Cam. I.] INTRODUCTION. 37 are the devoted vassals of the popes; others are much less submissive. The writings of some have been censured; of others, condemned. Those of some have been received for a time, and, subsequently, have been censured. Amid this endless confusion it is difficult to know sometimes whose sa. yings are most to be respected. Their acknow- ledged standards, however, will be our principal guide; while we will avail ourselves also of the declarations and explanations of their divines o� every class, as opportunity serves. We know it is the practice of the warm defenders of the Popish system to reject the sentiments of their best divines when pressed in argument by Protestants. When they teach their own people, then every thing called Roman Catholic is harmonious and one. But when heretics or Protestants are to be met, then uncertainty reigns in every sentiment uttered by every one of their divines. In the latter case Du Pin becomes traitor to Rome; the French were never true Catholics; Baronius was no Pope; Bellat- rains drew on himself, in some respects, the censure of the apostolic see; Dens' theology, though the principal text book of their modere schools, contains many things for which modern Catholics are not accountable. Or at any rate, as Dr. Milner teaches, "Protestants have no r/gAt to read or expound Scripture, and, therefore, they mu?t be wrong." This is a decisive argument indeed. XlL OENERAL REMARKS ON THEIR STAI?/DARDS. 1. These then are the witnesses to which Protestants appeal for testimony' relative to those doctrines and obligations of the Church of' Rome which they reject. ReinaRista cannot affirm that these are Pro- testant or heretical witnesses. They cannot den?/that they are their own standard authorities. For what can the Church of Rome's own repre- sentation of herself be, if it be not found in her creed of Plus IV., her oath of allegiance exacted from her bishops, her authentic catechism, her general councils, the bulls of her popes, her liturgical books, their own traditions, and Scripture as explained by them, and books of de- votion ? We cannot allow that every private priest or member of the Church of Rome should give his own opinions merely as the standard of doctrine. We will have recourse to the oracular response of the church, and insist that they be represented ?y them?elves--not, how- ever, by private individuals, but by their legal representatives. But, then, there is nothing which they dread so n?uch as the testimony of their own church. It is like the conscience of the wicked, which is their worst enemy. 2. It is a principal aim of all their controvertists to employ every mode of' evasion in order to disconcert their opposers. There is even a marked difference between the tone of these Romish divines who speak dogmatically for the instruction of their own members, and that of those who attempt to answer the objections of their antagonists. With the former, all is matter of downright certainty; with the latter, all is doubt, difficulty, subterfuge, and evasion. When the faithful are to be instructed, every priest becomes the sure depositary of the infal- lible decisions of an inl?allible church; but when Protestants are to be confuted, the declarations of their most illustrious men are of no autho- rity. Councils are discovered to have been but partly approved; popes did not speak ex az?dra; cardinntls and bishops are but private doc- l
�
