Brief Account of One Suggestion of the Romanist, Chapter 3 · Section 2

Brief Account of One Suggestion of the Romanist · Chapter 3 · Section 2

p. 209SECT. II.

The second previous consideration. Oral Tradition in opposition to Scripture or Fathers. Mr. Whites passages concerning Scripture, in his Apology consonant to Rushworths Dialogues. The Scales set betwixt S. W's way of Oral Tradition (Mr. Whites invention) and ours of Apostolical Tradition, Scripture and Fathers. Our way establish'd. Writing no praejudice to Tradition. This proved by the Suffrages of the Antients of the five first ages, St. Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Basil, Augustine, Vincentius, Salvian, The Greek Church of the last Century, the Romanist publisher. The practice at Nice, and Ephesus. Capreolus. Justinian. Mr. White. Gregory XIII. Julius Rogerius, Suarez, Abulensis, Mr. White again, Bellarmine, Suarez again. The true notion of Tradition from Peresius. Records overrule custome. Driedo's account. S. W's three objections answered. Perspicuity of Scripture. Helps for interpreting it. No advantage of Oral. The Romish mothers teaching written words not accusable of mutenesse. The Scriptures want of artificial rules of demonstration objected by S W. So their not being written of latter Controversies. Charity to dissenters taught by Scripture and Councels. Their Ʋniversal Pastorship and Infallibility deduced from Scripture by themselves.

1. Secondly then to clear the subject of our debate from all ambiguity, and distinguish it from any other praetenders, I have my directions here from the**Schis. Dispat. p. 47. close of this Section in these words, To stop the way against the voluntary mistakes of mine adversary, I declare my self to speak here not of written tradition to be sought for in the Scriptures and Fathers, which lies open to so many cavils and exceptions, but of Oral Tradition] so frequently elsewhere. To which also I referre that of the Apologist p. 8. that this Maxime*… [The Churches Doctrine is received from Christ, and still handed along to the praesent generation] is the only undoubted p. 210and self-evident principle, and again that of the same hand, p. 11. that A considerer, were it his design to set up a Religion, which he would have constantly and universally propagated, he must of necessity pitch upon this way, pronouncing, that if God hath not already taken this course, certainly he should have done it. Which speeches how untuneable soever to softer ears, must yet be taken in good part from so great an Authority, and are to be understood, with analogie to the former, of Oral Tradition, and not of written either in Scriptures or Fathers.

2. To this head again I referre the passages in this author, which to my weaker sences, savour much of diminution and unkindnesse (at least comparative) to the Scriptures. As when he saith Justin Martyr proved his Millenary Doctrine meerly out of the Prophets, Apol. p. 79.and never mentions Tradition for it (where yet by the way, he that avouched it as the Doctrine of all that were in all things of right opinions at that time will hardly be denyable to have proposed Oral Tradition for it, which is S. W's way, though neither Apostolical nor Ʋniversal, which is our way of urging Tradition) the [meerly out of the Prophets] layes blemish on such testimonies out of the Prophets, i. e. the Scriptures in comparison of the other of Tradition. P. 137.So when he saith 'tis a shamelesse proposition to say the Scriptures were written of Controversies, long after their date sprung up in the Christian world] As if it were a great impudence in a Christian to think that the Apostles could foresee by Gods spirit, and obviate the haeresies, which should after rise in the Church. And yet as**Contr. Haer. l. 3. c. 11. St. Irenaeus observes of St. Johns Gospel, in relation to the Valentinians and Marcionites, so I doubt not but the Arrians haeresie which after sprung (to omit others of yet later date) might, without shame, be defensible from some Texts of Scripture, there be three that bear witnesse in heaven— and these three are one, I and my Father are one, and the like, which made me the more take notice of his suggestion,Ap. p. 39. that he hath ground to believe that some learned men in Court were prevented by Arrius and solicited into a secret favour of his error, from whom 'tis likely proceeded that motion of Constantine to the Councel for determining the point out of Scripture, and when the Bishops contradicted not the proposition of the Emperor in words, and p. 211(he saith) had reason for it, yet he addes, that was not to that end to which the Emperor proposed it, viz. the solution of the question, but to the conviction of the Arrians, and satisfaction of the world, where I might ask why the Arrians should first contrive underhand the determining the point by that means, and then be so farre from wits, as to be convinced by it? and again how the world should be satisfied with it, if that were not deemed by the world at that time the proper way of determining Controversies? which if it might be yielded of any one age of the world, there were then also a determination and end of this Controversie.

3. So when he makes the comparison betwixt the**Apol. p. 135. authority of the Church, as the living word written in their breasts (that is the periphrasis peculiar to his Oral Tradition) and the dead letter of the Scriptures, and yet plainer, a††P. 149. mute ambiguous dead writing, not quickened with reason and discourse, and this, because, as he again explains himself more fully, the style of the Bible is accommodated to vulgar capacities (and yet alas it must not be permitted to the use of the vulgar) and the delivery by way of plain and direct affirmation (who would then ever have thought, it had been so excessively ambiguous) without attending to the artificial rules of demonstration (which the author so much affecting and attending to, must be excused, if he say some things, that vulgar capacities cannot comprehend to have the least even probable truth in them.) And as this is the ground, so it is the interpretation of his grand distribution of Professors of Christianity into believers of the word taught or delivered Orally, and believers of the word taught or delivered in Paper, in the beginning of his Praeface to the Dialogues. As for the Dialogues themselves, it were a long, and joylesse labour to recount, what, beyond the industry, and sagacity of all former writers in the world, I say not Romanist Christians, or**Sess. 4 decr. 1. Tridentine Fathers (who professe to make use of Scripture testimonies in confirmandis dogmatibus, acknowledging God for the author of them) but even the most profess'd enemies of Christianity, Jewes, and scoffing Heathens, (Mahumetan's have not attempted any thing of the kinde) he hath compiled and heaped together, to diminish the consideration p. 212of the books both of the Old and New Testament, on this one account of their being written, both in the Originals and Translations: One single **Dial. 2. Sect. 5.operation of his (for he hath many more that bear proportion with it) is so successefull to him, that having made one easie supposition, that there have been as many Copies taken in some age of an 100 years as there are columnes in the Bible, he demands, May we not well reckon as many faults escaped in every Copy (one with another) as there are words in a Column (which he supposes to be 336) which admitted ('tis then beyond a may be, it commences certain) you will finde, saith he, the number of errors in all the Copies made since the Apostles times, amount to fifteen or sixteen times as many as there are words in the Bible, and so by this account, it would be fifteen or sixteen to one, of any particular place, that it were not the true Text. And although this be but the Nephewes account in the Dialogue; who is feigned to think it too dangerous to be possible, yet the demure Ʋnkle tells him plainly, I doe not conceive you have taken your proportions too high, and hath but one exception to this reckoning, viz. that the errors of many Copies may have been the same in divers of them. Which being his only obstacle to concluding that we might look for Scripture in Scripture, and doubt whether we meet with one true syllable of it, and this most unluckily chosen, and the least for the Christians interest of any, (for the more Copies agree in an error, the more likelihood there is, that this error should praevail, and supplant the truth, such accordances being not easily supposeable to be casual, or imputable to the Scribes) the Result is obvious, and of neer concernment to more than††P. 79. the City-wives (whom he jeers for turning their Bibles) or the**P, 101. people at St. Antholins (who he thinks would stone him with their Brazen-corner'd Bibles (by the figure, you must suppose, of a Leaden Ink-horn) but could not answer his argument) even to all Christians, that shall ever think it their serious interest, to keep Paganisme from returning to overrun the world, or Judaisme to defie Christianity; which how would they misse to do, should they use but ordinary industry, the Christian being thus deprived of the writings of Moses, his chief weapons of defense and security from the one, and of the writings of the Prophets also p. 213from whence Christ and the Apostles fetch'd their principal evidences and offensive arms against the other; both which, with the rest of the written word, are by the judgement of common sense, if we will heed the Dialogists reasonings, voted to be so uncertain, that they ca never be relyed on with any confidence (any more than**Dial. 2. Sect. 14 p. 130. a beetle to cut with) against any adversary, and accordingly the††Ibid. p. 129. rule is given expressely, that Catholikes never undertake to convince their Adversaries out of Scripture, and so not Jewes or Mahumetanes, when they are such. This mindes me of Mr. Whites arguings against Purgatory pains being inflicted by Gods vindicative justice, the very same, that will aequally hold against adjudging men to the torments of hell, viz. 1.**De Med. an. Stat. p. 39. Because there accrues no profit either to the Souls themselves, or to any other, single person, or Ʋniverse, 2. Because††P. 41. neither the cause of restitution nor caution perswade it, which alone can have place, saith he, with a wise God. 3. Because the sins to which the pains are apportioned, seem not to him to be any **P. 43.injury to God, for how can they, saith he, volens vel nolens? si nolenti fit, non erat omnipotens, cum vellet impedire neque potuit, volenti si factum est, injuria non est] The very Logick and Dilemma that the Ranters have lately used, to conclude all the foulest acts of men or divells, the will of God, and thence to resolve, that there is nothing culpable in them. All that I shall think fit to reply, at this time, to all this is, in these few lines to take notice of the full image and character of immoderate opposition (foreign) which, so it may impugne enough the present Christian adversary, foresees not what aids it brings in to the Jew, or Pagan, or even to the Devil himselfe; But this by the by, I would it might have been spared.

4. He that will have a complete Collection of such passages for extolling the Orall, and depressing all written Tradition, must transcribe those Dialogues and the whole Apology for them, and therefore may more cheaply content himself with S. W's Epitome of it in these two expressions, 1. Positive ††Sch. Disp. p. 17.[the incomparable force of Ʋniversal Tradition, our only tenor] 2. compared to the [what small merit of assent can be praetended to by words of men p. 214dead long agoe, left to be toss'd by our various expositions and criticismes, and liable to a thousand evasions—

5. All that I note them for in this place, is to give the undoubted notion of the Tradition he speaks of, not so as that word properly signifies any kinde of conveighance to us from the Apostles, whether by the Scriptures or the writings of the Fathers, &c. but praecisely Oral Tradition, that, which, saith Mr. Apol. p. 10.White, the Mothers flatter into their children, and is**P. 11. the most sweet and connatural way that can be imagined to beget a firm and undoubted assent— and this still if not exclusively, yet comparatively, so as to carry it clearly from Scriptures and Fathers, which are all but dead letters and mute writings, in comparison of this which alone he looks on as Gods living word.

6. The subject then being thus explain'd, and removed from all ambiguity, and the competition cleared to lye betwixt Oral Tradition, or the Mothers teaching their Children the Faith, on one side, and Apostolical Tradition conveighed to us by Scripture and Fathers, on the other, the former S. W's sole praetension, the latter conjoyned (and taking in also Oral) ours, It is not amisse in this place, before we come to the definition and fuller discussion of it, to poise the Scales a while, and consider what rational demonstrative grounds he can be discerned to have, to depresse our way, of Scripture and antient Records of the Apostles depositum, both which remain to us in writing, and are our test, to discerne what beliefe is due to what is orally delivered us; for by this we shall be praepared to discern afterward, what incomparable force there is in his motives, to advance, and give the deference so much to this Invention, which with him hath supplanted that other.

7. Invention I call it from Mr. Whites own Profession, that it is a††Ep. Ded. to the Apol. path not much beaten by their own modern Controvertists, and by his telling us the beginning of it in a**Apol p. 1. slight familiar conference, and by S. W's††Schis. Disp. p. 18. great comfort, that he professes to take, that the best sort of wits begin to own their Reason in this particular, though yet he cannot but discern there be few of them. And that, me thinks, to one that acknowledges any kinde of p. 215Tradition for his only ground, should be a competent praejudice against it. But of this we shall hereafter consider more seasonably.

8. Let us then a while 1. establish, and 2. secure our own way, And therein first consider the rational grounds upon which it proceeds, acknowledged to be such by the Romanists themselves, and such as in other matters bear sway with the Romanists.

9. And first for the establishing, It is by all confess'd that the whole Christian Faith hath its intire beginning from the preaching of Christ, and the teaching of the Holy Ghost who should lead the Apostles into all necessary truths, 2. That the Apostles orally communicated all such to all Churches of their Plantations, 3. That their writings, as far as they are perspicuous, and as they set down these Christian Doctrines, so farre they ought to have force with all Christians, the same that their words would have, if they were orally conveighed to us, there being no such difference imaginable betwixt words written, and spoken, and the reading of one, and hearing the other, as that one should found certainty of belief, and the other be uncapable of founding it. 4. That if (on supposition) there be any thing in their preachings which they delivered as necessary, but committed not to writing, yet in case we have this their delivering it competently testified by those that heard their preachings, and in case this testification of those hearers, be plainly and intelligibly conveighed to us by their own writings, or by the consentient writings of those which received it, thus delivered down to them successively from their preachings in the several Churches, we have then no more reason to doubt, of the truth of these written testifications, than if they who first wrote, had orally delivered to us the same things, which they wrote.

10. This then, thus briefly deduced, is the ground why Tradition being yielded to be the only Rule of Faith, and that nothing is to be imposed as de Fide, and necessary, but what is thus delivered by the Apostles of Christ, we thinke not this Tradition praejudiced or any way weakened p. 216(I need adde no more to S.W.) by being committed to writing.

11. For this it is not amisse to adde the testimonies of antiquity, and I referre him in the first place to St. Irenaeus in the second Century, who having in his Praeface to his third book promised the Christian Reader, a **Plenissimam adversus omnes haereticos contradictionem.most full resistance against all haereticks, and establishment in the††Sola vera ac vivifica fide quam ab Apostolis Ecclesia percepit, & distribuit filiis suis. sole true and vivifick faith, which the Church received from the Apostles, and distributed to her children, tells him in the beginning of the first Chapter, that we know not that the disposition of our salvation is by any others, but those **Per quos evangelium pervenit ad nos, quod quidem tunc praeconiaverunt, postea vero per Dei voluntatem in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt, fundamentum et columnam fidei nostrae futurum.by whom the Gospel came to us, which they then preached, but after by the will of God delivered to us in the Scriptures, to be the foundation and pillar of our faith. Thus, saith he, Matthew among the Hebrewes ††Scripturam edidit evangelii, in Greek, foreign, Euseb. l. 5. c. 8.set out the Scripture or writing of the Gospel in their tongue, Thus Mark the Disciple and Interpreter of St. Peter**foreign delivered to us in writing what was preached by Peter, thus Luke a follower of Paul,††foreign. set down in a book the Gospell which was preached by him, and afterward John — Then in his second Chapter branding the haereticks he sets this for the first part of their charge, that when they are found fault with from Scriptures, they fall to accusing the Scriptures, that they are not right, that they are not authoritative, because they are variè dictae, and because truth cannot out of them be found by those that know not Tradition, for that was not delivered by writing, but by live voice. And as this was one of the haereticks foul guilts, to reject, and appeal from Scripture to Oral Tradition, so in the next words we are taught the true notion of Tradition, which next to Scripture was set up by the Church, as the rule of judging the truth, viz. that**Ad Traditionem qua est ab Apostolis, quae per successionem Presbyterorum in Ecclesiis custoditur, pro vocamus eos. which is from the Apostles, which by the succession of the Elders is kept in the Churches, (the descending and not revers'd Tradition) and to this the Orthodox Christians made their appeale. p. 217And then the brief of the haereticks charge is, that they neither consent to the Scriptures **Evenit itaque neque Scripturis, neque Traditioni consentire eos.nor to tradition, in which respect the slipperynesse of the Serpent is there said to be their Copy. For the confounding of whom††Ch. 3. the first opposes the tradition of the Apostles, **In toto mundo manifestatam in omni Ecclesia.manifested through all the world in every Church, and for††Quoniam valde longum est in hoc tali volumine omnium Ecclesiarum enumerare successiones, maximae et antiquissimae & omnibus cognitae, a gloriosissimis duobus Apostolis Petro & Paulo Romae fundatae & constitutae Ecclesiae. brevity sake, not to enumerate all, in the greatest, and most ancient and known to all, the Church of Rome, founded by two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, shewing there the tradition which that had from the Apostles, and the faith declared to men, coming down by successions of Bishops to his time; and so on, in those expressions of**Potentiorem principalitatem— honour to that Church, for conserving Apostolical Tradition in it, which we willingly acknowledge was by him most justly bestowed on it; wherein he nameth the immediate successors of those Apostles, Linus, Anacletus, and Clemens, who saw and conferr'd with them, and had their preaching sounding in their ears, and Tradition ††foreign.before their eyes (which they could not well be supposed to have had, unlesse it we…e written) under the last of which, Clemens, the Church of Rome, saith he, wrote to them at Corinth **foreign.a writing (the first Epistle of Clemens) most sufficient and powerfull, reducing them to peace, and††foreign. repairing their faith, and declaring the Tradition which it had newly received from the Apostles. Then setting down the heads of Faith, **Ex ipsa Scriptura qui volunt discere possunt & Apostolicam Eccl…siae traditionem intelligere, cum sit vetustior Epistola hic qui nunc falsa docent.They, saith he, that will, may learn out of the writing it self, and understand the Apostolical Tradition, seeing that Epistle is ancienter than the false teachers, And from Clemens deducing the succession of Bishops to Eleutherius in the twelfth place, by this succession, saith he, the tradition which is in the Church from the Apostles, and the preaching of the truth is come down even to us. And this, he concludes, is a most full demonstration, that it is one and the same inlivening faith, which in the Church p. 218from the Apostles untill his time is conserved and delivered in truth. The like he instances again in Polycarpe Bishop of Smyrna in Asia, who received his Doctrine from the Apostles, and delivered it to the Church, and concludes of him that he hath**foreign. written a most sufficient or powerfull Epistle to the Philippians (the phrase, which when 'twas used before, of the Church of Rome, gave occasion of Fevardentius's note, that from the beginning that Church had authority in moderating the Greek Churches, and then so had Polycarpe too) from which they that are willing, and have a care of their own salvations, may learn the character of his faith, and the preaching of truth. And though ch. 4. he ask, in case††Quid si neque Apostoli Scripturas reliquissent, nonne oportebat ordinem sequi Traditionis? the Apostles had not lest writings, must we not have followed the order of Tradition, and affirm the faith to have been**Cui ordinationi assentiunt multae gentes barbarorum, quorum qui in Christum credunt sine charta & atramenio scriptam habentes per spiritum in cordibus suis salutem— preserved in some barbarous Nations without Paper and Ink in their hearts by the Spirit (an authority better perhaps, than S. W. knew of, for the affirming of Oral Tradition, that 'tis written in mens hearts) yet ch. 5. he††Revertamur ad eam quae est ex Scripturis ostensionem. reverts to the demonstrating of the faith against the haereticks out of Scriptures, and ch. XI. resolves that St. John having preached the faith wrote his Gospell **Omnia talia circumscribere volens, & regulam veritatis constituere in Ecclesia—on purpose to constitute a rule of truth in the Church, that haereticks not only such as were in his own, but such as in that Fathers time, (the Marcionites by name, &c.) were refuted by what he wrote, and by his Gospell ††Abstulit a no…t dissensiones omnes Joan…es dicens, In munde erat—dissensions taken out of the Church.

12. The observations which this large transcript out of that one so Primitive a Father (a Controvertist, as well as S.W.) will yield, I shall leave the Reader to make to himselfe (for to S. W. I know 'tis but a wordish testimony) The least that he can, is the most that I shall conclude from it, that at that time Scripture and Tradition Apostolical (that is not Oral) p. 219where they were both to be had, were the means of establishing truth, and that it was no praejudice to Tradition, that it was written, in order to this of demonstrating against haereticks.

13. Tertullian in the beginning of the next age, the third Century, the greatest assertor of unwritten Traditions, where no more is to be had, doth evidently set the written first, and then, by way of supply, the unwritten. He that will better exercise his curiosity in the businesse of his salvation, Let him, saith he, surveigh the Apostolical Churches with whom the very chairs of the Apostles praeside in their places, **Apud quas ipsae authenticae literae eorum recitantur sonantes vocem— uniuscujusque, De Praescr. Adv. Haer. c. 26.with whom the very authentick Letters of them are recited, sounding the voice and representing the face of every one of them, and instancing in the Church of Rome, an happy Church, in which the Apostles powred out their whole Doctrine with their blood, he saith of it, that it††Legem & Prophetas cum Evangelicis & Apostolicis literis miscet, & inde potat fidem eam, aqu… signat—Ibid. mixes Law and Prophets with Evangelical and Apostolical writings, and from thence drinks the faith, and signes it with baptisme, &c.

14. The same it is manifest was the rule in St. Cyprians time, in the middle of that third Century, Ep. 74. to Pompeius, where, upon Pope Stephens pressing Tradition to him, he replies,**Ʋnde est ista Traditio? utrumne de dominica & evangelica authoritate descendens, an de Apostolorum mandatis atque Epistolis veniens? Whence is the Tradition? doth it descend from the authority of the Lord and the Gospel, doth it come from the commands and Epistles of the Apostles? for God, saith he, testifies and proposes to Josuah son of Nun,††Ea facienda esse quae scripta sunt. that those things are to be done which are written, saying, the Book of this Law shall not depart from thy mouth, but thou shalt meditate in it day and night, and observe to doe those things that are written in it (God it seems then thought that written words might be intelligible, and the rule of their lives)**Si aut in evangelio praecipitur aut in Apostolorum Epistolit aut Actibus continetur— observetur divina haec & sancta traditio. If then it be commanded in the Gospel or contained in the Epistles, p. 220or acts of the Apostles, Let this divine and holy Tradition be observed; But**Si retrò nusquam omnino praecepium est, neque conscriptum, quae est ista obstinatio humanam traditionem divinae dispositioni anteponere? if in all former times it be no where commanded nor written, what obstinacy, what praesumption is it to praeferre an humane Tradition before Gods disposing? Adding that††Consuetudo sine veritate vetustas erroris est. Custome without truth is but antiquity of error, and concluding that it is the duty of Priests that kept Gods Lawes, that**Si in aliquo nutaverit aut vacillaverit veritas, ad originem dominicam et Evangelicam et Apostolicam traditionem revertamur. Inde surgat actus nostri ratio, unde et ordo et origo surrexit. if in any particular the truth totter, or be ready to fall, they revert to the beginning in Christ and the Gospel, and Apostolical Tradition (not what the praesent age teaches) and from thence let the reason, saith he, of our action arise, whence our ordination and beginning (of our Christianity) arose.

15. Here certainly Tradition, if truely so called, was conceived to referre to the Authors in the first place, and to the remains of them that were in writing (and so to the wordish testimonies so fastidiously rejected by S. W.) and but secondarily, and as it accordeth with those, to after-custome.

16. So St. Basil in the fourth Century, as one while his appeal is from the disputers subtilties, to Christ, Apostles, Fathers, Martyrs, (sufficiently opposed to the Revers'd Tradition)††To. 1. Hom. 27. cont. Sabel. p. 608. A. foreign, Let Tradition put thee to the blush, the Lord hath thus taught, the Apostles preach'd, the Fathers observed, the Martyrs confirmed, be thou content to speak as thou hast been taught, and bring not me these captious Sophismes; So**foreign to. 2. p. 307. another while more expressely, by way of definition, in his morals, foreign, Every word or thing ought to be confirmed or ratified by the testimony of inspired Scripture.

17. And St. Augustine, in the beginning of the fifth Century, though he differed in opinion from Cyprian about the baptizing of those that had baptisme from haereticks, yet he avowedly adhaeres to his grounds (only adding that of††Ʋniversalis Ecclesiae admonitus firmitate vidit aliquid quod ille non vidit, quia plenarium de hacre concilium nondum habebat Ecclesia. de bapt. Contr. Donat. l. 4 c. 6. conciliar determinations, p. 221by which he came to see what Cyprian had not seen)**Quod autem nos admonet ut ad fontem recurramus, i. e a… Apostolicam traditionem, & inde canalem in nostra tempora dirigamus, optimum est, & sine dubitatione faciendum, l. V. c. 26. When, saith he, he adviseth us to recurre to the fountain, Apostolical Tradition, and from thence to bring down the Conduit to our own times, it is best, and without doubt to be practised, and accordingly fetches his testimonies out of Scripture. So again de Ʋnit. Eccles. c. XIX. Ʋtrum ipsi teneant Ecclesiam non nisi de divinarum Scripturarum Canonicis libris ostendant, requiring the Donatists to shew from the Canonical Books of holy Scriptures, whether they be in the right or no in their praetensions, as, saith he, when Christ rose from the dead, and shewed himself to his Disciples, lest they might think there were any deceit in it, magis eos testimoniis Legis & Prophetarum & Psalmorum confirmandos esse judicavit, he thought fit to confirm them by testimonies of the Law and Prophets and Psalmes, shewing that those things were fulfilled in him, which had been so long before foretold. An eminent testimony from Christs own judgement, what was the fittest way of concluding controversies of Faith. So††L. 4. c. 85. against the Letters of Petilian, Whether I, or you be Schismaticks, non ego nec tu, sed Christus interrogetur ut indicet Ecclesiam suam, Let Christ be asked, and neither I nor you, that he may shew or point out his Church. And so more expressely in his 166th Epistle, In Scripturis discimus Ecclesiam, the Scriptures which teach us Christ are the means to teach us the Church also, and**In Psal. 69.Ps 69 again, Lest any should tell thee that is Christ, which is not Christ, aut Ecclesia est, quae non est Ecclesia, or that is the Church which is not the Church, audi vocem Pastoris, hear the voice of the Shepheard, i. e. of Christ, in Scripture: Elsewhere we have him as punctual for our way of descendent, against this new of ascendent, Revers'd Tradition; Puritas doctrinae expendenda est non secundum Traditionem praesentis aut hujus, vel illius particularis Ecclesiae, hujus vel illius interpretis, sed secundum Traditionem ab initio a temporibus Apostolorum concordi Patrum sententiâ ad nos usque deductam, The purity of Doctrine is to be weighed, not according to the Tradition of the praesent Church, or of this or that particular Church, of this or that Interpreter, but according to Tradition deduced from the beginning from the times of the Apostles even to us by a concordant opinion of the Fathers. Many the like are to be had in that Father.

p. 22218. About 20. years after him, Vincentius Lirinensis in his Commonitory against haeresies, resolves the way of refuting them to be by**Prolatis atque collatis veterum magistrorum concordantibus sibimet sententiis. c. 39. producing and comparing the concordant opinions of the old Masters, and in case the haeresies be of some standing, so as to have falsified and corrupted those rules of ancient Faith, (this it seems by him is no impossibility) then the only way is††Aut sola Scripturarum authoritate aut jam antiquitus Ʋniversalibus Catholicorum Conciliis. Ibid. either by the sole authority of Scriptures, or by the ancient Ʋniversal Councels.

19. And About 20. years after him, Salvian speaking of the Goths and other barbarous Nations, that received the Faith, but as it was corrupted by the Arrians, gives this account of them, that Though they have the Scriptures, yet for want of literature **Nihil omnino sciunt nisi quod a doctoribus suis audiunt, quod audiunt, hoc sequuntur, de Gub. l. V. p. 153. Ed. Oxon.they know nothing, but what they hear from their Teachers, and what they hear they follow. And again, they that ††Necesse est ces qui totiùs literaturae ac scientiae ignari, sacramentum divinae legis doctrina magis quam lectione cognoscunt, doctrinam potius retinere quam legem. Itaque eis traditio Magistrorum suorum & doctrina inveterata quasi lex est, qui hoc sciunt quod docentur, haeretici ergo sunt, sed non scientes; Denique apud nos sunt haeretici, apud se non sunt. Nam in tantum se Catholicos esse judicant, ut nos ipsos titulo haereticae appellationis infament. Ibid.being ignorant of all literature doe know the sacred mystery of Gods Law by teaching rather than reading (a direct image of S. W's sole principle, Oral Tradition) doe rather retain what they are taught than the Law of God, and therefore the Tradition of their Masters and inveterate teaching is as it were law to them, who know that which they are taught; they are therefore haereticks, but know it not, haereticks in our, but not in their own account, for they are so confident that they are Catholikes, that they defame us for haereticks (whose practice this is both in the root and fruit, S. W. will soon recollect, if he be so minded.)

20. I might multiply authorities in each Century, and thereby demonstrate that S. W's one principle hath not been received in all ages of the Church, and so according to his own demonstration, is infallibly to be degraded from that dignity which he hath bestowed on it, and Scripture and Tradition p. 223together set up in its stead, the one to interpret and supply whatsoever imaginable omissions in the other, and that the latter of these is not to be praejudged (any more than the former) on this only account that it hath been written, and so me thinks the testimonies which his preaching adversary fetcheth from thence for deciding controversies, should not for ever fall under the reproach of wordish testimonies.

21. I shall only adde the Profession of the Greek Church, which the**Socolov. Praefat. A. 4 5. Romanists that publish'd it, recommends to all, as the means to recall them to the Catholike Church, by shewing they can have no sort of company out of it, the Eastern, as well as the Western Church refusing to countenance them; And yet in this so considerable a point, the resolving on the ground of all our faith, it is evident we are agreed; For thus in their name Jeremias the Patriarch of Constantinople, ††Prooem. Censur, p. 3.sets it, the very truth and wisdome of our Lord Jesus Christ, which his divine Disciples and Apostles in their Canonical and wholesome writings professe, which all the universal and particular Synods of the holy Fathers have followed, which the Preachers and Doctors of the one holy Church full of Divine knowledge deliver to us, and all with one common concord and will clearly consent in it. P. 6.And again they profess in their dealings with the Germans, to take care of this especially, not to say ought from their own private sense, but to fetch all they say from the seven Holy and Ʋniversal Synods (and so do**See Tract of Haeresie, Sect. 9, 10. we as farre as they were universally received) from the sense of the Holy Fathers and Interpreters of the Scripture delivered to us from God, whom the Holy and Ʋniversal Church of Jesus Christ commends and approves with unanimous consent, for these by the spirit of God speaking in their mouths, and breathing by them, as most lightsome starres illustrated the world with their teaching, signes, and wonders; their teaching and institution can never be put out or moved by any age or length of time, as being founded on the omnipotent word of God, according to that of St. Paul, that the Church of Christ is the pillar and ground of truth, against which the very gates of hell, according to Christs promise, shall not be able to praevail. To all which it is not amisse to annexe the Romanist publishers resolution (by way of††Socolev. Annot. p. 8. annotation on the mention of their acknowledging the p. 224seven Councels) that if the Greeks and Germans to whom they write,**Si vel has solas septem Synodos sequerentur, n…que illis Schismate, neque illis haeresi quicquam opus esset, cum in illis septem abunde explicatum sit, quid de quaque re sentiendum, quid quoquo loco habendum sit. followed even those seven Councels alone, the one would have no need of Schisme, the other of haeresie, it being abundantly explicated in those seven, what is to be thought and held in every thing and place. And then sure if the Oral Tradition of the praesent Roman Church have more Doctrines of Faith, than those seven Councels abundantly explicated, or if that of the Scripture and ancientest Fathers and Councels may not be permitted to be our sufficient Rule, but be required to be parted with, in exchange for the Oral, of the praesent Mothers, and Catechists, we shall have some company, even of Romanists, to countenance us, how deeply soever we fall under S. W's displeasure.

