NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION.

NOTE A, p. vi.

AND herein our Church agrees with the letter of the decree of the Synod of Trent, which declares that "the Gospel is contained in Scripture and unwritten Tradition," and therefore,― "Omnes libros tam Veteris quam Novi Testamenti, cum utriusque unus Deus sit auctor, necnon traditiones ipsas tum ad fidem tum ad mores pertinentes, tanquam vel oretenus à CHRISTO, vel à SPIRITU SANCTO dictatas, et continuâ successione in Ecclesia Catholicâ conservatas, pari pietatis affectu ac reverentiâ suscipit et veneratur." See Perceval, On the Roman Schism, pp. 159, 160, and pp. 361, 362: also post, p. 162, Note, where the subject is resumed. In further confirmation of the statement in the text, I shall enrich my pages with the following remarks of the learned and truly Catholic Dr. KAYE, Bishop of Lincoln. "If," says his Lordship, "we mistake not the signs of the times, the period is not far distant, when the whole controversy between the English and Roman Churches will be revived, and all the points in dispute brought under review. Of those points none is more important than the question respecting Tradition; and it is, therefore, most essential that they who stand forth as

the defenders of the Church of England should take a correct and rational view of the subject; the view, in short, which was taken by our divines at the Reformation. Nothing was more remote from their intention than indiscriminately to condemn all Tradition. They knew that, in strictness of speech, Scripture is Tradition-written Tradition. They knew that, as far as external evidence is concerned, the Tradition preserved in the Church is the only ground on which the genuineness of the Books of Scripture can be established. For though we are not, upon the authority of the Church, bound to receive as Scripture any book, which contains internal evidence of its own spuriousness-such as discrepancies, contradictions of other portions of Scripture, idle fables, or precepts at variance with the great principles of morality-yet no internal evidence is sufficient to prove a book to be Scripture, of which the reception, by a portion at least of the Church, cannot be traced from the earliest period of its history to the present time. What our reformers opposed was the notion, that men must, upon the mere authority of Tradition, receive, as necessary to salvation, doctrines not contained in Scripture. Against this notion in general, they urged the incredibility of the supposition that the Apostles, when unfolding in their writings the principles of the Gospel, should have entirely omitted any doctrines essential to man's salvation. The whole tenor indeed of those writings, as well as of our blessed LORD's discourses, runs counter to the supposition that any truths of fundamental importance would be suffered long to rest upon so precarious a foundation as that of oral Tradition. With respect to the peculiar doctrines, in defence of which the Roman Catholics appeal to Tradition, our reformers contended that some were directly at variance with Scripture; and that others, far from being supported by an unbroken chain of Tradition from the Apostolic ages, were of very recent origin, and utterly unknown to the early Fathers. Such was the view of this important question taken by our reformers. In this, as in other instances, they wisely adopted a middle course they neither bowed submissively to the authority of Tradition, nor yet rejected it altogether. We in the

present day must tread in their footsteps and imitate their moderation, if we intend to combat our Roman Catholic adversaries with success. We must be careful that, in our anxiety to avoid one extreme, we run not into the other by adopting the extravagant language of those who, not content with ascribing a paramount authority to the Written Word on all points pertaining to eternal salvation, talk as if the Bible—and that too the Bible in our English translation-were, independently of all external aids and evidence, sufficient to prove its own genuineness and inspiration, and to be its own interpreter.Ecclesiastical History of the Second and Third Centuries, illustrated from the writings of Tertullian, pp. 299-304. 2d Edit.

NOTE B, p. xi.

The following are the passages in the Commentary of St. Vincent to which, in particular, our Anglican Divines refer.

"In ipsa item Catholica Ecclesia magnopere curandum est, ut id teneamus, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est. (Hoc est etenim vere proprieque Catholicum, quod ipsa vis nominis ratioque declarat, quæ omnia fere universaliter comprehendit) sed hoc ita demum fiet: si sequamur Universitatem, Antiquitatem, Consensionem. Sequemur autem Universitatem hoc modo, si hanc unam fidem veram esse fateamur, quam tota per orbem terrarum confitetur Ecclesia: Antiquitatem vero ita, si ab his sensibus nullatenus recedamus, quos sanctos Majores ac Patres nostros celebrasse manifestum est: Consensionem quoque itidem; si in ipsa vetustate, omnium vel certe pene omnium Sacerdotum pariter et Magistrorum definitiones sententiasque sectemur. . . . Sed dicet aliquis: Si divinis eloquiis, sententiis, promissionibus, et diabolus, et discipuli ejus utuntur, quorum alii sunt Pseudo-apostoli et Pseudo-prophetæ, et Pseudo-magistri, et omnes ex toto heretici; quid facient Catholici homines et matris Ecclesiæ filii? quonam modo in scripturis sanctis veritatem à falsitate discernent ? Hoc scilicet facere magnopere curabunt, quod in

principio Commonitorii istius sanctos et doctos viros nobis tradidisse scripsimus: ut divinum Canonem secundum Universalis Ecclesiæ traditiones, et juxta Catholici dogmatis regulas interpretentur. In qua item Catholica et Apostolica Ecclesia sequantur necesse est universitatem, antiquitatem, consensionem. Et si quando pars contra universitatem, novitas contra vetustatem, unius vel paucorum errantium dissensio contra omnium vel certe multo plurium Catholicorum consensionem rebellaverit, præferant partis corruptioni universitatis integritatem: in qua eadem universitate, novitatis prophanitati antiquitatis religionem itemque in ipsa vetustate, unius sive paucissimorum temeritati, primum omnium generalia, siquà sunt, Universalis Concilii decreta præponant; tunc deinde, si id minus est, sequantur, quod proximum est, multorum atque magnorum consentientes sibi sententias Magistrorum: quibus adjuvante. DOMINO fideliter, sobrie, sollicite observatis, non magna difficultate, noxios quosque exsurgentium hæreticorum deprehendemus errores."—Commonitorium, ii. xxvii. pp. 6, 7; 68, 69. Oxford Edit. 1836.

"But to say no more of mere authorities, however strong," observes Bp. JEBB, "I own I cannot at present feel any difficulty in applying Vincentius's rule. If a doctrine is propounded to me as vitally essential, that is, to speak technically, as matter of faith, before I can receive it as such, I must go to the Catholic succession, and ascertain whether that doctrine has been held semper, ubique, ab omnibus: convinced, if it has not been so held, my assent is not due to it as matter of faith. If, again, a doctrine which I hold, is impugned as heretical, next to the Scripture, and as interpretative of Scripture, I must go to the Catholic succession: and if I find this doctrine universally asserted, I cannot believe that it is any other than the sincere truth of the Gospel. The universality here mentioned, is not, of course, a mathematical, but a moral universality: the universality, to use Vincentius's own words, of those Qui in fide et communione Catholicâ, sancte sapienter et constanter viventes, vel mori in CHRISTO fideliter, vel occidi pro CHRISTO feliciter meruerint. And here, I may observe, that Vincentius