Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	canonical_a	church_n	receive_v	6,086	5	6.1495	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A73761	The epistle congratulatorie of Lysimachus Nicanor of the Societie of Jesu, to the Covenanters in Scotland. VVherin is paralleled our sweet harmony and correspondency in divers materiall points of doctrine and practice.	Nicanor, Lysimachus, 1603-1641.	1640 (1640)	STC 5752; Thomason E203_7; ESTC R17894	65,738	81

Catholike Church hath holden which was not institute by Councels but ever kept in the Church that is most rightly beleeved to be an Apostolicall tradition and he brings for instances those holy daies which your Covenant abjures which hath ever been retained in the Church from the Apostles daies And albeit we could not prove Episcopacy from Scripture as wee may very wel prove it and is proved by those who defend the same yet this unquestionable rule of Augustine will bee sufficient to prove it to be of Apostolicall institution for you say it is not of Divine institution and I say it is not instituted by Councels and yet all that are but little exercised in antiquitie shall find that Episcopacie was ever in the Church from the Apostles dayes till this present time that it is called in question And beside that rule of Augustine consider that it is the generall tradition of the Catholik Church that Episcopacie hath ever been in it as an Apostolicall institution And by this generall tradition of the Catholike Church we are as certain that it is of Apostolicall institution as we are certaine of the received number of the Canonicall books of Scripture for we receive and take that number upon the continued generall tradition of the Catholike Church of Christ from age to age We reject and detest particular traditions of any present particular Church such as are those of the Church of Rome if they cannot shew those traditions to have been generally received at all times in the Catholike Church But there is no Protestant that doth not receive generall traditions of the Catholike Church such as is this concerning the definite number of the bookes of the Canonical Scripture and if I would assume a schismaticall humor I might with as good warrants deny that there are so many bookes in the Canon as the Catholike Church sayes there be as you deny Episcopacie to be of Apostolicall institution Thus have I briefly showne you the passages betweene the Anticovenanter and Covenanter which I leave to your consideration and returne to my purpose From this sweet harmonie in the preceding points especially of your independent power in Church matters there followeth another parallel by way of consequence viz. that you may excommunicate your King if hee doe not obey the Acts and Constitutions of your Assemblies Thus you threatned King James and his Councell both with excommunication if he would not execute your Acts of your Assemblie and good reason seeing it is the supreme judicatory and the King is a sonne of your Church from whom he ought to take the meaning And if hee bee refractarie why may not the Assembly excommunicate him as Ambrose did Th●●dosius And as I have said already from your Travers of your government Huic disciplin● omnes Principes c. There is a necessity that all Princes Monarchs should submit their Scepter and obey this Discipline It s your chief Commander in the Camproyall Thomas Cartwright being asked whether the King himself might be excommunicated answered That excommunication should not bee exercised upon Kings I utterly mislike and so do we also yea albeit they be not Heretickes themselves yet if they doe not punish such as their Pastors commands them they may be excommunicate Potest ac debet Pastor regibus jubere ut puniant Haereticos Bellar. contra Barklaiun● c nisi fecerint etiam cogere per excommunicationem The Pastor may and ought to command Kings to punish Hereticks if they do it not even to compell them with excommunication But especially si sit Haereticorum vel Schismaticorum fautor A●or ins● moral part 2. l. 10. cap. 9. receptor vel defensor if hee be a favourer receiver or defender of Hereticks and Schismaticks If your Bishops be such men is not this your Kings fault your fault is that you use but too much lenity in not ascending from the Myter to the Crown for this may stand very well with your Tenent and Ours though Protestant Divines disclaim it for your Buchanan teacheth you that not only it is lawfull to excommunicate Princes but that they should both depose him Buchan de ●ure reg apud Scot. pag. 70. and destroy him for hee sayes Ministers may excommunicate Princes and he being by excommunication cast into Hell is not worthy to enjoy any life upon earth But truly Knox Buchanan are more rigid then we are herein for howbeit we grant that it 's lawfull to excommunicate Kings yet wee hold it not necessary that upon excommunication either deposition or killing should follow Indeed by our common Tenent it will follow that excommunication is an antecedent to deprivation or killing but we do not hold that deprivation or killing of Princes is a necessary consequent or effect of excommunication For say we quando talis effectus adjungitur Sua●ez de censur disp 15. sect 6. non est effect us ipsius excommunicationis sed specialis poena simul cum excommunicatione imposita When such an effect is joyned to excommunication it s not the effect of it but a speciall punishment imposed with it But it s wonderfull to see the wide difference between this our Tenent and yours and that which Protestants hold for they make the power of the supreme Magistrate Architectonicke and subject unto it all power civill Ecclesiasticall So that as in civill affaires they use the counsell and help of Politicians and Jurisconsults for establishing of Lawes according to reason so in Ecclesiasticall businesse they use the help and advice of learned Divines for establishing religion according to Gods Word which ought never to depart from their hands And it s most boldly said by them in the words of Bishop Davenant Reges non it a astringuntur Episcoporum vel Theologorum suorum opinionibus Daven deter quast 19. quin si adversentur legi divina cujus oportet reges studiosissimos peritissimos esse teneantur ex officio regio veram religionem illis omnibus licet reclamantibus tueri subditis suis proponere Kings are not so tyed to the opinions of their Bishops and Theologues but if they bee contrary to the Law of God of the which Kings ought to be great studiers and very well skilled they are bound by their Kingly Office to defend the true religion and set it before their Subjects albeit all those Divines should cry out against it But those men are Court Parasites as your usuall word is or as Beeanus calls those that defend the Kings Supremacie regios adulatores King-flatterers And I admire that Tertullian being under Heathen Emperours should be guilty of those flatteries while hee sayes in a Court-like complement Reges in solius Deipotestate sunt Tersul ad Scap. à quo sunt secunds post quem primi●ante omnes super omnes de●s homines Kings are only in the power of God from whom they are second after whom they are first before all and above all