And equally absurd is that of the cost and trouble of procuring a sufficient number of copies. It is not seriously proposed by Dr. Wiseman, that men shall be left without any rule, or any instruction in divine things. He would send preachers. Now we are not objecting to the use of living missionaries: but when the point mooted as a serious objection to the use of the Bible as a rule, is, the cost and trouble of procuring copies, the obvious answer is, that a single living preacher must cost from £100. to £300. a-year; and that for that sum you might supply, every year, from five hundred to a thousand Bibles!

The last point mooted is that of the difficulty of understanding the scriptures. Now no Protestant will attempt to deny that there are deep and holy mysteries in the word of God. We could hardly suppose it to be a Revelation from heaven if it were without them. But we do mean to assert that by far the greater portion of the scripture is plain and level to every man's capacity, and full of every necessary instruction. Nor, when David declares it to be "a lamp unto his feet, and a light unto his path," is it either decent or comely for Dr. Wiseman to represent it as unintelligible and bewildering.

But the real question is, Is it the Rule prescribed by God himself? The existence of some lofty and still obscure prophecies in its pages is nothing to the purpose in this question. Here is a book, given by inspiration of God, for the use of man. It is, by the admission of all parties, wholly free from error or obliquity. It declares itself, again and again, to be sent to mankind as their infallible guide. And where is there any other? Those who tell us that the scriptures are not to be understood, ought to shew us 'the

voice of the church;' and let us see if that be more lucid and intelligible. But this voice of the church' is no where to be found, save in some threescore volumes of records of councils, or writings of fathers, which the great mass of the people could never possess, nor understand, if they were even to obtain them. Dr. Wiseman asks, 'Who ever heard of the propriety and wisdom of placing in men's hands a code or rule, which it was impossible for the greater portion of them to comprehend.' But we demand, in reply, Who ever heard of the propriety or wisdom of placing in men's hands no code or rule whatever; of leaving them without any other guide or director than a fallible man like themselves; and of taking away from them that which is not denied to be God's own word, merely because there are some passages in it which are too high for most men's comprehension!

We trust, then, that we have succeeded in shewing, that in every point suggested by Dr. Wiseman, as a ground for disbelieving that God intended the scriptures as a rule of faith to man,-the rival rule, put forward by Dr. W. himself,-to wit, THE CHURCH, is open to far greater objection. There must be a greater difficulty in establishing the authority of such a Rule, and a greater difficulty in applying it, if it could be established.

XIV.

INFALLIBILITY.

ON THE ALLEGED NECESSITY FOR AN INFALLIBLE

CHURCH.

IT now seems advisable, and, in fact, almost necessary, before proceeding further, to take a brief retrospect of the course of argument through which we have passed, and to gain, as far as may be, a correct idea of our present position.

The discussion has hitherto turned almost exclusively on the rule of faith. We have endeavoured to maintain the Protestant doctrine; that holy scripture was the one, sole, and sufficient rule, furnished and set forth by God himself;-and to shew the untenable nature of the opposite principle,—that the Catholic church is the true depository and only authorized expositor of Christian doctrine; dispensing from her ample stores, and with divine authority, both holy scripture and Catholic tradition, as in her wisdom she sees fit. In arguing the question, we have endeavoured both to establish the Protestant

principle, by showing the scriptures to be incontrovertibly genuine, true, and divinely inspired; and also to overthrow the contrary doctrine, by exhibiting the unfounded character of the pretensions of the Romish church. With the latter view we have investigated the claims of the church of Rome to her assumed title of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic church; and also the pretensions of her bishops to be considered the successors and representatives of St. Peter. Both these assumptions we found to be utterly untenable. And we are now in a position to demand, on behalf of the Protestant churches, a decision in their favour, on this great fundamental point.

In this stage of the argument, however, another view of the question is often raised, and one which it seems necessary here to meet.

It is asked, whether we can conceive it possible for the Lord Jesus, when he left for a time this earth, upon which he was shortly to number thousands of faithful followers, to have determined to leave all those followers destitute of guidance, subject to no authority, included within no pale, but wandering about in their isolated and individual characters, free to choose or to form a church for themselves, or to continue in a state of independence of all churches? Can you believe, it is demanded, for an instant, that he did not, most deliberately, fully, and of set purpose, constitute and appoint a CHURCH, in which, and by which, his gospel was to be preserved and preached; and within whose pale all his true disciples were bound to range themselves? This, it is assumed, can hardly be doubted. But if the fact be admitted, then we are asked, where can that church,

so founded and constituted, be found, except in that body of which the sovereign pontiff is the head?

In her, it is said, you find a clear and unquestionable succession, from the very days of the apostles. You find her also, ever admitted to stand as the alone centre of unity and fountain of authority; while all other churches, or rather pseudo-churches, are nothing else than so many irregular off-shoots, or run-away children, who claim to share in, or to vie with her authority, although they lose every vestige of right to assume such a position, the moment they rebel against her unquestionable rule. We ask, therefore, -it is said,-where, admitting, as you must, that Christ founded a visible church-where can that church be discerned, except in the communion of which the successors of St. Peter are the head? A church of Christ, established by himself, there surely must be; and where, except here, can it be found?

This is a favourite position with the Romish advocates in the present day, and we shall not attempt to evade or shrink from its force; but will endeavour carefully and deliberately to weigh its value.

We remark, then, first, that as we have an inspired record of the words and actions of the Lord Jesus, we have no occasion to imagine for ourselves what it was likely' that he would do, or leave undone. His commands, as they are recorded by his apostles and evangelists, we are to observe; his institutions we are to reverence; but the greatest regard and reverence we can possibly shew to his memory and his injunctions, will be exhibited by a careful guarding of those injunctions from all admixture and alloy; and a determination to allow no commandments of men' to be