ever else he believes or disbelieves, to be the word of God, is essentially orthodox."

"Very well."

"But the non-essentials, or matters it is lawful to believe or disbelieve to be the word of God, are not the words of men or of devils, but revealed truths, as we agreed in our former conversation?"

"Certainly."

"But to believe the words of men or of devils to be the word of God is, as you have said, essential error."

"True."

"Then, after all, we cannot say that he who believes the essentials is essentially orthodox, whatever else he believes or disbelieves to be the word of God; for this would imply that it is no essential error to add to the word of God the words of men or of devils."

"Say, then, he who believes the essentials is essentially orthodox, whatever else he believes or disbelieves to be the word of God, provided he believes nothing to be the word of God which is not his word.”

"Then none of those who believe any thing to be revealed which Presbyterians deny are essentially orthodox." "I do not see that."

"What they believe which exceeds what you believe, you hold to be either revealed or not revealed. If revealed, you are guilty of the sin of infidelity in not believing it; if not revealed, you must hold they err essentially, for you hold they believe that to be the word of God which is not his word. The last is what you do hold, and therefore you cannot hold that they are essentially orthodox Protestants."

"Be it so."

"You must also deny those to be essentially orthodox who believe less than you do. If the matters you believe which they do not are not revealed truths, you err essentially in believing them to be revealed; if they are revealed, you must believe they err essentially in disbelieving them; since in disbelieving them you must hold they disbelieve God."

"That seems to be so."

"Then you exclude from the essentially orthodox all who believe more or less than yourselves; that is, all but yourselves. If, then, you insist on the proviso you have adopted in your definition, and say no one can be essentially orthodox who believes any thing in addition to the word, you must either

give up your distinction, as I have said, between essentials and non-essentials, or else

say it is no essential error to disbelieve God; which will you do ?”

“ Neither.”

“ But you either believe the non-essentials to be revealed truths, that is, the word of God, or you do not. If you do not, your distinction between them and the essentials avails you nothing, as we have seen. Hence you have insisted that they are revealed truths. But if you hold them to be revealed truths, you must hold them to be not non-essential, but essential, as Toby and his dog have proved to us, since to disbelieve them would be to make God a liar. This you admit, do you not ?"

I have admitted it over and over again." “ Then on no ground whatever can you admit any portion of revealed truth to be unessential, and, willingly or unwillingly, you must abandon your distinction between the essentials and non-essentials, and either say Protestants have been and are virtual infidels in teaching that it is no essential error to disbelieve God, or else that they have never meant that any portion of the revealed word, clearly and manifestly revealed or not, can be disbelieved without essential error. Which alternative do you elect ? »

“If either, the latter."

“ Presbyterians, then, are the only essentially orthodox Protestants."

“Very well.” “Presbyterians are fallible, liable to be mistaken?" “ We do not, like Romanists, set up a claim to infallibili

ty."

“ If they are fallible, it is possible they take that to be the word of God which is not his word, or deny that to be bis word which is his word. In either case, they will be guilty of essential error. Consequently, it is possible that Presbyterians themselves are in essential error, and therefore impossible for them to say with certainty that they are essentially orthodox, and therefore they must admit that it is uncertain whether there are any essentially orthodox Protestants at all ! "

66 But you forget that the essentials are clearly and manifestly revealed, and therefore may be known with all necessary certainty."

“You also forget that we have just agreed that all revealed

truth is essential, and that you have surrendered the distinction between essentials and non-essentials. You assumed, as you were obliged, the non-essentials to be revealed, for otherwise they would be simply the words of men or of devils, which it is not lawful to believe to be the word of God; but the moment you admit them into the category of revealed truths, you must either concede them to be essential, or else that it is no essential error to disbelieve God; that is, to be an infidel, and make God a liar. This last you could not do; therefore you were obliged to say all that is revealed is essential. But, if you say this, you must say, either that the essentials are not restricted to what is clearly and manifestly revealed, or else that nothing but what is clearly and manifestly revealed is revealed at all. Which will you say?"

If

"For the present, that nothing is revealed but what is clearly and manifestly revealed. Almighty God is good, and natural reason suffices to prove that he cannot have made that necessary to be believed which is obscure or doubtful. he has made his whole word necessary to be believed, the whole must be clearly and manifestly revealed, and what is not so revealed can be no part of his word."

"His word, being clear and manifest, cannot be mistaken, or, at least, there can be no difficulty in determining what it is ?"

"None."

"But clear and manifest are relative terms. A thing may be clear and manifest to you, and not to me. To whom, then, do you say the word is clearly and manifestly revealed ?" "What is clear and manifest is clear and manifest, and can be honestly mistaken by no one.'

"That is, what is alike clear and manifest to all men.” "But I mean what is alike clear and manifest to all men.” "The word is revealed in the Scriptures, and in the Scriptures alone, and these alone are sufficient?"

"Yes; that is what all Protestants assert."

"The word is revealed in these alike clearly and manifestly to all men ?

"Yes."

"To those who cannot read, as to those who can ?" "There should be none who cannot read."

"But nineteen twentieths of mankind, at the lowest calculation, cannot read, and nearly as large a proportion of those who can read cannot read so as to understand what they read.

Do you say the revealed word is clearly and manifestly revealed to all these?"

"Of those to whom little is given little will be required." "That is to say, Almighty God does not require faith in his word of the immense majority of the human race?"

"I say not that.

Those who cannot read he instructs by

his pastors and by his Holy Spirit."

"But if the instructions of pastors and the direct revelation of the Holy Spirit are necessary in the case of the larger part of mankind, how can you say the Scriptures are sufficient?" "The Scriptures are sufficient."

"That is, for whom they suffice, and when and where they are not insufficient! That can hardly be questioned. But let us confine ourselves to those who can read, and who claim to be teachers among Protestants, so called. These all admit the Scriptures contain the whole revealed word?"

They do."

"That they are the sole and sufficient rule of faith and practice?"

“
"Certainly."

"And that the word revealed in them is clear and manifest?"

"Unquestionably."

"And that only what is clear and manifest is revealed?" "Be it so."

"Then they all agree as to what the word is ?"

"No; I am sorry to say they do not."

"There is disagreement, then, some saying the word is. one thing, others saying it is not that, but something else?" "But there is no honest disagreement; for the matter is clear and manifest, and none who do not wilfully close their eyes to the truth can mistake it."

"Are all parties dishonest?"

"No."

"Which is the honest, which the dishonest party?" "The orthodox party is the honest party."

"Which party is that?"

"The one which believes what, and only what, is clearly

and manifestly revealed."

"So say all parties; but which is that party?"

"The Scriptures must decide."

"But the dispute is as to what the Scriptures teach. They,

by the very terms of the supposition, have already been ap

NEW SERIES.

VOL. I. NO. I.

5

pealed to, and each party has obtained a decision in its own favor. The question now is, Which is the true answer? What is the decision of the court?"

"Let the Scriptures be appealed to again."

"That avails nothing; for they decide always in precisely the same terms, and the dispute remains always the same." "But the dispute is not honest."

"Be it so. But who is honest, who dishonest, you or your opponents? You charge them with dishonesty, and say the matter is clear and manifest as you believe; they retort and say it is clear and manifest as they believe. Which am I to believe?"

"Neither; but read the Scriptures and decide for yourself."

"And suppose I decide against both of you? There will then be three sects instead of two. Why shall I be counted the honest party rather than you or your opponents, they rather than you, you rather than they, either of you rather than I?"

"But the matter is clear and manifest to all who do not wilfully close their eyes to the light."

"With all my heart; but who are they who wilfully close their eyes to the light?"

"The Scriptures

"They have given their decision, and nothing is decided, for the dispute is as to what they decide."

Evidently they cannot be good orthodox Protestants who teach doctrines repugnant to those of the Protestant Reformation."

"Do you abandon the sufficiency of the Scriptures, then, and call in the aid of Protestant tradition?"

"I do not abandon the sufficiency of the Scriptures, but I maintain that what is clearly and manifestly repugnant to the doctrines of the Reformers cannot be clearly and manifestly revealed in the Scriptures."

"Your rule of faith, then, is the Scriptures understood according to the Reformers ?

"I hold the Scriptures alone are the rule of faith, but I compare my understanding of the Scriptures with the teachings of the Reformers."

"And if it coincide with what they taught, you hold that you rightly understand the Scriptures, and believe what is clearly and manifestly revealed?"

"Very well."