Book Four: On the Unwritten Word of God

Chapter Twelve: The Reasonings of the Adversaries are Solved

There remains the third kind of arguments, which are taken from reason. So, the first argument is that it seems impossible that unwritten traditions could have been preserved, since there are very many impediments: forgetfulness, lack of skill, negligence, perversity, which are never lacking among the human race. From which fact also we see that it has happened that the dogmas of Lycurgus, Pythagoras, and the like, who taught and did not write, have altogether perished.

I reply that not only is it not impossible for traditions to be preserved but that it is even impossible for them not to be preserved. For this care does not fall chiefly on men but on God, who rules the Church. Just as God, therefore, has preserved the Church up to this day against so many persecutions of Emperors, Philosophers, Jews, heretics, and just as he could preserve the traditions from Adam up to Moses for 2,000 years and then the Scriptures from Moses up to this time through 3,000 and more years, so he could without doubt preserve traditions from Christ up to us for 1,500 years, especially since, besides the providence of God, which is the chief cause, there are four other assisting causes.

The first is Scripture. For although the traditions are not written in the divine letters, yet they are written in the records of the ancients and in Ecclesiastical books.

The second is continuous use. For most traditions are in continuous observance, as the rite of administering the sacraments, feast days, times of fasting, celebration of the mass and of divine offices, and others of the same sort. Therefore as vernacular languages are preserved, even if there are no grammars extant, because of continuous use, as the Hebrew tongue, which was conserved as vernacular in the people of God from Adam up to the captivity of Babylon for so many thousands of years, so too traditions of this sort could, without any Scripture, be preserved by use.

The third cause is that there are certain external records that last for a very long time, as the most ancient temples, and in them altars, sacred fonts, memorials of saints, crosses, images, Ecclesiastical books, and the like. At Baleoli in Flanders in the year 1571 it was narrated to me by the Pastor of the place, when I had by chance come to those parts, that when an heretical minister had persuaded the people that the erection of stone altars was a new invention and scarcely a hundred years old, the citizens began to demolish the altars. But when they were busy at the work, they noticed some very ancient letters incised on one of the altars, in which was noted the year in which the altar had been dedicated. Now from that notice they understood that the altar had been erected long before and, unless I mistake, some hundreds of years before the time at which the heretic had said altars began. So the stone monument confounded the heretic and preserved the tradition of the Church.

The fourth cause is heresy. For God marvelously uses the enemies of the Church to preserve the Church. For because in each age new heretics have arisen, who opposed different dogmas of the Church, therefore too in each age there have existed learned men who, in order to resist the heretics, investigated the doctrine of the Church and the ancient traditions and commended them to posterity with great care. In the same way those who possess their goods in peace for a long time easily lose the instruments and letters in which is contained whence those goods came to them and by what right they posses them. But he who is always litigating very carefully guards them nor does he allow them for any reason to be destroyed.

The second argument of the adversaries. The divine letters are written so that we may have a rule and norm of faith and morals, as Augustine teaches in City of God bk.19 ch.18 and Against Faustus bk.11 ch.5. But the words of God are perfect, therefore Scripture is a perfect rule and adequate for our faith. Therefore whatever is in Scripture is de fide, and whatever is not in Scripture is not de fide; therefore Scripture alone is necessary and sufficient for preserving the faith.

I reply to the major proposition in two ways. First, that the proper and chief end of Scripture was not to be a rule of faith, but to be a certain useful admonition to preserve and foster the doctrine received from preaching. Proof that the chief end of Scripture is not to be a rule of faith: for then it ought to contain all and only those things that pertain of themselves to the faith, as we see was done in the Creed, which is truly said, and was composed, to be a sort of brief rule of faith. But in the Scriptures there are many things that of themselves do not pertain to faith, that is, which were not written for the reason that they should necessarily be believed; but those things are necessarily believed which are written, as is plain about all the histories of the Old Testament, even about many histories of the Gospel and of the Acts of Apostles, about the salutations of Paul in his epistles, and other things of that sort.

But that there are many things needing to be believed that are not in the Scriptures was shown copiously above; therefore the chief end of Scripture is not to be a rule of faith, but by various teachings, examples, exhortations, now frightening us, nor instructing us, now threatening us, now consoling us, to help us in this pilgrimage. For hence it is that Scripture is not one continuous body as a rule of faith ought to be, but it contains various works, histories, speeches, prophecies, songs, epistles etc. This end is expressed by Paul in Romans ch.15, “Whatever things were written were written for our doctrine, so that by the patience and consolation of the Scriptures we might have hope.” And II Peter ch.1, “I think it just, as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up in admonition.” And ch.3, “Behold I write this second letter to you, in which I excite your sincere mind in admonition.”

I say second that Scripture, although it was not made chiefly to be a rule of faith, is yet a rule of faith, not total but partial. For the total rule of faith is the word of God, or the revelation of God made to the Church, which is divided into two partial rules, Scripture and Tradition. And indeed Scripture, because it is a rule, has from this that whatever it contains is necessarily true and to be believed, and whatever is repugnant to it is necessarily false and to be rejected; but because it is not a total rule but partial, hence it happens to it that it does not measure everything, and for that reason there is something de fide which is not contained in it. And in this way should the words of Blessed Augustine be understood. For he nowhere says that Scripture alone is the rule, but he says that Scripture is the rule by which the writings of the ancient Fathers should be examined, so that we accept those that are consonant with Scripture, and reject those that oppose Scripture.

The third argument the adversaries take from the inconvenience that traditions bring with them. For if this door is opened, so that we say some dogmas are to be received that can be proved by no testimony of Scripture, occasion will be given for many to make up and introduce into the Church many false things under the name of traditions. For we see that formerly even the most holy men were deceived in this way. For Papias is said to have taught from tradition that the reign of Christ would be for 1,000 years after the resurrection here on earth, which was believed by Irenaeus, Tertullian, Lactantius, and very many others. See Eusebius Hist. bk.3 ch.39. Besides Irenaeus bk.2 chs.39-­‐40 teaches from tradition that Christ suffered in the fiftieth year of his age or thereabouts; but contrariwise Tertullian in his book Against the Jews ch.5 and Clement of Alexandria in Stromateis bk.1 teach that Christ suffered in the thirtieth year of his age, which traditions are all false.

I reply. First, if this argument is of any validity, not only traditions but even the Scriptures must be rejected. For many even false and pernicious books were formerly adorned with the title of canonical books, of Peter, of Paul, of Barnabas, and of other Apostles, as is plain from Gelasius in the Council of 70 Bishops, from Jerome in his book on Illustrious Men on Luke. Wherefore also Paul in II Thessalonians ch.2 says, “Do not be afraid either by speech or by epistle, as if sent by us.” Namely because both speeches viva voce and written epistles were being promulgated by false Apostles in the name of the true Apostles. Besides Papias took that error of his about the thousand years not so much from unwritten tradition as from the Scripture falsely understood of the Gospels and of the Apocalypse, as Jerome teaches on Isaiah ch.49 and on Matthew ch.19. Irenaeus too tries to prove from tradition and Scripture that the Lord had reached almost fifty years of age. For he proves it from John ch.8, “You have not yet reached fifth years and you have seen Abraham?” Finally Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria try to prove their error from badly understood Scripture alone. In vain, therefore, and rashly does Chemnitz bring these things against traditions.

I say second that this inconvenience, which is common to traditions and to the Scriptures, does not much harm either the true traditions or the true Scriptures. For there is an authority in the Church and also a definite way and reason for discriminating true traditions and Scriptures from false; nor by the public judgment of the Church has any apocryphal book been received for canonical, or a false tradition for true.

The fourth argument of the adversaries. It is proper to heretics to hide their dogmas and to say that Christ and the Apostles preached some things openly to everyone and certain things they handed on to certain others only in secret. For Irenaeus bk.1 ch.23 writes of the Basilidians that they assert they should not speak their mysteries, but keep them secret through silence. And ch.24 about Carpocratians he says, “They say that Jesus in a mystery spoke separately to his disciples and Apostles, and required of them that they hand these things on separately to the worthy and those who assent.” Tertullian too in his book on Prescription says, “They are wont to say that the Apostles did not know everything; or they did indeed know everything but did not hand on everything to everyone.”

I reply that heretics are the apes of Christians, as Cyprian teaches in his epistle to Iubaianus, and for that reason they also want to have mysteries. But there is a difference between their mysteries and ours, that their mysteries they require to be secret for the reason that these are very base, as is plain about the gnostics, who made the Eucharist from man’s semen and women’s menstrual discharge, as Epiphanius reports; this is also reported by Augustine of the Manichees in his book on Heresies ch.46, and the mysteries of the Anabaptists are clearly similar. And he again says that they want those things to be kept secret from the learned and manifest only to the unskilled. For on this point Irenaeus and Tertullian blame the old heretics who said that Christ did not hand on those mysteries to the Apostles, nor the Apostles to their successors the Bishops, but to some unknown others.

But our mysteries are not handed on only to some people for fear of the light, but because there is no need that they be known by all, or because not all have the capacity for them. Otherwise they are such as could be publicly preached. For nothing save what is pure and chaste is done by the Church. And this I think is what the Lord wanted when he says Matthew ch.10, “What you hear in the ear, preach on the housetops,” namely if there is need. And John ch.18, “I have spoken openly to the world and in the synagogue where all the Jews gather, and in the dark I have said nothing;” that is, I have said nothing that could not be said everywhere, as far as concerns the truth and purity of what I said. With this however is not in conflict that some things he expounded separately to his disciples.

Praise to God and to the Virgin Mother Mary

Robert Bellarmine’s: Controversies of the Christian Faith – Volume 1: On the Word of God — HOME