ance and teaching, without distinction of persons, and without limitation as to time, since he is with his church for ever."* But I do feel some difficulty in adopting this language for myself, and in claiming, personally, the attribute of infallibility. Ing. I do not wonder at your hesitation. And, in truth and plainness, I must tell you that had you laid claim, in virtue of your office, to such immunity from error, 1 must have disallowed the claim. For it so happens, that I have been personally acquainted in my voyages, with priests in Italy and in France, whose ordination, I suppose, was as unquestionable as your own, but whose lives were not such as the Bible prescribes. I could never have taken those men as my guides in any thing; and yet I suppose that, officially, they were as much entitled to call themselves infallible as you yourself. Rom. I know it: I know that it is beyond a doubt that there have been, and still are, wicked priests, wicked bishops, and even wicked popes. I will not, therefore, even hesitate on this point. I cannot pretend to set up men as infallible guides to others, who cannot keep the right way themselves. Inq. Then where are we? You furnish me neither with a written nor yet a speaking guide. Is "the church" a mere abstraction; or, if I am to listen to her voice, tell me where it is to be heard? Rom. I cannot answer you in any more explicit language than Dr. Wiseman's, when he says, "The successors of the apostles in the Church of Christ, have received the security of his own words and his promises of a perpetual teaching, so that they shall not be allowed to fall into It is this promise which Third Lecture of Rev. F. Martyn, Romish Priest of Walsall. P. 63. error. assures her she is the depository of all truth, and is gifted with an exemption from all liability to err, and has authority to claim from all men, and from all nations, submission to her guidance and direction." * Ing. Aye, but all these fine words do advance us one step. Suppose, for a moment, for argument's sake, that I admit or take for granted, all that you say about the church's authority, my question still remains unanswered.-if I am to hear the church, where, or by whom does she speak? Your opponent here is prepared to argue. that your Rule is more inapplicable, and less easy of adoption and use, than his own. Now certainly, as you do not deny the infallibility of the Word of God, but merely wish to add another infallible authority to it, you clearly give the advantage to your opponent, who holds ont and tenders his Rule of Faith, in the Bible, so long as you are unable to point out where your further infallible Rule is to be found. Prot. Why, the simple truth is, that if our friend here were able to point out the real seat or dwelling of his church's boasted infallibility, he would do more than the most learned doctor of his church has ever yet been able to accomplish. For, in fact, the disputes upon this very question have been endless, and the decision of the question impossible. One party contends that the church's infallibility dwells in the Pope;-others that it is found only in a general council; a third class that it is in a Pope and council conjointly; while a fourth describes it as resting in "the living voice of the great body of Roman Catholic pastors." And surely nothing can be clearer than this, that until you can settle among. yourselves where this infallibility of the church is really lodged, the *Wiseman's Fourth Lecture, p. 109. course dictated by common sense is this, to rest content with that Infallible Rule,-the written word, -whose excellence and divinity even you yourselves do not venture to deny; and to leave the reception of a further and better guide, until you of the Romish church can settle it among yourselves, where it is to be found. Inq. In the produceableness, then, if I may coin such a word, of their Rule, the Protestants certainly have the advantage. But does not the objection we are considering go further than this. I should think, can be clearer than this. If it is unreasonable to expect an unenquiring and implicit reception of the Bible, even though backed by the universal testimony of all times and of all countries, how much more absurd would it be, to demand for any one who happened to be called the Roman Catholic priest of a certain neighbourhood, that same sort of unenquiring and implicit submission. Fallibility, and liability to err, it is obvious, is far more likely to be found in a body of some tens of thousands of human beings, even supposing them to be divinely sent, than in one single book, which, if divinely inspired, is doubtless free from error. Inves claims and character, if necessary in the one case, is certainly equally necessary in the other. Prot. It does it demurs to the admission of the Bible as our Rule,-in that, before any one can be justified in so receiving it, he must go through a long investiga-tigation, then, into their real tion as to the genuineness, authenticity, and inspiration of the books of scripture. Now we are to try Dr. W's Rule by his own objections. I ask, therefore, do you think that it is a rational course for any one to adopt, to accept any person who calls himself a Roman Catholic priest, as an infallible guide, without any investigation at all?