« 前へ次へ »
a very just cause to rejoice on their own behalf, for so great a benefit received of ALMIGHTY GOD; yet made he them all burst out into tears, because that they which were yet alive, and had seen the former building of the temple before the Babylonians destroyed it, called to mind how far off it was yet from that beauty and excellency which it had in the old times past before. For then indeed would they have thought the temple worthily repaired, if it had answered to the ancient pattern, and to the majesty of the first temple.
St. Paul, because he would amend the abuse of the Lord's Supper which the Corinthians even then began to corrupt, he set before them Christ's institution to follow, saying :'“ I have received of the LORD that which also I delivered unto you.”m
And when Christ confuted the error of the Pharisees; ye must, saith he, return to the first beginning : “from the beginning it was not so.”. And when he found great fault with the priests for their uncleanness of life, and covetousness, and would cleanse the temple from all evil abuses, “ This house," saith he, “at the first beginning it was a house of prayer," wherein all the people might devoutly and sincerely pray together. And so it were your part to use it, now at this day. For it was not builded to the end it should be “ of thieves."
Likewise also, the good and commendable princes mentioned of in the Scriptures, were praised specially by these words—that “they had walked in the ways of their father David:"p that is, because they had returned to the first and original foundation, and had restored
i Ezra iii. 12. (JEWELL's assertion that this sorrow was owing to the suggestions of the prophet is mere conjecture, built upon the occurrence of a passage having such tendency, Hag. ii. 3.]
m 1 Cor. xi. 23. n Matt. xix. 8.
· [Thus JEWELL quotes the passage, evidently alluding to our Saviour's declaration when he cleansed the temple, and as evidently deceived by his memory. The very clause on which he lays stress, as most to his purpose, is not given by either of the evangelists. They all represent our Saviour only as saying “ It is written, My house shall be called a house of prayer.”—Matt. xxi. 13. Luke xix. 46. Mark xi. 17. Compare John ii. 16, 17.)
? 1 Ki. ix. 4. 2 Ki. xxii. 2. 2 Chron. ii. 17, &c. Comp. 1 Ki, viii, 25.
the religion even to the perfection wherein David left it. And therefore, when we likewise saw that all things were quite trodden under foot by these men, and that nothing remained in the temple of God but pitiful spoils and decays; we reckoned it the wisest and the safest way to set before our eyes those Churches which we know for a surety that they never had erred, and yet never had neither private mass, nor prayers in a strange and barbarous language, nor this corruption of sacraments, and other toys.9
Sect. 4. And forsomuch as our desire was to have the temple of the LORD restored anew, we would seek none other foundation than the same which we knew was long ago laid by the Apostles, that is, to wit, our SAVIOUR, Jesus Christ. And forsomuch as we heard God himself speaking unto us in his word; and saw also the notable examples of the old and primitive Church : again, how uncertain a matter it was to wait for a General Council; and that the success thereof would be much more uncertain: but specially, forsomuch as we were most ascertained (most surely informed] of God's will, and therefore counted it a wickedness to be too careful and overcumbered about the judgments of mortal men :s we could no longer stand taking advice
9 ["Howbeit, we have not-removed or shaken the authority of any one ancient General Council. For of all the ancient Councils that have been, touching the cases that lie between us in controversy, ye are not yet able to allege one. We have upon good causes removed your vanities and unseemly follies : and have restored again, so much as in us lay, the decrees and canons of the ancient Councils. HINCMAR bishop of Rheims (in the 9th century] saith thus : 'Cum duarum aut trium, &c. When the bishops of two or three provinces meet together, if they by the warrant of the old Councils appoint any matter of preaching or doctrine, so that it disagree not from the doctrine of the ancient fathers, it is catholic that they do, and perhaps may be called universal.' (HINCM. REM. c. 20.) Such are our doings: they agree with the doings of the ancient fathers, and have the warrant of the Councils of the primitive Church ; and therefore they are catholic.” Defence, p. 623, 624.] r1 Cor. iii. 11.
