Page images
PDF
EPUB

S. Chrifoftome (a) is as fully Proteftant in this parti cular (as if he had been of Councell in our caufe) In two

[ocr errors]

points he is pofitive for us. 1. He preffeth the people to examine things delivered to them (therefore he was against the Popish implicit faith) Let us not carry about the opinion of the multitude, but let us examine things; and not contented to deliver the affertion, he addes a reason. Is it not abfurd, that when you are to receive mony, you do not truft other men, but examine it your felves, and when you are to judge of things, then to be drawn away by other mens opinions? And this (faith he) is the worse fault in you, because you have the Scriptures. That brings in the fecond Herefy of Chrifoftomes: The rule by which he commands them to try all things is the Scripture, and (the mischiefe too is he calls it a perfect rule, you have (faith he) an exact ftandard and rule of all things: and he concludes thus, I beseech you do not regard what this or that man thinks, but enquire all things of the Scriptures: I know no way to avoid this evident teftimony but one: if I might advise them, the next Jefuice that Writes fhall fwear thefe words were foifted into Chryfoftomes works, by the Proteftants; and that they are not to be found in an old Manufcript Copy of Chryfoftome in the Vatican.

What Proteftant can deliver our Doctrine more fully then Origen: It is neceffary (faith he) that we should alledge the Teftimony of Scriptures, without which our ex• pofitions do not command faith (b): Or then Cyrill, Do

(a) 13. Homilia in 2. ex. ad Corinth. verfus finem un ras TWY WśXλων δόξας περιφέρωμεν, ἀλλὰ τὰ πράγματα εξετάσωμεν Καφὴν ἔχετε ἀκριβῆ ζύλον ἀπάντων και γνώμωνα και κάνονα αφέντες τὶ τῷ δεῖν καὶ τῷ δῖνι δοκεῖ περὶ τέτων παραὶ τῶν γραφῶν ταυτα πάντα πυνθάνετε.

[ocr errors]

(b) Neceffe eft nobis Scriptur as fanétas in teflimonium vocare, scafus quippe noftri te enarrationes nofire fine bis teftibus non habent fidem. Homil. 1.in Jerem.

A

not believe me faying these things, unleffe I prove them out of the Scriptures (c). Or then Ambrofe, thus fpeaking to the Emperour Gratian, I would not you should believe our Argument or difputation, let us aske the Scriptures, aske the Prophets, the Apostles, (d), S. Austin had none of the Fathers in greater veneration, then Cyprian, and Ambrofe; yet heare how be fpeaks of them, of Cyprian thus: (e) I am not obliged by his Authority, I do not look on bis Epiftles as Canonicall,but I examine them by the Scriptures, and what is repugnant thereunto, with his good leave I reject it: Would the Papifts give us but this liberty, we should defire no more: and of Ambrofe he faith the like.

Peradventure it will be faid in this point, as it is in the general; That although it is confeffed by the Fathers, that particular Doctors are liable to error, yet in fuch things wherein the Fathers do unanimously agree, they have an infallible Authority, and are a fufficient foundation of Faith.

To this I anfwer: If this were granted, it doth not in the least, fecure the Romifts concernments, because there is not one of all thofe points controverted between them and us, wherein fuch unanimous confent can be produced, but in every one of them there are pregnant allegations, out of fome of the Fathers repugnant to their opinions and affertions. This their learned men cannot but know, and if they have any ingenuity in them, they cannot deny.

4.

(c) Μηδὲ ἐμοὶ τῷ ταυτα λέγοντι ἀπλῶς πιςεύσης Catechef. (d) Nole Argumento nofiro credas, Sancte Imperator, aut noftræ difdifputationi, Scriptur as interrogemus,interrogemus Apoflolos,interrogemus Prophetas,interrogemus Chriflum, lib.1.de fide ad Gratianum.

(e) Ejus Authoritate non tencor,ejus literas non ut Canonic as habeo, eas ex Canonicis confidero; quod Scripturæ non congruit cum pace ejus refpuo. in lib. 2. contra Crefconium cap. 32.

I

2. I anfwer with Whitaker against Durens urging this very plea: What a filly thing is it to deny, that, that which happen'd to each of them cannot poffibly happen to all of skem (a) And with Gerhard, the Teftimonies of the Fathers collectively taken, cannot be of another kind and nature, then they are diftributively (b). Nor can any man deny the truth of the propofition, if he apprehends the meaning of it; for how can the fame perfons, being onely confidered under a double notion be both fallible and infalli ble at the fame time; And if Austin, Ambrofe, Cyprian (fuppofing thefe were all the Fathers) be each of them fallible, how can a meer collective confideration of them render them infallible?

