Historical Defense of the Reformation, Part 2 · Chapter 8
CHAP. VIII.
That our Fathers, in their Deſign of Reforming themſelves, were bound to take the Holy Scripture alone for the Rule of their Faith.
IT it now neceſſary to Examine by what Principle, or upon what Rule our Fathers proceeded in their Reformation. But before we go any further, we ſhall do well to weigh what the Author of the Prejudices ſays, who has made an expreſs Chapter upon this matter. The Argument of that Chapter is framed in theſe words. That the way which the Calviniſts Chap. 14.propound to inſtruct men in the Truth, is ridiculous and impoſſible. After having entred upon his ſubject, As the matter is, ſaith he, about the promiſe which they make of diſcovering divers Truths of the Faith to the Catholicks, which are in their Judgments obſcured and quite altered in the Church of Rome, there will be nothing more Juſt, or more natural, then in the firſt place to inquire into the way, which they would take to perform it, to the end that we may Judge by the very nature of that way what we may juſtly expect. For if it be found that they would engage us in an infinite way, and which could not come to an iſſue, there could not be a more lawful excuſe to hinder us from hearkening to them, nor a more evident conviction of the raſhneſs of their enterpriſe. Behold here, methinks, Two Declarations of that Author ſufficiently expreſs, concerning the means which we propound to inſtruct men in the Truth, the one, That it is a ridiculous and impoſſible way; and the other, That it is an infinite way, &c. and which can come to no iſſue; for we may well perceive that that Periphraſis of expreſſion, If it be found that they would engage us in an infinite way, &c. made uſe of, in the beginning of a Diſputation, means, that it will be ſo found in effect, and that it is as much as if it had been poſitively ſaid, they would engage us in an infinite way, and which has no end, there being no other difference between thoſe two expreſſions, unleſs that this latter is the more plain, and that the other has more of the Air of the Philoſophical Method of thoſe Gentlemen. After that preamble the Author goes on. It is true, ſays he, that if we will hear them ſpeak upon this ſubject without any more deep ſearehing into that which they ſay, we ſhall have reaſon enough to be ſatisfied. For they baldly promiſe to lead us to the Faith, by a ſhort, an eaſy and a clear way, without confuſion, without danger of wandring aſide, and this way ſay they, is the Examination of the Articles of the Faith by the Scripture, which is the only Rule that God has given us for the deciding of the differences of Religion, and aſſuring us of what we ought to believe, all others being ſubject to Error. This is the Explication of the way which we propoſe, which is to take the Holy Scripture for the only Rule of our Faith. He adds, But becauſe in a matter of this importance we ſhould take the greateſt care to avoid dazling our ſight with words that would have more of ſhew then Solidity, it will be good to inform our ſelves more exactly whether this way is ſo eaſy as they repreſent it, whether there do not occur ſome Obſtacles that hinder our paſſing further, and whether it be not of ſo exceſſive a length, that we ought not rationally to hope to come to the end of it, whatſoever diligence we uſe; whether it be fitted to all the World, and whether there be not any perſon who may not going on faithfully in it, arrive to the end whether it leads. Behold here another Concluſion againſt our way, inwraped under a ſo, to wit, that it is of a length ſo exceſſive, as we ought not rationally to hope ever to get to the end, whatſoever diligence we uſe, and that at leaſt, it is not fitted to all the World. In what follows he fills his Chapter with the Objections and difficulties that tend to turn away men from the Scripture, and to make them conceive that in effect it is that infinite way which has no iſſue at all, of which he had ſpoke, and that way of ſo exceſſive a length that we could never come to the end of, whatſoever Diligence we ſhould uſe. But the meaning of that is, that according to him, the way to be aſſured of the Articles of the Faith by the Scripture, is abſolutely unprofitable to all men, of what order ſoever they be, and for what Truth ſoever it be. For an infinite way which has no iſſue, and the length of which is ſo exceſſive that we could never with all the diligence we ſhould uſe come to the end of it, is equally unprofitable to all, as well to the Learned, as the Ignorant. And moreover, the greateſt part of the difficulties that render it infinite, according to him, being not to be found in ſome private paſſages, but in the Scripture in general, it follows that we can never be aſſured by that means of any Truth. So that, behold here, according to the Author of the Prejudices, the Scripture abſolutely unprofitable, and that for all ſorts of men, and all ſorts of Truths. In one word, as the Tilte of his Chapter bears, it is a ridiculous way, and impoſſible to inſtruct men in the Truth.
Whatſoever Prejudice there has been in the Church of Rome againſt the Reformation, I cannot believe that it would not be ſhaken at ſo ſcandalons and un-Chriſtian a Propoſition. For to treat the holy Scripture, which is the Oracle of Chriſtians, and the word of God, as a ridiculous way, and to reject it as abſolutely unprofitable, and improper to inſtruct men in the Truth, without diſtinction, without Limitation, as much for one ſort as for another, as much for one truth as for another, is methinks a new Goſpell, which we have not yet heard ſpoken of, for there was never any thing ſpoke ſo high till this, or to ſay better, none were ever yet carried out to ſuch Exceſſes. We have read in Pamelius and Pamel ex Quintino annot. 237. in preſcript-Tertul. Pighius contr. 3. Franchiſi. Cordub. de. Eccles. cap 82. Charon verit. 3. cap. 2. art. 8.ſome others, with Indignation and Horrour, That the Scripture is a noſe of wax, which may he turned which way we pleaſe, and that it is far more eaſy to wreſt it to Profane and Impious things, then it is to make uſe of half the verſes of Virgil to Compoſe Epithalamiums. We have ſeen in Pighius and elſewhere, that the Scripture is a dumb Rule, a dumb Witneſs, a dead and lifeleſs thing, a Sword that cuts with both edges, and ſuch other Expreſſions, injurious to the Scripture; But no body, that I know of, ever went ſo far yet as to make it a ridiculous way for the Inſtructing of men in the Truth.