-or that that investigation, if gone into, would prove more easy or more simple than the former one, to which Dr. W. so strongly objects? Inq. I see what you mean. Just as Dr. Wiseman objects, that before any one can rationally receive this book, called the Bible, as the word of God, he must go through a long course of inquiry, as to the history of the book,who were its authors or compilers, and what are the real nature of its claims; -so you now retort upon him, that before he himself, or our friend here, can expect to be received by a sincere inquirer, as the divinely-commissioned messenger of God, an exactly similar, and quite as difficult a scrutiny must take place, as to the nature of their claims to be so regarded. Prot. Precisely so. And nothing, Ing. I should think that this will hardly be denied. The only question, therefore, is, which of the two investigations is likely to prove the most troublesome and laborious. Prot. There can be no doubt that the enquiry into the claims of the Romish clergy must be far more tedious and complicated than that into the authenticity and inspiration of the scriptures; and there is also this important difference between them,-that while the divine character of the scriptures can be easily demonstrated, so as to be placed beyond the reach of a rational doubt, the other inquiry, instead of leading us to any satisfactory issue, lands us in a quagmire of most unprofitable and interminable controversy. Rom. I do not think that you are warranted in using such strong expressions. Granting that an investigation must take place in both cases, still I think that the truth is easily ascertainable in each. Prot. Let the general results decide that question. There has never yet been an instance of a patient and serious inquirer into the character of the Holy Scriptures coming to any other conclusion than that of their authenticity and inspiration. On the other hand, hundreds of the best and greatest men that Christendom has ever seen, have examined into the claims of the church of Rome, and have been unable to admit them. At least, therefore, do not say, that a satisfactory conclusion is as easy to be attained in the one case as in the other. But the point to which I am now to direct your attention is this, that an investigation, and a laborious one, is quite as necessary on the one plan as on the other. You must know that it is. Refer to Dr. Wiseman's third lecture, which you have in your hand, and see how ludicrously abrupt is his attempt to leap to a conclusion on this subject, without having laid down any premises. Pray read it. Rom. Dr. W. says, "The Catholic falls in with a number of very strong passages in which our blessed Saviour, not content with promising a continuance of his doctrines, that is to say, the continued obligation of faith upon man, also pledges himself for their actual preservation among them. He selects a certain body of men: he invests them, not merely with great authority, but with power, equal to his own; he makes them a promise of remaining with them and teaching among them even to the end of time and thus, once again, he naturally concludes, that there must have existed for ever a corresponding institution, for the preservation of those doctrines, and the perpetuation of those blessings, which our Saviour came manifestly to communicate. "Thus then, merely proceeding by historical reasoning, such as would guide an infidel to believe in Christ's superior mission, he comes, from the word of Christ, whom those historical motives oblige him to believe, to acknowledge the existence of a body, depositary of those doctrines which He came to establish among men. This succession of persons constituted to preserve those doctrines of faith, appointed as the successors of the apostles, having within them the guarantee of Christ teaching among them for ever; and this body is what he calls the church. He is in possession, from that moment, of an assurance of divine authority, and, in the whole remaining part of the investigation, he has no need to turn back, by calling in once more the evidence of man. For, from the moment he is satisfied that Christ has appointed a succession of men whose province it is, by aid of a supernatural assistance, to preserve inviolable those doctrines which God has delivered-from that moment, whatever these men teach is invested with that divine authority, which he had found in Christ through the evidence of his miracles." * Prot. Well, now, I would ask any one capable of an impartial judgment, whether any thing pretending to the form of an agreement, and yet so preposterously deficient of all the essential parts of one, was ever before seen. For, remember, the Dr. has just been objecting to the Protestant rule, in that it required a long course of investigation. He therefore certainly does not take for granted a similar investigation in his own proposed rule. His argument is to stand just as he has stated it, and it therefore runs thus-Christ selected twelve Apostles; conferred on them the Holy Ghost, and promised to be with them and their successors in his church to the end of the world :-therefore, the Romish church and the Romish clergy are infallible guides, and the only infallible guides. What connection there can be, be * Milner's Third Lect. p. 63, 64. tween the premises and the conclusion, in this proposition, it would puzzle a conjuror to imagine! The proof, all-essential to the validity of the argument, that the Pope and the Romish clergy are the rightful successors of the apostles, is wholly omitted; and we are desired to leap to the conclusion, that because Christ, on the mount of Ascension, promised to be with his church to the end of the world, therefore we may go and hear Dr. Wiseman at Moorfields, or any other Romish priest at any other chapel, with a certainty,that" whatever these men teach is invested with divine authority;" while all that the other Christian ministers in the kingdom teach, is nothing but falsehood and error! May I not ask, whether so outrageous a demand on the credulity and simplicity of his hearers, was ever before made by a preacher professing rationality? Rom. But I think you misunderstood Dr. Wiseman. He could not mean to demand an implicit assent to such a statement, without investigation; and you will remember, that in his subsequent lectures, he invites and draws on that very discussion. Prot. I am only dealing with his argument as I find it. I know, indeed, that the Doctor, in other parts of his series, enters upon the rest of the discussion. But I believe that he purposely omits it here, and for a very obvious reason. He had just been arguing against the Protestant rule, as one leading to a long and troublesome investigation; and he now presents his own principle, in contrast, in a far simpler and more succinct form. If he had stated his arguments properly, and not in the absurd way in which he has left it, he would have spoiled his own contrast; for he would have shown the Romish rule to be quite as difficult of ascertainment as the Protestant. And that is the point to which I have been endeavouring to bring you. Ing. State it, if you please, distinctly, before we pass on to the next head. Prot. It is this; that as the adoption and reception of the Bible, as our sole Rule of Faith, implies a previous investigation of its claims to be considered a divine revelation, so does that submission of the mind to the dicta of the Romish priesthood, which my opponent demands, imply a previous, and far more troublesome investigation of the claims of that priesthood, to be admitted as the rightful successors of the apostles. And thus when Dr. Wiseman asks, "Can the rule, on the approach to which you must pass through such a labyrinth of difficulties, be that which God has given to the poorest, the most illiterate and simplest of his creatures?" retort upon him his own question, and ask, "Can your Rule, in the approach to which the poor man must be dragged through all the controversies and quarrels of all your three-score folio volumes of councils, be that which God intended for the poorest and the simplest of mankind?" we Inq. Well, I suppose we may pass on to the next difficulty suggested by Dr. Wiseman, which is this: 2. Before any one can accept the Protestant Rule, it is in the next place necessary, that he should have satisfied himself not only that the sacred books are genuine and authentic; "but that no such genuine work has been excluded, so that the Rule be perfect and entire." Prot. This is but an amplification of the last objection. But I am obliged to Dr. Wiseman for stating it; since it very naturally suggests a kindred difficulty in his own course. Let us suppose that some one, in his search after truth, had followed the course which I just now shewed to be necessary; had filled up the hiatus in Dr. W's reasoning, and had made out the succession of the Romish priesthood to the apostles. How clear is it that the next step in the inquiry must be that which this objection of Dr. W's suggests. He must inquire not only whether these persons claiming to be the successors of the apostles are really so, but also whether "no other genuine successors have been excluded." The promise made by the Saviour was not to a portion of his church, but to the whole; not to the successors of St. Peter only, but to those of St. James and St. Thomas also. Now it is a fact open to every one's observation, that the church of Rome is not the only Christian church upon earth. We find the Greek church, the Syrian and other eastern churches, and in Europe the Protestant churches. Of these, most of the eastern churches are of equal antiquity with that of Rome, and among the Protestant churches there are those, England being one, which can trace their descent from the apostolic times, without relying upon their connection with the papacy. sequently when Dr. W. claims for his own church the sole possession of "divine authority," and treats all others as heretics and infidels, he forces any one who really wishes to understand what he believes, to plunge into the whole controversy. Con There is another church, for instance, in the east, called the Greek church, which is as unquestionably descended from the apostles, as that of Rome. She once was in fellowship and communion' with Rome; she is now at enmity. How comes this? Is she really a rotten branch-a decayed portion of the church? or was she unlawfully and schismatically excluded by Rome? Who is to understand all these matters without examination? And thus the inquirer is JANUARY 1838. D immersed, as I just now remarked, in all the depths of the ancient church controversies. Yet Dr. Wiseman's scheme requires it. He tells us that any one who takes the Bible as his rule, "must satisfy himself that no genuine work has been excluded, so that the rule be perfect and entire." It therefore follows of necessity that if the Church, rather than the Bible, be taken as the rule, the same necessity exists, of seeing "that no genuine apostolical churches are excluded," 66 so that the rule be perfect and entire." But whether this will be an easy task, or whether this can be the course marked out by God" for the poorest, the most illiterate, and the simplest of his creatures," let any reasonable man decide. At all events, the Romish rule is not, in this respect, at all more easy of application than that adopted by the Protestants; on the contrary, much and laborious reading is necessary, before we can possibly learn,-as, on Dr. W.'s plan, we must learn," whether no part of the genuine church has been excluded, so that the Rule be perfect and entire." Ing. Let us proceed then, to the third point insisted on,- --which is, that the student is also bound to satisfy himself, "whether it be beyond doubt, that these books were not only the real productions of their alleged authors, but were actually given by Divine Inspi ration. Prot. We have so lately reviewed this part of the subject, that I shall only restate, as briefly as possible, my argument; which goes to prove, if it be worth any thing, that until this point be settled, and until the inspiration of the scriptures be firmly established, it is impossible for the Romish clergy to have any basis for that church authority on which they lay so much stress. The mission of the Apostles, |