some later hands; whereof some were vain, some others pernicious; not such as they received from Moses and the Prophets.' ... But this is to cast mists before the eyes of the simple; for who sees not that our Saviour's challenge is general, to TRADITIONS THUS ADVANCED, not to these or those traditions? And where he speaks of some later hands, he had forgotten that our Saviour upon the Mount tells him ερρέθη τοις αρχαιοις : that these faulted traditions were of old.. Let them be able to deduce ANY Evangelical tradition from the Apostles, and we are ready to embrace it with all observance."1

"As for oral traditions, what certainty can there be in them? What foundation of truth can be laid upon the breath of man? How do we see the reports vary of those things which our eyes have seen done! How do they multiply in their passage, and either grow or die upon hazards!"?

"What is grounded upon the divine word must needs be irrefragably true, that which upon human traditions either must or may be erroneous.” 3

Church-tradition, then, is no divine informant, according to Bishop Hall.

Let us proceed to the second and third points.

He

"What can be more full and clear," says the bishop, "than that of St. Austin? In these things which are openly laid forth in Scripture are found all matters that contain either faith or manners.' Cardinal Bellarmin's elusion is not a little prejudicial to his own cause. tells us, that St. Austin speaks of those points which are simply necessary to salvation for all men, all which he acknowledges to be written by the Apostles; 'But, besides these there are many other things,' saith he,' which we have only by tradition,' [which is just what our authors say. And how does Bishop Hall meet it? Thus.] Will

1 Old Religion, ch. 12. § 2. Works, ed. Pratt, vol. 9. p. 288.

2 Ib. § 3.

3 Sermon on "The best bargain." Sept. 21, 1623.

it not therefore hence follow that the common sort of Christians need not look at his traditions?" 1

Again; "Even the very light of reason shows us that as there is a God, so that he is a most wise and most just God. Needs, therefore, must it follow, that if this most just and wise God will give a word, whereby to reveal himself and his will to mankind, it must be a perfect word; for, as his wisdom knows what is fit for his creature to know of himself, so his justice will require nothing of the creature but what he hath enabled him to know and do. Now, then, since he requires us to know him, to obey him, it must needs follow that he hath left us SO exquisite a rule of this knowledge and obedience as cannot admit of any defect, or any supplement. THIS RULE CAN BE NO OTHER THAN HIS WRITTEN WORD; therefore written that it might be preserved entire for this purpose to the last date of time." 2

"How miserably," he sarcastically remarks, "were every one of the learned Fathers of the Church blinded, that they could never either see or acknowledge any other rule of faith!" 3

And so in his sermon to the Synod of Dort he says, "No one can doubt that the Holy Spirit, speaking in the sacred Scripture, ought to be the Judge of Controversies.”

The second of these passages also clearly shows us his opinion as to the notion that there are any important revealed points not contained in Scripture, for if "the written word" is "so exquisite a rule of this knowledge and obedience as cannot admit of any defect, or any supplement," there cannot be any important revealed truths not conveyed to us in it, and for which we are indebted only to tradition.

The following, however, are perhaps still more clear on

Old Rel. ch. 12. § 1.

3 No Peace with Rome, § 4.

2 Ib. § 3.

4 Judicem esse debere controversiarum Spiritum Sanctum in sacra Scriptura loquentem nemo est qui ambigat. Conc. ad Syn. Dordr.

the point. "St. Augustine's words [alluding to the passage quoted above] are full and comprehensive, expressing all those things which contain either faith or manners, whether concerning governors or PEOPLE. If now they can find out anything that belongs not either to belief or action, we do willingly give it up to their traditions, but ALL THINGS

WHICH PERTAIN TO EITHER OF THOSE ARE OPENLY COM

PRIZED IN SCRIPTURE." "Whatsoever is not written, by this rule [i. e. one quoted from Tertullian] may not be obtruded to our belief." 1

On the alleged obscurity of the Scriptures urged in the fourth position, his opinion may be judged from the following;

"Yet one step more. Our question is, Whether the Scripture be easy or most obscure, and whether in all essential points it do not INTERPRET ITSELF, so as what is hard in one place is openly laid forth in another. Hear the judgment of the Old Church AND OURS. All things are clear and plain, and nothing contrary in the Scriptures,' saith Epiphanius. Those things which seem doubtfully and obscurely spoken in some places of Scripture, are expounded by them which in other places are open and plain,' saith Basil. What could Calvin and Luther say more?"

