eternal interests upon tradition; that is, a report of what was spoken eighteen hundred years ago, and has been transmitted by word of mouth through all the dark ages! I am verily persuaded Dr. Milner himself would not venture a shilling of his worldly property upon any thing that depended upon such evidence.

But does not the apostle Paul command Christians to obey tradition as well as the written word of God? Does he not say to the Thessalonian converts, "Stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle," 2 Thess. ii. 15? And again, in the third chapter of the same epistle, verse 6, does he not command them to "withdraw from every brother who walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he hath received of us?" This is all very true, and readily admitted; and if Dr. Milner could tell us with certainty what these traditions were, and what it was that the apostle told the people by word of mouth, I would without hesitation receive it as the word of God: and if it did not evidently appear to be a thing of a temporary and local nature, I would say that it commanded the faith and obedience of Christians.

It cannot be doubted that a great part of the oral teaching of the apostles related to things of a local and temporary nature; such as the condition of the Jewish converts, and the conduct that became them in their peculiar circumstances, in the prospect of the destruction of Jerusalem, and after that event had taken place. Having a living and divine oracle in the persons of the apostles, who spoke by inspiration of the Holy Ghost, the Christians would have recourse to them for instruction and advice in every emergency. When personally present, advice and instruction would be communicated by word of mouth, and when absent by writing. Either way, the communication was of divine authority, and as such it would be received by the individuals and churches to whom it was addressed.

It was not necessary that instruction with regard to every thing of a temporary nature should be committed to writing, seeing inspired teachers were continued to the churches as long as the occasion required; but that things of universal and permanent obligation were committed to writing we know by the fact, that such writings exist, with abundant evidence that they are the word of God. But whether that which apostles enjoined regarded things temporary or permanent, local or universal, it was imperative on Christians to obey, for the apostles spoke by the Spirit of God, whether it was by word or by epistle. That some apostolical instructions did relate to temporary things, is evident from the introduction of at least one of those things into one of Paul's epistles; and the reason seems to be, that application was made to him in writing, while he was absent, for advice relating to a matter of great importance at the time; and he gave his answer and his advice in writing, as we have it in the seventh chapter of 1st Corinthians.

Mistaking the design, and overlooking the occasion of this advice, many have understood the apostle as laying down the general proposition, that it is better for both men and women to remain single than to marry, which is directly contrary to his own words;-"I will that the younger women marry;" and, "marriage is honourable in all." 1 Tim. v. 14. Heb. xiii. 4. It was, however, to be regulated by pruVOL. II.-69

dential considerations; and it was solely because of "the present distress," that he advised the Corinthian converts to abstain from marriage; though even this he does not lay upon any one as a command, but merely suggests it as an advice. I have made this digression in order to show that the churches were in the practice of consulting the apostles in cases of difficulty, with regard to matters of a temporary and comparatively private nature; and that it does not thence follow that the responses which they received, were of permanent and universal obligation, unless they have been recorded and delivered as such, in the apostolic writings.

But we will come to a better understanding of the subject by attending to the meaning of the word. Tradition is not a word of native English growth, but, like many others, has been transplanted from the Latin; and its meaning in English, according to Dr. Johnson, is, something delivered by word of mouth without written memorials; or any thing delivered orally from age to age. But this is not the meaning, at least, not the whole meaning of the Greek word of which tradition is meant for a translation. Iapádoris is the word which the apostle wrote, and it signifies, precept, instruction, ordinance, delivered either orally or in writing. See the Lexicons. But I have higher authority than that of any lexicographer; namely, that of the apostle Paul himself, who says, "stand fast and hold the traditions (rapádores) which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle." The precepts or instructions, therefore, to which he referred, had been communicated both orally and in writing; or might have been communicated either

way.

Now this brings us to this point, that when the apostle Paul exhorted the believers in Thessalonica, to hold fast the traditions, (rapádoosis,) he meant the things which he had preached to them, and the things which he had written to them, in his former epistle. He refers in the first place to what he had taught them by word. What this was we may learn from what is recorded of the ordinary topics on which the apostles preached; and we know that their preaching related chiefly, if not solely, to Christ's life, death, and resurrection; in other words, they preached the gospel of the grace of God,-"how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures." This is called "the word,""the things reported unto you," and "a faithful saying;"-expressions of nearly the same import with what is meant by tradition, when stripped of the dress in which Papists have disguised it. We know what this "word," or "saying," is, from a sermon which the apostle Peter delivered in the house of Cornelius, Acts x. 36-48. It is a narrative of Christ's life, death, and resurrection; and this he expressly called the word; that is, saying, report, tradition, if you will; for it is said, verse 44, "while Peter yet spake these words,"—that is, while he was giving this narrative of facts, of which he had been a witness, "the Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the word," which word was just this testimony concerning Christ. That Paul's preaching was in the same strain, we learn from the report of a sermon of his in Antioch, Acts xiii. 23-43. in which, along with a narrative of facts about Christ's death and resurrection, he tells the persons who listened to his preaching, that "through this man was preached to them the remission of sins; and that through him all who believe are justified from all

things from which they could not be justified by the law of Moses."* From these two eminent examples, and there are more in the same book, we may conclude that this was the substance of the preaching of all the apostles. It was by the power of this word or report, when accompanied by the blessing of the Holy Ghost, that sinners, whether Jews or Gentiles, were converted; and "turned from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God." Companies of men and women so converted, were instructed to meet together, for the purpose of prayer, and for the observance of the other ordinances which God had commanded. These were the primitive churches; many of which were organized by apostles in person, others by evangelists acting under their direction. Among some of them Paul continued to preach for a considerable period; and to many of them he wrote letters in his absence,most of them, I believe, when he was a prisoner in Rome. In these letters he does not go over in detail the narrative of facts which he made the first subject of his preaching. He takes them for granted. He often alludes to them in a summary way; and again and again, he exhorts his correspondents to keep them in memory;-to hold them fast, and on no account to let them slip out of their minds. In these was the "faithful saying," "the word," "the report," the traditions, which he had delivered to them by word of mouth, and of which he reminded them in every epistle. I say he reminded them of them, for it was not necessary that he should repeat them all in his letters, seeing they were detailed in the narratives called the gospels, either published by this time, or about to be published. Before the publication of the gospels, these things were all communicated by word of mouth, but it was by the mouth of inspired men. They ceased to speak, one by one, as their Master called them to rest from their labours; but they were not all removed till they had committed to writing the things which they had so long declared by their living voice. These are what we have in the New Testament,-having which, we have their word, as really as those who heard them speak, and all the traditions which are of permanent use, and universal obligation among Christians. And I defy the church of Rome to adduce a single article of doctrine, or ordinance of worship, which she has derived from oral tradition, that is not contrary to, or inconsistent with some part of the written word; and, therefore, it cannot be of God; for it is the height of impiety and blasphemy to say, that He commanded his servants to teach one thing with their pens, and a contrary thing with their mouths. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God;-and is able to make

The reader is requested to turn to the passages and peruse them attentively. It is of more importance to be acquainted with the tenor of the apostles' preaching, than to study the style of any modern pulpit orator. It was the plain unincumbered doctrine of Christ crucified, that produced such wonderful effects by the preaching of the apostles; and it is the same doctrine, and nothing else, even now, that can be of any use in the way of converting sinners. The Moravians who went to Greenland, began to teach systematically. They descanted on the being and perfections of God;-very proper subjects, most certainly, for an enlightened Christian assembly; but they made no impression upon the poor Greenlanders, whose minds were not prepared to take in such things. Almost in despair of doing any good, the missionaries began at last to speak about Jesus Christ, and his wonderful kindness and mercy to poor sinners; and this was found to melt the hearts even of the men of Greenland. See Crantz's History. I have not the work at hand, and cannot refer to the page; but the above anecdote is well known.

the man of God perfect, thoroughly furnished unto every good work." Christians can desire no more than the word which is able to make them perfect, which must itself be a perfect word. But Papists, dissatisfied with this, and seeking for something else, have landed themselves in ignorance, superstition, idolatry, and every evil work.

CHAPTER CXC.

POPISH TRADITION DEFINED. VANITY OF DEPENDING UPON IT. PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE ALLEGED IN ITS SUPPORT. CORRUPT CHANNEL THROUGH WHICH TRADITION 13 DERIVED. SPECIMEN OF TRADITIONS; IN THE APOSTLES' CREED, SO CALLED. THE INSTRUMENT BOTH UNSUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE AND VERY INDEFINITE.

SATURDAY, March 2d, 1822.

