The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1902-02-22
Che CWc Brothers. f. Ry S SFsstss
Controversial Dialogue Between Presbyterian and Hi
Catholic Brother Leading Up to Formers Conversion.

sion to her authority. and the reserva-
ton that no doctrine is to be deduced
! from them which she does not author
( ize."
There she is wrong.
THAT is for you to prove"
God proposed to teach mankind by
writings not by body of men"
That, also, is for you to prove.
1T is evident from the Word itself"
You must prove that YOU have the
Word before you can introduce it as
evidence"
No one can read the New Testd-
ment and believe otherwise
Not true in fact; for the great mass
of all who do read the New Testament
actually believe otherwise. But you
must get legal possession of the New
Testament, and establish your right to
| interpret it, before you can quote it in
a sense the Church denies. Till then,
the denial of your assertion by the
Church is prima facie evidence against
you
4 do not care for the Church.
deny her authority"
Il know that; but her authority is to
be presumed, till reasons are set forth
for denying it. You are not at liberty
to deny it without a reason
L have given q reason"
What is ito
why. l tell you she is condemned
by the word of Cod"
You tell me so, but that is not
enough. You must prove that it is
so
You do not suffer me to do so. You
will not suffer me to quote the Bible
against her.
NO such thing. When you have
proved that the Bible, in the sense you
adduce it, is the word of God, you may
quote it to your hearts content"
Why, [ have told you again and
again that the Church herself admits
the Bible TO be the word of God. and,
therefore, ii is not necessary in argu-
ing against her, to prove that what 1
adduce from it is the word of God.
The Bible in the sense she author
ICES, she admits to be The word of God
| grant; in any other sense, she denies
it to be the word of God. Consequently,
since you would adduce it in a sense,
she does not authorize. if you adduce
it at all, she denies what you would
adduce, is the word of God. You must.
then. prove that it is, before you can
legally adduce it
But you will not let me prove it"
Il do not hinder you
Il offer to prove it by the word it
self"
That is not logical: for it would be
to assume the word to prove the word"
Not so. Here are the Scriptures,
admitted by the Church. when taken in
their genuine sense, to be the word of
God. | simply propose from them and
by them to show what is their genuine
sense; and if l do so, l prove by an au-
thority which she herself comedies; all
that I am required to prove
You cannot do that, because in do
ing it you assume that the Church is
not the authorized interpreter of the
word. which is the point you must
prove; and that you are the authorized
interpreter. which is also a point you
must prove. The Church simply adj
mits that the Scriptures. taken in the
sense she authorizes, are the word of
God. This is the full extent of her adj
mission. But, taken in another sense,
she denies them to be the word of God;
for the word of God as we have agreed
is not the words. but the sense, of the
Scriptures. Consequently, before you
can allege them in a sense contrary to
hers. nay, before you can go into any
inquiry as to their sense, you must. on
the one hand. dispossess her of her pre-
scriptive right to declare their sense,
and establish your own authority as
their interpreter. Till you have done
one or the other, tine sense of Scripture
is not an open question, and you cannot
open it without, assuming the point in
dispute"
Not absolutely. You may quote them /
in her sense against her, if you can; |
and in your own sense when you have |
proved it to be the word of Cod
But the first would be of no avail. |
because she has taken care to explain |
the Scriptures in her own favor; and l |
cannot prove them to be the word of !
God in any other sense, unless l am at |
liberty to explain them by themselves"
That is. you cannot prove your
point, unless you are at liberty to prove
the same by the same. Prove that you
are authorized to declare the sense of
the Scripture. and then you will have
no difficulty
But 1 cannot prove that [ am, save
from the word itself i
That is to say. unless you are at
liberty to assume and exercise the au
.hority to declare the sense of Scrip
lure, as the condition of proving that
you have such authority! That will
not do, brother. 1t would be proving
dem per idem. the same by the same,
which is bad logic
How then, am / to proceed"
THAT is your affair, not mine
ITO Be Continually