taken up all of them with their particular Charges and Imployments did not know of some opinions of the Prelates of their Age or that either their Modesty or their Charity or the little Eloquence and Repute they had abroad might have made them conceal the same The other Objection is drawn from hence because that these Doctors of the Ancient Church who held some opinions different from those which we read at this day in the Fathers did not publish them at all But I answer first of all that every Man is not able to do so In the next place those that were able were not always willing to do so Divers other Considerations may perhaps also have hindred them from so doing and if they are Wise and Pious Men they are never moved till they needs must And hence it is that oftentimes those opinions which have less truth in them do yet prevail because that Prudence which maintains the True Opinion is Mild and Patient whereas Rashness which defends the False is of a Froward Eager and Ambitious Nature But now let us but imagine how many of the Evidences of this Diversity of opinion may have been made away by those several ways before represented by us as namely having been either devoured by Time or suppressed by Malitious Men for fear lest they should let the World see the Traces of the Truth which they would have concealed But that I may not be thought to bring here only bare Conjectures without any proof at all I shall produce some Examples also for the confirming and clearing of this my Assertion Epiphanius maintains against Aerius whom he ranks among his Haeresiarchae or Arch Hereticks that a Bishop according to the Apostle Saint Paul and the Original Institution of the thing it self is more than a Priest and this he endeavours to prove in many words answering all the Objections that are made to the contrary If you but read the Passage I am confident that when you had done you would not stick to swear that what he hath there delivered was the general opinion of all the Doctors of the Church it being very unlikely that so Great and so Renowned a Prelate would so slatly have denied the opinion which he disputed against if so be any one of his own familiar friends had also maintained the same And yet for all this Saint Hierome who was one of the Principal Lights of our Western Church and who lived at the same time with Epiphanius who was his intimate Friend and a great admirer of his Piety saith expresly that Among the Ancients Bishops and Priests were the same the one being a name of Dignity and the other of Age. And that it may not be thought that this fell from him in discourse only he there falls to proving the same at large alledging several Passages of Scripture touching this Particular and he also repeats the same thing in two or three several places of his Works Whereby it evidently appears that even Positions which have been quite Contradictory to the opinions which have been delivered and maintained by some of the Fathers and proposed in what terms soever have notwithstanding been sometimes either maintained or at least tolerated by some others of 〈◊〉 less Authority S. Hierome himself hath â—alâ— extreamly foul upon Ruffinus and hath traduced divers of his opinions as most Pernicious and Deadly and yet notwithstanding we do not any where find that ever he was accounted as an Heretick by the rest of the Fathers But we shall have occasion hereafter to consider more at large of the like Examples and shall only at present observe that if those Books of S. Hierome which we mentioned a little before should chance to have been lost every Man would then assuredly have concluded with Epiphanius that no Doctor of the Ancient Church ever held that a Bishop and a Priest were one and the same thing in its Institution Who now after all this will assure us that among so many other opinions as have been rejected here and there by the Fathers and that too in as plain terms as these of Epiphanius none of them have ever been defended by some of the Learned of those times Or is it not possible that they may have held them though they did not write in defence of the same Or may they not perhaps have written also in deâ—ence of them and their Books have been since lost How small is the number of those in the Church who had the Ability or at least the 〈◊〉 to write And how much smaller is the number of thoâ—â— whose Wriâ—ings have been able to secure themselves against either the Injury of Time or the Malice of Men It is objâ—cted against the Protestants as we have touched before that S. Hierome commendeth and maintaineth the Adoration of Reliques But yet he himself testifieth that there were some Bishops who defended Vigilantius who held the contrary opinion whom he according to his ordinary Rhetorick calleth His Consorts in Wickedness Who knows now what these Bishops were and whether they deserved any such usage at S. Hieromes hands or no For the Expressions which he useth against them and against their opinion are so full of Gall and of Choler as that they utterly take away all credit from his Testimony But we have insisted long enough upon this Particular and shall therefore forbear to instance any further in others For as much therefore as it is Impossible to discover exactly out of the Fathers what hath been the sense and judgment of the Ancient Church whether taken Universally or Particularly or whether you take the Church for the whole Body of Believers or for the Prelates and Inseriour Clergy only I shall here conclude as formerly that the Writings of the Ancients are altogether Insufficient for the proving the Truth of any of those Points which are at this day controverted amongst Us. THE SECOND BOOK CHAP. I. That the Fathers are not of sufficient Authority for the Deciding of our Controversies in Religion Reason I. That the Testimonies given by the Fathers touching the Belief of the Church are not always True and Certain WE have before shewed how hard a matter it is to discover what the Sense of the Fathers hath been touching the Points at this day controverted in Religion both by reason of the small number of Books we have left us of the Fathers of the First Centuries and those too which we have treating of such things as are of a very different nature from our present Disputes and which besides we cannot be very well assured of by reason of the many Forgeries and monstrous Corruptions which they have for so long a time been subject to as also by reason of their Obscurity and Ambiguity in their Expressions and their representing unto us many times the Opinions rather of others than of their Authors besides those many other Imperfections which are found in them as namely their not informing us in
A TREATISE CONCERNING The Right Use OF THE FATHERS IN THE Decision of the CONTROVERSIES that are at this Day in RELIGION Written in FRENCH BY JOHN DAILLE Minister of the Gospel in the Reformed Church at PARIS Hieron Apol. adv Ruffin Fieri potest ut vel simpliciter erraverint Scriptores Ecclesiastici vel alio sensu scripserint vel à librariis imperitis eorum paulatim scripta corrupta sint Vel certè antequam in Alexandria quasi Daemonium meridianum Arius nasceretur innocenter quaedam minùs cautè locuti sunt quae non possint perversorum hominum calumniam declinare LONDON Printed for John Martin and are to be sold by Robert Boulter at the Turks Head in Cornhill M.DC.LXXV To the Noble LADY ANNE MORNAY Lady of Tabarriere and Baroness of St. Hermine c. MADAM IT is now almost four Years since that your Son the late Baron of St. Hermine acquainting me with what manner of Discourse He was ordinarily entertained at Court by those who laboured to advance the Roman Religion the rather to make him disgust the Reformed told me That the Chiefest Argument which they urged against him was Antiquity and the General Consent of all the Fathers of the First Ages of Christianity And although of himself He understood well enough the Vanity of this Argument of theirs yet notwithstanding for his own fuller satisfaction He desired me that I would discover unto Him the very Bottom and Depth of this Business This therefore I did as Exactly as possibly I could and gave Him my Judgment at Large in this Particular Which Discourse of mine He was pleased to like so well that conceiving some hopes from thence that it might happily be of use to others also I shortly after put Pen to Paper and digested it into this Treatise You now see It having therefore been Composed at first for His Service I had resolved also with my self to have Dedicated it to His Name purposing by this small Piece of Service to testifie to the World the Continuation of the Affection I bare to His Progress in Piety But that deadly Blow which snatched Him from us in the Flower of His Age about two Years since at the Famous Siege of Bosledue having left us nothing of Him now save onely the Spoils of His Mortality and the Memory of His Vertue together with our Great Sorrow for having enjoyed Him here so short a time I am constrained Madam to change my former Resolution For to Dedicate my Book to Him in the State wherein He now is in Heaven following the Example of many both Ancients and Modern Writers who have not stuck to direct their Discourses from hence below to those whom God hath taken up into Heaven I cannot perswade my self that the Practise is either Lawful or Fit For besides the Vanity of the Thing should we hold Discourse with one who being at so great and almost infinite a Distance from us cannot possibly hear what we say I should account it also if so be He could hear us a Point of extreme Inhumanity I had almost said Impiety to disturb that Perfect Rest His Blessed Soul now enjoyeth which hath now no more to do with our Debates or Discourses here below but sees the Truth now in a most pure Light and enjoys that Everlasting Bliss wherewith our Saviour hath out of his Mercy crowned His Faith and Perseverance in the Fear of His Name I shall therefore content my self with cherishing and preserving whilst I live the precious Memory of His Worth the Excellency of His Wit the Soundness of His Judgment the Sweetness of His Nature the Fairness of His Carriage and those other Choice Parts wherewith He was accomplished but above all His singular Piety which clearly shone forth in His Words and Actions till the hour of His Death And Madam as for this small Treatise which was at first conceived and composed for Him I thought I could not without being guilty of a piece of Injustice present it to any other but Your Self seeing it hath pleased God notwithstanding the Common Order of Nature to make You Heir to Him to whom it belonged This Consideration only hath emboldned me to present it to Your Hands knowing that the Nature of this Discourse is not so suitable to that Sorrow which hath of late cast a Cloud over Your House it having pleased God after the death of the Son to deprive You of the Father and to the Loss of Your Children to add that also of Your Noble Husband But my desire of avoiding the being Vnjust hath forced Me to be thus Vncivilly Troublesome seeing I accounted it a kind of Theft should I have any longer withheld from You that which was Your Right by this Sad Title of Inheritance Be pleased therefore Madam to receive this Book as a part of the Goods of your Deceased Son which I now honestly restore in the view of the whole World after some times Concealment of it in my Study This Name I know will oblige You to afford it some place in Your Closet which is all that I can at present desire For as for the reading of it besides that Your Exquisite Piety which is built upon Infinitely much Firmer Grounds than these Disputes hath no need at all of it I know also that Your present Condition is such as that