 1.5 and Joshua. Religion is too little minded in too many Fami∣lies: The use of a Catechisme is too rare; and That, when us'd, is often little understood, and less remembred. Commonly Parents teach their Chil∣dren the Lords Prayer, Creed, and Ten Commandments; and that is well. But these Rudiments are too slender a stock for Children to set up with, as qualified Conveyers of the Body of the Christian Faith. And if even these should pass down long by word of Mouth, and not be Written, they would be in danger of Maims or Corruptions.

But it may be thought, * 1.6 that Spi∣ritual Fathers instruct Young and Old both, and capacitate them better for being Oral Traditioners.

Yet, when the Priests were Fools, Stocks, and slothful Beasts; when they had neither Scientiam, nor Con∣scientiam; neither Knowledge, nor Conscience; (as it was com∣plain'd in Old time) it is not like∣ly, that then the Clergy were very careful to instruct the Laiety; or that the Laiety should learn much from such a Clergy.

When of far later years, some in Ire∣land, (a) 1.7 who would be accounted Members of the Roman Church, being demanded what they thought of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation; not only rejected it with indigna∣tion; but wondred also, that it should be imagin'd, any of their side should be so foolish, as to give Credit to such a senseless thing:

When throughout a County in England, (b) 1.8 the Vulgar Papists were

unable to render an account of their Faith, or to understand the Points of the Catechism, and utter'd their Creed in a Gibberish, ridiculous to others, and unintelligible by them∣selves: Then the Priests fail'd in teaching the People, or the People in teachableness.

But, perhaps it has been other∣wise since; and was then in those Countries, where the Publick and Authoriz'd Profession of the Roman Religion gave their Clergy more freedom of Access to, and of Con∣versation with, the Laiety. Yet, there's an Opinion of the Romanists, which will not much forward the diligent instructing of the Laiety in the Religion of Forefa∣thers, viz.

That (a) 1.9 it suffices the Vulgar to believe implicitely what the Church teaches: And that by virtue of such an implicite Faith, a Cardinal Bellar∣mine, and a Catholick Collier are of the same Belief.

This implicite Faith makes quick work, and super∣sedes a distinct knowledge of Divine

Truths; and then what much need is there of a careful Teaching them? They, who speak not so broadly, yet (a) 1.10 say, it is the common Opinion of Divines, that it is necessary to believe explicitely no more than the Apostles Creed (or the fourteen Articles, as they speak.) Nay, some hold too, that if this explicite Belief be only of the substance of the Articles con∣fusedly and generally, it is sufficient. But, by leave of these Authors, such an explicite Belief of the Apostles Creed only, (much less a confus'd, and general Belief) cannot be sufficient (howsoever sufficient it may be for other purposes) to qualifie the Laiety for that great Purpose, which, in these Papers, I am treating of.

But let the utmost be suppos'd, viz. That the Clergy now do, and former∣ly did, discharge their Pastoral Du∣ty, as amply and faithfully, as is requisite; yet the Peoples usual im∣mersion in secular business, and di∣stractions; their oscitancy in Religious matters, slowness of Understanding, frailty of Memory, in the things of

God, would hugely hazard their pro∣ficiency in so large and clear a know∣ledge, as might fit them to be Au∣thentick Trustees in the Delivery of the Christian Faith from Genera∣tion to Generation.

What I have writ in this Section, proceeds not in the least from an humour of reproaching any; not from any contempt of the Laiety; or, as if I expected they should be Divines. I pay Acknowledgment, and Honour to many of the Laiety for their sin∣gular Accomplishments in Religious Knowledge and Virtue: And it is out of question with me (as much as with any) that the rest of them may with their lesser measures of know∣ledge (for they have not generally advantages for higher Attainments; and the merciful God will not ex∣pect to Reap where he has not Sow'd) live good Christians, and be saved for ever. My only aim (and that in prosecution of my undertaking) has been to shew; how incompetent and very casual Traditioners the Laiety, (who are exceedingly the greater part of the Body of the Faithful) gene∣rally are of Divine Truths, in so

full and distinct a manner, as may be for their preservation and securi∣ty against the emerging encroach∣ments of the contrary Errors through all Ages. So that by far the grea∣test weight and strength of Oral Tra∣dition must lye upon the Clergy; whose proper business Religion is; whose Lips should preserve knowledge; and the People should seek the Law at their Mouth. Yet in that very place, where it is thus said of the Priests, it immediately follows: But ye [Priests] are gone out of the way, * 1.11 ye have caused many to stumble at the Law, &c. Their performance had not answered their Duty.

But (to say no more of that) how little Clergy and Laiety both are to be relyed on, as to an Oral indefectible Conveyance of Divine Truths shall be seen on a second account, in the next Section.

SECT II.

2ly. To an exact and constant stea∣diness of Tradition there is requisite an Integrity, a clearness of Spirit, an unencumbrance of Christians

through all Ages, with any thing which might sway them to a Belief or Profession, contrary to that of the first Age.

Now, if we look abroad into the World, we shall see, that com∣monly Men take up this or that Profession, side with this or that Party in Religion, more upon the score of Education, Example, or Interest, upon some extrinsick Mo∣tive; or upon some short and confuse Apprehensions; than upon an ex∣plicite knowledge, or at the least a truly solid Conviction of those Te∣nents, by which those Parties are distinguished. But to proceed more particularly.

Among others, there are four things, which have an usual and power∣ful Operation upon Mens Belief and Profession, to the changing or smo∣thering their Persuasions, and the corruption of their Practice.

1. A wantonness of Reason is very incident to Mankind. Man loves Variety; and conversing here below with little but what is mutable, in an unhappy kind of imitation learns

to affect change; and is apt to be cloy'd with old Truths, as with a wontedness to all things else. The hankering after some New things was not peculiar to the Athenians, and Strangers among them, but is an itch natural to all. And to cherish this affection for Novelty, there have not wanted Broachers of new Opi∣nions in most Ages of the Church.

2ly. There's an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ordinary enough; a bending the stick too much the o∣ther way, on pre∣tence to make it streight; a Re∣coile from one Ex∣tremity to ano∣ther: Out of keen∣ness in contending for a Truth, a Zeal for it, it has not been unusual to over∣do, and to retreat from an Error too far on the contra∣ty side. Both (a) 1.12 E∣rasmus,

and (b) 1.13 Sixtus Senensis, have given us Instances of this in several of the Antients; as may be seen in the Mar∣gent.

3. It has not been uncommon 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to have Mens Persons in admiration, (and that not alone for Advantage, but) for their Learning, and Piety; so high∣ly to revere them, as before Chri∣stians were aware, to become over∣credulous, and to follow their Con∣duct. Some Hereticks have been of sufficient Learning, and appearing Sanctity; and have been adhered to in the Church by no small num∣ber of Proselytes. The Reputation for Virtue, which once Pelagius had with

St. Chrysostom, and St. Augustine; his several Works; who were his Followers; what noise his Opinions made in the Christian World; and how the Relicks of them were con∣tinued among the Massilians or Se∣mipelagians, may be seen at large in (a) 1.14 Vossius.

4ly. What a strong influence have Hopes and Fears upon Men! Hopes of Ease, Profit, Preferment by their pleasing Insinuations gain great com∣mand over the Soul, and are apt to bribe the Judgment. Fear of Evil, of Confiscations, Imprisonments, Gibbets, and Stakes (tho' they are no proper Topiques to convince the Reason, yet) work hugely upon the Passions: And Men are often fright∣ed from those Opinions, out of which they could not have been fair∣ly and quietly disputed.

It is the Observation of a Learn∣ed and Honourable (b) 1.15 Person, That in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign, of many thousand Livings which are in England, the Incumbents of not an hundred chose rather to lose their Benefices for Popish Opinions, than to

keep them by subscribing to the Tenents of the Reformed Church of England: All who (for the greater part) must be suppos'd for private Interest to have dissembled their Religion, either then, or immediately before.

But if we look higher, there is what is much more remarkable: It is Famous, there was a time when the (a) 1.16 World turn'd Arrian, the Orthodox Profession being under Perse∣cution.

After what has been said, among such hazards, such incident Biassings of the Affections and Judgment, how unsafe must an O∣ral Tradition be; i. e. the trusting of the great Concerns of Religion with Man's good Nature, his Constancy, and Faithfulness to Divine Truths, through Ages!

But it may be, it will be replyed to the mention of the Doctrines of Arrius and Pelagius; and the bustle

they made in the Christian world; that yet the Catholick Doctrines did recover, and pass to after-Ages. And we are told, that (a) 1.17 erroneous Opinions, and absurd Practices (tho' they may creep into the Church, and spread there awhile, yet) can never gain any solid Footing in the Church: Forasmuch as the Church is a Body of Men relying on Tradition, or the Authority of Attesting Forefathers, not on the Authority of Opinators, &c.

In return to this, 'Tis confess'd, that the Doctrines assaulted by Ar∣rius and Pelagius were rescued, and preserved. But,

1. In, and about that time, there was such a Constellation of Pious and Learned Lights of the Church, as could scarce be parallell'd in the Ages before, or afterwards. This might be an especial Cause, that those Truths out-liv'd their Oppo∣sition. It may be questioned, whe∣ther if the Errors of Arrius, or Pe∣lagius, had been started, and as vi∣gorously manag'd, in the Ignorant, and Corrupt Ages, which follow'd afterwards, they might not have

found as easy an Entertainment, and have as generally prevailed, as some other Errors did.

2ly. But how will it be prov'd, that it was by the strength of O∣ral Tradition, that these Truths were recovered, and continued? To speak only of the Divinity of Christ impugn'd by Arrius: (besides what has been said in the foregoing part) 1. There was manifestly a Civil Cause interposing for the Restaura∣tion of a publick and free Profession of it. For as the Frown of the Prince, Constantius, and his Party arm'd with force, suppress'd the Or∣thodox Opinion: So the contrary in∣clination, and favour of succeeding Princes, countenance from the secu∣••ular Power, restor'd it. So that this Resurrection of that Truth was not from Orel Traditions strength, an im∣possibility of its sailure; but was owed to Causes extrinsick; and which might, or might not have been. For there was no necessity, that the Emperers should be Orthodox, or Fa∣vourers of the Orthodox Opinion; and if they had continued still Ar∣rian, and Persecutors of the Ortho∣dox;

and so there had been still the same Fears; it is as likely, that Arrianisme would still have been the general Profession, as it is, That the same Cause still existing, and work∣ing after the same manner, would pro∣duce the same Effect. 2ly. If we look after the Religious Cause, why may we not ascribe the Revival of the Truth to Holy Scriptures? For the Fathers had recourse to Them, du∣ring it's Depression, and after it.

(a) 1.18 St. Hilary, Truth's great Champion against the Arrians, is frequent in Citation of Scripture for it. And in his Ad∣dress to Constantius: He entreats that Constantius would vouchsafe (the Synod being present, which debated about the Faith) to hear him in a few words from the Evangelical Scriptures. And soon afterwards:—Thou requirest my Faith, O Em∣peror; hear it, not from new Papers, but from the Books of God. Where He opposes New Papers, or Writings,

not to Antient Oral Tradition, but to the Divine Books. There is some∣thing more to the like Sense in the Margent.

After him (a) 1.19 St. Au∣gustine tells the Arrian Maximinus: He would not object to him the Synod of Nice, nor should he urge to him that of Ariminum; but he would have the dispute to be manag'd by Authority of Scriptures.

That, which was thus us'd in Proof and Defence of this Article of Faith both under Persecution, and after it, why may not That deserve to have the honour of it's Preservation, and Restitution, viz. the Holy Scripture? Especially when as Holy Scriptures, being an unvaried and permanent Standard in all alterations of the Church's State, have an ap∣titude for such a Purpose; whereas Oral Tradition has no probable E∣nergy for it.

For they of that Age, when Ar∣rianism was generally regnant, either

really changed their Judgment about the Consubstantiality of the Son with the Father; and then (accord∣ing to our Adversaries Principle) they would teach their Children, as they judg'd, and believ'd themselves, and so the Arrian Opinion would have continued: Or they smother'd, and dissembled their Opinion out of fear, and profess'd contrarily to their Judgment. And in this Hypocrisie either their Children discover'd them, or not. If not, then much the same Effect would follow. If they did know it, then they would scru∣ple to believe them even in other Truths as Witnesses (and Traditio∣ners are no more than such.) For Hypocrisie weakens the Credit of a Witness, and gets him this disad∣vantage, that he will be the more hardly believ'd, even when he speaks truth. And in this particular Truth, Children would have been put at the least to the stand. For tho' the Posterity might satisfie them∣selves, that the Age before the last generally embrac'd the Tenent contra∣ry to the Arrian; yet they might

be tempted to doubt, whether (as their immediate Fathers made shew of be∣lieving the Opinion they secretly condemn'd; so) in remoter Ages Forefathers might not publickly pro∣fess the Divinity of Christ, rather out of compliance with the humour of the Times they liv'd in, than from their Hearts; and so the Te∣nent might have stoln down through following Ages, the manner of it's old reception, and Hypocritical Pro∣fession being lost: For why might not Dissimulation be incident to one, to a former Age, as well as to ano∣ther, a latter? And all this would be much more true, when an Error should possess the Church longer than the Arrian did.

Having now examin'd by Reason's Test the two necessary Qualificati∣ons of the Testifiers, and Guar∣dians of Christian Faith through Centuries of Years; and having prov'd, that the Dove can find no rest for the sole of her foot; that they are too fluid and sinking for Divine Truth to fix on, to conside in for safety in her passage through

the many hazards of Time: I go on to Experience; and to consider what the actual performance of Oral Tradition has been, how faithfully it has acquitted it self.

CHAP. IV. Experience against Oral Tradi∣tions, being a safe and certain Conveyance of Divine Truths.

SECT. I.

IF Oral Tradition be a certain and infallible Conveyance of Divine Truths, which is the ground of it's pretended Supreme Authority in Re∣ligion; then there has been an Ʋ∣niformity, a constancy of the same Belief of the Church, from the first through following Ages.

The Divine Scriptures indeed may retain their Integrity and Authority, though They, who own them as the only certain Conveyance and Rule of Faith, swerve from Them, and vary from one another, because they do not attend to, or misunderstand them (as, tho' some things in St. Paul's E∣pistles, * 1.20 and other Scriptures were wrested by the unlearned and unstable

to their own destruction; who also differ'd from those who truly un∣derstood them; yet notwithstand∣ing those passages in St. Paul, and those other Scriptures, remain'd still Canonical.) But Oral Tradition does so intimately and necessarily include in it a successive Harmony of Fore∣fathers and Posterities Belief (it be∣ing a continued Testification of the one to the other,) that if this Co-herence fails; if after Ages Be∣lief contrariate that of the Primi∣tive Age; if one Church's Belief opposes that of another contempora∣neous with it, or perhaps agrees not well with it self at the same time, or else with what it was in times precedent; then the Conveyance breaks; and so Oral Tradition forfeits its claim to Infallibility, and consequent∣ly its arrogated Authority.

Let us then observe, what the harmony and agreement of the Church's Belief has been through the several Ages of the World, from the first Delivery of the Truths believed.

SECT. II.

When God made Man, he en∣dow'd him with such a rectitude of Nature, as might enable him to glorifie his great Maker, and to attain to his own Happiness. And when Man had by eating of a for∣bidden Fruit, contracted a general Ataxie of Soul, and particularly a great dimness of Understanding; God was pleased to relieve him, and to repair the decays of his Know∣ledge of what concern'd him for Spiritual and Eternal purposes: Especially, doubtless God instruct∣ed him (so far as he wanted super∣natural Information) about his Na∣ture and Unity, and how he would be Worshipped. And questionless, the first Father of Mankind, and the succeeding Patriarchs, did di∣ligently teach their Children, what they themselves had received from God. And their exceeding long Lives gave them a peculiar oppor∣tunity to Catechise their Posterities through several Generations; and

to recover them upon any revolt from primitive belief, or practice; and the extraordinary length of their lives was also equivalent to a greater num∣ber of Traditioners. Adam, after the birth of Seth, liv'd 800 years, with his Children, and Childrens Children, and above 200 of those 800 years with Methusalah, whose death was but a very little before the period of the old World. Methusalah was Noahs Con∣temporary, very near 600 years. Noah (that Preacher of Righteousness) surviv'd with his descendents 350 Years after the Flood. And before their dispersion, and Plantation in re∣mote places, They (especially the Heads of the Colonies) had been edu∣cated, and influenced by Noah, that just Man; and whom Gods familiarity with him, and special care over him, ought to have rendered most venerable, and Them very dutifully sequacious of Him.

So likewise the two first Traditio∣ners, were incomparably conside∣rable; Adam and Eve, were the greatest Miracles that ever were. They could assure the World, that they had a Being, when as yet there was none of their own Kind, be∣sides

them: That they had near converse with the God that made them, (the Man of the Dust, the Woman of a Rib of the Man.) They could truly relate to their Children many strange things of the World, its State before, and presently upon Sin. And 'tis likely there was such an Impress of Majesty upon the First Father of Mankind, and a Prophet (as Josephus calls him) as might, and doubtless did, much awe his Chil∣dren into an obsequious Regard to what he told them. Then too in the days of Noah, the drowning of the World in stupendious Waters, and the Confusion of Tongues at the buil∣ding of Babel were so rare and astoni∣shing Wonders, * 1.21 as the world never since saw, and the memory of them so continued, and spread though the fol∣lowing Ages, that the Flood, and the (a) Ark were mentioned by all Barbarian Historians; and that (b) confusion at Babel was spoke of by

a certain Sibyl, and by (c) 1.22 Abydenus.

One would think, that here was Defence enough, of Tradition from miscarriage; yet notwithstanding all this, as the general Practice of Man∣kind was so vile, All Flesh had so corrupted his way upon Earth, (which is all the account, that Scripture egives) that God was provok'd to wash the Earth clean in a Deluge, so not long after the Flood, there was a great defection (in Practice, and Opinion also) from what had been deliver'd from Pious Fathers, concerning God, and the true Worship of Him; those Fathers, who were very qualified Testi∣fiers; and who reported to their Children, such Divine Wonders; as both might answer, for the want of a greater Number of lesser Miracles, and likewise make the Children to dread to reject what was delivered from God by Them. Yet for all this, (I say) corrupt Notions of God, and of his Worship crept in; Polytheism, and Idolatry, entred the World. E∣ven (d) 1.23 Terah (who lived with Noah

127 years) and other Fathers of the Holy Abraham, served other Gods. And how widely, Polytheism, Idola∣try, and Superstition afterwards spread in the World, and what a long possession they kept of it, is notorious.

Thus the world apostatiz'd and past a Recovery by Oral Tradition, which rather confirm'd it in it's Apostacy, for thus Symmachus pleads for Hea∣thenisme: (e) 1.24 Every People have their custome, each their Rites. Now if long time can give authority to Religions, belief is to be given to so many a∣ges, and we ought to follow our Fathers, who have happily follow'd Theirs.

Unto which the Christian Poet Prudentius replyes, to this Sense.

If there be such a studiousness and care of Antique Custome, and it pleases not to depart from old Rites: There is extant in antient Books, (He means the Scriptures) a Noble Instance; that e∣ven

in the time of the Deluge, or be∣fore, the Family or People, who first inhabited the new Earth, and dwelt in the empty World, serv'd but one God, whence our continued Race derives its pedigree, and reforms the Laws of the Piety of the Native Country.

—Si tantum sludium est, & cura vetusti Moris, & a prisco placet haud descedere ritu; Extat in antiquis exemplum Nobile libris, Jam tunc diluvii sub temporae, vel priùs, Ʋni Ins••rvisse Deo gentem, quae prima recentes Incoluit terras, vacuo{que} habitavit in Orbe. Ʋnde genus ducit nostrae porrecta propago Stirpis, & indigenae pietatis jura reformatis. Aurel: Prudentius contra Symmachum. Lib. 2.

SECT. III.

The State of Religion being so craz'd, the world being so corrupt in Opinion and Practice, God vouchsa∣fed to reveal Himself to Abraham, and the other Patriarchs, and at the last singled out the posterity of Abraham for his peculiar People, * 1.25 and established a Testimony in Jacob, appoin∣ted a Law in Israel, which he com∣manded the Fathers: that they should

make them known to their Children. That the Generation to come might know them, even the Children which should be born, who should arise and declare them to their Children; that they might set &c. Among these Laws, God commanded the owning, and Worship of himself, exclusively, of all pretended Deities whatsoever. He prescribed, in the greatest accu∣racy, the Substance, and very puncti∣lio's of his worship. And to fence these sacred Injunctions, the better to preserve them from violation, at the first delivery of them, God strook an holy dread into the People by Thundrings and Lightnings, and a thick Cloud, so that all in the Camp trembled: * 1.26 nay, so terrible was the sight, that Moses himself said, I ex∣ceedingly fear and quake. * 1.27 And to make all the more sure, there was super∣added an explicite and formal Co∣venant between God and the people, solemniz'd with the sprinkling of Blood, part of it on the Altar, * 1.28 and part on the People; and all the People answered with one Voice, and said; All the words, which the Lord hath said, will we doe.

What a large and exact Provision was here made for the safe descending of what God had committed to the People unto all Generations, and for the making them trusty Traditioners! yet how strangely were they ever and anon declining from the puri∣ty of what had been delivered to them; Fathers and Children propha∣ning the Divine Worship, and dis∣honouring God, by the mixtures of Heathenish Rites, and Idolatrous A∣bominations.

In the Chain of Tradition the first Link broke. That very People, who had so lately trembled at Mount Sinai, yet, tho' still so near that Mount, danced before a Golden Calf: saying, These be thy Gods, * 1.29 O Israel which brought thee out of the Land of Egypt. If this fall out so early, how much more likely was it, that the convey∣ance of Religion in its purity to af∣ter Ages should fail! And the event was answerable. The Books of Judges, Kings, and Chronicles, and of seve∣ral of the Prophets, so abound in examples of almost perpetual, and gene∣ral defections from the Ancient Faith,

and Practice, that many quotations are needless, two will be enough. 1. In the Reign of Ahab, Elijah mourn'd to God, that he only was left of the true Worshippers in Israel (at the least of the true Pro∣phets,) * 1.30 and that even his life was in danger. And tho' the All-seeing God comforted him by the account of seven thousand, who had not bow'd the knee to Baal: Yet (as it seems, this was to Elijah an invisible Church; so) what were these seven thousand to the multitudes of the rest of Is∣rael? 2ly. In Judah, so great and criminous was the Falling off from what God had antiently ordain'd, that good Josiah rent his Clothes, when he heard the words of the Books of the Law read; * 1.31 and com∣par'd former and present Practice with what was there commanded.

Such were the Apostasies of the Jewish Church from Primitive Do∣ctrine, and instituted Worship, and for a long time, and without any relief, and restitution from Oral Tradition (the intervening Reforma∣tion in Josiah's Reign was ow'd to

the Holy Scriptures:) * 1.32 Till God re∣veng'd those miscarriages sharply, but very righteously, first upon the ten Tribes, and afterwards upon the remaining two.

The two Tribes after seventy years Correction return'd home, re-built their City and Temple. But in time they split into several Sects, which were so many dege∣neracies from the first Purity of their Religion. Our Blessed Lord reprov'd them for their corrupt Tra∣ditions, as being a vain Worship, * 1.33 and Evacuations of the Commandments of God.

The Jews have amongst them an Oral Tradition, expository of the Law Writ∣ten, and given (as is said by them) by God to Moses, intrusted by Mo∣ses with Joshua, and the seventy Elders; and by them transmitted down from one Generation to another. This that People have in (a) 1.34 very high estimation, prefer∣ring it to the very

Scriptures, and honouring it with room in their Creed; of which one Article is: (a) 1.35

I be∣lieve that the Law, which was given by Moses, was wholly di∣ctated by God, and that Moses put not in one Sylla∣ble of himself: And so likewise that that which we have by Tra∣dition, by way of Explication of the Precepts of the other, hath all of it proceeded from the Mouth of God, delivering it to Moses.

Yet Learned Men judge this fardle of Traditions to be a very (b) 1.36 Figment; and that in some Age or other, Ancestors have impos'd on the Cre∣dulity of their Posterity; that Tra∣dition has recommended to them, That, as deriving from God which never had so sacred and infallible an Author.

After the foregoing Observati∣on of the Church; and how little agreeingly with it's first Model Tradition preserv'd it for two me mo∣rable and large Periods of Time, I proceed to the Christian Church.

SECT. IV.

Being come to the Christian Church, let us first take some ac∣count of the more early Ages of it.

As soon as the good Seed was sown, the Enemy came, and sow'd Tares among the Wheat. Tradition was not so viligant, but that many corrupt Doctrines and Practices quick∣ly arose, and spread in the Church. Else St. August. might have spar'd his Book of Heresies, or the Cata∣logue would have been shorter.

But I shall insist on two or three Opinions only, which have been antiently countenanced by great Names; and have been of consi∣derable continuance in the Church, and are now generally rejected, by the Church of Rome, as well as by o∣thers.

1. That after the Resurrection, Jerusalem should be new built, adorn'd, and enlarg'd; and that Believers in Christ should Reign with him there a thousand years; was very early believed. Papias (the

Scholar of St. John) Irenaeus, Apol∣linarius, Tertullian, Victorinus, La∣ctantius, Severus, and a great multi∣tude of Catholick Persons were of this Judgment. St. Hierome, tho' he did not hold, yet neither would he condemn this Opinion, because many Ecclesiastical Persons and Mar∣tyrs had own'd it. And St. Au∣gustine thought the Tenent tolera∣ble, if abstracted from any carnality of Pleasures; and confesses, that he himself once held it. We have all this in (a) 1.37 Sixtus Senensis.

But (b) 1.38 Justine Mar∣tyr, Elder than either St. Hierome, or St. Augustine, speaks of the Millenarian Do∣ctrine, as that which was embrac'd by all thorough Orthodox Christians of his time: which affirmation (whatsoe∣ver is oppos'd out of him elsewhere to the diminution of it) must mean, that at the least a very great number of Christians were thus Opinion'd.

And though the Judgment of more sober Christians was more clean and inoffensive concerning the Mil∣lenarian Reign, yet the apprehensions of many were more gross and sensual; as were those of the Cerinthians, as (a) 1.39 St. Augustine tell us, and that they were call'd Chiliasts.

According to (b) 1.40 Maldonate; St. Augustine's, and Innocent's the first Opinion of the necessity of the Eucharist to Infants, prevail'd in the Church about six hundred years.

This practice of Communicating of Infants is acknow∣ledged by (c) 1.41 the Council of Trent. But they deny, that the Practisers of it had any Opinion of its necessity; but us'd it upon some pro∣bable Motive only. And so they (d) 1.42 A∣nathematize them on∣ly;

who shall affirm, that the Eu∣charist is necessary to Children, be∣fore they come to years of discre∣tion. Thus the Trent-Fathers.

But if Tradition Antient and even Apostolical, and also Holy Scriptures, can make a Practice necessary, then (particularly) St. Augustine judg'd the Communicating of Infants to be necessary: For he (a) 1.43 discours'd for it, both from Tradition and Scriptures. For when he had assert∣ed upon the strength of both those To∣piques; that with∣out Baptism, and partaking of the Lord's Table none can be saved; he concludes, that therefore without these, Salvation is in vain promis'd to Children. Without these: i. e. Baptism, and the Eucharist also. So that, tho'

the Sanctissimi Patres have good words given them, yet the holy Augustine, and the rest who were of his mind, must fall under the Trent-Anathema. And, considering the clearness of the passage in St. Augustine; it is strange it should be said:

[There is an Objection,—That S. Au∣stine and Innocentius with their Councils, held that the Communion of Children was necessary for Salvati∣on; and their words seem to be apparent. But who looks into o∣ther passages of the same Authors will find, that their words are Metaphorical; and that their mean∣ing is, that the Effects of Sacra∣mental Communion, to wit, an In∣corporation into Christ's Body, which is done by Baptism, is of ne∣cessity for Childrens Salvation.

Rushworth Dial. 3d. Sect. 13.] What passages they are, which do thus interpret those Authors meaning, we are not told. But,

1. It is strange, that if St. Aug. and Innoc. intended Baptism only, and by that an Incorporation into Christ's Mystical Body, to be neces∣sary

to Children for their Salvation. They should at all mention the Communion of Christ's Body and Blood, and the partaking of the Lord's Table, to be necessary to Chil∣dren for that purpose, what needed such a disert and repeated conjunction of Baptism, and of the Eucharist, in expressing that necessity, if there was no necessity of the Communion, but of Baptism only? What reason for it, except they should be thought to have a mind to darken their Sense with Words. Nay, if they meant one of the Sacraments only to be necessary to Childrens Salvation; tho' they explicitly mention both; why may it not be said, that they intended the Communion only, and not Baptism to be necessary for that end; seeing they are in words as express for the Communion, as for Baptism?

2ly. As for St. Augustine, his word (in the Margent) will not without extremity of injury admit of such a Construction, as the Author a∣bove-named would (in his com∣menting way) obtrude upon them.

For certainly when he says; That [without Babtism, and partaking of the Lord's Table, and of the Body and Blood of the Lord, no man can be saved] he meant properly, and without a figure, why therefore, when he adds in way of Inference, [si ergo] if therefore both these Sacraments, Baptism and the Body and Blood of the Lord, be ne∣cessary to Salvation, in vain without these is Salvation promised to Children, sure he means not metaphorically but properly likewise. Else his discourse would not be homogeneous, the Inference would not be suitable to the Premisses.

From what has been said it is plain, that St. Augustine's words are to be understood in the most obvious sense, and unstrain'd by a Trope. And I am perswaded, St. Augustine does not con∣tradict Himself, disagree in other places, from what he clearly means in this, and several others.

I shall add; that the necessity of Communica∣ting of Infants, conti∣nued to be maintained in the Greek Church in the days of (a) 1.44 Li∣ranus; and much la∣ter,

in the time of, (b) 1.45 Azorius; and 'tis in use with the (c) 1.46 Armenian Church to this Age. And of this usage among the Christians in Habas∣sia, in Egypt, and some others, (d) 1.47 Brerewood may be seen.

3ly. That the Souls of the Saints departed enjoy not the beatifique Vi∣sion of God till after the Re∣surrection, was a belief of the Church, for some ages, (e) 1.48 Sixtus Senensts gives us a long Catalogue of Persons of Note, who enclin'd this way; as James the Apostle, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Clemens Romanus, Origen, Lactantius, Victorinus, Pru∣dentius, St. Ambrose, St. Chrysostome, St. Augustin, Theodoret, Arethas, Oe∣cumenius, Theophylact, Euthymius, Ber∣nard, and Pope John the 22d. Of all these he says, that They seem'd to give Authority to the Opinion by their Testimony: Tho afterwards he en∣deavours to interpret some of them to a commodious sense, and excuses

Others of them by this; that the Church had not then determined any thing certainly in this Article, (f) 1.49 Authors have obser∣ved the stream of Anti∣quity to have run much this way, and that (if it be not now,) it was believed, (g) 1.50 and de∣fended by the whole Greek Church, till of later years.

But the contrary to this was de∣fined by a (h) 1.51 Council, call'd first at Ferrara, but afterwards remo∣ved to Florence, not yet 250 years ago. And (i) 1.52 Bellarmine calls the Denying to Souls, who need no purifying by a Purgatory Fire, the clear sight of God immediately upon their departure, an Opinion of An∣cient, and Modern Heretiques, and he names, (with much reverence to the Fathers) Tertullian, as Pri∣mum ex Haereticis, the first of the Heretiques, who maintain'd it, That,

which made the Cardinal so fierce, it may be, was, because he conceiv'd the (k) 1.53 Beatifical vision of God by the Saints departed before the day of Judgment, to be a Foundation of the present Worship, and Invocation of them. But howsoever, he was more civil to John 22d. because a Pope, whom he brings off thus. (l) 1.54 John (he says) was really, and might be of this Opini∣on, without danger of Heresie; because there had been no determi∣nation as yet by the Church concerning it. This necessarily im∣plies, that if the point had been determined before John's time, his Tenent would have been Heretical, therefore an Error in Faith, and that it must so fare with those, whosoever have denyed, or shall deny it, since the Definition of it,

and so a Tenent may be in one Age an Article of Faith, which was not so in a former Age.

But I cannot conceive how this should be, how an Opinion should be coin'd an Article of Faith in the Mint of Oral Tradition, which yet is affirm'd to be the sole Rule of Faith, (and which is the thing I have undertaken to disprove.) For) 1. Neither can an Opinion advance into an Article of Faith, ex parte sui, in its own Nature, which was not so before, by virtue of Oral Tradition, because that is but a Witness; does not enact Articles anew, but only conveys down to us, such as were stampt Articles of Faith by Divine Autho∣rity, and deliver'd to the first Churches Custody. Nor, 2ly. Can an Opinion improve into an Article of Faith ex parte nostri, come to be known to us as such, if it were not known to be such in times past: Because every later Age depends for Intelligence on the Age foregoing, and can know no more, than what that Age informs of; and the foregoing Age could not teach the following one more than

it self knew. So that the Opinion of Pope John must have always been the same; as much an Heresie (if at all an Heresie) before the Church's Determination, as after it; or, as little an Heresie after the Church's Determination, as it was before. And here by the way, * 1.55 it may be observ'd, that tho' it is boasted, that the chief Pastor of the See of Rome has a particular Title to Infallibility built on Oral Tradition, above any See, or Pastor whatsoever: Yet the chief Pa∣stor John did err in a material and consequential point of Faith; a very Learned Adversary being Judge. And this is but one Instance among ma∣ny.

To draw toward an end of this Section. By a view of the two or three Opinions, which had once no small countenance from the antient Church, yet have been since turn'd out of favour, and two of them been vtigmatiz••d, we may perceive, that O∣ral Tradition has not been so even and regular in its Conveyance, as is asserted.

And if the Antient Church, so much nearer to the Apostles days, (nearer by so many hundreds of years, than we are now; or our Fathers were, at the first secession from the Roman Communion) did mistake, (as is yielded by the Ro∣manists) and Oral Tradition did de∣cline so soon; how much more pro∣bable is it, that it should grow yet more feeble, and corrupt at such a far greater distance of time! As Waters which arise clear, and of qualities agreeing with their Foun∣tain, the farther they run, do the more contract a new relish, and gather a foulness from the Chanels through which they travel.

SECT. V.

I proceed to the Christian Churches since the more Primitive times; and as they are commonly divided into the Eastern and We∣stern Churches; so I shall begin with the Eastern, and there speak of the Greek Church only. In which I suppose, none will question, but

that Christian Religion was planted in a very ample and punctual man∣ner; such, as might have secur'd a perpetuity of Primitive Truths a∣mong the Professors of them, as well as among any other Body of Chri∣stians.

This Church administers the Eu∣charist to the Laiety in both kinds; allows Married Priests, denys Pur∣gatory-fire, (to add no more.) In these things the Roman Church dif∣fers from them: One of them there∣fore must err, and have receded from what was delivered at the first to them. We believe the Roman Church to be guilty of the Recess, and they to be sure will deny it. But yet, which soever it be of the Churches, which is in the wrong (and one of them must be so) Oral Tradition is guilty of Mal-performance of its Duty.

But moreover, this Church holds, that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father, and not from the Son: Which is a Tenent condemned by Protestants, and Romanists both. And the Grecians misbelief in this

Article was judg'd by Card. Bel∣larmine so criminous, that he count∣ed

it meritorious of the sacking of Constantinople; which hapned ac∣cordingly (in his calculation) at the Feast of Pentecost, * 1.56 as a Judgment of God upon them for this error about the Procession of his Holy Spirit. And he adds, That many compare the Greek Church to the Kingdom of Samaria, which se∣parated from the true Temple, and for that was punish'd with perpetual Captivity.

How far charitable in his Censure, and right in his (a) 1.57 Chronology the Cardinal was, let others judge. But this is clear, that they of that Com∣munion (as they are very numerous, so) do generally consent in this O∣pinion; that there has been an en∣tail of it upon Posterity through hundreds of years; and that though their Reduction has been more than once attempted, yet endeavours have prov'd succesless: the wound may have been skin'd over, but it has not been heal'd. (b) 1.58 Though at the Councils of Lyons and Florence, it is

said, there was something of a Closure; yet as soon as the Greeks return'd home, there was presently a Rupture again; and the Churches remain'd at as great a distance as before. And they retain their old Error (a) 1.59 to this day, and are ob∣served to defend it with a particular dexterity.

The same Greek Church denies the Pope's Supremacy, that (b) 1.60 Dia∣na of the Romanists. They may have yielded the Bishop of Rome a (c) 1.61 Primacy of Order, and yet that too, not as enstated on him by Di∣vine Right, but indulg'd him by the favour of Princes, and Ecclesiasti∣cal Canon. But they would never grant him a Superiority of Power and Authority: They will not (d) 1.62 yet allow it him.

These Opinions of the Greek Church cannot in the Judgment of the Romanists (who hold contrarily to both, and are so especially con∣cern'd in the latter) descend from Christ and his Apostles: Therefore they must confess, that Tradition has miscarried. And Traditions mis∣carrying

among so great, and for∣merly renowned (tho' now afflicted) a Society of Christians, for so very long a time, and in Points of such moment, must needs decry it much below that value, to which its friends have enhans'd it.

SECT. VI.

Next shall succeed a considera∣tion of the Western Church. And what Church in the West would be more taken notice of, than the Ro∣man? VVhere we are to find the most accurate Tradition, or to de∣spair of meeting with it any where. They of that Communion having dress'd up, and strengthned the Cause of Oral Tradition with the greatest advantages, which their wit and learning can give it; and claiming it as their (a) 1.63 Priviledge, to be the most infallible Traditioners of a∣ny Church whatsoever.

Two things here may be consi∣dered: 1. VVhat the Accord is of the Roman with the Antient Church. 2ly. VVhat her Harmony is with her∣self:

How well Oral Tradition has preserv'd her in both these respects.

First how little the Church of Rome comports, in her Opinions and Practices, with the most antient and purest Churches, has been de∣monstrated by many Learned Pro∣testants. I shall insist but on one thing, viz. The denyal of the Cup to the Laiety in the Eucharist by the Roman Church.

The Learned Cassander thought it could not be prov'd; that (a) 1.64

For above a 1000 years the Sacra∣ment of the Eucha∣rist was otherwise ad∣ministred to the faith∣ful People, than un∣der the Elements of Bread and Wine both.

Several of our Ad∣versaries give their suf∣frages with Cassander: And the Greek Church administers to the Laie∣ty in both kinds, to the present Age. But let us come to that which will, with our Adversaries, be of more Authority.

The Council of (a) 1.65 Trent confesses, That from the be∣ginning of Christian Religion, the use of both Bread and Wine was not uncommon. Yet [licèt] although such had been the Primitive, and not uncommon usage; the Council approv'd of Communicating un∣der one kind, and decreed it to be ob∣served as a Law. And this the Council did by virtue of a (pre∣tended) Power of the Church to appoint, and to alter, in the administrations of the Sacraments, as should be judg'd ex∣pedient, for the Communicants pro∣fit, and the Veneration of the Sacra∣ments, according to the variety of Circum∣stances.

Before this the Council of (b) 1.66 Con∣stance

had acknow∣ledg'd, That Christ after Supper, Insti∣tuted, and Admini∣stred the Venerable Sacrament to his Dis∣ciples under both kinds of Bread and Wine; and likewise, that in the Primitive Church this Sacrament was received by the faith∣ful under both kinds. Yet [licet] although this was so; and [hoc non obstante] notwithstanding this, the Council declar'd, decreed, and defin'd, that the Bread only should be received by the Laiety. And this Council thus defin'd, by virtue of certain Canons, and because of a Custom rationally introduc'd for the a∣voiding certain dangers, and scandals.

We have had a clear and express acknowledgment of the Institution, and Primitive use of the Eucharist in both kinds; of the generality, and very long continuance of the Practice. We have this granted by two Coun∣cils,

and by others who were of the Roman Communion. How came it to pass then, that a Primitive In∣stitution and Usage, and that so long perpetuated, should be laid aside, nay, decreed against by those very Councils; and that they, who should say, that the Communicating under one kind only were Sacrilegious and Ʋnlawful, should be dealt with as (a) 1.67 Hereticks? VVhy, we may observe two Reasons given in those Councils. 1. The Church's Authority. 2ly. Expedi∣ency. Both these shall be considered of.

1. Of the Authority of the Church in the Case. I confess that the Church has Authority in determining and al∣tering things indifferent, as Edification, Decency, and Order shall require.

But Governours of the Church must beware how they deal with That, which was so remarkably honoured with our great Lord's, and good Saviours solemn Institution, and first Administration of it in his own Sa∣cred Person; and that in Commemo∣ration of no less than of the break∣ing his holy Body, and of the shedding his pretious Blood, and for to shew the Lord's death till he come.

In this August Ordinance, Times Place, and Gesture are Circumstan∣ces; but surely Bread and Wine are Substantials. For to the substance, and integrity of a Sacra∣ment, do concurr the (d) 1.68 outward, sensible Signs, as well as the inward, retired things signified; and the Eu∣charist consists (as (e) 1.69 Irenaeus says) of some∣thing earthly, and of som∣thing heavenly. And 'tis the Trent Fathers cau∣tion, that (f) 1.70 the sub∣stance of the Sacraments be preserv'd safe.

Now I desire to know of our Ad∣versaries, whether they think that the Church has power to lay aside the Wine and Bread both? I believe they would answer negatively. Then with what reason, and by what Au∣thority, do they dismiss One of them, i. e. the Wine, and afford the whole Laiety but a dry Communion? Did the Soveraign Ordainer permit any such halving, and mutilation of his Sacrament? There is no such Per∣mission to be found in the first In∣stitution,

and Administration of it by Him; nor in the Doctrine, and Practice of his Apostles afterwards. How then should the Subjects (and Councils, and Popes too, are no bigger) dare to make any distinction, where the Supreme Lawgiver Him∣self has made none? Let things be scan'd, and it will be plain, that the Sacramental Bread and Wine, in the Administration of them to the Faithful, have the same bottom; and that there is no rea∣son, why if the One be alterable, the other may not be so likewise. For, 1. There is the same ex∣press command of Christ for the One, as for the Other, 'Tis said, (a) 1.71 Do this: in the administra∣tion of the Wine, as well as of the Bread. And that it may not be catch'd at, that it is said (b) 1.72 of the Body Simply, Do this; but of the Cup, Do this as oft as ye drink it: as if there

were a tacit intimation of a greater necessity of communicating of the Bread, than of the Cup; and that therefore it were sufficient, if the Bread be received, tho' the Wine be not: to preclude (I say) any such Evasion, St. Paul presently ap∣plys the same [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] to the Bread, as well as to the Cup: (c) 1.73 For as oft as ye eat this Bread, and drink this Cup, ye do shew, &c. 2ly. Both these were administred to the same Persons. 3ly. There is the same end expresly, and distinctly assign'd to both: Do this in remembrance of me. 4ly. There's as much spiritual benefit, and comfort, which redound to the Communicants by the participation of the One, as of the Other. The Wine appears to have the advan∣tage rather of the other sacred Ele∣ment. For the Substance, colour, and manner of the delivering the Wine separately from the Bread, have a peculiar Aptness to represent Blood, and Bloodshed; and consequently to impress the quicker apprehen∣sions, and spiritual sense of our blessed Jesus's bloody death upon,

and to excite the smarter affections in, the Communicants.

By what has been said, there is evident an Equal necessity of the use of both the Sacramental Elements, and therefore the Wine is as little mutable, and dispensable with, in the Eucharistical Administration, by the Churches and Canons Authority, as the Bread.

As for Expediency of withholding the Cup from the Laity, and the In∣expediency of the contrary: it is not safe, or consequential upon such grounds to discourse against what is divinely instituted and commanded. But let us attend to what is pleaded.

The Council of Constance procee∣ded in their Decree, upon a Custome rationally (as they say) introduced, for the avoiding dangers and scandals, or offences. But, 1. why they should in∣sist on, and commend a Custome as rational, which was in truth but an Innovation (because contrary to the first Institution of the Sacrament by Christ, and to the first and general use in the Churches of Christ, and therefore unreasonable,) I cannot

understand. Certainly, the Council had shew'd the Prudence and Gravi∣ty of Fathers, if they had condemn'd this Custome, as a Novel abuse, and had done that Right to the Sacra∣ment, as to have restor'd the Admi∣nistration to what it was at the Be∣ginning. But perhaps, 2ly. The Avoi∣dance of certain dangers, and Scan∣dals may be some excuse. Now, what those dangers and Scandals might be, I should not have thought, but that I find Card. Bellarmin (who (d) 1.74 confes∣seth, that Christ instituted the Eu∣charist under both kinds; and that the Ancient Church administred in both kinds, yet) alledging (e) 1.75 some In∣conveniences, which, he says, would follow upon a necessity of the use of both Species. As, 1. Because of the Numerousness of some Congrega∣tions, where yet there may be but one Priest. 2. Danger of Irreve∣rence in casual spilling the wine. 3ly. Some cannot drink wine. 4ly. Vines do not grow, nor is wine made, in some Countreys. This is the sum of the four Incommoda, Inconveniencies, in which I conceive there is not

much. For, 1. If the Congregation be any where so very large, and there be but one Priest, he may procure an Assistant at the Sacramental Sea∣sons, or the more days may be assigned for Communicating. There be many great Congregations among Protest∣ants, each of which have but One Incumbent, and yet they do not find the administration of the Bread and Cup both, to the People, to be un∣practicable. 2ly. To avoid spilling, the Priest may put the less wine into the Chalice, and tread the more care∣fully; this is an easi prevention of Irreverence. 3ly. The persons, who have an Antipathy to wine, are but few, and it is unreasonable, that a rare and extraordinary case should wholly suspend the force of a Law, and supersede a Practice, with res∣pect to All, and even Extra casum ex∣traordinarium, where there is no such extraordinary occasion. 4ly. 'Tis known, that wine is common, and sufficiently cheap in those places, where it is not made. Or if there be any odd Corner, where wine cannot be had, the third answer

may serve. So much for Expedien∣cy, and the avoiding dangers and scandals.

(a) 1.76 They of the Council add, That it is most firmly to be believed, and not at all to be doubted, that the whole Body of Christ, and his Blood, are truly contain'd, as well under the species of Bread, as under the species of Wine.

'Tis likely, that they meant this pre∣tended concomitancy, as an Argument for the no necessity of the Laieties having the Cup Administred to them, because (as they say) the whole Body and Blood of Christ is contain'd under the Bread alone. But (as they went upon a supposition, that there's a real Transubstantiation of the Bread and Wine into the very Body and Blood of Christ, which we deny, and can never be prov'd; so) They boldly reflect upon the Wisdom of Christ, who did Ordain and Administer Wine as well as Bread, and that to the same Per∣sons; and best knew, how he was present in the Sacrament, and would be to the end of the World; best

knew what was necessary, what su∣perfluous in his own Ordinance.

Certainly, Christ having declared his Pleasure, by what he said and did at his Institution and Admi∣nistration of the Eucharist, con∣cerning Communicating in both kinds, Christians (without puzling their heads about an imaginary Concomi∣tancy, or the like needless Subtleties) are to judge; that then they partake of whole Christ in a Sacramental way; i. e. enjoy Communion of his Body, and Communion of his Blood also; when∣as they drink of the Cup of Blessing, as well as eat of the Bread broken confor∣mably to our Lord's own Institution, and accordingly as his Apostle (a) 1.77 sorts them out, each re∣spectively to the other.

Nay, suppose this fancied Concomi∣tancy, yet it can't be a Salvo for the denial of the Cup to the Peo∣ple in the Eucharist. For there Christ is represented, and Christians par∣take of him, as (b) 1.78 dying; partake

of his Body, as (a) 1.79 broken, and of Blood (b) 1.80 as shed; i. e. separated from his Body; but what is separated from his Body is not Concomitant with it. Hence (c) 1.81 Thomas Aquinas says, That if this Sacrament had been Admini∣stred at the very time of Christ's Passi∣on and Death; then the Body of Christ Administred under the species of Bread would have been without the Blood; as also the Blood under the species of Wine, would have been without the Body. Why, and so it must be understood still. For things Arbitrarily Institu∣ted (as the Eucharist was) must be consider'd and us'd, answerably to the Will and Intent of the Ordainer. It having then been Christ's plea∣sure, that his Sacrament should ex∣hibit him, not as he was before, or after his Death; but as dying and par∣ting with his Blood, Christians accor∣dingly are to participate of his Bo∣dy and Blood, considered under such circumstances as then were, when he hung bleeding on the Cross; i. e. When his Body and Blood were di∣vided from each other, and there∣fore significantly of this Separation

(in point of congrui∣ty, as well as pre∣cept) Christians are to receive the Wine, as well as the Bread.

