Concerning the Right Use of the Fathers in Controversies, Book 1 · Chapter 6
CHAP. VI.
Reaſon VI. That the Fathers oftentimes conceal their own Private Opinions, and ſpeak thoſe things which themſelves believed not; whether it be, when they report the Opinion of ſome others, without naming the perſons; as they frequently do in their Commentaries; or in diſputing againſt an Adverſary, where they make uſe of whatſoever they can; or elſe whether they have done ſo, in compliance to their Auditory, as may be obſerved in their Homilies.
THE Writings of the Fathers are, for the moſt part, of three ſorts; that is, they are either Commentaries upon the Holy Scriptures; or Homilies delivered before the People; or elſe they are Polemical Diſcourſes, and Diſputations with the Hereticks. Now we have formerly ſeen, how much their Ornaments of Rhetorick have darkned, and rendred their ſenſe obſcure, in their Writings of the firſt and ſecond ſort; and what their Heats of Diſputation, and Logical Wranglings have cauſed, in thoſe of the later. Let us now ſee, if having drawn the Expreſſions of the Fathers out of theſe thick Clouds, and attained to a clear and perfect underſtanding of the ſenſe of them; we may be able at length to reſt aſſured, that we have diſcovered what their opinions have been. I confeſs, I could heartily wiſh that it were ſo: but conſidering what they have themſelves informed us, concerning the nature, and manner of their Writings; I am much afraid, that we neither may, nor indeed ought, to reckon our ſelves in any ſure condition, even then, when we are upon theſe very Terms. For as concerning their Commentaries, which we have often occaſion to conſult, upon ſundry Paſſages of Scripture, touching the meaning whereof we diſagree among our ſelves; hear what S. Hierome ſaith, who was the moſt Learned of all the Latins, and who gives place but very little to any of the Greeks in theſe Matters. What (ſaith he) is the buſineſs of a Commentary? Hier. ep. ad Pammach. & Marc. Apol. adverſ. Ruff. Commentarii quid operis habent? Alterius dicta ediſſerunt; quae obſcurè ſcript… ſunt, plano ſormone manifeſtant, multorum ſententias replicant, & dicunt, Hunc locum quidam ſic ediſſerunt, alii ſic interpretantur; illi ſenſum ſuum & intelligentiam his teſtimoniis, & hâc nituntur ratione firmare; ut prudens Lector cùm diverſas explanationes legerit, & multorum vel probanda vel improbanda didicerit, judicet quid verius ſit, & quaſi bonus Trapezita adulterinae monetae pecuniam reprobet. Num diverſae interpretationis, & contrariorum inter ſe ſenſuum tenebitur reus, qui in uno opere quod ediſſerit, expoſitiones poſuerit plurimorum?It expoundeth the Words of another Man, and declareth in plain Terms the Senſe of Things obſ…urely written; it repreſenteth the ſeveral Opinions of others, and ſaith, Some expound this Paſſage thus, and others interpret it thus. Theſe endeavour to prove their Senſe and Meaning, by ſuch Teſtimonies, and ſuch Reaſons; to the end that the Intelligent Reader having ſeveral Expoſitions before him, and reading the Judgments of divers Men, ſome bringing what he may, and others perhaps what he cannot admit of, he may judge which among the reſt is the trueſt; and, like a wiſe Banker, may refuſe all adulterated Coin. Now I would fain ask, whether he ought to be accounted guilty of diverſity in his▪ Interpretations, or of Contradiction in the Senſes given, who in one and the ſome Commentary ſhall deliver the Expoſitions of divers Perſons? and ſo on, as it there followeth in the Place afore-cited. He ſpeaketh likewiſe to the ſame ſenſe in divers other Places throughout his Works. *Id. Apol. adverſ. Ruff. Hic eſt Commentariorum mos, & explanantium regula, ut opiniones in expoſitione varias perſequantur, & quid vel ſibi, vel aliis videatur ediſſerant. Et hoc non ſolùm ſanctarum interpretes ſcripturarum, ſed ſaecularium quoque literarum explanatores faciunt, tam Latinae Linguae quàm Graecae.This (ſaith he) is the uſual manner of Commentaries, and the Rule that Commentators go by; to ſet down in their Expoſitions the, ſeveral Opinions they have met withal; and to deliver both what their own, and what the Judgment of others is upon the Place. And this is the practice not only of the Interpreters of the Scriptures, but of the Expoſitors alſo of all kind of Secular Learning, as well in the Greek as in the Latin Tongue. Now I muſt needs ſay, that this ſeems to be a very ſtrange way of Commenting. For, what light, or what certainty can a Reader be able to gather out of ſuch a Rhapſodie of different Opinions, tumbled together in a heap, without ſo much as intimating either which is good or bad, or probable, or neceſſary, or to the purpoſe, or not? But ſeeing it hath pleaſed S. Hierome to follow this courſe, whatſoever his reaſon be, you ſee plainly, that we are not to take as his, whatſoever he hath delivered in his Commentaries. And ſeeing alſo he ſpeaks in general terms, as he doth, of the nature and manner of a Commentary, we are not to doubt, but that the reſt of the Fathers have been the greateſt part of them of the ſame Judgment, and that conſequently they took the ſame courſe in thoſe Expoſitions which we have of theirs. So that it will hence follow, that notwithſtanding that we ſhould chance to find in theſe kind of Writings of theirs, an Opinion, or an Interpretation, clearly delivered; yet may we not from thence preſently conclude, that this was the Authors own Opinion; for, perhaps he only delivered it as the Opinion of ſome other Man. Now if the Fathers had been but careful to have taken in Water out of wholeſom Fountains only, filling up their Commentaries with no other Opinions or Interpretations, ſave only thoſe of Perſons of known Piety, Faith, and Learning, this Mixture would have proved the leſs dangerous by much. For, notwithſtanding that we ſhould often be at a ſtand, and doubt, whether that which we there find be the true Senſe and Opinion of the Father whoſe Name it goes under; yet however we might ſtill reſt aſſured, that though it ſhould not perhaps be his, yet muſt it certainly be the Opinion of ſome other good Author, if not of equal, yet of little leſs Authority than he. But the miſchief of it is, that they took a quite contrary courſe, many times ſtuffing up their Commentaries with very ſtrange ſenſeleſs Expoſitions, and ſometimes too with dangerous ones, and ſuch as were taken out of very ſuſpected Authors, and which had no very good Name neither in the Church.Hier. Praefat. in Comment in ep. ad. Galat. & Apol 2. adv. Ruff. & ep. 89. ad August. & alibi ſaepe. S. Hierome tells us often, (and whoever ſhall but diligently and attentively read him, may eaſily obſerve as much) that his Commentaries (which make the greateſt and moſt conſiderable part of his Works) are interwoven throughout with Expoſitions taken out of Origen, Didymus, Apollinaris, and others, who were at that time ill ſpoken of, as Men who too preſumptuouſly put upon the World their own private Opinions,Hier. Comment. 5 in Eſ praef▪de Origine Ingenium ſuum facit Eccleſiae Sacramenta. Faſhioning the Myſteries of the Church out of their own private Fancies; as S. Hierome himſelf ſometime ſaid of Origen. Now this is wonderful ſtrange to me: for, no Man is morce fierce in crying down theſe Authors, than he, being indeed one of the principal Heads of that Holy League of Theophilus and Epiphanius, againſt Origen and his Party. No Man ever reproved any one ſo ſharply, as he hath done Ruffinus, for offering to preſent to the view of the Latins the poyſonous Doctrines of Origen, in thoſe Books of his which he had tranſlated: And in the mean time he himſelf ſtuffs up his own Commentaries with the ſame; many times without uſing any preparation at all about them, or furniſhing his Reader with any Counter-poyſon, in caſe he meet with any of them.Vid. Comment. in Nahum. So likewiſe, in his Commentaries upon the Prophets, he ever and anon bringeth in divers Expoſitions out of the Jews themſelves; inſomuch that when you think you are reading and ſearching after the Opinion and Senſe of S. Hierome, upon ſuch or ſuch a Paſſage, you often read that of an Heretick, or of a Jew. If the Fathers would have but taken the pains to have given us notice every time, who the Author was whoſe Opinion they alledged; this manner of Commenting upon the Scriptures would have been much more beneficial unto us, and leſs troubleſom. For, the Name would have been uſeful to us, in directing us what account we were to make of ſuch Opinions and Expoſitions. But this they do but very ſeldom; as you may obſerve out of the Expoſitions of S. Hilary, S. Ambroſe, and others; who robbing poor Origen without any mercy,Vid. Hieron. Apol. adv. Ruff. ad▪ Pammach. & Marcel. & Ep. 141. ad Marcel. do not yet do him the honour ſo much as to name him ſcarcely. This is certain, that you ſhall find in S. Ambroſe many times whole Periods, and whole Pages too, taken out of S. Baſil: but, unleſs my memory fail me very much, you ſhall never find him once named there. Theſe Men deliver you the Opinions and Words of other Men,Id. Comment. in ep. ad Galat. juſt as if they were their own; and yet will not be bound to warrant them us for good and ſound. S. Hierome, in his Commentary upon the Epiſtle to the Galatians, expoundeth that Paſſage where there is mention made of S. Paul's reproving S. Peter, by way of Diſpenſation; telling us, that S. Paul did not reprehend him, as if he had indeed accounted him blame-worthy; but only for the better Edification, and bringing in of the Gentiles, by this ſeeming Reprehenſion of his; who did but act this part with S. Peter, aUt hypocriſis obſervandae Legis, quae nocebat iis qui ex