the word of God by their tradition; which the Pharifees did no otherwife than Mr. S. does, by equalling oral tradition to fcripture; nay preferring it above fcripture, in making it the fole rule of faith, and interpreting the fcripture according to it. Hence are thofe common fayings in the Talmud, and other Jewish books: "Do not "think that the written law is the foundation, but that "the law orally delivered is the right foundation; " which is to fay with Mr. S. that not the fcripture, but oral tradition, is the true rule of faith. Again, There ❝is more in the words of the scribes, (viz. the testifiers "of tradition), than in the words of the written law." Again, "The oral law excels the written, as much as "the foul doth the body; " which accords very well with what Mr. S. frequently tells us, that the fcripture without tradition is but a dead letter, destitute of life and fenfe. Hence also it is, that they required the people (as the traditionary church does now) to yield up themselves to the dictates of tradition, even in the most abfurd things; as appears by that common faying among them: If the fcribes fay that the right hand is the left, "and the left the right, (that bread is flesh, and wine "is blood), hearken to them;" that is, make no fcruple of whatsoever they deliver as tradition, though never fo contrary to reafon or fenfe. And, laftly, the doctrines of the Pharifees were many of them practical; fuch were all those which concerned external rites and obfervances, as washing of hands and cups, &c. So that thefe Pharifaical traditions had also that unspeakable advantage which Mr. S. fays renders their traditions unmistakeable, that they were daily practifed, and came down "clad in fuch plain matters of fact, that the most "ftupid man living could not poffibly be ignorant of "them." Therefore, according to Mr. S.'s principles, it was impoffible that any age of the Jews fhould be perfuaded that these things were commanded by Mofes, and ever fince obferved, if they had not been fo: and yet our Saviour denies thefe cuftoms to have been of any fuch authority as they pretended.

§ 2. But I needed not to have taken all this pains to fhew the agreement which is between the traditionary Jews and Papifts; their own writers fo liberally acknow

ledging

ledging it. Mr. White indeed fays, (De fid. & theol. tract. 1. §6.), that "the faith of the Jews was not de"livered to them orally, but by writing." Than which nothing can be more inconfiftent with his hypothefis : for if the Jewish faith was conveyed to them not orally, but by writing; then, either the Jewish church had no fufficient rule of faith, or elfe a writing may be fuch a rule. But other of their champions make great ufe of the parallel between the traditionary Jews and the Romifh church to confirm from thence their own traditionary doctrines. Cardinal Perron hath a full paffage to this purpose, (Rep. to K. James, obferv. 3. c. 4.), As "this (fays he) is to preferve a found and entire refpect to the majesty of the ancient Mofaick fcripture, to be"lieve and obferve not only all the things which are "therein actually contained, but also those things which "are therein contained mediately and relatively, as the "doctrines of paradife, &c. which were not contained "therein but mediately, and by the authority which it gave to the depofition of the Patriarchal and Mofaick "tradition, preferved by heart, and in the oral doctrine of "the fynagogue; fo this is to preferve a found and en"tire refpect to the majefty of the Apoftolical scripture,

66

༤་

66

66

to believe and obferve all the things which it contains, "not only immediately, and by itself, but mediately, "and by reference to the Apoftolical traditions; to "which in grofs and generally it gives the authority of "Apoftolical doctrines, and to the church the authority. "of guardian and depofitary to preferve and attest "them." Voyfin, in his obfervations upon Raymundus Martin, (Pugio fid. p. 145.), tells us, that " as in "the old law the great confiftory at Jerufalem was the "foundation of the true tradition; fo (fays he) the fee "of Rome is the foundation of our tradition. And as "the continual fucceffion of the High Priests and fa"thers among the Jews, was the great confirmation of "the truth of their traditions; fo (fays he) with us the "truth of our Catholick doctrine is confirmed by a con"tinual fucceffion of Popes."

$3. From all this it appears, that the Pharifees among the Jews made the fame pretence to oral tradition which the Papifts do at this day, according to Mr. S.

And

their hearts.

373 And if fo, then Mr. S.'s demonstration à pofteriori is every whit as strong for the Jews against our Saviour, as it is for the Papists against the Proteftants. For we find that, in our Saviour's time, it was then the present perfuafion of the traditionary Jews, that their faith, and their rites, and the true fenfe and interpretation of their written law, was defcended from Mofes and the prophets to them uninterruptedly; which we find was moft firmly rooted in But the Jews had conftant tradition among them, that the Meffiah was to be a great temporal prince: and though the letter of the prophecies concerning him might well enough have been accommodated to the low and fuffering condition of our Saviour; yet they did infallibly know, that their Meffiah was to be another kind of perfon, from "fenfe written in their "hearts," from the interpretation of thofe prophecies orally brought down to them, "from the Patriarchal "and Mofaick tradition preserved by heart, and in the "oral doctrine of the fynagogue, and from the living "voice of their church effential;" that is, the univerfal confent of the then traditionary Jews. If it be faid, that the Jewish tradition did indeed bring down feveral doctrines not contained in fcripture, of paradise, of hell, of the last judgment, of the refurrection, &c. (as Cardinal Perron affirms), but it did not bring down this point of the Meffiah's being a temporal prince; then, as Mr. S. asks us, p. 76. fo the Jew does him, By what vir66 tue tradition brought down these other points? and "whether the fame virtue were not powerful to bring "down this, as well as thofe ?" Then he will ask him farther, "Is there not a neceffary connexion and rela66 tion between a conftant caufe, and its formal effect; "fo that if its formal effect be points received as deli❝vered ever, the proper cause must be an ever-delivery? ""whence he will argue from fuch an effect to its caufe for any particular point, and confequently for this "point that is in controversy between Jews and Chritians, (concerning the Meffiah's being a temporal prince), in cafe it be a point held ever delivered: " but most certain it is, it was fo held by the Jews in our Saviour's time, and hath been held fo ever fince to this day.

66

66

I

I fhall not trouble the reader with transcribing the reft of this demonstration; only defire him, as he reads it over, to imagine, instead of Mr. S. a Pharifee demonftrating, against one of Chrift's difciples, the infallibility of the oral tradition of the Jews: and I doubt not, but he will find this demonstration, and every part of it, changing only the names, as forcibly concluding Chrift not to be the Meffiah, as it doth infer any point of Popery against the Protestants.

§4. Before I leave this inftance of the Jewish tradition, I fhall briefly confider what Mr. White hath offered by way of answer to it, (Apol. p. 123, &c.); as, first, that "the matter of thefe traditions is nothing else but "explications of fcripture framed and invented by their "own Rabbins." So we fay, that the Popish traditions are innovations. But then, Mr. White and Mr. S. tell us, that they can demonftrate them to be defcended from Chrift and his Apoftles; because it is the prefent perfuafion of a multitude of Chriftians that they are fo defcended. In like manner, if this demonftration be good, the Jews can prove their traditions to be defcended from Mofes and the Prophets. Secondly, He fays, that "the form of these traditions is more ridiculous

than the canting of gypfies, or the juggling of hocus66 pocus; because it confifts in inventing the fenfe of "the fcripture from the myfteries, and numbers, and 46 changes of letters.' This is a grofs inexcufable miftake for though the Jews have fuch a cabala, called Gematry, as this which Mr. White defcribes; yet that cabala which is argued in this inftance, and which our Saviour reproves in the Pharifees by the name of tradition, is quite another thing, and, among the Jewish writers, known by the name of the unwritten or oral law; which they fay was delivered to Mofes on mount Sinai, and by him conveyed to Aaron, and Joshua, and the elders, and fucceffively delivered down from one age to another; and at last by Rabbi Jehudah compiled into one volume, which they call Mikna, or fevripwots. And this does not confift in the art of numbering, combining, or changing of letters, as Mr. White imagines. But fuppofe it did fo, and were more ridiculous than he conceits it to be, the inftance would be fo much the

more

66

more conclusive against them, if what they affirm be true, that oral tradition is infallible, and that the perfuafion of a traditionary church in any age, that fuch a doctrine defcended to them from Chrift or Mofes, be a demonftration that it did fo: for if this be fufficient evidence, it is nothing to the purpose what the doctrine be, either for matter or form; for if it be once demonftrated to have come from Chrift or Mofes, it is, without any farther difpute, to be received as of divine authority. So that Mr. White quite alters the state of the queftion; which was not, Whether the Jewish cabala be abfurd and ridiculous? but, Whether the general perfuafion of the Jews in any age, that it defcended to them by uninterrupted tradition from Mofes, be a demonstration that it did fo? If it be, then the Jewish cabala is as demonftratively of divine authority as the oral doctrine of the Papifts. Thirdly, He fays, "This cabala was a "doctrine delivered to few, and that with ftrict charge 66 to keep it from publicity, and fo communicate it again fucceffively to a felect committee of a few: where"in (fays he) you may fee as fair an opportunity for juggling and cozenage, as in our cafe there is an imแ poffibility." This, I think, is true of the cabala, which it feems Mr. White had only in his view; but is a horrible mistake, if he fpeaks of the oral law, which was contained in the Mifhna, and which this inftance only intends. For of this Maimonides (in præfat. fum. Talmud.) fays exprefsly, that," in every age, from the time "of Mofes to Rabbi Jehudah, who compiled the Mifh66 na, the oral law was publickly taught; and that, after Rabbi Jehuda had compiled it into one volume, "the Ifraelites did generally write out copies of it; and "it was every where carefully taught, for fear left the "oral law fhould, by forgetfulness, be loft among the 66 Jews." So that, upon account of the publickness of the doctrine, there is as great an impoffibility of juggling and cozenage in the cafe of the Jewish as of the Romfh tradition. Befides, was washing of hands and cups, which they also pretended to have come down to them from Mofes, and to have been constantly practised in every age, a fecret thing? was it not a practical tradition, and performed in a fenfible matter? If therefore no

66