order which the apostle gives us, that the word of Christ should dwell richly in us, shows that it is the duty of pastors sedulously to exhort their flocks to the study, reading, and meditation of the Divine Scriptures, and that it is incumbent on their flocks to addict themselves assiduously to it. Whence it follows, in the third place, that this word of Christ ought to resound continually every where; in the church, in its public assemblies, in private families, and the very closets of its members: otherwise how would it dwell plenteously in us? Moreover, since the apostle speaks here to all the faithful in general, as well people as ministers, this Epistle being directed by him to all "the faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse," it is evident his intention is, that not only should all Christians hear this word in the church, but that they should also read it each one in private if they can; and that such reading is not only permitted, but commanded, as profitable and necessary. Again, the apostle's requiring that it should dwell in them, yea, dwell richly in them, necessarily implies that it is not enough to know some general points of this heavenly doctrine; but that men ought to be fully and distinctly instructed in it, and in such a manner as that there may be no part of this Divine treasure of which we are not possessed. The same appears further from the effect which the apostle would have us draw from it, namely, our abounding, by means of this word, "in all wisdom;" a thing which has no place in those who have but a superficial, and, as they say, an implicit, that is, a confused, involved, and entangled, knowledge of it. Whence it clearly follows that the word of Christ contains all things necessary to salvation; it being evident that he who is ignorant of any part of them is not owner of wisdom, and much less of all wisdom; which yet the apostle intimates that we shall have, if the word of the Lord dwells richly in us. Compare now the law and the discipline of Rome with this doctrine of St. Paul, and you will find such a difference, or rather, so palpable a contrariety, between them, as that the night and darkness are not more contrary to the day and its light. First, the apostle refers his scholars to the word of Christ, to learn there all the duties of Christianity. Rome directs hers to the pope and his officers, to be instructed about their salvation. The apostle declares, that the word of Christ is capable of giving us all heavenly wisdom, if it dwell in us. Rome asserts, that it is not sufficient for this end, and that it contains but some part of saving wisdom, for the completion of which unwritten tradition must be added. The apostle would have this Divine word dwell in us. Rome would not that it should; and introduces in its place I know not what kind of fabulous legends, with which she fills the world, giving them to her votaries for instructing and feeding their souls. The apostle directs that this word be read, both in public and in private, among the faithful; Rome ordains that neither the one nor the other shall be done. As for the public, if she show her assemblies any pieces of it, she shows them hidden, and wrapped up in a language not understood; that is, she reads them, and reads them not; it being evident that proclaiming the laws and ordinances of a sovereign to a people in a language which they do not understand, is the same in effect as if they were not proclaimed. It is holding out a candle, but a candle hid under a bushel; that is, a holding it not out. It is presenting the face of Christ to his people; but presenting it veiled and disguised, under such a form as they discern nothing of it. And as to private, you know with what indignity Rome treats Christians, and how she forbids them to read their Father's Testament, and

judges it a crime that they should handle books which were made for them, or see those letters which are expressly directed to them. And that the permission of this reading, which they give some tradesmen of this city, and that the boldness of some doctors, who deny even the clearest things, may not deceive you, I think it pertinent to represent to you here the doctrine of Rome touching this matter. Know then that in the Treatise and Index of prohibited Books, drawn up by the authority of the Council of Trent, approved and published by the authority of Pope Pius IV., and of all his successors, one of their first rules runs expressly in these words: "Since it is manifest by experience, that if the Holy Bible be commonly and indifferently permitted in the vulgar tongue, there is derived from it more damage than profit, in consequence of the temerity of men; the judgment of the bishop or the inquisitor must be abided by in this case; so that they by the counsel of the parish priest, or of the confessor, may grant the reading of the Bible in a translation made by some Catholic author unto such as they shall find capable of drawing from such reading, not damage or prejudice, but increase of faith and piety; and this licence they must have in writing. As for those who shall presume to read it without such licence, they must not receive absolution of their sins without having first rendered up their Bible into the ordinary's hands."* Thus far the papal law.

