The CFs: SS or STC

[Koineman]

Let me add a suggestion: perhaps we could start the new CF directly under the OP. That way we won’t have to excavate down through the thread to get to it.

How do we do that? Any new post automatically gets appended to the end of the thread.

I’ll pray that you have a safe trip, and I look forward to your continuing the discussion when you return.

Jeremy

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

How do we do that? Any new post automatically gets appended to the end of the thread.

I’ll pray that you have a safe trip, and I look forward to your continuing the discussion when you return.

Jeremy

Use Threaded Mode under display. Then you can start from the OP.

Thanks, for the prayers.

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

True, but as far as I understand Tertullian in the passages posted thus far, he doesn’t touch on this detail.

I’ll post those two chapters with my usual summary.

Glad you agree. True, Tertullian doesn’t discuss this point.

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

Since the apostles authored their work in the beginning, then what they passed down can be found in what has been kept by their churches. In all these churches—including those established by the apostles as well as those who share the same gospel as the apostles—the Gospel according to Luke has remained steadfast since its beginning, unlike Marcion’s gospel, which is unknown to most. The authority of the apostolic churches will also confirm the apostolicity of the other gospels, including that of Mark, who was an interpreter for Peter, and that of Luke, which people usually attribute to Paul. These were written by disciples, but the work of the disciples can be seen as the work of their masters. In short, Tertullian maintains that the work of forgers is clearly seen by their later date, and he maintains the authority of churches that support the apostolic tradition.

As usual, accurate summaries.

 

[pablope]

So are we done with Tertullian? If so, is there a particular CF work that anyone would like me to delve into? If not, I’ll find something.

May I offer a suggestion before moving on…how about a summary paragraph of the work…what is was saying and all…in a short summary.

 

[PeaceInChrist]

This is an interesting thread. I have limited experience with the Fathers, but I did read sections of Irenaeus’ Against Heresies, and it was very relevant to this topic, as he expounded on the use of Scripture by heretics.

Each chapter contains a summary next to it, so from reading the summary one can get a glimpse of whether or not Scripture or authority will be spoken of in the chapter:

newadvent.org/fathers/0103.htm

 

[Koineman]

Fr of Jazz suggested we look into Irenaeus’ Against Heresies, so I’ll start posting from that work. It looks like Book III deals with the issues of Tradition and Scripture, so I’ll start with that. If anyone wants to add something from this particular work that I miss, feel free.

Irenaeus: Against Heresies
BOOK III, Preface.
Thou hast indeed enjoined upon me, my very dear friend, that I should bring to light the Valentinian doctrines, concealed, as their votaries imagine; that I should exhibit their diversity, and compose a treatise in refutation of them. I therefore have undertaken—showing that they spring from Simon, the father of all heretics—to exhibit both their doctrines and successions, and to set forth arguments against them all. Wherefore, since the conviction of these men and their exposure is in many points but one work, I have sent unto thee [certain] books, of which the first comprises the opinions of all these men, and exhibits their customs, and the character of their behaviour. In the second, again, their perverse teachings are cast down and overthrown, and, such as they really are, laid bare and open to view. But in this, the third book I shall adduce proofs from the Scriptures, so that I may come behind in nothing of what thou hast enjoined; yea, that over and above what thou didst reckon upon, thou mayest receive from me the means of combating and vanquishing those who, in whatever manner, are propagating falsehood. For the love of God, being rich and ungrudging, confers upon the suppliant more than he can ask from it. Call to mind, then, the things which I have stated in the two preceding books, and, taking these in connection with them, thou shalt have from me a very copious refutation of all the heretics; and faithfully and strenuously shalt thou resist them in defence of the only true and life-giving faith, which the Church has received from the apostles and imparted to her sons. For the Lord of all gave to His apostles the power of the Gospel, through whom also we have known the truth, that is, the doctrine of the Son of God; to whom also did the Lord declare: “He that heareth you, heareth Me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me, and Him that sent Me.”

Irenaeus of Lyons. (1885). Irenæus against Heresies. In A. Roberts, J. Donaldson & A. C. Coxe (Eds.), The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume I: The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus (A. Roberts, J. Donaldson & A. C. Coxe, Ed.) (414). Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company.

Irenaeus is going to show proofs from the Scriptures in this third book so that his “friend” may defeat the errors he is encountering, by using not only what he says in this third book but also what he says in all three of his books, defending the only true faith, which the Church received from the apostles and imparted to “her sons.” The Lord entrusted the apostles with the power of the Gospel, and through those apostles Irenaeus and other believers have come to know the truth, the doctrine of the Son of God. He reinforces this by quoting Christ’s words that whoever hears the apostles, hears Him, and whoever despises the apostles, despises Him.

 

[Koineman]

Irenaeus: Against Heresies, Book III, Chap. I:

1. We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith. For it is unlawful to assert that they preached before they possessed “perfect knowledge,” as some do even venture to say, boasting themselves as improvers of the apostles. For, after our Lord rose from the dead, [the apostles] were invested with power from on high when the Holy Spirit came down [upon them], were filled from all [His gifts], and had perfect knowledge: they departed to the ends of the earth, preaching the glad tidings of the good things [sent] from God to us, and proclaiming the peace of heaven to men, who indeed do all equally and individually possess the Gospel of God. Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews3 in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia.

1. These have all declared to us that there is one God, Creator of heaven and earth, announced by the law and the prophets; and one Christ, the Son of God. If any one do not agree to these truths, he despises the companions of the Lord; nay more, he despises Christ Himself the Lord; yea, he despises the Father also, and stands self-condemned, resisting and opposing his own salvation, as is the case with all heretics.

Irenaeus and other Christians learned the gospel only from those who handed the gospel down to them. Those people preached this gospel at one time in public but then later handed it on in the Scriptures, to be the ground of the faith. When they preached, they had perfect knowledge, unlike those who say that the apostles’ knowledge was imperfect and that they (false teachers) are improving on their knowledge. This echoes Tertullian’s thinking, namely, that the apostles handed on the teaching in its entirety, leaving nothing out, so that there is no need for improvement of any kind. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John set that gospel down in writing. That gospel truth, therefore, in its entirety, is now contained in the Scriptures.

 

[pablope]

Irenaeus and other Christians learned the gospel only from those who handed the gospel down to them. Those people preached this gospel at one time in public but then later handed it on in the Scriptures, to be the ground of the faith. When they preached, they had perfect knowledge, unlike those who say that the apostles’ knowledge was imperfect and that they (false teachers) are improving on their knowledge. This echoes Tertullian’s thinking, namely, that the apostles handed on the teaching in its entirety, leaving nothing out, so that there is no need for improvement of any kind. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John set that gospel down in writing. That gospel truth, therefore, in its entirety, is now contained in the Scriptures.

I think when Ireneus say here, the ground of the faith…he is not referring to the written scripture…but the “Gospel”…which is the message of salvation of Christ.

Do you agree with this observation?

 

[Koineman]

I think when Ireneus say here, the ground of the faith…he is not referring to the written scripture…but the “Gospel”…which is the message of salvation of Christ.

Do you agree with this observation?

I think that your observation is most likely correct, since what he has in view foremost is the gospel itself. What is telling to me is that he states that that gospel–complete and not needing improvement–is in the Scriptures. That doesn’t necessarily mean Sola Scriptura, but it is worth noting that both Tertullian and Irenaeus indicate pretty clearly that the message passed on by the apostles is complete and does not need any improvement or addition of any kind (that is what the heretics were trying to do, which they were clearly writing against). That is somewhat different from what we’re exploring in this thread; it’s more of a note I’m making to myself regarding the question of the development of doctrine.

 

[thenobes]

Koineman,

I have to disagree with your analysis of this quote from the start of Book 3 of Irenaeus’s Against Heresies.

Irenaeus (c. 130-c. 200)
We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.

ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf0…_ix.iv.ii-p1.3
(Against Heresies…Book 3 Chapter 1 Paragraph 1 Verse 1)

Any claim that he is clearly stating that the written gospel is the pillar of our faith, can be shown to be in error. This passage, considered as follows, is perfectly in synch with Catholic Doctrine:

We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those
through whom the Gospel has come down to us
(which they did at one time proclaim in public, and,
at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures,)
to be the ground and pillar of our faith.

In other words it is the Gospel which is to be the pillar and ground of our faith, The fact that we later received this Gospel in written form, as was said above, is no reason to discount the former oral version of this gospel.

This construction,“to be pillar and foundation of our faith”, is not an infinitive in Latin, but rather a future participle of being which agrees with Gospel in gender, declension and number, and is not an infinitive of purpose attached to “handed done to us in scriptures [writings]”

Iraneus follows with drawing out the nature of the scriptures and why they should be believed, but afterwards says that even if one suspects they are being interpreted wrong, one has the Tradition of the Apostles to support the Church’s interpretations.

To believe that he is equating the scriptures alone as the pillar and foundation of our faith is wrong. Scriptures, and Tradition, are only the pillar and foundation of our faith to the extent that they relate to us the Gospel.

peace
steve

peace
steve

 

[Koineman]

Koineman,

I have to disagree with your analysis of this quote from the start of Book 3 of Irenaeus’s Against Heresies.

Any claim that he is clearly stating that the written gospel is the pillar of our faith, can be shown to be in error. This passage, considered as follows, is perfectly in synch with Catholic Doctrine:

In other words it is the Gospel which is to be the pillar and ground of our faith, The fact that we later received this Gospel in written form, as was said above, is no reason to discount the former oral version of this gospel.

I think Irenaeus makes it clear that both the oral and written versions are the same, but the written version was what he had then, at the time he wrote this text. He was writing after the apostles had all died, unless I’m mistaken. If that’s true, then he did not have the oral version any longer, since the apostles were no longer around to give the message orally. The apostles preached the complete gospel message orally at first, and that message was handed down to them in the Scriptures, namely, the four gospels, which he mentions by name, and which they currently have. At this point, that is what he is saying. We’ll see what else he says in later chapters. One chapter at a time.

This construction,“to be pillar and foundation of our faith”, is not an infinitive in Latin, but rather a future participle of being which agrees with Gospel in gender, declension and number, and is not an infinitive of purpose attached to “handed done to us in scriptures [writings]”

I think that’s essentially what Pablope was saying, which I agreed with. The gospel itself is the pillar and foundation of the faith. But I would add that that gospel is now in the Scriptures, from the standpoint of Irenaeus. I’m only going by what he says in this particular passage. If he elaborates more so as to support the STC model, then so be it. I’m just going one passage at a time.

Iraneus follows with drawing out the nature of the scriptures and why they should be believed, but afterwards says that even if one suspects they are being interpreted wrong, one has the Tradition of the Apostles to support the Church’s interpretations.

I plan to continue posting from Irenaeus, so we’ll see what we shall see.

 

[Koineman]

Irenaeus: Against Heresies, Book III, Chap. II:

1. When, however, they are confuted from the Scriptures, they turn round and accuse these same Scriptures, as if they were not correct, nor of authority, and [assert] that they are ambiguous, and that the truth cannot be extracted from them by those who are ignorant of tradition. For [they allege] that the truth was not delivered by means of written documents, but vivâ voce: wherefore also Paul declared, “But we speak wisdom among those that are perfect, but not the wisdom of this world.” And this wisdom each one of them alleges to be the fiction of his own inventing, forsooth; so that, according to their idea, the truth properly resides at one time in Valentinus, at another in Marcion, at another in Cerinthus, then afterwards in Basilides, or has even been indifferently in any other opponent,2 who could speak nothing pertaining to salvation. For every one of these men, being altogether of a perverse disposition, depraving the system of truth, is not ashamed to preach himself.

1. But, again, when we refer them to that tradition which originates from the apostles, [and] which is preserved by means of the succession of presbyters in the Churches, they object to tradition, saying that they themselves are wiser not merely than the presbyters, but even than the apostles, because they have discovered the unadulterated truth. For [they maintain] that the apostles intermingled the things of the law with the words of the Saviour; and that not the apostles alone, but even the Lord Himself, spoke as at one time from the Demiurge, at another from the intermediate place, and yet again from the Pleroma, but that they themselves, indubitably, unsulliedly, and purely, have knowledge of the hidden mystery: this is, indeed, to blaspheme their Creator after a most impudent manner! It comes to this, therefore, that these men do now consent neither to Scripture nor to tradition.

