The real controversy is not a war of names
You will ask: what, then, is the real state of the controversy on Scripture's authority? In the heads reviewed so far the Orthodox and the Pontificii seem to agree. Is the fight only about a name? Not at all. The rift between the two sides is large and of the highest moment.
To see it clearly, note first that some revelations become known to us only through another revelation, and they borrow their authority for us from that other. Balaam's old revelation reached us through the revelation given to Moses. The same holds for that scrap of Enoch's prophecy to which Jude's letter lends authority.
Yet there cannot be an infinite regress here, and a circle — one revelation proved by another, and that other by the first — must not be allowed. So some revelation must be first for us: one that wins our faith by itself and for its own sake, not by help from a better-known revelation.
Latin
XIX. At, inquies, quis ergo tandem est status controversiae de Scripturae authoritate? nam in capitibus hucusque recensitis videtur esse consensus inter Orthodoxos et Pontificios. An forte hic est tantum de nomine certamen? minime certe. Hic magnum et maximi momenti dissidium est inter utrosque. Ad cujus intelligentiam notandum est, 1. quasdam esse revelationes quae non nisi per aliam revelationem nobis innotescunt, unde suam quoad nos authoritatem mutuantur. Ita verbi gratia, revelatio facta olim Balaam, per revelationem Mosi factam nobis innotuit. Idemque dico de fragmento illo prophetiae Enochi, cui Epistola Judae authoritatem conciliat. Sed cum hac in re non possit dari progressus in infinitum, nec debeat admitti circulus, quo una revelatio per aliam probetur, et haec vicissim per alteram illam: necesse est, ut detur revelatio quaedam, respectu nostri prima, quae per se, et propter se fidem apud nos obtineat, non autem beneficio revelationis cujusdam notioris.
About this text
Louis Le Blanc de Beaulieu - Sedan Theological Theses, newly rendered from the 1675 London Latin. Covers De Theologia through Angelorum & Hominum Sanctorum Cultu Romana I-LXXVII and Pars Secunda (Reformata) I-XL. Not the collected folio.
English follows locked Pitt Latin through Imaginum CLOSED + Sanctorum Cultu Romana CLOSED + Pars Secunda Reformata I-XL. 1675 PDF ~384-390 (book ~370-376); Vision OCR + pdftotext + tess. No modern English. This slice densifies Sanctorum Pars Secunda I-XL. Next: Pars Secunda XLI–fin (~CI). Claim stays claimed (book densify not done).
Catalogue & scope
ESTC R17887; Wing L802. IA bub_gb_eOkHAW4G0-wC (+ EEBO 1675 for gap leaves). Densify through Sanctorum Cultu Romana I-LXXVII + Pars Secunda Reformata I-XL (Pars Secunda not closed; not whole folio).
Witnesses
- Copy-text Locked Latin, De Theologia I-XLIII (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
- Checked print Internet Archive PDF of the 1675 Pitt folio (Latin)
- Checked print pdftotext of De Theologia pages (Latin)
- Checked print Internet Archive DjVu OCR of the 1675 Pitt folio (Latin)
- Copy-text Locked Latin, De Fide I-XXII (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
- Copy-text Locked Latin, De Authoritate Scripturae Pars I I-XLVII + Pars II I-XXXV + Pars III I-VIII (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
- Copy-text Locked Latin, De Scripturae plenitudine densify (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.