CHAI ?. IV.] IMrALLIB?JLI'rY. 8 ? lame one in ?, when we ? ?e or two l?s, but by ?ty or sixty; ?d p? of ?at time ?mugh a ?g night of i?omnce ?d ??on. ?t ?me novelVes have ? ?t?uc?, ?d seve? a?ical c?m8 disused, we have d?mbted testimony. The argument from prf.yc?pJ?m, so far as it respects the nature of (?od and Christ, the doctrines especially referred to by lreneeus and TertulLian, is as strQng now as in their days, because we still possess their writings, and consequently, for all controversial pur- poses, we occupy the same ground that they did. But tl?s argument, in the hands o� Romanists, is altogether futile, because they have in-. troduced several novelties into their system, such as transubstantiation, 8ac3'ifice of the mass, worship of' the host, purgatory, indulgences, auri- cular confession, and absolution, extreme unction, and many others. And what of these novelties we cannot point out the time when they did exist, we can determine the time when they d/? m?f e?.yt, which answers every purpose s?cient to overthrow the argument under consideration. "Whatsoever is first is true; whatsoever is more recent is spurious. n This sentiment may be employed very unfairly, and may tend to eetablish error. There are errors in the world far more ancient than (?hristianity itself. Is it fair reasoning to say that these errors are established truths, because of' their antiquity ? Still the argument be applied with some advantage. But what then ? Will this give sanction to the above named doctrines of the Latin Church of recent origin ? Certainly not. s III. We shall now produce and examine the various Op'll?S Roman Catholics respecting the sea? and ezt?.n? of infallibility. 1. It' infallibility belonged to the Church of Rome we would cer- tainly infer that it would not be difficult to ascertain wAere it was, and m/m were the depositaries of it. For if the seat .of it be a manet of doubt or uncertainty, the thing itself must be viewed as suspicious. If some place it in the hand8 of some, and others consider others to pos- sess it, this produces difficulties much greater than among Protestants, inasmuch as there is no diversity of opinion among Protestants respect- ing the seat of infallible direction, viz., the Holy Scriptures. There is a variety of opinions among Romanists respecling where this infallibility exists. They will all say that it exists in the church, but when they come to fix on its seat they divide into at least four sects. Some place it in the universal church scattered over the world; some place it in the pope; others in a general cotmeal independent of. the Oea?; while others assert that a general council with a pope at its is infallible. 2. As our plan is to hear the standards of. the Roman Church in de- cbring what her doctrines are, in like manner we quote the opinions of her doctors when we wish to give their true sentiments. In this article on infallibility we will pursue this course. The Jesuits and their followers maintain that the pope is infallible that he is the source of. thut tudimited and universal power w?ch Christ has granted to his church; that bishops and subordinate rulers derive their authority from him; that he is not bound by any laws of the church nor by any decrees of' its councils; and that he is supreme �f5oe Faber*o IMSeult? of Roamabra, p. Digitized by ?002I(?
�
