been proved to demonstration by the writings of our opponents themselves.

SECT. III. - WHETHER SCRIPTURE IS THE SOLE AND COMPLETE RULE OF FAITH AND JUDGE OF CONTROVERSIES.

In considering the testimony of the Fathers upon this subject, we need not fear to begin with some of the earliest; though it is obvious that their language respecting it cannot be expected to be identical with that which they themselves would have used at the present day. The immediate disciples of the Apostles, for instance, may be expected to speak of the oral teaching of the Apostles, which to them was as authoritative, as much the word of God, as the Scriptures. But consequently any notices from them, tending to confirm the view which we here advocate, are proportionably forcible.

Let us observe, then, the following passage of

IGNATIUS. (fl. a. 101.)

In his Epistle to the Philadelphians, written at the commencement of the second century, he says,—

"I exhort you that you do nothing out of strife, but according to the instruction of Christ; because I have heard of some who say, Unless I find it written in the originals, I will not believe it to be written in the gospel. And when I said, It is written, they answered what lay before them in their corrupted copies." (§ 8. Wake's transl.)1

1 Παρακαλω δε ὑμας μηδεν κατ' ερίθειαν πρασσειν, αλλα κατα Χριστομάθίαν. επει ήκουσα τίνων λεγόντων, ότι εαν μη εν αρχαιοις εύρω, εν τω ευαγγελιω ου πιστευω. Και λέγοντος μου αυτοις, ότι γεγραπται, απεκρίθησαν μοι, ότι προκειται. Εμοι δε αρχεια εστιν Ιησους Χριστος, τα άθηκτα (αθικτα) αρχεια ὁ σταυρος αυτού και δ θανατος, κ. τ. λ. IGNAT. Epist. ad Philadelph. § 8. Ed. Cotel. 1724. tom. ii. p. 32. The evident correspondence of the word apxalois to the word apxela, occurring twice in the latter part of this passage, has caused Vossius, Cotelerius, Smith, and others to suppose that apxelous is the true reading; and this is the reading in the interpolated copy of these Epistles. The word apxalois however may have the same meaning, for we are told in the lexicon of Suidas that the word is written both ways,-Apxeiα. . ...ทุ

Even at this early period, then, and in the presence of those who were the immediate disciples of the Apostles, the question as to any disputed point was, Is it written? For the animadversion upon those here alluded to, is not on the ground of their reference to Scripture, but of their cavilling at well-authenticated copies, and refusing to yield to anything but the Apostolical autograph. From Ignatius, let us pass on to

POLYCARP. (fl. a. 108.)

In his Epistle to the Philippians, written in the year 116 or 117, we meet with the following passages; "These things, my brethren, I took not the liberty of myself to write unto you concerning righteousness, but you yourselves before encouraged me to it; for neither can I, nor any other such as I am, come up to the wisdom of the blessed and renowned Paul, who being himself in person with those who then lived, did, with all exactness and soundness, teach the word of truth, and being gone from you, wrote an Epistle to you, into which if you look, you will be able to edify yourselves in the faith that has been delivered unto you, which is the mother of us all.” (§ 3. Wake's transl.)1

αρχαία, ὡς Ξενοφων Ιστοριων η. And Cotelerius says, " Αρχαιον pro αρχείον archivum legitur in Athenæo, Polluce, Suida et Josepho." There is as little reason, therefore, against translating both by the word archivum, as by the word antiquus; the evident correspondence of the words clearly showing an identity in their intended signification, and the sense of the sentence appears to me to forbid the latter. I confess, however, I do not feel satisfied with the above translation of τ πроKETα, nor with any which I have yet seen proposed. An account of the various modes of rendering this passage, is given in the late edition of the Patres Apostolici, by Mr. Jacobson. I should be inclined to translate the passage thus,-" And when I said, It is written, they answered me, It is set forth thus ;” (or, is in the copies before us thus;)—meaning that it was thus set forth in the common copies, but that it might not be so in the originals; and therefore that they would not allow the emphatic word yeypantai to be used respecting it, till they had seen it in the original.

