tending for the faith? How can others think that we are so much concerned as we seem to be, for truth, when we make no use of it, but let it lie dead in our minds? What pity is it, that their hearts should not love that which is good, whose minds are enlightened to discern that which is true? That their understandings being convinced, their wills should not also be converted? It is a lamentable thing, to profess that we know God, but in our works deny him. This makes us look as if we were of a faction, rather than of the faithful; who oppose others rather as our enemies, than as Christ's; as those that differ from us, rather than as those that differ from the truth.

For if it be the truth that we reverence, why do we not let it rule and govern us? Why do we not love to have it nearer to us, than in our brains? Even in our hearts and affections. For there is no greater truth than this, that ungodliness is the worst of heresies; a wicked life the most opposite of all other things, to the Christian faith.

Let us never forget, therefore, that admonition of the Apostle in the first chapter of the 1st Epistle to Timothy, ver. 19, "Hold faith and a good conscience:" which he repeats again in the third chapter to the deacons, whom he exhorts to "hold the mystery of faith in a pure conscience," ver. 9. For if we put away a good conscience, we may easily make shipwreck, even of our faith. Which we have just cause to think, is the reason why some have fallen from this truly Apostolic Church of ours. Concerning which, and concerning whom, I may say, as Epiphanius* (putting this place I have been expounding, and some others together) makes the Apostle speak to Timothy: It is "the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of truth; which many forsaking, are turned ɛis μúdovs kai μwρodoyías, to fables and foolish babblings; neither understanding what they say, nor whereof they affirm."

* Hæres. 40. num. 8.

THE TEXTS EXAMINED, WHICH PAPISTS CITE OUT OF THE BIBLE, FOR THE PROOF OF THEIR DOCTRINE OF INFALLIBILITY.

INFALLIBILITY being the great boast of the present Church of Rome, the principle into which she ultimately resolves her faith, and the very foundation of the Papal superstructure : therefore it will be requisite in the first place, for our clearer proceeding, to state the true notion of this infallibility pretended to; as in mathematics, the clearest science, the definition of the name always precedes the demonstration of the thing, that men may certainly know what they discourse about. Now I confess, this is the more difficult task in this place, because none of their General Councils have yet thought fit to define anything about it; and their particular doctors discourse loosely and inconsistently upon that subject; the high-flown flatterers of the Papal greatness, placing it in the Pope alone; others, more moderate, in a General Council, some with, others without, the confirmation of the Pope; and others, lastly, in a long chain of oral tradition from father to son; a novel, and heretical hypothesis, repugnant to the common sense and experience of mankind. Thus are these infallible men divided in their opinions about the subject of their infallibility, a consideration that does not much advance the credibility of what they pretend to. But however oportet haberi; it must be found amongst them, though God knows where it is; it is become the chief corner-stone of their Church, and therefore no parting from it, lest the whole fabric of the Trent superstructure tumble with it. There is, therefore, because there is no other way to account for her doctrine and worship, infallibility in the Church of Rome.

By which, I presume, they understand a power or ability inherent in the Pope, or a General Council, or both together, by the assistance of the Holy Ghost (especially in the true expounding of the Scriptures, which, without such infallible direction, are not certainly intelligible), so to decide and decree in all such cases, whether of faith or manners, brought before

them, as that they cannot possibly err or mistake in any of the definitions or determinations about them; but that if they decree the belief of such and such articles, as for instance, purgatory, transubstantiation, or the like, to be absolutely necessary to salvation to-day, which were not so yesterday, they become really such, and are to be expressly believed as such upon pain of damnation. If they decree the worship of images, contrary to the express words of the second Commandment; communion in one kind, contrary to our Lord's institution; prayers in an unknown tongue, point-blank against the injunction of St. Paul, or the like; they are nevertheless to be believed to have been influenced in all these their decrees, by the infallible guidance and conduct of the Holy Spirit; and to which definitive sentences of theirs, all Christians are consequently bound to submit their assent, without any farther reason of their so doing, than the inerrability of those who pronounce them.

This then, is the conclusion to be inferred from those texts which they of the Romish communion allege for the infallibility of their Church; and which we must be mindful to carry along with us in the particular examination of their Scriptureproofs.

But before I enter upon that province, it seems obvious and necessary to me to make two or three reflections, relating particularly to the matter in hand, the proof of this pretended infallibility from Scripture.

And the first is this, that it utterly vacates the usefulness and necessity of any Scripture, or written word at all. For, if the Scriptures have no determinate and orthodox meaning in them, till their Church, by Divine inspiration, fixes one upon them, to what purpose was it to commit the Divine will to writing? For God might as well have constantly revealed his will to their Popes or Councils, without any writing at all, as be obliged still to reveal the true sense and meaning of that writing; as he must be, if, according to them, it be only an unsensed character, whose meaning cannot be understood without such an infallible and inspired expositor. Which, in good earnest, is no better than downright enthusiasm ; and not so plausible as that of the Quaker, who pretends, without the dead letter of the Scripture, to be governed by the spirit of the body, or their general assembly; a plain indication of the genius that acts those deluded people.

The second is, that notorious begging of the question, which they commit in proving their infallibility from the Scriptures. For, to any one who shall ask them, how they know the infallibility of their Church to be either positively asserted in, or by good consequence deducible from, such a text of Scripture? They can, according to their principles, give no other answer than this, that their Church so expounds it; being bound to believe not only as their Church believes, but for no other reason than that she believes so: if asked again, why they look upon such exposition as sufficient ground for their belief? They can give no other answer, than that their Church is infallible; which is to beg the question. For, if they say, they therefore believe the Church's exposition, because it is agreeable to their reason: they then make that heretical principle of reason, the foundation of their belief of this article. If, because the Fathers so expound such texts; I answer, it is absolutely false; there being not one Father of the Church, two or three of their own Popes only excepted, who make the least inference or remark that looks that way, upon any of the texts they produce upon this occasion. So that we must still, by their principles, run round in a ring, and without the least advance, end where we started. All which amounts, I think, to a sufficient prejudice against their proofs of this position, from the testimonies of Scripture.

Thirdly, I would have it observed, how preposterous a method it is, for men ultimately to resolve their faith into that, and not rather into the Scripture, which they themselves are forced to fetch from the pretended testimony of Scripture. For, if the reason of their belief of an infallible judge is founded on the attestation of Scripture, why not also the reason of their belief of every other article of their faith; unless indeed, that be more plainly and explicitly revealed therein than any other doctrine; which yet, I think, they will not assert. And therefore,

Fourthly, and lastly, We cannot but remark, that the Scripture-proofs they produce for so primary and fundamental an article of their faith, ought to carry along with them the greatest evidence and conviction.

But how they answer that character, we come now to consider.

They allege, I know, several prophecies of the Old Testament to this purpose, but such as serve only to expose the weakness of the cause in whose defence they are produced,

and which need no other confutation than a bare recital of them.

"Thou shalt be called the city of righteousness, the faithful city," (Isa. i. 26.) "Through thee shall no more pass any that is uncircumcised or unclean" (ch. lii. 1), says the prophet Isaiah, speaking of Sion and Jerusalem, and the people of the Jews after their conversion; and therefore the Church of Rome is infallible in all her conciliary definitions. What prospective clear enough to see from the premises to the conclusion? "Thou art all fair, my love, and there is no spot in thee," says the mystical book of the Canticles (chap. iv. 7); therefore again, the Church of Rome cannot err. Lord, what outrages to common sense will not a desperate cause drive men upon! And in fine, whatsoever is prophesied concerning Mount Sion and Jerusalem, and the nation of the Jews after conversion (and what would for the most part as rationally conclude for impeccability, as infallibility in the Church), is greedily laid hold on to countenance this extravagant position. But whosoever shall desire more particular satisfaction in relation to the texts they allege out of the Old Testament, may have recourse to the additional discourses of the judicious Mr. Chillingworth, printed in quarto, in the year 1687. I shall confine myself to those they produce out of the New.

And because all or most of them are alleged on this behalf by the author of the Guide in Controversies, and made the foundation of that celebrated, heavy, tautological book, I shall choose, the rather, to have a particular regard to his management of them; which will carry this collateral advantage along with it, that if it appear they by no means prove that for which he produced them, his book, which is built upon them, must of course fall to the ground.

The first I shall mention, is that renowned place in the 16th of St. Matthew, and the 18th verse; where our blessed Lord, upon St. Peter's confessing Him to be Christ the Son of the living God, tells him, that "he was Peter, and upon this rock he would build his Church, and the gates of hell should not prevail against it."

A pregnant place this indeed, which is big with a Pope and a General Council too; for from hence they infer both the supremacy of the one, and the infallibility of the other: "For by Petra," says the Guide, "are meant the clergy, assembled in Council," as his whole book afterwards explains it,* "by

C. 1. p. 5.