But why are these things—whether of holy John himself, or of the other Fathers, if any we have recalled, and many others which, for the sake of avoiding prolixity, we do not wish to recall—not believed to be heretical, except because the intention of those who speak excuses the offense of the things said, according to which a better judgment is made of the words? It is the intention of the mind itself which, as a kind of eye to the body, presides not only over our sayings but also over our deeds: of which the Lord says: The lamp of thy body is thine eye. If thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light; but if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be dark. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great shall that darkness be (Matt. 6:22, 23)?
And so the single eye of these Fathers—that is, the intention by which, before the Nestorian question was yet stirring, they answered such things to the heretics for the sake of Christ's Church—made the whole body of their doctrine full of light. But if anyone now should misuse, with an evil eye—that is, with an intention against the Church—these words of the Fathers, or even of divine Scripture itself, for the assertion of the Nestorian dogma, his whole body will be dark. But it is not granted to us in this life that our action should match the purpose of our mind, and that the deed be such and so great as is our intention; rather, what shines perfectly in good intention grows somewhat dim toward evening in word or deed.
And if the intention itself should grow dark, much more will the sayings or deeds which proceed from it be dark. Hence therefore the Lord added this also: If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great shall that darkness be? Accordingly, the writings of these, or of any such Fathers, are to be read in such a way that, if anywhere something in them offends us, either we interpret it for the better, or leave it to be interpreted by better men. But if the error is so certain that it cannot be excused, let us believe that they could afterward have amended it, even if it be not read where they amended it; lest we blame, not so much themselves for a fault that crept upon them, as Christ's Church for its diligent approval.
But if some, by reason of the ambiguity of a new question—concerning which one common judgment was not yet held, just as once it was when blessed Cyprian believed that all heretics should be rebaptized—or by reason of the security of that time, because they were not yet, as we are, assailed from the other side by contrary questions, or because perhaps it escaped the Church's notice, so that they were not admonished, are said to have remained in that very error: let a religious intention excuse the weakness of those who fall; and since they remained in the charity of the Church, let us believe that that very charity has covered their faults, as it is written: Charity covereth a multitude of sins (1 Pet. 4:8).
For who in the Church of Christ is so inhuman and harsh that, even if he should know the man of God Augustine—endowed with such great piety—to have erred in those matters in whose faith we abide, and to have remained in error without being admonished, he would call or think him a heretic? He who in the opening of his books on the Trinity says: 'Nor will it irk me to inquire wherever I hesitate; nor will I be ashamed to learn wherever I err. Accordingly, whoever reads these things, where he is equally certain, let him proceed with me; where he recognizes his own error, let him return to me; where mine, let him recall me. Thus let us enter together the way of charity, pressing on toward Him of whom it is said: Seek His face evermore (Ps. 104:4).
And this resolution, pious and safe before the Lord our God, I would enter into with all who read what I write, both in all my writings and most of all in those where the unity of the Trinity—of Father and Son and Holy Spirit—is sought; because nowhere is error more perilous, nor is anything sought with more labor, nor anything found with more fruit.'
Who therefore would call Augustine a heretic—who thus enters the way of charity and presses on toward God, so as to profess that, if he should err anywhere, he would not be ashamed to learn, and exhorting that he be recalled from that very error—or, even if it were proved that he had erred in these matters, as we have already said, and had remained in error with no one admonishing him? For the very preparedness of his mind for correction, and his exhortation that he be called back from his error, ought to be esteemed more than a correction. For often men, pressed by shame, or even constrained by necessity, are corrected by another; but he, without any shame, binds by divine testimony all who would read his works to recall him:
'And this resolution,' he says, 'pious and safe before the Lord our God, I would enter into with all who read what I write.' Would then this resolution—pious before the Lord our God, entered into with all who read his works, as he believed—not be safe for him, even if, unadmonished, he had remained in some error? Who but a cruel man would say or believe it? Let us therefore esteem the other teachers of the Church to be such as Augustine showed himself to us to be; and let us call no one a heretic who has died in the peace and honor of the Church. For what does it harm me, if I think thus concerning all, even if not all were such? Here perhaps someone may say: But of Augustine you rightly hear thus, whose mind his own profession declares:
but concerning others, on what ground do you believe so? As though even he who contradicts holds it for certain that others too did not say this; as though he had read all the works of all and remembered all of them: or as though Augustine's mind was such only because he spoke in such a manner, and not rather, because he was such, therefore he spoke in such a manner—and through this, even if he had said nothing of the kind, the same disposition of mind, prepared to correct what justly gave offense, would nonetheless have been his. Concerning whom, even if we should think well in this way, it would beyond doubt be both pious and true, although it might seem uncertain. This therefore let us think also concerning the minds of others, since meanwhile it is pious, even if it seem uncertain:
but if we should think ill of them, this too will not be certain, but it will be a certain impiety: it is better therefore that, of the two, we choose that uncertain thing in which a certain piety is approved, than this uncertain thing in which a certain impiety is condemned. But I judge that even those very persons who are unwilling to think of the other teachers of the Church as they do of Augustine—because they do not find where the others likewise exhorted the readers of their sayings to correct them from error—judge it impious to believe that no one of the rest was prepared to correct, if anything in his sayings should rightly offend the reader.