gentibus crediderant, correptionis hypocriſi emendaretur, & uterque populus ſalvus fi…ret; dum & qui circumciſionem laudant, Petrum ſequuntur, & qui circumcidi nolunt, Pauli praedicant libertarem.to the end (ſaith he) that the Hypocriſie, or falſe ſhew of obſerving the Law, which offended thoſe among the Gentiles who had believed, might be corrected by the Hypocriſie, or falſe ſhew of Reprehenſion, and that by this means both the one and the other might be ſaved: whilſt the one, who ſtood up for Circumciſion, followed S. Peter; and thoſe other, who refuſed Circumciſion, applaud, and are taken with S. Paul's Liberty. S. Auguſtine, utterly diſliking this Expoſition of S. Hierome, wrote unto him in his ordinary, grave, and meek way; modeſtly declaring the Reaſons why he could not aſſent unto it: which Epiſtles of his are yet extant. The other anſwers him a thouſand ſtrange things; but particularly he therebHieron. e…ad Auguſt. quae eſt 89. proteſteth, That he will not warrant for ſound whatever ſhall be found in that Book of his: And to ſhew that he doth not do this without good reaſon, he ſetteth down a certain Paſſage out of his Preface to it, which is very well worth our Conſideration. For after he hath named the Writings of Origen, Didymus, Apollinaris, Theodorus, Her…clas, Euſebius Emiſſe…us, Alexander the Heretick, and others, he adds,Hier. ibid. Itaq ut ſimpliciter …at…ar legi haec omnia, & in mente mea plurima coacervans acci…o notario, vel mea, v…l a…iena dictavi, nec ordinis, nec verborum interdum, nec ſenſuum memor. That I may therefore plainly tell the truth, I confeſs, that I have read all theſe Authors; and collecting together as much as I could in my memory. I preſently called for a Scribe, to whom I dictated either my own Conceptions, or thoſe of other Men, without remembring either the Order, or the Words ſometimes, or the Senſe. Do but think now with your ſelf, whether or no this be not an excellent rare way of Commenting upon the Scriptures, and very well worthy both to be eſteemed and imitated by us! He then turneth his Speech to S. Auguſtine, ſaying, If therefore thou lightedſt upon any thing in my Expoſition, which was worthy of reprehenſion, it would have ſtood better with thy Learning, Id. ibid. Si qu…d igitur reprehenſione dignum putaveras in explanatione no…ſtra, eruditionis tuae fuerat quaerere, &c. Vide & Apol. contra Ruff.to have conſulted the Greek Authors themſelves, and to have ſeen whether what I have written be to be found in them, or not; and, if not, then to have condemned it, as my own private Opinion. And he elſewhere gives the ſame anſwer to*Id. Apol. 2. adv. Ruff. Ruffinus, who upbraideth him for ſome abſurd Paſſages in his Commentaries upon the Prophet Daniel. Now, according to this reckoning, if we would know whether or no what we meet with in his Commentaries be his own proper Senſe, or not; we muſt firſt turn over the Books of all theſe ancient Greeks▪ that is to ſay, we muſt do that which is now impoſſible to be done; ſeeing that the Writings of the greateſt part of them are utterly loſt: and muſt not attribute any thing to him, as his proper Opinion, how clearly and expreſly ſoever it be delivered, unleſs we are firſt able to make it appear, that it is not to be found in any of thoſe Authors out of whoſe Writings he hath patched up his Commentaries. For, if any one of them be found to have delivered any thing you here meet with, you are to take notice, that it belongeth to that Author, S. Hierome in this caſe having been onelyonly his Tranſcriber, or at moſt but his Tranſlator. So that you may be able, perhaps, by the reading of Books in this manner collected, to judge whether the Fathers have had the skill to make a handſom and artificial Connexion and Digeſtion of thoſe things which they took out of ſo many ſeveral Authors, or not: but whether or no they believed all that they have ſet down in their Books, you will be no more able to diſcover, than you can judge what Belief any Man is of, by the Books he tranſcribeth; or can gueſs at the Opinions of an Interpreter, by the Books he tranſlateth. Whence we may conclude, that teſtimonies brought out of ſuch Books as theſe, are of little or no force at all, either for or againſt us. And this ſeemeth to have been the Opinion of Cardinal Bellarmine alſo, where, to a certain Objection brought out of one of S. Hierome's Books, he makes this Anſwer; That the Author in that place ſpeaketh according to the Opinion of others; as he often doth in his Commentaries upon the Epiſtle to the Epheſians, and in other places. The like courſe hath Cardinal Perron taken, where the Proteſtants have urged againſt the Church of Rome, the Authority of S. Hilary, touching the Canon of the Scriptures of the Old Teſtament; confidently anſwering, That the Notes cited out of that place of S. Hilary, are not