we have a Synodical Epistle of Sophronius Patriarch of Jerusalem wherein as the usual Custom was he explaineth the Faith in a very large and particular manner and yet notwithstanding you shall no there meet with any of those Points which are now controverted amongst us Those that shall search more narrowly into the Business will be apt positively to conclude from this their silence that these Points were not at that time any part of the Belief of the Church and certainly this their way of Argumentation seems not to want Reason But as for my own particular it is sufficient for me that it confirmeth the Truth of my Assertion which is That it is if not an impossible yet at least a very hard thing to discover in what degree either of Necessity or Probability the Ancient Fathers held each of those Points which are now debated amongst us seeing that they appear not at all neither in the Expositions of their Faith nor yet in the Determinations of their Councils which are as it were the Catalogues of those Points which they accounted Necessary CHAP. IX Reason IX We ought to know what hath been the Opinion not of one or more of the Fathers but of the whole Ancient Church which is a very hard matter to be found out THose who make most account of the Writings of the Fathers and who urge them the oftnest in their Disputations do inform us That the weight of their Sayings in these Matters proceeds from hence that they are as so many Testimonies of the General Sense and Judgment of the Church to which alone these men attribute the Supreme Power of Judging in Controversies of Religion For if we should consider them severally each by himself and as they stand by their own strength onely they confess that they may chance to erre So that it will follow hence That to the end we may make use of the Testimonies of the Fathers it is not sufficient for us to know whether such or such Sayings be truly theirs and if so what the meaning of them is but we ought further also to be very well assured that they are conformable to the Belief of the Church in their time in like manner as in a Court of Judicature the Opinion of any single Person of the Bench is of no weight at all as to the passing of Judgment unless it be conformable to the Opinion of all the rest or at least of the Major Part of the Company And now see how we are fallen again into new Difficulties For whence and by what means may we learn whether the whole Church in the time of Justin Martyr or of S. Augustine or of S. Hierome maintained the same Opinions in every particular that these Men severally did or not I confess that the Charity of these Men was very great and that they very heartily and constantly embraced the Body and Substance of the Belief of the Church in all Particulars that they saw apparently to be such But where the Church did not at all deliver it self and expresly declare what its Sense was they could not possibly how great soever their desire of so doing might have been follow its Authority as the Rule of their Opinions Wheresoever therefore they treat of Points which were long since decided believed and received expresly and positively by the whole Christian Church either of their own Age or of any of the preceding Ages it is very probable that they did conform to what was believed by the Church so that in these Cases their Saying may very well pass for a Testimony of the Judgment and Sense of the Church it being very improbable that they could be either ignorant what was the Publick Doctrine of the Church or that knowing the same they would not follow it As for example when Athanasius S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Augustine and others discourse touching the Son of God they speak nothing but what is conformable to the Belief of the Church in General because that the Belief of the Church had then been clearly and expresly delivered upon this Point so that whatsoever they say as to this Particular may safely be received as a Testimony of the Churches Belief And the like may be done in all the other Points which have either been positively determined in any of the General Councils or delivered in any of the Creeds or that any other way appeareth to have been the publick Belief of the Church If the Fathers had but contained themselves within these Bounds and had not taken liberty to treat of any thing save what the Church had clearly delivered its Judgment upon this Rule might then have been received as a General one and what opinion soever we found in them we might safely have concluded it to have been the Sense of the Church that was in their time But the curiosity of Mans Nature together with the Impudence of the Hereticks and the Tenderness of Conscience whether of their own or of others and divers other Reasons perhaps having partly made them willingly and partly forced and as it were constrained them to go on further and to proceed to the search of the Truth of several Points which had not as yet been established by the universal and publick Consent of all Christians it could not be avoided but that necessarily they must in these Inquiries make use of their own proper Light and must deliver upon the same their own private Opinions which the Church which came after them hath since either embraced or rejected I shall not here stand to prove this my Assertion since it is a thing that is confessed on all hands and whereof the Romanists make special use upon all occasions in answering several Objections brought against them out of the Fathers As for example where Cardinal Bellarmine excuseth the Error of Pope John XXII touching the state of the Departed Souls before the Resurrection by saying that the Church in his time had not as yet determined any thing touching this Particular And so likewise where he applies the same Plaister to that in his Judgment so unsound Opinion of Pope Nicolas I who maintained That Baptism administred in the Name of Jesus Christ onely without expressing the other Persons of the Holy Trinity was not withstanding valid and effectual This is a Point saith Bellarmine touching which we find not the Church to have determined any thing And how dangerous and almost Heretical soever the Opinion of those Men seem to him to be who hold That the Pope of Rome may fall into Heresie yet doth he permit Pope Adrian to hold the same not daring to rank him among the Hereticks because that the Church had not as yet clearly and definitively delivered it self touching this Point The same Bellarmine in another Controversie of great importance touching the Canonical Books of the Old Testament finding himself hardly put to it by his Adversaries urging against him the Authority of S. Hierome who casts Tobit the Book of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus and the Maccabees out of the Canon contrary to the Judgment of the Church of
to give me leave to set down here the whole Passage at length As for these kind of Books saith he speaking of those Books which we Write not with Authority of Commanding but only out of a Design of exercising our selves to benefit others we are so to read them as not being bound necessarily to believe them but as having a liberty left us of judging of what we read Yet notwithstanding that we may not quite shut out these Books and deprive posterity of the most profitable labour of exercising their Language and Stile in the handling and treating of hard Questions we make a Distinction betwixt these Books of Later Writers and the Excellency of the Canonical Authority of the Old and New Testament which having been confirmed in the Apostles time hath since by the Bishops who succeeded them and the Churches which have been propagated throughout the World been placed as it were upon a high Throne there to be reverenced and adored by every Faithful and Godly Vnderstanding And if we chance here to meet with any thing that troubleth us and seemeth Absurd we must not say that the Author of the Book was ignorant of the truth but rather that either our Copy is false or the Interpreter is mistaken in the sense of the place or else that we understand not him aright And as for the Writings of those other Authors who have come after Them the number whereof is almost infinite though coming very far short of this most sacred Excellency of the Canonical Scriptures a man may sometimes find in them the very same truth though it shall not be of equal Authority And therefore if by chance we here meet with such things as seem contrary to the Truth by reason perhaps of our not understanding them only we have our Liberty either in reading or hearing the same to approve of what we like and to reject that which we conceive not to be so right So that except all such passages be made good either by some certain reason or else by the Canonical Authority of the Scriptures and that it be made appear that the thing asserted either really it or else at least that it might have been he that shall reject or not assent to the same ought not in any wise to be reprehended And thus far have we S. Augustine testifying on our side as well here as in many other places which would be too long to be inserted here that those opinions which we find delivered by the Fathers in their Writings are grounded not upon their bare Authority but upon their Reasons and that they bind not our belief otherwise than so far forth as they are consonant either to the Scripture or to Reason and that they ought to be examined by the one and the other as proceeding from persons that are not infallible but possibly may have erred So that it appears from hence that the course which is at this day observed in the World is not of sufficiency enough for the discovery and demonstration of the truth For we are now in doubt suppose what the sense and meaning is of such a piece of Scripture Here shall you presently have the judgment of a Father brought upon the said place quite contrary to the Rule S. Augustine giveth us who would have us examine the Fathers by the Scriptures and not the Scriptures by the Fathers Certainly according to the judgment of this Father the Protestant though a Passage as clear and express as any of the Canons of the Council of Trent should be brought against him out of any of the Fathers ought not to be blamed if he should answer that he cannot by any means assent unto it unless the truth of it be first proved unto him either by some certain Reason or else by the Authority of the Canonical Scriptures and that then and not till then he shall be ready to assent unto it So that according to this Account we are to alledge not the Names but the Reasons of Books to take notice not of the Quality of their Authors but of the Solidity of their Proofs to consider what it is they give us and not the face or hand of him that gives it us and in a word to reduce the dispute from Persons to Things And S. Jerome also seemeth to commend unto us this manner of Proceeding where in the Preface to his second Commentary upon Hosea he hath these words Then saith he that is after the Authors of Books are once departed this life we judge of their worth and parts only not considering at all the Dignity of their Name and the Reader hath regard only to what he reads and not to the Author whose it is So that whether he were a Bishop or a Lay-man a General and a Lord or a common Souldier and a Servant whether he lie in Purple and in Silk or in the vilest and coursest rags he shall be judged not according to his degree of honour but according to the merit and worth of his Works Now he here speaks either of matter of Right or of Fact and his meaning is that either we ought to take this course in our Judgments or else it is a plain Affirmation that it is the practice of the World so to do If his words are to be taken in the first sense he then clearly takes away all Authority from the bare Names of Writers and so would have us to consider the Quality only and weight of their Writings that is to say their Reasons and the force of the Arguments they use If he be to be understood in the second sense he seemeth not to speak truth it being evident that the ordinary course of the world is to be more taken with the titles and names of Books than with the things therein contained But supposing however that this was S. Hieroms meaning we may notwithstanding very safely believe that he approveth of the said course for as much as having this occasion of speaking of it he doth not at all reprehend it If therefore thou hast any mind to stand to his judgment lay me aside the Names of Augustine and of Hierome of Chrysostome and of Cyril and forget for this once the Rochet of the first and the Chair of the second together with the Patriarchal Robe of the two last and observe what they say and not what they were the ground and reason of their opinions and not the dignity of their persons But that which makes me very much wonder is that some of those who have been the most conversant in Antiquity should trouble themselves in stuffing up their Books with declamatory expressions in praise of the Authors they produce not forbearing to recount to you so much as the Nobleness of their Extraction the choiceness of their Education the gallantry of their Parts the eminency of their See and the greatness of their State This manner of writing may perhaps suit well enough with
Observation of the Lords Day by Pius both Bishops of Rome which is a thing Eusebius never so much as dreamt of as may appear out of some Manuscripts of him where you shall find him wholly muâ—e as to these Points wherewith the Moderns so much please themselves But to return and to take the Times all along as they lie we may observe that this Licence grew stronger daily as the Times grew worse because that the greater the distance of time was from the Author 's own Age the more difficult the discovery of these Forgeries must necessarily be the Example also of some of the most eminent Persons among the Ancients who had sometimes made use of these sleights adding on the other side boldness to every one and courage to venture upon what they had done before them For I pray you is it not a strange thing that the Legats of Pope Leo in the year 451. in the midst of the Council of Chalcedon where were assembled 600 Bishops the very Flower and Choice of the whole Clergy should have the confidence to alledge the VI Canon of the Council of Nice in these very Words That the Church of Rome hath always had the Primacy Words which are no more found in any Greek Copies of the Councils than are those other pretended Canons of Pope Zozimus neither do they yet appear in any Greek or Latin Copies nor so much as in the Edition of Dionysius Exiguus who lived about fifty years after this Council When I consider that the Legats of so holy a Pope would at that time have fastned such a Wen upon the Body of so Venerable a Canon I am almost ready to think that we scarcely have any thing of Antiquity left us that is entire and uncorrupt except it be in Matters of Indifferency or which could not have been corrupted without much noise and to take this Proceeding of theirs which is come to our knowledge as an advertisement purposely given us by Divine Providence to let us see with how much consideration and advisedness we ought to receive for the Council of Nice and of Constantinople and for Cyprian and Hieroâ—o's Writings that which goes at this day for such About seventy four years after the Council of Chalcedon Dionysius Exiguus whom we before mentioned made his Collection at Rome which is 〈◊〉 printed at Paris Cum Privilegio Regiâ— out of very ancient Manuscripts Whosoever shall but look diligently Into this Collection shall find divers alterations in it one whereof I shall instance in only to shew how ancient this Artifice hath been among Christians The last Canon of the Council of Laâ—dicea which is the 163. of the Greek Code of the Church Universal forbidding to read in Churches any other Books than those which are Canonical gives us withal a long Catalogue of them Dionysius Exiguus although he hath indeed inserted in his Collection Num. 162. the beginning of the said Canon which forbiddeth to read any other Books in the Churches besides the sacred Volumes of the Old and New Testament yet hath he wholly omitted the Catalogue or List of the said Books fearing as I conceive lest the Tail of this Catalogue might scandalize the Church of Rome where many years before Pope Innocent had by an express Decree to that purpose put into the Canon of the Old Testament the Maccabees the Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiasticus Tobit Judith c. of which Books the Fathers of the Council of Laodicea make no mention at all naming but XXII Books of the Old Testament and in the Catalogue of the New utterly omitting the Apocalypse If any Man can shew me any better reason of this suppression let him speak as for my part I conceive this the most probable that can be given however we are not at all bound to divine what the motive should be that made Dionysius out off that part of the Canon For whatsoever the reason were it serves the turn well enough to make it appear that at that time they made no great conscience to curtal if need were the very Text of the Canons themselves So that if we had not had the good luck to have had this Canon entire and perfect in divers other Monuments of Antiquity as namely in the Collections of the Greeks and also in the Councils of the French Church we should at this Day have been wholly ignorant what the judgment of the Fathers of Lâ—â—odices was touching the Canon of the holy Scripturâ—s which is one of the principal Controversies of these times It is true I confess that the Latins have their revenge upon the Greeks reproaching them in like manner because that in their Translation of the Code of the Canons of the African Church they have left the Books of the Maccabees quite out of the Roll of the Books of the Scripture which is set down in the 24. Canon of their Collection expresly against the Faith of all the Latin copies of this Collection both Printed and Manuscript as Cardinal Perron affirmeth and yet there are some others who assure us that no Book of Maccabees appears at all in this Canon in the Collection of Cresâ—bnius a Bishop of Africk not yet printed The Greek Cudâ— represents unto us VII Canons of the I Council of Constantinople which are in like manner found both in Balsamon and in Zonaras and also in the Greek and Latin Edition of the General Councils printed at Rome The three last of these do not appear at all in the Latine Code of 〈◊〉 though they are very considerable ones as to the business they relate to which is That Order in Proceeding in passing Judgment upon Bishops accused and in receiving such persons who forsaking their Communion with Hereticks desire to be admitted into the Church 〈…〉 very hard to say what should move the 〈…〉 this Council thus But this I am 〈…〉 in the VI. Canon which is one of those 〈…〉 hath omitted and which treateth of judging of Bishops accused there is not the least mention made of Appealing to Rome nor of any Reserved Cases wherein it is not permitted to any save only to the Pope himself to judge a Bishop the power of hearing and determining all such matters being here wholly and absolutely referred to the Provincial and Dioceâ—an Synods Now whether the Greeks added this tail to the Council of Constantinople which yet is not very probable or whether Dionysius or the Church of Rome curtalled this Council it will still that way also appear clearly that this boldness in gâ—lding or making Additions to Ecclesiastical Writings is not at all in use in these dayes After the Canons of Constantinople there follow in the Greek Code VIII Canons of the General Council of Ephâ—sus set down also both by Balsamon and Zonaras and printed with the Acts of the said Council of Ephesus in the First Tome of the Roman Edition But Dionysius Exiguus hath discarded them all not giving us any one of
formerly determined by the Orthodox Doct. as appears plainly not only by the Manuscripts but also by the most ancient Editions of this Author and even by Card. Baronius his alledging of this Passage also in the Tenth Tome of his Annals An. Dom. 869. These are they who have quite rased out this following Passage out of Oecumenius For they who defended and favoured the Law introduced also the worshipping of Angels and that because the Law had been given by them And this Custom continued long in Phrygia insomuch that the Council of Laodicea made a Decree forbidding to make any Addresses to Angels or to pray to them whence also it is that we find many Temples among them erected to Michael the Archangel Which Passage David Hâ—eschelius in his Notes upon the Books of Origen against Celsus p. 483. witnesseth That himself had seen and read in the Manuscripts of Oecumenius and yet there is no such thing to be found in any of the Printed Copies Who would believe but that the Breviaries and Missals should have escaped their Razour Yet as it hath been observed by Persons of eminent both Learning and Honesty where it was read in the Collect on S. Peter's day heretofore thus Deus qui B. Petro Apostolo tuo collatis clavibus regni coelestis animas ligandi solvendi Pontificium tradidisti that is O God who hast committed to thy Apostle S. Peter by giving him the Keys of the Heavenly Kingdom the Episcopal Power of Binding and Loosing Souls in the later Editions of these Breviaries and Missals they have wholly left out the word Animas Souls to the end that People should not think that the Popes Autority extended only to Spiritual Affairs and not to Temporal also And so likewise in the Gospel upon the Tuesday following the Third Sunday in Lent they have Printed Dixit Jesus Discipulis suis that is Jesus said to his Disciples whereas it was in the old Books Respiciens Jesus in Discipulos dixit Simoni Petro si peccaverit in te frater tuus Jesus looking back upon his Disciples said unto Simon Peter If thy Brother have offended against thee c. cunningly omitting those words relating to Simon Peter for fear it might be thought that our Saviour Christ had made S. Peter that is to say the Pope subject to the Tribunal of the Church to which he there sends him And if the Council of Trent would but have hearkned to Thomas Passio a Canon of Valencia they should have blotted out of the Pontifical all such Passages as make any mention of the Peoples giving their Suffrage and Consent in the Ordination of the Ministers of the Church and among the rest that where the Bishop at the Ordination of a Priest saith That it was not without good reason that the Fathers had ordained That the Advice of the People should be taken touching the Election of those Persons who were to serve at the Altar to the end that having given their Assent to their Ordination they might the more readily yield Obedience to those who were so Ordained The meaning of this honest Canon was that to take away all such Authorities from the Hereticks the best way would be to blot them all out of the Pontifical to the end that there might be no trace or footstep of them left remaining for the future But they have not contented themselves with corrupting onely in this manner some certain Books out of which perhaps we might have been able to discover what the Opinion and Sense of the Ancients have been but they have also wholly abolished a very great number of others And for the better understanding hereof we are to take notice that the Emperours of the first Ages took all possible care for the stifling and abolishing all such Writings as were declared prejudicial to the True Faith as namely the Books of the Arrians and Nestorians and others which were under a great penalty forbidden to be read but were to be wholly supprest and abolished by the Appointment of these ancient Princes The Church it self also did sometimes call in the Books of such Persons as had been dead long before by a common consent of the Catholick Party as soon as they perceived any thing in them that was not consonant to the present Opinion of the Church as it did at the Fifth General Council in the Business of Theodorus Theodoreius and Ibas all three Bishops the one of Mopsuestia the other of Cyprus and the third of Edissa anathematizing each of their several Writings notwithstanding there Persons had been all dead long before dealing also even in the quiet times of the Church with Origen in the same manner after he had been now dead about three hundred years The Pope then hath not failed to imitate now for the space of many Ages both the one and the other of these rigorous Courses withal encreasing the harshness of them from time to time in so much that in case any of the Opinions of the Ancients hath been by chance found at any time to contradict his we are not to make any doubt but that he hath very carefully and diligently suppressed such Pieces without sparing any though they were written perhaps two three four or five hundred years before more than the others As for example It is at this day disputed whether or no the Primitive Church had in their Temples and worshipped the Images of Christ and of Saints This Controversie hath been sometime very eagerly and with much heaâ— and for a long time together debated in the Greek Church That Party which maintained the Affirmative bringing the business before the VII Council held at Nicaea it was there ordained That it should be unlawful for any Man to have the Books of the other Party withal charging every Man to bring what Books they had of that Party to the Patriarch of Constantinople to do with them as we must conceive according as had been required by the Legats of Pope Adrian that is tâ—at they should burn all those Books which had been written against the Venerable Images including no doubt within the same Condemnation all such Writings of the Ancients also as seemed not to favour Images as namely the Epistle of Eusebius to Constantia and that of Epiphanius to John of Hierusalem and others which are not now extant but were in all probability at that time abolished For as for the Epistle of Epiphanius that which we now have is only S. Hieromes Translation of it which happened to be preserved in the Western parts where the passion in the behalf of Images was much less violent than it was in the Eastern but the Original Greek of it is no where to be found Adrian II. in his Council ordained in like manner that the Council held by Photius against the Church of Rome should be burnt together with his other Books and all the Books of those of his Party which
Castro and Melchior Canus Two Spanish Doctors For as much therefore as we are not bound to believe any thing save that which is True it is most evident that we neither may nor ought to believe the Opinions of the Fathers till such time as they appear to us to have been certainly True Now we cannot be certainly assured of this by Their Single Authority seeing that they were but Men who were not always inspired by the Holy Spirit from above and therefore it is necessary that we make use of some other Guides in this our Inquiry namely either of the Holy Scriptures or of Reason or of Tradition or of the Doctrine of the Present Church or of some other such means as they themselves have made use of So that it hence follows that their bare Assertions are no sufficient Ground for us to build any of our Opinions upon they only serve to encline us before hand to the Belief of the same the great opinion which we have of them causing us to conclude that They would never have embraced such an Opinion except it had been True Which manner of Argumentation how ever is at the best but Probable so long as the Persons we have here to do withal are only Men and no more and in this particular Case where the Question is touching Points of Faith it is by no means in the world to be allowed of since that Faith is to be grounded not upon Probabilities but upon necessary Truths The Fathers are like to other great Masters in this Point and their Opinions are more or less Valid in proportion to the Reason and Authority whereon they are grounded only they have this Advantage that their very Name begets in us a readiness and inclination to receive whatsoever comes from them while we think it very improbable that so Excellent men as they were should ever believe any thing that was False Thus in Humane Sciences the saying of an Aristotle is of a far different Value from that of any other Philosopher of less Account because that all men are before-hand possessed with an Opinion that this Great Philosopher would not maintain any thing that was not consonant to Reason But this is Prejudice only for if upon better examination it should be found to be otherwise his Bare Authority would then no longer prevail with us what himself had sometime gallantly said would then here take place namely That it is a sacred thing always to preferre the Truth before Friendship Let the Fathers therefore if you please be the Aristotles in Christian Philosophy and let us have a Reverent esteem of Them and their Writings as they deserve and not be too rash in concluding that Persons of so eminent both Learning and Sanctity should maintain any Erroneous or vain Opinions especially in a matter of so great Importance Yet notwithstanding are we bound withal to remember that they were but Men and that their Memory Understanding or Judgment might sometimes fail them and therefore consequently that we are to examine their Writings by those Principles from whence they draw their Conclusions and not to sit down upon their Bare Assertions till such time as we have discovered them to be True If I were to speak of any other Persons than of the Fathers I should not add any thing more to what hath been already said it having been already in my judgment clearly enough proved that they are not of themselves of Authority enough to oblige us necessarily to follow their Opinions But seeing the Question here is touching these great Names which are so highly honoured in the Church to the end that no man may accuse us of endeavouring to rob them of any of the Respect which is due unto them I hold it necessary to examine this business a little more exactly and to make it appear by considering the thing it self that they are of no more Authority neither in Themselves nor in respect of Us than hath been already by Us attributed unto them CHAP. II. Reason 2. That the Fathers themselves testifie against themselves that they are not to be believed Absolutely and upon their Own bare Word in what they deliver in matters of Religion THere is none so fit to inform us what the Authority of the Writings of the Ancients is as the Ancients themselves who in all Reason must needs know this better than we Let us therefore now hear what they testifie in this Particular and if we do indeed hold them in so high Esteem as we make profession of let us allow of their Judgment in this particular attributing neither more nor less unto the Ancients than they Themselves require at our hands St. Augustine who was the Principal Light of the Latine Church being entred into a Contestation with St. Hierome touching the Interpretation before-mentioned of the second Chapter of the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Galatians and finding himself hardly pressed by the Authority of six or seven Greek Writers which were urged against him by the other to rid his hands of them he was fain to make open profession in what account he held that sort of Writers I confess saith he to thy Charity that I only owe to those Books of Scripture which are now called Canonical that Reverence and Honour as to believe stedfastly that none of their Authors ever committed any Error in writing the same And if by chance I there meet with any thing which seemeth to contradict the Truth I presently think that certainly either my Copy is Imperfect and not so Correct as it should be or else that the Interpreter did not so well understand the Words of the Original or lastly that I my self have not so rightly understood Him But as for all other Writers how Eminent soever they are either for Sanctity or Learning I read them so as not presently to conclude whatsoever I there find to be True because They have said it but rather because they convince me either out of the said Canonical Books of Scripture or else by some Probable Reason that what they say is True Neither do I think Brother that thou thy self art of any other Opinion that is to say I do not believe that thou expectest that we should read thy Books as we do those of the Prophets or Apostles of the Truth of whose Writings as being exempt from all Errour we may not in any wise doubt And having afterwards opposed some other the like Authorities against those alledged by St. Hierome he addeth That he had done so notwithstanding that to say the truth he accounted the Canonical Scriptures only to be the Books to which as he said before he owed that ingenuous Duty as to be fully perswaded that the Authors of them never erred or deceived the Reader in any thing This Holy man accounted this Advice to be of so great Importance as that he thought fit to repeat it again in another place and I must intreat my Reader
to read the Ancients to prove all things and to hold fast that which is good and not to depart from the Faith of the Catholick Church according to the Rule which he hath commended unto us in his LXXVI Epistle where he adviseth us to read Origen Tertullian Novatus Arnobius Apollinaris and some other of the Ecclesiastical Writers but with this caution that we should make choice of that which is good but take heed of embracing that which is not so according to the Apostle who bids us prove all things but hold fast onely that which is good And this is the course he constantly takes censuring with the greatest Liberty that may be the Opinions and Expositions of all those who went before him He gives you freely his Judgment of every one of them affirming That Cyprian scarcely touched the Scriptures at all that Victorinus was not able to express his own Conceptions that Lactantius is not so happy in his Endeavours of proving our Religion as he is in overthrowing that of others that Arnobius is very uneven and confused and too luxuriant that S. Hilary is too swelling and incumbred with too long Periods I shall not here set before you what he saith of Origen Theodorus Apollinaris and of the Chiliasts whose professed Enemy he hath declared himself and whom he reproveth very sharply upon all Occasions whensoever they come in his way and yet himself confesseth them all to have been Men of very great Parts giving even Origen himself who is the most dangerous Writer of them all this Testimony That none but the ignorant can deny but that next to the Apostles he was one of the greatest Masters of the Church But that I may not meddle with any but such whose Names have never been cried down in the Church do but mark how he deals with Rhetitius Augustudunensis an Ecclesiastical Author There are saith he an infinite number of things in his Commentaries which in my judgment shew very mean and poor and a little after He seemeth to have had so ill an Opinion of others as to have a conceit that no Man was able to judge of his Faults He taketh the same liberty also in rejecting their Opinions and Expositions and sometimes not without passing upon them very tart Girds too He justifies the Truth of the Hebrew Text of the Old Testament and findeth an infinite number of Faults in the Translation of the LXX against almost the general consent not onely of the more Ancient Writers but also of those too who lived in his own time who all esteemed it as a Divine Piece He scoffs at the conceit of those Men who believed that the LXX Interpreters being put severally into Seventy distinct Cells were inspired from above in the Translation of the Bible Let them keep saith he speaking of his own Backbiters by way of scorn with all my heart in the Seventy Cells of the Alexandrian Pharos for fear they should lose their Sails of their Ships and be forced to bewail the loss of their Cordage perhaps the same Truth as S. Augustine saith a little before but it will not be of equal Authority with that of the Canonical Books Besides as Cardinal Baronius hath observed this last Passage of S. Hierome ought to be understood onely in the Point touching the Holy Trinity concerning which there were at that time great Disputes betwixt the Catholicks and the Arians for otherwise if his words be taken in a General sense they will be found to be false as to S. Hilaries particular who hath had his failings in some certain things as we shall see hereafter In a word although S. Hierome were to be understood as speaking in a General sense as his words indeed seem to bear yet might the same thing possibly happen to him here which he hath observed hath oftentimes befallen to others namely to be mistaken in his Judgment For we are not to imagine that he would have us have a greater Opinion of him than he himself hath of other Men. And S. Augustine told him as we have before shewed that he did not believe that he expected Men should judge any otherwise of him And I suppose we may very safely keep to S. Augustine's Judgment and believe with him that S. Hierome had never any intention that we should receive all his Positions as Infallible Truths but rather that he would have us to read and examine his Writings with the same freedom that we do those of other Men. And if we have no mind to take S. Augustine's word in this Particular let us yet take S. Hierome's own who in his second Commentary upon the Prophet Habakkuk saith And thus have I delivered unto you my sense in brief but if any one produce that which is more exact and true take his Exposition rather than mine And so likewise upon the Prophet Zephaniah he saith We have now done our utmost endeavour in giving an Allegorical Exposition of the Text but if any other can bring that which is more Probable and agreeable to Reason than that which we have delivered let the Reader be swaied by his Authority rather than by ours And in another place he speaketh to the same purpose in these words This we have delivered according to the utmost of our poor Ability and have given you a short touch of the divers Opinions both of our own Men and of the Jews yet if any Man can give me a better and truer Account of these Things I shall be very ready to embrace the same Is this now I would fain ask to bind up our Tongues and our Belief so as that we have no further liberty of refusing what he hath once laid down before us or of searching into the Reasons and Grounds of his Opinions No let us rather make use of that Liberty which they all allow us let us hearken to them but as they themselves advise us when what they deliver is grounded upon Reason and upon the Scriptures If they had not made use of this Caution in the reading of those Authors who went before them the Christian Faith had now been wholly stuffed up with the Dreams of an Origen or an Apollinaris or some other the like Authors But neither the Excellency of the Doctrine nor yet the Resplendency of their Holy Life which no Man can deny to have shone forth very eminently in the Primitive Fathers were able so to dazle the eyes of those that came after them as that they could not distinguish betwixt that which was Sound and True in their Writings and that which was Trivial and False Let not therefore the Excellency of those who came after them hinder us either from passing by or even rejecting their Opinions when we find them built upon weak Foundations You see they confess themselves that this may very possibly be we should therefore be left utterly inexcusable if after this their
so charitable Admonition we should still believe all they say without examining any thing I take it for a Favour saith S. Ambrose when any one that readeth my Writings giveth me an account of what Doubts he there meeteth withal First of all because I may be deceived in those very things which I know And besides many things escape us and some things sound otherwise to some than perhaps they do to me I shall further here desire the Reader to take notice how careful the Ancients were in advising those who lived in their own time to take a strict Examination of their Words As for example where Origen adviseth That his Auditors should prove whatsoever he delivered and that they should be attentive and receive the Grace of the Spirit from whom proceedeth the discerning of Spirits that so as good Bankers they might diligently observe when their Pastor deceiveth them and when he preacheth unto them that which is Pious and True Cyrill likewise in his Fourth Catechesis hath these Words Believe me not saith he in whatsoever I shall simply deliver unless thou find the things which I shall speak demonstrated out of the Holy Scriptures For the Conservation and Establishment of our Faith is not grounded upon the Eloquence of Language but rather upon the Proofs that are brought out of the Divine Scriptures If therefore they would not have those who heard them speak vivâ voce to believe them in any thing unless they had demonstrated the Truth of it out of the Scriptures how much less would they have us now receive without this Demonstration those Opinions which we meet with in their Books which are not onely mute but corrupted also and altered so much and so many several ways as we have formerly shewed Certainly when I see these Holy men on one side crying out unto us that they are Men subject to Errours and that therefore we ought to consider and examine what they deliver and not take it all for Oracle and then on the other side set before my eyes these Worthy Maxims of the Ages following to wit That their Doctrine is the Law of the Church Vniversal and That we are bound to follow it not only according to the sense but according to the Bare Words also and that we are bound to hold all that they have written even to the lest tittle This representation I say makes me call to mind the History of Paul and Barnabas to whom the Lycaonians would needs render Divine Honour notwithstanding all the resistance these Holy men were able to make who could not forbear to rend their garments through the Indignation they were filled with to see that service paid to themselves which was due to the Divine Majesty alone running in amongst them and crying out aloud Sirs why do ye these things We also are Men of like passions with you For seeing that there is none but God whose word is certainly and necessarily True and seeing that on the other side the Word whereon we ground and build our Faith ought to be such who seeth not that it is all one as to invest Man with the Glory which is due to God alone and to place him in a manner in his Seat if we make His Word the Rule and Foundation of our Faith and the Judge of our Differences concerning It I am therefore stedfastly of this Opinion that if these Holy men could now behold from their blessed Mansions where they now live in bliss on high with their Lord and Saviour what things are acted here below they would be very much offended with this False Honour which men confer upon them much against their Wills and would take it as a very great injury offer'd them seeing that they cannot receive this Honour but to the Prejudice and Diminution of the Glory of their Redeemer whom they love a thousand times more than Themselves Or if from out their Sepulchres where the Reliques of their Mortality are now laid up they could but make us hear their sacred voice they would I am very confident most sharply reprove us for this Abuse and would cry out in the words of S. Paul Sirs why do ye these things We also were Men of like Passions with you But yet what need is there either of ransacking their Sepulchers and disturbing their Sacred Ashes or of calling down their Spirits from Heaven seeing that their voice resoundeth loud enough and is heard so plainly in these very Books of theirs which we so imprudently place in that seat which is only due to the Word of God We have heard what the Judgment was of S. Augustine and of S. Hierome the two most eminent Persons in the Western Church touching this Particular let us not then be all afraid having such examples to follow to speak freely our Opinions But now before we go any further I conceive it will be necessary that we answer an Objection that may be brought against us which is that Athanasius S. Cyrill and S. Augustine himself also often times cite the Fathers Besides what some have observed that the Fathers seldom entered into these Lists but when they were provoked by their Adversaries I add further that when we maintain that the Authority of the Fathers is not a sufficient Medium to prove an Article of Faith by we do not thereby presently forbid either the reading or the citing of them The Fathers often quote the Writings of the Learned Heathens the Oracles of the Sibylls and Passages out of the Apocryphal Books Did they therefore think that theâ—e Books were of sufficient Authority to ground an Article of Faith upon God forbid we should entertain so ill an Opinion of them Their Faith was grounded upon the Word of God But yet to evidence the Truth more fully they searched into Humane Records and by this Inquiry made it appear that the Light of the Truth revealed unto Them had in some degree shot its beams also even into the Schools of Men how Close and Shady soever they had been But if they should have produced no other but Humane Authority they would never have been able to have brought over any one person to the Faith But after they had received by Divine Revelation the Matter of our Faith it was very wisely done of them in the next place to prove not the Truth but the Clearness of It by these little Sparks which shot forth their light in the Spirits of Men. And for some the like Reason did S. Augustine Athanasius Cyrill and many other of them make use of Allegations out of the Fathers For after that each of these had grounded upon the Authority of Divine Revelation the Necessity and Efficacy of Grace the Consubstantiality of the Son with the Father and the Union of the Two Natures in Christ they then fell to producing of several Passages out of those Learned Men who had lived before Them to let men see that this Truth was so clear in
