Images de page

doctrines to which the Catholic subscribes; there is not a single one of them which we do not as willingly profess as our Protestant brethren; there is not one of them which we do not again and again in our discourses assert. Not one of these, therefore, affects the point at issue; not one goes far enough to show that Scripture is the only rule of faith, or that Christ determined that no one of the revelations which he committed to his Apostles, should be handed down to subsequent ages by any other channel than the Bible.

Amongst the proofs which were alleged by Mr. Totten-1 ham in support of this proposition, one of the most formidable was in the 20th chapter of John, verse 31—

"But these things are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life through his name."

Hence it was argued, that the gospel of St. John contained all that is necessary for man to believe. Now this conclusion goes much further than the doctrine which it is brought to support, viz.-that the Protestant rule is the Bible, not one portion of it but the whole. For it establishes that the gospel of St. John alone is sufficient for the faith of Protestants. Nay, it goes still further, for St. John is not speaking here of the whole of his gospel. Dr. Clarke says, in his Commentary on this verse, that it relates to two miracles only, which are recorded in verses 19 and 26 of the same chapter, viz.-that Christ entered amongst his disciples, the doors being shut. Hence it would follow, that these two miracles alone, being "written that you should believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God," &c. are sufficient for salvation. Moreover we acknowledge that the greater portion of the gospels is written that we may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. But the question is, whether such portions alone are sufficient for our faith? That is, whether they contain all the revelations which Christ willed should be handed down to his followers? This is the point at issue, and this is a point that my adversary has not proved. He cited the 17th of Acts, verse 11, where you find related that the Bereans were more noble than those of Thessalonica, because they searched the Scriptures. We, too, recommend those who differ from us to read the Scriptures; and we recommend Catholics also to read the Scriptures. We hold with St. Paul that the Bereans were more noble than those of Thessalonica, because they

did not reject his doctrines without examining the Scriptures, whether the proofs he adduced from Scripture were valid or not.

It has been insinuated to you, indeed expressly said, that the Scriptures are open to the clergy, but not to the laity of the Catholic communion. This, my friends, is . one of those grievous calumnies which I spoke of at the commencement of my address, and which endeavours are made to impress upon you, even at this meeting. To convince you of the contrary, allow me to read an extract from a letter addressed by Pope Pius VI. to the Archbishop of Florence, dated Rome, April 1, 1788.

"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 Scriptures: for these are the most abundant sources which ought to be left open to EVERY ONE, to draw from them purity of morals and of doctrine, and to eradicate the errors which are widely disseminated in these modern times. This you have seasonably effected by publishing the Sacred Writings, in the language of your country, suitable to every one's capacity, especially when you show and set forth, that you have added explanatory notes, which preclude every possible danger of abuse."

Pope Pius VII. in his Letter to the Catholic Bishops of England, dated April 18th, 1820, exhorted them in like manner to encourage their flocks to read pious books, particularly the Holy Scriptures. Prefixed to a translation of the New Testament into the French language, by P. Amelote, there are many declarations of approbation given thereto by the French Bishops. In like manner at the beginning of a Catholic Bible, translated into English, we have the approbation of the Irish Bishops thus

"This new edition of the English version of the Bible—we, by our authority approve. And, we declare that the same may be used with great spiritual profit by the faithful; provided it be read with due reverence and the proper dispositions. "Given at Dublin, 2d September, 1829. "DANIEL MURRAY, D.D." "We concur with the above approbation."-[Here follows a list of Catholic Bishops in Ireland.]

Let not, then, the insinuation, which has so often been made, that we prohibit the laity from reading the Scriptures, he believed. If at any time such a regulation was made, it was not universal; and it was made under cir cumstances in which, I am convinced, many Protestants would approve of it. Indeed, many Protestants have expressed a desire that restrictions should be put upon the unlimited reading of the Bible.


Mr. Chairman,-With regard to the observations which were made at the opening of Mr. Brown's speech, as to the origin of this discussion, I feel that most of them are quite unconnected with myself, or with the Reformation Society; and therefore, I shall not waste that period of time, which is allotted me, by referring to those matters, having others of more consequence to attend to. However, Mr. Brown stated, in reference to this meeting, and to such meetings generally, that they were not oftentimes productive of much good, but that they caused a great deal of excitement, and perhaps confusion, and that many, if not most, of the persons who attended them were brought together by mere curiosity.

Now, I am not one who will stand up to affirm that controversy is free from evils. I acknowledge that it has evils attending it, and that it is encompassed with danger; but then, at the same time, I contend that it is oftentimes a scriptural duty. What saith the Apostle Jude, in the 3rd verse of his Epistle?

[ocr errors]

Dearly beloved, taking all care to write unto you concerning your common salvation, I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints."

And, if we remember the conduct of the Apostle Paul, as recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, we find that he went into the synagogues, and into the market-place, and he publicly disputed with the people, shewing by the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ. Therefore, though controversy, though discussion, may have their evils and dangers, which I am ready to admit, yet, at the same time, standing upon the authority of the Scriptures, we are not afraid of going onward in the Lord's strength.

Mr. Brown also stated something with regard to the effect of Reformation Meetings in general. He said, that he never knew an instance, so far as his experience went, of a person having apostatized from the Roman Catholic faith as the result of these meetings; whereas, he knew many instances to the contrary. I am not going to dispute with respect to this statement, though there may be many who have come over, notwithstanding Mr. Brown's want of knowledge on the subject. It is, however, a matter of no consequence to the present discussion.


I would say, is, that if indeed Reformation Meetings have produced such wonderful results in favour of the Roman Catholic faith, I really think Mr. Brown should be glad that such meetings are going forward, and ought to seek to cultivate them, rather than express a dislike for them.

Now, Sir, to proceed. Mr. Brown complains that he has been hampered by not being allowed to consider the question of "private judgment;" he admitted that, abstractedly, it is not a part of the Protestant rule of faith, the Bible alone being such; but he feels it very hard that he cannot refer to the means by which the rule of faith is made known; and, then, in opposition to me, he produces the opinion of Mr. Finch and others, at a discussion at Bath. I stand, however, on my original position; I have given not Mr. Finch's, or Mr. Gordon's opinion, or that of any individual, but I have given the standard documents of the Protestant Churches: it is by them we are to be guided in this matter, and they assert simply that the Protestant rule of faith is, the Scripture alone, and do not add, interpreted by private judgment." "But," says Mr. Brown, "if Mr. Tottenham will throw a chain around me, he should not have fallen into the same error which he deprecates, and brought forward the Church as a part of the Catholic rule." Now I think the cases are different, especially when I find that Mr. Brown (in one of his publications which I have with me) defines the Roman Catholic rule to be "the written and unwritten Word of God proposed by the Church." I say the cases are different for this reason; we do not admit private judgment to be a part of the rule of faith, because we do not admit it to be infallible; but the Roman Catholic contends that his church, which proposes the written and unwritten word, is infallible.

[ocr errors]

The sixth article of the Church of England has been referred to, and read again, which declares that " Holy Scripture contains all things necessary to salvation." Mr. Brown asserts that the Reformation Society has added, that the meanest outcast of society may interpret this word, by the exercise of his own private judgment, as he pleases. I remark here, that it was not the Reformation Society that added the right of private judgment, for I think it may be proved that this principle was admitted by many long before the Reformation Society was in existence. But here let me correct a mistake, into which Mr. Brown and other


Roman Catholics have fallen; no member of the Reformation Society, and no Protestant, who knows what protestant principles are, contends that a man may interpret the Bible as he pleases. We maintain that he is to exercise the judgment which God has given him, and for the use of which God will call him to account, and that “every man must bear his own burden." He is called on to employ his powers of mind on the Scriptures, according to the rules by which he would ascertain the meaning of any other writing; and if he misinterprets and perverts them, he is answerable to God for it. We do not contend for the perversion of the Scriptures, but we contend for the simple right, established by Scripture and by reason. Be it also remembered, in this case, that there is one point continually kept out of view, when our adversaries speak of the exercise of private judgment—it is supposed we maintain that a man should proceed, leaning on his own understanding, to interpret the Word of God. Now we rejoice to know that there is a promise given of the HOLY SPIRIT to him who asks,—and that, therefore, when we tell a man to read the Bible, we do not tell him to follow his own fancies, but we point him to that source, from which he may derive light and instruction, for the understanding of what he reads. If a man reads the Bible in sincerity of heart, and looks to God for a blessing on the word read, we may be sure he will be preserved from error, and will be led into all necessary truth.

Mr. Brown has referred to the testimony of several liberal Protestants, in reference to the calumnies and misrepresentations which (he says) are continually uttered against Roman Catholics and their religion. He has quoted from the Bishop of Norwich, from the Rev. Mr. Wix, Lord Donoughmore, and others. Far be it from me, Sir, to advocate the misrepresentation of the Roman Catholic religion, or of any other; and what I have to say about that system I wish to say upon this principle:-take the word of no man, whether Protestant or Roman Catholic, as evidence of the real state of things, but take the acknowledged documentary authorities of the Church. This is the way to judge of what a Church really holds: it is not to be discovered with accuracy from the statements of individuals on either side. Do you suppose I would admit that, whatever a man may choose to give as a version of Protestantism, should be

« PrécédentContinuer »