tories. In my first, I stated that this always had been, and was at this day, the custom of Catholics, viz., to prove the true faith in these two ways; "first, by the authority of the Divine canon; and secondly, by the tradition of the Catholic Church." And this not because the canon alone is not amply sufficient for everything, but because some interpret the Divine words according to their own pleasure, and so conceive different opinions and errors; and therefore, it is necessary that the understanding of the heavenly Scripture be directed according to the one rule of the Church's interpretation; i. e., in those questions chiefly on which the foundations of all Catholic doctrine depend. I also said, that in the Church we are bound to regard the consent both of universality and antiquity, lest we be either drawn aside from the integrity of unity, and led into schism, or be hurried headlong from ancient religion into novel heresies. I further stated, that in the antiquity of the Church there were two particulars, which especially and carefully men must consider, and unto which they must firmly cleave, if they would not become heretics. First, if any ancient decree had been passed on the authority of an Ecumenical Council, by all the priests of the Catholic Church, this we should receive; secondly, if any new question arise, upon which nothing of the kind can be found, we should then have recourse to the opinions of holy Fathers, i. e., of those who, living in their own several times and places, and yet remaining in the unity of communion and faith, became trustworthy masters: and whatever they shall be found to have held unanimously in one and the same sense, that should be without any doubt regarded by the Church as true and Catholic.

But for fear that I should be regarded as expressing my own sentiments, rather than speaking with the authority of the Church, I quoted the example of a holy Council, which some three years ago was held at Ephesus, in Asia, during the consulship of those most illustrious men, Bassus and Antiochus. And when there arose a discussion as to defining the rule of faith, lest haply any ungodly novelty should creep in there like the treachery at Ariminum, all the priests who had met together, in number about two hundred, resolved that it would be the most Catholic, faithful, and best mode of proceeding, that the opinions of the holy Fathers should be openly cited, some of whom were known to have been martyrs, others confessors, but all Catholic priests, and to have remained in the Church; to the intent that "the ancient doctrines of religion might be duly and rightly confirmed according to their consent and decree, and the blasphemies of wicked novelty be condemned by the same." And when this had been thus done, rightly and deservedly was that wicked Nestorius regarded as an enemy to Catholic antiquity, but blessed Cyril was declared to agree with holy antiquity. And that nothing might be wanting

to ensure confidence in these transactions, I gave the number and names (although I had forgotten the order) of those fathers, according to whose harmonious and unanimous judgment the words of the Divine law were explained, and the rule of Divine doctrine firmly settled. To recount these here also for the purpose of strengthening the memory, is by no means a work of supererogation.

CHAPTER XXX.

These, then, are they whose writings were produced in that Council, either as judges or witnesses, viz., S. Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, a most illustrious doctor, and blessed martyr; S. Athanasius, a Priest of the same city, a most faithful Master and eminent Confessor; S. Theophilus, who was also Bishop of the same city, a man most illustrious for his faith, life, and knowledge, whom the venerable Cyril succeeded, who now adorns the Church of Alexandria. And lest haply this should be regarded as the doctrine of one state and province, those lights of Cappadocia were also brought forward-S. Gregory of Nazianzum, Bishop and Confessor; S. Basil, Bishop and Confessor of Cæsarea; as also the other S. Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa, most worthy in every respect, both for his fidelity, conversation, integrity, and wisdom, of his brother Basil. But that it might be proved that not only Greece, or the East, but also the Western and Latin Church, had always held that opinion, some letters of S. Felix, martyr, and S. Julius, Bishop of the see of Rome, to certain persons, were also read in that Council. And that not only the head of the world, but also the sides, might give their testimony to that judgment, from the South was adduced blessed Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, and Martyr; from the North, S. Ambrose, Bishop of Milan. All these Fathers, then, (the same number as the sacred number of the Decalogue,) were brought forward at the Council of Ephesus, as masters, counsellors, witnesses, and judges, and holding their doctrine, following their advice, believing their testimony, obeying their judgment, that blessed synod, without wearisomeness, presumption, or favour, gave its decision on the rule of faith. Although a far greater number of the Fathers could have been quoted, it was unnecessary; because it was not fitting that the time of business should be taken up by a number of witnesses; and every one was convinced that these ten held precisely the same opinions as the rest of their colleagues.

CHAPTER XXXI.

In addition to all this, I gave the opinion of the blessed Cyril, which is contained in the very transactions of the Council. For when the letter of holy Capreolus, Bishop of Carthage, had been

read, who was anxious for, and entreated nothing else, but that novelty might be condemned, and antiquity defended, then Bishop Cyril spake and determined as follows. And it seems to the

point to give his decision here also; for he says at the end of the transactions," And this letter of the venerable and truly pious Capreolus, Bishop of Carthage, which has been read, should be inserted in the transactions, whose opinion is clear; for he desires that the ancient doctrines of the faith be confirmed, but that novelties, and things superfluous, which had been invented and wickedly taught, should be rejected and condemned.” ” All the Bishops unanimously exclaimed, "These are the words of all— we all say this-this we all desire." What, I say, were the words and wishes of all, but that what had been handed down from antiquity should be held-what had been lately invented should be rejected? Afterwards I praised and admired the great humility and holiness of that Council, seeing that so many Priests, and the greater part Metropolitans, of so great scholarship and learning, that almost all had the ability to argue concerning doctrines, (whom the very fact of their having assembled for that purpose might have encouraged to have ventured and determined something of themselves), made no innovations, presumed nothing, claimed nothing at all for themselves, but were beyond measure desirous to deliver nothing to posterity but what they had received from the Fathers. And so they not only disposed well of the business for the present, but also left a precedent for those that came after, that they, too, should preserve the doctrines of holy antiquity, but condemn the inventions of wicked novelty.

I inveighed also against the accursed presumption of Nestorius, in that he vaunted that he was the first and the only one who understood the sacred Scriptures, and that all they were ignorant, whoever before him, having the office of teachers, had expounded the Divine sayings, i.e., all Priests, Confessors, and Martyrs, some of whom had explained the law of GOD; but others had agreed with or believed their explanations; in a word, because he affirmed. that the whole Church was also now, and always had been in error, and had, as he thought, both followed, and would follow, ignorant and erroneous teachers.

CHAPTER XXXII.

Although all this might be amply and abundantly sufficient to overthrow and put an end to all wicked novelties, I will, however, that nothing may be wanting to so great fulness of evidence, finally add a twofold example from the Apostolic see; one, i. e., of S. Sixtus, the venerable Pope who now adorns the Roman Church; the other of his predecessor of blessed memory, Pope Celestine, which I have deemed it necessary to insert in this place also.

Holy Pope Sixtus then saith, in the letter which he sent to the Bishop of Antioch, touching the cause of Nestorius-Therefore, says he, as the Apostle says, the faith is one which has evidently obtained; let us believe what is to be said, and let us believe what is to be held. What, I pray, are the things to be believed and said? He goes on and says, "Let nothing more be granted to novelty, because no addition should be made to antiquity; let not the clear faith and belief of the ancients be polluted by an intermixture of mire." Truly spoken as an Apostle, to the intent that he might adorn the faith of the ancients with the light of perspicuity, but describe novel profanities by the intermixture of mire. Moreover, holy Pope Celestine, in like manner, speaks in the same mind; for he says in his epistle which he sent to the Priests of the Gauls, when he accused them of unwatchfulness, in that they had silently deserted the ancient faith, and allowed profane novelties to spring up: "Rightly," says he, "does blame attach to us if we cherish error in silence. Let men of this sort be reproved, and not allowed an unbridled expression of opinion according to their pleasure." Here, peradventure, some may doubt what kind of men they were whom he thus forbade to utter freely their opinions as they listed, whether they were preachers of antiquity, or inventors of novelty. Let himself answer, and quiet the doubts of the reader. For this sentence follows: If, says he, such is the state of the case, i. e., if it be, as some allege against your cities and provinces, that with baneful dissimulation ye allow them to assent to certain novelties; let, says he, if this be the case, novelty cease to attack antiquity. This, therefore, was the blessed opinion of blessed Celestine; not that antiquity should cease to overthrow novelty, but rather that novelty should cease to attack antiquity.

CHAPTER XXXIII.

Whosoever, therefore, denies these Apostolic and Catholic decrees, must of necessity, first of all, insult the memory of S. Celestine, who decreed that novelty should cease to attack antiquity; then he must scorn the definitions of S. Sixtus, who thought "that no further concession should be made to novelty, because nothing should be added to antiquity." Moreover, he must set at nought the decision of blessed Cyril, who praised with great approbation the zeal of venerable Capreolus, because he desired that the doctrines of the ancient faith should be confirmed, but novel inventions condemned. Further, he must trample under foot the Council of Ephesus, i. e., the judgment of the holy Bishops of almost the whole of the East, who, under Divine guidance, determined that nothing should be believed by posterity, but what the holy antiquity, agreeing with itself in

CHRIST, of holy Fathers had held; and who even with acclamation unanimously declared, that all wished this, and were of opinion that, as wellnigh all heretics before Nestorius, despising antiquity, and setting up novelty, had been condemned, so also Nestorius himself, the advocate of novelty, and impugner of antiquity, should be condemned. And if this holy consent, and one too proceeding from Divine inspiration, displease any, what follows but that he should affirm that the wickedness of Nestorius was unlawfully condemned? Lastly, he must also despise as dross the whole Church of CHRIST, and her Masters, Apostles, and Prophets, and above all, the blessed Apostle Paul. The former because she has never ceased religiously to hold and defend the faith once for all intrusted to her; but the latter, because he has written, "O Timothy, keep the depositum, avoiding profane novelties of words." And again, "If any one preach unto you anything besides what ye have received, let him be accursed." But if we are to violate neither the decrees of the Apostles nor the Church, by which according to the holy consent of antiquity and universality, all heretics always, and last of all, Pelagius, Celestius, Nestorius, have been rightly and deservedly condemned, it must surely be hereafter binding upon all Catholics, who desire to prove themselves true sons of their mother, to cleave to, adhere unto, and die in, the sacred faith of the holy Fathers, but to detest, shrink from, inveigh against, and oppose the profane novelties of wicked men. This is the substance of what I have written more fully in these two Commonitories, and which now have been somewhat condensed, as was fitting in a recapitulation; so that my memory, for the purpose of assisting which I have prepared them, may not only be refreshed by continual perusal, but also may not be wearied by prolixity.

HOW TO SAY THE LORD'S PRAYER.

СНАР. І.

Ir is most likely that in the course of your life you have repeated the LORD's Prayer many thousand times. You certainly ought to have done so: for it shows little love to Him Who taught us this prayer, if we get up in the morning, or go to bed at night, without saying it; and we ought also to repeat it at least once in the middle of the day. Then again, when you go to church, you never hear it less than twice, and sometimes three or four times.

Now you well know that no form of prayer, however holy in itself, can be of use to you, if you repeat it without, in some