assertions of certain learned men are to be safely relied on.a

"It is manifest that the concurrent testimony, positive or negative, of several witnesses, when there can have been no concert, and especially when there is any rivalry or hostility between them, carries with it a weight independent of that which may belong to each of them considered separately. For though, in such a case, each of the witnesses should be even considered as wholly undeserving of credit, still the chances might be incalculable against their all agreeing in the same falsehood. It is in this kind of testimony that the generality of mankind believe in the motions of the earth, and of the heavenly bodies, &c. Their belief is not the result of their own observations and calculations; nor yet again of their implicit reliance on the skill and the good-faith of any one or more astronomers; but it rests on the agreement of many independent and rival astronomers; who want neither the ability nor the will to detect and expose each other's errors. It is on similar grounds, as Dr. Hinds has justly observed, that all men, except about two or three in a million, believe in the existence and in the genuineness of manuscripts of ancient books, such as the Scriptures. It is not that they have themselves examined these; or again, (as some represent) that they rely implicitly on the good-faith of those who profess to have done so; but they rely on the concurrent and uncontradicted testimony of all who have made, or who might make, the examination; both unbelievers, and believers of various hostile sects; any one of whom would be sure to seize any opportunity to expose the forgeries or errors of his opponents.

This observation is the more important, because many persons are liable to be startled and dismayed on its being pointed out to them that they have been believing something-as they are led to suppose-on very insufficient reasons; when the truth is perhaps that they have been mis-stating their reasons."-Rhetoric, part 1. ch. 2 § 4.

Doubtful

ness of appeals to early

But when, in the case now before us, men come to consider and inquire what the foundaChurches. tion really is on which they are told (according to the principles I have been speaking of) to rest their own hopes of eternal life, and to pronounce condemnation on those who differ from them, it cannot be but that doubt and dissatisfaction, and perhaps disgust, and danger of ultimate infidelity, will beset them, in proportion as they are of a serious and reflective turn, and really anxious to attain religious truth. For when referred to the works of the orthodox ancient Fathers, they find that a very large portion of these works is lost; or that some fragments, or reports of them by other writers, alone remain: they find again that what has come down to us is so vast in amount that a life is not sufficient for the attentive study of even the chief part of it; they find these Authors by

b Would not the ingenuous course be, for those who refer to the authority of "The Fathers," to state distinctly, 1st. which of these ancient writers they mean and, 2dly. whether they have read these? For, a very large proportion, even of the higher classes, are far from being aware of the voluminous character of the works thus vaguely referred to and being accustomed, when any one refers to "The Scriptures," to understand him as speaking of a well-known book, which they presume he professes to have read, it is likely they should conclude, unless told to the contrary, that one who appeals to "The Fathers," has himself read them.

no means agreed, on all points, with each other, or with themselves; and that learned men again are not agreed in the interpretion of them; and still less agreed as to the orthodoxy of each, and the degree of weight due to his judgment on several points; nor even agreed by some centuries as to the degree of antiquity that is to make the authority of each decisive, or more or less approaching to decisive.

foundation

based on

reports.

Every thing in short pertaining to this appeal is Uncertain obscure, uncertain,-disputable-and actually of faith disputed, to such a degree, that even those who are not able to read the original authors may yet be perfectly competent to perceive how unstable a foundation they furnish. They can perceive that the mass of Christians are called on to believe and to do what is essential to Christianity, in implicit reliance on the reports of their respective pastors, as to what certain deep theological antiquarians have reported to them, respecting the reports given by certain ancient Fathers, of the reports current in their times, concerning apostolical usages and institutions! And yet whoever departs in any degree from these, is to be regarded at best in an intermediate state between Christianity and Heathenism! Surely the tendency of this procedure must

See Note, p. 114.

Pretended

decisions

tholic

Church.

be to drive the doubting into confirmed (though perhaps secret) infidelity, and to fill with doubts the most sincerely pious, if they are anxiously desirous of attaining truth, and unhappily have sought it from such instructors.

§ 22. But an attempt is usually made to of the Ca- silence all such doubts by a reference to the Catholic Church, or the "primitive" or the "ancient Catholic Church," as having authority to decide,—and as having in fact decided,— on the degree of regard due to the opinions and testimony of individual writers among the Fathers. And a mere reference such as this, accompanied with unhesitating assertion, is not unfrequently found to satisfy or silence those who might be disposed to doubt. And while questions are eagerly discussed as to the degree of deference due to the "decisions of the universal Church," some preliminary questions are often overlooked: such as,-when, and where did any one visible Community, comprising all Christians as its members, exist? Does it exist still? Is its authority the same as formerly? And again, who are its rulers and other officers, rightfully claiming to represent Him who is the acknowledged Head of the Universal (or Catholic) Church, Jesus Christ, and to act as his Vicegerents on Earth? For, it is plain that no

society that has a supreme Governor, can perform any act, as a Society, and in its corporate capacity, without that supreme Governor, either in person, or represented by some one clearly deputed by him, and invested with his authority. And a Bishop, Presbyter, or other officer, of any particular Church, although he is a member of the Universal Christian Church, and also a Christian Ecclesiastical-Ruler, is not a Ruler of the Universal Church; his jurisdiction not extending beyond his particular Diocese, Province, or Church any more than a European King is King of Europe. Who then are to be recognised as Rulers of (not merely, in) the Universal Church? Where (on Earth) is its central supreme government, such as every single Community must have? Who is the accredited organ empowered to pronounce its decrees, in the name of the whole Community? And where are these decrees registered?

ble records

decisions.

Yet many persons are accustomed to talk No accessifamiliarly of the decisions of the Catholic Church, of Catholic as if there were some accessible record of them, such as we have of the Acts of any Legislative Body; and "as if there existed some recognised functionaries, regularly authorized to govern and to represent that community, the Church of Christ; and answering to the king-senate-or other constituted authorities, in any sccular com