In the Year 374. or 375. _Damasus_ convened a great Council at _Rome_, in which the Errors of _Apollinaris_ were condemned; but neither was he nor any other named as the Broacher or Author of that Doctrine. [Sidenote: Damasus _imposed upon by_ Vitalis _one of his Disciples_.] The very Year that _Damasus_ condemned the Doctrine of _Apollinaris_, he was deceived and over-reached by one of the Disciples of that Heresiarch, named _Vitalis_. He was a Presbyter of the Church of _Antioch_, and of the Communion of _Meletius_, by whom he had been ordained; but afterwards, renouncing his Communion, he joined _Apollinaris_, and, being in high Esteem with the People, drew great Numbers over with him to that Side. Of these, called from him _Vitalians_, _Apollinaris_ some Years after appointed him Bishop, adding thereby a Fourth Party to the Three that already divided the Church of _Antioch_, _viz._ the _Arians_, _Paulinians_, and _Meletians_[1082]. Before he threw off the Mask, and publicly maintained the Tenets of _Apollinaris_, he strove to be admitted with his Followers to the Communion of _Paulinus_ of _Antioch_, and of _Damasus_; and with this View he undertook a Journey to _Rome_ in the Year 375. As he had been suspected, and even accused, of holding the Doctrine of _Apollinaris_, _Damasus_ required of him, before he admitted him to his Communion, a Confession of his Faith, which he gave under his Hand, but in such Terms as bore a double Meaning. _Damasus_, however, well satisfied with it, gave him a Letter for _Paulinus_ of _Antioch_, and sent him back to be admitted by that Bishop to the Communion of the Church[1083]. But _Damasus_ soon after, either upon his own Reflection, or at the Suggestion of others, apprehending himself imposed upon, writ another Letter to _Paulinus_, by the Presbyter _Petronius_, and afterwards a Third, which _Holstenius_ has inserted at Length in his _Roman Collection_[1084]. Together with this Letter _Damasus_ sent to _Paulinus_ a Confession of Faith, drawn up by a Council summoned for that Purpose, desiring him to admit none to his Communion, but such as should sign that Confession, and the Confession of _Nice_[1085]. To this Piece the Fathers of the Council of _Chalcedon_ no doubt allude, in commending _Damasus_ for pointing out, in his Letters to _Paulinus_, the Rules all Catholics ought to be guided by in reasoning of the Mystery of the Incarnation[1086]. What _Baronius_ observes here is true, _viz._ that _Vitalis_, by the same ambiguous Confession of Faith, imposed upon _Gregory Nazianzen_, who received the _Apollinarists_ as Brethren, and not as Enemies[1087]. He adds, _And no Wonder that_ Vitalis _imposed upon_ Damasus, _since by the same Confession he imposed upon_ Gregory Nazianzen: he ought rather to have said, _No Wonder that he imposed upon_ Gregory, _who did not pretend to Infallibility, since he imposed upon_ Damasus, _who was infallible_. As _Vitalis_ refused to sign the