and the devil, and to continue Christ's faithful soldier and servant unto his life's end'.' But how the saints departed, in whatever state or condition they be, whether in heaven or not, can be justly called the CHURCH TRIUMPHANT,' I am at a loss to discover, so long as their bodies, which bore a part in the christian warfare, are laid in the dust; under Christ's protection, I readily admit; but still under the dominion of the last enemy, that shall 'be destroyed;' and so long as the great captain of their salvation' himself, cannot, strictly speaking, be said to be fully and completely triumph'ant,' until he hath' actually put all enemies un' der his feet.'

my

du

I am aware that this may be deemed a point of speculation merely. Still however, as it may be, and, as I am convinced, it has been productive of some unseemly consequences, I feel it to be ty to guard the inexperienced theologian against a hasty admission of the doctrine, which represents one part of the church as triumphant, the other militant. For what was it but this unscriptural distinction which introduced into the Romish church one of the most impious of her corruptions? Was it not the doctrine, that the saints, reigning to'gether with Christ, are to be venerated, and invoked, or prayed to ? a species of idolatry, which had never been thought of, had there not been, by rea

son

See Office of Baptism, in the book of Common Prayer.

son of the belief of a Church triumphant in heaven, an opinion formed, that, being in heaven, the saints were of course invested with power to receive the invocations of the church militant here on earth, and to grant its members the wished-for aid.

But, after all, these constitute only what may be thought trivial points of dispute on the subject of the church. There are other two points which, as their importance is greater, have been more violently agitated, insomuch that not only divisions, but open ruptures have been the consequence. It is well known, that the pre-eminent title, HEAD of THE CHURCH,' has been, for a long period, assumed by one particular bishop, the bishop of Rome; and that, in due succession from one possessor of the Roman See to another. Nor has their claim of universal sovereignty been confined to things spiritual. They have not blushed to claim a sovereignty in things temporal. Nay, to such a height has their ambition been carried, in both respects, as to make it necessary for other churches, first, to insist on an abatement of their demands, and finally to rid themselves altogether of such intolerable dominion.

It is no part of my present design to enter on a subject so voluminous as that of the Pope's supremacy; a subject which has been so often, and so fully discussed, upon the authority of scripture, of antiquity, and of common sense, as to leave pro

testants at no loss whatever on this point, to give a reason, to every one that asketh, of the hope that is in them. I only therefore observe, in passing, that the distinguishing the mystical body of Christ, by the title of THE CATHOLIC CHURCH,' is sufficient of itself to point out the arrogance of any created being, whether man or angel, assuming to himself the incommunicable prerogative of being

HEAD over all things to the Church; a title which an apostle restricts to Christ himself'.'

The other much agitated point, which may be considered as a natural appendage of the Roman Pontiff's unwarrantable sovereignty, is his pretended infallibility even in matters of faith. This is the weapon which, whether used for attack or for defence, is of all others the most skilfully wielded by the Romanist, who never fails to upbraid his adversary with the want of an infallible guide, and consequently with the want of that unerring direction, in which they who are blessed with such a guide may safely rely. Yet it is worthy of observation, that Romanists themselves are not agreed, how or where even they, who are blest with such a guide, are to find this infallibility of direction, whether in the person of their Pope singly, in or out of his infallible chair; or in a General Council, with or without the Pope (for there have been General Councils that have censured, and

even

Ephes. i. 22. v. 23.

even deposed Popes), or in the whole body of the Catholic church, collectively or diffusively.

These hypotheses, different and contradictory as they confessedly are, have been severally defended with much vehemence, and no small shew of learning. Nay, each of them has been broken down into so many subtle questions, and enveloped in such a cloud of scholastic intricacy, as would require a prior infallibility on our part, to find out the seat of that, of which the Romanist boasts, and where it is to be met with. In reproaching us with the want of an infallible guide, he betrays only his own ignorance of sound protestant principles. He who is really Head over all things to his church, which is his body,' is assuredly a guide, divinely infallible: and he has promised to be with his church, (collectively in the members of it—individually in its governors), and that for the purpose of guidance and direction, as well as for the purpose of defence and protection, for no shorter period, than to the very end of the world'. True it is, that, in his human nature, he is now absent from this his body, for a little while;' but in his divine nature, he both can be, and is present, for every one of the purposes just mentioned.

The necessity of a visible guide, of which the Romanist talks so freely, is but a vain pretext; Kk 2

since

I St Matth. xxvii. 20.

For to

since no such guide can possibly exist. whom is their infallible guide visible? Not to the whole catholic church, nor even to all the Romish communion. He must transmit his directions from Rome, or from the particular spot of his limited residence, through the medium of his legates and nuncios, to all the distant churches which depend upon him. And may not the invisible head of the church, by means of those who are ambassadors for him, and stewards of the mysteries of God,' do the same? It is no answer to say, that impostors may pretend that they have an embassy from Christ; since the same pretence may be made to a deputation from the Pope. In the latter case then, the church is equally liable to imposition as in the former; and it is private judgement properly directed, that must, in such cases, detect the imposture.

But, not to prosecute the subject farther, as, on investigation, there is no certainty to be met with in the Romish dogma of infallibility, nor any benefit to be reaped from it, was its existence really ascertained, it is better for us to trust to the only Guide, who can be properly said to be INFALLIBle, even to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, who can, and who will illuminate the understandings, and direct the judgements of those vicegerents of his own divine appointment, who, in the exercise of their spiritual authority, have no other object in view, but the glory of God, and the good of souls. It therefore becomes us, and all who name

the