the one will.*' Again he says: "The council had m much reason to censure him as $er.qius, Paulus, Peter, and the other patriarchs of Con- stantinople." And he concludes his proofs of the alleged heresy by* saying: "This will stand for certain, then, that Honorius was con- (letoned, and justly too, as a heretic, by the sixth general council."*
- !'he sentence was approved by the legates of the reigning pope, Aga-
the, who afterward confirmed the decree. It is said, however, that liehofius was deceived in that matter. Be it so; and therefore he could not be infallible. It is enough th?tt the council condenmed him as a heretic, and proscribed his name and memory; and by this they* declare th? popes may err, and by consequence that they are not the rule of faith. tVhether he erred as a private person, as some say, or by a false dispensation, he would have imposed silence on the ortho- dox: it amounts precisely to the same thing. Those who rested on him as their infallible guide must have been deceived in either case. 'l'he?e are nothing more than mere Jesuitical quirks, which may amuse the unthinking, but can never pass for sound argument with the intelli- gent. How could those popes be infallible who confirmed the decrees of Constance and Basil, when the decrees the �allibility ot' popes, and the superiority In this case popes testify against their bwn infallibility. The Council of Baslit prono. unced Pope Eu?enius, a l,?rti.?'io? I?,?,?, ?,?'from ?.f,?itA. ..? There is one heresy el'which many popes have been guilty,, and called by Gregory �1I.? ?/?/oca l?er?-/.?; tie i?*e.?y ofa-/moa?/. If it be said these were no popes?be it so. Then there were no true popes for centuries, and there�ore no infallibility. 3. [t sometimes happened that popes were not skilled in divinity-, and theret'ore could not pronounce on matters o� t'aith except by mira�e. So Pope Innocent X. said :?" The vicar of Jesus Christ was not obliged to examine all thinss by dispute; for the truth of his de- crees depended on divine inspiration."{? 4. What became oF the infallibility of the popes when there were two or three popes at the same time, each excommunicating the others, and claiming at the same time to be in/'allible �/e? of/af?y. The inconstancy of some, the wickedness and treachery ot ? others, forbid us to consider them as free from erroneous decisions. For we must not separate these th/ngs from their official acta; so far from it, that many of their decisions have been given to gratify the basoat and most wicked dispositions in themselves and others. The Almight?r never gave the influence ot' his Spirit for the //ratification ot' vicious passions. That many popes were extremel)- wicked men we have the testimony ot' l?omanists themselvsa.? 6. The distinction made by some, that the pope is only infallible in matters of faith, but not in matters of fact; or by others, that he is in- fallible only in reference to such facts as belong to i'aith; or, as some ?I)u Pin, Ec. Hist., vol. ii, p. 16. ? ConcH. BasH., Sees. 24. ? Ep., lib. iii, 7. "Le Impe repondit, que !e vicaire de Jesus Christ n'Stoit point obli? d'examiner h v?wit? de see deerMs dbpendoit Oeulement de tootes cboees per h dispute ;que !"mspintiou divine."--Afffn. ;/'?,f. ?f? 5 Pr?sev. See hrrow, p. ! ?ee tony proof- in Oudey, nth ed., p. 107. Du Pin, Ec. Hist, vol. 5, p, t76. �OL. I?10
�
