A SERMON PREACHED At St. Michan's Church in Dublin, February the 23d 1700. Upon Receiving into the Communion of the Church of England, The Honble Sir Terence Mac-mahon, nt & Bar net and Christopher Dunn, CONVERTS From the CHURCH of ROME. Wherein is an Account also of a late Controversy, betwixt the Author and some Romanists. By john Clayton, Praebendary of St. Michan's. DUBLIN: Printed by Joseph Ray, and are to be Sold at his Shop in Skinner-Row, over against the Tholsel. To His GRACE NARCISSUS Lord ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN. MY LORD, I Presume to Dedicate This to Your Grace, upon many Accounts. As having received my First Education, at the University of Oxford, under Your Lordship's Care; and am now again Happy, in having Your Grace for my Metrapolitan. It was Your Lordship, that did me the Singular Honour, to recommend Sir Terence Mac-mahon to my Instruction, when my Lord Inchiquin brought him to Your Grace. And it is Your Lordship's Great Learning, that can best Protect, Aid, and Assist Me, and Secure the Cause that it Suffer not, through my Defects, and Infirmities, if any Subtle Adversary should Assail me. This is Printed at the Request of several Persons of Quality, and Others that were my Auditors, and persuade me that it may be Useful to the Public; and therefore having after all, Your Lordship's Approbation, I could not deny to gratify Them, when thereby also I might make an open acknowledgement of Your Graces Great and Manifold Favours. Who am Your Grace's Most Humble and Devoted Servant John Clayton. A SERMON On Matth. XVI Verse. xviii. And I say unto Thee, that Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will bailed my Church: And the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. I Having this Day Received into Our Church, Two Persons, Converts from the Roman Communion, wherein they were Brought up: The Occasion seems to require and claim a Discourse that has some Reference thereto. And I do not doubt, but that it is expected from all here, that I should expose some of the Errors and Falsehoods of the Romish Doctrine; To show how reasonable this their Renunciation is, and both to confirm them, and others, in the true Faith. But it may be fruitless, and in vain, to offer Rational Arguments on this Head, till one main Point be Established. As, Whether we are to be guided by Scripture, and confirmed by the Practices of the most Primitive Christians, and be governed by clear Arguments of Reason, deduced from thence, or no? For if I must give up my Religion, and Reason, absolutely and entirely to the Church of Rome, simply to be governed in Matters of Faith and Fundamental Doctrines, according to their Pleasure and Directions * This is a common Preface to the Decrees of the Council of Trent, Sacrosancta Oecumenica & generalis Tridentina ●ynodus; in Spiritu Sancto ligitime congregata. And then some of them end thus; Quap●opter cunctis Christi fide●ibus interd●cit, ne post hac de ijs, aliter vel credere, vel docere, vel predicare audeant. quam est his Drecetis explicatum atque definitum; vid. Concil. Trent Sess. 13. C. 1. Sess. 21. C. 1. etc. . Upon this Principle, That that Church is Infallible, and cannot Err. It is such a Subterfuge for Error and Ignorance, as stops all Controversy, and invalidates all Proofs, and the clearest Conviction of Reason. This, therefore, I take to be one of the most material and leading Points, and that which ought to be first discussed. This is as the main Fortification that surrounds their whole Camp; and if I can break in upon them, and force this Entrenchment, the rest will be an easy Conquest, when we are got once within them, and come to a fair Engagement, having cut off their common Retreat and Coverture. Indeed, the Affirmative being on their part, the Proof lies on their side; which should be clearly, fully, and infallibly Demonstrated by them, otherwise it is the most precarious Principle of all others; being only established on its own Authority. And according to their Tenants, it cannot be built on any other. For if this be the only Infallible Guide, and all other things Fallible; unless we allow the Authority of its own Assertion, it can have no other than a fallible Proof and Testimony; and it follows then, that they may be deceived and mistaken, and that their Church may not be Infallible, unless it demonstrate its own veracity by a continued series, of Infallible Truths. And upon this score it is, that the Controversy enters betwixt us, about the Certainty or Incertainty of this Infallibility. Which it is requisite to examine by such matters of Fact, as may give the fullest demonstration thereof, that the nature of the thing will admit. And yet before we come to this part, they commonly take us up with several delusive Arguments, and spend time about some Expressions that have a surprising Sound, as if they favoured their Assertion, but when they come to the Test, have no reference to any such matter. We allow and hold the Scriptures to be the undoubted Word of GOD, and therefore an Infallible Word of Truth. If therefore they can prove by Scripture, an Infallibility conferred on their Church, it is a sufficient Refutation as to us; nor would I Cavil about the various Contradictions it meets with, in the rest of their Principles. For I am fairly for the Truth, and would have all Trifling laid aside. And hereupon then, as to this point, I dare Engage the whole Body of their Clergy, and of all the Roman Party. They use then Three sorts of Arguments, brought from Scripture, to prove their Infallibility. Either from such Words, as are here contained in my Text, that refer (as they call it) to the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, being conferred in particular on St. Peter, and so on his Successors in the Church of Rome. Or from Words more generally spoken, as Matthew 28. 20. And Lo! I am with you always, even unto the End of the World. So John 14. 26. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my Name, he shall teach you all things and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. And John 16. 13. When the Spirit of Truth is come, he will guide you into all Truth. And so likewise the last Words of my Text, singly, and by themselves applied, are brought to Chime in amongst the rest. And the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. Or Thirdly, from a parity of Reason, betwixt theirs, and the Jewish Church, * This Argument the Papist Misrepresented and Represented makes use of, and ●o do most of their Authors: Belarmine urges hereupon▪ Exod. 28 Jubet Dominus in Rationali Pontificis summi pom Doctrinam, & veritatem & D●ute●on. 17. Qui indicabunt tibi judicij veritatem. Bel. De. Romano Pont. L. 4. C. 3. which they say was Infallible, and would prove it from Matth. 23. 2. Where (say they) for this reason, our Saviour commanded the People to have all strict regard to the Scribes and Pharisees, that sat in Moses Chair, all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe, and do. And then they urge, that the Argument holds stronger as to the Christian Church, for now is our Faith built on more sure, and established on better Promises, and on a more firm and complete Word of Truth, according to Hebrews 8. 6. To all which, our Church has given very full Answers, and shown how Mean, Trivial and Trifling a way of Arguing they Use. In that they wrist the plain sense of these Texts, to a quite different meaning, then ever was intended. I will indeed allow them, that if the Jewish Church was Infallible, than the Romish Church is also Infallible. But if the Jewish Shanedrim knew not, nor owned the Lord of Life, but erred in the main Article of their Faith, relating to the Messiah and Crucifi'd Christ: If Pontius Pilate put Him to Death, at the Instigation of the a Matth. 12. 22. Chief Priests and Elders. And if Caiaphas b John 11. 49 who was that Year the Highpriest, was particularly in the Conspiracy, and Ringleader c Matth. 26. 3, 57 thereof. Let them boast of their Parallel Principles, and Arguments of more Validity, I shall take them to be what Christ called those Scribes & Pharisees, but d Matth. 15. 14. 23. 16. Blind-Guides, and Men of the worst Principles, Blind, Leaders of the Blind. And that it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the Day of Judgement, then for them. And Secondly, Then as to those general Promises they instance in by those several Texts of Scripture before cited, they prove nothing against us, if they were allowed to refer to this matter: For being spoke indefinitely to the Church diffusive, there would be nothing determined thereby, but the Controversy would still remain. Whether our Church? or their Church? or some other amongst the various Sects in the World? were thus Infallible? These were Promises made to all the Apostles at large, to St. James, and St. John, as well as to St. Peter, that he would give them the Spirit of Truth, the Holy Ghost, to reveal to them all necessary Truths, for the Establishment of his Church, which afterwards he would accordingly preserve to the end of the World, so as that it should never cease to be a Church, that there should never cease to be a true Christian Church here on Earth. But there is no Promise that does Import, that he would preserve it from all Errors, so as to render it Infallible. The truth of these Revelations, and of Christ's Church is preserved; and I doubt not hereupon, but it will be preserved to the end of the World, in the Scriptures and Apostles Creed, and so forth, and in a certain number of faithful People, that shall hold and stand firm in that Faith, throughout all Ages. And so in the darkest times of Ignorance, * About the 10th Century called Saeculum Obscurum. which was when Popery was most prevalent, there were still a Remnant of God's People, of whom it might be said, as of those of old, when there were a Remnant of several Thousands left that bowed not the Knee to Baal, which latent numbers of Orthodox were the true visible Church on Earth; and St. Paul makes application of this Text, 1 Kings 19 18. to the same use, Rom. 11. 4. Therefore to come to the Third sort of Proofs, whereby they would prove a particular and singular Grant, Assigned by Christ to St. Peter, and to his Successors of the Church of Rome. This, indeed, if it could be made clear, would be to the purpose. But there are a great many Propositions and Parts contained herein; that if Critically Examined, would more than puzzle them to make out. But taken in gross they are so confused, and fluctuate so very strangely in their Opinions, and Assertions, as to this matter, that there is no fixing of them, or binding of them to be Determined thereby. My Text is one of the strongest of this Nature that they produce, which therefore I shall Answer. And for this I need not particularly Expound the Words. For at once I shall give a plain Answer to all that can be said on this Text, and all others they produce of the like nature. For these Words must be either spoke directly to St. Peter in particular, or else to all the Apostles in general. If to all the Apostles, then according to this Interpretation, all the Apostles, and all their * Summa potestas Ecclesiastica non solum data est Petro, sed etiam alijs Apostolis Bellarmin De. Rom. Pontif. L. 1. C. 9 Omnes fuerunt Capita & pastors Universae Ecclesiae, Ibid. C. 11. But then he adds. Sed Petro data est ut Ordinario Pastori cui perpetuò succederetur; aliis tanquam delegatis quibus non succederetur. Fuit enim in illis Ecclesiae primordiis necessarium ad fidem toto Orbe Terrarum celeriter disseminandam, ut primis praedicatoribus & Ecclesiarum fundatoribus summa potestas, & libertas concederetur Mortuis autem Apostolis, Apostolica authoritas in solo Petri successore permansi●. This is Answered by the Bishop of Granada, and the Bishop of Paris, when the same was urged in the Council of Trent. That it was an Audacious Saying without Ground, Authority, or Reason, Invented about 50 Years before by Cajetan, to obtain a Cardinal's Cap, but had been Ignominiously Censured by the Divines of the Sorbon since, and was unknown to former Ages, being inconsistent with the 20th of Matth. Vers. 20. vid. Hist. Council of Trent, by Pietro Polano, Octob. 13. 1562. Successors, have an equal pretence to Infallibility, as St. Peter, and his Successors have. Which confounds their Notion, and the grand Authority of their Church, which therefore they will not allow. Therefore on the other Hand, if these Words were directed to St. Peter in particular, than the Pope of himself must be Infallible, without the assistance of a Council, which is contrary to the Tenants of all the Persons of the Romish Church I meet with; for they utterly deny it, and when they can be got to declare themselves on this Head, they say, it is the Pope, together with his Council that is Infallible, but not otherwise. And hereupon it is, That they rarely put stress on any Scripture Proofs as to this point, but 〈◊〉 mostly to Tradition, as giving them the largest Scope, and being most beyond the Capacity of the Vulgar. And for which they can bring a company of their own Forgeries and Authors, and so never want a Proof. So far at least as to invert the Order of Dispute, and like subtle Attorneys, to make us become Plaintiffs instead of Defendants. Yet our Case is so Plain and Good, that we never refuse thus to join Issue, if so that they will but first fix their Principle, and declare where it is, that they place this Infallibility. And hereupon, in a ●a●e Dispute, that I might not spend time in vain Proofs, I desired that they would lay down some single positive Assertion as to this Infallibility, which accordingly was done. That they held the Pope and Council together to be Infallible. Hereupon I made this Position. That if I then proved one Pope and Council had made final Decrees in Fundamentals of Faith, and that other Popes and Councils with as full Authority had decreed the direct contrary, as to the said Fundamentals of Faith and Doctrine, it must be notorious that one of them had Erred, and the Notion of Infallibility be destroyed and proved false. This was allowed, and agreed to, and this I the rather undertook, because it utterly destroys Infallibility, wherever it be be placed. Whether in the Pope solely, or in the Council solely, or in the Pope and Council conjunctly. And hereupon I drew up the following Instances in Writing, and gave them to be shown to their Priests, or to whoever would undertake to Answer them. My first Instance was in the Constantinopolitan Council, held by Pope Vigilius, the Account whereof briefly is this. The Nestorian Heresy that denied Christ to be God, being revived by Theodorus, Bishop of Mopsvestia; and by Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus, against Cyril; and in the Epistle of Ibas, Bishop of Edessa to Maris; which were called the Three Chapters; Fierce Disputes arose in the Church, whereupon the Emperor called a Council to Constantinople to settle this Affair; but Pope Vigilius could not be brought over to join with them, but called another Council of himself, of African, Illirian, Italian, and other Western Bishops, and with extraordinary Application and Diligence they Composed a large Decree, * This Council is Extant at large in the Concilia Maxima, Paris è Typographiâ Regia 1644. Tom. 11. containing Sixty Pages in Folio, that it might in every Respect be Correspondent to the Gravity and Authority of the Pope and such a Council; and that likewise it might be Satisfactory to the Emperor, a Quatenus habito Deo auxiliante, tractatu, definitionis nostrae, constituto die Scripto, sententiam diceremus: Ad Fratres Coepiscopos nostros, a quibus similiter de eadem causa responsum vos flagitare dixisti. Vid. Constitutum Vigilij Papae de tribus Capitulis. and that other Synod that was Assembled by him; and also as it is Worded, to the whole Catholic Church, as a public Direction in Faith to them all, calling it a Constitution, a Statute, a Decree, and a Definitive Sentence, and as such was Subscribed b Juvante Deo & per ipsius gratiam Vigilius Episcopus Sanctae Ecclesiae Catholicae urbis Romae huic Constituto nostro Subscripsi. by Vigilius himself, and by all the rest of the Bishops and Deacons, which were as many as were in several Assemblies of the Grand Council of Trent. The Sum then of this Constitution, or Decree, was the Defence of the Three aforesaid Chapters, and in effect a downright Vindication, and assertion of Nestorianism, that (as is aforesaid) denied the Divinity of our Saviour, which Heresy had been condemned by the General Council of Chalcedon before, and by many Councils since. So that here is Pope and Council, against Pope and Council, making solemn Decrees point Blank contradictory in Matters of Faith. Hereunto were added other Instances, as in Pope Liberius, a Sozomen. Lib. 4. Cap. 14. Hierom. de Script. Eccles. in Fortu natiano. Epist. Liberij Episcopis Orientalibus. Liberij Epist. Ursacio yalenti & Germano. Et ad Vincentium. that confirmed Arianism, and in Pope Honorius, b Concil. Constant. General. 6. Actione 13. that established Monothletism. That the Sacrament should be received in both Kind's, was the constant Doctrine of the whole Church many Hundreds of Years, confirmed and established in General by all the Popes and Councils, until those late Councils of c Concil. Const. Sess. 13. Constance, d Concil. Basil. Sess. 30. Basil and e Concil. Trent. Sess. 21. C. 2. Trent. And therefore either all the Popes and General Councils, for at least a f Caslander Confut. Art. 22. P. 981. Thousand, or Twelve g Card. Bona Rerum Liturg. L. 2. C. 18. P. 862. Hundred Years, Erred, or else later Popes and Councils Erred, and whether soever it be, it destroys Infallibility. There was a Council held at Braga, a Habitum anno 4. Bambae Regis tempore Adeodati Papae A. D. 675. Aut integra Sacramenta accipiant, aut ab integris arceantur. Gelasius Majorco & Johanni Episcopis, apud Ivon decret. part 2. C. 8, 9 Excommunicari illos praecipit Gelasius Papa Microlog. Cap. 19 about Dipping the Bread in the Wine, and so Administering it for the whole Communion, which Custom some Persons offered to introduce. But the Council Condemned this Practice, because (say they) it is repugnant to the Doctrine of the Gospel, and to the Custom of the Church, and to the Institution of Christ the fountain of Truth, who gave the Cup by itself, saying, Drink ye all of this: And likewise he took the Bread by itself, saying, Take, Eat, etc. And thereupon they Anathematise, all that abrogate, or alter this Institution. And the Council of b Itaque Sancta ipsa Synodus, a Spiritu Sancto (qui Spiritus est Sapientiae & intellectus. Spiritus Consilij & pietatis) edocta, atque ipsius Ecclesiae judicium & Consuetudinem secuta, declarat ac docet, nullo divino praecepto Laicos & Clericos non Conficientes, obligari ad Eucharistiae Sacramentum sub utraque specie sumendum: neque ul●o pacto salva side dubitari posse, quin illis alterius speciei Communio ad salutem sufficiet. Nam etsi Christus Dominus in ultima Caena venerabile hoc Sacramentum in Panis & Vini speciebus instituit & Apostolus tradidit. Non tamen illa institutio & traditio eo tendunt, ut omnes Christi fideles statuto Domini ad utramque speciem accipiendam adstringant●r. Concil. Trident. Sess. 21. Cap. 1. Whereupon several Canons were made, as, Si quis dixerit ex Dei precepto, vel necessitate salutis, omnes & singulos Christi fideles utramque speciem sanctissimi Eucharistiae Sacramenti sumere debere Anathema sit. Canon. 1. Trent, c Nullatenus ambigendum est, quod non sub specie Panis Caro tantum, nec sub specie Vini Sanguis tantum▪ sed sub qualibet specie est integer totus Christus. Concil. Basil. Sess. 30. Basil and d Concilium S. Generale Constantness in Sp. Sto. legitime congregatum, declarat, decernit, & definite, quod licet Christ●● sub utraque specie, etc.— Et similiter, quod linnet in primitiva Eccle●●a hujusmodi Sacramentum reciperetur a fidelibus sub utraque specie— Tamen a Laicis tantummodo sub specie Panis suscipiatur— Qua propter dicere hanc Consuetudinem, aut legem observare sit Sacrilegum aut illicitum censeri debet erroneum & pertinaciter asserentes oppositum praemissorum tanquam Haeretici arcendi s●nt & graviter puniendi— Quod nullus Pre●byter sub paena Excommunicationis, communicet populum sub utraque specie Panis & Vini. Item ipsa Sancta Synodus decernit & declarat super ipsa materia, ut effectualiter puniant eos contra hoc decretum excedentes, qui communicando populum sub utraque specie Panis & Vini exhortati fuerint, & sic faciendum esse docuerint, & si ad paenitentiam redire non curaverint, animo indurato, per censuras Ecclesiasticas per eos ut Haeretici sunt coercendi Concil. Constant. Sess. 13. Constance, command That they be Excommunicated, who, contrary to their Decree, Exhort the People to Communicate in both kinds, of Bread and Wine, and do take upon them to Administer the Sacrament to the People after that manner, and requires, that they be treated as Heretics, if they persist in so doing without Repentance. The Council of a Binius ex Baronio Not. 1. in Laodicen. Concil. Hoc Concillium antiqua nobilitate celeberrimum, Graecorum atque Latinorum Scriptis celebri memoriae commendatum fuit▪ Laodicea excludes those Books, commonly called the Apocryphas, from the Canon of Scripture. And the Canons of this Council were received into the Code b Canon. de Libel. Distinct. 20. Cod. Can. Ecclaes'. Univer. of the Universal Church, and confirmed by the c Concil. Chalcedon. Act. 4. Act 11. Act. 13. 4th and d Concil. Constantinop. in Trullo. Can. 2. And by Imperial Law of the Emperor Justinian. Novel. 131. 6th of their General Councils, which is directly contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome, settled by later Councils. The Council of Basil deposed the e Pope Eugenius iv Constituted Amadeus the Duke of Savoy Pope, viz. Felix V. Pope, and condemned the Council f Jac. Meyerus in Annalibus Flandr. Lib. 16. Basiliense & Floren●ium adeo nihil Concordiae habebant, ut utrumque alterum Synagogamque Satanae nominaret. of Florence. The Lateran Council under a Sess. 40. habita Maij 4. Anno. Dom. 1515. Concilium Constantiense ubi definit Concilium esse supra Papam, reprobatum est in Concilio Florentino & Lateranensi ultimo. Bellar. de Concil. L. 1. C. ●. Leo. 10. decreed Infallibility to be in the Pope alone, and that he had a Superiority and Supremacy in himself alone, above all Councils. The Councils of b Sess. 45. Constance and c Concil. Basil Sess. 2. apud Binnium, Tom. 8. p. 22. Sess. 18. p. 55. Sess. 33. p. 95. Sess. 38. p. 101. Basil decree the Superiority of a General Council above the Pope, and that they have Authority to Decree matters of Faith without him. And one of their Decrees runs thus. * Concil. Basil. Sess. 23. 