A SERMON PREACH'D 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 K nt Bar net and Christopher Dunn CONVERTS From the CHURCH of ROME Wherein is an Account also of a late Controversie betwixt the Author and some Romanists By Iohn 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 ARCH-BISHOP 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 Subtile Adversary should Assail me This is Printed at the Request of several Persons of Quality and Others that were my Auditors and perswade me that it may be Useful to the Publick and therefore having after all Your Lordship's Approbation I could not deny to gratifie Them when thereby also I might make an open acknowledgement of Your Graces Great and Manifold Favours Who am Your Graces Most Humble and Devoted Servant John Clayton A SERMON On Matth. XVI Vers xviii And I say unto Thee that Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will baild my Church And the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it I Having this Day Receiv'd 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 shew 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 Establish'd As Whether we are to be guided by Scripture and confirm'd by the Practices of the most Primitive Christians and be govern'd by clear Arguments of Reason deduced from thence or no For if I must give up my Religion and Reason absolutely and intirely to the Church of Rome simply to be govern'd in Matters of Faith and Fundamental Doctrines according to their Pleasure and Directions * This is a common Preface to the Decreâ—s of the Councel of Trent Sacrosancta Oecumenica generalis Tridentina â—ynodus in Spiritu Sancto ligitime congregata And then some of them end thus Quapâ—opter cunctis Christi fideâ—ibus interdâ—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. c. Upon this Principle That that Church is Infallible and cannot Err. It is such a Subterfuge for Error and Ignorance as stops all Controversie 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 Intrenchment the rest will be an easie 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 establish'd on its own Authority And according to their Tenents 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 then 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 favour'd 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 conferr'd 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 conferr'd 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 apply'd 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 â—o do most of their Authors Belarmine urges heâ—eupon Exod. 28 Jubet Dominus in Rationali Pontificis summi pom Doctrinam veritatem Dâ—uteâ—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 establish'd on better Promises and on a more firm and compleat 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 wrest 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 then 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 Messias 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 High-Priest was particularly in the Conspiracy and Ring-leader c Matth. 26. 3 57. thereof Let them boast of their Paralel 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 tollerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the Day of Judgment 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 allow'd 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 bow'd 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 contain'd herein that if Critically Examin'd 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 Determin'd 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 Pastores 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 permansiâ— This is Answered by the Bishop of Granada and the Bishop of Paris when the same was urged in the Councel of Trent That it was an Audacious Saying without Ground Authority or Reason Invented about 50 Years before by Cajetan to obtain a Cardinals Cap but had been Ignominiâ—usly 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 then the Pope of himself must be Infallible without the assistance of a Councel which is contrary to the Tenents 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 Councel 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 Plantiffs instead of Defendants Yet our Case is so Plain and Good that we never refuse thus to joyn Issue if so that they will but first fix their Principle and declare where it is that they place this Infallibility
oppositum praemissorum tanquam Haeretici arcendi sâ—nt graviter puniendi Quod nullus Preâ—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 Hereticks 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 Apocripha 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 confirm'd 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 Florenâ—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. â— 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 Catholick Faith according to the Traditions of the Apostles and the General Councils and in particular of the General Councils of Lateran Lyons 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 Catholick Faith which who Pertinaciously resists is to be deemed a Heretick being an Article of Faith which cannot be neglected without the loss of Salvation These Decrees were Establish'd by Pope * Vid. â—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 Modell'd it advances a third Position that Infallibility is in the Church somewhere which my Adversary very Candidly to save a fruitless Search fix'd 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 answer'd 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 Synechdoche 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 past on the Council of Trent about the Pope's sending to them the Holy Ghost in a Port-Mantue And thus there is nothing more plain then that they Center this Infallibility in the Pope simply But the Papist Mis-represented 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 grosly 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 Apostolick Council was called to Reform and Correct that he may be said to be one of the Principle Ring-leaders thereof till God shew'd 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 advantagious 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 shew'd as I understand to several of the Roman Clergy in this Kingdom And all the Answer that I got in some Months time was That they were the Crabbedest or Knottiest Instances could have been pitch'd on and that they had not the conveniency of Books to Answer them It was then sent for England as I was inform'd 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 Controversie 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 contain'd 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 Dealings and by what profane Interest in the Empress Theodora he Usurp'd 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 Obloquie 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 duely 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 call'd and held and the Decree made several Years after Sylverius ' s Death I 'le 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 Jâ—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 Margent set a Note that Baronius has placed this in the 553 d. Year of our Redemption 13 Years after Sylverius's 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 Emperors 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 †Jesu 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 relegâ—tus confectus aerumnis consumptusque inedia diem tandem clausit extremum Duodecimo Kalendaâ— 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 Antvâ—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 deliver'd 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 Candor 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 coyn 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 Falshood 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 Candor 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 shew 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 Proselites For thus God may perhaps make us the Blessed Instruments of turning many to Righteousness and to the acknowledgment 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 Hereticks 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
And hereupon in a â—aâ—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 Heresie that deny'd 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 joyn with them but called another Council of himself of Affrican 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 Emperour 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 Catholick Church as a publick 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 deny'd the Divinity of our Saviour which Heresie 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 confirm'd Arianism and in Pope Honorius b Concil Constant General 6. Actione 13. that establish'd Monothletism That the Sacrament should be receiv'd in both Kinds was the constant Doctrine of the whole Church many Hundreds of Years confirm'd and establish'd 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 Administring 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 it self saying Drink ye all of this And likewise he took the Bread by it self saying Take Eat c. And thereupon they Anathematize 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 ulâ—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 adstringantâ—r Concil Trident. Sess 21. Cap. 1. Wheâ—eupon 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 Constantâ—eâ—se in Sp. Sto. legitime congregatum declarat decernit definit quod licet Christâ—â— sub utraque specie c. Et similiter quod liâ—et in primitiva Eccleâ—â—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