Gain Access To The Commonitory Of St. Vincent Of Lerins (1846) Prepared By Vincent Of Lerins Accessible As Digital

infinitely important work in the history of Western theology, Vincent's treatise codifies the systematic understand of what designates authentic tradition, and how it is separate from the two extremes of traditionalism and novelty.
The definition of semper, ubique, et ab omnibus was influential in the works of great theologians such as Cardinal John Henry Newman and the influential Congar, and was even taken up by the canons of the First Vatican Council nearlyyears after this work's publication.
It's well worth the read in order to understand how doctrine develops, and how that differs from change especially in regards to modern controversies such as hermeneutics of continuity vs.
discontinuity. It's a relatively easy read, though I would recommend the Latin version for clarity's sake, This short but powerful work from the's AD lays out the case for "The Antiquity and Universality of the Catholic Faith Against the Profane Novelties of All Heresies".


Not only does it dismantle the tendency of heretics to proof text scripture in order to support their erroneous doctrines, but in so doing it convincingly dismantles many of the foundational presuppositions of the reformation regarding Sola Scriptura, as well as the rebellion against the authority of the church no matter how corrupt Catholicism had become by Luther's time

Every Christian who cares about Truth and obedience to Christ's authority should read this book.
It has cemented my view that the only Church with any real authority on Earth is in fact the Orthodox Church.
Written in, the Commonitorium serves as an explanation of why the church cannonized the Scriptures, Vincent details the original intended purpose, use and place of the Holy Scriptures in the theology of the Church and the life of an individual Christian.
The Bible was formally canonized less than a century before Vincent publishes his book at the regional Council of Laodiceaand published by St.
Athanasius, so this discussion on what Scripture Ontologically is and its relationship to tradition is incredibly valuable,

At this time, the church was still ironing out the wrinkles in the canonization across all of the regions of Christendom, a task hampered by the logistics of getting a vast religion literally on the same page.
Yet already, the Bible was being used in an inappropriate matter either as the sole/ exclusive source of theology or as merely another part of tradition.
Vincent details why the Bishops of the early Orthodox church chose to assemble the Bible dogmatically and what their intent for it was.
Its an ancient reminder of why the church created the Scriptures by a theologian who was there when the cannon was being assembled.


The Commonitorium is valuable for two reasons, Firstly, St. Vincent Lerins displays how aware the contemporaries of Augustine were in recognizing that Augustine was infusing his theology with pagan Manicheanism.
It was not only academic anachronistic analysis millennia later which recognized this slight shift the church understood it was happening and actively tried to correct Augustine.
Unfortunately, the Blessed Augustine, the first major theologian who only spoke Latin and never read the scriptures in the Greek, has done centuries of damage by infusing his theology with Platonism/ Manicheanism and was instrumental in the Great Schism which would happenyears later.


Second, this detailing of the purpose and use of Scripture is incredibly relevant even,years later, He defends the "sole" and "completely sufficient" nature of scripture while maintaining that the Apostolic interpretation is critical and necessary to correctly divide the Word of God.
He frames this discussion in the divergence between what he calls "Northern" Christianity and "Southern" Christianity, which we would call Western and Eastern today.
This discussion is vital to understanding the Great Schism, the Western Schism, and the Protestant Schisms,

It is critical to note that he defines “Sole” very differently than the political and reactionary Roman Catholic Reformers would use the term,years later.
He is using "sole" to mean “sufficient” as an embodiment of the theology of the living church, not a fundamentally separate source of authority.
He notes that why the church created the Bible in the first place was to assemble and centralize the teachings of the Apostles.
It is a function of Apostolic authority, not separate from it as Protestants would argue,years later, It was never intended to be interpreted by mechanisms outside of the life of the church which created it, We still have schismatics with a heterodox and overzealous view of the scriptures enabling them to smuggle in faulty exegesis and at the same time, a corresponding antipodal heterodoxy that believes the scriptures are not completely authoritative in the instructions of a Christian.
Especially Western Protestantism which is bifurcated between these views,

Florevsky writes this about the position Lerins is articulating:

"Tradition for St, Vincent is not an independent instance nor a complementary source of doctrine, It is no more than Scripture being interpreted according to the catholic mind of the church, which is the guardian of the apostolic "rule of faith.
" St. Vincent repeats and summarizes the continuous attitude of the ancient church on this matter, Scripture is an adequate source of doctrine: ad omnia satis superque sufficiat, Tradition is the authentic guide in interpretation, providing the context and perspective in which Scripture discloses its genuine message, "

St. Vincent of Lerins spends his time pivoting around the idea of Catholicity that is, how we can recognize the sound doctrine of the true church from the false or misguided doctrine of an illegitimate church.
He recognizes dogmatically the "sufficient authority of the scripture" yet raises the problem of authoritative interpretation, He mentions Donatism, Arianism, Pelagianism, Apollinarianism, Nestorianism and a wide range of other heresies as examples of how heresies "defend themselves by filching certain passages of Scripture, and expounding them fraudulently and deceitfully, forthwith, the opinions of the ancient in the interpretation of the Canon are to be collected and.
. . without any tergiversation be condemned, " He emphasizes that heresy cannot stand the light of the teachings of the Apostles, which give only one authoritative interpretation of the Holy Scriptures.
He provides an exposition ofTimothy and other OT/NT passages throughout his arguments,

He clearly condemns the idea of Scripture as being the exclusive or only source of authority, pointing out that it was the authority of the universal, apostolic church which allowed the dogmatic creation of a cannon in the first place.
This is an idea that is equally dangerous in the opposite direction as the idea that it holds no authority at all and opens the church to heresy of all sorts.
Fast forward,years and look at the,schisms ranging from Jehovahs Witnesses, Mormonism, the World Mission Society of Jesus Christ and hundreds of thousands of schismatic forms of Protestantism which all base their theology “exclusively” on the Bible, and its easy to see that he was correct in this fear.
He writes:

"But here some one perhaps will ask, since the canon of scripture is complete and sufficient of itself for everything, and more than sufficient, what need is there to join with it the authority of the Church's interpretation For this reason because owing to the depth of Holy Scripture, all do not accept it in one and the same sense, but one understands its words in one way, another in another so that it seems to be capable of as many interpretations as there are interpreters.
For Novatian expounds it one way, Sabellius another, Donatus another, Arius, Enomius, Macedonius, another, Photinus, Apploinarius, Priscillian, another, Novinian, Pelagius, Celestius, another, lastly, Nestorius another.
Therefore, it is very necessary, on account of so great intricacies of such various error, that the rule for the right understanding of the apostles should be framed in accordance with the standard Ecclesiastical and Catholic interpretations.
"

The critically interesting part of his dialogue is where he identifies where Western Christianity is starting to deviate from the teaching of the apostles.
He writes about the emerging differences between the "North and South" aka the Latinspeakers and everyone else in the East, He talks about the Council of Ephesus, it's universal reception in the "North" focusing on the condemnation of Nestorianism and the canonization of Athanasius, Cyril, Basil and others as Doctors or Confessors of the church.
The Commonitorium is a nearly prophetic masterpiece as it details the origins of the philosophic cracks in the foundation of the developing Western Latinspeaking Christian faith, foretelling the problems that would create both Catholicism at the Western Schism and subsequently Protestantism.


He mentions Ambrose fondly, but not Augustine, He seems to indirectly criticize Augustine when he mentioned the Manichees and how important it is to not let their heresies seep into the church, even though otherwise pious men.
He implies that Augustine's theology was largely new to the church and was in opposition to the teachings of the apostles.
Augustine's understanding of prevalent grace and other soteriological topics became the foundation of the Latin church and eventually, the invisible foundation of all Protestant branches via Anselm, from Lutheranism and Calvinism to the Quakers.


It is interesting how aware the contemporaries of Augustine were in recognizing that Augustine was infusing his theology particularly his Anthropology, Soteriology, and Paterology with pagan Manicheanism.
This isn't academic anachronistic analysis millennia later that recognized this the church understood it was happening and actively tried to correct Augustine.
Unfortunately, the Blessed Augustine, the first major theologian who only spoke Latin and never understood the scriptures in the ancient Greek, has done centuries of damage by infusing his western theology with Platonism/ Manicheanism and was instrumental in the Western Schism which would happenyears later, and the dozens ofst generation Protestant Reformationsyears after that, eventually leaving us with hundreds of thousands of denominations vice one.


