according to the Laws of a legitimate Disputation to alledge for the proof of any Point in debate any other Principles than what they do allow of it is evident that they attribute to the Fathers nothing less than such an Authority For in the Confessing of Faith they declare in the very beginning of it That they hold the Scriptures to be the Rule of their Faith and as for all other Ecclesiastical Writings although they account them to be useful yet nevertheless do they not conceive that a man may safely build any Article of Faith upon them And indeed seeing that they believe as the tell you immediately after that the Scripture containeth all things necessary both for the service of God and the Salvation of mens Souls they have no need of any other Judge and should in vain have recourse to the Writings of the Ancients the Authority whereof how great soever it be is still much less both in it self and also in respect of us than that of the Bible In the next place they seriously profess that their intent is to reform the Christian Doctrine according to this Rule and to retain firmly what Articles of Faith soever are therein delivered and to reject constantly all those that are not there found laid down how high and eminent soever the Authority be that shall resciâ—d the one or establish the other in the Belief of Men. It is not Lawful say they for Men nor yet for the Angels themselves either to add to or to diminish from or to alter it neither may Antiquity nor Customs nor Multitude nor Judgments nor Humane Wisdom nor Definitive Sentences nor Edicts nor Decrees nor Councils nor Visions nor Miracles be brought in opposition to it but on the contrary rather all other things ought to be examined regulated and reformed by it These be their own Words If therefore they will not depart from this their Belief which is as it were the Foundation and Key of their whole Reformation they cannot receive the Fathers who lived in the Second Third and Fourth and so in the following Centuries as Judges nor yet Absolutely and Simply as Witnesses in the Points of Faith For they all hold That that Pure Simple and Holy Doctrine which was taught and preached by the Apostles at the beginning of Christianity and delivered over unto us by themselves in the New Testament hath been by little and little altered and corrupted Time which changeth all things continually mixing among it some Corruption or other sometimes a Jewish or a Heathenish Opinion and sometimes again some Nice Observation otherwhiles some Superstitious Ceremony or other whilst one building upon the Foundation with Stubble another with Hay a third with Wood the Body seems at length by little and little to have become quite another thing than it Anciently was we having in stead of a Palace of Gold and of Silver a House built up of Plaister Stone Wood and Mud and the like pitiful Stuff In like manner say they as we see that Brooks of Water the farther distant they are from their Springs the more Filth they contract and the more doth their Water lose of its first Purity And as a Man the more he groweth in years the more doth that Native Simplicity which appeared in him in his Infancy decay his Body and his Mind are changed and he is so much altered by little and little through Study Art and Cunning that at length he seemeth to be clean another Man In like manner say they hath it â—ared with Christianity And here they presently urge that notable Passage out of S. Paul in his Second Epistle to the Thessalonians where he speaks of a Great Falling away which then in his time began already to work secretly and insensibly but was not to break forth till a long time after as you see it is in all Great Things whether in Nature or in the Affairs and Occurrences that happen to Mankind which are all conceived and hatched slowly and by degrees and are sometimes a whole Age before they are brought forth Now according to this Hypothesis which as I conceive is equally common to us of France and all other Protestants whatsoever the Doctrine of the Church must Necessarily have suffered some Alteration in the Second Age of Christianity by admitting the Mixture of some New Matter into its Belief and Policy and so likewise in the Third Age some other Corruption must necessarily have got in and so in the Fourth Fifth and the rest that follow the Christian Religion continually losing something of Its Original Purity and Simplicity and on the other side still contracting all along some new Impurities till at length it came to the highest Degree of Corruption in which condition they say they found it and have now at last by the Guidance of the Scriptures restored it to the self-same State wherein it was at the Beginning and have as it were fixed it again upon its true and proper Hinge from whence partly by the Ignorance and partly by the Fraud of Men during the space of so many Ages together it had by little and little been removed This therefore being their Opinion they cannot admit of as the Rule of all their Doctrine the Writings of any of the Fathers who lived from the Apostles time down to ours without betraying and contradicting themselves For according to what they maintain touching the Progress of Corruption in Religion there hath been some Alteration in the Christian Doctrine both in the Second Third and all the following Ages And then again according to what they conceive and believe of their own Reformation their Doctrine is the very same that was in the time of the Apostles as being taken immediately out of their Books If therefore they should examine it by what the Fathers of the Second Century believed there must necessarily be something found in the Doctrine of the Fathers which is not in theirs and the Difference will be much greater if the Comparison be made betwixt it and the Doctrine of the Third Fourth and the following Ages in all which according to their Hypothesis the Corruption hath continually encreased For if their Doctrines were in every respect conformable to each other and had in them neither more nor less the one than the other there must necessarily then follow one of these two things namely That either this Corruption which they presuppose to be in the Belief and Politie of the Church is not that Secret which worked in S. Paul's time or else That their Reformation is not the Pure and Simple Doctrine of the Apostles the Members of which Division are contradictory to those two Positions which as we have said they all of them unanimously maintain So that to avoid this Contradiction it concerns them constantly to persevere in that which they profess is their Belief in their Confession of Faith to wit That there are no Ecclesiastical Writings whatsoever that are of so sufficient Authority as
that a Man may safely build upon them and make them the Judges of Faith and That the Holy Scripture is the onely Rule by which all these things are to be examined And this is that which they All agree upon as far as I have either read or known as any Man may see in the Books of Calvin Bucer Melancthon Luther Beza and the rest who all relie upon the Authority of the Scriptures onely and admit not of any part of the Authority of the Fathers as a sufficient Ground whereon to build any Article of their Belief It is true I confess that some of their First Authors as namely Bucer Peter Martyr and J. Jewell Bishop of Salisbury and in a manner all the Later Writers also alledge the Testimonies of the Fathers but if you but mark it it is onely by way of Confutation and not of Establishing any thing They do it onely to overthrow the Opinions of the Church of Rome and not to strengthen their Own For though they hold That the Doctrine of the Fathers is not so Pure as that of the Apostles yet do they withal believe that it is much Purer than that which is at this day taught by the Church of Rome the Purity of Doctrine having continually decayed and the Impurity of it encreased in such sort as that the further they are removed from the Time of the Apostles the nearer they approach as they say towards the afore-mentioned Falling away spoken of by S. Paul Although the Protestants therefore allow the Scriptures onely for the True Foundation of their Faith yet notwithstanding do they account the Writings of the Fathers to be Necessary also and of good use unto them first of all in the Proving this Decay which they say hath hapned in Christianity and secondly for the making it appear that the Opinions which their Adversaries now maintain were not in those days brought into any Form but were as yet onely in their Seeds As for example Transubstantiation was not as yet an Article of Faith notwithstanding that long ago they did innocently and not foreseeing what the Issue might prove to be believe some certain things out of which being afterwards licked over by passing through divers several Languages Transubstantiation was at length made up So likewise the Supremacy of the Pope had at that time no place in the belief of Men although those small Threds and Root-strings from whence this Vast and Wonderful Power first sprung long since appeared in the World And the like may be said of the greatest part of those other Points which the Protestants will not by any means receive And that this is their Resolution and Sense appears evidently by those many Books which they have written upon this Subject wherein they shew Historically the whole Progress of this Decay in Christianity as well in its Faith as in its Polity and Discipline And truly this their Design seemeth to be very sufficient and satisfactory For seeing that they propose nothing Positively and as an Article of Faith Necessary to Salvation which may not easily and plainly be proved out of the Scripture they have no need to make use of any other Principle for the Demonstration of the Truth Furthermore seeing that those Positive Articles of Faith which they believe are in a manner all of them received and confessed by the Church of Rome as we have said before in the Preface to this Treatise there is no need of troubling a Mans self to prove the same those things which both Parties are agreed upon being never to be proved but are always presupposed in all Disputations Yet notwithstanding if any one have a mind to be informed what the Belief of the Fathers hath been touching the said Articles it is an easie matter for them to make it appear that they also believed all of them as well as themselves as for Example That there is a God a Christ a Salvation a Sacrament of Baptism a Sacrament of the Eucharist and the like Truths the greatest part whereof we have formerly set down in the Beginning of this Discourse And as for those other Articles which are proposed to the World besides all these by the Church of Rome it is sufficient for them that they are able to answer the Arguments which are brought to prove them and to make it by this means appear that they have not any sure Ground at all and consequently neither may nor ought to be received into the Faith of Christians And this is the Vse that the Protestants make of the Fathers evidently making it appear to the World out of them that they did not hold the said Articles as the Church of Rome doth at this day So that their alledging of the Fathers to this purpose onely and indeed their Whole Practice in these Disputes declare evidently enough that they conceive not the Belief of the Church of Rome to be so perfectly and exactly conformable to that of Antiquity especially of the Four or Five First Ages which accords very well with their Hypothesis touching the Corruption of the Christian Doctrine But yet no Man may conclude from hence That they do allow of the Authority of the Fathers as a sufficient Foundation to ground any Article of Faith upon for this is repugnant both to their Doctrine and to the Protestation which they upon all occasions make expresly to the contrary So that I cannot but extremely wonder at the Proceeding of some of our Modern Authors who in their Disputations with the Protestants endeavour to prove the Articles of their Faith by Testimonies brought out of the Fathers whereas the Protestants never go about to make good their own Opinions but onely to overthrow those of their Adversaries by urging the Fathers Testimonies For seeing that they of the Church of Rome maintain That the Church neither hath nor can possibly err in Points of Faith and That its Belief in Matters of Faith hath always been the same that it is at this day it is sufficient for the Protestant to shew by comparing the Doctrine of the Ancient Fathers with that of the Church of Rome that there is great Difference betwixt them neither doth this in any wise bind them to believe throughout whatsoever the Fathers believed it being evident according to their Hypothesis that there may have some Errors crept into their Belief though certainly not such nor so gross ones as have been since entertained by the Church in the Ages succeeding We shall conclude therefore That the Protestants acknowledge not neither in the Fathers nor in their Writings any so Absolute Authority as renders them capable of being received by us as our Supreme Judges in Matters of Religion and such from whom no Appeal can be made Whence it will follow That although the Fathers might really perhaps have such an Authority yet notwithstanding could not their Definitive Sentence put an end to any of our Controversies and therefore it concerns the Church of Rome to have
Invention being ashamed to make use of it any longer And to say truth that which these Men answer by way of excusing the said Popes is not any whit more probable namely That they took the Council of Nice and that of Sardica in which those Canons they alledge are really found for one and the same Council For whom will these Men ever be able to perswade That two Ecclesiastical Assemblies betwixt which there passed near twenty two whole years called by two several Emperors and for Matters of a far different nature the one of them for the Explanation of the Christian Faith and the other for the Re-establishing of two Bishops in their Thrones and in Places very far distant from each other the one at Nicaea in Bithynia the other at Sardica a City of Illyricum the Canons of which two Councils are very different both in substance number and authority the one of them having always been received generally by the whole Church but the other having never been acknowledged by the Eastern Church should yet notwithstanding be but one and the same Council How can they themselves endure this who are so fierce against the Greeks for having offered to attribute which they do notwithstanding with more appearance of truth to the Sixth Council those CII Canons which were agreed upon ten years after at Constantinople in an Assembly wherein one party of the Fathers of the Sixth Council met How came it to pass that they gave any credit to the Ancient Church seeing that in the Greek Collection of her Ancient Canons those of the Council of Sardica are quite left out and in the Latin Collection of Dionysius Exiguus made at Rome eleven hundred years since they are placed not with those of the Council of Nice nor yet immediately after them as if they all made up but one Body betwixt them but are put in a place a great way behind after the Canons of all the General Councils that had been held till that very time he lived in And how comes it to pass that these Ancient Popes who alledged these Canons if they believed these Councils to be both one did not say so The African Bishops had diverse and sundry times declared That these Canons which were by them alledged were not at all to be found in their Copies Certainly therefore if those who had cited them had thought the Council of Nice and that of Sardica to have been both but one Council they would no doubt have made answer That 〈◊〉 Canons were to be found in this pretended Second Part of the Council of Nice among those which had been agreed upon at Sardica especially when they saw that these careful Fathers for the clearing of the Controversie betwixt them had resolved to send to this purpose as far as Constantinople and Alexandria And yet for all this there is not the least Syllable tending this way said by them And certainly if the Canons of the Council of Sardica had been in those days reputed as a part of the Council of Nice it is a very strange thing that so many Learned and Religious Prelates as there were at that time in Africk as namely Aurelius Alypius and even S. Augustine that glorious Light not of the African onely but of the whole Ancient Church should have been so ignorant in this particular But it is a wonder beyond all belief that three Popes and their Legates should leave their Party in an Ignorance so gross and so prejudicial to their own Interest it being in their power to have relieved them in two words We may safely then conclude That these Popes Zozimus and Boniface had no other Copies of the Council of Nice than what we have and also that they did not believe that the Canons of the Council of Sardica were a part of the Council of Nice but that they rather purposely alledged some of the Canons of Sardica under the name of the Canons of the Council of Nice And this they did according to that Maxim which was in force with those of former times and is not utterly laid aside even in our own namely That for the advancing of a Good and Godly Cause it is lawful sometimes to use a little Deceit and to have recourse to your Piae Fraudes They therefore firmly believing as they did That the Supremacy of their See over all other Churches was a Business of great importance and would be very profitable to all Christendom we are not to wonder if for the establishing this right on themselvs they made use of a little Legerdemain alledging Sardica for Nice reckoning with themselves that if they brought their Design about this small Failing of theirs would in process of time be abundantly satisfied for by the benefit and excellency of the thing it self Yet notwithstanding this Opposition made by the African Fathers against the Church of Rome Pope Leo not many years after writing to the Emperour Theodosius did not forbear to make use of the old Forgery citing one of the Canons of the Council of Sardica for a Legitimate Canon of the Council of Nice which was the cause that the Emperour Valentinian also and his Empress Galla Placidia writing in the behalf of the said Pope Leo to the Emperour Theodosius affirmed to him for a certain Truth That both all Antiquity and the Canons of the Council of Nice also had assigned to the Pope of Rome the Power of judging of Points of Faith and of the Prelates of the Church Leo having before possessed them That this Canons of the Council of Sardica was one of the Canons of Nice And thus by a strong perseverance in this Pious Fraud they have at length so fully perswaded a great part of Christendom that the Council of Nice had established this Supremacy upon the Pope of Rome that it is now generally urged by all of them whenever this Point is controverted I must crave pardon of the Reader for having so long insisted on this Particular and perhaps longer somewhat than my Design required yet in my judgment it may be of no small importance to the Business in hand For will the Protestants here say seeing that two Popes Bishops and Princes which all Christians have approved have notwithstanding thus foisted in false Wares what ought we to expect from the rest of the Bishops and Doctors Since these Men have done this in the beginning of the Fifth Century an Age of so high repute for its Faith and Doctrine what have they not dared to do in the succeeding Ages If they have not forborn so foully to abuse the sacred Name of the Council of Nice the most Illustrious and Venerable Monument of Christianity next to the Holy Scriptures what other Authors can we imagine they would spare And if in the face of so Renowned an Assembly and in the presence of whatever Africk could shew of Eminency both for Sanctity and Learning and even under the eye of the great S. Augustine
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
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
the Word of God as that all that went before them had both seen and acknowledged the same The Consideration whereof was both Pleasing and Useful unto them For what can more delight a Faithful Heart than to find that the chiefest and most Eminent Persons in the Church had long since held the same Opinions touching our Saviour Jesus Christ and His Grace that We now hold at this day But yet it does not hence presently follow that though these Holy men should have met with these Articles of our Faith in the Writings of their Predecessours only without finding any Foundation of them in the Canonical Scriptures they would notwithstanding firmly have believed and embraced the same contenting themselves with the Bare Authority of their Predecessours S. Augustine professeth plainly that in such a Case they might better have rejected them and not be blamed for so doing neither than have received them unless they would incur the imputation of being over Credulous For it is a point of too much Credulity to believe any thing without Reason and He further affirmeth that where men speak without either Scripture or Reason their bare Authority is not sufficient to oblige us to believe what they propose unto us So that it hence appeareth that Humane Testimonies are alledged not to prove the Truth of the Faith but only to shew the Clearness of it after it is once well grounded Now the Question at this day betwixt us and the Church of Rome is not concerning the Clearness of the Truth of the Articles they believe and press upon the World but it yet lies upon them to prove even the very Ground and Foundation of them Shew me therefore will a Protestant here say either out of some Text of Scripture or else by some Evident Reason that there is any such place as Purgatory and that the Eucharist is not Bread and that the Pope is the Monarch and Head of the Church Universal and then I shall be very glad to try if for our greater comfort we may be able to find in the Authors of the Third or Fourth Century these Truths embraced by the Fathers of those times But to begin with these is to invert the Natural Order of things We ought first to be assured that the Thing is before we make inquiry whether it hath been believed or not For to what purpose is it to find that the Ancients believed