Concerning the Right Use of the Fathers in Controversies, Book 1 · Chapter 11
CHAP. XI.
Reaſon XI. That it is impoſſible to know exactly what the Belief of the Ancient Church, either Ʋniverſal or Particular, hath been, touching any of thoſe Points which are at this day controverted amongst us.
BEfore we paſs on to the Second Part of this Treatiſe, it ſeemeth not impertinent to give the Reader this Laſt Advertiſement, and to let him know, that though all theſe Difficulties here before repreſented were removed, yet notwithſtanding would it ſtill be impoſſible for us to know certainly, out of the Fathers, what the Judgment of the whole Ancient Church, whether you mean the Church Univerſal, or but any conſiderable Part thereof, hath been, touching the Differences which are now on foot in Religion. Now that we may be able to make the truth of this Propoſition appear, it is neceſſary that we ſhould firſt of all explain the Terms.
We underſtand commonly by the Church, (eſpecially in theſe Diſputations) either all thoſe Perſons in General who profeſs themſelves to be of the ſaid Church, of what Condition or Quality ſoever they be; or elſe, in a ſtricter ſenſe, the Collective Body of all thoſe who are ſet over, and who are Repreſentatives of the Church; that is to ſay, the Clergy. So that whether you ſpeak of the Church Univerſal, or of ſome Particular Church, as, for example, that of Spain, or of Carthage, this Term may be taken in either of theſe two ſenſes. For, by the Church Univerſal, we underſtand either all thoſe Perſons in general who live in the Communion of the Chriſtian Church, whether they be of the Laity, or of the Clergy; or elſe, thoſe Perſons onelyonly who are Eccleſiaſtici, or Church-men, as we now call them. For, in the Primitive Times, all Chriſtians that lived in the Communion of the Catholicks, were called Eccleſiaſtici. In like manner, by the Church of Carthage, is meant either generally All the Faithful that live in the particular Communion of the Chriſtian Church of Carthage; or elſe particularly, and in a ſtricter ſenſe, the Biſhop of Carthage, with his whole Clergy. Now I do not believe that there is any Man but will eaſily grant me, that if we take the Church in the Firſt ſenſe, it is impoſſible to know, by way of Teſtimony given of the ſame, what the Senſe and Judgment of it hath been in each ſeveral Age, touching all the Points of Chriſtian Religion. We may indeed collect, by way of Diſcourſe, what hath been the Belief of the True Members of the Church: For there being ſome certain Articles, the Belief whereof is neceſſarily requiſite for the rendring a Man ſuch an one; whoſoever rightly underſtands which theſe Articles be, he may certainly conclude, that the True Church, whether Univerſal, or Particular, hath believed the ſame. But now, in the firſt place, this doth not extend to all the Points of Chriſtian Religion, but onelyonly to thoſe which are Neceſſary: beſides which, there are divers others, concerning which we may have not only different, but even contrary Judgments too; and yet not thereby hazard the loſs either of the Communion of the Church, or of our Inheritance of everlaſting Salvation. So then, this Ratiocination concludeth not, ſave onelyonly of thoſe who are the True Members of the Church. For as for thoſe who make but an outward Profeſſion onelyonly of the Truth, it being not at all neceſſary that they ſhould be ſaved, there is in like manner no more neceſſity of their embracing thoſe Beliefs which are requiſite for that end. They may, under this Mask, hide all manner of Opinions, how Impious ſoever they be. Laſtly, that which makes moſt for our purpoſe is, That this Knowledge is acquired by Diſcourſe, whereas we ſpeak here of ſuch a Knowledge as is collected by the hearing of ſeveral Witneſſes, who give in their Teſtimonies touching the thing which we would know. Now the Fathers having written with a purpoſe of informing us, not what each particular Man believed in their time, but rather what they thought fit that all Men ſhould have believed; we muſt needs conclude, That certainly they have not told us all that they knew touching this particular. And conſequently therefore, partly their Charity, and partly alſo their Prudence, may have cauſed them to paſs by in ſilence all ſuch Opinions, either of whole Companies, or of particular Perſons, as they conceived to be not ſo conſonant to the Truth. But ſuppoſing that they had not any of theſe conſiderations, and that they had taken upon them to give us a juſt Account, each Man of the Opinions of his particular Church wherein he lived; it is evident however, that they could never have been able to have attainēd to the end of this their Deſign. For, how is it poſſible that they ſhould have been able to have learnt what the Opinion of every ſingle Perſon was, amongſt ſo vaſt a Multitude, which conſiſted of ſo many ſeveral Perſons, who were of ſo different both Capacities and Diſpoſitions? Who will believe, that S. Cyprian, for example, knew all the ſeveral Opinions of each particular Perſon in his Dioceſs, ſo as to be able to give us an account of the ſame? Who can imagine, but that among ſuch a Multitude of People as lived in the Communion of his Church, there muſt needs have been very many who differed in Opinion from him, in divers Points of Religion? Even at this very day, that we may not trouble our ſelves to look ſo high, we ſee by experience, that there is ſcarcely that Pariſh to be found, how ſmall ſoever it be, where there are not particular Perſons that maintain, in many Points of Religion, different Opinions from thoſe of their Miniſter. But if we take a whole Dioceſs together, and paſs by all thoſe who trouble themſelves not at all with the difference of Opinions in Religion, whether it be by reaſon of their want of years, or their weakneſs of Judgment, or their malice; and take notice only of the reſt, dividing them according to the difference of their Opinions, I am verily perſwaded, that that part which ſhall agree in all Points with the Biſhop of that Dioceſs, will many times be found to be the leaſt. Let a Biſhop preach or write what he will, touching the Points which are now in Controverſie, he will very hardly repreſent unto you the Judgment of half the People of his Dioceſs. Now we muſt conceive, that the temper of the World of old was no other than what it is at this preſent day: and therefore alſo, for this very reaſon, the liberty of embracing what Opinions a man pleaſed, was much greater then, than it is now; foraſmuch as the Church of Rome did not exerciſe its Power then throughout Chriſtendom ſo Abſolutely as it doth now adays: neither did the Paſtors, or the Princes, uſe that ſeverity and rigour which is now every where practiſed in our days; for the repreſſing this diverſity of Opinions. We muſt therefore neceſſarily believe, that the Opinions of the Faithful were in thoſe days altogether as different, if not much more, than they are now. Whence it will alſo follow, That even the Doctors themſelves, who lived in thoſe Times, could not know all the different Opinions of Men, much leſs could they repreſent them unto us in their Writings. But we ſhall not ſtand any longet upon a thing that no Man can deny us; but ſhall rather proceed to the conſideration of that which every one no doubt will be ready here to reply upon us, touching this Particular; namely, That it is not neceſſary that we ſhould know the Opinions, in Points of Religion, of all particular Perſons, which are almoſt infinite in number, and for the moſt part very …ill grounded, and uncertain: but that it is ſufficient if we know what the Belief hath been of the Paſtors, and thoſe that have been ſet over the Church, that is to ſay, of the Church taken in the latter ſenſe. But yet I confeſs I do not ſee that this Rule is ſo abſolutely right, as that we ought to walk by it. For, if we are to take the Church for the Rule and Foundation of our Faith, (as the Authors of this Reply pretend we ought to do) the People, in my Judgment, ought not then to be here excluded, and paſſed by, as a thing of no conſideration. I confeſs, the Opinions of particular Perſons are very different one from the other; and the knowledge of ſome of them is very mean, and ſometimes alſo is none at all. But yet poſſibly this Reaſon may chance to exclude even a good part of the Clergy alſo, from the Authority which they lay claim to in this Particular; being it cannot be denied, but that both Ignorance and Malice have oftentimes as great a ſhare here, proportionably, as they have among the very People it ſelf. Who ſees not, that, if we muſt have regard to the Capacity of Men, there are ſometimes found, even among the plain ordinary ſort of Chriſtians in a Church, thoſe that are more conſiderable, both for their Learning and Piety, than the Paſtors themſelves? *Ambroſ. Ser. 17. T. 4. p 725. Plerum que Clerus erravit: Sacerdotum nutavit ſententia: divites cum ſaeculi iſtius terreno Rege ſenſerunt; Populus ſidem propriam reſervavit.One of thoſe Fathers, of whom we now diſcourſe, hath informed us, That many times the Clergy have erred, the Biſhop hath wavered in his Opinion, the Rich Men have adhered in their Judgment to the Earthly Princes of this World; mean-while the People alone preſerved the Faith entire. Seeing therefore that it may ſometimes happen, and that it hath alſo many times hapned, that the Clergy have held Erroneous Opinions, while the People onelyonly held the True, it is very evident, in my judgment, that the Opinion of the People in theſe caſes ought not wholly to be neglected. And truly, S. Cyprian telleth us in divers places, That the Church in his time had the People in very great eſteem; no Buſineſs of any importance being then tranſacted, without communicating the ſame to the People; as may be ſeen by any one, in the Epiſtles of this Father: inſomuch that,*C Cypr. in Conc Parthag. p 397. …raeſente etiam plebis maximâ parte. The greateſt part of the People alſo were preſent at the Council of Carthage, where the Queſtion touching the Baptiſm of Hereticks was debated; whereof we have already ſpoken ſomewhat a little before. But becauſe this Point is ſtill controverted, I ſhall let it alone for this time. Let us therefore grant, (ſince our Adverſaries will needs have it ſo) that it is ſufficient in this caſe to know what the Belief was of the Church, taken in the later and ſtricter ſenſe; that is to ſay, of the Clergy: for even this way it is evident enough,, that it is a very hard, if not an impoſſible thing, truly to diſcover what it hath been in each ſeveral Age. For, there is no leſs diverſity of Opinion among the Clergy, than there is among the People: and many times too there is much more; the being converſant in Books, ordinarily reducing things into nicer ſubtilties, and giving occaſion of raiſing divers Opinions upon the ſame. Who is he that will undertake to give us an Account what the Opinion is of all the Clergy of one City onelyonly; I do not ſay of a Kingdom, or of all Chriſtendom; touching all the Articles of Religion? Who would be able to perform this, if he ſhould undertake it? Never was there more exact care taken for the Conſervation of Uniformity in Judgment among Chriſtians, than is now at this day; when there is uſe made, not only of the Cenſures and Thunderbolts of the Church, but even of the Fire and the Sword of the Secular Powers alſo. And yet, notwithſtanding all this, how many Eccleſiaſtical Perſons are there to be found, even in thoſe very places where theſe rigorous Courſes are obſerved with the greateſt ſtrictneſs, even at Rome it ſelf, and as it were in the Popes own Boſom, who differ very much in Judgment touching Points of Religion, both from their Equals, and from their Superiours? In France, where, by the Bleſſing of God, the Liberty of Conſcience is much greater than in other places, it would be a wonder, if, where Four Clergy Men of the more Learned, and Politer ſort were met together, Two of them ſhould not, upon ſome Point or other of the Faith, differ in judgment from the Main Body of their Church. And here I am to intreat all thoſe who follow Caſſander in great numbers, adoring the Monuments of the Fathers, and who take whatſoever they find in him, for the General Senſe of the Ancient Chriſtians, but to turn their eyes back a little upon themſelves, and to conſider, how many opinions they themſelves hold, which are not only different, but even quite contrary too to the Church, in the Communion whereof they live, and of which they profeſs themſelves to be Members, and by which indeed they ſubſiſt. The Difference is here ſo great, as that it ſeems to be, as it were, one State within another State, and one Church within another Church. And yet notwithſtanding, when any of the Doctors of that