Literal translation :

The sacred œcumenical and general Council of Trent, lawfully assembled in the Holy Ghost, and presided over by the same three legates of the apostolic see, having it constantly in view that by the removal of errors, the Gospel (which, promised aforetime in the Holy Scriptures by the prophets, Christ himself first published with His own mouth, and then commanded His apostles to preach to every creature, as the source of all saving truth and discipline) should be preserved pure in the Church; and clearly perceiving that this truth and instruction is contained in written books and unwritten traditions,-which traditions have been received by the apostles from the mouth of Christ himself, or dictated by the Holy Spirit, and by the apostles handed down even to us,-receives and reverences, conformably to the example of the orthodox Fathers, with the same pious regard and veneration, all the books of the Old as well as the New Testament (one God being the author of both), and the traditions relating both to faith and practice, inasmuch as these traditions were either delivered by word of mouth from Christ himself or dictated by the Holy Ghost, and preserved by uninterrupted succession in the Catholic Church. (Then follows the Catholic Canon of Scripture.)

It will be seen from this that the Catholic Rule of Faith is the whole Word of God, viz., Holy Scripture and Divine traditions, which, as the Council of Trent says, were delivered to the apostles by Christ himself, or dictated to them by the Holy Spirit, and such traditions only. Hence the futility of the objection which Protestants often make that our Lord condemned the "traditions of men." We distinguish true from false tradition by the same method that we distinguish an authentic copy of Scripture from a false one. In both cases we must depend on the uniform and universal testimony of Christian antiquity. Both Protestants and Catholics believe the four gospels to be a reliable account of the life of our Lord, because all Christian nations and ages have done so before them. Catholics have the very same testimony for the traditional doctrines held as Divine by the Catholic Church. We have as much evidence for the truth of universally admitted traditional doctrine, as we have for the truth of the four gospels.

The subject-matter then of the Catholic faith is the original revelation of God. To that revelation nothing may be added, from it nothing may be taken away. We may neither fix our own private meaning upon it, nor may we misinterpret it, pervert it, or make it speak our own sense. We must receive it as God gave it, in its perfect fulness, with its true sense and purport, as it was revealed. But how are we to obtain a certain and definite knowledge of this revelation? The Catholic's answer may be inferred from the decree of the Council of Trent, which I have just quoted. Christ himself first promulgated the Gospel with His own mouth, and before His ascension commissioned a body of men "to preach it to every creature," promising to be with them to the end of the world (Matt. xxviii. 19, 20). Our Lord also said to them, "I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever, the Spirit of truth" (John xiv. 16). From these promises the Catholic infers that there is, and will be until the end

of the world, a body of men in existence who have authority to teach him all that Christ has revealed, and, moreover, that this teaching body, which the Catholic calls the Church, in consequence of its being assisted and guided by Christ and his Spirit, can teach him no error.*

Thus, to a visible society of men, is the great and important work of preaching the kingdom of heaven entrusted. The ultimate reason of the visibility of the Church is to be found in the incarnation of the Divine Word. Had that Word descended into the hearts of men, without "taking the form of a servant," and, accordingly, without appearing in a corporeal shape, then only an internal, invisible Church would have been established. But since the Word became flesh, it expressed itself in an outward, perceptible, and human manner; it spoke as man to man, and suffered and worked after the fashion of men, to win them to the kingdom of God; so that the means selected for the attainment of this object fully corresponded to the general method of instruction and education determined by the nature and wants of man. This decided the nature of those means whereby the Son of God, even after He had withdrawn himself from the eyes of the world, wished still to work in the world, and for the world. The Deity having manifested its action in Christ, according to an ordinary human method, the form also in which His work was to be continued was thereby traced out. The preaching of His doctrine needed now a visible human medium, and must be entrusted to visible envoys, teaching and instructing after the wonted method. And as in the world nothing can attain to greatness, but in society, so Christ established a community,-a Church wherein He continues to live -His Spirit continues to work, and the word uttered by Him eternally resounds. In fact, the Church is the Son of God Himself,

* It must be borne in mind that I am merely stating the Catholic doctrine, and not proving it; this will be done by others. I make this remark because, strictly speaking, our theory requires that we should prove the authority of the Church without having recourse to the Bible as an inspired volume, though of course we may use it as an authentic history. The demonstration of the Catholic Rule of Faith will be best understood by supposing one's self in the position of an apostle or missionary arguing with a heathen, or a Christian arguing with a deist. We first prove the Divine mission of Christ from His miracles, &c., and thence deduce the necessity of yielding implicit credence to whatever we find Him to have taught. We then show (merely as a matter of history) that He appointed a succession of men, whose province it is, by the aid of supernatural assistance, to deliver inviolate to man all that God has revealed. Here we find ourselves in the presence of the Church. The Church informs us that some of those works, which we had been looking upon merely as historical documents, are divinely inspired. We thus arrive at the canon of Scripture, and may henceforward use it to confirm the authority of the Church. In short, we admit the Divinity of Christ, on the strength of the miracles which He worked to prove the fact; we believe the Church on the authority of Christ, and believe in the inspiration and canonicity of the various books of the Bible on the authority of the Church.

perpetually manifesting Himself among men in a human form, or, as St. Paul says, "It is the body of Christ."* Hence it is evident that the Church, though composed of men, is yet not purely human; for as in Christ the Divinity and the humanity are to be clearly distinguished, and are yet bound in unity, so it is with the Church, His permanent manifestation-she is at once human and Divine. It is Christ Himself who, concealed under earthly and human forms, works in the Church; and this is the reason why she has a Divine and a human part in an undivided mode, so that the Divine cannot be separated from the human, nor the human from the Divine. Hence these two parts change their predicates. If the Divine-Christ and His Spirit-constitute, undoubtedly, that which is infallible, and eternally unerrable in the Church-so also the human is infallible and unerrable, in the same way, because the Divine, without the human, has no existence for us; yet the human is not unerrable in itself, but only as the organ and as the manifestation of the Divine.†

Those who deny the infallibility of the Church, practically assert that Christ has not fulfilled those glorious promises which He made before His ascension. They must maintain that Christ has not sent the Spirit of truth to remain with His Church for ever; they must maintain that Christ has failed in His promise of being with His Church, to guide it, "all days, even till the consummation of the world" (Matt. xxviii. 20).

A well-known Catholic divine‡ has truly said, "It will be found that the reluctance of too many, even among good men, to receive the doctrine of the infallibility of the Church of God, springs from this-that they base their religious opinions upon human reason,

and not upon the illumination and supernatural guidance of Christ, and His Spirit, ever present and ever dwelling as a teacher in the Church. It will be found to involve a doubt as to the office of the third person of the ever-blessed Trinity.. The discernment they ascribe to the Church is human, proceeds from documents, and is gathered by reasoning. We rise above this, and believe that the Holy Spirit of God presides over the Church, illuminates, inhabits, guides, and keeps it; that its voice is the voice of the Holy Spirit himself; that when the Church speaks God speaks, ... so that the ultimate authority upon which we

....

* "He gave some apostles, and some prophets, and other some evangelists, and other some pastors and doctors, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, until we all meet in the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God . . . that henceforward we be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every word of doctrine," Ephes. iv. 11-13. See also 1 Cor. xii. 27. The reader is particularly requested to peruse the whole of the twelfth chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians. It will be found to be a remarkable confirmation of the views here developed;

This will be a sufficient answer to those who, in the last debate, were constantly making inquiries as to the seat of infallibility in the Catholic Church. Dr. Manning, late Protestant Archdeacon of Chichester.

believe is the voice of God, speaking to us through the Church. We believe not in the Church, but through it, and through the Church, in God."* ("Grounds of Faith," page 47.)

As the Catholic doctrine respecting Divine tradition has already been touched upon in the last debate, and will, no doubt, receive ample attention from other writers, I will not prolong this already too lengthy paper by discussing it in detail. Having laid before my readers an exposition of the Catholic Rule of Faith, and having explained its theory and leading principles as lucidly as I possibly could, I will close my remarks with a few admissions which some celebrated Protestant writers have made on the subject.

Bishop Bull, "Defence of the Nicene Creed," page 2:

"The matter in question in the first Nicene Council, was a main article of the Christian religion (the Trinity). If, in a matter of such importance, all the pastors of the Church could fall into error, how shall we be able to defend the word of Christ, who hath promised to His apostles, and in their persons their successors, to be always with them? Which promise would not be true, the apostles not being to live so long, were it not that their successors are here comprehended in the persons of the apostles themselves."

Dr. Whittaker, "Controversy," ii. 13:

"The Church cannot hold any erroneous doctrine, and remain a Church. Truth constitutes the Church, and the Church shows where truth is to be found. The first of Timothy proves that truth ever remains in the Church, nor can be separated from her. Other societies may err; this society never can err.

Bishop Montague, "The Gagger Gagged," page 20:

"Traditions instituted by Christ in points of faith, have Divine authority, as the written Word hath. Traditions from the apostles have equal authority with their writings; and no Protestant in his senses will deny that the apostles spoke much more than is written."

Dr. Brett, on Tradition, page 73 :

"It is evident, from the Scriptures themselves, that the whole of Christianity was at first delivered to the bishops succeeding the apostles, by oral tradition, and they were also commanded to keep it, and deliver it to their successors, in like manner (2 Tim. ii. 2). Nor is it anywhere found in Scripture, by St. Paul, or any other apostle, that they would either jointly or separately write down all they had taught as necessary to salvation."

IGNATIUS.

NEGATIVE ARTICLE-I.

1. Ir is of great importance at the commencement of a debate that the terms of the question should be explained and freed from all ambiguity. The sense in which any word of dubious meaning is used should be determined; the propositions by which the question is affirmed or negatived should be clearly laid down; and then the

"All thy children shall be taught of the Lord, and great shall be the peace of thy children," Isa. liv. 13.

strongest arguments should be lucidly brought forward to demonstrate the truth of the propositions. This we shall endeavour to do in the present article.

2. By the "Catholic Rule of Faith," we understand the "Roman Catholic Rule of Faith ;" and, in speaking of its being "true," we refer to its Divine authority. This Rule of Faith includes the "Bible," the "Apocrypha," "unwritten traditions," and the "interpretations" of these by the Romish Church. * As we both admit the Divine authority of the "Bible," so our dispute will not relate to it, and we shall assume, of course, that that part of this Rule of Faith is "true." We deny the Divine authority of the others, and hope to make good our denial before we conclude this paper.

3. The Divine authority of the "Apocrypha," "unwritten traditions," and the "interpretations" of these by the Romish Church, entirely depends upon the infallibility of that church. If it were admitted that this church were infallible, it would follow that these are "true," simply because she has declared them to be so; and were we to discuss these one by one, our opponents would ultimately refer us to the infallible authority of their church for proof. They even assert that the Bible has no Divine authority but for her infallibility; and when we ask for proof of this infallibility, she refers us back to the Bible. This reminds us of the man who, when asked what he believed, said, "I believe what the Church believes." 66 And what does the Church believe?" "The Church believes what I believe," was the reply. It requires no argument to prove that these have no Divine authority except for the infallibility of the Romish Church, as the fact is maintained by our opponents. Bellarmine says:— "That is a true tradition which all former doctors have successively, in their several ages, acknowledged to come from the apostles, and by their doctrine or practices have approved, and which the universal Church owneth as such; and the reason is, because the universal Church CANNOT ERR." By "the universal Church" he means, of course, the Romish Church. Instead, then, of taking up these three topics seriatim, and discussing their "truth" separately, we purpose showing that the very foundation on which their Divine authority rests, is false; in fact, that they have no foundation whatever for such a distinction. For as their "truth" depends upon the infallibility of the Church of Rome, so, if it be proved that this Church is not infallible, it will follow that they are not of Divine authority, and, consequently, that "The Catholic Rule of Faith is not true." Let our opponents prove their Church to be infallible, and we must of necessity admit that their Rule of Faith is true.

4. We shall endeavour to make good our denial of the question by proving the truth of the following propositions :

*Douay note, 2 Tim. v. 16. 1853.

-

"De Tradit." cap. 9: "Poole's Dialogues," p. 50, 1839.