wary Conduct of the Roman Church towards her own Members seems to confess a distrust of her own Infallibility so the Unreasonable Confidence which she uses towards us begets in us a just Suspicion that she is in the wrong and is not altogether Insensible of it For it is a sign of a very bad Cause when those concern'd to Defend it are unwilling to enter into its Merits and instead of that only bluster and stand upon their Privilege instead of Maintaining it by Law and Reason declare that they are to give Law and not to submit to any and that whatsoever they say that must be Reason This is an Extravagancy in which no Authority upon Earth can bear a Man out For if a Professor when he is press'd by some Untoward Objections against some Opinion he has deliver'd should think fit to answer only with his Brow or else to deliver it again as his positive Judgment out of the Chair declaring That it belonged to him to dictate in that place I am apt to believe that his Beard though never so venerable would scarce be able to preserve him from the Contempt and Derision of his own Disciples Or if a Judge question'd for an Unjust Sentence should instead of Law or Equity produce only his Commission to justifie his Act I am afraid whatever became of his Person his Reputation would be in some danger Especially if all were of Judge * Rustworth's Coll. T. 1. P. 506. Dodridg's mind That it is no more fit for a Judge to decline to give an Account of his Doings than for a Christian of his Faith. Now this is the Case between Us and the Church of Rome We charge Them of Corrupting the Faith of Establishing Superstition and Insufferable Tyranny We produce our Evidence and alledge Scripture and Primitive Antiquity to make out Our Charge On the other side She takes upon her and stands upon her Privilege She defines and proves it with a Curse which is a Spiritual kind of Hectoring and We are Hereticks convict because we are not satisfied with these Demonstrations For my own part I think they are to blame that do not like this Proceeding in an Enemy for the nearest thing to an Acknowledgment that the Roman Cause is Indefensible is this desperate way of maintaining it the less of Argument Men have the more Positive they grow and endeavour to make up their want of Reason by the Boldness and Peremptoriness of their Affirmation And though some may ascribe the Infallibility-shift to the Confidence of the Church of Rome I shall rather impute it to her Desperation And we are the more confirmed in this Suspicion that the Roman Church was brought to this Shift by Distress rather than Choice when we consider the time and the Occasion upon which we find her openly to have declared her self Infallible When the Eastern Church quarrell'd with those of the West about some Points of Doctrin as well as Ecclesiastical Observances among other things they urge That the Catholick Church was on their Side For of the five Patriarchs which Govern'd the Church whom they usually compar'd to the five Senses there were four for the Eastern Opinions And if two to one be accounted odds it will be intolerable Presumption for one to oppose four For so Michael Cerularius urges not intending to confer any Infallibility upon those four Patriarchs but from a Majority pleading a Presumption of Right Pope Leo opposes to this the Dignity of St. Peter and the Privilege which the Roman Church had of being Infallible though she stood alone This appears by the Letters of Michael Patriarch of Constantinople and Peter of Antioch and Leo the Ninth's Reply to their Objections and it is no wonder the Pope took Sanctuary in such a Pretence when Authority did commonly bear down Reason And the Roman Church was too great to depend upon the sole Merit of the Cause and such Reasons as were common to her with every private Christian in the World. But this Pretence of Infallibility was yet rather Insinuated than Defined till Gregory VII condemn'd and depos'd by several German and Italian Councils was forc'd to lift up his See beyond all Human measure and to declare positively That his Church could never Err. About an Hundred and fifty Years after this the Schoolmen invented the Term Infallibility to express this Unaccountable Privilege Mr. Cressy calls it an Unfortunate Word and 〈◊〉 is indeed For never any had harder usage than this It is forced to stand against Scripture and Tradition against Authority and Reason and Sense This poor Infallibility must hide all Faults must cover every Defect and vouch every Absurdity and justifie even Transubstantiation I have insisted I fear too long upon the grounds we may have to suspect that the Church of Rome does not really believe her own Infallibility What conceit she may have of her self or how she may stand in the Opinion of her Adherents is to us of no great Importance since we do not conceive our selves concluded either by her fond Fancies of her own Excellence or the extravagant Applauses of her Flatterers only we would desire she would not press us too vehemently to this Belief while she is