especially the jesuits, give it to the pope: and the difference is not, that the fanatics give the supreme judgment to some one, and the papists give it to the whole church; for these also give it but to one man, to the pope, whose judgment, voice, and definition, must make up the deficiencies of Scripture. But because the fanatics, as it happens, change their judge every month, therefore they have an ambulatory religion: but that of the Roman way establishes tyranny; because their judge being one, not in person but in succession, and having always the same interest, and having already resolved upon their way, and can, when they list, go further upon the stock of the same principles, and being established by human power will unalterably persist in their right and their wrong, and will never confess an error, and are impatient of contradiction; and, therefore, they impose irremediably, and what they please, upon consciences, of which they have made themselves judges. Now, for these things there is no remedy but from Scripture, which, if it be allowed full, perfect, and sufficient unto all the things of God, then whatsoever either of these parties say, must be tried by Scripture; it must be showed to be there, or be rejected. But to avoid the trial there, they tell you the Scripture is but a dead letter, unsensed characters, words without sense, or unsensed; and, therefore, this must be supplied by the inward word, says one; by the pope's word in cathedrâ, says the other; and then both the inward. word and the pope's word shall rule and determine every thing; and the Scriptures will signify nothing: but as under pretence of the word internal, every new thing shall pass for the word of God, so it shall do also under the Roman pretence. For not he that makes a law, but he that expounds the law, gives the final measures of good or evil. It follows from hence, that nothing but the Scripture's sufficiency can be a sufficient limit to the inundation of evils, which may enter from these parties relying upon the same false principle. My last argument is from tradition itself: for, 7. If we inquire upon what grounds the primitive church did rely for their whole religion, we shall find they knew none else but the Scriptures, Ubi Scriptum?' was their first inquiry? Do the prophets and the apostles, the evan gelists, or the epistles say so? Read it there, and then teach it; else reject it:' they call upon their charges in the words of Christ, "Search the Scriptures;" they affirm that the Scriptures are full, that they are a perfect rule, that they contain all things necessary to salvation: and from hence they confuted all heresies. This I shall clearly prove by abundant testimonies: of which though many of them have been already observed by very many learned persons; yet because I have added others, not so noted, and have collected with diligence and care, and have rescued them from elusory answers; I have therefore chosen to represent them together; hoping they may be of more usefulness than trouble, because I have here made a trial, whether the church of Rome be in good earnest, or no, when she pretends to follow tradition; or how it is that she expects a tradition shall be proved. For this doctrine of the Scripture's sufficiency I shall now prove by a full tradition ; therefore, if she believes tradition, let her acknowledge this tradition which is so fully proved; and if this do not amount to a full probation, then it is but reasonable to expect from them, that they never obtrude upon us any thing for tradition, or any tradition for necessary to be believed, till they have proved it such, by proofs more, and more clear, than this essay concerning the sufficiency and perfection of the Divine Scriptures. I begin with St. Irenæus. "We know that the Scriptures are perfect, for they are spoken by the word of God, and by his Spirit. Therefore read diligently the Gospel, given unto us by the apostles; and read diligently the prophets, and you shall find every action and the whole doctrine, and the whole passion of our Lord preached in them. And indeed we have received the economy of our salvation by no other but by those, by whom the Gospel came to us; which truly they then preached, but afterwards, by the will of God, delivered to us in the Scriptures, which was to be the pillar and ground to our faith." These are the words of this saint, Rectissimè quidem scientes quia Scripturæ quidem perfectæ sunt, quippe à verbo Dei et Spiritu ejus dictæ, lib. ii. c. 47. Lib. iv. c. 66. Legite diligentiùs id quod ab apostolis est evangelium nobis datum, et legite diligentiùs prophetas, et invenietis universam actionem, et omnem doctrinam Domini nostri prædicatam in ipsis. who was one of the most ancient fathers of the church, a Greek by birth, by dignity and employment a bishop in France, and so most likely to know the sense and rule of the eastern and western churches. t Next to St. Irenæus, we have the doctrine of St. Clemens of Alexandria in these words: "He hath lost the being a man of God, and of being faithful to the Lord, who hath kicked against tradition ecclesiastical, and hath turned to the opinions of human heresies." What is this tradition ecclesiastical; and where is it to be found? That follows, "But he, who returning out of error, obeys the Scriptures, and hath permitted his life to truth, he is, of a man, in a manner made a god. For the Lord is the principle of our doctrine, who by the prophets and the Gospel, and the blessed apostles, at sundry times, and in divers manners, leads us from the beginning to the end. He that is faithful of himself is worthy of faith in the voice and Scripture of the Lord, which is usually exercised through the Lord to the benefit of men, for this Scripture we use for the finding