1

vate judgment? St. Paul, in a well-known passage, which we have before cited, clearly establishes the government of the pastors of the church, in terms which utterly destroy this supposed right; for he alleges, that the various pastors and guides, whom he enumerates, are appointed, THAT WE BE NO MORE CHILDREN, TOSSED ABOUT WITH EVERY WIND OF DOCTRINE 1. St. Peter, in terms not to be misconstrued, declares that NO PROPHECY OF SCRIPTURE IS OF PRIVATE INTERPRETATION 2. After such clear and incontrovertible testimonies, how is it possible, with any colour of reason, to set up the right of private interpretation? The purpose which the authors of this system have in view, in appealing from the Scripture as explained by the Catholic church, to the Scripture as explained by themselves, is so manifestly and so grossly visible, as not to deceive the plainest and most vulgar capacity.

But perhaps it may be alleged, that all these declarations of Scripture are not to be taken in the most rigorous meaning; and that in consequence of the superior light which was promised to the faithful in the new law, the apostles and their immediate successors might have left the supposed right of private judgment inviolate. Let this difficulty be decided by the holy Scripture, to which our opponents are so fond of appealing, in opposition to all authority. When

1

Ephes. iv. 11-14.

22 Pet. i. 20.

the celebrated dispute took place between the converted Jews and Gentiles, concerning the ceremonies of the old law, the controversy was decided, not by the judgment of private individuals, nor by any number of the parties concerned; the business was referred to the council of the apostles at Jerusalem, and their decision was pronounced and received as an oracle of the Holy Ghost: It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us1. In the same authoritative manner every dispute, which took place in subsequent periods of the church, was brought to a final close by the voice of general councils; and all who refused submission to their dogmatical decrees, were treated as heretics, who preferred their own judgment to that of the church. Thus were the Arians, the Macedonians, the Nestorians, and the Eutychians, condemned in the first four general councils; and any appeal from the Scripture as understood and explained by the fathers of these councils, to the Scripture as interpreted by individuals, particularly by the parties concerned, has always been regarded as a wretched and pitiful subterfuge, to set aside that authority which Christ has left in his church. But it is time to listen to the oracular wisdom of the cathechist on the subject, and to investigate his learned statements.

I. In the first place he says, that Catholics act

1 Acts xv. 28.

in opposition to the command of Christ, who says, search the Scriptures. It were to be wished, that all who produce a text from the sacred Scripture to establish any point, would first consider the whole context of the passage which they think proper to cite. This precaution would dissipate the greatest portion of flimsy arguments drawn from the sacred writings. The text produced by the catechist, contains not a shadow of command to lay the Scriptures indiscriminately before the faithful. Our Redeemer is there establishing against the Jews the reality of his mission, and his consubstantiality with his heavenly Father; and he asserts that those evidences, to which they appealed, bear witness to his character. He says: You sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth. In the same way he adds: You search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me3. This version and interpretation, which accord with the context, as well as with the Greek original, will be found to contain no command, but only a reference to the practice which the Jews were pursuing.

Besides, were we to grant that a command is conveyed in the words of Christ, such a concession would by no means warrant the inference of the catechist; for his argument would run thus: Christ, in discussing with the Jews the subject

1 John v. 39.

2 Ibid. 33.

⚫ Ibid. 39.

of his divine mission, refers them to the Scriptures; therefore, by the force of this direction, the whole body of the sacred Scriptures, without note or comment, is to be laid open promiscuously to the inspection of all the faithful, that they may come to such conclusions as the spirit shall suggest. The head that can produce such reasoning, is not fitted for theological discussion.

II. Then he argues, that the Bereans are commended for reading the Scriptures', and that consequently the Scriptures may be indiscriminately read by all the faithful. This consequence by no means flows from the commended practice. The Bereans are here described as more noble than those in Thessalonica, and as receiving the word of God with more readiness. But because such persons are applauded for examining and comparing the doctrine of the apostles with the predictions of the prophets, does it follow that the ignorant and illiterate, the ploughman and the peasant, should be urged to read every part of the sacred Scripture indiscriminately, without note or comment? and that the church, as a mother and guardian of the faithful, is not competent to introduce salutary restraints, and prudential precautions, for the purpose of inspiring christian humility, and a love of submission and order? It is really not too severe a censure to say of the catechist, that in all his allegations

on this and other subjects, there appears neither a knowledge of Scripture, nor of Christian antiquity, nor any portion of natural or artificial logic.

III. Here he urges, that the practice of the Roman Catholic church is contrary to that of the primitive church, when the holy fathers exhorted the people to a diligent reading of the Scriptures. It is perfectly true that the holy fathers perpetually urged the faithful to an attentive perusal of the divine oracles: and the Roman Catholic church, at the present period, would, under similar circumstances, pursue the same method. The catechist appears not aware, that matters of discipline must ever vary with the shifting scenes and changeable occurrences of human life; nor does he seem thoroughly acquainted with the circumstances, in which the holy fathers are perpetually urging their hearers to read the divine oracles. In those days of fervour, it was the continual practice of Christian bishops and preachers to explain the Scriptures at full length, in discourses styled homilies: not only Sundays, but days of devotion, and the penitential seasons of the year, were devoted to this salutary purpose. The same zealous pastor would often appear thrice in the day, in the performance of a function so useful and so salutary to religion. In this manner St. John Chrysostom explained the whole Scripture: the greatest portion of his im