FAULTS OF THE FATHERS, AS, FOR EXAMPLE, THEIR UNEXPLORING RECEPTION OF FACTS, THEIR UNCRITICAL INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE, THEIR CARELESS ABUSE OF THE SYSTEM OF TYPE AND PROPHECY."- Biography of the early Church. By the Rev. R. W. Evans, M.A. p. 360.

To "their uncritical interpretation of Scripture," the late lamented Author of the "Testimonies of the Ante-Nicene Fathers to the Divinity of Christ," bears testimony, when speaking of certain "mystical allusions," he observes that "the fathers were fond of such allusions as these. But I say it with deference, that such exercises of the imagination are more suited to THE INFANCY OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM THAN TO THE MORE PROFOUND AND RATIONAL SPECULATIONS OF

THE PRESENT DAY."-Dr. Burton's Bampton Lectures, p. 186.

This opinion is still further confirmed by Wilson, in his invaluable work in answer to Priestly, by republishing which, the present Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge has rendered an essential service to the Church at large. "It is important," remarks this judicious, logical, and learned writer, to know in what sense the fathers understood the New Testament-not because they were Christians-but, because they lived near the time, when it was written, and had read it with attention. Those who live only a century or two from the age of an author, must sometimes enter into the design and spirit of his work, when they are not so well comprehended fifteen hundred years later. WHEN WE ALLOW,

AND IT CANNOT BE DENIED, THAT THEY FREQUENTLY SHEW THEMSELVES INJUDICIOUS AND ILL-INFORMED COMMENTATORS ON THE NEW TESTAMENT; WE GRANT THAT THE OPINIONS OF ANY ONE, OR, EVEN OF A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF THEM, RESPECTING THE DOCTRINES OF THIS BOOK OUGHT NOT TO HAVE ANY VERY GREAT WEIGHT. But the concurrence of the whole body of Ante-Nicene Fathers, almost without exception, in any one sentiment, when they differ

from one another, or are inconsistent with themselves on most other subjects, is surely of some importance."-An Illustration of the Method of Explaining the New Testament by the early opinions of Jews and Christians concerning Christ. By W. Wilson, B.D. Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge, p. 120. First edition.

Having reason to believe that Daillé's "treatise concerning the right use of the fathers" is become very scarce, and, consequently, is but little known, I will submit to the reader's consideration two long extracts from it, one of which immediately relates to the subject of the foregoing quotations, and the other to the vaunted authority of Vincent of Lerins. To these I will subjoin some additional quotations from the conclusion of his treatise, which plainly indicate that he had no intention of disparaging the legitimate authority of the fathers.

"There is none so fit to inform us, what the authority of the writings of the ancients is, as the ancients themselves, who in all reason must needs know this better than we. Let us therefore now hear what they testify in this particular; and if we do indeed hold them in so high esteem, as we make profession of, let us allow of their judgment in this particular, attributing neither more nor less unto the ancients, then they themselves require at our hands. St. Augustine, who was the principal light of the Latin Church, being entered into a contestation with St. Jerome, touching the interpretation before mentioned, of the second chapter of the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Galatians; and finding himself hardly pressed by the authority of six or seven Greek writers, which were urged against him by the other to rid his hands of them, he was fain to make open profession, in what account he held that sort of writers. 'I confess,' saith he, 'to thy charity, that I only owe to those books of Scripture, which are now called Canonical, that reverence and honour, as to believe stedfastly, that none of their authors ever committed any error in writing the same.

:

And if by chance I there meet with any thing which seemeth to contradict the truth, I presently think that, certainly, either my copy is imperfect, and not so correct as it should be: or else, that the interpreter did not so well understand the words of the original: or lastly, that I myself have not so rightly understood him. But as for all other writers, how eminent soever they are, either for sanctity or learning, I read them so, as not presently to conclude, whatsoever I there find to be true, because they have said it: but rather because they convince me, either out of the said Canonical books of Scripture, or else by some probable reason, that what they say is true. Neither do I think, brother, that thou thyself art of any other opinion that is to say, I do not believe that thou expectest that we should read thy books as we do those of the prophets, or Apostles; of the truth of whose writings, as being exempt from all error, we may not in any wise doubt.' And having afterwards opposed some other the like authorities, against those alleged by St. Jerome, he addeth, 'That he had done so, notwithstanding, that to say the truth, he accounted the Canonical Scriptures only to be the books to which (as he said before) he owed that ingenuous duty, as to be fully persuaded that the authors of them never erred or deceived the reader in any thing.' This holy man accounted this advice to be of so great importance, as that he thought fit to repeat it again in another place; and I must intreat my reader to give me leave to set down here the whole passage at length. 'As for these kind of books,' saith he, speaking of those books which we write, not with authority of commanding, but only out of a design of exercising ourselves to benefit others, 'we are so to read them, as not being bound necessarily to believe them, but as having a liberty left us of judging of what we read. Yet, notwithstanding, that we may not quite shut out these books, and deprive posterity of the most profitable labour of exercising their language and style in the handling and

treating of hard questions; we make a distinction betwixt these books of later writers, and the excellency of the Canonical authority of the Old and New Testament: which, having been confirmed in the Apostles' time, hath since, by the bishops who succeeded them, and the Churches which have been propagated throughout the world, been placed, as it were, upon a high throne, there to be reverenced and adored by every faithful and godly understanding. And if we chance here to meet with any thing that troubleth us and seemeth absurd, we must not say that the author of the book was ignorant of the truth: but rather, that either our copy is false, or the interpreter is mistaken in the sense of the place, or else that we understand not him aright. And as for the writings of those other authors, who have come after them, the number whereof is almost infinite, though coming very far short of this most sacred excellency of the Canonical Scriptures; a man may sometimes find in them the very same truth, though it shall not be of equal authority. And, therefore, if by chance we here meet with such things as seem contrary to the truth, by reason, perhaps, of our not understanding them only we have our liberty either in reading or hearing the same, to approve of what we like, and to reject that which we conceive not to be so right. So that except all such passages be made good, either by some certain reason, or else by the Canonical authority of the Scriptures: and that it be made appear that the thing asserted, either really is, or else, at least, that it might have been; he that shall reject or not assent to the same, ought not in any wise to be reprehended.' And thus far have we, St. Augustine testifying on our side, (as well here as in many other places, which would be too long to be inserted here) that those opinions which we find delivered by the fathers, in their writings, are grounded, not upon their bare authority, but upon their reasons; and, that they bind not our belief otherwise, than so far forth as they are consonant either

to the Scripture or to reason: and that they ought to be examined by the one and the other, as proceeding from persons that are not infallible, but possibly may have erred.

So that it appears from hence, that the course, which is at this day observed in the world, is not of sufficiency enough for the discovery and demonstration of the truth. For we are now in doubt, suppose, what the sense and meaning is of such a piece of Scripture. Here shall you presently have the judgment of a father brought upon the said place, quite contrary to the rule St. Augustine giveth us, who would have us examine the fathers by the Scriptures, and not the Scriptures by the fathers. Certainly, according to the judgment of this father, the Protestant, though a passage as clear and express as any of the Canons of the Council of Trent, should be brought against him out of any of the fathers, ought not to be blamed if he should answer, That he cannot by any means assent unto it, unless the truth of it be first proved unto him, either by some certain reason, or else by the authority of the Canonical Scriptures and that then, and not till then, he shall be ready to assent unto it. So that, according to this account, we are to allege, not the names, but the reasons of books; to take notice, not of the quality of their authors, but of the solidity of their proofs; to consider what it is they give us and not the face or hand of him that gives it us: and, in a word, to reduce the dispute from persons to things. And St. Jerome also seemeth to commend unto us this manner of proceeding, where in the preface to his second Commentary upon Hosea, he hath these words: 'Then,' (saith he, that is, after the authors of books are once departed this life), 'we judge of their worth and parts only, not considering at all the dignity of their name: and the reader hath regard only to what he reads, and not to the author whose it is. So that whether he were a bishop or a layman, a general and a lord, or a common soldier and a servant whether he lie in purple and in silk, or in the vilest