lawyers, as badges of their profession; whence they are described as having the key of knowledge. The meaning of the promise, then, of giving St. Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven, is, that he was to open the dispensation of the Gospel; which was accomplished, when he first preached the Gospel to the Jews after the effusion of the Holy Ghost, and more remarkably, when he first opened the door to the Gentiles, by preaching to Cornelius, and baptising him and his houshold. 7. Granting that, under the figure of “the keys," the power of discipline be understood, still, this is a power, in which all parties have a share, and which cannot be appropriated to any one person. 8. The words, "binding and loosing," are used by the Jewish writers in the sense of affirming or denying the obligation of any precept of the law which might be in dispute. Their meaning therefore is, that Christ committed to the Apostles, the dispensing his Gospel to the world, by which he authorized them to dissolve the obligation of the Mosaic law, and to give other rules to the Christian Church, in which they should be so visibly aided by the divine presence, that it should be evident, their decrees were ratified in heaven. 9. Whatever be understood by the words, binding and loosing, they convey no special grant to St. Peter, since they are likewise used by our Saviour to the other Apostles. 10. Lastly, though this text conveyed a superior power to St. Peter, there is no proof that it was to descend to his successors.a b Our Saviour's prayer, that Peter's "faith might not fail," (Luke xxii. 32.) and his restoring him to his apostolical function, by the thrice repeated charge, "feed my sheep, feed my lambs," (John, xxi. 15,) are likewise produced as proofs of a peculiar power lodged in St. Peter. But it is evident that both bear a relation to his fall, and his denial of Christ. 4. The infallibility of the Pope involves several difficulties. It is necessary that one should know who has a right to elect the Pope; how far simony voids that election, and who is the proper judge on this subject; who is to decide in the case of two different elections at the same time, which has often occurred; and how we are assured, when the Pope speaks ex cathedrá, and when as a private person. All these things should be made known to us: since the information then is not given us, we may conclude that the claim of infallibility is unfounded. a See Dr. I. Barrow's Treatise on the Pope's Supremacy, in his Works, v. 1. p. 59. Lond. 1687, and Horsley's Sermons, ser. 13. This prayer must allude either to Peter's personal justifying faith, or to his judgment on points of doctrine. If to the former, it is certain that many of the Popes have not succeeded him in this respect, since they have led the most flagitious lives. If it allude to the latter (as Roman Catholics assert,) then it is certain that our Saviour's prayer was not heard, for his judgment was erroneous on a point of faith, respecting the Gentile converts.-See Abbot's Reply to the Bishop of London, c. 1. p. 25. Lond. 1611. ARTICLE XX. OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH. THE CHURCH HATH POWER TO DECREE RITES AND CE- WHEREFORE, ALTHOUGH THE CHURCH BE A WITNESS AND KEEPER OF HOLY WRIT, YET AS IT THIS Article consists of two parts: I. It declares the power of the Church; and, II. It defines the limits of that power. I. It declares the power of the Church. This power is claimed in two particulars : 1. In rites and ceremonies: and, 2. In matters of faith. 1. The Church hath power to decree rites and ceremonies. On this subject our doctrine is opposed by some persons, who deny all Church power, and hold that Churches should be limited in points of discipline by the rules expressed in the Scriptures. The principal arguments on which they found this opinion are, 1st, that the appointing new ceremonies seems to reproach the Apostles, as if their institutions had been so defective, that they required to be improved by the inventions of men ; and, 2nd, that the corruptions of Popery began by adopting some rites, apparently innocent, but which were afterwards abused to superstition and idolatry.c a This is the opinion of dissenters in general.-See The Admonition to Parliament, &c. and T. C.'s Reply to Whitgift. b When it is objected, that all rites are unlawful, unless commanded in Scripture, it may he asked, whether those commands must be general or special. If general, we reply, that our rites are authorized by the words "let all things be done decently, and in order." If it be said that there must be a special commandment for each particular ceremony, we answer, that the objectors cannot produce such commandments for the rites they themselves use. Thus, most sects celebrate the feast of the Nativity, yet there is no special command on the subject.-See Mason on the Author. of the Church, p. 32. Ed. Oxf. 1634; Hooker's Eccl. Pol. 1. 3. sec. 2; and Whitgift's Ans. to the Admonition, p. 45. Ed. Lond. 1573. purposes. It is absurd to object, that because a rite has heen used for idolatrous purposes, it therefore cannot be retained for religious The early Christians might thus be accused of favouring idolatry when they turned heathen temples into Christian Churches. But, perhaps there is no subject on which our Reformers observed such admirable moderation. Thus, the use of the sign of the cross, in common life, was prevented, because it was calculated to nourish superstition. The cross was also rejected from the sacrament for the same reason. But it was retained in baptism, because a declaration was added, to show its signification, and thereby prevent its abuse. The truth of our doctrine, however, appears from the following considerations: (1.) From the omission of ritual rules in the New Testament. It is evident, that in the Gospels and Epistles, few rules are given on this subject: The only intimations we find are general ones: "Let all 66 things be done to edification, to order, and to "peace," (Rom. xiv. 19. and 1 Cor. xiv. 40,) and, lay hands suddenly on no man ;" (1. Tim. v. 22;) precepts, which would require many distinctions, in order to apply them to particular cases. But further: the state of man varies in different climates and ages, so that the rules which would be considered grave in one society, may, in another age, tend to distract men's thoughts. Now, it is certain, that some method in these things, is necessary to maintain order and decency. The silence of Scripture, then, on this point, implies a power in the Church to decree them. (2.) From the example of our Saviour. The Jews, confessedly, had a limited number of ritual laws, delivered to them by God; yet they had many rites in use among them in our Saviour's time, which are not mentioned in the Old Testament. Such were the service and officers of the synagogues; the rite of baptism, and the addition of several ceremonies to the Paschal service. Our Saviour, however, rebuked them for none of these; he hallowed some of them |