22. And as this was the Doctrinal judgement, so††H…st. l. 1. c. 8. Theodoret from Athanasius tells us the practice was in the great Councel of Nice, they defined **foreign.from Scripture-words piously understood, and so as they††foreign. had testimony from the Fathers. Agreeably Capreolus Bishop of Carthage, which was, as he saith, a Legate sent to the Great Councel of Ephesus, gives an account of the proceeding of that Councel against the Nestorian haeresie, that it was**Ep. ad Vital. p 42. radio Apostolicae lucis extincta, extinguished by a beam of Apostolical light, and he being solemnly resorted to by the Bishops of Spain (under the title of the††Capreolum Episcopum Ecclesiae Catholicae Carthaginis. p. 35 Bishop of the Catholike Church of Carthage, **Domine sancte venerabilis & beat…ssime Papa, p. 40.holy venerable and most blessed Pope, and his††Sancto Apostolatu vestro, p. 36. holy Apostleship)**Provoluti genibus exoramus humiles servi tui sanctum Apostolatum vest…um ut inso metis parvitatem nostram in his quod rectum habet fides Catholica. for instruction in the true faith (in such a manner as when 'tis used to the Pope of Rome; passes for a proof of his supreme Pastorship) though, saith he, p. 42. the authority of the Catholike Church (that in the Councel foremention'd) be sufficient, yet he will adde his own professions that this is the††Ʋnam veramque doctrinam hanc esse confitemur quam Evangelica tenet ac tradit ant…quitas. p. 43. only and true Doctrine which the Evangelical antiquity holds and delivers; which may serve for farther evidences of the course we assert of refuting and convincing haeresie by the tradition and doctrine of the Evangelical and Apostolical antiquity.

p. 22523. Adde to all these the Novelle constitution of Justinian, where confirming the four first General Councels, he resolves,**foreign. Justin. Novell. foreign. 131. their Doctrines we receive as the Divine Scriptures, and their Canons we observe as Lawes, where the joynt authority of the Divine Scriptures and Canons of those Councels entred into a Codex, are exactly our praetension, and so I suppose St. Gregories too, when he profess'd to receive those four Councels as the four Gospels.

24. To all this, if mens words are intelligible, I must conclude the learned Romanists to give their suffrage also. In the first place S. W's good friend Mr. White, when 'twas usefull to confute††Dailles arts Discov p. 225. Mr. Daille, saith the seventh Councel confirmed all that was either in Scripture or Tradition, by binding us to those two pillars of truth (Scripture and Tradition, the two pillars, and the Tradition, that which was so ancient, as to be confirmed in the seventh Councel; who would ever desire more of him?) and in his Tab. Suffrag. being to prove the truth of his praetensions against new Revelations, he makes use of the very method that we Preachers are wont to doe, by the Suffrages of the Law and Prophets, and Gospels, and Epistles of the Apostles, Tab. 1. and then by the Testimonies of the Fathers, Tab. 2. Next after him I shall mention Pope Gregory XIII. in his Epistle to the King of Spain before his Bible, His libris (Scripturarum) omnia nostra Religionis & Divinitatis mysteria explicantur, in the Books of Scripture all the mysteries of Religion and Divinity are explicated, which how they can be, if they are so wonderfully ambiguous and unintelligible, I confesse not to understand. Next I adde Julius Rogerius Protonotarius Apostolic (Possevin, saith he, was Legate in Poland from the Pope, and Secretary to the Pope) who resolves, Traditionem nullam ullius esse ponderis, nisi nullis temporum intercapedinibus interruptam, ab Apostolorum usque temporibus, inde enim necesse esse traditionem manare, That Tradition is of no weight, unlesse it be uninterrupted from the very Apostles times, for that it is necessary all Tradition should flow from thence. According to which (saith Possevine) writing of the Canonical Books, Horum Traditio ad Apostolica usque tempora revocata — his method was to recall their tradition, and carry it back even to the Apostolical times. This then p. 226is the true nature of Tradition, to referre primarily to the Author or Authors, from whence it flowes, and but secondarily to any after practice, or custome, or Doctrine, for the confirming it, and so the only method this of ours, to look up to the authors, and so bring it down to the present Church; To which purpose**De leg. l. VII. c. 4. Sect. 10. Suarez distinguisheth betwixt Tradition and Custome. To this also I referre the resolution of††Defensorii par. 2. c. 32. Ecclesia quae non potest errare non est aliqua nisi Universalis, et ista vocatur proprie Ecclesia sine aliqua limitatione, quia est multitudo non connotato aliquo loco aut tempore. Abulensis, who placeth the firmnesse of truth in this, that the Church cannot erre, meaning, as he saith, none but the Ʋniversal Church, and that without any limitation, or connotation of time or place, and so taking in all time since there was a Christian Church, as well as place also. And, this a man would think again, should be Mr. Whites meaning in his Tab. Suffrag. **Tab. 3.when calling the Church to account by what title it holds the name of Catholike, he answers for it, that it is only from the Catholikenesse of the Faith, and that the Faith is said to be Catholike, because it hath had the possession of all Christianity per aetates et loca, through ages, (that must be through all ages) as well as places, concluding that the Faith, if it will be Catholike, must be of all times and places, which I should think were very impertinently insisted on by him, if what were now taught in the Church of Rome, as of Faith, by his Oral Tradition of the present age, were by that one medium secured to have been the Doctrine of all times, for then what farther need were there of evidence for the contignation and conjuncture to the Apostles, which after he with great reason requires of the new and latter Revelations, which the favourers of Papal Infallibility praetend to. After these I appeal even to Bellarmine himself in his defense of unwritten Traditions, ††De verbo Dei non scripto. l. 4 c. 2. § Vocatur autem— Vocatur doctrina non scripta, non ea quae nusquam scripta est, sed quae non est scripta a primo authore.We call that, saith he, unwritten Doctrine, not which hath never been written, but that which hath not been written by the first Author. From whence all that I conclude is, that as by him Tradition is set in expresse opposition to Scripture, and belongs not to those things which are written there (which will anon be usefull to us on another occasion) so the writings of the Fathers those words of dead men, in S. W's scornfull dialect, are as properly tradition, as any thing else in his opinion.

p. 22725. To which sense I adde the expresse words of**De Leg. l. 7. c. 2. Illa Scriptura non est lex, sed potest deservire in memoriam et probationem, sicut nos probamus Traditiones non scriptas ex Patribus. Suarez, writing is not Law, but may serve for a record and probation, as we prove Traditions unwritten out of the Fathers. The same is evidently of force to holy Scripture also, which was not written by Christ the first author of the Christian Law, but being delivered by him, by word of mouth, was afterward set down in writing by his hearers and their Disciples, and so is at once most signally the Orall Doctrine of Christ, and Law of his Church, and Tradition Apostolical, not written by the first author, and so tradition, though by others it were written.

26. For that this is the proper use of the word, to signifie, not that which is not written, but not written by the first author, may be judged by Martinus Peresius, ††De Tradit. par. 1. Tit. Quid sit proprie Traditio.defining it in the most exact propriety of the Romanists understanding of it, Tradition, saith he, more properly and more pertinently to our purpose, is taken for the Doctrine of the first and most ancient in the Common-wealth of the faithfull, received by word of mouth, and derived by continual succession from the Fathers to Sonnes, and confirmed by ancient custome, and not contained in the authentick Books of that Common-wealth and **Licet in aliis instrumentis vel libris fide dignis scripta fuerit, non ob id traditionis nomen amittit.though it be written in other Instruments or Books worthy of belief, it doth not for that lose the name of Tradition.

27. And then certainly these written memoires intervening, must be allowed, according to their esteem, and undoubtednesse of their sense (of which words written are as fully capable, as spoken) to have force to prove, or repudiate any Traditions or Customes which are vouched by the present age, and not on the other side those writings be controll'd by the present Doctrines; As in the Municipial Lawes of our Land (to which S. W. P. 38.resorts in the matter of possession) If a custome be sworn by all the homage of a Manor, (can the Oral Tradition of his present Church, ascend above this proportion?) that for all their memory such hath been an usage, and esteemed a right, and that their Fathers told them, that such it had been in all their memory also, yet if any Court-roll or other Record be extant, which declares that the custome was otherwise in ancient times, (like the finding of an ancient Coin, by which Baronius reforms all Historians ancient as well as modern in the point of Maxentius's birth, An. 306. n. 23.) p. 228that Record is a sufficient confutation of the testimony of the Homagers, and makes the custome not to be immemorial.

28. And this is a received truth among the Civilians, who give this account of it, Scriptura est conservativa memoriae, writing is conservative of memory, and Scriptura semper l…quitur, writing alwayes speaks (and then by S. W's good leave, 'tis not so mute and dead a letter) as in other things**Grot. de jur. Bell. l. 2. c. 16. § 30. Scriptura monumentum contractus, the writing is a monument of the contract, and††2. Par princ. tr. Praescript. Baldus resolves that the affirmative, viz. that there is a memory of it, may well be proved by an instrument or writing; So**4. par. de Antiqu. temporib. Cravetta propounds the very quaestions, how a praescription may be proved, or immemorial custome, and how the affirmative (against a praescription) that there is memory to the contrary, and answers to the latter; ††Affirmativa memoriam in contrarium extare, probatur per instrumenta, ex quibus apparet de contraria observantia.The affirmative, that there is memory to the contrary, is proved by instruments from which evidence is brought of the contrary observance. And then what becomes of S. W's and the Apologists whole Scheme, if Testimony of present witnesses may be controlled by written memorials of credit, (and that Scripture or Fathers are not such, they have not yet affirmed to be their opinion, the deadnesse, and mutenesse, and ambiguity, and want of demonstrativenesse, are the principal of their charges, and not that of the want of credit.)

29. The plainer resolution therefore of**De dogm. variis & lib. Apocr. l. 4. c. 4. Driedo I desire the Reader will compare with S. W's more refined Scheme, who recounting the speech of St. Augustine, of the great authority the Church had with him for the believing the Gospel, saith it was the††Ecclesia Catholica quae fuit ab initio Christianae fidei, Ʋniversal Church (not of his praesent age, but) which was from the beginning of the Christian Faith, growing down according to the series of succession of Bishops, **Quae sanè Ecclesia collegium plectitur Apostolorum.which Church, saith he, comprehends the College of the Apostles, But understanding it praescinded and abstracted, or naked, and without cohaerence in the faith and manners with the Churches which were in the former ages, Augustine would say, saith he, I should not acknowledge the men of this Church to be the Church of Christ, **Nisi doceret me quatuor Evangeliorum authoritas.unlesse the authority of the four Gospels taught me, I should not believe the Church, if it should preach to us any other Gospel, and not teach us the Doctrines of the Apostles. I conclude this with the words of Tertullian adver. Marc. l. 1. Omnino res Christiana sancta p. 229antiquitate stat, nec ruinosa rectius reparabitur, quam si ad Originem censeatur, Christianity depends on sacred antiquity, and the best redress for any corruption, is by resorting to the beginning.

30. It was therefore but necessary, that he that would place all authority in the Oral Tradition of the present age, should demonstrate the impossibility of its non-cohaerence to the Apostles times, which how happily he hath attempted to doe, we shall see hereafter.

31. Thus much mean while for the establishing of our tenure, that by Scripture and Apostolical Tradition, as it comes down to us in the writings of the Fathers; which there could be no need to have defended so sollicitously in relation to any other sort of Controvertists (unlesse perhaps the Schismatical opposers of our Church) but was fit to be thus confronted to S. W's praetension, his oral and unwritten tradition not of any, but the present age of the Church, nor as that stands in conjunction with all the former ages, but as by it the conjunction with those former is, as he conceives, demonstratively inferred, for else we have nothing to object to it.

32. I must now proceed to secure it from his exceptions; They are in effect but three, 1. That general fate of writings, their being ambiguous, uncertain, mute, dead, and that as being the words of men dead long agoe, saith S. W. 2.P. 17. The Scriptures being delivered by way of direct affirmation, without attending to artificial rules of demonstrating, 3. Their not being imaginable to be written of the Controversies, which since have sprung up.

33. To the first I answer by these steps and degrees, 1. That the style of the sacred writers hath been generally observed to have great plainnesse and simplicity, especially in setting down matters of fact in the Old Testament, the history and preachings of Christ and his Apostles in the New, and in that grand part of solid substantial piety, the ingaging us in good life; and though in some parts there be no small obscurity, as in the Prophesies, and in the metrical Books, and also in the contexture of some of St. Pauls Epistles, yet all force of objection which can be drawn from hence, will be superseded, 1. By that one rule of St. Chrysostoms foreign, those things are perspicuous that are necessary, p. 230from whence we may conclude, that as next the articles of the Crede nothing is so perspicuous in the Scripture, as the directions to all sorts of Christian practice, so when those necessary articles are received into believing hearts, the rest of our talent of time and industry should be laid out on a carefull conscientious practice of all duty, and then the Fathers will assure us that the foreign, this chariot with two horses in it, belief of the Crede, and practice of the Sermon on the Mount, will bring the humble constant persevering Christian most safe to his journeys end, though he never think of calling in at Purgatory by the way, and the like, never furnish himself with the Roman new Articles, which S. W. may be believed, he will hardly meet clear in Scripture. 2. By the supply, which is to be had from ancient Tradition, which hath in all points of faith been experimented to be ready and able to remove all such ambiguities, and those in the first Councels, the Conservatories of all Catholike faith, are consigned to us in words, so distinct, and so sollicitously removed from all ambiguity, that the haeresies which had crept in for want of this light, were generally extinguish'd. 3. By the expresse commands of those Councels, that nothing else should be taught as of faith (or the belief exacted of any Proselite) but what was thus clearly establish'd in those Councels. For then as the foreign of the Gospel requiring no more of any man, than what God by his grace doth, or is ready to assist him and inable him to perform, foundeth a demonstrative proof, that his commandements are not farre from us, foreign and foreign, over heavy, or unsupportable, but a gracious at once and light burthen, so the same temper of the Covenant of grace pertaining also to doctrines, and thus confirmed by the charity and tendernesse of those Councels, and, in them, of the Ʋniversal Church of God, hath given us full assurance, that whatever obscurities or ambiguities be supposeable in Scripture, there is still light sufficient in them (to all that will not set up their own judgement in opposition to ancient Catholike Tradition, visible in Fathers and Councels) securely to conduct any pious charitable humble Christian to everlasting happinesse. And of this a man would think Mr. White himself should not make any doubt, p. 231when he hath made it his observation of Scripture style, that 'tis**Apol. p. 139. accommodated to vulgar capacities.

34. Secondly, that in case there should be any considerable ambiguity in our written Traditions, whether of Sacred Scriptures, or ancient Fathers, yet unlesse the writings where they are set down, were on purpose framed in the most material parts, to be thus ambiguous, as the old Oracles, or to be thus obscure, as what was said to be so written as that it was not written, or unlesse they were written by halfe-witted men, that either comprehended not their own notions, or were unable to expresse them (none of which I hope S. W. will think fit to charge on them) there are still known rules by which ambiguous passages are interpretable; The Heathen Rhetoricians have furnished us with some, in their handling the place foreign, of ambiguity, and foreign, of the letter and the sense, and the Lawyers have directed us to others on their head of Antinomies, from the matter, from the effect, from the adjuncts, &c. and the sacred Criticks have given us many more, by the help of which, those that understand the languages, wherein the Scriptures are written, and bring not prejudices with them, to impose their own, instead of receiving the Writers judgement of their propositions, will not in the hypothesis finde it so impossible to understand Scripture, as S.W. phansies it in his demonstration. Many things are dreaded at a distance, and deemed impossible, which by Gods blessing on honest endeavours, with moderate skill, and industry, and humility, are soon discerned to be most easie and familiar; What therefore is concluded from such general suggestions of the ambiguities of all writings, of the several possible sorts of such, Critical, Philological, Historical, Sophistical, of their being left to be toss'd with our various Expositions and Criticismes, and liable to a thousand evasions, and the like, have perhaps somewhat of art in them, to amuse, and affright those vulgar capacities (to which yet at another time they are confess'd to be accommodated) but are of no solid force, when they are brought down to any particulars, there being obvious helps, either by surveighing of the context, or comparing of Scripture style and dialect, or conferring plainer p. 232places with the more difficult, which if thankfully made use of, will decide such difficulties, as are of any real importance to be decided; And I cannot but observe, that when Mr. White was willing to discover Mr. Daillees arts this was then noted for a principal one, that he would, if we could believe him, perswade us, Nothing is to be learned or understood out of Books, but every three words will never fail to have some reason or other to make them so obscure, that no light or satisfaction can be derived out of them, Page 216.

35. But then 3. if words committed to writing are so ambiguous, so subject to be toss'd and misinterpreted, yet having on the other side, the advantage of being written by none, but either inspired, or renouned persons, and that with great care and forecast, and deliberation, what shall then be said of S. W's favourite, Oral Tradition, the illiterate, and perhaps (and not rarely) simple mother, teaching her oft times dull and aukward children, who generally mark not what is taught them, or but con them by roat, (which he calls being written in their hearts) but praetend not to understand ought of them?

36. For I demand 1. Are the Mothers and Catechists so much better managers of their depositum, or more skilfull conveighers of it, than Scriptures, and Fathers? Are they conceivable to conveigh the Doctrines of the Church to their children in such a manner, as, according to Mr. Whites rules, shall exact belief of them? I shall instance in one particular, formerly touched on.**Apol. p. 16. A Tradition, saith he, begun by some Apostles, not all, 'tis no sacrilege to leave off, and by††Ibid. p. 7. Christs Doctrine he means no other but what was generally preached by the Apostles, I demand then, how can all his Mothers or Catechists be imagined to assure their children, that what they teach them, beyond the Apostles Crede, (be it any of their additionals) was preach'd by more than some, even by all the Apostles? Is it certain that every Mother now delivers it in this Ʋniversal style? or that her Mother gave her commission thus to deliver it? What if in reference to St. Peters Chair in Rome, she shall be found to have delivered the Popes supremacy only as a preaching of St Peters? In this the Catechumenus, that hath all his Faith from this connatural way, the Mothers Oral Tradition, can be no farther obliged than the Mother delivered it, and p. 233so may either disbelieve this article, and leave off this obedience without sacrilege, or else (which S. W. must in no wise imagine) two passages in that Apologist are not beyond all possible confute. Many such like imperfect manageries the Mothers may be subject to, according to these new Controvertists rules, to which in our method the Scriptures and Fathers will not be lyable, for they will assure us of all our Articles, that they were preach'd by all the Apostles, and resolved on joyntly by all, before they set out to preaching. 2. Is the childs memory, though then most receptive, yet being taken alone without staydnesse of temper, and maturity of other faculties (a volatile brain, and a giddy heart) a surer Conservatory, than the same memory in him, when he is come to more maturity, and stayednesse, and advisednesse, and mastery of passions, and hath the addition of judgement to memory, and the supply of a form of words in a written Crede, and written Gospels, &c. and so also the Expositions of Fathers and Councels, all ready to aid and instruct him farther? Or 3. are words spoken such charmes, that they shall certainly cast out the oracular dark Spirit, and cannot be misinterpreted.

37. To this last quaere **Apol. p. 81.Mr. White hath offered some satisfaction, by telling us, that a Tradition, as he hath explained it, is a sense delivered not in set words, but setled in the auditors hearts by hundreds of different expressions explicating the same meaning] But I am very farre from being satisfied with this, 1. Because the propositions of faith in Scripture and Fathers have certainly had this advantage of hundreds of different expressions explicating the same meaning, and so are not exceeded herein by Oral Tradition, whatever can in this kind be imagined of it. 2. That it no way appears de facto, as in Scriptures and Fathers it doth, that Mothers do thus settle sences by hundreds of different expressions, or indeed any more than teach the words of Bellarmines Catechisme (and then where are the hundred different expressions?) or if they doe, the Mothers are now become Expounders, and their expositions will be lyable to all the infirmities, that our Lay-mens (which are one degree above Lay-womens) Expositions and Sermons; Nay 3. if all this were granted him, yet upon his grounds, this will but encrease the difficulty on his side, for why may not every p. 234of those hundred different expressions be capable of as great variety of interpretations, as the very same expressions, or any other written in a book? and then still the more the expressions are, the more and not the lesse the uncertainty will be. 'Tis certain the Mothers must communicate their sences by words, (for they are Mothers, not Angels) and then those words must have the common fate of all words, and so be subject to all the ambiguities that S. W. objects to written Testimonies.

38. He tells us in another place, that his way is for Mothers to flatter into their children the first elements of the acquisition of Beatitude, and continual…y goe on, nursing them up in the maxims of piety. But first this can belong to none but pious and carefully conscientious Mothers, and all the world of Romanist Mothers, I fear, are not such. 2. Of those that be, why is it not possible (and then the contrary is not demonstrable, or to be as a principle supposed, without attempt of proof) that they may spend that time of leisure, which they have for such offices of charity to each of their children, in impressing the knowledge of God and Christ and the Holy Ghost, the holy Catholike Church, the judgement to come, &c. in infusing forms of prayer, knowledge of the Sacraments, and the general branches of duty toward God and man, and th…mselves, and the more obvious particular duties of daily occurrence, without ever telling them of the Popes Ʋniversal Pastorship, as that is much. more than a Patriarchate, and as it is extended to all other Nations, to England, and India, when the childe perhaps is brought up in Italy, and is as certainly part of his Diocese, if he be but a Primate, or Patriarch, as he would be, if he were Governor of the Ʋniverse, and therefore need not be told any more, than that he is to pay obedience to him, as his lawfull Ecclesiastical Governor, without bringing him out the two Gospels, as Xaverius to the Indies, the one of Christ, the other of St. Peter, and again without telling them of Purgatory, Transsubstantiation, &c. or being able to give them a distinct discriminative notion of these articles, as the one signifies temporary pains commencing at the time of death, and lasting many thousand years, and is capable of being abbreviated by indulgences, and prayers, and almes of the living, and as the other is miraculously p. 235more, than the real communication of the body and blood of Christ. Lastly, those that shall be supposed to do more neerly what S. W. would have them, infuse into their children a whole Romish Catechisme, and that they may be sure to leave out no article, pitch upon Bellarmines ample Declaration of the Christian Doctrine, Is it not certain that they shall teach them to believe the immaculate conception of our Lady (an article which Mr. White will not receive into his Faith) as firmly as the Popes Ʋniversal Pastorship? And if thus it be in these, or other instances, then what becomes of the sweet connatural way, so much praeferreable to all others, as not only to be the principle, but the sole principle of our Faith? Or because thus it may be, though it were not, or may have been in any considerable part of any one age (if but through inrodes of barbarous invaders, intestine warres, urgency of worldly diversions, &c.) what demonstration is that like to be, which is subject to so many uncertainties, every day experimented to have more than possible truth in them?

39. The mutenesse, and deadnesse of written words, what it means, so as to found any appearance of objection, will not easily be resolved on; Words written, when they are read with the voice, are as lively and vocal, as if they were never written, (and therefore**Anal. ch. 1. Less. 3. Dr. Holden, that resolves that beleiving generally comes by hearing, and is so by all acknowledged, doth yet put together what is told us, and what is written to us, adding his reason, for reading is a kinde of hearing) and so when without voice they speak, or are delivered to the eyes, they have as ready an avenue, and admission to the minde, as when they enter by the ear, and to a blinde man that cannot make use of his eyes, 'tis all one, whether his Mother or Catechist have read him his Lecture out of a book (the transcript of the writers mind) or pronounced it out of their memory, or immediately powred it out of their habit of understanding. The only possible difference is, that what is written in a book, the Author being dead, it cannot be farther, than it is already, explained by that Author. This then I suppose is the g…ound of the objection, because S. W. specifies in men dead long agoe. But I conceive not the demonstrative force of the argument, as it is thus improved, For 1. the author, dead 1600. years since, p. 236hath so ordered it, that though he be dead, he yet speaketh, 2. That Author having then approved his authority, and that being now abundantly testified to us, he is as authentick a witness, as farre as he hath declared himself, as if he were now living, and known to be inspired by God, much more so, than the Mother, or the Catechist. 3. If he have written intelligibly then, in each particular place, or if what is in one place obscure, he have elsewhere interpreted, or if other Fathers of the Church discerning this want, have supplyed it for him, still he speaks audibly to the intellect, though he be dead, and so mute. 4. If all this envy falls upon him, because he is not able to hear our present debates, and, upon our resort and appeal to him, interpose his judgement, and so speak to them, then that will be coincident with the third objection, of the Scriptures not speaking to later Controversies, and thither I referre it, and so there remains no least shew of difficulty in this first objection.

40. Passe we then to the second, the Scriptures being delivered by way of direct affirmation, without attending to artificial rules of demonstrating] This I confesse hath in it some of that amazingnesse, which S. W. promised me, whensoever I should approach this Apology for the Dialogues, whether I respect the cohaerence it hath with the other argument, or the particular matter of it; If the former, 'twould even amaze one to think, how that which is confess'd to be delivered by way of direct affirmation, and, as he there addes, accommodated to vulgar capacities should yet be 1. so prodigiously ambiguous, left to be toss'd by our various Expositions and Criticismes (All that I need reply, is, that sure it would have been much more so, if it had not been delivered in this Categorical way of direct affirmation) and 2. so dead and so mute, nothing being more contrary to our ordinary notions of those words, than direct affirmations. But the more truely amazing part of our present prospect is, that when all Christian Religion is at once demonstrated, by being convincingly proved to be taught us by Christ, and when all that is delivered in the Scripture, is, by immediate connexion of terms from that one prosyllogisme, demonstrated to have divine and so …fallible truth in it, the very same that there is, in nature, of this proposition, that p. 237God cannot lye, he should yet complain of the want of artificial rules of demonstration. If this demonstration be not cogent or artificial enough with him, that the Scripture being the word of God, every period thereof must have exact truth in it, I am then amazed to think what a Patron of the Catholike Religion this is; but if what is thus once for all demonstrated in the grosse, or bulk, must again in the retail be farther demonstrated of each truth in Divinity, if every thing that Christ or his Apostles say, be by him required to be confirmed from other arguments of natural reason, and the like, then he is a Didymus indeed. He would not believe Christs resurrection without its being demonstrated to, and inforced upon his senses, and this other requires demonstration for that which is only to be received by his faith, and this is not farre removed from the former, and is an aequally amazing consideration.

41. But then 2. how doth it appear that the Mothers in their Oral deliveries have either been more skilfull, or more diligent in observing these artificial rules of demonstrating? their softer method of flattering into their children, as he styles it, I should think were distant enough from this other which he is wont to call severe and rigorous, I hope I shall not be required to insist longer on this objection.

42. Lastly then for the 3^d. the Scriptures not being imaginable to be written on the Controversies which since have sprung up, 1. It hath evidently no truth in it, For the haeresie of the Gnosticks being risen in the Apostles times, and a great part of most of the Epistles written on purpose for the refuting of that haeresie, and many other haeresies, Valentinians, and Marcionites, &c. after that springing from that root of bitternesse, as 'tis certain they did, those books must be very proper to those Controversies; And so for others after them; That one place of St. Paul, Rom. IX. 5. doth,**foreign, Procl. de Fide. saith Proclus, Archbishop of Constantinople, shut and wall up all passage for calumny from them that love contumely or speaking ill of Christ, so saith Theophylact, ††foreign.From hence is Arius confuted, p. 238St. Paul proclaiming Christ to be God over all. And not to insist on the ancient haeresies, nor on modern, as well as ancient, which have their positive irrefragable decisions in Scripture, I shall confine my sel… wholly to the Controversies betwixt the Romanist and us; And if it were not, as I suppose it is, evident from Scripture, that some of our Articles opposed to theirs are the Doctrin… of Christ and his Apostles, as the use of the cup for all in the Sacrament, the not confining publike prayers to an unknown tongue, the honourablenesse of marriage for all that are not within the prohibited degrees, &c. yet the difference on our part from them, being only this, that we admit not many of their new articles; not that they reject any of our old, though some of these particulars should not be decideable from Scripture, yet the duty of Communion, and charity toward all those, which are lively members of Christ, being irrefragably concluded from plain Texts of Scripture, and the Ʋniversal Councels decreeing that there shall be no more exacted of any to believe but the few necessaries, which as they are all contained in Scripture, so they are not doubted to be maintained by us, the result is, that Scripture and the first Councels together, doe binde the Romanist not to set up their wall of separation against us, but to imbrace charitably all, who believe what they doubt not us to believe, and so will decide all our Controversies at once, and having done so, need not descend more minutely to the decision of each several.

43. Secondly, a prime controversie between us and the Romanists being that about the Ʋniversal Pastorship of the Pope, and that being by them deduced from Christs donation to St. Peter, and S. W. himself deducing it from thence, I shall demand, Doth the proof of that depend upon any words of Christ, which are not delivered in the Gospel? If it doth, what are they, and by what Tradition are they avouched? But 'tis certain no such unwritten words in this point are praetended, but expressely the written, Thou art Peter, and I will give thee the Key…s, and Feed my Sheep, and all these are verbatim in the Gospels. And then I demand, 2. Doe these truely p. 239own the Romanists praetensions, and decide the controversie on their side, or doe they not? If they doe, then are the Gospels written of our present Controversies; If they doe not, why are they then so eagerly press'd on men, and all we denyed the peace of their Church, for denying this importance of them. If, as he saith of the Scripture in generall, so he believe of these Texts of Scripture, that they are ambiguous, uncertain, mute and dead, and they have no other possible head, to which to divolve this Doctrine, and cannot maintain the jus divinum of it, but by thus divolving it, and if for the clearing of this ambiguity, the writings of the ancient Church be by them deemed sufficient, then why may not we use the very same method, and at once avow in all things to stand to the award of it, and be no more blameable than they, who how unjustly soever they manage it, and how imperfectly soever they conclude from it, are yet obliged not to blame in others, what themselves practise.

44. The like may again be inferred from their founding in, and proving from the words of Scripture [the Gates of Hell shall not praevaile against it, and the pillar and ground of truth] their other great Article, the Infallibility of their Church, on which reverts again all which hath been said on the former head, and then how can he in earnest think, that the Scripture was not written of our Controversies.

45. But then our praetension taking in the ancient Fathers to Scriptures, unlesse it be also appliable to them, that they speak not to our Controversies, this, if it had what it aimed at, in respect of Scripture, must presently loose all its efficacy, or concludency against us. For 'tis certain the learned Romanist layes or praetends to lay great weight on the authority of the Fathers, for deciding all the Controversies depending between us,††Ration. 5. so that * Campian could vaunt concerning this head, Admiseris? captus es; Excluseris? nullus es, that we should be insnared and p. 240caught, if we were content to be judged by that rule of their authority, but if we would not stand to it, we were utterly lost. And then we that doe not exclude them, but set them up avowedly against Oral Tradition, and from the variable, imperfect judicatures of the one, appeal to the more authentick, stable Tribunal of the other, what can we, on their grounds, be deemed to want, for the deciding of our Controversies? Thus perfectly void of all probability are his demonstrative arguments. And this may be sufficient to be added on the second head, the clearing the subject of the quaestion from ambiguity, and fitting it for defining.