Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	church_n	doctrine_n	write_v	3,156	5	5.6690	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A48817	The difference between the Church and Court of Rome, considered in some reflections on a dialogue entituled, A conference between two Protestants and a Papist / by the author of the late seasonable discourse.	Lloyd, William, 1627-1717.	1674 (1674)	Wing L2677; ESTC R18276	29,803	41

under some of them are absolutely void and null by the Decree of this Council and we must come to new Purchases to be secur'd in the possession of whatsoever we possess or challenge for our own And how fair Chapmen we shall meet with in that Case it will not be difficult to determine My next Allegation is of the Council of Lyons where the Pope after mature deliberation had with his Cardinals and the Council having depos'd and deprived the Emperour and absolv'd all those from their Oaths of Allegiance who had sworn it to him and commanded that no person should own him from thenceforth as Emperour or any way obey or intend to obey him and excommunicated all such as should give him Counsel or any way favour him and ordered that the Electors should proceed to a new Choice the aforesaid particulars being read in the Council the Pope and Prelates sitting in Council with Candles burning in their hands thundred out their Excommunication against the deposed Emperour Frederick c. The words of the Council are plain enough but when illustrated by such a Comment as the Actual Deposing of an Emperour I cannot think it needful to subjoyn any farther Enforcement but proceed to the remaining Allegation from the Determination of the Council of Constance which in the seventeenth Session decrees defines and ordains that whosoever whether he be King Cardinal Patriarch Archbishop Bishop Duke Prince Earl Marquess or of any other Condition or Dignity either Ecclesiastical or Secular shall hinder disturb or molest Sigismund King of the Romans and Hungary and the King of Arragon from meeting c. shall incur the Sentence of Excommunication c. and shall be deprived of all Honour Dignity and Office c. Where by the way we may take notice that this Council who lay so severe Penalties on the Violators of their Safe Conduct were not asham'd perfidiously to violate it themselves on Iohn Huss who in confidence thereof put himself into their hands Besides this we alledge from this Council Pope Martin's Letter approved by the last Session of the same Council where his Holiness admonishes and requires all Professors of the Christian and Catholick Faith the Emperour Kings Dukes Princes Marquesses Earls Barons c. that they drive out of their Kingdoms Provinces Cities c. all Hereticks according to the tenour of the Lateran Council which begins Sicut ait c. And then decrees That all Hereticks Partakers or Defenders of them though they shine in the Dignity of Patriarchs Archbishops Bishops Kings Queens Dukes or any other Ecclesiastical or Mundane Title c. shall be pronounced Excommunicate in the presence of the People every Sunday and Holy-day c. and requires that they proceed to deprivation of Dignities c. Now our Author to all this given in proof by me from these oecumenical Councils as the Romanists stile them opposes the Authority of one Iohn Bishop who in a Book written in the time of Q. Elizab. proved that the Constitution of the Lateran Council upon which the whole authority of absolving Subjects from their Allegiance and deposing Princes is founded is no other then a Decree of Pope Innocent the III. and was never admitted in England yea that the said Council was no Council at all nor was any thing at all there decree'd by the Fathers So then we are come to a Resolution of Faith if one single man shall write a Book against a received Doctrine in the Church that founds it self on the Decree of a Universal Council and shall deny that Council to be valid or received in a particular Church that Doctrine however received or founded as is above mentioned ceases to be the Doctrine of the Church Which if it be true I believe 't will be almost impossible for any man to be a Heretick some one or other having wrote a Book in the defence of his Tenet how Heterodox soever it were and disparaged the Authority of that Council that condemned it But this Author who relies so much on the credit of Iohn Bishop should have adverted to those very cogent Arguments which Cardinal Perron produces in his long Speech to the third Estate and Dr. Vane has since brought in favour of that Council and his Confutation of all Suggestions alledged on the contrary part Also he should have taken notice of the Subsidiary proof lately added by F. Labbe and Cossart Editors of the Councils now at Paris who there from a Copy supposed to be written in that very Age give the Canons of that Council in Greek deficient chiefly in those parts where the Controversie between the Eastern and Western Church was determined to the disadvantage of the Greeks And lastly he should have considered that the Council of Trent whose Authority he will not dispute has alledged the Canons of this fourth Lateran Council and therefore it will not be very reasonable to oppose I. Bishop to all those Fathers But to pass this How comes it about that our Author tells us this Council was never admitted in England Did he consider what power the Pope then claimed in this Island when he had rendered and openly stiled the King his Vassal As also how much work the English had to do in that Assembly particularly in the case of Stephen Langton then Archbishop of Canterbury and that the Canons of that Council were allowed and confirmed in the National Synod held at Oxford A. 1222. Had he told us that this convention notwithstanding all its pompous pretences of so many Patriarchs Emperous Kings and Princes Bishops and Doctors that attended at it was nothing but a Scene dressed up in Masquerade he would perchance have said something to the purpose For instance That the man who play'd the Greek Emperour was Hen. brother to Baldwyn Earl of Flanders that had lately before seised Constinople and some few more of the Greeks Towns with the Arms of the Croisade and had no other Title to his Conquests besides the Pope's gift That the Latin Emperour who yet was but Elect was the Popes Pupil so made by the will of his Mother Constance and chosen Emperor by the Popes influence who had unmade two Emperors before of whom one i. e. Otho 4. was then living and the next Pope save one Innocent the IV. deposed this very Emperour Farther that Iohn de Brenne and Almerick held the Kingdomes of Ierusalem and Cyprus of the Popes gift That our King Iohn was become his Feudatary and as his Holiness was pleased to stile him his Vassal that Iames King of Arragon held by the same Copy who besides was a Minor and Pupil to the Pope who was so favourable as to give him a Crown whose Father had deserved so ill as to forfeit to his Holiness both Kingdom and Life Then farther that Philip King of France had his Kingdom twice put under Interdict by this very Pope and was threatned worse That Andrew of Hungary was