There are enough in the world who know that theſe Gentlemen, of whoſe number the Author of the Prejudices is, write nothing but for one and the ſame Intreſt, and with the ſame Spirit. I may therefore, methinks, with very good reaſon make uſe for this occaſion, of what the Author of the Tranſlation of the New Teſtament of Mons has wrote in his Preface, to oppoſe it to the Author of the Prejudices, to ſhew him that the Spirit that animates them is an unequal Spirit, that blows both cold and hot. For behold what that Preface carries in it; We hope that not only the Souls of the more learned but even of the Simpler ſort may find here (that is to ſay in the Tranſlation) that which ſhall be neceſſary for their inſtructtion, provided that they read at with an intire Simplicity of heart, and Addreſs themſelves humbly to the Son of God in ſaying to him with Peter Lord, to whom ſhould we go? It is thou who haſt the words of Eternal Life, and it is thou alone who canſt make us learn. They muſt goe to him, as thoſe in the Goſpel, of when it is ſaid that they came to hear him, and to be healed of their Diſeaſes. And a little lower, The Holy Scripture is like to a great River, ſaith Saint Gregore, which has always ſlid …, and which will do ſo … the end of the world. The great and the ſmall. The mighty and the feeble may find there that living water which riſes up even unto Heaven, it …ffers it ſelf to all, and is fitted to all, it has a ſimplicity that deſcends even to the Souls of the moſt ſimple, and a height that excerciſes and elevates the moſt raiſed, all may draw there indiffirently, but it will be farr from being able to be drawn dry by filling us, we may always loſe our ſelves in the bottomleſs depths of learning and wiſdom, that we may adore without being able to comprehend. But that which ought to comfort us in that Obſcurity, is, that according to Saint Auguſtine the holy Scripture ſets before us in an Eaſy and Intelligible manner, all that which is neceſſary to us for the Conduct of our Lives, which ſhe explains, and makes clear her ſelf, in telling us clearly in ſome Places, that which ſhe ſaid obſcurely in others.
This Language is very different from that which they hold in the Book of the Prejudices: The one ſays, That we ſhall find in the Scripture all that which is neceſſary for our Inſtruction; and the other aſſures us, that the way of the Scripture is Ridiculous and Impoſſible to inſtruct men in the Truth. The one declares that the Scripture propounds to us after an Eaſy and Intelligible manner all that is neceſſary for the Conduct of our lives, which it explains and makes clear her ſelf; and the other ſays, that it is a way of ſo exceſſive a length that we ought not rationally to hope ever to come to the end, whatſoever dilligence we ſhould uſe. The one makes it a means of Inſtruction, proper not only for Inlightned Souls, but even for the Simpler ſort, for great and ſmall, for ſtrong and weak; and the other in making it an Infinite way which has no Iſſue, makes it improper not only for the ſimple, but even for the moſt learned. The one extends its uſe unto all that is Neceſſary for Inſtruction and the Conduct of life, and the other in heaping up of general difficulties, makes it unprofitable to Inſtruct us in the leaſt Truths. What Judgment can we make of this diverſity, unleſs this, that the language of theſe Gentlemen changes according to the difference of Times and Intereſts, as one has ſaid of them elſewhere. When the caſe is about gaining credit to their Tranſlation of the New Teſtament, they ſpeak as advantagiouſly of the Scripture as it is poſſible for them to ſpeak; and when the buſineſs is to oppoſe a Reformation made according to the Rule of the Scripture, but which notwithſtanding has not the happineſs of their Agreement, you ſee what they ſay of that ſame Scripture. The Scripture ſhall then, to ſpeak properly, be only to be commended, by the Intreſt of their Tranſlation, and as long as that Intereſt ſhall remain, ſhall be the Collection of the divine Teachings The ſame Preface of the N. T. of Mons.of our Lord, The Teſtament that aſſures us of the Inheritance of our Father, The mouth of Jeſus Chriſt, who although he is in Heaven ſpeaks continually upon earth, not only the nouriſhment of ſound Souls and thoſe who are eſtabliſh'd in grace, as the Body of the Son of God, but even the Conſolation of Sinners, the light of the blind, the remedy of the Sick, and the life of the dead. For theſe are the Titles that the Preface gives it; but whenever that Intereſt ſhall ceaſe, thoſe praiſes ſhall do ſo too, and it ſhall be nothing but a Ridiculous way, and impoſſible for the Inſtructing of men in the Truth. I would therefore very fain know of theſe Gentlemen, whether it were only upon the ſight of their Tranſlation, that S. Cyprian, S. Auguſtine, and S. Gregory, wrote that which the Preface relates, or whether thoſe Fathers did not conſider the Scripture in it ſelf. For if it be the firſt, they forgot to tell us that they only ſpake out of a Prophetick Spirit of that Tranſlation; and if it be the Second, why have they entertained us with that admirable proportion of the Scripture to great and ſmall, to the ſtrong and weak, and that eaſy and intelligible manner wherewith it propounds to us all that is neceſſary for the Conduct of our life ſince that, without the Tranſlation of Mons, it is an Infinite way, which has no end, a ridiculous way, and Impoſſible to Inſtruct men in the Truth?
What can the Author of the Prejudices ſay to defend himſelf from this Manifeſt Contradiction which he diſcovers between him and his Colleague? Will he ſay, that the Scripture is in truth a good means for the Inſtruction of men; but that it is ſo, only with the Interpretations of the Fathers? But the Author of that Preface ſpeaks for Scripture alone, ſeparated from the Interpretation of the Fathers, ſuch as its Tranſlation is; for he excuſes himſelf in that he had not made a collection of notes and explanations drawn out of the writings of the holy Fathers, and he does not fail to ſay that in his Tranſlation, as plain as it is, not only the Souls of the more learned, but of the more ſimple alſo and unlearned, may find that which will be neceſſary for their Inſtruction. Will he ſay, that he does not mean to exclude the learned from the uſe of the Scripture, but only the more ſimple, for the Inſtruction of which former, he does not deny but that it would be a moſt proper means. But beſides, that his Brother ſpeaks formally of the Inſtruction of the more ſimple, why has the Author of the Prejudices made it a ridiculous and Impoſſible way, an infinite way which has no Iſſue, a way which is of ſo exceſſive a length, that one can never rationally hope to come to the end of it, whatſoever diligence one ſhould make? Will he ſay that the Scripture ought to be joined with Tradition, and that without Tradition it cannot give a perfect Inſtruction? But the Preface ſays expreſly, that they will find in that Tranſlation all that will be neceſſary for Inſtruction. Will he ſay that in order to the Scriptures Inſtructing one, the Sence of the Church ought to be added to it? But the Preface ſays, that according to Saint Auguſtine the Scripture lays down all that is neceſſary for the Conduct of our lives after a moſt eaſy and Intelligible manner, and that ſhe explains and makes clear her ſelf. Will he ſay that in order to the Scriptures being capable to Inſtruct us, we ought at leaſt to read it with Dependance upon the Church, and to take it from her hand? But wherefore then would theſe Gentlemen have the People to read their Tranſlation, ſince they are only private Doctors, and not the Church? Wherefore when the Prelats rais'd to the higheſt dignities have forbid the reading of it by their Ordinances, have we ſeen Printed writings maintain on the contrary, there was in thoſe Ordinances, a Threatning of the Will and Commandment of God, who would, that we ſhould hear his Son, and not, that we ſhould Dialog. of the two Pariſh. of S. Hilary Montanus Dial. 1. pag. 23.ſuppreſs his Goſpel; a Contradiction to the Holy Scripture, which was ſet down in writing for no other end but to be heard and practis'd by all Nations of the world, a Contradiction of all the Councils which have always taken the Scripture for the Judge of the belief of the Church, and of all the Difficulties and Queſtions that can ariſe in the Doctrine of Faith or Manners; a Contradiction of all the Holy Fathers who advis'd the Faithful above all things continually to read the word of God. Why has one Introduc'd two Lay-men Pariſhoners, Saint Hilary Montanus, ſaying one to another, The Biſhops cannot Dial. 1. pag 2.take away from us the Goſpel that Jeſus Chriſt has given us, that God ſpoke to all his People, when he ſaid, To day if you will hear my voice, harden not your Hearts; a Biſhop cannot take away our Eyes from us, to hinder us from ſeeing and conſidering our way, we ſhould not ſee Jeſus Chriſt our Saviour, our Paſtor and our great Biſhop, who goes before us in his Goſpel. That if a Biſhop would turn us away from, if an Apoſtle, if an Angel from Heaven would ſtop up this way, and would go about to lead and guide us in another, we ought not to believe him. Why has he made us ſee thoſe Pariſhoners holding, That pag 3.there is nothing more contrary to the Goſpel then a prohibition to read and have it; that bread and nouriſhment is not more neceſſary to preſerve the life of the Body, then the word of God is to maintain Life in our pag. 25.Souls, That all Chriſtians have a natural right that cannot be taken from them, of Inſtructing themſelves by the word of God, and labouring to underſtand it, and that the Holy Scriptures were given to the whole Dial. 2. pag 9.Church, and not only to the Biſhops, who have no right to deprive the Faithful of them. That this is, ſay they, what the Divel would preach up if he were viſible, and Transfigured into an Angel of light, and in the ſhape of a Preacher in the Chair of Truth, and what elſe Dial. 2. pag 17.would he perſwade the Faithful too, but that the Faithful ought to take very great heed not to read the Holy Scripture, and not to meditate day and night upon the words of life, that the Spirit of God has dictated to the Prophets, and which God the Father has given to his Son for the Inſtruction of his Church, and to draw it from the Corruption of the world, to render it Holy and without Spot to his Father, who gave it to him—Jeſus Chriſt was the Word uf God, and liv'd by that Word, and to make his Church live, he gave it his word in an Intelligible Tongue, out of his own mouth, and by his Diſciples: Search, ſays he, and examine carefully the Scriptures, for they are they which Teſtify of me.
Thus it is that they ſpeak of it ſometimes, Jeſus Chriſt gave his Scripture to the Faithful, with a Commandment to read it, to examine it carefully, and to hear it. It was the Judge of the beleif of the Church, and the Difficulties and Queſtions that aroſe in the Doctrine of the Faith and Manners. The Pariſhioners made uſe of them againſt their Biſhops, They encountred even their Ordinances by paſſages out of that Scripture, they maintain'd that the uſe of them belonged to all Chriſtians by a natural right, and that to go about to deprive them of them, was to do an action of the Devil. But now a days they ſpeak no more after that manner, for they tell us on the contrary that it is a Ridiculous and Impoſſible way to Inſtruct men in the Truth, an Infinite way which has no Iſſue, and which is of ſo exceſſive a length that whatſoever dilligence we ſhould uſe, we can never arrive to the end, and they labour to heap difficulties upon difficulties, to drive them back, and to make a Labyrinth full of Circles and confus'd ways, that ſo out of a fear of thoſe Confuſions the world ſhould take heed of entring into it.
For my own part I freely acknowledg, That I can comprehend nothing in all that. For if, before one can aſſure ones ſelf of one only Paſſage of Scripture, whatſoever it be, we muſt needs go through a thouſand tedious ways, and overcome a thouſand Obſtacles that ariſe from the Queſtion about the Canonical Books, about the Conformity of the Tranſlations with the Originals, about the different manner of reading the Paſſages, and about the difference of Interpretations, as the Author of the Prejudices would have it, according to his ordinary Exaggeration, to what purpoſe is it to give the publick a Tranſlation, which after the manner that it was given and receiv'd in, cannot but be ſubject to the greateſt part of thoſe difficulties; and yet notwithſtanding, they put it into all mens hands, as well the Ignorant as the Learned, as well of the ſimple as the more Inlightned, as well to women as to men. The Church of Rome has not declared it Authentick, Two Biſhops and a Doctor have approved it, but two Arch-biſhops, and a Cardinal, have forbidden it; and yet one has not failed, notwithſtanding thoſe Prohibitions, to maintain, that all the world ought to read them, and that that forbidding them is a Violence, a Novelty, an unexampled Enterpriſe, a bold Attempt upon the Liberty that God has given to the Church, ranſomed at the Dial. 1. pag. 30.price of the Blood of his own Son, that it is an uſurpation, and the Introducing of a Tyrannical Authority that was never excerciſed in the Church until this day—and that every one is bound not only not to obey that Ordinance, but even to have an Horror for it, and to reſiſt it as much as he can. What will then become of thoſe Difficulties, and thoſe unconquerable Confufions which hinder them, according to the Author of the Prejudices, ſo that they cannot aſſure themſelves of one only Paſſage of the Scripture, through the uncertaitty wherein a man is of the unfaithfulneſs of the Tranſlations; through the Ignorance wherein we are of the different manner of reading thoſe Paſſages; and through the neceſſity of conſulting Interpreters? Is it becauſe they would expreſly engage the People in an Infinite way and which can come to no Iſſue, and in a ridiculous way, and which is Impoſſible for the Inſtructing of any in the Truth? or is it rather becauſe they did not propound to themſelves in that Tranſlation to Inſtruct men in the Truths of the Faith, but only to ſatisfy their Curioſity, and to make them read good French? The Author of the Prejudices may acknowledge therefore if he pleaſes, that the heat of Diſputation has carried him beyond the bounds of Right and Reaſon, and the reſpect which he ought to have for the word of God, and that in endeavouring to have troubled us, he has done it for himſelf and his Freinds; for if that which he has propounded were true, they would give us a ground to accuſe thoſe who have publiſh'd the Tranſlation of Mons, of Raſhneſs and Imprudence. And it will be nothing to the purpoſe to ſay, that they Publiſh'd it for thoſe perſons who were already Inſtructed in the Truths which the Church believes, that therein they might receive a Confirmation and increaſe of the Faith, by the Conformity which they ſhould find the Doctrines of the Church have with it, and that it was neceſſary for that that they ſhould go through all the difficulties which the Author of the Prejudices has worked, ſince the Sole Conformity of it with the Doctrines of the Church, would be ſufficient to aſſure them that it was truly the word of God. I ſay that anſwer will not ſatisfy; For beſides that it is an Injury to the word of God to make the Efficacy that it has in our Souls to depend upon the Conformity which it has with the Doctrine of the Church, whereas on the contrary the Efficacy of the Doctrine of the Church ought to depend on its Conformity with the word of God; beſides that, the Author of the Preface, ſays expreſly, That the Souls of the ſimpler ſort may find that in his Tranſlation which is neceſſary for their Inſtruction. He ſays not thoſe who ſhall be already Inſtructed in that which the Church teaches, but he ſays, the Simpler ſort, he does not ſay that they would be Confirmed in the Inſtruction which they had already, but that they would find that which ſhould be neceſſary for their Inſtruction. And elſewhere he ſays, That the word of God, that is to ſay in his Tranſlation, for it is about the Subject of that Tranſlation that he ſpeaks, is the Light of the Blind, and the Life of the Dead. Which ſignifies that it gives by it ſelf the firſt Impreſſions of the Spiritual Life. So that it was not in the view of the knowledge that the ſimple might have of the Doctrine of the Roman Church, that he publiſh'd that Tranſlation, if we believe the Pariſhioners of Saint Hilary Montanus; But on the contrary in the view of that Ignorance under which they were held. For ſee how they Dial. 2. pag. 23.ſpeak. Our Lord ſaid, I have Compaſſion on the Multitude, for they have nothing to eat; and you ſee the Complaint that the Prophet made, The Children ask for Bread, and there is none to give unto them. It were a ſmall matter if they would content themſelves with the not giving them the Bread of the Goſpel; They will not ſuffer them to take it, and if they take it, They ſnatch it out of their Hands; They do not Inſtruct them, and they would hinder them, ſo that they ſhould not Inſtruct thenſelves out of the word of God, and that that Prophecy ſhould not be accompliſh'd, Erunt omnes docibiles Deo, and they ſhall be taught of God.
