Selected quad for the lemma: city_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
city_n	church_n	pope_n	rome_n	4,716	4	6.7141	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A64561	Echemythia Roman oracles silenced, or, The prime testimonies of antiquity produced by Henry Turbervil in his manual of controversies examined and refuted / by ... Dr. William Thomas ...	Thomas, William, 1613-1689.	1691 (1691)	Wing T976; ESTC R1204	46,085	76

an Historical Evidence wherein there is no credible no rational account given to satisfie a judicious Inquisitor The best Author that Baronius upon the most industrious search could light on was Geoffry of Monmouth more reputably called Galsridus Asaphensis whom all Historians that mention brand for an Impostor Baronius himself in other subjects gives him no better character Even Galfridus the prime Oracle for this Fable could offer no better flourish of a Testimony than the obscure Authority of Anonymus one of no Name of no Esteem consequently of no Credit No Ancient Historian of the Third the Fourth or Fifth Century wherein the Sience is variously laid nor in some subsequent Ages recites the Martyrdom or Saintship of Ursula and her vast Virginal Retinue There is no Harmony among the Asserters of it touching the Age Whether in the Fifth Century where H. T. and others place it in the year 454 or in the Fourth Century where Baronius fixes it in the year 383 or in the Third Century where the Cistertian Breviary disposeth it in the year 237. There is no consent touching Ursula's Extraction her Habitation whether her Native Soil were England being as it is pretended courted to be the Bride of an English Prince or Scotland according to Wicelius's Poetry or Ireland according to the Vindication of Combachius Thus where there is no Truth there is no Stability no Concord Sigebertus in his uncorrupt Edition Petrus de Natalibus Bonifinius with other Historians and Chronologers reject the solemn Narrative touching Ursula as an Elaborate Fiction If the Argument of Baronius be Negatively firm to discard Cyriacus from being Bishop of Rome and an Associate of Ursula because no such Passage Extant in any Ancient Record The Proof is not invalid upon the same Topick for discountenancing expunging the whole Legend of Ursula Una litura sat est Let it be supposed That Ursula and her Eleven Thousand Virgins were not Theatrical but Real Saints and Martyrs yet British they were not Romish The Brittain Church did neither in the First Second Third Fourth or Fifth Century submit to the Roman nor conform to it not in its Liturgy not in its Rituals its Canons not in point of Ordination of Priests of the Prohibition of their Matrimony not in the Observation of Easter So little a Correspondence there was in matters Ecclesiastical betwixt them That Gregory the First was ignorant and inquisitive in the Testimony of Paulus Diaconus whether the Britains were Christians or Pagans The inserting by H. T. of Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Seventy Nine Martyrs of Africa is as wide an Impertinency of a List of Catholick Professors of the Roman Stamp St. Austin who is distinctly nominated in the Catholick Catalogue for this Age did subscribe to the Decrees of the Council of Carthage which did exclude the Romish Jurisdiction in Africa St. Chrysostome who is expresly cited was a Catholick Professor of the Greek not the Roman Church He was not ignorant of the First Constantinopolitane Oecumenical Council which ranked him being Patriarch of Constantinople with the Patriarch of Rome His Epistles First and Second to Pope Innocentius do not derogate from this Equality As the Romanists object They declare a voluntary Respect not a due submission In his Exigencies he made the See of Rome his Sanctuary for Refuge for Assistance not his Tribunal for Sentence His Address to Pope Innocentius was as to an Orthodox Prelate not as to a Supream Judge His Devoir Resort his Appeal was not to a Papal but a Synodical Determination To summ up the British African Greek Catholick Professors produced they are unjustly challenged appropriated by H. T. They were at a great distance from the Ancient City of Rome but at a much greater from the Modern Church of Rome as it is Establisht in the Trentine Council H. T. From the Year of Christ 500. Chief Pastors General Councils 514 Hormisda The Second Constantinopolitane Council Pope Vigilius presiding Fathers 165 An. Dom. 553 against Anthimius and Theodorus 524 Johannes 1. Authors Zonaras Nicephorus and Baronius 526 Foelix 4.   530 Bonifacius 2.   532 Johannes 2.   535 Agapetus   437 Sylverius   540 Vigilius   526 Pelagius 1.   560 Johannes 3.   573 Benedictus 1.   578 Pelagius 2.   