1. Such are the adversaries with whom we have to deal, my very dear friend, endeavouring like slippery serpents to escape at all points. Wherefore they must be opposed at all points, if per-chance, by cutting off their retreat, we may succeed in turning them back to the truth. For, though it is not an easy thing for a soul under the influence of error to repent, yet, on the other hand, it is not altogether impossible to escape from error when the truth is brought alongside it.

1. Irenaeus criticizes heretics for claiming that the truth was not handed down through the Scriptures at all but only by word of mouth, and they also claim that the Scriptures have no authority and are ambiguous. They misquote one of Paul’s written statements to justify this. So, according to their idea, the truth moves from one heretic to another, being at one time in one person, at another time in another person.
2. The heretics also deny tradition, though, when they are referred to that tradition that came from the apostles and that is preserved by succession of presbyters in the churches. They claim they are wiser than both the apostles and the presbyters that succeeded them, saying that they have found the unadulterated truth and that the apostles mixed the law with Christ’s words, and that both Christ and the apostles spoke sometimes from the Demiurge (subordinate deity who was the creator), the intermediate place, and from the Pleroma (fullness of deity?). They considered themselves, however, to have unadulterated, pure knowledge of the mystery.
3. The heretics must be opposed at all points because, even though it is hard for a person in error to repent, it’s possible to do so when they are confronted with truth.

 

[Koineman]

Since this is a longer chapter than usual, I’m going to post comments after each numbered section, rather than at the end. I’m also going to split this up into two parts due to the length.

Irenaeus: Against Heresies, Book III, Chap. III:

1. It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these [heretics] rave about. For if the apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to “the perfect” apart and privily from the rest, they would have delivered them especially to those to whom they were also committing the Churches themselves. For they were desirous that these men should be very perfect and blameless in all things, whom also they were leaving behind as their successors, delivering up their own place of government to these men; which men, if they discharged their functions honestly, would be a great boon [to the Church], but if they should fall away, the direst calamity.

Anyone in the churches, throughout the world, who wants to see the truth can examine the apostolic tradition. Irenaeus says he and others are able to identify those who were made bishops by the apostles as well as the succession of all those bishops down to his own time. If the apostles had imparted special mysteries only to those who were “perfect,” then surely they would have taught them to the men whom they had appointed. After all, they wouldn’t have entrusted the churches to men who were not perfect or blameless. Therefore, the heretics’ claim that they received some special teaching handed down from the apostles that the churches don’t know about, is false.

1. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre-eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.

It would be tedious to provide a list of successions throughout the churches, so he simply puts heretics to confusion by pointing to the tradition and the faith that came from the apostles, of the ancient, universally known church that was founded at Rome by Peter and Paul. Every church must agree with that church, because it has prime authority.

 

[Koineman]

Irenaeus: Against Heresies, Book III, Chap. III, continued:

1. The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome despatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spake with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his angels. From this document, whosoever chooses to do so, may learn that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, was preached by the Churches, and may also understand the apostolical tradition of the Church, since this Epistle is of older date than these men who are now propagating falsehood, and who conjure into existence another god beyond the Creator and the Maker of all existing things. To this Clement there succeeded Evaristus. Alexander followed Evaristus; then, sixth from the apostles, Sixtus was appointed; after him, Telephorus, who was gloriously martyred; then Hyginus; after him, Pius; then after him, Anicetus. Soter having succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherius does now, in the twelfth place from the apostles, hold the inheritance of the episcopate. In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth.

Irenaeus here identifies the initial bishops beginning from the time of the apostles:

Linus
Anacletus
Clement
Evaristus
Alexander
Sixtus
Telephorus
Hyginus
Pius
Anicetus
Soter
Eleutherius, the 12th bishop from the apostles and contemporary to Irenaeus.

1. But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true. To these things all the Asiatic Churches testify, as do also those men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time,—a man who was of much greater weight, and a more stedfast witness of truth, than Valentinus, and Marcion, and the rest of the heretics. He it was who, coming to Rome in the time of Anicetus caused many to turn away from the aforesaid heretics to the Church of God, proclaiming that he had received this one and sole truth from the apostles,—that, namely, which is handed down by the Church.2 There are also those who heard from him that John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, “Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within.” And Polycarp himself replied to Marcion, who met him on one occasion, and said, “Dost thou know me?” “I do know thee, the first-born of Satan.” Such was the horror which the apostles and their disciples had against holding even verbal communication with any corrupters of the truth; as Paul also says, “A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject; knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.” There is also a very powerful4 Epistle of Polycarp written to the Philippians, from which those who choose to do so, and are anxious about their salvation, can learn the character of his faith, and the preaching of the truth. Then, again, the Church in Ephesus, founded by Paul, and having John remaining among them permanently until the times of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles.