as appears plainly by the great account he makes of Ruffinus a Priest of Aquileia who was the Grand Patriarch of the Pelagians saying of him That he was not the least part of the Doctors of the Church Tacitely also taxing S. Hierome his Adversary and calling him A Malicious Slanderer as also by the Judgment which he gives of S. Augustine who was Flagellum Pelagianorum The Scourge of the Pelagians passing this insolent Censure upon him and saying That in speaking so much it had hapned to him what the Holy Ghost hath said by Solomon to wit That in the multitude of words there wanteth not sin So that I cannot sufficiently wonder at the Boldness of Cardinal Perron who when he hath any occasion of alledging this Author ordinarily calleth him Saint Vincent de Lerins Saint Vincent of Lerius thus by a very ill example Canonizing a Person who was strongly suspected to have been an Heretick Since therefore he was such a one why should any one think it strange that he should so much cry up the Judgment and Opinions of the Fathers seeing that there is no Man but knows that the Pelagians and Semipelagians had the better of it by the citing Their Authorities and laboured by this means to bear down S. Augustine's Name and all this forsooth only by reason that the Greatest Part of the Fathers who lived before Pelagius his time had delivered themselves with less caution than they might have done touching those Points which were by him afterwards brought into Question and many times too in such strange Expressions as will very hardly be reconciled to any Orthodox Sense Yet notwithstanding should we allow this Vincentius to have been a Person who was thus Qualified and to have had all those Conditions which he requireth in a Man to render him capable of being hearkned to in this Particular what weight I would fain know ought this Proposal of his to carry with it which yet is not found any where in the mouth of any of all those Fathers who went before him who is also so strongly contradicted both by S. Augustine and S. Hierome as we have seen in those Passages before alledged out of them and who besides is full of Obscllre Passages and Inexplicable Ambiguities So that Hoâ—â— Leâ—â—ned and Holy a Man soever he might be wheâ—heâ— he were a Bishop Confessor or Martyr which yet he was not this Proposal of his according to his own Maxims ought to be excluded from the Authority of Publick Determinations and to be accounted of only as his own Particular Private Opinion Let us therefore in this Business rather follow the Judgment of S. Augustine which is grounded upon evident Reason a Person whose Authority whenever it shall be questioned will be found to be Incomparably Greater than Vincentius Lirinensis his and let us not henceforth give any Credit to any Sayings or Opinions of the Fathers save onely such the Truth whereof they shall have made appear Evidently unto us either by the Canonical Books of Scripture or else by some Probable Reason CHAP. III. Reason III. That the Fathers have Written after such a manner as that it is clear that when they Wrote they had no intention of being our Judges in Matters of Religion Some few Examples of their Mistakes and Oversights WHosoever will but take the pains diligently to consider the Fathers manner of Writing he will not desire any other Testimony for the proof of this Truth For the very Form of their Writings witnesseth clear enough that in the greatest part of them they had no intention of delivering such Definitive Sentences as were to be Obliging meerly by the Single Authority of the Mouth which uttered them but their purpose onely was rather to communicate unto Us their own Meditations upon divers Points of our Religion leaving us free to our own Liberty of Examining them and to approve or reject the same according as we saw good And thus hath S. Hierome expresly delivered his Mind as we shewed before where he speaks of the Nature and Manner of Commentaries upon the Holy Scriptures And certainly if they had had any other Design or Intention they would never have troubled themselves as they ordinarily do in gathering together the several Opinions of other Men. This Diligence I confess is Laudable in a Teacher but it would be very Ridiculous in a Judge Their Stile also should then be quite of another kind than now it is and those Obscurities which we have observed in the Former Part of this Treatise proceeding either from the Rhetorical Ornaments or the Logical Subtilties which they made use of should have no place here For what use would there be of any such thing in pronouncing a Sentence of Judgment or indeed in giving ones bare Testimony only to any thing But that which makes the Truth of this our Assertion more clearly to appear than all the rest is the little care and diligence that they took in composing the greatest part of these Writings of theirs which we now would so very fain have to be the Rules of our Faith If these men who were endued with such exquisite sanctity had had any intention of prescribing to Posterity a true and perfect Tenor and Rule of Faith is it probable that they would have gone carelesly to work in a business of so great importance Would they not rather have gone upon it with their Eyes opened their Judgments setled their Thoughts fixed and every Faculty of their Soul attentively bent upon the business in hand for fear lest that in a business of so great weight as this something might chance to fall from them not so becoming their own Wisdom or so suitable to the Peoples advantage A Judge that had but never so little Conscience would not otherwise give sentence concerning the Oxen the Field and the Gutters of Titius and Moevius How much more is the same Gravity and Deliberation requisite here where the Question is touching the Faith the Souls and the Eternal Salvation of all Mankind It were clearly therefore the greatest injury that could be offered to these Holy Persons to imagine that they would have taken upon them to have passed Judgment in so weighty a Cause as this but with the greatest care and attention that could be Now it is very evident on the other side that in very many of those Writings of theirs which have come down to our hands there seemeth to be very much negligence or to speak a little more tenderly of the business security at least both in the Invention Method and Elocutioâ— If therefore we tender the Reputation either of their Honesty or Wisdom we ought rather to say that their design in these Books of theirs was not to pronounce definitively upon this Particular neither are their Writings judiciary Sentences or final Judgments but are rather Discourses of a far different Nature occasioned by divers emergent Occurrences and are more or less elaborate according
perhaps that his Hyperbolical way of Expression of a thousand Augustines Hieromes and Gregories all which joyned together he in too disdainful a manner casts down beneath the feet of one single Pope But this height of Expression may be somewhat excused in him considering that such Excesses as these are very ordinary with all high and free-spirited Persons But the Practice of the Church of Rome it self will be able to inform us more truly and clearly what esteem they have of Antiquity For if we ought to stand to the Fathers and not to depart from any thing that they have Authorized nor to Ordain any thing that they were ignorant of how comes it to pass that we at this day see so many several Observations and Customs which were observed by the Ancients now quite laid aside And whence is it that we find in Antiquity no mention at all of many things which are now in great request amongst us There are as it were three principal Parts in Religion namely Points of Belief of Ceremony and of Discipline We shall run them over lightly all three and so far as is necessary only for our present purpose that so we may let the world see that in every one of these three parts they have both abolished and established very many things expresly against the Authority of the Ancients As for the first of these we have formerly given the Reader some Tasts only in the preceding Chapters For we have seen that the Opinion of the greatest part of the Ancient Church touching the State of the Soul till the time of the Resurrection which besides is at this day also maintained by the Greek Church was condemned not much above two hundred years since by the Church of Rome at the Council of Florence and a quite contrary Belief there established as an Article of the Christian Faith We have seen besides that the Opinion of the Fathers of the Primitive Church and even down as far as to the end of the sixth Century after our Saviour Christ and afterwards was that the Eucharist was as necessary to Salvation as Baptism and that consequently it was therefore to be administred to little Children And yet for all this the Council of Trent hath condemned this Opinion as an Error in Faith withal Anathematizing by a Canon made expresly for that purpose all those who ever should maintain the same Let him be Accursed say they whoever shall say that the Eucharist is necessary for little Children before they are come to years of discretion Only that the Fathers might not take offence hereat as having so fearful an Affront put upon them these men have endeavoured to perswade both them and others that they never did believe that which themselves have most clearly and in express Terms protested that they did believe as we have before made it appear which is to double the injury upon them rather than to make them any reparations for it seeing that they deal with them now not as Hereticks only but as Fools also whom a man may at pleasure perswade that they do not believe that which they really do believe We have abundantly heard out of St. Hierome's mouth how that the Opinion of the Chilasts was of old maintained by several of the Ancient Fathers which yet is now condemned as an Error in Faith And indeed the number of these kind of differences in Opinions is almost infinite It was accounted no Error in those days to believe that the Soul was derived from the Father down to the Son according to the ordinary course of Generation but this Opinion would now be accounted an Heresie The Ancients held That it would be an opposing of the Authority of the Scriptures if we should bang up the Picture of any Man in the Church and that we ought not to have any Pictures in our Churches that That which we worship and adore be not painted upon a Wall But now the Council of Trent hath Ordained the quite contrary and says That we ought to have and to keep especially in our Churches the Images of Christ of the Virgin the Mother of God and of the other Saints and that we are to yield unto them all due Honour and Veneration All the Ancient Fathers as far as we can learn out of their Writings believed That the Blessed Virgin Mary was conceived in Original Sin If now the Fathers of the Council of Trent accounted them to be the Judges of Faith what moved them then to imagine that we ought not to believe that they maintained any such Opinion For having delivered their Definitive Sentence in a Decree there passed to this purpose and declared That this Sin which hath spread it self over the whole Mass of Mankind by Propagation and not by Imitation hath seised on every Person in particular They at length conclude That their Intention is not to comprehend within this number the Blessed and Vnspotted Virgin Mary the Mother of God Which Words of theirs it is impossible so to expound as that they shall not in plain Terms give the Lie to All the Fathers For if they mean by these Words that the Virgin Mary was conceived without Sin they flatly establish an Opinion which is contradictory to that of the Fathers which is the grossest manner of giving them the Lie that can be If they mean here no more than this which Sense yet their Words will hardly be ever made to bear that it is not known as a certain Truth that the Virgin Mary was conceived in Sin they however honestly say in plain Terms That these Good Men affirmed as True that which is yet Doubtful and maintained as Certain that which was but Problematical onely and Questionable The Council of Laodicea which is inserted into the Code of the Church Universal putteth not into the Canon of the Old Testament any more than Twenty two Books onely excluding by this means out of this number the Book of Tobit of Judith the Book of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus and the two Books of the Maccabees Melito Bishop of Sardis Origen Cyril of Hierusalem Gregory Nazianzene S. Hilary and Epiphanius do all of them the same Athanasius Ruffinus and S. Hierome expresly reject these very Books and cast them out of the Canon And yet notwithstanding the aforesaid Council of Trent Anathematizeth all those who will not receive as Holy and Canonical all these Books with every part of the same as they are wont to be read in the Church and as they are found in the Old Latin Edition commonly called the Vulgar Translation Where besides the Affront which they have offered to so many of the Ancient and most Eminent among the Fathers and indeed to the Whole Primitive Church it self which received this Conon of Laodicea in amongst its Vniversal Rules they have also established a Position here which was not till then so much as ever heard
from the Controversies now in hand p. 8. III. The Writings which go under the names of the Fathers are not all truly such but are a great part of them Supposititious and Forged either long since or of later times p. 11. IV. Those of the Writings of the Fathers which are Legitimate have been in many places corrupted by Time Ignorance and Fraud both Pious and Malitious both in the Former and Later Ages p. 34. V. The Writings of the Fathers are hard to be understood by reason of the Languages and Idioms they wrote in the Manner of their Writing which is for the most part incumbred with Figures and Rhetorical Flourishes and nice Logical Subtilties and the like and also by reason of the Termes which they for the most part used-in a far different sense from what they now bear p. 69. VI. When we meet with an Opinion clearly delivered in the Writings of any of the Fathers we must not from hence conclude that the said Father held that Opinion seeing that we often find them speaking those things which themselves have not believed whether it be when they report the opinion of some other without naming the persons as they frequently do in their Commentaries or in disputing against an Adversary in which kind of Writing they take liberty to say one thing and believe another or whether it be that they concealed their own private Opinion purposely as they have done in their Homilies meerly in compliance to such a part of their Auditory p. 100. VII Supposing that we are well assured that a Father hath clearly delivered his Opinion in any Point we ought notwithstanding to enquire into the time wherein he wrote that Opinion of his whether it were before or after he arrived to Ripeness of Judgment For we see that they have sometimes retracted in their old age what they had written when they were young p. 117. VIII But suppose that a Father hath constantly held one Opinion it will nevertheless concern us to inquire How he held it and in what degree of Belief whether as Necessary or Probable only and then again in what degree of Necessity or of Probability he placed it Beliefs being not all equally either Necessary or Probable p. 123. IX After all this we are to examine whether or no he deliver this as his own particular Opinion only for this cannot necessarily bind our faith or whether he deliver it as the Opinion of the Church in his time p. 136. X. In the next place it will concern us to enquire whether he deliver it for the Judgment of the Church Vniversal or of some particular Church only those things which have been received by the Major Part having not always notwithstanding been received by some particular parts of the Church p. â—4â— XI And after all this whether you take the Church for the Collective Body of Christians or only for the body of the Clergy or Pastors it is notwithstanding impossible to know what the Belief of the whole Church in any Age hath been for as much as it frequently so falls out that the Opinions of these Men who have appeared to the World have not only not been received but on the contrary have also been Opposed and Contradicted by thâ—se Members of the same Church who have not at all appeared to the World who notwithstanding both for their Learning and Piety deserved perhaps to have had as much or more Esteem and Authority than the other p. 151. The Second Book THE second Reason namely that neither the Testimony nor the Preaching of the Fathers is altogether Infallible is proved by these following Considerations p. 1. II. The Fathers themselves witness against themselves that they are not to be believed Absolutely and upon their own bare word p. 11. III. It appeareth plainly by their Manner of Writing that they never intended that their Writings should be our Judges p. 40. IV. They have erred in divers Points not only Singly but also many of them together p. 60. V. They have very much contradicted one the other and have maintained different Opinions in Matters of great Importance p. 112. VI. Lastly to say the truth neither Party alloweth them for Judges but reject them boldly and without any scruple both the one and the other maintaining divers things which the Fathers were ignorant of and rejecting others which were maintained by them the Protestants in those things where the Fathers have gone either against or besides the Scripture the Church of Rome where they oppose against them the Resolutions of their Popes or of Councils Seeing therefore that both Parties attribute the Supream Authority to some other Judges the Fathers though perhaps their Resolutions should be grounded on Divine Authority could never be able notwithstanding to clear their Differences and to reconcile the two Parties p. 126. So that it followeth from hence that our Controversies are to be decided by some other means than that of their Writings and that we are to observe the same Method in Religion that we do in all other Sciences making use of those things wherein we all agree for the clearing of those wherein we differ comparing exactly the Conclusions of both Parties with their Principles which are to be acknowledged and granted by both sides whether it be in Reason or Divine Revelation And as for the Fathers we ought to read them carefully and heedfully and especially without any prejudication on either side searching their Writings for their Opinions and not for our own arguing Negatively concerning those things which we find not in them rather then Affirmatively that is to say holding all those Articles for suspected which are not found in them it being a thing altogether Improbable that those Worthies of the Church were Ignorant of any of the Necessary and Principal Points of Faith but yet not presently receiving for an Infallible Truth whatsoever is found in them for as much as being but Men though Saints they may sometimes have erred either out of pure Ignorance or else perhaps out of Passion which they have not been always wholly free from as appeareth clearly by those Books of theirs which are left Vs The Testimonies of the Lord Faulkland Lord Digby Doctor Taylor Doctor Rivet concerning this learned Book Reader THE Translation of this Tract hath been oft attempted and oftner deâ—â—â—ed by many Noble Personages of this and other Nations among others by Sir Lucius Cary late Lord Viscount Faulkland who with his dear Friend Mr. Chillingworth made very much use of it in all their Writings against the Romanists But the Papers of that learned Nobleman wherein this Translation was half finisht were long since involved in the common loss Those few which have escaped it and the press make a very honourable mention of this Monsieur whose acquaintance the said Lord was wont to say was worth a Voyage to Paris Pag. 202. of his Reply he hath these words This observation of mine hath been confirmed by consideration of
Their Names how much more likely is it that they would not stick to make as bold with the Fathers And indeed this kind of Imposture hath always been very ordinary Thus we read That the Nestorians sometime published an Epistle under the Name of S. Cyril of Alexandria in the defence of Theodorus Bishop of Mopsuestia who was the Author and first Broacher of their Heresie and likewise that the Eutychists also vented certain Books of Apollinaris under the Title of The Orthodox Doctors onely to abuse the simple People Leontius hath written an express Tract on this Subject wherein he shews That these Men abused particularly the Names of S. Gregory of Neocaesarea of Julius Bishop of Rome and of Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria and he also saith particularly That the Book entituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A particular Exposition of the Faith which is delivered unto us by Turrianus the Jesuite Gerardus Vossius and the last Edition of Gregorius Neocaesariensis for a true and legitimate Piece of the said S. Gregory is not truly his but the Bastard Issue of the Heretick Apollinaris And the like Judgment do the Publishers of the Bibliotheca Patrum give of the XII Anathema's which are commonly attributed to the same S. Gregory The Monothelites also taking the same course forged an Oration under the Name of Menas Patriarch of Constantinople and directed to Vigilius Bishop of Rome and two other Books under the Name of the same Vigilius directed to Justinian and Theodora wherein their Heresie is in express terms delivered and these three Pieces were afterward inserted into the Body of the Fifth Council and kept in the Library of the Patriarch's Palace in Constantinople But this Imposture was discovered and convinced in the VI Council for otherwise who would not have been deceived by it seeing these false Pieces in so Authentick a Copy I bring but these few Examples to give the Reader but a taste onely of what the Hereticks not onely dared but were able also to do in this particular and all these things were done before the end of the Seventh Century that is to say above nine hundred years ago Since which time in all the Disputes about the Images in Churches and in the differences betwixt the Greek and Latine Churches and indeed in the most part of all other Ecclesiastical Contestations you shall find nothing more frequent than the mutual Reproaches that the several Parties cast at each other accusing each other of forging the Pieces of Authors which they produced each of them in defence of their own Cause Judge you therefore whether or not the Hereticks using the same Artifice and the same Diligence now for the space of so many Centuries since though in different Causes may not in all probability have furnished us with a sufficient stock of spurious Pieces sent abroad under the Names of the Ancient Fathers by their professed Enemies And do but think whether or no we may not chance to converse with an Heretick sometimes when we think we have a Father before us and a professed Enemy disguised under the mask of a Friend So that it will hence follow That it may justly be feared that we sometimes receive and deliver for Maxims and Opinions of the Ancient Church no better than the very Dreams of the Ancient Hereticks For we must conceive that they were not so foolish as to discover their Venom at the first dash in the height of their Heretical Positions but rather that they onely cunningly cast in here and there some sprinklings of it laying the foundation of their Heresie as it were afar off onely which makes the Knavery the more hard to be discovered and so consequently the more dangerous But supposing that this Jugling Trick of the Hereticks may have very much corrupted the Old Books yet notwithstanding had we no other spurious Pieces than what had been forged by them it would be no very hard matter to distinguish the True from the False But that which renders the Evil almost uncurable is that even in the Church it self this kind of Forgery hath been both very Ordinary and very Ancient I impute a great part of the cause of this Mischief to those Men who before the Invention of Printing were the Transcribers and Copiers out of Manuscripts of whose negligence and boldness in corrupting of Books S. Hierome very much complained even in his time Scribunt saith he non quod inveniunt sed quod intelligunt dum alienos errores emendare nituntur ostendunt suos That is They write not what they find but what they understand and whilst they endeavour to correct other Mens Errors they shew their own We may very well presume that what liberty these Men took in corrupting they took the same in forging Books too especially since this last course was beneficial to them which the other was not For by altering or corrupting the Books they wrote they could not make any advantage to themselves whereas in forging new Books and venting them under great and eminent Names they put them off both faster and dearer So likewise if there came to their hands any Book that had either no Authors Name or having any it was but an obscure or a tainted one to the end that these evil Marks might not prejudice the venting of it they would rase it out without any more ado and inscribe it presently with some one of the most Eminent and Venerable Names that was in the Church that so the Reputation and Favour that That Name had found in the World might be a means of the better putting off their false Wares As for example The Name of Novatianus who was the Head of a Schism against the Roman Church became justly to be odious to Christian ears as that of Tertullian was the more esteemed both for the Age Wit and Learning of the Person Now the Transcriber considering this with himself without any other design or end than onely of his own private Gain hath in my judgment made an exchange attributing to Tertullian that Book of the Trinity which is indeed Novatianus his as we are given to understand also by S. Hierome And I am of opinion that both the birth and fortune of that other Piece De Poenitentia hath been if not the very same yet at least not much unlike that of the other So likewise that Book which beareth Title De Operibus Cardinalibus Christi which was composed and sent by the Author of it to one of the Popes without setting down his Name as himself there testifies hath been vented abroad under the Name of S. Cyprian onely because by this means it is the more profitable to the Manuscript-monger and it hath formerly always passed and doth still pass for his notwithstanding that in my judgment it is clear enough that it cannot be his as is ingenuously confessed by very many of the Learned both of the one and of
our Age where this great Person hath given us his Judgment of most of the Authors of the Greek Church Now this Help we may make use of two manner of ways The one is in justifying a Book if it be found mentioned by these Authors The other is in rejecting it if they say nothing of it As for the first of these it concludes onely according to the Quality of the Authors who make mention of a suspected Book For some of the Fathers themselves have made use of these kind of Forgeries as we have formerly said others have favoured them because they served their turn some have not been able to discover them and some others have not been willing to do so whatsoever their Reason hath been I shall not here repeat the Names of any of those that have done these things themselves And as for those that have favoured them there are good store of examples as Justin Martyr Theophilus and others who alledge the Sibylls Verses as Oracles which are notwithstanding the greatest part of them forged Clemens Alexandrinus the most Learned and most Polite of all the Fathers in S. Hierome's judgment how often doth he make use of those Apocryphal Pieces which go under the Names of the Apostles and Disciples to whom they were most falsly attributed citing under the Name of Barnabas and of Hermes such Writings as have been forged under their Names And did not the VII Council in like manner make use of a supposititious Piece attributed to Athanasius as we have shewed before and likewise of divers others which are of the same stamp That even the Fathers themselves therefore have not been able always to make a true discovery of these false Wares no Man can doubt considering that of those many necessary Qualifications which we reckoned up before as requisite in this Particular they may oftentimes have failed in some S. Hierome himself the most knowing Man among all the Latin Fathers especially in Matters of this nature sometimes lets them pass without examination as there where he speaks of a certain Tract against Mathematicians attributed to Minutius Foelix If at least saith he the Inscription represent unto us the right Author of the Book And in another place whatsoever his reason was he delivers to us for Legitimate Pieces the Epistles that go about under the Name of S. Paul to Seneca and of Seneca to S. Paul which notwithstanding Cardinal Baronius holds for suspectâ—â— and spurious as doubtless they are But even those Men who have been able to discover these false Pieces have not sometimes been willing to do it either being unwilling to offend the Authors of them or else not daring to cast any disrepute upon those Books which having many good things in them had not in their judgment any false or dangerous Positions in them And this is the reason why they made choice to let such things pass rather than out of a little tenderness of conscience to oppose them there being in their apprehension no danger at all in the one and much trouble and envy in the other And therefore I am of opinion That S. Hierome for example would never have taken the pains nor have undergone the envy in laying open the Forgeries of Ruffinus if the misunderstanding that hapned to be betwixt them had not engaged him to it Neither do I believe that the African Fathers would ever have troubled themselves in convincing the false Allegation of Zozimus but for their own Interest which was thereby called in question For wise and sober Men never use to fall at variance with any Body till they needs must neither do they quickly take notice of any Injury or Abuse offered them unless it be a very great one and such as hath evident danger in it which was not at all perceived or taken notice of at first in these Forgeries which nevertheless have at length by little and little in a manner born down all the good and true Books These Considerations in my opinion make it clearly appear That the Title of a Book is not sufficiently justified by a Passage or two being cited out of it by some of the Ancients and under the same Name As for the other way which rendreth the Authority of a Book doubtful by the Ancients not having made any mention of it I confess it is no more demonstrative than the other forasmuch as it is not impossible that any one or divers of the Fathers may not have met with such a certain Wriâ—â—r that was then extant or else perhaps that they might omit some one of those very Authors which they knew Yet notwithstanding is this the much surer way of the two there being less danger in this case in rejecting a True Piece than in receiving a Forged one the want of the Truth of the one being doubtless much less prejudicial than the receiving the opposite Falshood of the other For as it is a less sin to omit the Good than to commit the Evil that is opposite to it in like manner is it a less Errour not to believe a Truth than to believe the Falshood which is contrary to it And thus we see what confusion there is in the Books of the Ancients and what defect in the Means which is requisite for the distinguishing the False from the True insomuch that as it often falls out it is much easier to judge what we ought to reject than to resolve upon what we may safely receive Let the Reader therefore now judge whether or no these Writings having come down along through so many Ages and passed through so many Hands which are either known to have been notoriously guilty or at least strongly suspected of Forgery the Truth in the mean time having made on its part but very weak resistance against these Impostures it be not a very hard matter to discover amidst the infinite number of Books that are now extant and go under the Names of the Fathers which are those that truly belong to them and which again are those that are falsly imposed upon them And if it be so hard a matter to discover in gross onely which are the Writings of the Fathers how much more difficult a Business will it be to find out what their Opinions are touching the several Controversies now in agitation For we are not to imagine that it is no great matter from which of the Fathers such an Opinion hath sprung so that it came from any one of them for there is altogether as much difference amongst these Ancient Doctors both in respect of Authority Learning and Goodness as among the Modern Besides that an Ages being higher or lower either raiseth or lesseneth the Repute of these Writings in the esteem both of the one Party and of the other as it were so many grains as years And certainly not altogether without good reason it being most evident to any one that hath been but the least versed in the
reading of these Books That Time hath by degrees introduced very great Alterations as well in the Doctrine and Discipline of the Ancients as in all other things Our Conclusion therefore shall be That whosoever shall desire to know what the Sense and Judgment of the Primitive Church hath been touching our present Controversies it will be first in a manner as necessary for him as it is difficult exactly to find out both the Name and the Age of each of these several Authors CHAP. IV. Reason IV. That those of the Writings of the Fathers which are Legitimate have been in many Places corrupted by Time Ignorance and Fraud both Pious and Malicious both in the former and later Ages BUt put the case now here that you had by your long and judicious Endeavours severed the True and Genuine Writings of the Fathers from the Spurious and Forged there would yet lie upon you a second Task whose event is like to prove much more doubtful and fuller of difficulty than the former For it would concern you in the next place in reading over those Authors which you acknowledge for Legitimate to distinguish what is the Author 's own and what hath been soisted in by another Hand and also to restore to your Author whatsoever either by Time or Fraud hath been taken away and to take out of him whatsoever hath been added by either of these two Otherwise you will never be able to assure your self that you have discovered out of these Books what the true and proper meaning and sense of your Author hath been considering the great Alterations that by several ways they may have suffered in several Times I shall not here speak of those Errours which have been produced by the Ignorance of the Transcribers Who write as Hierome hath complained of them not what they find but what themselves understand Nor yet of those Faults which necessarily have grown up out of the very Transcribing it being an impossible thing that Books which have been copied out an infinite number of times during the space of ten or twelve Centuries of years by Men of so different Capâ—â—cities and Hands should all this while retain exactly and in every Particular the self-same Juyce the same Form and Body that they had when they first came forth from the Author 's own hand Neither shall I here say any thing of the sufferings of these Books by Moths and a thousand other Injuries of Time by which they have been corrupted while all kind of Learning for so many Ages together lay buried as it were in the Grave the Worms on one side feeding on the Books of the Learned and on the other the Dust defacing them so that it is impossible now to restore them to their first integrity And this is the sad Fate that all sorts of Books have lain under whence hath sprung up so great variety of Readings as are found almost in all Authors I shall not here make any advantage of this though there are some Doctors in the World that have shewed us the way to do it taking advantage from this Consideration to lessen the Authority that the Holy Scriptures of themselves ought to have in the esteem of all Men under this colour That even in these Sacred Writings there are sometimes found varieties of Reading which yet are of very little or no Importance as to the Ground-work If we would tread in these Mens steps and apply to the Writings of the Fathers what they speak and conclude of the Scriptures we could do it upon much better terms than they there being no reason in the Earth to imagine but that the Books of the Ancient Writers have suffered very much more than the Scriptures have which have always been preserved in the Church with much greater care than any other Books have been whatsoever and which have been learnt by all Nations and translated into all Languages which all Sects have retained both Orthodox and Hereticks Catholicks and Schismaticks Greeks and Latins Moscovites and Ethiopians observing diligently the Eye and the Hand one of the other so that there could not possibly happen any remarkable Alteration in them but that presently the whole World as it were would have exclaimed against it and have made their Complaints to have resounded throughout the Universe Whereas on the contrary the Writings of the Fathers have been kept transcribed and read in as careless a manner as could be and that too but by very few and in few Places being but rarely understood by any save those of the same Language which is the cause that so many Faults have both the more easily crept into them and likewise are the more hard to be discovered Besides that the particular Stile and Obscurity of some of them renders the Errours the more important As for example Take me a Tertullian and you shall find that one little Word added or taken away or altered never so little or a Full-point or Comma but out of its place will so confound the Sense that you will not be able to find what he would have Whereas in Books of an easie smooth clear Style as the Scriptures for the most part are these Faults are much less prejudicial seeing they cannot in any wise so darken the Sense but that it will be still easie enough to apprehend it But I shall pass by all these minute Punctilioes as more suitable to the Enquiries of the Pyrrhonians and Academicks whose Business it is to question all things than of Christians who onely seek in simplicity and sincerity of heart whereon to build their Faith I shall onely here take notice of such alterations as have been knowingly and voluntarily made in the Writings of the Fathers purposely by our holding our peace to disguise their Sâ—nse or else to make them speak more than they meant And this Forgery is of two sorts The one hath been made use of with a good intention the other out of malice Again The one hath been committed in Times long since past the other in this last Age in our own days and the days of our Fathers Lastly the one is in the Additions made to Authors to make them speak more than they meant the other in subtracting from the Author to eclipse and darken what he would be understood to say Neither ought we to wonder that even those of the honest innocent primitive Times also made use of these Deceits seeing that for a good end they made no great scruple to forge whole Books taking a much stranger and bolder course in my opinion than the other For without all doubt it is a greater Crime to coin false Money than to clip or a little alter the true This Opinion hath always been in the World That to settle a certain and assured estimation upon that which is good and true that is to say upon what we account to be such it is necessary that we remove out of the way whatsoever may be a hinderance to it
had been written against the See of Rome and he commanded the very same thing also in the VIII Council which is accounted by the Latines for a General Council It is impossible but that in these Fires very many Pieces must needs have perished which might have been of good use to us for the discovering what the opinion of the Ancients was whether touching Images which was the business of the VII Council or that other Controversie touching the Power of the Pope which was the principal Point debated in the Synod held by Photius some of whose Pieces they for the self same reason do at this day keep at Rome under Lock and Key which doubtless they would long ere this have published had they but made as much for the Pope as in all probability they make against him This rigorous proceeding against Books came at length to that height as that Leo X. at the Council of Lateran which brake up An. 1518. decreed That no Book should be printed but what had first been diligently examined at Rome by the Master of the Palace in other places by the Bishop or some other person deputed by him to the same purpose and by the Inquisitor under this penalty That all Book sellers offending herein should forfeit their Books which should be presently burnt in publick and should pay a hundred Ducats when it should be demanded towards the Fabrick of S. Peter a kind of punishment this which we find no examples of in all the Canons of the Ancient Church and should also be suspended from exercising his Function for the space of a whole year This is a General Sentence and which comprehendeth as well the Works of the Fathers as of any others as appeareth plainly by this that the Bishop of Malfi having given in his opinion saying that he concurred with them in relation to New Authors but not to the Old all the rest of the Fathers voted simply for all neither was there any Limitation at all added to this Decree of the Council This very Decree hath been since strongly confirmed by the Council of Trent which appointed also certain persons to take a Review of the Books and Censures and to make a Report of them to the Company To the end that there might be a separation made betwixt the good Grain of Christian Verity and the Darnel of strange Doctrines That is in plain terms that they might blot out of all manner of Books whatsoever relished not well with the gust of the Church of Rome But these Fathers having not the leisure themselves to look to this Pious Work appointed certain Commissaries who should give an account of this matter to the Pope whence afterward it came to pass that Pope Pius IV. first and afterward Sixtus V. and Clement VIII published certain Rules and Indexes of such Authors and Books as they thought fit should be either quite abolished or purged only and have given such strict order for the printing of Books as that in those Countries where this order is observed there is little danger that ever any thing should be published that is either contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome or which maketh any thing for their Adversaries All these Instructions which are too long to be inserted here may be seen at the end of the Council of Trent where they are usually set down at large And in order to these Rules they have since put forth their Indices Expurgatorii as they call them namely that of the Low Countries and of Spain and other places where these Gallants come with their Razor in their hand and sit in judgment upon all manner of Books rasing out and altering as they please Periods Chapters and whole Treatises also often times and that too in the Works of those Men who for the most part were born and bred up and dyed also in the Communion of their own Church If the Church for eight or nine hundred years since had so sharp Razors as these men now have it is then a vain thing for us to search any higher what the judgment of the Primitive Christians was touching any particular Point for whatsoever it was it could not have escaped the hands of such Masters And if the Ancient Church had not heretofore any such Institution as this why then do we who pretend to be such Observers of Antiquity practise these Novelties I know very well that these men make profession of reforming only the Writings of the Moderns but who sees not that this is but a Cloak which they throw over themselves lest they should be accused as guilty of the same cruelty that Jupiter is among the Poets for having behaved himself so insolently against his own Father Those Pieces which they raze so exactly in the Books of the Moderns are the cause of the greater mischief to themselves when they are found in the Writings of the Ancients as sometimes they are For what a senseless thing is it to leave them in where they hurt most and to raze them out where they do little hurt The Inquisition at Madrid puts out these words in the Index of Athanasius Adorari solius Dei est that is God alone is to be worshipped and yet notwithstanding these words are still expresly found in the Text of Athanasius The same Father saith That there were some other Books besides those which he had before set down which in truth were not of the Canon and which the Fathers had ordained should be read to those who were newly come into the Christian Communion and desired to be instructed in the word of Piety reckoning in this number the Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiâ—sticus Judith Esther Tobit and some other Nevertheless these very Censâ—rs put out in the †Index of Athanasius his Works those words which affirm that the said Books are not at all Canonical In the Index of St. Augustine they put out these wâ—rds Christ hâ—th given the sign of his Body which yet are evidently to be seen in the Text of this Father in his Book against Adimantus Chap. 12. They put out in like manner these words Augustine accounted the Eucharist necessary to be administred to Infants which opinion of S. Augustine is very frequently found expressed either in these very words or the like throughout his Works as we shall see hereafter They likewise put out these words We ought not to build Temples to Angels and yet the very Text of S. Augustine saith If we should erect a Temple of Wood or of Stone to any of the holy Angels should we not be Anathematized And this is the practice of the Censors both in the Low Countries and in Spain in many other particulars which we shall not here set down Now if thou cuttest off such Sentences as these out of the Indexes of these Holy Fathers why dost thou not as well raze them out of the Text also Or if thou leavest
corrected by the Hypocrisie or false shew of Reprehension and that by this means both the one and the other might be saved whilst the one who stood up for Circumcision followed S. Peter and those other who refused Circumcision applaud and are taken with S. Paul's Liberty S. Augustine utterly disliking this Exposition of S. Hierome wrote unto him in his ordinary grave and meek way modestly declaring the Reasons why he could not assent unto it which Epistles of his are yet extant The other answers him a thousand strange things but particularly he there protesteth That he will not warrant for sound whatever shall be found in that Book of his And to shew that he doth not do this without good reason he setteth down a certain Passage out of his Preface to it which is very well worth our Consideration For after he hath named the Writings of Origen Didymus Apollinaris Theodorus Herâ—clas Eusebius Emisseâ—us Alexander the Heretick and others he adds That I may therefore plainly tell the truth I confess that I have read all these Authors and collecting together as much as I could in my memory I presently called for a Scribe to whom I dictated either my own Conceptions or those of other Men without remembring either the Order or the Words sometimes or the Sense Do but think now with your self whether or no this be not an excellent rare way of Commenting upon the Scriptures and very well worthy both to be esteemed and imitated by us He then turneth his Speech to S. Augustine saying If therefore thou lightedst upon any thing in my Exposition which was worthy of reprehension it would have stood better with thy Learning to have consulted the Greek Authors themselves and to have seen whether what I have written be to be found in them or not and if not then to have condemned it as my own private Opinion And he elsewhere gives the same answer to Ruffinus who upbraideth him for some absurd Passages in his Commentaries upon the Prophet Daniel Now according to this reckoning if we would know whether or no what we meet with in his Commentaries be his own proper Sense or not we must first turn over the Books of all these ancient Greeks that is to say we must do that which is now impossible to be done seeing that the Writings of the greatest part of them are utterly lost and must not attribute any thing to him as his proper Opinion how clearly and expresly soever it be delivered unless we are first able to make it appear that it is not to be found in any of those Authors out of whose Writings he hath patched up his Commentaries For if any one of them be found to have delivered any thing you here meet with you are to take notice that it belongeth to that Author S. Hierome in this case having been onely his Transcriber or at most but his Translator So that you may be able perhaps by the reading of Books in this manner collected to judge whether the Fathers have had the skill to make a handsom and artificial Connexion and Digestion of those things which they took out of so many several Authors or not but whether or no they believed all that they have set down in their Books you will be no more able to discover than you can judge what Belief any Man is of by the Books he transcribeth or can guess at the Opinions of an Interpreter by the Books he translateth Whence we may conclude that testimonies brought out of such Books as these are of little or no force at all either for or against us And this seemeth to have been the Opinion of Cardinal Bellarmine also where to a certain Objection brought out of one of S. Hierome's Books he makes this Answer That the Author in that place speaketh according to the Opinion of others as he often doth in his Commentaries upon the Epistle to the Ephesians and in other places The like course hath Cardinal Perron taken where the Protestants have urged against the Church of Rome the Authority of S. Hilary touching the Canon of the Scriptures of the Old Testament confidently answering That the Notes cited out of that place of S. Hilary are not his but Origen's in his Commentary upon the First Psalm part of whose Words he had transcribed and put into his own Prologue upon the Psalms and yet S. Hilary neither so much as nameth Origen nor yet gives us any intimation at all whether we are to receive what is there spoken touching the Scriptures as from Origen or from himself And the ground of this Answer of his is taken from what S. Hierome hath testified in divers places namely that S. Hilary hath transcribed the greatest part of his Commentaries out of the said Origen Now if we but rightly consider the account which S. Hierome hath given as we shewed before of all Commentaries in general how can we have any assurance whether that which the Fathers deliver in these kind of Writings be their own proper Opinion or only some other Man 's transcribed And if we can have no assurance hereof how can we then account them of any force at all either for or against us So that it is most evident that this Method which the Fathers have observed in their Expositions of the Scriptures must needs render the things themselves very doubtful how clearly and expresly soever they have delivered themselves But hath it not concerned them to be more careful in their Homilies or Sermons and to deliver nothing there save only what hath been their own proper Opinion and Belief May we not at least in this particular rest assured that they have spoken nothing but from their very soul and that their Tongues have vented here their own Opinions only and not those of other Men Certainly in all reason they should not have uttered any thing in this Sacred Place from whence they taught their People save what they conceived to have been most true And yet besides what we have formerly noted as to this particular namely that they did not always speak out the whole truth but concealed something of it as not so fit for the ears either of the Pagans or of the weaker sort of Christians Cardinal Perron that great and curious Inquirer into all the Customs of the Ancients hath informed us that in regard of the aforesaid Considerations they have sometimes gone further yet For in expounding the Scriptures to the People where the Catechumeni were present if by chance they fell upon any Passage where the Sacraments were spoken of that they might not discover these Mysteries they would then make bold to wrest the Text a little and instead of giving them the true and real Interpretation of the Place which they themselves knew to be such they would only present their Auditory with an Allegorical and Symbolical and as this Cardinal saith an Accidental and Collateral one only to give them some
Rome which receiveth them in rids his hands of this Objection after the same manner I confess saith he that S. Hierome held this Opinion because that no General Council had as yet ordained any thing touching these Books Seeing therefore it is most clear both from the Confession of our Adversaries and also by the consideration of the thing it self that the Fathers have venâ—ed in their Writings very many of their own particular Opinions digested out of their own private Meditations and which they had not learnt in the School of the Church who sees not that before we give any certain credit unto their Sayings we ought first to be assured of what Nature they are Whether they were their own particular Opinions onely or the publick Sense of their Age Since it is confessed by all That those of the former sort are not always obligatory necessarily but are such as oftentimes may and sometimes ought to be rejected without any scruple at all You will object perhaps to a Protestant That S. Hierome worshipped the Reliques of Departed Saints How shall I know will he reply upon you again whether this was his private Opinion onely or not If the Authority of this Father for want of being grounded upon some Publick Declaration of the Church could not bind Bellarmine to receive his Opinion touching the Canon of the Old Testament why should this Opinion of his which is not any whit better grounded than the other perswade me to the Worship of Reliques The same will he reply upon you and many times with much more appearance of Reason concerning divers other Testimonies produced out of the Fathers So that whether you would confirm your own Faith or whether you would wrest out of your Adversaries hand this manner of Reply and make good all such Allegations it will concern you to make it clear concerning any Passage whatsoever that you shall urge out of a Father that it is not his own private Opinion but was the Opinion of the Church it self wherein he lived which in my Judgment is a thing that is as hard or harder to be demonstrated than any one of all those things we have yet discoursed of For those means by which we might easily attain to this Knowledge are wanting unto us and those which we have left us are very weak and very little concluding If the Fathers themselves had but taken so much pains as to have distinguished betwixt these two sorts of Opinions informing us in every particular Case which were their own private Opinions only and which were taught by the whole Church or at least had but proposed some of them as Doubtful and others again as Assured Truths in like manner as Origen hath sometimes done they would indeed have eased us very much though to say the truth they would not have wholly cured us of our Grief forasmuch as sometimes as we shall hereafter make it appear they attribute to the Church those things which it is most evident that it never held But they very seldom use to make any such Distinction but commonly â—ent their own private Opinions in the very same manner as they do the publick and sometimes also by reason of the Passion which these Authors may chance naturally to have been subject unto be the thing what it will we shall have them recommending unto us with more eagerness that which they have conceived and brought forth themselves than that which they have received from any other hand so that we shall meet with very little in them that may give us any light in this Particular There would be left us yet another help in this business by comparing that which they say here and there throughout their Writings with the Publick Opinions of the Church which would be a pretty safe and certain Rule to go by had we any where else besides their Books any clear and certain evidence what the Belief of the Church hath been in each several Age touching all Points of Religion and if this were so we should not then need to trouble our selves with the studying the Writings of the Fathers seeing that we read them for no other purpose but only to discover out of them what the opinion of Christendom hath been touching those Points which are at this day controverted betwixt us But now there is no man but knows but this help is wanting to us For setting aside the Creeds and the Determinations of the six first General Councils and of some few of the Provincial you will not meet with any Piece of this nature throughout the whole stock of Antiquity Now as we have already made it appear in the preceding Chapter the Ancient Church hath not any where declared neither in its Creeds nor in the aforesaid Councils what the opinion and sense of it hath been touching the greatest part of those Points which are now in dispute amongst us It followeth therefore that by this means we shall never be able to distinguish in the Writings of the Fathers which were their own private opinions and which they held in common with the rest of the Church If we could indeed learn from any creditable Author that the present Controversies had ever been decided by the Ancient Church we should then readily believe that the Fathers would have followed this their Decision and then although the Coâ—stitutions themselves should not perhaps have come down to our hands yet notwithstanding should we be in some sort obliged to believe that the Fathers who had both seen and assented to the same would also have delivered over the sense of them unto us in their Writings But we meet with no such thing in any Author but it rather appears evidently to the contrary through the whole course of Ecclesiastical Story that these Matters were never so much as started in the first Ages of Christianity so far have they been from being then decided So that it manifestly appeareth from hence that if the Fathers of those Primitive times have by chance said any thing of them they fetched not what they said from the Determinations of the Church which had not as yet declared it self touching the same but vented rather their own private thoughts and opinions Neither will it be to any purpose to object here that the Testimonies of many Fathers together do represent unto us the sence of the Church although the voice of one or two single persons only is not sufficient to do the same For not to answer that that which hath hapned to one may have hapned to many others and that if some particular persons chance to have fallen upon some particular Opinions possibly others may either have accompanied or else have followed them in the same I say further that this Objection is of no force at all in this Particular For seeing that the Church had not as yet declared
its opinion publickly touching the Points at this day controverted it is as impossible that many together that lived in the same time should represent it unto us as that one single person should How could they possibly have seen that which lay as yet concealed How could they possibly measure their Belief by such a Rule as was not yet visible to the World The Chiliasts alledge the Testimonies not of one not of two but of a very great number of the most eminent and the most ancient among the Fathers who were all of their opinion as we shall see hereafter The Answer that is ordinarily made to the Objection is That the Church having not as yet declared its sence touching this Point the Testimonies of these Men bind us not to believe the same which is an evident Argument that a great number in this case signifies no more than a small in the representing unto us what the Belief of the Church hath been and that it is necessary that either by some General Council or else by some other publick way it must have declared its judgment touching any Question in debate that so we may know whether the Fathers have been of the same judgment or no. So that according to this Account we are to raise up again the whole Ancient Church and to call it to account touching every of these particular Points now debated touching which the Testimonies of the Fathers are alledged it being impossible otherwise to give any certain judgment whether that which they say be their own private or else the publick Opinion that is to say whether it be fit to be believed or not So that any man that is but of the meanest judgment may easily perceive how that it is not only a difficult but also almost an impossible thing to gather out of the Writings of the Fathers so much light as is necessary we should have for our satisfaction in matters of so great importance CHAP. X. Reason 10. That it is a very hard matter to know whether the Opinions of the Fathers touching the Controversies of these Times were received by the Church Vniversal or but by some part of it only which yet is necessarily to be known before we can make use of any Allegations out of them BUT suppose that a Father relieving us in this difficult or rather impossible business should tell us in express terms that what he proposeth is the sense and opinion of the Church in his time yet would not this quite deliver us out of the doubtful condition we are in For besides that their words are many times in such cases as these liable to exception suppose that it were certainly and undoubtedly so yet would it concern us then to examine what that Church was whereof he speaketh whether it were the Church Vniversal or only some Particular Church and whether it were that of the whole World or that of some City Province or Country only Now that this is a matter of no small importance is evident from hence because that the opinions of the Church Vniversal in Points of Faith are accounted infallible and necessarily true whereas those of Particular Churches are not so but are confessed to be subject to Errour So that the Question being here touching the Faith which ought not to be grounded upon any thing save what is infallibly true it will concern us to know what the judgment of the Church Vniversal hath been seeing the opinion of no Particular Church can do us any service in this case And that this distinction is also otherwise very necessary appears evidently by this because that the opinions and customs which have been commonly received by the greatest part of Christendom have not always presently taken place in each Particular Church and again those which have been received in some certain Particular Churches have not been entertained by all the rest Thus we find in story that the Churches of Asia minor kept the Feast of Easter upon a different day from all the other parts of Christendom and although the business it self seems to be of no very great importance yet did it nevertheless cause a world of stir in the Church Victor Bishop of Rome by reason of this little difference excommunicating all Asia minor Now each party here alledged their Reasons and Apostolical Tradition for what they did speaking with so great confidence in the justification of their own opinion as that hearing them severally a man would verily believe that each of their opinions was the very sense of the whole Church which notwithstanding was but the opinion of one part of it only The greatest part of Christendom held the Baptism of Hereticks to be good and effectual and received all those who forsaking their Heresie desired to be admitted into the Communion of the Church without re-baptizing them as appears out of St. Cyprian who confesseth that this had also been the custom formerly even in the African Churches themselves And yet notwithstanding Firmilianus Archbishop of Caesaria in Cappadocia testifies that the Churches of Cappadocia had time out of mind believed and practised the contrary and had also in his time so declared and ordained together with the Churches of Galatia and Cilicia in a full Synod held at the City Iconium And about the same time also St. Cyprian and the Bishops of Africk fell upon the same business and embraced this opinion of Re-baptization of Hereticks The Acts of the Council held at Carthage are yet extant where you have 87 Bishops who with one unanimous consent established the same The Custom at Rome in Tertullians time was to receive into the Communion of the Church all Fornicators and Adulterers after some certain Penances which they enjoyned them Tertullian who was a Montanist exclaimed fearfully against this custom and wrote a Book expresly against it which is also extant among his works at this day Who now that should read this Piece of his would not believe that it was the general Opinion of all Catholicks that such sinners were not to be excluded from Penance and the Communion of the Church And yet for all this it is evident out of a certain Epistle of St. Cyprian that even some of the Catholick Bishops of Africa were of the contrary perswasion and the Jesuit Petavius is further of opinion that this Indulgency was not allowed nor practised in the Churches of Spain till a long time after and that the Ancient Rigour which excluded for ever such Offenders from the Communion of the Church was in practice among them till the time of Pacianus Bishop of Barcellona who left not any hopes of Ecclesiastical Absolution either to Idolaters Murtherers or Adulterers as may be seen in his Exhortation to Repentance In the year of our Lord 364. the Council of Laodicea ordained that none but the Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament should be read in Churches giving us withal a Catalogue of the said Books
which amount in all in the Old Testament to the number of twenty two only without making any mention at all of those other Books which Cardinal Perron calls Posthumous namely Ecclesiasticus the Book of Wisdom the Maccabâ—es Judith and Tobit All the Canons of this Council were afterwards inserted into the Code of the Church Universal where you have this very Canon also Num. 163. that is as much as to say they were received as Rules of the Catholick Church Who would believe now but that this Declaration of the Canon of the Scriptures was at that time received by all Christian Churches And yet notwithstanding you have the Churches of Africk meeting together in the Synod at Carthage about the year of our Lord 397. and ordaining quite contrary to the former Resolution of Laodicea that among those Books which were allowed to be read in Churches the Maccabees Judith Tobit Ecclesiasticus and the Book of Wisdom which two last they also reckon among the Books written by Solomon should be taken into the number Who knoweth not the difference that there was in the first Ages of Christianity betwixt the Eastern and the Western Churches touching the Fasting upon Saturdays the Church of Rome maintaining it is lawful and all the rest of the World accounting it unlawful Whence it was that we had that so bold Canon passed in the Council at Constantinople in Trullo in these words Vnderstanding that in the City of Rome in the time of the Holy Fast of Lent they fast on Saturdays contrary to the Custom and Tradition of the Church it seemeth good to this Holy Council that in the Roman Church they inviolably also observe that Canon which saith that whosoever shall be found to fast either upon the Lords day or upon the Saturday excepting only that one Saturday if he be a Clergie-man he shall be deposed but if be be of the Laity he shall be excommunicated Who knoweth not after how many several ways the Fast of Lent was Anciently observed in divers Churches an account whereof is given you by Irenaeus in that Pious Epistle of his which he wrote to Victor part whereof Eusebius setteth down in his Ecclesiastical History Who doth not also know that the opinions and expressions of the Greek Church touching Free-will and Predestination are extremely different from what the Church believed and taught in S. Augustines time and so downward And as concerning the Discipline of the Church do but hear Anastasius Bibliothecarius upon the VI Canon of the VII General Council which enjoyneth all Metropolitans to hold Provincial Synods once a year Neither let it at all trouble thee saith he that we have not this Decree seeing that there are some others found among the Canons whose Authority nevertheless we not admit of For some of them are in force and are observed in the Greek Church and others again in certain other Provinces only As for example the XVI and XVII Canons of the Council of Laodicea are observed only among the Greeks and the VI and the VIII Canons of the Council of Africk are received by none but the Africans only I could here produce divers other Examples but these may suffice to shew that the Opinions and Customs which have been received in one Part of the Church have not always been entertained in all the rest Whence it evidently follows that all that is acknowledged as the opinion or observation of the Church ought not therefore presently to pass for an Universal Law The Protestant alledgeth for the justifying his Canon of the Scriptures the Council of Laodicea before mentioned Thou answerest him perhaps that this indeed was the opinion of the Churches but it was only of some particular Churches I shall not here enter into an Examination whether this Answer be well grounded or not it is sufficient for me that I can safely then conclude from hence that according to this account before you can make use of any Opinion or Testimony out of any of the Fathers it is necessary that you first make it appear not only that it was the Opinion of the Church at that time but you must further also clearly demonstrate unto us what Churches opinion it was whether of the Church Universal or else of some Particular Church only It is objected against the Protestants that Epiphanius testifieth that the Church admitted not into the higher Orders of the Ministry any save those that were Virgins or professed Continency Now to make good this Allegation it is necessary that it be first proved that the Church he there speaks of was the Church Universal For will the Protestant reply upon you as Laodicea hath had as it seems a particular Opinion touching the Canon of the Scriptures possibly also Cyprus may in like manner have had its particular Resolutions touching the Ordination of the Clergy The like may be said of the greatest part of those other Observations and Opinions of the Ancient Church Now how difficult a business it will be to clear these Matters which are so full of perplexity and to distinguish of Antiquity at this so great a distance of time severing that which was Publick from what was Particular and that which was Provincial from what was National and what was National from that which was Vniversal any Man may be able to give some kind of guess but none can throughly understand save he that hath made trial of it Do but fancy to your selves a City that hath lain ruinated a thousand years no part whereof remains save onely the Ruines of Houses lying all along here and there confusedly all the rest being covered all over with Thorns and Bushes Imagine then that you have met with one that will undertake to shew you precisely where the Publick Buildings of the City stood and where the Private which were the Stones that belonged to the one and which belonged to the other and in a word who in these confused Heaps where the Whole lies all together will notwithstanding separate ye the one from the other The very same Task in a manner doth he undertake who ever shall go about truly and precisely to distinguish the Opinions of the Ancient Church This Antiquity is now of Eleven or Twelve hundred years standing and the Ruines of it are now onely left us in the Books of the Writers of that Time which also have met with none of the best entertainment in their Passage through the several Ages down to our time as we have shewed before How then dare we entertain the least hope that amidst this so great Confusion we should be able yet to distinguish the Pieces and to tell which of them honoured the Publick Temple and which went to the furnishing of Private Chappels onely especially considering that the Private ones have each of them ambitiously endeavoured to make their own pass for Publick For where is the Province or the City or the Doctor that hath not boastingly cried up
turn their eyes back a little upon themselves and to consider how many opinions they themselves hold which are not only different but even quite contrary too to the Church in the Communion whereof they live and of which they profess themselves to be Members and by which indeed they subsist The Difference is here so great as that it seems to be as it were one State within another State and one Church within another Church And yet notwithstanding when any of the Doctors of that Party to which they adhere deliver unto us either in their Definitions or in their Sermons or in their Books the common Sense and Judgment of their Church this Intermixture of Opinions is quite laid aside and appears not at all They speak only of the opinions of others passing by those of Cassander which are contrary to them in silence as if they did not at all concern the Church of Rome neither more nor less and yet it is very well known unto us even to us who live at this very day that they are favoured and maintained by very many of the most Eminent Persons of the Roman Clergy it self And if this senseless Sect who forsooth think themselves much more refined in their opinions than the rest of the Body whereof they are a part should chance in time either to fail of it self or to be supprest by force their Memory would so utterly come to nought as that Posterity would not know any thing of their Belief but only by conjecture Every one will then believe that the Church of Rome at this time precisely held to the Doctrine and Opinions that he reads in the Decrees of Trent and in other the like Books and yet notwithstanding we both know and see that among those very Persons which have been Anointed Consecrated and Preferred also by the said Church there is a Party that dissenteth from it in judgment touching divers Important Articles of Faith Let us therefore reckon that the Ancient Church had also its Cassanders and very many even among the Clergy it self who held many opinions which were different from that which was the common Belief of the Church and which it hath at length by little and little sunk as it were under water and wholly swallowed up so that now there is not any Tract of them left us Christianity was either different in the Ancient times from what it is now or else it was the same If it was Different it is then a Piece of meer Sophistry to endeavour to make it seem to be the same and a very great Abuse to produce unto us for this purpose so many several Testimonies out of Antiquity If it were the same it must then without all doubt have produced the same Accidents and have sown the same seeds of diversity of opinions in the spirits of its Clergy Those opinions and observations which now give offence to the Cassandrists would then also have offended some persons or other that were endued with the like Moderation For we are not to conceive but that those First Ages of Christianity brought forth Spirits that were as much and more refined and delicate than ours have done But that we may insist upon this particular no longer it is sufficient for me that I have thus clearly made it appear that in the Ancient Church the whole Clergy of a City or of a Nation much less of the whole World had not necessarily one and the same sense and opinion touching Points of Religion So that it will follow from hence that we cannot know certainly whether those opinions which we meet withal in the Fathers were received by all and every of the Pastors of the Church at that time or not All that you can gather thence is but this at the most that they themselves and some others perhaps of the most eminent amongst them if you please maintained such or such opinions in like manner as that which Bellarmine and others have written touching the Sacrament of the Eucharist will inform Posterity that these Men and many others of our time held these opinions in the Church of Rome But as those who shall conclude from the Books of these Authors that there is at this day no other opinion maintained among the Clergy themselves of the Church of Rome touching this Particular would very much abuse themselves so is it much to be feared that we in like manner deceive our selves when from what we find in Two or Three of the Fathers we conclude that there was at that time no other opinion held in the Christian Church touching those Points whereof they treat save that which they have delivered It is a very hazardous business to take Eight or Ten Men how Holy and Learned soever they may have been as Sureties for all the Doctors of the Church Universal that lived in their Age. This is too little Security for so great a Sum. Now there are Two things which may be objected against that which we have before delivered The First is that if there had been in Antiquity any other opinions touching the Points now in Debate which had been different from those which we now meet with in the Books either of all the Fathers or at least of some few of them they would then both have mentioned and also refuted them But we have already heretofore answered this Objection by saying that the Fathers forbare to speak any thing of this Diversity of opinion partly out of Prudence lest otherwise they might have provoked the Authors of the said opinions which were contrary to their own and so might increase the Difference instead of appeasing it and partly also out of Charity mildly bearing with that which they accounted not any whit dangerous I only speak here of those Differences in opinion which they knew of for there might be a great number of others which they knew not of Who can oblige you to believe that a Monk for example that had retired into a Corner and as it were forsaken the World professing only to instruct a small number of Men and Women in the Rules of Devotion must needs have known what the opinions in Points of Religion of all the Prelates of his Age were Who will pass his word unto us in his behalf that he doth not sometimes reprove that in some Men which yet the Church allowed in an infinite number of others Who will warrant us that all Christendom in his time embraced all his opinions and had no other of their own Possevine answering an Objection made by some touching the Works of Dionysius the Areopagite which S. Hierome hath made no mention of at all saith that it is no great marvel that a Man that lay hid in a Corner of the World should not have seen this Book which the Arrians endeavoured to suppress May not a Man with as much reason say that it is no great wonder if S. Hierome or Epiphanius or any other the like Authors who were
taken up all of them with their particular Charges and Imployments did not know of some opinions of the Prelates of their Age or that either their Modesty or their Charity or the little Eloquence and Repute they had abroad might have made them conceal the same The other Objection is drawn from hence because that these Doctors of the Ancient Church who held some opinions different from those which we read at this day in the Fathers did not publish them at all But I answer first of all that every Man is not able to do so In the next place those that were able were not always willing to do so Divers other Considerations may perhaps also have hindred them from so doing and if they are Wise and Pious Men they are never moved till they needs must And hence it is that oftentimes those opinions which have less truth in them do yet prevail because that Prudence which maintains the True Opinion is Mild and Patient whereas Rashness which defends the False is of a Froward Eager and Ambitious Nature But now let us but imagine how many of the Evidences of this Diversity of opinion may have been made away by those several ways before represented by us as namely having been either devoured by Time or suppressed by Malitious Men for fear lest they should let the World see the Traces of the Truth which they would have concealed But that I may not be thought to bring here only bare Conjectures without any proof at all I shall produce some Examples also for the confirming and clearing of this my Assertion Epiphanius maintains against Aerius whom he ranks among his Haeresiarchae or Arch Hereticks that a Bishop according to the Apostle Saint Paul and the Original Institution of the thing it self is more than a Priest and this he endeavours to prove in many words answering all the Objections that are made to the contrary If you but read the Passage I am confident that when you had done you would not stick to swear that what he hath there delivered was the general opinion of all the Doctors of the Church it being very unlikely that so Great and so Renowned a Prelate would so slatly have denied the opinion which he disputed against if so be any one of his own familiar friends had also maintained the same And yet for all this Saint Hierome who was one of the Principal Lights of our Western Church and who lived at the same time with Epiphanius who was his intimate Friend and a great admirer of his Piety saith expresly that Among the Ancients Bishops and Priests were the same the one being a name of Dignity and the other of Age. And that it may not be thought that this fell from him in discourse only he there falls to proving the same at large alledging several Passages of Scripture touching this Particular and he also repeats the same thing in two or three several places of his Works Whereby it evidently appears that even Positions which have been quite Contradictory to the opinions which have been delivered and maintained by some of the Fathers and proposed in what terms soever have notwithstanding been sometimes either maintained or at least tolerated by some others of 〈◊〉 less Authority S. Hierome himself hath â—alâ— extreamly foul upon Ruffinus and hath traduced divers of his opinions as most Pernicious and Deadly and yet notwithstanding we do not any where find that ever he was accounted as an Heretick by the rest of the Fathers But we shall have occasion hereafter to consider more at large of the like Examples and shall only at present observe that if those Books of S. Hierome which we mentioned a little before should chance to have been lost every Man would then assuredly have concluded with Epiphanius that no Doctor of the Ancient Church ever held that a Bishop and a Priest were one and the same thing in its Institution Who now after all this will assure us that among so many other opinions as have been rejected here and there by the Fathers and that too in as plain terms as these of Epiphanius none of them have ever been defended by some of the Learned of those times Or is it not possible that they may have held them though they did not write in defence of the same Or may they not perhaps have written also in deâ—ence of them and their Books have been since lost How small is the number of those in the Church who had the Ability or at least the 〈◊〉 to write And how much smaller is the number of thoâ—â— whose Wriâ—ings have been able to secure themselves against either the Injury of Time or the Malice of Men It is objâ—cted against the Protestants as we have touched before that S. Hierome commendeth and maintaineth the Adoration of Reliques But yet he himself testifieth that there were some Bishops who defended Vigilantius who held the contrary opinion whom he according to his ordinary Rhetorick calleth His Consorts in Wickedness Who knows now what these Bishops were and whether they deserved any such usage at S. Hieromes hands or no For the Expressions which he useth against them and against their opinion are so full of Gall and of Choler as that they utterly take away all credit from his Testimony But we have insisted long enough upon this Particular and shall therefore forbear to instance any further in others For as much therefore as it is Impossible to discover exactly out of the Fathers what hath been the sense and judgment of the Ancient Church whether taken Universally or Particularly or whether you take the Church for the whole Body of Believers or for the Prelates and Inseriour Clergy only I shall here conclude as formerly that the Writings of the Ancients are altogether Insufficient for the proving the Truth of any of those Points which are at this day controverted amongst Us. THE SECOND BOOK CHAP. I. That the Fathers are not of sufficient Authority for the Deciding of our Controversies in Religion Reason I. That the Testimonies given by the Fathers touching the Belief of the Church are not always True and Certain WE have before shewed how hard a matter it is to discover what the Sense of the Fathers hath been touching the Points at this day controverted in Religion both by reason of the small number of Books we have left us of the Fathers of the First Centuries and those too which we have treating of such things as are of a very different nature from our present Disputes and which besides we cannot be very well assured of by reason of the many Forgeries and monstrous Corruptions which they have for so long a time been subject to as also by reason of their Obscurity and Ambiguity in their Expressions and their representing unto us many times the Opinions rather of others than of their Authors besides those many other Imperfections which are found in them as namely their not informing us in
the precepts of Rhetorick but sure I am that it agreeth ill enough with S. Hierom's rule which we gave you a little before But let us now observe out of some other more clear and express passages of his what the judgment of this great Aristarchus and Censor of Antiquity hath been touching this Point I know saith he writing to Theophilus Patriarch of Alexandria that I place the Apostles in a distinct rank from all other Writers for as for them they always speak truth but as for those other they erre sometimes like Men as they were What could he have said more expresly in confirmation of our Assertion before laid down There are others saith he both Greeks and Latins who have erred also in Points of Faith whose Names I need not here set down lest I might seem to defend Origen by the Errors of others rather than by his own Worth How then can we confide in them unless we examine their Opinions by their Reasons I shall faith the same Author read Origen as I read others because I find he hath erred in like manner as they have done And in another place speaking in general of Ecclesiastical Writers that is of those which We now call Fathers and of the Faults and Errors that are found in their Books It may be saith he that either they have erred out of meer ignorance or else that they wrote in some other Sense than we understand them or that their Writings have by degrees been corrupted through the ignorance of the Transcribers or else before the appearing of that impudent Devil Arius in the World they let some things fall from them innocently and not so warily as they might have done and such as can hardly escape the Cavils of wrangling Spirits Which Passage of his is a very excellent and remarkable one and containeth in it a brief yet a clear and full Justification of the greatest part of what we have hitherto delivered in this our Discourse Do but think therefore with how much circumspection we are to read and to weigh these Authors and how careful we ought to be in examining in their Books whether there be not either some fault committed by the Transcriber or some obscurity in the Expression or some negligence in the Conception or lastly some error in the Proposition In another place having set down the Opinions As for their Expositions he resuseth them openly whensoever they do not please him Thus doth he find fault with the Exposition which is given by the greatest part of the Fathers of the Word Israel which they will have to signifie A Man seeing God Notwithstanding that those who interpret it thus are Persons of very great both Authority and Eloquence and whose very shadow saith he in sufficient to bear us down yet cannot we chuse but follow the Authority of the Scriptures and of the Angel and of God who gave this Name of Israel rather than the Power of any Secular Eloquence how great soever it be And in his CXLVI Epistle written to Pope Damasus he saith That there are some who not considering the Text conceive Superstitiously rather than Truly that these words in the beginning of the XLIV Psalm Eâ—â—ctavit cor meum verbum bonum My heart is inditing a good matter are spoken in the Person of the Father And yet the greatest part of those who lived in the time of Arius and a little after him understood these words in the same sense It was likewise the General Opinion in a manner of all Men That Adam was buried upon Mount Calvary and in the very same place where our Saviour Christ was crucified And yet S. Hierome rejecteth this Opinion and which is more he makes himself merry with it without any scruple at all So likewise there were some among the afore-named Ancient Fathers who out of a Pious Affection which they bare to S. Peter maintained That he denied not God but Man and that the sense of the Words of his Denial is I know not him to be a Man for I know that he is God The Intelligent Reader saith the same S. Hierome will easily perceive how idle and frivolous a thing this is to accuse our Saviour as guilty of a Lie by excusing his Apostle For if S. Peter did not deny him our Saviour must necessarily then have lied when he said unto him Verily I say unto thee c. He takes the same liberty also in reprehending S. Ambrose who understands by Gog spoken of in the Prophet Ezechiel the Nation of the Gothes neither do those other Fathers scape his Lash who pleasing themselves too much with their Allegories take Bosra in Isaiah for the Flesh whereas it signifies a Fortress I might here produce very many the like Passages but these few shall now serve as a Taste onely For who seeth not by this time that these Holy Men took not the Fathers who went before them for the Judges or Arbitrators touching the Opinions of the Church and that they did not receive their Testimonies and Depositions as Oracles but reserved the Right which S. Augustine alloweth to every Man of examining them by the Rule of Reason and of the Scripture Neither are we to take any notice at all of S. Hierome when he seems to except out of this number the Writings of Athanasius and of S. Hilary writing to Laeta and telling her That her Daughter Paula might walk securely and with firm footing by the Epistles of the one and the Books of the other and therefore he counselleth her to take delight in these Mens Writings forasmuch as in their Books the Piety of Faith wavereth not And as for all other Authors she may read them but rather to pass her judgment upon them than to follow them For first of all although perhaps there should be some Piece of a Father that should have no Error at all in it as questionless there are many such yet would not this render the Authority of the same Infallible How many such Books are there even of the Moderns wherein neither the one Party nor the other hath been able to discover any the least Error in matter of Faith And yet I suppose no Man will presently conclude from hence that we ought to admit of these Authors as Judges of our Faith A Man may there find of several Authors touching a certain Question that had been proposed unto him that so the Reader might make choice of the best he gives this Reason of his so doing Because saith he we ought not according to the Example of Pythagoras his Scholars to have an eye to the Prejudicated Opinion of the Proposer but rather the Reason of the Thing Proposed Which words of his do sufficiently confirm the Sense which we have formerly given of that Passage of his in the Preface to his second Commentary upon Hosea He presently afterwards adds My purpose is
Vincentius should have cleared by this excellent course of his some Point or other which had been controverted he must have thanked the Fire the Water the Moths or the Worms for having spared those Authors which he made use of and for having consumed all those other that wrote in favour of the Adverse Party for otherwise he should have been an Heretick And if we should decide our Differences in Matters of Faith after this manner we should do in a manner as he did who gave Judgment upon the Suits of Law that came before him by the Chances he threw with Three Dice Do but imagine now what an endless labour it would be for a Man either to go and heap up together and run over all the Authors that ever have written one with another or else to distinguish them into their several Ages they wrote in and to examine them by Companies And do but imagine again what satisfaction a Man should be able to get from hence and where we should be in case we should find as it is possible it may sometimes so fall out as we shall shew hereafter that the Sense and Judgment of this Greatest Part should prove to be either contrary to or perhaps besides the Sense and Meaning either of the Scriptures or of the Church And again how senseless a thing were it to make the Suffrages of Equal Authority of Persons that are so Unequal themselves either in respect of their Merit Learning Holy Life and Soundness of Faith and that a Rheticius whom S. Hierome censured so hardly a little before should be reckoned Equal with S. Augustine or a Philastrius be as good a Man as S. Hierome There is perhaps among the Fathers such a One whose Judgment is of more weight than a Hundred others and yet forsooth will this Man have us to make our Doubles and our Sons to go for as much as our Crowns and Pistols And lastly What reason in the World is there that although perhaps the Persons themselves were equal in all things we should yet make their Words also of equal force which are oftentimes of very different and unequal Authority some of them having been uttered as it were before the Bar the Books having been produced both Parties heard and the whole Cause througly examined and the other perhaps having been cast forth by their Authors at all adventure as it were either in their Chamber or else in Discourse walking abroad or else perhaps by the By while they were treating of some other Matter But our Friend here to prevent in some sort this later Inconvenience requires that the Word of this Greatest Part which he will allow to be fit to be Authorised must have been uttered by them Clearly Often and Constantly and then and not till then doth he allow them for Certain and Undoubted Truth And now you see he is got into another Hold. For I would very fain be informed how it is possible for us to know whether these Fathers which we thus have called out of their Graves to give us their Judgment touching the Controversies in Religion affirmed those things which we find in their Writings Clearly Often and Constantly or not If in this his pretended Council of Doctors you will not allow the Right of giving their Suffrage to those of whom it may be doubted that they either expressed themselves obscurely or gave in their Testimonies but seldom or have but weakly maintained their own Opinion I pray you tell me whom shall we have left at last to be the Judges in the Decision of our present Controversies As for the Apostles Creed and the Determinations of the Four First General Councils which are assented unto and approved of by all the Protestant Party I confess we may by this way of Trial allow them as Competent Judges in these Matters But as for all the rest it is evident by what hath been delivered in the First Part of this Treatise that we can never admit of them if they are thus to be Qualified and to have all the afore-mentioned Conditions We may therefore very well conclude That the Expedient here proposed by this Author is either Impossible or else not so safe to be put in practice so that I shall rather approve of S. Augustine's Judgment touching the Authority of the Fathers I should not have insisted so long upon the Examination of this Proposal of his had I not seen it to have been in so high Esteem with many Men and indeed with some of the Learned too For in earnest after S. Augustine and S. Hierome have delivered their Judgments it matters not much what this Man shall have believed to the contrary But yet before we finish this Point let us a little examine this Author both by S. Augustine's and by his own Rule before laid down S. Augustine thinks us not bound to believe the Saying of any Author except he can prove the Truth of it unto us either by the Canonical Scriptures or else by some Probable Reason What Text of Scripture or what Reason hath this Man alledged to prove the Truth of what he hath proposed So that whatsoever his Opinion be he must not take it amiss if according to the Advice and Practice of S. Augustine we take leave to dissent from him especially considering we have so many Reasons to reject That which he without any Reason given would have us to receive And thus you see that according to the Judgment of S. Augustine the Saying of this Vincentius Lirinensis although you should reckon him among the most Eminent of the Fathers doth not at all oblige us to give our Assent unto it And yet you will find that his Testimony would be yet of much less force and weight if you but examine the Man by his own Rule For according to him we are not to hearken to the Fathers except they both Lived and Taught Holily and Wisely even unto the hour of their Death Who is there now that will pass his word for him that he himself was one of this number Who shall assure us that he was not either an Heretick himself or at least a Favourer of Hereticks For is it not evident enough that he favoured the Semipelagians who at that time swarmed in France railing against the very Name and Memory of S. Augustine and who were condemned by the whole Church Who may not easily see this by his manner of Discourse in his Commonitorium tending this way where he seems to intimate unto us under hand That Prosper and Hilary had unjustly slandered them and that Pope Celestine who also wrote against them had been misinformed And may not he also be strongly suspected to have been the Author of those Objections made against Prosper which are called Objectiones Vincentianae Vincent's Objections The great Commendations also which are given him by Gennadius very much confirm this suspicion it being clear that this Author was of the same Sect
Salvation because I conceive with Cassander that all those Passages may and indeed ought to be understood with respect had to the scope and drift of these Authors whose Business there was to confute those Hereticks of Their time who maintained That there was a Fatal Necessity in the Actions of Men by this means depriving them of all manner of Election or Judgment Neither hath the great Learning of Clemens Alexandrinus kept him from falling inâ—o very many the like Errors as for instance where in divers places he says plainly That the Heathen who lived before the coming of our Saviour Christ were justified by Philosophy which was then Necessary for them whereas it is now only Vseful unto them and that this Philosophy was thoâ—â— choolmister of â—he Gentiles which brought them to Christ or served to guide them till the time of his Coming in like manner as the Law did the Jews and that the Greeks were justified by iâ— aloneâ— and that it was given unto them as their Covenant being a step to and as it were a Foundation laid for Christian Philosophy He was of Opinion also in order to this That our Saviour went down into Hell to preach the Gospel to the Departed Souls and that he saved many of them that is all that believed And that the Apostles also after their Death descended likewise into the same place and for the same purpose Conceiving that God otherwise should have been Unjust and an Accepter of Persons if so be he should have condemned all those who died before the Coming of his Son For saith he if He preached to the Living to the end they might not be condemned Vnjustly why should â—e not for the same Reason preach also to those who were departed this Life before his Coming From these and the like Considerations he concludeth That it was necessary that the Souls of all the Dead as well Gentiles as Jews should have been made Partakers of the Preaching of our Saviour and should have had the Beâ—â—fit of the same Dispensation which he used towards others here upon Earth in order either to their Salvation through Repentance or their just Condemnation for their Impenitency He plainly maintains also in several places of his Works That all the Punishments which God inflicts upon Mâ—n tend to their Salvation and are sent them for their Instiuction and Amendment comprehending also within this number even those very Pains which the Damned endure in Hell and from hence it is that he somewhere also affirmeth That wicked Men are to be purged by Fire And hereto doth he refer the Conflagration spoken of by the Stoicks alledging also to this purpose certain Passages out of Plato and out of a certain Philosopher of Ephesus which I conceive to be Heraclitus by all which it clearly appears that he had the same Belief touching the Pains of Hell that his Scholar Origen had who maintains in an infinite number of places up and down his Works That the Pains of Hell are Purgative only and consequently are not Eternal but are to have an end when the Souls of the Damned are once throughly Cleansed and Purified by this Fire He believes also with Justin Martyr That the Angels fell in love with the First Women and that this Love of theirs transported them so far as to make them indiscreetly to discover unto them many Secrets which they ought to have concealed But now quite contrary to Irenaeus who maintains That our Saviour Christ lived upon Earth to the Age of Fifty years Clemens will have him to have Preached in the Flesh but one year onely and to have died in the Thirty first year of his Age. But since it is confessed by both Parties That there are very many absurd Tenets in this Author I shall not meddle any further with him As for Tertullian I confess his very turning Montanist hath taken off indeed very much of the repute which he before had in the Church both for the Fervency of his Pâ—ety and also for his Incomparable Learning But yet besides that a great part of his Works were written while he was yet a Catholick we are also to take notice that this his Montanism put no separation at all betwixt him and other Christians save only in point of Discipline which he according to the Severity of his Nature would have to be most Harsh and Rigorous For as for his Doctrine it is very evident that he constantly kept to the very same Rule and the same Faith that the Catholicks did whence proceeded that tart Speech of his That People rejected Montanus Maximilla and Priscilla not because they had any whit departed from the Rule of Faith but rather because they would have us to Fast oftner than to Marry And this is evident enough out of all those Books which were written by him during the time of his being a Montanist wherein he never disputeth or contendeth about any thing save onely about Discipline And this is ingenuously confessed also by the Learned Nicalaus Rigaltius in his Preface to those IX Books which he hath lately published Now notwithstanding the great Repute which this Father had in the Church and his not departing from it in any thing in Point of Faith yet how many Wild Opinions and Fancies do we meet withal in his Books I shall here speak onely of some of the principal of them passing by his so Dangerous Expressions touching the Person of the Son of God as having touched upon this Particular before But how strange is his manner of Discourse touching the Nature of God whom he seems to render subject to the like Passions that we are as namely to Anger Hatred and Grief He attributes also to him a Corporeal Substance and does not believe as he saith himself that any man will deny but that God is a Body So that we need the less to wonder that he so confidently affirms That there is no Substance which is not Corporeal or that with Justin Martyr and Clemens Alexandrinus he makes the Angelical Nature obnoxious to the Carnal Love of Women which occasioned those words in that Book of his De Virginibus velandis where he says That it is necessary that so dangerous a Face should be veiled which had scandalized even Heaven it self We need no after this think strange of his Doctrine touching the Nature of Mans Soul which he will have to be Corporeal and endued with Form and Figure and to be propagated and derived from the Substance of the Father to the Body of the Son and sowed and engendred with the Body increasing and extending it self together with it and many other the like Dreams in the maintaining whereof he useth so much Subtilty strength of Reason and Eloquence as that you will hardly meet with throughout the whole Stock of Antiquity a more Excellent and more Elegant Piece than that
find that the very same Error was defended by several Doctors of very great Repute in the Church S. Hierome who in divers places of his Commentaries hath excellently and solidly refuted this foolish Fancy says That many among the Learned Christians had maintained the same and to those whom we have already mentioned He addeth Lactantius Victorinus Severus and Apollinaris who is followed in this Point saith he in another place by great multitudes of Christians about us insomuch that I already foresee and presage to my self how many folks anger I shall incur hereby namely because he every where spoke against this Opinion Whence it plainly appears that in his time that is to say about the beginning of the Fifth Century it was still in great request in the Church And indeed how fierce soever he seem to be in his Onset yet he dares not condemn this Opinion absolutely Although we embrace not this Opinion saith he yet can we not condemn it for as much as there have been divers Eminent Personages and Martyrs in the Church who have maintained the same Let every man abound in his own sense and let us leave the judgment of all things to God Whence you see as we may observe by the way that the Fathers have not always held an Opinion in the same degree that we do For St. Hierome conceived this to be a Pardonable Errour which yet we at this day will not endure to hear of If it be here answered that the Church in the Ages following condemned this Opinion as erroneous this is no more than to say that the Churches in the Ages following acknowledged that the joynt Consent of many Fathers together touching one and the same Opinion is no solid Proof of the Truth of the same If Dionysius Alexandrinus had been of any other judgment he would never have written against Irenaeus as he did as St. Hierome also testifieth in one of his Books of Commentaries before cited And if we are to have regard to Authority only the Judgment of the succeeding Church cannot then serve us as a certain Guide in this Question to inform us on which side the Truth is For to alledge it in this Case were rather to oppose one Authority against another than to decide the Controversie As Dionysius Alexandrinus St. Hierome Gregory Nazianzene and others conceived not themselves bound to submit to the Authority of Justin Martyr Irenaeus Lactantius Victorinus Severus and others so neither are we any more bound to submit to theirs For their Posterity oweth them no more Respect than they themselves owed to their Ancestors It seemeth rather that in Reason they should owe them less because that look how far distant in time they are from the Apostles who are as it were the Spring and Original of all Ecclesiastical Authority so much doth the Credit and Authority of the Doctors of the Church lose and grow less If Antiquity as we would have it be the Mark of Truth then certainly that which is the most Ancient is also the most Venerable and the most Considerable And if there were no other Argument but this against the Authority of many Fathers unanimously consenting in any Opinion yet would it clearly serve to lessen the same but there are yet behind many others some whereof we shall here produce We have heard before Justin Martyr Irenaeus Tertullian and St. Augustine affirming all of them that Heaven shall not be opened till the Day of Judgment and that during this space of time the Souls of all the Faithful are shut up in some subterraneous place except some small number of those who had the Priviledge of going immediately to Heaven The Author of those Questions and Answers that go under the name of Justin Martyr maintains the same Opinion as you may see in the Answers to the LX and LXXIV Questions And that I may not unprofitably spend both Time and Paper in bringing in all the particular Passages I say in General that both the Major Part and also the most Eminent Persons among the Ancient Fathers held this Opinion either absolutely or at least in part For besides Justin Martyr Irenaeus Tertullian and St. Augustine and the Author of those Questions and Answers we before mentioned which is a very Ancient Piece indeed though falsly fathered upon Justin Martyr it is clear that Origen Lactantius Victorinus St. Ambrose St. Chrysostome Theodoret Oecumenius Aretas Prudentius Theophylact St. Bernard and among the Popes Clemens Romanus and John XXII were all of this Opinion as is confessed by all neither was this so admirable and general Consent of theirs contradicted by any Declaration of the Church for the space of Fourteen Hundred years neither yet did any one of the Fathers so far as we can discover take upon him to refute this Errour as Dionysius Alexandrinus and St. Hierome did to refute the Millenaries all the rest of the Fathers being either utterly silent as to this Particular and so by this their silence going over in a manner into the Opinion of the Major Part or else contenting themselves with declaring sometimes here and there in their Books that they believed that the Souls of the Saints should enjoy the sight of God till the Resurrection never formally denying the other Opinion But that which doth further shew that this Opinion is both very Ancient and hath been also very Common among the Christians is because that even at this day it is believed and defended by the whole Greek Church neither is there any of all those who make Profession of standing to the Writings of the Fathers as the Rule of their Faiths who have rejected it save only the Latines who have expresly also established the contrary at the Council of Florence held in the year of our Lord 1439. which is not above Two Hundred and Twelve years ago Do but fancy now to your selves a Vicentius Lirinensis standing in the midst of this Council and laying before them his own Oracle before mentioned which is That we ought to hold for most certainly and undoubtedly true whatsoever hath been delivered by the Ancients unanimously and by a Common Consent and do but think whether or no he should not have been hissed out by these Reverend Fathers as one that made the Truth which is holy and immutable to depend upon the Authority of Men For these men regarded not at all neither the Multitude nor the Antiquity nor the Learning nor the Sanctity of the Authors of this foolish Opinion but finding it to be false without any more ado rejected it as they thought they had good Reason to do and withal ordained the contrary Now I am verily perswaded that there are very few Points of Faith among all those which the Church of Rome would have the Protestants receive for which there can be alledged either more or more clear and evident Testimonies out of the Fathers than for this For as much therefore as that after
all this it hath not only be called in Question but hath been even utterly condemned also who seeth not that the Consent of many Fathers together although any such thing were to be had upon all the Points now in Debate would yet be no sufficient Argument of the Truth of the same But I shall pass on to the rest We have before heard how that Tertullian St. Cyprian who was both a Bishop and a Martyr Firmilianus Metropolitan of Cappadocia Dionysius Patriarch of Alexandria together with the Synods of Bishops both of Africk Cappadocia Cilicia and Bithynia held all that the Baptism of Hereticks was invalid and null St. Basil who was one of the most Eminent Bishops of the whole Eastern Church held also in a manner the very same Opinion and that a long time too after the Determination of the Council of Nice as appeareth by the Epistle which he wrote to Amphilochius which is also put in among the Publick Decrees of the Church by the Greek Canonists And yet this Opinion is now confessed by all to be Erroneous Many in like manner of the Fathers as namely Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus Lactantius and Africanus believed that our Saviour Christ kept the Feast of the Passeover but once only after his Baptism And yet notwithstanding this Consent of theirs the Opinion is known to be very false as Petavius also testifieth and besides is expresly contrary to the Text of the Gospel I shall not here say any thing of the Opinion of St. Chrysostom St. Hierome St. Basil and the Fathers of the Council held at Constantinople under the Patriarch Flavianus who seem all to have held that an Oath was utterly unlawful for Christians under the New Testament Neither shall I take any notice in this place of that Conceit of Athanasius St. Basil and Methodius as he is cited by John Bishop of Thessalonica who all believed that the Angels had Bodies to whom we may also add as we have shewed before St. Hilary Justin Martyr Tertullian and very many more of the Fathers who would all of them have the Nature of Angels to be such as was capable of the Passions of Carnal love of which number is even St. Augustine also Whosoever should now conclude from hence that this Fancy of theirs which yet is of no small importance is a Truth would he not be as sharply reproved for it by the Romanists as by those of Geneva But I must not forget that besides St. Cyprian St. Augustine and Pope Innocent I. whose Testimonies we have given in before all the rest of the Doctors in a manner of the first Ages maintained that the Eucharist was necessary for young Infants if at least you dare take Maldonat's word who affirms that this Opinion was in great Request in the Church during the first Six Hundred years after our Saviour Christ Cassander also testifieth that he hath often observed this Practice in the Ancients as indeed is also witnessed by Carolus Magnus and by Ludovicus Pius who lived a long time after the Sixth Century both of which assure us that this Custom continued in the West even in their time as they are cited by Cardinal Perron and the Traces of this Custom do yet remain to this day amongst those Christians who are not of the Communion of the Latine Church For Nicolaus Lyranus who lived somewhat above three hundred years since observed That the Greeks accounted the Holy Eucharist so necessary as that they administred it to little Children also as well as Baptism And even in our Fathers time the Patriarch Jeremias speaking in the name of the whole Creek Church said We do not only Baptize little Children but we also make them partakers of the Lords Supper And a little after we account saith he both Sacraments to be necessary to Salvation for all persons namely Baptism and the Holy Communion The Abyssines also make their Children in like manner Communicate of the Holy Eucharist as soon as ever they are Baptized Which are most evident Arguments that this false Opinion touching the Necessity of the Eucharist hath been of old maintained not by three or four of the Fathers only but by the Major part and in a manner by all of them For we do not hear of so much as one among all the Ancient Fathers who rejected it in express Terms as the Council of Trent hath done in these later Times To conclude the Jesuit Pererius hath informed us and indeed the observation is obvious enough to any man that is never so little conversant in the Writings of those Authors who lived before St. Augustines time that all the Greek Fathers and a considerable part also of the Latines were of Opinion that the Cause of Predestination was the Fore sight which God had either of Mens Good Works or else of their Faith either of which Opinions he assures us is manifestly contrary both to the Authority of the Scriptures and also to the Doctrine of St. Paul So that I conceive we may without troubling our selves any further in making this envious Inquiry into the Errours of the Fathers conclude from what hath been already produced that seeing the Fathers have Erred in so many Particulars not on singly but also many of them together Neither the private Opinion of each particular Father nor yet the unanimous Consent of the Major part of them is a sufficient Argument certainly to prove the Truth of those Points which are at this day controverted amongst Us. CHAP. V. Reason V. That the Fathers have strongly contradicted one another and have maintained Different Opinions in Matters of very Great Importance BEssarion a Greek born who was honoured with the Dignity of Cardinal by Pope Eugenius IV. as a Reward of his earnest desires to and the great pains he took in endeavouring a Reconciliation betwixt the Eastern and the Western Church in a Book which he wrote upon this Subject to the Council of Florence will have the whole Difference betwixt the Greek and Latine Churches to be brought before the Judgment Seat of the Fathers And for as much as he knew that unless the Judges did all agree and were of one Opinion the Cause especially in Matters of Religion necessarily remains undecided he strongly labours to prove that he hath all the Fathers consenting not only with him but which is yet much harder to prove that they are all of the same Opinion also among themselves insomuch that he commands us when ever there appeareth any contrariety in their Writings that we should accuse our own ignorance rather than blame them for contradicting each other We may conclude therefore from what is here laid down by this Author who was both as acute and as Learned a man as any was at this Council that to render the Fathers capable of being the Judges of our Controversies it is necessary that they should be
Bold Assertion of his at once we need go no further than to the very Point it self touching which he proposed it For whom will he ever be able to perswade that All the Fathers have written and said the very same things touching the Procession of the Holy Ghost It is evident that sometimes they will have It to Proceed from the Son also as S. Basil by name hath expressed himself in that Passage of his which is alledged by the Latins out of his Book against Eunomius which Piece yet the Greeks say is forged and as the Fathers of the Western Church have most expresly declared themselves in many places But yet I cannot possibly see how we can say That they have All been of this Opinion I shall not here meddle with those other Authorities produced by the Greeks out of the Fathers which their Adversaries put by as well as they can oftentimes most miserably wresting and stretching upon the Rack the Words and Meaning of the Fathers But that Passage of Theodoret in his Refutation of S. Cyril's Anathema's is so clear and express as that nothing can be more S. Cyril had said in his IX Anathema That the Holy Ghost proceeded Properly from the Son Theodoret answereth That it is both Impious and Blasphemous to say that the Holy Ghost hath its Subsistence from the Son or by the Son If he mean saith he that the Holy Ghost proceedeth properly from the Son as heing of the same Nature with It and as proceeding from the Father we shall willingly agree with him and shall receive his Doctrine as Sound and Pious But if he mean that the Holy Ghost hath its Subsistence from the Son or by the Son we must then reject it as Impious and Blasphemous He could not have thrown by this Proposition of S. Cyril more bluntly or in courser Terms And yet for all this so flat giving him the Lie as it were and his so insolent rejecting of an Opinion that was then received by the Church as the Latins pretend S. Cyril replies no more but this That the Holy Ghost altbough It proceed from the Father yet nevertheless is not a Stranger to the Son since He hath all things common with the Father Why did he not cry out against him as an Heretick as he many times elsewhere doth with much less reason if at least you must needs have it granted you that the Opinion of the Church at that time was That the H. Ghost proceeded from the Son Why did he not take it very ill at his hands that he should in so insolent a manner reject as Impious and Blasphemous a Proposition that was so Holy and so True Why did he not call the Whole Church in to be his Warrant for what he had said if so be it had Really been the General Belief of the Church at that time And how comes it to pass that in stead of all this he rather returns so tame an Answer as seems rather to betray his own Cause and something also to encline to the contrary Opinion of his Adversary For it is evident that neither Theoderet nor yet any of the Modern Greeks ever held That the Holy Ghost was a Stranger to or was Unconcerned in the Son seeing they all confess That these three to wit the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are One and the same God who is Blessed for ever Whosoever shall but diligently consider these things for we cannot stand any longer upon the Examination of them he cannot in my Judgment but confess that the Church had not as yet declared it self or determined any thing touching this Point and that these Doctors spake herein each Man his own Private Opinion only and according as the Present Occasion of Disputation led him to speak where you shall have them contradicting one another in like manner as is usual in speaking of things not as yet throughly examined or expresly determined insomuch that it would grieve a Man to see how the Greeks and the Latins toil and sweat to no purpose each of them labouring to bring over the Fathers to speak to their Side and fearfully wresting their Words whensoever they seem to be but never so little ambiguous and ever and anon accusing one another of having corrupted the Ancients Writings whensoever they are found to speak expresly against them and when all is done leaving those who either read or hear them without any Prejudice very much unsatisfied whereas it had been much more easie to have honestly confessed at first that which is but too apparent that the Fathers as in this so in many other Points of Religion have not all been of one and the same Perswasion And whereas Bessarion that he may clude this Testimony of Theodoret affirms That he was cast forth of the Church for having denied that the Holy Ghost proceeded from the Son and that he afterwards publickly confessed his Error at the Council of Cbalcedon where he was received into the Church again all this I say is only a Piece of Grecian Confidence which shews more clearly than all the rest how much this Man was carried away with his Passion and the violence of his Affection to the Latin Church For I beseech you in what Ancient Author had he ever read that Theodoret was I do not say Condemned or Excommunicated but so much as Reproved or Accused onely for having maintained any Erroneous Opinion touching the Procession of the Holy Ghost We have the Acts of the Council of Ephesus where he was Excommunicated We have the Letters of S. Cyril wherein he again received into the Communion of the Church John Patriarch of Antioch and all his Followers of which number Theodoret was the Chief We have the Council of Chalcedon where Theodoret after some certain Cryings out of his Adversaries against him was at length received by the whole Assembly as a Catholick Bishop and was admitted to sit amongst them In which of all these Authentick Pieces is there so much as one word spoken touching this Opinion of his concerning the Point of the Proceeding of the Holy Ghost S. Cyril himself that is to say those of his Party did not at all condemn what he said touching this Particular but he rather contented himself in excusing or if you please in defending onely his own Opinion The Business for which Theodoret was questioned in the Councils of Ephesus and of Chalcedon had nothing in the World to do with this touching the Procession of the Holy Ghost for the Question was onely there touching the Two Natures of our Saviour Christ whom Nestorius would needs divide into Two Persons John Patriarch of Antioch Theodoret and divers other Eastern Bishops favouring in some sort his Person or being indeed offended rather at the Proceeding of the Council of Ephesus against him and withal rejecting several things that were contained in the Anathemas of S. Cyril Now with what face could this Man tell us after all
