Find the Church : an aid to the inquirer


»R

. C hurth ' A^ohc^^ilC.S Nfa^-
</

FIND THE CHURCH

POLAND

^5 . Herder,

17 /S'. Broadway,

,

St. Louis, Mo.





FIND THE CHURCH.

“ SBBK AND YOU SHALL FIND."—{S. Matth. VII. 7.)

AN AID TO THE INQUIRER.

I. Where does the name “Church of Christ” belong?

II. How SHALL WE GET THE DOCTRINES TAUGHT BY CHRIST?

WILLIAM POLAND, S. J.,

St. Louis University,



PERMISSU SUPESIORUM.

Carreras Press.



FIND THE CHURCH.

AN AID TO THE INQUIRER.

This aid is intended to meet a special need of

many who profess Christianity. They have their
own special difficulty which arises from a fact that
is plain to the eyes of the world.

They recognize the divinity of Christ.

They recognize that Christ established a Relig-

ious Society which is called a Church.

They recognize that Christ left certain truths or

doctrines to that Society or Church.

They recognize that the profession of Christas

teaching or doctrine is a condition for membership

in His Church.

They recognize, finally, that the acceptance of

His doctrines on His word is the bond which unites

the members into one Society, one Church, one
Institution founded by Him.

But here arises their difficulty. It comes from

a broad fact which they cannot help seeing. They
behold around them hundreds of distinct Institu-

tions, each one of which claims the right to be called

the Church of Christ. They see, moreover, that



4 Find the Church,

each one of these distinct Institutions holds a doc-

trine which it puts forward as the doctrine of Christ,

but which disagrees with the doctrine held by any

other one of all the Institutions.

So that the difficulty which besets the inquirer

is a twofold difficulty. He asks himself

:

1. Where does the name “ Church of Christ ”

really belong?

2. How are men, to-day, to get the exact
doctrines taught by Christ?



WHERE DOES THE NAME ‘‘CHURCH
OF CHRIST’’ BELONG?

Christ did not establish several Churches, giving

to each a distinct set of doctrines at variance with

the doctrines given to each of the other Churches.

Christ gave one set of doctrines. It is precisely

the profession of this set of doctrines which has to

bind all the members into one society, one Church,
His Church.

Hence, if two distinct Institutions hold them-

selves to be distinct precisely because they have dis-

tinct sets of doctrine, they cannot both claim to be

rightly named ‘^The Church of Christ.”
Likewise, several hundred distinct Institutions

holding as many distinct and opposite sets of doc-
trine cannot all claim for themselves the name of
“The Church of Christ.”

Yet, here is the very fact which the inquirer has

to deal with. He finds several hundred Institutions
claiming the name “Church of Christ;” and he
finds that they make this claim on the strength of
their opposing doctrines.

This puts the inquirer in a very unsatisfactory

position. The object of his inquiry is, in a way,
twofold. He wishes to find the Institution which has
a valid title to the name “ Church of Christ

;

” and

he wishes to determine the exact set of doctrines left



6 Find the Church,

by Christ. He knows that if he finds the precise
Institution or Church, he may be satisfied that it has
the exact doctrine. He knows that if he discovers
the exact doctrine he will be enabled to locate the

Institution.

But as his difficulty has this twofold character,

it may be useful for him to make also a twofold
inquiry. He may, first consider the Institutions
simply as societies

;
then he may consider the doc-

trine—not each particular point of doctrine, but a
possible way of getting at the entire doctrine. When
he finds the now existing society which is identical
with the Institution founded by Christ, and which

thus has full and only claim to the name “ Church
of Christ,” and when he finds, moreover, that this
one claimant has preserved from the beginning an

absolutely accurate method for the transmission of

the doctrines left by Christ, he will be far advanced

on the way towards the solution of the whole difficulty.
The first question, then, is that of an identical

Institution.' Let us suppose a certain society to have

been founded fifty years ago. What would be done
to determine whether a given society existing to-day

is the identical society that was founded fifty years

ago? We should have to find out whether the society
existing to-day could be traced back through a con-

tinuous unbroken existence to the society of fifty

years ago. In like manner, to find the Church of

Christ, the Institution that was really established by

Christ, and therefore has still a right to the name,

we must find a Church with a clear title, a Church

whose continuous and unbroken existence can be



Where Does the Name Belong? 7

traced back to a Church about whose right to the

name there is and can be no dispute.
Among many hundred claimants, then, to the

name, Church of Christ,^’ there must be found

one Institution which has a clear title to the name.

There must be found existing to-day a Church which

is the identical Church founded by Christ. There

must be found a Church, a Society, an Institution,

whose continuous existence can be traced back

through regular succession until it is seen to be

identical with a true, undoubted, undisputed, right-

ful possessor of the title. This Society will have a

clear title to the name. There cannot be two clear

titles.

How far back will it be necessary to go?
There can be no doubt about the fact that the

Church of the Apostles was the Church founded by

Christ.

Which one of the many claimants existing
to-day can be traced back to the Church of the

Apostles, so as to be seen to come from it by an
unbroken succession? This one Institution will be

identical with the Church of the Apostles. It will

be seen to be the Church of Christ and will have a

clear title to the name.

There can be but one such claimant among the
many hundreds. No one of the other claimants will
be the Institution established by Christ. No one of
the other claimants will have any title to the name.

But will not this be an endless work? Where
shall an inquirer begin? Which claimant shall
have first place in the investigation? Which one



8 Find the Church,

shall have second, third, fourth, five hundredth

place?

The process of investigation will not he so very
long if it be pursued systematically, according to

methods which are universally recognized as abso-

lutely final in all civil matters of the same character.

In the first place the whole Christian era may
be divided into its nineteen centuries

:

1 — 100
100 — 200
200 — 300

1400 — 1500
1500 — 1600
1600 — 1700
1700 — 1800
1800 — 1900

We take the period between 1800 and 1900. It
is clear that an Institution which began as an Insti-

tution between the years 1800 and 1900 cannot be

an Institution which was founded by Christ more

than 1800 years ago.

Now, it is a very notable fact that very many of
the Institutions which claim to be the Church of

Christ, came into existence within the century which

has just gone by. Hence, in investigating the right

to the name, it is lawful to put aside all the Institu-

tions which began to exist after the year 1800.

Following the same law of investigation we can

reject all Societies which began as Societies in the

century preceding, that is after the year 1700. And



Where Does the Name Belong? 9

we can, likewise, reject all that began as Societies, or

Institutions after the year 1600.

The Church of Christ has not at any time ceased

to exist. There has always been a true holder of

the name. Whenever a society ceases to exist, the

same identical society never re-exists. It may have

a successor with the same purpose ; but this new

successor is not the same identical society ; it is a

new society. If any one were to say that the Church

of Christ could cease to exist, it could not re-exist as

a new society without being re-established by Christ

Himself, or by some one evidently commissioned by

Christ to effect the re-establishment. But the Church

of Christ has not ceased to exist, nor has it been

re-established. It has always existed from its first

foundation, and has always been in rightful pos-

session of its title to the name.

There was, therefore, a true claimant to the title

between the years 1500 and 1600.

Not to go too far back we may stop here. ' We
may consider the claimants now existing and which

are found midway between 1500 and 1600, that is

in the year 1550. The many hundred claimants of

to-day have really arisen by secession from the

ranks of the claimants that existed in the year 1550.

So that a true claimant must be found in the year 1550.

Those who have not considered this matter in

its true historical aspect will be surprised, upon

examination, to see how few of the present existing

religious societies claimed to be the Church of

Christ, or had even an existence in the year 1550,

that is three hundred and fifty years ago.



10 Find the Church,

They may be surprised to find that in the year
1550 there were but five Institutions in the enlight-

ened world that claimed the name, “Church of
Christ.” These five Institutions, to put them in
alphabetical order, were : the Anglican, the Calvin-

ist, the Catholic, the Greek, the Lutheran.

The present Methodist Institution grew out of

some religious conferences which John Wesley began
to hold with three or four of his friends in the year 1729.

The Kirk of Scotland took its rise from a move-

ment which John Knox first set on foot in 1557,
when, at his advice, some of the nobles formed

themselves into a covenanted body which they called

“the Lords of the Congregation.” The Kirk was
established by act of the Scottish parliament which

assembled at Edinburgh in 1560
;
and the first meet-

ing of the General Assembly of the Church of Scot-

land was held on the twentieth of December of the

same year.

The Society of Friends originated in the year 1647.

The Baptists were not an Institution until the

17th century. There were Ana-baptists in 1550 ; but

they have disappeared
;
and the Baptists do not claim

succession from them.

We may, therefore, rightly limit our investiga-
tions to the five institutions which existed in 1550

and exist to-day. Hence, the true claimant must be

found amongst the five. Which one of these five

Institutions of 1550 was the Church established by

Christ through the Apostles?

The Anglican Church was established in 1534 by



Where Does the Name Belong? 11

€dict of King Henry VIII. of England,—an edict
which is known as the ‘‘Act of Supremacy.”

The Lutheran Church first took some definite form

in the year 1530, when the schedule drawn up by
Martin Luther and Philip Melancthon, and known
as the “Augsburg Confession,” was presented at the

Diet of Augsburg.

The earliest date that can be assigned to Cal-

vinism, as an Institution, is 1541, when the “ Insti-
tutes ” of John Calvin were accepted at Geneva.

Even before the year 1600 there were at least twenty
variations of Calvinism. Its general idea is found

to-day in the Kirk of Scotland, in the Dutch Reformed

Church, in Congregationalism and in American

Presbyterianism

.

Now, if we go back another century, that is, to

1450, we find no record of the Lutheran Church nor

of the Anglican Church nor of Calvinism. Martin

Luther was born in 1483
;
King Henry was born in

1491, and John Calvin was born in 1509.

Thus, in 1450, we find only the Catholic Church
and the Greek Church. Rather, it would be more

correct to say that in 1450 the Catholic Church alone

is found of all the claimants that exist to-day. The
present Greek Church really dates from the year

1453, when Constantinople was taken by the Turks,
and Gregory Scholarius was appointed Patriarch of

Constantinople by command of the Sultan, Mahomet
II. From the days of Photius (867) the Greeks had
been, off and on, separating from and rejoining the

Catholic communion. From 1054 they remained sep-
arated for 220 years. In 1274 they re-united at the



12 Find the Church.

Council of Lyons . Six years later they separated again

.

Another re-union was effected at Florence in 1439.

This union was rejected four years later, in 1443, by

the Patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem,

The Patriarch of Constantinople adhered to the union.

But he was deposed and Scholarius was appointed in

his place by the Turkish Sultan in 1453. Thus the

Greek Church came into existence in the ninth cen-

tury. It ceased to exist several times in the course

of six hundred years, so that no one of the succeed-

ing establishments was an identical Institution with

its predecessor. The present Greek Institution was
really founded by the Sultan, in 1453, and it ab-

sorbed all the other Greek dissenters.

It is hardly necessary to go into details about the

Russian Church. It came out of the Greek Church

of Constantinople. The present Institution of the

Russian Church dates from the year 1721, when it
was made entirely dependent on the Czar.

There remains, then, but one claimant : the

Catholic Church. It exists to-day. It existed in the

time of Martin Luther and John Calvin and King
Henry VIII. They went out from it. It existed
through all that period during which the Greeks were

going out from it and coming back to it. It existed

before that time through the first nine centuries: and

of all the many hundred claimants that rose up
against it in those first nine centuries, few names are

even known amongst us.
The succession of the Catholic Church from the

Church of the Apostles to the present day, as an identi-

cal Institution, is complete without an interruption.



Where Does the Name Belong? 13

The organization of the Catholic Church has not

varied in all that time. The central seat of its ad-

ministration is found to-day where it was 1800 years

ago. The line of its Chief Pastors, the Popes, has

come down in regular succession from Peter who was

appointed by Christ.

To what Institution, then, does the name “Church

of Christ truly belong?

What would the jury say?



14 Find the Church,

IL

HOW SHALL WE GET THE DOCTRINES
TAUGHT BY CHRIST ?

Christ established a Church.

He chose twelve Apostles and taught them His
doctrine.

The doctrine taught by Christ to his Apostles
was made a complete body of revelation on the day
of Pentecost, that is to say, fifty days after the Resur-

rection and ten days after the Ascension of Christ to

the Father.

A Church with a complete and definite revelation
of truth was then finally established in the Apostles.

Christ established a Church not merely for the

days of the Apostles, but for all time.

He said to his Apostles, “ Going, therefore, teach
all nations ” (Matth. 28, 20) and Teaching them to

observe all things whatsoever I have commanded
you : and behold I am with you all days even to the
consummation of the world.’’ (Matth. 28, 20.)

Christ established a Church with a definite and

fixed doctrine
;
and that doctrine was to come down

through a continuous Church without addition or

diminution unto the day when He, Himself, was to



The Doctrines Taught by Christ, 15

come again to judge all men upon their acceptance

and observance of that doctrine according to the

measure of the opportunity which had been accorded

to them to become acquainted with it.

Christ taught a fixed and definite doctrine. He

did not teach contradictory doctrines, telling to some

persons that there is a Trinity, and to other persons,

that there is not a Trinity. He did not teach to some

that there is a Sacrament of Penance for the forgive-

ness of sins, and to others, that there is no such

Sacrament. He did not teach to some that He is really

present in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, and to

others, that He is not really present.

How is it that to-day we find separate classes of
individuals asserting different and contradictory

doctrines, and yet each class asserting for itself that

it is the Church of Christ?

When Christ had established a Church and

taught it a doctrine, He certainly did not leave things

in such a condition that it should be impossible ever

after for mankind to find the Church and the doctrine.

To-day we behold many distinct Institutions,

each of which claims to be the Church of Christ. Yet

each one differs from all the others as to which are the

doctrines of Christ. Is it not more than clear that each

and every one of the Institutions cannot be the

Church of Christ? The Church established by

Christ was an Institution with a doctrine. But here

we find many distinct Institutions, and each one takes

care to distinguish itself from all the others precisely

by a difference of doctrine.

For the same reason, no two of these Institutions



16 Find the Church,

can claim to be the Church of Christ, since Christ

taught one fixed doctrine : and there are no two of

these Institutions that hold the same doctrine.

How are we to discover which is the doctrine
taught by Christ? If we find that doctrine, we can

safely say that the Institution which holds that doc-

trine entire, without addition or diminution, is the

real Church of Christ.

We cannot admit that the doctrine has been
divided by Christ amongst the Institutions, some of it

to be held by one, and some of it by another
;
and

that all the Institutions taken together will form the

Church of Christ. Christ did not establish that kind

of a Church, a Church built up of contradictions,

formed by uniting the affirmation and denial of the

same truth.

The Church of Christ must be one Church—

a

Church possessing the entire doctrine taught by
Christ. There can be but one such Church. Two
Churches holding precisely the same doctrine would

not be two Churches, but one Church.

We must, therefore, affirm that there is one
Church which holds the precise doctrines taught by

Christ, and that it holds these doctrines in their en-

tirety, without increase or diminution.

Where shall we find the entire doctrine? How
shall we discover the Institution which possesses the

doctrine of Christ, entire and intact?

There is one way of setting about this investi-
gation. We must go back to the beginning and try
to learn what were the means which Christ, Himself,

established for the safe transmission of His doctrine,



The Doctrines Taught by Christ, 17

and what Institution has employed this secure means

of transmission established by Christ.

We want to know, therefore, the means which
Christ established to have His doctrine transmitted,

through the ages, complete and unchanged.

In the first place, let us remember that the doc-

trine was to be transmitted to human society. This
being the case, the means must be one which men
would be apt to recognize. Common sense will not
let us suppose that for the purpose of handing down,

of keeping, and of making known His doctrine,
Christ chose a means which would be calculated to

hide the doctrine rather than to manifest it.

Looking at the matter, then, with human eyes,
and taking account of what we know of human
nature, and considering humanity to be such as we
know it to be, what does our reason suggest to us as
the means which Christ might, perhaps, have chosen
for the transmission of His doctrine? We must pre-
sume that the means which Christ adopted must
have been one with which man could become ac-
quainted

I
one adapted to the manifestation of the

doctrine
;
one which an inquirer would be apt to look

for and apt to find
;
one which, when employed,

would always lead to the same doctrine, entire and

unchanged. We cannot presume that Christ chose
a means in itself calculated to hide the doctrine or to
make men believe in contradictions and accept each
other ^s contradictions as the doctrines of Christ.

If we look into the matter seriously, carefully,
leisurely and without prejudice, we shall find that all
the possible methods which might appeal to an



18 Find the Church,

inquirer as obvious and worthy of consideration, are

reducible to three. In saying this we are not mak-
ing judgments upon the ways of Divine Providence

and on the eternal wisdom. But we are simply limiting

and fixing the inquiry by doing what one in search

of the doctrine would most naturally do, that is by

first determining the ways in which he might deem it
possible for that doctrine to have been transmitted.

Upon due reflection, we shall find three ways and
three only.

One way would be that every person who should
come, in some manner, to recognize the divinity of

Christ, should receive personally a special revelation

of the sum total of the doctrines taught by Christ.
This method would not be impossible to Almighty

God.

A second way which we might conceive would be
that Christ had written down His entire doctrine •

that He had had this writing publicly authenticated

;

and that He had left definite instructions according
to which copies of the writing might be publicly and

unmistakably authenticated throughout all time.

This would also be a possible and sure method.

We can conceive of a third method of trans-
mission. Christ might have taught His Apostles and

given them a special aid so that they could not fail to

possess His doctrine. In this third case it would be

necessary that amongst their lawful and accredited

successors in the office of teaching. He should have
established some court of appeal supported also by

divine assistance to guard His Church against error

that might be put forward by false teachers. There



The Doctrines Taught by Christ. 19^

would have to be, at least, one person amongst the

successors of the Apostles, throughout time, who
would be divinely empowered and guided to decide

in every dispute and to condemn every error concern-

ing the doctrines taught by Christ. This power

would, of course, have to be a supernatural power.

It could not be a natural power : for, this person, as

a mere human being, would necessarily be exposed
to error, just as any other human being judging
by his own light. It would have to be made im-
possible for this person to speak error or to decide

incorrectly when speaking in his character of uni-
versal teacher and guardian of the truth. He might
err in any other matter, as might any other human
being, but his lips would have to be sealed by God
against the pronouncement of error whensoever he

should speak officially on Christ’s doctrine. More-

over, this person would have to be recognized,

throughout time, as the divinely appointed guardian

of the entire doctrine and as the sole court of final

appeal.

We have, here, three obvious methods of trans-
mission, each of them being a possibility to God in
the important work of the handing down the true
doctrine. They are obvious ways. If one is looking

for the doctrines of Christ, and wishes, first, to cer-

tify those doctrines by assuring himself of the cor-

rectness and legality of a method of transmission, it

stands to reason that the method of transmission

must be one adapted to human comprehension, some-
thing that can be recognized, and not a method so

secret and hidden that it cannot be found.



20 Find the Church.

Let us turn, now, to compare the methods with

what we know to be the facts.
To determine whether the first method has been

the one employed, we have but to ask ourselves the
question, “Has Christ made a personal, separate
revelation to each one of us?’’ We have to trust to
the testimony of our own memory and consciousness
for an answer. We are not conscious, we have no
memory of such revelation This ends the question.
We can dismiss this method as not being carried out
by the facts.

What about the second method? Did Christ
leave a written and authenticated statement of His

doctrines? Our answer must be: we do not know
that Christ left any writing. There is no record of

any writing of His. There is no record in history or

in story of any copy of any writing of His.

What about the Scripture, the New Testament,
the four Gospels? Christ did not -write the Gospels.

St. Matthew wrote his Gospel about six years after

the Ascension of Christ. This Gospel of St. Matthew

is the earliest written work containing the doctrines

of Christ. The entire New Testament was written after
the Ascension or departure of Christ from earth. The

New Testament, in its entirety, is made up of twenty-
seven distinct writings composed about as follows :

The Gospel according to St. Matthew written not

earlier than 6 years after the Ascension.

The Gospel according to St. Mark written not
earlier than 10 years after the Ascension.

The Gospel according to St. Luke written not

earlier than 24 years after the Ascension.



The Doctrines Taught by Christ. 21

The Gospel according to St. John written not

earlier than 63 years after the Ascension.

The Acts of the Apostles written not earlier than

30 years after the Ascension.

The Letters of the Apostles ( 21 Letters ) written

at least 20 to 30 years after the Ascension.

One of these Letters (the first of St. John) writ-
ten about 66 years after the Ascension.

The Apocalypse of St. John written about 64
years after the Ascension.

The writers of the different parts of the New
Testament make no reference to any writing left by
Christ.

The New Testament could not have been the
means established by Christ by which all men were
to become acquainted with His doctrines. The first
piece of the New Testament was not written until six
years after the Church had been established and had

been in possession of the doctrines of Christ. The
last Gospel, that of St. John, was written about

sixty years after the establishment of the Church.

Hence the Church was for six years without any

Scripture at all, and for sixty years without the com-

plete Scripture. So that if the doctrine had to reach

every person by means of a writing, it was sixty

years before anyone could have a chance to possess

the doctrine.

Besides this, the Letters of the Apostles were for

the most part written to individuals or to the inhab-

itants of certain towns or provinces. These letters

were not copied out and scattered broadcast, and put

into the hands of everyone who would be a Christian.



22 Find the Church.

Anyone who might have heard of a certain letter and
who wished to possess a copy, was obliged to have it
written out by hand.

Besides the twenty-seven writings mentioned

above, there were in the first centuries many other
writings about Christ. But there was no one of the

writings that was in the hands of every Christian.

After the lapse of four hundred years the twenty-seven

writings, put together in the form in which we now
have them, were authentically declared to be the writ-

ten revelation of the New Testament, and ail the
other writings were rejected as not being of divine

revelation.

Hence, for six years there was no writing. It

was sixty years before the writings were completed.

It was four hundred years before they were gathered

into one book written by hand and recognized uni-

versally as the written revelation of the New
Testament.

Now, the question is, if every person had to learn

the doctrines of Christ from a book, where was the

Church during four hundred years? The Church

certainly existed, and it existed without any writing

left by Christ. It was established without any writ-

ing made by Him, and without any writing upon
which He had put His personal seal of approval. It
existed for six years before the first of the writings

was made by St. Matthew. It existed for sixty years
before the last of the writings was made by St. John.
It existed for four hundred years before the writings

were put together and were universally recognized to

be a record of some of the truths divinely revealed as



The Doctrines Taught by Christ. 23

distinguished from other writings which were then

universally recognized not to be a part of the reve-

lation. And during these four hundred years the
people did not and could not possess the writings,

and after the writings were gathered together the

people could not possess a copy of them without hav-

ing them written out by hand. Still, the Church

had been established and continued to exist, and the

doctrines of Christ were known, and were accepted

by faith.

