nated, I believe, in mere unthinking complaisance childishly conceded to arrogant and offensive importunity: the idle humour of calling the Romanists Catholics, in their own professedly exclusive sense of the word CATHOLIC, ought surely, with one accord, to be systematically discontinued by every Protestant who himself claims to be a member of the Catholic or Universal Church of Christ. 10. As for Dr. Milner, had that gentleman somewhat varied the form of his very ingenious question propounded to a thoughtless Anglican; and had he, with this mere phraseological variation, asked the lowest protestant day-labourer, Whether he was a member of Christ's Universal Church upon earth, the existence of which he professes to believe when he recites the Apostles' Creed: I will venture to affirm, that the answer, instead of being No, would promptly have been YES. X. For the loan of books which I did not possess, I have to acknowledge my obligation, to my respected Diocesan Dr. Van-Mildert the present Bishop of Durham, and to my valuable friends Mr. Archdeacon Vernon and Mr. Brewster. For passages extracted or verified from books, to which in my retired situation I had no con venient access, I have to thank my equally valuable friends, Dr. Ellerton, Dr. Bardinel, and Dr. Routh President of Magdalen College. But, above all, I must pay my due tribute of acknowledgement to my late kind and lamented neighbour Mr. Anstey, without the use of whose library I should have been compelled, simply for want of tools, to decline the task imposed upon me by a respectable layman of my own communion. Before his death, Mr. Anstey, with that feeling of liberality which marked all his actions, converted his loan into a donation: and the goodly tale of folios, some originally my own, others the gift of my deceased worthy friend, which now decorate or crowd my penetrale, has set me very much at ease in respect to inquiries into primitive Antiquity. If in any measure I have profited from the timely assistance of the aforesaid folios, to God and his Christ be the glory, and to my Mother the Church of England be the benefit? LONG-NEWTON RECTORY, Dec. 12, 1829. CONTENTS. THE doctrines received by the earliest Church Catholic must have been the doctrines taught by the Apostles. p. 3. I. The argument from Prescription, as managed by Ire- II. An extension of the argument from prescription is the basis of the latin scheme of oral tradition. p. 4. 1. The scheme of oral tradition appeals to FACTS, and therefore by facts it must be judged. p. 5. 2. The FACT, upon which the prescriptive argument reposes, must be substantiated, before the argu- ment itself can be admitted. p. 7. III. The two Works of Dr. Trevern and Mr. Berington are constructed upon a tacit acknowledgment that this is a true statement of the case. p. 7. IV. In their adduction of historical testimony, these two 1. Some of the peculiarities of Romanism existed, it is 3. Summary of the matter, p. 11. 4. Exemplification of the necessity of substantiating the FACT, upon which the argumentation from Prescription reposes. p. 11. V. On the legitimate principles of historical evidence, valid testimony in favour of the peculiarities of Romanism must be confined to writers of the three first centuries. p. 16. VI. In the first book of the present Work, the question will be simply limited to an inquiry; whether the evidence, produced by the latin divines, be in itself sufficient to establish the apostolic origination of the peculiarities of Romanism. p. 17. CHAPTER II. INFALLIBILITY. p. 19. The Roman Church claims to be incapable of error. p. 19. I. Proof from Scripture and from the writers of the three first centuries. p. 19. 1. Proof from Scripture. p. 19. (1.) First proof. Matt. xvi. 18. p. 20. (2.) Second proof. Matt. xviii. 20. p. 20. (3.) Third proof. Matt. xxviii. 18—20. p. 20 (4.) Fourth proof. Luke x. 16. p. 20. (5.) Fifth proof. John xiv. 16, 17. p. 20. (6.) Sixth Proof. John xvi. 13. p. 20. 2. Proof from the writers of the three first centuries. p. 21. (1.) First set of passages. p. 21. II. An examination of the historical evidence adduced in favour of Infallibility. p. 25. 1. An examination of the evidence adduced from Scripture. p. 26. 2. An examination of the evidence adduced from writers of the three first centuries, p. 28. (1.) The passages from Ignatius. p. 28. (2.) The passages from Irenèus and Tertullian and (3.) The passages from Cyprian. p. 29. III. Idle claim of the Romanists, that the Roman Church and the Catholic Church are identical. p. 30. IV. Even if infallibility had been granted to the Roman Church, the grant would have been practically useless without a distinct specification of the precise organ through which such Infallibility is to be exercised. p. 32. V. If the precise seat of Infallibility be now unknown, it never can be known without a special revelation from heaven. p. 36. VI. Even if such a revelation should be vouchsafed; still Infallibility would be practically useless, unless every individual were himself infallible also. p. 39. VII. Childish objection of the Romanists, that the Faith of the Reformed Churches rests only upon moral evidence, retorted upon themselves. p. 41. VIII. Inutility of a living infallible judge. p. 43. |