sense and meaning of these words lest otherwise by misinterpreting the same you might chance to fall into the one or the other of these two Precipices If you have recourse to the Fathers in this case you shall have some of them referring it to the Vnion of the Affection and of the Will and others again to the Vnity of Essence and of Nature So likewise this other passage in the same Evangelist My Father is greater than I is very considerable also in the Question touching the Divinity of Jesus Christ And yet there are some among the Fathers who understand the words as spoken indefinitely of the Son of God although the rest of them do ordinarily restrain them to his Humanity These words also of St. John The Word was made Flesh are of no small consideration in the Disputes against Nestorius and Eutyches Now if you bring the business before the Fathers you shall have some of them expounding these words by comparing them with those passages in St. Paul where it is said that Christ was made sin and a Curse for us but St. Cyril saith that we must take heed how we interpret the words so It would be an endless Task if I should here go about to reckon up all the Differences and Contrarieties of Judgment that are to be found in the Fathers Those that have a mind to see any more of them may have recourse to some of our late Commentators whose usual course is to bring in all together the several Interpretations of the Fathers upon those Books which they Comment upon as Maldonate hath done upon the Gospels Cardinal Tolet upon St. John Bened. Justinianus upon the Epistles of St. Paul and others where they will find that there is scarcely any one Verse that the Ancients have understood all of them after one and the â—ame manner And which is yet worse than this besides this Contrariety and Difference of Interpretation you will often meet with very many cold and empty Expositions and it is very seldom that you shall find there that solid simplicity which we ought to expect from all those who take upon them the Interpretation of the Holy Scriptures For as much therefore as we many times meet with Contrariety of Judgment as well in their Expositions of the Scriptures as in their Opinions we may safely conclude that they are not of sufficient Authority to be admitted as the Supreme Judges of our Controversies that Contradiction which is often found amongst them evidently shewing that they are not Infallible Judges such as it is requisite that they should be for the making good of all those Points which are at this day maintained by the Church of Rome against the Protestants CHAP. VI. Reason VI. That neither those of the Church of Rome nor the Protestants do acknowledge the Fathers for their Judges in Points of Religion but do both of them reject such of their Opinions and Practices as are not for their Gust An Answer to two Objections that may be made against what hath been here delivered in this Discourse THus far have we laboured to prove that the Writings of the Fathers have not Authority enough in themselves for to be received as Definitive Sentences passed upon our Differences in Religion Let us now in the last place see how much they have in respect of us For although a Sentence of Judgment should be good and valid in it self as being pronounced by one who is a competent and lawful Judge duly and according to the Forms of Law yet notwithstanding would not this serve to determine the Controversie if so be the Authority of this Judge be denied by either of the Parties unless as it is in worldly Affairs the Law be armed with such a Power as is able to force those that are obstinate to submit to Reason for as much as the Question is here touching Religion which is a Holy and Divine thing to the embracing whereof men ought to be perswaded and not compelled since force hath no place here For although perhaps they could compel men outwardly to render some such respect to the Writings of the Fathers yet notwithstanding would not this serve to make any impression of the Belief of the same in the heart of any one The same Divisions would still remain in the minds of men which you are first of all to pull up by the roots if ever you intend to reconcile them to each other and to make them agree in Point of Religion For the certain determination therefore of all Differences of this nature it is necessary that both Parties be perswaded that the Judge who is to pronounce Sentence upon the same hath as much Authority as it requisite for that purpose Notwithstanding therefore that the Fathers should have clearly and positively pronounced what they had thought touching the Point in hand which yet they have not done as we have proved before Let us suppose further that they had been endued with all those qualities which are requisite for the rendring a man fit to be a Supreme Judge and from whom there can be no Appeal which yet is not so as we have already clearly proved yet notwithstanding would all this be to no purpose unless this Authority were acknowledged by both Parties The Old Testament is a Book which was written by Divine Inspiration and is endued with so supreme an Authority as that every part of it ought to be believed Yet doth not this work any whit at all with a Pagan because he doth not acknowledge any such excellent worth to be in it In like manner is it between the New Testament and the Jew neither can it decide the Differences betwixt the Jews and us not because it is not of sufficient Authority in it self but because it is not so to the Jew And indeed he were worthy to be laughed at whosoever should alledge in disputing against the Pagans the Authority of the Old Testament or that of the New for the bringing of a Jew over to our Belief Suppose therefore that the Writings of the Fathers were clear upon our Questions nay which is more let it be granted moreover if you please that they were written by Divine Inspiration and are of themselves of a full and undeniable Authority I say still that they cannot decide our Debates if so be that either of the Parties shall refuse to acknowledge this great and admirable dignity to be in them much less if both Parties shall refuse to allow them to have this Priviledge Let us now therefore see in what account the several Parties have the Fathers and whether they acknowledge them as the Supreme Judges of their Religion or at least as Arbitrators whose definitive Sentence ought to stand firm and inviolable As for our Protestants of France whom their Adversaries would fain perswade if they could to receive the Fathers for Judges in Religion and to whom consequently they ought not
recourse to some other way of Proof if they intend to prevail upon their Adversaries to receive the aforesaid Articles But what will you say now if we make it appear to you that the Church of Rome it self doth not allow that the Fathers have any such Authority I suppose that if we are able to do this there is no Man so perverse as not to confess That this Proceeding of theirs in grounding their Articles of Faith upon the Sayings of the Fathers is not onely very Insufficient but very Inconvenient also For how can it ever be endured that a Man that would perswade you to the Belief of any thing should for that purpose make use of the Testimony of some such Persons as neither you nor himself believe to be Infallibly True and so fit to be trusted Let us now therefore see whether those of the Church of Rome really have themselves so great an Esteem of the Fathers as they would be thought to have by this their Proceeding or not Certainly several of the Learned of that Party have upon divers occasions let us see plain enough that they make no more account of them than the Protestants do For whereas these require That the Authority of the Fathers be grounded upon that of the Scripture and therefore receive nothing that they deliver as Infallibly True unless it be grounded upon the Scripture passing by or rejecting whatsoever they propose either besides or contrary to the Sense of the Scripture the other in like manner will have the Judgment of the Fathers depend upon that of the Church in present being in every Age and approve pass by or condemn all such Opinions of theirs as the Church either approveth passeth by or condemneth So that although they differ in this That the one attributeth the Supremacy to the Scripture and the other to the Present Church of their Age yet notwithstanding they both agree in this That both the one and the other of them equally deprive the Fathers of the same Insomuch that they both of them spend their time unprofitably enough whilst they trouble themselves to plead their Cause before this Inferiour Court where the wrangling and cunning Tricks of the Law have so much place where the Judgments are hard to be got and yet harder to be understood and when all is done are not Supreme but are such as both Parties believe they may lawfully appeal from whereas they might if they pleased let alone these troublesom and useless Beatings about and come at the first before the Supreme Tribunal whether it be that of the Scriptures or of the Church where the Suits are not so long and where the Subtilty of Pleading is of much less use where the Sentences also are more clear and express and which is the Chiefest thing of all such as we cannot appeal from But that we may not be thought to impose this Opinion upon the Church of Rome unjustly let us hear them speak themselves Cardinal Cajetan in his Preface upon the Five Books of Moses spâ—â—king of his own Annotations upon the same saith thus If you chance there to meet with any New Exposition which is agreeable to the Text and not Contrary either to tbe Scriptures or to the Doctrine of the Church although perhaps it differ from that which is given by the whole Current of the Holy Doctors I shall desire the Readers that they would not too hastily reject it but that they would rather censure charitably of it Let them remember to give every man his due there are none but the Authors of the Holy Scriptures alone to whom we attribute such Authority as that we ought to believe whatsoever they have written But as for others saith St. Augustine of how great Sanctity and Learning so ever they may have been I so read them as that I do not believe what they have written because they have written it Let no man therefore reject a new Exposition of any Passage of Scripture under pretence that it is contrary to what the Ancient Doctors gave but let him rather diligently examine the Text and the contexture of the Scripture and if he find that it accordeth well therewith let him praise God who hath not tyed the Exposition of the Scriptures to the sense of the Ancient Doctors but to the whole Scripture it self under the censure of the Catholick Church Melchior Canus Bishop of the Canary Islands having before declared himself according as St. Augustine hath done saying that the Holy Scriptures only are exempt from all error he further adds But there is no man how holy or learned soever he be that is not sometimes deceived that doth not sometimes dote that doth not sometimes slip And then alledging some of those examples which we have before produced he concludes in these words Let us therefore read the Ancient Fathers with all due Reverence yet notwithstanding for as much as they were but Men with Choice and Judgment And a little after he saith That the Fathers sometimes fail and bring forth Monsters besides the ordinary course of Nature And in the same place he saith that To follow the Ancients in all things and to tread every where in their steps as little Cbildren use to do in play is nothing else but to disparage our own Parts and to confess our selves to have neither Judgment nor Skill enough for the searching into the Trutâ— No let us follow them as Guides but not as Masters It is very true saith Ambrosius Catharinus in like manner that the Sayings and Writings of the Fathers have not of themselves any so absolute Authority as that we are bound to assent to them in all things The Jesuits also themselves inform us sufficiently in many places that they do not reckon themselves so tyed to follow the Judgment of the Fathers in all things as people may imagine Petavius in his Annotations upon Epiphanius confesseth freely That the Fathers were men that they had their failings and that we ought not maliciously to search after their Errors that we may lay them open to the world but that we may take the liberty to note them when ever they come in our way to the end that none be deceived by them and that we ought no more to maintain or defend their Errors than we ought to imitate their Vices if at least they had any and again That many things have slipped from them which if they were examined according to the exact Rule of Truth could not be reconciled to any good sense and that Himself hath observed That they are out sufficiently whensoever they speak of such Points of Faith as were not at all called in question in Their time And to say the truth He often rejects both Their Opinions and Their Expositions also and sometimes very Uncivilly too as we have touched before speaking of his Notes upon Epiphanius And in one place the Authority of some of the
they maintain only such things as are eithe Expresly delivered in the Scriptures or else are Evidently deduced from thence and such as have also been expounded the greatest part of them and interpreted by the Ancients not in their own private Writings only but even in their Creeds and Synodical Determinations also They pretend not either to any Particular Revelation oâ— Secret Tradition or any other New Principle of Doctrine Their Faith is grounded only upon the Old and which is the Most Authentick Instrument of Christianity the New Testament Only in their Expositions either of the Doctrines therein Contained or other Passages They produce some few things that are not at all found in the Fathers But these things being not Necessary to Salvation the Argument which is brought from the Silence of the Fathers herein is not sufficient to prove the Falseness of them Time Experience Assistance of others and the very Errours also of the Fathers having as They say now laid that Open to Them which was Heretofore more Difficult and hard to be discovered and taken notice of in Divine Revelation Who knoweth not that a Dwarf mounted upon a Giants shoulders looketh higher and seeth further than the Giant himself It would be ridiculous in any man that should conclude that That which the Dwarf pretends to discover is not at all in Nature because then the Giant must also have seen it Neither would He be much wiser that should accuse the Dwarf of Presumption because forsooth He hath told Us that whereof the Giant said not a word seeing that it is the Giant to whom the Dwarf is beholding for the greatest part of His Knowledge And this is Our Case say the Protestants We are mounted upon the Shoulders of that Great and High Giant Antiquity That advantage which we have above it by its means enables us to see many things in Divine Revelation which it did not see But yet however this cannot be any occasion of Presumption to us because we see more than it did for as much as it is this very Antiquity to which we owe a great part of this our Knowledge It is Certainly therefore very Clear that as for the Protestants and what concerns the Positive Points of Their Faith they are wholly without the Compass of this Dispute And as for those of the Church of Rome They cannot for the Reasons before given make any Advantage of the Testimony of the Ancients for the proving of any of those Points of Doctrine which They maintain save only of those wherein their Adversaries agree with them and therefore if they would have us to come over to Their Belief They must Necessarily have recourse to some other kind of Proofs But yet I do not see but that we may very well make Inquiry into Antiquity touching many Articles which are now maintained by those of the Church of Rome and if we find that the Ancients have not said any thing at all of the same we may then positively conclude That they are not to be accounted as any part of the Christian Religion I confess that there are some of them against which this Argument is of no force at all as namely those which they do not account Necessary to Salvation and which both the Ancients heretofore might have been and we also at this day may be ignorant of But certainly this Argument in my Judgment would be utterly unanswerable against such Points as they press as Necessary and whereon indeed they would have our Salvation wholly to depend As for Example The Supreme Authority of the Pope and of the Church which owneth him as Its Head The Adoration of the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist the Sacrifice of the Mass the Necessity of Auricular Confession and the like For if so be they are of so great Importance as they would make us believe it would be a Point of high Impiety to say That the Fathers knew not any thing at all of them in like manner as it would be a most absurd thing to maintain That though they did know them they would not yet speak any one word of them in all those Books which we have of theirs at this day And if they had said any thing at all of them in their Writings we have no reason in the World to suspect that possibly those Passages where mention was made of them may have been rased out or corrupted and altered by false hands seeing that this Piece of Knavery would have been done to the disadvantage of those who had these Books in their Custody We have rather very good reason to suspect that whatsoever Alterations there are they have been made in favour of the Church of Rome as we have proved before in the First Book If therefore after so long a time and after so many Indexes as they of the Church of Rome have put forth and so great a desire as they have had to find these Doctrines of theirs in the Writings of the Fathers and the little Conscience that they have sometimes made of foisting into the Writings of the Fathers what they could not find there We can still notwithstanding make it appear that they are not to be found there at all After all this I say who can possibly doubt but that the Fathers were ignorant of them Who will ever be perswaded to believe that they held them as Necessary to Salvation And if they were not known to be such then how can any body imagine that they should at length come to be such now My Opinion therefore is That although the Authority of the Fathers be not sufficient to prove the Truth of those Articles which are now maintained by the Church of Rome against the Protestants although the Ancients should perhaps have believed the same it may notwithstanding serve to prove the Falseness of them in case that we should find by the Fathers that the Ancients were either wholly ignorant of them or at least acknowledged them not for such as they would now have us believe them to be which is a Business that so nearly concerns the Protestants as that to be able to bring about their Design I conceive they ought to employ a good part of their time in reading over the Books of the Ancients Onely it is requisite that either Party when they undertake so tedious and so important a Business as this is should come very well provided of all Necessary Parts as namely of the Knowledge of the Language and of History and should also be very well read in the Scriptures and that they use herein their utmost Diligence and Attention and withal read over exactly whatsoever we have left us of the Fathers not omitting any thing that Possibly they can get because a little short Passage many times gives a Man very much Light in the finding out their Meaning and not think as some who much deceive themselves do that they perfectly know what the Sense and Belief of the Ancients was because
perhaps they have spent four or five Months in the reading of them over But above all it is Necessary that they come to this Business void of all Passion and Prejudication which is indeed the greatest and the most general Cause of that Obscurity which is found in these Writings of the Fathers whilst every one endeavours to make them speak to his sense whereas in the greatest part of these Points of Religion which are now controverted amongst us these Ancient Authors really believed much Less than the one Party doth and some little matter More than the other doth and there are but a very few Points of all this number wherein they are fully and absolutely of the same Judgment that either of the Two Parties is Neither is it sufficient in this Business to take notice of such Testimonies as either positively affirm or deny those things which we look after because that how clear soever they perhaps may be it will go very hard but a quick Wit will find something to darken the sense of them as you may observe in all Books of Controversies where you shall have them so baffle and make nothing of such Testimonies as are brought against them out of the Ancients as that you would hardly know what to hold to But you must also observe what the Necessary Consequences are of each particular Article it being impossible to conclude upon any One Point that is of any Importance but that there will presently follow upon it divers Consequences as well within as without the Church As for example you are to consider what the Consequences are of the Transubstantiation of the Eucharist as it is now held by the Church of Rome of Purgatory and of the Monarchical Authority of the Pope and when you have observed them well you are then to mark in reading the Books of the Ancients whether they appear there in Whole or in Part. For if you find them not there at all it is a most Certain Argument that the Doctrine from whence they proceed and upon which they follow is New and Vnsound But I shall not proceed any further in this Discourse since divers have already treated hereof at large it being in my Judgment no hard matter to collect from what we have here delivered how we ought to read the Fathers FINIS Euseb Hist Eccles lib. 3. cap. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cassand Consult Ferdinan p 894. Perron Epist to Casaub Cypr. ep 74. p. 195. Orig Praef Operis contra Cels p. 1 2. Euseb Hist Eccles l. 1. c. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hieron l. de Scriptor c. Euseb in hist passim Tertul. aliquorum meminit Gontery Veron and others Hegesippus apud Euseb l. 4. c. 22. Concil 7. Act. 5. Tom. 3 p. 552. Hier. l de scrip Eccles Tom. 1. p. 346 B. 350. C. Concil 7. Act 6. Concil 5. Collat 6. Marian. ep ad Mon. Alex. ad calcem Concil â—halc T. 2. p. 450. E. Leont lib. extat Bibl. SS PP T 4 part 2. Greg. Thaumat op Par. ann 1622. pag. 97. ubi vide Voss Bibl. SS PP T. 1. Gr. Lat. Concil 6. Act. 3. Act. 14. T. 3. Concil Concil 6. Act. 3. Act. 14. T. 3. Concil Concil 7. Act. 6. Refut Iconoclast Tom. 5. Concil Florent Sess 20. T. 4. Hier. Ep. 28. ad Lucin. Tom. 1. Hier. Apol. 2. contr Ruff. Auctor operis De Operibus Card. Christi inter Cyprian oper p. 444. a Erasmus in edit Cypr. suâ Sixtus Senens Biblioth lib. 4. Bellar. de Euchar l 2. cap. 9. De amiss grat l. 6. c. 2. Pâ—ssevin in Apparat. Scult Medulla Patr. Andr. Rivet l. 2. c. 15. Crit. Sacr. Aubert de Euchar l. 2. c. 8. Hier. de script Eccl. Tom. 1. p. 350. Ex Tertul. li. de Baptismo cap. 17. Hier. l. 2. Apol. contr Ruffin Tom. 2. p. 334. Ep. 69. T. 2. Apol. contr Ruff. ad Pammach et Marc. Tom. 2. Hier. in Jerem. com 4. tom 4. Hier. l. 2. Apol. contra Ruffin Tom. 2. Orig contra Cels lib. 7. Concil Flor. Sess 2. p 457. Concil Afric 6. cap. 3. Concil Flor. Sess 20. Codex Can. Ec. Vn Dionys Exig p. 99. Leo in ep ad Theodos Imp. Tom. 2. Concil Valentin in ep ad Theod. Tom. 2. Concil Galla Placid in ep ad Theodos Tom. 2. Concil 5 Act. 5. Tom. 2. Concil Concil 7. Act. 4. Tom. 3. Concil Nannius in edit op Athan. Bellar de imag l. 2 c. 10. lib. de script Eccles in Athan Possevin in appar in Athan. D. 96. C. Constantino nostro 14. Augusti Steuchius de Dona. Constant. Baron in annal Melchior Canus locor Theolog l. 11. p. 511. Hen. Kaltheis ap Magdeb. cent 2. Nic. Cusan Conc. Cath. l. 2. c. 34. Jo. de Turrecr de Eccl. lib. 2. c. 101. Jo. Driedo de dogm scrip Eccl. l. 1. c. 2. Cl. Espens de Contin l. 1. c 2. G. Cassand defens lib. de officio pii viri p. 843. Sim. Vig. ex respons Syn. Basil c. en la lettre contr Durand Baron Annal. T. 2. an 102. an 865. Erasm praefat in Hieron Baron Annal. Tom. 1. an 51. Bellar. de lib. arbit T. 5. c. 25. NOs fatemur librum esse corruptum c. Sed tamen vel esse Clementis Romani vel alterius aequè docti ac antiqui Hier. ep 84. ad Magn. Tom. 2. a Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 2. b Id. Strom. l. 1. l. 2. alibi passim Hier. ep 84. ad Magn. Tom. 2. Id. in Catal. Tom. 1. Baron Annal. Tom. 1. an 66. Hier. ep 28. ad Lucin. Tom. 1. Hier. ep 4. ad Rustic Tom. 1. Daemonum contra se pugnantium pâ—rtenta coâ—fingunt a Ruffin in Expos Symbol lit de adult script Origen b Hier. ep 65. Tom. 2. Apol. 2. contr Ruff. a Cyril ep ad Ich. Antioch in Act. Conc. Eph. b In Praefat. in Tom. 1. Concil Gen. Epiphanius in Anchor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Hier. ep 5. ad Flor. ep 41. ad Ruffin b Aug. ep ad Hier. quae est inter ep Hier. 93. iterum ep 97. c Gennald in Catal. inter op Hier. a Hier. ep 62. ad Theoph. Alex lib. 2. Apol. contra Ruffin Hier. ep 75. Id. praefat in lib. Euseb de loc Hebr. Tom. 4. op Amb. p. 211. lib. 2. de Abra. in marg annot a Lud. Vives in lib. 21. de Civ Dei c. 24. In antiquis libris Brug Colon. non le guntur isti decem aut duodecim qui sequuntur versus b Holstein op lim praef tom op Athan. Neque solius Athanasti ea fortuna ut ineptissimorum interpolatorum manus subiret cùm Chrysostomi Procli aliorumque homilias similibus sequiorum saeculorum ineptiis faedatas in iisdem regiis codicibus invenerim Andr. Masius Praef. in Litur Syr. Cassand in Liturg cap. 2. Euseb in Chro. editâ—num 2148. 2158. Vide Scalig. in loc p. 198