purposes for which Scripture is useful; but it does not follow that no medium is necessary for its becoming useful to individuals. Scripture may be profitable for doctrine, instruction, and correction, that the man of God may be perfect, without thereby determining at all whether or not there are instruments for preparing, dispensing, and ministering the word for this or that purpose which it is to effect. Certainly Christ says, "Search the Scriptures," but He is speaking to the Jews about their Scriptures, and about definite prophecies; how does it follow that because it was the duty of the Jews to examine documents as prophecies, which profess to be prophecies, that therefore we are meant to gather our doctrines from documents which do not profess to be doctrinal? Besides, when Christ told them to search the Scriptures for notices of Himself, He had vouchsafed already to present Himself before them; He was a living comment on those Scriptures to which He referred'. What He was to be, was not understood before He appeared. The case is the same with Christian doctrine now. The Creed confronts Scripture, and seems to say to us, "Search the Scriptures, for they testify of me." But if we attempt to gain the truth of doctrine without the Creed, perchance we shall not be more successful in our search than the Jews were in seeking Christ before He came; 1 Vide Acts viii. 30-35. xvii. 11. yet under circumstances different from theirs, in that in our case knowledge is necessary to salvation, and error is a sin. Enough has now been said on the theory of Private Judgment. I conclude then that there is neither natural probability, nor supernatural promise, that individuals reading Scripture for themselves, to the neglect of other means when they can have them, will, because they pray for a blessing, be necessarily led into a knowledge of the true and complete faith of a Christian. I conclude that the popular theory of rejecting all other helps and reading the Bible only, though in most cases maintained merely through ignorance, is yet in itself presumptuous. I make but one remark in conclusion. A main reason of the jealousy with which Christians of this age and country maintain the notion that truth of doctrine can be gained from Scripture by individuals, is this, that they are unwilling, as they say, to be led by others blindfold. They can possess and read the Scriptures; whereas of Traditions they are no adequate judges, and they dread priestcraft. I am not here to enter into the discussion of this feeling, whether praiseworthy or the contrary. However this be, it does seem a reason for putting before them, if possible, the principal works of the Fathers, translated as Scripture is; that they may have by them what, whether used or not, will at least act as a check upon the growth of an undue dependence on the word of individual teachers, and will be a something to consult, if they have reason to doubt the Catholic character of any tenet to which they are invited to accede. LECTURE VII. INSTANCES OF THE ABUSE OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. I PROPOSE now to follow up the remarks last made upon the Abuse of Private Judgment, with some instances in which it has been indulged, and in which, as might be expected antecedently, it has been productive of error, more or less serious, but never insignificant. These instances shall, on the whole, be such as no orthodox Protestant shall be able to look at with any satisfaction, and some of them shall be taken from the history of Romanism itself. Without further preface I enter upon the subject, viz. what are the chief precedents, which past ages afford modern Protestants, of the exercise of Private Judgment upon the text of Scripture to the neglect of Catholic Tradition; and what is their character? 1. First might be instanced many of the errors in matters of fact connected with the Scripture history, which got current in early times, and, being mentioned by this or that Father, now improperly go by the name of Traditions, whereas they seem really to have originated in a misunderstanding of Scripture. Such, for instance, is the report recorded by Irenæus, and coming, as he conceived, on good authority, that our Saviour lived to be forty or fifty. Such is Clement's statement that St. Paul was married; such is that of Clement and Justin, that our Lord was deformed in person. These make out no claim to be considered Apostolical, whereas they do singularly coincide severally with certain texts in Scripture which admit of being distorted so as to countenance them'. Such again are probably in no slight degree the early opinions concerning the Millennium; certainly in Egypt in the third century they seem to have had their origin in a misconstruction of Scripture2. If these various opinions did really thus arise, it is a very curious circumstance that they should now be imputed to Tradition, nay, and adduced, as they are popularly, as if palmary refutations of its claims, being all the while but the result of either going solely by Scripture, or with but scanty and insufficient guidance from Tradition. At the same time it should be borne in mind, that, even if they were not mere deductions from Scripture, still such local rumours about matters of fact cannot be put on a 1 John viii. 57. 1 Cor. ix. 5. Is. lii. 14. liii. 2. |