Incorporeality of God is his being without a body. That ( iod is incorporeal is evident ; for, 1. ]\Iate- riality is iiicduiiiatihle with self-existence, and God, be- ing self-existent, must be incorporeal. 2. If God were corporeal, he could not be present in any part of the world where bodj' is ; yet his presence is necessary for the support and motion of body. 3. A body cannot be in two places at the same time ; j'et he is everywhere, and fills heaven and earth. 4. A body is to be seen and felt, but God is invisible and impalpable (John i, 18). See Chaniock, Worls, i, 1 17 ; Gill, Body of Divinity, i, 45, 8vo ; Doddridge, Lectures on Divinity, lect. 47 ; Buck, Theol. Dictionary, s. v. See God.
Incorruptibiles, an extreme sect of Entychians (q. v.), who held that the body of Christ was incorrupt- ible, i. e. " that from the time that his body was formed it was not susceptible of any change or alteration ; that he was not even subject to innocent passions or appe- tites, such as hunger or thirst, but that he ate without any occasion both before his death and after his resur- rection."— Farrar, Eccles. Diet, See Ai^hthahtodoce-
XJE; IMoXOfllYSITES.
IncorrupticolaB. See Incorruptibiles.
Incredulity. See Infidelity; Unbelief.
Incumbent, a clergjTuan in the Church of Eng- land who is inj^resent jiossession of (incumbit, is close to, 1-ests upon, as its immediate occupant) a benefice (Eden). Sir E. Coke, however, says that the title means tliat the clergyman '• in possession of a benefice ought diligently to bend all his study to the care of his church."
Indefectibility of the Church. This subject has already been alluded to in the article Church, voL ii, p. 325 (3) ; but Mr, Blunt {Theol. Cyclop, i, 340) has
INDEFECTIBILITY
543
INDEPENDENCE
treated it so much at length that we insert his remarks ' on this subject, which he treats under the two heads of (1) I'trpetidUj, and (2) Inerrancij and InfallibiliUj. The former, he argues, frees the Church from faihire in suc- cession of members; the latter two free it from failure in holding and declaring the truth. " Both these flow from the constitution and nature of the mystical body of Christ. The Scriptures which speak to this point are John xv; 1 Cor. vi, 15, 19; xu, 1-2; Eph. i,23; iv, 12 ; V, 30 ; Col. i, 18, and cannot be explained away into metaphor. As Christ's natural body was incorruptible, and yet before the resurrection was liable to human in- firmities (]Matt. viii, 17), so his mystical body, yet un- glorificd, is liable in each one of its many members to sin and falling from grace ; but nothing can touch the life of the body itself. As also the fulness of the Spirit dwelt in Christ, and Christ was the Truth, so the Spir- it, by virtue of whose indwelling the body is one, and one with its Head, guides the Church into all truth."
I. Pcrpetiiiti/ of the Ckur-c/i.—" VMn promises of this are made in Isa. Ixi, 8, 9 ; Dan. ii, 44 ; Matt, xvi, 18 ; xxviii, 20 ; John xiv, 16, 17. There are also arguments to be drawn for it from the consideration of God's coun- sel and purpose. The consummation of all things is de- layed only till God's servants are sealed (1 Cor. xv, 28 ; Rev. vi, 9-11). When faith fails in the earth, the end will be (Luke xviii, 8). This is as regards God, in whose work we cannot suppose an interruption. So, too, as regards man. God will have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth. The Church, which is the pillar and ground of the truth, could not fail without a faihire of God's mercy. So long as there are men capable of salvation (and all men are capable of salvation, since Christ died for all), so long will the Church be preserved, that to it may be added both ol ffoj^oi-ievoi and o'l aujQriauntvoi. The promises of God are given to the Church as a whole. Each branch of the Chiurch is on its probation, as is each individual member. And the law of probation, the law of their participation in the promise, is the same : 'He that hath, to him shall be given.' To argue that because each particular church may fail, therefore the whole may fail, is not only a fallacy in logic, but a denial of Christ's power to impart to the whole that which he does not impart to each particular member."
II. Inerraiici/ and Ii>fallihilitij of the Church.— "The foregoing promises and arguments sho;v that the Church will not fail either by dying out or by apostasy. As the work of the Spirit will not fail in bringing sons to God, so it will never fail in providing that there shall always be a body persevering in the faith according to the election of grace. This is to be considered more particularly as regards truth of doctrine. For this, also, there are promises, e. g. John xvi, 13 ; 1 John ii, 27. The spirit which dwells in the Chiu-ch is likewise declared to be the spirit of knowledge and miderstanding (Col. i, 9; ii, 3 ; iii, 10). Less cannot be implied in these words than that the Church shall always have a tenure of the truth sufficient for salvation. They show, further, that any doctrine which can be said to be the deliberately as- certained voice of the Church must be from God, whose Spirit is in the Church. But they cannot be pressed 80 far as to prove that the Church may not for a time hold such an error as does not directly deny the founda- tion of faith, or does not directly deny Christ. Even an error, which by logical consequence denies the foun- dation of faith, is not to be taken as such a denial. The consequence may not be perceived, and if perceived the premises would be at once rejected. The case is doubt- less of great improbability, but its possibility must be conceded. When, then, can we say that the voice of the Church is sufficiently ascertained? This leads us on from the inerrancy, or passive infaHUAUtij. to the ac- tive infaUibilitii, or declaration of the faith. No actual limits of time can be set for which, if a doctrine has been held, it must be considered as the ascertained de- cifiion of the Church, The circumstances of the Church