The-papacy-its-history-dogmas-genius-and-prospects-wylie

246 INFALLIBILITY.ing to the Romanist, is the writtenlaw,—the Church is theinterpreter or judge ;* and the example of England and othercountries is appealed to as an analogous case, where thewritten laws are administered by living judges. The analogyrather bears against the Eomanist ; for while in England thelaw is above the judge, and the judge is bound to decideonly according to the law's award, in the Church of Romethe judge is above the law, and the law can speak only accordingto the pleasure of the judge. But the argument bywhich it is sought to establish this living and speaking infallibletribunal is a singularly illogical one. From the greatvariety of interpretations to which the Scriptures are liable,such a living tribunal, say the Romanists, is necessary ; andbecause it is necessary, therefore it is. Was there ever amore glaring non sequitur ?If Romanists wish to establishthe infallibility of the Church of Rome by fair reasoning,there is only one way in which they can proceed : theymust begin the argument on ground common toboth parties.What is that ground ? It is not the infallibility, becauseProtestants deny that. It is the holy Scriptures, theinspiration and infallibility of which both parties admit.The Romanist cannot refuse an appeal to the Bible, becausehe admits it to be the Word of God. He is bound by clearand direct proofs drawn from thence to prove the infallibilityof his Church, before he can ask a Protestant to receiveit. But the texts advanced from the Bible, taken in theirobvious and literalimport, do not prove the infallibility ofthe Church ;and the Romanist, who is unable to deny this,maintains, nevertheless, that they do amount to proofs ofthe Church's infallibility, because the Church, who cannotpossibly mistake the sense of Scripture, has said so. Thething to be proved is the CJmrclis infalliUlity ; and this theRomanist proves by passages from Scripture which in themselvesdo not prove it,but become proofs by a latent sensecontained in them, which latent sense depends upon the in-• Milner's End of Controversy, part i. p. 116.