found that these traditions differed, one church saying their teach- ers had always taught them one thing, and another that theirs had taught them the opposite, it was felt that there should be some com- mon and authoritative standard. Hence the wisest and best of the j fathers insisted on abiding by the written word, and receiving noth ing as of divine authority not contained therein. In this, however, it must be confessed they were not always consistent. Whenever [ prescription, usage, or conviction founded on unwritten evidence, was available against an adversary, they did not hesitate to make the most of it. During all the early centuries, therefore, the dis- tinction between Scripture and tradition was not so sharply drawn as it has been since the controversies between Romanists and Pi'ot estants, and especially since the decisions of the Council of Trent. /
Tridentine Doctrine.
That Council, and the Latin Church as a body, teach on this subject, — (1.) That Christ and his Apostles taught many things which were not committed to writing, i. e., not recorded in the Sacred Scriptures. (2.) That these instructions have been faith- fully transmitted, and preserved in the Church. (3.) That they constitute a part of the rule of faith for all believers.
These particulars are included in the following extracts from the acts of the Council: " Synodus — perspiciens banc veritatem et disciplinam contineri in libris scriptis et sine scripto traditionibus, quas ex ipsius Christi ore ab apostolis acceptae, aut ab ipsis apos- tolis, Spiritu Sancto dictante, quasi per manus traditse, ad nos usque pervenerunt ; orthodoxorum patrum exempla secuta, omnes libros tam Veteris quam Novi Testamenti, cum utriusque unus Deus sit auctor, nee non traditiones ipsas, turn ad fidem turn ad mores pei'- tinentes, tanquam vel ore tenus a Christo, vel a Spiritu Sancto dic- tatas, et continua successione in Ecclesia Catholica conservatas, pari pietatis affectu et reverentia suscipit et veneratur." ^
Bellarmin 2 divides traditions into three classes: divine, apostol- ical, and ecclesiastical. " Divine dicuntur quae acceptae sunt ab ipso Christo apostolos docente, et nusquam in divinis literis in
veniuntur Apostolicae traditiones proprie dicuntur
illae, quae ab apostolis institutse sunt, non tamen sine assistentia Spiritus Sancti et nihilominus non extant scriptae in eorum epis-
tolis Ecclesiasticae traditiones proprie dicuntur con-
suetudines quaedam antiquae vel a pi'aelatis vel a populis inchoatae,
quae paulatim tacito consensu populorum vim legis obtinuerunt.
1 Trent. Sess. iv. 2 De Verbo Oei.iv. 1.
110 INTKODUCTION. [Ch. V. — R. C. R. of Faith.
Et quidem traditiones divinse eandem vim habent, quam diyina prg^cepta aive^ divina doctrina scripta in Evangeliis. Et similiter apostolicse traditiones non scriptse eandem vim habent, quam.apos-
^tolicae tra,(iitLQnss-.^Griptae Ecclesiasticge autem tra-
(EHoFesTandem vim habent, quam decreta et constitutiones ec- clesiasticse scriptae."
Petrus a Soto, quoted bj Chemnitz ^ says, " Infallibihs est regula et catholica. Quacunque credit, tenet, et servat Romana Ecclesia, et in Scripturis non habentur, ilia ab apostolis esse tradita ; item quarum observationum initium, author et origo ignoretur, vel inveniri non potest, illas extra omnem dubitationem ab apostolis tradita esse."
From this it appears, 1. That these traditions are called unwritten because not contained in the Scriptui'es. They are, for the most part, now to be found written in the works of the Fathers, decisions
"of councils, ecclesiastical constitutions, and rescripts of tKe PopesT
2. The oMce of tradition is to convey a knowledge of docfrines, precepts, and institutions not contained in Scripture ; and also to serve as a guide to the proper understanding of what is therein written. Tradition, therefore, in the Church of Rome, is both the supplement and interpretation of the written word.
