A Book indeed full of Learning, Printed at Paris without a Title-Sheet, came lately to my hands, intituled, The Critical Hiſtory of the Old Teſtament; Whereof Father Simon, Prieſt of the Oratory of Paris is thought to be the Author. He pretends to prove in that Work, that nothing for certain can be aſſerted in Religion, unleſs Tradition be joyned with the Scripture for the Deciſion of Queſtions of Faith. There is without doubt Ignorance, ſays that Author in his Preface, or Prepoſſeſſion in the Minds of the Proteſtants, Who pretend that the Scripture is clear of it ſelf. Nevertheleſs Sir, nothing is more certain in all that can be called Tradition, than this Principle of the Proteſtants. St. Chryſoſtom in his third Homily of Lazarus, obſerves after Origen this difference between the Philoſophers and the Authors of the Scripture, that the Philoſophers are obſcure, whereas the Apoſtles and Prophets being the common Maſters of the Univerſe, have written after ſo clear a manner, that every Capacity may be inſtructed in their Doctrine by the reading alone thereof. And in the ſame Homily that Doctor maintains that the ignorance of the Sacred Scriptures is the ſource of the Corrupted Morals, as well as of all the Hereſies. St. Auguſtin in the ſecond Book of the Christian Doctrine ſays, Chap. 9. In iis quae aperte in Scriptura poſita ſunt, inveniuntur illa omnia quae Continent fidem moreſque vivendi: In thoſe things which are plainly laid down in Scripture, are found all thoſe things which pertain to Faith, and the Rules of Living. This the Learned Gerſon, Chancellor of the Univerſity of Paris, expreſſes in theſe terms: Senſus Literalis Scripturae ſatis expreſſus eſt in iis quae ſunt neceſſaria ad Salutem. And this induced the Church of England to make this Canon with great reaſon, in the Synod of London in 1552, and 1562.

The Scripture containeth all things neceſſary to Salvation: So that whatſoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, although it be ſome time received of the Faithful as godly and profitable for an Order and Comelineſs, yet no man ought to be conſtrained to believe it as an Article of Faith, or reputed requiſite to the Neceſſity of Salvation.

Father Simon does diſingeniouſly quote the thought of St. Augustin in the 7th. Chap. of the third book of his Critical Hiſtory. That Holy Doctor ſuppoſes, ſayes he, that the Scripture is obſcure and hard to be underſtood, and yet he adds that for the moſt part what is obſcure in one place is found laid plainly open in another, and that what regards the belief and manners is much more clearly expreſſed in the Bible than all the rest. Now to read the thought of St. Augustin in the Book of Father Simon, that Doctor ſeems only to aſſert that commonly the Scripture is clear in what concerns the belief and manners, nay and more clear than in all the reſt. But St. Augustine ſays more in the Words Cited: for he ſays abſolutely that all we ought to believe and do, is found clearly in the Scripture, & therefore according to Father Simon, There is without doubt either Ignorance or Prepoſſeſſion of Mind in St. Auguſtin, as well as in St. Chryſoſtom, Gerſon, & generally in all the Great Divines of Antiquity, who have been perſwaded with Tom. 1. in Jerem. Origen, that not any Sentiment is worthy of Faith, unleſs it be proved by Scripture; nor any interpretation of the ſame Scripture to be admitted, without it be confirmed and ſupported upon Paſſages of the Old or New Teſtament: for this Reaſon is it that in the Decree of Gratian, Diſtinct. 27. in the Chap. which begins with this word Relatum, there is an expreſs order to decide all Controverſies by the Holy Writ, and to explain the obſcure paſſages which are met with therein by the Scriptures themſelves: ex ipſis Scripturis. But this is ſufficient Entertaining you Sir, with the groundleſs Sentiment of Father Simon, touching the inſufficiency of the Scripture, for the inſtructing People in Religion. Now I proceed to the three proofs which he makes uſe of for the Eſtabliſhing of his Opinion.

The firſt is taken from the great Changes which have happen'd as well in the Original Text as in the Verſions of the Scripture. This proof may ſeem to have ſome force upon an Atheiſt or a Pagan; but not upon a Chriſtian, Who knows, that notwithſtanding the Changes that have been made in Scripture, Jeſus Christ, The Apoſtles, and the Fathers of the Church, have always proved the Truth of their Doctrine by the Scripture. As for what concerns the Fathers, I ſhall ſhow it amply in my anſwer to the third proof of Father Simon, though what I have already urged might ſuffice. In regard of Jeſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles; Father Simon ſays, That they have fitted the Teſtimonys which they Cited out of the Old Teſtament, to the Explications received and authorized by Tradition. But this is a falſe fore-judging of that Father, of whom with reaſon theſe Words of St. Jerome may be ſaid, Hoc de Scripturis Authoritatem non habet, ideo ea facilitate Contemnitur qua probatur; This has no Authority from Scriptures, therefore may be rejected with the ſame eaſe it is admitted. Jeſus reprehends Traditions, and yet father Simon would make us believe that he eſtabliſhes his Doctrine by Tradition, and that he only makes uſe of the Word of God, according to the Pre-judgment of Tradition. It was a Tradition amongſt the Jews, founded upon a paſſage of the Prophet Malachy miſunderſtood, that Elias was to precede by his Preaching the coming of the Meſſias; but the Goſpel tells us, that tradition did ill interpret the Prophet Malachy, who did not pretend to ſpeak of the Perſon of the Prophet Elias, but of John the Baptiſt, who was to forego Jeſus Chriſt, in Spiritu & Virtute Eliae. It is evident by the 5th. Chapter, of St. Matth. that the Jews explaining the Scriptures by the Pre-judgment of Tradition, had very faulty Morals: But Jeſus Chriſt who came not to deſtroy the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfil them, rejects the falſe Expoſitions given to the Law by the Jews according to their Traditions, and diſcovers the real ſence thereof conformably to other paſſages of the Old Teſtament, which contain in clear terms the ſame things, which Jeſus Chriſt ordered his Diſciples to do for the ſurpaſſing the juſtice of the Scribes, and Phariſees, that they might enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. The Pre-judgments of Tradition made the Diſciples of Jeſus Chriſt ſtill doubt after his Reſurrection, if it was he who ſhould redeem Iſrael; but Jeſus Chriſt to free them out of that pernicious doubt, reproaches them with their hardneſs of heart, and ſlowneſs to believe all that the Prophets have ſaid. And to diſengage them entirely from that falſe Tradition which ran amongſt the People, as Theophylact does remark in his Commentary upon the 24 Chap. of St. Luke, beginning with Moſes, and continuing through all the Prophets, he explains to them all that had been ſaid of him in all the Scriptures, as St. Luke does relate it in the laſt Chapter of his Goſpel. Christ does never refer People to Traditions for their Inſtruction in truths neceſſary to Salvation, but alwayes to the Scripture. If you believed Moſes, ſaid he to the Jews in St. John. Chap. 6. You would believe me alſo, becauſe it is of me he has written; but if you believe not what he has written, how ſhould you believe what I tell you? St. Paul ſays expreſly in his 2 Tim. Chap. 3. That the Holy Scriptures are able to make us wiſe unto Salvation through Faith which is in Jeſus Christ. And to explain this thought more amply he adds, All Scripture is given by Inſpiration of God, and is profitable for Doctrine, for Reproof, for Correction, for Inſtruction in Righteouſneſs, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furniſhed unto all good Works. This is what the Fathers of the Council of Francfort expreſs in theſe terms, in the Capitulary of Charles the Great, lib. 2. cap. 30. Eſt plane Divina Scriptura Verax, est fixa, eſt caſta, eſt Caeleſtis Magisterii Instrumentum, & Aeterna praedicatio puriſſimo nitens eloquio, est Lux mortalium, dicente Propheta, Lucerna pedibus meis verbum tuum