Theophylact, and Ecumenius, appear to me to teach the same upon this passage. Many others teach that only the doctors and preachers of the gospel are here called architects by the apostle. Jerome insinuates this in his second book against Jovinianus. The blessed Anselm and the blessed Thomas hold the same opinion on this passage, although they do not reject the former opinion. Many more modern think the same, as Dionysius the Carthusian, Lyra, Cajetan, and others.

"The other difficulty is rather more serious, for there are six opinions. Some, by the name of foundation, understand a true but an ill-digested faith; by the name of gold, silver, and precious stones, good works; bythe names of wood, hay, and stubble, mortal sins. Thus Chrysostom upon this place, who is followed by Theophylact. The second opinion is, that Christ, or the preaching of the faith, is to be understood by the name of foundation; that by the names of gold, silver, precious stones, are to be understood Catholic expositions, as the commentary of Ambrose and even Jerome seem to teach. The third opinion, by the name foundation, understands living faith; and by the name of gold, silver, and precious stones, understands works of supererogation, &c. Thus the blessed Augustine, in his book on faith and works, lib. 6. The fourth opinion is that of those who explain by gold, silver, &c., to be meant good works; by hay, stubble, &c., venial sins. Thus the blessed Gregory, in the fourth book of his dialogues, c. 39, and others. The fifth is the opinion of those who understand by gold, silver, &c., good hearers; and by stubble, &c., bad hearers. Thus

Theodoret and Ecumenius. The sixth opinion, which we prefer to all, is, that by the name of foundation is to be understood Christ as preached by the first preachers; by the name of gold, silver, &c., is to be understood the useful doctrine of the other preachers, who teach those who now received the faith; but by the name of wood, hay, &c., is to be understood the doctrine, not indeed heretical, or bad, but singular, of those preachers who preach catholically to the Catholic people, without the fruit and usefulness which God requires.

"The third difficulty regards the day of the Lord. Some understand by the name of day, the present life or the time of tribulation. Thus Augustine, in his book of faith and works, c. 16, and Gregory, in the fourth book of his dialogue, c. 39. . . . . But all the ancients seem to have understood by that day, the day of the last judgment, as Theodoret, Theophylact, Anselm, and others.

"The fourth difficulty is, what is the fire, which in the day of the Lord shall prove every one's work? Some understand the tribulations of this life, as Augustine and Gregory, in the places noted; but these we have already rejected. Some understand eternal fire; but that cannot be, for fire shall not try the building of gold and silver. . . . Some understand it to be the pains of purgatory; but that cannot be truly said. First, because the fire of purgatory does not prove the works of those who build gold and silver; but the fire of which we are speaking, shall prove every man's work what it is. Secondly, the apostle clearly makes a dis

tinction between the works and the workmen, and says, concerning that fire, that it shall burn the works, but not the workers; for he says, 'if any one's work shall remain, and if any work shall burn;' but the fire of purgatory, which is a real fire, cannot burn works, which are transitory actions, and have already passed. Lastly, it would follow that all men, even the most holy, would pass through the fire of purgatory, and be saved by fire, for all are to pass through the fire of which we are speaking. But that all are to pass through the fire of purgatory, and be saved by fire is clearly false; for the apostle here openly says, that only those who build wood and hay are to be saved as if by fire: the Church, also, has always been persuaded, that holy martyrs, and infants dying after baptism, are presently received into heaven without any passage through fire, as the Council of Florence teaches in its last session. It remains, therefore, that we should say, that the apostle here speaks of the fire of the severe and just judgment of God, which is not a purging or punishing fire, but one that probes and examines. Thus Ambrose explains it on Psalm 118, and also Sedulius.

"The fifth and last difficulty is, what is to be understood by the fire, when he says, 'But he shall be saved yet so as by fire? Some understand the tribulations of this life; but this cannot be properly said, because then even he who built gold and silver would be saved by fire. Wherefore, Augustine and Gregory, who are the authors of this opinion, when they were not satisfied with it, proposed another, of which we shall speak byand-bye. Some understand it to be eternal fire, as

Chrysostom and Theophylact. But this we have already refuted. Others understand the fire of the conflagration of the world. It is, therefore, the common opinion of theologians, that by the name of this fire is to be understood some purgatorial and temporal fire, to which, after death, those are adjudged, who are found in their trial to have built wood, hay, and stubble.”

I ask you, then, in view of this illustration, to consider the absurdity of that pledge which is so solemnly given by every Roman Catholic minister, not to interpret the Holy Scriptures, otherwise than "by the unanimous consent of the Fathers."

But I cannot refrain from directing your attention to the opinions of the Fathers upon another text of Scripture. And, when I read it, you will not think it presumption in me, to say that, of all the passages of the New Testament, we have a right to expect, on this one especially, that the consent of the Fathers should be unanimous. I refer to Mat. xvi, 18:-"I say to thee that thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will Church."

build my

Remember, I am not now discussing the meaning of our Lord's language, I merely announce the views of the Fathers. Some of them say that the rock is Peter's faith; as Cyril of Alexandria, (dial. 4, on Holy Trin.) "He called nothing but the firm and immovable faith of the disciple the rock upon which the Church. was founded, without the possibility of falling" and thus Chrysostom (serm. de pent.)-"He did not say upon Peter, for he did not found his Church upon a man, but upon faith. What, therefore, is meant by

upon this rock? Upon the confession contained in his words." Also (Chrys. serm. 54, on Matt.) " and I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; that is to say, upon the faith of the confession." Augustine sometimes interprets the rock to mean Peter, and sometimes to mean Christ ; and referring to his contradictions in his book of retractations, he leaves the reader to choose for himself whichever of the interpretations he prefers. His words are to the following: (Retrac. lib. 1.) "I have said, in a certain passage respecting the Apostle Peter, that the Church is founded upon him as upon a rock. But I know that I have frequently afterwards so expressed myself that the phrase 'upon this rock' should be understood to be the rock which Peter confessed. For it was not said to him, thou art Petra, but thou art Petrus; for the rock was Christ. Let the reader select which of these two opinions he deems the most probable."

I might, almost without end, multiply examples of the differences which exist amongst the Fathers upon passages of Scripture and doctrines of faith; passages and doctrines that are allowed, by even Roman Catholics, to be of vital consequence in the system of Christianity. Am I surprised at this want of unanimity? By no means. It is to be expected that fallible men of different degrees of learning, educated in different schools, born and trained in various countries and climates, surrounded by dissimilar influences, should variously interpret texts of Scripture. I do not wonder at these differences, but I do wonder that a church so