OCR Text |
Show Cbe two Bmur$. l.yBSsson Controversial Dialogue Between a Presbyterian and His Catholic Brother, Leading Up to Former's Conversion. I Last week's installment concluded with the contention of James, the Presbyterian, that our Lord foundeft no such church as the Catholic, and hence the reformers were invested with as much authority as the "Romanists" in claiming the right to interpret Scripture; Scrip-ture; even more, because the reform-era reform-era received the Word from God himself. him-self. John, the Catholic, replied: "If i you say that, you concede the point you dispute. You allege against the Church, that our lAtrd founded no such church. The essential character of the Church, so far as concerns the present controversy, is that she has the word of God, and is its legal keeper and expounder. ex-pounder. If, then, you say the reformers reform-ers had legal possession of the Word, and were authorized to keep and expound ex-pound it. you make them essentially such a church as you say our Lord did not found. You contest the claims of the Church on the ground that our Lord founded no church with the authority au-thority she exercises: you must. then, unless you would concede what you deny, disclaim that authority on the part of the reformers." James, answering, answer-ing, said he disclaimed it on their part. Editor Intermountain Catholic XV. John "Then you grant, in the outset, out-set, that they had no legal possession of the Word, and were not its author- . ized keeper and expounder; therefore, I that they bad no Word of God which they had authority to quote against the Church? What they had not they could not adduce? Consequently, they did not, for they could not, adduce the Word of God in support of their allegation?" alle-gation?" James "But they had the Scriptures, as a matter of fact, and could read and understand for themselves." ."They had the Scriptures as a private pri-vate citizen has the statute-book, it may be: but as they were not the authorized au-thorized keeper and expounder of the Word of God. their understanding of it was without authority, and not to be entertained." "They had the right from God himself him-self to read and understand the Word for themselves." "Then they were authorized to keep and expound it, at least for themselves." them-selves." "They were." j "But I understand you to deny that ' anybody was authorized to keep and expound the Word." "I do not say so. Almighty God, in revealing his Word, has authorized everyone ev-eryone to keep, read, and expound its sense." "Then, so far from its being true, as you have alleged, that our Lord has rounded no church with the authority the Catholic Church claims, he has constituted each individual a church with the same authority. Decidedly, brother, you must give up this, or withdraw your allegation. If you ad mit that our Jbora nas anywnere. authorized au-thorized anybody, individually or collective, col-lective, to keep and expound the AVord of God, you admit that he did found, essentially, such a church as your allegation al-legation denies. You cannot deny uch authority to the Church on the ground that no such authority was ever given, and then claim it for each and every individual." "Be that as it may. I do claim it for each and every individual." "That is a bold stand for a Presbyterian, Presby-terian, but necessity sometimes compels com-pels us to be bold. But did the Church admit this?" "No. she denied it." "Then the reformers were bound to prove it." "They did prove it." "By what authority?" . "The Word of God." "By what the Church admitted to be the Word of God." "No matter what she admitted. They proved it by the Word itself." "Who says so?" "They said so." "On what authority?" "On the authority of God's word." "On what authority did they say that that was the Word of God which authorized au-thorized them to say so?" "The Word itself." "But by what authority did they prove the Word Itself?" "The Word of God IS the Word of God, and is in all cases supreme. Would you deny the Word of God?" "But as the Church denied what they adduced as the Word of God to be his word, they were then bound to prove that it was his word." "What did Almighty God give us his Word for, if it was not that we should read and understand it for ourselves: "Your first business is to prove that he has given YOU his word. The Church asserts that he has given it to HER. and that she permits the faithful faith-ful to read the Scriptures for their edification, but always with submis- sion to her authority, and the reservation reserva-tion that no doctrine is to be deduced from them which she does not authorize." author-ize." "There she is wrong." "That is for you to prove." "God proposed to teach mankind by i writings, not by a body of men." "That, also, is for you to prove." "U is evident from the Word itself." "You must prove that YOU have the AVord before you can introduce it as evidence." "Sit one can read the New Testament Testa-ment and believe otherwise." "Not true, in fact: for the great mass of all who do read the New Testament actually believe otherwise. But you must get legal possession of the New-Testament, New-Testament, and establish your right to interpret it. before you can quote it In a sense the Church denies. Till then, the denial of your assertion by the Church is prima facie evidence svgainst you." "I do not care for the Church. I deny her authority." "I know that: but her authority is to be presumed, till reasons are set forth for denying it. You are not at liberty to deny it without a reason." I have given a reason. "What is it?" "Why. 1 tell you she is condemned by the word of God." "You tell me so., but that is not enough. You must prove that it is so." "You do not suffer me to do so. You will not suffer me to quote the Bible against her." "Xo such thing. When you have proved that the Bible, in the sense you adduce it. is the word of God, you may quote it to your heart's content." j "Why, I have told you again and again that the Church herself admits the Bible to be the word of God. and. therefore, it is not necessary in arguing argu-ing against her, to prove that what I adduce from it is the word of God." "The Bible in the sense she authorizes, author-izes, she admits to be th ? word of God, I grant; in any other sense, she denies it to be the word of God. Consequently, since you would adduce it in a sense, she does not authorize, if you adduce it at all. she denies what you would j adduce, is the word of God. You must, then, provp that it is, before you can legally adduce it." "But you will not let me prove it." "I do not hinder you." "I offer to prove it by the word it- j self." j "That is not logical; for it would be to assume the word to prove the word." "Not so. Here are the Scriptures, admitted by the Church, when taken in their genuine sense, to be the word of God. I simply propose from them and by them to show- what is their genuine j sense; and if 1 do so. I prove by an au- i thority which she herself concedes: all that I am required to prove." "You cannot do that, because in doing do-ing it you assume that the Church is not the authorized interpreter of the word, which is the point you must pfove; and that you are the authorized interpreter, which is also a point you must prove. The Church simply admits ad-mits that the Scriptures, taken in the sense she authorizes, are the word of God. This is the full extent of her admission. ad-mission. But, taken in another sense, she denies them to be the word of God; for the word of God. as we have agreed, is not the words, but the sense, of the Scriptures. Consequently, before you can allege them in a sense contrary to hers, nay, before you can go into any inquiry as. to their sense, you must, on the one hand, dispossess her of her prescriptive pre-scriptive right to declare their sense, and establish your own authority as their interpreter. Till you have done one or the other, the sense of Scripture is not an open question, and you cannot open it without, assuming the point in dispute." "Not absolutely. You may quote them in her sense against her, if you can; and-in your own sense when you have proved it to be the word of God." "But the firsit would be of no avail, because she has taken care to explain the Scriptures in her own favor; and I cannot prove them to be the word of God in any other sense, unless I am at liberty to explain them by themselves." "That is. you cannot prove your point, unless you are at liberty to prove the same by the same. Prove that you are authorized to declare" the sense of the Scripture, and then you will have no difficulty." "But I cannot prove that I am, save from the word itself." t "That is to say. unless you are at liberty to assume and exercise the authority au-thority to declare the sense of Scripture, Scrip-ture, as the condition of proving that i you nave sucn auLiioriij: nidi win not do. brother. It would be proving idem per idem, the same by the same, which is bad logic." "How .then, am I to proceed?" "That is your affair, not mine." (To Be Continued.) 1 |