Page images
PDF
EPUB

concerning which there cannot be any doubt, I answer, that many such traditions may indeed be found; but what do they respect? those very doctrines which are most plainly and frequently inculcated in Scripture, and of which we need no exposition; for, as was said before, they are expressed as perspicuously as any exposition can be. But it affords us satisfaction to find the Church openly professing, from the beginning, those truths which we find recorded in Scripture. If it does not add confirmation to our faith, in these points, it gives us pleasure to find such a harmony in the belief of true Christians.

Finally, it is dangerous to rely upon traditions. Heretics, in all ages, sheltered themselves under this doctrine. Those with whom Tertullian contended, alleged that the Apostles did not know every thing necessary, as Christ declared he had many things to say, which they could not bear yet; or, there were some things which they did not teach publicly, nor commit to writing, but communicated privately to a few chosen persons, and therefore they declined the authority of Scripture. The same is true of those against whom Irenæus wrote. They appealed from Scripture to tradition, and he answers them by showing, that universal tradition was conformable to Scripture.

Eusebius informs us, that Artemon, who asserted that Christ was a mere man, pretended that he had learnt from tradition, that all the Apostles were of his opinion.*

Thus, also, Clement of Alexandria says, "That Basilides gloried in having received his doctrine, through a few hands, from Peter; and Valentinus gloried in having been instructed by one who had been a disciple of Paul." The Marcionites professed to have received their doctrines from St Matthew. The Arians, as appears by an oration against them by Athanasius, appealed to tradition for the confirmation of their tenets.

In fact, this doctrine of unwritten traditions, has been justly compared to Pandora's box, which is calculated to fill the world with evils and heresies.

But not only have heretics availed themselves of this corrupt fountain, but good men have been deceived by lending too credulous an ear to traditions.

PAPIAS, one of the hearers of John the Apostle, was a great collector of traditions. He was inquisitive to know what each of the Apostles had, at any time, said: and there was some chance of coming at the truth from oral tradition, by one who + Strom. xiii.

.

Libr. v. c. 28.

was a hearer of one of the Apostles. But what valuable information did this good man obtain by all his inquiries, which is not in Scripture? Let Eusebius answer: "Papias adopted many paradoxical opinions by giving heed to unwritten traditions (ragadores aygapoυ), and received certain strange parables of our Saviour, mixed with fabulous things, among which was the error of the Chiliasts, by which many other excellent men were deceived, paying too much deference to antiquity and unwritten traditions. Even such men as Irenæus, Appollinarius, Tertullian, Victorinus, and Lactantius, were misled by these ancient traditions, so that they adopted an opinion for which there is no foundation in Sacred Scripture, and not only so, but which is repugnant to the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles."

Clement of Alexandria, too, than whom no man of the ancient church was more celebrated, speaks of certain persons who had taken much pains to preserve the sayings of the Apostles, handed down by tradition, among whom he mentions a Hebrew, who is supposed to be Papias; but when he comes to tell us what he had learned from these unwritten traditions, which is not contained in Scripture, it amounts to this: "That there was a public doctrine and a secret doctrine; the one exoteric, and the other esoteric; that the former was committed to writing, and was in the hands of all; but the latter was communicated secretly to chosen disciples." And, if we may judge of the secret doctrine handed down by tradition, from some specimens of it which he had learned, we will not appreciate unwritten traditions very highly, in comparison with the written word. Among these, is the opinion, that the Greek Philosophy answered the same purpose as the Law of Moses, and was a schoolmaster to bring those that professed it unto Christ; that this philosophy, as well as the Law of Moses, was able to justify men; and that there were many ways of obtaining life. From the same tradition he teaches, that Christ's ministry was finished in one year, which opinion Irenæus ascribes to heretics, and delares it as a tradition from John, that Christ, when he was crucified, was nearly fifty years of age. Clement relates it as a tradition, "That the Apostles, after their death, went and preached to the dead, who descended with the Apostles into a place of water, and then came up alive," and many other like things.*

There is much reason to believe, that the corruption of the church, which commenced about this time, was owing to a

• Strom. lib. ii.

disposition which began to be indulged, of lending too credulous an ear to traditions, and to Apocryphal writings.

But among the Fathers, no one gave himself up so entirely to unwritten traditions, and Apocryphal fables, as Epiphanius. His writings abound with things of this kind; but who would assert that we are bound to receive these stories as articles of faith? Even the Romish church, with all her store of legends, will not receive, as true and necessary, all that is handed down by tradition from one and another of the Fathers.*

From what has been said, therefore, the conclusion is clear, that the Scriptures are complete without unwritten traditions; that no articles of faith, nor institutions of worship, concerning which the Scriptures are silent, have come down to us by tradition; that we have uniform, universal tradition, on those points which are plainly taught in Scripture; that many things pretended to have been received from the Apostles by tradition, cannot be traced to them; and that many others things made equally necessary by the Romish church, can be proved to have originated many hundreds of years since the death of the Apostles. It has also been shown, that there is no certain method of distinguishing between what is Apostolical, and what has been derived from other sources, unless we make the Scriptures our standard; that tradition cannot be our guide even in interpreting Scripture; and finally, that tradition has been the common refuge of heretics, and has greatly misled good and orthodox men, by inducing them to adopt wild theories, fabulous stories, and paradoxical opinions, some of which are directly repugnant to Scripture.