Was there ever ordinance more injurious to the word of God, and to his apostle's authority? First, their position at the entrance, namely, that the common reading of the Bible does more hurt than good, and causes more damage than profit, is horrible, and directly contrary both to the wisdom and goodness of God, and also to St. Paul's declaration. For who can believe that God would give such books to his church as are more apt to hurt than to help? And how does his apostle recommend them to all Christians indifferently, directing that this word dwell plenteously in them, if this is dangerous for them, and rather pernicious than profitable? And why does he promise us from it the fruit of wisdom, yea, of all wisdom, if the reading be so perilous? Is wisdom an evil and pernicious thing? But it is easy to comprehend the thoughts of Rome; she means assuredly that reading the Bible is prejudicial to her; that it discovers her impostures, and, giving wisdom to the simple, arms and fortifies them against her corruptions and pretended traditions. This is in truth the damage and loss she fears, and which makes her so careful to extinguish or set aside all glimpses of this heavenly light, to the end that she may reign at her ease by the favour of darkness. And if she would have sincerely represented her motives in this ordinance of hers, there would not have been the preface which we have just read, but such a one as this,-'It being evident by experience that the reading of the Bible is very prejudicial to her interests, giving men the hardiness to reject the authority and doctrine of her pope, who not only is not found any where in this word of God, but even opposes it in various instances; for these reasons it has seemed good to her to shut up and restrain the knowledge of it as much as she can, since the abolition of it altogether is both impossible and scandalous.' This is their true meaning, this their true motive. And indeed you see how in conclusion they straiten this reading as much as they possibly can. First, they will not allow men to read any version of the Scripture, though never so good and faithful, and exactly translated from the original

* Index Libr. Prohibitor. Reg. 4.

texts, except it has (as they say) some Catholic for its author; that is, one or other of those people who, being passionate for the Roman cause, would weaken the words of the Scripture as much as possible, and sometimes even audaciously corrupt them for their own advantage; as you may plainly perceive by the example of him who, passing the bounds of the modesty of all others, has not long since put the express term mass, a stranger to all Scripture, into the book of the Acts of the Apostles; and written at the third chapter, that the prophets and teachers which were in the church of Antioch did say mass, against the warrant of the original, and of all ancient versions, the Syriac, the Arabic, and the Latin, which is itself canonized by the Council of Trent, every one of which says, agreeably with the original, that those persons served or ministered to the Lord; contrary to the example of the vulgar versions of the Roman communion, as that of the doctors of Louvain, of Benedict, of Frison, and others; and, in fact, against the evidence of the thing itself, this latter version falsely supposing that there could be no Divine service but its pretended mass. Judge by this sample what the versions of the Bible, made by these good catholics, are likely to be. But however altered and disguised these versions are in their own favour, they still fear them; well knowing that it is not easy so to sophisticate this heavenly word, as that it will not always have virtue enough left to confound their errors. Therefore they add another restriction, that for the reading of such Bibles there must be had a licence, and in writing, not from the parish priest, (this is not sufficient,) but from the bishop of the diocess, or from the inquisitor (an office in the modern church, which is no more found in holy writ than the office of their mass). yet they do not leave them an absolute disposal of the matter; but oblige them to assure themselves first, by conference and deliberation with the curates of the petitioners, that they are persons to whom the word of God will do no hurt; that is, will not make them disgust the Roman religion, which is in reality all the danger they apprehend.

tle

And

Christians, do you not tremble to hear that these masters forbid what the apostle gives you orders to do? a thing that Jesus Christ himself commands you, when he says, "Search the Scriptures ?" and that their dispensation must be had to do that which Jesus Christ and his apostle enjoin you? The apossays, "Let the word of Christ dwell in you ;" and these gentlemen cry on the other side, No, meddle not with it. Cast not your eyes on it. Have not so much as the book in your houses, (which is far indeed from getting it to dwell in your hearts,) except one of our bishops or inquisitors give you permission for it. O new and unheard-of theology! that a Christian must have a dispensation from Rome, or one of her ministers, to obey Jesus Christ; and cannot do what St. Paul commands him, except the pope's officers give him a permission in writing. Can men more openly debase the authority of Christ and his apostle? Surely what is commanded is a duty; and that which is permitted (especially that for which one is obliged to have a permission in writing) is a thing contrary to our duty, as every one knows, and as you may see by the practice of Rome itself, where permission to eat flesh in Lent is indeed demanded, but not to eat fish in the carnival; because, according to their laws, the first is contrary to a Christian's duty, and not the second. If then a Christian must have a permission to read the Bible, it is evident that the reading of it is a matter of some contrariety to a Christian's duty, that of itself it is unlawful and prohibited. Again, if such read

ing be duly commanded, it must of necessity be said that every one is obligated to read it, (at least every faithful man or woman that can read,) and that they no more need any one's permission to read the Bible, than to give an alms, or to comfort an afflicted person, or to obey their father or their prince. St. Paul's command, as you see, is express, "Let the word of Christ dwell in you." It is then our duty to read it and meditate upon it. It is then a manifest invasion of the apostle's authority to restrain us from reading it without any man's permission, whoever he might be. It is a changing what Paul has ordained. It is a taking it out of the rank of duties where he had set it, and placing it among transgressions. It is a making that to pass for prohibited which the holy apostle has commanded; there being no place for a permission, but in things which the law of God or of men have forbidden.

Can a stranger thing be ordained? Yet they stop not here. For fearing lest such a permission, though difficult and strait, and depending upon the will of their officers, should yet prejudice their religion, if any use were made of it, they withdraw nearly altogether the power to grant it, which they before gave the bishop and the inquisitor. For in the observation which they add upon this fourth rule they declare expressly, that "the meaning is not that there is by it any new power attributed to bishops or inquisitors, or to the superiors of regular societies, to give leave to any to read, or buy, or keep the Bible, or any piece either of the Old or of the New Testament, or so much as summaries or historical abridgements of the books of Holy Scripture, in any vulgar tongue whatever; because (say they) they have hitherto been deprived of the power of giving such permissions by the Roman holy general inquisition, and it must be inviolably observed." See, I beseech you, a most manifest illusion! They forbid all Christians to read the Bible without the bishop's or the inquisitor's permission; but they presently declare that no bishop or inquisitor has power to give any. Thus there shall no person be permitted to read it. Is not this an evident mockery of the world? But these men so greatly dread the Scripture, that they had rather become guilty of thus shamefully and openly deluding Christendom, than suffer any one to possess or to read so dangerous a book. They would rather favour their interest than their honour. And, indeed, such is the practice in Spain and Italy, and in the territories of the inquisition, where this permission to read the Bible is not given to any man, whoever he may be ; and where it is held for a capital crime, and a sure mark of heresy, to have in the house but a volume of the Old or New Testament in the vulgar tongue. So that of necessity those who in these parts permit this reading to some, are either guilty of violating the general ordinances of that church of which they profess to be members, or have some particular and extraordinary power from the pope to do as they do, which however does not appear to be the case.

This crime would be less strange if it clashed only with this passage of the apostle. But it also overturns various other most express instructions which occur in the Holy Scriptures. For God commands the king of Israel, who was a layman, not a clergyman, to write a copy of his law, and to have it by him, and read it diligently, Deut. xvii. 18, 19; and generally all his people to lay up all his words in their hearts and in their minds; to bind them for signs upon their hands, and for frontlets between their eyes, that is, to have them as familiar as their

Index Libr. Prohibit. observ. circa Regul. 4.

