OF THE INFALLIBILITIE OF THE CHVRCH OF ROME A Discourse written by the Lord Viscount FALKLAND Now first published from a Copy of his owne hand OXFORD Printed by H Hall Printer to the UNIVERSITY M.DC.XLV OF THE INFALLIBILItie of the Church of ROME TO him that doubts whether the Church of Rome have any errours they answer § 1. that She hath none for She never can have any This being so much harder to beleive then the first had need be proved by some certaine arguments if they expect that the beleife of this one should draw on whatsoever else they please to propose Yet this is offered to be proved by no better wayes then those by which we offer to prove she hath erred Which are arguments from Scripture Reason and Ancient Writers all which they say themselves are fallible for nothing is not so but the Church which if it be the onely infallible determination and that can never be beleived upon it's owne authority we can never infallibly know that the Church is infallible for these other wayes of proofe they say may deceive both them and us and so neither side is bound to beleive them If they say § 2. that an argument out of Scripture is sufficient ground of Divine faith why are they so offended with the Protestants for beleiving every part of their Religion upon that ground upon which they build all theirs at once and if following the same Rule with equall desire of finding the truth by it having neither of those qualities which Isidorus Pelusiota sayes are the causes of all Heresies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pride and Prejudication why should God be more offended with the one then the other though they chance to erre They say § 3. the Church is therefore made infallible by God that all men may have some certaine Guide yet though it be infallible unlesse it both plainly appeare to be so for it is not certaine to whom it doth not appeare certaine and unlesse it be manifest which is the Church God hath not attained his end and it were to set a Ladder to Heaven and seeme to have a great care of my going up whereas unlesse there be care taken that I may know this Ladder is here to that purpose it were as good for me it had never beene set If they say we may know it § 4. for that Generall and constant Tradition instructs us in it I answer that ignorant people cannot know this and so it can be no Rule for them and if learned people mistake in this there can be no condemnation for them For suppose to know whether the Church of Rome may erre as a way which will conclude against her but not for her for if She hath erred certainly She may but though she hath not erred hitherto it followes not that She cannot erre I seeke whether She have erred and conceiving She hath contradicted her self conclude necessarily She hath erred I suppose it not damnable though I erre in my judgement because I try the Church by one of those touch-stones her self appoints me which is Conformity with the Ancient For to say I am to beleive the present Church that it differs not from the former though it seeme to me to doe so is to send me to a witnesse and bid me not beleive it Now to say the Church is provided for a Guide of faith § 5. but must be knowne by such markes as the ignorant cannot seeke it by and the learned may chance not to find it by though seeking it with all diligence and without all prejudice can no way satisfy me If they say § 6. God will reveale the truth to whosoever seekes it these wayes sincerely this saying both sides will without meanes of being confuted make use of therefore it would be as good that neither did When they have proved the Church to be infallible § 7. yet to my understanding they have proceeded nothing farther unlesse we can be sure which is it for it signifies onely that God will allwaies have a Church which shall not erre but not that such or such a Successiion shall be all waies in the right not that the Bishop of such a place and the Clergy that adheres to him shall all waies continue in the true faith So that if they say the Greeke Church is not the Church because by it's owne confession it is not infallible I answer that it may be now the Church and may hereafter erre and so not be now infallible and yet the Church never erre because before their fall from truth others may arise to maintaine it who then will be the Church and so the Church may still be infallible though not in respect of any set persons whom we may know at all times for our Guide Then if they prove the Church of Rome to be the true Church § 8. and not the Greeke because their opinions are consonant either to Scripture or Antiquity they runne into a circle proving their tenets to be true first because the Church holds them then theirs to be the true Church because it holds the truth which last though it appeare to me the onely way yet it takes away it's being a Guide which we may follow without examination without which all they say besides is nothing § 9. Nay suppose they had evinced that some Succession were infallible and so had proved to a Learned man that the Roman Church must be this because none else pretends to it yet this can be no sufficient ground to the ignorant who cannot have any infallible foundation for their beleife that the Church of Greece pretends not to the same and even to the Learned it is but an accidentall argument because if any other company had likewise claimed to be infallible it had overthrowne all so proved Nay it is but an arbitrary argument § 10. and depends upon the pleasure of the adversary for if any society of Christians would pretend to it the Church of Rome could make use of it no longer The cheifest reason why they disallow of the Scripture for Judge is because when differences arise about the interpretation there is no way to end them § 11. and that it will not stand with the goodnesse of God to damne men for not following his will if he had assigned no infallible way how to finde it I confesse this to be wonderfull true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and let them excuse themselves that thinke otherwise Yet this will be no argument against him who beleives that to all who follow their reason in the interpretation of the Scriptures and search for Tradition God will either give his grace for assistance to finde the truth or his pardon if they misse it and then this supposed necessity of an infallible Guide with this supposed damnation for want of it fall together to the ground If they command us to beleive infallibly the contrary to this § 12.
they are to prove it false by some infallible way for the conclusion must be of the same nature and not conclude more then the premisses set downe now such a way Scripture and Reason or infused faith cannot be for they use to object the fallibility of them to those that build their Religion upon them nor the Authority of the Church for that is part of the question and must be it selfe first proved and that by none of the former wayes for the former reasons The Popes infallibility can be no infallible ground of faith § 13. being it selfe no necessary part of the faith we can be no surer of any thing proved then we are of that which proves it and if he be fallible no part is the more infallible for his sideing with them So if the Church be divided I have no way to know which is the true Church but by searching which agrees with Scripture and Antiquity and so judgeing accordingly But this is not to submit my selfe to her opinions as my guide which they tell us is necessary Which course if they approve not of as a fit one for a Learned man they are in a worse case for the ignorant who can take no course at all nor is the better at all for this Guide the Church whilest two parts dispute which is it and that by arguments he understands not If I granted the Pope § 14. or a Councell by him called to be infallible yet I conceive their Decrees can be no sufficient ground by their own axiomes of Divine faith For first say the most No Councell is valid not approved by the Pope for thus they overthrow that held at Ariminum and a Pope chosen by Symony is ipso facto no Pope I can then have no certainer ground for the infallibility of those Decrees and consequently for my beleife of them then I have that the choice of him was neither directly nor indirectly Symoniacall which to be certaine of is absolutely impossible § 15. Secondly suppose him Pope and to have confirmed the Decrees yet that these are the Decrees of a Councell or that he hath confirmed them I can have but an uncontradicted attestation of many men for if another Councell should declare these to have beene the Acts of a former Councell I should neede againe some certaine way of knowing how this declaration is a Councels which is no ground say they of faith I am sure not so good and generall a one as that Tradition by which we prove that the Scripture is Scripture which yet they will not allow any to be certaine of but from them Thirdly for the sence of their Decrees § 16. I can have no better expounder to follow then Reason which if though I mistake I shall not be damned for following why shall I for mistaking the sence of Scripture Or why am I a lesse fit interpreter of one then of the other were both seeme equally cleare And where they seeme so I meane equally cleare and yet contradictory shall I not as soone beleive Scripture which is without doubt of at least as great authority But I doubt whether Councells be fit deciders of Questions § 17. for such they cannot be if they beget more and men have cause to be in greater doubts afterwards none of the former being diminished then they were at first Now I conceive there arise so many out of this way § 18. that the Learned cannot end all nor the Ignorant know all As besides the forenamed considerations Who is to call them the Pope or Kings Who are to have voices in them Bishops only or Preists also Whether the Pope or Councell be Superiour the last neede the approbation of the first debated among themselves Whether any Countries not being called or not being there as the Abissines so great a part of Christianity not resolvedly condemend by them for Heretiques were absent at the Councell of Trent make it not generall Whether if it be one not every where received as when the Bishops sent from some places have exceeded their Commission as in the Councell of Florence it be yet of necessity to be subscribed to Whether there were any surreption used or force and Whether those disanull the Acts Whether the most voyees are to be held the Act of the Councell or those of all are required As Canus sayth All the Councell cannot erre the most may which never yet agreed or Whether two parts will serve as in the Tridentine Synode a considerable doubt because Nicephorus Callistus relateing the resolution of a Councell at Rome against that of Ariminum makes them give three reasons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tom 2 pag. 172. One That the Bishop of Rome was not present The second That most did not agree to it Thirdly That others thither gathered were displeased at their resolutions which proves that in their opinions if either most not present agree not to it or all present be not pleased with it a Councell hath no power to binde All these doubts I say perswade me that whatsoever brings with it so many new questions can be no fit ender of the old In those things in which § 19. before a Generall Councell have defined it is lawfull to hold either way and damnable to do so after I desire to know how it agreeth with the Charity of the Church to define any thing and so bestow upon the Divell one path more for us to walke in to him If the infallibility of a Generall Councell be a point of faith I desire to know why it is so § 20. Scripture and Tradition seeme to me not to say so But if they did so I suppose you will grant they do of this doctrine That the soules of the blessed shall see God before the day of judgement and not be kept in secret Receptacles For else the doctrine of prayer to Saints cannot stand and yet for denying this doth Bellarmine excuse Pope John 22 of which beleife they know he was not alone because the Church he meanes I doubt not a Generall Councell had not then condemned it I desire to know why should not he be condemned as well without one as many Heretiques that are held so by their Church yet condemned by no Generall Councell which if he makes to be the rule of Heresie it had beene happy to have lived before the Councell of Nice when no opinion had beene damnable but some against the Apostles Councell at Hierusalem because there had yet beene no Generall Councell At least why shall not I be excused by the same reason § 21. though I beleive not a Councell to be infallible since I never heard that any Councell hath decreed that they are so Neither if it have can we be bound by that Decree unlesse made certaine some other way that it selfe is so If you say we must beleive it because of Tradition § 22. I answer sometimes you will have
of obedience which must needes be a lesse difficult and so a more agreeable way then to endure endlesse volumes of commentaries the harsh Greeke of Evagrius and the as hard Latine of Irenaeus and be pained by distinguishing betweene different senses and various lections and he would deserve not the lowest place in Bedlam that would preferre these studies before so many so much more pleasant that would rather imploy his understanding then submit it and if he could thinke God imposed upon him only the resisting temptations would by way of addition require from himselfe the resolving of doubts I say not that all these bookes are to be read by those who understand not the languages for them I conceive their seeking into Scripture may suffice But if I have by Gods grace skill to looke into them I cannot better use it then in the search of his will where they say it is to be found that I might assent to them if there I finde reason for it or if I do not they may have no excuse for not excusing me For whereas they say § 38. it is pride makes us doubt of their infallibility I answer that their too much lazinesse and impatience of examining is the cause many of them do not doubt Next what pride is it never to assent before I find reason for it since they when they follow that Church as infallible § 39. pretend reason for it and will not say they would if they thought they found none and if they say we do finde reason but will not confesse it then pride hinders not our assent but our declaration of it which if it do in any one he is without question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemned by himselfe and it must be a very partiall advocate that would strive to acquit him One much prevailing argument which they make § 40. is this that whosoever leave them fall into dissention betweene themselves whereas they in the meane while are alwayes at unity I answer first in this whereof the question is now they all consent Secondly when there is fire for them that disagree they need not bragge of their uniformity who consent Thirdly they have many differences among them as whether the Pope be infallible Whether God predeterminate every action Whether Election and Reprobation depend upon foresight Which seeme to me as great as any betweene their adversaries and in the latter the Jesuits have Ancienter and more generall Tradition on their side then the Church of Rome hath in any other question and as much ground from reason for the defence of Gods goodnesse as they can thinke they have for the necessity of an infallible guide yet these arguments must not make the Dominicans Heretiques and must us If they say § 41. The Church hath not resolved it which signifies only that they are not agreed about it which is that we object I answer It ought to have done if conformity to the ancient Church be required in which all that ever I could heare of before Saint Austin who is very various I confesse in it delivered the contrary to the Dominicans as not doubtfull and to say it is lawfull for them to disagree whensoever they do not agree is ridiculous for they cannot do both at once about the same point And if they say § 42. they meane by the Churches not having concluded it that a Councell hath not I answer that they condemne some without any and why not these Next I say that the opinion of the Diffused Church is of more force then the conclusion of a Representative which hath its authority from the other and therefore if all extant for foure hundred yeares teach any thing that is more Heresie to denie that then any Canon of a Councell But may not howsoever any other companie of People that would maintaine themselves to be infallible say as much § 43. that all other sects differ from one another and therefore should all agree with them Would those not thinke they ascribe all other mens dissentions and learned mens falling into divers Heresies to their not allowing their infallibility to their not assenting to their Decrees and not suffering them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sit as teachers of those things that come in question and to have all others in the place of Disciples obedient to them which is that which Nilus a Greeke Bishop professeth that because the Greeks would not allow the Romans was the only cause of seperation betweene them They use much to object § 44. How could errours come into the Church without opposition and mention both of that opposition in history I answer they might come in not at once but by degrees as in the growth of a childe and the motion of a clock we see neither in the present but know there was a present when we finde it past Next so many Authours being lost who can make it certaine to me that from none of those we should have had notice of this opposition if they had come to us Next I say there are two sorts of errours to hold a thing necessary that is unlawfull and false or that in but profitable and probable Of the second sort that errours should come in it appeares not hard to me and especially in those ages where want of Printing made books and consequently learning not so common as now it is where the few that did study busied themselves in Schoole-Speculations only when the Authority of a man of cheife note had a more generall influence then now it hath and so as Thucydides saith the Plague did in his time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the disease that first setled in the head easily passed through all the body considering how apt all men are to desire that all men should thinke as they doe and consequently to lay a necessity upon the receiving that opinion if they conceived that a way to have it received And then if it were beleeved generally profitable as for example Confession who would be apt to oppose their calling it necessary for the same cause for which they called it so Besides if this errour were delivered by some Father in the hot opposition of some Heretique it may be none of his side would oppose it least they might take advantage by their dissention and he that disputed for the Orthodox side might loose by it much of his authority The word necessary it selfe is often used for very convenient § 45. and then from necessary in that sense to absolutely necessary is no difficult change though it be a great one The Fathers use Heretiques sometimes in a large sense and sometimes in a stricter so differ in the reckoning them up Some leaving out those that others put in though they had seene the precedent Catalogue The doubtfulnesse of the sense of those words might bring in errour Names as an Altar Sacrifice Massa may have beene used first in one sense and the name