It remains for you, Dear Sir, and your religious friends, who have called me into the field of controversy, to determine which of the two methods you will follow, in settling your religious concerns for time and FOR ETERNITY! Were it possible for me to err in following the Catholic method, with such a mass of evidence in its favour, methinks I could answer at the judgmentseat of Eternal Truth, with a pious writer of the middle ages, 'Lord, If I have been deceived, 'thou art the author of my error.'(1) Whereas, should you be found to have mistaken the right way, by depending upon your own private opinion, contrary to the directions of your authorized guides, what would you be able to allege in excuse for such presumption?--Think of this while you have time, and pray humbly and earnestly for God's holy grace to enlighten and strengthen you.

I am,

Dear Sir, &c.

J. M.

LETTER XII.

To JAMES BROWN, Esq. &c.

DEAR SIR,

OBJECTIONS ANSWERED.

I AM not forgetful of the promise I made in my last letter but one, to answer the contents of those which I had then received from yourself, Mr. Topham and Mr. Askew. Within these few days I have received other letters from yourself and Mr. Topham, which, equally with the former, call for my attention. However, as it would take up a great deal of time to write

(1) Hugh of St. Victor.

separate answers to each of these letters, and, as I know, that they are arguments, and not formalities, which you expect from me, I shall make this letter a general reply to the several objections contained in them all, with the exception of such as have been answered in my last to you. Conceiving, also, that it will contribute to the brevity and perspicuity of my letter, if I arrange the several objections, from whomsoever they came, under their proper heads; and if, on this occasion, I make use of the scholastic instead of the epistolary style; I shall adopt both these methods.-I must, however, remark, before I enter upon my task, that most of the objections appear to have been borrowed from the Bishop of London's book, called a Brief Confutation of the Errors of Popery. This was extracted from Archbishop Secker's Sermons on the subject; which, themselves, were culled out of his predecessor Tillotson's Pulpit Controversy. Hence you may justly consider your arguments, as the strongest which can be brought against the Catholic Rule and Religion. Under this persuasion, the work in question has been selected for gratuitous distribution by your Tract Societies, wherever they particularly wish to restrain or suppress Catholicity.

Against the Catholic Rule it is objected, that Christ referred the Jews to the Scriptures: Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. John v. 35. Again the Jews of Berea are commended by the sacred penman, in that they search the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so. Acts, xvii. 11.

Before I enter on the discussion of any part of Scripture, with you or your friends, I am bound, Dear Sir, in conformity with my Rule of Faith, as explained by the Fathers, and particularly by Tertullian, to protest against your and their right

to argue from Scripture; and, of course, must deny that there is any necessity of my replying to any objections which you may draw from it. For I have reminded you, that No prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation; and I have proved to you that the whole right to the Scriptures belongs to the Church. She has preserved them, she vouches for them, and, she alone, by confronting the several passages with each other, and with Tradition, authoritatively explains them. Hence it is impossible that the real sense of Scripture should ever be against her and her doctrine; and hence, of course, I might quash every objection which you can draw from any passage in it by this short reply: The Church understands the passage differently from you; therefore you mistake its meaning. Nevertheless, as Charity beareth all things and never faileth, I will, for the better satisfying of you and your friends, quit my vantage ground for the present, and answer distinctly to every text, not yet answered by me, which any of your Gentlemen, or which Dr. Porteus himself, has brought against the Catholic rule or method of Religion.

By way of answering your first objection, let me ask you, whether Christ by telling the Jews to search the Scriptures, intimated that they were not to believe in his unwritten word, which he was then preaching; nor to hear his Apostles and their Successors, with whom he promised to remain for ever? I ask, secondly, on what particular question Christ referred to the Scripture, namely, the Old Scripture?-for no part of the New was then written.-Was it on any question that has been or might be agitated among Christians? No, certainly: the sole question between him and the Infidel Jews, was, whether he was or was not the Messiah: in proof that he was the Messiah, he adduced the ordinary motives of credibility, as they have been detailed by your

late worthy Rector, Mr. Carey, namely, the miracles he wrought, and the prophecies in the Old Testament that were fulfilled in him, as likewise the testimony of St. John the Baptist. The same is to be said of the commendations bestowed by St. Luke on the Bereans; they searched the ancient prophecies, to verify that the Messiah was to be born at such a time and in such a place, and that his life and his death were to be marked by such and such circumstances. We still refer Jews and other infidels to the same proofs of Christianity, without saying any thing yet to them about our Rule of Faith or judge of controversies.

Dr. Porteus objects what St. Luke says at the beginning of his gospel: It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, Most Excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the cer tainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed. Again, St. John says, c. xx.; 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.

Answer. It is difficult to conceive how his Lordship can draw an argument from these texts against the Catholic Rule. Surely he does not gather from the words of St. Luke, that Theophilus did not believe the articles in which he had been instructed by word of mouth till he read his Gospel; or that the Evangelist gainsaid the authority given by Christ to his disciples: He that heareth you heareth me, which he himself records, Luke, x. 16. In like manner the Prelate cannot suppose, that this testimony of St. John sets aside other testimonies of Christ's Divinity, or that our belief in this single article without other conditions, will insure eternal life.

Having quoted these texts, which to me appear so inconclusive; the Bishop adds, by way of prov

ing that Scripture is sufficiently intelligible, Surely the Apostles were not worse writers, with 'divine assistance, than others commonly are 'without it.' (1)

I will not here repeat the arguments and testimonies already brought (2) to show the great obscurity of a considerable portion of the Bible, particularly with respect to the bulk of mankind: because it is sufficient to refer to the clear words of St. Peter, declaring that there are in the Epistles of St. Paul, Some things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do all the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction, (2 Peter, iii. 16.), and to the instances which occur in the Gospels, of the very Apostles frequently misunderstanding the meaning of their Divine Master.

·

The learned Prelate says elsewhere, (3) 'The 'New Testament supposes them (the generality of people) capable of judging for themselves, and accordingly, requires them not only, to try the Spirits whether they be of God, (1 John, iv. 1.); but to prove all things, and hold fast that which is "good.' 1 Thess. v. 21.

Answer. True: St. John tells the Christians, to whom he writes, to try the Spirits whether they are of God: because, he adds, many false prophets are gone out into the world: but then he gives them two rules for making trial: Hereby ye know the spirit of God. Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God. And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh (which was denied by the Heretics of that time, the disciples of Simon and Cerinthus) is not of God. In this the Apostle tells the Christians to see whether the doctrine of these spirits was, or was not conformable to that which they had learnt from the Church. The second Rule was,

(1) P. 4.

(2) Letter ix,

(3) P. 19.