analogy of government is supported; the inconveniences arising from disorder and anarchy are obviated; all is regular, consistent, and agreeable to that subordination, which is as necessary in spiritual concerns, as in temporal government. If, therefore, the authority of the Catholic church is the only mode of determining the authenticity and inspiration of the sacred Scriptures, and consequently of separating what is spurious from what is genuine, we have only to solicit her judgment and decision on the case. She speaks in the most distinct terms, by the voice of Christian antiquity, by her councils, and in the writings of her holy doctors. The great St. Augustine, in enumerating the parts of the sacred Scripture, makes mention of those books as canonical, which the Catholic church admits at this day1. In the third council of Carthage, held in 397, at which this great prelate and doctor assisted, the same catalogue of sacred books is inserted, as forming the canonical Scripture. The decision of this council, though only a national council, may justly be considered as the voice of the whole church; for it was numerously attended Aurelius, the primate of all Africa, presided; the illustrious St. Augustine assisted at it, and sanctioned the proceedings with his signature; the great 1 St. Aug. de Doctrin, Christian. lib. ii. c 8. and eminent pontiffs at that period adopted its decree on this question; and the Catholic church, in a general council, subsequently confirmed the decision1. In addition to these distinguished authorities, let me adduce that of the Greek church, to which the catechist is so fond of appealing, when he imagines, however erroneously, that such a plan may suit his purpose. In the various attestations, procured by the order of Lewis XIV. and published by authority, we see these books received as canonical, which the catechist regards as apocryphal and spurious. In the attestation of the seven bishops, before referred to, we have the following passage: "We affirm, that the books of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruc, the Maccabees, constitute a part of the holy Scripture, and are not exploded like pagan performances." Now will the catechist, in the plenitude of his wisdom, inform me, and explain to the public, if he can, how such a portion of Christians, as constitute the Greek church, separated as they have been from the great body of the mother church for nine hundred years, let him explain how they happen to coincide with the Catholic church in communion with the see of Rome, except both parties had 1 Vid. Carranza, fol. 85. Innocent. I. Epist. ad Exuper. Gelas. 1 Decr. de lib. sac. St. Aug. loc. cit. Isidor. Etym. lib. vi. c. 1. Cassiodor. Divin. Lect. lib. Conc. Trident. sess. 4. 2 Perpet. de la Foi, loc. citato. No. 14, p. 412. considered their belief on the subject, as a part of apostolical tradition. There could be no collusion between parties of this description: their agreement, therefore, on the catalogue of the Scriptures, forms an argument altogether irrefragable. But let us hear our learned divine. I. He asserts, that the true oracles of God were delivered to the Jewish church, and that these books were not delivered as such. We grant it to be perfectly clear, that the oracles of God were delivered to the Jews; but that these books were not delivered as such, is a point, which rests upon his unsupported assertion. These books formed not indeed a part of the Jewish canon; but that was collected in the time of Esdras, several hundred years before some of these performances had an existence. If the Jews, from whatever reason, sturdily refused to extend their canonical books beyond the sacred number of twenty-two, that conduct ought not to influence the Catholic church, except it can be proved, that she is to be guided in her judgments by the decisions of the synagogue, or the fancies of the Jewish doctors. II. When the catechist affirms, that these books were written by persons not inspired, he opposes his unsupported assertion to the great weight of authorities, which we have produced1. 1 See the observations. III. In reply to the observations contained in the corresponding number, it may be said, that if protestants are determined to abide by the Jewish church, they thus manifest an unshaken resolution to discard the authority, which our Redeemer has established in the new law: they honour the synagogue, and disobey the church. IV. When the catechist ascribes to the writers of these books, language not fitted to inspiration, he seems to forget similar language in books confessedly inspired. If these writers make apologies for their slender performances, and the want of polished language, for that is the amount of the acknowledgment, does not St. Paul apologize for his own folly, as he expresses it, and for a rude and unskilful style of writing1? V. The silence of the council of Laodicea, which was an obscure provincial synod, cannot invalidate the authority of the council of Carthage, in the decision of a case, subsequently sanctioned by the whole church. VI. The catechist makes an acknowledgment that these books were read in the primitive church, for the purposes of instruction, but not for the confirmation of faith. But let the catechist know, that all the books of Scripture had not originally the same authority in the estima 1 See and compare Prol. of the Son of Sirach, and 2 Macc. xv. 38. with 2 Cor. xi. 1, 6. tion of many parts of Christendom: doubts were entertained relating to the Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, and the Revelations of St. John: these doubts were as extensive as any that were ever conceived concerning the books in question; yet the catechist admits these performances to be genuine Scripture. In this he acts most inconsistently; while the Catholic follows the regular, orderly, and religious plan, laid down by Christ, of HEARING THE CHURCH. VII. When he asserts, that some learned men in the church of Rome, do not admit these books as canonical, he forgets, or perhaps has to learn, that no man, however eminent or respectable, ventures to contradict the decision of a general council, on a dogmatical question, under pain of being regarded as a heathen and an unbeliever. |