All this being so, there is one thing evident, and

it is this : the one means which Christ chose to have

His doctrine handed down was not a writing
;

it was

not the Scripture. The doctrine was being handed

down before there was a Scripture; and when there
was a Scripture, everybody could not get a copy.

Now, we singled out three methods by which we
might suppose it possible for the doctrines of Christ

to have been kept and to have been transmitted.

The first method, we said, would be a personal

revelation made to each individual. We know that
this method does not agree with the facts

;
we are

not conscious of having received such a revelation.

The second method would be by a writing made
by Christ or authenticated by Christ and put into the

hands of all. But neither does this method agree

with the facts, as we see from the history of the
Scriptures.

We have, therefore, to go to the third method:
namely, that Christ left in His Church an authority
to be the guardian of the revelation which He left to
His Apostles. The Apostles received the whole



24 Find the Churchy

doctrine on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Ghost
taught them all truth. There must have existed in

the Apostles an authority to decide what was the doc-

trine left by Christ. This authority, then, would

have to come down through the Church for all
time. How?

Just as Christ died without leaving any writing

to the Apostles, so also did the Apostles die without

leaving any writing which they declared officially to

contain the sum total of the doctrines of Christ. Still,
the doctrine had to continue intact. There had to

be the possibility of an appeal for true and complete

doctrine. And as there was no official complete
writing, and as there was no personal revelation of

the entire doctrine made to each individual, we are
obliged to say that there would have to be a contin-

uous authority existing in the Church. How could
that authority continue? Some person or persons
would have to be invested by Christ with that

authority. It would have to be a special divinely

given power, a supernatural power. It could not be

a natural power by which one man after another
would in virtue of his own genius pass final and
unfailing sentence upon what was the doctrine taught

by Christ. Who, then, was to be invested by Christ

with the authority? Who was to have the divine
assistance to decide, with unerring certainty, when the

occasion called for a decision, what was the exact

doctrine taught by Christ?

Was this authority to be invested in the whole
body of believers, young and old? Was it to be given
to a committee of one hundred, or of two hundred?



The Doctrines Taught by Christ. 25

Was there to be a committee of two persons? Was
the possessor of this authority to be a single individual

who would be publicly known, and who could be
easily appealed to?

It certainly could not be the whole body of be-

lievers. In this supposition there would be no need

of an authority, since each person would thus have

his own personal aid (or revelation), a thing which
we know is not a fact. And if we should have to
certify to the universal agreement, it would be im-

possible to get the universal testimony.

Would it be a committee of one hundred? Why
a committee of one hundred? As the members of a
committee, divinely guided, would not and could not

speak by their own natural knowledge, but could
speak only according to the divine guidance, they

would all have to speak the same thing. What, then,

would be the advantage of having one hundred? It

would be fully sufficient to have the testimony of any

individual in the hundred. The solitary testimony of

any one member would be as secure as the testimony
of all.

Still further, as it would be of no advantage to

have the word of the hundred, so it would be of no

advantage to have the word of even two persons.

These two separate persons in the committee of two

would each have to speak by divine guidance. Hence,

the testimony of one would be as secure as the testi-

mony of both.

But could it not be that the testimony of one

would be a check on the testimony of the other?

Such a supposition could not be admitted since they



26 Find the Church.

would both be speaking by divine assistance. Besides,
the supposition that they could possibly give different

testimony, would be an end to the recognition of an
authority in the Church. For how would it ever be
possible to tell which was the correct testimony?

Hence, in order to get a recognizable unfailing

authority in the Church, we would always have to
seek for that authority as existing in one person.

