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.

CHAP. II. Objections answer'd.

SECT. I.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SECT. II.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SECT. III.

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

not written by the first Author, but,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SECT. IV.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

be more contented with their diffi∣culties.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes

• (a)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Apud Caran∣zam.
• (a)

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

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

  De Verbo Dei. L. 2. c. 2.
• (c)

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Id••m. I∣bid Ch. 2.
• (a)

  Sure Foot. pag. 115.
• (b)

  Ibid. pag 101.
• (c)

  Ibid. pag. 103.
• (d)

  Ibid. pag. 56.
• (a)

  Ibid. pag. 203, 204.
• (b)

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

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

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

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

  Sure Footing. P. 117.
• (b)

  Ibid. p. 98.
• (c)

  Ibid. p. 38.
• (d)

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

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