own hands and eyes; to teach them to their children, and discourse of them at home and abroad, lying down and rising up; and write them on the posts of their houses, and on their gates, Deut. xi. 18-20; vi. 7-9; which is just the same thing as St. Paul here briefly calls having the word of God to dwell in them. In fact, St. Luke praises the Ethiopian eunuch because he read the Scriptures; and the men of Berea, because they consulted them daily, to know if the things which Paul and Silas preached to them were so, Acts viii. 28; xvii. 11. Yet we no where read that they had leave of any papal bishops or inquisitors. And David pronounces that man blessed who meditateth day and night in the law of God, Psal. i. 1, 2. Again, the word of God being written, "that we might believe that Jesus is the Christ, and that believing we might have life through his name," as says St. John, chap. xx. 31; and "for our learning," as says St. Paul, "that we through patience and comfort might have hope," Rom. xv. 4; it must of necessity be concluded, that to forbid Christians to read the Scriptures is evidently either to frustrate the intention of the Lord, or to accuse him of having been unable to give us Scriptures proper for his aim and our aid. I say as much, and that more positively, of the apostolical Epistles; which being directed to the faithful clergy and laity indifferently, there is no reason to restrain any of them from reading that

which the first ministers of God wrote to them all.

The fault of our adversaries is so much the more inexcusable, as the ancient doctors, whom they so highly extol, are directly contrary to them in this particular. As Origen for one, who would have Christians not only hear the word of God in the church, but exercise themselves in reading it at home, and in meditating on it night and day.* St. Hierom for another, who would have women and maids themselves to learn the Scriptures by heart.† St. Augustine for a third, who most earnestly recommends the reading of the word of God to the very catechumeni, that is, Christians of the lowest form, such as had not yet received holy baptism.‡ St. Gregory the Great, that famous bishop of Rome, for a fourth, who gravely reproves a physician of the court because he took not the pains to read the words of our Redeemer every day. "For what is holy Scripture," says he, "but a letter from God to his creature? If you were in a far country, and there received letters from the emperor your master, you would not be at rest nor sleep at your ease till you had read them, and perceived what your earthly prince should have vouchsafed to write you, The Monarch of heaven, the Lord of men and angels, has sent and conveyed to your hands his letters about the concerns of your life. And yet, my son, you deign not to read them. Apply to them, I beseech you, and meditate daily upon your Creator's sayings." Thus wrote Gregory, more than a thousand years ago. Judge how far the language of later popes is from his spirit and from his principles. I pass by other doctors of antiquity, who are no less contrary to this modern abuse, and will only mention further John of Antioch, bishop of Constantinople, to whom the church has given the name of Chrysostom, that is, Golden-mouth, because of the richness and sweetness of his incomparable eloquence; he alone would furnish a man with enough to make a small volume, if any would put together all the passages of his works, in which he exhorts all the faithful, and especially those of the people, to an assiduous reading of the Holy Scripture; and particularly in the sermon which he wrote upon this * Homil. 9. on Levitic. Hierom, Ep. 14. et 30.

August. lib. de Catech, rud. c. 6. 8.

very text of the apostle which we are expounding. "Hear," says he, "you that live in the world, and have wife and children, hear how he orders you, yea, you principally, to read the Scriptures, not slightly and heedlessly, but with great care and diligence." He would have them heed no other master: "You have," says he to them, "the oracles of God, and no one can teach you so well as these Divine books." And a little after, "Have," says he, "the books of the Bible, the true medicines of the soul. Get at least the New Testament, the Acts of the Apostles, the Gospels. Let these be your perpetual masters and teachers. If any affliction befall you, loss of goods, of children, or of friends; if death itself present itself to you; make search forthwith in this book, as in the storehouse of celestial medicines, and fetch out of it the remedies that are necessary for the mitigation of your miseries: or rather, that you may not be put to the trouble of such search, lay them all up in your soul, and have them ready upon all occasions. Ignorance of the Scriptures is the cause of all our evils." Thus far Chrysostom. And truly, as you see, he was not of the opinion of the latter popes of Rome, who accuse, as you heard before, the reading of the word of God of doing more harm than good.

If the reading of them must be interdicted upon the pretence, that some unstable spirits wrest them to their destruction, it should be in the first place prohibited to bishops, priests, and monks; it being clear, if my memory does not deceive me, that those who have forged heresies by a misunderstanding of the Scripture were all of one of those three orders, and not of the common people. But it is a very wild expedient, and a remedy altogether extravagant, to condemn the use of things because of the abuse of them by some certain persons. By this account the best and most innocent things, and things most necessary for the life of men, should be taken from them; the light of the sun, the savour of meats, the excellency of wines and fruits, iron, silver, gold, and other metals, the accomplishments of learning, and the wonders of eloquence. For which of these gifts of God does not the intemperance or the malice of men abuse? And, as the prince of pagan philosophers has rightly observed, there is nothing they so perniciously abuse as that which is of itself best and most profitable.¶ To conclude; since the same God, who knows the nature and the efficacy of his own Scriptures better than any, commands us all to read them, it is an insufferable temerity for a man to intrude with his advice, and change what the Lord has appointed, as if he were wiser than the Most High.

II. But the apostle clearly refutes this calumny of Rome against Scripture in the other part of this text, where he sets before us the fruits and uses we ought to draw from it: "Teaching," says he, “and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord." Elsewhere he informs us that "all Scripture is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness," 2 Tim. iii. 16. Here, in like manner, he sets down, for the first fruit we are to gather from this rich knowledge of the word of God, that mutual teaching we owe to each other; for the second, admonition; for a third, consolation by the singing of psalms and spiritual hymns. As to the first, I grant the charge of teaching in the church principally pertains to pastors appointed for this purpose; yet there is not the most private believer who does not also in some measure participate in this function, when he has the gift and the opporGregor. in his Epistles, lib. 4. Ep. 40. Chrysost. Homil. 9. in Ep. ad Coloss. Aristot. Rhet.

tunity, to edify men in the knowledge of true religion. Particularly fathers and mothers owe this duty to their children, husbands to their wives, masters to their households, the elder to the younger, and, in short, each one to his neighbour, when he has the convenience. Whence it appears again how far distant the apostle's sentiment is from Rome's. Paul would have the faithful entertain and instruct one another in the things of the word of God. Rome will not let any but the clergy have power to speak of them. The second use we ought to make of the word of God is to admonish each other. Teaching properly respects faith; admonition has reference to manners. The Scripture furnishes us with that which is necessary to discharge both these duties; informing us plainly and plentifully, as well of things which are to be believed as those which are to be done. And it is incumbent on the believer to acquit himself in the matter according to the knowledge he has, instructing the ignorant and reproving the faulty, with a spirit of sweetness and discretion, as the apostle elsewhere prescribes. For every man ought to look upon his neighbour as his brother; to reclaim him, if he stray; to raise him up, if he fall; to clear things to him, if he doubt; and to have as much care of his welfare as of his own. Far be from us the cruelty of those proud spirits, who would not be solicitous in the least for their brethren's concerns; and who, if God should demand an account of them at their hands, would be ready to say, as Cain formerly answered, "Am I my brother's keeper," or schoolmaster? Now as we are to be charitable and prudent for the performance of this service to our brethren; so ought we again, in our turn, to receive it from them with patience and meekness; remembering how the psalmist says, "Let the righteous smite me; it shall be a kindness: and let him reprove me; it shall be an excellent oil," Psal. cxli. 5.

The third and last use the apostle directs us to make of the word of Christ is in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, to sing from our hearts with grace unto the Lord. The so doing respects partly the glory of God, which we ought to celebrate by our singing, and partly our own consolation and spiritual rejoicing. For the Lord is so good, that he has provided even for the recreation of his children; and knowing that song is one of his most natural means, extremely proper both to dilate the contentment of our hearts, and render it full blown, as also to alleviate and mitigate their sorrows, he has not only permitted, but even commanded, us to sing to him spiritual songs. And to assist us in so holy and profitable an exercise, he has given us in his word a great number of these Divine canticles, as the Psalms of David, and the hymns of various other faithful and religious persons, dispersed in various parts of the books of the Old and New Testament.