it unless we find withal in their Writings some Reason of this their Belief And again on the other side what harm is it to us to be ignorant whether Antiquity believed it or not so long as we know that the Thing is And whereas there are some who to establish the Supream Authority of the Fathers alledge the Counsel which Sisinnius a Novatian and Agellius his Bishop gave of old to Nectarius Archbishop of Constantinople and by him to Theodosius the Emperour which was that they should demand of the Arrians whether or not they would stand to what the Fathers who died before the breaking forth of their Heresie had delivered touching the Point debated betwixt them this is hardly worth our consideration For this was a Trick only devised by a subtil head and which is worse by a Schismatick and consequently to be suspected as a Captious Proposal purposely made to entrap the Adverse party rather than any free and ingenuous way of Proceeding For if this manner of Proceeding had been right and good how came it to pass that among so many Catholick Bishops as there were none of them all advised it How came it to pass that they were so ignorant of the Weapons wherewith the Enemies of the Church were to be encountred How came it about that it should be proposed only by a young fellow who was a Schismatick too And if it were approved of as right and good Counsel why did Gregory Nazianzene S. Basil and so many other of the Fathers who wrote in that Age against the Arrians deal with them wholly in a manner out of the Scriptures And certainly those Holy men besides their Christian Candor which obliged them to this way of Proceeding took a very wise course in so doing For if this Controversie had been to be decided by the Authority of Humane Writers I know not how any man should have been able to make good that which this Gallant so confidently affirmeth in the place aforecited namely That none of the Ancients ever said that the Son of God had any beginning of his Generation considering those many strange Passages that we yet at this day meet with touching this Particular in the Books of the First Fathers which is the reason also why the Arrians alâ—ledged their Testimonies as we see they do in the Books of Athanasius Hilary and others of the Ancients who wrote against them But what need we insist so long upon a Story which is rejected by Cardinal Baronius as being an idle Tale devised by Zozomene who was a Novatian in favour of those of his own Sect. The Counsel of Vincentius Lirinensis which he gives us in a certain little Discourse of his which is very highly prised by Gennadius is accounted by many men much more worthy of our Consideration For having first told us that he speaks not of any Authors Save only of such who having holily wisely and constantly lived preached and persevered in the Catholick Faith and Communion obtained the favour at length either to dye faithfully in Christ or else had the happiness of being crowned with Martyrdom for Christs sake he further addeth That we are to receive as undoubtedly true certain and definitive whatsoever all the aforesaid Authors or at least the greatest part of them have clearly frequently and constantly affirmed with an Vnanimous Consent receiving retaining and delivering it over to others as it were joyntly and making up all of them but one Common and Vnanimous Council of Doctors But this Passage of his is so far from advancing the Supreme Authority which some would attribute to the Fathers in Matters of Faith that on the contrary I meet with something in it that makes me more doubt of their Authority than I did before For I find by this mans discourse that whatsoever his reason was whether good or bad he clearly appears to have had a very great desire of bringing all Differences in Religion before the Judgment seat of the Fathers and to the same end he labours to prove with the same eagerness and passion that their Judgment is inâ—allible in these Cases But in the mean time I find him so perplexed and troubled in bringing out that which he would have as that it appears sufficiently that he saw well enough that what he desired was not so agreeable to Truth For he hath so qualified his Proposition and bound it in with so many Limitations as that it is very probable that if all these Conditions which he here requires were any where to be found we might
alledged by S. Paul out Habakkuk to the Original telling us that S. Paul had cited it in these words The Just shall live by My Faith whereas it is most evident that he Apostle both in the First Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans as also in the Epistle to the Galatians hath it only thus The Just shall live by Faith and not The Just shall live by My Faith Athanasius in his Synopsis or whoever else was the Author of that Piece reckoning up the several Books of Scriptures evidently takes the Third Book of Esdras which hath been always accounted Apocryphal by the common consent of all Christendom for the First which is received by all both Christians and Jews into the Canon of the Scriptures We might reckon to this number if at least so foolish a Piece deserve to have any place among the Writings of the Fathers that gross mistake which we meet with in an Epistle of Pope Gregory II. who raileth fiercely against Vzziah for breaking the Brazen Serpent calling him for this Act of his The Brother of the Emperour Leo the Iconoclast which as he thought was all one as to reckon him amongst the most mischievous and wretched Princes that ever had been and yet all this while the Scripture tells us that this was the Act not of Vzziah but of the Good King Hezekiah and that he deserved to be rather commended for the same than blamed As for their slips of Memory he had need to have a very happy one himself that should go about to reckon them all up For example S. Ambrose tells us somewhere That the Eagle dying is revived again out of her own Ashes Who sees not that in this place he would have said the Phoenix But however in another place giving us an Account of the Story of the Phoenix as it is commonly delivered he says That this we have learned from the Authority of the Scriptures By a like mistake it was that he affirmed that these words For this very purpose have I raised thee up that I might shew my power in thee were spoken to Moses to whom notwithstanding the Lord never said any such word but rather to Pharaoh In like manner doth he attribute to the Jews those words in the ninth Chapter of S. John which were indeed spoken by Christ's Disciples who asked him saying Master who did sin this Man or his Parents that he was born blind I impute that other mistake of his to the heat of his Rhetorick where he brings in one of the seven Brethren in the Maccabees who suffered under King Antiochus and makes him in his height of Gallantry alledge the Example of John and of James the Sons of Thunder two of our Saviour Christs Apostles who came not into the World as every one knows till a long time after this It was a slip of memory also in Tertullian where he tells us That the Lord said unto Moses They have not rejected Thee but they have rejected Me which words were indeed spoken to Samuel and not to Moses S Hierome also was overtaken in the like manner when he tells us That none of the Fathers ever understood the word Knew in the Last Verse of the First Chapter of S. Matthew otherwise than of the Conjugal Act not remembring that his own dear Friend Epiphanius takes the word in a quite different sense and will have the meaning of the place to be That Joseph before the Miraculous Birth of our Saviour Christ knew not what Glory and Excellency was to befal the Blessed Virgin knowing nothing else of her before save only that she was the Daughter of Joachim and of Annae and Cousin to Elizabeth who was of the House of David whereas he at that time knew clearly that God had done him that Honour of sending his Angel to him and of chusing his Espoused Wife Mary to be the only Woman on Earth on whom he would confer that so great and wonderful Benefit and Advantage above all others But we intend not here to give you an Inventory of all the Errors of this nature which are to be found in the Writings of the Ancients these Patterns may well enough serve to shew what the whole Pieces are I shall only add here That besides this Carelesness and Security which is so ordinary with them in writing thus confidently whatsoever came in their mind or whatever others had delivered over unto them for Sound and Good without ever examining it throughly they had yet another kind of Custom which seems not to suit so well with the Person of Judges as we will needs have them to be And this is that in their Writings they are sometimes so jolly and sportful coming over us with such rare Allegorical Observations as have scarcely any more Solidity or Body than those Castles of Cards that little Children are wont to make These Cardinal Perron calls Des Gayetez joyeuses Chearful Frolickings I know very well that Allegories are useful and many times also necessary if so be they be but sober clear and well-grounded But I speak not here save only of such as rack the Text and as it were drag it along by the Hair and which make the Sense of the Scripture evaporate in empty Fumes And of these are the Writings of the Fathers full S. Hierome often complains of the strange Liberty that Origen and his Disciples took herein Certainly he himself often flies out in this kind and whosoever hath a mind to fee it may read but his 146 Epistle where he expounds the Parable of the Prodigal Son or let him but turn to the Discourse which he hath made touching the Genealogy of the Prophet Zephaniah and concerning the City of Damascus and also upon the History of Abishag the Shunamite and also upon the Five and twenty Men and the Two Princes spoken of in Ezechiel chap. 11. and upon the Destruction of Tyre of Egypt and of Assyria foretold by the same Prophet as also his subtile Observations upon Numbers and upon King Darius and upon that Command of our Saviour Christ where he bideth us turn the Left Cheek to him that hath smitten us on the Right and many other the like Discourses of his S. Hilary is so much taken with this manner of writing as that his Expositions upon the Scripture are half full of these Allegories and to be sure to make himself the more work he sometimes frames certain Impossibilities and Absurdities which he would make the Scripture seem to be guilty of which yet it is not only that he may have some pretense to have recourse to his Allegories As for example in the 136 Psalm he will needs have the Letter of the Text to be utterly inexplicable where it says That the Jews sate down by the Rivers of Babylon and hanged up their Harps upon the Willows as if in this Country that
all this it hath not only be called in Question but hath been even utterly condemned also who seeth not that the Consent of many Fathers together although any such thing were to be had upon all the Points now in Debate would yet be no sufficient Argument of the Truth of the same But I shall pass on to the rest We have before heard how that Tertullian St. Cyprian who was both a Bishop and a Martyr Firmilianus Metropolitan of Cappadocia Dionysius Patriarch of Alexandria together with the Synods of Bishops both of Africk Cappadocia Cilicia and Bithynia held all that the Baptism of Hereticks was invalid and null St. Basil who was one of the most Eminent Bishops of the whole Eastern Church held also in a manner the very same Opinion and that a long time too after the Determination of the Council of Nice as appeareth by the Epistle which he wrote to Amphilochius which is also put in among the Publick Decrees of the Church by the Greek Canonists And yet this Opinion is now confessed by all to be Erroneous Many in like manner of the Fathers as namely Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus Lactantius and Africanus believed that our Saviour Christ kept the Feast of the Passeover but once only after his Baptism And yet notwithstanding this Consent of theirs the Opinion is known to be very false as Petavius also testifieth and besides is expresly contrary to the Text of the Gospel I shall not here say any thing of the Opinion of St. Chrysostom St. Hierome St. Basil and the Fathers of the Council held at Constantinople under the Patriarch Flavianus who seem all to have held that an Oath was utterly unlawful for Christians under the New Testament Neither shall I take any notice in this place of that Conceit of Athanasius St. Basil and Methodius as he is cited by John Bishop of Thessalonica who all believed that the Angels had Bodies to whom we may also add as we have shewed before St. Hilary Justin Martyr Tertullian and very many more of the Fathers who would all of them have the Nature of Angels to be such as was capable of the Passions of Carnal love of which number is even St. Augustine also Whosoever should now conclude from hence that this Fancy of theirs which yet is of no small importance is a Truth would he not be as sharply reproved for it by the Romanists as by those of Geneva But I must not forget that besides St. Cyprian St. Augustine and Pope Innocent I. whose Testimonies we have given in before all the rest of the Doctors in a manner of the first Ages maintained that the Eucharist was necessary for young Infants if at least you dare take Maldonat's word who affirms that this Opinion was in great Request in the Church during the first Six Hundred years after our Saviour Christ Cassander also testifieth that he hath often observed this Practice in the Ancients as indeed is also witnessed by Carolus Magnus and by Ludovicus Pius who lived a long time after the Sixth Century both of which assure us that this Custom continued in the West even in their time as they are cited by Cardinal Perron and the Traces of this Custom do yet remain to this day amongst those Christians who are not of the Communion of the Latine Church For Nicolaus Lyranus who lived somewhat above three hundred years since observed That the Greeks accounted the Holy Eucharist so necessary as that they administred it to little Children also as well as Baptism And even in our Fathers time the Patriarch Jeremias speaking in the name of the whole Creek Church said We do not only Baptize little Children but we also make them partakers of the Lords Supper And a little after we account saith he both Sacraments to be necessary to Salvation for all persons namely Baptism and the Holy Communion The Abyssines also make their Children in like manner Communicate of the Holy Eucharist as soon as ever they are Baptized Which are most evident Arguments that this false Opinion touching the Necessity of the Eucharist hath been of old maintained not by three or four of the Fathers only but by the Major part and in a manner by all of them For we do not hear of so much as one among all the Ancient Fathers who rejected it in express Terms as the Council of Trent hath done in these later Times To conclude the Jesuit Pererius hath informed us and indeed the observation is obvious enough to any man that is never so little conversant in the Writings of those Authors who lived before St. Augustines time that all the Greek Fathers and a considerable part also of the Latines were of Opinion that the Cause of Predestination was the Fore sight which God had either of Mens Good Works or else of their Faith either of which Opinions he assures us is manifestly contrary both to the Authority of the Scriptures and also to the Doctrine of St. Paul So that I conceive we may without troubling our selves any further in making this envious Inquiry into the Errours of the Fathers conclude from what hath been already produced that seeing the Fathers have Erred in so many Particulars not on singly but also many of them together Neither the private Opinion of each particular Father nor yet the unanimous Consent of the Major part of them is a sufficient Argument certainly to prove the Truth of those Points which are at this day controverted amongst Us. CHAP. V. Reason V. That the Fathers have strongly contradicted one another and have maintained Different Opinions in Matters of very Great Importance BEssarion a Greek born who was honoured with the Dignity of Cardinal by Pope Eugenius IV. as a Reward of his earnest desires to and the great pains he took in endeavouring a Reconciliation betwixt the Eastern and the Western Church in a Book which he wrote upon this Subject to the Council of Florence will have the whole Difference betwixt the Greek and Latine Churches to be brought before the Judgment Seat of the Fathers And for as much as he knew that unless the Judges did all agree and were of one Opinion the Cause especially in Matters of Religion necessarily remains undecided he strongly labours to prove that he hath all the Fathers consenting not only with him but which is yet much harder to prove that they are all of the same Opinion also among themselves insomuch that he commands us when ever there appeareth any contrariety in their Writings that we should accuse our own ignorance rather than blame them for contradicting each other We may conclude therefore from what is here laid down by this Author who was both as acute and as Learned a man as any was at this Council that to render the Fathers capable of being the Judges of our Controversies it is necessary that they should be
by the Fathers how can they expect that their Authority should pass for Authentick in any one Let us suppose for instance that they held that there was such a Place as Purgatory But by your Favour will the Protestant say if you have found their Belief to be so erroneous touching the State of the Souls of Departed Saints till the Day of the Resurrection why would you impose upon me a Necessity of subscribing to what they held touching Purgatory The Laws of Disputation ought to be equal and therefore if you by examining this Opinion of the Fathers by Reason and by the Scriptures have found it to be Erroneous why will you not give us leave to try that other touching Purgatory by the same Touch-stone Certainly should we but speak the Truth it is the plainest mocking of the World that can be to cry out as these Men do continually The Fathers The Fathers and to write so many whole Volumes upon this Subject as they have done after they have so dealt with them as you have seen And if it be here objected That the Protestants themselves do also reject many of those Articles which we have before set down we answer That this is nothing at all to the purpose forasmuch as they take the Scriptures and not the Fathers for the Rule of their Faith neither do they press any Man to receive any thing from the hands of the Ancients unless it be grounded upon the Word of God And if lastly you say That the Authority of the Fathers hath no place nor is at all considerable in the Points before set down because that the Churcb hath otherwise determined touching the same this is clearly to grant us that which we would have namely That the Authority of the Fathers is not Supreme And as for the Church that is to say how far the Authority of it extends in these things this is a New Question to be disputed of which I shall not meddle withal at this time Only thus much I shall say That what Authority soever you allow it whether Little or Much you will still find that it will very hardly be able to do any thing touching the Decision of our present Controversies forasmuch as you can never be able to make any use or benefit of this Position till such time as you are assured both What and Where the Church is seeing that the Protestants stiffly deny That it is That which appears at this day at Rome and the greatest Difficulty of all consisting in the Demonstrating this unto them For if they did but once believe that the Church of Rome was the True Church they would immediately joyn themselves with it so that there would not henceforth be need of any further Dispute We shall here conclude therefore That the Alledging the Testimonies of the Fathers upon the Differences that are at this day in Religion is no proper Course for the Decision of them seeing it is no easie matter to discover what their Judgment hath been touching the same by reason of the many Difficulties that we meet with in the Writings of the Ancients neither is it of so sufficient Authority in it self as that we may safely build our Belief upon it since the Fathers themselves have been also subject to Errour neither lastly is it of any force either aâ—â—â—nst the one or the other Party seeing that they both regulate and examine the Opinions Ceremonies and Discipline of the Ancients the One by the Rule of the Scriptures and the Other by that of the Church But here I find that upon this Conclusion Two Questions may arise For seeing that the alledging the Fathers is not sufficient for the deciding of those Points that are now in debate amongst us it may be demanded in the first place What other Course we ought to take for the attaining to the Truth in these Controversies And then secondly How and in what Cases the Writings of the Fathers may be useful unto us Now although both these Questions are without the compass of our present Design yet notwithstanding in regard they so nearly border upon it we shall in the last place say a word or two in answer of them As for the First it would be a hard matter in my Judgment to find out a better way for Satisfaction herein than that which one Scholarius a Greek who is very highly accounted of by those who printed the General Councils at Rome hath proposed This Learned Man in a certain Oration of his which he made at the Council of Florence for the facilitating of the Vnion which was then treated of betwixt the Latins and the Greeks and was afterwards concluded on lays down for a Ground first That we ought not to reject all those things which are not clearly and in express Terms delivered in the Scriptures which is a Pretext and Shift that many of the Hereticks make use of but that we ought to receive with equal Honour whatsoever directly followeth from that which is said in the Scriptures and to reject utterly whatsoever shall be found to be coâ—â—trary to those things which are undoubtedly True He says further That In those things wherein the Scripture hath not clearly expressed it self we must have recourse to the Scripture it self as our Guide to give us light therein by some other Passage where It hath spoken more plainly And after all this he requireth That we should use our utmost Endeavour fully to reconcile those seeming Contradictions which we sometimes there meet withal in several Passages to that purpose taking notice of the Diversity of Times Customs Senses and the like And going on he saith That the Fathers of the Council at Nice after this manner concluded by the Scriptures upon the True Belief touching the Son of God and then applying all this to his present purpose he adds That the Scripture saith clearly and expresly that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father and that this is agreed upon by both Sides both by the Greeks and the Latins But that It hath not so expresly declared it self whether the Holy Ghost proceed also from the Son or not and that this is the thing now in Question the Latins affirming it and the Greeks on the other side denying it We ought therefore saith he to prove this from some other things which are there more clearly delivered Which he afterwards performeth and indeed in my Judgment very Learnedly and Happily proving this Doubtful Point out of other Passages that are more Clear And this was the Judgment of this Great Person which will not give any offence to those of the Church of Rome because it came from one that was of their Side Neither do I see what could have been spoken more rationally And indeed this is the Course that is observed in all Sciences whatsoever If thy Adversary doubt of the truth of what thou proposest thou art to prove it by such Maxims as are acknowledged and allowed of
by him making good that which is Doubtful by that which is Certain and clearing that which is Obscure by that which is Evident And this is the Rule that I conceive we ought to walk by in the Disputes that are betwixt us at this day The Word of God is our Common Book let us therefore search into It for that upon which we may ground our own Belief and by which we may overthrow the Opinion of our Adversary As for example it is there said clearly and expresly That that which our Saviour Christ took at his Last Supper was Bread and herein we All agree But it is not at all there expressed whether this Bread were afterward changed or annihilated or not And this is now the Question in Dispute amongst us We ought therefore according to the Counsel of Scholarius to prove this by some other things which are there delivered clearly And if thou dost this thou hast got the Victory If not I do not at all see why or how thou canst oblige any one to believe it In like manner the Scripture telleth us in as express Terms as may be That our Saviour Christ commanded His Apostles to Take and Eat and to Drink that which He gave them in Celebrating the Eucharist But It doth not at all say that he commanded them to Offer the same in Sacrifice either Then or Afterwards And this is now the Question which it concerns those of the Church of Rome if they will have us believe it to prove by some other things which are clearly and expresly delivered in the Word of God The Scripture in like manner saith expresly That Jesus Christ is the Mediator betwixt God and Man and That He is the Head of the Church and That He purgeth us by His Blood from our Sins Now in all this both Sides are fully agreed But it is not at all there expressed That the Departed Saints are Mediators and That the Pope is the Head of the Church and That our Souls are in part cleansed from their Sins by the Fire of Purgatory And herein lies the Controversie betwixt us The Learned Scholarius his Opinion herein would now be that certainly those who propose these Points as Articles of Faith deduce and collect them from some things which are clearly delivered in the Scriptures for otherwise they are not to be pressed as Truths And although that in matters of Religion or indeed in any other things of Importance a Man may very well be excused for not believing a thing when there appears not any such Reason as may oblige him to believe it yet notwithstanding if those who reject the Articles now debated betwixt us have a mind to go further yet and to prove positively the Falseness of them you see this Author hath laid them down the way by which they are to proceed He accounteth those very absurd that require at your hands that you should shew them all things expresly delivered in the Scripture and this ought principally to be understood of Negative Propositions of which no Science giveth you any certain account forasmuch as to go about to number them all up would be both an infinite and also an unprofitable useless piece of Work It is sufficient to deliver the Positive Truth For as whatsoever rightly followeth thereupon is True in like manner whatsoever clasheth with or contradicteth the same is False wouldst thou therefore demonstrate those Propositions that are pressed upon thee to be False Do but compare them with those things that are clearly and expresly delivered in the Scripture And if thou findest them contrary to any thing there set down receive them not by any means As for example If a Protestant not contenting himself with having answered all those Reasons which are brought to prove that there is such a Place as Purgatory shall yet desire to go further and to make it appear that the Opinion is False he is in this case to have recourse to the Scriptures and to examine it by those things which are there clearly and expresly delivered touching the State of the Soul after it is departed this Life and touching the Cause and Means of the Expiation of our Sins and the like And if the Opinion of Purgatory be found to contradict any thing there delivered then according to Scholarius it ought not to be received by any means But the brevity which we proposed to our selves in this Discourse permitteth us not to prosecute this Point any further As for the Second Question it is no very hard matter to resolve it For although we do not indeed allow any Supreme and Infallible Authority to the Writings of the Fathers yet do we not therefore presently account them Vseless If there were nothing of Vse in Religion saving what was also Infallible we should have but little good of any Humane Writings Those who have written in our own Age or a little before are of no Authority at all either against the one or the other Party Yet notwithstanding do we both read them and also reap much benefit from them How much more advantage then may we make by studying the Writings of the Fathers whose Piety and Learning was for the most part much greater than that of the Moderns S. Augustine believed them not in any thing otherwise than as he found what they delivered to be grounded upon Reason and yet notwithstanding he had them in a very great esteem The like may be said of S. Hierome who had read almost all of them over notwithstanding that he takes liberty sometimes to reprove them something sharply where he finds them not speaking to his mind Though you should deprive them not onely of this Supremacy which yet they never sought after but should rob them also of their Proper Nomes yet notwithstanding would they still be of very great Vse unto us For Books do not therefore profit us because they were of such or such a Man 's Writing but rather because they instruct us in those things that are Good and Honest and keep us out of Errour and make us abhor those things that are Vicious Blot out if you please the Name of S. Augustine out of the Title of those excellent Books of his De Civitate Dei or those other which he wrote De Doctrinâ Christianâ His Writings will instruct you never a whit the less neither will you find any whit the less benefit by them The like may be said of all the rest First of all therefore you shall find in the Fathers very many earnest and zealous Exhortations to Holiness of Life and to the Observation of the Discipline of Jesus Christ Secondly you shall there meet with very strong and solid Proofs of those Fundamental Principles of our Religion touching which we are all agreed and also many excellent things laid open tending to the right understanding of these Mysteries and also of the Scriptures wherein they are contained In this very particular their Authority may be of
no such Doctrine was ever preached to Mankind either by our Saviour Christ or by His Apostles For what Probability is there that those Holy Doctors of Former Ages from whose hands Christianity hath been derived down unto us should be Ignorant of any of those things which had been Revealed and Recommended by our Saviour as Important and Necessary to Salvation It is true indeed that the Fathers being deceived either by some False manner of Argumentation or else by some Seeming Authority do sometimes deliver such things as have not been revealed by our Saviour Christ but are evidently either False or Ill grounded as we have formerly shewed in those Examples before produced by us It is true moreover that among those things which have been revealed by our Saviour Christ in the Scripture which yet are not Absolutely Necessary to Salvation the Fathers may have been ignorant of some of them either by reason that Time had not as yet discovered what the sense of them was or else because that for lack of giving good heed unto them or by their being carried away with some Passion They did not then perceive what hath since been found out But that they should all of them have been Ignorant of any Article that is Necessarily Requisite to Salvation is altogether Impossible For after this Account They should all have been deprived of Salvation which I suppose every honest Soul would tremble at the thought of I say then and as I conceive have sufficiently proved in this Treatise that an Argument which concludeth the Truth of any Proposition from the Fathers having maintained the same is very Weak and Ill-grounded as supposing that which is Clearly False namely That the Fathers maintained nothing which had not been Revealed by our Saviour Christ For this would be such a kind of Argumentation as if a man should prove by the General Agreement herein of the Fathers that all the Departed Souls are shut up together in a certain Place or Receptacle till the Day of Judgment or that the Encharist is Necessarily to be administred to Little Infants and the like where every one sees how Insufficient and Invalid this way of Argumentation is And to say the truth such is the Proceeding of the Church of Rome when they go about to prove by the Authority of the Fathers those Articles which they propose to the World and which are rejected by the Protestants I say moreover that to conclude upon the Nullity or Falseness of any Article that is not of the number of those that are Necessary to Salvation from the general Silence of the Fathers touching the same is a very Absurd way of Arguing as supposing a thing which is also Manifestly False Namely that the Fathers must Necessarily have seen and Clearly known All and every of those things which Jesus Christ hath revealed in His Word Such a kind of Argument would it be thought among the Franciscans if any one should conclude against them from the Silence of the Fathers that our Saviour Christ hath not at all revealed that the Blessed Virgin Mary was conceived without Sin But yet I confess again on the other side that in those Points that are accounted as Absolutely Necessary to Salvation an Argument that should be drawn from the General Silence of the Fathers to prove the Nullity or Falseness of it would be very Pertinent and indeed Unanswerable As for example His manner of Argumentation would be very Rational and Solid that should conclude that those Means of Salvation which are proposed by a Mahomet suppose or a David George or the like Sectaries are Null and contrary to the Will of our Saviour Christ how much soever these Men may seem to Honour Him seeing that none of ehe Ancient Christians speak so much as one syllable of it and are utterly ignorant of all those Secrets that these Wretches have preached to their Disciples and delivered as Infallible and Necessary Means of Salvation After this manner did Irenaeus dispute against the Valentinians and other of the Gnosticks who vented their own sensâ—less Dreams and Absurd Issues of their Own Brain saying That the Creator of the World was but an Angelâ— and that there were above Him certain Divine Powers which They called Aeones that is to say Ages some of them making more of these and others fewer and some reckoning to the number of CCCLXV and an infinite number of other the like Prodigies never shewing any Ground for the same either in Reason or out of the Scripture Irenaeus therefore that he might make it appear to the World that this so Strange Doctrine was produced out of their Own Brain only goes about and visiteth the Arohives of all the Churches that had been either Planted or Watered by the Holy Apostles turns over all their Records Evidences and Ancient Monuments and these Aeones Achamot and Barbele of the Gnosticks no where appearing nor so much as any the least Part or Trace of them He concludeth that the Apostles had never delivered over any such thing to their Disciples neither by Writing nor by Word of Mouth as these Impostors pretended they had For certainly if they had done so the memory of it could not have been so utterly lost This is also the Method that Tertullian followed in his Disputations against these very Hereticks and others the like in the 22 Chapter of his Book De Praescriptionibus adversus Haereticos and in other places The Practice of these Great Persons who made use of it themselves will here serve to prove unto us that this Course is Right and Good And thus you see that the Authority of the Fathers is of very great Use in the Church and serveth as an Out-work to the Scriptures for the repelling the Presumption of those who would forge a New Faith But forasmuch as those who broach New Doctrines of their own Head do Ordinarily slight the Holy Scriptures as those very Hereticks did whom Iraeneus confuted who impudently accused Them of not being Right and that they are of no Authority and speak in very Ambiguous Terms and that they are not able to inform a man of the Truth unless they are acquainted with Tradition the Truth having been delivered as These men pretended not in Writing but by Word of Mouth For this Reason I say and for other the like are the Writings of the â—athers of very great Use in these Disputes and I conceive This to be one of the Principal ends for which the Divine Providence hath in despite of So many Confusions and Changes preserved so many of them safe down to our times If therefore the Protestants should propose of their Own Head and should press as Absolutely Necessary to Salvation any Positive Article which doth not at all appear in Antiquiâ—y without all Question this Course might with very good Reason be made use of against Them But it is most Evident that there is no such thing at all in their Belief for
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