3.66 CATHOLIC AND P!tOT?ST&I?r RULES COMPARED. [BOOK I. Scripture, very* litde weight can be ascribed. ?h?me of the ?athers have been corrupted by the intermixtures of heretics, while others of them have been interpolated in particular places, by inserting words, &nd altering them to di?'erent senses. These corruptions and interpo- lations took plaoe previous to the times of popery.. Subsequently, when the Church of Rome found the fathers to be against her in those nts wherein she deviated from primitive Christianity, and di?ered m sound Protestants, she corrupted and mutilated the fathers, in order to destroy their testimony in fayour of Protestantism, and to force them to Romaa/we, or testify for the Church of Pome. Consequently, were the fathers unanimous, or were they now in fayour of Pome, it would prove very little in their fayour, unless it were o?rtain that in the points in debate the testimony adduced was not corrupted. Furthermore, when we consider that many of the ancient fathers taught false doctrines. and even heresies; that in many things they contradict each other, and are also contradicted by the Church of Pome; and since as moralists they are defective or unsound; as doc- trinal teachers they are ?requently heretical, contradictory, or errone- ous; as interpreters defective; we must infer that the value attached to them by the Council of Trent is too great. Indeed, the doctors of the Church of Rome, when they apply this recent rule of interpretation in theory', are compelled to modify it so as to render it useless; and when they attempt to reduce it to practice, they are forced to abandon it as a useless injunction. What then remains for us, but to receive the historical testimony of the fathers with due respect, and give it due weight, and bring all their doctrines and moral precepts to the standard of inspiration ? CHAPTER �I. THE ROMAN CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT RULE8 COMPARED. The two rules defined. 1. Their rule be the ?onrco ofur?arta?t?: (1.) It be in La- tin; !2.).Their .trod. i?orm ere uncertain, change. able, of' no authority, end parnicim?; ?.) .Tb. mr c. hurc?h ? ?ile.nt on .n?my pmnts to which the? attach much importance; (4,) 'i'hmr doctnne of mtontton produces uncartsintl: 2. Their rule is impracticable in its application: 3. Their unwarrantable liberties with their rule prove its de6ciency: (1.) She adds the apocrypha; (2.) She takes away from the decalo?e; (3.) She adds new articles of' faith: 4. The means re?ed to far its wappo? ably its deficiency: 5. Their mode of determining controversies is contrary to Scripture: 6. Their rule requires f?ith in the doctlines of men: 7. It is ever varying: 8. It roquires every man to he infallible: 9. Christ never established it: 10. Comlxtrieon or both rules. THE Ronmn Catholic rule of faith is, the Scriptures, the apocrypha, and oral a,id written traditions, as explained by a living infallible judge or oracle. This living infallible judge is, 1. According to some, the tl?e ? 2. According to others, a genera/cottad/. 3. Others consider pe and council together to be the infallible guide. 4. While some place this in t/? dmrci, that is, in the pope and clergy. Such is the diversity of opinion among Romanists themselves respecting the judge of controversy. When the thi be judged of brought to view, the confusion is still greater. n?nme are con6ne infallibility to f?ith 1
�
