PART at a venture? when he that brings them, had he IV. read the books themfelves, could not have had the face to have brought them. Such is this out of

Stromat.

1.7.

Clem. Alexand. " as if one of a man becomes a "beaft, like thofe infected with Circe's poifon ; fo "he hath forfeited his being a man of GoD and "faithful to our LORD, who fpurns against ecclefia"stical tradition, and leaps into opinions of hu66 mane election." Mr. S. knows whose way of quoting this is, to pick a bit out of the midst of a text that founds fomething towards his purpose, ⚫ and leave out the reft which would make it evident to be meant juft contrary. Yet I cannot charge this wholly upon Mr. S. whofe implicit faith were it not for his culpable ignorance might excufe him. But for his feducer Mr. White, how he can acquit himself of fo foul an imputation, I leave it to any ingenuous papift to judge, when I have nakedly fet the whole paffage before him. Clement speaking of hereticks who relinquish the scripture, or abuse it by wresting it to their lufts, fays,

¢ men who deal in matters of highest importance, "must need commit great errors, if they do not "take and hold the RULE of FAITH from

truth itself. For fuch men having once deviated "from the right way, do likewife err in most parti

culars; probably because they have not the facul

ty of distinguishing truths and falfhoods, perfect"ly exercised, to choose what ought to be chofen. "For if they had this, they would be ruled by the "divine SCRIPTURES. [Therefore as if any "of mankind fhould become a beast in such fort as "thofe who were bewitched by Circe; even fo he " hath

*

I.

* αιρίσε

hath loft his being a man of GoD and abiding SECT. "faithful to the LORD, who hath fpurned against "the tradition of the church, and skipp'd into the opinions of humane fects *,] (not of humane elec"tion, as Mr. S. blindly following Mr. White does wr "most abfurdly tranflate it) but he that hath re"turned from his errors, and hearkened to the "SCRIPTURES, and conformed his life to the 66 truth, is as it were advanced from a man to a God." At the fame rate he goes on for feveral pages together, taking the scriptures for an indemonstrable principle, from which all divine doctrines are to be demonftrated, and for the criterion whereby they are to be tried, and charges the hereticks in fuch words as we cannot find fitter for adverfaries," as "(fays he) naughty boys fhut out their schoolmaf 66 ter, so thefe drive the prophefies out of the church, fufpecting that they will chide and admonish "them; and they patch together abundance of falf"hoods and fictions that they may feem RATIO"NALLY not to admit the fcriptures." Again, fpeaking of thofe hereticks affronting the fcripture, he tells us," they oppofe the divine tradition with * HO "humane doctrines, + by other traditions [delivered Tapadó"from hand to hand] that they may establish a sect † Δὶ ἑτέ. "or herefy." Again, he fays," they adulterate the para"truth, and steal the rule of faith, &c. but for P "ORAL frauds they fhall have WRITTEN punishments." But enough of this; whofoever defires to fee more of it, let him read on where these men to their own fhame have directed us, and see whether any proteftant can speak more fully and plainly in this controverfy. The whole truft of the 7 P 2 papists

pων πα

ρήσεων.

PART papifts is upon the equivocal fenfe of the word traIV. dition. Which word is commonly used by the fa

thers to fignify to us the fcripture or divine tradition, as Clement here calls it; but the papists understand it of their unwritten tradition, and to this they apply all thofe paffages in the fathers where tradition is honourably mentioned. So Mr. S. deals with us in the teftimonies I have already examined: and there is nothing of argument in those few which remain, but from the ambiguity of this word; which I need not fhew of every one of them in particular, for whofoever fhall read them with this key will find that they are of no force to conclude what he drives at.

5. As for his citations out of the council of Trent, by which he would prove it to be the perfuafion of their prefent church, that tradition is the fole rule of faith; I have already fhewn that that council hath declared otherwife, and is otherwise understood by the chief of their own writers. And therefore he did prudently to conceal in an &c. those choking words, in which the council declares itfelf" to receive and honour, with equal pious "affection and reverence, the books of fcripture "and unwritten traditions." And after a deal of fhuffling, what a pitiful account is it that he at laft gives of that council's putting fcripture constantly before tradition, because scripture being interpreted by tradition, is of the fame authority

as

"if an apostle or an evangelist were present, and "therefore no wonder they honour fcripture-tefti66 mony fo as to put it before tradition;" which is to say, that because fcripture is fubordinate to tradition,

II.

dition, and to be regulated by it, therefore it de- SECT. ferves to be put before it. Befides, if fcripture and tradition be but feveral ways of conveying the evangelical and apoftolical doctrine, why fhould he imagine an evangelift or apoftle to be more prefent by the scripture than by oral tradition? especially if it be confidered, that he fuppofes fcripture to be an uncertain, and tradition an infallible way of conveying this doctrine.

SECT. II.

§ 1. ALL that now remains, is to confirm the Teson

behalf of

precedent difcourfe by teftimonies of the nies on the most eminent persons of the church, in several ages; scripture. in which I fhall not need to be large, being fo happily prevented by that full account which is given of the fenfe of the ancients in this matter, in the answer to Labyrinthus Cantuarienfis; which Mr. S. may if he please confult for his farther conviction.

§ 2. I begin with the hiftorical account which Eufebius gives of committing the gospel to writing; which is to this purpose, viz. "* that the Romans * Hiftor. "were not content with the doctrine preached, ecclet. 1.2. "unless it were also committed to writing; and "therefore did earnestly beg of Mark, Peter's

companion, that he would leave them a monu"ment in writing of that doctrine which had been "delivered to them by word of mouth. And this "was the occafion of the writing of St. Mark's "gofpel. And when Peter did understand that this "work was publish'd (being fuggefted by the di

vine

c. 14.

PART

IV.

3. c. 18.

66

66

vine revelation of the HOLY SPIRIT) it is faid "he was very much pleafed with the ready and "earnest defire of those perfons; and that by his "authority he confirmed this writing, to the end "that it might be every where read in the church." As for St. Matthew and St. John, he tells us, * Ibid. 1." that of all the difciples, they two only have left "monuments in writing; of whom it is also report"ted that they betook themselves to write, being "drawn thereto by neceffity. Matthew, after he "had preached the word of God to the jews, and "was refolved to go to other nations, wrote his gofpel in the language of his country; and thus "by the diligence and pains of writing, did abundantly supply the want of his presence to those "whom he left. And when Mark and Luke had 66 publish'd their gospel, it is reported that John (who had always used to preach the word without writing it) being at length wrought upon by "the fame reafon did betake himself to write." From this account it is clear, that the apoftles thought it neceffary, for the prefervation and fecure conveyance of the chriftian doctrine, that it fhould be put into writing; and that they judged this a better way to fùpply the want of their prefence than oral tradition. Therefore the fame au* Ibid. c. thor tells us, "that the difciples, who immediately fucceeded the apostles, as they travelled to "preach the gospel to those who had not yet heard "the word of faith, did with great care alfo de"liver to them the writings of the holy evangelifts." *Ibid. c. Again, "that Ignatius as he travelled towards "Rome (where he was to fuffer) exhorted the

31.

30.

"churches