knew not of them, but knew of no authority positively opposed to them ;)—still they would be to be regarded very differently from what was universally received. It is that only, which, according to Vincentius' invaluable rule, was received "by all, in all Churches, and at all times," (i. e. that, whose beginning cannot be traced, so that it should appear that the Church ever knew not of it, and in the evidence of whose reception there are no flaws, as if it should appear not to have been held either by distinct Churches, or by eminent individuals in each Church,) which has the degree of evidence, upon which we can undoubtingly pronounce that it is Apostolic.

3. Our Church being a sound member of the Church Catholic, "there is no notion of innovating upon her doctrine or practice," but rather of bringing out more fully how Catholic that doctrine and practice are, to determine in many cases what the meaning of her teaching is, to shew things to be Catholic and Primitive, and so Apostolic, which people, because they have only seen them in our Church, think to be human. Thus, much doctrine is contained in our Collects, much in our Sacramental Services, which, as belonging to high antiquity, can only be fully understood by means of that antiquity whence it is derived; and which, so understood, will appear in its real character, as part of those primitive ordinances or teaching, which the Apostles were guided by the Holy Spirit to establish or impart in the Churches, which they severally founded. Thus, as far as any appeal is made to antiquity, as, in the other case, it is made, not to the disparagement of Scripture, (God forbid!) but against modern interpretations of Scripture, so here it is made, not against our own Church, or as wishing to superadd any thing to it, but against modern misinterpretations of her meaning. The great object of practical and reverential men, must be, for a long time, confined to bringing out her existing system, in its depth, beauty, and fulness: if it should please God, that these should be ever fully and generally appreciated and felt in the Church, not with the patronizing pretensions of "friends of the Church,"

but with the dutiful devotion of sons, they, whose minds shall have been so purified and enlightened, will doubtless be guided to do what is best for their parent; our office is not to amend her, but respectfully to learn her real character ourselves, and convey it to those who wish to know it. Rather, the office of the present generation is to restore her sons to her; and she, when she shall again be raised from the dust, and have put on her jewels, like a bride, will be led by the Spirit of the Church, to do what is best for her children. What is done for the Church, as a whole, must be done by the Church, as a whole.

The object then of recalling men's attention to the Fathers, so far as relates to the establishment of doctrine or practice, is, subordinately to Scripture, to bring out the meaning of Holy Scripture, and, with respectful deference to our Church, to lead people to see the Catholic and Primitive character and meaning of the treasures which she possesses. To those who doubt whether there be any such thing as Catholic agreement, having been accustomed to partial statements of the variations of the Fathers, it can only be said, as of old time, "Come and see;" and we doubt not that they who have the candour of Nathanael, will, under the guise of flesh, see Him Whom they seek,—will, in his Church, see Him, Who promised to be with His Church, "even to the end of the world," pervading by His Spirit men of different temperaments, intellectual powers, learning, speech, discipline or depth or acuteness of mind, but fitting them alike, by docility and holiness, to carry on His message to the Church, and keep and transmit to us that one good thing committed unto them.

may

Meanwhile one or two remarks or cautions be of use, with a view to prepare the more candid of those who have misgivings about the Fathers, to receive them, as not to receive them amiss.

It is not denied, then, that there is diversity among the Fathers; the very contrary is implied in the very distinction of what is Catholic, and what is not; since, if there were no

diversity, all would be Catholic. But then, as Bp. Beveridge" well retorts the objection, "all the dissensions which have been raised among them on certain points, take nothing from their supreme authority on those points on which they agree, but rather in an eminent degree confirm it. For the fact that in other things they have differed, most plainly manifests, that those things, on which they have agreed, they have handed down, not from any compact or agreement, not from any party formed, not from any communication of design, nor, finally, from their own private opinions, but naked and unadulterated, as derived from the common and general interpretation of the Universal Church. And indeed, although, on certain less necessary points, as well of faith as of discipline, the ancient Fathers do in some little degree differ one from another, yet that very many things have been received with the fullest agreement by all, is so clear, that we may judge of it with our own eyes. For there are many things, which we see have been defined by the Universal Church in Councils truly œcumenical, many things which have been approved by the consent of several, many things by the consent of all the writers of the Church; many things, finally, concerning which there was in ancient times no controversy moved; some of this class have been mentioned by us above, to which very many others may be added; those especially, which, although not definitively prescribed in Holy Scripture, have yet been retained by our very pious and prudent reformers of the English Church.”

Any one, indeed, who would reflect how many subjects are contained in our Creeds, and how many other truths these involve, how many again in our Liturgy, and how many practices and rites are herein contained, on all which there was universal agreement in the ancient Church, will be slow to receive the vague assertions of the discordancy of her teachers,

In his most valuable preface to the of Lirins' Commonitory, Oxford, 1836, Codex Canonum. The translation pre- has been employed. fixed to the Translation of Vincentius

which are wont to be made by such as have but a superficial acquaintance with Christian antiquity. For a superficial acquaintance, and a superficial view, will only see discrepancy, where to one who can see a little below the surface, all is unity and harmony. The rills are different, the spring one. Then, also, the points of disagreement (where there is such) are offshoots, so to speak, remotely connected with the trunk, not the main stem of doctrine or practice: or they are details, where agreement is in principle; or they are points, which have been left free for the human mind to expatiate upon, and on which no definite result has been communicated, or is to be looked for. Disagreement on such points does not affect agreement upon the others, unless there be no such thing as partial knowledge, or unless because “we know in part,” we know nothing, and are to be sceptics, because we are not "as God." And, in truth, these notions of Christian antiquity originate in an unconscious, and may, and have ended, in a conscious, scepticism.

There is, indeed, one ground, on which people rest their despair of finding agreement in Christian antiquity, (perhaps, more truly in many cases, their hope that they may find none against themselves,) which deserves respect, for the sake of the source whence it is drawn: the descriptions of early divisions and heresies, in Holy Scripture. But the inference is founded on two mistakes; 1. The divisions were not between the recognized teachers of the Church; nor arose in misapprehensions of their doctrine; but the carnal among those who were taught, "would not endure sound doctrine;" and so "heaped to themselves" heretical "teachers." Thus Paul and Apollos taught the same doctrine; it is the rivalry of heretical teachers, which St. Paul condemns; in speaking whereof, St. Paul "transfers to himself and Apollos" what others were guilty of, that they might " learn in them," that there was to be no private teaching or authority in the Church; no name, however high, was to be set up as being any thing individually; but all were to "speak the

same thing," as having but one Gospel to deliver, and "with one mind, one mouth, glorify Godd." 2. The authors of these heresies ceased to be members of the Church," they went out from us;" so that one must not only speak of heresies, or heretical teachers "creeping into the Church," but of their being ejected out of it. They strove to assimilate themselves to it, but they could not; the inherent vitality of the Church separated and rejected them from it; and if they still appeared on its surface, no one could any more mistake them for the Church, than in a fair human countenance they would the foul matter, which the healthy action of the body had detached from itself. Hence St. Augustine takes blame to himself, for not having been at pains to ascertain the Church's doctrine, and having carped at what, after all, were but his own notions of it". So then he might have known it, had he pleased. There was a recognized body of Catholic truth, which belonged to the Church, and which whoso willed, might know to be her's. The modern doubts as to the meaning of the Church had no place then. In truth, the existence of early heresies, so far from at all disparaging Catholic unity, the more illustrates it; there was unity within the Church, and that unity so living and so powerful, that whoso abandoned the true doctrine ceased to be a member of it; "they went out from us, because they were not of us. "The rejection of heretics," says St. Augustine', "makes the tenets of Thy Church and sound doctrine stand out more clearly." Even in a less healthy state of the Church, it becomes clear in the long run, which doctrine was of the Church, which in the Church only; no one, for instance, would mistake Hoadley for a representative of the English Church, though the Church had not strength to cast him out, but he sat in high office within her. The waters clear as they flow on; much more then, when the primitive awe of the Church was so great, and her consciousness of the sacredness of her deposit so vivid, that

c 1 Cor. 1, 10.

d Rom. 15, 6.

e Conf. vi. §. 4, 5. pp. 89, 90.

f Conf. vii. §. 25. p. 128.