2d. With respect to apparent inaccuracies in matters of science, that the sacred writers having for their design to teach moral and religious truth, and not physical science, use on all such subjects the common language of their cotemporaries, always speaking of natural phenomena as they appear, and not as they really are. And yet revelation does not present one single positive statement which is not consistent with all the facts known to men, in any department of nature. In the progress of science, human ignor- ance and premature generalization have constantly presented diffi- culties in the reconciliation of the word of Grod with man's theory of his works. The advance of perfected knowledge has uniformly removed the difficulty.
CHAPTER V.
THE RULE OF FAITH AND PRACTICE.
The Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments; hav- ing BEEN GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD, ARE THE ALL-SUFFI- CIENT AND ONLY RULE OF FAITH AND PRACTICE, AND JUDGE OF
controversies. (This chapter is compiled from Dr. Hodge's unpublished Lectures on the Church.)
1. What is meant by saying that the Scriptures are the only infallible rule of faith and practice ?
Whatever God teaches or commands is of sovereign authority. Whatever conveys to us an infallible knowledge of his teachings and commands is an infallible rule. The Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the only organs through which, during the present dispensation, God conveys to us a knowledge of his will about what we are to believe concerning himself, and what duties he requires of us.
2. What does the Romish Church declare to be the infallible rule of faith and practice ?
The Komish theory is that the complete rule of faith and practice consists of Scripture and tradition, or the oral teaching of Christ and his apostles, handed down through the church. Tradition they hold to be necessary, 1st, to teach additional truth not contained in the Scriptures ; and, 2d, to interpret Scripture. The church being the divinely constituted depository and judge of both Scripture and tradition. — Decrees of Council of Trent, Session IV, and Dens Theo., Tom. II., N. 80 & 81.
3. By what arguments do they seek to establish the authority of tradition ? By what criterion do they distinguish true tra- ditions from false, and on what grounds do they base the au- thority of the traditions they receive ?
TRADITION. 79
1st. Their arguments in behalf of tradition are (1.) Scripture authorizes it, 2 Thess. ii., xv ; iii., 6. (2.) The early fathers asserted its authority and founded their faith largely upon it. (3.) The oral teaching of Christ and his apostles, when clearly ascertained, is intrinsically of equal authority with their writings. The Scriptures themselves are handed down to us by the evidence of tradition, and the stream can not rise higher than its source. (4.) The necessity of the case, a, Scripture is obscure, needs tradition as its interpreter, b, Scripture is incomplete as a rule of faith and practice ; since there are many doctrines and institu- tions, universally recognized, which are founded only upon tra- dition as a supplement to Scripture. (5.) Analogy. Every state recognizes both written and unwritten, common and statute law.
2d. The criterion by which they distinguish between true and false traditions is Catholic consent. The Anglican ritualists con- fine the application of the rule to the first three or four centuries. The Eomanists recognize that as an authoritative consent which is constitutionally expressed by the bishops in general council, or by the Pope ex-cathedra, in any age of the church whatever.
3d. They defend the traditions which they hold to be true. (1.) On the ground of historical testimony, tracing them up to the apostles as their source. (2.) The authority of the Church expressed by Catholic consent.
4. By what arguments may the invalidity of all ecclesiastical tradition, as a part of our rule of faith and practice, be shown ?
1st. The Scriptures do not, as claimed, ascribe authority to oral tradition. Tradition, as intended by Paul in the passage cited, (2 Thess. ii., 15, and iii., 6,) signifies all his instructions, oral and written, communicated to those very people themselves, not handed down. On the other hand, Christ rebuked this doctrine of the Eomanists in their predecessors, the Pharisees, Matt, xv., 3, 6 ; Mark vii., 7.
2d. It is improbable a priori that God would supplement Scripture with tradition as part of our rule of faith. (1.) Be- cause Scripture, as will be shown below (questions 7-14), is certain, definite, complete, and perspicuous. (2.) Because tradition, from its very nature, is indeterminate, and liable to become adulterated with every form of error. Besides, as will be shown below
80 THE RULE OF FAITH AND PEACTICE.
(question 20) , the authority of Scripture does not rest ultimately upon tradition.