254 THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION TAUGHT CLEARLY, &c.

either by the refined arguments or by the false assertions of those who endeavour to engraft their own opinion upon the oracles of God. He may safely be ignorant of all philosophy, except what is to be learned from the sacred books, which indeed contain the highest philosophy adapted to the lowest apprehensions. He may safely remain ignorant of all history, except so much of the history of the first ages of the Jewish and of the Christian Church as is to be gathered from the canonical books of the Old and New Testament. Let him study these in the manner I recommend, and let him never cease to pray for the illumination of that Spirit by which these books were dictated; and the whole compass of abstruse philosophy and recondite history shall furnish no argument with which the perverse will of man shall be able to shake this learned Christian's faith. The Bible thus studied will indeed prove to be what we Protestants esteem it, a CERTAIN AND SUFFICIEnt rule of FAITH AND PRACTICE, a

helmet of salvation, which alone may quench the fiery darts of the wicked." 1

1 Horsley's Nine Sermons on the Resurrection and other subjects. Serm. 5. Serm. ed. 1829. vol. ii. pp. 373-5.

255

CHAPTER X.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE FATHERS ON THE SUBJECT OF THIS WORK.

SECT. I.-PRELIMINARY REMARKS.

IN proceeding to review the sentiments of the Fathers on the subject of this work, I would offer in the first place a few general remarks, that may tend to assist the reader in forming a right judgment of them.

It is always difficult to give, by a few brief extracts, any correct notion of the full spirit and force of a writer's testimony to a point like that before us, in which his views are very much shown by the general tone of his remarks, and the whole course of his arguments. And it is still more difficult in the present case, from the misinterpretation to which the works of the Fathers have been subjected from the Romanists and our opponents.

Before I proceed further, therefore, I would caution the reader against allowing himself to be misled by sentences taken apart from their context, or phrases used in common by the Fathers and our opponents, but with a different meaning.

For instance, it is easy to find, in the works of the Fathers, as in the Catholic writers of later times, an appeal to the writers that preceded them, in confirmation of the orthodoxy of the doctrine they are inculcating. And these appeals are sometimes most incorrectly cited as proofs of their having maintained the pseudo-catholic notion that the Fathers are the authorized interpreters of Scripture, and patristical tradition a practically infallible

informant; whereas it will almost invariably be found, where such passages are examined, that the doctrine has been placed altogether upon the foundation of Scripture testimony, and the appeal to preceding writers in confirmation of it, made only with the view of showing that such an exposition of Scripture was no novelty, but not as if the testimony of a few ecclesiastical writers could be taken as an infallible expounder of God's word, or per se necessary to the right interpretation of it, on account of its imperfection and obscurity.

Another misinterpretation to which the writings of the Fathers have been subjected, (to which we have already alluded1,) and which has been more useful than any other to the pseudo-catholic cause, is the perversion of the meaning of the word " tradition," as used by the Fathers. The writings of the Romanists in particular abound with citations from the Fathers in which the whole force of the passage depends upon the meaning of this word, and where an examination of the context shows that it is Scripture to which the writer is referring; and thus, not unfrequently, the quotation which appears the most forcible to a superficial reader, turns out to be not only no evidence of what it is cited to prove, but precisely an evidence of the contrary. And, as we have already seen, our opponents have followed them in this, so that Mr. Newman has actually quoted a passage of Athanasius in defence of his views, which is diametrically opposed to them.2 In the former part of this work, I have given several passages in proof of what we are here maintaining, namely, that the word "tradition" is frequently used in the Fathers in reference to Scripture. But as the point is of considerable importance, I will here add some further proofs of it, in order to show its constant use by them in this sense.

Thus Origen says,-" If any arrogant person chooses to slight or despise the declarations of the Apostles, let

See vol. i. pp. 8, 69, 70, 74, 75.

2 Vol. i. pp. 74, 5.

3 See vol. i. pp. 8, 69, 70, 74-76.

him look to it himself. I for my part think it right to cleave close, as to God and our Lord Jesus Christ, so also to his Apostles, and to inform myself from the Divine Scriptures according to their own tradition."1

Thus, also, Pope Felix III. says, "Observe, disciples of Christ and my children, the traditions which ye have received from the Divine Scriptures.” 2

So Gregory Nyssen (already quoted) says, "It is believed. . . from the tradition of the Scriptures." "3

So Cyril of Jerusalem says, "Hold the traditions which ye now receive," where, as his learned editor, Milles, observes, the word traditions refers to what he had just set before his hearers from the Scriptures.

So Cyprian (already quoted) frequently speaks of our Lord's words recorded in the Gospels, under the name of "the Dominical tradition;" 5 and elsewhere, on the question of the rebaptization of heretics, exhorts (in similar language to the passage above quoted from him) a return to" the Evangelical testimony and the Apostolical tradition," meaning the Gospels of the Evangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles."

Si quis vero arrogantia tumidus Apostolica dicta contemnit aut spernit ipse viderit. Mihi autem, sicut Deo et Domino nostro Jesu Christo, ita et Apostolis ejus adhærere bonum est, et ex Divinis Scripturis secundum ipsorum traditionem intelligentiam capere. In Levit. hom. 7. § 4. Tom. ii. p. 224.

2

Φυλάξετε, Χριστου μαθηται. εμου δε υἱοι, τας παραδόσεις ὡς παρελάβετε από Twv delov papwv. FELIX III. Papa (fl. 483) in Epist. ad Petrum Fullonem Ep. Antioch. sub fin.; Concil. ed. Paris. 1671. Tom. iv. p. 1070.

* Πεπιστευται εκ τε της κοινής υποληψεως, και εκ της των γραφων παραδόσεως. GREG. NYSS. De anim. et resurr. Tom. ii. p. 644. Ed. 1615.

4 Κρατείτε τας παραδόσεις ἃς νυν παραλαμβανετε.

Milles, p. 76. See the note of Milles in loc.

Catech. 5. § 8. Ed.

5 Traditio Dominica. See his Ep. ad Cæcil. Ep. 63. Ed. Pamel. • Quare si rejectis humanæ contentionis erroribus, ad Evangelicam auctoritatem atque ad Apostolicam traditionem sincera et religiosa fide revertamur, intelligemus, &c. Ep. ad Jubaianum, circa med. Ep. 73. Ed. Pamel.

7 For the use of the word tradition by the Fathers, see also IREN, adv. hær. lib. iii. c. 25, p. 256, ed. Grab. (the word is also used, pp. 129, 131, 185 and 199); CLEM. ALEX. Strom. pp. 806 and 896. ed. Potter (al. pp. 679 and 762); CYRILL. ALEX. De recta fide ad Theodos. Tom. v. P. 2. p. 15. ed. Aubert. ; ORIGEN. In Matth. tom. x. § 17. Op. vol. iii. p. 462. ed. Ben.

VOL. II.

S

The description of the New Testament, occurring in these words of Cyprian, was one in very common use with the Fathers. Thus we find the Bible frequently referred to under the title, "The Law, the Prophets, the Evangelists, and the Apostles," as by Hippolytus,1 Gregory of Neocæsarea, Cyril of Jerusalem,3 Epiphanius, Salvian,5 and Hilary. So the New Testament is referred to by Origen, and Ephræm Syrus, as "the Evangelical and Apostolical sayings," by Hilary as "the Evangelical and Apostolical institutes," 9 and similarly by Gregory of Neocæsarea; 10 just as in the passages formerly referred to it is called "the evangelical and apostolical traditions." 11 The Gospels are referred to by Theophilus of Antioch and Cornelius as "the evangelical voice;" 12 by

1 Νόμον, προφητας, ευαγγελιστας, αποστολους. ΗIPPOL. De antichrist. § 58. Ed. Fabr. vol. i. p. 28.

2 GREGOR. NEOCES. In Annunc. Serm. ii. p. 19. ed. Par. 1622.

3

Ουχ έτερον μεν εν Νόμω και Προφήταις, ἕτερον δε εν Ευαγγελίοις και Αποστ τολοις, αλλ' έν εστι και το αυτο Πνευμα ἅγιον το εν Παλαια και Καινη Διαθηκη τας θείας λαλησαν γραφας. CYRILL. HIEROS. Cat. 17. § 3. ed. Milles, p. 243.

4 Ου μόνον εκ των Ευαγγελικών και Αποστολικων ... αλλα και εκ Νόμου και Проηтшν. EPIPH. Adv. hær. h, 31. § 15. tom. i. pp. 181, 2.-'Ori eos eis ήμιν εν Νόμω και εν Προφήταις και εν Ευαγγελίοις και Αποστολοις, εν Παλαια kai Kain AιaðNÊN, KEKNPVKTAI. ID. ib. Exp. fid. Cath. § 18. tom. i. p. 1101. Legem, Prophetas, Evangelium et Apostolicas lectiones. SALVIAN. De Gubern. Dei. lib. iii. p. 45.

5

• Dilatis igitur

Evangelicis atque Apostolicis præconiis, omnis interim nobis de Lege et Prophetis adversus impios pugna sit. HILAR. De Trin. lib. v. § 6. col. 858. Ed. Ben.

7 Των ευαγγελίων και των αποστολικων φωνών. ORIG. contr. Cels. lib. iii. § 15. tom. i. p. 457.

Diem semper adventus Domini prædictum Propheticis et Evangelicis atque Apostolicis vocibus contempleris. EPHR. SYR. De Pœnit. tom. iii. p. 599. 9 Evangelicis atque Apostolicis institutis. HILAR. De Trin. lib. iv. § 1. col. 827. See also § 5, col. 829 and lib. vi. § 8. col. 882. Also Tract. in Psalm.

§ 23. col. 38.

10 Όταν αναγινωσκεται το ευαγγελιον, η αποστολικόν, μη προσχης τω βίβλω, K. T. λ. GREG. NEOCES. In Annunc. Serm. ii. p. 19.

11 See vol. i. pp. 74, 5.

12 H evayyeλios pavŋ.

THEOPH. Ad. Autol. lib. iii. § 13. ed. Ben. p. 388. ed. Col. 1686. p. 126. Sequentes evangelicam vocem dicentem, Beatos esse puros corde quoniam ipsi Deum videbunt. CORNEL. Ep. ad Cypr. ap. Cypr. Epist. 49. ed. Fell.