(2.) They agree with us in receiving into the sacred canon all the books which we regard as of divine authority.
Romanists differ from Protestants in regard to the Scriptures, —
1. In receiving into the canon certain books which Protestants do not admit to be inspired, namely : Tobit, Judith, Sirach, parts of Esther, the Wisdom of Solomon, First, Second, and Third Books of the Maccabees (the Tliird Book of Maccabees, however, is not included in the Vulgate), Bariich, the Hymn of the Three Ciiil- dren, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon. These books are not all included by name in the list given by the Council of Trent. Several of them are parts of the books there enumerated. Thus, the Hymn of the Tiu'ee Children, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon, appear as parts of the book of Daniel. Some modern theologians of the Romish Church refer all the apocryphal books to what they call " The Second Canon," and admit that they ai-e not of equal au- thority with those belonging to the First Canon.^ The Council of Trent, however, makes no such distinction.
Incompleteness of the Scriptures.
2. A second point of difference is that Romanists deny, and Protestants affirm, the ^completeness ofjtbfi SitQ£edS,cri^Ul"e&. That is, Protestants maintain that all the extant supernatural revelations of God, which constitute the rule of faith to his Church, are con- tained in his written word. Romanists, on the other hand, hold that some doctrines which all Christians are bound to beheve, are onlyTrnperfectly revealed in the Scriptures ; that others are only obscurely intimated ; and that others are not therein contained at "all. The Preface to the Romish Catechism (Quest. 12) says,
" Omnis doctriuae ratio, quae fidelibus tradenda sit, verbo Dei con- tinetur, quod in scripturam traditionesque distributum est." Bel- larmin ^ says expressly, " Nos asserimus, in Scripturis non con- tineri expressd totam doctrinam necessariam, sive de fide sive de moribus ; et proinde praeter verbum Dei scriptum requiri etiam verbum Dei non-scriptum, i. e., divinas et apostolicas^Jraditiones." "T5n this point the Romish theologians are of one mind ; but what the doctrines are, which are thus imperfectly revealed in the Scrip- tures, or merely implied, or entirely omitted, has never been authoritatively decided by the Church of Rome. The theologians of that Church, with more or less unanimity, refer to one or the
1 See B. Lainy, Apparatus Bibl., lib. ii. c. 5. Jahn's Einldtung, Th. i. § 29j 2d ed Vienna, 1802, p. 132. Mohler's Symbolik. ■■^ De Verbo Dei, iv. 3, torn. i. p. 163, e. edit. Paris, 1608.
106 INTRODUCTION. [Ch. V. — R. C. R. of Faith.
other of these classes the following doctrines : (1.) The canon of Scripture. (2.) The inspiration of the sacred writers. (3.) The full doctrine of the Trinity. (4.) The personality and divin- ity of the Holy Spirit. (5.) Infant baptism. (6.) The obser- vance of Sunday as the Christian Sabbath. (7.) The threefold orders of the ministry. (8.) The government of the Church by bishops. (9.) The perpetuity of the apostleship. (10.) The grace of orders. (11-) The sacrificial nature of the Eucharist. (12.) The seven sacraments. (13.) Purgatory. It lies in ihe interests_of the advocates of tradition to depreciate theLSfiiij^tures, amPto show how much the Church would lose if she had no other source of knowledge of divine truth but the written word~ On this subject the author of No. 85 of the Oxford Tracts, when speak- ing even of essential doctrines, says,^ " It is a near thing that they are in the Scriptures at all. The wonder is that they are all there. Humanly judging they would not be there but for God's interpo- sition ; and, therefore, since they are there by a sort of accident, it is not strange they shall be but latent there, and only indirectly producible thence." " The gospel doctrine," says the same writer, "is but indirectly and covertly recorded in Scripture under the surface."
Ti-adition is always represented by Romanists as-iiot--only--tlia_
interpreter, but the complement of the Scriptures. The Bible,
therefore, is, according to the Church ofRome, incomplete. It "does not contain all the Church is bound to believe ; nor are the_ doctrines which it does contain, therein fully or clearly made known.
Obscurity of the Scriptures. 3. The third point of difference between Romanists and Prot- estants relates to the perspicuity of Scripture, and the right of private judgment. Pi-otestants hold that the Bible, being addi-essed to the people, is sufficiently perspicuous to be understood by them, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit ; and that they are entitled and bound to search the Scripture, and to judge for themselves what is its true meaning. Romanists, on the other hand, teach tjiat the Scriptures are so obscure that tliey need a visible^^reseiit^and in- fallible interpreter ; and that tlie people, being incompetent to un- derstand them, are bound to believe whatever doctrines the Church, through its official organs, declares to "be true and divine. On this subject the Council of Trent (Sess. 4), says : " Ad coercenda petu- lantia ingenia decernit (Synodus), ut nemo, suae prudentise innixus,
1 Pages 34 and 35.