and the fountain of all our blessedness."

INDEPENDENTS. See CONGRE

GATIONALISTS.

INDEX, EXPURGATORY, a catalogue of prohibited books in the Church of Rome. The first catalogues of this kind were made by the inquisitors, and these were afterwards approved of by the Council of Trent, after some alteration was made in them by way of retrenchment or addition. Thus an index of heretical books being formed, it was confirmed by a bull of Clement VIII. in 1595, and printed with several introductory rules; by the fourth of which, the use of the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue is forbidden to all persons without a particular license; and by the tenth rule it is ordained, that no book shall be printed at Rome without the approbation of the pope's vicar, or some person delegated by the pope; nor in any other places, unless allowed by the bishop of the diocese, or some person deputed by him, or by the inquisitor of heretical pravity. The Trent Index being thus published, Philip II. of Spain ordered another to be printed at Antwerp in 1571, with considerable enlargements. Another index was published in Spain, in 1584, a copy of which was snatched out of the fire when the English plundered Cadiz. Afterwards there were several expurgatory indexes printed at Rome and Naples, and particularly in Spain.

INDIGNATION, a strong disapprobation of mind, excited by something flagitious in the conduct of another. It does not, as Mr. Cogan observes, always suppose that excess of depravity which alone is capable of committing deeds of horror. Indignation always refers to culpability of conduct, and cannot, like the passion of horror, be extended to distress either of body or mind. It is produced by acts of treachery, abuse of confidence, base ingratitude, &c., which we cannot contemplate without being provoked to anger, and feeling a ge

nerous resentment.

INDUCTION, the act of giving a clergyman formal possession of his church, to which he has been appointed by institution; which see. It is performed by the archdeacon, or some person appointed by him for the purpose, who takes the clergyman to be inducted by the hand, lays it upon the key of the church, the ring of the door, the latch

of the church gate, or on the church wall, and pronounces these words;-" By virtue of this commission, I induct you into the real and actual possession of the rectory of -," &c. He then opens the church door, and puts the parson in possession of it, who commonly tolls a bell to give notice to the people that he has taken possession. Induction may likewise be made by simply delivering a clod or turf of the glebe.

INDULGENCES, in the Romish Church, are a remission of the punishment due to sin, granted by the church, and supposed to save the sinner from purgatory.

According to the doctrine of the Romish Church, all the good works of the saints, over and above those which were necessary towards their own justification, are deposited, together with the infinite merits of Jesus Christ, in one inexhaustible treasury. The keys of this were committed to St. Peter, and to his successors, the popes, who may open it at pleasure; and, by transferring a portion of this superabundant merit to any particular person for a sum of money, may convey to him either the pardon of his own sins, or a release for any one in whom he is interested, from the pains of purgatory. Such indulgences were first invented in the. eleventh century, by Urban II., as a recompense for those who went in person upon the glorious enterprise of conquering the Holy Land. They were afterwards granted to those who hired a soldier for that purpose; and in process of time were bestowed on such as gave money for accomplishing any pious work enjoined by the pope. The power of granting indulgences has been greatly abused in the Church of Rome. Pope Leo X., in order to carry on the magnificent structure of St. Peter's, at. Rome, published indulgences and a plenary remission to all such as should contribute money towards it. Finding the project take, he granted to Albert, elector of Mentz, and archbishop of Magdeburg, the benefit of the indulgences of Saxony, and the neighbouring parts, and farmed out those of other countries to the highest bidders; who, to make the best of their bargain, procured the ablest preachers to cry up the value of the ware. The form of these indulgences was as follows:- May our Lord Jesus Christ have mercy upon thee, and absolve thee by the merits of his most holy passion. And I, by his

the false Christ of Men, Ipswich, 1799; Watts's Glory of Christ, p. 6-203; Adams's View of Religions, p. 267. INFALLIBILITY, the quality of not being able to be deceived or mistaken. The infallibility of the Church of Rome has been one of the great controversies between the Protestants and Papists. By this infallibility, it is understood, that she cannot at any time cease to be orthodox in her doctrine, or fall into any pernicious errors; but that she is constituted, by divine authority, the judge of all controversies of religion, and that all Christians are obliged to acquiesce in her decisions. This is the chain which keeps its members fast bound to its communion; the charm which retains them within its magic circle; the opiate which lays asleep all their doubts and difficulties: it is likewise the magnet which attracts the desultory and unstable in other persuasions within the sphere of popery, the foundation of its whole superstructure, the cement of all its parts, and its fence and fortress against all inroads and attacks.

Under the idea of this infallibility, the Church of Rome claims, 1. To determine what books are and what are not canonical, and to oblige all Christians to receive or reject them accordingly. 2. To communicate authority to the Scripture; or, in other words, that the Scripture (quoad nos), as to us, receives its authority from her. 3. To assign and fix the sense of Scripture, which all Christians are submissively to receive. 4. To decree as necessary to salvation whatever she judges so, although not contained in Scripture. 5. To decide all controversies respecting matters of faith. These are the claims to which the Church of Rome pretends, but which we shall not here attempt to refute, because any man with the Bible in his hand, and a little common sense, will easily see that they are all founded upon ignorance, superstition, and error. It is not a little remarkable, however, that the Roman Catholics themselves are much divided as to the seat of this infallibility, and which, indeed, may be considered as a satisfactory proof that no such privilege exists in the church. For is it consistent with reason to think that God would have imparted so extraordinary a gift to prevent errors and dissensions in the church, and yet have left an additional cause of error and dissension, viz. the uncertainty of the place of its abode? No, surely.-Some

place this infallibility in the pope or bishop of Rome; some in a general council; others in neither pope nor council separately, but in both conjointly; whilst others are said to place it in the church diffusive, or in all churches throughout the world. But that it could not be deposited in the pope, is evident, for many popes have been heretics, and on that account censured and deposed, and therefore could not have been infallible. That it could not be placed in a general council, is as evident; for general councils have actually erred. Neither could it be placed in the pope and council conjointly; for two fallibles could not make one infallible, any more than two ciphers could make an integer. To say that it is lodged in the church universal or diffusive, is equally as erroneous; for this would be useless and insignificant, because it could never be exercised. The whole church could not meet to make decrees, or to choose representatives, or to deliver their sentiments on any question started; and, less than all would not be the whole church, and so could not claim that privilege.

The most general opinion, however, it is said, is that of its being seated in a pope and general council. The advocates for this opinion consider the pope as the vicar of Christ, head of the church, and centre of unity; and therefore conclude that his concurrence with and approbation of the decrees of a general council are necessary, and sufficient to afford it an indispensable sanction and plenary authority. A general council they regard as the church representative, and suppose that nothing can be wanting to ascertain the truth of any controversial point, when the pretended head of the church and its members, assembled in their supposed representatives, mutually concur and coincide in judicial definitions and decrees, but that infallibility attends their coalition and conjunction in all their determinations.

Every impartial person who considers this subject with the least degree of attention, must clearly perceive that neither any individual nor body of Christians have any ground, from reason or Scripture, for pretending to infallibility. It is evidently the attribute of the Supreme Being alone, which we have all the foundation imaginable to conclude he has not communicated to any mortal, or associations of mortals. The human being who challenges infallibility, seems

to imitate the pride and presumption of Lucifer, when he said,-" I will ascend, and will be like the Most High." A claim to it was unheard of in the primitive and purest ages of the church; but became, after that period, the arrogant pretension of papal ambition. History plainly informs us that the bishops of Rome, on the declension of the western Roman empire, began to put in their claim of being the supreme and infallible heads of the Christian Church, which they at length established by their deep policy and unremitting efforts; by the concurrence of fortunate circumstances; by the advantages which they reaped from the necessities of some princes, and the superstition of others; and by the general and excessive credulity of the people. However, when they had grossly abused this absurd pretension, and committed various acts of injustice, tyranny, and cruelty; when the blind veneration for the papal dignity had been greatly diminished by the long and scandalous schism occasioned by contending popes; when these had been for a considerable time roaming about Europe, fawning on princes, squeezing their adherents, and cursing their rivals; and when the councils of Constance and Basil had challenged and exercised the right of deposing and electing the bishops of Rome, then their pretensions to infallibility were called in question, and the world discovered that councils were a jurisdiction superior to that of the towering pontiffs. Then it was that this infallibility was transferred by many divines from popes to general councils, and the opinion of the superior authority of a council above that of a pope spread vastly, especially under the profligate pontificate of Alexander VI., and the martial one of Julius II. The popes were thought by numbers to be too unworthy possessors of so rich a jewel; at the same time it appeared to be of too great a value, and of too extensive consequence, to be parted with entirely. It was, therefore, by the major part of the Roman Church, deposited with, or made the property of general councils, either solely or conjointly with the pope. See Smith's Errors of the Church of Rome detected; and a list of writers under article POPERY.

INFANT BAPTISM. See BAPTISM and PÆDO-BAPTISM.

INFANT COMMUNION, the admission of infants to the ordinance of

the Lord's Supper. It has been debated by some, whether or not infants should be admitted to this ordinance. One of the greatest advocates for this practice was Mr. Pierce. He pleads the use of it even unto this day among the Greeks, and in the Bohemian churches till near the time of the Reformation; but especially from the custom of the ancient churches, as it appears from many passages in Photius, Augustin, and Cyprian. But Dr. Doddridge observes, that Mr. Pierce's proof from the more ancient fathers is very defective. His arguments from Scripture chiefly depend upon this general medium; that Christians succeeding to the Jews as God's people, and being grafted upon that stock, their infants have a right to all the privileges of which they are capable, till forfeited by some immoralities; and consequently have a right to partake of this ordinance, as the Jewish children had to eat of the passover, and other sacrifices: besides this, he pleads those texts which speak of the Lord's Supper as received by all Christians.

The most obvious answer to all this, is that which is taken from the incapacity of infants to examine themselves, and discern the Lord's body; but he answers that this precept is only given to persons capable of understanding and complying with it, as those which require faith in order to baptism are interpreted by the Pædo-baptists. As for his argument from the Jewish children eating the sacrifice, it is to be considered that this was not required as circumcision was; the males were not necessarily brought to the temple till they were twelve years old. Luke ii. 42, and the sacrifices they ate of were chiefly peace offerings, which became the common food to all that were clean in the family, and were not looked upon as acts of devotion to such a degree as our eucharist is: though, indeed, they were a token of their acknowledging the divinity of that God to whom they had been offered. 1 Cor. x. 18; and even the passover was a commemoration of a temporal deliverance; nor is there any reason to believe that its reference to the Messiah was generally understood by the Jews.

On the whole, it is certain there would be more danger of a contempt arising to the Lord's Supper from the admission of infants, and of confusion and trouble to other communicants; so that not being required in Scripture, it is much the

best to omit it.

When children are grown up to a capacity of behaving decently, they may soon be instructed in the nature and design of the ordinance; and if they appear to understand it, and behave for some competent time of trial in a manner suitable to that profession, it would probably be advisable to admit them to communion, though very young; which, by the way, might be a good security against many of the snares to which youth are exposed.-Doddridge's Lectures, lect. 207; Pierce's Essay on the Eucharist. p. 76, &c.; Witsius on Cov. b. 4. c. 17. § 30, 32; J. Frid. Mayer, Diss. de Eucharistia Infantum; Zornius, Hist. Eucharist. Infantum, p. 18; Thiol. and Bib. Mag. Jan. and April,

1806.

INFANTS, SALVATION OF. "Various opinions," says an acute writer, concerning the future state of infants have been adopted. Some think, all dying in infancy are annihilated; for, say they, infants, being incapable of moral good or evil, are not proper objects of reward or punishment. Others think that they share a fate similar to adults; a part saved and a part perish. Others affirm all are saved because all are immortal, and all are innocent. Others, perplexed with these divers sentiments, think best to leave the subject untouched; -cold comfort to parents who bury their families in infancy! The most probable opinion seems to be that they are all saved, through the merits of the Mediator, with an everlasting salvation. This has nothing in it contrary to the perfections of God, or to any declaration of the Holy Scriptures; and it is highly agreeable to all those passages which affirm where sin hath abounded, grace hath much more abounded. On these principles, the death of Christ saves more than the fall of Adam lost." If the reader be desirous of examining the subject, we refer him to p. 415, v. ii. Robinson's Claude; Gillard and Williams's Essay on Infant Salvation; An Attempt to elucidate Rom. v. 12, by an anonymous writer; Watts's Ruin and Recovery, pp. 324, 327; Edwards on Original Sin, pp. 431,434; Doddridge's Lect. lect. 168; Ridgley's Body of Div. v. i. p. 330 to 336; Harris and Russel on the Salvation of Infants.

INFIDELITY, want of faith in God, or the disbelief of the truths of revelation, and the great principles of religion. If we inquire into the rise of infidelity,

we shall find it does not take its origin from the result of sober inquiry, close investigation, or full conviction; but it is rather, as one observes, "the slow production of a careless and irreligious life, operating together with prejudices and erroneous conceptions concerning the nature of the leading doctrines of Christianity. It may, therefore, be laid down as an axiom, that infidelity is, in general, a disease of the heart more than of the understanding;' for we always find that infidelity increases in proportion as the general morals decline. If we consider the nature and effect of this principle, we shall find that it subverts the whole foundation of morals; it tends directly to the destruction of a taste for moral excellence, and promotes the growth of those vices which are the most hostile to social happiness, especially vanity, ferocity, and unbridled sensuality. As to the progress of it, it is certain that, of late years, it has made rapid strides. Lord Herbert did not, indeed, so much impugn the doctrine or the morality of the Scriptures, as to attempt to supersede their necessity, by endeavouring to show that the great principles of the unity of God, a moral government, and a future world, are taught with sufficient clearness by the light of nature. Bolingbroke, and others of his successors, advanced much farther, and attempted to invalidate the proofs of the moral character of the Deity, and consequently all expectation of rewards and punishments, leaving the Supreme Being no other perfections than those which belong to a first cause, or Almighty contriver. After him, at a considerable distance, followed Hume, the most subtle of all, who boldly aimed to introduce an universal scepticism, and to pour a more than Egyptian darkness into the whole region of morals. Since his time, sceptical writers have sprung up in abundance, and infidelity has allured multitudes to its standard; the young and superficial, by its dexterous sophistry; the vain, by the literary fame of its champion; and the profligate, by the licentiousness of its principles." But let us ask, What will be its end? Is there anything in the genius of this principle that will lead us to suppose it will reign triumphant? So far from it, we have reason to believe that it will be banished from the earth. Its inconsistency with reason; its incongruity with the nature of man; its cloudy and obscure prospects; its unsatisfying