Apologies in advance for the length. This is as summary as I can make it and still share the relevant point.
I cobbled this together from various online sources after listening to an excellent podcast on sola scriptura wherein one of the podcasters referred to St. Vincent's book The Commonitorium. It got me curious so I did some quick research and thought I would share the results.
First, who was Vincent of Lerins? He was a French monk who lived in the early 400s. When Vincent was born is unknown. His death occurred sometime between A.D. 434 and 450. He belonged to a monastery on the Island of St. Honorat, one of the Lrins Islands off the southern coast of France.
One of the controversies of his time was the Pelagian controversy, which centered on questions of grace, free will, predestination and original sin. The two poles of this debate were the British monk Pelagius and the North African bishop St. Augustine of Hippo. Pelagius stressed free will, minimizing the role of grace and St. Augustine did the reverse.
Some of those who were not fully satisfied with the positions proposed by either Pelagius or Augustine advocated middle positions, some of which were later deemed heretical and referred to as "semi-Pelagianism." Keep in mind that Vincent wrote The Commonitorium three years after the Council of Ephesus declared that the Blessed Virgin Mary can be referred to as the Theotokos (Greek, "God-Bearer" or "Mother of God"). Between the Theotokos controversy and the Pelagian controversy, the topic of whether developments of doctrine were legitimate or heretical was a hot topic in the church.
Like many in France at this time, Vincent has been regarded as a semi-Pelagian, but it is unclear what his exact position was. Further, since semi-Pelagianism had not been condemned in his day, he was not blocked from later being regarded as a saint.
On to the book, in AD 434, three years after the Council of Ephesus and 17 years before the Council of Chalcedon, he wrote The Commonitorium under the pseudonym Peregrinus (Latin for pilgrim). Commonitorium is Latin for remembrances or warnings. Taken from an online description of the book:
He states:
Finally, he then reaffirms this interpretive principle for all possible theological issues that may arise. One can turn to the Church Fathers, but even these "opinions" must be in line with, and in continuation and communion with, the Catholic Church.
Here's a link to the full chapter 4 of The Commonitorium if you're interested in reading it for yourself: https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/ancient/434lerins-canon.asp
We can see from his comments above, sola scriptura and its necessary concomitant principle of the right of private judgment were not unheard of in the ancient church. In fact, they are at the very heart of what the ancient church authoratively declared to be heresy. St. Vincent is clearly addressing them in chapter 4. The interpretative principle he promotes regarding the questions of who can properly interpret Scripture is perhaps the earliest formal warning against sola scriptura. So, the practice of sola scripture was not merely a 16th century innovation used to codify the divergent theological beliefs of the Reformers. On the contrary, sola scriptura and the necessary principle of the right of private judgment ARE the historical modus operandi for the justification for ALL theological beliefs that diverge from those held by the historic Church. The ONLY legitimacy both early heretics and later Protestant Reformers had for their beliefs were found in their ability to use "Scripture alone" and their "right of private judgment" to justify those beliefs. Without "Scriptural support," their beliefs were merely unauthoritative opinion and held no weight.
The date of Commonitorium also gives it weight from a historical perspective in the assessment of sola scriptura. The Commonitorium's proximity to the Council of Ephesus (431 AD) and St. Vincent's listing in it of all the major heretics of the early Church up to his own time (Nestorius) speak to this. He is showing us how the common unifying factor among the heresies is how they all rely on Scripture alone, and a misinterpretation of that Scripture, correctable only by the church.
I cobbled this together from various online sources after listening to an excellent podcast on sola scriptura wherein one of the podcasters referred to St. Vincent's book The Commonitorium. It got me curious so I did some quick research and thought I would share the results.
First, who was Vincent of Lerins? He was a French monk who lived in the early 400s. When Vincent was born is unknown. His death occurred sometime between A.D. 434 and 450. He belonged to a monastery on the Island of St. Honorat, one of the Lrins Islands off the southern coast of France.
One of the controversies of his time was the Pelagian controversy, which centered on questions of grace, free will, predestination and original sin. The two poles of this debate were the British monk Pelagius and the North African bishop St. Augustine of Hippo. Pelagius stressed free will, minimizing the role of grace and St. Augustine did the reverse.
Some of those who were not fully satisfied with the positions proposed by either Pelagius or Augustine advocated middle positions, some of which were later deemed heretical and referred to as "semi-Pelagianism." Keep in mind that Vincent wrote The Commonitorium three years after the Council of Ephesus declared that the Blessed Virgin Mary can be referred to as the Theotokos (Greek, "God-Bearer" or "Mother of God"). Between the Theotokos controversy and the Pelagian controversy, the topic of whether developments of doctrine were legitimate or heretical was a hot topic in the church.
