SctPTUtL BooE L t?re.,, not as understood by every man of sound judgment, but as holy men of' Cmd wrofe t/?,m, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. This is the perfect standard to which all true Protestants appeal. It is not affected by the ,oubrsf?**8' or rJ?s?nddrstand?tg of it by any man or body of men iu the world. It is immutable and infallible truth itselL No Protestant believes that the understanding of man could control or give a meaning to the word of ? which it has not in itselL If the Bible cannot be a peri'oct standa? of faith and mo?.ls, because men differ in their judgment with regard to some parts of it, there can- ?ot be a perfect standard at all; for there never was a composition, iu human language, of which men will not form diRerout opinions. No private individuals, but the pastors or bishops and elders of the Pro- testant churches, met in councils or synods, emitted the canons and confessions of faith, which they established by copious extracts from the Scriptures. And so it is now. No private interpretation of Scrip- ture by individuals is recognisod as the rule of Protestant faith. If it were true that our rule was the Bible as understood by every particular reader, it would infer the absurdity of being a rule, and no rule, at the same time. But while Protestants take the word of God as their rules in the sense which God intends, and in that sense only, they maintain that every ha8 a right to read it for himself, and to form his own on ' Th_i? right which he has, however, judgment m?a? is a roestung. merely iu relation to his fellow-men. In relation to C.?l, he has no right to form any judgment of/? oum. He ought to receive implicidy and gratefully what ? has revealed for the guidance of his faith and practice, without presuming to add a thought of his own to the divine communication, or to give a shade of meaning to it different from what the words of it will necessarily bear. To man he is not bound to an- swer, farther than the rights of other men may entitle them to put him away from their communion, if he shall persist in m?i__n_?ining prin- ciples inconsistent with Christian fellowship. More than this no church has a right to do with regard to any individual, be his errors what they may. If one is so perverse no to impute his errors to the holy and perfect word of God, it is an aggravation of his guilt; and it seems to be the design of popish writers in gene?.l, and of Dr. Milner in particular, to urge men on to be guilty of this wickedness, by their insidious misinterpretations of the Bible, as i? it necessarily led men into error. The exercise of ifLmA?d private judgment, which is the ?buse o? le?o?ur?e private judgment, is not a principle of sound Protestantism. The former of these may be defined private judgment in tl? interpr?ta- tkt =osv be tb r/g/u Such a wanton interpret- atiou is fundamentally the szme with the dogmat/? interpretations of Roman Catholic priests: as neither of them is supported by tho evi- dence of sound criticism and rational iurprotation. But it is, moreover, objetrod, "that pnvam interpretation is the Pro- tastant rule." To this we answor: The Bible is our infallible rule of faith. The Bible is ?he ru?; interpretatiou is the u? of the rule. And although men may pervert and abuse this rule, it nevertheless remains the rims. If msn abuse the light of the ?e? to evil deeds, the sun m-
�
