LECTURE XXXII.

* * * * *

LUKE i. 3,4.

It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that than mightest know the certainty of those things in which thou hast been instructed.

I said at the conclusion of my lecture, last Sunday, that when we of the Church of England assert that the Scripture is the sole authority in matters of faith, we by no means mean to exclude the office of the Church, nor to assert any thing so extravagant, as that it is the duty of every person to sit down with the volume of the Scriptures in his hand, and to make out from that alone, without listening to any human authority, what is the revelation made by God to man.  But I know that many are led to adopt notions no less extravagant of the authority of the Church and of tradition,—­even to the full extent maintained by the Church of Rome,—­because they see no other refuge from what appears to them, and not unreasonably, so miserable and so extreme a folly; for an extreme and a most miserable folly doubtless it would be, in any one, to throw aside all human aid except his own; to disregard alike the wisdom of individuals, and the agreeing decisions of bodies of men; to act as if none but himself had ever loved truth, or had been able to discover it; and as if he himself did possess both the will and the power to do so.

This is so foolish, that I doubt whether any one ever held such notions, and, much more, whether be acted upon them.  But is it more wise to run from one form of error into its opposite, which, generally speaking, is no less foolish and extravagant?  What should we say of a man who could see no middle course between never asking for advice, and always blindly following it; between never accepting instruction upon any subject, and believing his instructors infallible?  And this last comparison, with our particular situation here, will enable us, I think, by referring to our own daily experience, to understand the present question sufficiently.  The whole system of education supposes, undoubtedly, that the teacher, in those matters which he teaches, should be an authority to the taught:  a learner in any matter must rely on the books, and on the living instructors, out of which and from whom he is to learn.  There are difficulties, certainly, in all learning; but we do not commonly see them increased by a disposition on the part of the learner to question and dispute every thing that is told him.  There is a feeling rather of receiving what he is told implicitly; and, by so doing, he learns:  but does it ever enter into his head that his teacher is infallible? or does any teacher of sane mind wish him to think so?  And observe, now, what is the actual process:  the mind of the learner is generally docile, trustful, respectful towards his teacher; aware, also, of his