Page:Faithcatholics.pdf/185

 delivered: but what was delivered, was true, coming from them whose duty it was to teach it. Rejecting then what had been delivered, thou hast rejected what was true. Thou hadst no right to do it." '' De carne Christi. c. 11.

-“ If Scripture has here defined nothing, surely usage has ; which usage has arisen from Tradition. For had it not been delivered, how could it have obtained practice? But you say, even in speaking of Tradition, some written authority is necessary. Let us then enquire, whether no Tradition should be admitted, unless it be written a) I will allow, that it should not, if no examples of other practices can be adduced, which we maintain on the sole title of Tradition, and the strength of custom, without the smallest written authority." He proceeds to mention certain practices in the administration of Baptism and in other rites, and then adds :-“ Of these and other usages, if you ask for the written authority of the Scriptures, none will be found. They spring from Tradition, which practice has confirmed, and obedience ratified.” ''De corona Militis, c. iii. iv. p. 289.

“To the Scriptures, therefore, an appeal must not be made ;(c) on them no contest should be instituted, where victory is uncertain. And should the issue prove more favourable, another rule should rather be pursued. The question is :-to whom was that doctrine committed, by which we are male Christians? For where this doctrine and this Faith shall be found, there will be the truth of the Scriptures, and their expositions, and of all Christian Traditions.” De Præscrip. c. xix. p. 334.-See other passages from the same Tertullian, under, The Marks of the Church, p. 33.