Antiquity and Catholicity to be the real Guides, and the Church their organ."-Lectures on Romanism, &c. Lect. XI. pp. 320

322.

NOTE E, p. xxix.

"From all this I gather, that in the interval between Clement and Ignatius on the one hand, Irenæus and Tertullian on the other, the Canon of the New Testament had first become fixed and notorious, and then the fact had been observed, which is stated in our Article: That every fundamental point of doctrine is contained in the unquestioned Books of that Canon, taken along with the Hebrew Scriptures. And this observation, being once made, would, of course, immediately suggest that golden rule, not of the Anglican only, but of the Catholic Church ;That nothing is to be insisted on as a point of faith necessary to salvation, but what is contained in, or may be proved by, Canonical Scripture. At any rate, it is unquestionable, that by the time of Irenæus, i. e. towards the end of the second century, the fact had been universally recognised, and the maxim thoroughly grounded and incorporated into the system of the Catholic Church."-Keble's Visitation Sermon, pp. 30, 31. “If asked, how I know that the Bible contains all truth necessary to be believed in order to salvation, I simply reply, as the first Homily implies, that the early Church so accounted it, that there is a consent of Catholic Fathers' in its favour. matter, whether or not we can see a principle in it; no matter, whether or not we can prove it from reason or Scripture; we receive it simply on historical evidence. The early Fathers so held it; and we throw the burden of our belief, if it be a burden, on them. It is quite impossible they should so have accounted it, except from Apostolic intimations, that it was so to be. Stronger evidence for its truth is scarcely conceivable ; for, if any but the Scripture had pretensions to be an oracle of faith, would not the first Successors of the Apostles be that oracle?-Must not they, if any, have possessed the authoritative traditions of the Apostles? They surely must have felt, as

No

much as we do, the unsystematic character of the Epistles, the silence of Scripture on the doctrine of its own Canonicity, or whatever other objections can be now urged against the doctrine; and yet they certainly held it.

"If this line of argument can be maintained, there will be this especial force in it as addressed to Romanists. They are accustomed to taunt us with inconsistency, as if we used the Tradition of the Church only, when and as far as we could not avoid it; for instance, for the establishment of the Divinity of Scripture, but not for the doctrines of the Gospel. 'Were it not for the testimony of the Church,' they say, 'we should not know what Books are, what Books are not, inspired; they do not speak for themselves; or, at least, when they do, they scarcely can be admitted as their own vouchers. Yet a Protestant will quote them implicitly as Divine, while he scoffs and rails at that informant to whom he is indebted for his knowledge.' Protestants have felt the cogency of this representation; and have been led to explore other modes of proving the genuineness of the New Testament, which might set them free from the first ages of Christianity. Paley, for instance, has shown from the undesigned coincidences of the Acts and Epistles, that they bear with them an internal evidence of their truth. Others have enlarged upon what they conceive to be the beautiful and wise adaptation of the Christian doctrines to each other, which, in the words of one writer, is such as to show that 'the system' of the Apostles is true in the nature of things, even were they proved to be impostors." Ingenious as such arguments are, were they ever so sound and reverent, as they are generally irreverent, and often untenable, they do not touch the question of the Divine origin of the New Testament itself, except very indirectly, nay, sometimes tend to dispense with it. Yet, allowing what force we will to them, I suppose it is undeniable, after all, that we do receive the New Testament, in its existing shape, on Tradition, not on such refinements; for instance, we include the Second Epistle of St. Peter, we leave

1 Erskine's Internal Evidence, p. 17.

1

out St. Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians, simply because the Church Catholic has done so. Now this objection, whatever be its value, is fully met by the mode of proof which I have suggested; or, rather, a point is gained thereby. We do not discard the Tradition of the Fathers; we accept it; we accept it entirely; we accept its witness concerning itself and against itself; it witnesses to its own inferiority to Scripture; it witnesses not only that Scripture is the record, but that it is the sole record of saving Truth.

"This is the more remarkable, from the great stress which the Fathers certainly do lay on the authority of Tradition. They so represent it in its Apostolical and universal character, they so extol and defer to it, that it is difficult to see why they do not make it, what the Romanists make it, an independent informant in matters of faith; yet they do not. Whenever they formally prove a doctrine, they have recourse to Scripture ; they bring forward Tradition first; they use it as a strong antecedent argument against individual heretics who profess to quote Scripture; but in Councils, they ever verify it by the written Word. Now, if we choose to argue and dispute, we may call them inconsistent, and desire an explanation; but, if we will be learners in the school of CHRIST, we shall take things as we find them, we shall consider their conduct as a vestige and token of some Apostolic appointment, from its very singularity. It is nothing to the purpose, even though Catholic and Apostolic Tradition be strong enough to sustain the weight of an appeal, supposing, in matter of fact, it was not so employed by the early Church. CHRIST surely may give to each of His instruments its own place; He has vouchsafed us two informants in saving Truth, both necessary, both at hand, Tradition for statement, Scripture for proof; and it is our part rather to thank Him for His bounty, than to choose one and reject the other. Let us be content to accept the Canonicity of Scripture on faith."-Newman On Romanism, &c. Lect. XI. pp. 339-343.

NOTE F, p. xxxvii.

"Vincentius," says Bp. JEBB, "in perfect unison with the Church of England, proposes to assist, not supersede, the faculty of Private Judgment. This dissimilarity between the Catholic Church of the fifth century and the modern Church of Rome, deserves particular attention. The Church of Rome sends her children to no approachable standard, because her own summary decision is their first and last authority. To this dictation they must implicitly submit, or they are undutiful, rebellious children. And, in this manner, the rule of Vincentius is not simply neglected but directly violated, and flagrantly counteracted. For what are the words of Vincentius?. Sive EGO, sive ALIUS, whether I MYSELF, OR ANY OTHER PERSON, wish to detect the frauds, and shun the snares, of rising heretics, he must, through Divine assistance, fortify his faith in a twofold manner, by the authority of the Divine Law, and by the Tradition of the Church.' This language cannot be mistaken: SIVE EGO, SIVE ALIUS: that is, each individual member of the Church is to look to his own faith; each individual is to guard for himself his own faith, by his own best and wisest exertions, by his own application of Scripture, by his own examination of Antiquity."-Appendix to Sermons chiefly practical, pp. 371, 372. This is theoretically true, and may be urged against Dissenters and others who, because our Church maintains that, on certain points, private judgment upon the text of Scripture is superseded-misrepresent her to say, that the exercise of private judgment is superseded altogether in matters of Religion: but, in point of fact, not one man in a thousand is qualified "to guard for himself his own faith," either "by his own application of Scripture," or "by his own examination of Antiquity."

NOTE G, p. xxxvii.

"Now, if its advocates are asked on what grounds they conceive that Scripture is, under God's grace, the one ordained informant in saving Truth, I suppose they will refer to such

6

6

texts as our LORD's words to the Jews, Search the Scriptures ;' or to St. Paul's, All Scripture is given by inspiration of GOD, and is profitable for Doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works;' or to St. Luke's account of CHRIST'S 'opening' His Apostles' understanding, that they might understand the Scripture;' or to St. James's telling us to ask for wisdom of GOD, who giveth liberally;' or to our LORD's assurance, Ask, and it shall be given you;' or to St. Paul's statement, that the natural man receiveth not the things of the SPIRIT of GOD;' or to our LORD's promise to the twelve, that the HOLY GHOST the COMFORTER 'should guide them into all Truth;' or to the prophet Isaiah's prediction,

All thy children shall be taught of the LORD;' or to St. John's declaration, Ye have an unction from the HOLY ONE, and ye know all things.' Yet after all, can any one text be produced, or any comparison of texts, to establish the very point in hand, that Scripture is the sole necessary instrument of the HOLY GHOST for guiding the individual Christian into saving Truth? for it may be very true that we ought to search the Scriptures, and true that Scripture contains all saving Doctrine, and true that we cannot understand it without the HOLY SPIRIT, and true that the HOLY SPIRIT is given to all who ask, and true that all perfect Christians do understand it; and yet there may not be such connexion between these separate propositions as to make it true that men are led by the HOLY SPIRIT into saving Truth through the Scriptures. We may be bound to search the Scriptures, yet not to find saving doctrines, but chiefly to be thoroughly furnished unto all good works;' it may contain all saving Doctrine, yet so deeply lodged there, that those who are unlearned and unstable may wrest it unto their own destruction;' the HOLY GHOST may be promised to all Christians, yet not in order to teach them the faith through Scripture, but in order to impress Scripture on their hearts, and to teach them the faith through whatever sources.

6

spect some of the foregoing texts more narrowly.

Let us in

"First, there are texts which bid us ask wisdom of GOD, and