fell. The promise, which was a blessing and a high privilege to the Universal Church, became a snare to her feet, who arrogantly claimed it to herself. Where our LORD lodged it, through His Spirit Which dwelleth in her, it was safe; she who would be wise above that which was assigned her, has for the Spirit of Truth received a lying spirit, too mighty for her to control, and by him been goaded on, to prepare for herself her own destruction. Her claim is the invention of man, not the promise of CHRIST; it bears upon it the stamp of man's contrivance, in its lust of authority, furnishing the pretext for repudiating Canons1 of Ecumenical Councils, from which Rome, for private ends, withdrew its sanction, and making private synods into Ecumenical and infallible Councils, when its ends are thereby served, setting herself in the place of the Church universal throughout the world: it has the fruit of man's contrivance, leading that unhappy Church into presumptuous definitions of questions, against the voice of Scripture and Antiquity, or to form wrong conclusions from a partial use of either, taking from either the first support of her existing system which comes to hand, without examining carefully whether it do support her or no, as resting in fact not on Scripture or Antiquity, but on her own assumed infallibility; using unrighteous expedients, as one unaccountable and beyond questioning; rash and headstrong in her own defence (as over-confident persons

1 E.

g.

The 28th Canon of the Council of Ephesus.

are), not giving herself leisure to consider whether she were in the right or no, but obstinately defending each point on which she was censured; and thus multiplying her own perplexities, her precarious theories, and contradictions to Antiquity and Scripture, on which she professes to rest. Thus Satan has led her to the edge of a precipice, and there, by her very claim of infallibility, holds her fast; rendering it humanly impossible for her to retreat, ready to be cast down, unless God by an especial act of mercy, break the bond, "take' the prey from the mighty," and bid the "lawful captive" go free. Her vast system rests upon an assumed infallibility; she stands committed to every portion of it; and yet she cannot give account to those whom she holds captive, how they are to know that she is infallible, or in whom this infallibility resides2. Nevertheless she stakes her existence on the belief. The Churches under the Roman sway may purify themselves, as did we; Rome herself has no escape (sorrowful as her doom is, which she has drawn upon herself), except through such a confession as those, who have committed themselves so deeply and so presumptuously, very rarely, it is to be feared, humble themselves to make. Roman infallibility, then, has no other relation to the doctrine of Indefectibility of the Church, than that of the corruption to the

Isa. xlix. 24.

2 Newman, ib. lect. 4. considered," p. 150, ed. 2.

"Doctrine of Infallibility politically

truth which it has corrupted; the Romanist theory is bound up with her doctrine of traditions, she limits the doctrine on the one hand to the portion of the Church in communion with her, and on the other hand extends it to all subjects which that Church may determine; the Anglican view regards the promise as belonging to the universal Church, but restrained to those Articles of the faith which were delivered to her, and which in her real Ecumenical Councils she has defined; one may add, the UltraProtestant view narrows the promise, like the Church of Rome, in extent, to a handful of believing Christians, and, like Rome also, changes the subjects of the Faith, substituting a system of its own for Catholic truth; differing, as before, from Rome in this, that what Rome claims to the Churches of her own communion, it applies to individuals 1.

The contrast between the Roman claim to infallibility, and our Anglican acknowledgment of the indefectibility of the Church, has been so clearly pursued by Mr. Newman, that I must beg permission to insert it.

"Both we and Romanists hold that the Church

"When they interpret these promises, so full of exceeding consolation, Lo I am with you always,' and He shall guide you into all truth,' as given to the universal Church as a whole, not to individual Christians, what else do they than take away from all Christians the confidence, which ought to result thence for their encouragement ?"-Calv. Institt. 4. 8. 11.

2 L.

C. Indefectibility of Church Catholic," p. 259.

D

"Catholic is unerring in its declarations of faith for

66

saving doctrine; but we differ from each other as "to what is the faith, and what is the Church Catholic.

66

66

They maintain that faith depends on the Church, "we that the Church is built on faith. By Church "Catholic we mean the Church Universal, as de"scended from the Apostles; they those branches of it which are in communion with Rome. They "consider the See of St. Peter to have a promise of permanence, we the Church Catholic and Apostolic. Again, they understand by the Faith, whatever "the Church at any time declares to be faith; we "what it has actually so declared from the beginning. "We hold that the Church Catholic will never depart from these outlines of doctrine which the Apostles formally published; they that she will "never depart in any of her acts from that entire system, written and oral, public and private, explicit and implicit, which they received and taught; "we that she has a gift of fidelity, they of dis"cretion."

66

66

66

66

66

66

Again, both they and we anathematize those who deny the Faith; but they extend the condemna"tion to all who question any decree of the Roman

66

Church; we apply it to those only who deny any "article of the original Apostolical Creed. The creed "of Romanism is ever subject to increase; our's is "fixed once for all. We confine our anathema to the "Athanasian Creed; Romanists extend it to Pope "Pius's They cut themselves off from the rest of

"Christendom; we cut ourselves off from no branch, "not even from themselves. We are at peace with "Rome as regards the essentials of faith; but she tole"rates us as little as any sect or heresy. We admit her Baptism and her Orders; her custom is to rebaptize "and reordain our members who chance to join her. "These distinctions are sufficient for my present

66

purpose, though they are only a few out of various "differences which might be pointed out. They are

66

surely portions of a real view, which, while it re"lieves the mind of those burdens and perplexities "which are the portion of the mere Protestant, is essentially distinct from Romanism."

66

(4) There yet remains one other fear which I would wish to remove, namely, lest this appeal to Christian Antiquity should abate of men's reverence to their own Church. It is natural that they should dread this, who have looked upon their own Church as a modern Church. To them the authority of their own and the ancient Church must seem to stand in contrast; to us the authority of either, though not equally full, still goes in the same direction. We wish not to add any thing to our Church, but to develope what she has; it is admitted by all, that many points, being incidentally noticed in her formularies, need expansion: a modern school would wish to have this done exclusively by reference to the Reformers; we, thankfully acknowledging her to be a sound member of the Church Catholic, from which her Liturgy is derived, would resort to the fountain