I thought my ſelf bound to make theſe firſt Reflections, to ſhew the injuſtice and inequality of theſe men that we have to do with. Nihil est, ſays Cicero, quod minus ferendum ſit, quam rationem vitae ab altero repoſcere eum quinon poſſet ſuae reddere. Notwithſtanding after having a little cooled that impetuous motion of the Author of the Prejudices, I ſhall not fail to Juſtify our Fathers touching the Principle upon which they made their Reformation.
I ſay then in the firſt place, That they could not in that State wherein things were, take the Church in their days for the Rule of their Faith, without renouncing Common ſence. The Church in their days, or to ſpeak better, that which they would call the Church, was made up of Three ſorts of perſons. The Court of Rome, the Prelats and the other Clergy, and the People. The Court of Rome was the ſource of all evil, it was that that had ſpread abroad all the Errors and Superſtitions in the Latin Church, or that had at leaſt fomented and maintained them when they took their riſe elſewhere. Her Uſurpations and the diſorder of her Government, was one of the complaints of our Fathers. They complained of her Principles, her Maxims, and ſome deciſions of the Faith which ſhe had cauſed to paſs in Councils that were ſervilely ſubjected to her will and her intereſts. She was therefore a reſolute party in this affair, evidently intereſted, and by conſequence uncapable of Judging. It is True that ſhe called her ſelf the Mother and the Miſtreſs of all Churches, and that one of her pretenſions was Infallibility in the Faith. But that very thing was one of the Errors of which our Fathers required a correction, whatever probability ſhe had of aſcribing it to her ſelf. Adrian the ſixth acknowledged a great part of the diſorders of that Court, in his inſtructions to his Nuntio whom he ſent to the Diet of Nuremberg, as we have already ſeen, and the General voice of the whole Church, which demanded a long time ago a Reformation in capite & membris, make it known enough to leave us out of all doubt. Moreover, the Court of Rome did ſo loudly and vehemently declare her ſelf againſt a Reformation, that it could not be any further hoped for, and why ſhould our Fathers have taken her for the Rule of Faith, ſince not only the Gallican Church who lived in Communion with her, maintained that ſhe was not, but even the Experience of many years had very evidently ſhewed that ſhe could not be: Does not Tertullian, turned Tertull. advers. Prax. Cap. 1.Montaniſt, Teſtify, That Eleutherius Biſhop of Rome had received the Prophecies of Montanus, of Priſcilla and Maximilla, and that he had already wrote Letters of Communion to the Churches of Aſia and Phrygia which were Montaniſts, and that thoſe Letters ſhould have their effect, although Praxeas had not made them to be recalled, in relating falſe things concerning thoſe Churches and their Prophets? And has not the ſixth General Council condemned Pope Honorius as a Monothelite Heretick, with Sergius Patriaerch of Conſtantinople, and ſome others? I know that ſome have ſaid, that that Council was deceived in the buſineſs of Honorius; but without entring upon that Queſtion, in which it is certain that they deceive themſelves, as not long ſince P. Louis Thomaſſin, Prieſt of the Oratory, in his Diſſertation about that ſixth Council has acknowledged. It is enough that that Council condemned Honorius for an Heretick, and that it proſcribed his name and his Memory. For that Condemnation, after what manner ſoever it hapned, is an Authentick Declaration that a General Council has held, that Popes may Err, and by eonſequence that they are not the Rule of Faith. And it is nothing to the purpoſe to ſay, as P. Thomaſſin has done, that Henorius Erred only in the quality of a private man and not as Pope, or to ſpeak more properly, That he did not Err, but only that he had a mind to make uſe of a Diſpenſation for the procuring the peace of the Church, which was divided about the Queſtion whether there were two wills, and two operations in Jeſus Chriſt, or whether there was but one, and that he deſired that they would be ſilent about that point. Which ſide ſoever they chuſe, it will always follow from that Example of Honorius, that the Biſhops of Rome are not the Rule of Faith. For to make a Rule of Faith, it is not enough to be exempt from Error, either in quality of Popes, or even in the quality of private men, it is further neceſſary that they ſhould be always in a ſtate of not fomenting or entertaining Hereſy, but of oppoſing it on the contrary, of condemning it when it has made any progreſs, and of maintaining the True Faith. But this is that which they cannot ſay of Honorius, in reſpect of the Hereſy of the Monothelites. That Hereſy had over-ran all the Eaſt, the Patriarchates of the Eaſt were infected with it, the Emperour Heraclius had eſtabliſhed it by a publick Edict, a Council it ſelf held at Conſtantinople had confirmed it, whether therefore they ſay that Honorius embraced Hereſy in quality of a private man, or whether they ſay that by a falſe Diſpenſation he would only have impoſed ſilence on the Orthodox, which way ſoever they take, it is manifeſt, that he was not in a ſtate under the quality of Pope, to put a ſtop to the courſe of Hereſy, nor to ſuccour the true Faith. For what likelyhood is there, that as Pope he ſhould have condemned himſelf as a private man; or that in quality of Pope, or as they ſpeak, ex cathedra, he ſhould have Publiſhed the Truth that ought to be held, while his own private opinion was that he ſhould hold his peace about it and ſuppreſs it. It is therefore a Mockery to make a Rule of Faith of ſuch a Pope, who through his own private Hereſy, or his imprudent Diſpenſation, could not hinder Monotheliſm from Triumphing. And it cannot be a leſs one, if they ſhould pretend that the Church of Rome ſhould be the True Rule of Faith, while ſuch Popes are her Head, ſince ſhe can do nothing without them, and ſince they might render it incapable to defend the Truth.
I paſs over in ſilence a multitude of other things, which ſenſibly ſhew us the falſeneſs of that pretence of Rome, ſuch as are the lapſes of Marcellinus and Liberius, the Contradictory deciſions of divers Popes, their inconſtancy, their capricious humours, their intereſted Judgments, and I know not how many other Characters incompatible with a true Rule of Faith. It is ſufficient to know that that pretence has never been publickly received in France, and that our Kings and our Parliaments have always moſt vehemently oppoſed it.
As to the Prelats and the other Eccleſiaſticks, after the ſad Deſcriptions that we have given of their ſtate, in the days of our Fathers, and many Ages before them, there is no likelyhood that they can yet further with the leaſt ſhadow of Reaſon, propoſe them as a Juſt Rule of Faith, which way ſoever they are conſidered, whether in General, or in particular, whether ſeparated, or aſſembled together. Their Ignorance, their negligence in ſpiritual things, their ſinking into vices, their exceſſive love of the World, and in a word all that which we have have ſeen in them, will not permit us to believe that we ſhould be bound to truſt abſolutely to their word, about the Subject of the Reformation. They had given but too many marks that they were ſubject to Error, ſince the greateſt part of thoſe things which were to be reformed came from them, or from thoſe who went before them. And beſides that they were themſelves expreſs parties in that affair, conſidering the complaints that they made of them, and that they were engaged to uphold the ſuperſtitions in which they had held the People, we are not Ignorant that they had a ſervile dependance on the Court of Rome to which they were bound by Oath that they would no ſtir, nor ſpeak, nor act but according to her Inſpirations, and her Orders, as experience has Juſtified it to us in the Council of Trent. In fine, their Prelats were men, and ſuch men as had made the Church to fall into that Lamentable Corruption, out of which our Fathers ſought to get out, and how could they take them for an Infallible Rule?
As for that which reſpects the people, if the Author of the Prejudices is, as is reported, the Author of the Treatiſe of the Perpetuity of the Faith, he would it may be fain make them paſs with us for Infallible, and give them to us to be the Rule of our Faith. But we have ſhewn him often enough already that he is deceived in his opinion. What was there more liable to deceive them, and more to incline them to abuſes and ſuperſtitions, then the people, and above all a people ignorant of the Myſteries of the Goſpel, ſuch as was for a long time that of the Latin Church? How could a people that ought themſelves to undo the falſe prepoſſeſſions, with which they had been imbued, ſerve for the Rule of a Reformation?
But ſome will ſay, if there had been nothing in the Body of the Church capable of being a Rule of Faith, why did your Fathers demand a Council to hear their Complaints, and give them a remedy? I anſwer that our Fathers demanded a Council not ſuch a one as that of Trent, made up of the Creatures of the Pope, who waited for the Holy Ghoſts coming from Rome in a Cloak-Bag, as the Roman Catholicks have reproached them; but ſuch a free Council as wherein they might yet have hoped that God would have preſided, and his word have been heard. They demanded it not as the Rule of Faith, blindly to ſubmit their Conſciences to all that which ſhould be there determined; for they well knew that they owed that ſubmiſſion only to God; but as a humane Ordinary means in the Church that Chriſtian Charity and the love of Order made them deſire, to try if they could not by that way re-eſtabliſh the purity of the Goſpel in the Weſt by the way of the Scripture, I acknowledge, that there had lain a great difficulty in the choice of perſons; but if yet notwithſtanding they would have proceeded ſincerely in it, and in the fear of God, without letting the intereſts of fleſh and blood enter in, the difficulties were not unconquerable. Paſſion, Contention, a Spirit of Diviſion was not as yet generally ſpread over all, they were not as yet ſo obſtinate in Error as they have been ſince. All the Learned men that were then in it, acknowledged the neceſſity of a Reformation, and deſired it. They had therefore a ground to demand a free Council, and theſe who know Hiſtory; are not ignorant that to elude that demand which appeared to all the World to be ſo Juſt and Reaſonable, that the Court of Rome thought it needful to make uſe of the moſt deep and imperceptible piece of its Policy. But howſoever it be, there is a great difference between a Council that ſhould ſubmit it ſelf to, and Rule it ſelf by, the Word of God, and between a Rule of Faith. Our Fathers might very well demand the firſt, and expect to obtain it, although he ſtate of the Church was then extreamly corrupted; for there was yet ſome good deſires, which without doubt would have wrought ſome effect, if they had not been ſtifled or turned aſide. But it does not follow from thence, that they muſt after what manner ſoever have taken that Church, for the Soveraign and Infallible Rule of their Religion.
They would not have more reaſon to ſay, that we ought to turn to the ſide of Tradition, which the Council of Trent has raiſed to the ſame Honour and Authority with the Scripture; We ſhall quickly ſee which ought to have been believed. It ſhall ſuffice to ſay here, that although the greateſt part of the Roman Traditions are new, as the Proteſtants have often demonſtrated them to be, yet that in the Age of our Fathers which was as it were the ſink of the foregoing, there was ſcarce any Error, nor any Superſtition how groſs ſoever, that they did not labour to defend, under the pretence of Tradition, ſo that Tradition is ſo far from being able to ſerve for a Rule, that it ought it ſelf to be corrected and regulated according to that Maxim of Jeſus Chriſt, In the beginning it was not ſo.
