Selected quad for the lemma: earth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
earth_n	catholic_n	church_n	visible_a	2,907	5	9.9387	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A33098	A sermon preached at Edinburgh, in the East-Church of St. Giles, upon the 30th of January, 1689 being the anniversary of the martyrdome of King Charles the first / by James Canaries ...	Canaries, James.	1689 (1689)	Wing C423; ESTC R20246	68,911	94

nec Religio nec Patria nec Natura esse voluit Wherefore I shall only let all Papists see that by the very Tenor of their Religion they ought to be of such a damnable Opinion as leaves nothing no Prince inviolable when Popery comes in Competition I know it were needless to run to the Practice and Bulls of their Popes to the Doctrine of their greatest Doctors to the Books of their Cannon Law or even to the Decisions of their Councils for proving this For a Courtly sort of Papists set up in France and Brittain within some years ago have made it their great business to contradict these with a down-right impudence as manifestly as they use to do Sense and Reason in the point of Transubstantiation Had there been no more writ against them than what the Bishop of Lincoln has done one would think that either such Principles must be rejected by them or else Popery it self But some People know how to be Proof against all manner of evidence Peter Welch has indeed writ well against that Doctrine tho not against that Bishop He has clearly made it to appear that by universal Tradition nothing ought to be admitted by Christians that savours in the least of such a Treasonable tendencie As Mr. Allix has demonstrated that Transubstantiation was not the belief of the Romish Church before the Council of Trent And the great thing I admire in the Man next to his ingenuous following the Truth in it self is that he never understood he was pursuing a Protestant Tenet upon a Protestant Principle And I 'll engadge to refute all the Heresies of the Church of Rome as effectually as he has done That one of it by the same method he has taken in this affair And when he has for upwards of sixteen years been excommunicated by the Pope for such pranks we may look upon him as a Man of any other Religion rather than the Popish even when he stretches himself most to vindicat it from the most absurd and most gross of its Errors as you shall just now see by what I am to say It is then a short course I am to take with them being to Argument ad hominem And so in the first place I lay down this general Principle of theirs Namely That there is no Salvation out of the visible Communion of the Church of Rome I need not offer to prove that they own this For if they deny it Mr. Nicol may put up his Pen and I 'll ask no more for overturning St. Peters pretended Chair But none can be in visible communion with the Church of Rome but these who are in visible Communion with the Pope Because according to the Papists the Pope is the Vicar of Christ and so the Head of the Catholick Church and the Center of Catholick Unity Hence the common definition that their Divines give of the Catholick Church is That she is a Society of Men joyned together by the Profession of the same Faith and by the Communion of the same Sacraments under the Government of their lawful Pastours and especially of the Roman Pontife Christs only Vicar upon Earth And it were wholly unaccountable how the Pope could be Head of the Church and yet one might not be in visible Communion with him and nevertheless in visible Communion with the Church that is to say in visible Communion with the Body and not in visible Communion with the Head of that Body which is so indispensably its Head as that it could not be a Body unless it had that Head. I love not alwayes to reproach the Papists with Transubstantiation But bating that I know few contradictions they could be more coursly guilty of than they would be should they attempt to defend that one might be in visible Communion with the Church of Rome and yet not in visible Communion with her Head the Pope But further all Papists must either understand by that governing Power which they say is inherent in the Pope as he is Pope as immediat a Jurisdiction over the whole Catholick Church and all its Members as any particular Bishop has over his own Diocess Or else they must acknowledge him to be no more but only a certain Patriarch at best And I would fain have any Papist state me any Midle Power of Primacy and Head-ship betwixt such a Jurisdiction and such a Patriarchal Priority They must speak sense closely to the point and not meer words But why am I pleading only for an equal Jurisdiction in the Pope over the whole Church to that which privat Bishops have over their respective Flocks For that of Primacy must go much higher And if his Holiness be a Holiness at all he has committed to him the Superintendency of the Faith and Manners of the whole Church not only in as immediat a manner as any other Bishop has of that special portion of Christians which is alloted to his Care but also with a more Authoritative Force suitable unto such a transcendent elevation as is the Papacy Because not to speak yet of any infallibility residing in him when he Acts under the full extent of his Character he who can immediately command both those whom another commands and that other too who commands them can much more powerfully by himself immediately command them than can he who is also subject to be commanded by him As the Authority of a chief Stewart is much more prevalent than is that of those Inferiour ones who tho constituted also by the Master of all are yet accountable to that grand Fellow-servant And all this is manifest from the Popes assuming a Power to hear and Judge all Causes Originally and his reserving many Cases to himself which the Ordinary dares not meddle with Now it is without all doubt that any ptivate Bishop may in virtue of that Power he has over his Diocess not only inflict Censures upon the Persons of those who broach or maintain things prejudicial to the Faith but also condemn or approve Propositions as contrary to or consistent with it and annex Anathema's to those Definitions so that thereby they become Terms of Communion with him And this is the known Practice of the Bishops throughout all the Roman Church And whoever conforms not to their Definitions are actually excluded Communion with them and are no more Members of that Body namely their Diocesian Church of which they are the Head. From all which it is easie to infer that the Pope may and does deal so as to the whole Roman Church and that those who do not submit to his Definitions are consequently exterminated that visible Communion with him which is as essentially necessary to the being a Member of that Church as visible Communion with an inferiour Bishop is to the being a Member of his particular Church And this was very palpable in the fate of the Jansenists who were forc'd either to renounce and abjure those Propositions which the Pope had condemn'd or else to suffer