Domine, et Lumen Semitis meis. Eſt Vivax et mori neſciens, dicente Apostolo, Vivus eſt Sermo Dei & efficax, & penetrabilior omni gladio ancipiti, & pertingens uſque ad diviſionem animae, ac Spiritus. Eſt tenebrarum diſcuſſio, Salomone teſtante, qui ait, Lucerna eſt mandatum legis & lux vitae, & increpatio, & Diſciplina: de quo per Eſaiam dicitur, De nocte ſpiritus meus vigilat ad te Deus, quia lux praecepta tua ſunt ſuper terram. The Holy Scripture is plainly true, is ſtable, is chaste, the Inſtrument of Celeſtial Power, and an eternal Preaching ſhining throughout with a most pure eloquence, is the Light of Mortals, according to the ſaying of the Prophet, Thy Word, O Lord, is a Lamp to my feet, and a Light unto my pathes; Is quick and immortal, as the Apoſtle ſays, The Word of God is quick and Powerful, ſharper then a two-edged Sword, and piercing even to the dividing aſunder of Soul & Spirit. Is the diſſipating & diſpelling of thick darkneſs, witneſs Solomon, who ſays, The Commandment is a Lamp, and the Law is light, and reproofs of inſtruction are the way of life: Es. 26. v. 9. in Edit. lxx. Of whom it is ſaid by Eſaiah, Every night my Spirit waiteth upon thee O God, becauſe thy Precepts are a light upon the earth. And as the Holy Writ poſſeſſes theſe advantages, not by reaſon of the words, but by reaſon of the truths which it contains, according to the ſaying of St. Jerome in Cap. 1 ad Gal. Nec putemus in verbis Scripturarum eſſe Evangelium, ſed in ſenſu, non in ſuperficie, ſed in medulla, non in ſermonum foliis, ſed in radice rationis: Jeſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles had reaſon in their Citations to apply themſelves more to the real ſence then to the meer words of the Holy VVrit. Moreover to inſtruct us, That all that has paſſed under the Law of Nature and of Moſes was the figure and ſhadow of what was to paſs under the Goſpel, Jeſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles give us very often the allegorical ſence of the paſſages which they Cite out of the Old Teſtament.

The ſecond reaſon of Father Simon, which he calls a very evident proof, to ſhow that the Scripture is not ſufficient to decide Controverſies in matter of Religion, is taken from that the Socinions do agree with the Proteſtants, that the only and true Principle of Religion is the Holy Writ, and that nevertheleſs they draw from thence very different Concluſions. If Father Simon ſaid, the Socinians and Proteſtants differ in the Concluſions, which they draw from the Scriptures, therefore one or other of 'em is in the errour, becauſe they do not underſtand the Scriptures aright, the argumentation would be pure; But I do not ſee by what Logick he draws this inference that the Scripture is not ſufficient to decide Controverſies; Since it is manifest that the Socinians govern themſelves by prejudgments in the explication of the Scripture, as Father Simon ſpeaks in his Critical Hiſtory of the Old Teſtament, Book 3 chap. 16. Therefore if the Socinians draw quite contrary Concluſions to what the Proteſtants do from the ſame Scriptures, it is not the obſcurity of the Scripture that is the cauſe thereof, but the prejudgments of the Socinians, which make 'em abuſe the Scripture to favour the Syſteme of Religion which they have invented independantly of Scripture. The Devil abuſes the Scripture to Tempt Jeſus Christ, and Jeſus Christ reſiſts him by uſing the Scripture aright, Falſas de Scripturis Diaboli ſagitas veris Scripturarum frangit Clypeis, ſays St. Jerome: And this the Protestants do every day in their Controverſy with the Socintans; and this is what ought generally to be done in all Controverſies upon matters of Religion; and if the Fathers of the firſt Ages be Cited in theſe Diſputes, it ought only to make people ſenſible that thoſe perſons who ſtudyed the Scriptures to learn therein what it is God would have us believe and do to be ſaved, did draw the ſame Doctrine from thence, which we do who are alſo Orthodox, when they had no vail nor blind before their eyes, which hindred them from ſeeing the day and the light of the Word of God in the Scriptures, that is to ſay, when they had no Syſteme of Religion independant of Scriptures. The Phariſees falſely concluded from that the Scripture ſays, That a man may leave his Wife by giving her a Writing, by which he declares that he puts her away, that a man was allowed to put away his Wife for any cauſe ſoever; but Jeſus Chriſt convinces them of an errour, not by tradition, but by the Scripture, as we read in the 19. chap. of St. Mathew. The Saducees who rejected all traditions, pretended to conclude from the Scripture that there would be no Reſurrection of the Dead, and Jeſus Chriſt did not tell them that they fell into that errour becauſe they did not joyn tradition to the Scripture, or becauſe they rejected all tradition, but he reſutes them by a concluſion drawn out of Scriptures, & tells them, You are in an errour becauſe you do not underſtand the Scriptures; Erratis neſcientes Scripturas. And indeed St. Auguſtine very judiciouſly remarks, That the Hereticks are only ſo by their obſtinately perſevering to give a falſe ſence to the Scriptures which they do not underſtand, Omnes Haeretici Scripturas Catholicas legunt nec ob aliud ſunt Haeretici niſi quod eas non recte intelligentes, Lib. 7 de Gen. ad lit. cap. 9. ſuas falſas Opiniones contra earum veritatem pervicaciter aſſerunt. The ſame Holy Doctor in his 18th. Treatiſe upon the Goſpel of St. John: ſays, Non natae ſunt Haereſes & quaedam Dogmata perverſitatis illaqueantia animos, & in profundum precipitantia, niſi cum Scripturae bonae intelliguntur non bene, & quod in cis non bene intelligitur, etiam temere & audacter aſſeritur. Hereſy and certain perverſe Tenets enſnaring peoples minds, and plunging them into the abyſs, have onely proceeded from a miſunderſtanding of the Scriptures, and when what is not well underſtood in them, is nevertheleſs raſhly and audaciciouſly aſſerted. Chromatius whom St. Jerome calls the moſt holy, moſt learned Biſhop of his time, tells us upon the 15 verſe of the 5. chap. of St. Mat. That the Scripture is clear, but that the Jews and Hereticks endeavour to hide from us its perſpicuity by their perverſe interpretations; Perſpicuam lucem praedicationis divinae pravis interpretationibus obtegere & occultare nituntur, pro fide perfidiam praedicando & lumen veritatis erroris tenebris obvelando. From all this it may be concluded, that when people diſpute againſt the Socinians and other Hereticks, to convert them, the method of Jeſus Christ muſt be followed, and they muſt be Convicted of errour by the Scripture it ſelf. All that is not formally read in Scripture, or is not drawn from thence by an evident Concluſion, is ſubject to errour, and by conſequence cannot be the Rule of our belief. The very Diſciples of Jeſus Christ were miſtaken in the rumour which ran amongſt them that St. John did not dye, becauſe that rumour was onely grounded upon a concluſion falſely inferred from what Jeſus Christ had ſaid to St. Peter ſpeaking of St John? If I will that he ſtay until I come, what's that to thee. Nay the Scripture ſeems to ſhow us this on purpoſe that we might learn, that what in matter of Religion is not well grounded upon its authority, is not worthy of faith: Sine authoritate Scripturarum garrulitas non habet fidem. ſaith St. Jerome. All the Fathers of the firſt Ages teach us this truth in all the diſputes they had with the Hereticks of their time. For, as Janſenius that learned Prelate of Ipre does obſerve in his Book Intituled Augustinus, they ſo formed their ſentiments by the Holy Scriptures, Tom. 2. lib, Broem. C. 5. that they almoſt expreſſed themſelves in the ſame form: In antiquis patribus ſaith he, eorumque diſputationibus duo ſunt conſideranda magnopere; primum quod ex principiis verbi Dei ſenſus ſuos, & fere verba promerent; ſecuntium quod religioſe intra terminos oppugnatae ab errore veritatis ſine ulla ſuperfluarum multo minus curioſarum, frivolarum, atque inutilium quaestienum intermixtione remanerent. In the ancient Fathers and their diſputes two things are principally to be conſidered. Firſt that they draw their ſence and tenets, nay and almoſt their very terms out of the Principles of the Word of God.

Secondly, that they religiouſly remain within the bounds of the Truth that was combated by Errour without any intermixtion of ſuperfluous, much leſs of curious, frivolous and impertinent queſtions. Thus as Scripture is the onely way to decide queſtions of Religion, panormitanus had reaſon to ſay that people ought rather to believe a Lay-man who authorizes himſelf by Scripture, then a Pope and a whole Council, when they act without its authority. Magis credendum laico ſi ſcriptur as adferat, quam Papae & toti Concilio ſi abſque ſcripturis agant. St. Epiphanius who has given a Catalogue of all the Hereſies which had been until his time, and remarks the abuſe which the Authors of thoſe Hereſies have made of the Holy Writ to eſtabliſh their Errours, does not attribute this to the obſcurity of the Scripture, but to the Hereticks not having applyed themſelves to Scripture with a Spirit of Piety; for it is a conſtant Principle, ſays that Saint, that all the ſaving Truths are found clearly in the Scripture by thoſe who read them with judgment and a ſpirit with piety. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 St. Auguſtine diſputing againſt Maximin, an Arian Biſhop, lays down for Principle that the Authority alone of Scripture is to be inſiſted upon: Non ego Nicaenum Concilium tibi, nectu mihi Ariminenſet amquam praejudicatur us profer as: nec ego hujus authoritate, nec tu illius detineris. Scripturarum authoritatibus non quorumlibet propriis, ſed utriſque communibus teſtibus, res cam re, ratio cum ratione decertet. I do not urge to thee the Nicene Council nor do thou to me that of Ariminum as a forejudging of the Controverſie: Neither do I mean the authority of the one, neither art thou bound by that of the other. But let matter of fact & the reaſon of each Council be tryed by authority of the Scriptures, which both are bound to admit as witneſſing the Divine Truths. He ſays in the ſame place, that the Council of Nice inſiſted only upon Scriptures. And indeed it would be impertinent to place the Bible in the midſt of the Councils, unleſs it were to put them in mind, that their Deciſions would not be worthy of faith, unleſs they were founded upon the authority of the Scripture. Which has been admirably well ſaid by Optat Biſhop of Mileve in his Book againſt Parmenian; Quaerendi ſunt judices—in terris de hac re nullum poterit reperiri judicium, de Caelo quaerendus eſt judex. Sed ut quid pulſamus ad Coelum, cum habeamus hic in Evangelio Testamentum? Terrenus Pater cum ſe in Confinio ſenſerit mortis, timens ne poſt mortem ſuam rupta pace litigent fratres, adhibitis teſtibus voluntatem ſuam de pectore morituro transfert in tabulas diu duraturas. Et ſi fuerit inter fratres contentio nata, non itur ad tumulum ſed quaeritur Teſtamentum. Judges muſt be ſought in the caſe—No judgment can be had in this matter upon earth, a Judge is to be ſought for from Heaven. But why ſhould we have recourſe to Heaven, ſeeing we have here its will in the Goſpel? An Earthly Father when he ſees himſelf upon the brim of Death, fearing least after his death, the peace coming to be broken, the Brethren ſhould be at variance, having called the witneſſes tranſmitteth his Will from his dying breath into Deeds of long continuance. And if any contention ſhall ariſe amongſt the Brethren, let them not go to the Tomb, but ſeek out the Teſtament. In ſhort, even as the Goſpel does aſſure us, that thoſe who having Moſes and the Prophets do not live conformably to their Doctrine, would not be Converted by the exhortations of the Dead though they ſhould return, ſo thoſe who are not inſtructed and perſwaded of the ſaving truths by the Holy Scripture, will never be perſwaded by tradition. Father Simon cannot diſpute this in the leaſt, ſince he ſays himſelf in the 10. Chap. of the 1. Book of his Critical Hiſt. That it often happens that men being the Keepers of Tradition, do blend therein what they have invented, and then it is a hard matter to distinguiſh the true Traditions from thoſe which are falſe.

The third proof which I find in the Critical Hiſt. of Father Simon to ſhow the inſufficiency of the Scripture to decide Controverſies in matter of Religion, is That there has been in all times in the Churches an abridgment of Religion independantly of Scripture. Nay he pretends that it is upon the account of that abridgment, that the Fathers have explained the Scriptures, and that the Councils have decided the Controverſies of their time. I do not doubt but that in all ages there have Catechiſms been made for the inſtruction of Children and the ſhalloweſt Capacities; or abridgments of Religion; But I deny that thoſe abridgments were made independantly of Scripture. I maintain againſt Father Simon that thoſe who govern'd the Church took care to collect into an abridgment the cleareſt ſentences of Scripture, and the moſt neceſſary to inſtruct the faithful in the ſaving. Truths, and the Fathers and Councils had reaſon afterwards to decide the Controverſies according to thoſe abridgments, ſince their taking that Courſe was to explain obſcure paſſages by thoſe which are clearer, as good ſence doth require. All the paſſages which I have already Cited, do manifeſtly prove what I urge; nay and if we may believe thoſe Authors who have treated of Eccleſiaſtical Offices, the leſſons of the Scripture, which the Church of Rome ſtill reads at this day on Eaſter and Whitſon-eve, are onely the Catechiſms and inſtructions which were given to the Catechumenes, or Novice Proſelytes who were baptized on thoſe days. The moſt ancient abridgment of Religion which we have left of antiquity is the Symbol which is ſaid to have been compoſed by the Apoſtles; But this Abridgment is not independant of the Scripture, as St, Aug. ſays, book the firſt of the Symbol to the Catechumenes Chap. 1. Iſta verba quae audiſt is, per divin as Scriptur as ſparſa ſunt, ſed inde collecta, & ad unum redacta ne tardorum hominum memoria laboraret, ut omnis homo poſſit dicere, poſſit tenere quod credit. Thoſe words you have heard are ſcattered thro the Holy Scriptures, but Collected from thence, and reduced in a Body that they might not be burdenſome to the Memories of ſhallow Capacities, and that every man might ſay and remember what he believes. And Rabanus Maurus ſpeaking of the ſame Symbole in the 56th Chapter of his ſecond Book de Inſtitutione Clericorum, ſays, In quo quidem pauca ſunt Verba, ſed omnia continentur Sacramenta, de totis enim Scripturis haec breviatim Collecta ſunt ab Apostolis, ut quoniam plures Credentium Litter as neſciunt, vel qui ſciunt, prae occupatione ſeculi legere non poſſunt, haec corde retinentes, habeant ſufficientem ſibi ſcientiam ſalutarem. In which indeed are contained but few Words, but all the Mysteries being thus briefly collected from all the Scriptures, by the Apoſtles, that ſeveral of the Believers who know not how to read, or thoſe who do, being hindred from reading by the buſineſs of the world, getting theſe by heart, might have a Knowledge ſufficient to work out their Salvation. The Church of England ſpeaking of this Abridgment, as well as of thoſe which are called the Symboles of Nice and of St. Athanaſius, ſays in the Synods of London in 1552. 