I shall annex but one thing more. It is (a) 1.82 said, (the more, I suppose, to al∣leviate the Church's denial of the Cup to the Laiety; when as yet the Author confesses, that among the Antients, they did more frequently and publickly give the holy Eucha∣rist in both kinds) that this is a Practice, but not a matter of Faith. But,

1. Antient Divine Practices, and Usages, (such as the Sacramental Administration) as well as Divine Doctrines, should be held sacred, and be kept inviolate by Christians.

2ly. Faith is truly concern'd in this Sacramental Practice. For in Religion, and even the Agendis of it, the things to be done, Faith and Practice are interwoven with each other; the former must guide the

latter: The understanding must be right in its Belief, before the Actions can be regular. Now, that Christ did ordain the Sacrament, and com∣mand the Administration of it in af∣ter Ages, in such a way as he him∣self had ordain'd and administred it, are Credenda, things to be believ∣ed, tho' the Execution of, or Obe∣dience to the Command be a Practi∣cal. So then the Church of Rome, denying the Cup to the People, and avowing it; disobeying a Divine Com∣mand, and maintaining that disobe∣dience, doth offend in a matter of Practice and Faith both. For they do not barely omit a Practice or Du∣ty, but also oppose and evacuate a Di∣vine Command, and the obligation from it, which are Objects of Faith. And that Faith has to do in this Af∣fair, was the Judgment of the Coun∣cil of Constance; whenas they de∣nounc'd, * 1.83 that an Assertion of the un∣lawfulness, or sacriledge in administring in one kind only, should be sufficient for a Man's Conviction of Heresie.

After all, which has been dis∣coursed in this Section, it must be

concluded, that the Church of Rome have in their Half-Communion, and peremptory defence of it, departed from primitive Institution, divine command, and the Church's ancient general Ʋ∣sage, that Posterity has deserted Fore-fathers, and therefore that Oral Tradition has not done its Duty.

SECT. VII.

Secondly, let us examine, what the Agreement is of the Romanists among themselves. And if we find them at difference, then Tradition has not been so faithful, as to bring Truth whole and sincere to them, for if Tra∣dition were full and uniform, it would keep them at Ʋnity with one another.

But even among them there may be observed Parties; who tho' in Complement they acknowledge one first Mover, yet have each their counter-motions; tho' that Church boast of their Harmony, yet they have their discords; only, they are not so loud perhaps, as those are, among

their Adversaries. Let account be taken of some of their Civil Wars.

The Contests, between the Jesuits and Dominicans concerning Grace, and Freewil; Predetermination, and Contingency; as also between the Molinists and Jansenists; are well known.

The (a) 1.84 Doctrine of Probable Opini∣ons, and many practical Doctrines of the Jesuites questionless please themselves, and likewise the (b) 1.85 polite Saints, and Courtier-like Puritans: Yet others mislike them, and believe they never descended from Jesus, nor from his Apostle, St. Peter.

The difference between the Cassan∣drians and the Church, in commu∣nion whereof they live, is so great, as that it seems to be, as it were, one State within another State, and one Church within another Church; (as (c) 1.86 one reports who had reason to know.)

Some will have the (a) 1.87 Pope to be above a Council; others, a Coun∣cil to be above the Pope. Some affirm, that the Pope (b) 1.88 cannot err; Others that he may. Some are for the Pope's

plenary Power, over the whole world, both in Ecclesiastical affairs, and also Political; but others allow him (c) 1.89 only a Spiritual Power directly, and immediately; yet in virtue of that spiritual Power, to have likewise a Power indirectly, and that the high∣est, even in Temporal matters. Of this latter Opinion Bellarmin himself was, yet it seems the French denied the Pope's power in Temporals, whether directly, or but indirectly; when as Bellarmin's (a) 1.90 Book against Barclay, (in which Bellarmin defends the Popes Power over Princes) was so de∣tested by that State, that in their publique Assembly, they did prohi∣bit and forbid any, and that un∣der the Pain of High Treason, ei∣ther to keep, or receive, or print, or sell that Book.

(b) 1.91 H. P. de Cressy calls Infalli∣bility, to him an unfortunate word; confesses, that Chillingworth has comba∣ted it with too too great success: will have it, that the Church of Rome maintains no more than an Autho∣rity; and says, he has reason, moving him to wish, that the Protestants may

never be invited to Combat the Autho∣rity of the Church under the notion of Infallibility. And to shew, that he is not alone in this; he makes very bold with the Council of Trent, * 1.92 and Pope Pius 4th, if they are not on his side; for he shelters his Opinion, under a Decision of the former, and a Bull of the latter, concerning the Oath of the Profession of Faith. And likewise Dr. Holden (in his (d) 1.93 Approbation of Cressy's Book, with∣out any Censure of this passage) says; (He found it consonant to the Catholique Faith.)

If this be so, as Cressy would sain have it to be, then the Romanists and we are not at so much distance, as we thought we had been: for of an Authority of the Church, there's no dispute between us and them. But sure, there's more in the case than so. For the Roman Catechisme set forth by decree of the Council of Trent, and by the Command of Pope Pius 5th. (e) 1.94 says,

that the Church cannot Err in delive∣ring

Faith, and Manners, foras∣much as it is govern'd by the holy Spirit: cannot Erre, i. e. is infallible.

And this Church thus inerrable is that of the Roman Com∣munion: for the same Catechism (f) 1.95 says a little before, that the Roman Pontife is the vi∣sible Head of Christ's Church. And the great Defender of the Ro∣mish Faith, Card. Bel∣larmin affirms,

that (a) 1.96 all Catholiques do con∣stantly teach, that General Councils, confirm'd by the Pope, cannot Err in Faith or Manners, in explicating the one, or in delivering Precepts about the o∣ther.

And in the same Chapter he adds;

that (b) 1.97 the whole Autho∣rity of the Church is formally in the Prelates; and therefore, that the Church cannot err in defining matters of Faith, and

that the Bishops cannot Err, are the same Thing.

From what has been quoted, it seems that Dr. Cressy, and whoso∣ever else may be on his side, are considerably oppos'd by others. Indeed the Infallibility of the Roman Church, and the great usefulness of it to them, is better understood by them, than to be parted with.

Upon a survey of the foremen∣tioned Dissentions among Romanists themselves, the clear inference is; that either Tradition is full, and plain enough in the things disagreed about; and if so, then the Roma∣nists themselves do not believe Tra∣dition, rest not in what their Fathers taught them, and so transgress their own Rule of Faith; or Tradition comes down so divided, that it can∣not unite them; shines so dimly, that they cannot see their way by it (as (c) 1.98 Dr. Cressy says, some learned Catho∣liques are of Opinion) and so wander each Party in a Path by it self. And this evinces

Traditions impotency, want of a sufficient plainness and certainty.

But here is a retreat, to which our Adversaries must be followed. There is a (a) 1.99 distinction made be∣tween the Faith and the Doctrine of the Church; between Points, which are de fide absolutè, and such as are de fide sub Opinione; Points of Faith strictly so call'd, the denial of which would amount to Heresie; and Points of Opinion rather than of Faith, and Theological speculations only. Now it will be said by our Adversaries, that the Subject of their Home-dif∣ferences are not of the former, but of the latter kind, matters of meer Opi∣nion; and therefore that their diffe∣rences do not disparage Traditions care and sufficiency; that being main∣tain'd to be a Rule of Faith only.

But to make such an Evasion use∣less; a strict and close dispute about Points of Faith, (which are such, and which not) is with the more dif∣ficulty manageable betwixt our Ad∣versaries and us, because we differ about the Rule of Faith. Accor∣dingly, they account of a Point, as a

(a) 1.100 Point of Faith or of meer Opinion, as it is attested to, or not attested to, by a sufficient Tradition; which they assert to be the rule of Faith; but this is the thing in question be∣tween us. Therefore, as things stand, the way will be to review the afore∣named Tenents controverted among the Romanists; and to see what their tendency and importance is in Religi∣on, in the Judgment of any sober and unbïassed Christian; as also what our Adversaries own Sentiments are con∣cerning them. Then,

1. The freedom of the will in cor∣rupted Nature; the assistance of Di∣vine Grace; Predestination to an E∣ternal State; the extent of the Re∣demption by the Death of Christ; perseverance in Grace; look like material concerns in Religion; and the respective statings of the Que∣stions arising on these Subjects are judg'd momentous by the controver∣ting Parties: (b) 1.101 The Jansenists com∣plain of sharp usage from the Mo∣linists; that a Proposition of theirs, [viz. That the Fathers shew us a just Man in the Person of St. Peter, to

whom the grace, without which a Man cannot do any thing, was wanting] was censur'd by their Antagonists to be [temerarious, impious, blasphemous, worthy to be Anathematiz'd, and Heretical;] and that their Persons have been traduc'd, and defam'd in Books and Pulpits; openly and publickly accus'd—as Hereticks.—

The Controversies between the Remonstrants, and Contra-Remonstrants, some of the principal also between the Lutherans and the Calvinists, are much of the same kind with them con∣tended about between the Jesuits and Dominicans, the Jansenists and Molinists; and yet sure the Romanists will have them to be more than mat∣ters of meer Opinion, and Theolo∣gical speculations only, in us Prote∣stants; because they take occasion from these and some other differences of no higher a Complexion, (at the least can't be accus'd to be such, by a Romanist) to upbraid us with the (a) 1.102 darkness and confusion of our Condi∣tion; and that our bitter Conten∣tions and Speeches declare us to be of different Churches and Religi∣ons.

But if these differences in Judg∣ment and Heats, be of so high a na∣ture, and of so desperate effects in us, why not so in them also? For suppose that some Protestants passi∣ons are more warm in these disputes, yet there are also many moderate Men on both sides; and to make them of different Religions, there must be a contrariety of Judgments, and even in matters of Faith; and if these be Points of Faith in Prote∣stants, what just reason can be gi∣ven, why they should not be such in Romanists likewise?

2ly. (a) 1.103 The Doctrine of proba∣ble Opinions; and That an Opinion is then call'd probable, when it is ground∣ed upon some reasons of consideration; whence it sometimes comes to pass, that the Opinion of one grave Doctor may render an Opinion probable: Much of the Ca∣s••••stical Divinity of the Jesuits; their (b) 1.104 easie Devotions; their knack of (c) 1.105 direct∣ing the Intention; their Doctrine of (d) 1.106 mental Reservation, and of the sufficiency of (e) 1.107 Attri∣tion;

their Salvo's for (a) 1.108 Simony, (b) 1.109 Revenge, and (c) 1.110 Stealing; with se∣veral Practiques of the like stamp; certainly will be doom'd by any, who are seriously Chri∣stians, to be destructive of that fixed∣ness and soundness in the Faith, which is opposite to the levity of Children toss'd to and fro, and carried about with every wind of Doctrine, &c. (Eph. 4.14.) and of the Do∣ctrine, which is according to godliness. (1. Tim. 6.3.)

3ly. If Tenents may be thought to be de fide, points of Faith, by their influence on other Credenda and A∣genda, things to be believed and done, and on the Peace of the Chri∣stian World; then certainly those Tenents, which relate to the Pope, and were even now touch'd on, must be Points of Faith, and that of the first Classis. For whosoever can see through things, will judge, that they are of vast inference, that on the determination of them must depend the direction of the Pope in the

exercise of his Power; and of Christians in what, and how far to obey him, and his Commands, as to belief and practice. Prince's Crowns, and their Subject's Loyalty are deeply concern'd in them, and consequently the Ʋ∣nity and Welfare of all the Churches, and States in Christen∣dom. But Card. Bellarmine himself speaks high enough. Says he— (a) 1.111

What Subject is treated of? whilest the Pri∣macy of the (Roman) Pontife is treated of, I will tell you very briefly. [It is discours'd] of the sum of Chri∣stianity. For it is discuss'd, whether the Church must longer remain en∣tire, or fall asunder, and perish.

He goes on, as in the Margent.

Why now, if the Pope have a Power given him by Christ, of Go∣verning the Ʋniversal Church of

Christ; as was the definition of the Council of Florence (apud Caranzam,) and the Christian Church be so in∣finitely concern'd in the Pope and his Government, as is affirm'd; then it can't be rationally questioned, but that our Blessed Saviour, and Lord, the Head of the Church, did declare his Pleasure concerning the true state of the Papal Office, and Power, to his Apostles; and charg'd them to Communicate it to the Church, to be preserved through all Ages. The reason is, because it can't be conceiv'd consistent with our Lord's Wisdom and Goodness, to have established an universal Empire over Christians in Peter and his Suc∣cessors; and yet not to have de∣termined, and given a punctual Scheme of that Power and Jurisdicti∣on; and consequently of Christians due obedience and dependance; see∣ing that (as is pretended) such a Power was design'd for the guidance and preservation of all Christians in Truth, Holiness, and Peace: For the Papal Power without such a clear stating of it, would be utterly in∣sufficient

for attaining such glorious Ends. That which was intended to prevent, and to compose differen∣ces, would be it self an unhappy occasion of the greatest ruptures, as it proves to be at this day.

Forasmuch then as the Papacy is so transcendent an Interest of the Christian Church, in the claim of our Adversaries; and that in plain reason, the fixation and certainty of the Pope's Inerrability, and of the just latitude of his Power, is so necessary to a fit discharge of the Papal Office for the be∣hoof of the Church; and that there∣fore Christ was not wanting in the Revelation, and Communication of it to his Apostles and Church: Hence it follows, that because the Romanists are so uncertain, disagree so much about it, therefore they differ among themselves (not in Theological Quodlibets, or meer spe∣culative niceties; but) in very grave and substantial Points (let them call them Points of Faith, or by what other names they please;) and which the Church was at the first instruct∣ed in.

4ly. Between the infallibility of the Church (which the (a) 1.112 Trent Catechism affirms, in which are con∣tain'd the (b) 1.113 grounds and principles of the Ro∣man Faith; and which (c) 1.114 all Catholicks teach) and the Autho∣rity of the Church on∣ly (which was (d) 1.115 Cres∣sie's belief, in which he was confirm'd, (e) 1.116 by very Learned Catholicks) there is a very wide difference; and there are consequent very divers obligati∣ons and effects.

For if the Church cannot err, then, what it proposes ought to be believ'd as soon as it is made known, and un∣derstood. But if the Church may err, and have an Authority only, then its Articles and Canons may be so∣berly examin'd by some standard which is infallible; and accordingly, as they shall be found to agree with it, or to contrariate it; to yield, or to suspend Belief (quietly, and with∣out more noise than what a meek submission to the Church's censure

makes): or also, Obedience to the Church's Authority, may be a dis∣obedience to the higher, and su∣preme Authority of God; who com∣mands Christians Orthodoxy of Be∣lief, as well as holiness of Life.

I must not omit, that even about this so weighty Subject, (which we are now upon; viz. Oral Traditions being the only Rule of Faith) the Romanists are not at accord among themselves, (as I touch'd in the Pre∣face) (a) 1.117 Bellarmine held, that the

Word of God, or Revelation made by God, was the whole and entire Rule of Faith. And this (he says) is divided into two partial Rules, Scripture and Tradition.

If Scripture be in Part a Rule, and Tradition a Rule but in Part; then (in the judg∣ment of Bellarmine) Tradition is not the onely Rule of Faith. And no question but still there are those, who are of Bellarmines mind.

There's a Confessi∣on of (b) 1.118 Rushworth, that there is a Dissension of the Catholique Doct∣ors concerning the

Rule of Faith; but he says, that

this does not hurt the certainty of Traditions.

To clear which, and to satisfy the Nephews Scruple, grounded on this Dis∣sension, the Ʋncle says;

Truly, Cousin, your Objection is strong, yet I hope to content you. For—I see no great matter in the variety of Opinions amongst our Divines,

&c. See what follows in the Margent. (c) 1.119

But under savour, this variety of Opini∣ons is very Material. For tho' (suppose) all Romanists should agree to acknowledge no Articles of Faith, but such as have descended to them by Tradition from Christ, and his Apostles; should agree to acknowledge this, in gene∣ral: yet if they are still to seek; if it be still unresolved among them, who is the decider of Points of Doct∣rine; i. e. by whose mouth they are to

know (upon occasions of dispute) what, and which determinately be their Points, and Articles of Faith, then there must be an uncertainty among them about the Points and Articles of Faith. For the belief of Articles of Faith can be no more certain, no more fix'd and uniform, than the Deciders and Mouths are, by which they are to know, what and which be their Points of Faith: But that Decider and Mouth is yet confessedly unagreed on. Hence it must follow, that Tradition is hurt, is sorely wounded in its cer∣tainty: in that, it does not, either bring down primitive Truths so cleerly, that there needs no dispute about them, or at the least certain∣ly determine, who shall be the Deci∣der, and infallible Mouth, from which to receive the Decision of them: but leaves them, (when dis∣putes arise) to wrangle it out a∣mong themselves, as well as they can.

