writings of uninspired men show, in like manner, that even the humblest and most devout heart was in incessant peril of being led astray.

An answer is frequently here brought forward, to the effect that the sentiments of the primitive writers are to be reverenced, simply as testimonies to the universally received doctrines of the Catholic Church. To this we reply, that the assertion of any writer that any one doctrine in question is received by all true Catholics, is only equivalent to an avowal of his own belief in that doctrine. For, from the very nature of the case, no honest man could hold an opinion which he believed to be contrary to the genuine Catholic faith, as taught by the apostles themselves. If he did not suppose it to be really a Catholic doctrine, he must of necessity reject it. And further, the vast variety of sentiments which in our own day prevails with respect to many of the actual principles recognized by the Church of England, shows how easily a body of writers may err in attempting to describe the real faith of the Church of their own day. It happens, also, that in our own times this uncertainty continues, notwithstanding all the written articles and formularies which are open to investigation, while the primitive Christians were possessed of

few, if of any, documents, beyond the Scriptures themselves. Hence we cannot, with any confident certainty, rely upon the declarations of the early writers concerning the exact nature of the Catholic doctrines of their own day. And this conclusion derives no little weight from the peculiar character of the faith of the primitive Church. In the first times of the Gospel, the believers had not yet learned by sad experience, that the mysteries of their religion must be guarded and strengthened by an exactness of definition, by creeds, and articles of faith, in order to stand firm against the inroads of heresy. They had none of those lengthened and accurate descriptions of doctrines, which are the great barriers of orthodoxy in more modern times. From which it follows, that the most zealous of the sons of the Church might, in perfect unconsciousness of his error, ascribe sentiments to her which she would be the first to repudiate.

In reply to these views, it is often asserted, that it is to the declarations of the primitive Fathers that we owe our belief in the inspiration of the New Testament, and that on their testimony we admit its genuineness and authenticity. The first of these objections we answer by denying the statement so made. We altogether re

ject the notion that the dicta of the early Church are our guarantee for the inspiration of the Scriptures. We believe that inspiration, simply because the authors of the sacred volume were men who were gifted by God with the power of working miracles. The second objection we meet by admitting the fact, and by asserting the truth which is recognised in every occurrence of our lives, viz. that there is a fundamental distinction between the testimony of a witness to a matter of fact, and his accounts of traditionary opinions or of the actual sentiments of other men. Testimony to a matter of fact is accepted from every person who is neither dishonest nor insane; reports of traditions are held to be utterly valueless. And that this is no fanciful distinction is proved by the striking diversity of opinion which exists concerning the real sentiments of the English Reformers, while of the matters of fact which relate to the Rubric and the formularies of the Church no doubt can exist. The experience, also, of every man, shows how easy it is to live on from day to day in total ignorance of the actual sentiments of our most intimate friends.

V. That General Councils of the Church may err, is asserted by the twenty-first Article of the

Y

Church of England, and is manifest from the consideration, that they are merely representative of the majority of the professing Church, and consequently are liable to give their sanction to an erroneous opinion. The authority assumed by the Council at Jerusalem, as narrated in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, does not bear upon the general question. For that assembly was under the guidance of inspired men, and made no pretensions to be a council of the universal Church.

VI. That Unauthoritative Tradition subserves a most important purpose in the Church and the world, none are found to deny in practice, though some persons venture to doubt the fact theoretically. As a matter of history and experience the Bible has never been left to be its own sole interpreter; from age to age, it has been explained and illustrated by the labours, the learning, and the piety of Christian persons. And the result has been, and still is, that the religious knowledge of the majority of mankind is far greater than it would have been, if every individual had been left to the task of ascertaining the true doctrines of Revelation by his own unassisted study of the sacred pages.

This knowledge of revealed truth is strictly

traditionary knowledge, and it becomes injurious only when it is supposed to have in itself any antecedent claim upon the credence of those persons who have attained to an age of maturity. To every man, indeed, there is a presumption in favour of the religious belief of his own nation or family; and a child is bound by all laws of reason to submit its judgment on such matters to the decision of its parents. But this is to continue only so long as the mind is uninformed on the subject, or is by any necessary cause incapacitated from thinking for itself. Not that we can suppose that it is the bounden duty of every believer actually to institute a search into the Scriptures for the purpose of testing all his previous belief by what he therein reads. Doubtless the true faith is acceptable in the sight of God, whether it spring from the most cautious investigation of the Bible itself, or from an unthinking trust in the teaching of some greatly-reverenced teacher. We say no more than that if a man chooses to do so, God permits him to try all doctrines by the agreement which he himself perceives them to have with the written word. For the doctrines which he thus draws from the Bible, he is necessarily answerable to God; and unless he search with