" PROTESTANT INCONSISTENCY."

New Zealand Tablet, Volume VII, Issue 336, 26 September 1879, Page 9

" PROTESTANT INCONSISTENCY."

The Eev. Dr. Glairy, Catholic clergyman, Motherwell, had the following letter in the Glasgow Herald :—: — " It is the fundamental principle of Protestantism that each man has the right to read the Bible for himself and to form his own judgment of its meaning. The true Protestant is not only allowed but is bound to exercise his own judgment as to the interpretation of the statements of Scripture, looking for the guidance of the Holy Spirit, who is the infallible teacher of all true believers, and who it promised to guide them to all truth.

" The Church of Rome, on the other hand, holds that ' in matters of faith and morals no one confiding in his own judgment shall dare to wrest the sacred Scriptures to his own sense of them, contrary to that which hath been held, and still ts held, by Holy Mother Church, whose right it is to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of Holy Writ.'

" I see that sentence of suspension has been pronounced against the U.P. minister of Gourock by his brethem of the Gourock Presbytery. Now, had Mr. Macrae the privilege of being a Catholic I should be at no loss to understand the reasons of his suspension. He has wrested the Sacred Scriptures to his own sense of them contrary to that which has been held, and is still held, by Holy Mother Church. But as Mr. Macrae is unfortunately not a Catholic but a genuina Protestant, I confess I am altogether at a loss how to account for the proceedings which have been taken against him. " Like a true Protestant Mr. Macrae has read his Bible for himself ; surely no one blames him for that. Like a true Protestant he forms his own opinion concerning the sense of certain passages thereof. Still in his character of true Protestant Mr. Macrae disregards the opinions of most of his own concerning them. True, his opinions differ on some points from those held by Dr. Hutton and others of his rev. brethren ; but like a true Protestant he sticks to his own opinions. He does not lose his right of private judgment because he differs from Dr. Hutton or any number of Dr. Huttons.

" And yet Mr. Macrae is suspended I What then becomes of the right of private judgment?

" If it be argued that Mr. Macrae is free to exercise his private judgment, provided he agrees with the ' Standards of the Church,' I ask in what does his right differ from mine, who also am free to use my private jugdment provided I agree with the « Standards of the Church.'

" The principle is exactly the same, the only difference being that in Mr. Macrae's case he must, under pain of being treated as a heretic, agree with the interpretation of certain Presbyterian ministers who compiled a Confession of Faith in the seventeenth century, whereas I must agree with the interpretation which has always been held, and is held by Holy Mother Church.

" There is not an argument used by the prosecutors of Mr. Macrae in defence of their proceeding against him which cannot be employed with a thousand times more force to justify the Catholic Church in her condemnation of Luther, Cranmer, and Knox, whose memories these same prosecutors hold in veneration.

'■ Mr. Macrae reads his Bible for himself, so did they. He interprets it for himself, so did they. His interpretation differs from the received interpretation of the time, so did theirs. He is judged by the Standards of the Church, so were they. Judged by these Standards, he is condemned, so were they. The only difference is that in one case the Standards are the Westminster Confession of Faith, and in the other the doctrine of the Universal Church.

"Luther set himself against the authority of the Universal Church, and he was a hero. David Macrae set himself against the authority of the Westminster Confession, and he is a heretic. Was I not right in heading this letter ' Protestant Inconsistency ?' "