5.24 of Rome are confefs'd and lamented by the most » learned, and the most pious in her Communion, she may as well maintain her Impeccability as Infallibility, For Sin is the greatest Error. And there»fore I think nothing can be infallible, but what is likewife impeccable, pag. 32.

L. Sr, you tell me with a very ferious Counte nance, that the Corruptions of the Church of Rome are. confeß'd and lamented by the most learned and most pious. in her Communion. But pray, Sr, name me one Catholick Divine, who ever own'd any Corruptions in the Doctrine of the Church of Rome, And if you mean Corruptions of particular Perfons in Practice, what you fay, is nothing to the Purpose. He who is free from Sin, let him throw the first Stone: for I am fure no Body will be in Danger of being hurt by it.

But nothing for footh can be infallible, but what is likewife impeccable. That's very strange, For cannot God preferve a Man from Errors in Faith, tho at the fame Time he permits him to fall into Sin? Now Chrift has promised the former, but not the latter to his Church, and therefore the one may be maintain'd without the other,

You fay that Sin is the greatest Error. But I prefume every Sin is not an Error against Faith: and if it be not, the Church's Infallibility cannot be hurt by it. I am therefore furpriz'd at what you add, viz, that nothing can be infallible, but what is likewise impeccable. Pray, Sr, were not the Apostles infallible?

G. No more infallible than impeccable. St Peter ́ss err'd, and walk'd not uprightly according to the Truth of the Gospel, and many were carried away with his » Diffimulation, Gal. 2. V. 13, 14. pag. 32.

L. What, Sr! Were not the Apostles and Evangelifts infallible in their Doctrine, and Writings! If not, Then we are not fure, that the New Testament con

tains nothing but the reveal'd Word of God. And what becomes then of Christianity? As to St. Peter tho he was reprehenfible (as St Paul fays) in his Praçhetice, no Chriftian will furely fay, he err'd in Faith.

O

G. St Paul own'd, that in some Cafes he had no « Commandement of the Lord, only gave his Judgment « as a private Person, and spoke by Permiffion, and e not of Commandement. But in other Cafes he faid, « I command, yet not I, but the Lord ---- And, it is fo « after my Judgment, and I think alfo, that I have the « Spirit of the Lord, 1, Cor. 7. . 6. And no Doubt « great Deference was paid to his Judgment, as « being an infpired Man, but not infallible in every a Thing, as himself said. The Apostles were enabled « to work many and great great Miracles, which gave them « full Credence as to what they deliver'd for Chriftian Detrine. But this was no personal, nor universal « Infallibility. p. 32. 33. «

L. Sr, I have hitherto believed that all Scripture given by divine Inspiration. 2. Tim. 3. v. 16. And by, Confequence that the Sacred Penmen, whether they deliver❜d Precepts or Counfels, were equally infpired: that is, to deliver Precepts for Precepts, and Counfels for Counfels, But I perceive it is your Judgment, that when St Paul to the Corinthians gave his Advice concerning Celibacy, he wrote not by Inspiration, nor was infallible in his Doctrine; which in Effect is the Contradictory to what he tells us, that all Scripture is given by Divine Inspiration, 2. Tim. 3. ¥. 16.

I shall therefore put this Dilemma to you. viz. When St Paul wrote to the Corinthians the Words you have quoted, either he was infpired to write fo or not. If he was, your Quotations from him do RO ways prove, that he was not infallible in all his Doctrine. If not, that, Part of his Epiftle was not inspired, And by Confequence 'tis falle thes

5.25. all Scripture is given by the Infpiration of God. As to what you fay, that the Apostles were enabled to work many and great Miracles. This, to the best of my Judgment is fome Proof of the Infallibility of their Doctrine. For our Difpute is not concerning their Infallibility in Things, that have no Relation to the Chriftian Doctrine, as Philofophy, Mathematicks, or other humane Sciences. Neither do's the Church pretend to Infallibility but in Defining Articles of Faith, and Chriftian Morality. And she can shew her Credentials for it, viz. the Teftimony of Miracles, as the Apostles did. For Miracles are God's own Seal, by which he makes himself a Witness to the Truth of his Doctrine,

G.

VV Hat

S. 25.

Of Miracles.

WHat! Both true and falfe! Can both be from God? Or can you deny the many falfe Miracles, which have been notoriously detected in the Church of Rome? pag. 33.

L. I affure you, Sr, that whoever will be fo kind as to detect any falfe Miracle in the Church of Rome, will be heartily thank'd for his Pains; And the Author of the Cheat be punish'd according to his Deferts.

» G. If but one Sham-miracle had been found in the Apostles, I am afraid it had difcredited all the » others, and call'd their Mission in Queftion, whether it was from God, or not. pag. 33.

L. I am of your Mind, Sr: And yet there were Sham-miracles told of the Apostles themselves: buc being not countenanced by them, they did not in the leaft difcredit their real Miracles. And if you can

find one Sham-miracle countenanced by the Autho tity of the Church of Rome, you may discredit her as much as you please.

G. The Devil has Power (when permitted) to « shew great Signs and Wonders. Math. 24. and 2. « Thef. 2. v. 3. and the Reason is given y. 12. viz. as c 4 just Punishment of Unrighteousness. pag. 33.

L. But I hope the Devil's Power to shew Signs and Wonders is no Proof, that God has no Power to work Miracles by his Saints. And pray remember who they were, that attributed Chriff's Miracles to Beelzebub the Prince of the Devils. Which was fo black a Crime, that our Saviour calls it Blafphemy against the Holy Ghoft, which would neither be forgiven them in this World, nor in the World to come. Math. 12. V.320

G. My Lord, one falfe, or pretended Miracle is a fufficient to difprove all that come from the fame « Hand. Therefore your Book of Miracles the Le- « gends muft either be all believed, or all rejected, « all coming from the fame Authority: And the « greatest Part of them are fo very grofs and fimple, that no Man of Senfe among you will fay, that a he can believe Half of them. And your learned call them pia fraudes, holy Cheats to ftir up the « Devotion of the Vulgar, who swallow all implicitly. « And your Lordship will have Difficulty enough to « believe all the Miracles alledg'd of their Reliques, on And, as I faid, you must take all or none: unless « you think, that God can work true Miracles, and « the Devil falfe ones by the fame Means, and at the « fame Time. pag. 33. 34. “

L. Before I answer this wretched Stuff Word for Word, I shall lay down fome Principles, whereof you feem to be wholly ignorant. For really, Sr, you oblige me fometimes to deal with you, as if I were inftructing a young Schollar.

First then, the Church of Rome do's not oblige us to believe any Miracles but thofe, that are related in Scripture. The reft, tho never fo well attested, may be believed or rejected, and the Belief of them was never made a Condition of Communion. So that, whether many of these be true or not, 'tis but meer Trifling to draw any Confequence from it in a Difpute about Matters of Faith.

2dly, I grant, that a Perfon convicted of a forged Miracle, or one wrought by the Power of Art-magick, can never be reputed a Worker of true Mis racles.

3dly. Falfe Miracles may be reported of a Perfon, that works true ones, as it happen'd to the Apostles themselves. Whence it follows, that as fabulous Relations, or Romances do not take off from the Credit of Authentick Hiftories, fo the Legendary Miracles te lated by fome Authors do not fink the Credit of allEcclefiaftical Hiftory.

4thly. The very best Hiftorian may be mistaken in fome Facts. Yet this is no Argument or Proof that he is to be believed in nothing. Sr Richard Baker has told many Untruths: yet I should be a Madman to think, he has writ nothing but Fables.

Thefe Principles being fuppofed, I shall answer you Word for Word: First you say, that one falfe or pretended Miracle is fufficient to difprove all, that come from the fame Hand. This is true in the Senfe of the fecond Principle, I have laid down. viz. that a Perfon convicted of a forged Miracle, or one wrought by the Power of Art-magick, can never be reputed a Wor ker of true Miracles. But if you mean that an Hiftorian, who by Miftake, or an Over-credulity relates one falfe Miracle, cannot relate any true ones, tis not only falfe, but ridiculous. So is what follows next, Viz. Therefore our Books of Miracles the Legends must