Scripture and tradition compared in a sermon preached at Guild-Hall Chapel, Novemb. 27, 1687 / by Edward Stillingfleet ...

Scripture and tradition compared in a sermon preached at Guild-Hall Chapel, Novemb. 27, 1687 / by Edward Stillingfleet ...

Table of contents

Title page

§

THE PREFACE.

§

ERRATA.

§

[Page]

nestly as he doth to them? Must we think, as some do, that he uses these Expressions as gentle Methods of Insinuation, and commends them for that, which he would perswade them to? But this doth not seem agreeable to the Apostles simplicity and godly sincerity, 2 Cor. 1. 12. which he elsewhere sets such a value upon. But it is far more probable that hitherto they had been very orderly and stedfast: but Epaphras going to St. Paul had informed him throughly of their condition, viz. That they were like a Garrison closely besieged on all sides; and although hitherto they had held out with great Courage, yet he did not know what earnest Sollicitations, and fair Promises, and tempting Motives might do with them, and therefore the Apostle writes this Epistle to encourage them in their stedfastness, and to warn them against Temptations. Which he doth in such a manner, as shews,

2. That he had a more than ordinary Apprehension of the danger they were in. And this I say, saith he, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words, v. 4. and beware lest any man spoil you with Philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the World, and not after Christ, v. 8. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of Angels, &c. v. 18. All which expressions do imply, that he had just reason to fear and to give them caution in time, that while they did yet think that they stood, they should take heed lest they fall.

And this is that which the Apostle aims at in the words of the Text; As ye have therefore received Christ Iesus the Lord, so walk ye in him.

Receiving Christ Iesus the Lord, doth not here relate to his Person, but to his Authority, and to his Doctrine; so the Apostle himself explains it in the next verse, rooted and built up in him, and established in the Faith, as ye have been taught.

[Page] Walking in him is an Eastern way of speaking and supposes both an adhering to that Faith they had then received, and living according to it, looking on Christ and his Doctrine, as their only way to Heaven.

And as ye had received him, so walk ye in him, implies that the manner of their receiving Christ and his Doctrine at first was different from that which the false Apostles endeavoured to bring in among them, and that they were bound to keep close to that pure and Primitive Doctrine which they at first received.

From hence we may consider a double Obligation lying upon them.

1. To keep stedfast to that Faith which they first received, without being seduced from it by the Arts of Deceivers, who were then busie among them.

2. To live according to it,; by making that Faith the Principle of a Christian Life; and so walking in him, as they have received him.

1. As to the former, the Reasonableness of it cannot but appear from the supposition here made, viz. that they had received Christ Iesus the Lord.

For, thereby they declared, that they received him as the Christ, i. e. as him who was anointed of the Father to Teach and Instruct his Church; and therefore they were bound to adhere to his Doctrine; there being no other, whom the Father hath sealed and appointed to declare his Will;Col. 2. 3. and in him were hid all the Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge.

They received him as Christ Iesus, Col. 1. 14. that is, they hoped for Redemption through his Blood, even the forgiveness of sins. And if their hopes of Heaven depended upon his Mediation, they had the greatest Reason to adhere only to him.

They received him as Christ Iesus the Lord, and therefore they ought to submit to his Authority, to obey [Page] his Commands, and to observe his Institutions, and in all Circumstances of Life to keep stedfast to the Doctrine which he delivered.

But here arises the great Difficulty, how they should know by any Certain Rule, what was the true and genuine Doctrine of Christ, which himself delivered? For,

1. The false Teachers among them pretended to deliver the true Doctrine of Christ as well as the Apostles.

2. That which they at first received was no certain Rule. For the false Teachers might have been before them. And first Possession gives no Title in Religion.

3. The Apostle doth not put the whole Tryal meerly upon their Judgments or Memories, or Capacities; viz. What they thought, or remembred was at first taught them for the Doctrine of Christ.

For, it was very possible for them to have mistaken, or to have mis-remembred, what was at first delivered.

Nothing can be more weak than to imagine that the Judgments of People in matters of Faith, must be formed according to the skill and excellency of their Teachers. For the hearers of Christ himself; although he spake as never Man spake, yet did very often mistake his meaning. Aud at one time so remarkably, that although he took care to rectify their misapprehension, yet it is said,John 6. 66. From that time many of his Disciples went back and walked no more with him. So that the highest infallibility in the Teachers, doth not prevent the possibility, or the danger of mistaking in the hearers. And whatsoever any vainly pretend, nothing can do it, but Transfusing the Spirit of Infallibility into all.

If we look over the Apostolical Churches while they were under the Care and Conduct of an Infallible Spirit; yet this did not prevent their running into great errours and mistakes, as appears by the Account we have of them, given by that Spirit which cannot deceive in the Apostolical Writings.

[Page] In the Church of Rome it self, even at that time, when its Faith was spoken of throughout the World, Rom. 1. 8. yet there were dissensions and differences there, and such as were contrary to the Doctrine which was delivered. And St. Paul bids them to mark such which caused them; 16. 17. he doth not say, it was impossible for them to introduce any thing contrary to the Doctrine which they had learned by Tradition from the Apostles; but he not only supposes it very possible, but he bids them have a particular Eye to them, lest they should be deceived by them.

The Church of Corinth was planted by Paul, and watered by Apollos; and there were Disciples of Cephas and of Christ himself. And yet in the midst of so many Infallible Teachers, they had like to have lost all their Faith; as one of them tells them.1 Cor. 15. How say some among you there is no Resurrection of the dead? 12. 14. And if Christ be not risen, then is our Preaching vain, and your Faith is also vain. Could not they remember to day what was taught them yesterday, and so what the Apostles at first preached to them?

The Churches of Galatia had such an opinion of St. Paul, Gal. 4. 14. upon his first preaching the Gospel among them, that they received him as an Angel of God, even as Christ Iesus; yet presently after he saith, am I therefore become your Enemy beause I tell you the Truth? 16. What! Of an Angel of God, or of one received as Christ Iesus, to become their Enemy, and that upon the most unjustifiable account, because he told them the Truth! But, where truth can make Enemies, errours may easily gain Friends. And so we find it was in the Apostolical Churches, even under the Conduct and Teaching of the Apostles.

The Colossians were not yet so far gone; but they were in such danger, that the Apostle writes this Epistle with great concernment for them. He tells them v. 1. he had [Page] a sharp Conflict in his own mind about them.Ch. 1. v. 7. [...] 12. They had not yet seen his Face in the Flesh, being converted by some sent by him, of whom Epaphras is most taken notice of; but he was present with them in Spirit, v. 5. i. e. He was deeply affected with their Condition; for he understood the Designs and Artifices of the Seducers among them. He knew what fair and plausible pretences they had; viz. that they went about not to undermine Christianity, but to advance it, by taking in some Jewish Customs, and some Gentile Observances, and Modes of Worship which might easily be Accommodated to the Christian Doctrine; and so a great deal of the Ammosities both of the Iews and Heathens would be removed; and Christianity would thereby gain more Friends, and meet with fewer Enemies.

The Apostle finding how necessary it was at this time, if possible, to keep them Stedfast in the Faith,

1. He assures them, that the Christian Doctrine was of it self so sufficient for the good of Mankind, that it needed no Additions, either from the Law of Moses, or the Philosophy of the Gentiles, which might introduce several things, with a specious Appearance of Wisdom, Humility and Mortification; but they ought to be assured, that from Christ they had all that was necessary or useful for Salvation;v. 3. For in him are hid all the Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge.

2. That this Doctrine was at first truly delivered to them, and they ought to be stedfast in it; which is the design of the Text.

But they might object, that Epaphras was no Apostle of Christ himself; and if he were, yet there were many Apostles, and the false Apostles pretended to be true ones; and although St. Paul interposed his Authority; yet he was but one, and the Iudaizers would not yield to [Page] it, but were ready to suggest, that the other Apostles were more favourable to the Jewish Customs than he; and therefore it was necessary some more general and common Rule be found out, whereby to distinguish the Original and Genuine Doctrine of Christ from that of Pretenders and Seducers.

The clearing of this is in it self a matter of great consequence; and not only was to those of that Age, but is so in every Age of the Christian Church, where the same Question may be put: What was the true Primitive Doctrine of Christ; and by what means may we come to it? which concerns us this day as well as them.

And the Answer lay in two particulars, which I shall endeavour to clear.

1. [...] the Apostles did in common deliver to [...] by them, was the Genuine Doctrine [...].

2. That which they have left in their Writings, after it came to be contested which was the true Doctrine of Christ.

3. That which the Apostles did in common deliver to the Churches planted by them. For, we have all the reason in the World to believe, that the Apostles delivered one and the same Faith to all the Churches; having the same Infallible Spirit to direct them. There was no need for them to meet together before their dispersion, and to agree upon some common Articles of Faith, Russia. in Symbol. as Russinus imagins, lest they should differ from each other; For how could they differ,Joh, 16. 13. who had the same Spirit of Truth to lead them into all Truth? And we find nothing like a Combination among the Apostles, as to matters of Doctrine: And if there had been, it would have rendred the Faith they delivered more suspitious, in that they durst not trust particular Persons with delivery of it, without an antecedent Confederacy among themselves, which would have [...] [Page] cerning him; and the Disciples when they first heard him were amazed; Acts 9. 13 21. after this, he took a course by himself, and did not go up to Ierusalem to the College of Apostles there resident,Gal. 1. 17. but went into Arabia; so that, if any one might be thought to set up another Doctrine, it was he; but he was so far from it, that he established and confirmed the truth of what they delivered, and was very successful in his Apostleship in all places. And when there had been some whispers concerning him, as though he proceeded not in the same way with the rest, he went up to Ierusalem, and there upon full examination, James and Cephas,2. 9. and John, who were the leading Apostles, gave him the right hand of Fellowship; in token of their full consent in the same Faith.

2. The truth of the Gospel was the more plainly discovered.

All this while, the Apostles only preached and delivered their Doctrine to the several Churches by verbal Instructions; but after these had been received in the hearts of such multitudes, that there could be no suspition that a false Representation of Christs Doctrine or Actions could be received by those Churches, then the Wise Providence of God took care for Posterity, and imploy'd several Persons in distant Places and Times to write the History of our Saviour. And there was this advantage to the Church that the Gospels were written no sooner. For all the Churches planted by the Apostles, were then made Judges whether the Gospels written were agreeable to the Doctrine which the Apostles had taught; and if not, there would have been just reason to have question'd either the Truth of what had been taught them, or what was delivered in the Gospels.

But when they found the main to be fully consonant to what they had been taught, the Testimony of every [Page] one of these Churches did shew the concurrence of all the Apostles, as to the Doctrine contained in the several Gospels.

And that which adds to the strength of this proof is, that when the true Gospels were written, there were several false and counterfeit Gospels dispersed abroad, under the Names of the Apostles themselves. As of St. Peter St. Thomas, Euseb. Hist. l. 3. c. 25. St. Matthias, and others; as Eusebius informs us; and as we have the genuine Acts of the Apostles, so there were the pretended Acts of Paul, of Andrew and John, and the other Apostles. How came these to be rejected, and the other to be carefully received? Here lies the true Advantage of Original Tradition before the written Gospels, that by it the several Churches were enabled to pass a true judgment concerning them when they came to be dispersed among them. For they could presently tell, whether what they read were agreeable to what they had heard and received from the Apostles. As suppose the Gospel of St. Matthew being published in Iudea, were carried into Mesopotamia or Persia, where many Christian Churches were very early planted; these being throughly instructed by the Apostles in all things relating to the Life, Death, Resurrection and Doctrine of Christ, could presently judge whether St. Matthews Gospel agreed with what they had heard or not, and the like holds as to all the Churches in the Roman Empire. So that the Consent of the Churches so soon, while the memory of the Apostles Doctrine was so fresh in their minds, is in effect the consent of all the Apostles who taught them.

And this is very different from the case of particular Persons in some Churches, who might mistake or forget what was taught; for this is a concurrent testimony of all the Apostolical Churches, who could not agree to approve [Page] an error in the Gospels contrary to the Faith delivered to them. And that while some of the Apostles were still living. For the other Gospels were received and approved, before St. Iohn wrote his.

The case had been far otherwise, if no Gospels had been written in that Age; for then it might have been suspected, that either the Impressions of the first Teachers were worn out, or they had been by degrees alter'd from their first Apprehensions by the cunning craftiness of those who lay in wait to deceive them.

After the decease of the Apostles, the common Tradition of the Apostolical Churches was useful in these cases;

1. To convey down the Authentick Writings of the Apostles or Evangelists, which were delivered to any of them.

2. To bear Testimony against any pretended Writings, which were not first received by the Apostolical Churches to which they were said to be written. For there can be no Negative Testimony of more force than that; it being improbable to the utmost degree that such a Church should not know, or not make known any true Apostolical Writings.

3. To overthrow any pretence to a secret Tradition from the Apostles different from what was seen in the Apostolical Writings. Iren. l. 3. c. 3. 4. And to this purpose Irenaeus and Tertullian make very good use of the Tradition of the Apostolical Churches against the pretenders to such a Tradition, Tertul. de Praescript. Haer. which those Churches were not acquainted with.

But they agree that the Apostles committed the same Doctrine to Writing which they preached, and that it might be a Foundation and Pillar of Faith; that this Doctrine was contained in the four Gospels; and that the Apostolical Churches did receive them from those who first [Page] wrote them, and that within the compass of the Apostolical Age.

It was therefore most agreeable to the Infinite Wisdom of God in providing for a constant Establishment of the Faith of his Church in all Ages, neither to permit the Gospels to be written till the Churches were planted, nor to be put off to another Generation. For, then it would have been plausibly objected; ‘if these things are true, why were they not recorded, when there were Persons living who were best able to have either proved, or confuted them? Then we might have been satisfyed one way or other; but now the Iews are dead, and the Apostles are dead; and although there are many left who believe their Doctrine, yet this can never reach to the Testimony of those who saw and heard the things themselves, or whose Doctrine was attested by those who did so.’ And this is now the mighty Advantage of the Church ever since that the things concerning Christ were written by such Persons. With what another kind of Authority do those words command our Assent,1 John 1, 2, 3. That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the Word of Life; For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that Eternal Life, which was with the Father, and was manifest unto us, that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you; then if all the Testimony concerning Christ were to be resolved into those who heard some say, that others told them, they had it from such, who saw those who conversed with them who saw Christ in the Flesh? At such a distance the Authority of a Testimony is extremely lessen'd; which is not like a River which grows greater by running; [Page] but like a Mineral Water which loses its strength by being carried too far. We find in the time of Papias who lived but in the second Century, the Authority of bare Tradition was mightily sunk;Euseb. Hist l. 3. c. 39. For, Eusebius saith, he conversed with the Disciples of our Lord and his Apostles, he saith of himself, that he went up and down to them to get what he could from them, having a greater esteem of what he could learn from them than of what was written. And what Advantage did this bring to the Church? It brought some idle opinions into reputation, saith Eusebius; for afterwards they thought it enough to fix them upon Papias. But how was it possible for him to mistake? Eusebius saith, that being a Man of mean capacity, he might easily misunderstand the meaning of what was spoken. But if Tradition might fail after such a manner so near the Apostles times; then we must be assured of the Capacity as well as Integrity of those of every Age through whom a Tradition passed, or else they might deceive, or be deceived about it.

But God was pleased to provide better for the security of our Faith, by causing the Gospels to be written either by the Apostles themselves, as St. Matthew and St. Iohn, or by the Disciples of the chief Apostles, while the others were surviving, as St. Mark and St. Luke; and the latter gives this account of his undertaking to write it,Luk. 1. 4. viz. That thou mighest know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed. His instruction was by an Oral Tradition; but that it seems wanted something to strengthen and confirm it; and that was by St. Lukes writing his Gospel. How could they add any assurance to him, if all the ground of his certainty were to be taken from Tradition? St. Luke thought it necessary then, that those things which concerned the Life and Doctrine of Christ should be put into Writing, that they might [Page] be more certainly convey'd; and that while they had the Testimony of those, who were eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word.

2. And so I come to the second Rule of discerning the Primitive Doctrine of Christ; viz. The Writings of the Apostles, when matters of Doctrine came to be contested, were the Infallible Rule, whereby they were to judge, which was the true and genuine Doctrine of Christ.

There are some who pretend, that the Apostles Writings were meerly Accidental and Occasional things, but that the main design was to lodge the great Assurance of the Doctrine of Christ in Tradition from one to another; and what they wrote was not to make any Rule of Faith, but only to give some good Advice to those Churches they wrote to.

But I shall now prove that the Writings of the Apostles were intended by the Holy Ghost to be a standing Rule, whereby the Church was to judge which was the true and genuine Doctrine of Christ.

1. From the Reasons and Occasions of writing the Books of the New Testament.

1. As to the Gospels, we must distinguish the General Reason of writing them, from the particular Occasions as to the several Gospels. The General Reason is to be drawn from the Divine Wisdom which inspired and guided them; the particular Occasions relate to the circumstances of writing them.

[Page] The General Reason is that which Irenaeus gives, I [...]n. l. 3. c. 1. viz. That the Gospel which they had first preached, was by the Will of God put into Writing, that it might be a Foundation and Pillar of our Faith. Not meerly to keep up the Remembrance of it, which Fevardentius yields, and thereby overthrows the Infallibility of Oral Tradition; but that so it may be a certain Rule of Faith to all Ages. The Evangelists saith St. Augustin,Aug. de Con. [...]ers. Evang. l. 1. c. 54. were but Christs Hands, which himself as the Head, directed in writing the Gospels, and therefore we are to look on the Gospels as his own Hand-writing. The Holy Ghost, saith he, directed the Minds of the Evangelists,l. 2. c. 53. as to the order and manner of their Writing. Which varied according to the particular Occasions, but yet were all subservient to the General Reason.

St. Matthew wrote the first Gospel,Euseb Hist. l. 3. c. 2. saith Eusebius, to the Jews to whom he had preached, because going into other parts he would supply the want of his Presence among them by his Writing. What need this, if Tradition were a certain and infallible way of conveying the Doctrine of Christ? St. Chrysostom saith, [...] the Jewish Christians desired him to put into Writing what they had heard him Preach. Did not they understand the force of Tradition better? Or why should St. Matthew put them out of an Infallible Way? The Authority of the Imperfect Work on St. Matthew saith, [...]. in Mat. in Pr [...]ogo. they desired him to write his Gospel, that where ever they went they might carry an Account of their Faith with them. Clemens Alexandrinus, saith, the occasion of writing St. Marks Gospel was,Euseb. l. 2. c. 15. that the people were not satisfied with an unwritten delivery of the Holy Doctrine, and therefore importuned Mark, who was the Disciple of St. Peter, that he would leave a Monument of his Doctrine in Writing; which St. Peter understanding by Revelation, approved and confirmed his Gospel for the use of the Churches. Origen saith, he [Page] wrote it according to St. Peters directions.Euseb. l. 6. c. 25. Epiphanius saith, by his Authority, Athanasius saith, it was dictated by him at Rome. Epiphan. Haer. 51. Athanas. in Synopsi. p. 155.

It seems that Peter himself did not think fit to leave the Doctrine of Christ to an Oral Tradition, even at Rome, but Irenaeus thinks it was written after St. Peters decease,T [...]t [...]l. c. Marc. l. 4. c. 5. who therein differs from the rest, and shews how uncertain meer Tradition is.Hieron. de Script. Eccles. Tertullian saith, St. Marks Gospel was attributed to St. Peter, and St. Lukes to St. Paul. St. Ierom mentions the Opinion of some, that when St. Paul saith according to my Gospel, he means that of St. Luke.

But St. Luke himself plainly gives an Account of the occasion of his Writing.Ambros. in Luc. St. Ambrose thinks by those who had taken in hand to write of those things which were firmly believed among us, Luke 1. 1. he means the Authors of the counterfeit Gospels, as that of the Twelve Apostles and St. Matthias. But we have no evidence that these were older than St. Luke; his meaning is, that in those parts where he was, there were some who did undertake to give an Account of the Life and Actions of Christ, who wanted the Advantages which he had; having had great opportunities of knowing circumstances from the Eye-witnesses; and therefore he set himself to give an exact Relation of them, that not only Theophilus, Epiph. Haer. 51. but every one that answers his name might know the certainty of those things wherein they had been instructed. But, did not they know the certainty of these things by the Apostles Preaching? Yes, but the things they heard might slip out of their Memories; and to prevent this, saith Theophylact, St. Luke wrote his Gospel, Theophyl. in Luc. that they might retain these things with greater certainty. And words that are only spoken are more easily [Page] misunderstood;Maldonat. Com. in Evang. prol. which Maldonat assigns, as one great Reason of the Evangelists writing their several Gospels.

St. Iohn likewise gives an account himself of the Reason of his Writing; and that the greatest imaginable. But these are written that ye might believe that Iesus is the Christ, Joh. 20. 31. the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life through his Name. Why written that ye might believe? Did the Apostle in his old Age mistrust the understandings or the Memories of Christians? Was not the Apostles Teaching sufficient to keep up the Principles of the Christian Faith in the hearts of the people; no, not while St. Iohn himself was yet living? He had certainly a very mean Opinion of Tradition, that thought it necessary for him to write that they might believe that Iesus is the Son of God. For there was no point of Faith more necessary than this, which was required of all Persons to be owned before Baptism.

Yet for all this, and whatever else can be said, St. Iohn thought it necessary that these things be written that they might believe.

He lived the longest of any of the Apostles, and therefore saw how little Tradition was to be trusted; for it was already corrupted in so weighty a point as the Divinity of Christ.

Cerinthus and his Followers allow'd the general Tradition of the Church, that Iesus was the Son of God; but then they gave their own sense of it, by extraordinary Favour and Adoption.Hierom. Proem. in Matth. De Script. Eccles. And from hence the Fathers agree that St. Iohn took occasion to write his Divine Gospel, to clear this Fundamental point of the Christian Faith.

[Page] And withal observing that the other Evangelists insisted chiefly on the Actions of Christ for one year,Epiph. H [...]. 51. viz. after Johns Imprisonment he resumes the whole matter,Chrys. hom. 1. in Matth. and adds those things which were omitted by the rest;Euseb. l. 3. c. 24. that so the Church might be furnished with a full Relation of all that was necessary to compleat and establish the Faith of Christians.

2. As to the Epistles.

The first Epistle we read of in the Christian Church, (and in probability the first writing in the New Testament) was the Decretal Epistle of the Council of Ierusalem. Act. 15. 23.

