Cs,u,. H.] ?QXU,,rUBL ? whatever sense or nomeMe they pleased, Rmnnim would not be allowed to hold, much leas to publish their nonsense; for of all the sects in existence none exhibi? s?eh a mu8 of' nonsense us the Church of' Rome doe?; and it is nonsense founded on the wrem/ug of mauy plain texts of Scripture. 6. Let us examine BiMe readin s by its e#'f?r. The Church of Rome declares that it is the ? of more Am?A tA?s good. m?remarkable that the ?perioda of the world'8 history when the of mankind were in the worst state--the places where iniquity prevailed most--were the times and places when and where the greatest scarcity of the word of God prevailed. ?uch was the ease before the flood. "The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was failed with violence." Here is what tradition could do--here is what a deat/tut/on of Scripture could accomplish. Greece and Rome, under the guhlanee of tradition and philosophy, were sunk in every, species of crime and error; us appears from the first chapter of t:tomalm, as well as from their own writers. The same is the case with modern heathen nations. Roman Catholic countries, too, where the word of CJod is l/tile read, and le?s known, furnish ample proofs of the corrupting effect of prohibiting the general reading of the word of God, by the ignorance, errors, and immorality which prevail. And in countries where the Bible is circulated, very few, if any of those who are intemperate or inmates o� penitent/aries, m constant and careful readers of the Bible. Boom,m, the A, oog f?'ec? of Bible reading are great and numerous. Was ever any one injured by reading the Bible, or induced by it to in- jure others ! Nay; we may appeal to any man who has paid attention to the subject, whether he ever knew a good man become bad, or even a bad man become worse, in consequence of his re. arline. the Bible. But if we believe Catholics, we find that their ezjMrpm? 18 against Bible reading; accordingly they speak of it as one of the greatest evils in the world. Indeed, they ascribe most of the evils which have infested Europe for the last three hundred years to reading the word of God. 7. It is objected that Christ and his apostles did not propsKate the ?spel by the instrnmental/ty of' the written word. ]V? Hughes says, "Christ has made the promise of inf'all/bil/ty to auc,2? of TEaCHINe, and not to reading, writing, or private interpretation."* DF. .?iner, vicar general of all England, in his End of Controversy, de- chres, "If' Christ had intended that 811 men should learn their religion from a book, namely, the New Tesrmnent, he would have written that book himself, and enjoined the obligation of learning to read it, as the ht and fundamental precept of religion. But Chr?t wrote no part d the New Testament himself., and gave no ordem to his apusdes m mite it." They mainta/n that Chri? sent his apo?as "to teacl? all nations, and this always means ?'? imstructiono. They were sent to ],rm? not to ?e boob." To this we reply, that we find Christ and his apostles continuull F ref.erring to the written word' of C?od; and though they declared muy truths not contained in the 01d Ternmere, in pne?, *bey only enhrged upon and more buy m of tim written word, for our lord ? 1
�
