Rational arguments: First, from the consensus of heretics in despising traditions.
Rational arguments: First, from the consensus of heretics in despising traditions.
§ 410. In c. 8 Bellarmine brings out four rational arguments in favor of establishing traditions. The first is taken from the consensus of heretics in despising traditions. “For just as we gather from the common consensus of the fathers who accepted traditions that they are to be accepted, so also we conclude from the common consensus of heretics who reject traditions that they are not to be rejected.” Here he offers as examples “the Valentinians, Marcionites, Cyprian, the Donatists, Arians, Aerians, Eunomians, Nestorius, Eutyches, Dioscorus, and Wyclif.”
We respond. (1) We have shown in our treatise On Holy Scripture [1610 Loci Theologici, locus 1], § 64, that heretics most especially had the custom of running to traditions for help, something that Irenaeus testifies regarding all heretics in general (bk. 3, c. 2).
(2) Those who have rejected traditions and have appealed to Scripture alone have so far and in this respect not been heretics. Instead, they became heretics to the extent that they corrupted the Scriptures and twisted them to establish their own errors.
(3) The Arians appealed to Scripture in such a way that they were unwilling to accept terms that are not extant in Scripture, though the thing itself is contained therein; but we readily admit that this is a preposterous zeal for “the letter.”
(4) The traditions that Irenaeus and Tertullian were urging against the Valentinians and Marcionites, which Augustine was urging against the Donatists, and the orthodox against the Arians, were not some extrascriptural dogmas. Rather, these were either the public testimony of the Church concerning the canonical books or the “transmission of teaching,” as Tertullian says, preserved in the Church from the apostles. The foundation of both of these, however, is found in Scripture, and both are in conformity with Scripture in every detail.
(5) Those statements in which Cyprian appeals to Scripture from a custom opposed to him were put into canon law itself, as can be seen in dist. 8. Therefore we cannot make this charge in the case of Cyprian.