IMPRIMATUR, July 13. 1687.  
Hen. Maurice, Reverendissimo in Christo. P. D. Wilhelmo. Archiep. Cant. à Sacris.   

A Fair and Methodical Discussion OF THE First and Great CONTROVERSY, BETWEEN THE CHURCH of ENGLAND, AND Church of Rome, Concerning the INFALLIBLE GUIDE.  
In Three Discourses.  

Whereof the FIRST is Introductory, and states the Points, which are Preliminary to this, and all the other Controversies between the two Churches.  
The SECOND considers at large the Pretence of Modern Infallibility, and shows it to be Groundless.  
The THIRD, by the help of the Former, briefly examines the Pretended Rational Account of the Roman Catholics, concerning the Ecclesiastical Guide in Controversies of Religion; and detects its Artifice.   
LONDON, Printed for R. Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Churchyard, and R. Bentley in Russel-Street in Covent-Garden. MDCLXXXIX.   

An ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER.  
THE two former Discourses were begun, and almost finished nigh four years ago, on a design of bringing the whole Romish Controversy into a natural Method, for the Author's private satisfaction. Neither was he brought to think, that there was any need of them for the Public, during the late Religious Debate; our Cause having been so warmly, and so successfully undertaken by abler hands, against the Imprudent Aggressors. But because there was in these Papers some respect had to the Arguments of the Famous Romish Guide, and that whole Book might very easily and very briefly be refuted thence; it was thought fit, that they should however appear abroad for that Service: and accordingly, as much as is now Printed, was Licenced the last Summer was Twelvemonth. But than, it being stopped by some Accidents from coming out to its Date, and our Adversaries seeming to have given up the Dispute, this Design was quite given over too. Nor had it been resumed, had not the Author been told, that now the Romanists have had so little to say of their own, they would the rather call for the formality of an Answer to their Old Champion; and had he not besides considered, that the Pains here taken, of examining at large such Trifling Arguments, might be so far useful to the World, as to save some one else the ungrateful Labour, who might bestow his time better for the Public Good.   

ERRATA.  
PAge 29. in the Margin over against line 33. put Iren. l. 3. c. 4. p. 42. after the 14 l. put Basil. de Sp. Sanct. cap. 27. p. 66. l. 9 for Impenitent read Impertinent. l. 14. read to stick to the Conclusion. p. 79. l. 32. for 200 read 100 p. 96. l. 4. for a read no. p. 100 place over against the 11th. l. § VIII. and after in the running Contents of the Chap. for 7. read 8. p. 116. over against the 14 l. place §. III.   

DISCOURSE I. Concerning the PRELIMINARY POINTS, etc.  

The CONTENTS.  

THat the Pretence of any Modern Church to Infallibility, is to be proved by that Church, from the word of God, Written, or Unwritten. Chap. I  
That there is no Dispute between our Church and the Church of Rome, concerning the Authority of those Scriptures, that are to decide this, or any other Point in difference; except that only of Prayer for the Dead. Chap. II.  
Tradition, or the Unwritten Word Considered. 

The Nature of Tradition. Chap. III.  
The Uncertainty of Oral Tradition, particularly in Temporal Affairs. Chap. IU.  
That there is not much more reason for its Certainty in Ecclesiastical, than in Temporal Matters. Chap. V  
The Case of Tradition, as to Ecclesiastical Matters, particularly considered. Chap. VI  
Some Articles to be observed, concerning Traditional Authorities. Chap. VII.      

DISCOURSE I. Concerning the Preliminary Points, etc.  
CHAP. I  
That the Pretence of any Modern Church to Infallibility, is to be proved by that Church, and that the Proofs must be brought from the Word of God Written or Unwritten. 
Chap. 1. Proofs for Infallibility must be brought, and whence.   
AS Religion is a common Concern, and of the greatest Moment; so it is to be expected, that every Man should apply himself to the Consideration of it, with great Diligence and Zeal; and should take care, if Disputes arise concerning any material difference in it, that he be not of the wrong side; his Future Eternal Happiness depending so much on the right choice.  
Now the differences between the Church of Rome, and ours of England being very great; The one pretending God to be well pleased with the Service, at which the other says he is extremely Offended; The one requiring such things to be professed as necessary Truths, which the other avows to be falsities: Every Ingenuous Man, who is a Lover of Truth, and desirous to serve his God acceptably, is obliged to inform and satisfy himself concerning the Matters in Debate.  
And if one of these Churches shall positively command us not to question her Determinations, and tell us that she aught to be believed without further Examination; that she is the Infallible Judge, and if any Difference arises, it must be determined by her Authority: If this shall be the pretence of one of the Parties, to be such a Judge in her own Cause, and the other denies the Jurisdiction; it is plain that this now is another new question between them, to be decided some indifferent way.  
The Church of Rome, if she challenges this Privilege of Infallibility, must however be content to wave it for a time, and to submit it to a Trial. And not only so, but she is to remember too, that the Burden of the Proof lies altogether on her side; all common Human Presumption being so violent against her in this case. For we suppose she understands the nature of Christian Faith better, than to impute any want of that, to such a Reasonable Inquiry. We should indeed, we confess, be guilty of the want of it, should we not believe the Infallible Authority of our Saviour, and his Apostles; and should we not be ready to assent to what ever they shall have delivered; and this our Faith, the Roman Church is now desired to try, and to see whether we will not immediately yield to any good Argument they shall be able to bring us thence: But for us, without such Apostolical Direction and Warrant, to believe any Modern number of Men Infallible: This, we conceive, would not be an Act of Divine Faith, but a fond unaccountable Credulity, a Credulity below Human, that would not only by its easy Folly disgrace the rest of our Belief, but may in the consequence be carried to destroy it.  
Now that Church when it claims such an Infallible Judicature, must claim it by virtue of some Power derived from Christ, and this Commission must some way or other be produced and vouched.  
This Commission than to be produced, must either be under the Hands of one of the Evangelists or Apostles, and so it would be undeniable; or some Authority by Word of Mouth, signified from Christ or his Apostles, of which we may have some certain notice.  
This is the way that Question is to be debated; and it is plain that every Christian is to judge of it seriously and carefully; that he may either immediately submit to this Authority, if it be just; or if it be not, that he may not be led by a voluntary Subjection to Men, to do such things as may displease his God.  
It appears than, that in this Cause we are to be determined by Scripture and Tradition: And if the Roman Church is able to make good its Authority thence, we are to look not further, but submit in the other points: But if she shall be judged to have no such Power, than those other points must be tried the same way, by Scripture and Tradition also.  
Seeing than that Scripture and Tradition are the only Rules, by which we are to judge of the Truth of that Pretence, and consequently of all other Disputes that depend between the two Parties: We aught first to take Knowledge of these two great Principles, fixing and ascertaining them, before we undertake to proceed further.   

CHAP. II.  
That concerning the Authority of those Scriptures which are to decide this Point of Infallibility, (or any other, saving that of Prayers for the Dead,) there is no Dispute between us and the Church of Rome.  
AS to Scripture, the two Churches do not differ much. The Books of the New Testament are the same with them and us; received equally on both sides, as Divinely Inspired, and of unquestionable Truth. The Books of the Old Testament are the same too, excepting the Apocryphal Books, which they esteem as Canonical as the rest, we with great Reason and Authority denying them that Sacred Character. However for the present let them be admitted and stand by, till the time comes to remove them: For they have nothing to say, I think, between those of Rome and us, but in the Case of Prayer for the Dead.  

Chap. 2. The Scriptures agreed on.  Both sides therefore are obliged to assent immediately to any thing affirmed in those Books, commonly received by us, of the Old and New Testament.  
But here the Church of Rome is not to fancy, that when we receive the Holy Scriptures for Divine, we receive them by virtue of her Infallible Authority.  
We receive them from her hands, as we might have received them from the Greek, or more Eastern Churches. We receive them from her, not as a Judge over us, but as a Library Keeper, and a Witness: a Witness too, in such a Case, where her Testimony is corroborated by the Concurrence of others.  
For, under favour, where her vulgar Latin disagrees from the Greek Copies, we may take the liberty to prefer the Original: and if her Greek Copies had differed materially from those in the hands of the Greeks, or from the Copies in other Languages; we should not have deferred so much to her, as to have trusted her single Authority without better enquiry. But God be thanked, we found by collating the several Copies of several places and Languages, and the many Citations scattered in infinite Books, that we cannot complain of any falsification in this point.  
But Honesty in one instance, where they could not well do otherwise, is not therefore necessarily to be presumed in all. And besides, if we should allow that Church to be so honest, as not willingly to deceive; yet it would be a great strain to say, that therefore she can't be deceived, and is Infallible.  
We receive than the same Scriptures that they, and submit our Differences to that Authority; and this we do, without being foreclosed, or obliged to stand to the Judgement of that Church in other things, and own her Infallibility.   

CHAP. III.  
The Nature of Tradition.  
NOW besides those Truths or Precepts delivered down by the Evangelists or Apostles in Writing, there may be supposed many others spoken by them, which were of equal Authority with the Written, and obliged the Hearers as much; and which would too equally oblige us, had we any certain information concerning them.  
Such Say not put in Writing by the inspired Persons themselves, but taken from their Mouths, and delivered down by others, are called in Ecclesiastical Language Traditions; and as long as they are transmitted down by the Mouth, and not yet reduced into Writing, they are called Oral.  
These Traditions of either kind, Written or Oral, how many there are we would be glad to know: a great Body of them is pretended, some already authentically declared by Councils, or Popes; others mentioned by several Men, in several places, and standing for the next promotion; the rest reserved in Petto, to be produced on Occasion Eternally.  
Now because we may suspect that we shall be pressed mainly by Evidences of this nature, it will be best beforehand to inquire into their Circumstances and Character, and see how credible Deponents they may prove.  
These Say therefore pretended to be spoke by Christ or his Apostles, are given us either word for word, or the sense and substance only; and are for some time at lest supposed to be delivered down by strength of Memory.  
Now as to what is transmitted Orally, and to be preserved by successive Memories, we may consider; that to take and make the report of a Discourse word for word, these things are necessary: Attention to what was spoke, a due Perception of it, and a Memory that shall retain it. To give an exact Summary of a Discourse, there is besides necessary, a Judgement both comprehensive enough to take in the whole meaning, and so upright and unprejudicate as to give it no turn or bias; and besides that the Sense, if spoke in new words, should be truly expressed. And therefore further there must be considered another requisite of Care and Diligence, that must be all along supposed in each part, either to attend, conceive, and retain, or else fully and uprightly to consider and to express properly: Not to mention that Fidelity that is required, as in the custody or transmission of a Writing, so in the delivery of an Oral Narrative.  
There lies this Difficulty on all Oral Records: and it is plain there is very little or none of it on the Written. To keep the Written is, in the general, only to let it lie where it does; and to deliver it to another, is no more than to deliver so much Paper or Parchment into his hands; a matter of no wondered Skill or Capacity, to be discharged by any who is not an Idiot. So too, to Transcribe the Original into other Copies, be it never so long or Intricate, requires not more Learned Ability of a Man, than to Read and Writ; and no greater strength of Memory, than to bear in his head three or four Words, the while he writes them down: For this performance, one would think there is no such need of great Clerkship; and it is easy to conceive how it may be done.  
Those therefore in our Age, who could disparage the Invention of Letters so much, as to prefer Oral Tradition before the Written, for the more easy and certain conveyance of the two; must have had some great Pique at some certain Writing: and must too have thought the Truth of their Cause very unevident, when such an unreasonable Proposition was to be brought for its proof, and premised as the more undeniable of the two.  
I insist not therefore on the ridiculous Comparison, whether it be easier to copy a Book, or to get it by heart; to carry it in one's hand, or let it lie where it does, than to charge it upon one's Memory, and bear it in one's Head: which is the surer way of Record, to desire an Officer to remember a Deed, or to Exemplify it: and whether it be safer to sand a Message by Word of Mouth, from Stage to Stage, or by Letter. It is a hard case to be put seriously on such Determinations, not worthy certainly of an Infallible Judge. But I think the Readers patience, as well as my own, will have exercise enough, while it stoops to the following considerations: Where we proceed to inquire, what Credibility Oral Tradition can challenge after some tract of time; examining its Authority in Temporal Matters FIRST, and THAN in Spiritual.   

CHAP. IU.  
Concerning the Uncertainty of Oral Tradition in Temporal Affairs.  
ORal Tradition, after it has gone but a little way, finds small Credit in Affairs of the World; it is called Hearsay, or Fame; and goes for uncertain at lest, if not reputed a Lyar. A Story told at the third or fourth hand, is commonly so changed in its circumstances, that in common Conversation, tho' it passes for Discourse, it is never relied on without nearer Enquiry; nay, will hardly be repeated in the next Company, without this Addition; that he heard it not himself, and was only told so at such a distance. For the Person that gave me the Relation of a Discourse or an Action, may be believed by me, that he heard it so punctually from another, whom I know; and that other I may verily believe, upon his Affirmation, had it as he reports from a third Author; if too, I know that third Man for Honest and Exact, I may believe verily that, if he affirmed it, he gave a true recital of what he received from a fourth, etc. And yet, notwithstanding I have such a particular Confidence in each of these Men, that I would believe the Relation from each of them apart at the first hand; I should not however give the same entire credit to it, when it comes derived so far. For tho' I have Opinion enough of the Sincerity and Capacity of each; yet if the Subject of their Report was any thing long or nice, 
Chap. 4. The Uncertainty of Oral Tradition in Temporal Affairs.  and so liable to a Mistake; and I therefore not absolutely sure, but that some one of them might have mistaken: That Defective incomplete certainty diminishes in a continual progression; and will at a proportionable distance bring me to a suspense; as afterwards, if carried further, it will begin to increase in me a contrary inclination, rather to believe the conveyance Erroneous, than True.  
It is known that Human Understanding in respect to belief, is considered as a Balance, whose Scales are of a Determinate Capacity, and will turn upon some certain Weight. As than, if in one Scale there be a considerable Weight, and in the other an Equal, there is an equiponderance; if that other Weight abates but little, there is some doubtful Equiponderance still: But if it abates notably, the first Scale gins to fix, growing still the more and more unmoveable, according as the Weight in the second diminishes; which we may suppose to decrease so long, till it is either none, or of no moment at all: In like manner in our Understanding, if the Evidence on one side be considerable, but that on the other as great, our Belief is in a suspense; If that on the other be but a little lesle, we are still in a suspense, tho' wavering and inclining to the opposite; Afterward when the difference of Weight is momentous, we begin to settle and rest on the preponderating side; but grow more and more fixed, as the probability for the other does decrease; which at last may be either none, or such as the Balance shall not feel.  
Now, when to this observation we add further, that the Understanding of Man is such a Balance, as leaves out often what it is to weigh; and, to what it weighs, does not always give the due weight: we shall than easily perceive that Human Belief has its several Degrees; and tho' it rests on one side and is fixed, yet all the while there may be Probabilities too for the contrary, in the other Scale. Thou therefore the Opinion we have of the Capacity, Care, and Integrity of a Man, may determine us to believe his Report; yet our belief is not always so determined, that there is nothing of Verisimilitude on the other side. If he avers a Fact in which he could not well be deceived, we immediately and firmly believe it; as that he received this Writing from another: But if he affirms the truth of a Verbal Recital, that is long and intricate, and after some length of Time; he cannot expect to be believed, but in a lesle degree. For no Honest Prudent Man would in this case depose to the Words of a Discourse, without this Caution, to the best of his Memory; nor to the substance of it, without that other, to the best of his Understanding. But lastly, if such a Relation be not positively averred, but told without such formality of Assurance; or averred but by a stranger, or one in whose Integrity we do not absolutely confided; the degree of our Belief will be yet lesle: The odds for the Truth of the first, may be a thousand, or if you please a Million to one; for the truth of the second, it may not be that of Ten; and for the third, not above that of Two. Now this last measure of Belief generally serves in all ordinary Conversation; and something much lesle than the first, even in Causes of Life and Death.  
To return than to our first Case; let us suppose the four successive Relators to aver, what they successively said; and let it be supposed, that I would have given each of them in my Belief, such an odds or preponderance as 5. to 1. which in many cases is a very liberal Allowance: It is demonstrable than, that altho' I give a very great Credit to such a Relation at the first hand, at the 4th I must not give any; as it is also certain by the same undeniable computation, that a Report which at the first hand has the Odds in certainty, of 10 to 1, at the 7th hand would have none: And alike certain, that if at the first hand there be two to one for the probability of a Narrative, the advantage at the second will lie on the other side.  
Those that are versed in Calculation, know it to be supposed here: That the Continuity of an Oral Tradition, or the progress of a Report, is as a Chain composed of several Probabilities or Contingencies: That the probability of the whole diminishes still, as the particular Contingencies multiply; in the same kind of proportion in which the present value of Money lessens, upon rebate of Compound Interest, by the distances of the future Payment: And lastly, that as the likelihood for preserving the continuity of Truth abates, so the likelihood for Interruption and Mistake arises.  
The Computation we have made from these Supposititions is exact, the Reader may be assured; and gives the precise reason of that uncertainty, of which the World is so very sensible in gross, as to give but small Credit to Hear-say Relations. In any matter of Consequence, they are still rejected, and any Jury marks them with an Ignoramus. I take leave to add, tho' in another Case, that the same way of Speculation will discover how justly a great difference in value is still made between the Testimony of a single Witness, and that of two concurring: For the certainty is not only doubled by the addition of their Persons, but multiplied by the proportion of their credibility, in such a manner, that if the Credit of each Witness singly was as ten to one, there would be above six score to one for the truth of what they deposed jointly.  
But as to the Subject in hand, and that I may dispatch these Niceties all at once, the Reader may consider further; that in the numbering of the years of any successive Generations of Men, thirty years are commonly assigned to the duration of each, taking them one with another. This is the Calculation of the Ancients, from some old Successions. However we are content to allow about forty, a Number that may be tried in the two last fourteen Generations of our Saviour. But of that something must be necessarily abated in our purpose; for a Child of a day, tho' he begin than to live, and continued a course of years, yet cannot take up a Tradition, and bear his part in that till he is of riper Age: So that we in our case are very reasonable, when we follow the Vulgar Reckoning, and let a 100 years go for three Generations.  
This number of years beyond which no single Witness can be supposed to reach, (for he must be nigh a hundred and twenty years old, and than of good memory;) and for which three successive ones must, in ordinary computation, be allowed; is therefore deservedly by some Civilians, made the utmost limit of Human information; and what is beyond it, is all in the dark, and out of the memory of Man. But if we shall pass further, and suppose ourselves at the distance of three or 400 years, what was said than might have been thrice seccessively forgotten; and must be presumed to be buried in a multiplied Oblivion: It must have passed through ten or twelve several hands at lest; been preserved by each of them thirty or forty years together; and were the odds upon each of them that of ten to one, that they would be so diligent and of so happy Memories, as to transmit each in his own time, (whereas 'tis by no means even,) yet that so much was not performed by the whole twelve, the odds on the contrary side would be as of two to one.  
Let us than suppose that an Act of Parliament, of any length and niceness, were to pass from Constable to Constable, through twelve Parishes, by way of Oral Tradition, to be delivered over faithfully, and if you please on pain of death: How often must it be repeated, and how much conned, or how well studied and examined by each, to bring it either Verbatim, or in exact Abstract, to its journey's end? How fit do we think it would be, at the ordinary rate of Human Capacity, to be proclaimed for Law in the last Town, and to be the ground there of a Judicial Decision? Nay, suppose the Officers successively to be very intelligent Men, and of more than common Memories; as the Performance would be difficult to take up such a Charge, and carry it immediately cross the Parish; so much more, if each Man should be obliged, without help of Writing, to keep it for twenty, thirty, or forty years, and than at last to discharge himself on his Neighbour: It is too much to think that his Memory in that time shall not falter; but where would the Tradition be if he himself should dye? But further yet, let us imagine all the Parish to come in and help; it is plain, that without the assistance of writing, they would rather help to confounded and distracted, than to ascertain; and would easier agreed to give a wrong Report, than know how to set it right; the burden of the Trust must at last rest upon some one, or very few; whose Memories are as frail as their Lives; either of which failing before the day, the Tradition is lost.  
But all this is an extraordinary supposition. What than, if the distance of time continuing the same, the Successive reporters are not presumed to be any such Choice Men, but of the ordinary Size? what if they acted under no great apprehension of danger from the miscarriage? what too if they were not denied the help of Writing, but were all along so little careful as not to think of using it? what great stress do we judge is to be laid at last upon this report (if any such come,) so accidentally preserved by the successive Memories, and so contingently transmitted?  
We perceive from what is said, that it is no very feasible project to device an Utopian Succession of Men, either by single Persons, or in Society; (propose what choice Regulation, Rewards, or Punishments you please;) that shall convey Orally any Record of ordinary length, through three or four hundred years, with such a proportion of certainty as shall weigh with an understanding Man; there must be in that tract of time so much chance for failure and mistake, that the Report at last, tho' not impossible to be true, yet shall be too unlikely ever to be admitted. If therefore we make no such fiction, and remove all fanciful suppositions, if taking things and Men as they usually are, we let this memorial Conveyance pass in common course; we may easily conceive what will hap to it, and to what a miserble degree of incertitude it must sink; it must long before its period run out all its credit, and at last not retain so much probability as may poise with the dust of the Balance.  
For if sayings are to be transmitted verbatim, Oral report, like an Echo, may possibly keep something of them up for a while; and the Repetitions, by Chance or Art, may be larger, or more: but by degrees they will falter, diminish, and grow fainter, and at last expire. There is this difference, that the Vocal Tradition of an Echo, tho' defective, is always true; and delivers faithfully every Syllable it returns: whereas our Oral Tradition is subject to the infirmity of falcifying, as well as forgetting; and does not only let fall, but altars and confounds: so that its Voice however loud it may continued, grows insignificant and uncertain; its Credit at lest, like the sound of the Echo, becoming fainter and weaker upon each repetition, and dying at some distance in the air.  
This is the fortune of Sayings that pass through the memory only: but where they are to pass through the understanding too, and are to come out in Abstract new moulded, and worded, they are in greater danger of being misconceived or misrepresented; of receiving some new turn, according as the Bent of the Person, or Age is inclined. Some tincture of the Vessel in which they have been kept and digested, will pass along. If therefore they have went through many Persons, or much time, they must be presumed to be much altered; even such Rules and Maxims as are intended to regulate men's thoughts and manners, accommodating themselves so, and complying in such measure with the Minds that convey them, that at some distance they receive the change they aught to have produced.  
Neither is the Case in this matter different between single Persons, and a Company of Men. For as single Men altar their Opinion of things often with their Age, and sometimes in their thoughts and humours become as it were other Men: so in Bodies or Societies, the same Mutations hap, and in an Age or two there are commonly new Maxims of thinking, and Modes of living, as certainly as there is a new Generation. A Society as it insensibly changes its Persons, so changes its Opinions insensibly too: there cannot be assigned a time, when the Corporation gins to be a new set of Men, so neither, when the new Opinions come in; but both come in by degrees: and as it is sure by the Law of Nature, that a hundred year will make a total change in the Persons, so a hundred or two hundred more may make a change in their Judgements. A Change of Judgement being easier than that of the Persons, because it may be made in the self same Persons: and than, when it is once passed, there is no more Memory of an old Opinion forsaken, than of an old Collegiate departed.  
Now when Men altar by degrees, and all of them together it may easily hap, that they themselves shall not ●●●eive the variation. For they cannot discern it but by something without them, and which at the same time stands still. And if too they look on that direction, their Imagination may than be deceived; a those are who Sail by the Shore, and are apt to impute their own change of place to the fixed Land. Upon which Account, two Societies may not more agreed, which of them has varied; than Astronomers can resolve us, which it is that moves, the Earth and all its Company, or the Sun.  
But of this, Language is a sufficient Instance: which in time changes imperceptibly, Men altering their Words and Phrases, and Pronunciation unawares; forgetting by degrees the old, as they take up new. And this happens, without any violent Intrusion of a Foreign Speech; but only from freedom of fancy, and voluntary acceptation: Some Men refining, or affecting, and others imitating, as the Humour and Mode may be. And this at last prevails so indiscernably, that those of the City when they go into the distant Countries, think they are come unto a People of another Language, who yet it may be speak the truer English. Which indeed is the truer; the Eastern, the Northern, and Western Man may differ: and the Dispute without writing could never be decided, except one of our Great-Grandfathers should arise and inform us. But Books will easily end the Controversy, and Old Chaucer produced, will tell us the variation that has passed in lesle than 300 years.  
Now as Oral Tradition would not tell us a Discourse of 400 years old in the same Language in which it was spoke; so neither is it likely to give it us in the same Sense. Neither, if the present Age shall agreed in the same Report, is it a greater argument of its antiquity, than it is of the antiquity of our present Phrase, that we all now speak it. Languages altar either by force, the old being driven out totally, as the British by the Saxon; or in part only, as the Saxon after by the Norman, from the mixture of which our English sprang: or else they voluntarily change by importation, as from our former French Wars, or later Travels; by imitation, as in Habit so in Phrase, of Italy or France; by the Influence of those Nations on our Courts, and their influence than on the People; by new business, or new humour. Customs too and Manners, both in Civil and Religious Matters, altar in like manner; either by command and force, or by the gentler power of Example, and Contagion of practice. Now as without Books, we might have thought our Language the same it was spoke in Julius Caesar's time, and should not have been sensible of the changes since past; so neither should we have known any thing of the Government and Laws; but imagined this Form we now live under had been from the beginning, and that the City (for example) had a Mayor and Court of Aldermen by Charter from the Romans. For if Laws, tho' written, are often in a little time antiquated by desuetude, and abrogated by contrary custom, so that the Statute-Book itself secures them not the notice of the present Age; much more therefore may what was never Written be laid aside in a while, and at last utterly and irrecoverably be forgotten.  
But there is no more need of such reasoning speculation, than of that formal supposition, and scrupulous calculation we made before. For who is there that does not in fact see, what blind Stories are told of former times by those People that are without the use of Letters? what a darkness there dwells upon time, at a little distance; and still as the World goes forward, how fast night comes on behind; the Ages past, growing as obscure and unknown as those that are to come. So true it is, what was said by the Egyptian to Solon, (a Saying as good as any other of those Wise Men) That the Grecians without the use of Writing were always Children; being still as of yesterday, without any knowledge of the World, and experience of former years.  
For this purpose, we of this Nation need but look upwards towards Edward the Third's Reigns, (I might have said Henry the Fifth, or even the Eighth,) and than reflect how much we know of that Victorious busy time, more than what Writing has informed us. What Action of War or Peace, what Passage or Saying is now pretended to be told, other than what we read? Let all the Old Men and Old Women be consulted, and see what Traditional Memoirs they can furnish for a Supplement to our Histories and Records. If there be a tittle of Law or Story to be learned that way, than we may begin to think, that the Statutes of that Reign might have been transmitted by Tradition, and the year Books by Oral Reports. But who does not see, that if Paper and Parchment were out of the way, there would be no footstep nor Memorial of those times; not a much better account of Edward the Third, than we have now of a Tenth Edward? The World must than begin with us, short of that Age; and all before be but as the Chaos, darkness covering its face. All that we could than do, must be to judge the former days by our own; to imagine the same Proceed, the same Rules of Government, and Courts of Justice, the same Customs and Interpretations of Laws by which we now live. And had any ancient Law or Form come down by chance unvaryed; yet it could have brought no certainty with it of its Rise: it must have passed in account with the rest, and could not have given any proof of its elder descent. From what distance it came, and what in the mean time had happened to it, who should have informed us?  
It is manifest, that the interval of some three hundred years must cast so much uncertainty upon all Oral Report; that it can never pretend to any the lest Credit, at the distance, suppose of Edward the Third. But how shall any be afforded it, if we mount up three hundred years higher, and suppose the Hearsay to descend from the conquerors Days? For (to speak at the easiest rate) of Him, had there been no writing, we should, I presume, have known as much as we do of King Arthur; or have had just as much certainty of his descent from Normandy, as we have of Brutus' coming from Troy. A believing People we once were, when from that Story of Brute we challenged precedence in a Council: But we had, it may be, a further design in it, a very considerable one for those days; and had a mind to claim kindred with Rome.  
To conclude therefore, a certain term of years there is, beyond which all the foregoing Time, is Time out of mind, and utterly fabulous: whether it be two, three, or four hundred years, the Reader shall determine. But such a limited Sphere there is; as in space, for our Sight, and for our Hearing; so in time, for human Memory. At such a distance of years the truth of Tradition grows so obscure, that the addition of as many more years does darken it but little more: the Uncertainty before being so great, that it was scarce capable of any Accession.   

CHAP. V  
That there is not much more reason for the certainty of Oral Tradition in Ecclesiastical Affairs, than in Temporal.  
THis is the Case of Human Affairs, and whether in Religion it be much different, we shall now inquire. For it may be allowed us that such a concurrence of extraordinary Attention, Memory, Comprehension, and Uprightness of Understanding, that is requisite for a Verbal or Summary Tradition, cannot be supposed to continued to very many descents in Temporal Subjects: But is it not to be imagined (they will say) that the uttermost ability and care of Man will be employed, where the Discourse is made by God, or his particular Order, and the reporting of it infinitely concerns the Eternal Welfare of Human Kind? To prevent the suspicion of such a Disparity, and to preserve to ourselves the liberty of Judging in this matter by our ordinary measures, let us observe,  
(1.) That no gift of Memory is here to be supposed: For tho' the Text of bringing all things to remembrance, might prove an indefectibility of Memory, as well as that other of leading into all Truth, argues an Infallibility of Judgement, yet that Fancy not being advanced by our Adversaries, 
Chap. 5. Not more reason of Certainty in Ecclesiastical than, in Temporal Tradition.  I desire their pardon for bringing it into their Minds. Further we must not imagine any Art of Memory invented and used on this occasion. Neither yet have they told us of any Order of Men instituted for this purpose; that there were Recorders and Remembrancers amongst the Christians, as Readers there were, we know. Those too whose Lips should preserve this Knowledge, succeeded not by Families, where the Tradition might have been sucked in with the Milk, and descended by Inheritance; as with the Jews and Egyptians. There were not neither any Academies than Erected, in which men might have been supposed to have been trained up from their youth, for this Traditional Performance: And in the Ecclesiastical Family of each Church, the inferior Orders did but meanly prepare towards it; neither requiring any great comprehension of things, nor exercising the faculty of Memory much; such as the Office of keeper of the Door, of Reader, etc. The Employment too of the Deacons, was chief Oeconomical, to receive and to distribute the public Money, and to make Provision for the Clergy and the Poor. The Presbyters themselves, by reason of the dispersion of the People, and the exigence of the times, had very little leisure, from Visiting, Catechising, Exhorting and Encouraging; and accordingly they were chose into that Order, more for their Godly Simplicity, and holy Zeal, than for the greatness of their other Talents: That of Memory particularly, being never required at an Election, nor understood by any Interpreter, to be one of those Qualifications St. Paul prescribes, either for a Priest, or a Bishop. And lastly, when the Episcopal See was vacant, it was filled, not by the Signior Presbyter, or by such a one whom the Bishop had designed, and to whom he had left the Tradition; but by any other person, whom the Congregation did otherwise value and desire. So were men than taken to govern the Church; some that were but just come into the Presbytery, as St. Cyprian; very often from the other Orders, as in Rome frequently from that of the Deacons; often from other courses of life, from Politic Administrations, the Bar, or profane Philosophy; and those sometimes not yet Baptised, as St. Ambrose, Nectarius, and Synesius; from very mean Employments, and Mechanic Trades, as Carpenters, Smiths, etc. if Gregory Nazianzen may be credited in his time for the East, who speaks (to say not more) as if Synods had been than filled with that sort 
[a] Carmin. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. . Now, what was the study generally of those at that time in the West, St. Hierom will inform us, in his Dialogue against the Luciferians. 
[b] Deceptio tam Laici quam Episcopi communis est. At Episcopus errare non potuit. Revera de Platonis & Aristotelis sinu in Episcopatum alleguntur. Quotus enim quisque est qui non apprime in his eruditus sit? Denique, ex literatis quicunque hodie Ordinatur id habent ●●rae non quomodo Scripturarum medullas ebibant, sed quomodo aures Populi declamatorum flosculis mulceant.  Where he pleads, that the same Excuse of Ignorance is to be allowed both to the Bishop, and to the Layman, who had fallen into the Arrian Heresy. For a Bishop (says he) may be deceived as well as a Layman. But a Bishop you'll say could not be misled. As if Bishops were chose to their Sees, from the Schools of Plato or Aristotle; and as if there were but a very few of them that were not extraordinarily skilled in such Knowledge: as if too those in Orders of our days that are Learned, did study to understand the depth of the Scripture; and did not make it their chiefest care how they shall tickle the People's ears with Declamatory Flourishes. So much St. Jerom says in his Patron Pope Damasus his Family, and at Rome. But under the next Pontificate the Characters of that Clergy and City are described more plainly, 
[c] 
Cum in babylon versarer, & purpuratae Meretricis essem colonus, volui garrire aliquid de Spiritu Sancto, etc. & ecce Pharisaeorum conclamavit Senatus, & nullus Scriba vel fictu, etc.  
Hieron. Praef. in Librum Didymi. de Sp. S.   The place is called Babylon, and the Scarlet Whore, the Clergy a Senate of Pharisees, and not so much as a pretended Scribe amongst them. Something indeed is to be abated in that place, for St. Jerom's heat; but that cannot be done without impairing the Credit of a Witness our Adversaries sometimes want; (who must admit his satire if they take his Compliment) and without confessing, that Holy men might misrepresent in the Judgements they give down. For,  
(2.) We must not think that former Ages were not subject to Passions and Infirmities as well as the latter, so we shall not wisely inquire of these things. We must not imagine, that always in every Generation, the care and diligence of the Successors, was equal to that of the Apostles; and that the want of extraordinary Abilities or Institution was supplied by extraordinary labour and application. For the sincere endeavour of Man does not always answer the great moment of the Errand, or the Majesty of the Author: neither need we any thing more than our own experience to inform us; that Mankind is as much concerned for this life as for the next; and for the Commands of Man, as of God; notwithstanding the vast disproportion. We might say further, for ordinary reason will tell it us, that those who break Laws will not much care to keep them any way; and will not be at any wondered pains to instruct their Memory, to upbraid their Judgement and their William. So that as few Ages will suffer us to presume of any extraordinary Industry or Integrity in this Affair; some there are which will not allow us to say there was any at all: when it was well, that even Books could keep themselves; and that the lesle they were used, they lasted the longer; or that they were so far neglected, as not to be destroyed.  
Instances of perverse Inclination, and stupid negligence of this kind, might be given in Christian Ages: But, because these are the subject of our Dispute, we will at present look in the Old Testament. and there, not to take notice that the Serpent was able to obscure in Eve the first Command, she, new made, received from her Husband, he just before from God; not to mention that forgetfulness of God, that over ran the World in lesle time (according to the Hebrews) than has now passed since Christ, and which deserved the Deluge: you found, after that terrible punishment and exemplary warning, the new washed world, the Descendants of Noah, entirely relapsed into Idolatry within 500 years, say the Hebrews; (the Seventy but a thousand,) though Noah himself, the Preacher of Righteousness, lived three hundred of them, warning the new world, with as little Success as he had the old.  
Further, the Israelites, the Seed of Faithful Abraham, and a peculiar People, after their miraculous Redemption from Pharaoh, their Law wonderfully and terribly delivered by God himself, after all the mighty Signs by the hands of Moses, and Joshua; all their several Exhortations and Precautions, which we read, but they neglected; fell back again into Heathenism in the Third Generation, within the compass of 200 year. So little reason is there to presume of any miraculous Care or Sincerity from the Sons of men in Religious Subjects; for, besides that Interest and Humour take place there too; it is well if our Attention is not slacker, and our perception duller, and the Impressions on the Memory consequently weaker, on this, than on other Occasions.  
(3.) But, besides all this, such care and industry of Memory is not to be supposed, where there was no such extraordinary need of its help. For in the first years of Christianity the Skill of Writing was as common all over the Roman Empire, as now it is in Europe: and, tho' some Superstitions had forbidden the use of it in things Sacred, yet our Religion practised it from the beginning. The Evangelists writ their Narratives, the Apostles sent Letters; in which Scriptures Mysteries are spoke out, as Sacred, and as Opposite to Jewish or Heathen Opinions, as any Oral Tradition would pretend to whisper. There Christ Crucify'd was published, and the foolishness of Preaching was to be read; the Sacrament of Christ's Supper laid down, its Elements and Form of Institution Recorded by the Evangelists, by St. Paul, and afterwards openly mentioned without scruple by Justin Martyr and Ireneus: However it came to pass, that in the following Ages Christians grew to be more  on that Subject before the promiscuous People; and began to think it convenient to have Mysteries and Secrets, as well as the Jews, or Heathens. But even than when they did not speak plain in their common Sermons, they were not so reserved in their Writings that came abroad, but their meaning might be easily spelled; for why should they make such an impenetrable Secret of that, which every Christian knew, and any false Brother might tell?  
And besides, had they been more reserved on some few Matters, yet in others there was no need. For suppose to avoid Scandal, they would not publish in Writing their Adoration of what appeared to be Bread, for fear of giving Countenance to the Superstition of the Egyptians towards Beef, and Mutton, and Salads; nor their Worship of Angels, of the Virgin and Saints, or of Images, for fear of encouraging the other Gentle Idolatries: yet what harm had there been if the rest had been writ; that there were seven Sacraments, that the Intention of the Priest was necessary to them, that there was a Purgatory, & c? Or where had been the offence, if that had been seen in Writing which we now look for; that the Bishop of Rome, or the Majority of the rest should never mistake in the Rules of their own Religion? But after all, if Christians would not have made any writing public, yet nothing hindered but that they might have had them for their private use, in the Custody of the Bishop and Presbytery: in whose hands the Doctrine (for Example) of Transubstantiation itself, tho' written, was as likely to be kept Secret; as it would be, though unwritten, by those thousands of Laymen that knew it as well as the Clergy.  
Against the first and last of these three Reflections, I have been making, there is but one Instance that can be alleged in Christianity, of the enjoined use of memory, and the prohibition of Writing; and that is in the case of the Creed, which the Catechumen were sometimes heretofore ordered to get without book, and forbidden to writ. But the Apostles Creed we know is a very short lesson, that any man's memory may easily retain; and in some places it was than shorter than it is now. And as it will be always necessary for a Christian to have in his mind the Abstract of his Faith; so it was more necessary than, in the midst of Unbelievers; for whom he was to be prepared, either to resist, or to instruct them. It was too thought fit at that time, when Christians were afraid jest their Rites and Forms should be mimicked, or otherwise ridiculed by the Heathen, to the scandal of the weaker Brother, or the obduracy of the yet Unconverted; that this Sacred Form of our Belief, should not be lightly exposed into Strangers hands. For both those Reasons, the young Christian was directed to commit the Creed to Memory, and not to trust it to Paper; as he was too for the last of them admonished not to con it, or repeat it, in the hearing of an Unbeliever. But all the while, this brief form, to be remembered by each for their particular use, was so far from depending upon Memory for its Transmission, that it was actually written for the use of the Church; and that those very Authors who have told us of the Prohibition, (for we are beholding to Writing even for the knowledge of that) have at the same time given us the Creed in Writing, and their own large explications of it beside. Their explication of that Article concerning the Church, we shall have an occasion to thank them for hereafter; 
See the fourth Chapter of the 2d. Discourse.  and we shall found too, not only that the Creed might be wrote; but that it was nothing else than what was expressly writ in the Scriptures before.  
It appears than, that Oral Tradition has no peculiar place in Christianity. This the Modern Patrons of it should in discretion have considered betimes; and not have suffered themselves to fall so short of their Masters in the advantage of the Supposition.  
The Jews, from whom they borrowed the Fancy, did not think it fit to go alone; but supported that Fable with others. For first, they suppose it forbidden by God to writ down some sort of Precepts; and that of those Precepts this prohibition was one: and than, 
Pocockii Porta Mosis, pag. 5 tâ. etc.  when they had made Memory so necessary, they provided a peculiar method to inform it. Moses must be supposed, in his long Conversation on the Mount, to have been sufficiently instructed himself; and when he came down, he took a very singular Course with the Children of Israel. He first sent for Aaron and declared to him alone all the Precepts distinctly: than for his Sons, and repeated the same Lesson to them, in the presence of the Father. Afterwards the seventy Elders were called in; and they, in the hearing of Aaron and his Sons, were taught in like manner: and lastly, the whole People were admitted to the Company, and received the same Instruction. So that from Moses his mouth, Aaron had now heard the Law four times, his Sons thrice, the Elders twice, and the People once. This done, Moses departs, and leaves the like Task to Aaron, for a trial of his Memory: who accordingly rehearses to the whole Audience, and than withdraws. Than his Sons stand up, and after a like repetition, retire too. And lastly, the Elders, having been four times informed, make to the People their fourth Recital, upon which they all go home, and instruct their several Families.  
By this contrivance, the Law at its first setting forth, has passed so often through the mouth, that it deserves already the name of Oral: and we by these Circumstances of Care in the beginning, are prepared to imagine the same diligence in the following successions. These Elders, one may think, would not fail to transmit to the next; and so the Tradition descended through hands either unknown, and whose names it would not take along with it; or else so remote, that they must stretch very far to meet; till it came into the care of Samuel. and now we are well; for he was a great Person, and discharged his trust no doubt. From him, by Persons that must too be nameless, it went down to Jeremiah, thence to Baruch, and so to Ezra. In his Custody it was lodged safe, and after that found a conveyance, by men scarce ever remembered but on this occasion, for six or seven hundred years together; till at last sometime after the utter dispersion of the Jews by Adrian, it was thought necessary to consider the accidents that might hap to this Tradition, if trusted any longer to memory: upon which, Rabbi Juda the Holy, ventured upon the breach of one Precept, to secure all the rest, and so reduced them into Writing. This Book is the Misnah, and the Commentary upon it, made not long after, the Talmud.  
This is the Pedigree of Jewish Tradition; something like that of our Kings from Adam; drawn at length with formality enough, and wanting nothing but certainty. However the Jews are to be commended for this, that they dress up the Story as well as they can; and appear so much in earnest, as to endeavour for credit. The great performance is not supposed by them to be done in our days, and by such men as now live, but to have been finished fourteen hundred year ago: And than they are so ingenuous as to put another stop to their Traditions, and to take some care that we be not oppressed by their overflow; allowing us to believe no such Oral account, that has been ever under a dispute: so far are they from taking that sort of conveyance for the surest.  
Whereas on the contrary, our Modern Traditioners are so bold with us, as to use no caution, nor set any bounds: neither are they at any pains, or show any contrivances; bunglingly setting up their extravagant conceit without either Support or Ornament. They bestow none of their Legends upon this Fable, and prepare us with no inducing Circumstance; not telling us so much as the hands that should transmit the Tradition: unwilling, it may be, to name to that Office any other Bishops than the Popes; and than not daring to trust their Story to the Credit of such Reporters. The whole therefore is left at large; the Father is to tell the Son; and so the Tradition is to be propagated as naturally as Mankind.  
A Tradition propagated in that manner, is certainly not better descended than any common Spurious Relation, that has no other father but the People. But that absurd Hypothesis, tho' mentioned here, yet is too gross to be pursued further. Our Design in this Chapter was more general, and against wiser Adversaries: being only to show, that Christian Tradition is not to be exempted from the common frailties and uncertainties incident to Oral Reports.   

CHAP. VI  
The Certainty of Ecclesiastical Tradition particularly Considered.  
WE are than at Liberty to Judge of Tradition in Spiritual, and in Temporal Matters, much after the same manner; and cannot in prudence, after some assignable Tract of years, admit for Testimony hearsays of one sort, rather than another.  
All, I say, which on this Subject has been laid down before, must be allowed to be as true in Ecclesiastical Tradition; and we need not here proceed any further to draw the easy Parallel; but reckon on the same distance of time as absolutely immemorial; and look upon the Ages beyond it, as fabulous, and in utter darkness.  
But we will not use the extremity of our Right, nor pass Sentence in so peremptory a manner; but will, with the Readers leave, give these Ecclesiastical Hearsays more respect; consider them more particularly, and have the patience to make the following deductions.  
If than of 1600 years that have passed since Christ, we consider the space of two or three Centuries, and those of a middle indifferent rate, supposing them extraordinary neither in their Care nor Negligence; remembering that Memory was no particular qualification of a Christian; and that their mediocrity of Memory needed not to be strained, when Writing was so much in use, and at hand; this considered, and supposed,  
1. As to Verbal Reports: if we will favourably suppose that something in our Saviour's or the Apostles own words might have descended down to the Survivers of the two or three hundredth year, preserved by such uncertain accidental memory, yet it can never be furmised to have been any thing of length, of the length of a short Chapter we may say, were it a Parable or continued Story; much lesle if it were a number of Unconnected Say, like a Chapter of the Proverbs. We see therefore that we cannot expect either much new Text, nor much interpretation of the old in Apostolical words: the Bulk after three or indeed two hundred years could not be very considerable.  
And besides, (2dly) if they pretend not to any continued Discourse, but only to Unconnected Say, we are to consider, that such Say, if any, coming down without the Context and Circumstances of the Discourse to which they related, may have often an uncertain Authority. For tho' spoke by an Apostle, yet distinction must be made, whether they were spoke in our Lord's name, or in his own; whether too by way of permission or advice only, or else of positive precept. And than further, if we take their Authority for certain, yet their sense will frequently be ambiguous and undetermined, not to be securely limited or amplified without more precise direction. For Example, Suppose these words, This is my Body, had been transmitted Orally, as said on occasion of the Blessed Sacrament: if they had been taken for an Answer of Christ's to a Disciple enquiring what the substance of the Sacrament was, they would have attested to Transubstantiation: but if it had been known that no such question was made, and that Christ spoke of that Bread which he took and broke at Supper, their meaning must than be perfectly different; especially if it had been told, that it was ordinary for Christ to speak in such Figures; and that particularly, something like this was frequent with the Jews in their Paschal Phrase.  
But (3dly) Admit there were any Say came so contingently down, whose Authority was certain, and sense determined; they must have been such as were kept up and remembered, because there was all along present occasion for them. For if they had not been in ordinary use, there is no reason to think they would have been distinctly preserved. Of this kind are those Traditions, 
Iren. l. 1. c. 2. Tert. de Praescr. c. 13.  mentioned by Ireneus and Tertullian; being nothing else than some of those Articles, that make what we call the Apostles Creed: As that God the Father was Maker of Heaven and Earth; and that his Son Jesus was born of the Virgin, that he Suffered, was Crucify'd, Dead, and Buried, and risen up again. etc. These Circumstantial particulars were such as directly opposed the first Heresies of Christianity, that either denied the Father of Christ to be the Creator, or that Christ was born really a man, or really suffered (Those against whom the Apostle St. John and Ignatius writ.) And such plain Truths as these, of such constant and daily use, no wonder if they were remembered in the first Age; and not forgot neither in the second, when Martion and Valentinus broached again the same Heresies, and denying the Authority of the Scriptures were properly refuted by this Traditional Evidence.  
But than we must observe; that these Traditionary Articles, remembered occasionally and on particular Exigences, when brought out by Ireneus and Tertullian, are produced by the last of the two at no great distance, not much above a hundred years after the death of St. John; neither yet are they supplemental to the Scripture, but a brief recital only, of some few passages, of those which are there found written at large.  
These Articles, properly speaking, belong not to this head, not being reported verbatim; as may appear from the difference of Phrase even in these two Authors. But if the Transmission of such few necessary Articles in exact words for so little a time, would not induce us to allow Verbal Tradition much more scope, nor much longer continuance: neither is the Transmission of their sense, should we suppose that, to prevail further with us. For in the general,  
2. If Tradition shall pretend not to the very Say, but only to the Effect and Substance: it is obvious with what uncertainty they must be transmitted. For how know I with what Judgement the Apostles saying was understood by him that gave the Abstract, whether he conceived the meaning aright, did not give a Bias to it, and whether he rightly expressed it. This might well hap at the first hand, but that it did not in any of the 10 or 15 that were to give it down, who can promise'? The Scripture itself informs us of two such mistakes which arose immediately; one in matter of Fact, and another in Doctrine. Our Saviour's indeterminate Answer concerning St. John, 
Joh. 21.23.  If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? went abroad among the Disciples for a positive affirmation, that that Disciple should not dye: whereas, Jesus said not he shall not dye, but, etc. So easily were the Hypothetical words of our Saviour lost in the Relation; and other Categorical ones reported by the Disciples: either from their want of attention, or misunderstanding; their minds being prepossessed with the thoughts of our Saviour's particular love to St. John, or led by the human inclination to believe and tell a strange Story. This mistake would have set up for a Tradition in matter of Fact: see another in an Article of Faith. Certain men, say the Apostles in Council to the Gentiles of Antioch, which went out from us, 
Acts 15.24.  have troubled you with words, subverting your Souls, saying, ye must be Circumcised, and keep the Law; to whom we gave no such Commandment. They Preached, it seems, the necessity of Circumcision; concluding it from some Words or Actions of the Apostles, and delivering it for their mind: Whereas the Tradition came not from them, but from the weakness or prejudice of the Reporters. No stress therefore can be laid on such Summary Traditions: They in proportion abating of their Evidence, as they ease the Memory.  
We see than, that Oral Report, after some Successions, as many as may hap in much lesle than 300 years, can have no Authority of its own: whatever it has, even at lesser distances, must be borrowed from other Supports; and it can be credited only, as it comes confirmed by concurring Testimony.  
Now corroborating Testimony there may be of two sorts, either from other agreeing Reports, or from Writing.  
(1.) If Oral Tradition will accept the assistance of Writing; it may gain credit, and deserve to be believed. 
Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. 5. c. 20.  For so, those Traditions Ireneus mentions, that obtained among the Barbarous Nations, were confirmed fully by the Apostolic Writing; and what Ireneus heard from Polycarp of our Saviour's Miracles and Discourse, which Polycarp had received from those that were present, was gladly heard by him, for it was agreeable to the Holy Scriptures.  
But such an Attestation our Oral Tradition cannot pretend to; for it is set up in opposition to Writing, and is to tell us those things which we no where read.  
(2.) As to the other way of Confirmation; if a Discourse be spoke in an Assembly; and the Persons of that Audience, without conferring together before, agreed after in the same report, it shall be taken for unquestionably true; and if they differ in some Circumstances, yet the Substance in which they consent, shall be credited: But if they have been influenced one by another, and there has been Communication between them, their Evidence will not have the same force, and if too punctual, will be justly suspected of Confederacy. Now when the Apostles went Preaching over all the World, delivering the Doctrine of the Gospel as they went; as their Disciples might remember the chief Heads of their Discourse; and the Auditors even of these might remember such as were remarkable, and in which they took themselves to be principally concerned: so, when the Believers of several distant Countries, came at some distance of time, to compare their several Traditions received apart; there could be no possible doubt of the truth of that Doctrine, in which they all concurred. And, if than those Traditions had been reduced into Writing; their Authority would have been justly sacred with us; and had they not been admitted into the Canon, they would have deserved to be bound up with it, and regarded in a very near degree. From such Traditions, the Ancient Writers, Tertullian particularly and Ireneus, argue against the Heretics that denied or depraved the Scriptures; and the Argument, in their Circumstances, as it was proper, so was absolutely Convincing. By such a Comparison of Truths the Scriptures themselves, tho' they wanted not such an Evidence, were confirmed in their Authority; and their Canon or Rule settled. Now till that time and somewhat after, Oral Tradition might well serve, especially in some eminent notable Articles of necessary daily use; and the report of one place be strengthened by the Concurrence of the rest. But, in after Ages, when the Churches came to inter-communicate more frequently, and imbody by Politic constitutions; and especially, when the lesser Bishoprics came to be more formally under the direction of the greater, Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, &c. it was no wonder that the meaner and dependant followed the Advice of the greater and more Potent: and than, if the World was found to be in the same Lesson, the Common consent might as well proceed from the Influence of the Court, from the Authority of some one or more of the great Bishops gaining the rest, from Imitation and Contagion of Example in the generality; as from the Unity of Truth, and simplicity of an unconstrained unaffected agreement. For which reason, Traditions that continued Oral for 500 year, as they are to be utterly rejected by reason of that distance from their Original, so cannot have any accessional Authority given them from the agreement of the Churches of that Age. Much lesle is the present Roman Church in any Article to urge upon us her consent with the Modern Greeks with whom she actually corresponded for eight or nine hundred year, and upon whom she is known to have been practising ever since. But of much lesle Authority yet, is the Agreement, or rather Conspiracy of the Western since that time: a sworn Conspiracy of the Clergy under the Pope their General, to beaten down any Truth, that should be against the Interests of the Churchmen, and contradict the Common gainful Superstitions.  
When therefore the Authority of a precedent Age is pressed upon us; we are not so much to consider, how long we come after that Age, as how long that Age came after the first. For they they are to be believed concerning things said before, not by their distance from us, but by their nearness to the Apostles: as a man that lives all his time at Kensington, is of his own knowledge not better a Witness of what was said at Westminster-Hall, than if he had lived at the Landsend. If than the Age that was mentioned to us was out of the hearing of the first, and removed at a fabulous distance; its Tradition, which was uncertain a thousand year ago, will become not more certain a thousand years after, than what is a lie now, will grow true a thousand years hence. The Tradition will be in itself not truer; tho' it may, we confess, be told by a Church so long, that she may at last believe it herself.  
And therefore when the times of Gregory the Pope, and Austin the Monk are vouched; and they are said to be Saints of above a thousand years old: we are to reckon upon the 600 years that went before them; and to remember, that all the Oral Tradition of that time must be twice an arrant Fable. Nay, if the 5th Age be alleged, we must consider than too the immemorial Distance, and oblivious force of four hundred years; that as there was room enough for some superstitious conceits to creep in, so it was utterly unlikely that much of Apostolical Say should be memorially conveyed foe far.  
For those Persons that than lived, however we at our great distance call them Ancients, looked upon themselves as of latter date. Vincentius, who wrote in the year 434, in the Rules he gives for Catholic Doctrine, order's Antiquity to be followed, as he there calls it: and of those Ancients he refers to, St. Cyprian was the Eldest; who lived before him not 200 year. Those too of St. Cyprian's age, esteemed themselves far removed from the Apostles days; and he himself reckoned upon the past time, as large enough, not only to tender the Truths of the Gospel Ancient, but to bring in after-errors, and let them grow old too. For, when Pope Stephen would have regulated a controvered Practice by his Roman Tradition, 
Cypr. ad Pompeium. Unde est ista Traditio? utrumne de Dominicâ & Evangelicâ Autoritate, etc.  St. Cyprian asks what Tradition was meant, whether that of the Gospels and Epistles, to which he was ready to Subscribe? if any other was intended, the Ancient Tradition (he says) might be an Ancient Error: that in any doubtful Case, they were to consult the Scriptures; and when they were at a loss for Truth, they were not to trust such Aqueducts as would hold no water, but pass by those faulty Pipes, and immediately repair to the Fountain that was at hand. These are but part of St. Cyprian's expressions on this Subject; who treats the unwritten Tradition of his own times with as little respect, as we can show to any that shall offer itself now 1400 years after.  
For to come from Speculation to Fact; we shall found the Course that Oral Tradition had in the Christian World, was very narrow, and very short. For so it came to pass; by reason, I suppose, of those Uncertainties we have traced out; that Oral Reports, many no doubt in the first Age, and by which Christians were in many places chief directed, yet in a little longer time, and as soon as the Canon of Scripture was brought together, began to decrease in their number, and to loose their Authority; insomuch, that those who lived within the distance of 200 years from the Apostles, and whose Books are full of Allegations from Scripture; scarcely make use of a Saying or two from that Traditional Authority: whether it was, that they were than most of them lost; or few of them credited; or those that were credited, did not differ from what was written. Of this Observation the Writings of Ireneus, Tertullian, Origen, and Cyprian are pregnant Testimonies. From Ireneus alone, one might recover a good part of the Gospels; but of Traditional Doctrine, not six lines. And by one of those Traditions, (to observe the fate of them) that Holy Father was led into the Millenary mistake.  
The fortune which the Labours of Papias found, is another instance. He was Bishop of Hierapolis, an Acquaintance of Polycarp's; 
Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. 3. c. 39  and had familiarly conversed with several Auditors of the Apostles, from whom he studiously enquired concerning their Actions and Discourses; What Peter, what Thomas, what James or John were want to say: (for he was of the Opinion, as Eusebius tells us, that what was to be read in the Scriptures was not so edifying, as that which might be had by the living voice.) Of these Relations he picked up so many, that he made up five Books; and than we were in a fair way, if ever, of having some certainty in this kind. But he had gathered together so much Fable and Paradox, that Eusebius, upon occasion of his Millenary Tradition, was forced to give us his Character; how he was a very weak man, as might be discerned by his way of Writing; and that he put down things in one sense, which were spoke in another. The little therefore of his Writings we have, we own to Eusebius; for so small account was made by the World of his five Books, that they were all quickly lost, and that well-meant Collection of Hearsays returned again upon Oral Tradition.  
There is, I confess, honourable mention made by some Ancients of Unscriptural Traditions; and such a mention, as might at first sight incline one to believe, that there had been some very weighty thing preserved that way: but a nearer view of those places will quickly undeceive us; and the particular they give in of those matters easily instruct us; how much the general expressions are to be restrained, or how far disregarded.  
For to begin with Clemens Alexandrinus, the honour he does to Unwritten Tradition, is so justly disparaged by the Apocryphal particulars he produces, and by the Allegories he derives thence, (things in which Fancy has more to do than Memory;) that our very Adversaries never think fit much to insist upon it.  
Tertullian indeed is always alleged for this purpose, in that famous place of his Book de Coronâ Militis. There the Author, at other times over-subtle and over-proving, but now a rigid Montanist endeavours to prove the wearing of a Garland unlawful for Christians, by their former abstaining from that Common fashion. In order therefore to the raising an Argument from Negative Custom, he thinks himself obliged by his Subject, as well as by the Confirmation of Montanus, to make the Positive of great Authority: 
There are several Examples of observations which we hold by virtue of no Writing; but only by the Title of Tradition patronised by Custom. To begin with Baptism, when we are going into the Water, and before too in the Church; we profess under the hands of the Priest, that we Renounce the Devil, and his Pomp and Angels: after that, we are dipped thrice; answering something more than our Lord has prescribed in the Gospel. When we come out we taste the mixture of Milk and Honey: and from that time for a whole Week we abstain from our daily Bathing. The Sacrament of the Eucharist, which our Lord appointed to be taken at Meals, and by all promiscuously, we take in our Assemblies before day, and only from the hands of the Precedents. We make Oblations for the Dead, and keep yearly their Birth-days [into the other World.] We hold it a great Crime to Fast, or to Kneel at Prayers on a Sunday. The same Privilege we enjoy, all the time from Easter to Whitsuntide. We are much troubled that any, even of our own Bread or Drink should fall upon the ground. When ever we move or go about any thing; when we come in, or go out; when we put on our Shoes, when we Wash, when we are at Table; when Candles are lighted, when we lie or sit down; what ever Action we are upon; we still wear away, as it were, our Forehead by Signing it with the Cross. Tert. de Coron. Mil. Cap. 3.  and accordingly he gives out the Present Observations than practised in common by the Catholick-Church, and the Montanists, for Primitive necessary Ordinances; as you have them in the Margin rendered from his own words.  
Now, because such Observations as these are the man things ascribed by Ancients to Tradition; I shall, with the Reader's leave, take this occasion to consider them more particularly. These Usages than are, we perceive, of two sorts; either Forms of Words, or Rites Practical: and in both, two things are to be minded; the Fact of their Antiquity, and the Opinion either of their Necessity or Legality.  
1. Now, as to the Antiquity of Usages, we have seen already how uncertain that must be in Forms of Words Orally delivered; and how easily they may be interpolated and changed. Rites too and Gestures, to be transmitted by Imitation, or practical Tradition, are as subject to vary in a little time, and to pass into another mode; either by Addition or Substraction, from the Fancy, or from the mistake of the Imitator: so that at last they may retain but little resemblance of what they were at first; and appear not more akin, than a Copy a little removed would be to an Original, however it might go under the name of the first Master. Besides this, it is very easy too for foreign Usages of the Neighbourhood to slide in afterwards: and than, when they are once admitted into Company, and pass for some time with the Elder, they very securely pretend to the same Antiquity. Such introduced practices might without much difficulty get themselves styled Apostolical; either because used in an Apostolical Church, that is where an Apostle had been heretofore; or because brought in by an Apostolical, that is a Reverend and Orthodox Bishop; or because having been used immemorially, and descending from a time higher than the present, they were presumed to have descended from the Highest, as Rain that comes from the Clouds, is said to come down from Heaven. For in those sensible things our Opinion acts as our Sight; and at such an assignable Distance, confounded all further Distances; taking every thing to be equally remote, that is removed beyond such a degree: as our Eye and Fancy place the Planets, or even a Meteor of the lower Region, in the Firmament among the Fixed Stars. Now such Errors of Place, any small observation discovers, and their correction is presently admitted: but these of time, tho' easy to be observed, are not so easily corrected, because favoured and indulged by the nature of Man; who, as he loves to consecrated the Original of his City, or antedate that of his Family, so is willing to have all his solemn Actions as venerably Ancient as he can. And in such things it is not perhaps Civil to be very difficult; and we are rather to imitate the Courtesy of St. Jerom. 
Unaquaeque Provincia abundet in sensu suo & praecepta Majorum Leges Apostolicas arbitretur. Hieron. ad Lucinium.  Let than every Province as to this matter, enjoy its own Opinion, and think as honourably of its Customs as it pleases; provided such Customs will be Civil too, not make any claim by their Antientry, nor prescribe upon us for our Sufferance. The Tradition of these Usages is much like that of Relics: that there were some such indifferent Ceremonies practised by the Apostles, we do not much question; but the number of them is strangely increased, and which are the Genuine we know not how to tell; they are multiplied like the wood of the Cross; and the Counterfeit is never to be discerned. We are therefore ready to show those that seem to be Ancient; a decent respect; but for Swearing to the Truth of them, or however, for falling down and Worshipping them, we desire to be excused. The Antiquity of Rites is a matter of Fact, and in that we see the mistake is easy.  
2. The other thing we are to consider of them is either their Lawfulness, or their Necessity: and this is a matter of Doctrine; descending down with them, or accrueing to them, in common presumption; but admitted often upon mistake. For as such Usages are always presumed Lawful, not only from ancient Practice, but by our own; so we know how easily an Opinion of their necessity may arise. In all Customary Proceed, Precedents at pleasure, are apt however to pass into standing Rules: and as we are naturally willing to have our own practice followed, and our Example go for Law; so, when we can recommend it from more ancient usage, we fail not to urge the Authority; and make it a point of Reverence and Duty to our Ancestors, to follow their steps and ours. For which reason it is no wonder, that Rites which had once gained to be esteemed Apostolical, should not only be taken for Lawful, but for Obligatory too, by lesle thinking men. Whereas on the contrary, it is so far from being certain, that Practices reputed Apostolical are necessary and perpetual; that the very true ones often were not so much to be ascribed to the Apostles, as to the Age they lived in, not being purposely instituted, but provisionally taken in, some out of Compliance merely, and to avoid present Offences; and consequently they were not only indifferent, but might grow inexpedient, if not unlawful, in tract of time: such were the Kiss of Love; the Love Feasts; to take the Eucharist at Meals; to abstain from Blood, and things Strangled; to Circumcise a Timothy, etc.  
For a Right Originally Expedient, remaining the same and unvaryed in itself, may yet grow to be of a contrary nature, by change of outward Circumstances: it may too in time deserve to be laid aside, for the Superstition that may be tacked to it by the inclination of the Age. But if it has been varied, it may either suffer so much alteration, as to become another thing; or at lest it may be brought by a slight, and after a little time indiscernible inoculation, to produce a Fruit of a far different kind Not to say how one that is sub-introduced and Novel, if it be not at the first rise apparently and grossly erroneous, may however have in it some Seed of Superstition, not than perceived, nor affecting therefore the first Users, but which shall afterwards grow and exert itself, as it may be improved and displayed by the Corruption of the succeeding Imitators. We of our Church think we have very good instances of these Matters, in many of the Roman Usages. For so the Latin Language, once necessary to the Prayers of the Western Church, because it was the Language of those Countries; is now, by their alteration of Speech, grown as improper for the same reason, and is most absurdly retained. So the Sign of the Cross, which formerly accompanied Prayers, visibly showing them to be made in the name of Christ Crucified; has been since used Superstitiously alone, and I know not what Virtue attributed to the airy Figure. By the insertion of the Transubstantiating Doctrine, the Respect due to the Holy Elements of the Eucharist has passed into absolute Adoration; and the nature of that Sacrament is almost Transubstantiated too. And lastly, to mention not more; Prayer for the Dead, which, besides the Testimony it gave to another Life, was no more at first than a holy Wish for the Deceased, expressing our Concern for their Condition; whereby our Desire, or our Joy and Thanks for their happiness was rather professed, than any want of it supposed to be relieved; and which therefore was made as frequently and as solemnly, for the Apostles and Martyrs, consummate Saints, as for lesle Righteous Men; such a Prayer was after thought to have some real effect for the Dead; than it was surmised to contribute to their present advantage, however as yet but sparingly offered, and at set times: at length it came to be esteemed of some great benefit or other, and to be highly recommended to the Piety of their surviving Relations: till at last, by the coming in of Purgatory, it had a stated use, and grew to be a most necessary Office; Men beginning to make it the greatest care of their lives not to want this Help after their death, erecting and endowing Societies for this purpose. So did the Error, when once insinuated into the Practice, grow on still like a grain of Seed; till by degrees it became a Tree: which, after it was once well grafted, has since spread so wide, and bore such Fruit, that under it all the numerous kinds of Romish Orders have been lodged and fed.  
It were obvious to found many such like Examples: but, as they may not be agreed to by our Adversaries; so they are not necessary to our Design. It must be granted us that such changes are easy, and such Errors very natural: and as to Tertullian, to whom we now return, he himself affords an Instance of one sort; it being manifest that he was mistaken in the Duty of these Observations, even by the Confession of our Adversaries themselves, who have made no scruple of discontinuing one half of them long ago.  
This his Error about the Necessity of those Practices, will easily lead us to think him capable of the other concerning their Antiquity: an Error the old Bishops of Rome have often committed, ascribing still their Modern Usages to St. Peter and St. Paul But with this we have no just cause to charge Tertullian: he for his part speaks very warily in the Point, and declines to father the Observations, he reckons, upon the Apostles; giving great reason of suspicion to those who are acquainted with his manner of gaining all advantage to his Cause, that he himself was conscious enough of their later reception. It is certain that none of them needed an Apostolical Institution; that the Forms might have been devised by un-inspired Bishops; and that several of the Rites might as well have been brought in by succeeding Converts, from the Customs of their former Life. For that carefulness about their Bread and Drink, is still a Jewish Observance; and was too heretofore, in part, a Roman Superstition 
[a] Ceremonies des Juifs par Leo de Mod. Part 2. Chap. 10. Cibus è manu prolapsus redebatur, utique per mensas. Plin. Lib. 37. C. 2. . To Pray for the Dead, was in some sort used both with the Heathens, and the Jews. Not to Fast, or Kneel, on a Sunday, was only to pay to that day the honour of the Sabbath. The frequency too of the Sign of the Cross here mentioned, might have nothing more it it, but so many Benedictions, as the Jews use to this day on the same occasions 
[b] Leo de Moden. p. 1. Ch. 9 Buxtorf. Syn. Jud. C. 12. Coloss. 3.17. ; only in this distinguished to the Eye, that they were made, as the Apostle directs, in the name of Christ. Tertullian himself tells us in other places 
[c] Tert. Apol. c. 16. Ad Nation. l. 1. c. 13. Diem Saturni Otio & Victui decernere. Aliis diebus Lavacrum subtrahere, aut in vesperam differe. Ritus Lucernarum. Jejunia cum Azymis. Orationes Littorales. A Judaico more, quem ignorant.  of several Jewish Customs, which the Heathen Romans of his time practised, not knowing whence they had derived them. With much lesle difficulty we know might the Customs of that Religion have passed into Christianity; and the Christians too, might in some time be as ignorant of their Original: and than it followed of course, that what had no known Author, and it may be no apparent ground, was to be referred to the common Authors of our Religion, and attributed to their positive appointment. That something of this was the Case of these Rites Tertullian produces, his wariness, we observed, will incline us to believe. But as to the fifty days after Easter, it is more particularly probable that their Festival Solemnity was not of so early a date, at lest at Rome: (not to take notice of St. Paul's contrary practice observed by St. Jerom.) 
Acts 21. Hier. Ep. ad Lucinium.  For it is not likely that the Interdiction of Fasting after the Resurrection, was earlier than the observation of Fasting before: and there are some words of Ireneus preserved by Eusebius, 
Euseb. l. 5. c. 24. Edit. Vales.  which give us a shrewd intimation, that Good Friday was not long kept at Rome before Pope Soter's days, if Easter was. But to Conclude, however these Reflections may be received, we are not much concerned in their Success. For should we allow, that a few indifferent Changeable Usages might make a shift to pass down sincere from the Apostles, through some eightscore years; yet Tradition would not have much to boast of: it should rather be out of countenance, that so accurate and so vehement a Writer as Tertullian, when he had a mind to recommend it, should have nothing more considerable to produce for it at so small a distance.  
Having thus considered this passage of Tertullian, we have at the same time dispatched another of St. Jerom, which is nothing else but a Transcript of this, and not made the better by being put into a Luciferians mouth. And indeed, Tertullian being once set aside, a Writer so exact, and so near the Apostolic times, the remarks we have made will easily help us to examine the Junior Authority; the eldest of which is as distant from him, as he from the Apostles. For which reason, the Reader, I presume, 
Of Decrees and Declarations preserved in the Church, the one we have in Writing; and the other we have received by Tradition from the Apostles, delivered down to us in a more private manner: both which are of the same use to Religion. And this will be contradicted by none, who is but ever so little conversant in Ecclesiastical Constitutions. For if we shall go about to reject all Unscriptural Usages, as things of no great moment; we shall be in danger of maiming Religion in its Principal Parts, or rather of reducing the Preaching [or Declaration] to a mere sound. As for Example; to begin with the first and most common Rite; who has taught us in the Scripture that those should be Signed with the Sign of the Cross, who hope in the Name of our Lord Jesus? what Scripture has directed us to turn towards the East when we Pray? The form of Holy words said over the Elements at their Consecration, which of the Holy Writers has left us in the Scripture? For we do not think that sufficient, which the Apostle or the Gospels have Recorded; but we say both before and after, other words, as very necessary to the Mystery; which we have received by an Unscriptural Information. The Consecration of the Water and Oil at Baptism, and of the Baptised Person, and the use itself of Oil, and the Dipping thrice, and the Renunciation, are none of them from the Scripture; but from that secret and undivulged Instruction, which our Fathers have privately preserved, without any busy Curiosity, or impertinent inquiry: understanding well that Mysteries, which are to be kept venerable, were to be kept in Silence. For how was it proper that those things should stand perpetually exposed in Writing, which Strangers are not so much as once allowed to look on? Or why did not Moses admit every one promiscuously into every part of the Temple?— Was it not out of his Wisdom, because he knew, that what is common and obvious is subject to Contempt; and that what is reserved and rare, is naturally endeavoured after and esteemed? After the same manner the Apostles and Fathers, who first Ordered the Church, procured veneration to their Mysteries, by keeping them unspoken and concealed. This is the reason of Unscriptural Tradition; that the knowledge of, [or Speculation imported by] the Decrees [or Ordinances] should not be an ordinary Theme, and grow into contempt by familiarity. For a Decree is one thing, and a Declaration is another. Decrees are [generally] kept under silence: but Declarations are Published. Now one sort of silence is, that Obscurity the Scripture uses, when it makes it a difficult thing to found out the meaning of the [Decree or] Ordinance: For so, all of us look toward the East at Prayers; but few of us know that we are seeking our old Country, that Paradise which God planted in the East in Eden. And all of us on Sundays pray standing; but all of us do not know the reason. For it is not only because we are risen with Christ, and are to seek those things which are above; that therefore, on that day of the Resurrection, we put ourselves in mind, by our posture, of the Grace than given us: but because that day is, in some manner, the Image of the Eternity we expect. Upon which account, tho' it were the first of days, yet it is not said by Moses to be the first, but the one day. For, says he, the Evening and the Morning were the one day: as being the same day, that returns to us in a frequent Revolution; and so represents to us the future State, the endless Day, that is to have no Evening, etc. (For the Author pursues the Speculation further, and at last concludes) The time would fail me, should I rehearse all the Churches Unscriptural mysteries. I therefore pass over the rest; but the very Confession of our Faith, to Believe in the Father, and in the Son, and in the Holy Ghost; from what Scripture is it? for, if by a Religious consequence, we frame our Confession from the institution of Baptism, because as we are Baptised, so we are to Believe; let our Adversaries than give us leave to use the same way of consequence, and to express our Doxology conformably to our Belief: but, if they reject the form of our Doxology, because it is Unscriptural, let them than show us the place, where the Creed, and the other things we have mentioned above, are set down in Scripture too.  would hardly excuse any further enquiry upon this Subject; were not St. Basil's great Name offered for the next Testimony, and that very much insisted on by our Adversaries: which therefore I give here in the Margin.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have rendered distinctly, as St. Basil I conceive has directed. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is plainly a Decree, whether Speculative or Practical, both in the Civil and Philosophic use; (for so the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Philosophers are by Tully interpreted Decreta:) and accordingly is either an Opinion and Persuasion, or an Ordinance of something to be done; most commonly the latter, in Civil and in Sacred acception. And than because being only a resolve of the Mind, or of a Council, it does not in its nature imply Publication, and ordinarily is not published: It is therefore supposed by this Author to be Private, and contradistinguished to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the Declaration or Proclamation of such Opinions or Ordinances. This I take to be the Author's meaning, and our Adversaries have no disadvantage by it: for I do not make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here to signify an Ordinance only, but a Doctrinal Persuasion too, when the sense admits it.  
This Passage of St. Basil, which I have not been afraid to give at full length, seems to aggrandise Tradition much, and to make its use of very high and necessary importance: but, if we consider the words nearly, and refer them to their occasion; they will not be found to make any great matter. The intention of the Father is only to show, that a 
* Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, with the Holy Ghost.  Form of Doxology, which he has before proved at large to be substantially contained in the Scripture, although it be not found there precisely in the same words, may however be lawfully continued in the Church. And with this regard his highest Say for Tradition are undoubtedly true: as that the Church uses Forms and Rites delivered down from their Fathers, and no where to be read in Scripture; that they are of great importance to Devotion; and that, if the Church were denied the use of any thing that is Unscriptural, she would be left naked and almost mute. In such a respect St. Basil's Say are exact, and this was enough for his purpose. But to make him say, that there were any necessary Truths consigned to Tradition, different from those of the Scripture; or that any of the particular Ordinances he mentions, were determinately necessary; is to make him speak more than he himself asserts. And further, to understand him, as if he positively affirmed all those things to be of Apostolical Institution; is to deal too rigorously with an Eloquent man, and not to give his Style those favourable allowances that are usual in his Case.  
The General expressions with which he gins, are best to be interpreted by the instances he gives. And therefore when we found him reckoning the Creed for Unscriptural, we are not longer at a loss for his meaning concerning Doctrinals Unscriptural, but know that in his account all Declarations and Confessions of Scriptural Faiths, are however Unscriptural, if they have not been writ by the Apostles just in that very form. And in this sense it is he truly affirms, that the Declaration or Preaching of Gospel Truths would be too much straitened, and brought almost to nothing, if confined to Gospel Text, and not allowed the liberty of proper and larger Explications.  
In like manner it is apparent, that St. Basil could not intent those particular Forms of Belief or Prayer, or those Particular Rites, to be so necessary, as that they must never be varied or enlarged, or some of them totally laid aside. The Church of his Age, did not understand itself to be under such a Confinement, for even the Creed that is called Apostolical, was than variously conceived in several Churches, and admitted besides great enlargements in the Council of Nice. The Forms too of Prayers were very different: not to mention the other Rites. And as to these few usages which happened to be observed more generally; their perpetual necessity was never, I suppose, believed than by any wise man; and has since been sufficiently disowned by the practice of the Roman Church.  
St. Basil seems indeed to speak for the Apostolic Antiquity of those things something plainly: but to name not more now, the Differences we before observed of the Creed itself so named peculiarly, do not agreed with the conceit, as old as our Author, that it was Composed by the Apostles in common. It is very well known how easy the Churches of his time were in giving that Venerable Title to every respected Usage; and how easily Usages were than multiplied. Of this St. Basil gives unawares an instance in this very Book: where, drawing an Argument from the practice of the Church of Neocaesaria, founded by Gregory Thaumaturgus, he commends that Church much to the disadvantage of the rest, and tells us, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 29.  That she was so punctual to the Customs of her first institution, that she seemed to others to be very defective.  
Than, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Ibid.  in St. Basil's days the Antiquity of two hundred years, and the practice of such an eminent Apostolic Person as that Gregory, were sufficient to procure to any Rite the name of Apostolical: much lesle was it refused to such as were esteemed Old, even before that Old Bishop's time; especially if they had the chance to be somewhat universally received. And therefore it is no wonder, if St. Basil followed the Phrase of his time, and was content to speak not very exactly, in a stile that would favour his Argument, and be admitted by his Adversary. Neither could any one have been much misled by this modern way of Expression, that had observed how cautiously the more Ancient Doctors had abstained from it, when the Argument equally required it. But however, St. Basil seems here in this very place to have recollected himself, and to Interpret his meaning; when, upon the Resumption, he mentions not the Apostles only, but adds other Authors for his Traditions: The Apostles, says he, and Fathers, who first ordered the Churches.  
He speaks too according to the singular practice of his latter times, when he makes such a secret of these Rites: and than he supposes them not written, that they might lie concealed; as if the Apostles could not have ordered a Writing to be kept secret. Whereas I suppose the true reason, why the Apostles wrote not down such kind of things, was not to keep them either private, or venerable; but because they were not worth the writing; as not being designed for perpetual memory and use, but left to the discretion of each Age that was to follow.  
When those Ceremonies were made so venerable, by their secrecy, and by the names of their Authors; it was as fit to found out some profound reasons for them, as it was agreeable to the Allegorical humour of some Great men, particularly of those who followed the Alexandrian way. And these Mysterious ones, St. Basil here gives us, have indeed that qualification he supposes, and are not very obvious. For so few knew his true reason for turning to the East, that the Author of the Orthodox Answers, subjoined usually to Justin Martyr, was utterly ignorant of it. That too for standing at Prayers on Sundays, etc. is very Mystical. But had our Author been acquainted with the Jewish Rituals, he would never have went so deep for the Rationale of an ordinary practice: much lesle, if he had known their Language, would he ever have founded it upon the Septuagints bad Greek. For our part we need desire not more, than that the Customs, and their Reasons should go together; and the one not be admitted for Apostolical, without the other.  
What is said upon this place of St. Basil, I desire may be understood with all due respect to his just Authority; whose Testimony in weightier Matters, or such as were under his own knowledge, I should be unwilling to decline. But it is not, I presume, any imputation upon his Integrity or Capacity, to say that he lay under the common prejudice or ignorance of a distant Age; and that he spoke concerning slighter things, and such as were not in question before him, according to the fashion of his time, and as he was carried away by the stream of his flowing Eloquence.  
These Remarks, we have made, as we have been obliged by truth, and for the more abundant satisfaction of our Adversaries; not that they are much necessary to our present Intention. For upon this Testimony of St. Basil we needed not to have made any other observation than this: that he was willing enough, as appears by the Preface, to have advanced the Honour and Truth of Tradition, and that the Argument of his Book led him to instance in Doctrines; but that he was forced to descend very low for his Examples, having nothing to reckon but a few indifferent mutable Usages, whose meanness he endeavours to cover with mysterious reasons, never certainly intended at their Introduction.  
Neither is it necessary to proceed any further, and to examine the remaining authority for Tradition, that is usually brought out of Epiphanius, a something later, and a much lesle exact Writer than St. Basil. His Say are much the same, and there need no other Reflections upon them, than those we have already made.  
The Assertion which led us to the discussion of these Testimonies, the Reader may remember was this: That our Reasonings concerning Oral Tradition were confirmed by Fact; and that actually the Use and Authority of it in the Church lessened very much in a little time, and as soon as the Code of the Scriptures was Collected. Now this Assertion is so far from being impeached by these Authorities, that it is absolutely verified by them, and wants no further confirmation: it manifestly appearing thence, that in those days Tradition had nothing to tell, but a Story of some ancient Modes and Practices; and that she could not pretend to remember than any one Unscriptural Article of Faith; however it has happened since, that she has been made to rub up her memory, and been suborned by after Ages to depose to the truth of Precepts, and Doctrines, of which 1400 years ago she knew not a Syllable.  
My Lord Bacon, considering that few things of value were conveyed to us from Antiquity, aptly compares Time to a River, in which lighter things swim down, but the weightier are drowned. We may too, with St. Cyprian, suppose Oral Tradition to be the River, and to descend down through some Tract of Time or Place. This than, if it will preserve itself pure and unmixed, must be content to run like one of those Eastern Brooks, which, receiving no accession, diminish as they pass; subdivided still into lesser Branches, and wasted continually, if only by the drought of the Air, and the leakiness of the Channel, till at length they are entirely lost. But the ordinary Course of Tradition is (we see) like that of a common River; many a stream falls into it by the way from either hand, and it comes down to the lower grounds a wide and a mighty Current, bearing all along the old name: but no one thinks it was as great at its Head; or knows where to found below a drop of the first Water.  
This uncertainty of Traditional Evidence in gross, has been the designed Subject of the present Chapter. For, as we have not insisted on the probable Objections we had to make against the Divine Right of the abovementioned Rituals; so we do not stand neither upon that advantage our Adversaries Testimonies have incidentally given us, in favour of the Sixth Article of our Church, which admits no Doctrine to be of Faith that is not contained in the holy Scripture. We do not therefore pretend here, to set aside all Unscriptural Articles at once; we are only preparing to examine them hereafter, as they shall be offered singly: having only endeavoured now to bring Oral Tradition within some compass, and to prescribe it some certain limits and conditions, to which it aught to submit. And in order to such particular Inquiries, I have deduced the general intent of this long Discourse into the following Corollaries.   

CHAP. VII.  
Articles to be observed concerning Traditional Authorities.  
I. IF any Apostolical Say of Moment had been Orally delivered down, it would have been convenient that they should not have passed many descents, and that at the second or third hand they should have been compared and attested by some unconcerted concurring Tradition, and than have been reduced into Writing by good and credible hands, and that Writing received for true by some considerable part of the Catholic Church.  
The wisdom of our Law has thought fit to use a nicer Caution in matters of far lesle importance. In the Nuncupative disposal of any Sum above 30 l. it requires three Witnesses deposing to the words of the Testator, or their effect; and that they should not be accidental Hearers, but called on to that purpose: it trusts not neither their Memories at the distance of half a year; but is so scrupulous, as to require that  Evidence they bring in after that time, should have been written down, not only before the half year was expired, but within six days after the words were first spoke. Of the necessity of some such exactness that Author seems to have been sensible, who first put out in writing the Donation of Constantine, and amongst the Letters of the first Popes, that Nuncupative Testament of St. Peter under St. Clemens his hand. But that way aught to have been thought of earlier, and than it might have deserved a greater credit. For tho' it found so much with the Popes as to be made Law, and has been defended for good Tradition, even in this Age: yet a Deed never produced till 400 year after the Maker's death, was shrewdly to be suspected of Forgery; and a Nuncupative Testament not all proved in Seven hundred years, was manifestly barred by the reason of that Statute against Frauds and Perjury.  
II. However the Say of our Saviour and his Apostles might have been delivered down Orally in Barbarous Countries; yet no doubt, had there been any Traditions considerable, and different from what were written by the Apostles, known for authentic in the Roman World, especially to the end of the second, the third, or fourth Ages; they would not have wanted some one that should have recorded and fixed them in writing, in perpetuam rei Memoriam, amongst those many Zealous, Inquisitive, and Learned men that flourished in those times.  
This was to have been expected from them, out of ease to their own memory, and out of a pious care for Posterity. Something of this kind was too attempted by some of them: but the success of their labour showed, how little need there was thought to be of it; and that the holy Spirit had already written all the necessary Doctrines he designed to be transmitted. For, besides the Heretic Gospels and Revelations, besides the spurious Recognitions of Clemens, and the Apostolical Constitutions and Canons known to be suposititious; there were Traditional Collections made by Papias, whom we have mentioned, and by Hegesippus; there were Doctrinal Memoirs, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  going under several venerable names; there were too the Apostolical Constitutions alleged by Epiphanius: all which have been neglected and lost, either for their insignificancy, or uncertainty, their Spots and Faults having been discovered, or their lesser light obscured quite and extinguished, by the Scripture our great Luminary.  
III. But further, suppose the men of those Ages so much wanting to themselves and us, upon I know not what by respects; yet however we cannot think them so careless in their Argument, and so forgetful of what they knew, (if any such considerable Say they did know) as not to bring them out on proper and exigent occasions. Not more than now for a whole Age together, Hoc est Corpus has been omitted for Transubstantiation; or Tu es Petrus, for the Pope's Supremacy.  
IU. And for the same Reason, it cannot be demanded that any Traditive interpretation of holy Scripture should be allowed for Authentic now by us, which the Holy Fathers of those Ages, commenting upon the Scripture professedly, either knew not, or else passed by. To say there were such Traditions, unknown to such men, is to bring the Authority of those Traditions too much in question: for to whom, or by whom else should they be transmitted? and to think that an Authentic interpretation, as Divine as the Text itself, should be omitted by the Commentator who knew it; and that he would, instead of that Sacred one, substitute one of his own, is unreasonably absurd.  
V But further yet, so much we must take leave to demand, that whatever Traditive Interpretation shall be brought to control the Text, and wrist it from its own natural obvious sense; much more that shall impose upon the Text a sense seemingly absurd to Human Apprehension, and introductive of new Duties, otherwise unlawful; that than such a Traditional interpretation should be as Authentic, and as well attested as the Text itself.  
VI And lastly; to return to our proper Argument in hand, this too we must of right expect; that no place of the written word of God, should be more express, or more Authentic; than that of the unwritten word, which is to set up and authorize an Infallible Interpreter of all that Scripture, and an infallible propounder of all Articles of Faith.  
In this view of Oral Tradition, we have seen, first in the general, how little of it we are to expect to meet, and how uncertain its evidence must be; and than, if any particular of it be urged, upon what terms it must be admitted. And now so prepared, we may proceed to examine the pretences of the Roman Church. The first and grand one is their Infallibility, which therefore we are to consider in the next place.    

DISCOURSE II. Concerning Infallibility, etc.  

The Contents.  

THE Hypothesis of Infallibility explained according to its pretence. Chap. I  
The Nature of the Proof that is to be requied for this pretended Infallibility. Chap. II.  
The Authorities or Positive Proofs for it considered. 

The Proofs alleged from Scripture insufficient. Chap. III.  
The Proofs from Tradition insufficient, 

For an Infallibility at large. Chap. IU.  
For the Infallibility of the Pope. Chap. V  
For the Infallibility of the Majority of the Church Universal. Chap. VI  
For the Infallibility of a Council. Chap. VII.  
For the Infallibility of Pope and Council together. Chap. VIII.      
The Indirect Arguments pretended to be drawn from Reason, and to conclude ad Absurdum, considered. As, 

That otherwise God has not sufficiently provided for his Church. Chap. IX.  
That without Infallibility there can be no certainty of Faith. Chap. X.  
That without Infallibility there can be no Authority in the Church. Chap. XI.  
That without Infallibility the Church may fail. Upon this Occasion there follows Chap. XII. 

A Digression in two Inquiries. 

1. Whether the whole Church may possibly Err. Chap. XIII.  
2. Whether Salvation may be obtained in an Erring Church. Chap. XIV.        
The Conclusion. That no Modern Ecclesiastical Body is by any antecedent Grant made incapable of Error; that their Judgement may be sometimes justly suspected; and that it must be discerned by their consequent Decrees, whether actually they have Erred or no. Chap. XV.    

DISCOURSE II. Concerning Infallibility, etc.  
CHAP. I  
The Hypothesis of Infallibility explained according to the usual Pretence.  
INfallibility, is a word of very easy meaning, and needs not any extraordinary Proponent for its definition; it being nothing else but an impossibility of erring, or being in the wrong: which as it is an Eternal Attribute of God, whose Dictates are necessarily true; so is pretended by his Gift, at some times, and in some Cases to belong to Men.  
But as plain and simple as it is in its first notion, when it comes to be applied to men, it grows more encumbered, and includes several respects; as (1) the Persons to whom it appertains, (2) the Cases in which it takes place, (3) how and in what manner it is wrought and works.  
1. The Consideration of the Persons alone includes great variety. For tho' it be allowed by Pretenders on all sides, that this high Privilege belongs to none but Christians; yet whether it be appropriated to a single Person, as the Pope; or whether it results from the consent of a Body, and what that Body is: or whether, lastly, it be not tied to the united concurrence of that Body of Men, and of the Pope together; these all are questions made to our hand, and which we aught not to overlook.  
For the claim may be put in, in the name of the present Universal Church; and that be Truth in which all Christians, all the Clergy, or all the Bishops now living shall Unanimously agreed; or else it may be said that Truth shall go along with the consent of the greatest part.  
Now if the Consent of the greatest number be Infallible, it may be than supposed, that such as have been voted out by Majority of Voices heretofore, have no share in this Privilege now; and that Heretics therefore, tho' greater in number at present, yet are not to be taken into consideration: The Infallibility belonging only to that Body of Men, who are the Majority in remainder, after the several successive Exclusions.  
And than further, it may all along be surmised that this Grace is so dispensed, as not to belong either to the whole Body of the Christians, or to any particular Church, without the Concurrence of some certain Bishops, or Bishop, as that of the Roman See; presumed therefore to be of the Quorum in that High Commission.  
And than lastly, if any single See has that Prerogative; it may be thought to be Infallible of itself, and to want no other concurrence.  
The Reader, it may be, that is in a zealous search after this Infallible Guide, thinks himself impertinently delayed by such an enumeration. He expected perchance that the Seat of that Authority should have been perspicuous, and visible; that the Decider of Controversies, should himself have been subject to none; and that it should immediately have been known, to whom resort was to be made: But he will be pleased to stay till the several pretences are laid open; both that he may not be mistaken in the Person of his Guide, and that he may know what assistance from him he is to expect.  
First than, the common Interest has been so much considered by Great Men of the Roman Communion, 
Chap. 1, etc. Car. Alliacen. apud Richer. vindie. Sch. Paris. Coloniae. Lib. 3. pag. 16, etc. 42, 43, etc.  that it has been sometimes questioned, whether this Inerrancy is not to be placed in the Collective Body of all Christians, Children only excepted. However it has not been thought extraordinary, to vest it in the Consent of the whole Clergy, or of the upper part, or at lest of the Bishops; so that, that only should be necessarily true, in which all respectively should agreed. By this means every Person, at lest of the Superior Rank, would be secure enough against the infallible Sentence: and a Heretic Bishop must be self Condemned, formally, and not without the concurrence of his own Vote. But this supposition, at the best, would end but few Controversies: and it is thought necessary for the Church to have a more practicable and ready Decision.  
Let us than have no regard to those Popular Sorbonnists; and let us too set aside the Decree of their whole Theological Faculty, 
Facult. Theol. Paris. apud Richer. lib. 1. pag. 3. De Potest. Eccles. apud eund. Richer. lib. 3. pag. 144.  exclude the Domini Curati from the Hierarchy, and deny them the Decisive voice allowed them, particularly by Gerson. Let us suppose that this Infallibility rests only in the Episcopal College; and let us grant further, that the Consent of the whole may be taken from the greater part; yet still there are many Points remaining to be settled. As, what shall the odds of number be on that side, on which Infallibility must go? Is it a simple Majority, as in ordinary Assemblies? or will not the Holy Ghost come down but upon two Thirds, as in the Election of a Pope? And besides, are the Voices of those Bishops supposed to be taken at home? or are they not Infallible till convened and met together? if they are met together, will the present, tho' a Minor part, include the absent? if so, what Power is to Summon them, and make their absence contumacious? or can the absent make Proxies, and is the share in this Privilege such as may be delegated? or lastly all along is every Bishop to have an equal Voice? or shall they not be considered according to the largeness of their Diocese, and in proportion to the number they represent? has every Petty Italian Bishop with his small Care, or a Titular Bishop with none, the same share of Infallibility with the real and greater Diocesans? A thing not allowed by the Councils of Constance and Basil, tho' necessary to the Council of Trent. Concerning these Circumstances, we aught to have determinate satisfaction, and express warrant. But besides, we are to consider, that Infallibility this way will be very difficultly, and very uncertainly attained. The Poll of the Christian World is numerous, and cannot be exactly taken as the Episcopal Votes lie dispersed: and if they are to meet, the Controversy concerning the freedom of the place, the notice given, etc. is so manifold, that it can never be a clear Case.  
Upon which account, the Particular Church, that shall now pretend itself to be Heir, as it were, to the Old Universal by Successive Exclusions, can never be too sure that those several Exclusions were duly made; that the Poll was rightly taken, and all necessary formalities observed: for she is to know, that upon so many contingent suppositions her claim of Infallibility depends.  
These Difficulties and Inconveniences arise upon placing Infallibility in the general Body of Christian Bishops: and they still increase, if besides the consent of that Body, we suppose the Concurrence of any certain Bishop, or Bishops, precisely necessary.  
All the Great Bishops put in heretofore a claim somewhat equal; though not of this kind. Those of Antioch, Alexandria, and Rome, founded a preeminence partly upon Apostolical Succession, partly upon the greatness of their Cities. Constantinople afterwards insisted upon the Privileges of its City singly. The See of Jerusalem had its pretence too, a weak one as the World went; for it was purely Spiritual, and in right of the first Church. Now great Reason there was, that in common Causes no innovation should be made in the Christian World, without the Advice of the several Patriarches; because they were supposed to speak the sense of their several Districts, whom upon such occasions they consulted, and in whose Name they pronounced. Accordingly all these Patriarches were nigh equal heretofore, when Rank and Precedence were only thought on: but the Pope has since advanced such a singular pretence, and it is pressed upon us so much, that we need take no notice of the other, but only of the Roman.  
Here than it may be considered, whether the Pope challenges his Power in this Infallibility, whether of a Negative Voice, or absolute Determination, in virtue of his See, the place of his residence, or in virtue of his Succession to St. Peter. It is fit that this should be known, in order to the discerning the Person whom we are to look after, and the Proofs that are to be produced.  
If he presides in virtue of the place, we may inquire whether Infallibility will not be lost, if Rome be destroyed, or become either Heathen or Mahometan? Whether the Gates of Hell are never to prevail against that City? or if they do, whether a Titular Bishop must be made, and the Style be Bishop of Rome, consumptae per Hosts, or in Patribus Infidelium? Or lastly, we may ask, whether the Privilege was good to a Pope errand, or to the Residentiaries of Avignon?  
If he presides by virtue of the General Title of Successor to St. Peter, it than comes naturally to be enquired, by what grant the Cardinals, as the Clergy of Rome, choose a general Officer for the whole World? and whether the Bishops of all Christendom aught not to join in his Election to make it valid? whether the Authority be particularly annexed to Rome? or may not be translated to another place, at the pleasure of the Electors, and at lest revert to Antioch?  
If than the Pope be of the Quorum; all the uncertainty to which the Papacy itself is incident, from the forementioned Causes, or to which the Papal Person is obnoxious from Simony, or any other common Nullity of Election, must fall upon Infallibility. It will be but ill founded, when the See is full. But it must be in Nubibus, in a Seed Vacant, and as much in suspense, during a competition of Antipopes, of which there have been many; the last of above 50 years' continuance. For in that Case, not a General Council of Bishops can resolve us certainly who is the right Pope; they being by themselves, and without him, but fallible Judges in the present supposition.  
Thou therefore a Conjunction of the Pope and a Council compounds the Difference, and unites their several Titles; Thou the Infallibility of them both together, seems to be the surer, yet it will be rarer too, and of much lesle service to the World. For either there will not be a right Council, or not a right Pope; or else a right Pope and right Council will very seldom agreed.  
Therefore lastly, those seem to have taken the more expedite Course, that make the Pope Infallible alone: for than Infallibility may be had with more certainty and ease than in the former Cases. For tho' many questions might arise concerning the true Pope, and though his residence at Rome would be at a very inconvenient distance for those of China and America; yet, when you are got thither, an Infallible answer you might have, if the Oracle would speak.  
Now these Scruples are not imaginary, and of our own raising; but have been occasioned by eager Disputes among themselves. 
Dante ad hoc ipsum vexatione praesentis Schismatis Intellectum. Gers. opusc. laudat. pag. 128.  The Schism of Antipopes made the Western Church consider of these things. For when for a long while together this part of Europe had owned one Infallible, and that another, to whom there was as length a third added; The Church than wearied and ashamed of the Scandal, assembled itself, and proceeded to the deprivation of all the Concurrents: upon that occasion, declaring its Power above that of a Pope, and determining even in Faith without one. Than too it was thought fit to vote by Nations of Bishops, and not by their persons; so that they were considered in their share of Infallibility, according to the number of their Flock. There they made Constitutions to be observed by the Popes; which were however regarded no more, than the solemn promises made in the Conclave to the Cardinals are used to be: for after that the Popes began quickly to reassume their old extravagance of Power, their absolute  Authority was taught by their Benificiaries and Stipendiaries; and the Jesuits a new Order erected, whose greatest perfection was their blind Obedience to the Roman See, and whose great endeavour it was, to recover Infallibility to the Pope, and bring all, if not into their Order, at lest into the like subjection.  
Now indeed the Jesuits (at lest of France) seem to have dispensed with that solemn Vow; and the French have by late Declarations carried the Authority of Councils up to the height of Constance: but the rest of the Popish Communion are not agreed in that point. The Spanish, Italian, German, and Polonian Clergy stand of in the behalf of their Lord and Master; and were they all of a mind, yet we were never the surer, except the Pope would declare against himself too. But this we are not to expect; for tho' they have been content to join Head and Body against the Reformation, yet they have still kept their separate Pretences on foot. The Popes, even in the Council of Trent, resolving not to give up their Infallibility to the common Cause; and ordering it so at last, that the sanction of the Decrees might still be said to proceed from their single Authority.  
That Council of Trent, if examined by our former Reflections, will have a very uncertain Authority; not to mention the Nullities that are alleged from other Reasons. For we see it is very justly questionable, whether the Pope has that Authority to call all the World together, that they are obliged to meet upon his assignation of time and place; so that if they are not there than, they shall be reputed either contumacious or consenting, and the Holy Ghost will proceed without them? whether those that are there, are to vote by Heads or by Proxies? whether the after consent of those that were away, is to be presumed to concur to the Infallibility, and their votes can be taken at home? By what Reason the Greek Church is excluded? By what General Council declared Schismatical and deprived of Suffrage? By what General Council the Lutherans were shut out for Heretics? whether guilty for not believing Transubstantiation by the Lateran, a Council disowned by some now of the Roman Communion? whether offending in the point of Images against the 2d. of Nice, a Synod heretofore rejected by the West? whether as Unbelievers in the Articles of Purgatory, etc. defined by the Schismatical Conventicle of Ferrara and Florence? Concerning these Particulars we may justly expect satisfaction, and that they should let us know, by what Rules they have proceeded, and on what formal precise word from God their Authority is founded.  
Such doubts may be raised on the Council of Trent, of all since the first four; (nay of them too had the Romanists a mind to quarrel.) And as our Adversaries do not allow one Council to be Infallible because not free, another because not General, another because not called, or because not approved by the Pope: so need not we allow any of them all to have been Infallible; because there has never yet been any, that has not been subject to some of these Queries and Uncertainties we have now suggested. For as to precise Infallibility, what certainty of it can we have, unless it be precisely known, what those requisites are, which God has made peremptorily necessary to the production of such an extraordinary thing?  
The Romanists indeed, dextrous in finding their advantage, would raise one even from their own Differences concerning the Infallible Person; and because Infallibility is still supposed in the Dispute, would impose therefore upon the World that the thing itself is out of question. But the contrary Conclusion will be made by all thinking Men: who will not be persuaded that God gave a Commission of Infallibility with a Blank for the Person; and that he would, in order to the ending of all differences among Christians, have added a new one. It will not, I say, be thought that God would have left a doubtful uncertain direction, (terms almost inconsistent,) if he intended any; and that such Texts, as cannot ascertain the Person, aught ●o be construed to the Authority.  
For altho' our Modern Romanists, sensible of the disadvantage they have suffered by their falling out among themselves, have pieced up the Quarrel, and accommodated Affairs; proposing to us some few Councils, as that of Trent particularly, for unquestionably good by the Title, on both sides, both Pope and Bishops; yet this will not do, and they are wise too late. For as in the Case of Land or Franchises supposed held from the King, to which two Competitors make several Titles; they may go to Law so long, and prove against one another so well, till it be found that neither have any Title; and that the thing in Controversy belongs not to them: but is still in the Crown; so here it has happened, that both Parties have already exposed the weakness of their common pretence too far; it appearing plainly from the former hear, and mutual opposition, that the Evidence produced on either side is of no force, and that the Infallibility they contend for belongs only to God; the Prerogative that is said to be granted, being of so high, and withal of so peculiar a nature, that if it be not expressly mentioned and determinately assigned, it can never be supposed to be conveyed. They may go therefore, and get a new Grant if they can, but as yet they have none.  
II. But this Uncertainty concerning the Person of our Infallible Judge is not all; there are other very material Questions concerning the extent of his Jurisdiction.  
In the first place, one would expect, that all commands of such a Person, or Body, should lay an indispensable Obligation upon Inferiors: for so it seems good to the Holy Ghost, and to them; and the Holy Ghost, we know, must be obeyed when commanding, as much as assented to when defining. Neither is it to be presumed, that this Body knows not the limits of its own Power; or that it will transgress them. For if Infallibility be given to a Pope, and a Council for our direction, how shall they direct more properly than by Commands? and if even our Infallible Director may err out of its Sphere, and Command where it aught not; what an uncertain direction is this? and instead of being a help, what a Snare is it to the Consciences of Men? But so it is, for those who receive the Doctrines of the Council of Trent, think it not so much as a Venial Sin, to refuse some of its Precepts; and a very great and most Christian Country will not to this day submit to its Holy Decrees. By what just Authority they exempt themselves from obedience, and where in the word of God they found this exception, we would willingly learn, for Reason would lead us to make none.  
But however, although it be not in the Power of a Council, by their Precepts to make indifferent things Obligatory; yet still shall not their Commands be supposed to be lawful? and can an Infallible Body ordain a thing to be done, which must not be done, and is against the will of God? For shall it be supposed, that they decree an Action, either knowing it to be unlawful? or not considering whether it be lawful or no? or did they think it lawful? for a Body of Bishops, with a Pope in their Head, to decree an Action without considering its Legality, is an absurd supposition; much more to imagine, that they decree it conscious of the Illegality; (for why than may they not decree a false Doctrine, conscious of its falseness?) But if they judged it Legal, why are they not Infallible in that Judgement, as well as others? and why is not their Command as manifest a Declaration of that their Judgement, as any other way of Expression? shall not therefore their Command presume manifestly the Thing to be lawful? and a Command under pain of Excommunication, suppose it to be necessary? but here too the Infallible Judge is cut short, and he shall never be supposed to be exempt from error, but when he determines Affirmatively: for fear the Council of Lions, when it deposed an Emperor, and ordered his Subjects to Rebel, should be as Infallible as any other that decreed Transubstantiation. When therefore the Commission for Infallibility is produced, you are to remember to look for this Clause of exception too.  
Well, but than are they always Infallible when they expressly and positively determine? are they so concerning the Truth of Matters of Fact? and will a Council of Bishops impanneled, be an Infallible Jury? The Jesuits of France indeed, to serve an Occasion, would have had the Pope not only Infallible, but Infallible in matter of Fact too: and than it was absolutely to be believed on his word, that such condemned Propositions were in Jansenius; tho' they themselves would not undertake to turn to the Page, and show the place. But they were overruled in this new point of Divinity; and it was laid down for Catholic Doctrine, that Modern Infallibility obtained in Matters of Doctrine only.  
But this Exception must not be taken too grossly, for the Church proposes many matters of Fact, in the Creed, and in the Scriptures, to be believed. And besides, every speculative Article which the Church determines, is supposed always to have been taught de facto before, by Christ or his Apostles: and too, if a Council shall determine, that such a Proposition is found in the Bible; tho' they cite neither Chapter nor Verse, and we cannot found it, must we not believe them? Infallibility therefore must take place in Ancient Facts, recorded or done by the Apostles; and other Modern Facts only are to be excepted. This Exception has something more of Reason in it than the other, and we may be tempted to like it the better, for the sake of the Inconvenience our Adversaries may found from it; (for so, they will never be able to determine Infallibly, concerning the Legality of any preceding Council, or Papal Election:) however they will be pleased not to deal with us here, as the Jesuits would have dealt with the Jansenists; but do us the favour hereafter to show it, when they come to produce their Proofs.  
Suppose we than that the Holy Ghost will assist the Church in no other Subject, but only concerning the mind of the Apostles, and in explanation of their words; yet, 
Guid. in Cont. Disc. 3. S. 101.  thus much is not said without mincing and restriction. For some will not dare to say that the Church is Infallible in the Affirmation of any, but necessary Articles; that the Council of Trent, for Example, was not Infallible in its Doctrinal Chapters, but only in its Canons with Anathema: so that, as in some other Affairs we do not use to credit men, but upon their Oaths; we are not bound to believe the Church, except she Curses. This is indeed a cunning Restriction, it does not diminish the Power of the Church; for she is to be Judge of what is necessary, and may therefore give her Anathema as she pleases: But her other Doctrines, which she puts on Trial, if you are a good Catholic, you cannot refuse; and yet she is not obliged, if they grow inconvenient, to maintain them. This subtle, but strange Clause of restriction, we desire likewise to see, whether it be in the body of their pretended Charter.  
Well than, are we at an end yet? Is a Declaration of the Supreme Ecclesiastical Power, Pope and Council, made in form, and enforced with an Anathema, infallibly certain, and a sure direction to the Conscience? no, there are still some excepted Cases, relating to the Temporalty, in which, after all, it will be of no Force, however Authoritatively pronounced. 
Traité Histor. des Prerogat. de l'Egl. de Rom. Chap. 29.  If, says Maimbourg from the Sorbonnists, Some Councils since Gregory the Seventh have threatened Kings with Deposition, and if one has actually deposed an Emperor; yet this was not done by way of Decision. And if any Council had made a Decision in this Case, it would have went for nothing but an unjustifiable Enterprise, etc. For this will be Eternally true, which all Antiquity still believed; that the Church, though it be Infallible, (that which the Pope never was in the Opinion of the same Antiquity,) yet never received the gift of Infallibility from its Divine Spouse, but only for things purely Spiritual, and entirely separate from the Temporalty, and the Kingdom of this World, with which Jesus Christ, who said, my Kingdom is not of this World, would never intermeddle.  
The Church than is Infallible, that you are sure of, but who this Church is, it is hard to tell; as after, to come to the speech of this Church, is a very difficult thing. When too she does speak, she is not to be harkened to, if she speaks in the Imperative Mood; and in the Indicative, she is Infallible but in one sort of Phrase; and after all, she is not to be believed neither, but in one kind of Affairs; in other Causes her Sentence is null, and she no Judge: There lies a Prohibition against the whole Church, as well as against any other Judge Ecclesiastical, and her Excommunication may be alike discharged by the Municipal Laws. She says indeed that her Declaration seems good to Her, and to the Holy Ghost; but whether what seems good to the Church, does indeed seem good to the Holy Ghost, that must be determined finally, in France by the Parliament of Paris, and with us in the Exchequer Chamber or Upper House. So that after all this pretence to Ecclesiastical Authority, those Temporal Bodies it seems, are indeed the supreme Courts, and last Resort.  
III. But lastly, let us suppose, that the Council do keep within their Bounds, and pronounce an Infallible Sentence: yet in what manner I pray was this Infallible Sentence produced? did it result from premises? was it concluded from Arguments? and was the Church assisted to found out proper Reasons, from whence the Definitive Judgement should be inferred? Not, this is dangerous to say; for the Reasons alleged in Councils, are often Unconcluding, and their weakness apparent. It remains therefore that the Holy Ghost assists the Church in the Conclusion only, and comes in after the Ergo. Well: this indeed is the Authoritative way: but than, (not to ask whether the Premises were thought true or false,) to what purpose were they brought? why reasoning and debate, all that human jangling, in which the Holy Ghost does not concur? Why do they not propose the Question, and immediately proceed to Placet? to what intent are all the Doctors called in? or what need the Bishops should be better Theologues, than Innocent the 10th. or this 11th.? There is it seems as little need that the Bishops in a Council should understand the question, as that the People should understand their Prayers; and Placet may be said in the one Case, as Amen is said in the other. How indeed the unlearned People should say Amen, St. Paul makes a doubt; (for he neither supposed a Miracle, or that they should hear a strange Language so long, till they had their Queves by rote: but how the Unlearned Bishops should say Placet, is very easy to imagine. For a Miracle we must suppose; and there will be need of no greater to rebuke a Heresy, than served heretofore to forbidden the Madness of the Prophet.  
This Hypothesis of theirs, however oddly it may appear, yet salves all the Phoenomena of the Church admirably well. All the Ignorance, Artifice, and Passions, all the irregular Motions, that may have ever been observed in Conciliary proceed; all these it accounts for consistently, and preserves Infallibility still. For whereas in other Affairs, want of understanding may tender Men unqualified to pass a Judgement; and Bribery, or Force, Fear, or Affection may make it justly suspected; these in our Case can have no Influence, and will neither impeach nor disparage the Resolutions of our Assembly: The Conclusions will be true, though taken up upon false Reasons; and the Resolutions just and good, be the Motives and Inducements never so corrupt and ungodly. We Heretics therefore are impenitent, when we talk of such kind of Nullities; and those of the Romanists, who have required freedom in a Council, understood not its nature: For what force can there be upon it, that the Holy Ghost cannot overpower.  
The Roman Church does wisely to the Conclusion: and to her own Children the Logic is good, by an Enthymem without either of the Premises. But, tho' Reason signifies nothing in a Council, yet out of a Council it is used to be considered. This Hypothesis therefore of theirs they will be pleased to prove; and, on this occasion at lest, bring such Arguments as shall be found concluding.  
Whoever has viewed with us the Differences and Difficulties concerning the Seat of Infallibility, its Subject Matter, and the manner in which it is to be produced, will be very much inclined to suspect their pretence, if he goes not further: but now he is desired to proceed to the main Question, and examine the Arguments that are brought in its defence.   

CHAP. II.  
The Nature of the Proof that is to be required for this Infallibility.  
TO Forego than all the Advantages, their Disputes among themselves, and their crude Assertions, may give us; let us suppose, that as yet there's no Heretics in the World; that all the Bishops and all the Clergy are assembled about some new question; and let the Question be about the meaning of our Saviour's or his Apostles words, and in such a Subject as may challenge Infallibility; supposing all this; yet I take leave to say, it is not impossible but the Pope, and all the Patriarches, and the Majority of the rest, may be mistaken in their Decision, and that the contrary Article may be true.  
For so it is, All men appart are acknowledged fallible, and various ways obnoxious to Error. They may pronounce wrong, for want of knowledge or consideration, out of Interest, and design, to abet others, to assert themselves. When too they are met together in an Assembly, tho' they have greater opportunities of Information from a Company, yet they are found too to be as often misled by it. They are often surprised into Error, by a conceived good Opinion of other men, by their Arts, their Rhetoric, their Confidence; often frighted, or tempted to the wrong side; voting either for favour and Affection, or supposed duty, as their Friend or Patron goes, or out of Emulation and Opposition, as they see their Adversary inclined: they are often unaccountably fermented in the Mass, and overborn and carried away from their Judgement by the Crowd.  
For such Reasons these single fallible Men cannot be supposed to make up an Infallible Body: and it will not be absurd to say, that an Assembly of them may Err, Nemine Contradicente; much lesle is it impossible, that a Mayor part of them should vote wrong.  
Now as Men, not yet Christians, are fallible Creatures; so the grace in Baptism renders them not more infallible than they were before. After too they have received their new Character in Orders, it is no benefit of their Clergy to be exempt from the same human frailties; and every ordinary Priest or Bishop asunder remains the same fallible man: it is neither impossible that he should be deceived himself, nor that he should endeavour to deceive another, even in matters of Religion, and Articles of Faith.  
By what Change than is it, that the majority of these fallible Christians, or ecclesiastics, or Bishops, are more infallible, than the Majorities of other fallible men? it must be by some supernatural Power, and from some extraordinary gift of God. We must suppose that God at that time shall not only enlighten their Understanding, so as to be able to perceive the Truth, and pronounce it with certainty; but also that he shall so control their wills, that they shall not be moved by Fear or Favour, Interest or Dependence, to overlook that Truth, and pass a contrary Vote. That is, they must be, not only infallible; but, to that purpose, impeccable: and it must be impossible for them, in the giving of that suffrage, to deceive, as well as to be deceived.  
This is the Miracle that must be presumed to make good such a Pretence. Neither must our Adversaries think to persuade us, that such an ascertained fixed Influence of the Holy Ghost, is ever the lesle miraculous and extraordinary; because there are other supernatural influences, which we acknowledge to proceed hourly from his good and free pleasure.  
The Holy Ghost has determined its assistance to certain circumstances of time and place, in the Sacraments only: there too the Operative Grace that is given, works not irresistably, but concurrently with the will of the Person, and as he joins to promote or hinder the Action. Nay in the Sacrament (as they call it) of Orders itself, a Character indeed is conceived to be impressed on the Ordained, like a mark upon his Body, by force of the Holy Ceremonies; whereby he is distinguished from the Lay: but no more knowledge or honesty given, than the Party himself shall please to retain, or endeavour to acquire. So the Holy Spirit acts in the very Sacraments themselves; but out of them it blows as it lists, and dispenses itself not in certain places and times, by certain measures, but according to its secret pleasure: so that no man from the sincerity of his Prayers, or from any promise, can secure himself such a Determinate degree of Assistance; much lesle can he be secure, that it is vouchsafed another, at such a peremptory minute, and on such an occasion. And consequently, if all the Christians of the World should meet together, and pray that the Holy Ghost would confer such an extraordinary Grace on such a Person, at such a time; they might hope it would be done, if they referred it to the good pleasure of God: but they could not peremptorily challenge it, without a presumption, that would forfeit even the favour they might otherwise expect.  
If than any Church had made a Sacrament of Conciliary Actions; they had made us a very extraordinary Sacrament, that should have conferred the Graces of Knowledge and Truth, and been liable to no impediment from the pravity of the Persons: but to suppose no Sacrament, and yet to presume upon such an extraordinary Gift; must be to suppose a strange Miracle of Grace, something that surpasses the ordinary Methods or Laws, which the Holy Spirit observes even upon extraordinary occasions.  
For there are ordinary Laws, which the Holy Ghost has prescribed to himself in the second Creation, as we allow others in the first. The Divine Power may go beyond them, when it thinks fit: but when it does, the Action is extraordinary and miraculous; and not to be supposed done without good Proof, nor to be expected afterwards without sufficient Authority. For even in the supernatural works of God, as in the infusion of Human Souls, tho' God can give the rectitude of the first Soul, and a stability such as Angels have: yet he always continues in that extraordinary Action, an ordinary Course; neither is the Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary herself, supposed by any immaculate without a Miracle.  
Now a Miracle, whether in the Corporeal or in the Spiritual World, tho' easy to be done by God, yet is not so easily to be imagined by us. We are to suppose, that he keeps his usual methods, until we have notice to the contrary. A visible Miracle when doing needs no other notice, and demonstrates itself: but it cannot be presumed for the future, without express warrant; otherwise to expect it, is to tempt God. An Invisible miracle therefore, for the same reason, is neither to be believed for the past or present, nor expected for the future, without the same express Authority. Even in speculation to allow it done, is unwarrantable credulity; and to wait for it, is Temerity and Presumption.  
such Invisible Miracles the Church of Rome thinks she may suppose at pleasure; and that God's Omnipotence is always at her service: where she thinks she cannot be disproved, she securely asserts; never considering that the simple belief of such things requires some good Evidence; and that they cannot be imposed as necessary Articles of Faith, but upon such Evidence as carries along with it necessary Conviction.  
Were there therefore no consequence to be heeded upon the Admission of the Church's Infallibility, were it a single speculation; as it would be highly presumptuous in the governing part of the Church, to depend upon such an extraordinary Grace, without extraordinary warrant; so to enforce the rest to believe it, without such due warrant, would be absolute Tyranny.  
But if they intent to govern by this Maxim, and make it the foundation of an uncontrollable Authority, demanding upon this supposition, an absolute assent to  else they shall say: it is plain that than we have greater reason to be more rigorous in our Demand; and that our Assent cannot be required from us, but upon full Evidence, and such to which we cannot but submit; it being but fit that they should give us some very good reason for this Proposition, who upon our admitting it, are afterwards discharged for ever from giving us any reason more.  
So much difficulty we should make of granting this Infallible Authority in General; had we no notice at what it aimed, and to what purpose it would be used.  
But further, the Proof for this pretence, as great as it should be, however aught if possible to be greater yet; if this Proposition comes actually loaded with others, that want very great proof themselves, and cannot be maintained but upon this fond. For than it is not a simple Miracle we are persuaded to believe; nor a miracle which may possibly engage our belief a little further; but such a one, as has actually undertaken the maintenance of many more miracles, some of them more strange than itself, and scarcely reconcileable to human understanding; that for example, of Transubstantiation, as wondrous and as much above ordinary miracles, as any other miracle is above the effects of Nature.  
But further yet, whereas if these unlikely hoods and miracles, appendent on Infallibility, were purely speculative, and rested in the Brain; yet, if we had not an Evidence proportionably extraordinary, we could not without violence to our understanding give assent to their truth, nor without breach of honesty profess it: so by greater reason, if they are not speculative only, but pass on to practice; and oblige us to Actions, at the first sight unlawful, and no otherwise justifiable but by this pretence, of Infallibility; it is apparent than, that we are much lesle at our liberty, to give up ourselves to its hazardous obedience; but are bound in our duty to God, and care of our Souls, to examine it with the utmost severity.  
When therefore I am to prescribe the Proof, I might well demand such a one, that shall be able enough to sustain all the Definitions of the Council of Trent. For, it being manifest that the Laity depend upon this Principle for their assurance in all their Belief; and that the Learned leave, upon all occasions, their want of proper Arguments to be supplied by this Common Theorem: it follows, that this Article, so fundamental, must have some very extraordinary support itself; not only sufficient to bear its own single weight, but all that vast additional load that rests upon it.  
As for Example, whether these are Articles of Faith, and necessary to Salvation; That the Sacraments, truly and properly so called, are Seven 
1 Conc. Trid. Sess. 7. Canon. de Sacram. 1o. : That in the Conferring them, the intention of the Minister is necessary 
2 Ibid. Can. 2o. : That in the Church of Rome, who is the Mother and Mistress of all Churches, the Doctrine concerning the Sacrament of Baptism is true 
3 De Bapt. Can. 3o. : That the Body and Blood of Christ, with his Soul and Body, are really and substantially in the Sacrament of the Eucharist 
4 Sess. 13. de Euchar. Can. 1. : the substance of Bread and Wine not remaining, but converted 
5 Can. 2o. : and this not only during the Sacramental use, but before and after 
6 Can. 4o. ; That Christ in that Sacrament is to be worshipped with external Sovereign Worship, and to be carried about for that purpose 
7 Can. 6o. : That Auricular Confession was always used in the Church, and is necessary by Divine Command 
8 Sess. 14. de Sacr. Penitent. Can. 6o. ; to the remission of Sins 
9 Can. 7o. : That all Christians are not obliged by God's Command to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist in both kinds 
10 Sess. 21. Can. 1o. : That the practice of the Romanists in that Case is just and reasonable 
11 Can. 2o. : That in the Mass there is a true and proper Sacrifice offered 
12 Sess. 22. Can. 1o. : That it is to be offered not only for the Living but for the Dead, in Purgatory 
13 Can. 3o. : That the Priest may, and does well, to Communicate (as they call it) alone 
14 Can. 8ᵒ. collat. cum cap. 6o. : That Matrimonial Causes belong to Ecclesiastical Judges 
15 Sess. 24. Can. 12. : etc. whether, I say, these Articles are so necessary, that neither these can be denied, nor the Church of Rome left without the loss of Salvation; are Propositions each of them highly questionable, and much easier to be asserted by the Church of Rome, than proved: the proper Demonstration of all of them being so very defective, and of some, the very principal, so short and lame; that some in part, and others nigh altogether, are left to subsist on this general Infallible Ground. So that the Arguments, borrowed at other times from this common place, are here to be accounted for; and so much super-abundant Evidence is to be brought in, as shall not only serve to outweigh the particular improbabilities of this Point, but shall besides make good all the other defects of Argument, under which the rest of the Roman Doctrines labour.  
But we are ready to abate of this justifiable Rigour, and are content to require only such Proof, as shall be necessary properly to this Article.  
Now, to be as easy as we can, and not to insist upon hard terms, thus much our Adversaries must observe; that a miracle so strange as this, of such an influence on our whole Lives, and of so great consequence in Religion, cannot be pretended but from the word of God; nor than presumed, much lesle necessarily collected, from equivocal large expressions, capable of an easier sense; and that therefore we shall not think ourselves bound to expect it, and rely upon it, except they bring us some Divine Saying, of certain Authority, and express meaning, for our Warrant and Command.  
Thus much it may have been fit to premise: but I am scarcely to be excused, for thinking any of them so weak as to need the following Premonition; that the Authority of the Church is now, for a while at lest, set aside; and that as the Doctors of the Sorbon will not admit a Pope's Definition, to prove the Pope's Infallibility, not more are we to admit the same assertion, (were there any) from a Council and Pope, as a Decisive Evidence on their own side. The Pope or a Council must in this point demonstrate from Scripture or Tradition, the written, or unwritten word of God, and to that we are now going.  
The Reader therefore who cannot but have heard much of this wondered Authority, lodged somewhere in the Church; who may have been counselled to repair to that Oracle, and bid upon pain of Damnation to take the infallible direction of that Guide; may be pleased to reflect with himself, that his first thoughts must naturally have fancied some express and frequent mention of such a Power in the word of God; some plain designation of the Persons to whom it is committed, and a Peremptory Order to the Faithful to obey it for ever without scruple: and than from that Reflection, he may be pleased to go on with me, and see how much of this those Pretenders are able to show; and what pitiful Allegations they bring in so wondered and momentous a Case.   

CHAP. III.  
The Proofs for Infallibility brought from Scripture Insufficient. First, those for the pretended Infallibility of the Jewish Church considered, (Sect. I.) Than those concerning the Christian. Particularly the 28th. of St. Mat. v. 19, 20. (Sect. II.) 14 John 16.26. Ch. 16. v. 15. 15. Act. 28. 1 Joh. 5.20. 1 Cor. 12.7, 8. (Sect. III) 18 Mat. 17, 18, 20. (Sect. iv) 1 Tim. 3.15. (Sect V.) 4 Eph. 11.14. (Sect. VI.) other scattered Texts seeming to presume it. (VII.) A Conclusion from the whole against it. (VIII.)  
THE Places of Scripture alleged for an Infallible Guide, relate either to the Old or the New Covenant. Those which are to prove such a standing Infallibility under the New, and which are the most proper to our Purpose, 
Disc. 1. §. 7.  I shall take, as they are proposed in the Rational Account concerning the Guide in Controversy; neither shall I altar the order, that I may not seem to abate any thing of their force: only I shall take leave to add, upon occasion, something of the Context; that the sense may better appear.  
The rest of the Romish Champions do not fail, on this Subject, 
Chap. 3. The Proofs from Scripture insufficient. Sect. 1.  to lead us on to the admittance of Infallibility in the Christian Church, by preparing a supposition that there was such an establishment in the Jewish. But this Rational Guide to their Great Guide, led us not this way: it may be, because he saw, that if the supposition were never so well proved, yet the Consequence might fairly be denied. For the Methods and Polity of the Christian and Mosaical Dispensations are so different, that no Argument can be drawn from the existence of such a standing Officer, or Power, under the one, to the same under the other. Whatever of that Law was not from the Law of Nature, all the rest of its constitutions Judicial and Ceremonial, were Temporary and Arbitrary, appropriate to that People and Season. And tho' some of its appointments looked forward, and presignifyed; yet those Types were set to be Earthly shadows of Heavenly Things, not to be Forms and Models of a future Administration here below: as the High Priest is known to have represented Christ, no Apostle or Bishop; and those Sacrifices than continually offered, That one Sacrifice once for ever offered for our Sins. As therefore the Ephod, Breastplate, and Bells, are no Pattern for Pontifical Garments now; so we are not to expect that their Vrim and Thummim should be answered by any Modern Oracle; no more than any High Priest of our days will pretend to Prophecy, from that extraordinary Power which belonged to their Priests, even when their Vrim and Thummim ceased; and which was not withheld, not not from Caiphas himself. Old Things are passed, and all Things are become new. All Commands of Positive Institution, and all Gifts of extraordinary Favour, given out by Moses, are vacated and expired; not to be pleaded now, except revived by a new Sanction, or a new Promise, from our proper Lawgiver. For this Reason, had our Guide offered any Proofs for his Cause relating to the Old Testament, we might have passed them over, and used our right to consider only his pertinent Arguments: but the Reader, who is to exercise much Patience during this whole Debate, will give me leave to entreat it here; that we may not seem to take an advantage of one Author's Omission; especially when he will be found to have made it, not through forgetfulness, but design; and to have done his Cause more service, by concealing this Evidence, than by his producing all the rest.  
The Fundamental Proof for a standing Infallibility in the Jewish Government, is from the 17. Deuter. where, after the appointment of Judicatures in their several Cities, made in the 16th. Chap. and after the ennumeration of some Crimes of a very heinous and notorious nature; it is ordained in the 8th verse, that in all doubtful Cases the last resort should be, to the supreme Tribunal sitting in that place, unto which they are commanded in that 16th. to repair thrice in the year, for the service of their God.  
The words are these. If there arise a matter too hard for thee in Judgement, between Blood and Blood, between Plea and Plea, between stroke and stroke, being matters of Controversy within thy Gates; than shalt thou arise, and get thee up into the place which the Lord thy God shall choose; and thou shalt come to the Priests, the Levites, and to the Judges that shall be in those days, and inquire; and they shall show thee the Sentence of Judgement. And thou shalt do according to the sentence which they of that Place (which the Lord shall choose) shall show thee, and thou shalt observe to do according to all that which they inform thee: according to the sentence of the Law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgement which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do: thou shalt not decline from the sentence which they shall show thee, to the right hand nor to the left And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not harken unto the Priest that standeth there to Minister before the Lord thy God, or unto the Judge, even that man shall dye, etc. Josephus gives the sense of this place so. And if those Judges know not how to determine, in some Cases which may be brought before them; (and such cases often hap among men:) Let them than transmit the Cause to the Holy City; and let the High Priest, and the Prophet, and the Senate meet together, and decree the Sentence. As to the Persons of whom this Sovereign Court was composed, some would have the High Priest with his Brethrens to be the Supreme Moderators, in all Ecclesiastical Causes; and the Temporal Judge or Prince to decide unappealably in Civils. Others give the Senate or Sanhedrim, (a Body consisting not of the Tribe of Levi only, but of all the rest promiscuously) the Preeminence in all Causes, and over the High Priest himself: the constant received Opinion of the Jewish Doctors. And Josephus, we see, joins all Titles together, and adds a Prophet, if there be any, besides. If now we are to regulate our Christian proceed by this Rule; Josephus will assign the Authority to the Pope and a Council together: the Rabbins will give it with those of Basil, to a Council: and the first Opinion, to the Pope and his Consistory. But a Council will found little satisfaction hence: because Laymen may pretend to an equal voice; and it must be assembled in the Holy City. The Advantage in truth lies fairer for the Pope: for he may well be the High Priest; and by St. Peter, the Successor of Aaron: the Cardinals may be the Priests, the Levites, and Rome the Place which the Lord our God has chosen. And than it follows plainly from the Text, that  is commanded thence, we are to observe to do: and further, that he who fails to do it, is not only to be Excommunicated, but to be put to death for his presumption.  
Now for our part, we shall leave this Controversy concerning the Persons to be debated by the Jews, and those Christians who are concerned in the advantage of it. If too the Pope or a Council shall gain the Cause; if either of them, or both, can derive to themselves the Authority of the Text; we must than, we confess, grant them a Power of Life and Death over us; (a Power I know they will not loose by non user:) but as for this privilege of Infallibility, we shall not yet be obliged to allow it.  
For as the design of God, in ordering his People to meet for their Devotions in one place thrice every year, seems to have been, in part at lest, to Cultivate the Brotherly Love, and continued the Unity of that Family of Israel: so the adjourning all the more weighty Causes to the same common place, seems intended to knit that Politic Combination faster and closer, and to prevent any such breach as happened afterwards by the Sin of Jeroboam. The last Sentence therefore of that Court was to be Final; and peremptorily obeyed under the highest Penalty; but it is to be supposed not more Infallible, than the Sentence of other last Resorts, and human Sovereign Judicatures are thought to be.  
This, and no more, Josephus expresses; and no more can be collected from Moses his words, than that, what such a High Court pronounced, should be taken for Law; and that the Person who opposed its jurisdiction, should be put to death, as opposing the Supreme Authority, and Fundamental Establishment of that Polity.  
Here is than an Authority settled with Power of Life and Death; , but not Infallible; supposed to judge in questions of doubt and difficulty, and than to determine righteously; but not created incapable, (such is the nature of all human Bodies) of determining wrong even in plainer Cases, and of Decreeing such a Sentence, as might possibly be more intolerable to the Righteous, than the Sentence of Death. This is the plain natural meaning of the place, agreeable to common sense, and the known practice of all Governments.  
Had therefore the Jews been willing to have raised a Miracle on this Text, as their Usage at other times is; and had we wanted some gross instance of Error to prove upon them; yet we could not justly be obliged to prefer their wondered strange interpretation, before a more ordinary and more Familiar sense. But here it so happens, that the Jews themselves make no such pretence; and that if they did, we Christians are not only able, but bound to convict it of falsity. Their High Priest, the rest of the Priests, the Sanhedrim, and the whole body of the People, (that there might be no question of the Legality of the Court,) having committed the most execrable Error, and by a most solemn Sentence condemned our Blessed Saviour for an Impostor.  
Some I know of the Romanists, being indeed very hard pressed, fly to this subterfuge; that the Error of the Jews, though a grievous one, was only an Error of Fact. But were not Matters of Fact, by this very Ordinance, triable before that Court, as well as matters of Right, and alike determinable by final Sentence? where too will they lay this Matter of Fact? was it whether he said, he was the Christ? or whether he was that Christ? that he said he was the Christ, was true, and they erred not in it: and the other Point, whether Jesus was that Christ, was as much a matter of right, as whether the Person called Tiberius was than Emperor: And was too at that hour the same Article of Faith that it is now. This Solution therefore is justly rejected by Cardinal Bellarmine, who chooses rather to give a lesle Competent one, than one so grossly absurd. That Court, says he, was Infallible till our Saviour's coming; but upon his appearance their Infallibility was withdrawn, as the Vrim and Thummim had ceased for some time before. This is as much as to say, wherever you can prove they did err, there I will grant you in that particular case they might: an answer that amounts to this plain Confession, that he had nothing to reply. For does the Text that constitutes this Authority make any such reserved Case? or has he any other just cause to surmise this pretended failure? That the Jewish Dispensation was to determine at last by the Christian, there is no question: But that this determination was not to be made till our Saviour's Death, is as certain too. Until that time the Mosaical Law did abide in the same state; the High Priest continued to Prophesy to the last Passeover; and our Saviour himself, not long before, had reinforced the Authority,  it was, of those that sat in Moses his Chair. As to the Oracle of the Breastplate, it had indeed ceased, but long before our Saviour's time: above 200 years says Josephus, 
Josephus Archaeol. l. 3. c.  as we read him; with the first Temple say the Rabbins. But than too That,  it ceased, ceased sensibly; like the Sun, disappearing as visibly as it had appeared: whereas this invisible Oracular virtue, except there was some supernatural notice given of its being taken away, must be supposed to be withdrawn from the former Owners, they knowing nothing of its absence, and presuming that they still possessed it. For as these Men could never have known they were Infallible, unless God had told them; so neither could they know when they ceased to be Infallible, unless informed by the same Author. Now if the Cardinal would have such a supernatural notice here understood, he should have told us whence he learned it, for otherwise it is not to be presumed: and if there was no such notice given, we are than to discharge the Elders and People of the Jews, from that accursed Crime of which they have been so long accused. For the Elders, they gave sentence under their old Confidence, and as far as they knew, assistance of Infallible direction. And as for the People, they in their blind obedience subscribed to the sentence of their Superiors; doing no more than what in the present supposition, they were ordered of old to do by Moses, and but lately by our Saviour himself.  
Had that High Court been than owned for Infallible by the Mosaical institution; it must have been a very difficult thing, if not impossible, to have converted any Jew to the Religion of Christ. For how should they have admitted that Person to be Christ, who was Condemned by their Infallible Judicature for an Impious Blasphemer? and how absurd as well as impious must it have been in any, to have judged those Judges, and to have pretended to know better than themselves, whether they continued fallible or no? Was it not to be presumed, that in case of such a failure, the Court should have first known it from God; and the People, by the confession and surrendry of the Court? we Christians therefore do not consider well, when to gain a present Infallibility, we give one against us; which tho' we raise at pleasure, yet should the Jews lay hold of it, we cannot at our pleasure dissolve.  
But, God be thanked, the Jews, however willing they might be to accept of any Argument against us, and also to tender the Constitution of their Fathers as Sacred as they can, have not yet taken this Course, nor arrogated to their celebrated Sanhedrim any such extraordinary Authority. As, since the destruction of their first Temple, they have jealously abstained from all manner of Idolatry; so too they have preserved themselves from this Spiritual Sacrilege, of taking to themselves what belongs to God, and invading so high a gift without his Grant.  
The constant received Doctrine of the Jewish Masters concerning this matter, is as follows.  
(1.) With them it is no impossible supposition, that the whole Sanhedrim might err in their Judgement, not only unwittingly, but knowing, even against an express Law; and that, not only against some part of it, 
Libr. de Sacrif. ex Interpretat. Lud. de Veil. Tract. 4ᵒ. Cap. 12, 13, 14.  but against the whole, both root and branch. These Cases are all supposed possible in Practice, and accordingly Offerings for the Sins consequent to such a false judgement, are assigned in Maimonides; according as the guilt should be supposed to lie, either upon the particular Persons who followed the false direction, or on the Government that gave it.  
(2.) And therefore in Doubtful Cases, the proper subject of the Sanhedrim's Authority, the Truth of their Decisions was not supposed to proceed from the concurrence of any Divine Inspiration, but from rational Motives and Inferences: so that if upon a division in the Senate concerning the Interpretation of the Law; 
Maimon. in Pocockii Portá Mosis. pag. 32.  thirty five Prophets as great as Elija, and Elisha, had been of one Opinion, and thirty six Elders learned in the Law of the other, the Opinion of the uninspired majority should have prevailed.  
(3.) And lastly, it may be observed, that the duty of obeying the Decree of the Majority, is supposed by the Jews to be intimated by that very Text, whose positive meaning is to forbidden a blind Obedience: they presuming it employed in the general, that we should follow the most, or a Multitude; because we are commanded in particular, 
23 Exod. 2.  not to follow the most, or a multitude to do evil.  
We see than that Infallibility is not given by Moses to the great Senate; that such a claim was never made by the Jews; and must not be allowed them by Christians.  
We cannot therefore suppose that our Saviour gives the Sanhedrim, in the 23d. of St. Matth. more Authority, than they had before from Deuteronomy. The words are these. The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses his Seat: all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do. But do not ye after their works; for they say, and do not. Now it is not well imaginable, that Christ should direct an Obedience without reserve to be paid to those, whom presently after he calls Blind Guides, and whose Error in Doctrine he taxes, together with the viciousness of their Lives: not more than we can think, that he there order the multitude to join hereafter with the Senate in the demand of his Death, and to promote his Crucifixion. But such a sense of the place is too gross, even for the Roman Commentators to own. Maldonate, A Lapide, etc. are ashamed of it; and make it unnecessary for us to cite St. chrysostom, or any other Ancient to the contrary. And indeed nothing is plainer, if we take the words positively, than that our Saviour, being to censure the conduct, and not yet designing to lessen the just Authority of the Jewish Magistracy, prefaces therefore to the multitude the injunction of a due obedience. But they may be taken comparatively, not enjoining but supposing an Obedience; and than directing that the Commands of those Men should be observed, rather than their Examples: because, tho' they were Blind and Fools, yet they were greater Hypocrites, and their Lives were still more corrupt than their Doctrines; an intimation that has sometimes had its place in the Christian Church, even by the Confession of our Adversaries themselves.  
After this tedious Enquiry into Jewish Infallibility, we may think we had reason to thank the Ingenuity of the Guide in Controversy; who, if we would have followed him but in this, would have spared us at lest so much pains. But we shall found there was as much of Discretion, as Ingenuity in him; and that we have not lost our labour, while we gained the following Corollaries.  
FOR NOW WE KNOW,  
I That a Church of God may be founded without the Institution of an Infallible Judge.  
II. That the Infallibility pretended by the Roman Church, is an Original, and that this controversy is a new Case, and of the first Impression; to be debated therefore by proper Arguments from the Christian Religion.  
III. That the Authorities to be vouched for it, aught to be very full and precise, more full and more express, than those of Deuteronomy, or St. Matthew. For we see, that if our Saviour had either commanded us on any doubt to go up to Rome, and consult a Congregation of Bishops assembled there, and to observe and do according to all they should inform us, under the Penalty of Excommunication or Death; or had enjoined us to observe, etc. all which a Council should bid us observe and do, &c. that yet, even from words so positive and large as these, so extraordinary a thing as the Infallibility of that Council must not have been concluded.  
Whether than our Author has any such proper Christian Authorities, more clear and plain to the point, than those would have been; we are now going to inquire.  
We come now to the Scriptures alleged by our Author. 
§. II.  The first place is the 28th Chapter of St. Matthew, the 19th. and 20th. verses, take in the 17th and 18th verses, and the words are these. And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted, and Jesus came, and spoke unto them, saying, all Power is given unto me in Heaven and in Earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all Nations, Baptising them in the Name, etc. teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo I am with you always, even to the end of the World.  
These words, lo I am with you always, etc. are a promise of Assistance, conceived in general terms, to be restrained therefore in all reason at the pleasure of God the Donor; and which are to be supposed sufficiently fulfilled, in what ever particular they shall be found to have been made good. All sort of assistance which God could give, and at all minutes, was not to be expected from them, not by the Apostles themselves, to whom they were spoke immediately.  
Consequently therefore, if we of the later Ages shall take this Promise to ourselves, we cannot determine its performance to what particular we shall think fit: neither if we found it fulfilled to the Apostles in some very extraordinary ways, amongst others more ordinary; are we therefore to demand the higher assistances, but to rest abundantly content, with those other Divine Graces that shall be vouchsafed us.  
This easy observation is a sufficient answer to all pretence of Modern Infallibility from this place. But because we deal with Adversaries, that are not so easily satisfied; and this Text is offered to us first, and brought into the Front; we will therefore, with the Readers leave, take a more particular notice of it.  
1st. Than we will consider the words, as spoke to the Apostles, and to be accomplished to them. Now here, tho' the Assistance promised under such a general expression, may seem to include that Infallibility, with which the Apostles were afterwards eminently endowed from on high; yet it may be thought principally to be intended of other aids. The Guide indeed, who therefore brings in only the precedent verse, would refer the Promise to the subject of Doctrine, and their capacity of Teaching: but it is plain even thence, that their knowledge is supposed, and the Commands mentioned, as received already; their Courage and assurance were rather wanting, to the undertaking so dangerous a Mission, and such an incredible Errand; as the preaching up to the Jews a Messiah, but now Crucify'd by them for an Impostor, might well seem. Of the truth of their Lord's Resurrection and Doctrines they could not well doubt; but how they should be believed, they might justly distrust. To this purpose it was that our Saviour first arms them with the knowledge of the Power, with which he was invested; and than afterwards, under the protection of that Power, commands them on their Duty, bidding them not to fear now, nor despond hereafter; for notwithstanding he was now to leave the Earth, yet he would still be with them, to give their heart's courage, and their words Authority, that they might speak the word with all boldness, and that Signs and Wonders might be done by the Holy Name they were to Preach; so he would always be with them in the discharge of their Office here, till at last they should be with him for ever in Heaven. This seems to be the natural scope and sense of the words, and therefore what we read ordered and promised in the end of St. Matthew's Gospel, that in the close of St. Mark's we found accordingly performed: They went forth and Preached every where, they doing as they were commanded; and the Lord, pursuant to his promise, working with them, and confirming the word by Signs following.  
But than 2dly, supposing Infallibility comprehended equally with those other gifts to be vouchsafed the Apostles; yet it will not follow, that the Promise was equally meant to the Doctors or Disciples of all Ages. For (1.) it may be said, that this Promise' made to the Apostles might be Personal, and needs not by any necessary construction be carried to their Successors at all. For though these words, to the end of the world, taken by themselves, may continued the Grant till that time, and may be supposed in the failure of the Apostles, to leave the benefit of it to their Successors for the remaining term: yet the same words may too bear a very proper sense in conjunction with the Persons of the Apostles; either that our Saviour would be with them to the world's end, that is always with them in this World, as long as they should continued in it; 
21 Exod. 6. 15 Deut. 17.  as in our Law, and sometimes in the Scripture, an Estate for ever, is an Estate for Life; or else, that he would be with them on Earth till their Death, and than when they should go hence, in Heaven. However, in the 2d place, not to insist on such strictness, but supposing the promise of Assistance to go along with the command of Teaching and Baptising, yet it cannot be presumed to go down in its whole latitude, and widest extension; that our Saviour should be bound by it, to be with the Bishops of this time, just in the same manner, and by the same measures, he was heretofore with the Apostles themselves. For, as he that should offer to prove, that the Apostles yet live, and shall live here to the world's end, because the Lord promised to be with them till that time; would bring a ridiculous interpretation, notoriously untrue: so he, who shall assert that the same their extraordinary Gifts still continued; must be contented to have his interpretation contradicted by as plain Evidence of Fact. For such a sense cannot be confirmed but by Signs and Wonders following, the same which were wrought by the Apostles. We might therefore put our Adversaries upon a very difficult proof, and desire they would demonstrate their Infallibility by a Concomitance of the other Miracles: but we need not go so far on this Text. For here their pretence to Infallibility destroys itself; neither do they presume to claim it, as it was granted at first. They will not say that every Bishop, though of an Apostolical See, has always been Infallible; and by what reason than, from this Promise, must the Majority prove so? for this place gives no more Infallibility to them in a Body, than asunder: nay what it promises to them, it promises apart; that our Saviour should be with them Teaching and Baptising, an Office performed by the Apostles apart, and in their several Missions. They have therefore from this Text, construed too for them in the most favourable manner, not more Authority to assign Infallibility to any Number of Bishops, than to any single Bishop; and have as much reason hence to ascribe it to any other Bishop, Successor of the Apostles, as to the Bishop of Rome.  
But notwithstanding common sense and ordinary reason finds nothing for that Infallibility of after Ages in this Text, yet does not Tradition interpret otherwise? and has not God somewhere, by some unwritten word, given the Roman meaning to this part of the Written?  
Not Ancient Commentator that I know, has strayed into such a sense. But had any, yet we might have known that they learned it not from Authentic Tradition: for than it would not have been omitted by St. Chrysostom for the Greeks, and St. Jerom for the Latins, both purposely commenting on the Place. The Interpretation I gave at first as the most natural, is St. Chrysostom's: and what St. Jerom gives is in part the same; he who promises that he will be with the Disciples to the end of the World, both shows that they are to live for ever, and that he will never departed from the Faithful. 
Ch. 7. Art 〈◊〉.  It appears therefore by these Fathers, that our Adversaries sense has no Authority from Tradition: a Remark I make expressly on this Text, with a request, that the Reader himself would be pleased to observe it on those that follow.  
The indifferent Reader will not, I hope, need to be advertised, that the various interpretations we give to this, or the other places of Scripture, are not brought by us, to cast an ambiguity upon the Text; but only to show, that almost any meaning that can be offered, deserves to be preferred before the Roman.  
But here he is desired to take notice, that as yet we see neither Infallible Judge mentioned, nor his Person assigned, nor the Causes of which he is to determine expressed, nor any thing else so much as hinted at, which we might have expected to found positively declared: nor, to speak once for all, is he to hope to see any such thing hereafter. He may too observe on this place, and found it verified in the rest, that those who exercise Infallibility in voting Conclusions, are not very good at Inferring. Whatever is any where promised to the Apostles our Infallible Guides is challenged to their Successors as Guides too: and no difference made, between the extraordinary Gifts vouchsafed to the first Founders of the Church; and those ordinary Graces that were still to continued to its ordinary Ministers. But here they are quickly at a loss. For working of Miracles should than belong to the Churchmen: but because every one sees that neither Pope nor Councils work them, they are obliged to wave their pretences on that side. Personal Infallibility should belong to all Successors of the Apostles on the same account, and all Bishops be Infallible, for the better guidance of the People; but they are forced to drop this claim too, for the vanity of it would be too apparent. This High Privilege is therefore to be given by them only to one Bishop as the Pope, or to an Assembly of all Bishops: but this is not safe neither; for the Popes have showed where Councils have erred, and Councils have found the same infirmity in Popes. The best way than, one would think, is to challenge it to the Pope and Council jointly and together: for there have not been many of those Conjunctions in 1600 year; and it is to be hoped that these few have kept from contradicting one another, or from any of the more gross absurdities. But because it may have happened that some particular extravagancies of those Bodies may have displeased even their own Communion; it is thought expedient not to allow even to the Trustiest Infallible, an Infallibility at large. For notwithstanding its Apostolical Endowment, it may command some things unlawful: and even a Decree in form, if it presumes to meddle with the Secular Power, may be false. So do they give ground, as absurdities press on; retrenching still as they go: but as for any Right the word of God gives them, they have not more legal title to the place on which they stand, than to the rest which they have deserted. From all this shuffling course it manifestly appears, that the Charter on which they proceed is not from God: for they limit it as they please; and they could not be so bold with it, if it were not of their own making.  
We are directed next to see St. 
§ 111.  John 14.16, 26. and 16.15. with reference to the 15th Acts 28.1 John 5.20. and 1 Cor. 12.7, 8.  
In the Citations from St. John, let us, with our Guide's leave, begin at the First verse of the 14th Chapter: (remembering, that the whole discourse of our Saviour is addressed particularly to his Disciples, under their present Melancholy Circumstances, expecting his Imprisonment and Suffering.) [1.] Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. [12. [v.] Verily I say unto you, he that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also, and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. [13. v.] And what soever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. [16. v.] If ye love me, keep my Commandments. [16 v.] And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, who shall abide with you for ever. [21. v.] He that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. [25. v.] These Things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. [26. v.] But the Comforter which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will sand in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all Things to your Remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. 16 Chap. 12. I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. [13. v.] Howbeit, when He the Spirit of Truth is come, he will guide you into all Truth;— and will show you things to come.  
After the Reply Mr. Chillingworth has made to Mr. Knot [Chapt. 3. §. 71.] concerning these Texts, they aught not to have been brought forth to the same purpose again. Mr. Chillingworth had observed, that those promises of the Holy Ghost were made to the Apostles themselves conditionally, upon supposition of their Divine Love and Obedience; such terms, upon which they were not to be Challenged by the Majority of Bishops of every Age.  
This Observation the Guide excepts against; because, 
Guide in Controver. Disc. 1. §. 7.  as he says, (1.) It makes the Apostles Infallibility uncertain, and to depend upon suppositions: and (2dly,) because the duration of a Christian Church, being inferred from the like Promises, must be as uncertain as its Infallibility.  
Now this last Reason is a perfect fallacy: for tho' we grant, that in all Ages there shall be such a Degree of Divine Love and Obedience, as shall save some of the Clergy; yet it follows not, that there shall be always so much, and in so many, as to make a Majority Infallible. 
Chap. XIII.  But of this in its more proper place. And as for the first Reason, it is an unholy reflection upon all the Apostles; and particularly (as one would think he might have discerned) on St. Peter the denier of his Master; as if there were any question to be made, after the descent of the Holy Ghost, of their performing the Conditions; and as if God had not wrought in them all that Holiness he had made necessary to their Infallibility.  
But we need only to observe the unreasonable arrogance, wherewith these Texts are challenged to the present Clergy. Our Saviour here comforts his Disciples in a very particular manner; and makes them Promises of an extraordinary Nature; (1.) of bringing all those things which he had said or did, and they through the blindness or dulness of their hearts had never animadverted, or else forgot, to their remembrance; (2.) of leading them into all Truth, more than he had yet taught them, and which before they could not bear; (3.) of showing them Things to come—; and (4.) of enabling them to work Miracles. By the first of which, they should be able to give account of his Actions upon the Earth, as Evanglists; by the other, to fill up and perfect his new Covenant, as Apostles and Doctors: by the Third to be Prophets under the New Testament, as there had been under the Old; and by the fourth, to Evidence the truth of all this by Signs and Wonders. These Promises were made, and eminently than performed unto the Apostles for our sakes; and, by the Apostolical instruction we have received, the advantage of those promises has been sufficiently derived down to us: But to entitle ourselves immediately to them, we have no foundation; nor can we do it, but by express Warrant, without the greatest insolence. The Latin Church does not say, that an Assembly of Bishops can either work Miracles, or Prophecy; they do not pretend, that any new Truths are revealed to them, other than what the Apostles delivered, and the knowledge of the Old they have not by any Platonic Reminiscence neither: whereas, if they claimed any thing in these extraordinary Promises, they have an equal Title to all; to Miracles; to Prophecy; to more Truths spoke by Christ, than the Apostles ever told us; to more than were ever revealed by Christ on Earth, even to the Apostles themselves. We have therefore from this place of Scripture, not greater Reason to expect from any Bishop or Body of Bishops, Miracles of the one sort, than of the other; and have not further Obligation to believe the present Church Defining than Predicting, nor their Doctrines than their Legends.  
Neither does the next Text, to which we are referred, altar the Case. 15. Acts 28. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, say the Apostles and Elders and Brethrens met together. Now the Apostles were personally Infallible; and who questions than but they were Infallible together? we firmly believe that the Holy Ghost was with them in the Council; for he was with them elsewhere, and apart: but what signifies all this to prove, that now an Infallible Body shall be made by a number of fallible men? and how does it appear, that what seems good to a Majority of other ecclesiastics, shall always seem good to the Holy Ghost too. Had the Doctrine of Infallibility been one of these Apostolical Decrees, that Council had been vouched properly: but there is no such definition in the Acts of it. So much therefore our Adversaries may collect hence, if they please; that upon Dissensions arising, the Church may meet, and consider, as the Apostles did: but that the Convention of every Age shall be alike Infallible, will by no means follow. We might, with their leave, observe here, that St. James is as great in this Council as St. Peter, and speaking last, seems to have had the more Honourable Place: he presided, says St. Chrysostom, because he was Bishop of that See. But I shall rather desire the Reader to take notice, that St. Chrysostom upon this place, speaking concerning the Scandals those cause, that in the Apostles name trouble Christians, perverting their Souls; and concerning the Difficulties, in his days too pretended, of discerning Truth; does not take an occasion from this Council, to sand the doubting Christian to the Oracle of any other Modern Assembly: but on the other side, upon the mention of the writing the Apostles in this Council sent, he recommends to us their other Scriptures; and there, instead of directing us to the Judgement of a living Infallible Interpreter, he refers us finally to our own.  
Another place we are desired to compare with the foregoing, is 1 John 2. Ch. I suppose v. 20, 27. Writing to Little Children, Fathers, and Young Men, [13. v.] he tells them [18 v.] as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, even so now are there many Antichrists; they went out from us, but they were not of us, [20. v.] but ye have an Unction from the Holy one, and ye know all things. [21. v.] I have not written unto you, because ye know not the Truth. [24. v.] Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you; ye shall also continued in the Son, and in the Father. [26. v.] These Things have I written unto you concerning them which seduce you. [27. v.] But the Anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any one teach you; But as the same anointing teacheth you all things, and is Truth, and is no Lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. [28. v.] And now, Little Children, abide in him, that when he shall appear, we may have confidence, etc.  
We have taken leave to set down something more of the Text, than we were directed to; and it may be we may be satisfied by this instance, how little of the Scripture would come to our share, if the Doctors of the other Church had the Monopoly of it, and could retail it as they pleased. But, were there no Scriptures at all, what sort of Stories Oral Tradition would make, you may guests by this Citation.  
The Text out of the Acts produced next before, mentions a Council, and this is brought to be collated with the other, and to make out that Conciliary Authority: as if by this method the Guide would have it surmised, that these words were wrote by St. John to some Council or other; and an ignorant Man might be left than to think that they were meant to the Council of Trent. Whereas they are not addressed to ecclesiastics, to the Pope, and such a number of Bishops, but in general to the Faithful; (orderly reckoned in Ranks, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Philo. Legat ad Caium.  as the Jews upon occasion were used to be placed;) to Fathers, Young men, and Children: those too in all probability not of the Western Church neither, but of some other part of the Catholic, where the truly Antichristian and Blasphemous Heresies, that denied God the Father to be the Creator, or the Son to have been real man, began to overthrew the Faith of some. Against these Damnable Doctrines he confirms the Disciples, exhorting them to abide in that Truth, which they had heard from the beginning; and telling them, (to fix them the more in the Truth, by an ill Character of those that were gone, and a good one of themselves,) that those who are gone after the Antichrists, were always all along no Christians; and that they, the true Christians, were in no great danger of being deceived into such gross absurdities, having their Unction from the Holy One; (that Unction by which they were again properly to be called Christians, and by which they would so remain;) being secured by the grace of God, and the knowledge they had already received, as having been fully instructed heretofore in such Truths, and knowing well all things belonging to that Subject. This is the obvious sense of the words. Now, from this place, that very Church, and those Persons to whom the Apostle writes, could not well have arrogated to themselves an impossibility to declare for those Heretics, not even in those matters there spoken of; St. John's expressions speaking a charitable probability, and his obliging confidence, rather than any positive assertion. However, it can never be imagined, that those Persons are here pronounced Infallible in All things, in all other points of Faith whatsoever. And than besides, if such an Infallibility be affirmed here, it belonged to the Laity, as well as to the Clergy. But after all, if St. John had pronounced so much concerning those men of that time, from some supernatural knowledge of their Minds and Dispositions; by what Revelation are we to learn, that the same saying shall be as true of us, and that the men of the last, or our Age, know all things too? Under such a multiplicity of absurdities and inconsequences, the deduction of the Roman Pretence, from this place, labours. Oecumenius understands all those things, said to be known to the Disciples, to be these: The last hour; that Antichrists abounded; and that the World was full of Lies. All this we know too; and think ourselves therefore obliged to take the direction in the 4th Chapter of this Epistle, (instead of that submission the Guide would persuade,) Beloved believe not every Spirit, but try the Spirits whether they be of God: as also that other in the last Verse of the Epistle, Little Children keep yourselves from Idols, Amen.  
