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
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
what hath been so temperately learnedly and judiciously written by Monsieur Daille our Protestan-Perron And what the same Lord in a Treatise which will shortly be publisht saith concerning the Popish Perron viz. Him I can scarce ever laudare in one sense that is quote but I must laudare in the other that is praise who hath helpt the Church to all the advantages which wit learning industry judgment and eloquence could add unto her is as true of this our Protestant I shall add but one Lords Testimony more viz. the Lord George Digbies in his late Letters concerning Religion in these words p. 27 28. The reasons prevalent with me whereon an inquiring and judicious person should be obliged to rely and acquiesce are so amply and so learnedly set down by Monsieur Daillé in his Employ des Peâ—â—s that I think little which is material or weighty can be said on this subject that his rare and piercing observation hath not anticipated Were it needful to wander to Foreigners for Testimonies I could tell you how highly this Author is esteemed by the Learned and Famous Doctor Andr. Rivet upon whole importunity his Book des Images and other Tracts have been translated but writing to Englishmen I will only name the judicious Doctor Jer. Taylor Libert of Proph. Sect. 8. n. 4. in these words I shall chuse such a topick as makes no invasion upon the great reputation of the Fathers which I desire should be preserved sacred as it ought For other things let who please read Mr. Daillé du vrai usage des Peres Et siquis eueulo locus inter Oscines I must ingenuously profess that it was the reading of this rational Book which first convinced me that my study in the French Language was not ill employed which hath also enabled me to commend this to the World as faithfully translated by a judicious hand And that if there were no other use of the Fathers there is very much while Testem quem quis adducit pro se tenetur accipere contra se is a rule in reason as well as Civil Law and that the works of Cord. Perron for whose monstrous understanding they are the words of Viscount Faulkland p. 59. Bellarmine and Bironius might with most advantage to their party and no disgrace to them have been employed in seeking citations being built upon the principle That whatever the Fathers witness to be tradition and the doctrine of the Church must be received of all for such and so relied on And this principle being here throughly examined You have here as sufficient a constitation of Perrons Book against K. J. and by consequence of the Marquess of Worcesters against K. C. and Dr. Vanes and other Epitonizers of the Cardinal as you have of Mr. Cressys in the Preface to the Lord Faulkland by the learned I. P. Chr. Coll. Aug. 1. 1651. T. S. THE PREFACE ALl the Difference in Religion which is at this day betwixt the Church of Rome and the Protestants lies in some certain Points which the Church of Rome maintaineth as important and necessary Articles of the Christian Faith Whereas the Protestants on the contrary neither believe nor will receive them for such For as for those things which the Protestants believe for their part and which they conceive to be the Fundamentals of Religion they are so evidently and undeniably such as that even their Adversaries themselves do also allow of and receive them as well as they for as much as they are both clearly delivered in the Scriptures and expresly set down by the Ancient Councils and Fathers and are indeed unanimously received by the greatest part of Christians in all Ages and Parts of the World Such for example are these Maxims following Namely That there is a God who is Supreme over all and who created the Heavens and the Earth That having created Man after his own Image this Man revolting from his Obedience is faln together with his whole Posterity into most extreme and eternal misery and become infected with Sin as with a mortal Leprosie and is therefore obnoxious to the Wrath of God and liable to his Curse That the Merciful Creator pitying Mans Estate graciously sent his Son Jesus Christ into the World That his Son is God Eternal with him and that having taken Flesh upon himself in the Womb of the Virgin Mary and become Man He hath done and suffered in this Flesh all things necessary for our Salvation having by this means sufficiently expiated for our Sins by his Blood and that having finished all this he is ascended again into Heaven and sitteth at the right hand of the Father from whence He shall one day come to judge all Mankind rendering to every one according to their Works That to enable us to communicate of his Salvation by His Merits He sendeth us down His Holy Spirit proceeding both from the Father and the Son and who is also one and the same God with Them in such sort as that these Three Persons are notwithstanding but One GOD who is Blessed for ever That this Spirit enlightens our Vnderstanding and begets Faith in us whereby we are justified That after all this the LORD sent his Apostles to Preach this Doctrine of Salvation throughout the whole World That These have planted Churches and placed in each of them Pastors and Teachers whom we are to hear with all reverence and to receive from them Baptism the Sacrament of our Regeneration and the Holy Eucharist or Lords Supper which is the Sacrament of our Communion with Jesus Christ That we are likewise all of us bound to love GOD and our Neighbour very fervently observing diligently that Holy Doctrine which is laid down unto us in the Books of the New Testament which have been inspired by His Spirit of Truth as also those other of the Old there being nothing either in the one or in the other but what is most true These Articles and some other few the like which there perhaps may be are the substance of the Protestants whole Belief and if all other Christians would but content themselves with these there would never be any Schism in the Church But now their Adversaries add to these many other Points which they press and command Men to believe as necessary ones and such as without believing of which there is no possible hope of Salvation As for example That the Pope of Rome is the Head and Supreme Monarch of the whole Christian Church throughout the World That He or at least the Church which he acknowledgeth a true one cannot possibly erre in matter of Faith That the Sacrament of the Eucharist is to be adored as being really Jesus Christ and not a piece of Bread That the Mass is a Sacrifice that really expiates the Sins of the Faithful That Christians may and ought to have in their Churches the Images of God and of Saints to which they are to use Religious Worship bowing down before them That it is
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
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
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
from the Father to the Son this doubt I say of his manifestly proveth that the Church had not as yet at that time embraced or concluded upon the former of these Opinions it being a thing utterly improbable that so modest a Man as S. Augustine was would have cast off the general Opinion of the Church and have taken up a particular Fancy of his own But the Passion wherewith S. Hierome was at that time carried away against Ruffinus a great part of the Learned Men of his time being also of the said Opinion easily wrought in him a belief that it was the Common Judgment and Opinion of the whole Christian Church From the same Root also sprung that Errour of John Bishop of Thessalonica if at least it be an Errour who affirmed That the Opinion of the Church was That Angels are not wholly Incorporeal and Invisible but that they have Bodies though of a very Rare and thin Substance not much unlike those of the Fire or the Air. For those who published the General Councils at Rome conceive this to have been his own private Opinion onely And if so neither shall we need at present to examine the Truth of this their Conceit you then plainly see that the Affection this Author bare to his own Opinion carried him so far away as to make him father upon the whole Church what was indeed but his own particular Opinion though otherwise he were a Man who was highly esteemed by the VII Council which not onely citeth him among the Fathers but honours him also with the Title of a Father Epiphanius must also be excused in the same manner where he assures us That the Church held by Apostolical Tradition the Custom which it had of meeting together thrice a Week for the Celebration of the Holy Eucharist which yet Petavius maketh evidently appear not to have been of Apostolical Institution The Mistakes of Venerable Bede noted and censured elsewhere by Petavius are of the fame nature also The Belief of the Church if I mistake not saith he is That our Saviour Christ lived in the Flesh Thirty three Years or there about till the time of his Passion And he saith moreover That the Church of Rome testifieth that this is Its Belief by the Marks which they yearly set upon their Tapers upon Good Friday whereon they always inscribe a Number of Tears which is less by Thirty three than the common Aera of the Christians He likewise saith in the same place That it is not lawful for any Catholick to doubt whether Jesus Christ suffered on the Cross the XV day of the Moon or not Now Petavius hath proved at large that both these Opinions which Beda delivers unto us as the Churches Belief are nothing less than what he would have them The curious Reader may observe many the like Carriages in the Writings of the Fathers but these here already set down in my judgment do sufficiently justifie the doubt which I have made namely that we ought not to receive as Certain Truths the Testimony which the Fathers give touching the Belief of the Church in their Time Nevertheless that we may not seem to make a breach upon the Honour and Reputation of the Fathers I say that though we should grant that all their Depositions and Testimonies in this Particular were certainly and undoubtedly True yet notwithstanding would they be of little use to us as to our present purpose For first of all there are but very few Passages wherein they testifie plainly and in direct Terms what the Belief of the Church in their Time hath been touching the Points now controverted amongst us This is the Business of an Historian rather than of a Doctor of the Church whose Office is to teach to prove and to exhort the People committed to his Charge and to correct their Vices and Errours telling them what they ought to do or believe rather than troubling them with Discourses of what is done or believed by others But yet when they do give their Testimony what the Belief and Discipline of the Church in their time was this Testimony of theirs ought not to extend save onely to what was apparently such and which besides was apparent to themselves too Now as we have formerly proved they could not possibly know the Sense and Opinions of every particular Christian that lived in their time nor yet of all the Pastors and Ministers who were set over them but of some certain Particular Christians onely Forasmuch therefore as it is confessed even by those very Men who have the Church in greatest esteem that the Belief of Particular Churches is not infallible we may very easily perceive that such Testimonies of the Fathers as these can standus in very little or no stead seeing they represent unto us such Opinions as are not always certainly and undoubtedly True and which consequently are so far from confirming and proving ours as that they rather stand in need of being examined aud proved themselves But yet suppose that the Church of Rome did hold that the Beliefs of Particular Churches were Infallible which yet it doth not yet would not this make any thing at all against the Protestants forasmuch as they are of the clean contrary Opinion Now it is taken for granted on all hands that Proofs ought to be fetched from such things as are confessed and acknowledged by your Adversary whom you endeavour to convince otherwise you will never be able to move him or make him quit his former Opinion Seeing therefore that the Testimonies of the Farthers touching the State of the Faith and Ecclesiastical Discipline of their Times are of this Nature it remaineth that we now consider their other Discourses wherein they have delivered themselves not as Witnesses deposing what they had seen but as Doctors instructing us in what they believed And certainly how Holy and Able soever they were it cannot be denied but that they were still Men and consequently were subject to Error especially in matters of Faith which is a Business so much transcending Humane Apprehension The Spirit of God onely was able to direct their Understandings and their Pens in the Truth and to withhold them from falling into any Error in like manner as it directed the Holy Prophets and Apostles while they wrote the Books of the Old and New Testament Now we cannot be any way assured that the Spirit of God was present always with them to enlighten their Understandings and to make them see the Truth of all those things whereof they wrote They neither pretend to this themselves nor yet doth any one that I know of attribute unto them this Assistance unless it be perhaps the Author of the Gloss upon the Decrees who is of Opinion that we ought to stand to all that the Fathers have written even to the least tittle who yet is very justly called to a round account for this by Alphonsus Ã
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 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
Tobit the Book of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus and the Maccabees out of the Canon contrary to the Judgment of the Church of 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
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