on Revelation, whether found in Scripture or Antiquity." Dr. Hook's diligence in the performance of his ministerial functions will be cheerfully admitted by every candid person, whatever may be the difference of their respective opinions upon controverted points. But surely he must, upon reflection, be aware, that the benefits of that ministry will not be increased by thus wantonly bringing forward railing accusations, or by levelling the unseemly charge of "gross falsehood" against a course of argument, which, whatever may be its other defects, certainly has not been conducted in a spirit of unfairness and unchristian intolerance.

NOT TRADITION,

BUT.

SCRIPTURE.

“THE Universal Lord gave to his Apostles authority to preach the Gospel, by whose means we possess knowledge of the truth, that is to say, the doctrine of the Son of God; to which same Apostles the Lord also said,

He who heareth you, heareth me; and he who despiseth you, despiseth me and him who sent me.' For by no other persons have we been instructed in the dispensation of salvation than by those through whom the Gospel has been delivered to us; which Gospel they at the first preached by word of mouth, but afterwards, by God's will, handed down to us in writing, to be the foundation and pillar of our faith * * *. Thus Matthew among

!

B

the Hebrews published his written Gospel in the language, of that people, at the time that Peter and Paul were preaching the Gospel and founding their Church at Rome. But after their removal from the world, Mark, the disciple and amanuensis of Peter, himself delivered to us in writing the facts which had been communicated to him by Peter; and Luke also, the follower of Paul, published in a book the Gospel which had been preached by that Apostle. Lastly, John also, the disciple of our Lord, who reclined upon his breast at supper, himself also published his Gospel while residing at Ephesus in Asia1." Adversus Hæres. lib. 3. cap. I.

1" Dominus omnium dedit Apostolis suis potestatem Evangelii, per quos et veritatem, hoc est, Dei Filii doctrinam cognovimus; quibus et dixit Dominus, Qui vos audit, me audit; et qui vos contemnit, me contemnit et eum qui me misit. Non enim per alios dispositionem salutis nostræ cognovimus, quam per eos per quos Evangelium pervenit ad nos; quod quidem tunc præconiaverunt ; postea vero per Dei voluntatem in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt, fundamentum et columnam fidei nostræ futuram ***. Ita Matthæus in Hebræis ipsorum lingua scripturam edidit Evangelii, cum

Such is the testimony of Irenæus to the sufficiency and completeness of the written works of the first teachers of Christianity as a summary of Christian doctrine. That which they originally taught by word of mouth, says he, the same they afterwards put into writing; and those writings are the books of the New Testament. Here is not the slightest intimation that their oral instruction was in any respect wider in extent of doctrine than that written record which has descended to our times. So far is the primitive author now quoted from asserting that the first Apostles entrusted of their doctrines to the uncerany tain vehicle of mere tradition, that his expressions are scarcely compatible with such a supposition. Not even the remotest suspicion

Petrus et Paulus Romæ evangelizarent et fundarent Ecclesiam. Post vero horum discessum, Marcus, discipulus et interpres Petri, et ipse quæ a Petro annunciata erant, per scripta nobis tradidit; et Lucas, sectator Pauli, quod ab illo prædicabatur Evangelium in libro condidit. Postea et Joannes, discipulus Domini, qui et supra pectus ejus recumbebat, et ipse edidit evangelium Ephesi Asiæ commorans.' Adversus Hæres lib. 3. cap. 1.

"

to that effect appears to have glanced across his mind. The above words, it should be remembered, were directed by him against the Gnostic heretics of his day, with reference to whom he thus continues his argument on the subject of Tradition: "For when they are refuted from Scripture, they (i. e. the Valentinians) turn their attack against the Scripture itself, as incorrect, as not of sufficient authority, as vague and contradictory, and incapable of affording perception of the truth to persons unacquainted with Tradition1." versus Hæres. lib. 3. сар. 2.

Ad

It appears, from the above quotation, that the first appeal to floating tradition, as containing articles of belief in addition or in contradiction to the records of holy writ, was made by the earliest of those numerous classes of heretics who at so early a period of the

1 "Cum enim ex Scripturis arguuntur (Valentiniani videl.) in accusationem vertuntur ipsarum scripturarum ; quasi non recte habeant, neque sint ex authoritate, et quia varie sint dicta, et quia non possit in his inveniri veritas ab his qui nesciant Traditionem." Adversus Hæres. lib. 3. cap. 2.