The last Authority to be compared with the precedent, is from the 1 Cor. the 12th Chapter, and the 7th and 8th verses; to which we shall add the three following. But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the word of Wisdom, to another the word of Knowledge by the same Spirit, to another Faith by the same Spirit, to another Gifts of Healing by the same Spirit, to another the working of Miracles, to another Prophecy, to another discerning of Spirits, to another divers kind of Tongues, to another Interpretation of Tongues. But all these worketh that one and selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he william.  
If the Guide had imagined we would have looked into the place, sure he would not have sent us to it. For is it not manifest, that the Apostle describes the particular State of the Church in his days? the variety of extraordinary Gifts with which it was enriched? to what purpose, and by whom they were bestowed? by the Spirit, to the profit of the Brotherhood, and edification of the rising Church; not for the ostentation and vain glory, nor at the choice of the Persons endowed? Now at that time, if to one was given by the Spirit the word of Wisdom, to another the word of Knowledge; so to one was given the Gift of Healing by the same Spirit, to another the working of Miracles, etc. And as these last sort of Gifts have long since ceased, so may it be, that the first have abated much of that extraordinary measure, by which they were than bestowed. For God gave those Graces than to every Man severally as he thought fit, and by such proportions as he pleased: in like manner has he since given to every Age, not the same Gifts, but under a diversity of dispensation; to one Age those Miraculous Powers, for the extraordinary Conviction and instruction of the first Believers; to another, the lesle surprising, tho' not lesle excellent, the abiding Graces; to one the presence of his Servants, to another their Writings; dividing to each severally as he will, as it shall seem most convenient to his Heavenly Wisdom, and good pleasure.  
The Corinthians, amidst that variety of wondered gifts than vouchsafed, were desirous, it seems, to have the most wondered for their share: and that of Tongues was chief coveted by them in those days; for some wrong respect it appears, and not agreeably to the purpose of God. Our Adversaries have other designs, and covet a Miracle of another sort: Infallibility, or a Wisdom or Knowledge Unerring, is their Choice. This choice of theirs is made they think, with some wisdom: and, did it appear that they had it, it would be to our profit and content. But whereas the Corinthians are reproved for coveting a particular Miracle, in that plentiful time of Miracles: the Romanists covet their Miracle now, when God had ceased to bestow the rest. However, if they coveted only, it were more tolerable, though an offence still: but they further, take it to themselves; produce no Charter for it from God, and yet would force us to bear witness to the Gift. When too the Corinthians pretended to any of these Miracles, either the Gift proved itself openly, as in the Case of Healing, Tongues, and even of Wisdom and Knowledge, if above their natural Parts and Education; or else it was attested by the concomitance of the other manifest ones: but this pretended Gift of our Adversaries, is neither attended with others, to bear it Company and Evidence it; nor does by any means manifest itself, and shine out with any Lustre of its own. They claim it by no other reason, but because it was heretofore in the Apostolical times given to others; and they, they think, either deserve it as much, or want it mightily.  
That is the Argument the Guide makes from these places, which he desired should be compared. Those places make no promise of a Living Infallible Director to all Ages; and chief, if not solely, concern the Persons to whom they are spoken, the first Planters of the Gospel: but in his opinion, one at lest of those extraordinary Powers should descend, as there should be occasion for it, to the Interpreting of doubtful Scripture, and for the instruction of succeeding times; for, says he, it is very Needful. A good Argument to make out a Title; as if we had a Right presently, to every thing that would be of advantage to us. This is the Modern Droit de Bienseance, transferred to Spirituals, and pleaded against the Holy Spirit. But how true would the inference be, that all Missionaries have the Gift of Tongues, because it is highly necessary to their Office? or would it be a good Proof, that Miracles are now wrought in Rome, because there may be Atheists that want them? If Heresies make an Infallible Judge necessary, why was there a General Council for the first 300 year, the time of the most grievous and dangerous Heresies that ever infested the Church? or must we affirm, against all History, that there were such Councils, because there was so much need of them? But as needful as it is that a General Council with the Pope should be Infallible, so much more profitable, to avoid delays, would it be that the Pope should be Infallible alone; much more yet, that every Bishop; and highly expedient that every Priest should be that unerring Guide. They show not much of Wisdom or Knowledge, that make such conclusions as these: however, that they have great need of the Gift, we allow.  
Let us see now the 18th Chapter of St. Matthew, 
§ iv  and the 20th verse, with which we are bid to compare the 17th and 18th. But we shall first desire a Licence to read more of the context, and shall begin therefore at the 15th verse. Moreover, if thy Brother shall Trespass against thee, go and tell him his faults between him and thee alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy Brother. [16. v.] and if he will not hear thee, than take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three Witnesses every word may be established. [17. v.] and if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the Church: but if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be to thee as a Heathen and a Publican. [18. v.] Verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven: and whatsoever ye shall lose on Earth, shall be loosed in Heaven. [19 v.] Again, I say unto you, that if two of you shall agreed on Earth, as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in Heaven, [20. v.] For where two or three are gathered together in my Name, there am I in the midst of them. [21. v.] Than Peter came to him, and said, Lord, how often shall my Brother Sin against me, and I forgive him, etc.  
This whole Chapter directs our behaviour to our Brethrens; and particularly, from the 15th verse, if a Brother shall Trespass against us, by what steps we are to proceed, and after how many Admonitions to give him over. 
Chap 3. The Proofs from Scripture insufficient. Sect. 4.  Where we are told, that if the offending Person does not recover himself, and ask Pardon; he shall be bound, that is, Condemned before God as well as men: but if Brethrens agreed, the Offence shall be pardoned in Heaven, nay nothing shall be denied them by their Father. This is the natural meaning of the words; and the same is understood by the Fathers, particularly by St. Chrystostom: 
See Disc. 1. Chap. 7. Art the 4th.  so that no other sense can be opposed to it, as from Authentic Tradition. Now to wave the interpretation of those that will not suppose this Process to end in a formal Excommunication of the Offender, and cutting him of from the whole Assembly, 
If you look upon a Brother as a Heathen or Publican, you have bound him on Earth: if you have corrected your Brother, you have loosed him. Aug. Hom. 15. De Verbis Dom.  but only in a Licence given to the offended Person, after that to break of the former correspondence, and no more to converse with him: not too to take notice that St. Augustin, and St. Chrysostom, in this Case, make the Parties injured to be the Persons that bind or lose, according as they shall remit the Offence or not: to pass by all this, and to suppose that the Bishops have here an Authority given, and that Excommunication is directed; yet this at lest must be granted, that the 17th and 18th verses do not speak concerning the Catholic Church, but only concerning a particular Congregation, nor concerning defining of Doctrines, but admonishing and censuring an injurious Person. In the first place therefore, not more Authority can be challenged hence to the Universal Church, than is to be allowed to any singular: and than in the second place, since in our Adversaries own Opinion, the Keys of the Church may err, and Condemn the Innocent; how shall this Text, that does not make the Discipline of the Church unerring, of which only it can be surmised to speak, prove it Infallible in Articles of Faith, of which it says not a Syllable? As to the 19th and 20th verses, if they refer to the Context, they are to be construed to the same sense, (that given above;) and will be as little to our Adversaries purpose: if too they are taken abstracted, they will be no more at their service neither. For suppose we, that the Promise was absolutely fulfilled to the Apostles, and that whatsoever any two of them desired was granted: yet to others, it must be understood in a more limited sense; upon condition, things convenient are asked, by a good man, in the Spirit of Charity, for a worthy Person, who too contributes his best endeavour. These Conditions St. Chrysostom says are employed under the Phrase, in my Name; and that two or three are rarely so met together. For it is not, says he, every Synod or meeting that is meant by our Saviour, but one so qualified. It is manifest these words can be brought to promise' not more: neither will it follow hence, if a number of Bishops meet together, and pray to God to give their Majority an Infallible Spirit, that therefore immediately they are to have it, which is the only inference that can be made from this place. Besides this Text, by our Adversaries way of deduction, proves more than they themselves will be content with: making the smallest Synod, as Infallible as the most Universal; and giving as much authority to any Bishop and two or three Laymen, as to the greatest Bishop, joined with two or three thousand Bishops more. 
§ V   
The next Proof for Infallibility is from the 16th of Matth. 18, 19, v. It is given by the Guide in Latin with a touch of Syriack: Tues Petrus, &c, and so no doubt is a better Argument to those that understand not the Language: but in English the known words are these. And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. 
jaunoy, in the Seventh Letter of the Fifth Tome, reduces the several Interpretations of this Text, whether professedly or incidentally given by Fathers and Doctors, to four sorts. The first understands the Church to be built on St. Peter; the second upon all the Apostles in common: the third upon St. Peter's Confession: the fourth upon the Rock Christ Jesus. He than brings in order, under these distinct Heads, the several Expositions he finds: and at last, upon the review forms this Judgement. I. That the third and fourth way, which are the same in effect, have very much the advantage of Authority above the first. II. That, if the Fathers can be said to be Unanimous in any of these Expositions, they are so in the third; and much more so, if the fourth be reckoned with the third, as in right it aught. To these Observations I would add another: that of all those who make St. Peter the Rock, only St. Jerom is found to concern his Sucessours of Rome in it, and to make that See to be the Rock of the Text. And this too he insinuates by way of allusion only, in a Complimental Letter to Pope Damasus; but in his Commentary on this place, where he must be presumed to give the true Sense, there he gives another.  And I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt lose on Earth, shall be loosed in Heaven.;;  
Now of this place we have no certain Interpretation, from any Authentic Tradition, for St. Chrysostom (for example) makes the Rock upon which the Church was to be built, to be St. Peter's Confession, that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God; St. Augustin, with little difference, our Saviour so confessed: some expound it of St. Peter's Person, and others jointly of the rest of the Apostles. The Gates of Hell, some take for Heresy and Vice; others, for Death and Destruction. That too, against which those Gates should not prevail, is commonly supposed to be the Church, but thought by St. Jerom to be the Rock; that is, in his Opinion, the Apostles. Besides, as to the Power granted to St. Peter in the next verse, whether of Teaching according to the Jewish Phrase, or of Discipline, or whatever other extraordinary Power; it is here but promised; not given, actually, till after the Resurrection, nor fully until Pentecost. This Promise therefore is to be expounded by the completion. And than we found, that the other Apostles were equally partakers of the Gift, both that of forgiving and retaining Sins, and that other of the Holy Ghost: as too it is apparent from the Acts, that St. Peter had no Power over the rest of the Apostles, nor any Negative upon them in the first Council.  
From this place, several assertions have been advanced, either first in behalf of the See of Rome, or else of the Universal Church: in behalf of the Roman See, that it should have a perpetual existence, never err in Faith, and have the Government of the whole Church; in behalf of the Universal Church, that it should never fail, or never Err.  
Now as to the Church of Rome, she seems not, by any rational construction, to have any private interest in this Text; 
Chap. 3. The Proofs from Scripture insufficient. Sect. 5.  neither does Tradition interpret it for her: the whole current of ancient Authorities carrying it another way; St. Jerom himself, who calls her the Rock, in a Complimental Epistle which they much boast of, never in the lest mentioning her on the proper occasion, in his Comment on the place. She cannot therefore fairly challenge hence the privilege of perpetual Existence, much lesle the Authority of a Supremacy: so far is she from having any Title to Infallibility, a Prerogative absolutely denied the Pope by the Gallican, 
See Ch. 5.  and I suppose by our English Romanists.  
As to the Church in General, whether it can totally fail we do not dispute. Whether too by virtue of this Text there must not always be preserved an Unerring Church, (tho' we may hereafter, yet) we do not now question: for That upon a Division may be the Minor Part, and Dissenting from the Pope, and undistinguishable by any outward Mark. But whether or not the Majority of the Church, or any assignable part of it, asunder, or consenting with the Pope, shall always be Infallible; that we desire at present should be demonstrated from this place.  
For when it is said, that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church, whether founded on St. Peter's Confession, or upon St. Peter so Confessing; the utmost that can be concluded is this, that such a Church there shall always be, that simply shall confess that Article of Faith, or if you please, that shall in all points confess the whole Faith: but where that Church shall be, or what the numbers of that Church shall be is not defined here; neither is it made impossible for the greater or any assigned part to Apostatise, much lesle to err in some single point, provided such a Church here spoke of shall some where or other still remain. For suppose by this Text there is always to be an Unerring Church, yet the Text which (in the Opinion of the Gallicans') does not place that Unerring Church at Rome, does not neither (to do the Papalins right) assign her any other Seat; neither does it determine her numbers, or give us any other mark whereby she may be discerned. As than the Roman Church, that part of the Universal Church may err; so may any other assignable part of the Universal err too: and as the Roman Church may err alone; so too she may err in Conjunction with any assignable proportion of the other Churches, and yet an unerring Church be preserved still.  
When too it is promised to St. Peter, that the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven shall be given him, and that what he binds, etc. The Keys here mentioned, are either of Knowledge, or of Jurisdiction, or both. The Fathers generally understand it of the last; some Moderns of the first only: let us take them together. As than one is given, so the other: both eminently, and with exemption from Error to the Apostles; ordinarily, and with no such exemption to their Successors. The Keys put into the hands of the Apostles, were Master-keys; the others opened or shut but to such Apartments: those in the hands of the Apostles were rightly used; these in the hands of their Successors, might be used amiss, and against the will of the Master of the House. So much is confessed by themselves concerning the Key of Discipline: and if the Key of Knowledge be here to be understood; where the Text excepts the use of one from Error, and not the other, they cannot show. But as we observed before, our Gallican Romanists have unawares yielded up the Cause to us. For, if the particular Successors of St. Peter have not Infallibility conveyed to them by this Text, other Successors of the Apostles are not to expect it hence: and if the Bishops have it not apart, they have than from this Text no warrant to claim it to the Majority of their Body with or without the Pope: which is the Proposition aught hence to be proved, and after which at present we only inquire.  
The next proof produced, is from 1 Tim. 3.15. we begin at the former verse. [14.] These Things writ I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly. [15.] But if I tarry long that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the House of God which is the Church of the Living God, the Pillar and Ground of Truth. [16.] And without Controversy, great is the Mystery of Godliness, etc.  
The Church, says our Guide, unlimited to the Apostles days; that is, the Successive Teachers of it, are the Pillar and Ground of Truth, the Foundation of God that standeth sure. 2 Tim. 2.19. But this which he lays down for sure, is not so well founded. For first it seems to some not incongruous, to join these words The Pillar and Ground of Truth, in construction with those that follow, and not with those that go before: a new Sense beginning with them, and running thus; The Mystery of Godliness is the Pillar and Ground of Truth, and without Controversy great, namely this, God seen in the Flesh, etc. This S●ntax the Greek will bear very well; and the sense, (especially if the Pillar of Truth be taken materially, and in St. Chrysostoms' acceptation, which you found here below;) is not improper: however I may safely say it is much more natural than that which the Romanists would bring in upon us. But we need not fly to this Novel Construction: for in the other, the received and authorised one,  
(2dly.) It is not certain, whether in this place Timothy himself be not supposed to be the Pillar and Ground of that Truth, which the Apostle, the Master Builder is now establishing: the sense running thus, that thou mayst know, [as] a Pillar and Ground of Truth, how, etc. This has been suggested by Mr. Chillingworth, and has Gregory Nyssen for its Voucher.  
And than (3dly.) Supposing it not to be said of Timothy, yet there are other Senses, under which it may be affirmed. For St. Chrysostom taking Truth here as opposed to Type and shadow, and understanding a Pillar of Truth to be Phrased, as a Pillar of Fire or Smoak, denominated not from what it supports, but of what it consists; seems to give the Text this Construction, which is the Church of the Living God being a Pillar and Ground [or whose Pillar and Ground is] of weighty and substantial Truth. His Paraphrase runs thus. The House of God, which is the Church of the Living God, a Pillar and Ground of Truth, not as that Jewish House. For this it is that Supports our Faith, and our Preaching: It is Truth, that is the Pillar and Ground of the Church.  
But (4thly.) Suppose the Church said to be the Pillar of Truth, as that which supported Truth, and on which it was built: if we take Truth in St. Chrysostom's sense, as contra-distinguished to Types, the Sentence will not import, that the Church bears up all Truth, and nothing but the Truth; but only that it holds up and shows forth those great Truths, of which the Old Law was but the shadow, the great Mystery that follows, of God manifested in the Flesh, etc. And than this at best, should we suppose it to give the Church an Infallibility, would give it only in such Fundamentals, of which betwixt us and the Romanists there is no dispute.  
But lastly, let the Church be said to be the foundation of Truth, that is of all saving Truths, so as to support them, raise them up, and show them to the World. Take than the Church for its Policy and Frame, as it was constituted by the Apostles; and we readily acknowledge it to have been such: but this hinders not, but this Fabric may since have been much impaired, or defaced, dilapidated, or superonerated by the folly of the Builders; tho' not entirely ruin'd, by reason of the firmness and strength of the Building. If too we understand by the Church the Persons who constitute it, 
Gal. 2.9. Eph. 2.20. 2 Cor. 6.16, 1 Pet. 2.5.  we know well that the Apostles were its Pillars and Foundation, as they founded and supported it by their Doctrine and Rules; and that the Faithful edified and built up by them, were a Temple. We grant too that their Successors, at lest the far greater part of them, did for some time make good those names, bearing up and evidencing the whole Truth. And yet notwithstanding it might remain possible, that the Majority of Clergy or People, who should come after, might fail any longer to support it or retain it; and that some since who seemed to be Pillars, may have advanced their own Capitels too high; may have let fall something, of what aught to have been held up; and instead of that may have taken up some error, and fixed it where it aught not, in the Holy Place.  
The Church therefore in either sense, taken either for the Building, or for the Builders, was actually in the Apostolical times the Foundation and Ground of Truth: in the following Ages it aught to have been so likewise; that is the same frame aught to have been kept up; and it was the Duty of the Apostles Successors, to be Pillars. But whether what aught always to be done, should be done always, that this Text does not affirm. If it affirms at all, it affirms concerning the first Church: but of that certainly which was to come, it was no Prophecy, but an Exhortation. And as an Exhortation it may be well understood even to Timothy himself. For the Apostle instructs him in this Letter, how he is to behave himself; and here he intimates a weighty Motive for such a behaviour, that he should take good care, either to be a steady Pillar of the Church, or to see that the Frame of the Church was not injured under his Government: for the Church was the House of the Living God; and the Trust was very great, of the formerly Mysterious, now Conspicuous Truths, committed to his Charge. He aught therefore to take great heed: and that the more, because, as the Apostle proceeds to warn him, 
Chap. 4. v. 1.  the Spirit expressly speaketh, that in the latter times some shall departed from the Faith, 
verse 6.  giving heed to seducing Spirits, and Doctrines of Devils, etc. If than says St. Paul, thou put the Brethrens in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good Minister of Jesus Christ; 
verse 16.  take heed therefore unto thyself and thy Doctrine, etc. The Apostle not speaking positively concerning the future demeanour even of Timothy himself, much lesle of any number of future Bishops.  
This is the plain easy interpretation of this Place. As for that of the Roman Church, neither St. Chrysostom, nor the Authors of the Commentaries ascribed to St. Hierom, or to St. Ambrose, ever thought of it: whence we are at lest assured of this, that it is not more the Traditional, than it is the Rational meaning.  
The 4th Chapter of the Ephesians, (the 11th and 14th verses of which, 
§. VI  are produced next by the Guide) gins with a general Exhortation, that they would walk worthy of their Vocation: and than, as to the particulars, directs first to Love and Unity, that they should keep the Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace: 
Chap 3. The Proofs from Scripture insufficient. Sect. 6.  [3. v.] that those who had the more eminent Gifts should not contemn the rest; neither they which had the lesser, should be discouraged, much lesle envy the others; for Grace is given according to the measure Christ has thought fit, and for common benefit: that some are Apostles, and some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some Pastors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the Ministry, for the edifying the Body of Christ, all those co-operating to produce in each Christian the same Faith, and Knowledge of the Son of God; to the intent they may all grow up to that measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, as to be perfect Men, and no more Children, tossed to and from, and carried about with every wind of Doctrine, by the slight of Men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive. So does the Apostle caution them as to the first Particular, against those that would toss them to and from, and break them one against another. He than at the 17th verse resumes the same general exhortation; This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not, as other Gentiles walk, etc. Proceeding to other Particulars, against the Sins of Lying, Anger, Stealing, Fornication, etc. That they should keep steadfast to the duties they knew, and suffer no man that lies in wait, to deceive them with vain words concerning these things. Now all that this place supposes, is, that heretofore there were Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers, the which we deny not: and the direction given to the Ephesians is this, that those Graces should not be made an occasion of Pride and Conceit, Division and Emulation, by the craft of ill men; but that the Disciples should suffer themselves to be edified and perfected by those Gifts, growing more men, than to be led away by every deceiver, into the deceitful lusts of their former un-regenerate State. This the Text spoke to the Ephesians, to whom it was writ: and the exhortation is good to us, that we should make the due improvement of the helps we enjoy, of what is come down to us from the Apostles and Evangelists, i e. of the Holy Scriptures, and particularly of this Epistle. But that a Succession of such highly qualified men should be continued down to our time, that is no supposition of the place. Yes, says the Guide, as long as men are liable to be tossed about, there must be the same Infallibility: that is, there do continued the one sort of Persons, the Deceivers, and the Deceivable; and therefore the other must remain, that cannot err, the Apostles, or inspired Doctors; and as the winds of false Doctrine arise on one side, the Holy Spirit must of necessity descend down and blow on the other. But nothing can be more unreasonable, or more presumptuous, than this Inference. For that blessed Spirit blows where, and how it lists: and as it did not think fit, to obviate all Cavils and Objections, and to prevent all Deception than; so now it has not taken care, for a formal definition of all the questions that may have been raised since. If none had been deceived in the Apostles time, and the Faith of every man had been fully assured, we might have wanted Infallibility more impatiently now: but men, we see, were tossed about in those days; and there was need, it seems, of something Super-Infallible, to have hindered it. Those Apostles therefore and Prophets, etc. were given, not absolutely to hinder winds of Doctrine from rising, nor to make it impossible that any deceivable men should be tossed about by those winds; but to give to the Chosen and Pure of Heart such a stability and Ancorage, that tho' they might be blown upon, and ruffled, yet they should be able to keep the Course to their Port, and not make Shipwreck of their Souls. Had it pleased the Divine Providence, Man at first might have been made Infallible, and Impeccable too; had the Holy Spirit so pleased, every Hearer of the Gospel, might have been a Believer, every Believer Infallible, and the will only left to its liberty of Obedience and Disobedience to what the Understanding knew. But the Creator took not this measure in the beginning, nor the Holy Ghost after. A few only were Infallibly assisted, and these did not Preach to every Man of that Age; and were not personally with their Infallibility in all places where their Gospel came: neither 〈◊〉 it appear upon them where they were, in such a Latitude, or with such an  force, that there was no room for further enquiry, nor even a possibility of contradiction. For many, even in the Churches founded by the Apostles, doubted of their mind in many things, and many perversely gainsaid, who never had, it may be, the opportunity of any further instruction or conviction. As than it cannot be said without impiety, that this Divine method was defective, and that there was not at that time administered means of Knowledge sufficient for stability of Faith; God working by his own ways, his own end, choosing some Nations out for the hearing of the Gospel, and even than so proposing that Gospel to them, that the hearts of men might be tried by its reception, and the approved be saved: so neither can it be said more venially in the after ages, that the good wisdom of God is wanting to itself, or them; if they have not their Apostles too, and found not such an Infallibility as they have fancied, continued to them. It is we that are wanting in Duty and Gratitude, we to whom the Scriptures of those Apostles are come, and who know more than many a Church Contemporary with the Apostles than did, (instructed, as many than were, by some not Infallible Teacher, and to which the Writings, sent by the Apostles to other places, were not yet communicated;) it is we, I say, that shall be wanting to God, and ourselves, if we do not see, and confess, that we have those opportunities of knowledge God thought sufficient enough, to lead the honest and industrious into all saving Truths; tho' not so much, as every wanton idle man may wish, or every perverse Caviller demand. It was needful in the Opinion of the Rich man in Hell, that to reclaim his Brethrens one should be sent from the dead: but it was thought as unnecessary by Abraham; for they had Moses and the Prophets, and if they would not hear them, they would not be persuaded, says he, tho' one came from the Dead. We have Moses, and the Prophets, our Saviour Christ, his Evangelists and Apostles; they have told us already what was thought necessary, and thence we must study their mind: but they will neither return on Earth themselves, nor sand any other Infallible, to give us an exacter information. We are to be content with what God has given, and not undutifully pretend to more. And as no man persuades himself that he is rich, because he has need of Wealth; or that God has given him an excellent understanding, because he finds he wants it: so neither is a Church to arrogate to itself Infallibility, because she thinks she needs it. But I have said enough before of this begging Argument, drawn from pretended necessity, by such as are unwilling to labour, and use their honest endeavour; which offers itself here again, and is so impudent as not to receive an answer.  
We return therefore to this Apostolical exhortation, and hope, that as every man must acknowledge himself sufficiently instructed by it, in the Duty of abstaining from Pride, Contention, Anger, Uncleanness, &c: So no man will have profited so little by the use of this and the other Scriptures, as not to discern between Modern Bishops and the Apostles; nor to be so weak, as to be taken with the slight and juggle of this Argument, a craftiness that is not cunning. For he must be a Child, that is deceived by such an Inference: and with this wind from this corner,  turns, turns easily. We grant to the Guide his allegation from St. Peter, 2 Eph. 3.16. that some Scriptures are hard to be understood: but as to the Scriptures he here citys, it is not hard to understand that no Infallibility is imported by them. Those hard places of St. Paul, which St. Peter means, were not the only places wrested by unlearned and unstable men to their own destruction, for so also were the other Scriptures: And the Reader, I presume, does by this time see that no say are more violently and unnaturally forced, than those which are wrested to this Infallibility even by Learned Men.  
The last Proof for this Infallibility is weaker, 
§. VII.  if possible, than any of the foregoing. It is taken from the frequent injunctions made by the Apostle to Pastors and People, as [1 Cor. 1.10.] That they should all say one thing, and that there should be no Schisms among them: [Phil. 1.27.] That they stand fast in one Spirit, be of one mind: 
Chap. 3. The Proofs from Scripture insufficient. Sect. 7.  [Phil. 2.2, 3.] That they be of one meaning, agreeing in one: [3.16.] That they should continued in the same Canon or Rule: [12. Rom. 16.] that they should be of one mind, following along with the Humble, not Wise in their own conceits: [Rom. 17.17.] That they should mark those that make Differences and Scandals, contrary to the Doctrines they had learned; [1 Cor. 14 32, 33] That the Spirits of the Prophets, are subject to the Prophets, etc. Now, says he, this Precept how can it be observed, unless there be in the Church some Persons, whose Judgement, Faith, etc. all the rest are bound to follow? And who can these be, but the Guides? etc.  
So far the Guides meaning is true, that these exhortations suppose something in which Christians should be United: that is, the Truths of Christianity which they had received, and the mutual kindness they owed one to another. And so much may be supposed now, without the continuance of an Infallible Judge: there being Truths delivered to us, in which we aught to agreed; and the same duty of Charity obliging us, in those things in which we differ. These Admonitions therefore concerning the Christian Faith and Love, do not direct us to repair to a Living Infallible Guide; but to make a careful use of the Heavenly Guidance, we have already received, as we will answer the neglect before our Eternal Judge. For though such exhortations take place, if there be a Judge deputed; yet they are so far from inferring one, that they are as proper, and more necessary, when there is none: being than pointed against Negligence, or Prejudice, or Passion, such things by which our own judgement may otherwise be corrupted. So two private Neighbours may be advised to end their Difference, and not so much as a Trial by consent be ever thought of. So two Sovereign Princes may be Counselled to agreed, and no Arbitrator appointed. And if in a Schism of Antipopes, any good man should have exhorted them to have removed the Scandal, he had not therefore made himself their Judge, nor supposed any other.  
These Apostolical Directions do so little prove the design of a perpetual Infallibility, that they need not be encountered by others, that are much stronger against it. Such as Beware of False Prophets [Mat. 7.15.] Prove all things, hold fast that which is good [1 Thes. 5.21.] Believe not every Spirit, but try the Spirits, etc. [1 Joh. 4.1.] For from these, and other Passages, great Presumptions might be raised by us against the Popish Pretence: but the Proof lies absolutely on their side; and what they produce is so weak, that it falls of itself, and excuses us from the trouble of any further opposition.  
Now than, after we have with great Patience examined all their Scriptural Proofs, the Reader may be pleased to stand and take breath, and only to consider, whether he has found in them any the lest degree of Evidence, that was necessarily to be expected for the Establishment of such a Power. He may reflect that first the design of a Judge did require, that his Person should be ascertained, his Jurisdiction expressed, in what Causes he should pronounce, and what Speech should be esteemed his Sentence: and than 2dly, that the extraordinary nature of an Infallible Tribunal, which was to supersede our Natural Guide, and Suspend the Use of Human Understanding, and this in Affairs of infinite Moment; which was new too, and never before known to the World under the Old Testament; did require some very extraordinary notice, a notice under the New, more express than that Passage of Deuteronomy, as clear as any other Divine Revelation, and as plain as any Dictate of Reason. He was therefore to expect in this Case the Erection and Designation of such an Office, in Formal Precise terms, and as express, at lest, as any other Article of our Faith. But instead of all this, he will remember that he has found no other Evidences produced, than such as will very fairly admit another, and a far easier Sense; any, which require another Sense to be affixed to them; which not Rational man unprejudiced would ever Construe to the Popish meaning; and which the facto, none of the Ancient Celebrated Interpreters ever did: which too have been so far from being esteemed by those Doctors to prove an Infallibility, that they never gave them so much as an occasional Hint to mention and remember it on the place. From all which Considerations, I think I may, with the leave of any Equitable Reader, fairly conclude, that there is no Scriptural Testimony at all for the existence of this pretended Judge.  
And now, when our Adversaries have failed so much in their Authentic Writings and Records, it remains, that they should call us on to the hearing of their Unscriptural Testimonies, and tell us, that they have many a Witness to produce who is able to speak much to the Affair; that the Infallible Court is a Court by prescription, and they can prove its Authority by infinite Depositions. Such pretended Witnesses of theirs, which may be said to be many in remote parts, and which they may pray to have examined, shall be enquired after, and fairly heard in due time. But in the mean while, that such a Suggestion is made, only to put of the Sentence, and to hinder Justice, any Indifferent Reader will presume aforehand.  
For their failure of Proof from Scripture, does not only very much weaken and disparage their Cause, by the want of the best sort of Evidence; but does besides enable us to form a very Peremptory Conclusion against them.  
FOR AN INFALLIBLE COURT is a thing in itself of so high a Nature, that it may well seem to require something more Authentic than a Verbal Commission for its warrant: It was withal so new and so strange in our Saviour's time, that if any thing of his Institution had been put in Writing, This in all Probability, could never have been omitted: besides, the Knowledge of such a Court was to be the Leading and the Principal Truth, by which all other Truths were afterwards to be regulated and fixed, and by which the Christians of all Ages were to be chief instructed: and therefore on all accounts it must have found a very particular mention in the Holy Records, if it had not been premised in the first place. But, however, if the Erection of this Court, with the Nomination of the Persons, had not been Registered by itself, as a remarkable Passage, in the Gospels or in the Acts; yet it could never have been forgot, when fit and proper occasion was given, particularly in those places which the Romanists take for its Proof, and where they are so far in the right, that this Infallibility, had it been at all intended, aught to have been mentioned of necessity. For the Stability of the Church spoke of in St. Matthew, the Submission to the Church there directed, the Promise of the Holy Spirit, and of his assistance in St. John, were all, in our Adversaries opinion, proper places for this Subject, and such on which they for their part are never used to forget it. But the Apostle St. Paul's distinct Ennumeration of Heavenly Gifts, his notice of the grievous Heresies that were to enter, his Cautions against them, his frequent Exhortations to continued in the True Faith, these certainly could never have suffered him to have passed by this wondered Grace, and to have left the Disciples without the benefit of so necessary a Direction. Let any Roman Doctor, prepossessed as they are, with the Opinion of an Infallible Guidance, consider with himself, whether in these Cases he would not have thought himself justly to be blamed, had he forgot it; whether he would not certainly have proposed it, as the only effectual remedy, and God's wisest Provision against Error; and whether he would have failed to have addressed his doubtful Disciples to it: and than let him tell us, whether he can think St. Paul more forgetful than himself; or lesle Wise, or lesle Careful of the salvation of those to whom he writes. Of such a different Proceeding, there can be no cause assigned, but the difference of the Principle by which the Apostles went, from that which has been since taken up by the latter Ages.  
The proper designed result of this Chapter was this, That there was no Scriptural Notice of a standing Infallibility: and from that Conclusion this Corollary does naturally follow, That there was not therefore any such Infallibility at all erected. As therefore we concluded the first Chapter, with a just suspicion against it, from the single view of the Pretence: so may we, by force of this Corollary, put a full end here to the whole Dispute; and justify our surceasing from any further Enquiry in so plain a Case. But the Reader, either out of Curiosity, or out of mere Grace to the Parties, and for super-abundant satisfaction, may, if he pleases, proceed on with us to the other Allegations.   

