LECTURE V.

THE RULE OF FAITH-THE BIBLE ALONE, IN OPPOSITION TO TRADITION AND THE CHURCH.

"To the law and to the testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them."-Isaiah viii. 20.

Just pause for one moment, to consider the highly favoured epoch in which these words were spoken. This standard of appeal was proposed, not in an age when there was no immediate communication with the mind of God, and no intimations of his will from on high, but when prophets spake as inspiration directed them, and messengers came from the upper sanctuary, armed not with the sentiments and expositions of fallible men, but with the pure and immediate prescriptions of infinite Wisdom itself. In such an age, and under such favourable circumstances, the listening people of Israel are commanded to test even a prophet's message, by its analogy with that which was written, and to bring his dreams, his visions, and his announcements, not to the Church, nor to tradition, nor to the priest, but "to the law and to the testimony." "If they speak not according to this word," whatever be their pretensions, how persuasive soever their eloquence, "it is because there is no light in them."

In the Roman Catholic Church, the rule of faith-that is, the standard by which all doctrines are to be tested, and all opinions determinedis not the Bible alone, but the Bible and tradition; and both these, propounded and expounded by what is called the Church. Among the Tractarians, or Romanising Protestants, (if the name Protestant may at all be applied to them,) the rule of faith is the Bible, and the universal voice of Catholic antiquity; and both set before you and taught on the authority of the Church. So that though there is a difference in words, there is substantially no difference in fact, between the rule of faith laid down in the canons of the council of Trent, and that laid down by the learned divines of Oxford; and it will be obvious, that in discussing the merits of the one, I am really canvassing those of the other also, and that whatever tends to overthrow the foundations of the former, must of necessity go to sap and undermine the pretensions of the latter.

On the other hand, the Protestant rule of faith is—not as Protestants frequently express it, and as Roman Catholics generally urge it, the Bible explained by every man's private judgment, but-the Bible alone, without note or comment, or any thing extrinsic to itself. This is the only standard of appeal, which a Protestant can recognise; and as long as he keeps within the circumference of the Bible, he is on impregnable ground. But the instant that he goes beyond the Bible, and allows that the opinion of Scott or Henry, or the comments of the Anglican, or the Scottish, or any other Church, are part and parcel of

F

the rule of faith, he has left "the munition of rocks," where no power can dislodge him, and he has placed himself upon Roman Catholic ground, and must, if consistent, terminate in the full reception of Roman Catholic dogmas.

You perceive, then, the wide distinction between the two. And whether, on the one side, the term used be the voice of antiquity, or the opinion of the Catholic Church, or tradition, or the consent of the fathers, all substantially resolve themselves into a continuous tradition, circulated and transmitted from age to age, until the present moment. Now, it is a remarkable fact, that from the very commencement of Scripture to its close, we are never taught that there is the least value in tradition, but we are incessantly warned to beware of it. Now this is an à priori presumption, that it is not to be trusted, at least to the extent to which the Tractarians and the Roman Catholics rely on it. We are continually warned in Scripture, to be on our guard against the traditions of men; we are never in one solitary instance directed to revere and cherish, and pay deference to unwritten traditions.

Tradition, let me here observe, pre-supposes a number of things, which never have existed, do not now exist, and are never likely to exist. It pre-supposes perfect memories, to retain what is intrusted to them perfect faithfulness to transmit, without subtraction or addition, what has been received; and a perfect and pure moral character, not to bias or distort in the least the sacred truths which are to be conveyed to others. There has been no age in the whole history of man since the fall, in which a perfect memory has existed; no age, in which men have been so immaculate, untainted and undefiled, that you could believe, without doubt, they would transmit uncontaminated to others the sacred truths which unveiled their sins and condemned them; and we know, that during whole centuries the corruption of the Church has been so entire, as recorded in the Annals of Baronius, and in the History of Dupin, that so far from being fit and suitable conductors of sacred truths, its priests were the most unsuitable and unfit, that could possibly be selected. And if we must believe that water cannot be transmitted pure and untainted through a defiled and corrupted channel, we must equally believe that the pure and living streams, which come originally from the ocean fulness of God's presence, cannot (even if committed to them,) be conveyed pure and untainted through imperfect memories, damaged consciences, immoral conduct, and men, whom Baronius, one of themselves, pronounces to be worthy of the name of apostates, but not in the least of that of apostolicals.

