For some having rejected this, have in various ways plotted against us, because we do not assent to the Arian heresy, and have become the causes of heresy and schisms in the Catholic Church. For the true and pious faith in the Lord hath stood forth evident to all, being known and read out of the divine Scriptures. For in this, the saints being perfected, endured martyrdom," &c.1 Now this passage, so far from being favourable to Mr. Keble's view, is directly opposed to it; for it expressly tells us that the true faith is evident to all, as being known and read out of the divine Scriptures. The next quotation stands thus ;-"The Fathers inserted the clause of the Son's consubstantiality with the Father, and anathematized those who affirmed a diversity of substance, not in terms which they had framed for themselves, but which they too had learned from the Fathers before them . . . . . which being so, which being so, the creed of Nicæa is sufficient, agreeing as it does also with the antient bishops." "This," adds Mr. Keble, "shows in what light the framers of the creed wished it to be viewed." Now the real passage, as it stands in Athanasius, is in more than one point very different, and runs thus ;—"The Fathers, having taken this view of the matter, wrote that the Son was consubstantial with the Father, and anathematized those who say that the Son is of a different substance, not having invented phrases for themselves, but having themselves learnt them from the Fathers before them, as we have said. These things, 1 Θελησασης τοινυν της σης ευσεβείας μαθειν παρ' ἡμων την της καθολικής Εκκλησίας πιστιν, ευχαριστησαντες επί τούτοις τω Κυρίω, εβουλευσάμεθα μάλλον πάντων την παρα των Πατερων εν Νικαια ὁμολογηθεισαν πιστιν ὑπομνησαι την στην ευσέβειαν ταύτην γαρ αθετήσαντες τινες, ημιν μεν ποικίλως επεβουλευσαν, ότι μη επειθόμεθα τη Αρειανη αίρεσει αιτιοι δε γεγονασιν αἱρέσεως και σχισματων τη καθολική εκκλησια· ἡ μεν γαρ αληθης και ευσεβης εις τον Κυριον πιστις φανερα πασι καθεστηκεν, εκ των θείων γραφων γινωσκομένη τε και αναγινωσκομένη εν ταύτη γαρ και οἱ ἅγιοι τελειωθέντες εμαρτύρησαν, κ. τ. λ. ATHANAS. Epist. ad Jovian. § 1. tom. i. p. 780. The Benedictine translation of the latter part is, nemini tamen obscura esse potest vera et pia in Dominum fides, ut quæ ex divinis Scripturis haberi et internosci queat. therefore, being thus demonstrated, their Synod at Ariminum is superfluous; and the other Synod concerning the faith named by them, is superfluous; for that at Nicea is sufficient, being also in agreement with the antient bishops, in which also their Fathers subscribed." Now, here all is consistent with the accounts we have already quoted from Athanasius. The Fathers, taking that view of the matter which is laid down in Scripture, which Athanasius has been just before describing, wrote, on that authority, that the Son was consubstantial with the Father; and in so doing, did not use an expression which was entirely new; for some of the earlier Fathers had used it, which, of course, as far as it went, was an argument in its favour. And these matters having been in the Nicene Council fully investigated, and demonstrated to be as the Nicene creed represented them to be, it was unnecessary that any other Council should be called upon the same matter; the decision of the Council of Nice having also the argument in its favour, as it appeared to him, that it was in unison with that of the antient bishops. The reader will observe, not only the different turn given to the sentence by the words omitted by Mr. Keble at the beginning of it, but more especially that the stringent words, "which being so, the Creed of Nicaa is sufficient," are a complete (however unintentional) misrepresentation of the passage. To these three passages of Athanasius, quoted by Mr. Keble, I would add for his consideration the two following. In his Letter concerning the decrees of the Nicene Council, Athanasius, after discussing the points controverted at Nice, adds these words,-" And of these things we are certified, not from any external source, but from 1 Οντω νοησαντες οἱ Πατέρες εγραψαν ὁμοούσιον είναι τον υἱον τω Πατρι, και ανεθεμάτισαν τους λεγοντας, εξ ἑτερας ὑποστασεως είναι τον υἱον ουχ ἑαυτοις πλασαμενοι λέξεις, αλλα και αυτοί απο των προ αυτών πατέρων μαθόντες, καθαπερ Τούτων δε ούτω δεικνυμένων, περιττη αυτων ἡ Αρίμηνος, περιττη και ἡ αλλη παρ' αυτων ονομαζόμενη περι πιστεως συνοδος αρκει γαρ ή εν Νικαια, συμφωνος ουσα και τοις αρχαιοις επισκόποις, εν ἡ και οι πατέρες αυτων ὑπέγραψαν. ATHANAS. Epist. ad Afios Episc. § 9. tom. i. P. 898. ειπομεν. the Scriptures."1 Moreover, how unwillingly even a word was used, not found expressly in the Scriptures, we may judge from the following passage in the same Letter. "But, perhaps, being reproved for the word uncreated, they will themselves, in their impiety, say, It behoves us, also, with respect to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, to speak from the Scriptures those things which are written respecting him, and not to introduce phrases not to be found in the Scriptures. IT DOES, indeed, BEHOVE US SO TO DO, I SHOULD MYSELF ALSO SAY, for the representations of the truth derived from the Scriptures are much more exact, than those derived from any other source; but the perverseness, and artful and versatile impiety of the Eusebians, compelled the bishops, as I before said, to set forth words more plainly subversive of their impiety; and those words which were written by the Council have been proved to have a right sense." From which we may see that the use of the words by preceding bishops, formed no sufficient authority, in the estimation of Athanasius, for their being considered orthodox; and that Scripture was so completely the sole authority followed, that even words not found therein, though appearing to express a Scriptural sense, were very reluctantly used. There remains one more passage, viz., that from Epiphanius, which, according to Mr. Keble, runs thus ;"They professed the faith of the Fathers, orthodox and unswerving; and delivered down to us from the Apostles and Prophets," (p. 141); the real passage being this; They profess the orthodox faith of the Fathers, which 66 Και τούτων ουκ εξωθεν ήμεις αλλ' εκ των γραφων εχομεν την πίστιν. ATHANAS. De Decret. Nic. Syn. § 17. tom. i. p. 222. 2 Αλλ' ίσως και δια το όνομα το αγένητον ελεγχθεντες, πονηροι τον τρόπον οντες, εθελήσουσι και αυτοι λεγειν εδει και περι του Κυρίου και Σωτηρος ήμων Ιησου Χριστου εκ των γραφων τα περι αυτου γεγραμμενα λεγεσθαι, και μη αγραφους επεισάγεσθαι λέξεις. Ναι εδει, φαίην αν και εγωγε ακριβεστερα γαρ εκ των γραφων μαλλον η εξ έτερων εστι τα της αληθειας γνωρισματα· αλλ' ἡ κακοήθεια και μετα πανουργιας παλιμβολος ασέβεια των περι Ευσέβιον ηναγκασε, καθα προείπον, τους επισκόπους λευκοτερον εκθεσθαι τα την ασέβειαν αυτών ανατρέποντα ῥηματα και τα μεν παρα της συνόδου γραφεντα διανοιαν ορθήν έχοντα δεδεικται, ATHANAS. De Decret. Nic. Syn. § 32. tom. i. p. 237. is also immutable, and was delivered by the Apostles and Prophets." The notion of successional delivery, implied in the terms" down to us," has no place in the original, and if it had, the passage would only state a matter of fact which we do not call in question. Wearisome as the examination of these passages may have been, the result will, I suppose, have proved the necessity of it, and produce at least one good effect, namely, that the reader will be set on his guard in this matter, and prevented from hastily putting credence in such representations, without comparing them with the originals; as it is evident, from the specimens given above, how completely he may be misled, even where, as in the case before us, he may have every motive for confidence which character can give. I have now gone through the whole of Mr. Keble's arguments and authorities, by which he has attempted to support his view of the mode of proceeding adopted at Nice, and shall leave the reader to judge how far his conclusion holds good, 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.) One thing only I would add, and that is, that when he speaks as if those who opposed his views discarded the testimony of the primitive Church to the faith as useless, and no help to the understanding of Scripture, or confirmation of our view of its meaning, he very sadly misrepresents their sentiments, and makes use of a mere controversial artifice, by which no impartial reader will be deceived. The question, the sole question is, whether we have an infallible Church-tradition, binding the conscience to receive what it delivers as the meaning of Scripture, or whether our faith ought to rest on Scripture only. We affirm the latter, and also that such was the 1 Ομολογουσι την των Πατερων ορθοδοξον πίστιν και ακλινη και απο των Αποστολων και Προφητων παραδοθεισαν. ΕΡΙΡΗ. in Hær. Arian. § 11. Ed. Petav. tom. i. p. 735. mind of the Nicene and earlier Fathers, who appealed to the testimony of Fathers who went before them, not as a testimony binding upon the conscience, (and thus practically superseding Scripture,) but as one which might reasonably be an additional moral inducement to lead men to believe that the doctrine they supported was the doctrine of Scripture; and in the consciousness that it was but reasonable that such testimony in favour of their views should be required of them, to show that they were not novelists. Church-tradition, in that sense in which alone it could be considered " practically infallible," as Mr. Keble calls it, namely, as implying a strictly universal consent, never could and never can be had, even for any one moment, during the whole period of the Church's existence. That such was the mind of the Nicene Fathers, is evident from the course of their deliberations, as described by Athanasius. Had they held the notions of our opponents on the subject, there would have been some reference made by them to ecclesiastical tradition as the authoritative interpreter of Scripture, and consequently their authority for the interpretation they gave to Scripture in their decision. But, on the contrary, we find from the various passages given above from Athanasius, that their judgment was given directly from Scripture, without any such reference. Nay, they had evidently no idea of being in possession of any such authoritative interpretation, for it appears that their intention and great desire was to use nothing but phrases occurring in Scripture, and that they very reluctantly adopted a word not found in Scripture, and then only on the consideration that that word seemed compendiously to express the meaning of a number of Scriptural phrases they had collected together for the purpose of obtaining the sense of Scripture on the subject. Let our opponents hear one of their own chosen witnesses, Bishop Patrick,-"This tradition [i. e. the Nicene Creed] supposes the Scripture for its ground; and delivers nothing but what the Fathers assembled at Nice VOL. II. A A |