(4) Usus moralis. The books of Moses, the Psalms, Proverbs, and other portions of the Old Testament, are full of precepts relating to the wise conduct of human life, and calculated to awaken religious and pious sentiments. Even the historical portions of the Old Testament are highly useful in this view; and should be employed by religious teachers, and especially the teachers of youth, for the promotion of virtue and piety, more than is commonly done. It was the manner of Moses, and of all the ancient Jewish teachers, to give instruction by means of history,-a manner which is always interesting, and which was imitated by the first Christian teachers, who always built their instructions upon the history of the Old Testament and of Christ.

CAUTIONS to be observed in the use of the Old Testament for moral instruction.

(a) All the precepts contained in the Old Testament are not of universal obligation: some of them are applicable only to those liv ing under the peculiar constitution of the Jewish nation. Christians commit a great mistake, when they apply to themselves the promises of temporal good, and the threatenings of temporal evil, which are contained in the Old Testament, but which are valid only under a theocratical form of government. Christians can make application to themselves of such only of these precepts as relate to all men in every age. By neglecting this distinction, and applying to the present time, what has long since ceased to be valid, the teacher of religion frequently draws contempt upon himself and his doctrine, and awakens unnecessary suspicion of the truth of what he utters. ery act of disobedience to the divine law will indeed be punished, and every act of obedience, rewarded. But that this will be visibly accomplished in the present life, is no where taught in the Christian system; but rather the contrary. Temporal rewards and punishments are peculiar to a theocratic constitution, and ought not to be expected under a different divine dispensation.

Ev

(b) The rudeness of the early ages, and the degeneracy of the Jewish nation, called for a strictness of discipline, from which Christianity has now released us. The spirit of Christianity is in many respects essentially different from that of Judaism. The latter terrified by punishments, those who were too depraved to be influenced by love. The former teaches us to love God as our father and benefactor, and moves us by mildness and benevolence. Rom. 8:

15, "Ye (true Christians) have not received (by Christianity) a slavish spirit, leading you still (náλev, as Christians) to tremble before God; but ye have a filial, confiding disposition (лvεuμa viovεsias) produced in your minds by God, under the influence of which you can supplicate him in all circumstances as your beloved father." Cf. Heb. 12: 18-24. Gal. 4: 1-4. When therefore, as Christians, we obey any part of the law of Moses, or of the precepts of the Old Testament; we yield this obedience, not because it is required by the law of Moses, or the Old Testament; but partly because it is commanded by the universal moral law, and chiefly because it is commanded by Christ. For Christ did not come, as he himself said, to annul the moral law of the Old Testament, but to fulfil and enforce it, Matt. 5: 17, sq. So depraved were the Jews at the time of Moses, and long afterwards, that he was compelled to proceed with them, as a teacher does with ignorant, rude, and untractable pupils. The first measures which the teacher takes in the education of such pupils, are, to separate them from others of the same character with themselves, to impose compulsatory restraints, to awe them with threatenings, and to make to them such sensible representations, as are most calculated to produce an effect. And these are the measures which Moses adopted. Those for whom his institute was intended, were in a great measure incapable of any higher religious knowledge; which was not therefore given them, except in such obscure intimations as were proper in elementary instructions. Vid. Introduction, $8, II. Cf. Gal. 4: 3. Col. 2: 8, 20. Warburton, Divine Legation of Moses.

(c) Christians ought not to adopt, without some limitation, the life and example of the persons described in the Old Testament, even of those there mentioned with approbation, as models for their own imitation. For in consequence of their better instruction, Christians are now in many respects far advanced beyond the best of former times. In those ages of ignorance, many things were allowed or palliated, which, in this period of higher illumination and improvement, would be without excuse. Many events in the histories of David, Samson, and others, for which they might perhaps have been exculpated, cannot be adopted by Christians, as models for their imitation.-These remarks are sufficient to show the necessity of caution in the use of the characters of Old Testament history, in recommending moral duties, and in popular instruction. Vid. Joh.

Aug. Wolf, Diss. duo de exemplis biblicis in theologia morali caute adhibendis, Lipsiæ, 1786, 4to.-Christian teachers would do well to follow in this respect the example of the writers of the New Testament. They never deal in indiscriminate praises and encomiums of the characters of the Old Testament; but always select those parts of their example, which are worthy of commendation, and of the imitation of Christians; such as the piety and faith of Abraham, and others mentioned, Heb. xXI.

$13. Of the reading of the Holy Scriptures.

I. History of the dispute respecting the reading of the Bible.

That the Holy Scriptures were less read by the ancient Jews, and primitive Christians, than at the present day, is beyond dispute. Books were formerly very rare and costly, and the reading public was extremely small. Even in Europe, it was not so large by half, a century ago, as now. The great body of society, in former times, had little taste for reading, or indeed ability, as a general thing, either to read or to write. They were not therefore required by any precepts of the Bible, to read the Scriptures themselves. This was made the duty of the teachers of religion, who were then required to read the Scriptures before the people. Thus the sons of Levi were required to read the law of Moses in the hearing of the people, Deut. 31: 11, 12; and Timothy was required to study the Scriptures in order to qualify himself to teach others, 2 Tim. 3: 15. The passage John 5: 39 is also addressed to the teachers of religion.-In consequence of the fact, that, in ancient times, the great body of mankind received instruction more by hearing, than by their own reading, the learner was called axooarns, and instruction, y, axon,

Rom. 10: 15.

But on the other hand, the common people, and the ignorant are no where forbidden, in the Old or New Testament, to read the Scriptures; but were rather encouraged to instruct themselves by their own study of the Word of God, if they had sufficient leisure and ability. The letters of the apostles were addressed to the whole church, and were publicly read, in the hearing of all, Col. 4: 16.

HISTORY OF THE DISPUTE, ETC.

143

Now if the apostles did not fear any harm from having their epistles read in public, in the hearing of all, they could have no reason to apprehend danger from having them perused in private. The Jews also were always permitted the free use of their Scriptures, cf. Acts. 8: 28; nor is there a passage in all the Old Testament in which this is prohibited. In the early Christian church too, the reading of the Bible was universally allowed, and indeed encouraged and facilitated by frequent versions. As early as the second century, the Bible had been rendered into Syriac and Latin, and was accessible in these versions to as many as wished to own or study them. Hieronymus commends Pamphilus "quod scripturas quoque sanctas, non ad legendum tantum, sed ad habendum tribuebat promptissime, non solum viris sed etiam feminis, quas vidisset lectioni deditas," Apol. I. Contra Ruffinum. Julian objected to Christians, "quod mulieres puerosque paterentur Scripturas legere," Cyril. Alex. Contra Jul. VI. 9. Cyprian recommended the study of the Bible to Christians: "Scripturis inquam sacris incumbat christianus fidelis, et ibi inveniet condigna fidei spectacula," Cyprian, De Spectac. p. 342. From all this it appears, that at this period of the church, the use of the Holy Scriptures was unincumbered. Vid. Walch, Vom Gebrauch der heiligen Schrift unter den alten Christen, Leipzig, 1779, 8vo.

At a later period, the great decline of learning commenced. And to such a point of darkness did western Europe arrive, that the whole learning of the clergy of the middle ages often consisted in their being able to read. In a state of things like this, the Bible was not of course much read by the laity, if indeed they were able to read at all. And as the Latin version was retained, although the Latin language had ceased to be vernacular after the seventh century, the common people became more and more ignorant of its con

tents.

In the midst of this darkness, the Pope and clergy established many doctrines, which were as promotive of their own interests, as they were contrary to the Bible. These innovations and errors were soon discovered and opposed by some of the more intelligent and inquisitive even among the laity. Hence, to take the Bible from their hands, was the obvious policy of the clergy. Accordingly Pope Gregory VII, of the eleventh century, declared himself against the free and general use of the Scriptures. But as many of

66

the laity, who had obtained more enlightened views from the use of the Bible, opposed themselves to the designs of the Pope, the prohibition was repeated by Innocent III, at the commencement of the thirteenth century. The use of the Bible was again forbidden the laity, on account of the Waldenses, by the council held at Toulouse, in the year 1229. Prohibemus, ne libros V. T. aut N. laicis permittatur habere; nisi forte Psalterium vel Breviarium pro divinis officiis ac Horas Beatæ Virginis aliquis ex devotione habere velit; sed, ne præmissos libros habeant in vulgari translatione, arctissime inhibemus," Concilium Tolosanum, Can. XII. At a synod at Beziers, in the year 1233, the laity were forbidden to possess any books of theology in the Latin language, and both clergy and laity to possess any in the vernacular. In the year 1338, John Wickliff was declared a heretic by a synod at Oxford, for publishing an English translation of the Bible; and in the year 1408, the third synod at the same place ordained, "ne quis textum aliquem ex Scriptura transferat in linguam Anglicanam, nisi a Dioecesano vel Concilio provinciali translatio approbata sit."

Still there were many among the different sects, and some even of the Catholic church, who read the Bible for themselves. And by comparing the existing state of faith and practice with the Bible, they were soon convinced of the errors and corruptions of the church. At last in the sixteenth century, Luther and the Swiss reformers appeared, and restored the free use of the Bible. Luther especially very much promoted the general circulation of the Scriptures by his German translation, which was the principal means of the reformation. The council at Trent did not now venture to renew the prohibition of the Bible, and undertook only to establish the Vulgate edition as alone authentic. But afterwards, Pope Pius IV, issued an Index librorum prohibitorum, in the preface to which he writes, "Cum experimento manifestum sit si sacra Biblia vulgari lingua passim sine discrimine permittantur, plus inde ob hominum temeritatem detrimenti quam utilitatis oriri; hac in parte judicio Episcopi sive Inquisitoris stetur, ut cum consilio parochi vel Confessarii Bibliorum a catholicis auctoribus versorum lectionem in vulgari lingua eis concedere possint, quos intellexerunt ex hujusmodi lectione non damnum, sed fidei atque pietatis augmentum capere posse; quam facultatem in scriptis habeant. Qui autem absque tali facultate ea legere sive habere præsumserit, nisi prius Bibliis or