There is in Scripture a very early record of the distorting nature and tendency of tradition; and at the same time we have exemplified the corrective power of the word of God. In the Gospel of St. John, just at the close of that most beautiful and interesting, because inspired biography, we read, that "Peter seeing John, saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die." Our Lord made no promise, he merely stated a hypothesis; tradition, with its natural tendency to magnify, distort, and dilate, altered the hypothetical statement into a positive prediction.

Now mark the corrective power of "the law and the testimony;" tradition is nipped in the bud, when it is beautifully added -"Yet Jesus said not unto him, he shall not die; but, if I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?"

Another presumption, I may mention, against tradition being any part of the channel of truth to us, is found in the fact, that there is no appointment of an order of men for the express purpose of transmitting tradition. Under the ancient Levitical economy, an order of men was instituted for continuing the morning and evening and yearly sacrifices; and under the New Testament economy there is an order of men, whose function it is to "preach the Gospel to every creature," and to minister the sacraments to those they have called in from the world. But there is not the least intimation of an order or class of men, to whom were to be entrusted certain mysterious communications, which they were to transmit to their successors, and so on to the present day, as the lights that were to illuminate the sacred page, amid the splendour of which we should see and comprehend all truth.

Again it has always been found to be the practical result, that if you admit tradition to a level with Scripture, the balance will not be long maintained; but by and bye Scripture will come to be depressed, and tradition to be exalted. In fact, it is a law in the spiritual economy, that the moment you admit a human element into anything that is divine, the divine element dies by the contact, and the human comes to be alone. Here especially it seems to be true, that "no man can serve two masters." You cannot bow to the Scriptures on the right hand, and recognise tradition on the left as equal; for by and bye you will find, you must serve the one and dismiss the other; and it needs no seer's or prophet's eye, to tell which will be retained and which dismissed. Tradition is full of all that chimes in with man's fallen and corrupt propensities, and it stands ready to minister apologies for sins, and occasions for the indulgence of his appetites; Scripture rebukes our sins in the tones of a judge, and proclaims our duties in the accents of an authoritative master; and it is clear, that my natural heart will prefer that which tells me smooth things, and will shrink from that which speaks what it calls evil concerning me. In the long run, the result will assuredly be, that Scripture shall be trampled under foot, and tradition (as in the Church of Rome) made practically and substantially the only and conclusive rule of faith.

In order now to give you some specimens of the mind of God on the subject of tradition, I will read to you a few texts. Ezekiel, XX. 18, 19. "Walk ye not in the statutes of your fathers, neither observe their judgments, nor defile yourselves with their idols: I am the Lord your God; walk in my statutes, and keep my judgments, and do them." That is to say, do not follow the fathers in their devious courses, guided by the flickering taper of tradition, but come afresh" to the law and to the testimony," just as if a previous generation had never existed, and take thence the tone of your character and the direction of your career. Matthew, xv. 1, 2. "Then came to Jesus, Scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders?"-for at the close of the Jewish economy, tradition, by its necessary tendency,

had come to be all, and Scripture, being uncongenial to man's depraved heart, had come to be depressed. This was a purely Roman Catholic question: and the reply of our Lord was a purely Protestant reply-" Why do you also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?" Mark vii. 5-7. "The Pharisees and Scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands? He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, this people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men :"-another very express and decisive rebuke of deferring to tradition, and departing from the precepts and doctrines of God. Again, 1 Peter, i. 18. "Ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ." We associate this beautiful announcement with redemption from sin, and we do well; but one great result of the atoning blood of the Son of God was redemption, not merely from the condemnation of sin, but from the bondage of the traditions and commandments of men: and that man, in one respect, sins against the redeeming blood of the Son of God, who defers to the traditions and commandments of men, contrary to the precepts and doctrines of God, just as that man sins against the blood of Christ, who continues in the practice of sin because grace hath abounded.

