In conclusion, the word of God speaks only of two states after death; the one of happiness, the other of misery; both of which are alike interminable. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned." 1 "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life; and he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." 2 Surely any further quotations must be unnecessary to convince every man who believes his Bible, that the cunningly-devised fable of purgatorial durance is utterly at variance with the whole tenor of the sacred writings. Well, therefore, may we appreciate and admire the wisdom of the framers of the twenty-second Article of our Church, which declares that "The Romish doctrine concerning Purgatory, is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the word of God." 1 Mark xvi. 16. 2 John iii. 36. CHAPTER IV. PATRISTICAL AUTHORITIES EXAMINED. We have sent and certified the king, that search may be made in the book of the records of thy FATHERS.-EZRA IV. 14, 15. We now proceed to examine the authorities which Antiquity is said to furnish in support of the doctrine of Purgatory, as exhibited in the writings of those holy men, who lived after the times of our Lord and his Apostles, and within the first five centuries of the Christian era. These writers have, by general consent, been styled the Fathers of the Church. Their works abound in scriptural exposition and paraphrase, as well as in arguments in defence of our common Christianity; and many of them sealed their testimony with their blood. An appeal to such authority must necessarily be of vast importance. As the stream flows more clear and transparent in the vicinity of its source, so the light of Christianity is more pure and unclouded in the early dawn of " the day-spring from on high." The errors were but few and trifling which had crept into the Church previous to the Council of Nice, A.D. 325; and the Fathers, who flourished closely upon the times of the Apostles, were doubtless so well acquainted with the manners and customs to which the Scriptures allude, with the proverbial expressions of the Jewish people, with the structure and phraseology of the oriental dialects, with the forms of Church-government, and with the rites and ceremonies which prevailed in those early days, that their unanimous consent in the statement of any fact may be received as decisive of its authenticity, and their unvarying agreement in the interpretation of any passage of Scripture, as declaring its true sense and import. But notwithstanding the just meed of praise which we are ready to award to these primitive Christians, to their piety, their zeal, their purity, their singleness of heart, their constancy even unto death: yet we must not forget that they were men, subject to the same infirmities of mind and judgment with ourselves, who often differed widely from each other in their opinions upon particular subjects, and that not unfrequently upon matters of some importance. But error in opinion ought not to invalidate their testimony as to matters of fact: and, indeed, this occasional difference should rather raise our estimate of the value of their unanimous concurrence upon any point of doctrine or discipline, inasmuch as it proves that they wrote not by design, or in combination, but for the sake of truth. Yet, valuable as the Fathers unquestionably are, according to the view now taken of them, and lauded as their writings have been by Romanists, with the most extravagant eulogies,' they were not infallible, they were not inspired. With respect, indeed, to the critical acumen of each individual, who would venture to compare Polycarp with Patrick, Justin with Jackson, Tertullian with Taylor, Hilary with Horsley, Ambrose with Usher, Jerome with Jewell, Augustine with Waterland, Vicentius with Van Mildert? At all events, it is clear, from their own writings, that they regarded Scripture alone as the grand rule for the regulation of life, for the decision of doctrine, for our guidance to heaven. In proof of this position, it may be proper to adduce a few authorities. 66 Reason," says Justin Martyr, "suggests to those, who are truly pious and lovers of wisdom, to honor and love the truth alone, regardless of the opinion of the ancients, should they be erroneous."2 "We are instructed in the knowledge of the truth," observes Clement of Alexandria, "by the word of the Lord. For we abide not by the opinions of men, against whom a contrary opinion may be alleged with equal authority; but, since it 1 See " The Nullity of the Romish Faith," by Matthew Poole : pp. 33, 34, Oxford, 1667. 2 See Note A, p. 153. is not enough to assert, without supporting the assertion by proof, we appeal from human testimony to the sanction of God's word, which is the most excellent, or rather the only standard of all doctrine."1 According to Origen, "It is necessary to produce the testimony of the Scriptures, without which our assertions and expositions are not to be relied upon."" "It is required," says St. Basil, "of those who are instructed in the Scriptures, to prove the doctrines of their teachers; and, receiving those things which are agreeable to Holy Writ, to reject what is contrary thereto." " St. Ambrose addresses the Emperor Gratian in these terms:-"I would not that you should trust to our arguments or disputation; let us appeal to the Scriptures; let us appeal to the Prophets, to the Apostles, and to Christ."4 St. Augustine says, with reference to one of the Fathers who preceded him, "I am not bound by the authority of St. Cyprian, for I do not hold his epistles as canonical; but I examine them by those which are canonical, and whatsoever agrees with the authority of holy writ, that I willingly receive ; but whatsoever is contrary to the same, that with his pardon I reject." See Note B, p. 153. See Note C, p. 153. See Note E, p. 153. See Note F. p. 154. |