What should make the Apostles put these Decrees into Writing? They were very short, and concerned the practices of Men, and withal were sent by Barnabas and Paul, and Iudas, and Silas. Were not these sufficient to deliver the Apostles sense to the Churches, without Letters from them? What a pitiful thing did they take Oral Tradition to be, if they thought such Men could not by it give full satisfaction to the Churches of Syria and Cilicia, unless they sent it under their hands?

The Epistle to the Romans was written by St. Paul on purpose to clear some main points of the Christian Doctrine, which were then warmly disputed between the Jews and the Christians, and between the Judaizing Christians and others, as about Iustification, Rejection of the Iews, the difference of Meats, &c. And St. Paul took very needless pains in writing that excellent Epistle, if he knew of Christs appointing a Iudge of Controversies there; or if he thought Writing were not a certain way to [Page] make a Rule of Faith, whereby they were to judge in those matters.

The first Epistle to the Corinthians was written not meerly to reprove their Factions and Disorders; but to direct them, and to establish and prove the Faith of the Resurrection, 1 Cor. 15. 2. which was then contested among them. The Epistle was sent by Stephanus and Fortunatus, who could have carried the Apostles sense without his Writing; but there are many weighty things, besides the particular occasions which are of lasting concernment to the Church in all Ages; as there are likewise in his second Epistle to them.

The Epistle to the Galatians was written on occasion of one of the greatest points of controversy at that time, viz. the Use and Obligation of the Law of Moses. And St. Paul sound by sad experience among them, that it was very possible for those who had the best Instructions, either to forget them, or to grow out of Love with them, and to be fond of a change; else he would never have said,Gal. 3. 1. O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you that ye should not obey the Truth? And I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the Grace of Christ into another Gospel, 1. 6. How was it indeed possible for them to be removed, and to be soon removed, who had received the Faith by the Delivery of St. Paul himself? Then, for all that I can see, human Nature taken with all its Advantages and Motives, and Evidences, is a very sallible thing; and if then it might be deceived, and that so easily and grosly; then much more in any following Age of the Church; unless human Nature be mightily changed for the better, since the Apostles times; or any Teachers since be more effectual, than the Apostles,1 Cor. 15. 10. and especially than St. Paul, who laboured more abundantly than they all.

[Page] The Epistle to the Ephesians, though written upon a general Argument, yet doth suppose that they were in continual danger of being deceived; Eph. 4. 14. and tossed up and down, and carried about with every wind of Doctrine by the sleight of Men, and cunning craftiness whereby they lie in wait to deceive.

And therefore he advises them to be upon their guard, and to have their Armour about them, and one choice part of it,6. 17. is the Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God.

The Philippians were assaulted by a rude, violent, head-strong Faction of Judaizers;Phil. 3. 2. which the Apostle bids them to beware of; and writes his Epistle to them for that purpose, and he exhorts them to stand fast in one Spirit, 1. 27. with one mind striving together for the Faith of the Gospel.

In the second Epistle to the Thessalonians, and in both Epistles to Timothy, 2 Thess. 2. 3. he gives notice of a great Defection from the Christian Faith; he describes the manner of it, that it shall be with signs and lying words, and with all deceiveableness of unrighteousness in them that perish, 10. because they received not the love of the truth; 1 Tim. 4. 2, 3. that they shall speak lies in hypocrisie, and forbid to marry, and command to abstain from meats, 2 Tim. 3. 1. 5. being evil men, having a form of godliness, and denying the power of it. I meddle not now with the time when this Apostacy began; but from hence, it is evident that St. Paul supposed, that those who at first received the Christian Faith by Tradition from the Apostles themselves, might notwithstanding through their own weakness and folly, and the Artifices of Deceivers be drawn from it; and that to prevent such mischievous consequences, he knew no better means than a Written Rule,2 Tim. 3. 16, 17. which he tells Timothy was able to make him wise to Salvation; and to make the Man of God perfect, throughly furnished to every good Work.

[Page] And to name no more, the Colossians were set upon by some who thought to refine Christianity; or at least to make it more passable in the World, and therefore would have introduced into it some Rites of the Jews, some Austerities of the Gentiles, some ways of Worship which would recommend them to their Adversaries; and upon this occasion he writes this Epistle to them to convince them that Christianity alone was far beyond any mixtures of the Fancies or Traditions of men, and therefore he could give them no better Advice, than as they had first received the Doctrine of Christ to continue in it, or in the words of the Text, As they had received Christ Iesus the Lord so to walk in him.

The design of what I have said is, that although the Gospels and Epistles were written upon particular occasions; yet those occasions were so great and considerable; and the Assistance of the Holy Ghost did so direct the Hands and Pens of the Evangelists and Apostles in writing them, that what they have therein delivered contains a compleat Rule of the true and genuine Faith, as it was at first delivered to the Church.

But against this, it is objected, that St. Paul himself charged the Thessalonians to stand fast and hold the Traditions which they have been taught either by word or by his Epistles.2 Thess. 2. 15. From whence it appears, that there were other Traditions to be held, that were not written.

The force of all this will be taken away, if we consider when that Epistle was written; viz. one of the first which St. Paul wrote, and soon after the former Epistle to the Thessalonians; which was some time before St. Lukes Gospel, which was first received in the Churches of Greece planted by St. Paul. Therefore all the proper Doctrine of Christ himself, and all that relates to his Life and Actions were then but Traditions among them; [Page] and therefore St. Paul had great Reason then to require them to stand fast to the Traditions they had been taught; i. e. to the Doctrine of Christ they had received in that manner.

But it is urged, Bell. de verbo. l. 4. c. 5. that he mentions before, something he had said about Antichrists coming when he was with them, v. 5.

If this be allow'd, it will be more against than for Tradition. For, what is become of that Tradition? If it be lost, then it follows that Tradition is no Infallible Way of conveyence; and therefore we have more Reason to adhere to a written word.