590 Gregorius Magnus   W.T. As for the Eleven Popes nominated they were no Asserters of the Tenets wherein the Reformed differ from the present Church of Rome As for Vigilius's Precedency in the Second Constantinopolitane Council H. T. is more positive than Bellarmine would adventure to be who warily makes the point of Right a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Evasion lest the point of Fact should be disproved that he did or might preside in it As for the Papal Interest of Presidency in Councils which Turrecremata exacts for the Form the Essence and Canus for the Weight and Validity of such Assemblies There is no Constitution no Prescription for it in the purest Antiquity Cardinal Cusanus being Convinced with so evident a Truth ingenuously acknowledged That in the Primitive Oecumenical Councils there is but a single Instance and that in the Third Action of the Council of Chalcedon which Exception is not warranted by the Genuine Records of that Council were it allowed yet according to the Rational Maxim of the Civil Law An Exception ratifies the Rule in what is not excepted by this Consequence the alledged Presidency of Vigilius is infallibly discarded for Vindication whereof H. T. produceth Three Witnesses Zonaras Nicephorus Baronius These are defective in point of Antiquity and thereby less credible The Second Constantinopolitane Council was Convened the Year 553 as H. T. professes whereas the Testimonies produced are of a much later Date Zonaras wrote in the Twelfth Century Nicephorus in the Thirteenth Baronius in the last who was no less the Advocate of the Papacy than the Annalist of the Church too frequently Adulterating the Records of Antiquity and prostituting them to the Grandeur of the See of Rome Evagrius a more Ancient Authentick Historian before the end of the Sixth Century testifies the Consent of Vigilius by his Letters an Orthodox Correspondence of Judgment no Authoritative Confirmation of Power he was so far from presiding in that Council that he would not be present at it H. T. Produces three Witnesses not without some grains of a Sophister he cites the First Zonaras as the Tempter did the Psalmist imperfectly Zonaras joyns Eutychius of Constantinople Apollinarius of Alexandria as Princes or Principal Prelates in that Council most probably so Titled in respect of their Patriarchal Dignity without any mention of any distinct peculiar Personal presidency The Second Witness Nicephorus doth not aver Vigilius to be President of that Council but Menas and Eutychius successively the one in the Beginning the other in the Progress and Close of the Council Vigilius repaired to Constantinople but not to the Council though frequently intreated

apprehensive that it was a check to the Transcendent Honour his Ambition aspired to Both Councils of Constantinople and Chalcedon checking his desire of superlative Grandeur H.T. Pope Antherus Anno 238 being asked by the Bishop of Bettica and Toletum Whether it were lawful for a Bishop to be changed from one City to another Answered affirmatively As Peter Prince of the Apostles was changed from Antioch to Rome Decret 7. q. 1. W.T. There is little certainly touching the exact time and continuance of the Papacy of Antherus Whether One year according to Eusebius or Three according to Volateran or Twelve according to Damasus There is less certainty touching the sincerity of the Decret Epistle produced which many have excepted against as spurious upon several accounts among others for the barbarism of the stile the impertinence incoherence of the conclusion Historical Narratives touching Eusebius and Felix long after his time However were the Epistle genuine the Title Prince of the Apostles is no proof of the preheminence alledged as hath been already manifested St. Austin applyed the same Phrase to St. Paul who was acknowledged by St. Chrysostome to be equal in Dignity with St. Peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 HT St. Gregory sayes he knows no Bishop but is subject to the See of Rome Ep. 6. 2. W.T. St. Gregory though his memory be pretious being 600 years after Christ when the Church of Rome declined in piety though improved in power hath the less Authentick veneration This great Prelate being a Party is no competent Witness to assert and vindicate the Papal prerogative As the Witness produced so the Evidence it self is justly liable to exception That he knew none but subject to the See of Rome It must probably be limited to the bounds of his personal Acquaintance or his Patriarchical Jurisdiction That it cannot be more diffusively generally understood appears by his solemn waveing any Paternal or Magisterial power to prescribe to other Patriarks assuming only a fraternal Candour to advise That St. Gregory was not ignorant of a Grandee who was not subject to the See of Rome but challenged a higher station Ecclesiastical than himself is abundantly manifest by his zealous resentment of the Patriark of Constantinople his contemporary in espousing the transcendent Title of Universal Bishop not in excluding all others as the Romish Champions would sophistically evade it but in subjecting them It is his paraphrase of this Title To be Inferiour to no other to be Superior to all St. Gregory amply declared his abhorrence of this Title branding it to be novel prophane superstitious proud presumptuous an effect of Infidelity a tincture of Lucifer's Apostacy a badge of Antichrist H.T. Catholick Professors to the year 100 the Blessed Virgin St. John Baptist St. John Evangelist c. Martha Magdalen St. Paul St. Stephen Timothy Barnabas Terla Dennis Martial Ignatius Clemens W.T. They who are of sober discerning Intellectuals cannot but disgust and nauseate this unsavoury fallacy in obtruding shells without kernels Names without any Allegations These are as insignificant for proof in Divinity as Cyphers without any Figures are for account in Arithmetick unless you design to confute as Magicians to conjure by Names to produce Spells instead of Arguments for Enchantment not Conviction Your Confidence in those venerable Saints and your Interest also seems to be the same with that distracted person at Athens whose deluded Imaginations prompted to him That all the Ships and Commodities in the Haven were his own H.T. The Church was spread in this Age over all those Countreys to which St. Paul wrote his Epistles as also France Spain England c. See Baronius W.T. This is out of the Track of our Controversie That Church which was spread in this Age asserted no other Doctrines but what are owned by the Church of England H.T. Catholick Professors to the year 200 Eustachius Hermes Getulius Policarp Concordius Justin Martyr Eusebius Irenaeus Vincentius Potentianus Sophia Fides Spes Charitas St. Felicity with her Seven Children Lucius King of England c. W.T. The Church of England doth not recede from the Religion of these Saints If you have any Instances to charge us with why do you not produce their Testimonies If you have none why do you recite their Names It is an empty pageantry of Sophistry Ad populum phaleras H.T. The Apostles Canons define That if any Bishop or Priest the Oblation Mass being made shall not communicate he should be excommunicated as giving suspition of him who hath sacrificed That he hath not rightly offered Can. 9. approved in the Sixth General Synod W.T. Some of the Canons set out in a specious disguise the name of the Apostles have been boggled at by eminent Romanists among others by the Two Learned Cardinals the accurate Sticklers for the Papal Interest the one in an Historical Sphere the other in a Controversal Baronius and Bellarmine Though they are solemnly cited peremptorily obtruded upon others by the Modern Romanists yet they are not exactly observed by themselves Mich. Medina acknowledgeth that the present practice doth not retain a tenth part of them in the Church of Rome it self The alteration and corruptions of time are the smooth Apologies for the familiar recesses from these pretended Apostolical Rules They are branded for Apocryphal in the worst Nations as not received in the Catholick Church not in the Primitive Roman as composed by Hereticks in the judgment of Gelasius Bishop of Rome in the latter part of the Fifth Century who excelled most of his Successors in Piety and Literature as also by the famous Isidor Bishop of Hispalis towards the close of the Sixth Century Baronius vainly essayed to evade this latter Testimony being not extant as he alledged in the Edition in his Library since in the Decretal purged and refined by the Order of Pope Gregory XIII It is acknowledged to be transmitted from the Toletan Library to Rome which being a publick Record having so signal a Papal Approbation ought to be more Venerable Authentick for credit and estimate than that private Copy of a Cardinal who himself confest They may be so far deservedly termed Apocryphal as being destitute of Authority to have been entirely established by the Apostles Whereas Gelasius inserted them among Apocryphal Books that are not received Photius the Learned Patriark of Constantinople about the middle of the Ninth Century takes the rise of these Canons to be an extraction out of a tumultuous heap 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his phrase of Synodical Canons The first recital of any such Canons called Apostolical in Genuine Antiquity the Testimony of Zepherine being notoriously spurious was St. Epiphanius towards the end of the Fourth Century Many Reformed Divines have by weighty Arguments unmaskt these Canons which have passed abroad with a false Passport not to be truly Apostolical Among others the Centurists of Magdeburg have offered these proofs 1. They clash with the