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 [Page 2] 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 ^*. 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; [Page 3] 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, ^* 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 Matth. 12. 22. Chief Priests and Elders. And if Caiaphas John 11. 49 who was that Year the High-Priest, was particularly in the Conspiracy, and Ring-leader 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 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 [Page 6] 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 [Page 7] 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 ^* 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.

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 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, 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 Juvante Deo & per ipsius gratiam Vigilius Episcopus Sanctae Ec­clesiae Catholicae urbis Romae huic Constituto nostro Subscripsi. by Vigi­lius [Page 10] 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 that confirm'd Arianism, and in Pope Honorius, ^b 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 Constance, ^d Basil and ^e Trent. And therefore either all the Popes and General Councils, for at least a ^f Thousand, or Twelve ^g 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 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 Trent, ^c Basil and ^d Constance, command That they be Excom­municated, [Page 12] 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 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 of the Uni­versal Church, and confirm'd by the ^c 4th and ^d 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, and condemned the Council ^f of Florence.

The Lateran Council under ^a 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 Constance and ^c 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 Truth belonging [Page 14] 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. [...]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 [Page 15] 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 [Page 16] 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 [Page 17] 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, [Page 18] 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 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 ^† Baronius. And he places the Death of Vigilius in the 14th Year of the [Page 19] 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, [Page 20] 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.