neither proved from the Holy Scriptures, nor is it according to the received opinion of the world'."

I conclude with referring to Theodoret's mode of conducting the same or a similar controversy. In each of the three argumentative Dialogues, of which his Eranistes is composed, we find the following significant arrangement, in accordance with Vincentius's direction already commented on;—the arguments from Scripture come first, and then passages from the Fathers in illustration. Moreover in his first Dialogue, he introduces his authorities from the Fathers in the following way. Eranistes, the heterodox disputant, after hearing his proofs from Scripture, says; "You have expounded this text well; but I would fain learn how the ancient Doctors of the Church understood it." Orthodox replies; "You ought to have been satisfied with these proofs from Apostles and Prophets. However, since you desire besides the expositions of the Holy Fathers, I will give you this aid also, with God's blessing." As if he said, it is not now the place for bringing mere authority; I am proving the doctrine. Authority is well in its place, viz., before the controversy; but now our business is with Scripture.

Again, in his second Dialogue: "We will endeavour to persuade Arius to confess the one substance

1 Ibid. ii. 8. Vide also passages in 9. 13, 14. 17, 18, and 19.

of the Holy Trinity, and we will bring the proofs of this from Holy Scripture."

And again; "How can a man dispute with those who deny our Lord has taken flesh, or human soul, or mind, except by adducing his proofs from divine Scripture? how refute those who with mad zeal disparage the Divinity of the Only-begotten, except by showing that Divine Scripture has spoken some things with reference to His Divine, other things with reference to His human Nature 1?"

1

Out of the third Dialogue I select the following. After Orthodox has stated the Catholic doctrine of the Passion and Resurrection, Eranistes answers; "The doctrines of the Church should be set forth, not in declaration merely, but by proof. Show me, then, that Holy Scripture teaches this." Upon which Orthodox proceeds to cite the Epistle to the Romans.

Again: "Eranistes.-St. Peter says, 'Christ having suffered for us in the flesh.' Orthodox.-Surely this is quite agreeable to our doctrine; for we have learned our Canon of doctrines from Holy Scripture."

"To add any

One more passage shall be cited. thing to the words of Scripture is madness and audacity; but to open the text, and to develope its hidden sense, is holy and religious." Here is the

1 Pp. 43. 78. 113. Vide also pp. 79 and 97.

doctrine of the Gallic Vincentius in the mouth of a Syrian Bishop'.

Nothing, I think, is plainer from these extracts, than that the authors of them looked upon Scripture as the public standard of proof, the tribunal of appeal, in controversy, however conclusive the argument from Catholic Tradition might be for private conviction. Now how strikingly coincident with this view are the words of our Articles! "Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation, so that" (i. e. in such sense that) "whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man." The Article is altogether of a polemical character.

1 Pp. 199. 213. 224.

LECTURE XIV.

ON THE FORTUNES OF THE CHURCH.

AND now, that our discussions on what may fitly be called the Prophetical Office of the Church draw to a close, the thought, with which we entered on the subject is apt to recur, when the excitement of the inquiry has subsided, and weariness has succeeded, that what has been said is but a dream, the wanton exercise, rather than the practical conclusions of the intellect. Such is the feeling of minds unversed in the disappointments of the world, incredulous how much it has of promise, how little of substance; what intricacy and confusion beset the most certain truths; how much must be taken on trust, in order to be possessed; how little can be realized except by an effort of the will; how great a part of enjoyment lies in resignation. Without some portion of that Divine Philosophy which bids us consider "the kingdom of God" to be "within us," and which, by prayer and meditation, by acting on

LECT. XIV.] ON THE FORTUNES OF THE CHURCH. 401

what is told us, and by anticipating sight, develops outwardly its own views and principles, and thus assimilates to itself all that is around us, not only the Church in this age and country, but the Church Catholic any where, or at any time, Primitive, Roman, or Reformed, is but a name, used indeed as the incentive to actions, but without local habitation, or visible tokens, "here or there," "in the secret chambers," or "in the desert." After all, the Church is ever invisible in its day, and faith only apprehends it'.

Under this feeling I proceed, lastly, to consider more attentively this main difficulty in the AngloCatholic system; and in so doing shall have opportunity to justify, by examples, the doctrine which has just been suggested, by way of reconciling the mind to it.

The most plausible objection, then, urged by the Romanists against the English Church, is, that we are what they call a Parliamentary Church, a State Creation or Establishment, depending on the breath of princes or of populace, and directed towards mere political ends, such as the temporal wellbeing of the community, or the stability of the Constitution; whereas the True Church is built upon the One Faith, transmitted through successive generations, and simply maintains what it has so received, leaving temporal benefits to come and go,

Vid. Hab. iii. 17, 18.

D d