his, but Origen's, in his Commentary upon the Firſt Pſalm; part of whoſe Words he had tranſcribed, and put into his own Prologue upon the Pſalms: and yet S. Hilary neither ſo much as nameth Origen, nor yet gives us any intimation at all, whether we are to receive what is there ſpoken touching the Scriptures, as from Origen, or from himſelf. And the ground of this Anſwer of his is taken from what S. Hierome hath teſtified in divers places; namely, that S. Hilary hath tranſcribed the greateſt part of his Commentaries out of the ſaid Origen. Now if we but rightly conſider the account which S. Hierome hath given, as we ſhewed before, of all Commentaries in general, how can we have any aſſurance whether that which the Fathers deliver in theſe kind of Writings, be their own proper Opinion, or only ſome other Man's tranſcribed? And if we can have no aſſurance hereof, how can we then account them of any force at all, either for or againſt us? So that it is moſt evident, that this Method which the Fathers have obſerved in their Expoſitions of the Scriptures, muſt needs render the things themſelves very doubtful, how clearly and expreſly ſoever they have delivered themſelves. But hath it not concerned them to be more careful in their Homilies, or Sermons; and to deliver nothing there, ſave only what hath been their own proper Opinion, and Belief? May we not, at leaſt in this particular, reſt aſſured, that they have ſpoken nothing, but from their very ſoul; and that their Tongues have vented here their own Opinions only▪ and not thoſe of other Men? Certainly, in all reaſon, they ſhould not have uttered any thing in this Sacred Place, from whence they taught their People, ſave what they conceived to have been moſt true. And yet, beſides what we have formerly noted, as to this particular, namely, that they did not always ſpeak out the whole truth, but concealed ſomething of it, as not ſo fit for the ears either of the Pagans, or of the weaker ſort of Chriſtians; Cardinal Perron, Perron of the Euchar. l. 1. c. 10. Aut. 24. ch. 15. & paſſim locis infra citandis.that great and curious Inquirer into all the Cuſtoms of the Ancients, hath informed us, that in regard of the aforeſaid Conſiderations, they have ſometimes gone further yet. For, in expounding the Scriptures to the People, where the Catechumeni were preſent, if by chance they fell upon any Paſſage where the Sacraments were ſpoken of, that they might not diſcover theſe Myſteries, they would then make bold to wreſt the Text a little, and inſtead of giving them the true and real Interpretation of the Place, which they themſelves knew to be ſuch, they would only preſent their Auditory with an Allegorical and Symbolical, and (as this Cardinal ſaith) an Accidental and Collateral one, only to give them ſome kind of ſmall ſatisfaction; foraſmuch as, if in ſuch caſes they ſhould have been utterly filent, it would queſtionleſs have much amazed their Auditors, and in ſome ſort alſo have ſcandalized, and given them offence. To ſatisfie therefore their expectation, and yet to keep theſe Myſteries ſtill concealed from them, they waved the buſineſs handſomly, laying before them that which they accounted not the beſt and trueſt, but the fitteſt for their purpoſe and deſign. Thus do we ſometimes pleaſe little Children with an Apple, or ſome little Toy, to take them off the deſire they have to ſomething of greater value. Thoſe therefore who take all that the Fathers deliver in the like places for good and ſolid Expoſitions, and ſuch as they themſelves really believed, do very much deceive themſelves; and believing they have a ſolid Body in their Arms, embrace only an empty Shadow. Now we ſhould hardly believe thoſe Holy Men to have been guilty of any ſuch jugling dealing as this, had we not the word of this ſo great a Cardinal for our Warrant; upon whoſe Authority we have, for this once, adventured to propoſe it to the Readers conſideration, and ſhall withal produce ſome few Examples, taken out of the ſame Author. S. Auguſtine being to expound the ſixth Chapter of the Goſpel of S. John, where, as he conceives, our Saviour Chriſt is very copious in his Diſcourſe concerning the Euchariſt; he preſently falls to overſhadow and diſguiſe the Myſtery, with ſuch a number of Allegories, Riddles, and Ambiguities, as that, if you dare believe the Cardinal, throughout the whole XXVI Tract there is not one Period but hath in it ſome Eluſion, Diverſion, or Diminution of the true and ſolid Definition of this Article. Thus doth he interpret the Bread which came down from Heaven, to be the Gift of the Holy Ghoſt:Perron. Tract. de S. Auguſt. c. 12. & lib 2. de …ch. Aut. 22. c. 1. Our Saviour (ſaith he) purpoſing to ſend down the H. Ghoſt, ſaith, That It is the Bread which deſcended from Heaven. You may, if you pleaſe, believe, upon the faith of this Father, that