Another interesting point is his discussion on Theologians who deviated slightly from Orthodoxy, but not enough to completely write them off.
While this will be review for anyone wellread on the ancient church, Vincent presents a robust analysis of the teachings of Origin first among the Greeks and Tertullian first among the Latins and clearly draws a line between their pious works and where their thinking when wrong.
Personally, I didn't understand how robust and wellrounded the opinions of Origen and Tertullian were so early in history, I know the modern church understands that Origen and Tertullian both became 'too smart for their own good' and while they were largely Orthodox, they did accidentally stray into heresy, at least temporarily.
But both are revered as great theologians despite their misgivings at certain points, St. Vincent spends a chapter each articulating a careful and balanced understanding of how to deal with them and others without condemning them completely or accepting their teachings without reservation.
I thought this position developed over long periods of time, but Vincent shows that the church had an evenkeeled view of Origen and Tertullian all the way back in theth century.


Contrary to what is sometimes claimed by western Christians, there is no evidence of semiPelagianism in the Commonitorium, Rather quite the opposite he largely focuses on condemning Pelagianism to the bone, He refers to Pelagius by a wide range of names such as that "ancient sink of everything vile" and his followers as "rabid dogs" to humorous effect.
He writes "Pelagius attributed so much antecedent power to freewill, as to deny the necessity of God's grace to aid it towards good in every single act" This statement alone, that God enables all good deeds completely absolves him of the charge of semiPelagianism or "works based salvation" as lowchurch protestants like to call it that was found among the theologians of Gaul at the time.
St. Vincent is articulating the apostolic position of walking the line between the heresy of Pelagius all the way to the opposite heresies of Predistinarianisbeginning to bloom in Augustine's works the influence of the Manichee amp Platonist Religions Augustine spent most of his life in.






A few notable quotes:

"But here someone perhaps will ask, since the canon of scripture is complete, and sufficient of itself for everything, and more than sufficient, what need is there to join with it the authority of the Church's interpretation For this reason because owing to the depth of Holy Scripture, all do not accept it in one and the same sense, but one understands its words in one way, another in another so that it seems to be capable of as many interpretations as there are interpreters.
For Novatian expounds it one way, Sabellius another, Donatus another, Arius, Enomius, Macedonius, another, Photinus, Apploinarius, Priscillian, another, Novinian, Pelagius, Celestius,

another, lastly, Nestorius another.
Therefore, it is very necessary, on account of so great intricacies of such various error, that the rule for the right understanding of the apostles should be framed in accordance with the standard Ecclesiastical and Catholic interpretations.
"

"the intelligence, then, the knowledge, the wisdom, as well of individuals as of all, as well of one man as of the whole church, ought, in the course of ages and centuries, to increase and make much and vigorous progress but yet only in its own kind that is to say, in the same doctrine, in the same sense, and in the same meaning.
"

"But the church of Christ, the careful and watchful guardian of the doctrines deposited in her charge, never changes anything in them, never diminishes, never adds, does not cut off what is necessary, does not add what is superfluous, does not lose her own, does not appropriate what is another's, but while dealing faithfully and judiciously with ancient doctrine, keeps this one object carefully in view if there be anything which antiquity has left shapeless and rudimentary, to fashion and polish it, if anything already reduced to shape and development, to consolidate and strengthen it.
"

This is a notable discussion on Vincent of Lerins by Ecumenist and Academic George Florevsky from his paper "Scripture and Tradition: an Orthodox view".
Dialog, Vol., No.Autumn, pp.:

"To conclude this brief excursus on the ancient tradition we should mention St, Vincent of Lerins and his famous Commonitorium, Sometimes it is asserted that Vincent admitted the double authority of Scripture and Tradition, Actually he held the opposite view, Indeed, the true faith could be recognized, according to Vincent, in a double manner, duplici modo, that is, by the authority of the divine law i.
e. Scripture and by ecclesiastical tradition, This does not imply, however, that there are two sources of Christian doctrine, The "rule" of Scripture was for St, Vincent "perfect and selfsufficient. " Why then was it imperative to invoke also the "authority of ecclesiastical understanding," ecclesiasticae intelligentiae auctoritas The reason is obvious: Scripture was variously interpreted and twisted by individual writers for their subjective purposes.
And to this confusing variety of discordant interpretations and private opinions, St, Vincent opposes the mind of the church catholic ut propheticae et apostolicae interpretationis linea secundum ecclesiastici et catholici sensus normam derigatur.
Thus tradition for St. Vincent is not an independent instance nor a complementary source of doctrine, It is no more than Scripture being interpreted according to the catholic mind of the church, which is the guardian of the apostolic "rule of faith.
" St. Vincent repeats and summarizes the continuous attitude of the ancient church on this matter, Scripture is an adequate source of doctrine: ad omnia satis superque sufficiat, Tradition is the authentic guide in interpretation, providing the context and perspective in which Scripture discloses its genuine message, ".