And having quoted several other passages from Augustine and Chrysostom, he concludes with the two following from the latter. "He [i. e. Chrysostom] makes this difference betwixt the philosophers and Apostles, 'The philosophers speak obscurely, but the Apostles and Prophets,' saith he, 'contrarily make all things delivered by them clear and manifest; and, as the common teachers of the world, have so expounded all things, that EVERY MAN may OF HIMSELF by BARE READING learn those things which are spoken.' Yea, lastly, so far he goes in this point as that he asketh, Wherefore needeth a preacher? all things are clear and plain in the divine Scriptures;

1 Old Rel. ch. 12. § 1.

but because ye are delicate hearers, and seek delight in hearing, therefore ye seek for preachers.'" 1

"It is not to be imagined that the same word of God which speaks for all other truths should not speak for itself. How fully doth it display its own sufficiency and perfection! All Scripture,' saith the Chosen Vessel, 'is given by inspiration of God; and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.' 2 Tim. iii. 16. 'Profitable,' saith the Cardinal, ‘but not sufficient. Many things may avail to that end whereto they suffice not; so meat is profitable to nourish, but without natural heat it nourisheth not.' Thus he. Hear yet what followeth, That the man of God may be perfected and throughly furnished unto all good works.' 2 Tim. iii. 17. Lo, it is so profitable to all these services, that thereby it perfects a divine, MUCH MOREe AN ORDINARY CHRISTIAN. That which is so profitable as to cause perfection is abundantly sufficient, and must needs have full perfection in itself. That which can perfect the teacher is sufficient for THE LEARNer.'

2

Against the last position, as to our receiving the Scriptures on the authority of Church-tradition, the following may suffice.

"This is yet most shamefully injurious, to deny unto the word of God credit of itself, avrоTIOTIAV; and so to hang the Scriptures upon the Church, that they must needs beg all their authority from the voices of men." This remark, I need hardly observe, is as forcible against the views of the Tractators on this point, as against those of the Romanists. And in his "Serious dissuasive from Popery," (div. 2. § 5.), he quotes several passages from Augustine and Chrysostom, showing that, in their view, the Scriptures are not to be received "on the authority of the Church."

Can it be a question, then, as to what would have been

1 Serious Diss. from Popery, Div. 2. § 3.

2 Old Rel. ch. 12. § 2.

3 No Peace with Rome, § 4.

Bishop Hall's sentiments respecting the system under consideration?

ARCHBISHOP LAUD.

The next witness whose testimony we propose to examine is Archbishop Laud, and there can be little doubt that the Archbishop took tolerably high views of Church-authority, and its correlative points, and accordingly he is a great favourite with the Tractators. Mr. Keble has, therefore, given us a passage from his conference with Fisher the Jesuit; a passage, however, in which there is not one word about tradition from beginning to end. And this is the more extraordinary, because in this very work the Archbishop has entered somewhat fully into this question of tradition; and if it shall turn out that the views of the Archbishop are entirely opposed to Mr. Keble's, then I think that the reader will agree with me in thinking that Mr. Keble's fondness for the notions he has imbibed on this subject has betrayed him into much unfairness. His reference, moreover, in this case would be singularly unfortunate, for if Archbishop Laud opposes his views, a fortiori are they contrary to those of the great body of the English clergy on such a point.

Now, as to the first point, the Archbishop says,—" Even in those fundamental things in which the whole universal Church neither doth nor can err, yet even there her authority is not divine, because she delivers those supernatural truths by promise of assistance, yet tyed to means; and not by any special immediate revelation, which is necessarily required to the very least degree of Divine authority. And therefore our worthies do not only say, but prove, 'that all the Church's constitutions are of the nature of human law.' And some among you, not unworthy for their learning, prove it at large, that all the Church's Testimony, or Voice, or Sentence, (call it what you will,) is but suo modo or aliquo modo, not simply, but in a manner divine.' Yea, and A. C. himself, after all his debate, comes to that and no

VOL. II.

X X