it would be very Troublesome unto You. And if You shall chance to desire to spend some hours in the Perusal of it it must be hereafter when the Lord by the Efficacy of His Spirit shall have comforted Yours and shall have allayed the Violence of Your Grief to whom I pour out my most earnest Prayers that He would vouchsafe Powerfully to effect the same and to shed forth His most holy Grace upon You and Yours and that He would by His great Mercy preserve Long and Happily that which remaineth of that Goodly and Blessed Family which He hath bestowed upon You. This Madam is one of the most Hearty Prayers of Your most Humble and Obedient Servant DAILLE The Design of the whole WORK THE Fathers cannot be the Judges of the Controversies in Religion at this day betwixt the Papist and the Protestant 1. Because it is if not an impossible yet at least a very difficult thing to find out what their sense hath been touching the same 2. Because that their Sense and Judgment of these things supposing it to be certainly and clearly understood not being Infallible and without all danger of Errour cannot carry with it a sufficient Authority for the satisfying the Vnderstanding which neither can nor indeed ought to believe any thing in point of Religion but what it knows to be certainly True The first of these Reasons is proved by these Mediums following I. We have very little of the Writings of the Fathers especially of the First Second and Third Centuries pag. 1. II. Those Writings which we have of the Fathers of those times treat of matters very far different
lawful and also very useful to pray to Saints departed and to Angels That our Souls after death before they enter into Heaven are to pass through a certain Fire and there to endure grievous Torments thus satisfying for their Sins That one neither may nor ought to receive the holy Eucharist without having first confessed himself in private to a Priest That none but the Priest himself that consecrated the Eucharist is bound by right to receive it in both kinds And a great number of other Opinions which their Adversaries protest plainly That they cannot with a safe conscience believe And these Points are the ground of the whole Difference betwixt them the one Party pretending That they have been believed and received by the Church of Christ in all Ages as revealed by him and the other maintaining the contrary Now seeing that none of these Tenets having any ground from any Passage in the New Testament which is the most Ancient and Authentick Rule of Christianity the Maintainers are fain to fly to the Writings of the Doctors of the Church which lived within the four or five first Centuries after the Apostles who are commonly called the Fathers my purpose is in this Treatise to examine whether or no this be a good and sufficient means for the decision of these Differences And for this purpose I must first presuppose two things which any reasonable Person will easily grant me The first is That the Question being here about laying a Foundation for certain Articles of Faith upon the Testimonies or Opinions of the Fathers it is very necessary that the Passages which are produced out of them be clear and not to be doubted of that is to say such as we cannot reasonably scruple at either touching the Author out of whom they are alledged or the Sense of the Place whether it signifie what is pretended to For a Deposition of a Witness and the Sentence of a Judge being of no value at all save onely for the reputation of the Witness or Judge it is most evident that if either proceed from Persons unknown or suspected they are invalid and prove nothing at all In like manner if the Deposition of a Witness or Sentence of a Judge be obscure and in doubtful Terms it is clear that in this case the Business must rest undecided there being another Doubt first to be cleared namely What the meaning of either of them was The second Point that I shall here lay down for a Foundation to the ensuing Discourse is no less evident than the former namely That to allow a sufficiency to the Writings of the Fathers for the deciding of these Controversies we must necessarily attribute to their Persons very great Authority and such as may oblige us to follow their Judgment in Matters of Religion For if this Authority be wanting how clear and express soever their Opinions be in the Articles now controverted it will do nothing at all toward their Decision We have therefore here two things to examine in this Business The first is Whether or not we may be able now certainly and clearly to know what the Opinion of the Fathers hath been touching the Differences now in hand The second Whether their Authority be such as that whatever faithful Person shall clearly and certainly know what their Opinion hath been in any one Article of Christian Religion he is thereby bound to receive that Article for True For if the Church of Rome be but able to prove both these Points it is then without all dispute that their Proceeding is good and agreeable to the End proposed there being so many of the Ancient Fathers Writings alledged at this day by them But if on the contrary side either of these Two things or both of them be indeed found to be doubtful I should think that any Man of a very mean Judgment should be able to conclude of himself That this way of Proof which they have hitherto made use of is very insufficient and that therefore they of necessity ought to have recourse to some other more proper and solid way in the Proof of the Truth of the said Opinions which the Protestants will not by any means receive THE FIRST BOOK CHAP. I. REASON I. Touching the Difficulty of knowing the Sense of the Fathers in reference to the present Controversies in Religion drawn from hence Namely Because there is very little extant of Their Writings for the Three First Centuries IF we should in this particular