to express it: Some might infer, and some allege. And no wonder that he should take this method of suggesting a principle totally subversive of the doctrine of the infallibility, wheresoever placed; a doctrine which now, among the learned of that communion, seems to be regarded as purely of the exoteric kind, that is, as proper, whether true or false, to be inculcated on the people, as an useful expedient in governing them. This Frenchman's principle plainly subverts the Pope's pretensions; for Celestine freely acceded to the sentence, condemning Nestorius as a most pestilent heretic: It subverts the pretensions of an ecumenical council, which that of Ephesus, however disorderly and tumultuous, has always been acknowledged by the Romanists to be: It subverts the pretensions of the church collectively, which did, for many ages, universally (the not very numerous sect of Nestorius only excepted) receive the decrees of that synod. This Ephesian council was one of the four concerning which Pope Gregory, who is also called St Gregory and Gregory the Great, declared, that he received them with as much veneration as he did the four gospels.

Yet so little of consistency in speculations of this sort is to be expected from either Popes or councils, that when, so late as the pontificate of Clement XI., in the beginning of the present century, some affected to style St Ann the grandmother of God, (no doubt, with the pious view of conferring an infinite obligation on her), his holiness thought fit to suppress the title, as being, in his judgment, offensive to pious ears. Yet it is impossible for one, without naming Nestorius, to give a clearer decision in his favour. For what is the meaning of grandmother? Is it any more than saying, in one word, what mother's mother or father's mother expresses in two? To say then of Ann, that she was the mother of the mother of God, which they admit, and to say that she was God's grandmother, which they reject, are absolutely the same. The sole spring of offence is in the first step: if that be admitted, the propriety of such expressions, as God's grandmother or grandfather, uncle, aunt, or cousin, follows of course. The second council of Nice, with greater consistency, in quoting the epistle of James, do not hesitate to style the writer God's brother. Kara тov adeλpodeov IaxBoy, are their

very words. Only from this more recent circumstance we may warrantably conclude, that if the phrase, mother of God, had never been heard till the time of Clement XI., it had fared well with the author if he had not been pronounced both a blasphemer and an heretic. What made the case of Nestorius the harder was, that he was in no respect the innovator: he was only shocked at the innovations in language, if not in sentiments, of the newfangled phrases introduced by others, such as this of the mother of God, and the eternal God was born; the impassible suffered; the immortal and only true God expired in agonies. I have seen a small piece, called, if I remember right, "Godly Riddles,” by the late Mr Ralph Erskine, one of the apostles and founders of the Scotch Secession, written precisely in the same taste. "There is nothing new," says Solomon, "under the sun." In the most distant ages and remote countries kindred geniuses may be discovered, wherein the same follies and absurdities, as well as vices, spring up and flourish. To men of shallow understandings, such theologic paradoxes afford a pleasure not unlike that which is derived from being present at the wonderful feats of jugglers. In these, by mere slight of hand, one appears to do what is impossible to be done; and in those, by mere slight of tongue, (in which the judgment has no part), an appearance of meaning and consistency is given to terms the most self-contradictory, and the incredible seems to be rendered worthy of belief. To set fools a-staring is alike the aim of both. I shall only observe, that of the two kinds of artifice, the juggler's and the sophister's, the former is much the more harmless.

To proceed: The contention that arose soon after, on occasion of the doctrine of Eutyches, appears to have been of the same stamp. The whole difference terminated in this, that the one side maintained that Christ is of two natures, the other, that he is of and in two natures, both agreeing, that in one person he is perfect God and perfect man. Yet this dispute was, if possible, conducted with more fury and rancour than the former. Much need, in those days, had the rulers of the church, who called themselves the followers and ministers of the meek and humble Jesus, to go and learn what this meaneth, (2 Tim. ii. 14.), Charge them before the

Lord, that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. They acted, on the contrary, as if they could not conceive another purpose for which a revelation had been given them, but to afford matter of endless wrangling, and to foster all the most malignant passions of human nature. Had they so soon forgotten the many warnings they had received from inspiration, of the mischievous tendency of such a conduct; that profane and vain babblings would increase to more ungodliness, that their pitiful logomachies, their oppositions of science, falsely so called, their foolish and unedifying questions and vain janglings, could only gender strife? Is it possible they could be so blind as not to see their own character, as well as the consequences of their conduct, so distinctly delineated in these words of the apostle, If any man consent not to wholesome words, practical and useful instructions, not idle speculations, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the doctrine that is according to godliness; he is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, who think that gain is godliness? Could they read these things, and not be struck with so bright a reflection as they exhibited of their own image? We must think, that at that period these things were but little read, and less minded.

to say

From the fifth century downwards it became the mode, in all their controversies, to refer to the councils and fathers in support of their dogmas, and to take as little notice of sacred writ as if it no way concerned the faith and practice of a Christian. But their despicable and unmeaning quibbles, the truth, were not more remote from the doctrine of the gospel, than the methods whereby they supported their dogmas were repugnant to the morals which it inculcates. Let us hear the character given of their councils, their procedure, and the effects produced by them, by a contemporary author, a bishop too, who spoke from knowledge and experience. St Gregory Nazianzen, writing to Procopius, thus excuses his refusal to attend a synod at which his presence was expected: "To tell you plainly, I am determined to fly

R

all conventions of bishops; for I never yet saw a council that ended happily. Instead of lessening, they invariably augment the mischief. The passion for victory and the lust of power (you'll perhaps think my freedom intolerable) are not to be described in words. One present as a judge will much more readily catch the infection from others, than be able to restrain it in them. For this reason I must conclude, that the only security of one's peace and virtue is in retirement." Thus far Nazianzen. How a man who, in the fifth century, could talk so reasonably and so much like a Christian, came to be sainted, is not indeed so easily to be accounted for.

On the whole, when one seriously considers the rage of dogmatizing, which for some ages, like a pestilential contagion, overspread the church; when one impartially examines the greater part of the subjects about which they contended with so much vehemence, and their manner of conducting the contest, especially in those holy convocations called synods, it is impossible not to entertain a low opinion of their judgment, and abhorrence of their disposition. At the same time, it is but doing them justice to remark, that in cases wherein their imaginations were not heated by controversy and party-spirit, when they kept within their proper sphere, the making of regulations or canons for maintaining order and discipline in the church, they did not often betray a want of judgment and political capacity. On the contrary, they frequently give ground of admiration to the considerate, that the same persons should, in the one character, appear no better than sophisters and quibblers, fanatics and furies, and, in the other, no less than prudent statesmen and wise legislators.

But it is time to return from this digression, if it can be called a digression, about councils, to the policy of Rome, and the means by which she rose to the very pinnacle of worldly prosperity and grandeur. I thought it of consequence to give, in passing, a slight sketch of the general nature, and rise, and consequences of those disputes, which constitute so essential a part of ecclesiastical history. I shall, in my next, proceed in tracing the causes and maxims which contributed to the establishment of the Roman hierarchy.

LECTURE XV.

In my last discourse, I gave you a general account of the IN nature, rise, and progress of those controversies, which continued for many ages to disturb the peace of the church, and which were, in a great measure, the consequence of a defection from the genuine spirit of the gospel, from the primitive simplicity of its doctrine and purity of its morals, and no less evidently the cause of still greater corruptions, and a more flagrant apostacy, though men still retained the abused name of Christian. I took notice also of the methods taken to terminate those disputes by synods and councils, a remedy which commonly proves worse than the disease; rather, I should say, a prescription of that kind, which, instead of curing, inflames the distemper, and renders it epidemical; nay, is often productive of several others. The very convoking of such numerous assemblies from all the corners of the empire, for the discussion of such senseless debates as the greater part of them manifestly were, gave, in the eye of the world, a consequence to their logomachies, and drew an attention to them, which it was impossible they should ever otherwise have acquired. Besides, the sophistry and altercation employed by both parties in the controversy naturally gave birth to new questions, insomuch that they sprang up faster on every side than it was in their power to terminate them. What the poets feigned of the hydra was here verified. By lopping off one of the heads of the monster, they gave rise at least to two others. "Reges ignari (says Le Clerc, Ars Crit. p. 2. s. 2. c. 5.) nec inter bonos principes numerandi, convocarunt Græculos, qui linguæ acuendæ per totam vitam operam dederant, rerum ipsarum ignaros, contendendi studiosos, perpetuis rixis inter se divisos; et bardos aliquot homines ex occidente, rudiores quidem illis, sed non meliores; iique post pudendas contentiones, obscurissima quædam dogmata, verbis sæpe parum aptis, auctoritate sua firmant; quæ stupidi populi sine examine adorent, quasi divinitus accepta. Non ficta me loqui norunt qui synodorum historias legerunt; nec certe vanus erat qui dixit :