things of which they wrote. They this themselves, nor yet does any on attribute to them this assistance, unles the author of the "Gloss upon the D of opinion that we ought to stand t Fathers have written, even to the lea he is very justly called to account f phonsus à Castro,† and Melchior Canus doctors.

Since, therefore, we are not bound thing but what is true; it is most ev neither may nor ought to believe the Fathers, till such times as they appear been certainly true. Now we cannot assured of this by their single authorit they were but men, who were not alwa the Holy Spirit from above: and theref sary that we make use of some other our inquiry; namely, either of the Ho or of reason, or tradition, or the doctri sent Church, or of some other means, themselves have made use of. It henc their bare assertions are no sufficient gr build any of our opinions on; as they incline us beforehand to the belief of t great opinion which we have of them conclude that they would never have e an opinion, except it had been true. T argumentation, however, is at the best so long as the persons we have here to only men and no more; and in this pa

*Hodie jubentur omnia teneri, usque ad ultim in Decr. D. 9. c. 3.

† Alphons. à Castr. 1. 1. advers. Hær. c. 7.

Melch. Canus. 1. 7, loc. Theol. c. 3. Num. 4.

where the question is on points of fat, it is bу пo means to be allowed; since faith is to be grounded, not upon probabilities, but upon necessary truths. The Fathers are like other great masters in this point, and their opinions are more or less valid, in proportion to the reason and authority on which they are grounded: they have, however, this advantage, that their very names beget in us a readiness and inclination to receive whatever emanates from them; while we think it very improbable that such excellent men as they were, should ever believe anything that was false.

Thus, in human sciences, the saying of an Aristotle is of far different value from that of any other philosopher of less account; because all men are beforehand possessed with an opinion, that this great philo→ sopher would not maintain anything that was not consonant to reason. But this is prejudice only; for, if, upon better examination, it should be found to be otherwise, his bare authority would then no longer prevail with us; what he himself had once wisely said, would then here take place-"that it is a sacred thing always to prefer the truth before friendship;" Αμφον όνταν φιλοιν, ὅσιον προτιμαν τὴν ἀληθειαν.*

Let the Fathers, therefore, if you please, be the Aristotles in Christian philosophy, and let us have a reverent esteem of them and their writings as they deserve; and not be too rash in concluding that persons so eminent for learning and sanctity should maintain any erroneous or vain opinions, especially in a matter of so great importance: yet notwithstanding are we bound to remember, that they were but men, and that their memory, understanding, or judgment, might sometimes fail them, and therefore, consequently, that we are to examine their writings by those principles from whence they draw their conclusions,

* Arist. in Ethic. 1. 1, c. 6.

speak

per

Fathers, I should not add anything m been now said; sufficient having bee ment, already adduced, to prove that themselves of sufficient authority to o sarily to follow their opinions. But s question is relative to those great nan highly honoured in the Church; in ord may accuse us of endeavouring to ro of the respect which is due to them, necessary to examine this matter a littl and to make it appear, on due considera are of no more authority, either in the regard to us, than we have already attri

CHAPTER II.

1

REASON II.-The Fathers testify themselves that be believed absolutely, and upon their own ba what they declare in matters of religion.

THERE are none so fit to inform us what t of the writings of the ancients is, as themselves, who in all reason must neces this better than we. Let us therefore no they testify in this particular; and if w hold them in such high esteem, as we pr allow of their judgment in this particular, neither more nor less to the ancients, than selves require at our hands.

Augustine, who was the principal light o Church, having entered into a contest wi on the interpretation before-mentioned, of

chapter of the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians; and finding himself hardly pressed by the authority of six or seven Greek writers, which are urged against him by the other; to extricate himself, states in what account he held that kind of writers:-"I confess," says he, "to thy charity, that I have learned to pay to those books of Scripture alone which are now called canonical, such reverence and honour, as to believe steadfastly that none of their authors ever committed any error in writing them. And if by chance I there meet with anything, which seems to contradict the truth, I immediately think that either my copy is imperfect, and not so correct as it should be; or else, that the interpreter did not so well understand the words of the original: or lastly, that I myself have not so rightly understood him. But as for all other writers, however eminent they are, either for sanctity or learning, I read them in such manner as not instantly to conclude that whatever I there find is true, because they have said it; but rather, because they convince me, either out of the said canonical books of Scripture, or else by some probable reason, that what they say is true. Neither do I think, brother, that thou thyself art of any other opinion: that is to say, I do not believe that thou expectest that we should read thy books, as we do those of the Prophets or Apostles; of the truth of whose writings, as being exempt from all error, we may not in anywise doubt."*

* Ego enim fateor caritati tuæ solis eis Scripturarum libris, qui jam canonici appellantur, didici hunc timorem, honoremque deferre, ut nullum eorum auctorem scribendo aliquid errasse firmissimè credam. Ac si aliquid in eis offendero litteris, quod videatur contrarium veritati, nihil aliud quàm mendosum esse codicem, vel interpretem non assequutum esse quod dictum est, vel me minimè intellexisse, non ambigam. Alios autem ita lego, ut quantalibet sanctitate, doctrinaque præpolleant, non ideo verum putem, quia ipsi ita senserunt, sed quia mihi, vel per illos authores canonicos, vel probabili ratione, quod à vero non-abhorreat, persuadere potuerunt. Nec te, mi frater, sentire aliquid aliter existimo: prorsus inquam, non te arbitror sic legi libros tuos velle tanquam Prophe

the truth, he accounted the canonical to be the books to which (as he said 1 that ingenuous duty, as to be fully pers authors of them never erred, or decei in anything.'

This holy man accounted this advice great importance, that he thought fit to in another place; and I must entreat give me leave to extract here the who length.

As for this kind of books," (says h those which we write, not with the auth manding, but only from the design of e selves to benefit others,) 66 we are so to 1 not bound necessarily to believe them, b liberty left us of judging of what we rea withstanding, that we may not quite e books, and deprive posterity of the m labour of exercising their language and handling and treating of difficult questio a distinction between these books of later the excellency of the canonical authority and New Testament; which having bee in the Apostles' time, has since, by the succeeded them, and the churches which propagated throughout the world, been were upon a high throne, to which every godly understanding must be subject. chance here to meet with anything that

tarum vel Apostolorum, de quorum scriptis, quod on reant, dubitare nefarium est.-August. ep. ad Hier. qu fol. 14. ed. Paris. 1579, et inter Hier. Op. 97. t. 2. p. 5

* Quanquam, sicut paulò antè dixi, tantummodo nonicis hanc ingenuam debeam servitutem, qua eas sol ut conscriptores earum nihil in eis omninò errasse, ni posuisse non dubitem.-Id. ibid.