With respect to faith, the reformed church maintains,

inspiration of God's Spirit, to consign to writing, that word, which was first spoken by mouth. Thus St. John expressly says, that his Gospel was written-"that we might believe that Jesus was the Christ the Son of God, and that believing we might have life through his name;" (John xx. 31.)

The Romanists themselves attempt to prove their peculiar doctrines from the scriptures, and admit that whatsoever is contrary to them, ought not to be received for divine truth. Do they not acknowledge by this, that all necessary articles are contained in them? if they say that all their doctrines can be proved by plain scripture evidence, then they must reject the necessity of unwritten traditions, and acknowledge the scriptures to be a complete and perfect rule of faith. St. Paul exhorts all christians, to "contend earnestly for the faith which was once delivered to the saints"; and this particle, once, must condemn all additions, or why doth St. Paul say to Timothy, the scriptures are able to make him wise unto salvation? Why doth St. Austin say, "Ea quæ manifeste posita sunt in sacris scripturis omnia continent, quæ pertinent ad fidem moresque vivendi ?" Why does every one of the four evangelists, entitle their book, the Gospel, if any necessary or essential part of the Gospel were left out of it? Can we imagine that either they omitted something from ignorance, not knowing it to be necessary; or knowing it to be so, intentionally concaled it; or out of negligence, did the work they had undertaken, by halves? If none of these things can

that man is a fallen, depraved, and ruined creature, involved in guilt, pollution, and misery.

without blasphemy be imputed to them, (considering they were assisted in this work by the Holy Spirit,) it clearly follows, that every one of them writ the whole Gospel of Christ; I mean all the essential and necessary parts of it.

Further, by what means can the true church be now known without the scriptures ?-I see company of men who call themselves a church; but a church must have a divine origin, and therefore there is no ascertaining a church, without seeing its charter; for there can be no note or mark of its being a pure and uncorrupted church, but its conformity to the most ancient church of all, that is, the primitive and apostolic.

Traditions were highly esteemed among the Jews. They were styled law by the mouth, in opposition to law in writing, and they were said to be lineally deduced from Moses and God himself, by a succession of oral deliverers. These traditions as they related to Christ, were of the following import. 1. When Christ cometh, no man can know, said tradition, whence he is. John vii. 27. But we, the Jews observed, are well acquainted both with this man's birth and parentage. 2. When a voice from heaven declared Christ to be the Son of God, in the presence of St. Peter, James, and John, they object against it, the tradition of the scribes that Elias must first come. Matt. xvii. 10. 3. There was a general tradition, that Messiah was to abide for ever; but Christ declared, that he was to be lifted up, and die an ignominious death.

That God so loved the world, as of his tender mercy to give his only son, Jesus Christ, for our redemption.

4. The Jews believed that the Messiah would come in a triumphant manner, and release them from subjection to the Roman yoke and even the disciples were so fully possessed with this idea, that after our Lord's resurrection, they immediately enquired-" Wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?"

Thus "by teaching for doctrines the commandments of men," did the Jews, notwithstanding all the instruction of their prophets, and successive preceptors in duty, in spite of miracles the most astonishing, and evidence the most conclusive, reject their Messiah, and with wicked hands, crucify the Lord of life and glory.

Of the general tendency of traditions, to pervert the plain and obvious meaning of scripture, our Saviour himself has given us a striking example, by expressly stating the text first,-the commandment of the law, "Honour thy father and mother"-then the Jewish doctrine derived from tradition, that if any man should say, It is Corban, or a gift, to his father or mother, it had the force of a vow, and he was released from any obligation, to contribute to their support, it being unlawful to convert to private use, that which was consecrated to God.

-a mis

Many of the errors of the Roman Church, originate from the same source as those of the Jews, viz. placed confidence in the authority of traditions, the whole of her religion being conceived, or pretended to have issued from the fountain of apostolic purity;

That our blessed Lord willingly left the glory of the Father, was conceived by the Holy Ghost, was born of the Virgin

whereas it is evident to every man who reads ecclesiastical history, that many of her doctrines were originally derived from decrees of councils, many from Papal definitions, and many from the authority of some great man, so that we may apply here what Gregory Nazianzen said of Athanasius-"What pleased him was a law to men-what did not please him, was as a thing prohibited by law." From whence, for instance, does the Roman church derive her authority for the idolatrous use of images, the invocation of saints, the worship of the blessed virgin, the celibacy of the clergy, the vows of her monastic orders, male and female, and the performance of divine service, in a language which the people cannot understand? a practice plainly repugnant to the word of God, and the custom of the primitive church. I am confident, that the most learned antiquary, in the catholic communion, nay that Baronius himself, were he now alive, could not produce one example, of any church, city, or parish, in all the world, for 500 years after Christ, where the sermons to the people were in one language, and the service in another. Even the Lateran council, held in the year 1225, makes this decree"Quoniam in plerisque," "because, in many parts, within the same city and diocess, people are mixed, and of divers languages, having, under one faith, different rites and ceremonies, we strictly command that the bishop of the said cities or diocess, provide fit and able men, who, according to the diversities of their rites and lan

Mary, and at length, humbled himself, even to the death of the cross, for us, miserable sinners, to the end that all, who with hearty repentance and true faith, should come to him, might not perish but have everlasting life.

That he descended into hell, (the place of the dead) and rose again the third day

guages, may celebrate divine services, and administer the sacraments of the church."

"Whatever is first," says Tertullian, "is true, whatever is more recent, is spurious." To the severe test of this primitive canon, we must bring the pretensions of the Roman traditions, rejected by the Protestant church. The question is not, whether many of the Popish doctrines and practicês be not of very remote antiquity, but the real question is, whether they can claim such antiquity, as reaches to the age of approving apostolic authority-Unless a chain can be constructed, which shall bind the modern church of Rome, to the primitive church of Christ, the mere comparative antiquity of its peculiar tenets, will avail nothing. The connecting link will be wanted; and let such tenets be introduced when they may, (since they cannot be shewn, to have existed from the beginning,) they stand convicted of novelty, and on that specific ground, they must be rejected as spurious. Against God and truth, there can lie no prescription, it is therefore the duty of every man, to forsake ancient errors, for more ancient truths.