As to the Antient Fathers, I confeſs that their Writings may be of great uſe to Learned men, to furniſh them with a great meaſure of knowledge; but they can never have Authority ſufficient to ſerve for a Rule of Faith. The Fathers were men ſubject to Errour, to Prejudices, and Surpriſes, as well as other men, and there appear but too many ſigns of it in their Writings. They have ſubmitted themſelves to the Authority of the Scripture. They have called it, the balance and exact Rule of all things, a ſure Anchor, and Foundation of the Faith. They have taken, Chryſoſt. hom. 13. in 2. Cor. Athanaſ, in Synops.in their Controverſies Jeſus Chriſt ſpeaking in his Goſpel, for their Judge. They have Exhorted their Hearers and their Readers, to believe them only ſo far as their words ſhould be found confirmed by proofs drawn from the Scripture. They have ſaid that Optat. lib. 5. Cyril. Hieros. illnm. cat. 4. Clem. Alex. Serom. lib. 7.they did not care for the Teſtimony of men but that they would confirm what they ſaid by the Voice of God, which was more certain then all Demonſtrations, or to ſay better, the only Demonſtration.
It is Evident therefore, that our Fathers could not take any other Rule of the Faith, or Principle of the Reformation then the Holy Scripture. In effect, the Scripture is the Word of God, the Law of our Soveraign Lord, according to which we muſt all be Judged Paſtors and People, great and ſmall, Learned and Ignorant. It contains the Foundations of Divine Revelation, without which there is neither Faith, nor a good Conſcience, nor peace of mind, nor hope of Salvation, and if they would conſider theſe things a little more carefully then they ordinarily do, I am perſwaded they would make no Difference with us about this Article. All Chriſtians are agreed that the Word of God is the only ſource of all the Myſteries that are neceſſary to our belief in Order to our Salvation; and that his will, is the only Rule of our Worſhip. This is a Maxim about which there is no diſpute between us and thoſe of the Church of Rome; for they know with us, that Faith comes out of the Word of God, and that Rom. 10. Mat. 15.it is in vain to Honour God, when we follow the Commandments of men. All our difference conſiſts but in the knowing where that word and that will is; we reſtrain it to the Scripture, our Adverſaries extend it further; for they would have it to be found in Traditions, in the writings of the Fathers, in the deciſions of the Popes, in the Determinations of the Councils, and in all that which they call the belief of the Church, not only while thoſe things are conformable to the Scripture, but alſo while they are beſides the Scriptures.
But as for the deciſions of the Popes and Councils, our Adverſaries themſelves conſeſs, that God gives them not any new and immediate Revelation, that diſcovers new Objects of Faith to them, or new ways of Worſhip, and that ſince Jeſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles, God has not given the like Revelations to men, either in theſe latter or the proceeding Ages. It is certain, ſays Monſieur du Val, his words being ſet down by Monſieur Arnaud in his ſecond Letter, That the Holy Ghoſt does not aſſiſt the Pope in Duvollius de Supr. fummi. Pontif. pot. Part. 2. Queſt. 5.the deciſions of points of Faith, by an immediate and expreſs illumination, as well becauſe that Illumination would be miraculous, and that there would be no neceſſity of eſtabliſhing ſuch a Miracle, as becauſe that no Pope ever attempted to prove that when he would decide any matter, he ſhould be immediately and expreſly inlightned by the Holy Spirit. A Council alſo, adds he, has not the like illumination, or ever had. And if ever any had had it, it would have been without doubt, the first of all, which the Apoſtles held at Jeruſalem, at a time wherein the Holy Ghoſt viſibly deſcended upon the Faithful. And yet notwithſtanding the Apoſtles, in that Council, did not determine any point of difference about the Legal Ceremonies, by an expreſs and immediate illumination; but after a long debate and diſcuſſion.
It is therefore an unqueſtionable Truth, that there is no new and immediate Revelation in the Church, and that Revelation ceaſed in Jeſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles. From whence it evidently follows, that all that is to be found, either in the deciſions of the Popes, or in the Definitions of the Councils, or in the Writings of the Fathers, or the belief of the Church, or in that which they call Tradition, or in a word, in all that proceeds from the Mouth and hands of men, whatſoever Denomination they may paſs under, is the word of God, but as far as it may be found conformable to that Revelation of Jeſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles.
But that being ſo, as it is without any difficulty, how can they be certain of that Conformity, but as they refer to and compare things with the Scripture? They ſay, that there are certain Articles of that Revelation, which the Apoſtles have delivered down in Truſt from their own living voice, alone to their Succeſſors, and which from hand to hand have came down to us. But beſides that that very thing is a matter of Hiſtory, about which we cannot have any certainty of Faith, and upon which by Conſequence we can build nothing firmly, what certain ſign can they give us to know thoſe pretended Apoſtolical Traditions by, or to diſcern the True by, when they ſhould be mingled with the falſe? From the firſt Riſe of Chriſtianity, Hereticks, would ſay as may be ſeen in Saint Irenaeus, to gain Iren. lib. 3. cap. 2. 3. Euſeb. lib. 3. cap. 33.credit to their Errors, that they had were the ſecret Myſteries which the Apoſtles taught not to all in Common, but to the perfect in particular. Papias himſelf, as Euſebius Teſtifies, had made a Collection of Tables, and New Doctrines, under the Title of unwritten Traditions, which he had Learned, from the Mouths of thoſe who had ſeen the Apoſtles and converſed familiarly with them. Saint Iren. lib. 2. cap. 39.Irenaeus ſpeaks of a certain Tradition, which had paſſed for currant in his Time in Aſia, as immediately coming from the Apoſtle Saint John, to wit, That Jeſus Chriſt Taught after his Fortieth Year, which is notwithſtanding now held to be falſe by all Chronologers. They do not not hold the Opinion of the M…llenaries to be leſs falſe, which divers Antient Fathers have approved and maintained as a Tradition proceeding from the Apoſtles.
The Churches of Aſia who have the Feaſt of Eaſter Celebrated preciſely on the Fourteenth Day of the Moons Age after the Vernal Equinox, boaſt for that purpoſe of the Tradition of Saint John, and Saint Philip; and the reſt of the Church, hold on the contrary by Apoſtolical Tradition that it ought to be Celebrated on the Sunday of our Lord's Reſurrection. The Greeks, Neſtorians, Abaſſines, Latins, Armenians have their contrary Traditions; for Tradition changes its Face and Form, according as the Nation changes; one ſort hold for a Tradition, the neceſſity of three immerſions in Baptiſm, and that of the uſe of Leavened bread in the Sacrament of the Euchariſt; and the other mock at it and reject it. The one ſort believe a Purgatory by Tradition, the others believe it not. The one by Tradition Circumciſe their Children; the others have that practiſe in horrour, as being a Relique of Judaiſm. The one ſort faſt by Tradition upon the Saturday; the reſt have that faſting in Execration. One ſort, by Tradition Sacrifice Lambs at this day after the manner of the Jews; the reſt deteſt that cuſtom. Who can ſay Juſtly in ſo great a Confuſion, which this is Apoſtolical, and this is not ſo?
Moreover, there are a great many Antient Traditions, which publick uſe heretofore Authoriſed, and which Time has ſo aboliſhed; that there remains not the leaſt ſhadow of them among the Latins, as that of not Baptizing, without a Caſe of neceſſity but only at the Solemn Feaſts of Eaſter and Whitſuntide, of giving of Milk and Honey to the Baptized, of Adminiſtring the Euchariſt to little Children after Baptiſm, of Praying ſtanding upon the Lords day, and from Eaſter till Whitſuntide, of Celebrating the Communion on the Evening of Faſt-days, of every ones carrying home with him a piece of the Bread of the Communion, of diſtributing the Cup to all the faithful Communicants, of receiving the Communion not on ones Knees, but ſtanding, of mutually kiſſing one another before the Communion; and divers others, which the Latins have Abrogated. On the other ſide, how many Latin Traditions are there which the uſe of the Church of Rome Authoriſes at this Day, of which we cannot find the leaſt Trace in the Primitive Church, and which from thence viſibly diſcover themſelves to be New, and by conſequence falſe, and not Apoſtolical, as the Worſhipping of Images, Invocation of Saints, Tranſubſtantiation, Adoration of the Hoſt. Uſe of Altars, that of Lights or Tapers, Maſſes without any Communion, the Divine Service in a Tongue not underſtood by the People, the Soveraign Authority of the Church of Rome over all other Churches, Auricular Confeſſion, the Number of the ſeven Sacraments, and as many more, that the Primitive Church which came neareſt to the Apoſtles never knew, as we have often Juſtified, from whence it follows, that they are not Apoſtolical, and deſcending from that only and laſt Revelation without which there is no word of God. There is therefore nothing more improper to be the Rule of Faith then that pretended Tradition, which is not eſtabliſhed upon any certain Foundation, which ſerves for a pretence to Hereticks, which is embraced pro and con, which changes according as times and places do, and by the favour of which they may defend the greateſt abſurdiries, by meerly ſaying that they are the Traditions which the Apoſtles Tranſmitted from their own Mouths to their Succeſſours.
In a word, if they would have us to believe a Myſtery with a Divine Faith, if they would that we ſhould practiſe a Worſhip with a perſwaſion that it is agreeable to God, they ought to ſhew us that that Myſtery, and that Worſhip proceeds from the Revelation of Jeſus Chriſt, and his Apoſtles; for without that, all that is in the World is of Men's Invention, ſince after Chriſt and his Apoſtles there has been no Revelation, as we are both agreed. But they can only ſhew us that by theſe two ways, either by that of the Scripture in ſhewing us that thoſe Myſteries, and that Worſhip are conformable to it, or by that of Tranſmiſſion viva voce. But as to that Tranſmiſſion viva voce, we are ſo far from being able to have a Divine certainty, that we can't have ſo much as a humane, for the Reaſons which I have alleadged. Which are, that from the beginning of Chriſtianity, Hereticks have boaſted of them, and yet they were not believed for them; that the Orthodox themſelves, were deceived in them, alleadging them in falſe and vain things, which the following Ages have rejected; that the Schiſmatical Churches alledge them againſt the Latins, and the Latins againſt the Schiſmaticks, without one ſides having any better ground then the other; that the Church of Rome ſets them before us for thoſe New things, which the firſt Ages never knew. It remains therefore that the way of the Conformity to the Scripture, upon which we are all agreed, is that in which the Divine Revelation is contained.