( 147 )

may be taken, is a Confession of Faith, wherein hecould not be deceived, because he was an Eye-wit-ness to the whole Transaction. Before we can just-ly disbelieve a Writer in such a Case, we must haveProof that he was not only credulous , but false.Not that this Confession rests entirely on Victor’s.Testimony. For Gennadius , who lived at thefame Time, in his Catalogue of illustrious Writers,under the Name Eugenius , mentions the Thingwith some Circumstances, that are found in VictorVitenfis. Upon the whole therefore, there is no-thing in the Writings of that HiJhrian , that canreasonably call in Question, either the Genuinenessor Veracity of his Character. And consequently hedeserves Belief when he gives us that illustriousConfession of Faith, wherein the Bishops of Afri-ca, of Mauritania , of Sardinia and Corsica, toge-ther with those of the Balearick Isles, to the Num-ber of 3 or 400, supported the Catholic Doctrine ofthe Trinity from 1 John v. 7. and pawn’d theirLives as well as Reputation , for the Verity of thatdisputed Passage. The Advocates for that 'Text, nofarther involve themselves in the Affair of Victor ,than with Regard to his Honesy , against whichthey think nothing has been urged by the Anno-tator. And for this Reason they fear no ill Conse-quences of such an Engagement , but bid him do hisworst.

His next Attempt is against Vigilius Tapfenfis ,another Witness to the Text in Controversy. TheCriticks unanimously represent him as contempora-ry with ViBor and Eugenius . But our Annotatorthrusts him down as low as Charlemagne , andmakes that Work of his, which goes under the

U 2 Name