[“. It becometh us not, ye say, 'to call the determinations of your General Councils the judgment of mortal men. Yet it became Ś. AUGUSTINE to call the same Concilia contendentium episcoporum.' "The Councils of quarrelling bishops.' (De Unitat. Eccles. cap. 10.) And again ; 'Humanarum contentionum animosa, et perniciosa
with flesh and blood, but rather thought good to do the same thing that both might rightly be done, and hath many a time been done, as well of other good men, as also of many catholic bishops ; that is, to remedy our own Churches by a Provincial Synod.
For thus, we know, the old fathers used to put matters in experience, before they came to the public universal Council. There remain yet sundry Canons, written in Councils of free cities; as of Carthage, under Cyprian ;u as of Ancyra, of Neocæsarea,' and of Gangra, (which is in Paphlagonia,) as some think ;w before that the name of the General Council at Nice was ever heard of. After this fashion, in old time, did they speedily meet with and cut short those heretics the
certamina. "The bold and hurtful contentions of human quarrels.' (Ibid. c. 10.) But what need we many words? Your own PANORMITANUS saith : 'Leges summorum,' &c. "The laws and determinations of Popes and Councils are called the determinations and laws of men, and so in strait manner of speech, they cannot be called the laws of God.' (In Extra. de Consang. et Affin. Non debet.)" Defence, p. 622,]
+ ["Certainly, the truth of God is not bound neither to person nor to place. Wheresoever it be, either in few or in many, it is evermore catholic, even because it is the truth of God. In the Council of Constantinople, it is written thus: Definierunt pariter,' &c. "The fathers agreed altogether, that if any matter should happen to
grow in the province, by a council of the province it should be ended. (Hist. Tripart. Lib. IX. c. xiii.) Likewise saith ISIDORUS : ‘Manifestum est,' &c. It is clear, that matters happening in every province, by a provincial synod may be ordered, as it is concluded in the Council of Nice.'(Præf. in Concilia.) Likewise S. AMBROSE saith: 'Sciebant esse,' &c. "They knew it was a custom that a Council of the East bishops should be holden in the East, and a Council of the West bishops should be holden in the West.' (in Conc. Aquileien.) S. AUGUSTINE saith : Literas episcoporum, et per sermonem forte sapientiorum cujuslibet in ea re peritioris, licet reprehendi
, si quid in eis forte a veritate deviatum est. Bishops' letters, if they swerve any thing from the truth, may be controlled by the discretion of any other man, that hath more skill in the matter. (De Baptismo contra Don. Lib. II. c. iii.)”—Defence, p. 623.]
(Cyprian held a Council in Carthage, on the subject of infant baptism, in 351 and 352; and another, respecting the admission of such as lapsed in persecution, and the rebaptization of heretics, in 255.]
[Both held in the year 314.] w [Both the date and place of this Council is uncertain. The situation assigned to Gangra by JEWELL is probably correct : but the time at which the Council met is generally placed about 360.--There · were several other provincial Councils, of more or less note, antecedent to the Council of Nice.]
Pelagiansand the Donatists,» at home, by private disputation, without any General Council. Thus also, when the emperor Constantine evidently and earnestly took part with Auxentius, the bishop of the Arians' faction, Ambrose,' the bishop of the Christians, appealed
[The Pelagians derived their opinions and their name from PELAGIUS, a British monk, eminent for his learning and the sanctity of his manners. Residing at Rome, in the beginning of the fifth century, he taught that the consequences of the sin of our first parents were confined to themselves—that men are now born in the same state in which Adam was created—that their natural powers are sufficient to work out their own salvation-and that divine grace, although necessary, is only so for the purpose of arousing men to the exertion of those powers. An invasion of the Goths in 409-10, drove Pelagius, and Cælestius, an Irish monk who assisted him in the propagation of his opinions, from Rome; the one to Sicily, and ultimately to Palestine ; the other to Carthage. There Cælestius was detected, and warmly, not to say bitterly, opposed by Augustine. The result was his condemnation by a Council convened at Carthage in 412, and the deputation of a presbyter to Palestine to denounce Pelagius as a heretic. A council of bishops assembled in Jerusalem, and another convened from all Palestine at Diospolis, acquitted Pelagius; and, on an appeal to the bishop of the metropolis of the empire, even Zosimus, then Pope, espoused the interests of Cælestius and Pelagius, and pronounced them free from the stain of heresy. But the industry, perseverance, learning, eloquence, and invective," of Augustine, were ultimately successful. After the convention of numerous councils, and the publication of still more numerous writings, by the African bishop, Pelagianism was entirely suppressed in those parts ; and though it lingered some time in the remoter West, and in some districts of the East, yet the anathema of the General Council of Ephesus in 431 was directed against an oppressed and rapidly expiring sect.]