Like many in France at this time, Vincent has been regarded as a semi-Pelagian, but it is unclear what his exact position was. Further, since semi-Pelagianism had not been condemned in his day, he was not blocked from later being regarded as a saint.
On to the book, in AD 434, three years after the Council of Ephesus and 17 years before the Council of Chalcedon, he wrote The Commonitorium under the pseudonym Peregrinus (Latin for pilgrim). Commonitorium is Latin for remembrances or warnings. Taken from an online description of the book:
In the fourth chapter of The Commonitorium, undoubtedly influenced by the hot topics of the time, St. Vincent muses about who has the proper authority to interpret Scripture. His musings sound very modern. He wonders if there is a principle to properly discern between orthodoxy (right belief) and the "falsehood of heresy."Quote:
"A classic text affirming the authority of Scripture and the teachings of the Church Fathers, The Commonitorium was written as a "reminder," in an effort to preserve the authority of the Christian tradition. Citing Deuteronomy 32:7 ("ask thy father and he will show thee; thy elders and they will tell thee"), St. Vincent notes that "to commit to writing such things as I have faithfully received from the holy fathers, would be a work of no small utility." The Commonitorium is his effort to do soa theological treatise in which he affirms authentic Christian teaching and advocates the necessity of interpreting Scripture under the authority of the Church and her tradition. An important window into Christian thought between the Council of Ephesus and the Council of Chalcedon, The Commonitorium is rich with historical and theological insights; it's the source the well-known definition of orthodoxy as "that which has been believed in the Church everywhere, always, by everyone."
He states:
St. Vincent then addresses the inherent challenge of scriptural interpretation and how the improper use of Scripture can lead some down a heretical path. As a result, he concludes that all Scriptural interpretation must accord with that of the Catholic Church.Quote:
"I have continually given the greatest pains and diligence to inquiring, from the greatest possible number of men outstanding in holiness and in doctrine, how I can secure a kind of fixed and, as it were, general and guiding principle for distinguishing the true Catholic Faith from the degraded falsehoods of heresy…?"
It is interesting to note that St. Vincent seems to think the canon is settled by AD 434.Quote:
"Here, it may be, someone will ask, 'Since the canon of Scripture is complete, and is in itself abundantly sufficient, what need is there to join to it the interpretation of the Church?' The answer is that because of the very depth of Scripture all men do not place one identical interpretation upon it. The statements of the same writer are explained by different men in different ways, so much so that it seems almost possible to extract from it as many opinions as there are men.
Novatian expounds in one way, Sabellius in another, Donatus in another, Arius, Eunomius and Macedonius in another, Photinus, Apollinaris and Priscillian in another, Jovinian, Pelagius and Caelestius in another, and latterly Nestorius in another. Therefore, because of the intricacies of error, which is so multiform, there is great need for the laying down of a rule for the exposition of Prophets and Apostles in accordance with the standard of the interpretation of the Church Catholic."
Finally, he then reaffirms this interpretive principle for all possible theological issues that may arise. One can turn to the Church Fathers, but even these "opinions" must be in line with, and in continuation and communion with, the Catholic Church.
Ironically, but somewhat poetically, this approach caused what MIGHT have been his views on the Pelagian controversy to later be declared out of bounds.Quote:
"But what if some error arises regarding which nothing of this sort is to be found? Then he must do his best to compare the opinions of the Fathers and inquire their meaning, provided always that, though they belonged to diverse times and places, they yet continued in the faith and communion of the one Catholic Church;"
Here's a link to the full chapter 4 of The Commonitorium if you're interested in reading it for yourself: https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/ancient/434lerins-canon.asp
We can see from his comments above, sola scriptura and its necessary concomitant principle of the right of private judgment were not unheard of in the ancient church. In fact, they are at the very heart of what the ancient church authoratively declared to be heresy. St. Vincent is clearly addressing them in chapter 4. The interpretative principle he promotes regarding the questions of who can properly interpret Scripture is perhaps the earliest formal warning against sola scriptura. So, the practice of sola scripture was not merely a 16th century innovation used to codify the divergent theological beliefs of the Reformers. On the contrary, sola scriptura and the necessary principle of the right of private judgment ARE the historical modus operandi for the justification for ALL theological beliefs that diverge from those held by the historic Church. The ONLY legitimacy both early heretics and later Protestant Reformers had for their beliefs were found in their ability to use "Scripture alone" and their "right of private judgment" to justify those beliefs. Without "Scriptural support," their beliefs were merely unauthoritative opinion and held no weight.
The date of Commonitorium also gives it weight from a historical perspective in the assessment of sola scriptura. The Commonitorium's proximity to the Council of Ephesus (431 AD) and St. Vincent's listing in it of all the major heretics of the early Church up to his own time (Nestorius) speak to this. He is showing us how the common unifying factor among the heresies is how they all rely on Scripture alone, and a misinterpretation of that Scripture, correctable only by the church.
