means a contemptible person in the esteem of his own sect. He is praised in a high degree by most of his correspondents, who are unceasingly commending his excellent work. It will be recollected, that the very correspondent from whose letters I have quoted so largely in this number, puffs him off as a man who understands the subject of religion better than prophets and apostles did, and knows much better how to teach it; for which see the conclusion of my thirty-first section. In fact, he is the champion, if not the oracle, of modern Papists, especially of those who resist the veto; and his writings are highly commended by the bishop of Castabala, the vicar apostolic of the midland

district.

Now, this said editor and his correspondents have set themselves down to revile those who are labouring to give the poor the word of God, and they do not scruple to vilify the Bible itself. It is quite fair to consider them as expressing the sentiments of their brethren in general, unless some other writer of equal authority with bishop Milner and Mr. Gandolphy, and the other correspondents of the "Orthodox Journal," shall come forward and publicly disavow such sentiments. Such disavowal has not been made by any Popish writer in England or Ireland, so far as I know; and as they are well known to be in general hostile to the

circulation of the Bible alone, they may be presumed to hold the same sentiments with the writer above quoted.

This writer asserts, that the Scriptures alone, that is, simply as they were given by the Almighty, cannot possibly be an unerring rule of faith and morals, which is asserting plainly, that the word of God cannot accomplish the object intended by it without human aid. Nay, from what follows, it is insinuated that it will do incalculable mischief if left to be privately interpreted; and the writer has the presumption to say, that this mischief will be chargeable against God himself, if he shall permit his word to be generally read, and to be at the mercy of ignorant and perverse interpreters. No Protestant ever taught that the Almighty has given authority to every man, or to any man, to put upon his word whatever interpretation he pleases. He has given a revelation of his will sufficiently intelligible for the salvation of the guilty, and the instruction of the simple; and persons to whom this revelation is made known by reading the Bible are in no danger of misunderstanding it, if they really desire to understand it, and pray for Divine instruction; for God has promised his Spirit to guide into all truth. The words of God “are all plain to him that understandeth, and right to them that find knowledge," Prov. viii. 9. Such a knowledge of them as is connected with salvation

is the fruit of Divine teaching. Under such teaching, the poor and illiterate, by means of the Bible, are made wise unto salvation. Without such teaching, the holy father of Rome, with all his army of cardinals, priests, and doctors, are no better than mere fools who hate knowledge. “How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge? Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my Spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you," Prov. i. 22, 23. This is a public proclamation of the Author of the Bible. He requires it to be made known to all, without any consideration of the danger of misunderstanding it; and he will secure against such danger by giving his Spirit, and making known his word, to all who apply their hearts to such knowledge.

ADDENDA (B.)

THE last named author (Mr. Andrews*) has repeatedly challenged me, in his "Catholic Vindicator," to tell him how I come to know the Bible to be the word of God; and the train of his reasoning, if such it can be called, is, to show that no man can know this but upon the authority of the church of Rome.

* [A Roman Catholic, who wrote to the Editor of "The Protestant."-ED.]

This holy church, it seems, claims the power of deciding infallibly what is the word of God, and what is not; or, which comes nearly to the same thing, she alone has power and authority to declare the true meaning of the Scriptures. In her infallible wisdom she pretends to prove from the Bible that she possesses this authority, and yet the Bible itself has no authority or meaning but what she is pleased to allow it; which exemplifies the absurdity of proving a thing by itself, or two things mutually by one another. Juvenis is entitled to an apology for classing him with such a writer as Mr. Andrews, whose name as an author is not worthy to appear on the same page; but as they are agreed in maintaining the insufficiency of the Bible, which I hold to be virtually the same thing as rejecting its inspiration, I shall, before entering upon another general topic of discussion, devote a number or two to the answering of the question, how I know the Bible to be the word of God? I shall first, however, give the challenge itself, in the words of the Vindicator, from different parts of his work.

"As the accuser," says he, meaning “THE PROTESTANT," "speaks positively to the Scriptures containing the word of God, will he permit me to inquire of him how he came by the information, and upon what authority he grounds his assertion ? Has he been taken into the council of the Almighty, that

he should know more of his will than other men?" (so it seems other men do not know that the Bible contains the word of God!) Has he been favoured with a revelation from heaven in his private ear? Or has a heavenly messenger been sent to him, to inform him that the Bible is actually the word of God?" Cath. Vind. col. 233. Some of these expressions had been used by me when inquiring how the Popish priests came to know the mind of God better than other men, independently of the Bible; and here the Vindicator makes use of my words to inquire how I came to know the truth of the Bible itself, from which it is evident that, in his opinion, there is no way of knowing it but by the authority of his church, or by means of a private communication by an angelic messenger sent from heaven.

The author introduces a long extract from his infallible oracle Dr. Milner, intended to show that Protestants cannot be certain with regard to any book in the Bible that it is genuine. The extract concludes thus :

66

Granting, for example, that St. Paul wrote an inspired epistle to the Romans, and another to the Ephesians, yet, as the former was intrusted to an individual, the deaconess Phebe, to be conveyed by her to its destination, (Rom. xvi., see Calmet, etc.,) and the latter to his disciple, Tychicus, (Eph. vi. 21,) for the same purpose, it is impossible for you