37. Consil. Const. Sess. 39 That for the future every one that is to be chosen Pope, shall in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, with Heart, and Mouth, profess to God Almighty, and to blessed Peter, firmly to believe and hold, as long as he shall live, the Holy Catholic Faith, according to the Traditions of the Apostles, and the General Councils, and in particular of the General Councils of Lateran, Lions, Vienna, Constance, and Basil, and to keep that Faith, to a tittle unchanged, and to Preach, Confirm and Defend it with their Life and Blood. And the following Popes, till after the time of Eugenius the iv made this Profession. They Decreed also, † Concil. Basil. Sess. 2. That General Councils have Authority immediately from Christ, and that the Pope himself is bound, and obliged to stand to the Declaration and Definition of these Councils. And further says, This is a d Veritas fidei Catholicae Concil. Basil. Sess. 33. Censendus est haereticus— sine interitu salutis. Idem. Truth belonging to the Catholic Faith, which, who Pertinaciously resists is to be deemed a Heretic, being an Article of Faith, which cannot be neglected without the loss of Salvation. These Decrees were Established by Pope * Vid. ●inn. Concil. Basil. Sess. 29. Sess. 38. Martin V and by virtue hereof John III. and Benedict XIII. were deposed, and hereby Eugenius iv was made Pope. And yet Popery, as they have newly Modelled it, advances a third Position, that Infallibility is in the Church somewhere; which my Adversary very Candidly, to save a fruitless Search, fixed in the Pope and Council together. So that here are Three Positions contrary one to another about this Infallibility; and place the Infallibility where you please, there is accordingly an infallible Determination that there is no such Infallibility in any of them. For when they have said all they can on this last Point, which seems the strongest, and let them set it off with as much Pomp and Ostentation of Words as possibly they can, the aforesaid Instances can never be answered; and it is further manifest that this is only a Collusion and Mask to convey the Pope's Infallibility into the Hearts of the People. For when they say the Pope is Infallible, General Councils are Infallible, the Church is Infallible; it is plain they never meant to make three distinct Infallibilities, but one Infallibility, which must rest virtually in the Pope, for otherwise the Church would be always without an Infallible Guide, but when a Council sits. To evade this, they say at other times, the Church and Council is virtually in the Pope, who, by a Synecdoche, is Infallible. Then the Pope is always Infallible but when a Council sits, and hereby is a fresh occasion given for that Flout that was passed on the Council of Trent, about the Pope's sending to them the Holy Ghost in a Portmanteau. And thus there is nothing more plain, then that they Centre this Infallibility in the Pope simply. But the Papist misrepresented and Represented * In the Chap of the I fallibility of the Church. says, He Believes, That the Pastors and Prelates of his Church are Fallible. What, without an Equivocation? Does he herein include the Pope? Honest Men deliver themselves as plainly as they can possibly contrive, especially in such Matters. But this seems Equivocal, for otherwise, why does he lay the Foundation of this Infallibility on such places of Scripture as my Text, and the like? For there is not one Tittle or Word that can refer to placing an Infallibility in St. Peter in Council only; but if their Infallibility be derived hence, and founded hereupon, it must be in St. Peter simply, and yet as if it were out of a Divine Prescience, to determine such Disputes and Controversies, and Pretensions, the very next thing that follows, shows that St. Peter was so far from being Infallible, that he so grossly Erred, as to cause the same Gracious Lord Jesus Christ to say within Five Verses of my Text, unto the said Peter, Get thee behind me Satan, Mat. 16. 23. thou art an offence unto me, for thou savourest not the things that be of GOD, but those that be of Men. And so St. Paul found him in a great Error, when he met him at Antioch, and withstood him Gal. 2. 11. to the face, because he was to be blamed. And indeed he was so great an indulger of that Error and Faction, which the Grand Apostolic Council was called to Reform and Correct, that he may be said to be one of the Principle Ringleaders thereof, till God showed him a particular Vision, to reveal to him his Error, a little before that Council was held. It is certain, they have been much at a loss where to fix this Infallibility, and therefore have invented these several Positions, to place it sometimes in the Pope, sometimes in the Council, sometimes in the Pope and Council, all which (I think) I have proved absolutely False, and that this Uncertainty is because it is really no where. So that the Doctrine of Infallibility, instead of being so advantageous to their Church as they pretend, is the greatest distracting Principle imaginable, it is the Mother of Error, a Cloak for Ignorance, an Abuse and Cheat, and only an Artificial Contrivance, to deceive and captivate silly poor Souls; and never was started, thought on, contrived or heard of in the World, for above a Thousand Years after Christ's time. This was the Purport of what I gave in Writing, and it was showed (as I understand) to several of the Roman Clergy in this Kingdom. And all the Answer that I got in some Month's time, was, That they were the Crabbedest, or Knottiest Instances could have been pitched on, and that they had not the conveniency of Books to Answer them. It was then sent for England, (as I was informed) and after a long time came a most tedious Answer, which I could never get a Copy of. I had indeed the Perusal of it, and made Answer it would be too great an Avocation for me that have so great a Cure, to reply to every thing I thought Faulty therein; and would too much distract the Dispute, that the Conclusion would not be so evident. But, If they would pitch upon any one Instance, that would clearly decide the Controversy, I would be bound to be Determined thereby; thereupon the first Instance was chosen, that I was urged to make a Reply to; that about Vigilius. The Answer owned, That there was such a Council or Assembly, and according a Constitution or Decree Extant, made by them and Vigilius, which contained Erroneous Doctrines in points of Faith, but said this was made when Vigilius was a Pseudo-Pope. And gave an Historical Account of Vigilius out of Platina, or some of their Authors; telling how Vile a Person Vigilius was at first, and laid on him a load of Infamy; telling by what corrupt Deal, and by what profane Interest in the Empress Theodora, he Usurped the Seat of Pope Sylverius, and got to be Pope; during whose Life-time he was therefore a Pseudo, or false Pope, and it was then, that he made this Decree. I shall make no Reply to this Obloquy, being therein they only vomit forth their own Shame. But, says the Answer, after Sylverius ' s Death, the Spirit of God came upon him, & he immediately receded from his former Election, till he was chosen again, and then became a true Pope, and a Holy Father of the Church. This I suppose was added, to insinuate what a Divine Inspiration of Infallibility there is at the time of their Accession to the Chair, when they are duly and regularly made Popes. But to be short, and come to the stress of the Point in Debate; which was laid herein. Whether this Constitution was made before Sylverius ' s Death, or no? That is, Whether it was made whilst Vigilius was a false, or a true Pope? It is a plain single Point, and I will venture the whole upon it. For, If I do not prove, that this Council was called, and held, and the Decree made several Years after Sylverius ' s Death, I'll turn Papist; if my Adversary will but as fairly engage to turn Protestant, if I prove it very fully. * Datum pridie Idus Maij imperante Domino nostro J●stiniano perpetuo Augusto Anno 27. post Consulatum Viri clarissimi Anno 12. in Constantinopolitana Civitate. The Date then of this Decree runs thus. Constituted the 14th Day of May, in the 27th Year of the Reign of our Sovereign Lord the Emperor Justinian, and in the 12th Year after the Consulatship of that Renowned Man Basilius, in the City of Constantinople. This is Extant at the end of the Decree in the Paris Edition of the Councils, at large, èTypographia Regia, 1644. But Binnius, and some others, have purposely (as I suppose) omitted the Date and Subscriptions, though they have all the rest of the Decree at large, yet at the beginning, he has in the Margin, set a Note, that Baronius has placed this in the 553 d. Year of our Redemption. 13 Years after Sylverius' Death. Observe then here is a double date; one, that it was the 27th Year of Justinians Reign; the other, the 12th Year after Basilius' Consulatship; and what is further remarkable, that I would have you Note, that Basilius was the last Consul, and so the Ephoca, or manner of dating is altered the Year after Basilius was Consul, for whereas before they Dated things from such a Year of the Emperor's Reign, and when such, and such Persons, were Consuls. They then changed the method of Dating, to such a certain Year after Basilius was Consul, all which clearly denotes there could be no accidental mistake in the Date. Let us now see then what Year Sylverius Died, and for this I take their own great Author † Jesus Christi Annus 540. Vigilij Pap. Annus 1. Justiniani Imp. 14. Vitigis Reg. 4. Qui sequitur Annus Quadragessimus supra quingentessimum ascriptus fastis reperitur consulatu solius Justini tu addas Collegam Paulinum, Juniorem dictum.— Quo Anno Sylverius Papa in Insula Palmaria releg●tus confectus aerumnis, consumptusque inedia diem tandem clausit extremum Duodecimo Kalenda● Julij.— Quod autem aliqui nec duos Annos cjus sedi concedunt, inde id evenisse liquet, quod absurde admodum numerent ejus sedis tempususque ad Vigilij intrusionem tantum, cum ipse Sylverius e sede expulsus est at vero usque ad consummatum Martyrium semper ipsum legitimum perseverasse Pontificem▪ Baroni Antv●rpiae ex officina Plantiniana 1603. Tom. 7. Baronius. And he places the Death of Vigilius in the 14th Year of the Emperor Justinians Reign, and in the Consulatship of Justinus, and Paulinus, who were immediate Consuls before Basilius. So then, Sylverius Dying the 14th Year of Justinian, and the Date of the Constitution, being the 27th Year of Justinian, it is plain Vigilius, if ever was a true Pope, and had been so 13 Years, and so also by the other Date. For Justinus and Paulinus being Consuls the Year before Basilius, and the Date of the Constitution being the 12th Year after Basilius was Consul, in like manner confirms, that it was 13 Years after Vigilius was a Right Pope. Nothing in the World can be more plain and positive, and though I have delivered this in Writing above Half a Year since, I hear nothing in return, and therefore I shall not add any thing more hereto, for if I would have Enlarged, I could have shown that the greatest Share of that Story about Vigilius, and the Empress, is a late Invention of their Authors, and Historians, purposely contrived, to conceal and cloak this matter. Now Mortal Men have such Imperfect Reason, that they may be liable to Mistakes, for so only GOD is True, but every Man a Liar, that is, they are subject to Error. And therefore I do not contemn or hate any Man on that Account, if I could but think he had Candour, and a good Conscience, that he were sincere, and honest in his Principle. But when Men plainly see they are in an Error, to have them forge Untruths, for Religion's sake, to coin New Histories, forge New Inventions to deceive themselves, and others, it is such a Pia Fraus or Religious Cheat, as is most Impious, and Abominable. What a strange Current there is in Men's Natures to Vice, that Men should ever think to serve God with Falsehood, and Forgeries, and be begotted to Principles that they themselves Invent, for no other end, but to enslave themselves with all; such is an unhappy Zeal. Whereas to contend for the Truth, with Candour and Honesty, to be Zealously affected for Righteousness with Simplicity and Singleness of Heart, is true Piety and Zeal, as well as hearty Religion. For God loves a Tenderness of Conscience, as well as a Flaming Affection, but the Conjunction of one with the other makes the Blessed Temper of a Christian. Let us therefore show forth our Faith by our Works, for such are the most prevalent Arguments; for the greatest part cannot but be under jealous Apprehensions, that we have the Truth on our sides, if we had but the Testimony of good Works to Illustrate our Profession. Let us therefore with Holy Lives, with the confounding Evidence of Moral Principles, as well as of an Orthodox Faith, endeavour to Convert and Gain many more Proselytes. For thus God may perhaps make us the Blessed Instruments of turning many to Righteousness, and to the acknowledgement of the Truth. So as that they may recover themselves out of the Snare of the Devil, and though we should fail of preserving theirs, we may be sure to save our own Souls. But, Turn Thou them O Good Lord, and then will they be Turned, Be favourable be favourable, O Lord to that People, out of Thy Great and Tender Mercy. For Thou art full of Compassion, Long-Suffering, and of great Pity; nor wouldst the Death of a Sinner, but rather that he should be Converted and Live. Have Mercy therefore upon all Jews, Turks, Infidels and Heretics, and take from them all Ignorance, hardness of Heart, and contempt of Thy Word; and so bring them home to Thy Flock, that they may be saved amongst the Remnant of the true Israelites, and be made one Fold under one Shepherd. Jesus Christ our Lord, who Liveth and Reigneth, with Thee, and the Holy Spirit, one God, World without End. Amen. FINIS.