themselves) of incurring that sentence of damnation which Christ pronounced against those who reject any one of the doctrines which he came to establish.

This brings me to an assertion that was made-namely, that Protestants do not differ on matters of faith; or, as it was afterwards said, on essential matters of faith. How can any one dare to come before an assembly composed of persons of contradictory creeds, one admitting another rejecting the doctrines of reprobation and free grace, others holding different tenets upon the sacraments, a fourth party maintaining a different belief respecting the attributes of God,-how can a minister of the Established Church come forward, saying, "the difference amongst Protestants is not upon matters of faith?" You who are Methodists, you who are Baptists, do you not make acts of faith upon points in which you differ from each other? The Baptist differs from the member of the Established Church, and the member of the Established Church from the Methodist, and the Methodist from the Unitarian.Is there not a difference even upon essential matters of faith amongst you? Before I conclude my arguments I shall be able to make this point much clearer than I do now. . I proceed to the third proof of my second proposition, that the Apostles expressly termed their oral communications traditions, and provided measures for handing down to future ages these unwritten doctrines. I adduce first the 2 Thess. ii. 15:

"Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle."

I beg to remark on this passage, first, that verbal and written communications are placed upon an equality; there is no distinction made between the written and the unwritten word, but the Thessalonians were to hold fast the traditions they had been taught, whether by word or by epistle. Observe also the words, "hold fast," by which is implied, not that they would look into some future book of Scripture for them, but that they were to cling to them, to preserve them; and this seems to me, at least, to imply the fact that they were to be handed down by tradition, and not to be found afterwards in some parts of the inspired volume. Such was the interpretation which the most learned doctors of antiquity have given to this passage. St. Basil, in his book on the Holy Ghost, cap. 29, writes thus:

According to my sentiment, it is Apostolical to persevere in unwritten traditions, for the Apostle has said, Brethren, stand fast,""&c.

6

This was written in the 4th century. The great St. Chrysostom says on this place:

"Hence it is evident, that the Apostles have not delivered all things by Epistles, but many also without writing. But one and the other are equally deserving of belief."

Theophylactus and Ecumenius express themselves in similar language.

I could cite others to the same effect, but this is sufficient to shew you that belief in tradition, and my exposition of the preceding text, were admitted by the early fathers, as well as by the Catholics of the present day.

I shall be told, perhaps, that the traditions have been since lost. This was the answer given by Whitby, a celebrated Protestant commentator, and also by a champion of the Reformation Society, Mr. Gordon. But what proof have you that they were afterwards lost? What proof have you that the Apostles would be so neglectful of the traditions of Christ as to suffer them to be lost? I have in part answered the difficulty already; I will confirm that answer by the authority of a Protestant writer, whom I quote from a book of sufficient authority to ensure the correctness of the extract. "England's Conversion and Reformation." In p. 43, I find this quotation from the work of a Protestant writer, entitled "Tradition Necessary," p. 32, 33.

"Here we see plain mention of St. Paul's traditions, consequently of Apostolical Traditions, delivered by word of mouth, as well as by Epistles or in writing; and a condemnation of those who do not equally observe both."-" Thus," he continues in page 78, "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 and deliver it to their successors in the same manner. Nor is it any where found in Scripture by St. Paul, or any other of the Apostles, that they would either jointly or separately write down all that they had taught as necessary to Salvation, or that they would make such a complete canon of them, that nothing should be necessary to Salvation, but what should be found in those writings."

I return to my quotations from Scripture, proving the existence of tradition, 2 Thess. iii. 6. "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother who walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received from us. In 1 Tim. vi. 20, "O, Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings and oppositions of science falsely so called." In the 2 Tim. i. 13, "Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus." Let me conclude this day by quoting to you, on this subject, the opinion of a Protestant, Lord Somers, in his Tracts, p. 341, vol. iii.

"As I am not of those who admire the great knowledge in divine matters revealed in this latter age of the world, I do not think there are any now so likely to discover the truth of Gospel mysteries as those of ancient days. As for that saying, a pigmy set on a giant's shoulder may see more than a giant; pardon me if I call it a shallow and a silly fancy, nothing to our purpose; for our question is not of seeing more, but of the clear discerning and judging those things we all see, but are in doubt what they mean; if a pigmy and a giant see a beast at a mile distant, and are in dispute whether it be a horse or an ox, the pigmy set on the giant's shoulder, is never the nearer discerning what it is, which depends on the sharpness of sight, not on the height of his shoulders: Now that the ancient and holy Fathers of the Church were more spiritual and consequently sharper-sighted in spiritual things than we carnal creatures of this latter age, is evident by their spiritual holy lives.... Wherefore I shall always hearken with due reverence unto what those primitive holy Fathers deliver, and the more holy and more ancient doubtless more to be regarded."

SECOND DAY.-Thursday, Feb. 27, 1834.

SUBJECT:

THE RULE OF FAITH (continued.)

THE CHAIRMAN.-I have the honour to inform you, that the discussion will be resumed-the subject, The Rule of Faith.

THE REV. E. TOTTENHAM.

Mr. Chairman, my Reverend opponent yesterday seemed to complain that I should have touched upon the Apocryphal question, because (as he says) it was mutually agreed that the Protestant Rule of Faith, and not the Roman Catholic, should be discussed between us. Now, Sir, though I am aware that, during these first three days of the discussion, Mr. Brown appears rather in the attitude of an assailant than a defendant, yet I do not consider that the arrangement was so precise as to preclude me altogether from a notice of the Roman Catholic rule. You will remember, Sir, that when at the opening of the meeting, the rules were read which had been agreed upon by both parties, the way in which the subject was specified, was, THE RULE OF FAITH-generally-without any limitation. And let me add, that the title to the subject was given by Mr.

Brown himself; for, when I asked him in my private interview how we should express the subject, he said, "The Rule of Faith."

I have another observation to make in reference to this point. Mr. Brown frequently during the discussion violated his own principles, because he constantly adduced texts of Scripture in support of tradition and the authority of the Church. There he was maintaining his own rule of faith, and not merely attacking mine: and, therefore, upon this principle of violation on his part, I am equally justified in attacking his rule of faith as in defending my own. So far for this matter.

The observations just made will appear more striking from what is to follow: for I am going to consider two or three texts of Scripture, which Mr. Brown has adduced in support of tradition, or an additional rule of faith besides the written word of God. The first text I shall notice is that quoted from the 11th chapter of 1st Corinthians, 34th verse, where the Apostle says at the close of the chap

ter

"And the rest I will set in order when I come."

From this Mr. Brown draws an argument in favour of tradition, or in defence of the assertion that all things which we require are not contained in the written word. Now I have two answers to give to this passage, or rather to this application of the passage:

1st. A general conclusion respecting tradition cannot fairly be deduced from this text, because the circumstances to which the Apostle here alludes were more probably peculiar to the Corinthian Church, than of general application. This will appear, first of all, if you look to the 1st chap. and the 11th verse, where we read that the Apostle had received intimation concerning some peculiar circumstances in the Corinthian Church; and in reference to those peculiar circumstances, though not altogether, he wrote the epistle-" For (says he) it hath been signified unto me, my brethren, of you by them that are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions amongst you." Then, if we pass to the 7th chap. 1st verse, we find that the Corinthians, or some amongst them, had written for information upon particular points; for the Apostle begins by saying, "Now, concerning the things whereof you wrote to me," &c. Further, the connexion of the passage seems to lead us to the supposition that the Apostle was speaking in this place of matters peculiar to the Corin

thian Church, and not of general application. In the preceding part of the chapter he had dilated with reference to the Lord's Supper; and had noticed an error which certainly was peculiar to the Corinthian Church. Pursuing these observations, he comes to the close of the chapter, and then says "The rest will I set in order when I come." These circumstances give very strong colour to the supposition I have advanced, with respect to this passage. But

2ndly. I have another answer (and this answer will serve for all the texts)-Let the Church of Rome produce the tradition or traditions of which the Apostle here speaks let her authenticate them before the world as being the very same to which he refers-and then shall we receive them; but until that is done we have no right to do so.

Another passage to which Mr. Brown referred will be found in the 20th chapter of St. John, and the 30th

"

Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book."

Here, you will observe, Mr. Brown argues that Christ must have done and spoken many things not recorded in this Gospel, or in the Scriptures generally. I am not going to dispute this. It is a fact I am willing to admit, because the Apostle here states it; and I have no desire to question the statement of the Apostle. But then Mr. Brown, or our friends on the other side, must prove that those things which Christ thus spoke were absolutely necessary to salvation. Now it would appear to me that the remaining verse of the chapter seems to prove that they were not necessary to salvation, or that, if they were, that which was necessary in them was already embodied in what the Apostle had stated; for he goes on to say,

"But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God and that, believing, you may have life in his name."-v. 31.

::

This is one of the passages to which I referred at the opening of the discussion, and it seems, or more than seems, to imply, that the Apostle John had written within the compass of his Gospel all the truths which were absolutely necessary to be believed for salvation; so that, if there were no other book in the Bible, we should find the truth in that Gospel.

But here again we come to the other answer-let the Church of Rome produce these sayings, and authenticate