Let us proceed, however, to other passages in the writings of Athanasius, illustrative of this question.

In his first Oration against the Arians, he says,-" If they should be suspected of such sentiments, they shall be overwhelmed by proofs from the Scriptures,"❞—not by the interpretation given to Scripture by tradition, but by “ proofs from the Scriptures."

Again: "This," he says, "we must especially inquire, Whether he is Son; and respecting this, the Scriptures are before all things to be searched."2

Again; "Where did they find that the counsel or will of God was before his Word; unless neglecting the Scriptures they deceitfully embrace the errors of ValenLet them, if they please, defend the notions of Valentinus; but we, having read the divine oracles, have found it written respecting the Son, that 'he

tinus ?

was.

Again; "Who delivered these doctrines to them? Who taught them these doctrines? No one, certainly, from the Divine Scriptures." This testimony, though indirect, very forcibly shows how completely the Divine

οἱ ἅγιοι βουλομενοι νοειν τοιαυτα και παραδειγματα δεδωκασι. De decret. Nic. Syn. § 12. i. 219. The phrase occurs also in the same sense in his treatise, De sent. Dionys. § 2. i. 244. And frequently in his Orations against the Arians, as Orat. i. § 63. i. 467. Orat. 2. § 5, i. 473. ib. § 6. i. 474. ib.§ 63. i. 531. And elsewhere passin. And so the phrase is used continually by the other Fathers. As for instance Gregory Nyssen, Contra Eunom. orat. 9. ii. 254. ed. 1615. It is quite true that the word aywr may some. times be found connected with marepwv, in reference to the Nicene, or other Fathers ; but the emphatic phrase, of ayuou, when applied to the writers of the Church, belongs peculiarly to the inspired writers.

1 Εαν ὑπονοηθωσι, βληθήσονται παρα παντων τοις εκ των γραφων ελέγχοις. ID. Orat. i. contr. Arian. § 10. i. 414.

2 Τούτο γαρ προ παντων δει ζητειν, ει υίος εστι, και περι τουτου τας γραφας προηγουμένως ερευναν. ID. Orat. 2. contr. Arian. § 73. i. 541.

3 Αυτοί δε που αρα βουλησιν η θελησιν προηγουμενην εὗρον του λόγου του Θεου, ει μη αρα τας γραφας αφέντες, υποκρίνονται και την Ουαλεντινου κακονοιαν ; εκείνοι μεν ουν τα Ουαλεντίνου ζηλευτωσαν ἡμεις δε εντυχόντες τους Betots Aoyots, ETL LEY TOU viov, To nr, eipour. Ip. Orat. iii. contr. Arian. § 60. i. 608, 9.

4 Τις γαρ αυτοις παρέδωκε ταυτα, τις ὁ διδαξας, αλλ' ουδείς εκ των θείων Ypapwv. ID. Ep. 4. ad Serap. § 5. i. 700.

Scriptures were considered by Athanasius as the only source whence such doctrines should be taught.

Again; "Vainly, therefore, do they run about pretending that they demand that there should be councils held for the sake of the faith. For the Divine Scripture is more competent [to determine the faith] than all other things."

Again; "Either, therefore, reject the Divine Scriptures, or, if you admit them, do not think to speak words of incurable deceit, other than and beyond those that are written."

Again; "If, therefore, ye are disciples of the Gospels, speak not injustice against God, but walk by those things that are written, and have been done. But if you wish to speak other things beyond those that are written, why do you contend against us, who can endure neither to hear or speak anything beyond the things that are written . . . . What enormous folly is this of yours to speak things that are not written ?"3

And, in the Fragment of his Festal Epistle, after having enumerated the books of the Old and New Testament, he adds," These are the wells of salvation, that he who thirsts may be filled with the oracles contained in these books. In these alone the doctrine of religion is taught. Let no one add to them, nor take away anything from them.”4

1 Ματην γουν περιτρέχοντες προφασίζονται δια πιστιν ηξίωκεναι γενεσθαι τας συνόδους. Έστι μεν γαρ ίκανώτερα παντων ἡ θεια γραφη. ID. De Synod. § 6. i. 720.

2 Η τοινυν αρνησασθε τας θείας γραφας, η ταυτᾶς ὁμολογοῦντες, μη έτερα παρα τα γεγραμμενα επινοείτε λαλειν ῥήματα απατης ανίατου. ID. Contr. Apoll. lib. i. § 6. i. 926.

• Ει τοινυν μαθηται εστε των ευαγγελιων, μη λαλείτε κατα του Θεου αδικιαν Ει δε έτερα παρα τα γεγραμαλλα στοιχειτε τοις γεγραμμενοις και γενομένοις. μενα λαλειν βουλεσθε, τι προς ἡμας διαμαχεσθε, τους μητε ακούειν, μητε λεγειν, Τις ύμων ἡ τοσαυτη απόνοια της παρα τα γεγραμμενα πειθομένους ; ID. Contr. Apoll. lib. i. §§ 8, 9, i. αμετρίας, λαλειν τα μη γεγραμμένα ; 928, 9.

4 Ταυτα πηγαι του σωτηριου, ώστε τον διψώντα των εν τούτοις εμφορείσθαι λογιων εν τούτοις μόνοις το της ευσεβειας διδασκαλείον ευαγγελίζεται. Μηδεις τούτοις επιβαλλετω, μηδε τούτων αφαιρείσθω τι. Fragm. ex Epist. Fest. i. 962.

Lastly, I would recall to the remembrance of the reader a passage already quoted in a former page,1 which, however, occurs in a treatise that is classed by the Benedictines among those of doubtful authorship, and with which, therefore, the reader may deal as he pleases.

Moreover, Athanasius distinctly recognizes the completeness of Scripture as the rule of faith.

"As you desire," he says, on one occasion to a person to whom he was writing, " to hear something on this subject, we will, as far as we are able, give a brief exposition of the Christian faith; which, indeed, you might have found from the divine oracles; but, nevertheless, politely hear also from others. For, indeed, the holy and inspired Scriptures are sufficient of themselves for the delivery of the truth.”s

Again; in the passage which has been so misquoted by Mr. Newman, he bears a similar testimony in the very words which have been cited against us. "I have written these things, beloved; although, indeed, there was no need to write anything more, for the Evangelical tradition is sufficient of itself; but because you inquired respecting our faith, and on account of those who love to make sport with the faith by their inventions, and do not consider that he who speaks from his own private fancies, speaks a lie. For it is not possible for the wit of man to declare

1 See vol. i. p. 70.

2 The passage in the original is as follows :-Επει τοινυν ηκουσαμεν παρ' ὑμιν τινας ταραττεσθαι και ζητειν γραμματα παρ' ἡμων περι της κοινης και εξ απο στολων εισαχθείσης πίστεως, γραφομεν, ότι την μεν ακρίβειαν αυτης επιζητειν ολιγων εστι, την δε πιστιν κατέχειν, ἁπάντων των προς τον Θεον ευπειθων, οἱ και μεγιστον επαινον αποφέρονται της επιθυμίας. Ο μεν γαρ ζητων τα ὑπερ ἑαυτον, επικινδυνος· δ δε τοις παραδοθεισιν εμμενων, ακινδυνος. Παραινούμεν δε ύμιν, όπερ και ἑαυτοις παραινουμεν, την παραδοθείσαν πιστιν φυλάττειν, εκτρέπεσθαι δε τας βεβήλους καινοφωνίας, και τούτο πασι παρεγγυαν φοβείσθαι την περι του τηλικαύτου μυστηριου ζητησιν· ὁμολογειν δε, ότι πεφανέρωται Θεος εν σαρκι, κατά την απο στολικήν παραδοσιν. ID. De incarn. Verbi Dei. § 2. tom. ii. p. 34.

3 Ποθουντι δε σοι όμως τα περι ταυτης ακουσαι, φερε, ω μακαρις, ὡς αν οἷοι τε ωμεν, ολιγα της κατα Χριστον πιστεως εκθώμεθα, δυναμένω μεν σοι και απο των θείων λογιων ταυτην εὑρειν, φιλοκαλως δε όμως και παρ' ἑτερων ακουοντι. Αυταρ κεις μεν γαρ εισιν αἱ ἅγιαι και θεοπνευστοι γραφαι προς την της αληθειας απαγ γελίαν. ID. Οrat. contr. Gent. § 1. i. 1.

fully the beauty or glory of the body of Christ. But it is possible for us both to confess the things that have been done, according as they are recorded in Scripture, and to worship the true God."1

And, as it respects its full delivery of particular doctrines, we have clear testimonies in Athanasius affirmative of this, in both the doctrines which his writings were more particularly intended to support, namely, the doctrine of the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father (as we have seen in the passages but just now quoted), and that of the divinity of the Holy Spirit; respecting which he says, "Let not any one any longer ask such questions, but learn only what is in the Scriptures; for the illustrations we have of this matter in them, are sufficient of themselves, and need no addition."2

From these passages, then, I suppose we may conclude that, in Athanasius's view, Scripture was the sole and entire rule of faith; tradition forming no part of it, either as adding doctrines to those there revealed, or as interpretative of the revelation there made.

But, as some passages are adduced both by the Romanists and the Tractators, as if they affirmed their views, we will consider them before we proceed further. Some of these passages we have formerly noticed; and for them, therefore, refer the reader to what has been already said respecting them. Others are quoted, through a mistaken view of the meaning of the phrases used; and the rest imply no more than what we willingly allow, that the Fathers, like ourselves, referred to the testimony of those who preceded them, in confirmation of the truth of their doctrines.

1 Ταύτα εγραψα, αγαπητε καν ότι μαλιστα ουδεν πλεον εδει γραφειν αυτάρκης γὰρ ἡ ευαγγελικη παραδοσις" αλλ' επειδη ηρώτησας περί της εν ήμιν πιστεως, και ἕνεκα γε των ερεσχελειν βουλομενων ταις εφευρέσεσι, και ου λογιζομένων, ὅτι ὁ εκ των ίδιων λαλων το ψεύδος λαλει. Ούτε γαρ καλλος, ούτε δόξαν σωματος Χριστου εφικτον διάνοια ανθρωπου εξείπειν. Αλλα γε και τα γενόμενα, ὡς γεγραπται, ὁμολογειν, και τον οντα Θεον προσκύνειν, κ. τ. λ. ID. Contr. Apoll. lib. i. § ult. i. 939, 40.

2 ID. Ep. i. ad Serap. § 19. i. 667. See p. 13 above. 3 See vol. i. pp. 66 et seq.; and pp. 348-50 above.

Thus Mr. Keble quotes, as supporting his view of tradition, the passage in the Second Epistle to Serapion, in which Athanasius, laying down what he calls the form or outline (xaparтnp) of the faith in Christ, says, "This form comes from the Apostles, through the Fathers." But, in the first place, the Fathers here mentioned are, as will be seen by a reference to the context, the Nicene Fathers, a sense in which the word is continually used by Athanasius," not "the Fathers," in Mr. Keble's sense of the phrase, as indicating the catholic consent of all from the beginning. This is a mistake, we have already had occasion to point out in another passage, quoted both by Mr. Newman and Mr. Keble, where the context alike shows the error. Moreover, the passage only states a fact which we are far from questioning, and far from reckoning a poor argument for that which is so confirmed, namely, that the doctrine in question was taught by many bishops of the primitive church. But Athanasius neither here nor anywhere else, makes their testimony part of the rule of faith. And as to Mr. Keble's notion that this passage shows us that Athanasius held that, for "the form of the faith in Christ," we must go to the Fathers, as if it was not as fully and clearly delivered in the Scriptures, it is altogether overthrown by a passage in a fragment of a Letter to the Monks, in which Athanasius, speaking on the very same point, says,-" I might also have considerably extended my letter, by subjoining the form of such doctrine from the Divine Scriptures.” 5

The appeal which Athanasius makes in the above, and other passages, is not to the "Catholic consent" of all the

1 Ο μεν χαρακτηρ ούτος εκ των αποστολων δια των πατέρων. In. Ep. 2. ad Serap. § 8. i. 688. See Keble's Serm. App. pp. 124, 5.

2 Ούτω γαρ και οἱ πατερες νοησαντες, ωμολόγησαν εν τη κατα Νικαιαν συνόδω, K. T. A. ID. ib. § 5. i. 686.

3 See De Synod. § 6. i. 720. B. Ep. ad. Jovian. §§ 1, 2. passim. i. 780, 781. De incarn. Dom. contr. Apoll. lib i. §§ 1, 2. i. 922.

See vol. i. pp. 71, 72.

5 Possibile quidem erat mihi etiam per multa extendere epistolam, apponenti ex Scripturis divinis formam ejusmodi doctrinæ, &c. Ep. ad. Mon. i. 967.