IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) f.O lii|2J, ■JO ^" ■It 125 140 6" C \ ^ 1 d 5,^ \ ^. ^Sdmces Corporalioii :!3 VWST MAIN STMn WIIISTM,N.Y. 145M (71«)t73-4903 o^ ^'. I CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHfVi/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microraproductions / Institut cartadian da microraproductions historiquaa Tachnical and Bibliographic Notas/Notas tachniquaa at bibliographiquaa Tha inatituta has attamptad to obtain tha baat originai copy avaiiabio for filming. Faaturaa of this copy which ntay ba bibliographically uniqua, which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha rariroduction. or which may aignificantly c^hanga tha uaual mathod of filming, ara chackad balow. D D n D Colourad covers/ Couvartura da coulaur I I Covars damagad/ Couvartura andommagAa Covara rastorad and/or laminatad/ Couvartura raataurte at/ou palliculte I I Covar titia missing/ La titra da couvartura manqua I I Colourad maps/ Cartas g^ographiquas an coulaur □ Colourad ink (i.a. othar than blua or blackii/ Encra da coulaur (I.a. autra qua blaua ou noira) I I Colourad platas and/or illustrations/ Planchas 3t/ou Illustrations an coulaur Bound with othar matarlal/ RaliA avac d'autras documents Tight binding may causa shadows or distortion along Intarior margin/ Lareliura sarrAe paut causar da I'ombra ou da la distortion la long da la marga IntAriaura Blank laavas addad during rastoration may appaar within tha taxt. Whanavar possibia, thasa hava baan omittad from filming/ II sa paut qua cartalnas pagas blanches ajouttea lors d'una rastauration apparaissent dans la taxta, mais, lorsqua cala 4talt possibia. cas pagas n'ont pas AtA filmtes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppKmantaires: Various pagingt. L'institut a microfilm* la meilleur exemplaira qu'il lui a *tA possible oe se procurer. Les ditaiis da cat ex^npiaira qui sont paut-Atre uniquaa du point da vue bibliographiqua. qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dana la r.iAthoda normale de filmage sont indlqu(6s ci-dessous. D D D B D Q D D D D Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pagas damaged/ Pagea andommagAes Pages restored and/or Itminatad/ Pages restaurtes at/ou paliiculAes Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d^colorAes, tachatAes ou piqu4es Pagas detached/ Pagas d^tachAas Showthrough/ Tranaparance Quality of print varies/ Quality inigale de I'Impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du material supplAmantaira Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slipa, tissues, etc., have been ref limed to . ensure the best possible Image/ Les pagas totalement ou partiallement obscurcles par un feuillet d'c rata, une pelure, etc., ont M fiimies A nouveau d«i fagon A obtenir la mellleure image possible. Tl to Tl P< o fl Oi b« th Si( ot fit Si( or Jt sh Tl wl dll en bJ rig re< mi This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est f !lm* au taux de reduction indiqui ci-deasous 10X 14X 18X 22X asx s^ '''-' ^ "•j":,'.-' ' 30X '/r y 1 12X 16X 20X a4x 28X 32X ^?^ ^m mm Th« copy film«d iMr* has b««n r«procluo«d thanks to tha ganarosity of : U BibliotMqiM d« la Villa fte MontrM L'axamplaira film* fut raproduit grica A la gAnAroaitA da: U BiUiotMqiN da la Villa d* Montrial Tha imagas appaaring hara ara tha baat quality posaibia conaidaring tha condition and lagibility of tha original copy and in kaaping with tha filming contract spacif ications. Las imagas sulvantaa ont AtA raproduitaa avac la piLS grand soin, compta tanu da la condition at da la nattatA da I'axamplaira filmA, at «in confotmitA avac las conditions u contrat da fllmaga. -■ ■■:, , ;,;. Original copias in printad papar covars ara fiimad baginning with tha front covar and anding on tha last paga with a printad or illustratad impras- sion. or tha back covar whan appropriata. Ail othar original copiaa ara fiimad baginning on tha first paga with a printad or illustratad impraa- sion, and anding on tha iaat paga with a printad or illustratad Imprassion. Las axamplairas originaux dont la couvartura an papiar aat ImprimAa sont filmAs an commandant par la pramlar plat at an tarminant soit par la darnlAra paga qui comporta una amprainta d'Impraaaion ou d'illuatration, aoit par la aacond plat, aalon la caa. Toua laa autraa axamplairas originaux sont filmAs an commanpant par la prainiAra paga qui comporta una amprainta d'Impraaaion ou d'lllurtratlon at an tarminant par la demlAra paga qui comporta una taila amprainta. Tha last racordad frama on aach microflcha shall contain tha symbol ^^^ (moaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha symbol ▼ (moaning "END"), whichcvar applias. Un daa aymboiaa suivants apparaftra sur la darnlAra imaga da chaqua microfieha, aalon la caa: la symbola -^ aignifia "A SUIVRE", la symbols V si(k nifia "FIN". Maps, platas, charts, ate, may ba fiimad at diffarant raduction ratios. Thosa too larga to ba antiraly includad in ona axpoaura ara fiimad baginning in tha uppar iaft hand cornar, laft to right and top to bottom, as many framas aa raquirad. Tha following diagrams lllustrata tha mathod: •■ /:■ Las cartas, planchaa, tablaaux, ate, pauvant Atra fllmAa A das taux dt rAduction diff Aranta. Lorsqua la documant aat trop grand pour Atra raproduit an un aaul clichA, 11 aat fiimA A partir da i'angia supAriaur gaucha, da gaucha A droita, at da haut an baa, an pranant ki nombra d'Imagas nAcaaaaira. Las diagramnr.as suivants illustrant la mAthoda. '' 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 (■':■ "'.*■, '•' 1. ^.^ti^" 9\t y^K ■•^....r ^ .!!« i V V / I- ^ 'v'\ (Ve '■r^i^' fmmw'iF^^m^^WWT^mSl^llmifli ^ 7' r^- t. H BAifTiBXi Gabby. BarrisieY, mmy. SoUcitor & Notary Public; y{ Verbatim Report of a Sermon delivered by Rev. Wm, Stephenson, in the W, M, Ghwch, Ottmoa,^on- ^ Srniday, Javmary 14, 1872.) -••» 6ttaw*a «fbee peess" pumting house elq£t7^st< f%M^ ,> i k .N> X X w^l^^^^f^^^mm • • .• t ,» • . ♦ .*. * .♦■ • • < « « « . » • • • -•- • • I * < J I « » »• t i « * M *¥■ *.■>{ <•• ^*r /I f .^^ WHY I AM A PROTESTANT. w^immmm I, Peter 3, 16. " And be ready always to give an answer to every man . ^ that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you, with meek- ness and fear." Isaiah, wrajpt in animal vision, pro- laimed, touching Christ, that "of the increase of His Government and "peate there shall be no end." His advent amongst men was angelically announced as the inauguration of "peace on earth and good will to men." When Christ had raJBTered and died — ere he ascended to His Father and our Father, and while his "Disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, He came and stood in their micLst and saith unto them, peace be unto you," and then, suiting the action to the word, "when he had so said. He showed unto them his hands and his side." For the encouragement of his followers he says, " in the world ye shall have tribu- laticn, but in me ye shall have peace." But we are not to understand that the peace which Christ came to establish was a peace at any price, with all manner of men, with, all manner of principles, hence in a particular place he saith, *' I am not come to send peace, but a sWord," hence again, while he is " the God of all peace, He avows Himself the adversary of His adversaries ; and dec- lares that " those who are not with Him are against Him." The' kingdom which Christ established was akinffdomof peace, " a kingdom wherein dwelfeth righteous- ness," "a kingdom not of this world," a spiritual kingdom, a kingdom which the apostie declares is wiuiin the be- liever. He further states, "which is Christ in you, the hojiC of glory, whom we preach." Hence, " the peace of God which passeth all understanding," is not the possession of any system. Christianity is not a creed, not a theology. It may have a theology, but its theology is not itself. Christiani^ is nothing more, it certainly is nothmg less, than Christ, in the human heart. Christ in the human heart, swaying affection, controlling thought, ruling passion, marshalling actions, and sanctifying all the habits of human life — ^that is Christianity, and that only is Christianity. The outword frame- work of the Christian Church is, to a certain extent, adventitious and accident- al. If, in a human heart, Christ sludl be throned in undisputed monarchy, then, whether that man shall be found beaming the name of Roman Catholic, Episcopidian, Presbyterian, or Msthodiat I hold him in the inteeer, the essential sense ; a Christian. When Jesus was here, in the world preaching, he said, "believe in me," not simply oelieve in certain truths that I teach, out, "believe in me, have confidence in me, obey me." "Wlien he left this world, his holy apostles preached the same doctrine ; they exhorted aJl men to believe in Christ. They said, he is not dead — ^he lives still ; he has left the world only in person, he is here in spirit ; he demands your heart, your love, your obedience ; his kingdom hath been set up ; we proclaim him king ; we invite you to rally round his standwi, and to fight his battles against all that is false and sinful ! Thus the apostles preached ; and thus, brethren, we preach. And the apostle Paul, when addressing the GaUo- (rrecian Church, says, "but though we. s^*- or an angel from heaven, preach anv other gospel unto you, than that which we have preached unto you, let him be Anathema (accused)." Standing thus, as we do, upon " the foundation of the pro- Ehets and the apostles, Jesus Christ imself being the chief comer stone," it is only befitting that we should hold our- selves in "readiness to answer him that asketh us a reason of the hope which is within us with meekness and fear." Jesus says : " Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." "But," says the weary one, " how am I to come? " The Church of Rome says, come through me. Her priests say, come through us — through us m some of our formulas — through us in some of our developments, and ye shall find rest. Look to the Church. She, they allege, is the directress to Heaven, the pure way to everlasting joy. " Hear the Church," they cry — 'and be happy, be at rest.' Such religion may be Church- ianUy. It is not Chiistianity. Christian- ity, we have alreadv defined as an em- bracing of Christ ; ancl the whole Bible pro- ceeds upon the hypothesis that the Church Mrithont Christ is a body without a head, a robe without tlie cUvine wearer, the richly chased cup, but without the wine. I caimot see that there is any more chance of being saved by a church, than there ifl of being saved by a college ; there is no more connection, in the way of meirit, between the one, and salvation, tiian there Js between the other and ti^alvatibn. l%en, how is the weary and heavy 'Niilto one, to* C<6me to Christ "that hQmay find rest? the ' appMMdh is «to- %^&dy not cii^ui«(Mn. St. Prul's^fdMaiiila "(ft^en Mlcbi*^SnK ^the Milii^'an^ JailOr, wiU apswe^i^e 'ftt^dtra, '^beIievc^utl^e Lohl J«iMs GhHst »^d >tlM>u 'ti^t be Mkved. " The ' iMistei^ IkiiilMilf ' %u^teoes a striking ^ani|>lefin'ttie'case of the pdor ^blican, 'v^ho,' unaided by cotttly cere- indloial, . olrmcr^otal' pomp, ' < smote upon huii'brefist/and t^d Godbe m6txiifui to me ft siiiiier, 'Mid went down to his house fiiqtffiM." We Niflike '«he g6flpel of Mir 'iMiTeBuiSiOhrist as the '^ly infallible 'liuide to iiftlVation ; ilttd ' Avlien others ' wtoiiild 'tfsitoil ; He s^ys, "O, sir, I am in distress, T h«ve siamd, 't.at then is the conclusion, but that, if the written word of God (not sufficient according to the teaching of the Church of Rome) has been the means in the experi- ence of thousands and tens of thousands of working in them, the effect, the great effect, which it is destined to produce, viz : purity and consecration of life, and also of investing them with the greatest of its designed blessings, eternal salvation — it is, and must be sufficient, and that that law, which makes wise the simple and converteth the soul, must be sure and oerfect. Again, is there a single point connect- ed with the duty or the hopes of man on which the Scriptures do not shed a light ? It is true there are difficulties which, with our limited grasp of mind we cannot solve ; but have the Fathers solved them? Has the Church of Home solved them ? Have the Fathers, has the Romish Church, harmonized seeming inconsis- tencies, more than there are narmonized in the Bible itself ? Have the Fathers, has the Church, shed even one glimmer- ing ray of light on the doctrines of Scripture ? Thus there stands the case, Christianity says, " what saiththe Scrip- ture ?" No, says the Church of Rome, ' ' hear the Cb urch. ' ' Amid these discordant and distracting notes, the Scriptures au- thoritatively declare, " If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues which are writen in this book ; and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy. God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and the things which are written in this book. " Again, I hold the Scripture as a sufficient rule of faith because of the fallibility of all tradition. Take the Fathers of the Church ; what peculiar character had they to qualify them to give statements, bearing the force of Scripture ? Were they inspired ? Nobody says they were, in the sense m which the apostles were inspired. Were they infallible? Inspiration alone would secure their infallibility ; and that has not been claimed for them, and that they did not possess. What mental or critical advanti^es did they possess ? They had the Bible, and so nave we ; they had the possession of reason, and so have we ; and. we have this advantage over them, that we have all the discoveries and researches of 17 centuries, and though we may not be mentally as powerful an they, yet having the fruit of their toil, and that of others, we see beyond the horizon of their vision, and rejoice in the results of their sagacity and investigation. Again ; nobody will say that those Fathers were individuals of unbroken distinguished consistency of character. No ; contradictions the most Khuring are to be found in their pages, and no better proof of uhis can be furnished, than the fact that " our separate brethren" can quote them in their defence, as boldly as we can in ours. Dr. Shnttleworth, a thorough pro-Romanist, truly says : "The moment we compare the writings of the A.postles with those of the primitive Christian Fathers, we perceive at once, tiiat in passing from the former to the latter, we have crossed the boundary of inspira- tion, and have to do henceforward with mere fallible human beings." The dif- ference in composition, the difference in thought, is so remarkable and glaring, that no one, who has read the one and the other, can for a moment doubt that he is goirg upon another territory, and that he has to do with individual of a totally different character from those whose p^es he has perused in the New Testament, mt says Cardinal Wiseman, " Look at the differences of Protestants, where is your rule of faith. " I just meet ' ' my separate brethren," on the same ground, ilnd I ask where is your rule of faith in tradi- tion ? which of the Fathers are you to believe ? or if you admit any, why not repose in the earliest, when floating tradi- tion, if any, would be most abundant and most probably seized and preserved in the writings of men. Oh ! the Romanist boasts of we luuty of his Church ; let any one read the history of that Church from the fourth century downwards, and he will find diversities, and disagreement and quarrels, the most bitter and acrimoni- ous. The unity of Romanism? why it is the unity of the frozen river, where the ice has bound into one mass the most heterogeneous and unblending of all objecti^boimd,butnotchangedthem. The unity that we want is the unity of the ,1 ■'S[ ' «-m\ ' f- ' y ' KW' "W m A>' 1 ' f . i' if ill,- F: 1; 8 light and heat of heaven, which will unite, by auimilatinff, and fuse into one homogeneous mass, tne minds of Ul be- neath its sacred influence. Where is our rule of faith ? I say it is the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. " What, 3ay my separate brethren." In the translation bearing .the signature, of King James tl, I say precisely, in so far as the English of tnat day could possibly re- present the classic Greek. Being more or less familiar with both languages, I am bold to aver that the English trans- lation, as we have it, does no violence to the original, perverts no divine truth, and though it ma^ occasionally betray a verbal poverty, it nevertheless gives the "mind of the spirit," as fully, and as forcibly as the Latin Vulgato itself, the Church of Rome to the contrary notwith- standing. Am I then to prostrate myself before those who possess no grander chl^rter of soul, no greater educational advantages, no truer revelation from God, and declare myself at once disloyal to my reason, and to my conscience ? God for- bid ! It is every man's prerogative to think and to reason, and it is at every man's peril that he allows others to do for him, m matters of salvation (were it possible) what €k>d demands of himself alone. But we are asked, with ill-diseuised contempt, where our church was before Luther ? " But," to use the language of an eminent critic, "what do they mean by our Church ? Do they mean a visible