I observe, in the next place, that the Scriptures always profess to prove their own sufficiency as a rule of faith; and there can therefore be no necessity for any extraneous addition. If the sun, as it shines in the firmament, is sufficient to direct the footsteps of the traveller, it is altogether unnecessary to appeal to the glow-worm or to light up the evening tapers at noonday; and if Scripture prove itself by its own testimony (which cannot be untrue,) to be perfectly sufficient as a rule of faith to men, and to ministers too, it is clear that nothing beside is necessary to "guide us into all truth." I quote, then, first from 2 Timothy, iii. 15. "The holy Scriptures are able to make thee wise unto salvation, through faith which is in Christ Jesus;" and if this be so, we Protestants must be right, because the Bible is sufficient "to make us wise unto salvation," while Roman Catholics may be wrong (to go no farther) in mixing up other elements with that which is sufficient. In the next verse,- "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness;" and what is the result?" that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." What necessity, then, can there be for tradition? But Dr. Wiseman has said recently, that "man of God" means not a private Christian, but a priest, a minister of the Gospel; and I think he is right, and that his is the true interpretation of this. But his deduction is, that therefore the laity should not read the Scriptures. Now I contend, that if the Scriptures are adequate to make a minister "perfect," which is the greater thing, à fortiori they are adequate to make a layman perfect, who has no need of such extensive erudition; and therefore, taking the construction which the Roman Catholic bishop puts upon the text, it proves the Scripture sufficient to make

perfect the greater, and, consequently, the less also. Again, Psalm xix. 7. "The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul," the great object we are all anxious to attain; "the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple ;" and if adequate to this blessed result, I cannot see what need we have of tradition to add to it. John xvii. 3. "This is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent;" and John xx. 31.-"These are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing, ye might have life through his name:" and if this could be said of the Gospel of St. John alone, it must be still more true, that the whole New Testament is able to accomplish these results. Romans xv. 4. "Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope." I contend, that these texts fairly and clearly make out the self-asserted sufficiency of Scripture to make the Christian wise to everlasting life.

I will, in the next place, endeavour to prove to you by a few texts, that the Scriptures are decisive as a standard of appeal in all questions respecting truth and error. And the very first proof I adduce, is my own text; for if a prophet, commissioned from the throne of God, was to be tested and tried by "the law and the testimony," much more is an ordinary minister of the Gospel, who claims no supernal inspiration, and no personal infallibility. Joshua xxiii. 6, "Be ye therefore very courageous, to keep and do all that is written in the book of the law of Moses, that ye turn not aside therefrom, to the right hand or to the left;" they were to bring all religious questions and perplexities, neither to tradition on the right nor to the Church on the left, but only to the statutes and the laws of their God. Mark xii. 24, "Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the Scriptures, neither the power of God?"-so that the cause of error and wrong judgment is ignorance of the Scriptures. Luke xvi. 29, "They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them." The rich man had said, 'I have brothers and sisters upon earth, and if some spirit were to go from the realms of glory, fragrant with the perfumes and robed with the light of the blessed land, and were to speak with angel's tongue of its harmonies, its joys, its happiness, and its deep peace, they would be so impressed that they would be converted and live; or if a spirit were to rise from the depths of hell, and to tell forth in the hearing of mortality the secrets of its awful prison-house, they would surely be arrested and believe;' but our Lord replies, that this would be of no service (as far as instruction and direction are involved,) to those who can appeal to the word of God, and would fail to convince and convert them; and if this was true of the Old Testament, much more is it true of the old and new combined. Acts xvii. 11, "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so;" they recognised only one standard of appeal, and to it they brought even an apostle's preaching. If a Roman Catholic were to go home and test his priest's preaching by the Douay Bible, he would be told that he was becoming a heretic, or had already ceased to be a Catholic; but the Bereans, instead of being told that they would become more deeply rooted Jews or idolators, are commended