under such flagrant Suspicion of Deriding it within her self If she do really believe this we envy her not the Paradise of such a Conceit but rather pity her Disease and the disorder of her Imagination for so it is And something not unlike her case we have in the Character of the Church of Laodicea Because thou hast said I am Rich and encreased with Goods and have need of nothing and knowest not that thou art Wretched and Miserable and Poor and Blind and Naked anoint thine Eyes with Eye-salve that thou mayest see But be the Roman Pretence never so sincere we have further grounds of Suspicion that really there is no such thing For I. Christ himself the Author of our Faith though he was Infallible because he was God yet did not think fit to use this way of Authority or meer Defining to introduce his Doctrin nor to recommend it to his Disciples as a Principle for trying Doctrâ—â—â— when he was gone to Heaven The way therefore which our Saviour took was to Prove and to Convince by Arguments proper and conclusive When he was question'd he appeal'd to the Scriptures Search the Scriptures for they testifie of me If I bear witness of my self my witness is not true And therefore produces the Testimony of John the Baptist of his Father at his Baptism of the Miracles that he did The same Works which I do they bear witness of me that the Father hath sent me If ye do not believe me believe the Works But above all he alledges the Scripture in Vindication of his Person and his Doctrin When he was blamed for Healing on the Sabbath he justifies himself from the Law that permitted Beasts to be relieved on that day and by an Argument a fortiori he
proves That a Charity towards a Child of Abraham was much more to be allowed When the Sadducees disputed with him he reproach'd them for not knowing the Scriptures but blames them not at all for being ignorant of the Infallible Judge In short all his Instructions all his Preaching all his Disputes were full of Arguments and Proofs drawn from the Merits of the Cause from Scripture and Reason and to finish his Evidence and the Conviction of his Hearers oftentimes he crown'd all with Miracles The Pharisees indeed when they were at a loss for an Argument would take Refuge in their Authority and therefore when they could not answer a poor Man thus they take upon them Thou wast altogether born in Sin and dost thou Teach us Are we blind also And have any of the Pharisees believed on him But our Saviour instead of Encouraging this assuming way warns his Disciples against it Call no Man Rabbi or Master upon Earth call no Man Father i.e. Submit not your selves implicitly to such Arrogant Teachers as these that usurp Dominion over your Faith. And therefore he recommends to Men the Use of their Judgment Why of your own selves judge ye not what is right And lest any should think that this noble Faculty was given them only for their Worldly Occasions he reproaches the Jews for not making due Use of it in Enquiries of Religion Ye can discern the face of the Heaven and why do you not discern this time of the Messiah Which the Scriptures did plainly mark out to those that would use their Judgment to discern them Now it became our Saviour to deal with us in this manner for since upon our account he was pleas'd to be made Man it was most suitable to that Condescension to speak to us as a Man and to meet us in our own way of Apprehension And besides it seems more agreeable to the Nature of the Eternal Word or Reason to satisfie and convince our Understandings than to amaze and confound them with Paradoxes without Proof or Explanation Although Christ's Disciples call'd him Master and so indeed he was yet he did not use them as Servants but as Friends For the Servant knows not what his Lord doth A Servant is not to demand Reasons or to know the Intention of his Master in every thing he commands But Christ calls his Disciples Friends because he had made known to them all things that he had heard of the Father Besides it is much cheaper to affirm Confidently than to preduce any tolerable Proof and many may amaze Men with strange and extravagant Opinions that are not able to render any Reason that may move an ordinary sober Understanding The Gnosticks and the extravagant Sects that sprung from them would submit their wild Conceits to no rational Examination you must take all upon their Credit or be an Infidel For these Mystical Rabbies were above the poor Dispensation of giving Reasons Apelles the Heretick in a Conference with Rhodon affirms That a Man ought not to Examine his Faith but to content himself with whatever Opinion he had receiv'd And being demanded a Proof for his Belief of One God since he rejected Moses and the Prophets He frankly confess'd He had none to give but that he was mov'd he knew not how to believe it And therefore is justly derided by his Antagonist But the true Christians did not thus learn Christ they received his Doctrin not only because he Pronounced it but because he gave Proof and Demonstration of what he said And besides the outward Testimony of Miracles it was no small help to their Conviction to see the Inward Merit and Excellency of this Religion that it had nothing unworthy of God nothing contrary to Moral Honesty or the Principles of Natural Religion And Justin Martyr though he believed in Christ with so much Assurance as to Die for him yet to let us see that his Faith was not altogether Implicit but grounded upon Rational Conviction from the Merit of the Doctrin makes this bold and somewhat harsh Declaration in his Book against Marcion That he should not have believed Christ himself had he preach'd any other God beside the Creator And we have Irenaeus's Approbation That it was well said The Apostles did not think fit to make use of this way of Infallibility though the Promise upon which it is now grounded was made immediately to them and the Assistance of the Spirit was visible in the Miracles they wrought But they did not affect to be above their Master and they could not forget that Caution he gave them Not to be call'd of Men Rabbies Nay so far were they from affecting Dominion over the Faith and Understanding of Christians that they permit and applaud the diligence of those who would not receive the Gospel upon their bare Affirmation but search'd the Scriptures to see whether those things were so as they were alledged by the Apostles If we may allow St. Luke to speak their sense It was St. Paul's Advice to the Corinthians that they should Examine themselves whether they were in the Faith and he renounces all Dominion over their Faith. When the same Corinthians doubted of the Resurrection St. Paul does not think it sufficient to say That it was defined and a received Article of the Creed But enters into the Merits of the Cause and proves the Truth by Arguments unanswerable and Defends it against all the Objections that had rendred it suspected When the Churches of Galatia were divided upon the great Question Whether the Gentile Christians were obliged toobserve the Law of Moses and many pretended the Authority of Peter and James to the Prejudice of Christian Liberty St. Paul undertakes our Defence and throws off all not only the Authority of Men though they were Apostles but of Angels Though an Angel from Heaven should preach any other Gospel let him be accursed And this high Declaration was intended if Chrysostom understand it right to shew That where the Debate is concerning Truth St. Paul will not be satisfied with the Dignity or Office of any Persons As if that must be Gospel which they declare Alas then for the Infallible Judge if there be no respect of Persons no regard of Offices when Truth is in question We were told a quite contrary story That the only way to know the Truth was to consult Men plac'd in certain Dignities and to take for Oracle whatsoever they shall think fit to define St. Paul it seems knew nothing of any Infallible Judge from the heavenly Angels downwards and Chrysostom his Interpreter takes not the least care to Except him The Greeks have a Tradition That when Chrysostom wrote his Comments upon St. Paul's Epistles the Apostle was seen for several days standing behind the Bishop's Chair and whispering into his Ear But without believing this a Man may have reason to be satisfied that the Gloss speaks the sense of the Text and if all his Epistles had been as clear as this
Passage I am apt to believe that this Apostle might have sav'd himself the labour of coming down from Heaven to be his own Commentator I must confess that in reading this Epistle I have often wondred how St. Paul should come to omit one Argument which according to the Men of the Infallible way must have been worth all the rest And that is the Determination of this Question by the Council of Jerusalem for all are agreed and the Notation of years which we find in the First and Second Chapters makes it clear that this Epistle was written after that Council yet in all this long Vindication of the Liberty of the Gentile Christians it is not once urg'd And I cannot conceive any reason of this Omission unless it be that having in the very beginning laid aside all Human Authority and Respect of Persons he might not think it proper afterwards to alledge the Apostolical Decree But if this had been the only Infallible way of Deciding Controversie this Omission cannot be excused Now because some have endeavoured to prove the Infallibility of Councils from the Example of that of the Apostles I proceed briefly to shew That they did not proceed in the way of Infallibility though they were really Infallible because they were Inspired Persons but all their Proceeding was according to Allegation and Proof and the Conclusion is made to depend upon these Premisses and not their Infallibility in pronouncing it Whereas in the New Way the Conclusion is Certain because some Men declare it though the Reasons alledged may be good for nothing The summ of that Synodical Action was this First S. Peter represented to them How the Holy Ghost had already Determined that Question by falling upon Cornelius and other Persons Uncircumcised then Paul and Barnabas declared What Wonders that God had wrought among the Gentiles by them And lastly S. James shews out of the Prophets How the Conversion of the Gentiles was foretold and concludes Wherefore my Sentence is Then it pleased the Apostles and Elders to send certain Persons with an account of this whole Matter to the Churches concerned and a Letter with this Expression among others It seemed Good to the Holy Ghost and to us Which does not import as if whatsoever they agreed to declare must therefore be the Truth and to be received without asking farther Questions though what they did Decree was certainly Truth and Right but only suggests the former Decision of the Holy Ghost in the Case of Cornelius and some other declared by Barnabas and Paul for then it seemed Good to the Holy Ghost to receive the Gentiles without Circumcision But in the Assembly of Jerusalem we have not the least Intimation of any Declaration of the Spirit either by Miracle or Revelation But the Holy Ghost having before visibly declared upon the Point to that in all likelihood the Expression must allude But whatever the Apostles thought of the way of Infallibility it is plain The Believers were not yet well instructed concerning it for this Definition could not end the Controversie And in the beginning of the next Chapter We find S. Paul Circumcising Timothy whose Father was a Greek Because of the Jews that were in those Quarters and how little Use was made of it in ending the same Controversie in the Church of Galatia I have observed already But further yet S. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans teaches another Method of Belief than the Advocates for Infallibility for some time would impose upon the World for he utterly disallows this way of making the Faith of God to depend upon the Belief or Unbelief of Men as if that were to be the Standard of Truth and Error For what if some did not Believe shall their Vnbelief make the Faith of God of none Effect God forbid Yea let God be True and every Man a Lyar as it is written c. This is an Answer to such Objections as were Suggested against the Christian Faith from the Unbelief of the Jews For when our Saviour appeared they had the Visible Church and all Ecclesiastical Authority the Priesthood the Sanadrim the Scribes and Pharisees and the Renowned Doctors were theirs the Religious Sects the Outward Purity the Opus operatum and Supererogation were on their Side Now if these must prescribe to our Belief we Christians have lost our Cause for the High Priest and the Elders assembled i. e. The Pope and Council of that Time condemned Christ for a Blasphemer But S. Paul would no more submit to such Definitions than we Protestants to those of the Council of Trent but enters his Protestation against all such as by any Act of Men would Prescribe against the Truth of God and gives Reason and Scripture for his Proceeding God must be Pure but all Men may be Lyars and so fairly takes his leave of all Infallible Men. And so far is he from Affecting that Brerogative himself which he denies to others that he appeals to the Scriptures as his Vouchers and does not desire to be believed upon the Authority of his Place but by the Method he uses of proving what he advances he sets a Fair Precedent to all other Teachers and which Origen upon this Place understands to be his Design For if a Person so Great and so Qualifyed as S. Paul did not think the Authority of his Saying any thing to be sufficient unless he prove it out of the Law and the Prophets how much more should we the least of Gods Ministers observe the same Rule And Lastly S. Peter from whom some of the Competitors for Infallibility derive their Title advises all Christians To be ready always to give an answer to every one that asketh them a Reason of the Hope that is in them Now all Interpreters of this Place both Antient and Modern that I have seen are very much out if this Reason be no other than the Infallibility of S. Peter or of the Church Now this Answer I Believe because the Church Believes is surely the Easiest of any and all other Answers would be Impertinent if this alone were the Infallible Reason The School-Men have upon some Occasions thought fit to ground their Rational Way upon this Passage and Valued their Usefulness and Service to the Church on this Account But for God's sake What Use can there be of these Fallible Reasons in a Church that is Infallible in her Conclusions and holds not her self obliged to render any other Reason for them but a Curse And indeed I cannot see any Occasion of giving any Reason since her Disciples do Profess that they have no Assurance but that in these she may be Mistaken Now if the Apostles did not think fit to use this Way of Infallibility it seems something incongruous for the Church in Succeeding Ages to pretend to it for as the Gifts of the Spirit grew less methinks the Way of Teaching should rather be less than more Magisterial unless some new Paraclet to supply the Defect