or|;anization, professing Protestant doc- trines ? If so, the quesnon is absurd and childish. They might as well ask an English statesman, ^erewas parliament- ary government before the revolution of 1640? He would tell them that the re- volution was accomplished in order that there midit be parliamentary govern- ment in England. In like manner the fruit of Reformation was that tibe pure doctrinal of the Gospel which the B. C. Church had corrupted and overlaid with human traditions, might be oncemorefree- ly taught and professed in certun portions of Europe at least, and become we basis of creeds and Churches; new undoubtedly from one point of view^ but from another, older than the cormptions they protested against. If, when «re are asked where protestantism was before Luther, the doctrinei of protestantism are meant, the answer is short and oasy. As Jeremy Tay- lor lon^ ago said : "They were in the Bible, m the origmal and authentic docu- ments of the Christian Relioion ! There they had always been, as ^he R. C. hier- archy knew tolerably well even before Luther's time ; as we may judge from the fact that they had never, to one siiude nation of Europe, given one oop^ of tiie Bible in the vernacular ton||ue. In the 1 6th Century various editiono m the modem languages were current, the work of pri- vate individuals, but all these were put by Pope Paul IV in the Index Expurffotioitt, not a smgle exception being made. This was in the year 1659. Yes, those who want to know where the doctrines of Protestan- tism were before the Reformation, have only to look for them in the right place, and they will find them ; and probably if their mmds be open to conviction, they will begin to ask where the peculiar doc- trines m the Church of Rome are to be be found, for, wherever else they come from, I cannot find them in the Holy Scriptures." I am a Protestant in the next place — Beeauae the Teaching of the Roman Catholic Church ignoree my intelligence^ tnd offende my conscience. I believein justificationbyfaith, throuoh grace ; that not of uiyself, but as the oift of God. Now, the Council of TtetA nas uttered its fulminations amunst any one who shall dare to dispute tiie doctrme of justification by works. What is justifi- cation? As I understand it, it is a work done for a man on certain conditions, viz : a Godly sorrow for sin woi^ing a re- pentance that needeth not to be repented of. In its forensic sense it means a declar- ation of innocence. In its Evangelioal sense, it implies pard CMn( rufe q/" my faith, and I hold ntj/aelf reaponrible/or tearehing them. " Ke v. Wm. Stephenson's Sennon. m -< t ■ ■'!•: ''fr'^^'^'^yv^: ■ V' ^ OTTAWA; "FREE PRESS*' PRINTING HOUSE» ELGIN STREET. 1872. .^.:k A A«.■;='^».^yl* ■ **->4#"* •**v (^, -x.--,, f. THEBlBa THE SOLE RULE OF THE w ...... ^ - ^ >• f I ■>•, 4.«i nilp of Protestants, fundamental rule oi ii ^ • 4 »«ii fiTxlusive authority of - I « Tfe wi'i«t «»*««) «" ^'^ , ' ,„.. /row the bondage V »«" iJome.-Bisliop Tomline. Ex. Bible Quest. Fairly Test. ^ ' \: ' • ;J]J'P^fi^J!pii jyiii^iyipiipip^ «■.;, • '- THE PROTESTANT RDLE OF FAITH. •* Dearly beloved^ believe not every spirit; but try the spirits whether they be f^ God ; because many false prophets are gone out into the world. . . . They are (fthe world) therefore of the world they speak, and the world heareth them. TTe are qf God. He that knoweth Qod heareth us ; he that is not of Qod heareth us not ; by this we know the spirit qf truth, and the spirit of error !^ — I Ep. St. John, IV : 1. 5. 6. ;yr J,:!v. ;. >• '"':,■■ fif In a pamphlet published on the 23rd ult., appears a "Verbatim report of a Sermon delivered by the Rev. Wm. Stephenson, in the M. E. Church, Ottawa, January 14th," on the subject: "Why I am a Protestant." This y "man purports to be a reply to the lecture of the Rev. Father Damen, «> jrsuit Missionary, delivered on the evenings of December 14th and 18th, in the Catholic Cathedral of this city, on the subject : The Protestant and Catholic Rules of Faith, or the means ordained by Christ whereby men may learn, without fear of being led astiay, without the possibility of mis- take or error, the true religion, the religion taught by u esus Christ. Father Dameu, in considering the subject, clearly and distinctly stated his proofs and arguments and logically reasoned them out against the Protestant Rule of Faith. Does Mr. Stephenson, as a fair and logical debater, take them up, one by one, and disprove them ? He does not : he simply satisfies himself ^y shying clear of them, or at most, by only firing a few random shots at them iii gUibo^ and then retiring undjr the cover of a cloud of dust, which he has laboured to crea^, ^^qudbingi;^ jEeW i«xti| of Scripture which may dazzle the i^i^^fkr^r, bu{»^wjSi(^ prove •nobh^^ oo^^^usure to the point. Let us Me whitt father !l3amen sa&dy aifcf what greatVa2ii€),{l;«(e is in that rule of faifl^«9rwc& holds the Ref^'Afrg ^Stephenson in the J^testant religion. " I am'^*Wotestant,", he^ 8ay{i , «' ]t>9<^Ji9l? ^ J^<>H ^^^ Holy' Scriptures a suf- ficient rule of iz^^i|i|li, jt48^ ftiyflelf •responsible- fo^ searching them." (See page 6. ) He gives otlter refe^na ako f but theri'tde of laitif being the main question at issue, the subject on which Father Damen lectured, I will strictly confine my ronarks to it ; and my readers, at the close of this pamphlet, will be able to say, whether I have fulfilled my promise, or wandered off, like the /• :■;. KeV. Mr. Stephenson, into any number of Mnbjects. If the Rer. Mr, Stephenson's rule of faith is the true one, the one ordained by Christ, then, of course, he has a solid reason in it for being a Protestant and so have all Protestants. But is it so? ' :. . -^^ H' ^. Father Damen opened his lecture by a few renuurks on tiie necessity of divine faith. Divine faith, he explained, was different from human faith } the one was faith founded on the authority of God, the other was belief based upon the authority of man. Divine futh, he said, was absolutely necessary to salvntion ; and consisted in believing on the authority of God, without doubting or hesitating, the truths which God has revealed. Divine faith was necessary ; for Christ himself has said that, " He that believeth not shall be condemned," that is damned, (Mark, xvi ch., 16 v.) And St. Paul has declared that "without faith it is impassible to please God." (Heb. xich., 6 v.) Divine futh, then, being necessary to sahration, the next question which naturally presented itself to the mind was : What must we believe that we may be saved ? What must we believe that we may not be damned ? For, " He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be condenmed." (Mark, xvi.) To this question Father Damen answered : We must beLave and profess the true religion. And what is the true religioa? Father Damen said: It is to believe in Christ, and all the truths \( ;iich Christ has taught, all that God has revealed. The Rev. Mr. Stephensoa says, the true religion, r,T Christianity in the " essential sense " — ^by which term I take him to metJi that true religion or Christianity which must be believed upon pain of ete:- nal damnation, — ^is " nothing more, it Is certainly nothing less than Christ in the human heart, swaying affection, controlling thought, ruling passions, marshalling actions, and sanctifying all the habits of human life— that is Christianity and that only is Christianity." (Page 2.) But this definition, Mr. Stephenson will permit me to say, is exceedingly general and vague ? ^ Yill he therefore be good enough to tell me what does he mean by having " Christ in the human heart, ftc." He means by it, he says, that we must believe in Jesus, not simply believe in certain truths which He has taught. "'Whan .Tastici tMma ItAwa " aawa *M«s Si^MrAA.■nat%J^ *< m t\\a •arniAA r\l^oaAhir\tr lieve in the trntb which Christ haa^ Uf^il^f ^^^ ^'^ ^^ U^ ^T^ ^^^ Christianity without beli^ in which we will be damned, — ^it is n^cUtU to believe that Christ was God, the Son of God, the Word made flesh, the prjmised Messiab, and that we ^n.M l^r^Jto reject and dfar^gard and ■: ■-v&'.i.'i^-i. I I II JiW « diabeilieve all the other truths which Christ has taught ; " all things" which he commanded his Apostles to preach ; then I say, Mr. Stephenson, you are wrong, you do an injury to Christ, you insult common sense, you are not a Christian even in the "essential sense." You are wrong ; for Christ has said, that the Holy Ghost would teach his Apostles " all truth," (John xvi ch., 13 v.) and Christ himself commissioned these Apostles, im- posed the obligation on them, to go into the world and teach this "all truth," " all things which I have commanded you " to every creature. He must therefore necessarily have, at the same time, imposed on "every creature " the correlative obligation of receiving these " all things," " all truth," from the Apostles and believing in them. — " He that believeth not shall be condemned." — You do an injury to Christ ; for you insult him by refusing to accept His word. His authority in " all things," " all truth," by rejecting or refusing to accept, some of His teachings, and treating Him with less confidence and respect than yon would any gentleman of the world in whose honor, integrity and credibility, you would make profes- sion, and whose word or authority, in consequence, you would find yourself bound, not to rashly call in question. You insult common sense ; for common sense telL? us that if Christ is God, he is the Eternal, the Infinite Wisdom, and being the Infinite Widdom, He could not stultify himself by teaching any truth, which would not tend towards the fulfilment of His mission among men, to shew forth and promote the glory of the Eternal Father, and promote &nd secure the eternal salvation of men's souls ; and if all His truths or teachings tend to promote these two objects, it follows, as a necessary consequence, that men must believe them, that is — all of them ; for all men are created with souls to save, and to give honor and glory " to our Father who is in Heaven." You are not a Christian even in " the essential sense," for to be a true Christian means to be a true follower of Christ, and to be a true follower of Christ you must believe, as I have shewn, all truths which Christ has taught, ** all things" which He has commanded, not simply a few of them. But I cannot really believe that the Bev. Mr. Stephenson, who prof essei to be a "preacher of the (Gospel, " looks upon it as quite sufficient that men should believe in order to salvation, that Christ was God the Son of God, the promised Messiah, and, that it is a matter of perfect indifference whether they believe or not, all other truths whidh Christ has thought I will ^o him the justice to think, that he considers that every w>« i.t* is bound to believe every truth that Christ has t hs nght, which comes under his knowledge ^ and that every man is boundi so far as his ability, 1^ time, his occnpations ftc. , will permit him, to lenmii^t these truths are. I will not insult his reason by saying, that he considers that the word of Christ, the authority of Christ, is not as worthy of credit H every instance when He teaehes truth, as ix. one or two or three pariicalsr iistAooes. ^.T^ ms^^^m^m f^ ■\ I ,V,.,T_^-. 4 Wctl, then, taking it for granted, that the Rev. Mr. Stephenson considers^ that all men are required to believe, not only in Christ but also in all the truths which Christ has taught, on pain of being condemned, of eternal damnation ; and thai all men are bound, as far as circumstances will permit, to learn what these all truths, "all things," are ; the question naturally arises: How are they to come to a knowledge of Christ and all the truths which Christ has taught? There muat be certainly some means opon to them ; for it would be outrageous to say, that all men must believe in Him and them upon pain of being damned, and that Christ has left no means by which they may learn what they are required to believe. Not only must there be some means, but that means must be, — our common sense tells us so — a means existing in all ages, available in all times ; for in all ages and all times of Christianity, the obligation to believe existed and upon the same penalty. It must also be a means within the reach of all people, the poor as well as the rich ; for the poor are required to believe and have souls to save as well as the rich. It must moreover be a means adapted to the capacity dt all people, the dullest and mpst ignorant, as well as the most intelligent and learned ; for the former have as good a right to the joys of Heaven as the latter. It must finally, be a means, that will, if people honestly and sincerely follow it, infallibly lead them, without danger of error, without possibility of mistake to know Christ and "all things' which he has commanded them to believe upon pain of being damned. These conditions, our own reason con- vinces us, must attach to the rule which Christ has left us. Now, where is the rule, which Christ has left us, to be found ? The Rev. Mr. Stephenson says, he has it, that Protestantism has it ; and that it consists in the Bible, the whole Bible and nothing but the Bible as under- stood and interpreted by each person. " I am a Protestant," he says " becatue 1 hold the Holy Scriptures a su^dentrule of my faith, and mytelf re- apormhU for searching them." (Page 5.) By the " Holy Scriptures" he must necessarily mean the whole Bible ; for he does not limit the meaning of the wa-days, when Bibles are scattered, through the aid of type and steam-presses, all over the world by millions, your rule of faith is an impossible one for all unable to read, the majority of the people of thb world. It therefore cannot be a " sufficient" rule for them, and consequently can not be the rule ordained by Christ, who came on earth to save the illiterate and the ignorant as Well as the learned. But even supposing, that every man, women, and child, in the world could read and read well, would the case be very different ? It is a well known fact, that comparatively very few in the world, know anything about the languages in which the Scriptures were originaly written. Very few therefore could consult or search them, /^ their vernacular tongues; the great bulk of the population of the worl^would have to search the tran- slated versions. Well, then, take the English Bible for example. A man takes it in his hands, seats himself and begins to search it. A thought strikes him. I am about, he says, to do — what ? To try and learn from this Book, which in given to me as a " pnfficent" rule of my faith, whatsoever, Christ has commanded I shall believe upon pain of damnation. And how must I proceed in order that I may not be led astray, be deceived T I must, first, make myself perfectly certain that this English copy of the Bible is a correct rendering, a faithful translation of the Bible as written in the or- iginal languages ; for, if it is only an unfaithful rendering, a corrupt tran- slation, then it does not contain the pure word of God; therefore, in search- ing it, I may be led astray and deceived, for I may faU upon the corrupt passages in it. And how can I make myself certain, that it is a faithful translation? Here I am at a stand-still; for I do not know even fh« first vord about the original lanc^uages, and therefore cannot test the matter." Thereupon, Mr. Stephenson steps forward and charitably relieves the embarrassment of the searcher of the Bible by saying : " Being more or less familiar with both languages, I am bold to aver that the English translation, as we have it, does no violence to the original, perverts no divine truth. '^ (see page 8.) The man reflects seriously, for a few moments, on this solemn assurance ; but not findmg in it that perfect satisfaction or certainty which he considers he should have in a matter of snch serious import h« replies: "'Your bold averment, Mr. Stephenson, may be perfectly satisfactory to yourself, but to me it is not so. Toia may, indeed, as yoU say, be more or less familiar with both languages, and feel convinced, that the English translation, " as we have it," does no violence to the origiiial, perverts no divine truth; but it strikes me that I l^ive often heard «iiid often read, that our En^ish translation does do violenoe to the orilginal and w-^ 1 1 i I > I ^ > 12 does pervert divine truth, and that this has been maintained even by •ometknen most learned in the original languagoa, and in biblical lore. And when I have read and heard that this is the oa8<), you, surely, cannot im- agine, that I should so far forget the dictates of common prudence and, to use expressions of your own, "ignore my intelligence and offend my conscience," (see page 8) — as to accept your ipie dixit or " bold" averment in the matter. When learned doctors disagree, what can I, who know not a word about the Greek Hebrew, &c., decide in the matter. Therefore I must still say, I am at a staud-stiil, that I know not what to say ; and, therefore, I am forced to conclude, on the very threshold of my search, that the Bible is not to me a *' sufficent " rule of my faith, and that I cannot be held responsible for searching it." But even granting that this point — the correctness and faithfulness of tha translation is settled, — does the searcher of the Bible find himself in a much better position? As great difficulties yet remain. The man takes the Bible and opening it at the xxii Chapter of the Book Revelations, he reads a quotation which he finds in Mr. Stephenson's sermon as follows : "If any man shall add unto those things, God shall add unto him the plagues which are written in this book ; and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prohecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life." " Thia is a terrible threat," says the Bible searcher to himself ; " so I must beuareful, to make myself certain, not to add anything to the book or take away any- thing from it* And how can I make myself certain of this ? Only by being certain, assured beyond the possibility of doubt, or mistake that the deduc- tions or doctrines, or teachings, I draw from the words of the book, are the truths which Christ has taught, that God has revealed. And how can I be thus certain ? Only by being certain beyond room for doubt, of giving to the words of the book, the exact meaning which Christ, which God, intended they should express and convey to the minds of men. And how can I be certain of this ? Ah ! here is the difficulty which puzzles me. If I trust my own judgment, I know I may be led astray ; for I know my judgment is liable to err, and, as a matter of fact, has often erred in my life time, and may, of course, err, also, now in this instance. What then must I do ? Consult my minister ; but my rule of faith says, no ; search the Scriptures yourself, they are " sufficient" for you. Consult my Church as the divinely instituted organ of God's word, which cannot lead me astray, but my church, says, she is not infallible, is not a divinely instituted body commissioned by Christ to teach infallibly the truth and nothing but the truth, she may, therefore, like my own judgment, err. Where then must I turn in my perplexity ? I am at a stand-still again. I cannot trust my judgment, I cannot trust my minister, I cannot trust my Church; what, then, am I to do ? Is it possible, that, in this fearful uncertainty, I am held responsibl* ~r— T % — — v^ f^mmm ^^^m^mm 13 hy Ohrist to go on and learch thoSoripturea ? It cannot be ; for if I go on anil •earoh, the only result of my iiearch may bo, to ^Ive a wrong inter* pretation to the words of God, to run into error, profess doctrines which are not the teachings of inspiration, and, therefore, I may add to, or take away from, " the words of the book ;" and Ood has declared that if any man do so, He will visit him with plagues and take away his part out of the book of life. Surely, Christ could not place any man in such a terribly perplexing position." But, here Mr. Sephenson might again step forward, and leoom' mend the Bible searcher to have recourse to prayer and " boldly aver" that if he adopted this advice, the Holy Spirit would guide him all right. But to this the searcher of the Bible might answer : " This is indeed a very good advice you give me, Mr. Stepenson, but I do not think that after all your "bold" averment will relieve me out of my difficulty. There are my neighbours, groat Bible searchers, Mr. Prayerful, Mr. Pious, Mr. Religious, Mr. Sanctimonius, Mr. Honest, Mr. Sincere, Mr. Welldisposed, Mr. Well- intentioned, Mr. Goodroasoner, Mr. Goodjudgement, Mr. Scientific, and Mr. Learned, and a better intentioned, more prayerful set of men I have never known in my life ; and they have been praying and praying and searching and searching the Scriptures, and imagining that the " Holy Spirit" was guiding and directing them in doing so, for thn last forty-five years * and what is the result ? Why, that Mr. Prayerful, nothwithstand- ing all his praying and imagining the *' Holy Spirit" was guiding him, has come to the conclusion that the Bible teaches, that there are not three really distinct persons in God, while Mr. Pious, on the contrary, has come to the conclusion, that there are three persons ; that Mr. Religions quotes th« Bible to prove that Christ was not God, while Mr. Sanctimonious quotes il to prove that He is God ; that Mr. Honest says, there is no hell, taught in the Bible, while Mr. Sincere says, there is ; that Mr. Welldisposed proclaims polygamy as a Scriptural institution, while Mr. Wellintentioned says, the Scriptures abhor such a monstrous doctrine ; that Mr. Goodroasoner from his searching of the Bible professes Free-loveism, while Mr. Goodjudgment stoutly maintains the Bible teaches marriage ; that Mr. Scientific says yon must not baptize infants because no such teaching is to be found in the Bible, while Mr. Learned says it is to be found there and you must baptise them. And so on it is with many others of my neighbours, all apparently honest and prayerful tec, and all nevertheless professing the most con-- tradictory doctrines, which they imagine, that, under the guidance of th^ Holy Spirit, the} have found to be contained in the Bible. Now, how can the searcher of the Bible, if he be a sensible, pmdenk man, in the face of such facts, accept, the Rev. Mr. Stephenson's *' bold" averment, that the Holy Spirit will guide him all right, and thereon trust himself to searching . the Scriptures, whep he sees so manj »-. I .V A I I" i.* s I 14 «(«liii(l him, who h»ve been led utray in doing lo. His oonunon lenM telli him, that all these men, profeiaing the most contradictory doctrines, cannot all be right, all believing the truth ; and, stilly they appear, in their searching after truth in the Bible, all to be a« sensible, as honest and as prayerful as he is himself. What, then, must he tionclude ? Simply that Mr. Stephenson's bold averment is not " sufficient," and the rule, which has led so many other people into error and often into the greatest blasphemies, may lead him astray also. And this being the conclusion which he must, in common sense, draw, how can he trurt that rule ? And not being able to trust it, he cannot look upon the Holy Horiptures as " a sufficient" rule of his faith, and, consequently, cannot regard it, as the rule ordaiaed by Christ, to lead all men, without fear of mistake or error , to a knowledge of what they must believe, upon pain of being damned. " He that believeth not shall be condemned." But, do not the Scriptures themselves warn the Bible searcher Agaiust trusting to his own private judgement, in searching and interpreting them ? Does not St. Peter tell him, that in the Scriptures there are contained " things hard to be understood which the unlearned and unstable wrest as they do also the other Scriptures to their own destruction"? (2 Pet. Ch. III. 16.) And if there are '-.hingshard to be understood" in the Bible, or Holy Scriptures, how can " the unlearned aud unstable," the great mass of man- kind, without the greatest temerity and the blindest presumption, imagine that they can easily understand and interpret them T And how can Mr. Stephenson place the Bible in their hands as a " sufficient " rule of their faith, and assure ihem, that they will be able to leam from it, the tmth% the " all things " which they are required to believe, to save themselves t St. Peter warns them that they may wrest these " things hard to be under- stood " as they may also all the other Scriptures to their "own destruction," — -fhat is damnation ; but Mr. Stephenson assures them, there is no such danger— but, on the contrary, that the Bible including the "hard things " will nnqnestionably, lead them right, make them " wise unto salvation." Which are we to believe, & . Peter or Mr. Stephenson ? And again ; does not St. Peter also assure us, that " no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation "? (2 Pet. 11 Ch.— 20 V.) But Mr. Stephenson's rule of faith says, that St Peter is wrong ; fhat all prophecy of Scripture, all the Scriptures, are of private interpretation, and that fhey are. Si Peter to the contrary notwithstanding^ a " sufficient " rule of faith for all men, even the " unlearned and unstable." Again, I ask, which are we to be- lieve ; St Peter or Mr. Stephenson ? Moat people would say : unquestion- ably, St Peter. Then, in that caae^ how can the. " unlearned and unstable," the great mass of numkind, look upon the liable m a sufficient rule of their fkith ? And if they cannot do this, kow can they rqgud it as the means or- dained by Christ ? v -~^ ij» » ' ;» ,. - ■•' ■ ■. ' ,-'< » ■ »; . -r-^ ; pt». -, « T >f — .'i-.j.' '*~«,' ^''(^y^^S^S'^"*" , T^ • ■ ^*=^=T> 15 Bui even aappoeiug all these ^lifficultiei removed, are there not yet points which the eearoher of the Bible muat latisfaotorily settle before he can make use of Mr. Stephenson's rule of faith ? How will he be able to prove, beyond doubt, the inspiration of the Bible and all parts of the Bible ? And how can he establish the Canon, or the authentic list, of the books of the Scripture, which are to be received as divine ? In regard to the firrt question, the Scriptures themselves furnish no satisfactory information or proof, in re< gard to their being inapired in all their parts. The Rev. Mr. Stephenson himself cannot produce this essential information or testimony from any part of the New Testament, from the first page of the Gospel of St. Mathew to the last page of the Book of Revelations. But, even, if he could, it might still be objected, that the book, being on its trial could not legi' timately bear testimony in favor of itself ; or that those parts which might be produced, as bearir *▼ testimony to it, were not themselves inspired, and. therefore were useless as testimony. To be a sufficient rule, the inspiration of every part of the Bible must be first settled, and settled by unques* tionable testimony, which the Bible, itself does not furnish. The ReV. Mr. Stephenson may, however, say, that the few texts, that can be wrested or forced into a weak semblance of proof, that the Scriptures assert their own inspiration, ought to satisfy any man ; but from what I have said and in the face of the fact, that learned men, Protestantualso, like Bishop Colenso and the writers in the Essays and Reviews, have unhesitatingly called in ques> tion the inspiration of the Scriptures or at least the inspiration of parts of them, the searcher of the Bible, could have but little confidence in the Rev. Mr. Stephenson's assertion ; and therefore on the very threshold ot his enquiry he would have to give up the Bible as a sufficient rule of faith for him. Now, as to the question of the Canon, or authentic list, of the books which constitute the Bible, the Scripture searcher, would be very little better off. The Scriptures, themselves give no catalogue of those books of the New Teetment, which are to be received as divine. How, then, could he determine them. His own private judgement could decide nothing in the matter ? Would the Rev. Mr. Stephenson here again "boldly aver" something for his satisfaction ? But might not he as before, dissent from the Rev. Mr. Stephenson's averment, especially should he happen to know, that learned Protestants themselves have wrangled and quarrelled over the qne»> tion ; and that both in the Old and New Testaments mention or allusion, is made (Numbxzi oh. v. 14 ; 11 Chron. ix ch. 29 v. Math, xxvn oh. 9 v. and elsewhere) to books which are now lost. Parsons, Grabe, Toland and many other learned Protestants, have regarded the Canon as either full of difficulties or as very incomplete. The celebrated Protestant divine, the Rev. Jeremiah Jones, who died in the last Century (1724), published a learn* ■'\m I 16 u » •d treatiae on a " New and full method of settling the Canonical authority of the New Testament "; and in that work, he admits that the nuestion of the Canon is " attended with very many and great difficulties"; and that ''^ a great number of christians are destitute of any good arguments for their belief of the Canonical authority of the books of the New Testament ; and " very little has been done on the subject " to settle it. The quotations are from the first edition of his work (the heads of the chapters as giveu on the first page) published at Oxford in 1827. And at page 12 he says : 'JBTa whohoM but the leeut oceeuion to acquaint hinuelfmth the religious ttate o/*nankindf cannot but with wrprinr^ eoneem have observed, how slender and uncertain the principles are, upon which men receive the Scripture as the word of God." And he adds : " The truth is though a very painful cue, that many persons. . . .by the chance of education and the three of custom receive the Scriptures as the word of God, without making any nrioM enquiries, and conseqnen< tly without being able to give any solid reasona, why they believe them to be such." 'And the celebrated Richard Baxter in still stronger language, speaks of the difficulties of the Canon. In his well known work. " The Saints' Everlasting Re<3t" at page 197 he says : " Are the more exercised, under- standing sort of Christains able by «oun(/ arguments to make good the verity of Scripture ? Nay, are the meaner sort of ministers able to dc this ? Let them that have tried judge." So you see, Mr. Stephenson, that, even according to the celebrated Protestant divine, Richard Baxter, not only are the exercised and understanding class of I rotestants, not able to prove the truth of Scripture, but that the lower order of ministers or teachers are not able to do it. And again at page 201, he says : '* It is strange to consider how we all abhor that piece of Popery, as most injurious to God of all the rest, which resolves our faith into the authority of the Church ; and yet that we do, for the generality of professors, content ourselves with the Mine kind of faith, only with this di£ference.— the Pop^t^te believe the Sorip- hae to be the word of God, because their Church saith so, and we, because our Chur 'h or our leaders say so. Yea And many ministers never yet gave their people better grounds, but tell them tiiat it is damnable to deny it, but help them not to the antecedents of faith ." And in the following page he remarks : " It is to be imderstood that many thousands doprqfess Christanity and xealousljf hate the enemies thereof upon the same grounds, to the same end and from the the same inward corrupt principles, as the Jews did haU and hiU Christ." This is very strong language ! not the " bold assertions " of Father Damen, but the calm deliberate averment of a learned and celebrated Protestant divine, the Rev. Richard Baxter, who was, subsequently to the Restoration Chaplain to the King of En|^and. And, now, Mr. Stephenson, in the faoe of such deliberate averments ay some of the most learned and di»> iinguished Protestant diviaes, how can' the searcher of the Bible, "'W'l'^T — IT trart himBoIf — ^his own private judgement, beyond danger of doubt, in aettl- in;^{ the question of the Canon ? And if he can not, how can he accept the Scriptures as a " sufficient" rule of his faith, even in this progressive age, when Bibles, through the aid of type and nteam-presses, are scattered over the world by millions. I have now, I tnink, answered pretty fully the two questions, which I preferred at Page 6, of this pamphlet, regarding the rule of faith which holds the Rev. Mr. Stephenson in the Protestant religion. I have examined ryhether that rule, the Holy Scriptures or whole Bible, could have ^jeen a sufficient rule of faith for all people in all times in the past, and shewn it could not ; and I have examined, also, whether even in the present age, when Bibles are scattered all round, it is a sufficient rule for all people ; and proved the same. What, then, is the conclusion thai necessarily fol- lows ? That the Rev. Mr. Stephenson's rule is not the rule ordained by Christ, and, therefore, that no man can be held responsible for searching, it, to learn what he must believe. But are there any other arguments, which may be adduced to shew, that the Rev. Mr. Stephenson's, or Protestant rule, is not the divinely instituted rule ? There are many ; and I will briefly touch upon a few of them, before I come to the consideration of the quotations from the Scriptures and the early Fathers, which M.r. Stephenson brings forward in support of his rule. In the first place ; is it not very probable that, if Christ intended that the Holy Scriptures, should be the rule of faith for the world, the means by which the world should be converted and the Christian Religion maintain- ed "even unto the consummation of the world," — (Math, xxviii. 20) — that He would have written them or some part of them, himself ? And what is the fact ? That Christ never wrote one single word of the Bible, in his whole life. He tpoks much, taught much by word of mouth ; Ke preached constantly, but. He never wrote, or gave any express intimation of a desire or wish, that his truths, or teachings, should be ever taught by writing, or otherwise, than by oral preaching. But, if He did not write a word of the Bible himself, surely, if the Protestant rule of faith be the true one, He must have given some express command to his Apostles to commit his teachings to writing. And what do we find ? Not one word in the whole New Testament, from the first page of the Oospel of St. Mathew, to the last of the Book of Revelations, about any such command. We find, that He commanded his Apostles to teaeh^ and preach his religion " to every creature," and that he commanded every creature to hear them, (Lukex. 16.) In His commission to his Apostles, (Math xxviil. 19.20.) He does not say : Go, write Bibles to all nations ; but "Go, teach all nations," " teaching them to observe, &c." He does not •ay : Gu, write Bibles to every creature ; but, Go, preach to every creature. 1; 18 (St. Mark xvi. 15.) And what do we find in St. Mark, (same chapter, 20 v) ? That, going forth, they wrote Bibles to every nation, no ; but that going forth, they preacAerf everywhere. There is no question, but that the Apostles afterwards did commit to writing, some of the truths which they had prs- vionfiy preached, but they received no command from Christ to do so, and they did not do so, with the mind of leaving their writings as the rule of faith for the world. St. Paul himself intimates this, when he refers so frequently to his waZ ^McAtn^rs, hia preaching, and when (11 Thess. 11. 14.) he bade the Thessalonians to stand firm, and hold the s not one of the twelve Apostles ; he was not converted to Christianity until Christ had left the earth. Moreover ; if it had beeu the intention of Christ, that the Scriptures shouldjform our rule of faith, would not l^e Apostles have given us, in their writings, at least a regular and complete summary of the Christian faith, and have stated clearly and distinctly somewhere in the New Testa- ment, what are the doctrines or truths which we are required to believe upon pain of being condemned ? And, still, they have not done so, and the best proof they have not done so, is to be found in the mass of contradictory doctrines professed by those, who take the Bible as their rule of faith, and hold themselves responsible for sear I:ing it. ^ ; , ,, / , ,7 , ;, Again ; if the Apostles believed that Christ wished them to write down his teachings and leave the Scriptures as the rule of faith, is it not probable, that they would have gone to some trouble to write down for us, all that Christ said and did ? And have they done this ? They have not. During the forty days, which intervened between Christ's resurrection from the dead and His ascension into Heaven, Christ must have said and done an innumerable number of things * and still how little do any of the inspired 19 Mcriters record of His sajrings and doings, during that time. And, still, who will say, that this was not a time, in which Christ was very likely to say and do a great deal ; discourse much with his Apostles about the kingdom of God ? St. Paul himself tells us that He did speak ''things" about it. (Acts i. 3.) It it not surprising, then, that the Apostles, if the Protestant rule of faith be the true one, have not left us a fuller account of "the things" which He did speak, pertaining to the kingdom of God ? Is it not surprising also^ that they should have satisfied themselves with giving to the world in the writ- ten word, only very brief summaries of a few of the many things Christ did, and said, during His whole public life? It really is. And still the Rev. Mr. Stephenson says, the Scriptures are a satisfactory, a " suffi- cient" rule of faith. If, indeed, all the many ' 'things" which Christsaidand did, were recorded fully in them, there might be some pretence, to regard them as such.. But how can any sensible man hold them as "sufficient," when he read§ in St. John xxi. 25. "But there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written." * Again ; is it not a generally admitted fact, that until the time of Moses, there was no written revelation to form the guide or rule of faith for all the people who lived before his day ? And, still, will the Rev. "Mr. Stephenson say that Seth, Abraham, Isaac, Melchisedeck, and aU God's people, were not saved? And, nevertheless, the truths which they believed and by belief in which they were saved, were truths for which they had no authority but tradition. Moreover, did Moses, when he had written the law, give a copy of it to each person of the people of Israel, as the only rule of his faith ? He did not ; on the contrary, he delivered it to the priests and the ancienfd, (Deut. xxxi. 9.)— and commanded them to deposit it " in the side of the ark of the covenant," adding, " after seven pears, in the year of remission. . . . thou shalt read the word of this law, before all Israel in their hearing." This does not look much like, as if the Scrip- tures or written law, in the days of Moses, formed the sole rule of faith for the people, or that they were held responsible for searching them. The priests themselves were to read them to the people and this only, once in seven years. Again, (Deut. xvii. 8. 9.) what do we read? That in all matters concerning them, they should take the written law as their sole guide or judge and search it \ Not so ; for we read that when any hard and doubt- ful matter in judgement was among them, recourse should be had to the priests and the judge of the law and they should decide it, and all should abide by the r judgement, upon pain of death. "K thou perceive there be among you a hard and doubtful matter in judgement. . . . thou sAalt come to the priests of the Levitical race and to \^q ju^e, that shall be at that time ; and thou shall ask of them and they shall fik&VTyovi the truth of the judge- 20 inent. And thou shalt do whatsoevor they shall say, that pretide in the place which the Cord ehall choose, and what they shall teach thee according to his law ; and thou shalt follow their sentence, neither shalt thou decline tot''e right hand, nor to the Irft hand. But he that will be proud, and refute to obey the eommandment oi ihapriett, who miniatereih at that time to the Lord thy God and the decree of the judge, that man shall die, and thou shalt t^ke away the enl from Israel. And all the people hearing it shall feiu*, that no one after- wards swell with pride." (Deuter xvii. 8 to 13.) From this it is clear^ that the people of Israel were not aUowed to indulge their judgement by jHivate interpretation of the written law, but, on the contrary, were com- manded to consult the priestti and especially the judge or High Priest in mattws hard and difficult to be decided, and to follow their judgement, upon pain of death. And again : (in ii Par. or Chron.) we read : "In Jerusalem, also, Josaphat appointed Levttestaid priests, and chiefs of the families of Israel io judge the judgement and the cause of the Lord for the inhabitants thereof. And he charged them sajring : Thus shall you do in the fear of the Lord faithfully and with a perfect heart. Every cause that shall come to you (before you) of your brethren. . . . concerning the law, the commandments, the ceremonies, the justifications, shew it them, (decide it for them,) that they may not sin against the Lord. . . . And Amarias the priest your high priest shall be chitf in the things which regard Ood. . . . and you have before you the Levites for masters." (ii Par. or Chron. xix 8. to 11.) Here again, we find that it was the priests, especially the High Priest, and not each individual, that were to search the Scriptures and ex- plain or decide, "the things which regard GU)d." — ^Elsewhere, (in Malachias u. 7.) the Lord declares that " the lips of the priest shall keep knowledge ; and they (the people) shall seek the law at his mouth ; because he is the Angel (the minister) of the Lord of Hosts." — I might quote many other passages from the old Testament to shew, that before the advent of Christ, the private interpretation of the Scriptures was not permitted; and that the people were not allowed to " hold the Holy Scriptures" as a "sufficient' rule of their faith and hold themielves responsible for searching them. But, I think, the quotations I have made, are clear and explicit enough to decide the question ; as they shew, beyond doubt, that recourse was to be had "in the things which regard God" to the priests and especially to the High Priest. And what are we to infer from this ? That there is a very strong antecedent probability that the rule asserted by the Rev. Mr. Stephenson and by Protestants ganerally, is mi the rule ordained by Christ, and that, therefore, it isnotasufficient rule. Again, is it not absurd to place such a book as the Bible in the hands of even the most stupid and ignorant men, and pretend that each one of 21 them is better able to interpret it, than all the pastors of the Church together ? Now, what is the Bible ? Let a work open before me, answer. "Here is a book" (the Bible;) says the writer, " which comprises within a limited compass, the period of four thousand years, and adviuices further towards the most distant future, by embracing the origin and destiny of man and the universe — a book which, with the continued history of fi. chosen people, iatermingles, in its narrations and prophecies, the revolutions of mighty empires — a book which, side by side with the magnificent pictures, of the power and splendor of Eastern monarchs, describes, in simple colors, the plain domestic manners, the candor and innocence of a young nation — ^a book in which historians relate, sages proclaim, their maxims of wisdom, Apostles preach, and doctors instruct — a book in which prophef;s, under the influence of the divine Spirit, thunder against the errors and corruptions of the people and annoimce the vengeance of the Qod of Sinai, or pour forth inconsolable lamentations on the captivity of their brethren, and the desolation and solitude of their country; where they relate, in wonderful and sublime language, the magnificent spectacles which are pre- sented to their eyes ; where, in moments of ecstacy, they see pass before them the events of society and the catastrophes of nature, although veiled in mysterious figures and visions, of obscurity — a book, or rather a collection of books, where are to be found all sorts of styles and all varieties of narrative, epic majesty, pastoral simplicity, lyric fire, serious instruction, grave historical narrative, and iivb.^ .^d rapid dramatic action ; a coUec- tion of books, in fine, written at various times and in various languages, in various countries, and under the most peculiar and extraordinary circum- stances. Such is the Bible." And, now, Mr. Stephenson is there not something very absurd, in putting such a book, as a rule of faith, into the hands of illiterate, ignorant men and telling them to search it, to try and understand it ? Must not such a book, in the words of the same author, confuse the heads of men, even well instructed, who pul*ed up with their own conceit, grope through these pages in the dark, ignoiant of climates^ times, laws, customs, and man- ners. They wiU be puzzled by allusions, surprised by images, deceived by expressions ; they will hear the Greek and Hebrew, which was written in those remote ages, now spoken in a modem idiom. What effects must all these circumstances produce in the minds of readers who believe that the Bible is an easy book, to be understood without difficulty by all ? Persuaded that they do not require the instructions of others, they must either resolve all these difficulties by their own reflections, or trust to that individual inspiration which they believe will not be wanting to explain to fhem the loftiest mysteries. "^Yho, therefore, can be astonished, that Protestantism has produced so many absurd visionaries, who have imagin- 92 ed, that they had a "call" from Ood, to rend into pieces the seamless garment of Christ and establish religions as numerous as the days of the year. Who, therefore, can be astonished to find, so many religions, so many sects; "Old and New Presbyterians; Associate and Reformed, and Cumberland Presbyterians ; Luther&ns ; Dutch Reformed ; German Reformed Churches ; Evangelical Lutherans ; Baptists ; Freewill Baptists ; Seventh Day Baptists ; and — as we have sometimes heard and read of — Hard and Soft Shell Baptists; Methodists, — The Methodist Society, — The Methodist Episcopal, and Methodist Protestant Churches, the Reformed Methodist and finally, the true Wesleyan Methodist Church ; Mennonites and Reformed Mennonites ; Shakers and Qakers ; Seekers and Finders ; Tunkers and Restorationists, Millenarians and New Jerusalemites, Schwenkfelders and Second Advent Men ; United Brethren in Christ , C^ngregationalists, Universalists, Unitarians, Moravians, Christians, True Christians, Saints and Latter-Day Saints ; Spiritualists and Freeloveists," and two or three hundred other tsts, all contradicting one another, and all professing to teach the truth. All these ists are but the natural offspring of the private interpretation of the Scriptures, of the rule which makes the Rev. Mr. Stephenson, a Protestant ; and they are the only o£f- spring which might hav3 been expected from it. It is this principle of private interpretation which has given birth to the whole of thum, and generated so many errors. For, such is the activity of the human mind, and the ardour with which it is inclined to embrace all sorts of innovation, that once the yoke of authority thrown off. It is impossible to restrain its restlessness, or make it remain fixed on any one point. Men of free and active minds can never remain tranquil, ex pt in the peaceful regions of truth ; and, until they sre convinced, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that they dwell in these regions, they will keep seeking after the truth continually with restlessness, and anxiety, and disquietude ; and, if they have only a false principle to act upon or to guide them in their enquiry, they will keep constantly changing their position, leap from error to error, and precipitate themselves from one abyss to another. And hence, the reason, why we see so many sects continually springing up around us, brought into existence, by those free and active minds, who, feeling no solid ground beneath their feet, constantly change their position, and, like the mariner on the wide ocean, without any compass or reliable chart or knowledge of his course, steers in ' every direction, in the hope of at last, by chance, reaching some safe harbour • in which he may find shelter from the dangers which threaten to loose him. Protestantism itself, at its commencement, seemed to have some idea of this, and it made an attempt to govern this activity and restlessness of the mind of man. "The religious revolution of the sixteenth century," says a Protestant writer, Mr. Ginzot, " did not understand the true princi- « 23 plea of intellectual liberty ; it liberated the human mind, and yet pretended to govern it by law. " But, this attempt, as a writer commenting on the above says, was in vain ; for man cannot struggle with success against the nature of things : Protestantism endeavoured, without success, to limit the right of private judgement. It raised its voice against it, and sometimes appeared to attempt its total destruction ; but the right of private judgement, which wM in its own bosom, remained there, developed itself, and acted there, in spite of it. There was no middle course for Frotestanism to adopt , it was compelled, either to throw itself into the arms of authority, and thus acknowledge itself in the wrong, or else allow the dissolving principle of private judgement, to exert so much influence on Ms various sects, as to destroy even the shadow of the religion of Jesus Christ, and del^ase Christianity to the rank of a school of philosophy. The cry of resistance to the authority of the Church once raised, the fatal results might have been easily imagined ; it was easy to foresee that that poisoned germ, the principle of private judgement, in its develope- ment, must cause the ruin of all Christain truth. And time, the best judge of opinions, has confirmed these melancholy prognostics. Things have now reached such a pass, that those only who are very ill instructed, or who have a very limited grasp^of mind, can fail to see that the Christian relig- ion as explained by Protestants, is nothing more than an opinion — a system made up of a thousand incoherent parts, and which is degraded to the level of the schools of philosophy. If Christianity, among Protestants, still seems to surpass these schools in some respects, and preserves some feat- ures which cannot be found in whtit is the pure invention of the mind of man, it ought not to be a matter of astonishment. It is owing to that sublim" ity of doctrine and that sanctity of morality, which, more or less disfigured, always shines while a trace is preserved of the words of Jesus Christ. But the feeble light which struggles with darkness after the sun has sunk below the horizon, cannot be compared to that of day : darkness advances,' despite its struggles, and spreads and extinguishes the last {expiring reflection, and night comes on. Such is the doctrine of Christianity among Protestants. A glance at these sects shows us that they are not purely philosophical, but it shows us at the same time that they have not the characters of the true religion. Christianity has no authority therein ; and is there like a being out of its proper element, — a tree deprived of its roots ; its face is pale and disfigured like that of a corpse. Protestantism talks of faith, and its fundamental principle destroys it;; it endeavors to exalt the Gospel, and its own principle, by subjecting that Gospel to private judgement, weak- ens, its authority. If it speak of the sanctity and