The traditions of the Romish church stand on no higher ground than the traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees, in the time of our Saviour; but he rejected these traditions as having no authority, and as making void the law of God.

66

Why do ye," says Christ, "also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?-Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.† Howbeit, in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." The same questions and reproofs may, with equal propriety, be addressed to the Pope, and the doctors of the Romish church. But we say, "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to these, it is because there is no light in them."§

Thus we have brought this work to a close; and it affords us pleasure to believe, that most who read these pages, will * Note H. + Matt. xv, 3, 6. + Mark vii, 7. § Isaiah viii, 20.

be convinced, that the Bible is a complete rule, both of faith and practice. "The Law of the Lord is perfect." What a treasure have we in the Old and New Testaments! Here, God speaks to us by his Lively Oracles. The truth is taught so plainly in this sacred volume, that he who runs may read. The way of life is delineated so distinctly, that the wayfar ing man, though a fool, shall not err therein. We have, indeed, 66 "a sure word of prophecy, to which ye do well that ye take heed, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day-star arise in your hearts."*

There is nothing lacking to him that is in possession of the Scriptures; for, "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, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."†

Let us then be grateful to God, and give him unceasing thanks for this precious deposit, which he has committed to his church; and which, by his Providence, he hath preserved uninjured, through all the vicissitudes through which she has passed.

Let us praise God, that in regard to us, that night of darkness is past, in which there was a famine, not of bread, nor of water, but of the word of the Lord; when the light of this brilliant lamp was put out, or rather "put under a bushel," and the feeble erring light of tradition was substituted in its place.

Let us be glad and rejoice that we have lived to see the day, when copies of the Bible are multiplied, and when many run to and fro to circulate them; and let us wait in assured hope for the day, when the knowledge of the Lord shall cover the earth, as the waters cover the sea. Even so, come Lord Jesus, Amen.

[blocks in formation]

NOTES TO PART II.

6

A, p. 90. We are rather surprised, after Bishop Marsh's note on this statement of Michaelis (Introduction, c. vii, § 6), that Dr Alexander should have adduced Melito, as expressly declaring that a Syriae version of the Bible, which, if there be any cogency in the statement, must have included the New Testament, existed in his time. For, according to this learned Annotator, the evidence on which Michaelis rests his opinion is of no authority whatever, being founded solely on a Scholion printed in the Roman edition of the Septuagint, Gen. xxii, 13, and there ascribed to Melito, which says, Ὁ Σύρος καὶ ὁ Εβραιος κρεμάμενος φησὶν· ὡς σαφέσερον τυχόν τὸν σαυρόν: i. e. The Syriac and the Hebrew have the word hanging' (instead of caught' or 'holden') by the horns, that it might more manifestly typify the cross. He then shows that, even admitting the Scholion to be genuine, which is, however, a matter of doubt, it not only does not follow that gos denotes the Peshito, or oldest Syriac version, but that it is impossible the Feshito can be meant; because that version, in Gen. xxii, 13, has a word expressive not of xgpausvos, "hanging," but of sariχόμενος, caught," or holden," the reading of the Septuagint. The Scholion, indeed, he thinks most probably spurious, and written long after the death of Melito; "for, when the Greek fathers quote uges, they understood not the Syriac version, but a work written in the fifth century. After all," as he justly adds, "though the Scholion were genuine, and the old Syriac version intended to be expressed, the only inference that could be deduced would be, that the Syriac version of the Pentateuch existed before the close of the second century."

[ocr errors]

No doubt, Dr Routh, in his Reliquiæ Sacra, or “ Fragments of Authors who lived during the second and third centuries, but whose whole works are now lost," has given an extract from two Vatican MSS. of a Catena in Octateuchum, by Nicephorus, in which not only the substance but the precise words of the Scholion, referred to by Michaelis, are contained. This, however, as will be at once perceived, in no respect invalidates the legitimacy of Bishop Marsh's inference as stated above. Nor does his quotation from Eusebius, lib. iv, c. 22, who there says that Hegesippus brought forward some things from the Syriac Gospel according to the Hebrews, and peculiarly from the Hebrew tongue," at all affect that inference; for he immediately adds, "whether these words of Eusebius throw any light on those of Melito, others may seek to find out; but, most probably, Melito speaks of some version of the Ancient Scriptures either into Greek or Syriac, whilst Eusebius certainly does not speak of any version of the Gospel, but of the Syro-Hebraic Gospel.”—Vol. I. p. 142.

66

B, p. 90. So far is this from being the case, that, according to Michaelis, the learned are divided in opinion, whether the Armenian translation was made from the Greek original or the Syriac version. And after stating the opinions of various writers, with their authorities for these opinions, he adduces the following relation of Moses Chorenensis (lib. iii,

« PreviousContinue »