The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1870-01-09
"a Law unto themselves. :"


version that gives us confidence in its accu-
racy, and that contains explanations of the
meaning which to some may appear doubt /
full. We do not think the reading of the
Bible dangerous to those who read it by
the light of authority, it is dangerous only
to those who claim the right to interpret it
in accordance with their own peculiar no
tons. We think it's reading useful, be-
cause its testimony corroborates every doc
trine of the Church, and clearly confirms
the authority which, before as we'll as after
it's compilation, the Church has always
claim ed.- She compiled it, she gave it to
us, and we receive it on her authority,
which if it had not, it would be no more to
us than any other book. Ignorant of the BIZ
bic as one ofour wise and learned contem-
poraries may please to assume us to be, we
have not forgotten the many promises made
to His Church by our Blessed Redeemcr,
which are contained therein. Even~the
very words which he used, when sending
out the seventy disciples on their mission
to the cities of Samaria, leave us little room
to doubt what e meant:
"He that heareth you, heareth me; he that
spiseth me- despiseth him thatsent me-"
In commenting our quotation of the
words "a law unto Themselves our wise
and learned contemporary says that the
18th verse of the I'd chapter of st. Paufs
Epistlc to the Romans, declares that 1t is
those only that have not the Bible who are
a law to themselves" The verse to which
he refers, and which, on account of our ig-
norancc, lie undertakes to interpret for us,
reads as follows:
For when the Gentiles. which haVc not the
| law, do by nature the things ,coutaiugd i'll the
law, these, having not the law, are law unto
/ themselves
This we take from King James version
of the Bible, not that we hold it to be of
any authority with us, but because it does
not substantially differ from the same text
in the English Douay edition translated
from the Latin Nulgate in 1909, and sane
toned by the only authority whichwe, Ca
tholics, can recognize in spiritual matters.
| 1t will appear evident to those who may
read the above verse, that the version oft
! riven by our wise and learned contcmpo-
rary is not only inaccurate, but an actual
MISREPRESENTATION of its real meaning The
reason that when st. Paul wrote those
words. what we call the Bible not only had
not heen- complied. but some of it was not
the same year, but the gospel of st. John
|. was not written for nearly forty years after.
st. Paul himself, had not yet written his
/ epistles to the Ephesians, Philippians, CO.
I=fossiuns, and Hebrews, nor to Timothy, nor
Titus. The epistles of St. Peter, st. James
and st. John were not written, nor the
! apocalypse The fact is, the Bible as es-
tablished by the authority of the Church.
was not compiled until long after st. Pauls
death. What st. Paul wrote of was the
law that existed before our Bible was COM
piled, just as authoritatively as it has since.
| Whether that can be properly called the
only revelation of Christianity which did
/ not come into any recognizable form or ex-
istence for nearly n century after the death
of Christ, and some of which was not writ
ten for forty years after, we hardly think a
| fit subject for argument.
There is another error in our wise and
learned contemporaries version of St. Pauls
language, that we think equally if not still
more reprehensible than the one we have
just referred to. He interpolates the word
FFon1y" as coming from st. Paul, to give a
color to his own comments. The word
| "only" alters the meaning of the text, and
makes it say what St. Paul never said and
evidently never intended to say. Neither
is it consistent with the real meaning of the
text which is by no means obscure. If
those who, having not the law, do the
! things contained in the law, may be said to
be ga law unto themselves surely those
who have the law and disregard it, and, in
the very face of the l0W.-set up the law of
their own will, may with equal propriety
be said to be ga law unto themselves"
The very way in (Which he undertakes to
interpret the written language of the great
Apostle of the Gcntilcs seems to us to place
him in tile same category. by the addition
or omission of word here and there he