Bible-Burning: the substance of a sermon preached in St. Martin's Church, Birmingham, on Sunday evening, Dec. 10, 1848 — John Stuart Mill — John Shaqi
Bible-Burning: the substance of a sermon preached in St. Martin's Church, Birmingham, on Sunday evening, Dec. 10, 1848
John Stuart Mill · en
Men and Brethren beloved! let this be distinctly impressed upon your
minds—that the universal right of the laity—yes, of the uneducated part
of the laity—to the Word of God, in their own tongue, is a distinctive
principle of the blessed Reformation. As it was the Bible which
contributed mainly to enlighten and emancipate the mind of the great
Luther, so have the translation and circulation of the Bible in the
vulgar tongue been co-extensive with the progress of true religion in
this country, since the Reformation. From the time when the large Bible
stood in the Parish Church, with its chain to secure it; when the
multitudes who wanted to read the Word of God had to flock there and to
wait in turns to get to the sacred treasure, or one had to be the reader
for the rest; from that time down to the present, when the Christian
Knowledge Society, the British and Foreign Bible Society, and other
Institutions have successively given their aid, the Word of the Lord has
had free course and been glorified.
And now I submit that I have proved, my case against the Church of Rome.
I have shown that the act which, notwithstanding the explanation of the
Priests, has excited the astonishment and indignation of Protestants
throughout this town, does not stand alone. And more, that even the
version which is authorised by the Romish Church is not permitted to be
generally read, without the permission of a Priest or authorised person.
Without saying one word which is not entirely consistent with Christian
charity, I now ask of you, whether that Church is more in accordance with
the will of God, which tells you that, before you read his Word in
private, you must have the written permission of the Priest—or that
Church which, without exception or reserve, puts into the hand of her
every member the written Word of God? What, I would ask, was the
language of David? He was not a Priest—“O how love I thy law! it is my
meditation all the day.” The poor Romanist, unless he has the written
permission of his Priest cannot, amid his troubles and his sorrows, say
with David, “Thy statutes have been my songs in the house of my
pilgrimage.”—(PSALM cxix. 54.) Remember too what is said of the Bereans,
when they heard Paul preach—“These were more noble than those in
Thessolonica, in that they received the word with all gladness of mind,
and SEARCHED THE SCRIPTURES DAILY, whether these things were so.”—(ACTS
xvii. 11.) No Romanist will assert that his Priest is superior to St.
Paul. But what did the Bereans do when Paul preached to them? They
“SEARCHED THE SCRIPTURES DAILY” to see whether he was preaching truth.
And I tell you that if St. Paul himself, yea, if an angel were to preach
to me, I would do the same. But what would be said to a poor Irishman
who should go to his Priest and say “I have been looking to my Bible to
see what is said there about what you told us yesterday, and I find that
what you taught us is not according to the Word of God?” And what does