Two Apologies and Dialogue with Trypho

authors, or by what other reason the authority of these very scriptures can be better known, or even (since we wish to be ignorant of nothing) what things are absolutely necessary for salvation, and what things we may safely omit, than from the faith and opinion of the earliest Christians. Furthermore, to omit many other things, it is fair for them to show that this argument carries more weight against the Fathers than against all learning whatsoever, and that the sole duty of the theologian is to understand and interpret, no longer the scripture itself, but those parts of it which cannot be ignored by any person without the loss of salvation, and which are themselves easily understood by all. But if this is so, let them see what purpose theology serves, and indeed what value those possess who, hanging its insignia around their necks, walk about so magnificently; for if they speak the truth, they can be of no use to us, and if they speak falsely, they even do us harm, so that whether they speak truth or falsehood, they are men of no account and least of all worthy to be publicly maintained at such great expense.

And these are my thoughts regarding the reading of the Fathers: a few things must now be said concerning the ars critica critical art, which I see burns with such envy among the unlearned and the common mob of scholars (partly due to its own remarkable and shining dignity and excellence, and partly due to the insolence and pride of certain men who arrogate its name to themselves) that they judge it not only to be despised and treated as nothing, as a matter utterly useless, but even to be thoroughly cast out and exterminated from the respublica literaria republic of letters,