of the Apostles' writings which happen to remain are sufficient, considering that some of them are undoubtedly lost. We may answer, that any one book of Scripture would be sufficient, provided none other were given us; that the whole Volume, as we have received it, is enough, because we have no more. There is no abstract measure of what is sufficient. Faith cannot believe more than it is told. It is saving, if it believes that, be it little or great.

Lastly, it may be asked, if Scripture be, as has been above represented, but the document of appeal, and Catholic Tradition the authoritative teacher of Christians, how it is that our Articles say nothing of Catholic Tradition, and contemplate Tradition only in its relation to Ceremonies and Rites which are not "in all places one or utterly like," " and may be changed according to the diversity of countries, times, and men's manners?" To which I answer by asking, in turn, why the Articles contain no recognition of the inspiration of Holy Scripture. In truth, we must take the Articles as we find them; they are not a system of theology on whatever view, but a protest against certain specific errors, existing at the time when they were drawn up. There are, as all parties must confess, great truths not expressly stated in the Articles.

LECTURE XII.

ON SCRIPTURE AS THE RECORD OF OUR LORD'S TEACHING.

Of the two lines of proof offered in behalf of the sixth Article, which I discussed in my last Lecture, the one considered it to declare a doctrine, the other a fact; the one spoke as if Holy Scripture must contain, the other as if it happened to contain all necessary truth. Of these the former seems to me to come nearer to the real meaning of the Article, and also to the truth of the case, though the particular considerations commonly offered in proof are insufficient. Certainly, we cannot maintain the peculiar authority of the written word, on the ground of any antecedent necessity, that revelation should be written, or from the witness of Scripture itself, or from the parallel of the Jewish Law; yet there are probabilities nevertheless, which recommend the doctrine to our belief, even before going into the details of that historical testi

А а

mony which I consider to be the proper evidence of it.

Let us see, then, what can be said on the primá facie view of the subject, in behalf of the notion that Scripture is on principle, and not only by accident, the sole Canon of our faith.

First, the New Testament is called by the name of a testament or will. Indeed, the very circumstance that St. Paul calls the Gospel Revelation a Testament, and that Testaments are necessarily written, and that he parallels it to the Mosaic Testament, and that the Mosaic was written, prepares us to expect that the Gospel will be written also. And the name of Testament actually given to the sacred volume confirms this anticipation. It evidently is a mark of special honor; and it assigns a most significant purpose to the written Word, such as Tradition, however clearly Apostolical, cannot reach. Even granting Tradition and Scripture both to come from the Apostles, it does not therefore follow that their written Word was not, under God's over-ruling guidance, designed for a particular purpose, for which their Word unwritten was not designed.

Next, we learn from the testimony of the early Church, that Scripture and Scripture only is inspired. This explains how it may be called in an especial manner the Testament or Will of our Lord and Saviour. Scripture has a gift which Tradition has not; it is fixed, tangible, accessible, readily applicable, and besides all this perfectly true in all

its parts and relations; in a word, it is a sacred text. Tradition does not convey to us any forms of words or discourses, but things only; doctrine, that is, embodied in diversified language, which in all its varieties expresses the same ideas, but is avouched as literally Apostolic in none. It gives us little or nothing which can be argued from. We can argue only from a text; we can argue freely only from an inspired text. Thus Scripture is in itself specially fitted for that office which we assign it in our Article; to be a repository of manifold and various doctrine, a means of proof, a standard of appeal, an umpire and test between truth and falsehood in all emergencies. It thus becomes the nearest possible approach to the perpetual presence of the Apostles in the Church; whereas Tradition, being rather a collection of separate truths, facts, and usages, is wanting in flexibility and adaptation to the subtle questions and difficulties which from time to time arise. A new heresy, for instance, would be refuted by Tradition negatively, on the very ground that it was new; but by Scripture positively, by the use of its text, and by suitable inferences from it.

Here, then, are two tokens that Scripture really is what we say it is. But now let us proceed to a third peculiarity, to which more time shall be devoted.

Scripture alone contains what remains to us of our Lord's teaching. If there be a portion of

revelation, sacred beyond other portions, distinct and remote in its nature from the rest, it must be the words and works of the Eternal Son Incarnate. He is the One Prophet of the Church, as He is the One Priest and King. His history is as far above any other possible revelation, as heaven is above earth; for in it we have literally the sight of Almighty God in His judgments, thoughts, attributes, and deeds, and His mode of dealing with us His creatures. Now this special revelation is in Scripture, and Scripture only; Tradition has no part in it.

To enter into the force of this remark, we should carefully consider the peculiar character of our Lord's recorded words and works when on earth. They will be found to come even professedly, as the declarations of a Lawgiver. In the Old Covenant, Almighty God first of all spoke the Ten Commandments from Mount Sinai, and afterwards wrote them. So our Lord first spoke His own Gospel, both of promise and of precept, on the Mount, and His Evangelists have recorded it. Further, when He delivered it, He spoke by way of parallel to the Ten Commandments. And His style, moreover, corresponds to the authority which He assumes. It is of that solemn, measured, and severe character, which bears on the face of it tokens of its belonging to One who spake as none other man could speak. The Beatitudes, with which His Sermon opens, are an instance of this