: which he was then preaching, nor to hear his apostles and their successors, with whom he promised to remain forever? I ask secondly, on what particular question Christ referred to the Scripture, namely, the Old Scripture? (for no part of the New was then written) was it on any question that has been or might be agitated among Christians? No, certainly the sole ques. tion between him and the infidel Jews, was, whether he was or was not the Messiah: in proof that he was the Messiah, he adduced the ordinary motives of credibility, as they have been detailed by your late worthy rector, Mr. Carey, the miracles he wrought, and the prophecies in the Old Testament that were fulfilled in him, as likewise the testimony of St. John the Baptist. The same is to be said of the commendations bestowed by St. Luke on the Bereans; they searched the ancient prophe cies, to verify that the Messiah was to be born at such a time, and in such a place, and that his life and his death were to be marked by such and such circmstances. We still refer Jews and other Infidels to the same proofs of Christianity, without saying any thing yet to them about our rule or judge of controversies. Dr. Porteus objects what St. Luke says, at the beginning of his Gospel: It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed. Again St John says, c. xx. These things are written that ye might believ that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing p might have life through his name. Answer. It is difficult to conceive how his lordship can dra an argument from these texts against the Catholic rule. Surely he does not gather from the words of St. Luke, that Theophilu did not believe the articles in which he had been instructed by word of mouth till he read this Gospel! or that the evangelist gainsayed the authority given by Christ to his disciples: He that heareth heareth me, you which he himself records, Luke x. 16. In like manner the prelate cannot suppose that this testimony of St. John sets aside other testimonies of Christ's divinity, or that our belief in this single article without other conditions, will ensure eternal life. Having quoted these texts, which appear to me inconclusive, the bishop adds, by way of proving that Scripture is sufficiently intelligible, "Surely the apostles were not worse writers, with divine assistance, than others commonly are without it."* P 4 I will not here repeat the arguments and testimonies already brought to show the great obscurity of a considerable portion of the Bible, particularly with respect to the bulk of mankind, because it is sufficient to refer to the clear words of St. Peter, declaring that there are in the Epistles of St. Paul, some things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do all the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction, (2 Peter iii. 16,) and to the instances, which occur in the Gospels, of the very apostles frequently misunderstanding the meaning of their divine Master. The learned prelate says, elsewhere,† "The New Testament supposes them (the generality of the people) capable of judging for themselves, and accordingly requires them not only to try the spirits whether they be of God, 1 John iv. 1, but to prove ali things and hold fast that which is good, 1 Thess. v. 21." Answer. True: St. John tells the Christians, to whom he writes to try the spirits whether they are of God, because, he adds. many false prophets are gone out into the world. But then he gives them two rules for making trial: Hereby ye know the spirit of God. Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God. And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus is come in the flesh, (which was denied by the heretics of that time, the disciples of Simon and Cerinthus) is not of God. In this, the apostle tells the Christians to see whether the doctrine of these spirits was or was not conformable to that which they had learnt from the church. The second rule was, He that knoweth God, heareth us; he that is not of God, heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth and the spirit of error: namely, he bid them observe whether these teachers did or did not listen to the divinely-constituted pastors of the church. Dr. P is evidently here quoting Scripture for our rule, not against it. The same is to be said of the other text. Prophesy was exceedingly common at the beginning of the church; but, as we have just seen, there were false prophets as well as true prophets: hence, while the apostle defends this supernatural gift in general, Despise not prophesyings, he admonishes the Thessalonians to prove them not certainly by their private opinions, which would be the source of endless discord; but, by the established rules of the church, and particularly by that which he tells them to hold fast, 2 Thess. ii. 15, namely, tradition. Dr. P. in another place, urges the exhortation of St. Paul to Timothy, "Continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned • Letter ix. + P. 19. + P. 69. them and that from a child thou hast known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation, through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doetrine, for reproof," &c. 2 Tim. iii. Answer. Docs, then, the prelate mean to say, that the form of sound words which Timothy had heard from St. Paul, and which he was commanded to hold fast, 2 Tim. i. 13, was all contained in the Old Testament, the only Scripture which he could have read in his childhood? Or that, in this he could have learned the mysteries of the Trinity and the incarnation, or the ordinances of baptism and the eucharist? The first part of the ques tion is a general commendation of tradition, the latter of Scripture Against tradition, Dr. P. and yourself quote* Mark vii, where the Pharisees and Scribes asked Christ, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashed hands? He answered and said to them, In vain do they worship me, teaching FOR† doctrines the commandments of men. For, laying aside the commandments of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups, &c. Answer. Among the traditions which prevailed at the time of our Saviour, some were divine, such as the inspiration of the books of Moses and the other prophets, the resurrection of the body, and the last judgment, which assuredly Christ did not condemn, but confirm. There were others, merely human, and of a recent date, introduced, as St. Jeroine informs us, by Sammai, Killel, Achiba, and other Pharisees, from which the Talmud is chiefly gathered. These, of course, were never obligatory. In like manner, there are among Catholics divine traditions, such as the inspiration of the Gospels, the divine, observation of the Lord's day, the lawfulness of invoking the prayers of the saints, and other things not clearly contained in Scripture; and there are among many Catholics, historical and even fabulous traditions. Now, it is the former, as avowed to be divine by the church, that we appeal: of the others, every one may judge as he thinks best. Beware lest any man You both, likewise, quote Coloss. ii. 8. spoil (cheat) you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. * P. 11. + This particle FOR, which in some degree affects the sense, ts a corrupt interpolation as appears from the original Greek. N. B. The texts which Dr P. refers to I quote from the common Bible; his citations, of it are frequently inaccurate. Such are the acts of sevaral saints condemned by Pope Gelasius; such also was the opinion of Christ's reign upon earth for a thousand years. Answer. The apostle himself informs the Collossians what kind of traditions he here speaks of, where he says, Let no man therefore judge you in meat or drink, or in respect of any holiday, cr of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days. The ancient fathers and ecclesiastical historians inform us, that, in the age of the apostles, many Jews and Pagan philosophers professed Christianity, but endeavoured to allay with it their respective superstitions and vain speculations, absolutely inconsistent with the doctrine of the Gospel. It was against these St. Paul wrote, not against those traditions which he commanded his converts to hold fast to, whether they had been taught by word or by Epis tle, 2 Thess. ii. 15; nor those traditions which he commended his other converts for keeping, 1 Cor. xi. 2.* Finally, the apostles, in that passage, did not abrogate this his awful sentence, now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us. 2 Thess. iii. 6. Against the infallibility of the church in deciding questions of faith, I am referred to various other arguments made use of by Dr. Porteus; and, in the first place, the following "Romanists themselves own that men must use their eyes, to find this guide; why then must they put them out, to follow him?" I answer by the following comparisons. Every prudent man makes use of his reason, to find out an able physician to take care of his health, and an able lawyer to secure his property but having found these, to his full satisfaction, does he dispute with the former about the quality of medicines, or with the latter about forms of law? Thus the Catholic makes use of his reason, to observe which, among the rival communions, is the church that Christ established and promised to remain with having ascertained that, by the plain acknowledged marks which this church bears, he trusts his soul to her unerring judgment, in preference to his own fluctuating opinion. Dr. Porteus adds, "Ninety-nine parts in every hundred of their (the Catholic) communion, have no other rule to follow, but what a few priests and private writers tell them." According to this mode of reasoning, a loyal subject does not make any act of the legislature the rule of his civil conduct, because, perhaps he learns it only from a printed paper, or the proclamation of the bell-man. Most likely the Catholic peasant learns the *The English Testament puts the word ordinance here for traditions, contrary to the sense of the original Greek, and even the authority of Beza. + P. 19. + Ibid. doctrine of the church from his parish priest; but then he knows that the doctrine of this priest must be conformable to that of his bishop, and that otherwise he will soon be called to an account for it. He knows also that the doctrine of the bishop himself must be conformable to that of the other bishops and the Pope, and that it is a fundamental maxim with them all, never to admit of any tenet but such as is believed by all the bishops, and was believed by their predecessors up to the apostles themselves. 'The prelate gives a "rule for the unlearned and ignorant in religion, (that is to say of ninety-nine in every hundred of them,) which is this: Let each man improve his own judgment, and increase his own knowledge as much as he can; and be fully assured that God will expect no more."-What? If Christ has given some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists and some pastors and teachers; for the perfecting the saints, for the work of the ministry, Ephes. iv. 11, does he not expect that Christians should harken to them, and obey them? The prelate goes on: "In matters, for which he must rely on authority," (mere Scripture then, and private judgment, according to the bishop himself, are not always a sufficient rule, even for Protestants, but they must in some matters rely on church authority,) "let him rely on the authority of that church which God's providence has placed him under," (that is to say, whether Catholic, Protestant, Socinian, Antinomian, Jewish, &c.) "rather than another which he hath nothing to do with," (every Christian has, or ought to have, something to do with Christ's true church,) and "trust to those, who, by encouraging free inquiry, appear to ove truth; rather than such as, by requiring all their doctrines to be implicitly obeyed, seem conscious that they will not bear to be fairly tried." What, my lord, would you have me trust those men, who have just now deceived me, by assuring me that I should not stand in need of guides at all, rather than those who told me, from the first, of the perplexities in which I find myself entangled! Again, do you advise me to prefer these conductors, who are forced to confess that they may mislead me, to those others who assure me, and this upon such strong grounds, that they will conduct me with perfect safety! Our Episcopal controvertist finishes his admonition "to the ignorant and unlearned," with an address, calculated for the stupid and bigoted. He says, "Let others build on fathers and Popes, on traditions and councils, what they will: let us continue firm, as we are, on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone." Ephes i |