Chapter 5.—8. "Further," Cyprian goes on to say, "in vain do some, who are overcome by reason, oppose to us custom, as though custom were superior to truth, or that were not to be followed in spiritual things which has been revealed by the Holy Spirit, as the better way."1358
| 1358 Cypr. Ep. lxxiii. 13.
|
This is clearly true, since reason and
truth are to be preferred to
custom. But when
truth supports
custom, nothing should be more strongly maintained. Then he proceeds as follows: "For one may pardon a man who merely errs, as the
Apostle Paul says of himself, ‘Who was before a blasphemer, a persecutor, and injurious; but I obtained
mercy, because I did it ignorantly;’
1359
but he who, after
inspiration and revelation given, perseveres advisedly and knowingly in his former error,
sins without
hope of pardon on the ground of ignorance. For he rests on a
kind of presumption and obstinacy, when he is overcome by reason." This is most true, that his
sin is much more grievous who has
sinned wittingly than his who has
sinned through ignorance. And so in the case of the holy Cyprian, who was not only
learned, but also
patient of
instruction,
which he so fully himself understood to be a part of the
praise of the
bishop whom the
apostle describes,
1360
that he said, "This also should be approved in a
bishop, that he not only
teach with
knowledge, but also
learn with
patience."
1361
| 1361 Cypr. Ep. lxxiv. 10.
|
I do not doubt that if he had had the opportunity of discussing this
question, which has been so long and so much disputed in the
Church, with the pious and
learned men to whom we owe it that subsequently that ancient
custom was confirmed by the
authority of a plenary
Council, he would have shown, without hesitation, not only how
learned he was in those things which he had grasped with all the
security of
truth, but also how ready he was to receive
instruction in what he
had
failed to perceive. And yet, since it is so clear that it is much more grievous to
sin wittingly than in ignorance, I should be
glad if any one would tell me which is the worse,—the man who falls into
heresy, not knowing how great a
sin it is, or the man who refuses to abandon his
covetousness, knowing its enormity? I might even put the
question thus: If one man unwittingly fall into
heresy, and another knowingly refuse to depart from
idolatry, since the
apostle himself says, "The
covetous man, which is an
idolater;" and Cyprian too understood the same passage in just the same way, when he says, in his letter to Antonianus, "Nor let the new
heretics flatter themselves in this, that they say they do not communicate with
idolaters, whereas there are amongst them both
adulterers and covetous persons, who are held
guilty of the
sin of
idolatry; ‘for know this, and understand, that no whoremonger, nor
unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an
idolater, hath any inheritance
in the
kingdom of
Christ and of
God;’
1362
and again, ‘
Mortify therefore your members which are upon the
earth;
fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection,
evil concupiscence, and
covetousness, which is
idolatry.’"
1363
I ask, therefore, which
sins more deeply,—he who ignorantly has fallen into
heresy, or he who wittingly has refused to abandon
covetousness, that is
idolatry? According to that rule by which the
sins of those who
sin wittingly are placed before those of the ignorant, the man who is covetous with
knowledge takes the first place in
sin. But as it is possible that the greatness of the actual
sin should produce the same effect in the case of
heresy that the witting
commission of the
sin produces in that of
covetousness, let us suppose the ignorant heretic to be on a par in guilt with the consciously covetous man, although the evidence which Cyprian himself has advanced from the
apostle does not seem to
prove this. For what is it that we abominate in
heretics except their blasphemies? But when he wished to show that ignorance of the
sin may conduce to ease in obtaining pardon, he advanced a
proof from the case of the
apostle,
when he says, "Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious; but I obtained
mercy, because I did it ignorantly."
1364
But if possible, as I said before, let the
sins of the two men—the blasphemy of the unconscious, and the
idolatry of the conscious
sinner—be esteemed of equal weight; and let them be judged by the same sentence,—he who, in seeking for
Christ, falls into a
truth-like setting forth of what is false, and he who wittingly resists
Christ speaking through His
apostle, "seeing that no whoremonger, nor
unclean person, nor covetous man, which is an
idolater, hath any inheritance
in the
kingdom of
Christ and of
God,"
1365
—and then I would ask why baptism and the words of the gospel are held as naught in the former case, and accounted valid in the latter, when each is alike found to be estranged from the members of the dove. Is it because the former is an open combatant outside, that he should not be admitted, the latter a cunning assenter within the fold, that he may not be expelled?
E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
