Cee. III,] . Ti?orl?o?. 10! to determine the first pmposilion thsy oughI fir? to dstermine whether it were a question of fact or of right: that is to say, whether the Chris- tian doctrine has two pans, one, that which God commanded te be written; and the other, that which he prohibited to be put in writing, and commanded to be taught by word of mouth. Or whether all the doctrine being ?aught, one par? was accidentally committed ?o writing. He added, dmt it was manifest that under the old covenant God com- manded the faith to be written, and that he wrote it himseft with his own finger; but that under the new, Jesus Christ engraved the evan- gelical law in men's hearts, yet without forbidding it to be written; so that no man can say that the apostles having preached and written as they were inspired by the Spirit of God, God forbad them to write any particular thing in order to keep it as a mystery. From whence it follows, that we are not to distinguish two sorts of articles of faith, some published in writing, and others taught only by word of mouth: and if any one, says he, is of a contrary opinion, he will have two great difficulties to encounter: one is, to determine wherein the dif- ference of these articles does consist; the other, how the successors of the apostles could put that in writing which God forbad. To say that it was by accident that some things were written, is to do God an injury, who guided the apostles' hands. Whence he concluded that i? was better to imitate the fathers, who never mentioned tradition but upon urgent necessity; and who also took great care not to equal it to the Holy Scriptures; and so much the rather because the Lt?tbr?s had not yet enlarged upon this question, though they had said that they would have no other judge but Scripture."* This advice, sound as it was, had few approvers. Cardinal Pole particularly opposed it. Some desired a distinction to be made between tradkions of faith and those which related to manners and rites; the first to be universally received, but of the rest only such as the custom of the church had sanctioned. Others would have the reception of all enjoined without the least distinction. _ When the decree of the council was proposed for consideration, and that part was read which enacted that Scripture and tradition should be regarded "with equal piety and veneration," Bertani objected that the fact of many traditions having fallen into disuse seemed to indicate that God himself did not intend that they should be veneraIed equally with Scripture. The bishop of Chazza even ventured to assert that it was impious to equal the authority of Scripture and tradition. But not- withstanding there were many in the Council of Trent who utiered such sentiments as these, yet, as the council was entirely under the control of the pope, those of the opposite sentiments prevailed, and brought in unwritten tradition to be of equal authority with the word of God. This matter had, before the session of this council in 1545, been principally a matter of opinior?, but by the decision of the council the equality of tradition with Scripture becomes an article of faith. Still it seems as if all the assumed i?fallibility of Rome cannot produce any thing like uniformity on this article of faith; some placing tradition below, others equal, and others superior to the word of God. This �one presents a complete refutation of their doctrine conceruin? tradi- tion. �]IV Pin, F.?. l'Ii?., vol. iii, p. 419. 1
�
