XIX. ART. ignorance, and weakness, or corruption, and on defign, abuse and mislead us. So that the authorities or proofs of this infallibility must be very exprefs; fince we are fure no man nor body of men can have it among them, but by a privilege from God; and a privilege of fo extraordinary a nature must be given, if at all, in very plain, and with very evident characters; fince without thefe human nature cannot and ought not to be so tame as to receive it. We must not draw it from an inference, because we think we need it, and cannot be fafe without it, that therefore it must be fo, because, if it were not fo, great disorders would arife from the want of it. This is certainly a wrong way of arguing. If God has clearly revealed it, we muft acquiefce in it, because we are fure, if he has lodged infallibility any where, he will certainly maintain his own work, and not require us to believe any one implicitly, and not at the fame time preferve us from the danger of being deceived by him. But we muft not prefume, from our notions of things, to give rules to God. It were, as we may think, very neceffary that miracles fhould be publicly done from time to time, for convincing every age and fucceffion of men; and that good men fhould be fo affifted as generally to live without fin: thefe and feveral other things may feem to us extremely convenient, and even neceffary; but things are not fo ordered for all that. It is also certain, that if God has lodged fuch an infallibility on earth, it ought not to be in fuch hands as do naturally heighten our prejudices against it. It will go against the grain to believe it, though all outward appearances looked ever fo fair for it: but it will be an inconceivable method of Providence, if God fhould lodge fo wonderful an authority in hands that look fo very unlike it, that of all others we should the least expect to find it with them. If they have been guilty of notorious impoftures, to fupport their own authority, if they have committed great violences to extend it, and have been for fome ages together engaged in as many falfe, unjuft, and cruel practices, as are perhaps to be met with in any history; these are fuch prejudices, that at leaft they must be overcome by very clear and unquestionable proofs: and finally, if God has fettled fuch a power in his Church, we must be diftinctly directed to thofe in whofe hands it is put, so that we may fall into no mistake in fo important a matter. This will be the more neceffary, if there are different pretenders to it: we cannot be fuppofed to be bound to believe an infallibility in general, unless we have an equal evidence directing us to thofe with whom it refts, nad was who have the difpenfing of it. These general confidera- ART, tions are of great weight in deciding this queftion, and XIX. will carry us far into fome preliminaries, which will appear to be indeed great fteps towards the conclufion of the matter. There are three ways by which it may be pretended that infallibility can be proved: the one is the way of Mofes and the Prophets, of Chrift and his Apostles, who by clear and unquestionable miracles publicly done and well attefted, or by express and circumftantiated prophecies of things to come, that came afterwards to be verified, did evidently demonftrate that they were fent of God: wherefoever we fee fuch characters, and that a miracle is wrought by men who fay they are fent of God, which cannot be denied nor avoided; and if what fuch perfons deliver to us is neither contrary to our ideas of God, and of morality, nor to any thing already revealed by God i there we must conclude that God has lodged an infallible authority with them, as long and as far as that character is ftamped upon it. That is not pretended here: for though they study to perfuade the world that miracles are still among them, yet they do not fo much as fay that the miracles are wronght by those with whom this infallibility is lodged, and that they are done to prove them to be infallible. For though God fhould bestow the gift of miracles upon fome particular perfons among them, that is no more an argument that their Church is infallible, than the miracles that Elijah or Elisha wrought were arguments to prove that the Jewish Church was infallible. Indeed the public miracles that belonged to the whole body, fuch as the cloud of glory, the answers by the Urim and Thummim, the trial of jealoufy, and the conftant plenty of the fixth year, as preparatory to the fabbatical year, feem more reasonably to infer an infallibility; because these were given to that whole church and nation. But yet the Jewish Church was far from being infallible all that while; for we see they fell all in a body into idolatry upon feveral occafions: those public miracles proved nothing but that for which they were given, which was, that Mofes was fent of God, and that his law was from God, which they faw was ftill attefted in a continuance of extraordinary characters. If infallibility had been promifed by that law, then the continuance of the miracles might have been urged to prove the continuance of the infallibility; but that not being promifed, the miracles were only a standing -proof of the authority of their law, and of God's being R 4 ftill XIX. ART. ftill among them. And thus though we should not dif pute the truth of the many legends that fome are daily bringing forth, which yet we may well do, fince they are believed to be true by few among thenfelves, they being confidered among the greater part of the knowing men of that Church, as arts to entertain the credulity and devotion of the people, and to work upon their fears and hopes, but chiefly upon their purfes: all thefe, I fay, when confeffed, will not ferve to prove that there is an infallibility among them, unless they can prove that these miracles are wrought to prove this infallibility. The fecond fort of proofs that they may bring, is from fome paffages in Scripture, that feem to import that it was given by Chrift to the Church. But though in this difpute all these paffages ought to be well confidered and anfwered, yet they ought not to be urged to prove this infallibility, till feveral other things are firft proved; fuch as, that the Scriptures are the word of God; that the book of the Scriptures is brought down pure and uncorrupted to our hands; and that we are able to understand the meaning of it: for before we can argue from the parts of any book, as being of divine authority, all these things must be previously certain, and be well made out to us fo that we must be well affured of all thofe particulars, before we may go about to prove any thing by any paffages drawn out of the Scriptures. Further, thefe paffages fuppofe that thofe to whom this infallibility be longs are a Church: we must then know what a Church is, and what makes a body of men to be a Church, before we can be fure that they are that fociety to whom this infallibility is given: and fince there may be, as we know that in fact there are, great differences among feveral of thofe bodies of men called Churches, and that they condemn one another as guilty of error, fchifm, and herefy; we are fure that all these cannot be infallible for contradictions cannot be true. So then we must know which of them is that fociety where this infallibility is to be found. And if in any one fociety there fhould be different opinions about the feat of this infallibility, thofe cannot be all true, though it is very poffible that they may be all falfe: we must be then well affured in whom this great privilege is vefted, before we can be bound to acknowledge it, or to fubmit to it. So here a great many things muft be known, before we can either argue from, or apply those paffages of Scripture in which it is pretended that infallibility is promifed to the Church: and if private judgment is to be trufted in the inquiries that arife about all all these particulars, they being the most important and ART. moft difficult matters that we can fearch into, then it will XIX. be thought reasonable to trust it yet much further. It is evident, by their proceeding this way, that both the authority and the fenfe of the Scriptures must be known antecedently to our acknowledging the authority or the infallibility of any Church. For it is an eternal principle and rule of reafon, never to prove one thing by another, till that other is first well proved: nor can any thing be proved afterwards by that which was proved by it. This is as impoffible, as if a father should beget a fon, and should be afterwards begotten by that fon. Therefore the Scriptures cannot prove the infallibility of the Church, and be afterwards proved by the teftimony of the Church. So the one or the other of thefe muft be firft fettled and proved, before any ufe can be made of it to prove the other by it. Contr. The last way they take to find out this Church by, is Bellar. from fome notes that they pretend are peculiar to her, fuch as the name catholic; antiquity; extent; duration fucceffion of bishops; union among themfelves, and with their head; conformity of doctrine with former times; miracles; prophecy fanctity of doctrine; holiness of life; temporal febicity; curfes upon their enemies; and a conftant progress or efficacy of doctrine; together with the confeffion of their adverfaries and they fancy, that wherefoever we find thefe, we muft believe that body of men to be infallible. But upon all this, endless queftions will arife, fo far will it be from ending controverfies, and fettling us upon infallibility. If all thefe must be believed to be the marks of the infallible Church, upon the account of which we ought to believe it, and fubmit to it, then two inquiries upon every one of thefe notes must be difcuffed, before we can be obliged to acquiefce in the infallibility: First, whether that is a true mark of infallibility, or not? And next, whether it belongs to the Church which they call infallible, or not? And then another very intricate queftion will arife upon the whole, whether they must be all found together? or, how many, or which of them together, will give us the entire characters of the infallible Church? In difcuffing the questions, whether every one of these is a true mark, or not, no use must be made of the Scriptures; for if the Scriptures have their authority from the teftimony, or rather the decifions of the infallible Church, no use can be made of them till that is firft fixed. Some of these notes are fuch as did not at all agree to the Church XIX. ART. in the best and pureft times; for then she had but a little extent, a fhort-lived duration, and no temporal felicity; and the was generally reproached by her adverfaries. But out of which of these topics can one hope to fetch an affurance of the infallibility of fuch a body? Can no body of men continue long in a conftant feries, and with much profperity, but muft they be concluded to be infallible? Can it be thought that the affuming a name can be a mark? Why is not the name Chriftian as foleinn as Catholic? Might not the Philofophers have concluded from hence against the first Christians, that they were, by the confeffion of all men, the true lovers of wisdom; fince they were called Philofophers much more unanimously than the Church of Rome is called Catholic? If a conformity of doctrine with former times, and a fanctity of doctrine, are notes of the Church, these will lead men into inquiries of fuch a nature, that if they are once allowed to go fo far with their private judgment, they may well be fuffered to go much further: Some ftandard must be fixed on, by which the fanctity of doctrine may be examined; they must also be allowed to examine what was the doctrine of former times: and here it will be natural to begin at the first times, the age of the Apostles. It must therefore be firft known what was tl:e doctrine of that age, before we can examine the conformity of the prefent age with it. A fucceffion of bishops is confeffed to be ftill kept up among corrupted Churches. An union of the Church with its head can not be supposed to be a note, unless it is firft made out by fome other topics, that this Church muft have a head; and that he is infallible: for unless it is proved by fome other argument that the ought to have a head, the cannot be bound to adhere to him, or to own him; and unless it is alfo proved that he is infallible, the cannot be bound abfolutely, and without restrictions, to adhere to him. Holinefs of life cannot be a mark, unless it is pretended that thofe in whom the infallibility is are all holy. A few holy men here and there are indeed an honour to any body; but it will feem a strange inference, that because fome few in a fociety are eminently holy, that therefore others of that body who are not fo, but are perhaps as eminently vicious, should be infallible. Somewhat has been already faid concerning miracles: the pretence to prophecy falls within the fame confideration; the one being as wonderful a communication of omnifcience, as the other is of omnipotence. For the confeffion of adverfaries, or fome curfes on them; thefe cannot fignify much, |