The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1868-03-08
The Rule of FAITH Continued.

The Rulo OF Fdltn-IO
We find in the Acts of the Apostles mar
rative which seems to have been written
purposely against the delusion of those who
claim private infallibility in reading the
Scriptures. We read in the eighth chapter
of that Sacred Book that Philip, one of the
seven first deacons, was sent by :" an angel
of the Lord" toward an Ethiopian who,
being n convert to the Jewish religion,
had come to Jerusalem to adore, and he
was returning, sitting Oh his chariot and
reading Isaiah, the prophet. And the spirit
said to Philip: GO ahead, and join thysef
to that chariof.,.And PHILIP, running thither,
heard him reading the Prophet Isaiah; and
he said: Thinkest thou that thou under
standest what thou readest7'"
The question is plain, and goes to the
point. A Protestant, if there had been any
ut the time, would have boldly answered ::
:" Certainly, 1 understand what I read"
But the good Ethiopian, who was no Pro-
testant, gives an answer full of truth and
good sense 80 And he said How can un-
less some one show me- and he desired
Philip to come up and sit with him."
However skillful man may be in distort-
ing the meaning of the Scriptures, we do not
see how he can escape the consequence that
follows from that plain fact, SO simply and
so clearly narrated.
But let lis admit for a moment that all
surd superstition of private infallibity in
every reader of the Scriptures,-here arises
another insuperable difficulty.
How can a man who reads the Scriptures
know positively that the book he is actually
reading is Seriptural book, that is, q book
inspired by the Holy Ghost We, Catho-
lies, admit the infallibility of the Church
we say that she is infallible in pointing out
to us the Scriptural books as well as in in
terpreting them, and, therefore, as we re-
ceive from her with a complete certainty the
meaning of the sacred text, with the same
perfect certainty we receive from her hands
the canon OF the Scriptures, that is, the list
of the books which she declares to have been
inspired by the Holy Ghost.
But as Protestants reject the infallibility
of the Church, they are compelled again to
rely OH private infallibility in order to know
whether such book is inspired or not. But
we have proved already that such private
infallihility in the Interpretation of the
Scriptures does exist neither naturally nor
systematically, and the same must be APP
piled to the pretended infallibility ascribed
to every private man to pronounce whether
such book was or was not inspired. Now,
if man cannot know with an absolute Ger
tainty whether the book he is reading is
really Scriptural, it is evident that the whole
Protestant system is nothing more than
perfect nonsense.
Let us, for example, take the Gospels. 1t
is u well-known fact, that in the first century
there were about twenty-five OF thirty
various gospels known, such as the gospel
of Nicodemus, the gospel of Joseph of Ari-
mathea, the gospel of the Nazarenes, and
many others. Among all those gospels, four
only are admitted as Scriptural, or inspired,
and all the others are rejected as apocry-
phal and we must remark that this word,
apocryphal, is not fused by way of contempt,
for those apocryphaI gospels contain many
things interesting and edifying, and even
several of them have been, rightly or wrong
W, 1--WE do not know nor do we carey ascribed
to some of the Apostles or of the first dis
ciples of Christ. But when we call them
apocryphal, we mean only that they have a
mere human authority as any other histor-
ical book, but do mot possess that permanent
authoritylwhich is grounded on inspiration.
Now, why do Protestants, among so many
gospels, recognize only four gospe1sas Scrip
tural How do they know that those four