From the account, which has been given, it is manifest, that the Points, in which the Romanists dissent from one another, are Points of Faith; or else

that those about which Protestants dif∣fer are not such, the Tenents disagreed about among the Romanists being as material, and influential, as those con∣troverted among the Protestant for∣med Churches, or rather much more considerable.

Thus in the foregoing pages, Oral Tradition has been tryed by Reason and by Experience; (the few passages of Scripture quoted, be∣ing not intended for Proof of the Thing in Controversie, but only us'd incidentally, and in a sense which is obvious,) and is found guilty of so much uncertainty and failure, that it deserves to be judg'd too insuffi∣cient to be trusted with the Convey∣ance of divine Truths, down from their first Delivery through all suc∣ceeding ages.

But it may happen sometimes, that there may be Arguments against a Thing, so plausible, and which may have so strong a seemingness of Demonstration, as to engage the Judgment against it; and yet there may be Arguments too for it, so far more cogent, and convincing,

as (upon a weighing both) to pre∣ponderate the other, and to de∣termine the Understanding to the affirmative part. Let us see then, whether the like may fall out in Oral Tradition, and having alleged the proofs against its sureness, and safety of Conveyance, let us next con∣sider what, and how rational the Pleas are on its behalf, and whether they are weighty enough to turn the Scales.

CHAP. V. The Arguments alleg'd for Oral Tradition.

SECT. I.

THE Defences brought for the certainty and infallibility of Oral Tradition, are such as follow.

1. It is pleaded, that Oral Tra∣dition is a (a) 1.120 Principle Self-evident to all Mankind, who use common Rea∣son; that (b) 1.121 Man's Nature is the Basis of it, according to those faculties in him, perfectly and necessarily subject to the Operations and Strokes of Nature; i. e. his Eyes, his Ears, handling, &c. that the (c) 1.122 way of Tradition is as efficaciously established in the very grain of Man's Nature, as what seems most natural, the propagation of their kind; that (d) 1.123 the virtue by which Tradition regulates her followers to bring down Faith unerringly, is grounded on a far stronger Basis, than all material Nature.

Answ. Indeed, a Principle Self-evident, deeply founded and radi∣cated in Man's very Nature, and more strongly grounded than all ma∣terial Nature, deserves to be heed∣fully attended to, and preserved inviolate. But let these high strains be considered of.

1. As to Self-evidence: First Prin∣ciples (most properly) are Self-evi∣dent, being indemonstrable; not borrowing, but shining by a light of their own: Such are, [It is im∣possible for the same thing to be, and not to be: The whole is greater than any Part.] But in this Sense, Tra∣dition (tho' the Author of Sure Footing, calls it a (a) 1.124 first Princi∣ple) is confess'd not to be Self-evi∣dent, for he undertakes to demon∣strate it, as well a (b) 1.125 Priori, as a Posteriori. Therefore he says, that there are Principles (c) 1.126 Self-evident in an inferior manner; not as inca∣pable of demonstration, but because they need none; being presently as∣sented to by all, who have the use of their faculties; the notions of them stealing universally into Mens

understandings, and there gaining a fix'd entertainment undiscernibly.

The Instances given are; That [in a square space, 'tis a neerer way to go from one corner to that which is opposite by the Diameter, than to go by the two sides: Or, that things look less afar off, and bigger nearer hand.] 'Tis affirm'd, that Tradition is a Self-evident Principle of this latter kind.

But Tradition is not a Self-evident Principle even of this latter kind. That Testimony and Authority (and Oral Tradition, which is one sort of (a) 1.127 Testimony) has room among the Topiques, and is a seat of dia∣lectical argumentation, is evident enough; its use and necessity (in some cases) have been acknowledg'd. But That Oral Tradition is a cer∣tain, infallible Medium; That (b) 1.128 Councils general and provincial, nay, particular Churches are infallible by proceeding upon it, is deny'd by Pro∣testants to be Self-evident, evident, or but true. And tho' it is not material, what Protestants affirm, or deny in other Points disputed between

them, and the Romanists, farther than they can prove; yet in this business their very denial is much sufficient, because the Question is driven up to this, viz. whether they are Owners of so much Reason, as is common to all Mankind. And let all judge, who have had conversation with them, whether (as they are no inconsiderable part of Mankind, so) they have the use of Common Reason or no; and (as one Argu∣ment of this) whether they deny such plain Propositions, as were be∣fore instanc'd in; or any the like, which are the Sentiments generally of Mankind.

2ly. (Which is of some kin to the former consideration, forasmuch as the knowledge of first, and Self-evident Principles is in some Sense natural) Let Oral Tradition's Foun∣dation in nature be examin'd.

'Tis confess'd, that the Faculties of Seeing and Hearing; the Memo∣ry, Understanding, Will, and Affe∣ctions are from Nature, are natu∣ral to us; that according to a Me∣thod of Nature, outward Objects

do excite the Faculties into Acts proper to each: That they being in motion do influence upon one ano∣ther. The Senses inform the Un∣derstanding; the Understanding trusts the Memory, and gives im∣pulses to the Will and Affections. Suitable to this procedure in Na∣ture, I grant, that Tradition strikes upon the Senses, and those strokes are derived to the inward Faculties, and cause variety of impressions there. This is all, which I can understand by the Faculties perfect and necessary subjection to the operations and strokes of Nature; or by Traditions being grounded and engrain'd in Man's Na∣ture.

But now, how short is all this of a Proof, that Tradition is infallible, in the strength of any Basis it has in the Nature of Man! Tho' our Faculties, and their way of Opera∣tion be Natural, yet the Operations, or Exercises of them are not be∣yond a possibility of Error, and mi∣stake. Sure all will allow, that the very Senses are not undeceivable, nor the Ʋnderstanding inerrable; that the

Memory is frail and leaky; and that the Will and Passions are not impec∣cable. And yet all these having to do in Tradition, it must be other∣wise with them, or else it is evident, that Tradition will be crazy, fallible, and uncertain. We may conclude therefore, that as in Nature, and pro∣pagating the kind (which the Author of the Letter of Thanks says, is most natural;) so in Tradition's propo∣gation and continuation of it self, there may have hapned Abortions, Su∣perfetations, and monstrous Births; and that much less Tradition is ground∣ed on a far stronger Basis than all material Nature; whence it should have such a virtue, as to regulate its followers, to bring down Faith uner∣ringly.

SECT. II.

2ly. It is urged, that the greatest hopes and fears imaginable (indeed infinitely greater than any other whatsoever, springing from any temporal consideration,) viz. of

Heaven, and of Damnation, were

propos'd, * 1.129 and strongly applied to the minds of the first Believers, encouraging them to adhere to the Doctrines received, and de∣terring them from Apostacy; and that this was in all Ages the per∣swasion of the Faithful.

Ans. 'Tis acknowledged, that the wis∣dom and goodness of God have endea∣red and facilitated to Man his Duty by Method, the most imaginably Obliging. But if it be argued from the Power∣fulness of the Motives, and their pre∣valence too upon the first Christians, unto their actual Effects upon the generality, or far greater part of Christians throughout all ages since; such a procedure would prove, that Christians generally have been, and are virtuous, as well as Orthodox, that they have as piously imitated (and still do so,) the Apostolical sancti∣ty, as that they have been unva∣ryingly constant to the Faith, the A∣postles preached and wrote. For without question the one, was as strongly press'd upon the first Christi∣ans and resented by them, as the other; and the same Propositions were made

to both,: Heaven was offer'd as the gracious Reward of holy Practice, as well as of right believing; and Hell was threatned as the Punishment of an evil Life, as well as of Heresie.

But 'tis too well known, that pri∣mitive Purity, Zeal, and Care for Religion did too soon wear out of the Heart and Practice of Christians. An Eternity of Blessedness and Misery were known but too little, and seriously thought on. Present and material Objects, worldly Plea∣sures, Profit and Grandure, beat smartly upon the Senses, and in∣veigle the sensual Appetite; by which Men are too commonly more governed than by Reason or Religion, and the strict dictates of either. Heaven and Hell being things fu∣ture and spiritual; and, for want of a frequent and vigorous Application of them to particular Actions, work but faintly, and much unsuc∣cesfully. Such has long been the course of this World, and still is. And 'tis not likely, that Men should have much more care of their Chil∣drens Souls, than of their own. Not

as if Men purpos'd to (a) 1.130 damn themselves, or their Children; but they of∣fend; are too profane or indifferent, both as to Practice and Opini∣on; and so endanger their own, and their Posterities Salvation, through Incogitancy and Improvidence; as a Bird hasteth to the snare, and knows not that it is for his life.

No question, but there are, and have been in all Ages, very many good Persons, who have look'd not at things seen and Temporal, but at things not seen and Eternal; who have endeavour'd to be sound in the Faith, and to have a good Con∣science in all things: But I wish, it could not without uncharitable∣ness be said, that such have been, and are much fewer than those, who travaile the broad way. Nor have even Holy Men been so ad∣vanc'd by their Spiritual Condition, as to be priviledg'd from all Ob∣noxiousness to Error, any more than wholly from sinning. They have still

had some weaknesses of Ʋnderstand∣ing and Passions not untemptable. It might be incident even to them (their remaining frailty betraying them) to be drawn out of their road by temporal hopes or fears; or the example of a great number of Christians of their times, mo∣ving another way; especially, if they who gave the Example had a plau∣sible appearance of Holiness; which is much winning upon well-dispos'd Per∣ons, and apt to ensnare them, except they be the more wary; and we can't be sure, that the Virtuous in every Age were the most prudent and circumspect. Or suppose, that Pious Parents should have been exempt from these infirmities and misfor∣tunes, which might at the least endanger Oral Tradition's miscar∣rying: Yet what security have we, (have we not reason rather to sus∣pect the contrary?) that the Chil∣dren were as Pious as the Fathers? And yet the indefectibleness of Oral Tradition depends on the Childrens, as well as on the Fathers Piety, en∣couraging them by the hopes of

an Eternal reward to adhere to the Doctrines taught them, and deter∣ring them by the fears of an ever∣lasting punishment from parting with them; it depends upon all the Fathers, and likewise their Childrens Piety and Constancy to Doctrines taught them throughout 1600 years.

Notice is taken of the (a) 1.131 indis∣position of Mankind by reason of Original corruption. But it is said, This would not hinder, but that a great part would be virtuous, and would teach their Children what, &c. And so a Body of Traditionary Christians would still be continued to the very end of the World.

But only a great Part, and a Bo∣dy, is not the Major part; and that which is great, look'd upon in its self, may be little comparatively, and in respect of other things. And Rush∣worth (b) 1.132 grants, that the lesser number may be a sufficient Party to make a Tradition. Here,

1. Is a great Fall from the large pretended Empire of Oral Tradi∣tion over Souls, and its Potency ri∣veted in the very Nature of Man∣kind.

It might be rationally ex∣pected, that a Self-evident Principle, whose (a) 1.133 way is as efficaciously establish'd in the very grain of Man's Nature, as what seems most natural, the pro∣pagation of their kind, should work so strongly, as to produce a more universal Effect, and that it should always keep, at the least, the far greatest part of Christians firm in the Faith first delivered; as in the propagation of the kind, sterili∣ties and monstrous Issues are more rare; generally Nature is fruitful e∣nough, and regular in its producti∣ons.

2ly. I deny it to be (b) 1.134 certain, that (but) a great Number, or Body of the first Believers, and after faith∣ful in each Age, i. e. from Age to Age, would continue to hold themselves, and teach their Children as themselves had been taught; would preserve and derive the Body of Christian Faith as entire, and pure, as it was origi∣nally committed to the Church; and this by virtue of the hopes of an Heaven, and fears of an Hell. For how strongly soever these might be

applied to the minds of the first Believers; yet, that so strong and effectual an Application of them was made by all Fathers to all their Children through all after Ages (so that the (a) 1.135 Cause should be al∣ways actually causing) is uncertain, nay, very improbable, for the Reasons be∣fore given.

3ly. If a less number may be a sufficient party to make a Tradition, then meerly the compa∣rative fewness of (b) 1.136 those, who through several for∣mer ages held, some fewer, some more, of the Points, in which we Protestants differ from the Roma∣nists, and that thy mov'd Eccen∣tricks to the generality of Christians of their times, is no rational Ob∣jection against them, and their Te∣nents, as if they were not truly Primitive; nor, in a parity of Rea∣son, did it justifie the Romanists Tenents, that they had got so large a Possession of the Western World; nor consequently did our Fathers deserve to be call'd Deserters of

Tradition, because they departed from some Tenents and Practices of the Roman Church, which had sto∣len the general Vogue in some for∣mer blind Ages. For 'tis not af∣firm'd, that the greatest number of Christians, but only a great Part, and a Body of them, would be trusty Traditioners. A great Party, abso∣lutely considered, may be but little comparatively; and the Minimum quod sic in the case we are not told: Therefore the general Prevalency of certain Romish Tenents at, and be∣fore the Secession, did not conclude them to be therefore justified by Tra∣dition (properly so called;) nor did the bare comparative Paucity suffice to condemn them of Innovation, who made the Secession.

SECT. III.

3ly. To assure Oral Tradition's infallibility, it is press'd; that there is an (a) 1.137 Obligation on Posterity to be∣lieve their Ancestors in a matter of Fact, or a matter delivered to have

been (not thought or deem'd, but) done. And 'tis confidently added, [I make account, there is not a Man in the World, or ever was (such is the good∣ness of rational Nature given us by God) who in his natural thoughts could ever raise such a doubt, or think he could possibly frame his thoughts to a belief of the contrary.—And it ap∣pears at first sight to be a strange distortion, or rather destruction of hu∣mane Nature, which can so alter it.] The Instances given, in which Po∣sterity is obliged to believe An∣cestors, are (a) 1.138 Alexander's conquer∣ing Asia, (b) 1.139 William the Conquer∣or's, Harry the Eights, and Maho∣met's Existence.

(c) 1.140 The proof of the Obligation on Posterity not to believe contrary to Forefathers from Age to Age, is thus proceeded in, viz.

The second Age after the first was ob∣liged to believe the first Age, be∣cause they saw with their Eyes what was done: The third Age was obliged to believe the se∣cond, tho' they saw it not, because the second Age could not be de∣ceived

in what the first Age told them; and they must be conceived so honest, and withal such to be the disinteressedness of the position, that they would not conspire to deceive the third Age; and so those of the third Age have the first Ages Authority applied to them. And by virtue of this same Argument, the same effect will be upon the fourth, fifth, and five hundreth Age.

This is the full substance (to the best of my under∣standing) of the Author's Argu∣mentation.

Ans. In reply to this, If the matter of Fact be but some general thing (such as the Author himself has given Example of) there may be the more of Truth in this Procedure; but then there's little in it; it comes not home enough to our. business. But if the things done (or spoken) at, or about the same time, were divers; or if the thing, tho' one, were wrap'd in several circumstan∣ces; then the first Eye, or Ear-Wit∣nesses might for want of a more close and steady attention, mistake or for∣get

some partitulars, and so might misreport, and therefore might justly be disbelieved; or the second Witnesses from the first (though suppose, things were truly and punctually reported to them by the first, yet) might misunderstand, or forget something, if not much, of what was related to them; or, if there should be no misinformati∣on by the second Witnesses; yet the third might misapprehend, or not well remember, what the se∣cond told them. The same may be said of the Witnesses in the fourth remove, or age, with regard to the third; and of those in the fifth, with respect to these in the fourth; and so unto the five hundredth; till after a discent through so many hazards and chances, what was done, or spoken at the first, be at length wholy altered, or become very un∣like to its Primitive self. Seeing then there may be such failures in suc∣cessive Testifyings, how can a Man be bound to believe conformably to Forefathers; especially when as perhaps he is distant hundreds of

Successions from the speaking or doing the thing testified of?

I may confirm the uncertainty of successive Testifyings through Ages by a passage of an Adversa∣ry. (a) 1.141 He putting the Question, whether the very rehearsing, and citing anothers words, do not breed uncer∣tainty and variety? resolves it in the affirmative. 'Tis true, he aimes at the invalidating Scriptures cer∣tainty in conveying to after-Ages the mind of the Authors; but what he writes is adaptable to words spoken as well as written.

For (answerably to what he discour∣ses (b) 1.142 in the Mar∣gent) Points of Faith in the Oral Traditi∣on of them, must have (as pass'd from one Country to ano∣ther, so) been cloth∣ed in variety of Languages; the di∣vers Accents in the pronuntiation of the words, passing thro' multitudes of mouths,

the divers turnings of the Speakers Head or Body, this way, or that way; the allusion to some precedent discourse, or the like, may change the Sense of words, when spoken by one, from what they were, when spoken by another, as well as make them different in writing, from what they were in speaking; and E∣quivocation too is incident to words spoken as well as written. So that, if for these reasons the Conveyance of the Faith antiently spoken or preach'd by Scripture will be uncer∣tain (as is said;) for the same rea∣sons (if they are truly reasons) the sense and meaning of the Divine Planters of the Faith, will as uncer∣tainly descend to us by an Oral Tra∣dition.

All this while I have mentioned only casualties, and the more inno∣cent infirmities (as shortness in un∣derstanding, inheedfulness in Me∣mory) incident to Testifiers; on the score of which there may be a mis∣representation of things, tho' there be no Conspiracy to deceive. But then if the question be concerning the Soberness and Integrity of all the Testifiers, what assurance can be given of them? There is a proneness in Men, (not alone out of inadver∣tency, and precipitancy, but also) out of capriciousness and ambition to be an Author, to substract, to to add to, to alter Stories; which meeting with Credulity in others (as it often happens;) the Stories, and their Errata pass currant, and uncorrected. Besides, if there be not such a disinteressedness of the Position (or thing testified,) which frequently falls out; then the Ho∣nesty and Fairness of the Testifiers in their Relation may be the more questionable, and others may be the more suspending in their Belief.

I suppose what I have said, is enough to shew the descent of Testifications from Age to Age to be liable to great failures; especial∣ly if it be applied to Religion; where the Articles of Faith, the Sacred Practices and Senses of Scripture (which concern all these) are so many; and withal, there are so ma∣ny, and so tempting Diversions of Men, as has been above proved.

But here it is replyed, that Reli∣gion is rather a Remedy of the failures attending on the descent of Testi∣monies. And to prove a far grea∣ter steadiness of Oral Tradition in Religion's Affairs, than in any other; there are (a) 1.143 alleg'd the great Di∣vine Author of Religion; the superla∣tive Interest of Mankind in it; the publick miraculous Confirmation of it; the Preaching and Reception of it in all, even the remotest parts of the World; the entertainment of it among the first Christians, when they were at Age to judge of the Miracles, and Mo∣tives to Christian Religion; and among the after Christians, when they were yet scarce able to speak, much less

to judge, and taught by Nature to believe their Parents. And from hence are inferr'd an incomparable recommendableness in Religion, and an Obligation to believe and to practise it; and likewise a most forcible Obli∣gation on Children to believe Parents attesting to it.

Answ. I acknowledge that to be true, which is alleg'd in the just commendation of Religion; and that it does deserve, and bind to a zeal, diligence, and sincerity in the Treat∣ment of it, far above what Men be∣stow on any worldly thing what∣soever. I question not also, but that the incomparable remarkable∣ness of Religion did fix deep, and indeleble Impressions on the Chri∣stians of the first Age; and on all afterwards, who have known how to value love, and tender it answera∣bly to its true worth.

But this is that, at which I stop, i. e. Whether Christians have in all Ages so cherish'd the even now named virtues for Religion, as to send it down to us without any disguises, and in its genuine, and first Integri∣ty;

and this by virtue of an Oral Tradition, and of Fathers long con∣tinued testifying to their immediate Descendents; whether they have not been too cold, and careless for it; or too, whether their zeal, for want of a governing Prudence, has not sometimes transported them from one Error to an opposite one: Whe∣ther they have been so single, and upright in the Maintenance of the Truths of Religion, as the Simpli∣city of it does require (especially may we doubt of this Candor and Ingenuity in those, who hold the Doctrine of Equivocation,) I think, that he who has considered the Genius of Mankind, will see it pro∣bable enough; that Christians may have given worldly Interests, and corrupt Passions, too great a Pre∣ference in their dealing with Re∣ligion; the particular Truths and Practices of it: And that, were it not for some Leading Men, Per∣sons of Parts, and Spirit, who some∣times sway the Age in which they live, (and yet these too may be over∣born by a dissenting Multitude,)

the most would be too prone to turn almost with every wind that should blow, and to steer their Course thither, whence they might look for the greatest Temporal ease, and advantage. And this Men might do, and yet (a) 1.144 not as a pack of impudent Knaves, that con∣spir'd to abuse their Posterity, purpose∣ly to damn them. For Men may act contrarily to their Duty, and to the wrong of themselves, and of theirs eventually (nay, too often do so); and yet not out of a desperate and form'd purpose to destroy either.

From what has been discours'd, it follows, that the incomparable recommendableness of Religion, and its obligingness to be believed, do not conclude a continued, and necessary obligation upon Children to believe their Parents through all Ages.

And yet suppose, that there were such an Obligation upon Children to believe their Fathers; unless Children did believe such an obliga∣tion incumbent on them, Oral Tra∣dition would be still failable. For then Children, Posterity would take

the liberty to judge for themselves, and to vary from the Fathers, as they should see reason for it. Or if they should believe as Fathers did, it would be casual. Therefore (to make all sure) 'tis (a) 1.145 own'd and undertaken to be proved; That every Age in the Church, and all Persons in it, look'd upon themselves as obliged not to vary in any thing from the Doctrine and Practice of the precedent Age.

Yet I cannot discern in all the following Pages of that Author, any proof of this, but only an at∣tempt to prove an Obligation on those in every Age to believe those of the precedent Age. But as this Obligation has been sufficiently dis∣prov'd; so yet if it were true, could it infer that they in every Age look'd upon, thought themselves obliged to believe those of the Ages fore∣going; for 'tis notorious, that Men do not always think themselves oblig'd to believe, and to do that, which yet they are really obliged to believe, and to do.

But I can't discover any Indi∣cation of such a Belief of Posterity concerning such an Obligation. 'Tis well known, that antiently, and in several Ages of the Church, scarce a new Opinion could start up, but it found Abettors. 'Tis strange, if there were indeed such a persua∣sion, as is pretended, fix'd in the hearts of Christians, that so often they should have left the Road, and turn'd into an unbeaten Path in for∣mer Ages.

To come neerer to our own Times: The Relinquishers of the Roman Tenents and Communion; the Deserters (as our Adversaries call them) of Tradition, were (like the Croud in St. John's Vision) a great Multitude, which no man can number, of many Nations and Kin∣dreds, People, and Tongues: People divided by diversity of Climates, and vast spaces of Earth and Seas; of various Complexions of Body, and Dispositions of Soul; of diffe∣rent Education, manner of Life, and Civil Interests. This being unde∣niably true, how utterly improba∣ble

is it, that so many Myriads, dif∣ferenced by so many considerable Circumstances, should so unanimously agree in a departure from the Ro∣man Church (i. e. in the Style of our Adversaries, in a defection from Tradition), if there had really been such a common Charm, and great Principle regnant among them, and uniting them in an Obsequious adhe∣rence to their Fathers Faith, and in an opposition to any alteration of their Belief. Especially, it is yet the more improbable, if it be remem∣bred, that many of these adven∣tur'd on a change through the sharpest Persecutions. And the Suc∣cessors of those first Reformers have maintain'd the Secession toward two Centuries of years, and are so well fatisfied in it, that they are general∣ly averse from a return to the Ro∣man Communion; unto which no∣thing but force is likely to reduce them, if even That can do it.

By this it appears, how highly improbable that Position is, viz. That it, is impossible, that Men should not think themselves obliged to believe, (a) 1.146

and to do, as their Predecessors did.

Or if a very great improbability be suppos'd, and that the Secessors from Rome had such a Belief of a Tye upon them unto the Faith, and Practice of Ancestors; then for cer∣tain they acted contrarily to that Be∣lief: But howsoever, Act they did, and Counter to the Age then, and some Ages before. And even this will weaken Oral Tradition's in∣defectibility. For what hapned in this alteration, may have hapned in the Ages before: Tho' Children (suppose) did conceive an Obligation upon them to the same Faith with that of their Fathers, and because it was their Fathers; yet if they might move contrarily to them, not∣withstanding such a believed engage∣ment, there might be a Rupture in Tradition as surely, as if they had had no sense of such Obligation.

So that I do not see, if it should be granted, that there had been (and were still) in all Generations such a persuasion of Posterities Obligation to believe, and to practice just as Forefathers did, how such a Con∣cession

would quite do Oral Tra∣dition's business. For tho' it may be well argued negatively; if Poste∣rity did not conceive themselves ob∣lig'd to believe and to do as their Fathers did, there can be no cer∣tainty of Oral Tradition; yet it does not necessarily follow on the other side, and affirmatively; if suc∣cessive Generations do believe them∣selves engag'd to believe, and to practise just as the foregoing did, therefore it will be sure, that they will so believe and practise. The reason is, because Men do not always, (nay too seldom) what they know it is their Duty to do. And tho' they, who first departed from Tra∣dition, might proceed against con∣viction of their Obligation to the contrary: yet their Successors, not discerning the manner of the first departure, might continue it (as the 200 Men followed Absalom) in their simplicity; till continuance grew into a Prescription, and gain'd the Port of Tradition.

But, notwithstanding, that the so numerous Relinquishers of Rome

render it very improbable, that there was, or is a belief generally rooted in the minds of Men, that they are bound to believe, and to do conformably to Fathers; yet it may be perhaps said (to counter∣ballance this); that they, who keep still constant to Rome, and to Tra∣dition, are remarkably numerous. And it is confess'd, they are too many. But it may rationally be questioned, whether all, or the greatest part of them do stay in that Communion, out of a fix'd belief, that they are bound to believe as their Fathers did. I am sure, their Being of that Church does not e∣vince such a Belief in them; be∣cause there are divers other Causes, which may detain them on that side, besides such a persuasion; As Igno∣rance, Education, Prepossession, and Wontedness to it; variety of great Preferments and Grandure, secular Pomp and Splendor; the profita∣bleness and pleasingness of some Doctrines; fear from the Princes, who are Popish, and of Civil Pe∣nalties; dread of Ecclesiastical Cen∣sures,

and of the Inquisition. Were they of the Roman Party more free, the Rod not so held over them, were Punishments not so severely threatned, and executed on Revol∣ters, we should better understand, how devoted submitters they were to Oral Tradition; and how much they were convinced of it as a necessary Duty, not to let their Faith alter from that of Ancestors.

The summ of this Section is this; 1. That it has not been proved, that there is an Obligation on Poste∣rity to believe Forefathers, nay the contrary has been proved. 2ly. That if there were such an Obligation, yet it is not necessary, that Poste∣rity should conceive themselves to be under such an Obligation. 3ly. That if they did conceive themselves to be so obliged, yet it does not ne∣cessarily follow, that they would move according to their Sense of such an Obligation. Therefore on this third Head there is not sufficient security given for Oral Tradition's infallibility.

SECT. IV.

4ly The Author of the Answer to the Lord Falkland's Discourse of the Infallibility of the Church of Rome says; * 1.147 That a deeper root, which greatly strengthens, and reduces into action, the efficacity of Tradition, is; that Christian Doctrine is not a speculative knowledge, but it is an Art of living,—a practical Doctrine. —The consequence of which is, that it is not possible, that any material Point of Christian Faith can be chang∣ed as it were by obreption, whilest Men are on sleep, but it must needs raise a great scandal, and tumult in the Christian Common-weal.—We remember in a manner as yet, how Change came into Germany, France, Scotland, and our own Country. Let those be a signe to us, what we may think can be the creeping in of false Doctrine; specially, that there is no point of Doctrine contrary to the Ca∣tholick Church, rooted in any Chri∣stian Nation, that the Ecclesiastical History does not mention the times and

combats by which it entred, and tore the Church in pieces.

Here's another Argument for the great Efficacy of Tradition; in that it prevents Obreptions, so that the Church can't be assaulted by any material Error, but it is strait A∣larum'd, and then stands upon its guard, and consequently is in a capacity to defend, and to preserve it self. And this is one reason more, why the Church, receiving her Faith by Tradition, and not from Doctors, * 1.148 hath e∣ver kept her entire.

Answ. 1. But first (to wave a consideration, how little an altera∣tion some Doctrines cause in Chri∣stians Practice, whether they are held pro, or con) it is deny'd, that it was not possible, that any material Point of Faith can be chang'd, as it were by Obreption,—but it must needs raise a great Scandal and Tu∣mult in the Christian Common∣weal. For that there should be a noise, and tumult in the Church, it was requisite that there should be a Breach of Communion, a separation of one part from another. Thus

it hapned in the Arrian controver∣sie, and some others; there was a manifest siding, a departure of the Dissenters from each other. Such was the Case too in Germany, Eng∣land, &c. Several Corruptions had possess'd the Church of Rome for a long time; and that Church made the Profession and Practice of those corruptions, a Condition of Commu∣nion with her; upon which the Pro∣testants withdrew from her Com∣munion; which occasion'd the no∣tice of the World; and the Guilt lies on them, who were the cause of the Breach, who gave the Offence.

But there may have been Inno∣vations in Doctrine, and Discipline too; and yet the Members of the Church have still continued mutual Communion, and therefore no cry have been rais'd, little, if any, no∣tice been taken; not because of the little consequence of the Doctrine or Practice; but (tho' it might be con∣siderable) by reason of its surprizing manner of entrance. Some things in their first beginnings, because small, and in their progresses, because

stealing on sensim sine sensu, by in∣visible steps, are often little, if at all discern'd; till arriving at some maturity, and a size, much exceeding what they had in their Infancy, and sly growth, they then manifest them∣selves, and awaken other's Observa∣tion. Is it not thus frequently in Nature? Are there not some la∣tent Diseases, which make secret at∣tempts upon the Life, and undis∣cover'd; till by more sensible effects and rudeness to Nature, they warn the Patient of his danger? Let us enquire, whether the like may not have hapned in Religion also.

It has not been uncommon for Persons of busie Parts, and good Credit for Virtue and Learning in their times, to have mov'd in a little Sphere of their own, to have held some Opinions against, or be∣side the general Vogue of the Age. Now, suppose one such Person in Preaching or Writing, to have started a Doctrine. This coming into the Church, commended by the Reputation and plausible Argu∣ments of the Author, wins the good

liking of many, and is passable as a probable Opinion for some years: Till in the next Generation, through a wontedness to it, and a forgetful∣ness in what degree of assent it was at the first entertain'd, it comes to be believ'd as necessary. Which ad∣vance would be the more facile, and likely, if the Doctrine were such, as had not been expresly de∣fin'd against in any general Coun∣cil, for then it would pass with the greater shew of Modesty; or were very advantageous, and particularly were such to the governing Party in the Church (as suppose, the Do∣ctrine of the Supreme and Univer∣sal Domination of the Bishop of Rome; or that of Pardons and In∣dulgences, &c.) for then Interest would cast another weight into the Scale; and it might be judg'd con∣venient to be believ'd as necessary.

By a zealous straining of Ex∣pressions and Practices, there might in time be a slip from the Mean, to an Extremity. The high and de∣serv'd Veneration for the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper might occasion

some lofty expressions of it, and re∣verential Gestures at the Celebration of it. And then from the Hyperbo∣lies of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. might arise Transubstantiation, and Adoration of the Host. There may have been very antiently a Solemn and Publick Commemoration of them, who dyed in the Lord, in way of Thanksgiving to God for such holy, useful Persons; and of recommen∣dation of them, as Religious Exem∣plars to the People. It may be, some too might pray for the Dead, out of a superabundant Charity; yet not for a release of them from Pains, but for a more speedy consum∣mation of their begun blessedness. And hence in time might creep in an Opinion of a middle state of the departed, and Prayers for the deli∣verance of Souls out of a Purgato∣ry fire. As the first Ages of the Church were Blessed with a multi∣tude of Glorious Martyrs, so the Christians of those Ages had a very high and fitting esteem of them. Sometimes it was an use to pray at the Monuments of the Martyrs;

to address them also with Rheto∣rical Apostrophes; till at the last the Saints departed came to be prayed to, and to be Worshipped. Thus it is intelligible enough, how there might be alterations in the Church's Doctrine and Practice, by stealth, and unobservedly; and this is suffi∣cient to oppose to the Authors (whom I quoted at the beginning of this Section); [it is not possible, that any material Point should be chang'd, as it were by Obrepti∣on, &c.]

But this secret and little notic'd Intrusion of Opinions, and Practices into the Church, will be found to have been the more feasible; if we look back upon former Ages in it, and the Genius of them. For a great while Learning was very scarce, and Piety likewise. The Ignorance, Irreligion, and Debaucheries of the Laiety, and Clergy al∣so, were so notorious in the eleventh, and fol∣lowing Centuries, that they occasion'd the great and loud (a) 1.149 complaints

of many who liv'd in the Roman Communion, and in the respective Ages; and may pro∣voke to wonder, and grief, Those who shall read them.

This being adverted to; 'tis so far from being impossible, that Chan∣ges should invade Religion, that ra∣ther 'tis impossible, but that Doctrines and Practices should be corrupted, and alter'd from their first Purity, in their passage through so long and foul a sink, as those dark and im∣pure Ages are represented to have been. For as good Knowledge and Piety are great defensatives against Error's seizure of the Judgment, so Ignorance in the Understanding, lewdness and depravedness of the Will and Passions, make Men in∣different for Religion, and unwary in the matters of it; dispose Men to a reception of Opinions and Practices precipitantly, and without a due Examination of them, whence they come, and what they are; without a discreet prospect, whether

they tend, and what their issue may be at the last. So that from what has been said, it is more than likely, that there may have been Obreptions, points of Faith, and Religious Pra∣ctice may have been materially chan∣ged; and yet no great Tumult have been rais'd in the Christian Com∣mon-weal, no Schisme; because per∣haps the Innovations rush'd not in the whole at once; but convey'd them∣selves into the Church in a Climax, insinuated themselves by sly and gradual Transitions, therefore with the less (if any) observations; espe∣cially might this surprize be un∣discern'd in blind and irreligious A∣ges.

2. Secondly, as for notice of the changes of Opinions and Practices from Church-Histories: So great is the use of Ecclesiastical Histories, that we may with reason wish, we could rather boast of a plenty, than complain of their scarcity; which yet Learned Men do, especially con∣sidering the great extent of the Christian Church, for Time and Place; which necessarily afforded

as huge a variety of Events and Revolutions. (a) 1.150 For above 200 years after the Apostles, till Euse∣bius Pamphilus, there was none who did more than begin to designe some History of the Church, rather than seriously set about it. For a consi∣derable while after the six hun∣dreth year that (b) 1.151 Learned Man (quoted in the Margent) doubts, whether to call those Ages, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Times of Por∣tentiloquie, or of Ignorance. But there are those, who say as much, or more, and were Sons of the Church of Rome. The great (c) 1.152 Annalist confesses, That no∣thing seem'd to have been so much neglected, as a true, and certain, and exact Histo∣ry of Ecclesiastical Affairs. And before Him, it was acknowleg'd by (d) 1.153 Lu∣dovicus Ʋives; That the Acts of the Apostles, of the Martyrs, and of the Saints, and the Con∣cerns of the Church, both

growing up, and grown, were unknown, being conceal'd un∣der very great darkness. In this penury of Ecclesiastical History, how much of the Changes in the Church with an abun∣dance of other very memorable ac∣cidents must have perished! In those Histories, which were Written, and are still extant, we can expect no more than the most remarkable Occurrents in the respective Ages, of which the Authors wrote (if all those). That a Change in the Church should be remarkable, it was requisite, that it should raise a Storm, cause a Publick disquiet, and Breach of Communion; which yet might not have hapned, tho' there were an Alteration in material Points (as has been shewn above); and therefore Church-Histories (if we had more of them to speak) might be silent of it.

And yet notwithstanding, Pro∣testants can say more, viz. That Ecclesiastical Writings are not so wholly unintelligencing; but that they do report, when, and how se∣veral

Points of the Romanists, con∣troverted between them and us, got into the Church; how and by whom they were observ'd, and resisted in the several Ages of the Church. For which (among others) (a) 1.154 Dr. J. White may be seen. But I am not engag'd necessarily to in∣sist on this, having said what is suf∣ficient before.

SECT. V.

Scriptures, Councils, and Fathers, were (b) 1.155 once drawn into the Field to engage in the defence of Oral Tradition; but upon after thoughts a Retreat is sounded to Two of them.

For the Author of Sure Footing says; That he Discourses from his Scriptural Allegations, but (c) 1.156 Topical∣ly, and that in Citation of them he proceeds on such Maximes, as are ut'd in Word-skirmishes, on which ac∣count he believes, that those Texts, he uses, sound more favourably for him, than for us. But in Word-skirmishes (i. e. Appearances ministred from

Words, which may afford to a plea∣sant Sophister an opportunity of making passages seem to favour his Hypothesis, when really they do not so) I have no inclination to deal; and I conceive such a wordy velita∣tion to be below the Gravity of the Cause depending between us, and our Adversaries.

Next, the Author disclaims his Quotations of (a) 1.157 Councils to be intended against Protestants; if so, then I am not obliged to take no∣tice of them. As for the Fathers, I know, all Protestants do declare, that they do highly value the Fathers, to such a degree as can be justly demanded from them, and as the Fa∣thers themselves, were they now living, would require from them. And concerning their Testimonies (both of Holy Scripture, and of Tradi∣tion) something shall be said in the Second Part, and there, on a parti∣cular occasion.

I have now dispatch'd the First Part of my Undertaking and have

evinc'd from the Nature of Oral Tra∣dition; from Experience or Event; and also by Answer to the Defenses brought for it; That it is a very unsafe, and insufficient Conveyance of Divine Truths down from their Origi∣nal Delivery unto us. And here I might rest, thinking that I had com∣pleated my work; if I might be al∣low'd to discourse after the man∣ner of the * 1.158 Author of Sure Foot∣ing (with the change only of a few words) and to say: There being on∣ly two grounds, or Rules of Faith own'd, namely, delivery of it down by Writing; and by Words and Practices, which we call Oral and Practical Tradition; 'tis left unavoidably out of the im∣possibility, that Oral and Practical Tra∣dition should be infallible as a Rule, that Sacred Scriptures must be such; and therefore that they are the surest Conveyance of faith. But I shall not so crudely conclude my enquiry; but shall in a Second Part prove, Holy Scriptures to be the most safe immediate Conservatory and Convey∣ance of Divine Truths, down from their first Delivery, unto all after

Ages: Only, having been large in the First Part; I suppose, I may be the briefer in the Se∣cond.

Notes

• (a) 1.1

  Dr. Cosins, the late Reverend Lord Bishop of Duresme, in his Scholast. History of the Canon of Scripture, pag. 4, 5.

  — Ecclesia Testis est, & custos sa∣crarum Literarum. — Ecclesiae Offi∣cium est, ut ver as, germanas, ac ge∣nuinas Scripturas, a falsis, suppo∣sititiis, ac adulterinis dijudicet, ac discernat. D. Whitak. de S. Script. Controv. 1. Quest. 3. Cap. 2.

  Article of Religion. 20.
• * 1.2

  2 Tim. 3.15, 16, 17. Isa. 8.20.
• * 1.3

  Sure Foot∣ing in Chri∣stianity p. 10••.
• * 1.4

  Sure Foot∣ing. p. 60.100, 101.
• * 1.5

  Gen. 18.19. Josh. 24.15.
• * 1.6

  Dr. James, in his Ma∣nuduction to Divinity. p. 108. Ex. Jo. Avent. Conc. Bas. & M. S.
• (a) 1.7

  The reverend Arch-Bishop Usher, in a Ser∣mon Preached before the King, June 20. 1624. on Eph. 4.13.
• (b) 1.8

  Dr. J. White, in his Preface to, The way to the true Church.
• (a) 1.9

  The Author of Cha∣rity mistaken, &c. In Dr. Potter's Answer to it. pag. 183. 200, 201.
• (a) 1.10

  Azor Instit. Mor. Part 1. Lib. 8. Cap. 6. Sect. Tertiò quaeri∣tur. Et Sect. Sed mihi probabilius, & verius.
• * 1.11

  Mal. 2.7, & 8.
• (a) 1.12

  Illud interim caven••um, ne Erroris unius odio devolvamur in alium errorem. Id si nullis fere veterum non accidit aliquâ ex par∣te, equidem non deprecabor homi∣nis ociosi notam, qui haec admo∣neam. Tertullianus, dum nimis acriter pugn••t aaversus eos qui plus sat is tribuebant Matrimonio, delatus est in alteram foveam:— Hieronymus tanto ardore pugnat adversus eos, qui Matrimonium efferebant, cum injuriâ Virgini∣tatis; ut ipse sub iniquo Judice vix possit suam tueri causam, si reus fiat parum reverenter tracta∣ti Conjugis, & Digamiae. Mon∣tanus, dum ardentiùs oppugnat ill••s qui passim dignis, & indig∣nis aperiebant Ecclesiae fores, plus satis taxatâ severitate disciplinae Ecclesiasticae, in diversum inci∣dit malum. D. Augustinus, adv••••s••s Pelagium toto studio dimicans, ali••••bi minus tribuit Li∣bero arbitrio, quàm tribuendum putant, qui nunc in scholis regnant Theologicis. Possem hujus gene∣r••s exempla permulta commemo∣rare, etiam ex recentioribus. Sed praestat (opinor) in re odiosâ non esse admedum copiosum. In Epistolâ praefatoriâ ad Opera Sti. Hilarti.
• (b) 1.13

  Ardebant veteres Illi tanto sincerae pietatis, & Catholicae defensienis ardere, ut dum unum errorem omnium virium co∣natu destruere annituntur, saepe in alterum errorem oppositum de∣ciderent, vel quodammodo decidisse videantur.—Sic Die∣nysius Corinthiorum Antistes, &c. In Praefatione Lib. 5ti. Bibliothecae Stae.
• (a) 1.14

  Historia Pelag. lib. 1. cap. 3.4, 5, 6, 7.
• (b) 1.15

  The Lord ••f Falkland, in his Re∣ply, p 122.
• (a) 1.16

  —Tum haeresis Arrii prorupit, totúm{que} Orbem, invecto Errore, turbaverat. Etenim duobus Arriis, acerrimishujus perfidiae Autoribus, Imperator etiam depravatur. Dúm{que} sibi Religionis Officium vi∣detur implere, vim persecutionis exercuit: acti{que} in Exilium Episcopi, saevitum in Clericos, animadversum in Laicos, qui se ab Arrianorum communione secreverant. Sulpic. Sev. Sac. Histor. Lib. 2.
• (a) 1.17

  Sure Footing, p. 118, 119.
• (a) 1.18

  —Ʋnum hoc ego per hanc dignationis tue sin∣ceram audientiam rogo: ut praesente Synodo, quae nunc de fide litigat, pau∣cis me de Scripturis E∣vangelicis digneris audi∣te.—

  Fidem Imperator quae∣ris, aud•• eam non de novis cha••tulis, sed de Dei libris.—

  Audi, rogo, ea, quae de Christo sunt Scripta, ne sub eis ea quae non Scripta sunt, praedi••en∣tur. Summitte ad ea, quae de libris locuturus sum. aures tuas. In Lib••o ad Constantium Augus••um, propiùs ••••em.
• (a) 1.19

  Nec ego Nicaenam Synodum tibi, nec tu Ari∣menensem mihi debes, tan∣quam praejudicaturus, obji∣cere. Scripturarum au∣thoritatibus res cum re, causa cum causa, ratio cum ratione concertet.

  Contra Maxim. Lib. 3 Cap. 14.
• * 1.20

  2 Pet. 3.16.
• * 1.21

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Jos. Antiq. Jud. Lib. 1. Cap. 4.

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Joseph. Ibid.
• (c) 1.22

  Hago Grotius, ex Eusebio, in Annotatis ad Lib. de Veri∣tate Religi. Christ. pag. 244.
• (d) 1.23

  Josh. 24.2.
• (e) 1.24

  Suus cui{que} mos, suus cui{que} ritus est. Jam si longa aetas ••••thoritatem religionibus faciat, servanda est tot Se∣culis fides: et sequendi sunt nobis Parentes, qui faeliciter sequuti sunt suos. Symmachi V. C. Relatio ad Valent. Theodos. &: Arcad. Au∣gustos, pro veteri Deòrum cultu adversus Christia∣nos.
• * 1.25

  Ps. 78.5.6.7, 8. Deut. 6.6, 17.
• * 1.26

  Exod. 19.16.
• * 1.27

  Heb. 12.21.
• * 1.28

  Exod. 24.3, 4.5.
• * 1.29

  Exod. 32.4
• * 1.30

  1 Kings 19.10.18.
• * 1.31

  2 Kings 22.11.
• * 1.32

  2 Kings. 23.2, 3.
• * 1.33

  Math. 15.3.9.
• (a) 1.34

  —Video Hebraeos om∣nes—Legem, quae per os tradita est, tanti facere, ut eam non modò aequent Legi Scriptae, sed longe antefe∣rant, tanquam animam corpo∣ri; quò sine eâ impossibile sit, ut ipsis videtur, Legem Scriptam intelligere aut ob∣servare: adeo{que} sine eâ Lex tota non sit nisi corpus ••ine Spiritu, &c. Episcopii Instit. Theol. L. 3. C. 4.
• (a) 1.35

  Leo Modena: History of the present Jews, &c. Translated by Mr. Chilmead. p. 248.
• (b) 1.36

  Epis∣cop. Ibid. Cap. 6. per to••.
• (a) 1.37

  Bibl. Stae. Lib. 5. Annot. 233. & Lib. 6. Annot. 347.
• (b) 1.38

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.

  Contra Tryphonem. p. 307.
• (a) 1.39

  Cerinthiani—mille quo{que} annos post resurrectionem in terreno regno Christi secundum carnales ventris, & lihidin••s voluptates futuros fabulantur: unde etiam Chiliastae sunt ap∣pellati. De Haeres. Cap. 8.
• (b) 1.40

  In Jo∣han. cap. 6.
• (c) 1.41

  Ut enim sanctissimi il∣li patres sui facti probabilem causam, pro illius temporis ra∣tione hab••erunt, ita certè ecs nullâ salutis necessitate, id fe∣cisse sine controversiâ credendum est. Trid. Conc. Sess. 5. Can. 4. Caranz. Summa Concil.
• (d) 1.42

  Siquis dixerit, parvulis, antequam ad annos discretionis pervenerint, necessariam esse Eu∣charistiae Communionem: Ana∣thema sit. Sess. 5. Can. 4. De Communione sub utra{que} specie, & parvulorum. Caran.
• (a) 1.43

  —Ʋnde nisi ex antiquâ, ut existimo, & Apostolicâ Traditione Ecclesiae Christi insitum tenent, praeter Baptis∣mum, & participationem Do∣minicae Mensae, non solum ad regnum Dei, sed nec ad salutem, & vitam aeternam posse quenquam hominum pervenire. And pre∣sently after two or three Quotations out of Scripture, he adds: Si ergo, ut tot, & tanta divina testimonia conci∣nunt, nec salus, nec vita aeter∣na sine Baptismo, & corpore & sanguine Domini cuiquam spectanda est, frustra sine his promittitur parvul••s. Porro si a salute, a•• vitâ aeterna ho∣minem nisi peccata non separant, per haec Sacramenta non nisi peccati reatus in parvulis solvi∣tur. S. August. De peccati merit. & remiss. Contr. Pelag. L. 1.
• (a) 1.44

  Notandum quòd ex ho•• quod dicitur hic: Nisi manducaveritis &c. Di∣cunt Graeci, quòd hoc Sa∣cramentum est tantae ne∣cessitatis, quod pueris de∣bet dari, sicut Baptismus. In Johan. Cap. 6. p. 53.
• (b) 1.45

  Graeci—Eucharistiam parvulis etiam infantibus praeb••nt, Instit. Mor. par∣te 1. L. 5 C. 11.
• (c) 1.46

  Ricaut of the Arme∣nian Church.
• (d) 1.47

  Enquiries touching, &c. Cap. 22, 23, 25.
• (e) 1.48

  Bib. Stae. Lib 6. An∣not. 345.
• (f) 1.49

  M. Daille of the right use of the Fathers. Lib. 2. Cap 4. Vossii Theses Hist••rico-Ecclesiasticae, de slatu Animae Separatae. Luc. 2. Th s. 1.2.3.
• (g) 1.50

  Daille Ibid. propiùs fi∣nem. Brerewood Enqui∣ries. Cap. 15.
• (h) 1.51

  Definimus— Illorum etiam animas, qui — in caelum mex recipi, & in∣tueri clarè ipsum Deum tri∣num & Ʋnum, sicuti est. Conc. Flor. apud Caran.
• (i) 1.52

  De Beatit. & Ca∣non. Sanctorum. Lib. 1•• Cap. 1. In initio.
• (k) 1.53

  Haec quaestio fundamen∣tum est omnium altarum; nam idcirco aute Christi adventum non ita coleban∣tur, neque invocabantur Spi∣ritus Patriarcharum, & Prophetarum, quemadmo∣dum nunc Apostolos, & Mar∣tyres colimus & invocamus, quòd Illi adhuc inferni carceribus clausi detiner en∣tur, Ordo disputationis subnexas Praefationi ad septimam Controversiam ge∣neralem de Ecclesiâ trium∣phante.
• (l) 1.54

  Respondeo imprimis ad Adrianum, Joannem hunc reverâ sensisse, animas non visuras Deum, nisi post resurrectionem: ••aeterùm hoc sensisse, quando adhuc sentire licebat sine pericu∣lo Haeresis, nulla enim ad∣h••c praecesserat Ecclesiae de∣finitio. Bellarm. de Romano Pontifice, Lib. 4. Cap. 14.
• * 1.55

  Sure Foot∣ing. p. 116.
• * 1.56

  Bellarm. de Christo. lib. 2. cap. 30.
• (a) 1.57

  Vossius de tribus Symboli; in Addendis.
• (b) 1.58

  Idem. Ibid.
• (a) 1.59

  Ricaut, of the Greek Church.
• (b) 1.60

  Summa Rei Chri∣stianae. Bel∣lar In Praef. ad lib. de summo Pon∣tifice.
• (c) 1.61

  See Ni∣lus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• (d) 1.62

  Ricaut, of the Greek Church.
• (a) 1.63

  Sure Footing, P. 116.
• (a) 1.64

  Non puto demonstra∣ri posse totis mille ampliùs annis, in ullâ Catholicae Ecclesiae parte sacrosanctum hoc Eucharistiae Sacramen∣tum aliter in sacrâ synazi è mensâ Dominicâ fideli po∣pulo, quàm sub utro{que} panis vini{que} Symbolo, administra∣tum fuisse. De saerâ Comm. sub utrâ{que} specie. He is positive, and large in this, in his Consultation like∣wise. Much to the same purpose, Alphonsus a Ca∣stro. Tit. Eucharistia. Hae∣resi. 13.
• (a) 1.65

  Praeterea declarat, hane potestatem perpetuò in Ec∣clesiâ fuisse, ut in Sacramen∣torum dispensatione, sal∣va illorum substantia, ea statueret, vel mutaret, quae suscipientium utilitati, seu ipsorum Sacramentorum ve∣nerationi, pro rerum, tem∣porum, & locorum varieta∣te, magis expedire judica∣ret.—Quare agnoscens ma∣ter Ecclesia hanc suam in ad∣ministratione Sacramento∣rum Anthoritatem, licèt ab initio Christianae religionis non infrequens utrius{que} speciei usus fuisset, tamen—hanc consuetudinem sub alterâ specie communicandi, appro∣bavit, & pro lege habendam decrevit.—Sess. 5. Can. 2. Apud Caran.
• (b) 1.66

  Hoc generale Concili∣um declarat, decernit, & definit,—quòd licèt Chri∣stus post caenam instituerit; & suis discipulis administra∣verit sub utra{que} specie panis & vini hoc venerabile Sa∣cramentum; tamen, hoc non obstante, sacrorum Canonum Authoritas, & approbata comuetudo Ecclesiae serva∣vit, & servat — Et simi∣liter quòd licet in primitivâ Ecclesià h••jusmodi Sacra∣mentum reciperetur a fide∣libus sub ut••••â{que} specie; tamen haec consuetudo, ad e∣vitandum aliqua pericula & scandala, est rationabiliter introducta, quòd a conficien∣tibus sub utrâ{que} specie, & a laicis tantummodo sub specie panis suscipiatur.—Sess. 3. Apud Eundem.
• (a) 1.67

  Concil. Constan. l∣bid,
• (d) 1.68

  Sacramentum est sacrae rei signum. — ut Sacramen∣tum sit sacrum signans, & sacrum signatum. Pet. Lumb. Lib. 4 Distinct. 1. B.
• (e) 1.69

  — Eucharistia ex du∣abus rebus constans terre∣nâ, & caelesti. Adversus haereses. Lib. 4. Cap. 34.
• (f) 1.70

  — Salvâ illorum substantiâ—Conc. Trid. suprà.
• (a) 1.71

  1 Cor. 11.24 25.
• (b) 1.72

  As for the words of our Saviour (do this in remem∣brance of me) they do no ways inser a precept of receiving in both kinds. First, because our Saviour said these words absolutely onely of the Sa∣crament in the form of Bread, but in the form of Wine onely conditional∣ly (do this, as o••t as y shall drink, in remembrance of me;) not commanding them to drink but in case they did drink—that then they should do it in memory of Christ. Dr. Vane's lost sherp, &c. pag. 311, 312.
• (c) 1.73

  1 Cor. 11.26.
• (d) 1.74

  De Eu∣char. Lib. 4. Cap. 24.6. neque ad hoc incommo∣dum.
• (e) 1.75

  Ibid. Sect. Sexta ratio sumi potest ab in∣commodis.
• (a) 1.76

  Con. Con∣stant. Ibid.
• (a) 1.77

  The Cup of Blessing, which we bless, is it not the Commu∣nion of the Blood of Christ?

  The Bread which we break, is it not the Communion of the Bo∣dy of Christ?

  1 Cor. 10.16.
• (b) 1.78

  1 Cor. 11.26.
• (a) 1.79

  1 Cor. 11.24.
• (b) 1.80

  Math. 26.28.
• (c) 1.81

  Par. 3. Qu. 76. Ar∣ticle. 2. ••.
• (a) 1.82

  The Title of the Dialogue is [whether, and how, Commu∣nion in both kinds is Faith?] And toward the end of it:—Be∣sides that the present Practice, (viz. administring in one kind) though universal, doth not deciare the Church's Faith, as in this parti∣cular, the Council of Trent shews, declaring that the Pope may dis∣pence upon just occasion, which could not be in matters of Faith. Enchiridion of Faith. Dial. 14. pag. 75. By Fran. Covent. (Tho. White, as is supposed) Printed at Douay, 1655.
• * 1.83

  Concil. Con∣stant. Ibid.
• (a) 1.84

  Les pro∣vinciales, or the Mistery of Jesuitism. pag. 92.
• (b) 1.85

  pag. 194.
• (c) 1.86

  Mr. Da∣ille Of the right use of the Fathers. Lib. 1. Cap. 11.
• (a) 1.87

  Bellarm. De Concil. Auctor. Lib 2. Cap. 14.
• (b) 1.88

  Bellar. de Romano Pontif. L. 4. C. 2.
• (c) 1.89

  Idem de Pont. Rom. L. 5. C. 1.
• (a) 1.90

  Gold. in Repl. pro. Imp. cited by Dr. Cra∣kanthorp, of the Popes Tempor. Monarchy. Chap. 11.
• (b) 1.91

  Exomo∣log. C. 40.
• * 1.92

  Ibid.
• (d) 1.93

  Quem & Cathel cae Fidei con∣sonum inve∣ni, &, &c.
• (e) 1.94

  Quemadmodum haec una Ecclesia errare non potest in fidei, ac morum discipli∣nâ tradendâ, cùm a spiritu S. gubernetur, ita, &c. Ca∣tech. Rom. Cap. 15. Quest. 15.
• (f) 1.95

  Quid de Romano Ponti∣fice, visibili Ecclesiae Christi Capite, sentiendum est. De eo fuit illo omnium Patrum ratio, &c. Ibid. quest. 11.
• (a) 1.96

  Catholici verò omnes constanter d••cent, Concilia generalia, a summo Ponti∣fice confirmata, non posse errare, nec in fide explican∣dâ, nec in tradendis mo∣rum praeceptis, toti Eccle∣siae communibus. Bellarm. de Conciliorum Autoritate. L. 1. C. 2. circa initium.
• (b) 1.97

  — Tota Autoritas Ec∣clesiae fermaliter non est nisi in Praelatis,—ergo idem est, Ecclesiam non posse er∣rare in definiendis rebus fi∣dei, & Episcopos non posse errare. Idem. Ibid. Sect. ex his enim locis manifeste col∣ligitur.
• (c) 1.98

  In the points of immacu∣late Conception, and the Con∣troversies between the Je∣suits, and the Dominicans, &c. Exomolog. Ch. 82.
• (a) 1.99

  Enchi∣rid. of Faith. p. 17. 113. Some what to this purpose likewise Cressy speaks, Ex∣om. Ch. 28.
• (a) 1.100

  Enchi∣rid. of Faith p. 113. and to the like purpose, Cresly, I∣bid.
• (b) 1.101

  Les Provincia les; Or, the, &c. p. 45. 41.
• (a) 1.102

  C••ari∣ty mistak∣en apu•••• P••tter, want of Charity 〈◊〉〈◊〉 charg∣ed. &c. p. 58.
• (a) 1.103

  Les Pre∣vin 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Let••e••. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 92.
• (b) 1.104

  Ibid. L••tter 9. 186, &c.
• (c) 1.105

  Ibid. Let. 7. p. 131, 132, &c.
• (d) 1.106

  Ibid. Let. 9. p. 202, 203, &c.
• (e) 1.107

  Ibid. Let. 10. p. 231, &c.
• (a) 1.108

  Ibid Let. 6. p. 115, and Let. 13. p. 285, 286, &c.
• (b) 1.109

  Ibid. Let. 7. p. 134, &c.
• (c) 1.110

  Ibid. Let. 8. p. 171, &c.
• (a) 1.111

  De quâ re agitur, cùn de prim••••u p••ntificis agitur, b••e issime d••cam, de summà rei Christian••e. Id enim qu••eritur, debeatne F••••lesia diutiùs con∣sist••••e, 〈…〉〈…〉 d••ssol••i, & con∣〈◊〉〈◊〉. ••••d eni•• al••ud est 〈◊〉〈◊〉, an eporteat ab ••dificio fu•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 n••u••n••r mo••ere, a gre••e pasterem, ••b exercitu impera∣torem, sol••m••ab astris, caput a corpore; quàm an oporteat aedi∣fictum ruere, g••egem dissipari, e••••c••um sued••, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 obs••u∣••ari, corpus i••cere? Bellarm. In Praefati••ne ad Libros de su••nmo pontifice habitâ in Gym∣n••sio Romano. Anno. 1577. clica initium.
• (a) 1.112

  Suprà.
• (b) 1.113

  Sacrae Synodi decreto Catechismus cons••ribitur, certa{que} formula, & ratio Christiani populi ab ipsis fidei rudimentis instituendi. —In Epist. dedicat.
• (c) 1.114

  Bellarm. suprà.
• (d) 1.115

  Suprà.
• (e) 1.116

  Exomol. Cap. 41.
• (a) 1.117

  De ver∣bo Dei non scripto. Lib. 4. Cap. 12. Sect. Dico Secundò.
• (b) 1.118

  The Title of the 9th. Par. of the 3d Dialo. is, that the dissention of the Catholique Doctors concer∣ning the Rule of Faith, doth not hurt the certainty of Tradition.
• (c) 1.119

  —For you see, they seek out the Decider of Points of Doctrine, i. e. by whose mouth we are to know (upon occasion of dis∣pute) what, and which be our Points, and Articles of our Fàith; to w••t, whether the Pope, or a Coun∣cil, or both. Which is not much Material to our pur∣pose, whatever the truth be, supposing we acknow∣ledge no Articles of Faith, but such as have descended to us by Tradition from Christ and his Apostles. Rushworth. Ibid.
• (a) 1.120

  Sure Footing. p. 114.
• (b) 1.121

  Ibid. p. 53.
• (c) 1.122

  Letter of thanks, &c. p. 87. 88.
• (d) 1.123

  Sure Footing. p. 54.
• (a) 1.124

  p. 114.
• (b) 1.125

  p. 57.
• (c) 1.126

  Letter of thanks, &c. p. 24, 25, 26.
• (a) 1.127

  That vast Testi∣fication we call Tradi∣tion.—Sure Footing. p. 54.
• (b) 1.128

  Sure Footing. p. 115.
• * 1.129

  Sure Foot∣ing. p. 59, 60.
• (a) 1.130

  Tho' Nature in∣cline men to sin, or vi∣cious Appetites, yet can it incline them all to this sort of sin, i. e. to teach their Children, what they think will damn them? Sure Foot∣ing. p. 61.
• (a) 1.131

  Sure Footing. p. 61.
• (b) 1.132

  Dial. 3. Sect. 13. Where he speaks on ec∣casion of de∣taining the Cup from the Laiety.
• (a) 1.133

  Suprà.
• (b) 1.134

  Sure Footing p. 60.
• (a) 1.135

  Ibid.
• (b) 1.136

  Catal. Testium ve∣ritatis A••rian R••gen. in Histor. Eccles. S••avo∣nic. Dr. Field. in the Appendix to the 3d. Book of the Church.
• (a) 1.137

  Sure Footing. p. 236, 237. Author of Sure Foot∣ing. Ibid.
• (a) 1.138

  Ibid. p. 217.
• (b) 1.139

  Ibid. p. 236, 237.
• (c) 1.140

  Ibid. p. 219. 220, 221.
• (a) 1.141

  Rush∣worth Di∣al. 2. Sect. 7.
• (b) 1.142

  Let us suppose the writer himself play the Translator, as for Example, that our Saviour himself having spoken in He∣brew, or Syriak, the holy writer is to express his words in Greek or Latin. And farther, that this which we have said of Translations be (as tru∣ly it is) grounded in the very nature of divers Languages, therefore unavoidable by any Art or Industry, will it not clearly follow, that even in the Origi∣nal Copy, written by the Evan∣lists own hand, there is not in rigor the true and self-signifi∣cant words of our Saviour, but rather a Comment, or Para∣phrase, explicating and deli∣vering the Sense thereof. Nay, let him have written in the same Language, and let him have set down every word and sylla∣ble, yet men conversant in no∣ting the changes of meaning in words, will tell you, that di∣vors accents in the pronunciati∣on of them, the turning of the Speakers Head and Body this way, or that way, the allusion to some Person, or to some pre∣cedent discourse or the like, may so change the Sense of the words, that they will seem quite diffe∣rent in writing from what they wree in speaking.—Rush∣worth. Ibid. And the Title of the next (the 8th.) par. is: The uncertainty of Equivo∣cation, which of necessity is incident in all Writings.
• (a) 1.143

  Sure Footing. p. 224, 225, 226, 227, 228.
• (a) 1.144

  Sure Footing. p. 230.
• (a) 1.145

  Sure Footing. p. 215, 216.
• (a) 1.146

  Sure Footing. p. 216.
• * 1.147

  P. 10, 11, 12.
• * 1.148

  Ibid. p. 44.
• (a) 1.149

  The Authors, and the Collections out of them, may be seen, in Dr. J. White's Way to the tr••e Church, p. 113, 114, 115. In Dr. James his Manuduction. 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108. And in Dr. Whit∣by's Absurdity, and Ido∣latry of Host Worship (the Appendix) from p. 70, to p. 108.
• (a) 1.150

  Is. Ca∣saub. in Proleg. ad Exercitat.
• (b) 1.151

  Idem. Ibid.
• (c) 1.152

  Nulla res ita hac∣tenus negligi vis est, ac rerum Ecclesiasticarum gestarum vera, certa, & exactâ diligentiâ per∣quisita Narratio. Baron. in Praefatione ad Annal. Tom. prim.
• (d) 1.153

  Maximum saepenu∣mero dolorem cepi, dum ipse mecum reputo; quàm diligenter—Acta verò Apostolorum, Martyrum, dein{que} Divorum nostrae Religionis, & ipsius sive crescentis Ecclesiae, sive jam adultae, op••rta maxi∣mix tenebris ferè ignorari. —Fuere qui magna pietatis loco ducerent men∣dacia pro religione con∣fingere.—Lib. 5. de Trad. Discipl..
• (a) 1.154

  Way to the true Ch. p. 195, 196, &c.
• (b) 1.155

  Sure Footing. p. 126, &c.
• (c) 1.156

  Letter of thanks, p. 106.
• (a) 1.157

  Ibid. p. 105.
• * 1.158

  P. 52.