trinal errors of this great body are, in teaching a variety of articles which they contradict; yet, one of them will always assert that what the other calls error is truth in the doctrines of the original code which God has revealed. 7. They all assert that her errors consisted in changing from what was originally given by God. 8. They have neven been able satisfactorily to point out the date of those alleged changes, nor that at the period of such alleged change, there continued together any large body of Christians who condemned this alleged change and who preserved the true doctrine. 9. This great body has clearly pointed out the date of all the changes which she alleged the separatists to have to have made in doctrines; also, the special doctrines, the author of the change, and all the circumstances of the separation. 10. This great body traces its unbroken existence to the days of Jesus Christ. 11. Such of the separated divisions as attempt to do the same, are obliged to graft themselves upon the stock of that great body, at the time that is pointed out as the period of their sepation. 12. Those bodies have at different times since their separation changed their doctrine; that is, at one period, they stated that God did not reveal what, at another time, they stated He revealed; and no one of them lays claim to be infallible in showing what God taught. 13. This great body alleges that it has never altered its doctrine, and that, at this day, it holds to every doctrinal declaration which it has made during eighteen centuries; and that it will infallibly teach what God has revealed; and, an imputation which other divisions frequently make upon it, and which it acknowledges to be to itself a source of gratification, is, that it obstinately holds to what it first taught, and will make no reformation in its doctrine, to suit the change of times and the progress of science.

I next view another body of facts, which are in full evidence, respecting which there can be no doubt. 1. Jesus Christ existed, and was put to death in Judea, about eighteen centuries ago. 2. He proved by miraculous works that He

had a divine mission. 3. He wrote no book of doctrine; but He instructed a number of persons whom He had selected; and He, in a special manner, gave particular instructions to some whom He had chosen from amongst these disciples. 4. He commissioned them to teach His doctrines to all mankind. 5. They did teach; and they, too, wrought miracles. 6. They instructed vast multitudes of others; some of whom they selected and commissioned as teachers, and associated with themselves. 7. Their mode of instruction was not by giving to the people a Book, which, they said, contained God's Word, and telling them to interpret it for themselve; and that whatever they thought to be the meaning of the Book was to be followed, though that meaning should be contradictory, as the opinions of the readers might be contradictory. 8. A few of them wrote abridged histories of the acts and sayings of Jesus Christ, the copies of which were very scarce; others wrote some espistles on particular occasions; and an imperfect history of some of the Acts of the Apostles was also written; together with a long and darkly mysterious history of a prophetic vision; but of all these, the copies were very few, and the circulation very limited. 9. Several other histories, epistles, and visions, were also circulated, which have been generally acknowledged, long since, to be compilations of falsehood, and many of them of folly; and have been rejected as such. 10. During more than two centuries these productions continued to circulate, without any public distinction having been generally made between them. 11. There was a dispute amongst the early Christians, in the days of the Apostles, as to what was the doctrine of Christ, respecting the observance of the law of Moses, and several other subjects. 12. This dispute was terminated, not by referring persons to any books of authority and leaving the individuals to judge for themselves, but by the authoritative decision of the teachers, who gave a judgment, in which they asserted they had the aid and co-operation of the Holy Ghost. 13. The persons who would not submit

to that judicial decision were cut off from the Church. 14. All other disputes were terminated in like manner; and all who would not submit were cut off in like manner, and thus formed new sects, calling themselves Christians, but not recognized by the great body. 15. More than three centuries elapsed, before the books which are recognized as containing the Word of God, were separated from those which were spurious. 16. This selection was made by the successors of the Apostles and was an act of judicial, authoritative declaration. 17. Hitherto, those successors and their predecessors had been considered as the only authority, through which men could certainly know what Jesus Christ had taught. 18. Their recognition of the truth of what the selected books contained could not and did not destroy any authority which they previously had and which they and their successors were to have to the end of the world. 19. After this selection, they continued to exercise their authority as before. 20. At this period, several nations, containing several millions of Christians, had a full knowledge of the doctrines of Christ, although they had never seen a copy of the Scriptures; and then, their faith was found to agree with that of the persons who, belonging to the great or universal or Catholic body, had also the Scriptures.