y [See Standard Works, Vol. I. p. 80, Note ». The downfal of the Donatist schism, which in the middle of the fourth century numbered four hundred bishops as its supporters, and continued to flourish nearly a century in fearful vigour, is hardly to be attributed to the Councils and disputations held on its account. The inroads of the Saracens laying waste the province of Africa, to which it was confined, were a far more efficient agent ; and to their operation the final disappearance of the Donatists is unquestionably to be traced.]
[In place of Ambrose, the Latin text, and the translation in the Fathers of the English Church, have ATHANASIUS. A. C. CAMPBELL has the same, with the foolish note 'Some read Ambrose for Athanasius :' as if either might be correct !
There is some strange blunder in this passage. Jewell, probably trusting to memory, appears to have confounded two bishops of the name of Aurentius, both conspicuous in transactions which took place at Milan; with one of whom Athanasius was concerned, with the other Ambrose. Hence he seems to have inserted the name of Athanasius in his original work ; but on second thoughts, to have substituted that of Ambrose, when he published Lady Bacon's translation
not unto a General Council, where he saw no good could be done, by reason of the emperor's might and great labour ; but only to his own clergy and people, that is to say, to a Provincial Synod. And thus it was decreed in the Council at Nice, that the bishops should assemble twice every year. And in the Council at Carthage it was decreed that the bishops should meet together in each of their provinces at least once in the year: which was done, as saith the Council of Chalcedon, of purpose that if any errors or abuses had happened to spring up anywhere, they might immediately at the first entry be destroyed, even where they first began. So likewise when Secundus and Palladius rejected the Council of Aquileia, because it was not a General and Common Council, St. Ambrose, bishop of Milan, made answer, that no man ought to take it for a new or strange matter that the bishops of the West part of the world did call together Synods, and make private assemblies in their provinces, for that it was a thing before that time not seldom used by the bishops of the West Church, and by the bishops of Greece used oftentimes, and commonly to be done. And so Charles the Great, being emperor, held a Provincial Council in Germany,
together with the Defence. Yet in either case the mention of Constantine would have been an error ; since even Auxentius the Elder was not brought into notice until his appointment to the bishopric of Milan by Constantius, the successor of Constantine.
The story to which JEWELL means to allude, rightly told, is as follows.-In the year 386, the emperor Valentinian the younger promulgated an edict in confirmation of the Arian Council of Rimini ; and at the same time resolved to give the Arians possession of a church in Milan, an object at which they had long been aiming, under the sanction of Justina, the mother of the emperor, and even of Valentinian himself, but had hitherto been defeated by the exertions of Ambrose, then bishop of the city. To accomplish this measure, the banishment of Ambrose was determined ; but the populace resisted the execution of the sentence, and defended their bishop, in the cathedral, several days. During this time, the proposition was made, that he should go to the palace, and hold a disputation with Auxentius (the younger) an Arian bishop; which he refused, on the ground that in such case the decision would be left to laymen and Pagans. He did not wholly refuse to submit the matter to a Council: but demurred, on the ground that the occasion was not of sufficient importance to warrant the summons of such a body; and that the points in dispute between the Arians and orthodox had already been decided.]