Such is the testimony of one who was himself a Romanist, after which I think there can be no doubt what are the views supported by Cyprian.

As connected, however, with our present subject, I would commend the following passages to the attention of the reader.

"That they may understand from you, and be instructed, and learn what ecclesiastical discipline demands, according to the dictates of the Scriptures." 1

"This happens, dear brethren, in consequence of a return not being made to the source of the truth, and the fountain head not being sought, nor the doctrine of our heavenly master being adhered to. Which if any one considers and examines, there will be no need of a long discussion and arguments."

"Wherefore we also holding a middle course, and contemplating the Lord's balance, and meditating on the mercy and compassion of God the Father, after much and long discussion with each other, held a steady course between extremes in determining what was to be done.” 3

"We came together, and after the Scriptures had been cited for a long time on both sides, we, with a happy moderation, determined upon a middle course." 4

"I have received your letters, dear brother, which are truly sensible and full of integrity and faith. Nor am I

Ut sciant ex vobis et instruantur et discant, quid secundum Scripturarum magisterium ecclesiastica disciplina deposcat. Ep. ad clerum de cura paup. &c. (Op. ed. Fell. Ep. 14. p. 32.)

2 Hoc eo fit, fratres dilectissimi, dum ad veritatis originem non reditur, nec caput quæritur, nec magistri cælestis doctrina servatur. Quæ si quis consideret et examinet, tractatu longo atque argumentis opus non est. De unit. Eccles. (Op. ed. Fell. Oxon. 1682. P. 1. p. 105.) On the fraudulent corruption of this Treatise by the Romanists see James's Corruption of Scripture and Fathers. Part 2. init.

3 Propter quod et nos temperamentum tenentes, et libram Domini contemplantes, et Dei Patris pietatem ac misericordiam cogitantes, diu multumque tractatu inter nos habito, justa moderamine agenda libravimus. Ep. ad Max. Presh. &c. (Op. ed. Fell. Ep. 54. P. 2. p. 100.)

In unum convenimus, et Scripturis diu ex utraque parte prolatis temPeramentum salubri moderatione libravimus. Ep. ad Antonian. (Op. ed. Fell. Ep. 55. P. 2. p. 102.)

surprised that being well versed and skilful in the Dominical Scriptures, you do all things prudently and advisedly."

LACTANTIUS (fl. a. 303.)

1

Proceeding to Lactantius, we are told that "the faith is contained in the divine Scriptures."

2

EUSEBIUS OF CÆSAREA (fl. a. 315.)

Our next witness is the learned Eusebius Pamphilus ; who, though not apparently in all respects orthodox,3 may, I suppose, be considered a witness not to be despised on the question before us.

In his Letter to the people of his own Diocese concerning the Council of Nice, he thus speaks of the Anathema which that Council annexed to the Creed which it published;" Moreover we considered the anathematism published by them at the end of the Creed to be unobjectionable, inasmuch as it prohibits the use of expressions not found in the Scriptures, through which has come nearly all the confusion and disturbance that has arisen in the Church. No part, therefore, of holy Scripture having used the phrase, 'out of nothing,' or 'there was a time when he was not,' or those which follow, it appeared improper to say or teach these things; to which, as appearing reasonable, we assented."4 Can anything

Accepimus literas tuas, frater carissime, satis sobrias et integritatis ac fidei plenas. Nec miramur si exercitatus et in Scripturis Dominicis peritus caute omnia et consulte geras. Ep. ad. Caldon. (Op. ed. Fell. Ox. 1682. Ep. 25. P. 2. p. 50.)

* Quod quia ille [i. e. Cyprianus] non fecit, raptus eximia eruditione divinarum literarum, ut iis solis contentus esset quibus fides constat, accessi Deo inspirante ut ego facerem, &c. LACTANT. Div. Instit. lib. v. c. 4. (Cant. 1685. p. 243. Paris. 1748. vol. i. p. 372.)

3 Many of the antients, and some of the moderns, speak of him as a ringleader among the Arians. This, however, is evidently unfair, as he expressly repudiated the statements of Arius as to the Son, though his notions on the subject do not appear to have been strictly orthodox. Du Pin and Cave, the latter particularly, will give full information on the point.

4 Και τον αναθεματισμόν δε τον μετα την πίστιν προς αυτων εκτεθεντα άλυπον είναι ἡγησάμεθα, δια το απείργειν αγραφοις χρήσασθαι φωναις· διο σχεδον ἡ πασα γεγονε συγχυσις τε και ακαταστασία των εκκλησιων μηδεμιας γουν θεοπνεύστου

show more clearly how completely Scripture was made the sole authoritative rule of faith by Eusebius, and as far as his testimony goes by the Bishops at Nice? We shall hereafter see that the introduction of the word "consubstantial" into their Confession is not inconsistent with this decision, for that word was made use of as one immediately flowing from the language of Scripture, and only equivalent to that which was clearly expressed in Scripture.

Again; in the disputation with the Philosopher in the Council of Nice recorded by Gelasius, Eusebius replying in the name of the bishops there assembled, makes in one of his answers the following observations, - "Believe those things which are written, the things which are not written neither consider nor enquire after;" and shortly after, having expounded what he considered the true doctrine respecting the Son, he adds, "which we, knowing by faith, preach according to the teaching of the Holy Scriptures."

Still more plainly in the Preface to his Oration in praise of the Emperor Constantine, in which he discourses at large respecting God and his providence, the incarnation of our Saviour, and the blessings we derive through him, he speaks of the Holy Scriptures as our great

γραφής το, εξ ουκ οντων, και το, ην ποτε ότε ουκ ην, και τοις εξης επιλεγομενοις κεχρημένης, ουκ ευλογον έφανη ταυτα λέγειν και διδάσκειν. ὡ και αυτω καλως δοξαντι συνεθέμεθα. EUSEBI Epist. ad. Cæsariens. in Socrat. Hist. Eccles. lib. i. c. 8. (Ed. Reading, vol. ii. p. 26.) See also Theodoret. Hist. Eccles. lib. i. c. 12, et Gelas. Cyzic. Comment. Act. Conc. Nic. P. 2. c. 36. Ed. Balf. p. 185.

2 Τοις γεγραμμενοις πιστευε, τα μη γεγραμμενα μη εννοει μηδε ζητει ὅπερ ἡμεις πίστει νοούντες κηρυττομεν, κατα την διδασκαλίαν των ἱερων γραφων. Euseb. ad. Philosoph. in Gelas. Cyzic. Comment. Act. Conc. Nic. P. 2. c. 19. Ed. Balf. p. 124. It is right that I should here add that some modern authors have doubted the authenticity of the statements made by Gelasius as to what took place in the Council of Nice, that is, those which rest upon his authority alone. The Romanists, in particular, find it convenient to call his statements in question. As to this particular passage, therefore, I leave the matter to the reader's judgment. See respecting Gelasius, Mirai Auctarium De Scriptor. Eccles. p. 21. in Fabric. Biblioth. Eccles. Hamb. 1718. and Cave Ilist. Liter.

Teacher in these points. "Let the declarations of the Oracles, not those uttered by divination or rather foolish madness, but those uttered by the light of divine inspiration, be our teachers in the sacred mysteries; [let them teach us] concerning the kingdom itself, and concerning the supreme King, and the divine Guard which surrounds the universal King; as also concerning that example of royalty which is among us, and concerning that which falsely counterfeits its character; and those things which accompany each rank. From these [oracles] therefore, having learnt the sacrifices suitable to God, as from some Hierophantæ, let us thus commence handling the divine mysteries."

THE COUNCIL OF NICE (a. 325.)

From Eusebius let us pass on to the consideration of the proceedings at the great Council of Nice, and see what is the testimony borne by the conduct of that assembly to the subject under discussion.

The Tractators with the Romanists would fain make us believe that the Fathers there assembled pronounced judgment not directly from Scripture, but from the interpretation given to Scripture by ecclesiastical tradition. Mr. Keble, in particular, has devoted many pages to the endeavour to prove that the Nicene Fathers were "earnest and constant in resorting to tradition in order to decide among conflicting interpretations of Scripture, and settle the fundamentals of our most holy faith," (p. 141,) and asserts that they "went to church tradition for the critical and decisive phrase of one substance with the Father,'" (p. 138,) all which I hope to prove is very far from the truth.

5 Λογιων δε χρησμοι, ουκ εκ μαντειας μαλλον η μανιας παραφρονος, φωτος δ' επιπνοίας ενθεου προσπεφωνημένοι, των τελείων ήμιν γενεσθωσαν διδασκαλοι αμφι Βασιλείας αυτής αμφι τε βασιλεως του ανωτατου δορυφορίας τε θειας αμφι των παντων βασιλεα του τε καθ' ἡμας βασιλικού παραδείγματος, και του το χαραγμα κεκιβδηλουμένου των θ' ἑκατέρω συνομαρτούντων ταγματι. οἷς δη τας θεοπρεπεις τελετας ἱεροφαντούμενοι, ὧδεπη θειων οργίων εφαψωμεθα. Praef. ad Orat. in laud. Constant. (Ed. Reading, vol. i. p. 716.)

I shall now, then, first give the reader some extracts from the accounts remaining to us of the proceedings of this Council, and then offer a few observations on what appear to me the very incorrect and delusive statements of Mr. Keble.

After an address on the part of the bishops to the Emperor Constantine, the discussion was opened by a speech from Constantine to the assembly, at the close of which he makes the following remarks,—" It would be grievous," he says, 66 yea, very grievous, our enemies being destroyed, and no one daring to oppose us, that we should wound one another, and afford pleasure and laughter to our adversaries. And especially when we are discussing divine things, and have the teaching of the most holy Spirit fully committed to writing. For the evangelical and apostolical books, and the oracles of the antient prophets, CLEARLY AND FULLY TEACH US what should be our views respecting the Godhead. Let us, therefore, banish hostile contention, and TAKE THE SOLUTION OF THE POINTS IN QUESTION FROM THE WORDS OF DIVINE INSPIRATION." 1

Such were the sentiments of the Emperor Constantine, who was at that time not a novice in the Christian faith, and who had certainly had every advantage of instruction in it. A testimony more decisively in favour of the views for which we are contending could not have been pronounced, and whatever slight may have been put upon it by Bellarmine, in saying that Constantine was a great Emperor, but not a great doctor, or by Mr. Keble in passing it over in silence, there will be those who will regard it as

å

1 Δεινον είη και αγαν δεινον, των πολεμιων καταλυθέντων, και μηδενος αντιτείνειν τολμώντος, αλληλους βαλλειν, και τοις δυσμενεσιν ἡδονην και γέλωτα προξενειν αλλως τε και περι θείων διαλεγόμενους πραγματων, και του παναγιου Πνεύματος την διδασκαλίαν αναγραπτον έχοντας. Ευαγγελικαι γαρ, φησι, βιβλοι και Αποστολίκαι, και των παλαιων προφητων τα θεσπίσματα, σαφως ἡμᾶς ὁ χρη περι του Θείου φρονειν εκπαιδεύουσι. Την πολεμοποιον ουν απελάσαντες εριν. εκ των θεοπνεύστων λογων λαβωμεν των ζητουμενων την λυσιν. Theodoret. Hist. Eccles. lib. i. c. 6. (Op. ed. Schulze Hala, 1769 et seq. vol. iii. p. 757.) See also, Gelasii Cyzic. Comment. Act. Conc. Nic. lib. ii. c. 7. Ed. Balf. Lutet. 1599, pp. 84,5.