THE true rule of faith, according to Dr. Milner, "is not merely the written word of God, but the whole word of God, both written and unwritten; in other words, scripture and tradition, and these propounded and explained by the Catholic church." In my last number I did little more than clear the way for the consideration of this proposition. Seeing, in two passages of one of his epistles, the apostle Paul makes use of a word which is rendered tradition in English, popish writers are in the habit of citing his authority in favour of their traditions; but I showed that what he referred to were communications made by himself under divine inspiration, including the apostolic testimony and report concerning Christ, as recorded in the gospel history: and, seeing Dr. Milner alleges that the ancient patriarchs received all that they knew of religion for 2400 years from tradition, I showed that the patriarchs were themselves prophets, and received from God himself that religion which they communicated to their families; and thus it is evident that the popish doctrine of tradition derives no countenance from apostles or patriarchs: and I might have added, that such traditions as the Papists plead for, were strongly condemned by Christ, in his discourses to the Pharisees, who made void the law by their traditions, just as the Papists make void the gospel by theirs.

The simple statement of what Papists mean by tradition, might be enough to convince persons of common sense of the folly of depending upon it. It consists of certain doctrines and precepts, which Christ and the apostles are said to have spoken, but which were not committed to writing. These doctrines and precepts are said to have been delivered by word of mouth from one age to another, and to have come down to us as pure and uncorrupted as the written word contained in the gospels and epistles. Those who can believe this, must believe in the existence of a perpetual miracle, without any conceivable reason for miraculous interposition, seeing the object could have been accomplished by the ordinary means of writing. Dr. Milner, however, not only believes this certainty of traditional communication, but he believes further, and stoutly maintains, that by this means, the knowledge of Christianity might have been preserved and propagated in the world, though there had not been a word of divine revelation committed to

writing. No doubt God could have done this, had he thought fit to preserve a succession of inspired men in all ages, as he did in the ages before his word was written; but what he could have done is no rule to us; our business is with what he has done; and we know that he has given us his word in the scriptures, with a command to receive and apply our minds to the understanding of it; that he has not commanded us to receive the traditions of men, but to beware of them; and therefore we feel upon sure ground when we rely on the written word alone.

.

The other arguments from scripture in favour of tradition, are Christ's command to all men to hear the apostles ;-" He that heareth you, heareth me ;" and, "if he refuse to hear the church let him be unto thee as a heathen and a publican." Now, I have admitted that it was the duty of all men to hear what the apostles said to them; but this has nothing to do with what other men have said, or may yet say;-and popish tradition consists entirely of what other men said. I deny that the apostles spoke a word of that which the church of Rome propounds as apostolical tradition. This is not asserting a negative; for the church has condescended to mention what some of her traditions are,such as the mass sacrifice, purgatory, and prayers for the dead; and as these are directly opposed to what the apostles wrote, I am sure they formed no part of their oral teaching, for they both wrote and spoke under the influence of the divine Spirit, who cannot teach contradictions. But suppose I had no such positive evidence on the subject; suppose it were all negative on that side; I am entitled to deny that of which there is no evidence. At any rate, the burden of proof rests with those who maintain the truth of tradition; and I challenge them to prove the genuineness of a single sentence ascribed to Christ and his apostles beyond what we have in the New Testament.

Aye, but, says Dr. Milner, the apostles had their successors, and Christ included them when he said, "He that heareth you heareth me;" and these words cannot be restricted to the apostles, for as they continued only for the ordinary period of human life, it was impossible that all nations, and all ages, could receive the gospel from them personally; therefore Christ must have included their successors, who are the priests of the Catholic church, the depositaries of the faith, by whom the unwritten word of God, that is, apostolical tradition, has come down to us with infallible certainty.

These are not precisely Dr. Milner's words, but they are the substance of his argument. And I reply, first, that the apostles, as such, had no successors; which I showed at length, in my reply to the Catholic Vindicator: and now, secondly, I maintain, that there was no need of any successors to the apostles, or any to fill their place, after they had committed their words to writing, and gone to receive their reward. Hearing the apostles is not a mere acoustic operation; it is not the mere reception of sounds into the ear. Papists indeed argue as if it were nothing else; and thus it is that they degrade and carnalize every thing that they touch. They think it impossible to hear the apostles, unless the sound of their voice shall literally be received into our ears, or the sound of the voice of some person who pretends to be one of their successors. But in the scripture sense of the expression, to hear the apostles, signifies the belief of their testimony, and submission to the ordinances which they appointed in