IV. Why the church is called one, holy and catholic.

The Church is one, not because those who are members thereof dwell together, or because the rites and ceremonies to which they conform are the same; but on account of their agreement in doctrine and faith. It is called holy, because it is sanctified of God by the blood and Spirit of Christ, that it may be conformable to him, not in perfection, but by the imputation of Christ’s righteousness, or obedience; and by having the principle of holiness, because the Holy Spirit renews and delivers the church from the dregs of sins by degrees, in order that all who belong to it may commence and practice all the parts of obedience. It is also called holy, because it is consecrated to a holy and divine use, and is separated from the ungodly who are without its pale. The Church is called, catholic, first in respect to place; because it is spread over the whole world, and is not tied or restricted to any particular place, kingdom, or certain succession. The catholicity of the church, in this respect, commenced at the time of the Apostles because prior to this time the church was circumscribed in narrow limits, being confined to the Jewish nation. Secondly, in respect to men, because the church is gathered from all classes of men of every nation. Thirdly, in respect to time, because it will endure throughout every period of the world: “I will be with you always even to the end of the world;” and because there is only one true Church of all times, which is of such a peculiar constitution as to embrace the whole world, and not to be tied down to any one particular place.

That there is but one church of all times, from the beginning to the end of the world, there can be no reasonable doubt; for it is manifest that the church has always existed, even before the time of Abraham. It is not to be supposed that the family of Abraham, did not worship God before his calling, and that he was only after his calling the servant of the most High. For even before he was called, he held fast to the fundamental principles of the doctrine of the true God, although they were not clearly understood, on account of the false notions and superstitions which were mingled with them. Melchisedek, who was the priest of the most high God, also lived at the same time. Hence there were besides, and before Abraham, other worshippers of the true God, whose priest Melchisedek was. That the church will always exist is evident from these declarations of Scripture: “My words shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed.” “if the night and the day may be changed, my covenant may also be changed.” “I will be with you always, even to the end of the world.” (Is. 5:9, 21. Jer. 83:20. Matt. 28:20.) Christ, moreover, always has been, and always will be king, head and priest of the church. Hence there always has been, and ever will be, a church. And hence it is also evident that the church, both of the Old and the New Testaments, is one and the same; which is also confirmed by the following article of the Creed. For Christ is the sanctifier of his church, and is common to those who have believed on him under each dispensation.

The question of the authority of the church properly belongs here and must, therefore, be considered. The Papists say that the authority of the church is greater than that of the Scriptures, which is false. For the church did not produce the Scriptures; but the Scriptures gave birth to the church. They bring forward the testimony of Augustine against the epistle of Manichaeus, cap. 5, where he describes the manner in which he was led to embrace the faith of the Catholic Church. He says that he obeyed the Catholics when they said, “Believe the gospel” And in the same book is contained that declaration of his, so generally known: “I would not believe the gospel, unless the authority of the Catholic Church would move me” It was, therefore, by the testimony of the church, that he was induced to read the gospel, and to believe the doctrine which is contained therein. But what then? Does he promise himself, after he has believed, that he would have more faith in the church, than in the gospel, if the church were to propose, or to decide any thing contrary to the gospel, or which could not be proven from the Scriptures? Augustin would certainly never have assented to this. Nay, in different portions of his writings, he denounces anathemas upon those, who teach any thing different from that which we have received in the writings of the law and gospel. And in the very same place to which reference is had above, he declares, that he could not believe Manichaeus, because he believed the gospel, inasmuch as he could read nothing in the gospel concerning the apostleship of Manichaeus. Hence traditions lead us to the Scriptures, and bind us to that voice which speaks in them.

But here it must be observed how honestly the Papists act in this affair. For wherever the word tradition occurs, they wrest it in a very short time from its proper meaning, and add it to their own traditions, which they cannot prove from the word of God. As when Paul says, “I delivered unto you that which I received.” (1 Cor. 15:3.) They immediately exclaim, do you not read of traditions? I do; but read on a little further to the place, where Paul explains what those things are, which were delivered unto him: “I delivered unto you that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again according to the Scriptures.” (1 Cor. 15:3, 4.) Here you hear the traditions of Paul, to be according to the Scriptures. They were first taken out of the Scriptures of the Old Testament; and then they were committed to writing by Paul himself. Paul also says concerning the Lord s Supper: “I have received of the Lord, that which I have delivered unto you.” (1 Cor. 11:23.) But this tradition the Apostle himself also committed to writing, after the Evangelists. The Jesuits in like manner quote the declaration of Paul in his second epistle to the Thes., 3:6, where he says, “Withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.” But a little farther on he declares in the same chapter what tradition he meant, as must be manifest to every one that will read the passage with care. And yet they will maintain, that many things are to be believed, which cannot be proven by the testimony of the Scriptures. They also show the same effrontery in regard to another declaration of Scripture recorded in Acts 16:4, where it is said, “They delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem;” when it is, only a little before, declared that these decrees were sent down in letters written by the apostles.

The declaration of the Papists, that the Church, does not err, is true in this sense:

1. The whole church does not err, even though some members of it, or a certain part of it, may err.

2. The church does not err universally, although it may in some particular points of doctrine.

3. It does not err in the foundation.