this is the true ſenſe and meaning of the Place: But yet the Cardinal makes it appear, out of Calvin, that it cannot be ſo. He likewiſe contradicteth after the ſame manner, that which the ſame Father ſaith a little after; to wit, That the purpoſe of our Saviour was, to let us underſtand that this Meat and Drink, whereof he ſpeaks in S. John, is the Communion and Fellowſhip, that is betwixt his Body, and his Members, who are the Holy Church, in his faithful Servants, Predeſtinated, Called, Juſtified, and Glorified. Had not the Cardinal given us this information, who would ever have imagined, that this Author (who was ſo Conſcientious, as that he made it a great quarrel againſt S. Hierome, only for having laid Diſſimulation to St. Pauls charge,) ſhould here himſelf ſay, that our Saviour Chriſt would have us to underſtand His Words thus, unleſs he himſelf really believed this to be the true ſenſe and meaning of them? The Cardinal applies alſo this very conſideration, to the greateſt part of thoſe other Paſſages, cited out of this Father, by the Proteſtants; as namely to this: to believe in Chriſt, is, to eat the Bread of Life: and to this other, He that believeth in him, eateth of it; and he is inviſibly fed by it, becauſe that he is alſo inviſibly born again: and this other: Whoſoever eateth of this Bread, he ſhall never die: but this is to be underſtood of him that eateth of it, according to the vertue of the Sacrament, and not according to the viſible Sacrament; of him that eateth of it Internally, and not Externally; of him that eateth of it with his heart, and not of him that cheweth it with his teeth. In all which places the Cardinal pretendeth, that S. Auguſtine ſuppreſſeth the true, full, and ſolid Definition of this Manducation, or eating of the Fleſh, and drinking the Blood of Chriſt; and inſtead thereof, preſenteth this Allegorical, and Accidental Meditation to the Catechumeni, only to caſt a miſt, as it were, before their Eyes, and to elude their curioſity. He makes uſe of the ſame courſe alſo, in anſwering thoſe Paſſages, which are alledged by the Proteſtants out of Theodoret, Id. de Eu…h. l. 2 A…t. 24. c. 15.and Gregory Nazi…nzen *Id. l▪ 2. A…t. 18. c. 5.; who, he ſaith,†Id. Ibid. called the Euchariſt, the Antitype of the Body and Blood of Chriſt, in the ſame manner as Abrah…m, being among Infidels, called Sarah, his Siſter; concealing ſomething of what was true, but yet affirming nothing that was falſe. He likewiſe explaineth after the ſame manner this Paſſage, out of Clemens Alexandrinus his Paedagogus: †Perron. de Euch. l. 2. Aut. 5.The …, and the Blood of Chriſt, is▪ Faith▪ and the Promiſe. In a word, he is ſo much pleaſed with this Obſervation, as that he fetcheth it in at every turn:*Id. de Euch. pag. 52. 329. 332. 339. 344 356. 417. 420. 434 501. 503. 508. 510. 516. & Trac. de S. Auguſt. p. 55. 57. 95. 145. 191. and indeed we may very well ſay, that this is his main Treaſury, out of which he produceth the greateſt part of thoſe ſubtile, and ſo admired Solutions that he giveth to the Paſſages objected againſt them out of the Fathers. Thoſe that have a mind to examine theſe places of his, may happily find ſomething to return upon him, in ſome of thoſe Applications which he hath there made. It is enough for our preſent purpoſe, that he grants us, that the Fathers in their Sermons and Diſcourſes made to the people have oftentimes made uſe of this piece of Art, it following clearly from hence, that we cannot then poſſibly have any aſſurance, that they themſelves accounted, as ſolid and full, ſuch Expoſitions, and Opinions, as they have delivered in theſe Writings of theirs. For, as the Cardinal endeavoureth by this means to weaken the force of thoſe Paſſages of S. Auguſtine, Gregory Nazianzen, Theodoret, and Clemens Alexandrinus; may not the Proteſtants, when you alledge againſt them any Paſſages out of the Homilies of St. Chryſoſtom, or Eucherius, which ſeem to make ſtrongly againſt their opinions, be allowed to have the ſame Liberty, and to anſwer; that theſe Fathers ſpeaking before the people, made uſe of this Diſpenſation, ſpeaking that which they thought to be, not the Beſt, and Trueſt, but the moſt proper for the edification of others? and that they had an apprehenſion, that a bare and down wright expreſſion of the Truth, might poſſibly have taken off the Heat of the peoples Devotion? there being apparently (ſay they) more cauſe to doubt, that the people might di…-eſteem and …ight the Sacrament, than to fear leſt they ſhould adore it: as indeed the Fathers are much more careful in concealing the matter of the Sacrament, the outward appearance whereof is apt to make it di…eſteemed▪ than they are in concealing the Form, which is of ſo Venerable a nature: ſaying often, and in expreſs terms, that it is the Body of Chriſt; but ordinarily forbearing to ſay▪ that it is or that it was a Piece of Bread.