purity of Christian mor- ality, it is reminded that some of its dissenting sects deny the divinity of Jesus Christ ; and that they may all do so according to the principle of private \".f^'^V 24 WPPVP judgement on which it rests. The divinity of Jesus Christ once doubted, the Qod made man is reduced to the rank of great philosopher and legis- lator ; He is no longer the authority necessary to give to his laws the august sanction which renders them so holy in the eyes of men ; he can no longer imprint upon them the seal which raises them above all human thoughts, and His sublime instructions cease to be lessons flowing from the lips of uncreated wisdom. — If you deprive the human mind of the support of authority of some kind or other, on what can it depend ? Abandoned to its oMm delirious dreams, it is forced again into the gloomy paths which led the philosophers of the ancient schools to chaos. Reason and exper- ience are here agreed. If you substitute the private judgement of Protes- tants for the authority of the Church, un the great questions respecting God and man, remain without a solution. All the difficul vies are left ; the mind is in darkness, and seeks in vain for a light to guide it in safety ; stun- ned by the voices of a hundred schools or sects, who dispute without being able to agree or throw any light on the subject, it relapses into that state of discourc^gement and prostration in which Christianity found it, and from which, Mdth so much exertion, she has withdrawn it. Doubt, pyrrhonism, and indifference become the lot of the greatest minds ; vain theories, hypothet- ical systems, and dreams take possession of men of more moderate abilities ; the ignorant are reduced to superstitions and absurdities." Of what use, then, would Christianity have been on the earth, if the dis- solving principle of private judgement, which affords no support to the human mind, had been the true principle, the true and only guide, which the human mind nad to direct it, in its search after the truth. " Let us, if you will," as the same author remarks, " acknowledge the dignity and elevation of our minds to shew our gratitude to our Creator, but, let us not forget our weakness and defects. Why should wo deceive ourselves by fancying, that we know what we are really ignorant of ? Why forget the incon- stancy and variableness of our minds, and conceal the fact, that with respect to many things, (even those with which we are supposed to be well acquainted,) we have but confujed ideas? How delusive is our knowledge, and what exaggerated notions we have of our progress in information, even in those things? Does not one day contradict, what another had affirmed ? Time runs its course, laughs at our predictions, destroys our plans, and clearly shows how vain are our projects. What have those geniuses who have descended to the foundations of science, and risen to the boldest flights of the loftiest speculations told us ? After having reached the utmost limits of the space which it is permitted to the human mind to range over, — ^after having trodden the most secret paths of science, and sailed on the vast ocean of moral and physical nature, the greatest minds of all ages have returned dissatisfied with the results. They have seen a beautiful illusion ^5 appear bofore their eyes, —the brilliant image which enchanted them has vanished ; and when they thought, they were about to enter a region of light, they have found themselves surrounded with darkness, and they have viewed with affright the extent of their ignorance. It is for this reason that the greatest minds have so little confidence in the strength of the human intellect, although they cannot, but, be fully aware that they are ■aperior to other men." And, still, in the greatest and deepest of all sciences, the science of Qod, the Eternal, the Infinite, and of the truths He has re- vealed, the Rev. Mr. Stephonsou would tell the poor, ignorant, illiterate man, that he is, by his ovm individual judgement, fully competent to explore it, and, with the Bible, — that most difficult of books, — in his hands, fully able to uifravel all its mysteries and difficulties, and learn what God has revealed, and what He requires, that he shall believe, upon pain of being damned t Is there not something here very absurd ? Let the human mind study itself, its own history, and it will see and understand how little security, there is to be found in its own strength, and how very liable it is to err, in its own judgement. Abounding in systeifis, inexhaustible in subtilties; as ready in conceiving a project as incapable in maintaining it ; full of ideas which rise, agitate, and destroy each other, like insects that abound in lakes ; now raising itself on the wings of sublime iuppiration, and now creeping like a reptile on the face of the earth ; as able and as willing to deibtroy the work of others, aa it is impotent to construct any durable ones of its own ; urged on by the violence of passion, swollen with pride, confounded by the infinite variety of objects which present themselves to it ; confused by so many false lights and so many deceptive appearances, the human mind when left entirely to itself, resembles those brilliant meteors which dart at random through the immensity of the heavens, assume a thousand eccentric forms, send forth a thousan-'i sparks, dazzle for a moment by their fan1»stic splendor, and disappear without leaving even a reflected light to illuminate the dark- ness. Such is the history of man's knowledge. And in the light of such history can we be astonished that man, relying solely on his private jmdgo- ment, in interpreting the Holy Scriptures, should grope in the dark, follow delusion after delusion, profess error after error, until, in the hundreds of sects which have been established, a ray of that divine truth which Christ has taught, is scarcely discernible. The Catholic Church, knowing this weakness of man's mind, says to him ; " Thy intellect is weak, thou hast need of a guide in many things." Protestantism, on the contrary, says to him : " Thou art surrounded by light, walk as thou wilt ; thou canst have no better guide than thyself." Which is right ? I leave the reader, to his own reflections on what has been Said about the difficulties of the Bible and the weakness of man's intellect, t» answer tht» question himself. r> I 4 ^ I /• >'/ 26 Bat, it ii not alone Catholic writers who proclaim the Bible aa replett with difBcoltiee, which pnczlethe weaknew of man's mLid when left to itself; Protestant authors themselves proclaim them, and point out the remits, of private interpretation, in attempting, by its own unaided light, to solve them. •• In order to understand the Bible, " says the celebrated Pro- testant divine, Claude, " a great deal is required. A great many obstaclea •re to be surmounted, and a great many difficulties, to be overcouxe. The terms are to be weighed exactly ; the style to be examined. Similar ex- pressions must be considered, and dissimilar passages discussed. The sens* of obscure and ambigous sentences should be penetrated, and the connection of texts alluded to, as they refer to such and such an object. For these purposes, it is necessary to know how to distinguish the Apocryphal books from the Canonical ones, and to understand the original languages, in order to be enabled to judge of the fidelity of the translations ; in to mueh that it M in/aet true, that the whole length cfa life m w>t too long to do thi* well. Nay, 1 even tay^ that it it too thort ; and that all human ttrength it too weak to fathom the tente qfthe Bible— the bottomlett louree qf mytteriet and heavenly trutht.* (Def de la Ref). And, still, Mr. Stephenson would give this ''bottomless source, &c.," which it is above all hi\man strength to fathom, to aven ignorant men. to learn by their own private judgement, what God has revealed, what they are required to believe. ^' Anotiier Protestant, the renowned Jurieu, writing an the same subjeet says : " The ignorant and simple are not only incapable of finding out the truth threading the Bible; but, I allow, with Monsieur Nicole, that lueh meant terpretation, and of his holding "mistaken doctrines," he is enabled, with the Scriptures alone in his hands, " to come even with boldneu to the throne of grace." His "boldness " must indeed be something very extraordinary. The most celebrated Protestants have considered the Bible, not only as a most difficult book ; but, they have plainly pointed outthesad state to^which the private interpretation of it, has brought ihe religious world. In a work before me entitled " The Bible Question Fairly Tested," I find the following (Page 65. ) : " The number of organized sects, and religions, which within the interval of a few years, (after the Reformation was started), was establish- ed among the Reformers, exceeded according to the testimony of some of the Protestant historians, — ^Functius, lindan, Ac.,— upwards of two hundred. The confusion was indeed such, 'that Luther lamenting now the evils, which his own violence had created— exclaimed I " Men are now eome to me A a pitch qf dieorder, that they ttand no longer in wed qf any teaehen. Every man now gives the law to himself." Mosheim, (the great Oerman Pro. testant historian) states that in some parts of Qermany,— such was the growth of error and fanaticism,— the magistrates interfered and forbid th$ reading <^ the BihU, This too, as I have already remarked, was more or less the case in England, where in 1543, the Parliament in consequence of the abuses, resulting from the indiscriminate use of theiiaored book, re- stricted the reading of it to miehp«rmm» only « wero deemdtho motteom- peteni to undentmid U." s'i .4 '^.. 'W PMi i< mx«f P "I » ' _• "H I "( 28 Again ; — " Our Divine*," says Starko, himself a Proie8tant--C(i// the tnoit/undnnenfal dortriwa qf ChrialainUy. religiom pr^ndiee»,juat like ao many cnrp'^ntera, eonatantty haeking and hewing away, th»y have made the temple of rel ijion a mere maemble hooel," — " The Academical Pr ^tratanttam <^ Germany" say th« writers of the Quarterly Review, " ia hardly a veHid Deiama. . . . . The Bible in the handa of Iheae Christian eommentatora, ia changed into a mere minn/r^-hy of lh» Jewiah Rorder — i patchwork (f wild old ballade," Mullor, — a^aiii, a l'rofces*:ant, — ;i8Sort8 the same thing ; " Many Lord Liverpool, "that the Bible Societii ia an inatilution, fraught with dinger, not only to onr Chureh, but to l/te beat intereata qf truth and unity, thoronghout th!ate, to which this private in- terpretation 1)1 them, has reduced rt igion in the world. In the words of the loaruf)l Swllen, tiiase two words "search the Scriptures," h'zve undone ihe I'!} II ''1 -«;-■ ■Ml 29 ' '--i.^ ':;•! . •f-. But the Rev. Mr. Stophenion may My, thii is all vety fine, sir ; but uotwithstauJing all thd diffiuultiea of understanding the Scriptures, if a man only pray sincerely for light, the Holy Spirit will guide him to a know- lodge of the truth. I have answered this " bold" assertion suflioiently be- fore (page 13). If the Holy Spirit really does direot the searchers of the Bible, how.does it happen, that so many thousands as woll-intentione jected. Tertullian, the reader will remember, was bom about the year 160 ; he became a convert to Christianity, and was afterwards ordained a priest» and died about the yeat 246 ; having lived about 85 years. Tertullian must, therefore, have known pretty well, whether the Christian Church, in those early days rejected tradition and the authority of the Churcli, and regarded the Soriptures alone, as the rule of faith. Well, what does Tertullian say on the matter ? Let him speak for himself. In his most excellent work on " Proscriptions against Heretic»," he says : " We are not allowed to indulge our own humor, nor to choose what another has invented. We have the Apostles of our Lord for our founders, who were not themselves, the inventors nor the authors of what they left us ; but uhey have faithfnUy tauffht the world," (not allowed the world to teaeh itself by Scripture seard&> ing) *' the doctrines which they received from Christ." (Ch. vn.) And how are we to know these d'^trinee? Tertullian answers: "Now to know what the Apostles taught, that is what Christ revealed to them, recourse must be had." — (To the Scriptureo ? No, but,)—" to the Churches which they founded and which they instructed by vord qf manik and by their epistles." "For," continues Tertulb'an, "it is plain that all doctrine, which is cm^formahle to the faith of these mother Churches," — (not to the faith which each individual imagines he finds in the Scriptures) — " is true, being that which they received from the Apostles; the Apostles from duist ; Christ from God ; and all other opiniont mtut be novel andfcUee.** (Ch. XXI.) And addressing those who would claim the Scriptures as justify > ing and upholding thoir " notions," he asks r " What will yon gain by recurring to Scripture, when one denies what the other asserts ? Learn ratiier, who it is that possesses the faith of Christ ; to whom the Sorip> tnres' b|# • St. Athanasius is the next Father, which the Rev. Mr. Stephenson summons up in favor of his rule. He was bishop and patriarch of Alexandria, and lived in the f ourtL century. He was one of the most celebrated Fathers of the Church ; he wrote much against the Arian heresy. Well, let the reader peruse the following prayer of St. Athanasius and say, whether he looks much like a Protestant, or an advocate of the Protestant rule of faith. Addressing the Blessed Virgin, Mary, he says. " Hear now oh ! daughter of David ; in line thine ears to our prayers," — ^We raise our cry to thee. Remember us, oh I most Holy Virgin, and for the feeble eulog- iums we give thee, grant us great gifts from the treasures of thy graces, thou who art full of grace. — Hail, Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Queen, and Mother qf Ood, intercede for ua." — (Serm in Annunt). — I think this extract from St. Athanasius, is quite sufficient, without any more, to decide, whether St. Athanasius was a Protestant or not. St. Basil, (fourth century), is the next Father, which the Rev. Mr. Step- ^4 henson mentions ; but he does not quote any extract from him- I will :' supply the omission. Hear St. Bazil on tradition, or the unwritten word : "" Among," he says, "the points of belief and practice, in the Church, some ^ were delivered in writing, while others were received by apostolic traditiotu in mystery, that is in a hidden manner • but both have an equal authojr i^r^ P^^^^WP p 38 uor are they opposed by any one, who if bat slightly versed in ecdesias- tical rites. For, if we attempt to reject, a» m^ It is not only the Fathers, quoted by Mr. Stephenson, who speak against his rule ; but so, also, do all the other Fathers, who have touched upon the subject, either directly or indirectly. I cannot encumber this article with too many citations from them, otherwise, I might cover any number of pages, with their testimony. I will content myself with re- fering to ?*■. Iren«us, who lived in the second century, and a few others. St. IrensBus, — whom the great book-of-Martyrs*-man, John Fox — an aathoriby, which, I presume, the Hev. Mr. Stephenson will not questi«^ — dasignates as " the zealous opposer of heresies in general, "—was the disciple of St. Polycarp, who was a convert of St. John, the Evangelist; and therefore, he must have been well acquainted with the mind of the Apostles and of the Church in his day, on the question of the private interpretation of the Scriptures. Well, what docs he say ? Hear him. "To him" he writes, " that bolieveth that there is one God and holds to the head which is Christ, — (whom all Catholics hold to be the invisible head of the Church,) — to this man all things will be plain, if he read diligently the Scriptures, — (and be guided by his own private judgement in interpreting them ? No. But) — with the aid of those who are the priests in the Church an i in whose hands, as we have shown, rests .the doctrine of the Apostles. V An 1 elsewhere in book first of the same work. Chapter Ist., he says, speak- ing of these same heretics: "And not only from the evangelical and apostolical writings, which they perversely interpret and wickedly expound, do these (heretics) attempt to prove their assertions ; but also from the law and the prophets. For as there are in these, many parables and allegories, whish may be forced into various meanings, them they craftily fit to their own purposes." And again in the same work "Such being their positions (or doctrines) which the prophets never preached, nor Christ taught, nor the Apostles delivered, they boast their own superior knowledge, and attempt to make it seem credible— (like Mr. Stephen- 35 •on with his "bold" averments) — forming as it were a rope of sand by adding some words from tho parables or sayings of the prophets, or of Christ, or of the Apostles/' — like Mr. Stephenson, by the texts of Scrip- tare which he cites, in support of his position. And, again, in the same work book IV. Ch. XIX. after stating that " so varying are the notions," which these searchers of the Bible " draw from the Scriptures," ho declares, that it is scarcely worth the trouble to refute them, for they already refute themselves, by their constant variations. "When they shall be agreed," he says, "among themselves on what they draw from the Scriptures it will be our time to refute them. Meanwhile, thinking wrongfully, and not agreeing in the moaning of tho sama w<^rds, they convict themselves." Just as the many sects of Protestantism do now convict themselves, by thinking wrongfully and not agreeing on the meaning of tho same words. I presume the Rev. Mr. Stephenson will not consider St. Ireneeus much of an authority in favor of his rule of faith. A few more extracts and I am done with the Fathers for the present. Origen who lived in the same century says : " That alone is truth which in nothing differs from ecclesiastical and apostolical tradition. (E^racf. lib. 1. de Princip.) And again : "As often as tho heretics pro- duce the Canonical Scriptures in which every Christian is agreed and believes, they seem to say, Lo i with us is the word of truth. But to them (the heretics) we cannot give credit nor depart from the first and ecclesiastical tratlitions." (Tract 29 in Mat.) St. Cyprian says: "If we turn to the source of Divine tradition, error ceases." (Ep. 63.) -St. Epiphanus says : " We mast look also to tradition for all things cannot be learned from the Scriptures." But, enough from the Fathers. The reader can, now, see what truth there is in the "bold averment" of the Rev. Mr. Stephenson, (Page 6.) that " the authority of the Fathers" is with him in his attitude against tradition. As I have said before, he had better let the Fathers alone. They were not Protestants, as any one can preceive from the foregoing extracts. The next witness, which the Re.-. Mr. Stephenson calls up, to testify in favor of his rule of faith, are the Scriptures. And what do they say ? "In tho second Epistle to Timothy (3. 15)," he says, "it is said that *the Scriptures are able to make ua wise unto salvation." (Page 6.) Be honest, Mr. Stephenson ; the Scriptures say no such thing. In your anxiety to prop up your rule of faith, you should not allow yourself to change the words of Scripture. Even in your own Protestant Bible, the text reads, "are able to make titee (not "us") wisennto salvation ; or, as the Catholic Bible has it ; , " can instruct thee to salvation. " Now why did Mr. Stephenson change the word "thw" into ' 'us"? Hit object is evidwat : he with«d to make fail hMurtn } ■' .■) Sf^W^^fSPi •v'lti' '"mim'ni' -.',W.WR S6 imagine, that St. Paul was speaking in thir text to all the laity or faithful ; and that he wished them ("us") to search the Scriptures, as their only- rule of faith, to become wise unto salvation ; whereas Mr. Stephenson must know, St. Paul yfM addressing Timothy, a bishop of the Gharch. It was to him Timathy, a bishop, and not to the laity that the Apostle said, the Scriptures "are able to make thee (not "us") wise unto salvation." It was Timothy's duty, a4 a bishop, to study and possess the Scriptures, that he might, not only matte himself, " wise unto salvation," but be able to instruct others — the faithful committed to his care, — to become wise unto it also. And St. Paul himself tells him this ; for he says to him, " all Scripture i3 profitable to teich, to reprovs, to correct, to imtruel in justice *" or as the Proccstant Bible expresses it, " is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." If any further proof were reqbired that St. Paul was not, in the text quoted, speaking of the private interpretation of the Scriptures as the tole rule of faith, either for the laity or, even, for Thimothy himself, although a Bishop ; it can easily be found in the versa preceding, where the Apostle, telh Timothy : "Continue thou in those things > hich thou hi^st learned, and which have been committed to thea ; or ai in Prot. Bible; "thou hast bedu assured of knowing of whom thou hast learned them." Remark, the Apostle does not say : knowing chou hast learned them by thy own private judgement from the Scriptures ; but " of whom (St. Paul himself) thou hast learned them." The reader can how judge for himself, what value there is in argumeat in favor of his rule, which Mr. Stephenson attempts to draw from this text of St. Paul ; and why he changed the word " thee " into " us." Besides, he must remember that the Scriptures, St. Paul speaks of, were not the whole Bible, or Protestant rule of faith ; for the whole of the New Testament was not then written. ' The next text which the Rev. Mr. Stephenson quotes, is from St James. Martin Luther used to call his Epiatle "an Epistle of straw" ; but, if; is evident, Mr. Stephenson does not look upon it in the same light as the "great Reformer," since he quotes from it in favor of his rule. Well, what does St. James say? "In St James, (i. 21)" says Mr. Stephenson, " we are toM ; ' the engrafted word is able to save us.' " But what of this? Has Mr. Stephenson read over carefully the chapter of St. James from which h3 quotes ? If he had, I do not think he would be in a hurry to summo St James as a witness to testify in his favor. St. James says : "the engrafted word is able to save us"; and then Mr. Stephenson concludes that he, therefore, teaches the private interpretation of the Scriptures. Now, if he really meant this by the words quoted, what does he mean in verse 16, by the words "let every man be swift to hear" ; in verse 3^ '*.^9%^ifm$ci Di9««r^ 4v4 loot hesir*r» »nf0"i in vers* 2S, ** II % - i'iai*« T .'»- r-i vf js^^^-^?;*;? ^^ ilj. mmmi-w m mmm mmimwi'^f'fl^^mimm^ I? man be a Jiearer of the word, and not a doer " ; in vene 25, " not becoming 9,/orgetful hearer, but a doer of the work " and in the very vene quoted (21), " with meekness recemng the engrafted word." Please explain all these Iharett and reeeivert of the word, so often repeated in the immediate context of the text quoted, do not seem to establish that St. James was speaking about searehen or private interpretatiotu of the Scriptures. People hear with their etre, they aeareh the Scriptures with their eye$. And, again ; if the engrafted word is able to save us, in the sense Mr. Stephenson wishes it to be understood, what did St. James mean by doer of the word repeated three times in a faw short verses ? It is clear, St. James knew nothing of Mr. Stephenson's doctrine about the rule of faith, and he would have gained much more for his cause, by treating St, James' writing, ^ nth Luther, "the greac Reformer," as an "Epistle of straw," than by summoning him up as a witness. Let the reader ponder St. James' words. But, perhaps, the Rev. Mr. Stephenson's next quotation will be more satisfactory. He tells us, that Christ gave us a "precept" to search the Scriptures in these words, " search the Scriptures," (John vr 39.) Why does not Mr. Stephenson give the whole text ? Christ said : " Search the Scriptures for yon think in them to have everlasting life ; and the same are they that give testimony of me," or, as we read in the Protestant Bible, 'tior in them ye think ye have eternal life : and they are they, ^hich testify of me*" Now, is it a question beyond dispute, that in this text Christ gives a precept, as Mr. Stephenson says, to search the Scriptures. Mr. Stephenson must know, if he knows anyt^hing, at all, about the writings of commenta- tors, even Protestant commentators, on this text, that it is not beyond question, that a precept was therein given. Many maintain, that Christ in speaking, did not use the imperative mood, but the present tense of the indicative ; aT d that the words should read, "ye search the Scrip- tures" and not " search the Scriptures." Even the great Protestant cvitic. Dr. Campbell, whom the celebrated Baptist divine. Dr. Carsons, calls "one of the abloit crities that has ever appeared," maintains that the words of Christ should be read in the indicative. The Rev. Albert Barnes, another Protestant commentator, is of the same opinion. Ke says : " The word [search) matf be either in the indicative or imperative nood. ' In our translation it is in the imperative, as if Jesua commanded them to search the Scriptures. But it is probable that he meant merely to say that they did search the Scriptures, expecting to find in them eternal life." And, still, in the face of this judgement of Barnes, and other Protestant commentators, and even, of Dr. Campbell, " one of the ablest critics that has ever appear- ed," as Dr. Carsons caUs him, Mr. Stephenson is "bold" enough to aver unreservedly, that a "precept" is given in the words: "Search the Soripturea." Really, his boldness seems to have no Umit. Ai-i •J r /4 iMr i^^mf^^i^n^'ww^'fi^'^^fvj^'Sw^ vr^^jummfTJ ^i9^['i ' ''miflf" 88 But, even allowing that the words of Christ do convey a preoeptp what follows ? That Mr. Stphensun's rule is right ? Not at all. To whom was Christ speaking at the time ? To His Apostles, His disciples or followers ? Evidently not, as any one can perceive in reading ovvr carefully this Chapter of St. John ; but to the Scribes and Pharisees, to the Jews and the enemies of Christ. His words w?u*e addressed reproachfully or sarcastically to them, becacuso they had all along boasted they knew the prophecies, and, still in Hun they could not preceive the fulfilment of them. He spoke in much the same manner, as if He had said : Ye boast yourselves on your knowledge of the Scriptures, and, still, you so are blind, as not m> see that I am the Messiah, the f ullfiUment of them. Again: -'Search the Scriptures." But what Scriptures? The whole Bible, composed of the New as well as the Old Testament, which form or constitute together, the Protestant rule of faith? Not at all; for, at that tiui J, there was not one word of the New Testament written. What Scriptures then ? The Old Scriptures only, — which alone do not constitute Mr. Stephenson's rule of f uth. But, why did Christ use these words "Search the Scriptures," at all? Because, as I have before said, He wished to reproa'th His enemies for their protended knowledge, or, rather, understanding, of the Scriptures, and still denying, that He was the promised Messiah. This itself is evident, from the words which follow : "because ye think ye have life everlasting in them." Ho does not say, because ye know for certain, ye have ever- lasting life in them ; but ye think ye have. And hence, it is, that in the preceding verse he tells them, that not withstanding all their thinking, the ^/ord of the Father did not abide in them. ' ' You have not his word abiding in you ; for whom he hath sent, him you believe not." Christ spoke to them, much in the same manner, as any person might say to the Rev. Mr. Stephenson himself : " You are a Protestant, because you (AtnA?, not because you know, without fear or possibility of error or mistake, that the Pro- testant rule of faith, is the one taught and ordained by Christ." As with the Jews, might it not, also, possibly be with him, that, notwithstanding all his searching end thinking, the word of the j^'ather abideth not in him either, and that he believeth not in the manner, required by Christ upon pain of eternal damnation ? In the text, Christ further adds: "and the same are they that give testimony of me." Exactly. If the Jews leally understood, as they boast- ed, the Scriptures, the prophecies, why did they not perceive this testimony? But, like Bible searchers, now-a-days, they only presumptuously thouffht {ye tfiink) they understood them, and, therefore, they did not perceive the testi- mony, they offered of Christ. It is this thinking about understanding the Scriptures, which has given rise to all the hsMsiw, that h%v« ever wdsted. ^^W7«^ « The reader can now see what argument there is, in this text from St. John, in favor of Mr. Stephenson's rule of faith. If it proves anr bhing. it proves simply a condemnation of his rule, which makes people, like the Jews in question, tfunk and imagine, they understand the Scriptnres, and fail to perceive the testimony which they give of Christ and His religion. "Ye tAi'fiA in them to have lifo everlasting" and still "you have not his word abiding in you ; for whom he hath sent, him you beleive not," in>all He teaches. The next text which the Rev. Mr. Stephenson brings forward is, that in which St. Paul appears, to commend the Bereans for *' daily searching the Scriptures." "The precept" he says, 'search the Scriptures,' and the commendation of the Bereans who ' searcheil the Scripture daily' present a rule and an example, we should all follow." If Mr. Stephenson simply means by this, that it is, n good, an excellent, a recommendable thing, to read the Scriptures, or parts of them daily, for edification, &c., I have not to disagree with him. But he means much m'^ro ; that all are bound to take them and search them, as their otUy rule of faith. Now, let us consider the text and examine, if it teaches any such precept. St. Paul said : "Now these (Bcroaas). were more noble than those in Thessalonica, who received the word with all eagerness, daily searching the Scriptures, whether these things wore so," or, as given in the Protestant Bible, "in that they received the word with all readiness of mind and searched the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so." (Acts xvii. ii.) The Rev. Mr. Stephenson imagines or thinkit, again, this text offers a powerful prop for his rule of faith. Let us see. , In the first place, all commentators— (I wonder whether Mr. Stephen- son ever read commentators' works) — are not agreed, whether the epithet, "more noble" was strictly intended to commend the Bereans for daily searching the Scriptures, or for "the all eagerness," or the " all readiness of mind," with which tjxey received the word from him bt/ preaching. If the commendation, " more noble " was bestowed on thorn, lor the latter reason, as some say it was, because, that the Jews in Thessalonica, where the Apostle had been preaching only a short time before, had " stirred up the people and the rulers of the city" against him, and forced him to fly to Berea (Acts 17) ; — then the text is decidedly against the Protestant rule of faith. But, even if the commendation, "more noble," w4s bestowed on them for the former reason, it offers no solid argument to Mr. Stephenson. And why ? Because, in the first place, what Scriptures did the Bereans examine daily, whether the faith St. Paul taught, the sacraments he ad- ministered and the observances he commanded, were so ("whether these things were so ?") Evidently not the Acts of the Apostles, or at least this part of ihem ; for It is self evidmt this paxt of the New Testament was not *■.-« iiiiiiii iH P||Pll|i^^^«^Pff|WW|P^i^ "VP mmmw li then written, nor did they aearoh ftny portion of it, for all of its eptitlea were not written : nor is it likely the Bereans h«d a copy of any Gospel or Epistle then writtou. It was, therefore, the Old Testament they searched, the very same whijh, a few dayc before, St. Paul had expounded, had preached, to them. It was not, therefore, the whole Bible, or Protestant rule of faith, which they searched. But why did they search the Old Scriptures at all ? Evidently not to call it doubt or question, or to set up and profess doctsines extracted from them, by theirown private judgement, contrary to, what St. Paul had preached to them by word of mouth a few days before ; since we find they were "all eagerness," or "all readiness" to receive the word. But, being Jews, and desiring to embrace the religion of Christ, if they found it to be true, they very naturally turned to the prophecies to ascertaia, whether what St. Paul had preached to them, about the fulfilment of these prophecies in Christ, was correct or not ; and, finding that it was, they be« came Christians. It was simply on this account they searched the Scrip- tures, and not because they believed they were required to take them as their aole rule of faith and search them, to learn what they were required to believe, upon pain of being condemned. But enough : I munt not extend this article to too great a length. The texts of Scripture which the B.ev. Mr. Stephenson quotes, even by straining them out of their real meaning, afford no satisfactory proof in favor of his rule of faith. What he should do, .to prove the Protestant ru^- of faith to b? the one ordained by Christ, is to give his hearers or readers some clear, distiact texts from the Scriptures, which may, not only in their isolation from their context, be forced or strained into appearing to give a feeble support to his rule of futh ; but which will, read in their connection with the context, clearly and dittinetty, and without room for retuonable doubt, prove that his or the Protestant rule of faith — the Bible, the whole Bible and nothing but the Bible— is the one, tole rule ordained by Christ, and that all men must hold themselves responsible for searching it. " lam a Proteatant," he says, " beeauae J hold the Holy Seripturea a auffieient rule rf my faith, and myaelf reaponiible for eearehinff them." I ask my readers to consider, well, whether in his sermon he has proved this rule, in any satisfactory manner from the Holy Sciipturest A few words more on some of, his other " bold " averments, and I have done for the present. His next argument is on Page 6. There he says : " The great mass of men, who have been saved by the Bible are emphatical- ly Bible Christians, unacquainted with the traditions of men, individuals of humble minds — in many cases illiterate, who knew, but, knew no more, their Bible true, and who felt and cared only for this, that the Bible is the word of God, and who aetthemselvee *n find Him and His truth i« its xr^r^-T^?^: 41 written pagw o/oM." All thii Mnoonts to what? Tlut Mr. Stephenaon 'bolddy »▼«»' that the great maM of men — " Bible Chriatiana"— hare been aared by aearohing Qod and his truth in thi Soripturee atone, and that ia alL It ia another " bold" aaaerti^n, and aa mere aaaertion ia not proof or argument, I paaa on to the next paragraph. " la there," he aaya, "a aingle point connected with the duty orhopea of man on which the Scripturea do not ahed light ?" Thia ia exactly the quea* tion, the Rev. Mr. Stephenaon, ahould anawer himaelf ; and the very queaton he propoaed to rolve when he aaid : lama Pr»Uttant, bteatue I hold, Jkc. But, now, he aeema to feel that it ia rather a difficult queatiou, and he would feel much obliged, H aome one elae wouldanawer it for him. I think, however, he doea anawer it, unknowing to himaelf, and not in a manner, very favor* able to hia rule. " It ia true," he aaya, there are difficultlea, (in the Scripturea) which, with our limited graap of mind we cannot aolve." Well, if there are difficultiea, &c., how doea he know, but aome of theae " difficultiea" contain aomething, which might ahed a ray of lighten " a aingle point connected with the duty or hopea of man f He, aurely, ia not^ infallible; therefore, theae "difficultiea" may contain aome ray of lighi auch aa he apeaka of. Therefore hia " bold" averment goea for nothing, and therefore, hia rule of faith, deapite it, may not be " all-aufficient." But, he aaka : ". Have the Fathera aolved them ?" " Haa the Church of Aome aolved them?" Thia ia not the queation. He propoaed to aolve them himaelf, when he "boldly" declared that the Holy Scripturea alone area "aufficient," an "all-aufficient" rule of peoplea' faith. They cannot be an " iJl-aufficient" ruleof faith, if there be aome " duty and hopea of men," on which they do not ahed a ray of light. The I'athera, or the Church of Rome, never "boldly" declared that the Scripturea alone ^ are the rule of any man's faith. It ia, therefore, for Mr. Stephenaon, him* aelf, to anawer hia own queation. Let him do hia own work ; prop up hia own rule. Let him prove that " the difficultiea which &o., in the Scrip* turea," contain no ray of light, which might be ahed " on a aingle point connected with the duty or hopes of man." Let him do thia and he will have aolved hia own queation. In another para(p«ph, Mr. Stephenaon aays: " I hold the Scriptures aa a aufficient rule of my faith, becauae of the fallibility of all tradition." Here, again, he aaaumea, what he ahould prove. He does, indeed, aay : " Take the Fathera of the Church ; what peculiar character had they to qualify them to give atatements, bearing the force of Scripture f ' But, thia ia only another queation; it ia not proof ; and, beaides, no person ever said, that the Fathera ever did or could give atatementa bearing the force of Scripture. He further aaka : " Were they inapired, in the aenae, in whieh the Apoatlea were inapired ? Wtrethey infallible V Mr. Stephenaon ia wm^"«^'^|«ii«»pwiii|ifp(|ifnp^i>w.;^ Ill m mw'<«r'''mmmmfmfimfftmim 42 very prolific in asking quMtions ; more lo than in aniwering ihem. Nobody, as he admits himself, ever said they were inspired like the Apostles. And as to their infallibility, in the sense ho means, I am not aware, that anybody, ever maintained it. Itis clear, from the manner, in which he writes, that ho does hot really understand what tradition means. Tradition signifies, the unwritten word qf Qod, not the Fathers, either individually or collectively. They are not tradition ; they are, indeed, the channels, through which tradition or the unwritten word of Qod, has been handed down to us ; they are faithful and credible witnesses of the doctrines professed and taught by the Church, in all the ages of her existence ; but they are not tradition itself. They bear reliable testimony to it, are credible witness of it, in all the ages, in which they, respectively, lived ; that is all. Their falli- bilty, as men, therefore, has nothing to do with the infalliMlity of tradition itself. But, though they wore not inspired or infallible " in the sense in which the Apostles wore," there is no reason to say, why they were not, and could not be, just as infallible in recording the belief of tlie Church in their respective days, as other historians in recording events v ^ch transpir- ed in those same days. Most people would say, they should be more infalli- ble. But let Mr. Stephenson, regard this as ho may ; it has really little to do with the question. The Catholic rule of faith is not the Fathers, or tradition, or even tradition and the written word together, as interpreted by each individual ; but tradition and the Scriptures, or the unvmtten as well as the written word, interpreted, exjraunded and preached by the Church to which Christ gave his commission to teach all nations, to preach the Gospel to every creature, and against which He has promised, the gates of hell shall never prevail. This is the Catholic rule of faith, and, therefore, when the Rev. Mr. Stephenson talks about ihe fallibility of the Fathers, ho •ays something not to the point ; and, consequently, adduces no proof in favor of his rule. His talk, a^so, about the inconsisteucids of the Fathers, is of the 8{jne character as his other bold averments. What he, as a "logical debater," has to do, is, not to toko up his time in boldly averring this or thr.t, about the Fathers, who, as he himself admits, were men of powerful minds and talents ; but to try, if he deem himself able, to clear the rule he has so "boldly" professed, from the inconsistencies in which it is involved ; and, further, prove, that it is an infallible, an unerring guide to divine truth. " I am a Protestant," ho says, " because, I hold the Holy Scrip- turea a mffieientnde qf my faith and myself reeponrible for searching them." Let him prove this, an infallible rule, one capable of leading all men, in all times, to a knowledge of what they are required to believe, upon pain of being damned ; and he needs not, then, trouble himself much about the fallibility or infallibility of any other rule of faith. This proved, he may reat Mtiified, that he ia right* «id that his hearers have indispntabla ^l-^■. -v . i^ . l-i..' J til. 'l^i I'l. ..a ! fprnnni for 1»6fng Profcostunts. But hw fio proved it, or can ho prove it ? lie has not and ho cannot, as I have already shewn. The Uov. Mr. Stephenson, next, says : " Bn^- iv« are asked, with ill- disguised contempt where our Church was before Luther," and he adds, a little further on : "If, when, wo are asked where Protestantism was before Luther, the doetrirui of Protestantism are meant, the answer is thrrt and ea$y. As Jeremy Taylor, long ago said : ' They were in the Bible, in the original and authentic documents of the Christian religion ? There they had always boon, m the R. C. hierarchy knew tolerably well even before Luther's time ; as wo may judge from the fact that they had nevtr, to one tingle ni/ion of Surope given one copy of the Bible in the vernacular tongue." T1 Now, as to the answer to the above question being '* short and easy," if it be really so, why, then, has not the Rev. Mr. Stephenson given it clearly and distinctly, and in some manner, at least, satisfactorily. He says, the doctrines of Protestantism were, before Luther, in the Bible. But this is exactly what he has to prove ; his ipte dixit, or " bold" averment, does not settle the matter bsycnd dispute. Let him prove, that the 'loctrines of Protestantism were in the Bible before Luther's time ; that that fundamental doctrine of Protestantism, — that doctrine on which the whole fabric of Protestantism rests, as upon its foundation, — that the Bible, the whole Bible and nothing but the Bible, is the rule, ordained by Christ and taught in the Bible, to lead all men, In all times, to a knowledge of what they are required to believe, upon pain of being damned. " I am A Protestant" he says, "because I hold the Holy Scriptures a sufficient rule of my faith, and myself responsible for searching them." Let him prove, that this rule was contained in the Bible before Lnther*s time ; or is con* tained in it now, and he may, then, cuugratulate himself, that he has done something satisfactory. As yet he has not done it ; and he cannot do it. All his averments, therefore, about the do'strinu of Protestantism beini; in the Bible before Luther, are but so many high sounding words. There is another "bold" averment, and an exceedingly bold one too, in the above quotation, which I cannot allow to pass without notio?. The Rev. Mr. . Stephenson says, that the Catholic hierarchy knew very well, the doctrines of Protestantism were contained in the Bible before Luther, "as we may judge, from the fact that they had never, to one etngle nation of Europe, given one eopg of the Bible in the vernacular tongue." I wonder, thai Mr. Stephenson did not blush, redden, to the very eyes when making such a barefaced statement. He pretends to be a preacher of truth, and from his pulpit, he does not hesitate to proclaim one of the greatest falsehoods, that ever fell from the lips of man. Can it be, that he was quizzinghis hearers, twitting them on their deep ignorance of history ; %)n^i he wislffd to show to the commanify, that, no matter what ho A'W »"''[''?. V*' JV^ff ''IfmP'r'^'J^'f'^Ww^^^ — '""• wwwp 44 might *' boldly" vrtr, even were it the most absurd and ridionlous thing in the world, they are ready, in their ignorance, to gulp it down. It r«aUy looks very much like as if this was his object ; for, it is impossible to be- lieve, that any one, like Mr. Stephenson, pretending to even a fair know- ledgeof history, would utter such a barefaced statement, merely for the purpose of making hinueif ridiculous before the world. He must, indeed, have been laughing within himself when he uttered it, and saw his hearers swallow it wivnout objection. " One copy" of the Bible in the vernacular tongue, to "one single nation of Europe indeed ! The thing is really rich. And Mr. Stephenson's hearers swallowed the whole of it, without one sign of repugnance ? Wonders will never cease. Who will say, after this, that the age of miracles has passed ? A minister boldly averring, and a whole congregation unhesitatingly swallowing, the state- ment, that no'y one eopy of the Bible was ever given before Luther'b time, in the vernacular tongue, to otie tingle nation of Europe. Is not chis one of the greatest wonders of the age ? But, to bo serious ; is it true ; is there even the smallent particle of truth, in this bold averment of the Kev. Mr. Stephenson! There is not ; and it is almost impossible to believe that he himself did not know there was not. " Oue copy" of the Bible to "one single" nation of Europe Why, has the Rev. Mr. Stephenson ever read a page of rsal history ? Has he never cast his eyes beyond the pages of the short epitomes of history placed in the hands of children in the elementary schools of the country ? or has he never thought it his duty to wander beyoud the lying pages of some authors, like D'Aubigue, who, in their mad hatred against the Catholic Church, have not hesitated to garble history, to misrepresent faoti}, and write the most unblushing falsehoods ? If he had, hn would have hesitaW himself before making so barefaced a statemei.fc. '* One copy " of the Bible in the vernacular tongue to "on^ single " nation of Europe ! Now, what are the facts ? I wish the reader, to call to mind, here, that printing was not invented until about the year 1440 ; so before that time it was not possible to print and publish any copy of the Bible. There were, however, before that time, many manuscript translations — not m'mtioned in the follow* ing list— into the vernacular tongues, as even learned Fi'otestiant historians admit. Now, what versions of the Bible were published after the invention of printing, and before Luther had published his version ? I will give a list of some of them, which will be quite sufficient to show what little truth tiiere is in Mr. Stephenson's statement. It was about the year 1523 that Luther commenced his translation of the Bible, and it was not, until about eleven year afterwards, that he completed it It was, therefore, not until about the year 1434, that his whole venion wa« paUiihed, or until about ninety four iP'w.i.pi. ^w^mmm^mmm vl/ r IS Catholic Tersiona which were pub- The list ifl not completed, but [ take the enumeration frora an the first place," he says, " there. old as to have no date ; for the ir name of place. In the second Fust in 1472, nearly sixty years Another had appeared as early and a fifth in HTfi. At Nnrem- U77) and republished three timet )peared, at Augsburg, another in kt editions before that of Luther. mrg, in 1483, and in 1488 ; and at as republished in 1524, about the ith his ; and down to the present in almost countless. ef ore Luther was thought of, and B country most peculiarly tmder Bs were translated into Italian by version was republished aeventeen y, and twenty-three years before of the Scripture was published by Brucciole, at Venice, in 1532 ; in 1538, two years after Luther e came out, not only with the at with that of the Inquisition, itributed and promulgated, edln 1478 ; another by Menand, in 1487, which may rather be another, by Jacques C. Fevre, published at Cologne, in 1475, which, before 1488, had been repuoiisned three times. A second appeared in 1618. There was also a Bohemian translation, published in 1488, thrice reprinted before Luther's ; not to speak of the Pclish and Oriental versions. In our own country (England) it is well known that there were (manuscript) versions long before that of Tyndal or of Wickliffe. "Sir Thomas More has observed that, "the hole Byble was, long before his (Wicklifie's) dayes, by vertuous and wel lerned men, translated into the English tong, and by good and godly people, with devotion and soberness, well and reverently red." X might add other venioiii, bat the above list is quite raffioient to show, ^:m\ M might "boldly" aver, even wen it the most absurd and ridionlons thing in the world, they are ready, in their ignorance, to gulp it down. It really looks very mnoh like as if this was his object ; for, it is impossible to be- lieve, that any one, like Mr. Stephenson, pretending to even a fair know- ledgeof history, wottld utter such a barefaced statement, merely for the purpose of making himulf ridiculous before the world. He must, indeed, have been laughing within himself when he uttered it, and saw his hearers swallow it without objection. " One copy" of the Bible in the vernacular tongue, to " one single nation of Europe indeed ! The thing is really rich. And Mr. Stephenson's hearers swallowed the whole of it| without one sign of repugnance ? Wonders will never cease. Who will say, after this, that the age of miracles has passed ? A minister boldly averring, and a whole congregation unhesitatingly swallowing, the state- ment, that not opt eopy of the Bible was ever given before Luther's time, in the vernacular tongue, to one single nation of Europe. Is not tliis one of the greatest wonders of the age ? But, to be serious ; is it true ; is there eveu the smallest particle of truth, in this bold averment of the Rev. Mr. Stephenson? There is not ; and it is almost impossible to believe that he himself did not know there was not. "Ope copy" of the Bible to "one single" nation of Europe Why, has the Bev. Mr. Stephenson ever read a page of real history ? Has he never cast his eyes beyond the pages of the short epitomes of history placed in the hands of children in the elementary schools of the country ? or has he never thought it his duty to wander beyond the lying pages of some authors, like D'Aubigue, who, in their mad hatred against the Catholic Church, have not hesitated to garble history, to misrepresent facts, and write the most unblushing falsehoods ? If he had, he would have hesitated himself before making so barefaced a statement. " One copy " of the Bible in the vernacular tongue to "one single " nation of Europe ! Now, what are the facts? I wish the reader, to call to mind, here, that printing was not invented until about the year 1440 ; so before that time it was not possible to print and publish any copy of the Bible. There were, however, before that time, many manuscript translations — not mentioned in the follow - ing list — into the vernacular tongues, as even learned Protestant historians adsiit. Now, what versions of the Bible were published after the invention ol printing, and before Luther had published his version ? I will give a list of some of them, which will be quite sufficient to show what little truth there is in Mr. Stephenson's statement. It was about the year 1523 that Luther commenced his translation of the Bible, and it was not, until about eleven year afterwards, that he completed it. It was, therefore, not until about the year 1434^ that his whole vecaion wm puhUihed, or until about ninety foot \ < yews aft«r printing warn invented. The GathoUo renions which were pub- lished, in the meantime, wore