a declaration concerning the canon of the New Testament, would be to condemn what was spurious and false. The evidence of the genuineness and authenticity of the acknowledged writings would be concentrated and arranged; and what had previously depended on traditional authority and the general concurrence of accredited testimonies, would be embodied in one specific declaration, as the universal belief of the Christian world. But this was not the formation of the rule, it was only its promulgation. It was not the creation, of an authority unknown before, but a legal provision for the perpetuity of a record; and was evidently designed to preserve the sacred writings, entire and uncorrupted.* But I observe, THIRDLY. That unless the antecedent authority of the New Testament, prior to all such declarations of it, be acknowledged, it will be impossible to prove the divinity of the Christian Religion.† For the fact that certain writings were invariably regarded as indisputable and authoritative, by those who had it in their power to ascertain the truth of what they contained;-who were under * See Appendix. NOTE C. + It is actually the assertion of Cardinal Bellarmine, "if we take away the authority of the existing Church-the whole Christian "faith becomes doubtful;" and again, he says "the stability of '(Christian) doctrines depends on the authority of the existing "Church." The Cardinal's words are- "Nam si tollamus auc"toritatem præsentis ecclesiæ-in dubium revocari poterunt, om"nium conciliorum decreta, et tota fides Christiana.--Omnium "dogmatum firmitas, pendet ab auctoritate præsentis Ecclesiæ." Bellarm. De Effectu. Sacram: Lib. 2. Cap. 25. Hence it follows that all the mighty assemblage of evidence, by which prophets, apostles, and Jesus Christ himself established the divine authority of the gospel, is nothing, till human testimony itself confirms it. They might as well assert that we had no reason to believe the Copernican System of philosophy to be true, till the sentence of the Vatican sanctioned and confirmed the discoveries of modern science! LECTURES ON THE PRINCIPLES AND INSTITUTIONS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION, LECTURE I. ON THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH. "As the Christian ministry is established for the instruction of men, throughout every age in truth and holiness, it must adapt itself to the ever-shifting scenes of the moral world, and stand ready to repel the attacks of error under whatever form they may appear." Supported by these views of the nature and design of the office I sustain, it will not be deemed a rash and obtrusive attempt, if I deviate from the ordinary course of ministerial instruction, and commence a series of controver sial lectures on the reasons of our separation from the Church of Rome. Though the inquiry on this subject, be at all times interesting and important, I frankly confess, that I should not now have entered upon it, had not local circumstances, in my apprehension, most imperiously required it. You are well acquainted with those circumstances; and their notoriety presents a sufficient reason for my undertaking. In appearing thus prominently, on behalf of the Protestant cause, I hope no suspicion will be entertained of the slightest reflection B on those zealous, and I doubt not, well intended exertions which have furnished the immediate occasion of my present appearance before you. Such exertions are highly commendable. It is, or ought to be a principle of acknowledged authority among Protestant churches, that every man has a right to explain and vindicate his religious convictions: and I hope that day will never dawn on Britain, when any religious party whatever, shall be prohibited from freely discussing, and recommending their respective peculiarities. May the spirit of intolerance never darken by its malignant shade, nor invest with its polluted atmosphere, the churches of the reformation; but a practical conformity to the "law of love," at once adorn and defend their common principles! It should never be forgotten that the interests of truth are always ultimately promoted by free inquiry. I feel therefore thankful for the opportunity which the circumstances alluded to, have presented, of conducting an inquiry into the principles and institutions of the Roman Catholic religion. For a long period, the question respecting the origin and reasons of the Protestant secession from the hierarchy of Rome, has excited in this country comparatively little attention. Intermingled indeed with political discussions on the extent of Catholic claims, the religious and ecclesiastical peculiarities of their system have been occasionally investigated; but it is not my intention to introduce any remarks on that controversy. The collisions of party politics, and secular debate should never be blended with the explanation and defence of Christian truth. On the contrary, to explain, illustrate, and improve the general principles on which alone our Protestantism can be vindicated, is the sole object of my inquiries. It is to be regretted that much ignorance prevails on these subjects. Thousands are Protestants for the same reason that their neighbours are Roman Catholics-because it is the religion of their fathers; and are often less informed, and consequently less capable of defending their cause than those against whom they protest. To remove this ignorance-to present a candid and rational vindication of the grounds of our secession-to enable the members of Protestant churches, to defend themselves against sophistical and unscriptural reasonings-and to furnish an inquirer of the papal communion with materials for reflection, if any such are disposed to make use of them are the principal objects I would endeavour, conscientiously and faithfully to regard in the course of our subsequent investigation. The zeal of our opponents, naturally leads us to inquire Can we defend ourselves?—are we in reality separatists from the only-and the apostolic church? are we out of the pale of the true Catholic communion? and must we suffer eternal damnation for venturing to dispute the authority and infallibility of the See of Rome, or the Church of Rome? I wish with all candour and impartiality to state my convictions on these points: and if any expressions unbecoming the sanctity of this place, or tending to produce the feelings of irritation, apart from the natural tendency of the arguments themselves, should escape me in the warmth and ardour of discussion, I trust they will be consigned to the oblivion they deserve. I could wish none to retire from these services under any other impressions, than those which might secure more lively gratitude to God, for the revelation of his will-a more carnest desire to understand its sacred truths, and to obey its holy injunctions and a more sincerely benevolent disposition towards all those who conscientiously |