Book Three: On the Interpretation of the Word of God
Chapter Eight: the Same is Proved by the Testimony of the Fathers
It is proved fifth from the testimonies of the Greek and Latin Fathers. Irenaeus bk.3 ch.2 teaches that controversies cannot be ended from the Scriptures alone, because the words are expounded variously by heretics, and then in ch.3 he teaches that controversies must be ended by the doctrine of the Roman Church. “The whole Church, that is, all the faithful everywhere,” he says, “must come together to this Church because of its more potent principality, in which has always been preserved the tradition that comes from the Apostles.”
Athanasius in his epistle to those leading a solitary life, speaking of the Emperor Constantius, an Arian, who in Councils usurped some judgments to himself, says, “When from the beginning of the age was it heard that the judgment of the Church received its authority from the Emperor? Or when was this ever recognized for judgment? Many Synods happened before; many judgments of the Church have been passed. But never did the Fathers try to persuade the Prince of this sort of thing, nor did the Prince make himself curious about Ecclesiastical matters.” And later he says, “Whoever sees that the Prince is making himself one of the Bishops in passing decrees, and is presiding over Ecclesiastical judgments, would he not rightly say that this is that abomination of desolation predicted by Daniel?” Basil in epist.52 to Athanasius says that it seems good to him that when a Synod could not then take place, they should write to the Roman Pontiff to send by his own authority some persons to the East to undo the acts of the Council of Rimini.
Gregory Nazianzen in the oration in which he excuses himself for being so long absent from his Ecclesiastical function, says, “Do not wish, you sheep, to feed the pastors, nor to raise yourselves above their limits, for it is enough for you if you are rightly fed. Do not judge the judges, nor pass law for the legislators etc.” But how do they not judge the judges and feed the pastors who presume to judge the opinion of a Council or of the Supreme Pontiff? And lest you think Gregory makes an exception of Emperors, in the same oration to the citizens struck with fear and to the irate Emperor, he says, addressing the Emperor, “Would you receive a voice speaking freely? And the fact that the law of Christ has subjected you to my power and my tribunal? For we ourselves too, I add, have command, and in a greater and more perfect empire; receive therefore a voice speaking more freely: I know you are a sheep of my flock, etc.” Chrysostom in his last homily on John says that Peter was by Christ set as master for the whole world. Cyril in his Thesaurus, as cited by St. Thomas in his little work on the Errors of the Greeks, says, “We must adhere to our head the Roman Pontiff; it belongs to us to receive from him what is to be believed, what is to be maintained.” See also Damascene in his first and second orations for images.
Among the Latins Tertullian in his book On Prescription beautifully proves what we wish. For he first teaches that one should not dispute with heretics from the Scriptures, because the possession and true understanding of the Scriptures belongs to the Catholic Church; one must first establish what the true doctrine of the Church is, and then from that must the Scriptures be understood. But what the true doctrine of the Church is cannot be safely inquired save from the Apostolic Churches, of which the chief is the Roman. For God handed the doctrine of truth to Christ, Christ to the Apostles, the Apostles to their successors. So in sum Tertullian. Cyprian bk.1 epist.3, “For neither have heresies arisen nor schisms been born from anywhere else than from this, that the priest of God is not obeyed, and that the one Priest at the time in the Church and the one judge at the time in the place of Christ is not thought on.” For, before a definition from the Pontiffs, one may without the vice of heresy hold either side on doubtful matters; but after a definition, those who do not obey are heretics.
Ambrose epist.32 to the Emperor Valentinian the Younger who, corrupted by the Arians, wanted to judge of matters of the faith, says, “But certainly, if we go over either the series of divine Scriptures or ancient times, who would deny that in a cause of faith, a cause, I say, of faith, the Bishops are wont to judge of Christian Emperors, that is, of their faith, and not the Emperors of the Bishops (that is, of their faith)? You will, by the favor of God, become even more advanced in the maturity of old age, and then you will think about this, what sort of Bishop he is who subordinates Priestly law to laymen. Your father, a man of mature age, used to say, ‘It is not mine to judge among Bishops; your Clemency now speaks, should I judge?’” And later, “If there is need of conferring about the faith, that conference should be among priests, just as was done under Constantine, Prince of august memory, who set down no laws in advance but gave free judgment to the priests. So was it also done under Constantius, Emperor of august memory, heir of his father’s dignity. But what he began well ended otherwise. For the Bishops first wrote down the pure faith, but when some within the palace want to dispute of the faith, they acted to change the judgments of the Bishops with their circumlocutions.” Note, reader, these last words. For laymen in the house of the Prince, when they wish to judge of the opinion of Bishops, deserve to fall into error.
Jerome in his epistle to Damasus, about the name hypostasis, says, “Please discriminate, I beg, I do not fear to say three hypostases if you command.” And later, “I call your Beatitude to witness through the crucified one, the salvation of the world, through the consubstantial Trinity, so that by your letters authority may be given me to be silent or to speak about hypostases.” He asks the same in the following epistle. And note that Jerome was far more learned than Damasus, as is plain from the many questions of the Scriptures that Jerome explained to Damasus. And yet when it was a question of faith, so as to define something, Jerome attributed all judgment to the Pontiff Damasus.
Sulpicius in Sacred History bk.2 reports that St. Martin once said to the Emperor Maximus, that it was a new and unheard of impiety for a secular judge to judge a cause of the Church.
Augustine Against Cresconius bk.1 ch.33, “Whoever fears to be deceived in the obscurity of this question, let him consult about it the Church that sacred Scripture, without any ambiguity, points to.” And in epist.106 to Paulinus, speaking of the epistles of Innocent in which was expressively put that judgment about matters of faith pertains to the Apostolic See, he says as follows, “He replied to us on all matters as was right, and as the Priest of the Apostolic See ought to respond.” And in his book Against Fundamentus, ch.5, he says, “But I would not believe the Gospel unless the authority of the Catholic Church moved me.”
Calvin replies that Augustine is speaking of a certain private persuasion of the faithful, by which some are converted to the faith, so that the sense is: I would not believe the Gospel, so that I would not now be a Christian, unless Christians moved me with their persuasions. But this is a cold solution; for in the first place Augustine is speaking of the present when he says, “unless the authority of the Church moved me.” Then a little later he says, “Whose instructions then did I believe, but those who commanded you I do not believe?” where not persuasion but command he attributes to the Church. And later, speaking of the book of Acts, he says, “I should believe this book if I believe the Gospel, since Catholic authority commends both Scripture to me similarly.” In the preface to his books on Christian Doctrine, as if foreseeing this private spirit which disdains to have an instructor, he says, “Let us be wary of such very proud and dangerous temptations, and let us think more of the Centurion Cornelius; although the Angel announced that his prayers were heard and his works of mercy accepted, yet he was handed over to Peter to be instructed. And certainly that eunuch who, when reading Isaiah, did not understand, was not sent by the Apostle to an Angel, nor was what he did not understand expounded by an Angel, or divinely revealed to his mind without the ministry of a man, etc.”
Prosper in his book Against the Collector, at the end, did not prove the Pelagians were truly heretics in any other way than that they had been condemned by the Roman Bishops Innocent, Zozimus, Boniface, and Celestine. Vincent of Lerins in his Commonitorium says, “Here perhaps someone may ask, since the canon of the Scriptures is perfect, what need there is that the authority of Ecclesiastical understanding should be enjoined on him. Because, to be sure, all do not take the sacred Scripture, on account of its depth, in one and the same sense, but the same sayings are interpreted by one in one way and by another in another, so that it seems possible to erect as many opinions on it as there are men who have it. And therefore there is great necessity, because of so great a twisting of such diverse error, that the line of Prophetic and Apostolic interpretation be drawn according to the norm of Ecclesiastical and Catholic sense, etc.” But the norm of Catholic sense is openly shown in the same place to be the decrees of Councils, the agreement of the Fathers, and the like.
Gregory bk.5 epist.25 says, “We know that the most pious lords direct discipline, keep order, venerate the canons, and do not involve themselves in priestly business.” Anselm in his book on the Incarnation of the Word ch.1 thus addresses Urban the Roman Pontiff, “Since,” he says, “divine providence has chosen to commit to your Holiness the guarding of Christian life and faith and the ruling of his Church, to no other is reference more rightly made if something against Catholic faith arises in the Church, so that it may by his authority be corrected, etc.”
Bernard in epist.190 to Pope Innocent II, “To your Apostolate must all dangers and scandals that emerge in the kingdom of God be referred, and especially those that happen about the faith. For I think it worthy for losses in the faith to be there most of all repaired where faith cannot feel defect.” And later, “It is time to acknowledge, most loving Father, your principate, to approve your zeal, to honor your ministry. In this you plainly fill the place of Peter, whose faith you also hold, if you confirm by your admonition hearts wavering in the faith, if by your authority you grind down the corruptors of the faith.” And in epist.189, “I said that his writings are sufficient to accuse him, nor is it my affair, but the Bishops’, to whose ministry it belongs to judge of dogmas.”
Robert Bellarmine’s: Controversies of the Christian Faith – Volume 1: On the Word of God — HOME