out of things, this we use as the rule of judging.But if it be not enough to speak our opinions absolutely, but that we must prove what we say, we expect no testimony that is given by men, but by the voice of the Lord we prove the question; and this is more worthy of belief than any demonstration; or rather it is the only demonstration, by which knowledge they who have tasted of the Scriptures alone, are faithful." Afterwards he tells how the Scriptures are a perfect demonstration of the faith: "perfectly demonstrating out of the Scriptures themselves, concerning themselves, we speak or persuade demonstratively of the faith. Although even they that go after heresies, do dare to use the Scriptures of the prophets. But first they use not all, neither them that are perfect, nor as the whole body and contexture of the prophecy does dictate: but choosing out those things which are spoken ambiguously, they draw them to their own opinion."-Then he tells how we shall best use and understand the Scriptures: "Let every one consider what is agreeable to the Almighty Lord God, and what becomes him, and in that let him confirm every thing from those Strom. lib. vii. p. 757. edit. Paris. 1629. things which are demonstrated from the Scriptures, out of those and the like Scriptures."-And he adds, that "it is the guise of heretics, when they are overcome by showing that they oppose Scriptures,-yet still they choose to follow that which to them seems evident, rather than that which is spoken of the Lord by the prophets, and by the Gospel, and what is proved and confirmed by the testimony of the apostles:"—and at last concludes", "they became impious, because they believe not the Scriptures ;"—and a little before this, he asks the heretics, "Will they deny, or will they grant there is any demonstration? I suppose they will all grant there is; except those, who also deny that there are senses. But if there be any demonstration, it is necessary to descend to questions, and from the Scriptures themselves to learn demonstratively, how the heresies are fallen; and on the contrary, how the most perfect knowledge is in the truth. and the ancient church."-But again, "they that are ready to spend their time in the best things, will not give over seeking for truth, until they have found the demonstration from the Sc iptures themselves."-And after this, adds his advice to Christians, "to wax old in the Scriptures, and thence to seek for demonstrations."-These things he spoke, not only by way of caution to the Christians, but also of opposition to the Gnostics, who were very busy in pretending ancient traditions. This is the discourse of that great Christian philosopher St. Clement; from which, besides the direct testimony given to the fulness and sufficiency of Scripture in all matters of faith, or questions in religion; we find him affirming that the Scriptures are a certain, and the only demonstration of these things; they are the gingov, the rule' of judging the controversies of faith; that the tradition ecclesiastical, that is, the whole doctrine taught by the church of God, and preached to all men, is in the Scripture; and therefore that it is the plenary and perfect repository of tradition, that is, of the doctrine delivered by Christ and his apostles and they who believe not these, are impious. And lest any man should say, that, suppose Scripture de contain do " ἀσεβεῖν διὰ τὸ ἀπιστεῖν ταῖς γραφαῖς. page 755. all things necessary to salvation, yet it is necessary that tradition, or some infallible church, do expound them, and then it is as long as it is broad, and comes to the same issue;" St. Clement tells us how the Scriptures are to be expounded; saying, that "they who rely upon them, must expound Scriptures by Scriptures, and by the analogy of faith, 'comparing spiritual things with spiritual,' one place with another, a part with the whole, and all by the proportion to the Divine attributes." This was the way of the church in St. Clement's time; and this is the way of our churches. But let us see how this affair went in other churches and times, and whether there be a succession and an universality of this doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture in all the affairs of God. The next is Tertullianz, who writing against Hermogenes that affirmed God made the world not of nothing, but of I know not what pre-existent matter; appeals to Scripture in the question, whose fulness Tertullian adores; "Let the shop of Hermogenes show that this thing is written. If it be not written, let him fear the woe pronounced against them that add to or take from Scripture." Against this testimony it is objected, that here Tertullian speaks but of one question' So Bellarmine answers: and from him E. W. and A. L. To which the reply is easy: for when Tertullian challenges Hermogenes to show his proposition in Scripture, he must mean that the fulness of the Scripture was sufficient not only for this, but for all questions of religion ;—or else it had been an ill way of arguing, to bring a negative argument from Scripture, against this alone. For why was Hermogenes tied to prove this proposition from Scripture more than any other? Either Scripture was the rule for all, or not for that. For suppose the heretic had said, 'It is true, it is not in Scripture; but I have it from tradition, or it was taught by my forefathers' there had been nothing to have replied to this; but that, it may be, he had no tradition for it. Now if Hermogenes had no tradition, then indeed he was tied to show it in Scripture; but then Tertullian should have said, let Hermogenes show where it is written, or that it is a tradition for if the pretending and proving tradition (in case z Contr. Herm. c. 22, De verb. Dei, lib. iv. c. 11. Sect. Profert undecimò. |