Читать книгу On Temporal and Spiritual Authority - Robert Bellarmine - Страница 33

The third error is that of George Cassander in the book De officio pii viri, where he teaches that princes must find a ground for peace among Catholics, Lutherans, Calvinists, etc. But as long as they have not found it, they must allow each person to profess his own faith, provided that all accept Scripture and the Apostles’ Creed, for those are all members of the true Church, even though they dissent in particular doctrines.¹⁷³ Similar things were once taught by peacemakers, inspired by Emperor Zeno; see Evagrius, book 3, chapters 14 and 30.¹⁷⁴ Likewise also Apelles, who, according to Eusebius, book 5 of Historia, chapter 13, said that the reason for faith should not be discussed, but it was sufficient to believe in the crucifix. This is clearly an error, against which Jean Hessels, among Catholic teachers, and John Calvin, among the heretics, wrote.

This opinion can in fact easily be refuted. First, Catholics, Lutherans, and Calvinists cannot be reconciled in this manner, for we do not agree on the Creed itself. For example, regarding the article “He descended into hell,” we mean very different things, for we believe that Christ’s soul, separated from the body, in accordance with its substance, descended to the Limbo of the Fathers. Some heretics, however, think that “Christ descended into hell” means only that he was buried; others think he suffered the pains of hell. Likewise, we interpret the article “I believe in the holy Church,” and “the communion of saints” in different ways, for there are controversies also on the specific sacraments. Finally, on “the remission of sins” we disagree immensely.

Cassander says that it is sufficient that we all admit that the Creed is true and accept it.

Against this I say, first, that the Creed is indeed only one, but not in words, only in meaning and faith, and therefore we do not have the same Creed if we disagree on its interpretation. Moreover, if it were sufficient to accept the words of the Creed, almost none of the ancient heretics would have been rightfully condemned, for the Arians, the Novatians, the Nestorians, and almost all the others accepted the words of the Apostles’ Creed, but because the dissension was about the meaning, they were condemned and expelled from the Catholic Church.

Second, the foundational principle of Cassander is false, for the Lutherans and Calvinists could not be called true members of the Church even if they agreed with us on the Creed. In addition to that belief it is required that one subject oneself to the legitimate head of the Church, established by Christ, and take communion with the other members, for the Church is one visible body and therefore it has a visible head and visible members, and a member that is separate from the head and the rest of the body cannot be called a member. Certainly even if Aerius agreed with the Catholics on the meaning of the Creed, Epiphanius and Augustine nevertheless put him in their catalog of heretics because he did not want to submit to the bishop and to be in communion with the other members. And Cyprian in book 4, epistle 2 [52],¹⁷⁵ says that Novatian was outside of the Church because he did not want to submit himself to the Pontiff Cornelius, even if he did not introduce any other heresy.

Third, Cassander discusses these matters almost as if among Catholics, Lutherans, and Calvinists there were only dissensions regarding human rituals and ceremonies, but there are many doctrines of the greatest importance on which we disagree, and which are not expressly in the Creed, and because of which no peace can be hoped for between Catholics and Lutherans. For example, we say that the mass is the holiest form of worship of God, while they say it is a horrible idolatry; further, invocation of the saints is for us a pious act, for them an impious one, etc.

Fourth, the holy Fathers taught us to preserve untouched not only the Creed but also all the other doctrines of faith, and not to allow them to be changed in any way because of the heretics. In Galatians 2 Paul says that he did not, even for an hour, want to give pride of place to the false brethren.¹⁷⁶ Once the Arians asked the Catholics to omit just one word that is neither in Scripture nor in the Creed, or to change one letter, namely, not to say ὁμοούσιον but ὁμοιούσιον, and if they did that, the Arians would promise peace. But the Catholics refused and wrote to the emperor that it was impious to change anything already defined, and if anything were to be changed in the just sanctions, it should not be because of future peace, for there can be no peace with those who do not know the laws of peace. See Theodoretus, book 2 of Historia, chapters 18 and 19, or Historia tripartita, book 5, chapters 21 and 33.¹⁷⁷ It is clear from the Council of Rimini that this was true, for when the less prudent Catholics, deceived by the Arians, decreed that the name ὁμοούσιον had to be removed, the Arians immediately declared to the whole world that they had won. And not satisfied with having removed ὁμοούσιον and having substituted ὁμοιούσιον for it, they soon afterward transformed ὁμοιούσιον into ἐτεροούσιον, that is, “of different substance,” as Theodoretus reports in book 2 of his Historia, chapter 21.¹⁷⁸

Hence when Emperor Valens’s prefect asked Basil to submit to the circumstances and not to allow so many churches to be upset because of a small detail of doctrine, Basil replied: “Those who are nourished by divine words do not allow the corruption of even a syllable regarding divine doctrines, for if this should happen, they would rather suffer any kind of death for these doctrines.” See Theodoretus, book 4, chapter 17, of the Historia Ecclesiastica. Eustathius and Sylvanus were provided with the same constancy, for when the emperor threatened them with exile unless they abrogated the word ὁμοούσιον, they replied: “You have the authority to punish us, but nevertheless we do not destroy what was established by the Fathers” (see Historia tripartita, book 5, chapter 24).

Finally, in his epistle to Euphemianus, Gelasius spoke to the heretic, who asked the Pope to bend down [condescendere] to them, that is, to compromise on something regarding the Catholic religion for the sake of peace, and Gelasius elegantly mocked his petition: “While you say that we should bend down to you, you reveal that you meanwhile are lowering yourself further down, or that you have already done so. So I ask, what is this slippery slope [descensio]? Surely you see, you understand, you do not deny that you have been lowered from a superior place to an inferior one, that you have fallen from the Catholic and Apostolic communion to the heretical and condemned one, and you wish us, who remain in the superior place, to be persuaded to descend with you; you invite us from the highest to the lowest, but we ask you to ascend with us from the lowest to the highest.”

Fifth, one cannot be free to believe in one doctrine without, for the same reason, having a similar freedom in all doctrines, even those contained in the Apostles’ Creed, because there is one rule of faith that is undoubted and certain for everything in which one believes, that is, the word of God as explained through the Church. If, therefore, I trust that the Church is delivering the Apostles’ Creed to me, because I do not know what the apostles said from any other source than what the Church says, then I must for the same reason believe that I should invoke the saints, because the same Church says so; or, if I cannot believe this, then for the same reason I cannot believe that that Creed was indeed the Apostles’ Creed.

Sixth, Cassander’s opinion is a novelty, first devised by him, as he himself says at the beginning, and therefore it must be considered suspicious. For, as Vincent of Lérins teaches beautifully in his Commonitorium adversus profanas novitates, what is new cannot be without suspicion, since the true faith is one and is very ancient.

Seventh, this opinion makes the true Church completely hidden and invisible; indeed, it makes it composed of flatterers and feigners only, for Cassander says that two things are required by the true Church, faith in Christ and peace with men, and hence he deduces that those who persecute Catholics and Lutherans with hostility are not part of the Church, but only those are who are at peace with everybody. Therefore those who are part of the Church must be hidden and must simulate with the Catholics that they are enemies of the Lutherans, and with the Lutherans that they are enemies of the Catholics, for the Catholics do not allow in their group those who show any external sign of favor toward the Lutherans. And even if in the Lutheran provinces all sects are permitted, nevertheless no sect allows in its own group those who are friendly to the other sects, as is well known. So those pious and peaceful men are necessarily fake and feigning when they say one thing with their mouth and hide another thing in their heart, just like Herod, who was a pagan with the pagans, and a Jew with the Jews, for he built simultaneously temples for Caesar and the true God, as Josephus reports in Antiquitates, book 15, chapters 13 [10] and 14 [11].

Note furthermore that Cassander says that his associates are few and hidden. But hence it is clear that they cannot constitute the Church, as the Church is so manifest and visible that it is said by the Lord in Matthew 5 to be a city on a hill. Finally, the true Church cannot exist without pastors (Ephesians 4);¹⁷⁹ but those hidden men have no pastor, nor can they while they remain hidden, and therefore they have no Church.