If therefore it is impious to believe that no other was of the same resolve, whence does he know that the one whom he esteems worthy of condemnation was not such a man? In every way therefore it is concluded that no one, for such ignorance—provided he died at least in the peace of the Church—is condemned, except out of great impiety and rashness. Whence, if anyone before the holy Synod of Chalcedon had accused Theodore, and could and did show some of his errors, the aforesaid Synod would without doubt have acted modestly and piously, if it had thought well even of his uncertain mind.
But now he was accused before that Synod, and his mind was not uncertain—he whom, in the preceding book, we showed to have confessed, spontaneously and providently, his own negligence even in the work in which he was praised by his friend Cerdo, lest anyone, led by the authority of his name, should follow him erring; and to have not despised the offense of his hearers, when he said something that was not thought to have been rightly said; but as victor over a pernicious shame, to have removed that very offense which through carelessness of word he had incurred. This correction purged him not only of those things in which it evidently appeared, but of any like things.
Why then should his sound doctrine in other matters not be praised, since even in his very error it is to be praised—through which he taught us, by example rather than by words, both to confess errors spontaneously and to correct a reproved offense without shame? There is therefore nothing for which the holy Synod should be blamed in the case of Theodore. For it did not impose upon anyone, by the authority of his sayings, that they should be read without any examination, and that whatever he wrote should be held by all unshaken and undiscussed. In these matters therefore let there be held that of which the Apostle says: Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
And so we read in one way the divine Scriptures which are called canonical, and in another way those of men who, advancing by zeal for reading and writing, and through the faculty acquired by daily labor, have spoken of these matters as they were able: among whom was that most wise and most modest man Augustine, who in the third book also on the Trinity speaks thus: 'Indeed, since in all my writings I desire not only a pious reader but also a free corrector, much most of all in those where the very magnitude of the question—would that it might have as many discoverers as it has gainsayers. Nevertheless, just as I do not wish my reader to be devoted to me, so I do not wish my corrector to be devoted to himself. Let the former not love me more than the Catholic truth;
just as I say to the former, Do not be a slave to my writings as to the canonical Scriptures, but in the latter, when thou hast found even what thou didst not believe, believe it without hesitation; whereas in the former, what thou didst not hold for certain, unless thou hast understood it for certain, do not firmly retain—so I say to the latter, Do not correct in my writings out of thine own opinion or contentiousness, but out of divine reading, or unshaken reason. If thou hast comprehended anything true in them by examination, it is not mine; but by understanding and loving, let it be both thine and mine; but if thou hast convicted anything as false, it was mine in the erring, but now, in being avoided, let it be neither thine nor mine.'
And so, as this most prudent man teaches, we read the canonical writings in one way—in which it is necessary, even what we do not believe, when we have found it, to believe without hesitation; but in another way those either of Augustine himself, or of such others—in which what we hold as uncertain, unless we have understood it for certain, we ought not firmly to retain. He also, writing to Jerome, says (Epist. 19): 'For I confess to thy charity that I have learned to defer this fear and honor only to those books of the Scriptures which are now called canonical, so that I most firmly believe that no author of them erred in anything in writing;
and if I encounter anything in those writings which seems contrary to truth, I shall not doubt that it is nothing other than either that the manuscript is faulty, or that the translator did not attain what was said, or that I have by no means understood it. But others I so read that, however much they may prevail in sanctity and learning, I do not therefore think a thing true because they so thought it, but because they were able to persuade me of it, either through those canonical authors, or by probable reason which does not depart from the truth. Nor, my brother, do I suppose that thou thinkest otherwise: indeed, I say, I do not judge that thou wishest thy books to be read as those of the prophets or apostles, of whose writings it is wicked to doubt that they are free from all error.
Far be this from a pious humility and a truthful thinking concerning thyself: which, unless thou wert endowed with it, thou wouldst certainly not say, Would that we might be worthy of thine embraces, and by mutual converse might either teach some things or learn them.' Holding therefore the judgment of this most wise man, let us neither ascribe divine authority to non-canonical books, nor deny human compassion, wherever the writers of them, as men, have fallen. For what should he do whose soul the corruptible flesh weighs down, and whom the earthly habitation depresses as he ponders many things in his mind, when by the necessity of the office he has undertaken he is compelled to teach—except to permit what he writes or says to the discussion and judgment of the very Church for which and from which he undertook the peril of teaching?
But if he has intruded upon another's office, if he has usurped what was not entrusted to him, he deservedly lacks pardon, nor could he in any way be excused, who of his own accord and rashly thrust himself into perils belonging to others. The teacher of the Church, however, is excused by the necessity of his position, if he is prepared to correct those things in which he has offended.