VI. ART. it had the utmost advantages poffible of its fide, failed fo much in the conveyance both of natural religion, and of the Mofaical, we fee that it cannot be relied on as a certain method of preferving the truths of revealed religion. 6,9. In our Saviour's time, tradition was fet up on many occafions against him, but he never fubmitted to it: on the contrary he reproached the Jews with this, that they Mat. xv. 3, had made the laws of God of no effect by their traditions; and he told them, that they worshipped God in vain, when they taught for doctrines the commandments of men. In all his difputes with the Pharifees, he appealed to Mofes and the Prophets, he bade them fearch the Scriptures; for in them, faid he, ye think ye have eternal life, and they teftify of me. Ye think is, by the phrafeology of that time, a word that does not refer to any particular conceit of theirs ; but imports, that as they thought, fo in them they had eternal life. Our Saviour juftifies himself and his doctrine. often by words of Scripture, but never once by tradition. We fee plainly, that in our Saviour's time the tradition of the Refurrection was fo doubtful among the Jews, that the Sadducees, a formed party among them, did openly deny it. The authority of tradition had likewife impofed two very mischievous errors upon the ftricteft fect of the Jews, that adhered the moft firmly to it: the one was, that they understood the prophecies concerning the Meffias fitting on the throne of David literally: they thought that, in imitation of David, he was not only to free his own country from a foreign yoke, but that he was to subdue, as David had done, all the neighbouring nations. This was to them a ftone of ftumbling, and a rock of offence; fo their adhering to their traditions proved their ruin in all refpects. The other error, to which the authority of tradition led them, was their preferring the rituals of their religion to the moral precepts that it contained: this not only corrupted their own manners, while they thought that an exactnefs of performing, and a zeal in afferting, not only the ritual precepts that Mofes gave their fathers, but thofe additions to them which they had from tradition, that were accounted hedges about the law: that this, I fay, might well excufe or atone for the moft heinous violations of the rules of juftice and mercy: but this had yet another worfe effect upon them, while it poffeffed them with fuch prejudices againft our Saviour and his Apoftles, when they came to fee, that they fet no value on thofe practices that were recommended by tradition, and that they preferred pure and fublime morals even to Mofaical ceremonies themselves, and fet the Gentiles at liberty VI. liberty from thofe obfervances. So that the ruin of the ART. Jews, their rejecting the Meffias, and their perfecuting his followers, arose chiefly from this principle that had got in among them, of believing tradition, and of being guided by it. The Apostles, in all their difputes with the Jews, make their appeals conftantly to the Scriptures; they fet a high character on thofe of Berea for examining them, and A&ts xvii. comparing the doctrine that they preached with them. 11. In the Epiftles to the Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews, in which they pursue a thread of argument, with relation to the prejudices that the Jews had taken up against Christianity, they never once argue from tradition, but always from the Scriptures; they do not pretend only to difparage modern tradition, and to fet up that which was more ancient: they make no fuch diftinction, but hold close to the Scriptures. When St. Paul fets out the advantages that Timothy had by a religious education, he mentions this, that of a child be had known the holy Scrip- 2 Tim. iii. tures, which were able to make him wife unto falvation, 15, 16. through faith which was in Chrift Jefus : that is, the belief of the Chriftian religion was a key to give him a right understanding of the Old Teftament; and upon this occafion St. Paul adds, all Scripture (that is, the whole Old Teftament) is given by divine infpiration; or (as others render the words) all the divinely inspired Scripture is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for inftruction in righteoufnefs, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. The New Teftament was writ on the fame defign with the Old; that, as St. Luke expreffes it, we might know the certainty of thofe things wherein we Luke i. 4. bave been inftructed: These things were written, faith St. John xx. John, that ye might believe, that Jefus is the Chrift, the Son 31. of God, and that believing ye might have life through bis name. When St. Peter knew by a special revelation that he was near his end, he writ his fecond Epiftle, that they might have that as a mean of keeping those things always 2 Pet. i. 15. in remembrance after his death. Nor do the Apostles give us any hints of their having left any thing with the Church, to be conveyed down by an oral tradition, which they themselves bad not put in writing: they do sometimes refer themselves to fuch things as they had delivered to particular Churches; but by tradition in the Apofiles' days, and for fome ages after, it is very clear, that they meant only the conveyance of the faith, and not any unwritten doctrines: they reckoned the faith was a facred depofitum which was committed to them; and that VI. ART. was to be preferved pure among them. But it were very eafy to fhew in the continued fucceffion of all the Chrif tian writers, that they ftill appealed to the Scriptures, that they argued from them, that they condemned all doctrines that were not contained in them; and when at any time they brought human authorities to justify their opinions or expreffions, they contented themselves with a very few, and thofe very late authorities: fo that their defign in vouching them feems to be rather to clear themselves from the imputation of having innovated any thing in the doctrine, or in the ways of expreffing it, than that they thought thofe authorities were neceffary to prove them by. For in that cafe they muft have taken a great deal more pains than they did, to have followed up, and proved the tradition much higher than they went. We do alfo plainly fee that fuch traditions as were not founded on Scripture were eafily corrupted, and on that account were laid afide by the fucceeding ages. Such were the opinion of Chrift's reign on earth for a thousand years; the faints not feeing God till the refurrection; the neceflity of giving infants the Eucharift; the divine infpiration of the feventy Interpreters; befides fome more important matters, which in refpect to thofe times are not to be too much defcanted upon. It is alfo plain, that the Gnoftics, the Valentinians, and other heretics, began very early to fet up a pretenfion to a tradition delivered by the Apoftles to fome particular perfons, as a key for understanding the fecret meanings that might be in Scripture; in oppofition to which, both Irenæus, Tertullian, Iren. 1. iii.c. and others, make use of two forts of arguments: The one 1, 2, 35 is the authority of the Scripture itself, by which they Prefc. cap. confuted their errors: the other is a point of fact, that 20, 21, 25, there was no fuch tradition. In afferting this, they ap Tertul. de 27, 28. peal to thofe Churches which had been founded by the Apoftles, and in which a fucceffion of Bishops had been continued down. They fay, in thefe we muft fearch for apoftolical tradition. This was not faid by them as if they had defigned to eftablish tradition, as an authority diftinct from, or equal to, the Scriptures: but only to thew the falfehood of that pretence of the heretics, and that there was no fuch tradition for their herefies as they gave out. When this whole matter is confidered in all its parts, fuch as, Ift, That nothing is to be believed as an article of faith, unless it appears to have been revealed by God. 2dly, That oral tradition appears, both from the nature of man, and the experience of former times, to be an incom petent VI. petent conveyer of truth. 3dly, That fome books were ART. written for the conveyance of those matters, which have been in all ages carefully preferved and efteemed facred. 4thly, That the writers of the firft ages do always argue. from, and appeal to, these books: And, 5thly, That what they have faid without authority from them has been rejected in fucceeding ages; the truth of this branch of our Article is fully made out. If what is contained in the Scripture in exprefs words is the object of our faith, then it will follow, that whatfoever may be proved from thence, by a juft and lawful confequence, is alfo to be believed. Men may indeed err in framing these confequences and deductions, they may miftake or ftretch them too far: but though there is much fophiftry in the world, yet there is alfo true logic, and a certain thread of reafoning. And the fenfe of every propofition being the fame, whether expreffed always in the fame or in different words; then whatfoever appears to be clearly the fenfe of any place of Scripture, is an object of faith, though it thould be otherwife expreffed than as it is in Scripture, and every juft inference from it must be as true as the propofition itfelf is: therefore it is a vain cavil to afk exprefs words of Scripture for every Article. That was the method of all the ancient heretics: Chrift and his Apoftles argued from the words and paffages in the Old Teftament, to prove fuch things as agreed with the true fenfe of them, and fo did all the fathers; and therefore fo may we do. The great objection to this is, that the Scriptures are dark, that the fame place is capable of different fenfes, the literal and the myftical: and therefore, fince we cannot understand the true fenfe of the Scripture, we must not argue from it, but feek for an interpreter of it, on whom we may depend. All fects argue from thence, and fancy that they find their tenets in it: and therefore this can be no fure way of finding out facred truth, fince fo many do err that follow it. In anfwer to this, it is to be confidered, that the Old Teftament was delivered to the whole nation of the Jews; that Mofes was read in the Synagogue, in the hearing of the women and children; that whole nation was to take their doctrine and rules from it all appeals were made to the Law and to the Prophets among them: and though the prophecies of the Old Teftament were in their ftyle and whole contexture dark, and hard to be understood; yet when fo great a question as this, who was the true Meffias? came VI. ART. to be examined, the proofs urged for it were paffages in the Old Teftament. Now the queftion was, how these were to be understood? No appeal was here made to tradition, or to church-authority, but only by the enemies. of our Saviour. Whereas he and his Difciples urge these paffages in their true fenfe, and in the confequences that arofe out of them. They did in that appeal to the rational faculties of thofe to whom they fpoke. The Chriftian religion was at firft delivered to poor and fimple multitudes, who were both illiterate and weak; the Epiftles, which are by much the hardest to be understood of the whole New Testament, were addreffed to the whole Churches, to all the Faithful or Saints; that is, to all the Chriftians in those Churches. These were afterwards read in all their affemblies. Upon this it may reasonably be asked, were these writings clear in that age, or were they not? If they were not, it is unaccountable why they were addreffed to the whole body, and how they came to be received and entertained as they were. It is the end of fpeech and writing, to make things to be understood; and it is not fuppofable, that men infpired by the Holy Ghoft either could not or would not exprefs themselves fo as that they fhould be clearly understood. It is also to be obferved, that the new difpenfation is opposed to the old, as light is to darkness, an open face to a vailed, and fubftance to fhadows. Since then the Old Teftament was fo clear, that David both in the 19th, and moft copiously in the 119th Pfalm, fets out very fully the light which the laws of God gave them in that darker ftate, we have much more reafon' to conclude, that the new difpenfation fhould be much brighter. If there was no need of a certain expounder of Scripture then, there is much lefs now. Nor is there any provifion made in the new for a fure guide; no intimations are given where to find one: from all which we may conclude, that the books of the New Teftament were clear in thofe days, and might well be understood by thofe to whom they were at first addressed. If they were clear to them, they may be likewife clear to us: for though we have not a full hiftory of that time, or of the phrafes and cuftoms, and particular opinions of that age; yet the vaft induftry of the fucceeding ages, of thefe two last in particular, has made fuch discoveries, befides the other collateral advantages which learning and a niceness in reasoning has given us, that we may juftly reckon, that though fome hints in the Epiftles, which relate to the particulars of that time, may be fo lost, that we |