take the same course which some Writers of the Church of Rome make use of against the Holy Scriptures it would be a very easie matter to bring in question and render very doubtful and suspected all the Writings of the Fathers For when any one alledgeth the Old or New Testament these Gentlemen presently demand How or by what means they know that any such Books were truly written by those Prophets and Apostles under whose Names they go If therefore in like manner when these Men urge Justin Irenaeus Ambrose Augustine and the like one should take them short and demand of them How and by what means they are assured that these Fathers were the Authors of those Writings which at this day go under their Names it is very much to be doubted but that they would find a harder Task of it than their Adversaries in justifying the Inscriptions of the Books of Holy Writ the Truth whereof is much more easie to be demonstrated than of any Humane Writings whatsoever But I pass by this too-artificial way of Proceeding and onely say That it is no very easie matter to find out by the Writings of the Fathers what hath really beeen their Opinion in any of those Controversies which are now in debate betwixt the Protestant and the Church of Rome The Considerations which render the knowledge of this so difficult are many I shall therefore in this First Part handle some of them onely referring the rest to the Later examining them one after another The first Reason therefore which I shall lay down for the proving of this Difficulty is The little we have extant of the Writings of the Ancient Fathers especially of the First Second and Third Centuries which are those we are most especially to regard For seeing that one of the principal Reasons that moveth the Church of Rome to alledge the Writings of the Fathers is to shew the Truth of their Tenets by the Antiquity which they reckon as a Mark of it it is most evident that the most Ancient ought to be the most taken notice of And indeed there is no question to be made but that the Christian Religion was more pure and without mixture in its beginnings and Infancy than it was afterwards in its Growth and Progress it being the ordinary course of Things to contract Corruptions more or less according as they are more or less removed from their first Institution As we see by experience in States Laws Arts and Languages the Natural Propriety of
his Opinion I had not saith he as yet diligently enough inquired into nor found out what the Election of Grace was whereof the Apostle speaketh in these words There is a Remnant to be saved according to the Election of Grace which certainly is not Grace if any Merits preceded it so that that which is given should be rendred rather as due to the Merits than as given freely by Grace Now who knoweth but that among those Fathers whom we so confidently alledge every day some of them may have retracted those things which we at this day read in their Works and that Time may have devoured their Retractations of those their Opinions and may have left us only their Errors Besides who knows and can truly inform us what Date their Writings bear Whether they were the Fruits of their Spring or of their Summer or of their Autumn Whether they were gathered green or were suffered to ripen upon the Tree Doubtless this whole Inquiry is very dark there being scarcely any mark of their Season to be found upon the greatest part of them There are indeed some few of them that have some of these Marks but yet they are so doubtful and uncertain ones as that the most able and choicest Wits are sometimes deceived in this their Inquiry And when all is done who knoweth not that there are some Trees that bear their Summer-fruit even in the very beginning of the Summer when as the Spring-time is yet hardly past And again the Fruits which are gathered at the end of the Later Season are not always the ripest for Time in stead of ripening many times rotteth them In like manner is it also with Men and consequently with the Fathers Sometimes their Summer yieldeth much more and better Fruit than their Autumn For as for the Winter that is to say the last part of our Age it is evident that it usually brings forth nothing at all or if it do chance to force it self beyond Nature the Fruits it bringeth forth are yet worse and more crude and imperfect than those even of the Spring Seeing therefore it is for the most part impossible to give any certain judgment of these things either by the History of these Authors or by their Books themselves and that again on the other side without this we ought not to sit down upon any thing we find in their Writings as reckoning we have made a discovery what their Opinions have been we may safely conclude in this Point also as we have done in the former That it is a very hard matter to know truly and precisely what the Opinions and Sense of the Ancients have been touching the Differences at this day debated amongst us CHAP. VIII Reason VIII That it is Necessary and withal very hard to discover how the Fathers have held all their several Opinions Whether as Necessary or as Probable onely and in what degree of Necessity or Probability LOgick teacheth us That True Propositions are not all equally so some of them being but Contingent only as the Schools speak and others being Necessary and again both the one and the other being more or less either Contingent or Necessary according to that admirable Division which the Philosopher hath made into those Three Degrees of Necessity explained by him in the First Book of his Demonstrations And hence it comes to pass that the Knowledge or Ignorance of these Degrees is the more or less important in those Sciences whereunto they appertain there being some of them as namely those which they call Principles that are so Necessary as that a Man cannot be ignorant of them without overthrowing