2. Which leads us to the second Reason from which I designed to prove, that there ought to be a written Rule for discerning true primitive Christianity; and that is from the notorious uncertainty of meer Tradition. I say, notorious, because there never was any Tryal made of it, but it failed, even when it had the greatest Advantages.

I might insist upon the Tradition of the first Ages of the World; when mens Lives were so long, and the principles of the Natural Religion so few; and yet both before and after the Flood, mankind was strangely degenerated from them.

I might insist on many instances in the first Ages of the Christian Church; so many, that scarce one can be produced wherein they pleaded meer Tradition, but they were mistaken in it; As about the Millennium, the Age of Christ, the time of Easter (on one side or other) the Communicating Infants. Aug. de Peccat Meritis. l. 1. c. 4. For St. Augustin quotes Apostolical Tradition for it.

But I shall wave all these, and only mention a very necessary and important thing, which was a long time trusted to Tradition, and yet they differ'd so much about [Page] it, as evidently proved, that meer Tradition was no Infallible Means of conveyance. And that is about the Apostles Creed which was to be repeated by all that were to be Baptized.

We have many plain Testimonies to prove, that this was not to be written; but to be conveyed from one to another, by an Oral Tradition; In Symbolo Fidei & Sp [...]i nostrae, quod ad Apostolis traditum, non scribitur in Charta & Atramento, sid in tabulis cordis carnalibus. Hieron. ad Pammaclu: advers. Errores Joh. Hierosol. St. Hierom, Nec ut eadem verba Symboli teneatis, ullo modo debetis scribere, sed audiendo perdisctre; nec cum didic [...]ritis scribere, sed memoria semper tenere & recolere. August. de Diversis Serm. 75. St. Augustin, Iacirco denique haec non scribi Chartulis & membronis, sid requiri credentium cordibus tradiderunt, ut certum esset haec neminem ex lectione, quae interdum [...] ad infideles solet, sed ex. Apostolorum traditione didicisse. Ruffinus in Symbol. Ruffinus all affirm it.

And the Creed was commonly then calledTetul de Prascrip. c. 12, 13, 14, 21. De Virgin. V [...]l. c. 1. Adv [...]s. Pra [...]am. c. 2. August. Som. 59. 186. 213. 215. Retract. l. 2. c. 3. En [...]i [...]i [...]. de Fide, n. 15. De Symbol. ad Ca [...]c [...]. R [...]ffin. in [...]oem. the Rule of Faith; which shewed that they looked on all the Articles therein contained, as the standard of necessary points.

And yet there is a plain and considerable difference in the Antient Creeds; some Articles being in some which were not in others; although we have Reason to believe the necessary points were at first the same in all. Or else the several Churches must have different Rules of Faith.

The Church of Ierusalem was calledTheod. l. 5. c. 9. the Mother of all Churches by the General Council of Constantinople; and in the Creed there delivered to the Catechumens. Cyrill. [...]. 11. St. Cyril mentions the Eternal Generation of the Son before all Worlds; and so dothTheodo. l. 1. c. 12. Eusebius at Caesarea in the Creed, which he saith, he learnt at his Baptism, which was long before the Nicene Creed. Cassian de [...]. l. 6. c. 3, 4. Cassian makes it a part of that Creed which the Apostles delivered to the Church, and was particularly received in the Church of Antioch.

But no such thing was delivered in the Western Creeds [Page] as far as now appears, by what St. Augustin, Ruffinus, and others say in their expositions of it.

St. Ierom writing against the Bishop of Ierusalem, urges him with the Creed, Hi [...]on ad Pammach (no doubt that which was received in his own Church) and he saith, it consisteth of three main points, the Confession of the Trinity, the Unity of the Church, and the Resurrection of the Flesh.

And the Creed of the Church of Aquileia went no farther, saithRuffin in Symbol. p. 191. V. Vsser. de Symb. p. 8, 9. Ruffinus; nor some old Copies of the Roman Creed.

But Marcellus of Ancyra had Eternal Life in hisEpiph. [...] Haeres. 72. Creed, and so hadCyrill. Catech. 18. Cyril of Ierusalem; so had the African Church in St.August. de Symb. l. 1. Petr. Chrysol, Serm. 57, &c. Augustins time; so had the Church of Ravena; but not the Church of Turin; nor the Gallican Churches; if Maimus Taurinensis, and Venantius Fortunatus explained all the Articles of their Creeds.

Ruffinus confesses the Article of Descent into Hell was not in the Roman, nor in any of the Eastern Creeds.

The Creeds of Ierusalem and Aquileia had not the Communion of Saints; nor those of Marcellus andEpiph Ancor at Epiphanius.

The Title of Catholick was not added to the Church in the Creed in St.Augustin [...] de Fide & Symbolo. Et de Symbolo Serm. 243. Augustins time; for he makes it a Periphrasis, utique Catholicam, from whence probably it came to be added afterwards.

Ruffinus takes no notice of it, and it was not extant in the old Copies of the Roman Creed; nor in that of Marcellus Ancyranus.

These things I mention, not in the least to shake the Faith of the Articles of the Apostles Creed; whichDe Symbolo ad Catech. c. 1. St. Augustin saith was gathered out of Scriptures, and is agreeable to them; but to shew what an uncertain way of conveyance meer Oral Tradition is, when a thing so easily remembred, so constantly used, of so much weight and [Page] consequence fell into such varieties in the greatest. Churches, while they were so scrupulous about the writing of it.

What cause have we then to be thankful to God, that hath taken so much care of his Church, as to provide us an Infallible Written Rule in the Holy Scriptures, whereby we certainly know, what the true Primitive Christianity was, which was delivered by Christ and his Apostles?

But here is a great difficulty to be removed, as to the Written Word.

How can we be certain, we have it, if not by Tradition? and if Tradition be so uncertain, how can we be made certain by it, that we have that written Word which the Apostles delivered? For might not that fail in this, as well as the Creed? And then what security can we have for our Faith?

In Answer to this, I shall shew,

1. What Advantage things that are written have, as to the certainty of conveyance above things meerly committed to Memory and Tradition.

2. What Advantage the Scriptures have, above any other things committed to Writing as to the certainty of their conveyence.

1. As to the Advantage things Written have above those committed to Memory and Tradition only. Which will appear by these things,

1. It was the way God himself made choice of, where the Reason for Tradition was stronger; I mean as to the Ten Commandments, which were short and plain, and easy to be remembred, and very agreeable to the Sense and General Interest of Mankind; yet the Wise God who perfectly understood the Nature of Man, would not leave the Ten Commandments to an Oral Tradition, but God delivered to Moses Two Tables of Stone written [Page] with the Finger of God;Deut. 9. 10. 10. 4. and on them he wrote the Ten Commandments. What a vain and superstuous thing were this, if Oral and Practical Tradition were Infallible? But Gods own pitching upon this way, after so long a Tryal of Mankind in the other; is a Demonstration of the greater certainty of it, if we suppose that God aimed at the benefit of Mankind by it.

2. When Religion was corrupted among the Jews, the only way of restoring it was by a Written Book of the Law.

As we find in the case of Iosiahs Reformation, which was made by the Book of the Law,2 Kings 22. 8. 23. 2, 3. which was found in the House of the Lord.

This was the Rule by which Hilkiah the High Priest, thought it necessary for Iosiah to go by; and not by any Tradition left among them concerning the Law which God had given by Moses.

3. This was that which our Saviour appealed to in all his Disputes;John 5. 39. search the Scriptures, saith he to the Iews; not run to your Traditions, for those were then very corrupt, especially about the Messias, as that he was to be a Temporal Prince, &c. which was then a dangerous and fundamental mistake; and therefore Christ appeals from them to the Scriptures; And they are they which testifie of me. 46. Had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me, for he wrote of me; but if ye believe not his Writings, how shall ye believe my words? 47. And our Saviour severely checks the Pharisees for regarding their own Traditions more than the Written Law.Matt. 15. 3. 9. And yet they pretended to an Oral Tradition down from Moses; as the Jews do to this day; and none are more grosly deceived than they.

4. The general Sense and Experience of Mankind agrees herein, that all matters of consequence are more certainly preserved by Writings than by meer words. There is [Page] no Invention hath been more valued by the Wiser part of Mankind than that of Letters; because it is of such excellent use for conveying the sense of our minds at a distance to others. All men have so great a mistrust, either of the capacity or memory, or fidelity of others; that what they would have done with security they commit to Writing. And whatever we truly understand of the Ages before us, we are beholden to Writing for it; all those memorable Actions, and Institutions, either of Philosophy or Religion which were not written, are long since buried in Oblivion, without possibility of a Resurrection.

But where they have been committed to Writing they are preserved after so many Ages; and by it we certainly know the History of the Patriarchs, and the strange Revolutions that happened from the beginning of the World. By it, we converse with the Wisest persons of former times; and were able to justifie the Scriptures by the concurrent Testimonies of other Writers. By it, we are enabled to interpret Prophecies, and to make plain their accomplishments, which without it, we could never make out. Yea by it, the Wisdom of those is preserved for the benefit of mankind, who thought fit to write nothing themselves, as Socrates and Pythagoras, but their Disciples took care in time to Write their Doctrines. So that we have the general Consent of the wisest part of mankind, that writing is a far more certain way of conveyance than meer Tradition.

2. And especially in our case where there are so many particular advantages, as to the Holy Scriptures, above any other Writings.

1. From the special Providence of God, with respect to them; for since it is agreed by all Christians, that these were written by Divine Inspiration, it is most reasonable [Page] to believe, that a more than ordinary care would be taken to preserve them.

And therefore to suppose any Books of Scripture to be lost, which contained any necessary points of Faith is a great Reflexion on Divine Providence. For, if God watches over his Church, he cannot be supposed to let such Books be lost which were designed for the universal and lasting Benefit of his Church.

2. From the mighty esteem which the Church of God had always for them; for, they built their Hopes of Heaven upon the promises contained in them. The Book of Scripture was their Evidence for their future Inheritance; the Foundation of their Hope, and Rule of their Faith; their Defence against Assaults and Temptations; their Counseller in cases of Difficulty; their Support, under Troubles; and their surest Guide to a happy Eternity; and therefore the Primitive Christians chose rather to endure any Torments than basely to betray it, and give it up to their Enemies.

3. From the early disputes that were about them. Which shews that they were no Invention of after times; nor were brought into the World by Stealth and Art; for, they endured the greatest shock of Opposition at first, while the matters of Fact concerning them were the most easily proved. And having passed the severe Scrutiny of the first Ages, when so many counterfeit Writings were sent abroad, the following Ages could have no Reason to call their Authority in question.

4. From the general consent of divided Churches about them. It might have pleased God to have kept his Church from those unhappy Breaches which have been in all parts of the Christian World; but the East, and the West, the North and the South can all bear Testimony to the sad Divisions of Christendom; and those [Page] of many Ages standing. But yet, we have this considerable Advantage by them; that we can have no Reason to mistrust a conspiracy where the several Bodies are so much divided.

5. From the great internal satisfaction which the minds of good Men have concerning them; and which no other writing can pretend to give. For here we read of the Promise of Divine Assistance to sincere and humble minds. And that Assistance carries a Lumen Fidei into the mind; as Aquinas calls it 2. 2. a 3 ad 2. and by that he saith, the mind is united to Truth, that its assent is only fixed upon it; and therefore there is no danger of Damnation to those who are in Christ Iesus, and are thus illuminated by Faith in him. Not that this is an Argument to convince others, who have not that inward sense which they have; but the same Holy Spirit which did at first indite them, may give such an inward and effectual Testimony as to the Truth of the matter contained in them; that from thence they may firmly conclude these Books to contain the word of God. And that Assurance which the minds of good Men have from the Influence of Divine Grace, may be more effectual and powerful in them, than all the pretended Infallibility or Demonstration in the World. It is certain those cannot be deceived whom the Holy Spirit teacheth; and the best and wisest of the Antient Schoolmen did make the great firmness and certainty of Faith not to depend on outward Motives, but on inward Grace; which so inlightned the Mind, and fixed the Inclinations of the Soul, that nothing is able to remove it. This sort of Faith is no blind Assent; but after all the Evidence which it hath to make its Assent Reasonable; it takes so fast a hold of Divine Truths by discerning the excellency and value of them, that he that hath it is willing to let go any thing rather than that; and although [Page] the Apprehension of Faith be not so clear as that of Science; yet the Hypostasis, as the Apostle calls it, may be so firm,Heb. 11. 1. that no Temptations may be able to shake it. And he that can die for his Religion hath a stronger and better Faith, than he that thinks himself never so Infallible in the Grounds of it. That is a true Divine Faith which purifies the Heart, Act. 15. 9. and thereby enlightens the mind; which works by Love, Gal. 5. 6. and not by cavilling and wrangling about the Grounds of it;1 Joh. 5. 4. which overcomes the World, and not that which overcomes the Temptations of it. And such a Faith, and only such a one will carry us to Heaven; when, if it were possible for us to have the utmost Infallibility in the Act of believing; yet if it did not work effectually on our Hearts and Lives, we might go infallibly to Hell.

And so I shall conclude this Discourse with the second sense of the Obligation which lies on those who have received Christ Iesus the Lord so to walk in him: i. e. to improve their sound Faith into the Practice of a good Life.

For alas! What advantage will it be to us, to have the most Primitive and Apostolical Faith, if our Works be not answerable to it?Luk. 6. 46. Why call ye me Lord, Lord, saith Christ, and do not the thing which I say? Why do we pretend to receive Christ Iesus the Lord, if we do not observe his Commands? It is good, Gal. 4. 18. saith S. Paul, to be zealously affected always in a good thing. And no doubt our Faith is such; but then let us be zealous of good Works too, that we may shew our selves to be that peculiar people who are redeemed by Iesus Christ. Tit. 2. 14. So that our Obligation arises every way from Christ Iesus the Lord, to walk in him; if we consider him as our Lord, so we are to obey him; if as Christ Iesus, so he died for us to redeem us from all iniquity. We can have no pretence to live in our sins, if we have received him who commands us to forsake them; for then [Page] we receive and reject him at the same time.2 Tim. 2. 19. Let every one that names the name of Christ, depart from iniquity, saith St. Paul, what should those then do that profess to receive him as their Lord, who are thereby bound to yield obedience to his Laws? one of the great causes of the Degeneracy of the Heathen World was the separating Religion and Morality; when this was left to the Schools of Philosophers to instruct men in, whereas their Religion consisted only of some Solemn Rites and Sacrifices. Let us have a care of as dangerous a Separation between Faith and Works, or which is all one, between receiving Christ, and doing his Will. For those are the proper Works of the Gospel, wherein we own Christ as our Lord, and do them because he commands us. And the Apostle hath summ'd up the whole Duty of Christians in those comprehensive words,Tit. 2. 12. Teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present World; 13. looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearance of the great God, and our Saviour Iesus Christ. To whom, &c.

FINIS.

§

[Page]

[Page]

SCRIPTURE AND TRADITION COMPARED; IN A SERMON Preached at Guild-Hall Chapel, Novemb. 27. 1687.

By EDWARD STILLINGFLEET, D. D. and Dean of St. Paul's.

LONDON, Printed for Henry Mortlock at the Phoenix in St. Paul's Church-yard. 1688.

§

[Page]

Imprimatur,

Guil. Needham Rmo in Christo ac D. D. Wilhelmo Archiep. Cant. a Sacris Domest.

Nov. 28. 1687.

THE PREFACE.

[Page]

I Intend, God willing, to publish in a little time, a full Answer to J.S. his Catholick Letters, so far as I am concerned in them. In the mean while, I thought it not unfit to Print this Sermon I lately Preached, that I might give a General View of Scripture and Tradition, as to the Way of conveying Matters of Faith, before I come to the particular Debate with J.S. Wherein I do not doubt, but I shall be able to shew that we have ry good Grounds for the Certainty of our Faith, and that they have none either as to Faith or Tradition, as to the main Points in Controversie between us.

[...]

ERRATA.

PAge 8. line 18. for Days read Places. p. 25. l. 15. r. Matim [...]. p. 28. l. 18. for were [...]. are.

[Page]

Information about this book

Title statement

Scripture and tradition compared in a sermon preached at Guild-Hall Chapel, Novemb. 27, 1687 / by Edward Stillingfleet ...

Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699.

Edition statement

1688

Publication

Publisher

Text Creation Partnership,

Place of publication

Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :

Date

2004-05 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).

ID [DLPS]

A61596

ID [STC]

Wing S5632

ID [STC]

ESTC R14282

ID [EEBO-CITATION]

13142410

ID [OCLC]

ocm 13142410

ID [VID]

97983

Availability

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.

Series

Early English books online.

Notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A61596)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 97983)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 752:4)

Source

— Scripture and tradition compared in a sermon preached at Guild-Hall Chapel, Novemb. 27, 1687 / by Edward Stillingfleet ..., Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699..

Extent

[4], 32 p.

Printed for Henry Mortlock ...,. London :: 1688.. (Marginal notes.) (Errata: p. 32.) (Reproduction of original in Duke University Library.)

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.