CHAP. IU.  
No Proof from Tradition for Infallibility at Large. The Proofs from Tradition, to what they are to speak, and of what kind they are, [Sect. I] None of any kind for Infallibility in Gross. Not from the Article of the Creed concerning the Church. This proved in general from the nature of the Creed, [Sect TWO]: than from the particular consideration of the Article [Sect. III]. Whence arises another Peremptory Conclusion against the whole Pretence [Sect. IV]. 
Chap. 4. No Proof from Tradition for Infallibility at large.   
FRom the Proofs taken out of Scripture, 
§. I.  we now descend to those we are to expect from Tradition. But although in the Scriptural Testimonies we were content to follow that order, which the Guide thought most advantageous to his Cause; yet here, where he has not been pleased to lead us the way, we shall take ourselves to be at liberty to pursue a more natural method.  
We may therefore consider the Traditional Evidence, for an Infallible Judge or Guide, either, (1) as they speak, such an Infallible Authority in gross, not ascertaining the Person; or else as it is determined to certain Persons: If determined; either (2) as assignable to the Pope singly, or in general to the majority of the Body of Bishops; and those whether (3) apart and in their several Dioceses, the diffused Church; or (4) assembled together in a Council; or else (5) last, to the Pope and that Majority consenting. The Majority of all the Bishops I say, because our present Enquiry supposes a Division in the Church upon some new question, concerning which all Bishops are not agreed.  
The Subject to which these Traditional Testimonies are to speak may be so distinguished. The Testimonies too themselves may be of different kinds: either (1) Tradition properly Divine, some Say of our Saviour or his Apostles, reported from their Mouths, whether verbally or summarily, by the Ancients; or else they may be the Opinion and Judgement of those Ancients, expressed, or (2) in their Writings; or (3) by their Practice. These are the three sorts of Unscriptural Evidence, that must prove an Infallibility; as that Infallibility be assigned in any of those five manners above mentioned.  
Now to begin with the Traditional Authorities for Infallibility at large, 
§. II.  and to examine their several kinds about it.  
I. Here is no Traditional Divine Saying offered to this Purpose: no word reported from our Saviour, or the Apostles, making mention of such a Power somewhere given; and directing us, so much as in the general, to resort to the Infallible Authority, and submit to its Determination.  
II. There is no such saying of any Ancient, affirming the modern existence of Infallibility; no mention of the Unerring Tribunal.  
III. We found in Practice no such supposition, from the Appeals and Addresses of contending Parties: not such Phrase or Style as this; I am ready to refer myself to the Decision of those that cannot Err; I appeal to the Infallible Judge.  
I know of nothing that can look like any sort of Evidence on this Subject; except that Article of the Creed should be alleged, wherein we profess to believe in the Holy Catholic Church: as if by this Profession we did own some Living Unerring Guide, and our duty to submit to that Conduct.  
Now to this Suggestion there is a very ready answer, without Enquiring into the meaning of those words. For whatever the meaning be, it must be such a one, as is expressed already in the Holy Scriptures: the Articles of the Creed being declared by sufficient Authority to be Scriptural Assertions, and not to be derived from Oral Tradition. For this we have the Positive Affirmation of two Ancient Expositors of the Creed, St. Cyrill, and the Author of the first Book to the Catechumen, going under St. Augustin's Name.  
St. Cyrill, speaking to the Catechumen, says in his Fifth Catechetick Discourse. Embrace and keep this Faith, which is now delivered to you by the Church, and which is confirmed by the whole Scripture. For because every person is not able to read the Scriptures, but some are debarred from that Knowledge for want of Learning, and some by want of Leisure; for that reason, jest any Soul should perish by Ignorance, we have the whole Doctrine of our Faith comprehended in these few Lines— Keep in your memory this Faith; and expect hereafter the confirmation of each Article from the Holy Scriptures. For the Creed does not consist of the Opinions of Men; but of the Chief Heads of Holy Scripture, collected out of it, and brought together in this Form.  
The first Book to the Catechumen gins thus. Receive my Children the Rule of Faith, which is called the Symbol: and when ye have received it, writ it in your hearts, and say it every day to yourselves. Before ye go to sleep, and before you go abroad, arm yourselves with your Symbol, [or Creed.] No body writes the Creed to read it, but to get it by heart; jest that which has been preserved to us by diligence, should be blotted out by forgetfulness. Let your Book be your Memory: that which you are now to hear, ye are to believe; and that which you shall believe, ye are to repeat again with your Tongue: As the Apostle says; with the heart we believe unto righteousness, and with the Mouth Confession is made unto Salvation. This than is the Symbol which you are to remember, and to repeat.— These words which you have heard, are found scattered here and there in the Holy Scriptures, but they have been collected thence, and brought together in this manner: jest the Memories of the Unlearned should be at a loss; and to the end that every man should be able to say, and to comprehend, [or Retain,] that which he does believe.  
It appears therefore evidently, that no Article of the Creed is to be produced as Traditional proof; and that this Article concerning the Church is to import no other Proposition, than such as may be collected and demonstrated from the Holy Scriptures. Upon which account it cannot be supposed to imply, either an Infallibility in gross, or affixed to certain Persons; except such Infallibility could be proved from the written word, a thing by no means to be done, as we have already seen.  
This Answer in Bar would be sufficient alone. But we may be content to consider more fully this their only Argument; and the rather, because we may meet the Article again on other heads: besides, these word Church and Catholic being often to occur, we have here given us a convenient occasion to explain them.  
First than, a Church is a Society founded by Christ, on such Belief, and such Obedience, as he has prescribed; which we own, and to which we engage ourselves by Baptism. This Church was first Erected at Jerusalem: and from that there have been since raised, by the Order of our Lord, and Labours of his Servants, infinite more.  
The Word Catholic is Greek, and includes in it the signification of All, or a whole. Now it is known that the Notion of All or Whole may be either simply taken, for a Sum and Aggregate of parts not otherwise joined; or for a Whole, properly so called, whose parts have between themselves some other Union.  
As than the word Catholic implys not more than number: so the first single Church at Jerusalem might be styled Catholic, in contradiction to the Jewish, because it lay open to all men, without exception of Nation, or Sex, or Quality, to Jews, and Gentiles, Men and Women, Bond and Free. So too, when there were more Churches propagated, all those Churches Collectively might be called the Catholic or Universal Church, as being the Particulars in a Sum or Aggregate, without any consideration yet of a nearer Conjunction. In the same manner it is plain that the Doctrine that was taught in common in all those Churches, might be called Catholic too.  
Now it having pleased the Holy Providence of God to qualify his Servants for the Universal Catholic Promulgation of his Gospel by the Gift of Tongues, and to sand them out immediately into all the World, in their several Missions: as all parts were in a little time made happy by the knowledge of the Truth; so there resulted this advantage from that dispersion to the word of Truth, that it was now lodged and deposited, as it were by so many Copies, in so many several distant hands, and was thereby the better secured, from being either lost, or corrupted. Upon which account there could be no question in the first Ages, but those Doctrines or Precepts were Apostolical and Divine, which were found to be taught in all the distant Churches, and Universally attested by the whole World.  
From this consideration therefore of the State of the Christian Church in its beginning, the word Catholic might by a Metonymy be brought to signify True: and thence it might come, that in Theologick Language, Catholic Doctrine, is the same as true Doctrine; and a Catholic Church, that which Professes the True Faith, and the True Obedience.  
So it might be. But finding the word Catholic under that Figurative fence, very early, not only in the Authors of the fourth Age 
1 Of this the Instances are well known and many noted by Bishop Pearson on this Article, in his Exposition of the Creed. , or of the third 
2 The Synod of Antioch held in the year 272, has these expressions in its Circular Letter; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, speaking of the Church of Antioch, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. St. Cyprian in the 47th, and 49th Epistle of the Oxford Edit. ann. 251, 252, uses Catholica Ecclesia in that Sense; and so Firmilian in his Letter anno Chr 256. So Tertullian, in the beginning of the Century, in his Book de Pres●r. c. 30. ; but of the second too, as in Clemens Alexandr. 
3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Strom. 7. . and higher in the Letter of the Church of Smyrna concerning Polycarp's Martyrdom 
4 Polycarp is called, in the Letter of the Church of Smyrna, [Vsser. p. 25. Euseb. Hist. l. 4 c. 15.] about the middle of the Second Century, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  (if not in Justin Martyr 
5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seems to bear such a sense in the beginning of his Book de Monarch. :) finding, I say, the word so early used in that sense, as an ordinary Appellative, and wanting no Adjunct to explain it: one may be tempted to think, that this was than no new Metonymical Expression, just raised to signify from the particular Circumstances of Christianity, but that rather it had been received into common use before in those Countries, and had the Notion of Verily affixed to it. For long before, among the Logicians, ever since Aristotle's time, a Catholic Attribute was that which belonged to the Subject essentially, and for ever 
6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Analyt. Post. l. 1. c. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid. c. 7. . And so in Quintilian, a Catholic Precept or Maxim, was that which held true absolutely, and without any exception 
7 Quintil. l 2. c. 13. Praecepta Catholica. i e. Vniversalia & Perpetualia. Leges immutabili Necessitate constrictae. . And lastly, in the Titles of the Chapters of Pliny's Natural History, we found the Properties of the Planets, called their Catholic Affections; and afterwards the Propositions concerning Lightning, Catholica Fulgurum 
8 Libr. 2. cap. 17. 54. . From all which it is very probable, that Catholic did stand in Profane Usage for Universally the Same, and constantly True. And this Notion of Truth or Certainty appears further, from the contrary word Heresy: which signifies an Opinion taken up upon Choice, or at Pleasure 
9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Diog. Laert. in Proaem. Haereses, quarum opera sunt Adulterae Doctrinae, dictae Grecâ Voce ex interpretatione Electionis, quâ quis, sive ad instituendas, sive ad suscipiendas eas, utitur. De arbitrio suo inducere. Tertul. De Praescrip. c. 16. Haeresis, Humana Praesumptio. De Jejun. c. 1. ; at the best only Probable and Contingent, and so distinguished from Science and Demonstration; but sometimes understood in a worse Sense, and as opposed to Truth, even in the time of the New Testament 
10 24 Act. 5.14. 1 Cor. 11.19. , at farthest, notoriously so taken by Justin Martyr, Ireneus, and Clemens Alexandrinus 
11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Strom. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid. and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendered by Hesychius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. , etc. The last of those mentioned Authors very much countenances the Comparative observation we are now making 
12 The latter part of the 7th Strom. beginning at 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— which we have often cited already, supposes Heretics to be led by uncertain Opinions, and Fancies of Probability; but the True Church to be founded on Science, and Demonstration [that is on 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉]. on this occasion he says. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to which add that Sentence before cited numb. 11 and than it will appear that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be well said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. . And upon the whole, it may be, one may be allowed to guests, that the lose meaning of Universal or General does not always in Ecclesiastical Writers belong to Catholic, there where it is ordinarily assigned 
13 possibly in that pail 〈◊〉 of Eusebius, (Hist. l. 4. c. 7) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may be but the Exposition or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And in that of Justin Martyr's Dialogue, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may have in it the signincation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as well as of what follows, etc. .  
But whatever the reason might be of the acceptation of the word; this is certain, that in Christian Phrase Catholic has been the same with Orthodox; and the true Doctrine, or Church, so named in opposition to the false, very Anciently, if not all along from the beginning of Christianity.  
Next we are to consider the Word as it signifies All, or a Whole of Parts, not only summed up in a number, but United in its Constitution.  
Any single Church, is such a whole of particular Persons Confederated and Conjoined together, in the Profession of the same Truths, and the same Obedience, under Christ our Lord; by whose Authority this Strict Regular Society was first founded; and in Obedience to whom, it is always to be maintained.  
Such a single Church was that of Jerusalem, the Original and mother of all the rest. And than, when there was no other, he that should have broke the Union and Order of that Body, would have been a Schismatic; and he that had kept it, as properly styled a Catholic.  
But after, when other Churches were form by the Apostles and their Disciples, these distinct Churches, as they were founded severally in that first Unity of Order, each within themselves; so too they were founded in a Collateral Unity one with another: all those several Churches or Bodies making one Church, or one Body, called therefore the Catholic Church.  
For those several Churches, were not only of the like kind and nature, professing the same Faith and Obedience; but they were all, virtually and in effect the same Church: each member of each Society having a right in all; by his admittance into one, being admitted into the rest, and made perfectly free of all those Christian Corporations. So that the Identity between any such two Societies was not only specifical, but in some kind numerical too: and as the Christian Society of Jerusalem continued the same, notwithstanding the change of Persons by lapse of time; so the Christian Society of Antioch was the same with that of Jerusalem, notwithstanding the difference of Persons by distance of place. Upon the account therefore of this Fundamental Close Union, by which each Church is immediately joined with, and incorporated into each other, all those Churches together are properly styled the Catholic Church, and each of those Churches is Catholic too.  
This Secondary Collateral Union is immediate and internal, 
Tota & tantae Ecclesiae, una est illa ab Apostolis prima, ex quâ omnes; sic omnes prima, & Apostolicae dum unâ omnes probant Unitatem. Tert. de Prescript. c. 20.  belongs fundamentally and essentially to the Constitution of a Christian Church, and is so expressed by the Ancients, by Tertullian particularly, and by St. Cyprian.  
Besides this Essential Unity between different Churches, 
Episcopatus unus est, cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur. Cypr. de Vnit. Eccl. Et si Pastores multi sumus, Unum tamen Gregem pascimus. Id. Ep. 68 Edit. Oxon.  there is another Mediate and External one; as when the several particular Churches shall join together in some common form of Policy, and under the Government and Direction of some one Church, in which the rest Concentre, and by the mediation of which they are further United. This Principal Church, is than the Root, the Origine, and the Centre of this Political Union. Such a Church is the Metropolitan Church of each Province, in respect of the particular Bishoprics: the Patriarchal, 
Chap. 4. No Proof from Tradition for Infallibility at large. Sect. 3.  in respect of the particular Provinces: and such the Church of Rome would be, in respect of the Patriarchates themselves. The Romanists therefore suppose those several Churches that Communicate with the Roman Church, to be Catholic by that Communion; and those altogether, with her their Chief and Head, to make the Catholic Church: and this by Divine Right, and from the Institution of Christ; which whosoever denys is most properly a Schismatic in their Opinion.  
Whether the Church of Rome has such a Supremacy by Divine Ordinance; or whether all this External Unity, by which particular Churches Politically confederate together for common Government, be not Positive and Human; we are not now to inquire: that notion of Catholic which denotes Communion, and is opposed to Schism, belonging not to our present purpose. At this time, our search is after a judge of Controversy, and we are to consider the Church Catholic, only as it signifies Orthodox, and in opposition to Heresy and Error: we having nothing now to do with the Church of Rome, as it pretends to be the Centre of Unity, but as it claims to be the Basis of Truth.  
This is the Import of the Words Church, and Catholic: we come now to consider them, as they lie in the Creed.  
Here than we are to observe first, concerning the Creed in general; that as Catholic signifies Orthodox, so this Creed was nothing else but the Orthodox Profession. For it so coming to pass, that there arise up in the beginning of Christianity very dangerous Errors, and destructive of the true Faith; the Catholic or true Church thought advisable in opposition to those Errors, to form to itself some short fundamental Profession, whereby they might distinguish themselves from Heretics, as by a Shibboleth: which Profession being Characteristic, or the Cognisance and word of a true Regular Christian, was called for that reason Symbolum, or a Mark and Token.  
Our Saviour himself made his own Symbol or Cognisance first; when he commanded his Disciples to Baptism in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. For by this Mark of difference, the True Christian was first distinguished from a Heathen, as believing in the Father the God of the Jews; secondly from an ordinary Jew, as believing the Son Christ Jesus to be the Messiah: and lastly, he was discriminated from those Jews who admitted Christ to be their Prophet and Messiah, but would not recede from the Old Law, by believing in the Holy Ghost, who spoke by the Apostles, and declared the abrogation of that Covenant. So did our Saviour himself order his Disciples to be Characterised, at their admission, by the Belief of those three Persons, and obedience to their several directions.  
But because in a little time Deceivers crept in, who under the name of Christians, and the show of this Character, subverted the Faith; being really Jews or Heathens, and using the words of this Profession in a meaning quite different from the first intention: it grew therefore necessary to determine those few words of the Original Symbol to their proper sense, by the addition of others, which should further distinguish and divide the true Catholic Christian, from the Heretical and false. Jest therefore an Ethnic Christian, under the name of Father, should mean some other God, different from the Creator; He was to add expressly, the Maker of Heaven and Earth: and jest he should mean such a Son, as was man only in appearance; or the Jews such a one as was man only, and as the rest of men; he was obliged to profess his belief circumstantially, in that Son, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, and who suffered under Pontius Pilate, was Crucified, Dead, and Buried, etc.  
The Archetypal Original Symbol of our Saviour's, so explained, is called the Symbol or Creed of the Apostles: being explained after their mind, and expressly in their own Phrase. This, as far as the Article of the Holy Ghost, (excepting that of Christ's descent into Hell) was every where Uniformly professed over all the World; and called anciently the  Rule, and Unreformable Canon. It was the fundamental Characteristick of Catholicism: by the Profession of it men were Baptised, and admitted to be the true Christians; and that Baptism, at which such a Profession could not be presumed, was reputed and declared null; and consequently a Christian, otherwise made, supposed to be none.  
Now altho' those that professed this Creed, were by it sufficiently discriminated from the grosser Heretics, such as deserved not really the name of Christian: yet other Heresies there were, very dangerous and wicked, that might hid themselves under this form; and could not be detected and severed, but by some more precise distinction. The Arrian Heresy denying the Coeternal Existence of our Saviour, occasioned therefore that enlargement, concerning the Son, which we found in the Nicene Creed; and afterwards, the Macedonian, denying the Person of the Holy Ghost, that Explanation we have on that Article in the same Nicene Creed, as it is commonly called. After that too, the Nestorians, Eutychians, etc. gave further reason for the additional Explications, that are given on those subjects, in the Creed that goes under the name of Athanasius.  
So were these Symbols and Cognisances of the true Belief enlarged, and multiplied, occasionally: each of them, in their several times, being Characteristical enough; till new and other Heresies arose, which were to be excluded by some further distinction. But all along, whereas these and after Creeds differenced the Pure Christianity, from Christianity Corrupt; the Apostolical was supposed to discern between the true, and that falsely so called: and accordingly the admission into common Christianity by Baptism, continued still to use only this Mark; while at the same time there were other marks in use, to separate one Christian from another.  
Now as Heresies and Errors are of different sorts; some more gross, and more contrary to the Christian Faith, some lesle; some utterly inconsistent with Christianity, the Heresies of the first Ages, some Consistent with it; and of these some highly dangerous, and some pernicious in a lesle degree: so on the other side, Orthodoxy, or a Catholic Belief, may either be so in perfection, purely and absolutely, and voided of all sorts of Error; or else in its degree, and qualifiedly; not pure from all Error, but from such of which some, otherwise good Christians, are guilty; from such so gross, and very dangerous; at lest from such which are absolutely incompatible with the Christian profession.  
Accordingly, one that Professed the Apostle's Creed, in the Elder Times, and when no other Errors appeared to infested the Church, but such as were refuted by that form; was, by that Symbol, reputed and known for a Catholic Absolute. Afterwards, when the Arrian or Macedonian Heresies came up, if he adhered to those, and did not subscribe to the Nicene Creed; he was, by that new Mark to be held no absolute Catholic, and a Heretic in that regard: but he yet continued so far Catholic, as to be accounted a Christian; and Catholic too he might be justly styled, in respect of other Heretics, the Simonians, Basilidians, Valentinians, Marcionites, etc. whose Impieties he had renounced in the Apostle's Creed. In the same manner, he that professes the Nicene Creed, is a Catholic respectively to those Heretics, and to the Arrian and Macedonian too; tho' not therefore necessarily a perfect Catholic: for he may be a Nestorian, Eutychian, etc. And so too he that owns the Athanasian Creed, as he is Catholic in respect of all those forementioned errors; so he may not yet be completely Catholic: for he may be Heretical, in those points particularly, about which the Roman and the Protestant Churches differ.  
And according to this account it is, that we Protestants, speaking concerning Christian Doctrine, may allow the Romanists the Title of Catholic; provided they will bear the Symbol with a difference, and distinctive Mark of Diminution. For as an Arrian Catholic will signify one that holds to the Apostle's Creed, and is not a Marcionite; etc. and as an Eutychian Catholic, will mean one that holds to the Nicene, and is not an Arrian: so a Roman Catholic, or Popish Catholic, will denominate one, free from the Heresies of the first seven hundred years; though grossly Erroneous in other points, and such of which an Arrian, or Eutychian, would never have been guilty.  
The Apostle's Creed, of which we are speaking, was so framed for a Symbol of Catholicism. But what we have suggested of the latter Articles, that they were variously inserted over the Christian World; that we are now to observe particularly, concerning this of the Catholic Church.  
For (1) this Article was not in the Ancient Eastern Creeds: not in the Nicene, properly so called, and as delivered by that Council. It is not in those Creeds among St. Jerom's Works: as it is not in that we call the Athanasian. (2) It was early in the Latin Creeds; as we learn by Tertullian: but with some difference. 
Tert. de Bapt. c. 6.  For whereas the Roman brought it in Affirmatively, and in the place where it now stands: the African brought it in at last, and indirectly too. As in St. Cyprian's time it run thus; I believe in the Remission of Sins, and Eternal Life by the Holy Church: In the time of those three last Expositions of the Creed, ascribed to St. Augustin, thus; I believe in the Remission of Sins, the Resurrection of the Dead, and Eternal Life, by the Holy Church. And besides it may be observed, that in these Latin Symbols the Epithet, whether for Ornament or Distinction of the Church, was Holy, and not Catholic: this Greek word being borrowed afterwards from the Usage of the Graecian Churches.  
Now than, to return to our present Enquiry, the occasion of this Digression; and to see, whether the notion of an Infallible Judge or Guide, be to be understood under this Article: let us observe, that  
The word Church has not in it the signification of a Tribunal, or Court of Judicature.  
And than in the next place, the Epithets Holy or Catholic, do not superinduce any such meaning. The most they can signify towards it is True and Orthodox: But whoever is True and Orthodox, is not therefore an Infallible Guide. For (1) a Particular Church may be Orthodox, and actually Unerring; and yet not be Infallible: for it might not have been impossible for her to have erred, even in those Points, in which she does not err. She may too be Orthodox in all those Points, she has already declared; and yet she may afterwards err in new Points, and which want a new Declaration. And (Secondly,) the Position of a Church Unerring, or if you will Infallible, does not therefore infer, that the Unerring Church is an Unerring Guide, and an Infallible Judge in Controversy: except at the same time it be supposed, that that Unerring Church may be known to be so, and distinguished from others, by proper Marks, and such as are external to those Truths in which she does not err. For if we agreed, that there is such an Unerring Church; but are to found her out by the Truths she professes, and by the Examination of her Doctrines: we are not than guided by the Infallible, to Truth; but by the Truth to this Infallible; neither is such a Church to us, a Judge of Doctrines; but it is we who are by those Doctrines, to Judge of Herald  
Now if we consider this Article, as it lies in the African Creed; where the Candidate for Baptism professed to believe the Remission of Sins, etc. by the Holy Church; the most the African could be supposed to say, was, that Remission was not to be had out of the Unerring Church: but, that such a Church Unerring, was the Infallible Guide he does not at all affirm. For his plain meaning must either be, that he expected to be saved, by being Baptised into the Catholic Church in General; or with a particular Implication; either that this Catholic Church, was the Church which professed the Creed he repeated; or else the Church in which he was going to be Baptised. If he meant an Orthodox Church in General, which ever, and where ever it was; it is plain than, from what we just now premised, that he meant not the Church to be a Guide, or Judge; for as a Guide she must be ascertained and determined. And too, if he meant an Orthodox Church in particular, determining that to be so, which professed the Apostolical Creed; it is as manifest, that he spoke not of that Churches being Judge in other Points. But if he designed the Local Church in which he was to be Baptised, by that name; it is than too evident, that however he might take that Church to be Catholic in all her Tenets; yet he did not affirm that she might not grow Uncatholick, even in those, or at lest in other new ones: much lesle did he assert that he knew her to be Catholic, by Permanent outward Marks of Place or Number; by which marks (to be a Guide) she was to be distinguished in that Age, and to the end of the World.  
It appears, I suppose, that an African in the recital of his Creed, was not obliged, by that indirect mention of the Church, to ascribe any Judicial Infallibility to Herald And than as to the Nicene, tho' this Article be there expressed directly, in the Clause brought in by the Council of Constantinople; yet it can seem to have no other Construction than what the Africans gave. For he that professes to believe One Holy Catholic Church; to acknowledge one Baptism for the Remission of Sins; and to look for the Resurrection of the Body, and Everlasting Life after death: what does he mean else, but that he believes the Remission of Sins, [to be obtained] by [being Baptised and admitted into] the Catholic Church, in prospect and hopes of Everlasting Life? Such a Sense the Nicene Creed manifestly carries, agreeably to the African: and than it can never be presumed that the Roman or any other did under the same words intent a different meaning. But all this appears further.  
For if the Notion of Holy, or Catholic Church, will not infer that of a Judge or Guide: the Phrase I believe, or I believe in, will not contribute much towards it.  
The Primary Notion of the word Believe, as it is used in the Creed, denotes a firm Persuasion concerning the Truth, either of the Essence, or Existence of the Thing believed: as that there is such a Being as a God; such a thing to be had as Remission of Sins. If it implies any further Sense, either of Reliance or Submission, or Hope and Expectation; that additional Notion arises from the Nature of the Thing believed. As, He that believes there is a God, submits to his Guidance by implication, because he is God: And he that believes the Remission of Sins, hopes for it, as for a thing extremely desirable. By the same Construction, he that believes in the Catholic Church, believes first the Essence or Existence of it; that there aught to be, or is such a Society; or that this Society is it: but is not to be supposed to own it for an Infallible Guide or Judge, except some such notion be involved in the Notion of the Church, which he so believes. When therefore the Phrase I believe in is continued through all the Articles (as it is in St. Cyril's Creed) it signifies always according to the connotation of the Subject to which it is applied: and than to believe in the Remission of Sins, or in the Resurrection of the Dead, is the same as to acknowledge one Baptism for the Remission of Sins, and to look for the Resurrection of the Dead in the Nicene. But the Roman (as Ruffinus observes) to make the distinction plainer; and that we may not seem to believe in the Church as we do in the Trinity; puts its Credo to all the later Articles without the Preposition in; saying, Credo Sanctam Ecclesiam, etc. I believe that there is, or that this is the Holy Church.  
The Sum of all is this; that the Article concerning the Church, acknowledges either the Essence and Nature; or else the Existence also of such a Society.  
The Essence of the Holy Church consists in this: that it is a Society instituted by Christ, into which men enter by Baptism, Professing the Belief of his Holy Truths, and Obedience to his Holy Commands, in hopes of Eternal Salvation; which Society it is the duty of those Christian men (according to one of those Commands) to maintain and to propagate to the end of the World. This is its Essence in General: and it may be particularised, by the Belief of such and such Articles, which the false Churches deny. Now the Confession of such a Society, with its Nature, Privileges, and Duties, in the Confession of a very great and weighty Truth, and enough to make up one Article of our Creed.  
The Existence of this Society will respect either the Past, or the Present, or the Future: That there was such a Church, or is, or ever shall be.  
That there was such a Church once instituted, and actually erected, is, together with the Essence of it, an undoubted part of our necessary Belief. But that this Church was existent heretofore in some other past Age, or that it Exists now, or shall always hereafter; these Propositions, tho' Truths, may be only Contingent, and not so certain as an Article of our Creed. 
See the 13. Chap.  How far these Circumstances of Existence, are employed in this Article; it is not our business now to inquire: it is enough for us at present, to have discovered that the Notion of a Catholic Church although signifying an Unerring Church, does not signify an Unerring Judge or Guide; and that consequently the Existence of this Church, however it may be Co-signified, does not infer neither the Existence of such an Infallible Proponent.  
By this way of deduction it sufficiently appears, that no Infallibility in gross is meant under this Article. And this Course I have the rather took, because it has naturally led us into an easy meaning of an Article of so great importance. But that no such thing, as an Infallible Tribunal was ever intended by it; we have still a further and an undeniable Evidence.  
We have still extant many Ancient Expositions on the Creed, (too we have cited above) made on purpose to instruct the Candidates for Baptism; Composed too much about that time, when this Article came to the Universally received into the Symbol; as the Catechetical Discourses of St. Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem, the Exposition of Ruffinus, and those four Books we found in St. Augustin's Works on that Subject; the several Expositions in Chryologus, and in Maximus Taurinensis: and from these we shall best learn the sense of the Church of that time, concerning herself; and whether any Judgement Seat was intended by this Article.  
Now none of these Catechetical Doctors, in their Discourses on this Article, are found to make any manner of mention of an Infallible Judge, neither in General, nor Particular: nor do they refer the Christian Novices to the further direction of any Unerring Person or Assembly. Whatever they propose to their Disciples out of the Creed itself, they think themselves obliged to prove out of the the Scripture; being content that neither they, nor their Church should be credited on other Terms. Accordingly upon the Precedent Articles, they discover and they refute the Errors of those Heretics, that had arose; and upon this they declare the institution of a Church by Christ; and that to be the True Church, which rejected those Heresies; that the others were impious Confederations, and Councils of vanity; that this they were to adhere to as the One, the Holy, the Catholic. But they still prove the Church, into which the Catechumen was entering, by her Doctrine; and never the Doctrine, by the Church: they affirm de Facto that it did not err; but never assert, that the Jure it could not have erred, by privilege of Place, or Number: much lesle do they oblige the Catechumen in virtue of this Article to submit for the future, to the Decisions of such a Tribunal; and blindly to receive whatever other Articles such a number of Men should determine, with the same Faith and Assent, with which he now believed the Articles of his Creed, and the present Faith in that Church professed. Of such an Authority in the Church, and such a Submission in the Members, of which our Modern Roman Catechists say so much, on this Article; these Ancient Doctors, say not a Syllable. Hence therefore from all those Premises we conclude undeniably, that an Infallible Judicatory was never at all intended by this Article; and that Holy and Catholic Church here, did never in the lest signify any necessary implication of the Pope, or of a Majority or certain proportion of Bishops, or Faithful: by which we learn, that this Article of the Creed can neither be brought against us on this Head, nor on any of those that follow.  
BUT THAN FURTHER, 
§. iv  WE DO NOT ONLY LEARN from the Expositors of the Creed, that an Infallible Authority in the Church, is no Article of the Creed; but we found, from their silence in this matter, great reason to think, that there was in their time no such Article believed at all.  
For had there been owned any such Principle of Christianity at that time; it must have been of the same Importance and Necessity, which it is now esteemed to bear; and alike reputed the Primary and Fundamental Principle of Divine Truths to men. 
Chap. 4. No Proof from Tradition for Infallibility at large. Sect. 4.  Neither can it be imagined, that it should not have had its proper place in the Creed, Universally, and from the beginning; being of such Consequence to the understanding of the other Articles, by whose help their sense was chief to be determined, and for whose sake they were to be believed by most of mankind. Had therefore this Principle been than owned; a Principle so necessary to be known, that the denial of it is the formality of Heresy, and the very ignorance of it unexcusable; insomuch that most other Truths may be implicitly believed in this, but this must be explicitly professed, under the pain of inevitable Damnation; had it I say been owned than for true, how could it have been left out of the Creed, without the greatest negligence in the Composers, and the greatest danger to the Salvation of Men? Is it imaginable that the mention of the Church, would throughout all Africa have been made so by the by, and as it were by chance; much lesle, that it should have been so totally neglected by the Eastern Christians, the most Numerous, and the most Knowing of those Times? Or is it likely, that at last, when the Church came generally into the Creed, the Infallible should not be particularised by some distinctive Character; and that so necessary a notice, of so high and useful a Prerogative should have been utterly forgotten? But suppose the Article of an Infallible Guide, left out of the Creed by I know not what design; (I suppose because it was a Principle of more evidence, than the being of a God:) yet it is hard to think, that upon the mention of the Church, though brought in to another purpose, no Expositors should have occasionally remembered this Beneficial and Instructive Truth. Was an Unerring Guide so little thought of, and of so slight a Consideration, that it came not into the mind of the Catechist, and was not worth the mentioning to the New Christian? what could be more natural, at the instruction of those that were just entering into the Church, than to have described her to them, by her proper marks; to have commended her, by that high Endowment; to have exhorted them to believe their Creed, upon her Authority; and directed them to submit all future Questions to her Infallible Decision? The Expositions of these Catechists are leveled chief against those many Heresies with which their Age was distracted; and great use there was to be made of the Infallible Guidance in their times; an occasion too for the mentioning of that Guidance, if ever, was to be taken in those Discourses: and yet for all this so many Zealous Knowing Men, of so many several Countries, have all conspired to omit it. In the Holy Scriptures there might be some pretence made of an indirect obscure reference to it; and upon sufferance it may be supposed that the more express mention was referred to Tradition: But here in our Case, the Men we cite, are those by whom the Tradition should be conveyed; and this is the proper Time and Place for them to speak it out; and yet it is not so much as pretended by the Romanists, that there has been the lest mention made of it by them: There must be some great Mystery in this profound Silence of those Expositors, concerning a standing Infallibility: and what can it be but this; that they were utterly ignorant of the Thing?  
And so we have again gained another Positive and irrefragable Argument, against the intent of our Adversaries, from this other Evidence of their own showing. We might therefore from this silence, first of the Scriptures, and than of the Creed and its Expositors, fairly put a Final Silence on the contrary Party, and here at lest close the Dispute. But if the Reader is pleased to lend me his Patience: the Romanists shall not complain, they were not heard out: only they must be content to know, that as the Proof now offered has discredited their Cause; so what remains grows still harder upon them. For whereas, if an Infallibility at large had been countenanced by any tolerable Testimony; it would than have been the easier affixed to some one of the Competitors, either Pope or Church, etc. according as they should make the better claim: so now on the other hand, all the Parties together not being able to furnish out such an Evidence for the common Cause; we are left to proceed, free from any Prepossession, to the examination of their several Titles; and are to expect, that whoever of them challenges this Infallible Authority, should so make out his Propriety to it, as at the same time, if he can, to prove its Being.