We come now to the third ſort of the Writings of the Ancients, wherein the Fathers diſpute againſt the Adverſaries of their faith; namely, the Pagans, Jews, and Hereticks. We have formerly touched how much obſcurity the earneſtneſs and heat of ſpirit have cauſed in the expreſſions of the Fathers; and this defect proceedeth from the weakneſs of their Paſſion only; and not from any deſign or purpoſe that they had of ſpeaking thus, rather than otherwiſe. For, ſeeing that all manner of paſſions do diſturb, and in ſome ſmall meaſure, as it were, confound the Judgment; and ſeeing it is hard for a Man, how holy ſoever he be, to go through with a Diſputation, without ſome alteration in his Temper, eſpecially if it be of any Importance, as all thoſe touching Religion are: we are not to wonder at it, if in theſe Caſes we ſometimes find the language of the Fathers ſomething mixed, and appearing of ſeveral colours, ſuch as Paſſion uſually dyeth both the Countenance and the Words withal of ſuch perſons, as it hath ſeiſed on. But beſides this Confuſion, which is cauſed meerly by the Agitation of the ſpirits, without the Fathers ſo much as thinking of it; we are here further to take notice, that the proper deſign, and the Law of the Method that is obſerved in diſputations, is the cauſe of our incountring with ſo many, and ſo great Difficulties. For their opinion was, that in this kind of Writing it was lawful for them to ſay, and make uſe of any thing, that might advance their Cauſe, although it were otherwiſe but Light and Trivial, or perhaps alſo contrary to what themſelves believed; and ſo, on the other ſide, to conceal and reject whatſoever might prejudice their Cauſe, though otherwiſe True, and allowable. Now that this Obſervation may not ſeem ſtrange, and incredible, as coming out of my mouth; let us hear what they themſelves ſay▪ in this particular. And firſt let us hear S. Hierome, who was the greateſt Critick of them all, and who by often exerciſing the ſtrength of his admirable Wit, both by himſelf, and with others, hath obſerved more, touching the Style, Method, Natural Diſpoſition, and Opinions of the Fathers, than any other.†Hier. ep. 50. ad Pammach. Simul didicimus, plura eſſ… videlicet genera dicendi, & inter caetera aliud eſſe foreign ſcribe…e, allud foreign: In priori vagam eſſe diſputationem, & adverſario reſpondentem nunc haec, nunc illa proponere, argumentari ut liber, aliud lo…ui, aliud agere, p…nem (ut dicitur) o…e dere, lapidem tenere. … ſequen…. …tem aperta fron…, & …t ita dicam, …ngenuitas neceſſaria eſt. Aliud eſt quaerere, aliud defin…: in altero pugnandum, in altero…d cendum eſt. Tu me ſtantem in p…aelio, & de vita per…clitan…em, ſtudioſus magiſter doceas? N…ll ex obliquo, & unde no… putaris, vulnus infe…e. Directo percure gladio. T…rpe …bi eſt hoſtem dolis … non viribus. Quaſi non & haec ar… fumni… p…ga…tium …t, … minari, … percut…e. Legite obſecro vo… De…nor …hen…m, legite Tull…um: ac ne forſitan Rhetores v…bis d…pliceant, quorum artis eſt veri…imilia mag…s quàm vera dicere, legite …atonem, Theophraſtum, Xenophontem, Ariſtorelem, & reliquos qui de So r… fonte manantes dive… …is … quid in illis apertum, quid ſimplex eſt? quae verba non ſenſuum? qui ſenſus non victorix? C…n…de ate quibus argumentis, & quam lubricis problematibus diaboli ſpiritu contex…a ſubvertant: & quia inte…dum cogu…tur loqui, non qu…d ſenti…nt, ſed quos neceſſe, eſt, dicunt adverſus ea quae dicu…t Gentiſes. Taceod L…nis ſcriptor … …, Cypriano, Minucio, Vi…orino, …, Hitario▪ ne non tam me d…fendiſſe, quàm alios vide…r accuſaſſe. We have learned together, (ſaith He, writing to Pammachius,) that there are divers ſorts of Diſcourſe; and among the reſt, that it is one thing, to write foreign, by way of Diſ…utation; and another thing, to write foreign, by way of Inſtruction. In the former of theſe the Diſputes are free, and rambling where, in anſwering an Adverſary, and propoſing one while one thing, and another while another, a Man argueth as he pleaſeth; ſpeaking one thing, and doing another; ſhewing bread (as it is in the proverb) and holding a ſtone in his hand. Whereas in the ſecond kind? an open Forehead, and that I may ſo ſpeak, Ingenuity is neceſſarily required. It is one thing to make Inquiries, and another to de…ine: in the one we muſt fight, in the other we muſt te…ch. Thou ſeeſt me in a combat, and in peril of my life; and doſt thou come with thy grave Inſtructions, like ſome Reverend Schoolmaſter? Do not wound me by ſtealth, and from whence I leaſt expected it. Let thy ſword ſtrike directly at me: it is a ſhame for thee to wound thy Enemy by guile, and i…t by ſtrength: as if it were not a piece of the greateſt maſtery in fighting, to threaten one part, but hit another. I beſeech you read Demoſthenes, read Tully: and leſt perhaps