as follows. The list is not completed, but it is sufficient for my present purpose. I take the enumeration from an author before me and in his words. " In the first place," he says, " there is a copy yet extant of a printed version so old as to have no date ; for the first printed books had neither date nor name of place. In the second place, a Catholic version was printed by Fust in 1472, nearly sixty years before the completion of Luther's version. Another had appeared bs early as \467 ; a fourth was published in 1472 ; and a fifth in K73. At Nurem- berg, there was a version published in 1477, and republished three time* more, before Luther's appeared. There appeared, at Augsburg, another in the same year, which went through eight editions before that of Luther. At Nuremberg, one was published by Koburg, in 1483, and in 1488 ; and at Augsburg, one appeared in 1518, which was republished in 1524^ about the same time that Luther was going on with his ; and down to the present time, the editions of this version have been almost countless. In Spain, a version appeared in 1478, before Luther was thought of, and almost before he was bom. In Italy, the country most peculiarly under the sway cf Papal dominion, the Scriptures were translated into Italian by Malermi, at Venice, in 1471 ; and this version was republished seventeen timet before the conclusion of that century, and twenty-three years before Luther's appeared. A second version of parte of the Scripture was published in 1472 ; a third at Rome, in 1471 ; a fourth by Brucciole, at Venice, in 1532 ; and a corrected edition, by Marmochini, in 1538, two years after Luther had completed his. And every one of these came out, not only with the approbation of the ordinary authorities, but with that of the Inquisition, which approved of their being published, distributed and promulgated. In France, a translation was published In 1478 ; another by Menand, in 1484 ; another by Ouiars de Moulins, in 1487, which may rather be called a history of the Bible ; and, finally, another, by Jacques C. Fevre, in 1512, often reprinted. In the Belgian language, a veMion was published at Cologne, in 1475, which, before 1488, had been republished three times. A second appeared There was also a Bohemian translation, published in 148b, thrice reprinted before Luther's ; not to speak of the Pclish and Oriental versions. In our own country (England) it is well known that there were (manuscript) versions long before that of Tyndal or of Wickliffe. flir Thomas More has observed that, "the hole Byble was, long before his (Wickliffe's) dayes, oy vertuous and wellemed men, translated into the English tong, and by good and godly people, with devotion and soberness, wdl and reverently red." X might add ofhw veraioiu, bat the above list is quite nifficient to show, 46 "^f^YW- bow little truth th«re is in the reckless statement of the Rav. Mr. Steph- enson, that to one single nation of Europe one copy of the Bible in tbo vernacular tongue was never given before the time of Luther. But, even, had not one copy of the Bible in the vernacular tongue bsan given to one single nation of Europe, would this fact prove what the Rev. Mr. Stephenson desires to insinuate by his statement, — ^that the Catholic hierarchy wished to conceal the Bible from the people ? It would not ; for, not to speak of the vernacular versions, there were the Latin versions, which could be easily consulted. " The Latin language," as an author before me remarks, " continued to be that which was most general^ ly understood, and even spoken in Europe, until the reign of Charlemange, in the begihning of the ninth century ; and even for several centuries after- wards, while the modem languages were struggling into form, it was more or less known, and was not, properly speaking, a dead language. At the beg:u:i{ng of the sixteenth century, and for a long time afterwards, it was th% wuiy language of literature, of theology, of medicine and of legislation Most of the modern languages were formed from it, and were so similar to it both in words and in general structure, that the common people of Spain, Italy, Portugal and even France, could understand the mother tongue without great difficulty. In Hungary, it had been the common language of the people since the days of King Stephen, in the latter part of the tenth century. It was, moreover, taught and studied in every school and college of Christendom, and it was the medium through which most other, branches were taught. The Latin language must, therefore, have been pretty commonly understood in Europe, even up to the time of the Reforma- tion, and the Catholic Church, consequently, could not have concealed the Bible from the people, even if she had given it to them, only in the Latin Vulgate ; nor could it have remained " an unknown book," as the Rev. Mr. Stephenson, wished his hearers to believe it was. It is a well known fact, that one of the first — if not the first — books published after the art of printing was invented waa the Latin Bible. The Protestant historian Hallam insists it was the first book printed ; probably in the year 1456. And the learned Protestant bibliographer, Didbin, mentions several other Latin Bibles printed before Luther's time. " From the year 1462 to the end of the fifteenth century," he says in his 'library Companion,' "the editions of the Latin Bible may be considered literally innwMrable,'* and he' mentions the places at which some of them were printed : " at Mentz in 14$5 ; at Bambei-g 1461 ; at Rome, 1471 ; Venice 1476 ; Naples, 1476 ; in Bohemia, 1488; in France, 1475; in Holland, 1477; in Spain, 1477."— So you see, Mr. Stephenson, the insinuation, which you wished to convey to the minds of your hearers by your "bold," averment, has not one particle of truth to rest upon. When yon, next time, try to prejudice your hearers, against 4T. the Catholic Church, endeavor to have, at least, some little plausibility in your bold averments ; for, after all, I do not believe your congregation are 80 utterly ignorant of history as you seem to imagine, and some of them might undertake to contradict 3->ur "bold" statements, themselves, and this would be rather unpleasant for you, their "minister of truth." But besides all this, if the Catholic Church wished to destroy the Bible, had she not a pretty fair opportunity to do so long before the Refor- mation was thought of ? Was, it not she, on the contrary, who preserved it ? and wAa it not from her that the Reformers received it? Who, as an author bifore me asks, " itept it safe through all dangers ; in the midst of conflagra- tions, wars, and the destructive torrents of barbarian incursion ? Who copied it over and over again, before the art of printing? The Roman Catholic Church did all this ; and yet flippant or dishonest writers still accuse her of having concealed this Book of Life from the people ! But for her patient labor, vigilant watchfulness, and maternal solicitude, the Bible might h'avo perished with thousands of other books ; and still she was an enemy -of this good book, and wished to keep it hidden under a bushel ! She had choice selections from it read to her people on every Sunday and festival in the year, even according to the enforced avowal of our unscnipulous and romantic historian of the Reformation ; still she wished to conceal this treasure from the people ! A curious way of concealing it truly. ""^ But did riot Pope Paul IV., as the Rev. Mr. Stephenson boldly avers, put all the various editions in the modem languages, extant in the 16th century, in the Index Exj>urgatorius, not a single exception being made ? He did not, Mr. Stephenson to the contraiy notwithstanding ; and the best proof that he did not is to be found in the fact, that the Iniex Expurgato- rttM, had no existence until Paul IV. was for some years dead and buried. The list of prohibited books, or the Index, was not drawn up until after the Council of Trent had closed its sessions in 1563, during the Pontificate of Pius IV ; and the Congregation of the Index was not established until 1588, during the Pontificate of Pope, Sixtus V. How, then, could Paul IV put the various editions of the Bible, &c., in the Index in the year, Mr. Stephen- son is so particular to mention, 1559? Mr. Stephenson is, evidently, a little tOQ reckless in his "bold" avei'ments. 'But did not some Pope put the various editions of the Bible in the modem languages, "not a single exception being made," in the Index? Kot that I have ever been able to discover ;'and, 1 think, the Rev. Mr. Stephenson will have a pretty difficult task to find good proof of it eitiher. There is no evidence that any general restrictive law ever existed, previous to the Council of Trent, as to the reading of the Bible. Pius IV. did, indeed, after the close of the Council cf Trent, im]^se restrictions of a tem- porary and local character on the indiscriininate reading of the BibLo in tb* r* 4^ mmk ^gl^ rmm^ 'HI ■^— ''-'"'?!fHP!igppppi«i^^ f^mr' T^mmw!^ 48 vemaoalar tongues, in that period of reUgious vertigo, which followed the outbreak of the Reformation, and in which men'i mindi dwelt in an offer* vescenoe of excitement, incapable of calmly and dispauionately judging any question. In issuing this temporary decree, Pius iv. gave his reason for doing so, in these words ; "that experience had made it manifest, that the permission to read the Bible indiscriminately in the vulgar tongues had, from tht rashnesM qfmen, done more harm than good." And the Pope was not alone of this opinion, for many others were of the same opinion ; and the learned Gerson himself, who cannot certainly be accused of having favoured the maxims of the Ultrambntanists, felt himself constrained to avow, that the alleged right of reading and interpreting the BiUe, was the empoitoned aouree from which came forth and daily increased, the errors of all innovators ; that it was "the source qferrori andrnhf withotU number." The decree in question, however, as I have said before, was merely a disciplinary regulation of a temporary and local character, and it has long since ceased to be of binding force in any part of the Catholic Church. Any rescripts which may have been since issued, regard not the reading itself of the Bible, but only the false and corrupted versions of it, which some people in their zeal and bigotry would force upon the attention of Catholics. Thereis no prohibition whatsoever, against any Catholic reading an approved version of the Bible, accompanied with explanatory notes taken fi;^m the Fathers, or approved Catholic commentators. On the contrary, they are urged to read it, as any one may see by lef erring to the letter— published at the beginning of approved editions of the Catholic Bible— of Pope Piuf VL, to Anthony Martini, the translator of the Italian version, in 1778. In that letter the Pope says : "At a time that a vast number of bad books, which most grossly attack the Catholic religion, are circulated, even among the unlearned, to the great destruction of souls, you judge exceedingly well, that the faithful should be excited to the reading of the Holy Scrip- tures ; For these are the most abundant sources which ought to be left open to every one, to draw from them purity of morals anld of doctrine, to eradicate errors which are so wildly disseminated in these corrupt times." These are the words of the Pope himself, published in every Catholic Bible, and, still, we are never done hearing the slander repeated, that the Catholic Church hates the Bible and forbids her children to read it. There are no people so blind as those who have eyes and will not see ; and such are they who are constantly rehashing this sland^ at Bible society meeting's &c>, about the Catholic Church. I have now done with ^he consideration of the chief reason given by the Rev. Mr. Stephenson for his being a Protestant, " I am a Protestant," he said, " because J hold the Holy Seripturee a eu^kientruleqfmjf/aithf andmyeelf retpotuiblefor Hatching them. " I have endeavored to aacertain whetbar thia 49 reason is a sound one or not, for him or any other person being a Protestant; apd, I think, I have shewn, that it is not. I have examined, whether it is a rule of faith which existed and was available in all times, that people might learn, what thsy were required to believe upon pain of being damned, and I have shewn that it is not. I have further shewn that it is not a rule or means within the reach of all people, the poor as well as the rich ; that it is not a rule or meaas adapted to the capacity of all people, the dullest and most ignorant, as well as the intelligent and learned ; that, finally, it is not a rule or means which will, if honestly and sincerely followed, lead men, without danger of error, or possibility of mietake, to a knowledge of what Qod requires they shall believe, upon pain of bemg condemned ; but, on contrary, that is calculated to lead them astray and into any number errors. Therefore, ths conclusion is necessarily forced upon the mind, that it is not the rule of faith, or means, ordained by Christ, to teach men what they must believe, upon pain of being condemned, and, therefore, it is no rule at all, and, consequently, it is nu sound or sufficient reuon for any man being a Protestant, not even for the Rev. Mr. Stephenson, himself. The reader can now weigh my arguments and say for himself, whether, the conclusion, I have drawn, is justified or not. In the beginning of this phamphlet, I said, that I would confine my remarks strictly to the question of the rule of faith, as professed by the I^ev. Mr. Stephenson, and the reader will now be able to judge whether I have not pretty closely adhered, throughout, to that promise. I have carefully avoided mixing up questions, by following the Rev. Mr. Stephen- son into all the subjects into which he has wandered, or touched upon in his sermon, except, perhaps, noticing, enposxant, a few of the aspersions which he has cast upon the Catholic Church, in regard to the reading of the Bible. And I have done this ; because, first, these subjects have no direct or proximate bearini; on the question ustder discussion.- secondly, because one thing at a time is quite sufficient to treat ; and, thirdly, because, if the rule of faith, professed by the Rev. Mr. Stephenson in these words : "I am a PretcaUut, became 1 hold the Holy Scripturea &c., — is the true one, the one ordained by Christ, to lead men to a knowledge of what they are required to believe, upon pain of being condenmed ; then, of course, all I had to say, was, that Father Damen was wrong, and Mr. Stephenson was right, and that he and all Protestants had good, solid, unquestionable ground for being Protestants and for believing all that Protestantism teaches. But, this, I think, I have shewn is not the case. Into the Catholic rule of faith, — ^the second part of Father Damon's lecture, — I can not noi^ enter, as in doing so, I should extend this pham- phlet, far beyond reasonable limit. On some future occasion, I may take the subject up and deal with it. In the meantime, if any of my readers. .4*' '»• 60 B- desire to study it, he will find it pretty fully treated in Wisemen's work on ''The doctrines of the Church/' or in "the Points of Controversy" by SanuuriuB. These books may, I ^'^lieve, be procured at the book store of Mr. Joyce, Rideau Street. I now conclude, apologizing for the length to which I have extended this article, and expressing the sincere hope that the reader will calmly, dispassionately, and without prejudice, weigh seriously the arguments, one by one, that I have advanced, with a view, to learning where is to be found that true religion, which the Saviour came on to establish, and which is to lead us to the haven of eternal rest. For, "who is the man that shall live and not see death," (Ps. 88. 49.) and we know not the hour that the Son of man will come to judge us, and " what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer loss of his own soul." (Math. 16. 26). Ottawa, February 7th, 1872. P.S. — In referisnce to Father Damen's visit to this city, I find the following remarks, in the Ottawa Citizen of 17th inst., which it may not be out of place to insert here : " Father Dambn. — Now that the little controversial breeze raised by this missionary has subsided, the good works he achieved are becoming known. In the annals of the Police Court, for many years past, the names of certain delinquents, sunk in drunkenness, poverty,' and vice, were con- tinually appearing, but since Father Damen's last visit to this city they have not been seen at their usual place, in trembling dejection or hudened effirontery. They had been induced to hear the gifted preacher, and their hearts, that had withstood all previous efforts of reclamation, were melted. They were induced to take the pledge of temperance, and this point once /a;ained, the rest was easy. Sobriety brought reflection, which in turn brought shame and repentance, and now these poor outcasts are struggling with poverW alone, having thrown from them the serpent drink ami the devil vice. This we hold to be a sreat triumph for temperance and religion, and the^ preacher, who can penorm such wonder, no matters what his creed may be, is deserving of the warmest approbation of all good people." ?j,- . i