3. ^lie authority due to tradition is the same as that which be- Jongs to the Scriptures. Both are to be received " pari pietatis
affectu et reverentia." Both are derived from the same source • both are received through the same channel ; and both are authen- ticated by the same witness. This authority, however, belongs properly only to traditions regarded as divine or apostolical. Tiiose termed ecclesiastical are of less importance, relating to rites and usages. Still for them is claimed an authority virtually divine, as they are enjoined by a church which claims to have been endowed by Christ with full power to ordain rites and ceremonies.
4. The criteria by which to distinguish between true and false traditions, ^'e either antiquity and catliolicity, or the testimony of .thee^tant Church. Sometimes the one, and sometimes the other isiirged. The Council of Trent gives the former; so does Bellar- rnin, and so do the majority of Romish theologians. This is the famous rule established by Vincent of Lerins in the fifth century, *' quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus." On all occasions, however, the ultimate appeal is to the decision of the Church. "Whatever the Church declares to be a part of the revelation com- mitted to her, is to be received as of divine authority, at the peril of salvation.
1 Examen Concilii Tridentini, p. 85, edit. Frankfort, 1574.
MO THE CHURCH AS A TEACHER. Ill
§ 4. The Office of the Church as Teacher.
1. Romanists define the Church to be the company of men pro- fessino- the same faith, united in the communion of the same sacra- ments, subject to lawful pastors, and specially to the Pope. By the first clause they exclude from the Church all infidels and
Jieretics ; by the second, all the unbaptized ; by the~Ehtfd, all "wFo" are not subject to bishops havmg canonical succession ; and by the fourtTi7"all who 3o not acknowledge the iiishop or Rome to be the head of the Church on earth. It is this external, visible society thus constituted, that God has made an authoritative and infallible teacher.
2. The Church is qualified for this ofiice : first, by the communi- cation of all the revelations of God, written and unwritten ; and secondly, by the constant presence and guidance of the Holy Spii'it preserving it from all error in its instructions. On this point the " Roman Catechism," ■"• says : " Quemadmodum haec una Ecclesia errare non potest in fidei ac morum disciplina tradenda, cum a Spiritu Sancto gubernetur ; ita ceteras omnes, quae sibi ecclesioB nomen arrogant, ut quae Diaboli spiritu ducantur, in doctrinae et morum perniciosissimis erroribus versari necesse est." And Bellar- min,2 " Nostra sententia est Ecclesiam absolute non posse errare nee in rebus absolute necessariis nee in aliis, quae credenda vel facienda nobis proponit, sive habeantur expresse m Scripturis, sive non."
3. Tiie Church, according to these statements^s infallible only as to matters of. faith and innrnls. Its infallibility does not extend over the domains of history, philosophy, or science. Some theolo- gians would even limit the infallibility of the Church, to essential doctrines. But the Church of Rome does not make the distinction, recognized by all Protestants, between essential and non-essential doctrines. With Romanists, that is essential, or necessary, which the Church pronounces to be a part of the revelation of God. Bel- larmin — than whom there is no greater authority among Romish theologians — says that the Church can err "nee in rebus absolute necessariis nee in aliis," i. g., neither in things in their own natui'o necessary, nor in those which become necessary when detfermined and enjoined. It has been disputed among Romanists, whether the Church is infallible in matters of fact as well as in matters of doctrine. By facts, in this discussion, are not meant facts of his- tory or science, but facts involved in doctrinal decisions. When the Pope condemned certain propositions taken from the works of
1 Part I. cap. x. quest. 15. 2 2)e Ecclesia Mititanle, c. 14.
112 INTRODUCTION. [Ch. V. — R. C. R. of Faith.
Jansenius, his disciples had to admit that those propositions were erroneous ; but they denied that they were contained, in the sense condemned, in the writings of their master. To this the Jesuits repHed, that the infalHbility of the Church extended in such cases as much to the fact as to the doctrine. This the Jansenists de- nied.