you ſhould refuſe Oratours, whoſe profeſſion it is to propoſe things rather probat…e, th…n true; read Plato, Theophraſtus, Xenophon Ariſto…le, and others; who ſpringing all from Socrates his Fountain, as ſo many ſeveral Rivolets ran ſeveral ways: what can you find in them, that is clear and open? what word in them but hath its Deſign? and what Deſign, but of Victory only? Origen, Methodius, Euſebius, Apollinaris, have written largely againſt Celſus, and Porphyrie: do but obſerve what manner of Arguments, and how ſlippery Problems they made uſe of, for the ſubverting of thoſe works, which had been wrought by the ſpirit of the Devil: and how that being ſometimes forced to ſpeak, they alledged againſt the Gentiles, not that which they believed, but that which was moſt neceſſary to be ſaid. I ſhall not here ſpeak any thing of the Latin Writers, as Tertullian, Cyprian, Minucius, Victorinus, Lactantius, and Hilary, leſt I might ſeem rather to accuſe others, than to defend my ſelf. Thus S. Hierome. For, as for that which he preſently addeth, touching St. Paul, whom he believeth to have practiſed the very ſame Arts, this is no proper place to examine, either the▪ Truth, or the Uſe of this Opinion of his; …or as much as our purpoſe is here to treat of the Fathers only. Now you ſee, that he teſtifieth clearly, that they were wont, in their Diſputations, ſometimes to ſay one thing, and believe another; to ſhew us Bread, and keep a Stone in their hand; to threaten one part, and to hit another; and that they were ſometimes conſtrained to fit their words, not to their own proper Thoughts,Athan. ep. de fide Dion. Alex. but to the preſent Neceſſity. And the very ſame thing is confeſſed alſo by Athanaſius, ſpeaking of Dionyſius Alexandrinus, as hath been ſaid before: namely, that he wrote, not ſimply, and plainly, as giving us an account of his own Belief; but that he was moved, and as it were forced to ſpeak as he did, by reaſon of the Occaſion, and of the Perſon he diſputed againſt. The like account doth S. Baſil give of a certain Paſſage of Gregorius Neocaeſari … anſwering for him with this diſtinction;Baſil ſup. c. 5. …. That he ſpake not in that place. Dogmatically, but only by way of Oeconomy,Athan. ep. de fid. Dion. Alex. foreign. or Diſpenſation. By which Term is meant, that a Man keepeth to himſelf what he believeth, and propoſeth ſome other thing, lying wide of his own opinion, either this way, or that way; being concerned ſo to do out of ſome certain particular conſiderations. And as we ſometimes ſee, that the Water aſcendeth; being forced to mount up, to fill ſome ſpace, which otherwiſe would remain void: (Now you will not, I hope, conclude from hence, that this is its natural and ordinary motion:) In like manner was it with the Fathers; who, being ſometimes diſtreſſed, and hard put to it in Diſputation; for to avoid, as I may ſo ſpeak, ſome certain Vacuum, which they were afraid of, they ſometimes left their Natural Motion, and their proper ſenſe and opinion, and took up ſome other contrary one, according to the Neceſſity of the preſent occaſion. And indeed, although St. Hienome had not given us this notice, the thing it ſelf would evidently enough have appeared, out of their Writings. For otherwiſe, how could any one poſſibly have believed, that they could have ſpoken ſo diverſly as they have done in many particulars, blowing hot and cold with one and the ſame mouth? How could they poſſibly have delivered ſo many things contrary either to Reaſon, or to the Scriptures, or to the Fathers? For (as the ſame St. Hierome ſaith) who is ſo very a Block head, and ſo ignorant i… the Art of Writing, as that he will praiſe and condemn…ne and the ſame thing; pull down what he hath b…ilt; and build, what he had pulled down? Now the*Hier. ep. 50. ad Pam. Quis enim tam hebes, & ſic in ſcribendo rudis eſt, ut idem laudet & damnet? aedificata deſtruat, & deſtructa aedificet? Hier. ep. ad Deſider. quae eſt 144. Certè adoraſſe ubi ſteter…ne pedes Domini, pars fidei eſt. Fathers are often obſerved to have done this very thing. We are therefore to conclude, that they have been forced to it, out of ſome ſpecial Deſign; and that they did it, as they uſe …o ſpeak, by Oeconomy, or particular Diſp…nſation▪ ſe…ing that it is evident, that the greateſt part of them were very able Men. St. Hierome by namo recommending the going in Pilgrimage to Jeruſalem, went thus far, as … ſay▪ † That it was a part of our Faith, to go and … in …oſe places, where the feet of our Saviour, once ſt…d; and to … a ſigh… of the … which at this day continue freſh, both of his Nativity, Croſs, and Paſſion. Now how doth this agree with that large Diſcourſe,Id. ep. 13. ad Paulin. Quorſum (inquies) haec tam longo repetita principio? Videlicet ne quidquam fidei tuae deeſſe p…tes, quia Hi…oſolyma… …on vidi…, nec nos idcircò meliores exiſtimes quòd hujus loci habi…aculo fruimur. which he hath made in another place, to a quite contrary ſenſe? namely, in his Epiſtle to Paulinus; where at length concluding, he gives him this Reaſon of the length of his Diſcourſe; * To the end (… he) that thou maiſt not think that any thing is wanting to the compleating of thy Faith becauſe thou haſt not viſited Jeruſalem; or, that we are any whit the better for having the opportunity of dwelling in this place. And here he concurs with Gregory N…ſſen, who …ath written a Diſcourſe, expreſly againſt the opinion of thoſe, † Who account it to be one of the parts of Pi…y to have viſited Jeruſalem. Let any rational Man therefore now judge, whether or no this courſe muſt not neceſſarily embroil, and inwrap in a world of almoſt inexplicable Difficulties, the Writings of the Fathers. For, how is it poſſible that we ſhould be able to judge, when they ſpeak as they thought,Greg. Nyſſ. in Ep. foreign, &c. foreign, foreign. Hier. ep. 50 ad Pam. Debuerat prudens & benignus Lector etiam ea quae videntur dura aeſtimare de caeteris, & non in uno atque eodem libro criminari me diverſas ſententias protuliſſe. and when not? Whether they mean really what they ſay, or whether they make but a flouriſh only? Whether the Bread which they ſhew us, be to deceive, or to feed us? Whether the Problems they propoſe be ſolid, or ſlippery ones? Whether their Poſitions be Dogmatical, or Oeconomical? Certainly, if our Court judgments were framed after this manner, we ſhould never hope to have an end in any ſuit of Law. For as for that which S. Hierome ſaith, That an intelligent, and favourable Reader ought to judge of thoſe things which ſeem hard, out of the reſt of the Diſcourſe: and not preſently to accuſe any Author of blockiſhneſs, for having delivered in one and the ſame Boo…, two contrary Opinions: I confeſs that this is very true; but yet it doth not remove the Difficulty. For how intelligent and diſcerning a Man ſoever the Reader be, it will very often be impoſſible for him, to make a right judgment in this particular: as for example, when thoſe other things are wanting which S. Hierome would have a Man to make the meaſure of his judgment: or, when one bringeth us no more of an Author, ſave only a bare Sentence; the Chapter, and Book where theſe words are, which have need to be explained, being quite out of his memory. And how many ſuch are alledged every day, in our Diſputations? What can we now do, or which way ſhall we turn our ſelves, if meeting with a Paſſage out of any of the Fathers, that needeth to be explained, we can find no other place in him concerning the ſame Point; or if there be none found, but what is as doubtful as the other; or that is not in ſome other Book controverted it ſelf? Who ſhall regulate us, amidſt ſuch Contradictions as theſe? But, which is yet worſe, thoſe things which S. Hierome preſcribeth us for a Rule, and direction to our judgment, are now in theſe days of ours very unſeaſonable, as being harſh, as to the one ſide, and pleaſing to the other; according to mens ſeveral affections, and intereſt; according to which they are wont to interpret, and judge of the Fathers; whereas we ſhould rather ſearch in them, which way we are to direct our judgments. And that favourableneſs which S. Hierome requireth in us, cannot be here of any uſe at all; but may poſſibly beſides do very much hurt. For the greater the affection is that we bear to any Father; the greater care and pains will we take in vindicating his words, and interpreting them in a ſenſe as far different as we can from what we have long ſince condemned, as Erroneous and Unſound; though poſſibly this may have been his real ſenſe, and opinion. As for example, in thoſe Paſſages before-cited, out of S. Hierome, and Gregory Nyſſen, the Proteſtant accounteth that a very harſh piece of Doctrine, which yet his Adverſary is very well pleaſed with: the one of them ſweats, and torments himſelf much, in the explaining of ſuch a Paſſage, as appears very eaſie to the other; the one takes that for Text, which the other accounts but as a Gloſs. And thus the greater affection men bear to the name, and authority of any one of the Fathers, the more do they labour and uſe their utmoſt endeavours, to bring him over to ſpeak to their Opinion; that is to ſay, in plain truth, to force him out of his own; it being impoſſible that we ſhould hold both Opinions at once. We ſhall here therefore conclude, That how clear and expreſs ſo ever the Words of the Fathers may be, yet nevertheleſs will it very often ſo fall out, as that we cannot have any aſſurance that we have their Senſe expreſſed in them; whether it be in their Expoſitions of the Scriptures, or in their Homilies and Sermons before the People, or laſtly, in their Diſputations with their Adverſaries, touching their Faith.