Finding that authority in one person we would feel
that there was no need of seeking any further. That

person would be one who would need and who would
have supernatural, divine, assistance, whenever he

came to speak, as the authority^ to the Church of

Christ upon the doctrines left by Christ. It would

have to be an impossibility for him to make a mis^
take when speaking, as the authority, to the Church.
This would not be because he might be naturally a

great genius or a learned man, or a man of very vir-
tuous life

;
but it would be simply because he would

be the person invested with the teaching authority,

and God would make it impossible for him to write
or speak other than the exact doctrine when giving
decisions, as the authority, to the Church of Christ,

upon the doctrines of Christ. So that even if he
should come to be a bad man, and should wish to

introduce false doctrines into the Church, God would
make it impossible for him to speak those false doc-
trines. All of these things would be necessary in

this third method—the only one left—in which the
doctrines would be kept and transmitted by means of

an authority always existing in the Church. Finally

it would be necessary that this individual should



The Doctrines Taught hy Christ, 27

know that he possessed the authority, and it would
be necessary that he should be known by others to
possess it.

Now, has anything of this kind been recognized

amongst those who have professed to believe in Christ?
Yes. We have it to-day and we have had it from the
beginning. Where? In the Catholic Church. The
Catholic Church recognizes that it cannot obtain or

safeguard the doctrines in any other way than by a
living authority. This authority it has always rec-

ognized to exist in one man. Who is this one man?
In the first place it was St. Peter. Since the death

of St. Peter it has been his successors, the Popes, who
are always the Bishops of Rome. More than two

hundred and fifty of them have existed since the days

of St. Peter, and they have always been recognized

as possessing the authority; and they have always

been appealed to in matters concerning the doctrines

taught by Christ.

But do not Catholics hold that the Scriptures are

a revelation and an authority, and that they contain

the doctrines of Christ? Catholics hold that the

Scriptures are a revelation, and that they contain

doctrines taught by Christ. But Catholics go further

and ask how it is that they hold the Scriptures to be a
revelation and to contain doctrines taught by Christ.

They find that for six years there was no writing,

and yet that there was an authority in the Church.

They find that it was sixty years before the last of the

writings was made. In the meantime and afterwards

there were a multitude of other writings made. After

four hundred years twenty-seven writings were taken



28 Find the Church.

from the whole number and were declared to be a
revelation, and all the others were rejected as not be-
ing a revelation. Now, who did this? It must have
been done by a recognized authority. The twenty-
seven writings were accepted, and the others were

rejected, universally. The decision was certainly

made by an authority which was acknowledged to
have power to decide upon what belonged to reve-
lation, to decide that these twenty-seven writings

which make what we call the New Testament contained
a revelation and doctrines taught by Christ. From
that time to this day, the successors in the authority

have invariably given the same reply to all doubts

arising as to what was to be regarded as the New
Testament.

What did that authority decide in regard to the
New Testament? Did it decide that the New Testa-
ment writings were the sole rule of faith and the

whole rule of faith? No. That would be a strange

thing, as the authority itself had to decide upon the

Scriptures: nor do the Scriptures themselves anywhere

refer to themselves as the sole rule of faith that is to

be consulted by each individual so that he might try

to make out the entire meaning for himself. Or did
the authority say that when each man read the
Scriptures he would receive a divine inspiration as to

their meaning? The authority did not say either of

these things. It simply declared the writings of the

New Testament to be a revelation, to contain doctrines
taught by Christ. It did not affirm that the Book

contained all the doctrines. For the complete doc-

trine, therefore, we have still to go to the authority,



The Doctrines Taught by Christ. 29

and we have to read the Book as it is interpreted by

the authority.

To conclude, then, we have to get the doctrines

of Christ either by a personal revelation which Christ

makes to us—and this revelation we have not : or we
have to get them from a writing which Christ left for

us—and Christ left no writing : or we have to get
them from an authority which Christ established and

which continues. Such an authority we have. It has

come down to us as recognized by the greatest scholars
of the Christian era.