1562. The three Creeds, Nicene Creed, Athanaſius's Creed. & that which is commouly cal'd Apoſtles Creed, ought thro'ly to be receibed: for they may be proved by moſt certain Warrants of Holy Scripture. St. Cyprian did certainly never own any Abridgement of Religion independently of Scripture, ſince in his Epiſtle to Pompeius he demands that they ſhould ſhow him in Scripture that Hereticks were not to be baptized again, to perſwade him that it is an Apoſtolical Tradition. Si aut in Evangelio Praecipitur, aut in Apoſtolorum epistolis, aut Actibus continetur, ut a quacumque haereſi venientes non baptizentur, ſed tantum manus illis imponantur in Poenitentiam, obſervetur divina haec & ſancta Traditio. If there can be ſhown any Precept of the Goſpel, or in the Epiſtles, or Acts of the Apoſtles, that thoſe who are converted from what Hereſy ſoever, ought not to be baptized, but only to be reconcil'd to the Church by Repentance, let that Divine and Holy Tradition be obſerved. This Abridgement was unknown to Tertullian, who ſays in his diſpute againſt Hermogenes, Chap. 22. Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem. — Scriptum eſſe doceat Hermogenis officina, ſi non eſt Scriptum, timeat illud Vae adjicientibus aut detrahentibus deſtinatum. I adore the fulneſs of Scripture; let Hermogenes demonſtrate that it is Written; If it be not writen, let him fear that Woe which is pronounced againſt thoſe who add or leſſen it. The ſame in his Book of the Fleſh of Chriſt Chap. 7. diſputing againſt Apelles, he has not recourſe to the Pretended Abridgements of Father Simon, but he tells that Hereſiarque, Non Recipio quod extra Scripturam de tuo infers; I do not allow of what thou urgeſt that is not in Scripture. This Abridgement was unknown to St. Auguſtin, who in his Book of the Ʋnity of the Church, againſt the Epiſtle of Petitian, Chap. 11. ſays, Quis quis aliud Evangelizaverit, Anathema ſit, Whoſoever preaches ought elſe for Goſpel, let him be accurſed, and Chap. 12. Aut legat mihi hoc in Scripturis, & non ſit Anathema; Or let him produce me this in Scriptures, and he ſhall not be accurſed. And in the ſame Chapter, Si autem non ea de ſacris Scripturis legunt, ſed ſuis contentionibus perſuadere conantur, Credo illa quae in Scripturis ſanctis leguntur, non Credo iſta quae ab Haereticis vanis dicuntur. But if they do not read thoſe things in the Holy Scriptures, but endeavour to perſwade by their Wranglings, I believe thoſe things which are read in Scriptures, I do not believe thoſe which are aſſerted by vain Hereticks. The ſame Doctor in the 2d. Book de Nup. & Concup. Chap. 33. ſays, Iſta Controverſia judicem quaerit, judicet ergo Chriſtus, & cui rei mors ejus profuerit, ipſe dicat — judicet cum illo & Apoſtolus, quia in Apoſtolo ipſe loquitur Chriſtus. This Controverſy requires a Judge, therefore let Christ judge, and ſay of what Advantage his Death hath been, and let the Apoſtle judge with him, becauſe Chriſt himſelf ſpeaks in the Apoſtle. In his Book of Grace, and free will Chap. 13. Sedeat inter nos judex Apostolus Joannes, Let the Apoſtle John judge between us. And in the 2d. Book againſt Creſconius, Chap. 32. Litter as Cypriani non ut Canonicas habeo, ſed eas ex Canonicis conſidero, & quod in eis divinarum Scripturarum autoritati congruit, cum laude ejus accipio; quod autem non congruit, cum pace ejus reſpuo. I do not allow of the Letters of Cyprian as Canonical, but I judge of them by the canonical Scriptures, and what in them is congruous to the Authority of the Holy Scriptures, I receive with due praiſe to him; but what is incongruous, I Reject with his leave. In ſhort, this Abridgement was unknown to the Councils, ſeeing they placed the Scriptures in the midſt of them, to ſerve for a Rule to their Deciſions, which would have been to no purpoſe if there had been in all times in the Church an Abridgement of Religion independant of the Scriptures. Father Simons ſaying, That the Apoſtles preached the Goſpel before they wrote it, and that in the time of St. Irenaeus, there were ſtill ſeveral Churches who believed in the Goſpel by Tradition, without having ſeen it in Writing, ſerves little to Authorize his pretended Abridgement, for certain it is that when we ſay, that the Scriptures contain clearly all that is neceſſary to Salvation, we do not oppoſe the Truths couched upon Paper in the Scripture, againſt the ſame truths uttered by the tongue of the Preachers; we know that the Prophets and Apoſtles ought to have been believed when they preached the Truths which the Holy Ghoſt inſpired into them, as well as when they reduced 'em into Writing; But we only ſay that the Apoſtles and Prophets have reduced the ſame truths which they Preached into Writing after ſuch a manner, that for the Regulating of our Faith we only need to have recourſe to their Writing. This is what St. Irenaeus ſays, in his third Book againſt Hereſies, Chap. 1. Non enim per alios diſpoſitionem ſalutis nostrae cognovimus, quam per eos, per quos evangelium pervenit ad nos, quod quidem tunc praeconiaverunt; postea vero per Dei voluntatem in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt, fundamentum & columnam fidei noſtrae futurum. We know not by others the Diſpoſition of our Salvation, than by thoſe from whom the Goſpel came to us, which indeed, they then Preached: But afterwards by the will of God they delivered to us in Scriptures, to be the Foundation and Pillar of our Faith. If Father Simon asks us what aſſurance we can have that the ſaving truths were not altered in the Holy Writ, we can anſwer him that the Tradition or Preaching of the Goſpel in all Ages, was the inſtrument which God made uſe of, to make known to us that the Scripture is the Word of God, and that it was never altered after ſuch a manner, but that it ſtill contains very clearly what we ought to believe, and what we ought to do to be ſaved. Fides ex audi tu Rom. 10.17. But that it is God who hath perſwaded us inwardly of the Truth of this Preaching; and this anſwer is very true, ſince that the Faith is a gift from God, and very conformable to what St. Auguſtine ſayes, ſpeaking to God in the 5. chap. of his 6th. Book of his Confeſſions. Perſuaſiſti mihi, non qui crederent libris tuis, ſed qui non crederent, eſſe culpandos: Nec audiendos eſſe ſi qui forte dicerent, Ʋnde ſcis illos unius veri & veraciſſimi Dei Spiritu eſſe humano generi miniſtratos. Thou haſt perſwaded me, that thoſe who do not believe in thy Books, not thoſe who do believe, are guilty; nor are they to be given Ear to, if they ſhould by chance ſay, Whence knoweſt thou that they were adminiſtred to Humane Kind in the Spirit of the moſt true and upright God. I have nothing more Sir, then to make an end with beſeeching you to thank God for me, that he has given me by his mercy that precious gift of the faith, and perſwaded me to renounce the Idolatry, Heterodox Traditions, & Superſtitious Noveities of the Church of Rome, & to embrace an Orthodox Communion, which profeſſes to love the Brotherhood, fear God, and honour the King, and to Rule her Morels as well as her worſhip and Faith onely by the Scripture divinely inſpired, non taliter fecit omni Nationi, and to deſire the ſame God to continue to me his Grace, and Protection, whom I heartily pray that he would more and more ſhed abroad his Bleſſings over your worthy Perſon, and over the Lady Katherine Viſcounteſs Ranelaugh, Your moſt Accompliſhed, Godly, Charitable and Bountiful Siſter, and over all your Noble Family.