the whole Science wherein they ought to have place and there being others again on the contrary side that a Man may be ignorant of so far as to hold their Contradictories for true and yet nevertheless not run any great hazard As for example These here following are Philosophical Principles of the first sort namely That there is Motion and That every Body occupieth some certain Place and the like For I beseech you what strange Philosophy would it be that should either be ignorant of or should deny these Principles But these other following are of the second sort namely That there are precisely but Five Senses in Living Creatures and That the Heavens are not of an Elementary Substance and the like For although these Propositions are by most held to be True yet notwithstanding are they not so Necessary but that a Man may pass for a Philosopher and yet not only be ignorant of these Positions but may also if he please maintain even those things that are contradictory to them Now if there be any Science where this Consideration ought carefully to be applied it is in my judgment in this of Divinity For there is very much difference betwixt the Truths whereof it consisteth some of them being evidently more Necessary than others as Origen proveth plainly in his XXVII Homily upon S. Matthew Do but compare these two Propositions together Christ is God and Christ suffered death being of the age of thirty four or thirty five years who seeth not that though both these Propositions are true yet notwithstanding there is a very vast difference betwixt them For the former of these is Necessarily True that is to say it is True in such sort as that it is Impossible but that Christ should be God the Salvation of Mankind which is the End of our Religion being otherwise not possibly to be obtained But as for the second notwithstanding that it is true and is collected clearly enough out of the Scriptures yet is it not at all Necessary For Christ might if he had so pleased have suffered at the Fortieth or Fiftieth year of his age without any prejudice at all to our Salvation which was the End of His Suffering Now according to this diversity of Dâ—grees the Belief or Ignorance of these two Propositions are also of very different importance The first of them we may not be ignorant of and much less deny without renouncing Christianity The second we may be ignorant of and even deny too as supposing it false yet without any great danger To be able therefore to come to a clear and perfect understanding what was the Sense of the Fathers touching the Points of Religion at this day controverted amongst Us it is necessary that we should know not only whether they believed or not believed them but also how they believed or not believed them that is to say whether they held them as Propositions Necessarily or Probably either True or False and besides in what Degree either of Necessity or Probability they placed them Now that this Inquiry is very Necessary Cardinal Perron hath clearly demonstrated in that Learned Epistle of his written to Casaubon against K. James For the King attributing to himself the name of Catholick under pretence that He believed and held all those things that the Fathers of the four or five
his own Opinions and Observations as Apostolical and which hath not used his utmost endeavour to gain them the Repute of being Vniversal S. Hierome allows every particular Province full liberty to do herein as they please Let every Province saith he abound in its own Sense and let them account of the Ordinances of their Ancestors as of Apostolical Laws It is true indeed that he speaks in this place onely of certain Observations of things which are in themselves indifferent But yet that which he hath permitted them in these Matters they have practised in all other I shall not here trouble my self to produce any other Reasons to prove the Difficulty of this Inquiry because I should then be forced to repeat a great part of that which hath been already delivered For if it be a very hard matter to attain to any certain knowledge what the Sense of the Writings of the Fathers is as we have proved before how much more difficult a thing will it be to discover whether their Opinions were the Opinions of the particular Churches wherein they lived or else were the Opinions of the Church Universal in their Age the same things which cause Obscurity in the one having as much or rather more reason of doing the like in the other And if you would fully understand how painful an Undertaking this is do but read the Disputations of the Learned of both Parties touching this Point where you shall meet with so many Doubts and Contradictions and such diversity of Opinions that you will easily conclude That this is one of the greatest Difficulties that is to be met withal throughout the whole Study of Antiquity CHAP. XI Reason XI That it is impossible to know exactly what the Belief of the Ancient Church either Vniversal or Particular hath been touching any of those Points which are at this day controverted amongst us BEfore we pass on to the Second Part of this Treatise it seemeth not impertinent to give the Reader this Last Advertisement and to let him know that though all these Difficulties here before represented were removed yet notwithstanding would it still be impossible for us to know certainly out of the Fathers what the Judgment of the whole Ancient Church whether you mean the Church Universal or but any considerable Part thereof hath been touching the Differences which are now on foot in Religion Now that we may be able to make the truth of this Proposition appear it is necessary that we should first of all explain the Terms We understand commonly by the Church especially in these Disputations either all those Persons in General who profess themselves to be of the said Church of what Condition or Quality soever they be or else in a stricter sense the Collective Body of all those who are set over and who are Representatives of the Church that is to say the Clergy So that whether you speak of the Church Universal or of some Particular Church as for example that of Spain or of Carthage this Term may be taken in either of these two senses For by the Church Universal we understand either all those Persons in general who live in the Communion of the Christian Church whether they be of the Laity or of the Clergy or else those Persons onely who are Ecclesiastici or Church-men as we now call them For in the Primitive Times all Christians that lived in the Communion of the Catholicks were called Ecclesiastici In like manner by the Church of Carthage is meant either generally All the Faithful that live in the particular Communion of the Christian Church of Carthage or else particularly and in a stricter sense the Bishop of Carthage with his whole Clergy Now I do not believe that there is any Man but will easily grant me that if we take the Church in the First sense it is impossible to know by way of Testimony given of the same what the Sense and Judgment of it hath been in each several Age touching all the Points of Christian Religion We may indeed collect by way of Discourse what hath been the Belief of the True Members of the Church For there being some certain Articles the Belief whereof is necessarily requisite for the rendring a Man such an one whosoever rightly understands which these Articles be he may certainly conclude that the True Church whether Universal or Particular hath believed the same But now in the first place this doth not extend to all the Points of Christian Religion but onely to those which are Necessary besides which there are divers others concerning which we may have not only different but even contrary Judgments too and yet not thereby hazard the loss either of the Communion of the Church or of our Inheritance of everlasting Salvation So then this Ratiocination concludeth not save onely of those who are the True Members of the Church For as for those who make but an outward Profession onely of the Truth it being not at all necessary that they should be saved there is in like manner no more necessity of their embracing those Beliefs which are requisite for that end They may under this Mask hide all manner of Opinions how Impious soever they be Lastly that which makes most for our purpose is That this Knowledge is acquired by Discourse whereas we speak here of such a Knowledge as is collected by the hearing of several Witnesses who give in their Testimonies touching the thing which we would know Now the Fathers having written with a purpose of informing us not what each particular Man believed in their time but rather what they thought fit that all Men should have believed we must needs conclude That certainly they have not told us all that they knew touching this particular And consequently therefore partly their Charity and partly also their Prudence may have caused them to pass by in silence all such Opinions either of whole Companies or of particular Persons as they conceived to be not so consonant to the Truth But supposing that they had not any of these considerations and that they had taken upon them to give us a just Account each Man of the Opinions of his particular Church wherein he lived it is evident however that they could never have been able to have attainēd to the end of this their Design For how is it possible that they should have been able to have learnt what the Opinion of every single Person was amongst so vast a Multitude which consisted of so many several Persons who were of so different both Capacities and Dispositions Who will believe that S. Cyprian for example knew all the several Opinions of each particular Person in his Diocess so as to be able to give us an account of the same Who can imagine but that among such a Multitude of People as lived in the Communion of his Church there must needs have been very many who differed in Opinion from him in divers Points of Religion Even
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
with others than he hath with St. Augustine wresting their words much further than he ought to have done But sometimes he goes further yet and speaks even of the Pen-men of the Old and New Testament in so disrespectful a manner as that I am very much unsatisfied with these his doings As for example where he says in plain Terms without any Circumlocution that the Inscription of the Altar at Athens was not expressed in those very words which are delivered by St. Paul in the Acts Chap. 17. TO THE UNKNOWN GOD but in other Terms thus To the Gods of Europe Asia and of Africk to the Vnknown and Foreign Gods So likewise where he tells us and repeats the same too in many several places that St. Paul knew not how to speak nor to make a Discourse hang together and that he makes Soloecisms sometimes and that he knew not how to render an Hyperbaton nor to conclude a Sentence and that he was not able to express his own deep Conceptions in the Greek Tongue and that he had no good utterance but had much ado to deliver his mind And again in another place he tells us that It was not out of modesty but it was the plain naked truth that he told us when the Apostle said of himself that he was Imperitus Sermone Rude in Speech because that the truth is He could not deliver his mind to others in clear and intelligible Language And he says moreover which is yet much worse than all the rest that the Apostle disputing with the Galatians counterfeited ignorance as knowing them to be a dull heavy People and that he had let fâ—ll some such Expressions as might possibly have offended the more intelligent sort of people had he not before hand told them that he spake after the manner of men Whosoever shall have had but the least taste of the force and vigour and of the Candor of the Spirit and Discourse of this Holy Apostle can never see him thus used without being extremely astonished at it especially if he but consider that these kinds of speeches although they had perhaps some Ground which yet they have not must needs scandalize and give offence to the weaker sort of People and therefore ought not to have been uttered without very much Qualification and sweetning of the business St. Augustine I confess is much more discreet in this particular every where testifying as there is very great Reason he should the great Respect he bare to the Authors of the Books of the Holy Scriptures and never speaking of any of them whether it be of their Style or of their Sense but with a singular admiration But as for his own private Opinions and those of other men which he embraceth he is not without his Errours also Such is that harsh Sentence of his which he hath pronounced upon all Infants that dye before Baptism whom he will have not only to be deprived of the Vision of God which is the punishment that the ordinary Opinion of the Church condemns them to but he will further have them to be Tormented in Hell fire wherein he is also followed by Gregorius Armininensis a Famous Doctor in the Schools where he is called by reason of this Rigour of his Tormentum Infantium He maintaineth also that the Eucharist is necessary for little Infants as we have formerly noted to another purpose To which we must also add that other Opinion to which he evidently inclines namely that the Soul is derived from the Father to the Son and is engendred of his Substance as well as the Body and is not immediately Created by God which is the Common Opinion at this day There is no man but knows that He every where attributes to the Angels a Corporeal Nature and also that he conceives against all sense and reason that the whole World was created all in an instant of time and refers the six days space of time wherein the Creation is said to have been perfected to the different degrees of the knowledge of the Angels He believed also with the most of the Ancient Fathers that the Souls of Men departed are shut up into I know not what secret dark Receptacles where they are to remain from the hour of their departure till the Resurrection But we need not trouble our selves any further in proving that he also might erre in matters of Religion seeing that himself hath made so clear and so Authentick a Confession hereof in his Books of his Retractations where he correcteth many things which he had formerly written either besides or against the Truth I must here confess also that in my Opinion it would have added very much to the great and high Esteem which we generally have of his Parts and Worth if he had been more positive and more resolved in the Decision of things which he hath handled for the most part after the manner of the Academicks doubtingly and waveringly all the way insomuch that he leaveth undecided not only whether the Sun and the other Stars be endued with Reason but also whether the World it self be a Living Creature or not He that will but exactly and carefully read the rest of the Fathers may very easily observe in their Writings divers Errours of the like nature and a man shall scarcely meet with any one Father of any Note or Repute from whom some such thing or other hath not escaped As for my own part who have taken upon me this troublesom Business very unwillingly I shall content my self with these few Instances already set down seeing they do in my Judgment make this Business very clear the discovery whereof I have been necessitated to undertake though I wish rather they might have been concealed For seeing that these so eminent Persons who were of the greatest Repute amongst all the Ancients have through Humane Infirmity fallen into such Errors in Point of Faith what ought we to expect from others who come very much behind these both in respect of their Antiquity Learning and Holiness of Life Since Justin Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian Cyprian Lactantius Hilary Ambrose Hierome Augustine and Epiphanius that is to say the most Eminent and most Approved Persons that ever were have yet stumbled in many places and have quite fallen in some other what hath Cyril Leo Gregorius Romanus and Damascene done who have come after them and in whom hath appeared both much less Gallantry of Spirit and Sanctity than in the Former Besides if these Men have been mistaken in matters of so great Importance some of them for Instance in the Point touching the Nature of God some touching the Humanity of our Saviour Christ others touching the Quality of our Soul and some touching the State and Condition thereof after Death and touching the Resurrection why for Gods sake must they needs be Infallible when they speak of the Points now debated amongst us Why may
this That Theodoret had been deposed from his Bishoprick for having maintained an Erroneous Opinion touching the Procession of the Holy Ghost But enough of this I would in the next place fain know how this Reconciler of Differences could compose that Debate betwixt the DCXXX Fathers of the Council at Chalcedon and Leo Bishop of Rome and how he can reconcile the XXVIII Canon of the one with those many Epistles written by the other touching this Point to Anatolius Patriarch of Constantinople to the Emperour Marcianus and his Empress to the Prelates who were there met together in that Council and to the Patriarch of Antioch the Fathers of this Council advancing the Throne of the Patriarch of Constantinople above those of Alexandria and of Antioch and making it equal even with that of Rome it self Pope Leo in the mean time sending out his Thunderbolts against this Decree of theirs and charging them as guilty of a most insufferable Injury offered him And when this our Conciliator shall have done his business at Chalcedon if he please he may pass over into Africk and there also Reconcile the Fathers of that Country to the Bishops of Rome the former of these forbidding their Clergy to make any Appeals to Rome and the other in the mean time to their utmost endeavouring to prove That it is their Proper Right to have such Appeals brought before them And when he hath finished this Work our Greek may then in the next place try to remove all misunderstanding betwixt the Fathers of the Council of Francfort and those of the II. Council of Nice touching the Point of the use of Images the later of these Ordaining That we ought to pay unto them Salutations and Adoration of Honour and that we ought to honour them with Incense and Lights and the other as every man knows having not only rejected this Greek Council but having written 〈◊〉 expresly against it by the Command of the Emperour Carolus Magnus Certainly he that shall but read the Fathers themselves will easily and quickly perceive that they clash and contradict each other in most plain and irreconcileable Terms and that there is no other way of bringing them honestly together but by receiving every one of them with his own private Opinions imitating herein the marvellous Wisdom of the Council of Constantinople in Trullo which receiveth and alloweth of all in gross without distinction both the Canons of the Apostles and the whole Code of the Church Vniversal together with those of Sardica Carthage and Laodicea amongst which notwithstanding there are found strong Contradictions As for Example the Council of Sardica will have the Right of receiving the Appeals of all Bishops to belong to the See of Rome whereas Chalcedon gives this Priviledge to that of Constantinople The Council of Laodicea leaveth out of the Canon of the Scriptures the Maccabees Ecclesiasticus the Book of Wisdom Tobit and Judith that of Carthage puts them in expresly But now these honest Fathers of Constantinople to the end they may give content to all the World take no notice at all of these their Differences but receive each of them with their own particular Canons and Opinions without obliging them to any one Common Rule doing this I believe upon condition that themselves may not be required by those whom they thus admit to receive any more from them than they shall think convenient I know no man that would not at this rate readily admit of as Canon all the Writings of the Fathers provided that he might but have liberty to take or leave therein what he thought good So that we may very well from henceforth rest satisfied that notwithstanding Bessarion's resolution to the contrary the Fathers have not always been of the same Judgment in matters of Religion and that consequently they ought not to be received by us as our Judges touching the same For seeing that I find them contradicting each other in so many several Points of very great importance how shall I be assured that they are all unanimously agreed touching those Points which are now debated amongst us Why may they not have had the same diversity of Opinion touching the Point of the Eucharist the Authority of the Church the Power of the Pope Free-will or Purgatory that they had in those other Points which we have before presented to the Readers view which were of as great importance as these and no less easie to be determined as we have proved in the Chapter preceding Epiphanius and St. Hierome are as opposite in their Judgments touching the Ancient Condition of Priests and Bishops as Theodoret and St. Cyril are touching the Procession of the Holy Ghost Neither are some Opinions of Tertullian and of Damascene Theodoret and of Eusebius Emisenus of Eusebius Caesareensis and of the VII Council touching the Point of the Eucharist less opposite to each other than are those of Cyprian and of Stephen◠touching the Baptism of Hereticks and so likewise in many other particulars Why then should we take so much pains and trouble our selves so to no purpose in reconciling these men and making them speak all the same thing Why should we so cruelly and so uncivilly rack them as we do to make them all of one Opinion and to say the same things whether they will or no and sometimes too against our own Conscience but certainly for the most part without any satisfaction to the Reader Why should we not rather honestly confess that their Opinions were also different as well as their words We make no scruple at all to confess that they have been of contrary Opinions touching those other Points of Religion which are not at all now controverted amongst us How much greater harm for Gods sake would it be if we should confess that they have not any better agreed among themselves touching these Points now in debate But we shall not need to press this matter any further it is sufficient for us that we have proved that they were of different Opinions in Point of Religion so that it clearly follows from hence that we ought not to admit of their Writings as the proper Judges of our Controversies I have formerly touched though very lightly only upon their Diversity of Opinion and Contrariety in their Expositions upon the Scriptures which yet is a business of no very small consideration For if we take them for our Judges we shall necessarily then have occasion every minute of having recourse to them touching the sense of those Passages of Scripture about which we disagree among our selves If now there be as great Contrarieties and Difference in Judgment touching these things among them as there is amongst our selves what have we then left us to trust to This Passage for Example in the Gospel according to St. John I and my Father are one is of very great importance in the Disputes against both Sabellius and Arius Would you now know the true
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