1 Ταυτα, αδελφοι, ουκ εμαυτω επιτρέψας, γραφω ύμιν επι της δικαιοσυνης αλλ' επει ύμεις προεπεκαλέσασθε με. Ούτε γαρ εγω, ούτε άλλος όμοιος εμοι δύναται κατακολούθησαι τη σοφία του μακαριου και ενδοξου Παυλου· ὡς γενομενος εν ύμιν κατα πρόσωπον των τότε ανθρωπων, εδίδαξεν ακριβως και βεβαίως τον περι αληθειας λογον· ὁς και απων ύμιν εγραψεν επιστολας, εις &ς εαν εγκύπτητε, δυνηθη

Again; "Whosoever perverts the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts, and says that there shall neither be any resurrection nor judgment, he is the firstborn of Satan. Wherefore, leaving the vanity of many, and their false doctrines, let us return to the word that was delivered to us from the beginning; watching unto prayer [1 Pet. 4. 7,] and persevering in fasting; with supplication, beseeching the all-seeing God not to lead us into temptation [Matt. 6. 13]; as the Lord hath said, The Spirit truly is willing, but the flesh is weak. [Matt. 26. 41.]”1 (§ 7. Wake's transl.)

And again; "For I trust that ye are WELL EXERCISED IN THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, and that nothing is hid from you." (§ 12. Ib.)2

These passages are worth observing, as showing how, even at that early period, the Scriptures were referred to for an authoritative report of the teaching of the Apostles. JUSTIN MARTYR. (fl. a. 140.)

I proceed to Justin Martyr, of whom we may observe, first, that in his conference with Trypho the Jew, he makes it a rule to ground all his statements upon Scripture, and Scripture only;3 and exhorts Trypho to despise the tradition of his Jewish teachers, as under that name they palmed their own fancies upon the world. 4 As σεσθε οικοδομείσθαι εις την δοθεισαν ὑμῖν πιστιν, ἥτις εστι μητηρ παντων ὑμων. POLYCARP. Ep. ad Philipp. § 3. Ed. Cotel. 1724. vol. ii. p. 187.

1 Ος αν μεθοδεύη τα λογια του Κυριου προς τας ιδιας επιθυμίας, και λέγη μητε αναστασιν, μητε κρισιν είναι, οὗτος πρωτοτοκος εστι του Σατανά. Διο απολιποντες την ματαιότητα των πολλων, και τας ψευδοδιδασκαλίας, επι τον εξ αρχης ἡμῖν παραδοθέντα λογον επιστρεψωμεν, νήφοντες προς τας ευχας, και προσκαρτε ρουντες νηστείαις, δεήσεσιν αιτουμενοι τον παντεπόπτην Θεον, μη εισενεγκειν ήμας εἰς πειρασμόν, καθώς ειπεν ὁ Κύριος, το μεν πνευμα προθυμον, ἡ δε σαρξ ασθενης. lb. § 7. Ed. Cotel. 1724. vol. ii. pp. 188, 9,

2 Confido enim vos bene exercitatos esse in sacris litteris, et nihil vos latet. Ib. § 12. Ed. Cotel. 1724. vol. 2. p. 191.

Καγω, επειδη απο τε των γραφων και των πραγματων, τας τε αποδείξεις και τας ὁμιλιας ποιουμαι, έλεγον, μη ὑπερτιθεσθε, μηδε διστάζετε πιστευσαι τω απεριτμήτω εμοι. JUSTIN. MART. Dial. cum Tryph. § 28. Ed. Bened. Paris. 1742. p. 126. (Ed. Colon. 1686. p. 245.)

4 Έτι και παραδοξότερους δοκούντας αλλους λόγους ακουσετε μη ταρασσεσθε δε, αλλα μαλλον προθυμότεροι γενόμενοι ακροαται και εξετασται μενετε, καταφρο

these remarks, however, apply only to Jewish traditions, and not to those of the Christian Church, (though it is hard to see why one should be secure from error, though the others were not,) I shall not press them as evidence on our present subject.

Again, in a passage already quoted, he says,-alluding to a heterodox doctrine prevailing among some professed Christians at the time,-" With whom I do not agree, nor could agree, even though the great majority of those who are of my own religion should say so; since we are commanded by Christ himself to be ruled by not the doctrines of men, but those preached by the blessed prophets, and taught by him."