The apostle names three sorts of them, psalms, hymns, or praises, and odes, or songs. Now though there is no occasion to take much pains in exactly distinguishing these three sorts of sonnets; nevertheless I think their opinion very probable, who put this difference between them; that a psalm is in general any spiritual poem, whatever may be its subject; that a hymn particularly signifies sonnets composed to the praise of God; and that an ode, or song, is a kind of hymn of more art and variety of composition than others. You have various examples of them all in the Book of Psalms. First, all the compositions there are called psalms in general. But it is very evident they are not all of a sort. There are some in which is celebrated the goodness, the wisdom, and the power of the Lord, either towards David or towards the church, or with reference to all creatures.

These are properly hymns, and such is the 18th Psalm, the 104th, the 145th, and many others. There are others in which are mystically and elegantly represented, with excellent skill, either the wonders of Christ, as the 45th, the 72nd, the 110th, and the like; or the histories of the ancient people, as the 78th, the 105th, and 106th. To these properly the name of odes, or songs, belong. It is with these sacred lyres, of which the word of Christ affords us both the matter and the form, that the apostle would have us solace ourselves. St. James gives us orders for it: "Is any among you merry? let him sing psalms," chap. v. 13.

The apostle calls all these sonnets spiritual, both on account of their author, who is the Holy Spirit, and also of their matter, which concerns only Divine and heavenly things, the glory of God, and our salvation, not the vanities, passions, and follies of men, as carnal poems. He adds, "with grace;" signifying by that expression the sweet and saving effect of these spiritual songs, which profit and refresh at the same time. He would have us, in the third place, to sing from the heart; that is, not barely with the mouth, as hypocrites, but with the attention and affection of the heart. In conclusion, he directs us to sing to the Lord, that is, to the praise and glory of Christ, who is ordinarily signified by that term, the Lord, when it is couched singly, as it is here.

This is the rule he gives us for this holy and spiritual melody; a rule which Rome has as little spared as the other, which we have seen him prescribe, about our being studious of the word of God in general. For, first, she has banished from the church the singing of faithful people, and that so far, that those who are of her communion openly declare that to sing the Psalms of David, as we do, is great scandal to Christians. Strange Christianity! which is scandalized by singing that which the apostle commands; singing that celebrates the glory of God; singing what was indited by his Spirit, composed by his prophets, and tends only to the edification and consolation of faithful souls. Certainly, beside the authority of the book of God, it appears also by the writings of men, that formerly, in the ancient church, the Christian people bore a part in the singing of psalms, and did it both in public and in private. Again, as to that which our adversaries make their clergy sing, with what conscience can they say that they sing it with the heart, since they who hear it, and the greater part of those who sing it, understand it not? all their anthems being in Latin, a tongue long since dead and unknown to the people. Consider, too, whether the pomp, and the nicety, and the curiosity of their singing, and such a multiplicity of instruments as they mingle with it, and all the other artifices of their music, be not more proper for the pleasing of the ear than the edification of the spirit.

But, dear brethren, let us lay aside the defaults of others, and mind ourselves. First, bless we our good God that he has set up the word of his Christ again among us, in its light, and in its genuine use; and, acknowledging this grace from the bottom of our hearts, improve his favour. Let this word be the only governess of our hearts and lives. Hear we its voice in public, consult it in private. Let us have these Divine books, in which the Holy Spirit has consigned his instructions. Read them without scruple, and without fear of finding any thing that is dangerous or venomous in them. They are the paradise of Jesus Christ, in which the tree of life grows, and whence flows the streams of holiness, joy, and immortality, but a paradise where the old serpent never entered, where his breath and poison are unknown.