then, that we hear nothing here of the interpretation possessed by the Church, and derived from the oral teaching of the Apostles? Had Epiphanius held the views we are commenting upon, he must necessarily have adverted here to that interpretation, as his authority for the sense he gave to Scripture; but as it is, we hear of nothing but Scripture and right reason. And so, a little further on, he accuses Aetius, the leader of these heretics, because that, being a man by nature, and seeking to understand things beyond nature, (viz. questions relating to the nature of God,) he sought to know them not by Scripture consequence, but by the syllogisms of human reasonings; 1 whence, I suppose, it follows, that Epiphanius thought that such questions should be determined by Scripture consequence only, and that too by each individual.

Again; he says to the same heretics,-" But we must yield our assent with a pious mind and sincere confidence to that which the Holy Spirit teaches us through the holy Scriptures." And he concludes, "I conceive that I have now, according to my ability, sufficiently met his arguments, in a simple style indeed, but with proofs from the divine Scriptures and pious reasoning." But all this while we hear nothing of the Church being in possession of an Apostolical traditionary interpretation of Scripture, though this would have cut the matter short at once.

And as to the completeness of the record of the faith contained in Scripture, we may observe the following passage. Writing against the Valentinians, he says,

γισμου αντιρρήσεις τε, και ζητηματων παρα σοι λογικών ανατροπας. ID. ib. hær. 76. Anom. § 3. i. 933.

1 Ανθρωπος ων τη φύσει, και τα ύπερ φυσιν βουλομενος ειδεναι· ειδέναι δε ου κατ' ακολουθιαν γραφης αλλ' εκ συλλογισμων βροτειων διανοημάτων, κ. τ. λ. ID. ib. hær. 76. Anom. i. p. 949.

2

Εξ ευσεβούς δε λογισμού, και δικαιας ασφαλειας επι την του άγιου Πνεύματος δια των άγιων γραφων διδασκαλίαν ανακαμπτεον. ID. ib. hær. 76. Anom. i.

985.

3 Νομίζω δε και ἱκανως ἡμας προς τας αυτού προτάσεις κατα το δυνατον ιδιωτικώ λόγω, συστάσει δε των από των θείων γραφων, και αυτού του ευσεβούς λογισμου προς αυτόν απηντηκεναι. ID. ib. p. 989.

"Their idle fables are destitute of confirmation, the Scripture nowhere mentioning them, neither the Law of Moses, nor any prophet of those who came after Moses, nor, moreover, the Saviour, nor his Evangelists, nor the Apostles. For if these things were true, the Lord who came to lighten the world, and the Prophets before him, and then also the Apostles, who reproved idolatry, and every act of impiety, and feared not to write against every evil doctrine and opposition to the truth, would have declared such things to us plainly." 1

And as to the doctrine of the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father, he says, even as to the word consubstantial, "But if the word were not in the Divine Scriptures, though it is, and plainly occurs in the Law, and in the Apostles and Prophets; for, by two or three witnesses, shall every word be established ;' yet, nevertheless, it would be lawful for us to use, for the interests of true religion, a convenient word," &c. And again, still more clearly," The word substance does not occur in the letter in the Old and New Testament, BUT THE SENSE IS TO BE FOUND EVERYWHERE.”3

But it will be said, Does not Epiphanius himself, in other places, tell us that there is need of "tradition?" He does so; and we will now consider those passages, and show that they touch not the question of the Rule of faith. The sentiments of the Fathers respecting the Rule of practice, will be considered presently.

1 Ασύστατα τα παρ' αυτοις μυθοποιήματα, ούτε που γραφης ειπούσης, ούτε του Μωυσέως νόμου, ούτε τινος Προφητου των μετα Μωυσέα, αλλ' ούτε του Σωτήρος ούτε των αυτου Ευαγγελιστων, αλλ' ουτε μην των Αποστολων. Ει γαρ ταυτα αληθινα ύπηρχεν, δ ελθων φωτισαι την οικουμενην Κυριος, και προ αυτού οἱ Προφηται, έπειτα δε και οἱ Αποστολοι οἱ ελεγξαντες την ειδωλολατρείαν, πασαν τε παρανομον πραξιν, και μη δειλιάσαντες γράφειν κατα πάσης παρανόμου διδασκαλίας και εναντιότητος, σαφως αν τα τοιαυτα ἡμιν κατηγγελλον. Ib. ib. har. 31. Valent. § 34. i. 205.

2 Ει δε μη ην ή λέξις εν ταις θειαις γραφαις, εστι δε και σαφως εγκειται εν νόμω και παρα Αποστολοις και τοις Προφήταις" εκ γαρ δυο μαρτυρων η τριων σταθήσεται παν ῥημα όμως εξον ην ἡμιν δι' ευσέβειαν χρησασθαι λέξει χρησιμη, κ. τ. λ. ID. ib. hær. 69. Arian. § 70. i. 797.

3 Το της ουσίας ονομα, γυμνώς μεν εν παλαια και καινη ου κείται γραφη, δ νους δε πανταχου φερεται. Ip. ib. her. 73. Semiarian. § 12. i. 859.

VOL. II.

CC

The first is as follows;-" But it is necessary to use tradition also. For all things cannot be gathered from the divine Scripture. Wherefore, the holy Apostles delivered some things by writing, and some by tradition."1

But what is it, of which Epiphanius is here speaking? The context will show us, for it immediately follows;"Therefore the holy Apostles of God delivered the precept to the holy Church of God, that it was sinful for any one, after having vowed virginity, to betake himself to marriage." He is not speaking of any doctrine of the Christian faith, but has in view only directions relating to ecclesiastical duties, and the rites and ordinances of the Christian Church. In his Exposition of the Catholic faith, at the latter end of the work from which we have been quoting, he draws a clear line of distinction between the two. Having laid down the principal doctrines of the Christian faith, he says,-" And these are what the undivided Catholic Church herself holds respecting the faith. . . . both with respect to the consubstantiality of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and concerning the true appearance of Christ in human nature, and the other parts of the faith. But with respect to her laws, it is now necessary for me briefly to bring forward, in a measure, the form of her laws; such as have been more especially observed in her; and are observed, some by command, and others by a voluntary reception. . . . . . And in the first place the base, and, so to speak, the foundation in her is virginity." And he proceeds to notice various

1 Δει δε και παραδόσει κεχρησθαι· ου γαρ παντα απο της θείας γραφης δύναται λαμβάνεσθαι. Διο τα μεν εν γραφαις, τα δε εν παραδόσει παρέδωκαν οἱ ἅγιοι ΑποID. ib. hær. Apostol. 61. § 6. i. 511.

στολοι.

2

Παρέδωκαν τοινυν οἱ ἅγιοι Θεου Αποστολοι τη ἅγια Θεου Εκκλησία, εφαμαρτον είναι το, μετα το όρισαι παρθενίαν, εις γαμον τρέπεσθαι. In. ib.

3 Και ά μεν περι πιστεως έχει αὕτη ἡ μονη Καθολική Εκλλησια . . . . περί τε Πατρος και Υιου και ἅγιον Πνευματος ὁμοουσιοτητος, και περι της ενσαρκου Χριστου και τελείας παρουσίας, και άλλων μέρων της πίστεως· περι θεσμων δε της αυτής εν ολίγω μεν μοι εστι παλιν αναγκη του παραθέσθαι των αυτων θεσμών απο μερους το είδος, όσαπερ φύσει πεφυλακται εν αυτή, και φυλάσσεται, τα μεν εκ προσταγ ματος, τα δε κατα αποδοχήν προαιρέσεως Και πρωτον μεν κρηπις, και, ὡς ειπειν, βαθμος εν αυτη ἡ παρθενια. Ib. ib. Expos. fid. Cathol. § 21. i. 1103.

....

other customs, rites, and ordinances in use in the Church. And then concludes with the remark, already quoted in a former page,1 namely, that, " as it respects the other mysteries, namely, concerning baptism, and the more sacred mysteries, they are observed, according as the tradition of the Gospel and the Apostles [i. e. the New Testament Scripture] directs."

There is but one other passage, as far as I am aware, which appears opposed to our view; and that, when taken with the context, offers no real difficulty. Standing alone it reads thus," For limits are prescribed to us, and foundations laid, both the structure of the faith, and the traditions of the Apostles, and the holy Scriptures, and the instructions delivered from one to another; and through all these, the truth of God is preserved safe, and let no one be deceived by new fables." But take the passage with what precedes, and there is no difficulty; for Epiphanius is not there discussing any point of the faith, but merely some historical matters, namely, the genealogy of some persons mentioned in Scripture. His words are these,-" How many others are there whose genealogies are not clearly given; for instance, Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, Abednego, Elijah the Tishbite; even their fathers and mothers are nowhere mentioned in all the books of Scripture; but that no error may hence arise, I shall not hesitate to mention what we have received by tradition . . . . [and then having given the name of Daniel's father, and the genealogy of Elijah, he proceeds]. But certainly, with respect to the three children, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, we find nothing either in Apocryphal books, or in traditions. What shall we say, therefore? Shall these persons, I mean Shadrach's followers, delude us into imagining what it behoves us not; and into holding in high regard and excessive admiration the reports of every conjecture? See p. 259 above.

2 Όροι γαρ ετέθησαν ἡμιν, και θεμελίοι, και οικοδομη της πιστεως, και Απο στολων παραδόσεις, και γραφαι άγιαι, και διαδοχαι διδασκαλίας, και εκ πανταχόθεν ἡ αληθεια του Θεου ησφαλισται και μηδεις απατασθω καινοις μυθοις. Ib. ib. her. Melchis. 55. § 3. i. 471.

God forbid. For limits are prescribed to us, and foundations laid, both the structure of the faith and the traditions of the Apostles, and the holy Scriptures, and the instructions delivered from one to another; and through all these, the truth of God is preserved safe; and let no one be deceived by new fables."

When we take this passage with its context, then, it opposes not the doctrine we are endeavouring to establish; for it is written with reference to points which form no part of the Christian faith. The mind of Epiphanius upon our present subject, must be judged by other passages; for no conclusion respecting it can be drawn from this; and in other passages, as we have seen, he supports the view we are defending.

The other references to tradition, to be found in his works, so evidently respect only points either of history or discipline, that it is unnecessary here to consider them.

OPTATUS (fl. a. 368).

The next author that demands our attention, is Optatus; whose clear reference to Scripture, as the Rule of faith, and Judge of controversies, has often been quoted on this subject.

Addressing the Donatists, he says, " Ye say, It is lawful: we say, It is not lawful. Between your declaration of its lawfulness, and ours of its unlawfulness, the minds of the people are in suspense and agitation. Let neither of us be trusted in the matter. We are all party men. We must inquire for judges. If they are Christians, neither of us can supply them; because truth is impeded by party spirit. We must seek a judge from with

...

1 Ποσοι δε αλλοι ου γενεαλογούνται κατα το φανερωτατον; Δανιηλ, Σεδραχ, Μισακ, Αβδεναγω, Ηλιας ὁ Θεσβίτης και εν πασαις ῥηταις βιβλοις ουδαμου εμφέρονται τούτων οἱ πατέρες τε και μητερες· ίνα δε μη κατα τούτο πλανη τις γενηται, ουδεν λυπησει ἁ και εν παραδοσεσι κατειληφαμεν λέγειν . φύσει δε των τριων παίδων, Σεδραχ, Μισακ, Αβδεναγω, ούτε εν αποκρυφοις ούτε εν παραδόσεσιν εύρομεν τι ουν ερούμεν, αρα κακείνοι, οἱ περι Σεδραχ λεγω, φαντασιασουσιν ἡμως λογίζεσθαι & μη χρη, και υπερογκων θαυμάζειν ύπερ το μέτρον τα εκαστης ὑποθέσεως ; αλλα μη γενοιτο· και όροι γαρ ετέθησαν ἡμιν, κ. τ. λ (ut supra). ID. ib. pp. 470, 1.

6