Polycarp was taught by the apostles and spoke with many who had seen Christ; he was also appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna and lived to a very old age, when he was martyred. Polycarp always taught apostolic doctrine, and that doctrine the church has handed down. All the churches in Asia testify to this, as well as the men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time. The apostles and their disciples regarded heretics with the utmost horror, even fleeing from them, not wanting even to talk with them.

 

[pablope]

Since this is a longer chapter than usual, I’m going to post comments after each numbered section, rather than at the end. I’m also going to split this up into two parts due to the length.

It would be tedious to provide a list of successions throughout the churches, so he simply puts heretics to confusion by pointing to the tradition and the faith that came from the apostles, of the ancient, universally known church that was founded at Rome by Peter and Paul. Every church must agree with that church, because it has prime authority.

Could be a translation issue…what does he mean put heretics to confusion?

 

[Koineman]

Could be a translation issue…what does he mean put heretics to confusion?

I take it to mean refuting their position.

 

[Koineman]

Oh, and sorry, I have not been able to figure out how to post something in threaded mode so that the post appears at the top of the first page of this thread, rather than at the end. I know how to go to threaded mode, but I tried posting in that mode, to no avail.

 

[thenobes]

I think Irenaeus makes it clear that both the oral and written versions are the same, but the written version was what he had then, at the time he wrote this text. He was writing after the apostles had all died, unless I’m mistaken. If that’s true, then he did not have the oral version any longer, since the apostles were no longer around to give the message orally. The apostles preached the complete gospel message orally at first, and that message was handed down to them in the Scriptures, namely, the four gospels, which he mentions by name, and which they currently have. At this point, that is what he is saying. We’ll see what else he says in later chapters. One chapter at a time.

Sorry to have taken so long to respond.

I’m not saying that, as far as what you have said, you are wrong. What I am trying to point out is that the former oral gospel has become written in the prayer and liturgy, the life, of the church. As well as the teachings (sacred Tradition). It is not limited to the Scripture.

peace
steve

 

[thenobes]

Irenaeus and other Christians learned the gospel only from those who handed the gospel down to them. Those people preached this gospel at one time in public but then later handed it on in the Scriptures, to be the ground of the faith. When they preached, they had perfect knowledge, unlike those who say that the apostles’ knowledge was imperfect and that they (false teachers) are improving on their knowledge. This echoes Tertullian’s thinking, namely, that the apostles handed on the teaching in its entirety, leaving nothing out, so that there is no need for improvement of any kind. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John set that gospel down in writing.

That gospel truth, therefore, in its entirety, is now contained in the Scriptures.

But I think you may have overlooked the following:

Irenaeus: Against Heresies, Book III, Chap. I:

1. We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith. For it is unlawful to assert that they preached before they possessed “perfect knowledge,” as some do even venture to say, boasting themselves as improvers of the apostles. For, after our Lord rose from the dead, [the apostles] were invested with power from on high when the Holy Spirit came down [upon them], were filled from all [His gifts], and had perfect knowledge: they departed to the ends of the earth, preaching the glad tidings of the good things [sent] from God to us, and proclaiming the peace of heaven to men, who indeed do all equally and individually possess the Gospel of God. Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews3 in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia.

1. These have all declared to us that there is one God, Creator of heaven and earth, announced by the law and the prophets; and one Christ, the Son of God. If any one do not agree to these truths, he despises the companions of the Lord; nay more, he despises Christ Himself the Lord; yea, he despises the Father also, and stands self-condemned, resisting and opposing his own salvation, as is the case with all heretics.

Meaning the Gospel resided in the Church as a whole. The written Gospels are the recorded versions of the Gospel by the 4 Evangelists. They are by no means exhaustive but do contain the necessary elements to retrieve the remaining elements.

peace
steve