Acts 8:30-39 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understand you what you read?… 1. This interview is a specimen of the private ministration of the gospel, and teaches us how such ministration should be opened and conducted. Philip fell in, not only with the eunuch, but with the train of thought his mind was pursuing. It is surprising how many good and even Scriptural words utterly fail to take hold of the mind, because not in a state which requires that particular counsel. Now as there is in nature a specific for every physical disorder, so there is in God's Word a specific for every spiritual malady. If the right specific is offered to an individual, he appropriates it; it is what his conscience requires; but if the wrong, no effect or a bad one is produced, not because it has lost its virtue, or is essentially deleterious, but because there is no correspondence between it and the patient's state. Now in order to offer men remedies to meet their case we must study the direction of their thoughts. And when we come upon them off their guard, and observe how they are occupied, we can obtain a clue to their thoughts. The Ethiopian was reading the Scriptures as if he took pleasure in them, which showed him to be a religiously minded man. What followed brought out his docility and willingness to be enlightened. So Philip, guided by Providence and by the turn of his bearer's mind, spake a word in season. 2. Our Lord had instructed His disciples to "salute no man by the way." In common intercourse men begin with trifles before they pass on to topics of importance. But trifles do not befit the character of God's messenger. So Philip does not open the conversation by talk about the weather or the crops, but begins at once with the business of his mission. He was abrupt, judged by the standard of the world's manners, but not as regards the Ethiopian's state of mind, who therefore invites him up into his chariot. Alas that our thoughts, unlike his, should be exercised so much on secular things that spiritual remarks seem to us an intrusion and a want of tact! 3. The eunuch's response, "How can I understand," etc., intending to express nothing more than the sentiment of the moment, contains an important principle. The Scriptures are the Church's law, they contain all principles of faith and duty, and are given by inspiration of God. Moreover the Church stands on them; for if the acts and the commission of Christ to His disciples did not exist the Church would have the ground cut from under her. In this point of view Scripture is paramount to the Church and prior in order of thought. Yet the Church is prior to Scripture in order of time. No book of the Old Testament was written before Moses, and yet from the time of Abel there were believers. No book of the New Testament had been composed at this time, yet there was a flourishing Church in Jerusalem. And each one of us, as we come into the world, is approached by the Church, e.g., in baptism, before he can be approached by the Scriptures. That is the principle on which godparents, who represent the Church, and on which religious teachers act. The child is taught by catechisms compiled by the Church, but gathered out of Scripture. Now, suppose a man competently educated, but whose mind has been left a blank on religion, were to sit down to compile a creed for himself out of the Bible, how many years would he take? The mind must proceed in the first instance upon human authority; but in after days, having been imbued with the faith, he can recognise it in Scripture, and see how it can be proved thereby. The Bible can be with none of us the original teacher of truth, but we must not shrink from the duty of testing by this infallible criterion what we first receive on human authority. We have no fear that the Catholic faith will be shaken by this examination if made in the spirit of prayer. Yet as regards lesser points of belief about which there are two opinions a word of caution is needed. Correct conclusions are scarcely likely to be arrived at if we discard the commentary drawn from the sentiments of the primitive Church. Take, e.g., infant baptism. There are passages from which it may be inferred that it is conformable to the mind of Christ. Yet it would be too much to say that it is proved from the Bible. But if you allow the usages of the early Church to be any evidence of what apostolic practice was, then the evidence is overwhelming. The relations between the Church and Scripture are illustrated by those between the judicial and the legislative power in the State. A judge has no authority to make the law: that is made by Parliament; he is only the interpreter and the administrator. On the one hand the judge is as much under the law as those whom he tries, and on the other, juries would often go wrong unless the judge directed them. Well, Scripture is the law; the Church is the judge; the individual soul is the jury. In interpreting the Scripture the individual soul needs the guidance of the Church, which if he rejects, he rejects the aid God has given him for arriving at a right conclusion, and kicks down the ladder by which he has risen to what he knows of Divine truth. And yet should the Church, as Rome has done, impose new articles of faith, he must break with such a society. Whenever the judge imposes new laws, it is time to side with the law against the judge. (Dean Goulburn.) Parallel Verses KJV: And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? |
    |