ઃ

infallibility; which is as follows, "That the church does not expect to be taught by God immediately by new "revelations, but makes ufe of feveral means, &c. as being governed, not by Apostles, &c. but by ordinary paftors and teachers: That these paftors, in making "ufe of these feveral means of decifion, proceed, not as "the Apoftles did, with a peculiar infallible direction. "of the Holy Spirit, but with a prudential collection "not always neceffary: That to the Apoftles, who were the first mafters of evangelical faith, and foundCC ers of the church, fuch an infallible certitude of " means was neceffary; not fo now to the church, &c." If this be true, that an infallible certitude of means is not now neceffary to the church, and that her pastors do now, in deciding matters of faith, proceed only with a prudent collection not always neceffary; then it should feem, that a fearching wit may maintain his ground of fufpenfe, even against their church alfo, with a Might "it not be otherwife?" Again, Mr. Creffy tells us, (Append. c. 5.), that "truth, and our obligation to

believe it, is in an higher degree in fcripture than in "the decifions of the church, as Bellarmine acknowledges:" which is to fay, that we may have greater affurance of the truth of doctrines contained in the fcriptures, than we can have of any doctrine from the determination of the church. But if we have the greatest affurance that can be of truths delivered to us by the church, as Mr S. affirms, then I would fain learn of him, what that higher degree of affurance is, which Bellarmine fpeaks of, and whether it be greater than the greateft? Not to infift upon that, (which yet I cannot but by the way take notice of), that Mr Creffy, by his approbation of this determination of Bellarmine's, doth advance the fcripture above the church, as to one of the most effential properties of the rule of faith, viz. the certainty of it.

But the most eminent teftimony to my purpofe in Mr Creffy, is that famous paffage (c. 40. § 3. &c.) which hath given fo much offence to feveral of his own church, wherein he acknowledges "the unfortunateness (to him) "of the word infallibility;" and tells us, "that he could find no fuch word in any council; that no ne

"ceffity

ceffity appeared to him, that either he, or any o"ther Proteftant, fhould ever have heard that word na"med, and much less preffed with fo much earnestness,

cr

as of late it has generally been in difputations and "books of controverfy: and that Mr Chillingworth "combats this word with too great fuccefs; infomuch "that if this word were once forgotten, or but laid by, "Mr Chillingworth's arguments would lofe the greatest part of their ftrength; and that if this word were "confined to the fchools, where it was bred, there "would be still no inconvenience: and that, fince by "manifeft experience the English Proteftants think "themselves fo fecure when they have leave to stand .. or fall by that word, and in very deed have fo much to fay for themselves when they are preffed unneceffarily with it; fince likewife it is a word capable of fo high a fenfe, that we cannot devife one more full " and proper to attribute to God himself," &c.: fince all this is fo, he thinks he cannot be "blamed, if fuch "reafons move him to wish, that the Protestants may

never be invited to combat the authority of the church "under that notion." A very ingenuous acknowledgement, and as crofs to Mr S.'s principle as any thing can be. But the word infallibility was not fo unfortu nate to Mr Creffy, as his untoward explication of the forecited paffage in his Appendix; which he afterwards publifhed, chiefly by way of vindication of himself, against the learned author of the preface to my Lord Falkland's Difcourfe of infallibility. There (Append.

2. & 3.) he tells us, that "there are feveral degrees "of infallibility." And that we may know what degrees of infallibility he thinks neceffary to be attributed to the church, this following paffage will inform us : "Methinks (he fays) if God have furnished his divine "and fupernatural truth with evidence equal to this, "that the fun will fhine to-morrow, or that there will "be a fpring and harvest next year, we are infinitely o

bliged to blefs his providence; and justly condemned, "if we refufe to believe the leaft of fuch truths, as fhewing lefs affection to fave our fouls, than the dull ploughmen to fow their corn, who certainly have far "lefs evidence for their harvest, than Catholics for their VOL. III. D d

ઃઃ

"faith;

"faith; and yet they infift not peevishly upon every capricious objection, nor exact an infallible fecurity of a plentiful reaping next fummer, but, notwithstanding "all difficulties and contingencies, proceed chearfully in "their painful husbandry." So that, according to this difcourfe, whatever degree of affurance the church hath, or can give to those who rely upon her, it is plain, that no further degree is neceffary, than what the husbandman, when he fows, hath of a plentiful harvest; and that men are justly condemned, if they refufe to believe the leaft truth upon fuch fecurity, which yet, by his own acknowledgement, is liable to contingencies: nay farther, that men are not reasonable, but " peevish, in

exacting infallible fecurity, and infifting upon every "capricious objection," fuch as is Mr S.'s Might it "not be otherwife?" Now, as to this degree of afsurance, or (as he calls it) infallibility, I cannot but grant what he fays of it to be moft true; viz. that

in a fevere acceptation of the word, it is not rigo"rously infallible;" that is, (as he explains it), it is not abfolutely impoffible, nor does it imply a flat contradiction, that the thing whereof we are fo affured may be otherwife: but then I utterly deny, that according to any true acceptation of this word, fuch a degree of affurance as he speaks of, can be called infallibility; and withal I affirm, that none of thofe feveral degrees of infallibility which he mentions, excepting that only which imports an abfolute impoffibility, can with any tolerable propriety of fpeech, or regard to the true meaning and ufe of the word, have the name of infallibility given to them. For infallibility can fignify nothing elfe but an utter impoffibility that one fhould be deceived in that matter as to which he is fuppofed to be infallible; and to fay fuch a thing is impoffible, is to fay, that the exiftence of it implies a flat contradiction: fo that, whofoever afferts degrees of infallibility, is obliged to fhew, that there are degrees of abfolute impoffibilities, and of perfect contradictions; and he had need of a very sharp and piercing wit, that is to find out degrees, where there neither are nor can be any. Indeed, in refpect of the objects of knowledge, it is eafy to conceive how infallibility may be extended to more objects or fewer;

but

but in refpect of the degree of affurance, (of which Mr Creffy fpeaks) it is altogether unimaginable how any one can be more or lefs out of all poffibility of being deceived in those things wherein he is fuppofed to be infallible for no one can be more removed from the poffibility of being deceived, than he that is out of all poffibility of being deceived; and whofoever is lefs than this, is not infallible; because he only is fo, who is out of all poffibility of being deceived in thofe matters wherein he is fuppofed to be infallible. So that Mr Creffy's lower degrees of infallibility are no degrees of that affurance which may properly be called infallible, (for that can have no degrees), but of that affurance which is lefs than infallible. And he needed not have raised all this duft about the degrees of infallibility, had it not been, that, by the means of fuch a cloud, he might make the more convenient efcape out of that strait he was in between the clamour of his own church, and the advantage which his adverfaries made of his free and open difcourfe against infallibility. For any one that carefully reads his book, will find, that he understands nothing by the infallibility of the church, but "an authority of obliging all Chriftians to fubmit to her decifions;" which is no more, but what every fupreme civil judge hath in civil matters, viz. a power to determine those controverfies that lie before him as well as he can or will; and when that is done, every one is bound to submit to fuch determinations: but yet for all this, no man ever dreamed a fupreme civil judge to be infallible more than another man. I do not now difpute the extent of the church's authority: but if she have no other infallibility, but what a full authority of decifion does fuppofe, I am fure fhe hath none at all.

66

Before I leave Mr Creffy, I cannot but take notice how unfortunate and difingenuous he is in explaining the meaning of these words of his own, viz. “ Against this "word infallibility Mr Chillingworth's book especially "combats, and this with too too great fuccefs ;" which in his Appendix, c. 5. § 6. he interprets thus: " Suc"cefs, I mean, not against the church, but against his own foul, and the fouls of his fellow English Pro"teftants," &c. As if one that had wifhed well to

D d 2

Cæfar,

86

Cæfar, fhould have faid, "that Pompey had fought against him with too too great fuccefs;" and being afterwards challenged by Cæfar's party, as having faid, that Pompey had conquered Cæfar, he fhould explain himfelf thus: "Succefs, I mean, not against Cæfar, but

22

against his own life, and the lives of his followers.' Can any thing be finer than for any man to say, that by Pompey's fuccefs in fighting against Cæfar, he means, that Cæfar had beaten Pompey? Which is no more than if one fhould take the liberty to interpret white by black. 6. Mr White doth moft exprefsly contradict this principle of Mr S.'s, in thefe following paffages: In his preface to Mr Rufhworth, he fays, that "fuch a cer

tainty as makes the caufe always work the fame ef"fect, though it take not away the abfolute poffibility "of working otherwife, ought abfolutely to be reckon"ed in the degree of true certainty; and that thofe au"thors are mistaken who undervalue it." So that it feems Mr S. is mistaken in affirming, that a man cannot be certain of any thing fo long as there is any poffibility that it may be otherwife. In his anfwer to my Lord Falkland, he fays, p. 14. 15. that "in moral

matters, and fuch as are fubject to human action, we "must expect fuch affurance as human actions bear. "If for the government of your fpiritual life, you have as much as for the management of your natural and "civil life, what can you expect more? Two or three "witneffes of men beyond exception will caft a man out of, not only his lands, but life, and all. He that among merchants will not adventure where there is a "hundred to one of gaining, will be accounted a filly factor; and among foldiers, he that will fear danger "where but one of a hundred is flain, fhall not efcape the ftain of cowardice. What then fhall we expect in religion, but to fee a main advantage on the one fide, "which we may rest ourselves on; and for the reft, "remember we are men fubject to chance and mutabi"lity; and thank God he hath given us that affurance "in a fupernatural way, which we are contented withal "in our civil ventures and poffeffions; which, neverthe

lefs, God knoweth we often love better, and would "hazard less than the unknown good of the life to

come ?"