Further, as to the question of the fulness of the revelation made in the Scriptures, we may observe the following passages.-" Those," saith he, "who have left us a relation of all things that concern our Saviour Jesus Christ have thus taught us." Again; " Neither did God ask Adam where he was, as one who knew not, nor Cain where Abel was; but for the purpose of convincing each of them what he was, and that the knowledge of all things might be conveyed to us by their being committed to writing."

IRENEUS (fl. a. 167.)

We now come to an author who is very confidently appealed to, both by the Romanists and our opponents, as a supporter of their views, viz., Irenæus. The claim is made upon the authority of one or two passages, which need only to be compared with other parts of the work in which they occur, to show that they afford no support to the views, in defence of which they are adduced.

"By no others," says Irenæus, "have we come to the

νούντες της παραδόσεως των ὑμετέρων διδασκαλων επει ου τα δια του Θεου υπο του προφητικού Πνεύματος ελεγχονται νοειν δυναμενοι, αλλα τα ίδια μαλλον διdаσкELV πроаιроνμEVOL. ID. ib. § 38. p. 135. (Ed. Col. p. 256.)

1 Ως οἱ απομνημονεύσαντες παντα τα περι του Σωτηρος ἡμων Ιησου Χριστου edida av. ID. Apolog. Prim. § 33. p. 64. (Ed. Col. Apolog. Sec. p. 75.)

2 Ουδε τω Θεω εις ανοιαν ην το ερωταν τον Αδαμ, που εστιν, ουδε τον Καιν, που Αβελ, αλλ' εις το έκαστον ελεγξαι όποιος εστι, και εις ήμας την γνωσιν πανTwv dia to avaypapnyai exbei. ID. Dialog. cum Tryph. § 99. p. 195. (Ed. Col. p. 326.)

knowledge of the plan of our salvation, but those through whom the Gospel came to us, which they then preached, but afterwards, by the will of God, delivered to us in the Scriptures to be THE FOUNDATION AND PILLAR OF OUR FAITH;" a testimony which one might suppose would be sufficient of itself to settle the question. But it stands not alone.

After having spoken of the witness borne by Scripture to the truth of his doctrine respecting God, he says,"Having, therefore, the truth itself as our rule, and the testimony respecting God placed clearly before us, we ought not to cast away the firm and true knowledge of God," &c.2

And again;-"But we, following the one only true God as our teacher, and taking his words as our rule of truth, always teach the same all of us on the same points."3

And again; "Therefore the disciple of the Lord, wishing to proscribe all such things, and to constitute a rule of truth in the Church . . . . thus commenced the doctrine taught in his Gospel,- In the beginning was the Word, and the Word, &c.' 4"

And when, after having in his first and second books explained and shown the absurdity of the doctrines of the heretics whom he was opposing, he proceeds to prove their opposition to the doctrine of the Apostles, he professes only to be about to give that proof from their

1 Non enim per alios dispositionem salutis nostræ cognovimus, quam per eos per quos Evangelium pervenit ad nos: quod quidem tunc præconiaverunt, postea vero per Dei voluntatem in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt, fundamentum et columnam fidei nostræ futurum. IRENEI adv. Hær. lib. iii, c. 1. Ed. Grabe Oxon. 1702. fol. p. 198. (Ed. sec. Massuet. Ven. 1734. vol. i. p. 173.)

2 Habentes itaque regulam ipsam veritatem, et in aperto positum de Deo testimonium, non debemus per quæstionum declinantes in alias atque alias absolutiones ejicere firmam et veram de Deo scientiam. Ib. ii. 47. p. 173. (M. ii. 28. p. 156.)

3 Nos autem unum et solum verum Deum doctorem sequentes, et regulam veritatis habentes ejus sermones, de iisdem semper eadem dicimus omnes. Ib. iv. 69. p. 368. (M. iv. 35. p. 277.)

4 Omnia igitur talia circumscribere volens discipulus Domini et regulam veritatis constituere in Ecclesia. . . . sic inchoavit in ea quæ est secundum Evangelium doctrina. Ib. ii. 11. (M. ib. p. 188.)