Party, to which they adhere, deliver unto us, either in their Definitions, or in their Sermons, or in their Books, the common Senſe, and Judgment of their Church, this Intermixture of Opinions is quite laid aſide, and appears not at all. They ſpeak only of the opinions of others, paſſing by thoſe of Caſſander, which are contrary to them, in ſilence, as if they did not at all concern the Church of Rome neither more nor leſs: and yet it is very well known unto us, even to us who live at this very day, that they are favoured, and maintained by very many of the moſt Eminent Perſons of the Roman Clergy it ſelf. And if this ſenſeleſs Sect, who forſooth think themſelves much more refined in their opinions than the reſt of the Body whereof they are a part, ſhould chance in time either to fail of it ſelf, or to be ſuppreſt by force; their▪ Memory would ſo utterly come to nought, as that Poſterity would not know any thing of their Belief, but only by conjecture. Every one will then believe, that the Church of Rome at this time preciſely held to the Doctrine and Opinions that he reads in the Decrees of Trent, and in other the like Books: and yet notwithſtanding we both know, and ſee, that among thoſe very Perſons, which have been Anointed, Conſecrated, and Preferred alſo by the ſaid Church, there is a Party that diſſenteth from it in judgment, touching divers Important Articles of Faith. Let us therefore reckon, that the Ancient Church had alſo its Caſſanders, and very many even among the Clergy it ſelf, who held many opinions which were different from that which was the common Belief of the Church, and which it hath at length by little and little ſunk, as it were, under water, and wholly ſwallowed up, ſo that now there is not any Tract of them left us. Chriſtianity was either different in the Ancient times from what it is now, or elſe it was the ſame. If it was Different, it is then a Piece of meer Sophiſtry, to endeavour to make it ſeem to be the ſame; and a very great Abuſe, to produce unto us, for this purpoſe, ſo many ſeveral Teſtimonies out of Antiquity. If it were the ſame, it muſt then without all doubt have produced the ſame Accidents, and have ſown the ſame ſeeds of diverſity of opinions in the ſpirits of its Clergy. Thoſe opinions and obſervations which now give offence to the Caſſandriſts, would then alſo have offended ſome perſons or other, that were endued with the like Moderation. For we are not to conceive, but that thoſe Firſt Ages of Chriſtianity brought forth Spirits, that were as much, and more refined and delicate, than ours have done. But that we may inſiſt upon this particular no longer, it is ſufficient for me, that I have thus clearly made it appear, that in the Ancient Church, the whole Clergy of a City, or of a Nation, much leſs of the whole World, had not neceſſarily one and the ſame ſenſe and opinion, touching Points of Religion. So that it will follow from hence, that we cannot know certainly, whether thoſe opinions which we meet withal in the Fathers, were received by all and every of the Paſtors of the Church at that time, or not. All that you can gather thence is but this at the moſt; that they themſelves, and ſome others perhaps of the moſt eminent amongſt them (if you pleaſe,) maintained ſuch or ſuch opinions: in like manner, as that which Bellarmine, and others have written, touching the Sacrament of the Euchariſt, will inform Poſterity, that theſe Men, and many others of our time, held theſe opinions in the Church of Rome. But as thoſe who ſhall conclude from the Books of theſe Authors, that there is at this day no other opinion maintained, among the Clergy themſelves of the Church of Rome, touching this Particular, would very much abuſe themſelves; ſo is it much to be feared that we in like manner deceive our ſelves, when, from what we find in Two or Three of the Fathers, we conclude, that there was at that time no other opinion held in the Chriſtian Church, touching thoſe Points whereof they treat, ſave that which they have delivered. It is a very hazardous buſineſs, to take Eight or Ten Men, how Holy and Learned ſoever they may have been, as Sureties for all the Doctors of the Church Univerſal, that lived in their Age. This is too little Security, for ſo great a Sum.
Now there are Two things, which may be objected againſt that which we have before delivered. The Firſt is, that if there had been in Antiquity any other opinions touching the Points now in Debate, which had been different from thoſe which we now meet with in the Books, either of all the Fathers, or at leaſt of ſome few of them; they would then both have mentioned, and alſo refuted them. But we have already heretofore anſwered this Objection, by ſaying, that the Fathers forbare to ſpeak any thing of this Diverſity of opinion, partly out of Prudence, leſt otherwiſe they might have provoked the Authors of the ſaid opinions, which were contrary to their own; and ſo might increaſe the Difference, inſtead of appeaſing it: and partly alſo out of Charity; mildly bearing with that, which they accounted not any whit dangerous. I only ſpeak here of thoſe Differences in opinion, which they knew of: for there might be a great number of others, which they knew not of. Who can oblige you to believe, that a Monk, for example, that had retired into a Corner, and as it were forſaken the World, profeſſing only to inſtruct a ſmall number of Men and Women in the Rules of Devotion, muſt needs have known, what the opinions in Points of Religion of all the Prelates of his Age were? Who will paſs his word unto us, in his behalf, that he doth not ſometimes reprove that in ſome Men, which yet the Church allowed in an infinite number of others? Who will warrant us, that all Chriſtendom in his time embraced all his opinions, and had no other of their own? Poſſevine anſwering an Objection made by ſome,Poſſevine in Appar. touching the Works of Dionyſius the Areopagite, which S. Hierome hath made no mention of at all, ſaith; that it is no great marvel, that a Man that lay hid in a Corner of the World, ſhould not have ſeen this Book, which the Arrians endeavoured to ſuppreſs. May not a Man with as much reaſon ſay, that it is no great wonder, if S. Hierome, or Epiphanius, or any other the like Authors, who were taken up all of them with their particular Charges, and Imployments, did not know of ſome opinions of the Prelates of their Age; or that either their Modeſty, or their Charity, or the little Eloquence, and Repute they had abroad, might have made them conceal the ſame?
The other Objection is drawn from hence, becauſe that theſe Doctors of the Ancient Church, who held ſome opinions different from thoſe which we read at this day in the Fathers, did not publiſh them at all. But, I anſwer firſt of all, that every Man is not able to do) ſo. In the next place, thoſe that were able, were not always willing to do ſo. Divers other Conſiderations may perhaps alſo have hindred them from ſo doing: and if they are Wiſe, and Pious Men, they are never moved, till they needs muſt. And hence it is, that oftentimes thoſe opinions, which have leſs truth in them, do yet prevail; becauſe that Prudence, which maintains the True Opinion, is Mild, and Patient: whereas Raſhneſs, which defends the Falſe, is of a Froward, Eager, and Ambitious Nature. But now let us but imagine, how many of the Evidences of this Diverſity of opinion may have been made away, by thoſe ſeveral ways before repreſented by us; as namely having been either devoured by Time, or ſuppreſſed by Malitious Men; for fear leſt they ſhould let the World ſee the Traces of the Truth, which they would have concealed? But that I may not be thought to bring here only bare Conjectures, without any proof at all, I ſhall produce ſome Examples alſo, for the confirming, and clearing of this my Aſſertion.
Epiphanius maintains againſt Aerius, Epiph. in Panar. Haer. 75.whom he ranks among his Haereſiarchae, or Arch Hereticks that a Biſhop, according to the Apoſtle Saint Paul, and the Original Inſtitution of the thing it ſelf, is more than a Prieſt: and this he endeavours to prove in many words, anſwering all the Objections, that are made to the contrary. If you but read the Paſſage, I am confident that when you had done, you would not ſtick to ſwear, that what he hath there delivered, was the general opinion of all the Doctors of the Church; it being very unlikely, that ſo Great, and ſo Renowned a Prelate would ſo ſlatly have denied the opinion which he diſputed againſt, if ſo be any one of his own familiar friends had alſo maintained the ſame. And yet for all this, Saint Hierome (who was one of the Principal Lights of our Weſtern Church, and who lived at the ſame time with Epiphanius, who was his intimate Friend, and a great admirer of his Piety,) ſaith expreſly,†Hieron. Ep. … ad O…an. Tom. 2. Quanquam apud veteres iidem Epiſcopi & Presbyteri ſucrint: quia illud nomen dignitatis eſt, hoc aetatis. Id. ep. 85. ad Ev…gr. Tom. 2. Cùm Apoſtolus perſpicuè doceat, eoſdem eſſe Presbyteros, quos & Epiſcopos, &c. Id. Com. in Ag. Tom. 5. p. 512. Et Com. in Tit. Tom 6. p. 443. Fuſ. that Among the Ancients, Biſhops, and Prieſts, were the ſame; the one being a name of Dignity, and the other of Age. And that it may not be thought, that this fell from him in diſcourſe only, he there falls to proving the ſame at large, alledging ſeveral Paſſages of Scripture, touching this Particular; and he alſo repeats the ſame thing, in two or three ſeveral places of his Works. Whereby it evidently appears, that even Poſitions which have been quite Contradictory to the opinions which have been delivered, and maintained by ſome of the Fathers, and propoſed in what terms ſoever, have notwithſtanding been ſometimes either maintained, or at leaſt tolerated by ſome others of … leſs Authority. S. Hierome himſelf hath …al… extreamly foul upon Ruffinus, and hath traduced divers of his opinions, as moſt Pernicious and Deadly: and yet notwithſtanding we do not any where find, that ever he was accounted as an Heretick, by the reſt of the Fathers. But we ſhall have occaſion hereafter to conſider more at large of the like Examples; and ſhall only at preſent obſerve, that if thoſe Books of S. Hierome, which we mentioned a little before, ſhould chance to have been loſt; every Man would then aſſuredly have concluded with Epiphanius, that no Doctor of the Ancient Church ever held, that a Biſhop and a Prieſt were one and the ſame thing, in its Inſtitution.
Who now after all this will aſſure us, that among ſo many other opinions, as have been rejected here and there by the Fathers, and that too in as plain terms, as theſe of Epiphanius, none of them have ever been defended by ſome of the Learned of thoſe times? Or, is it not poſſible that they may have held them, though they did not write in defence of the ſame? Or, may they not perhaps have written alſo in de…ence of them, and their Books have been ſince loſt? How ſmall is the number of thoſe in the Church, who had the Ability, or at leaſt the … to write? And how much ſmaller is the number of tho…, whoſe Wri…ings have been able to ſecure themſelves, againſt either the Injury of Time, or the Malice of Men? It is obj…cted againſt the Proteſtants, as we have touched before, that S. Hierome commendeth, and maintaineth the Adoration of Reliques: But yet he himſelf teſtifieth, that there were ſome Biſhops, who defended Vigilantius, who held the contrary opinion; whom he, according to his ordinary Rhetorick calleth*Hiet. in Vigil. T. 2. p. 159. Proh! nefas, Epiſcopos ſui ſceleris dicitur habere conſortes. His Conſorts in Wickedneſs. Who knows now, what theſe Biſhops were; and whether they deſerved any ſuch uſage at S. Hieromes hands, or no? For, the Expreſſions which he uſeth againſt them, and againſt their opinion, are ſo full of Gall, and of Choler, as that they utterly take away all credit from his Teſtimony. But we have inſiſted long enough upon this Particular, and ſhall therefore forbear to inſtance any further in others. For as much therefore as it is Impoſſible to diſcover exactly, out of the Fathers, what hath been the ſenſe and judgment of the Ancient Church; whether taken Univerſally or Particularly; or whether you take the Church for the whole Body of Believers, or for the Prelates and Inſeriour Clergy only; I ſhall here conclude, as formerly, that the Writings of the Ancients are altogether Inſufficient, for the proving the Truth of any of thoſe Points, which are at this day controverted amongſt Us.