THE TESTIMONY ATTESTED.

Evening Star, Issue 3735, 11 February 1875, Page 2

THE TESTIMONY ATTESTED.

To the Editor. Sib,— Some surprise has been created in rrottwtant circles at the recent conversion of some of the titled plutocrats of England to the Catholic faith, and many. explanations have been offered as to the “ why ” of their conversion. It has been said that if Protestanti m which ends in infidelity—see your Spencers! Huxleys, and 1 yndalls —is not chocked, social anarchy will bt the result, and when this comes security for property is gone ; hence the landed classes support the Catholic Church. That this is an adequate explanation of the recent' conversions, no one at all acquainted with history can say. When earnest, God-fearing men like Newman and Manning have also been converted, the property explanation is out of the question. What then is the cause of secessions from the English Church ? I reply, because iu Protestantism many can find no safe restingplace for their salvation. Ever and anon a recurrence for peace—for the full significance an,d appreciation and blessing of the apostles —pots va6iscwm~-is i had to the Catholic Church. And if Curistianity is assailed—if its dogmas are denied—if its testimony to Christ’s Deity is sneered at —it is to the Catholic Church and to the logic and arguments of the Catholics that the Protestants must appeal. Particularly was I struck with this in reading a small book published by the Rev. Dr Copland, and n hich you have reviewed. The only arguments that are telling or worth reading—indeed, the main arguments on which Dr Copland. relies are good Catholic theology, liven ne must defend the testimony by relying for aid on Catholic theology. Does not this again show that, after all, English-speaking people are Christian, that the mists of prejudice alone need to be dispelled in order to see not hundreds but thousands seeking peace and rest for their souls in Catholicism. In order to show that I am not misinterpreting Dr Copland’s book, I may state that the proof of the inspiration of the New Testament precedes, as you have pointed out, the proof of the inspiration of the Old Testament. For if the New Testament be inspired, vhen it will become clear the Old is also ; and it might be the first could be proved mspired; but if this were done it would not prove the succeeding testimony—the New—was also inspired. Very properly, therefore. Dr Copland first gives the attestation of the testimony of the New. The author, in order to j. rove “ that all that is in the Gospels, in addition to these facts—that is, facts attested by Pagan and Jewish histonana—deserves an explicit credence,” proceeds to show that the “ most convincing proof of this may be afforded if he can show that the Gospels were published in the same form as we have them now at a period” near the time when the events took place. He then quotes from Irenaeus, Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius. Tertulhan, aud Justyn Martyr. What is this but relying ou the patristic writings in the early Church? In fact, except the Comforter had been given to the early Church—except there was some witness outside the human elemeht —how can we say that these men might not have been deceived ? To prove the inspiration of a book, by showing that people that lived in the end of lho first and beginning of the second centuries accepted it as inspired, is impossible. How can wo say that uninspired men can prove that other men were inspired? Dr Copland sees this weakness. He has felt that this position was insecure. He, therefore, relies on the fact—and this I say is of the utmost importance—that the Church, the wituess of Christ, accepted it as inspired. He also balls iu aid another Catholic argument. Indeed he relies on this further one as the main one, and it is this :-Page 73—the testimony of ChrifcV— Christ said to His Church, “ He that heareth you. heareth me.” *■ The Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same time what ye ought to say.” “It is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.” And after quoting various other m. sages the wiitef triumphantly exclaims, “If then the Scriptures of the New Testament were written by men professing such authority and Qualifications, or given forth bj such men to thn world, in the chai actor of Christ’s ambassador*! as true representations of Christ’s works and words, and authoritative expositions of Ins will, we have th» clearest grounds for accepting them as possessing the same authority and character as if they proceeded from thfe pen of Christ himself.” This is .the kernel oT the book, aud it is the bains of the Cathblio hef in the Bible. He con only know that the Slbln w foe bMwb tlfe

nesses to it. He can only know tht A; ostles and Church were inspired, becaust of Christ’s promise to them. The A jostles and Church, when the} apeak, speak “as if theii words proceeded ft oin the pen of Christ himself.” That Dr Copland means this is plain. Paul was not personally addressed by Christ If Christ witnessed, therefore, to the plenary inspiration of the Apostle’s teaching, the pro mised Spirit was to guide others than those who were originally addressed. Paul was in spired ; and if Paul was inspired, when did the authority with which the early Church wa.clothed cease? Can it be that the Church lun 1 a guide—had a spirit of wisdom in the first century, and none in the nineteenth ? Has tin Comforter quitted the Chinch? If not, then those precious promises which Christ gave are still being fulfilled. The truth is again realised of “ Lo, I am with you alway, even to the con summation of the world.” It is cheering to see Dr Copland using such arguments. It show.-, that, though the Catholic Church is despised, the inspiration of the Bible can only be proved by falling back on the inspiration of the Apostles and Church, and hence it is the true Church has not ceased to pioclaim (as the Apos ties proclaimed then) its inspiration. This proclamation Dr Copland, at page 75, has also the good grace to acknowledge to be a valid argument. The fact that the Apostles claimed that their writings were inspired is a proof that theii’ claim was true ; so the fact that the Church also claims that the spirit of truth still resides in it, still guides it, is a proof of the truth of that claim. I am cheered by a book like Dr Copland’s. It has many defects-—many errors ; but there !■ in it—in its backbone—such a recognition of Catholic theology, of Catholic faith, that I hope and trust he may yet embrace the true faith. "Would that he would only study the Fathers more. If he did, he might be raised up a second Newman to witness for the truth, and to attest the testimony anew.—l am, &c., Alt-Katholik. Dunedin, February 11.