3. I Answer with Learned Dr Holdsworth: That the Fathers deny this Infallibility, not onely to one or two of them difperfedly, but to all the Antients collectively confidered, (c) and this I fhall prove onely by one Argument. They that make Infallibility the peculiar property of the Canonical Writer, deny the Infallibility of the Fathers,either collectively, or diftributively confi dered: But the Fathers make Infallibility the peculiar property of the Canonicall Writers, and abjudicate it from all other Writers. S. Jerome is expreffe, Except the Apoftles, whatfoever elfe is afterward faid, let it be cut off,

(a) Quam hoc ineptum eft quod fingulis contigit, id negare pole in omnes cadere Contra: Duraum lib.6. De Firmamentis patrum.

pag. 414.

(b) Patrum fingulorum teftimonia collective fumpta non poffunt effe alterius generis quam fingula funt diftributive. Confefl, Cathol. lib. r. par.2.cap.13.

(c) Non folum de uno aut altero fparfim, fed de omnibus veteribus gregatim in fcriptis fuis Patres ubique pronuntiant & eorum dogmata effe ad Scripturas expendenda ut probentur,& corum teftimonia ex Scripturis afimanda ut ex iftarum confenfu aut diffenfu magis minnfve valeant ad fidei controverfias dirimendas. Lea,46,

for it hath no Authority (a). And againe, I make a diffe rence between the Apostles and other Writers, thofe alwaies faid Truth, but these in some things did erre.(b)

St. Auftin makes this difference between the Holy Scrip tures and all other Writings, That thofe are to be read with a neceffity of believing, but thefe with a liberty of judging (c). What living man can expreffe the Proreftant Doctrine in more evident termes then the fame Father elfewere doth. That which is confirmed by the Authority of the Holy Scriptures, is without doubt to be believed, but for other witnesses and teftimonies, (whether more,or fewer; agreed, or divided, all is one to St. Auftin) you may receive them or reject them as you shall judge, they have more or leffe weight (d). And again, when he was preffed by ferom with the Authority of fix or feven of The Greek Fathers, he thus Anfwers: (e) I have lear ned to give this honour and reverence to the Books of Scrip ture, to believe there is no error in them: But as for others, how Learned or Godly foever they be, Ifo read them that I do not believe any thing to be true, because they thought fo,

(a) Exceptis Apoftolis, quodcunque aliud poftea dicitur, abfcindatur non habet poflca authoritatem. in Pfal.86. (b) Scito me ali'er habere Apoftolos, aliter reliquos tractatores, illos femper vera dicere,iftos in quibufdam,ut homines errare, Epift 62.ad Theoph. Alex.

(c) id genus literarum a nobis non cum credendi neceffitate, fed cum judicandi libertate legendum eft, contra Fauftum 1.11.c.5.

(d) Quod divinarum Scripturarum perfpicuá firmatur Authoritate, fine ulla dubitatiome credendum eft: aliis verò, teftibus vel testimoniis tibi credere vel non credere liceat, quantum ea momenti ad faciendam fidem vel babere vel non babere perpenderis. Epift.112. ad Paulinum.

(e) Solis Scripturarum libris-didici bune timorem honoremque deferre ut nullum eorum fcribendo erraffe firmiffimè credam - Alies autem ita lego, ut quantalibet fanétitate,doctrinaque præpolleant,non ideo verum putem, quia ipfi ita fenferunt, fed quia per Canonic as perfuadere potuerunt. Tom.2. Epift. 19.

*but

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

but because they proved it fo to be by the Scriptures. To conclude, fo evident is S. Anftin's judgment in this point, that it forced this ingenuous confeffion from a learned and acute Papift, Occam by name, who fpeaking of a paffage of S. Anftins about it, hath these words. It is to be noted, that Austin in that authority Speaking of other writer sbefide the pen-men of the Scripture, makes no difference among thefe Non-Canonical Writers: and therefore, whether they be Popes, or others, whether they writ in Council, or out of Council, the fame judgment is to be paffed upon them. (a) You fee S. Auftin's mind is plain, and doth (our Adverfaries themfelves being judges) directly overturne that great fundamental point of the In fallibility of Councels and Popes (which, if you will believe them, is not only true, but neceflary to falvation) and yet these are the men that walk in the good old paths, Thefe are they, that maintaine no doctrine, but what hath been conveyed to them by the Fathers. I know no Salvo but that which they ufe in the great.article of Traniubftantiation, viz. to tell us, we muft nog believe our felves when we read fuch paffages in the Fathers, and that together with the eyes of our mind our Reafons, and Confciences, we must give up the eyes of our body to the Pope's difpofal. And this doctrine of Auftins (if you will believe the Romanifts) when delivered by the Proteftants is a new and upftart doctrine, never heard of in the world till Luther's dayes, and by this you may judge of the juftice of that charge, when the like is faid of our other doctrines. I might fill up a Treatife with pertinent citations out of the Fathers to this

(a) Notandum quòd Auguftinus in authoritate illa loquens de fcriptoribus aliis à fcriptoribus Biblia, inter hos fcriptores illos non diftin. gust:& ideo, five fuerint fummi Pontifices, five alius, five fcripferint aliquid in Concilio, five extra, confimile de cis judicium eft habendum. Part.3.Dialog.tract.1.lib.3.cap.24.

E

purpofe

« PreviousContinue »