A Summary of What Has Been Said

This being so, it is now time for us to sum up, at the close of this second Commonitory, what was said in it and in the one before.

We said above that it has always been the custom of catholics, and still is, to prove the true faith in these two ways: first by the authority of the divine canon, and next by the tradition of the catholic church. Not that the canon is not sufficient on its own for every question. But since most people interpret the divine words according to their own views and so take up various mistaken opinions, it is necessary that the interpretation of divine Scripture be governed by the one standard of the church’s belief, especially on those articles on which the foundations of all catholic doctrine rest. We said likewise that in the church itself regard must be had to the agreed voice of universality just as much as to that of antiquity, so that we are neither torn from the wholeness of unity and carried off into schism, nor thrown down from the religion of antiquity into heretical novelties. We said further that within this same church antiquity, those who want to keep clear of heresy must keep two points very carefully and earnestly in view. First, they should find out whether any decision has been given in ancient times on the matter in question by the whole priesthood of the catholic church, with the authority of a general council. Second, if some new question arises on which no such decision has been given, they should then turn to the opinions of the holy fathers, at least of those who, each in his own time and place, remained in the unity of communion and of the faith and were accepted as approved teachers. Whatever these are found to have held with one mind and with one consent ought to be counted the true and catholic doctrine of the church, without any doubt or scruple.

So that we should not seem to put this forward presumptuously on our own say-so rather than on the authority of the church, we appealed to the example of the holy council held some three years ago at Ephesus in Asia, in the consulship of Bassus and Antiochus. There the question was raised of settling the rules of faith with authority. And so that no profane novelty might creep in, as the perversion of the truth did at Ariminum, the whole body of priests gathered there, nearly two hundred of them, approved this as the most catholic, the most trustworthy, and the best course: to bring out into their midst the views of the holy fathers. Some of these, it was well known, had been martyrs, some confessors, but all had been, and remained to the end, catholic priests. This was done so that by their agreed judgment the reverence due to ancient truth might be duly and solemnly confirmed, and the blasphemy of profane novelty condemned. When this had been done, that impious Nestorius was lawfully and deservedly judged to be opposed to catholic antiquity, and blessed Cyril, on the contrary, to be in agreement with it. And so that nothing might be lacking to the credibility of the matter, we recorded the names and the number of the fathers (though we had forgotten their order) by whose agreed and unanimous judgment both the sacred preliminaries of the trial were set out and the rule of divine truth established. To strengthen our memory, it will not be wasted labor to name them again here as well. [a]