From these facts I draw the following conclusions: 1. Christ did not establish as the mode of knowing His doctrines, the publication of Bibles and leaving to individuals to interpret them as they thought fit; or-what is but a modification of the same-establish those individuals as judges, to know from Bible-reading whether the teacher gave them His doctrine or not. 2. He sent teachers, to whom the people were to listen, and from whom and upon whose authority, the people were to receive His doctrine. 3. This authority of theirs was approved by miracles and therefore had the sanction of heaven. 4. It was by its exercise nations were converted and truth preserved. 5. It is only by its recognition we can know that Scripture con

tains the Word of God. 6. Without its recognition we have no certain knowledge that the New Testament contains the doctrines of Christ. 7. If it be a fallible tribunal in what concerns faith, we have no certainty that the books which we receive are inspired and that those which we reject are not God's Word. 8. Therefore, if the great body of teachers of the Church cannot give us with infallible certainty the doctrines of Christ, we have no cerainty that these doctrines are contained in the New Testament or are now taught any where in the world.

III.

We have now seen general considerations founded upon facts, which lead one to conclude: 1. That we cannot have a certainty of what God has taught, without having a witness who will give us with infallible certainty the doctrine which He revealed. 2. That we cannot have faith without such infallible testimony. And 3. That the facts of the establishment of Christianity evidently suppose the public teachers of the Church, as a body, to be a witness of this description; and that, if they be not, we have no certainty that Scripture is the Word of God; nor have we any certainty that we now find the true doctrines of Christ.

In every human society, men not only make laws; but, however plain those laws may be, a tribunal from which there is no appeal decides for all the members what is the meaning of that law. And, although this tribunal is liable to error, society causes it to be regarded as infallible. So ciety cannot make it infallible; but it can have it treated as if it were an infallible tribunal; otherwise, the law would be useless, if not mischievous. What would be though of two litigants and their advocates who would come int court, and, each producing his law book, decide in his own favor, when the tribunal had already decided; the one whom the decision favored, remaining satisfied with this decision while the other party said: "The tribunal has erred; I know the law; the judges are but men, I will not abide b

their decision?" How long could society hold together? Who would live in a country where the order of the court could not be enforced? Yet, we all agree, this tribunal might err. Still, the good of society requires that it must be treated as if infallible. Indeed, if it could be made infallible, it ought to be made so; and, in practice, it is made so. No one goes before such a tribunal merely for advice or instruction; recourse is had to it for authoritative decision. To go for advice or instruction would be giving it no power to effect the object of its creation; because, you might be unwilling to follow the advice, and might not consider the instruction good, nor the evidence sufficient. The Supreme Court of the United States generally publishes the grounds of its decisions; but the judge never asks the parties whether they consider those grounds sufficient. The decision is made by authority of the court, and not by the admission of the parties. Common sense, peace, truth, justice, the public good require this.

We have seen that the contests as to what is the meaning of passages of the Bible are as numerous as the contests about the meaning of the law of our States; and a tribunal is as necessary to give the one with accuracy and certainty, as to give the other. And, if it be important to know what God teaches, as it unquestionably is, it is important that the tribunal appointed to tell us what He teaches should not err. Why are the courts of society fallible? Because society, from which they derive their power, and by which they are erected, could not gift them with infallibility. The tribunal of the Church is erected by God, who is all-powerful. It derives its commission to teach from Him who could make it infallible; and His wisdom shows the necessity of doing what His power can effect. He must, then, have made the tribunal of the Church infallible in testifying what He has taught. Single individuals are liable to err in their decisions; but the tribunal is infallible; not because composed of a number of infallible individuals, but because Almighty wisdom saw the