Selected quad for the lemma: end_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
end_n power_n prince_n temporal_a 1,487 5 9.3415 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A62533 The friar disciplind, or, Animadversions on Friar Peter Walsh his new remonstrant religion : the articles whereof are to be seen in the following page : taken out of his history and vindication of the loyal formulary ... / the author Robert Wilson. Talbot, Peter, 1620-1680. 1674 (1674) Wing T116; ESTC R24115 96,556 164

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

or reprehension in his History against Constantin You will needs haue it that Constantin by his own sole authority banish'd and restored Bishops and Priests amongst others you instance both S. Athanasius a The case of Athanasius and Arius and the heretik Arius You impart to vs pag. 347. this general obseruation You shall neuer find that any Councel especialy this of Nice forc'd or gaue sentence of forcing corporaly a Bishop from his see and Citty and haling him into banishment but only a bare spiritual sentence or declaration of his being now deposed from such authority as the Church gaue him formerly And on the other side you shall euer see So the the print must be corrected putting Neuer for Euer it was the Prince alone that by his own royal power onely sont Bishops to exile Nay and this too not seldom without any preuious sentence of deposition by other Bishops as also that not seldom also the sole exile of a Bishop from his see by the only sentence of the Secular Prince was by the Church held for a sufficient deposition of such a Bishop and that the Clergy proceeded to election and consecration of an other when the Prince desir'd it as holding the see absolutely vacant Mr. Wash General rules and obseruations ought to be well considered before they be prescrib'd because there are few which admit not of som exceptions But yours is so totaly false that you can not name as much as one partioular to giue the least colour of probability b Mr. Walsh his general rule failing in euery particular to your vniuersal proposition I challenge you to name any one Catholik Emperor or Soueraign that banished or deposed any Catholik Bishop or Priest by his own sole authority or before they had bin deposed by the Pope or other Bishops Your instance of S. Athanasius and Arius are ridiculous Was S. Athanasius banished by Constantin before the Tyrian Synod such as it was had deposed him and banisht him also from Alexandria Were not the Arian Bishops deposed and banisht also by sentence of the Nicen Councel as well as Arius himself Jts true the sentence was not put in execution because they submitted and subscribed to the Councells Creed But yet you see how Socrates and others tell you that though Arius submitted yet the Councel reserued vpon him that part of his sentence which banisht him from his home Alexandria Was this no coerciue corporal punishment inflicted by a spiritual power or by Bishops as Bishops How ignorantly or disingeniously then do you reprehend Baronius in this particular pag. 347. That great Annalist as you call him knew very well how to distinguish twixt a meer ecclesiastical or meerly spiritual sentence of deposition and a ciuil imperial sentence of exile Constantins sentence of exile against Arius was long after this of the Councel and was but a continuation or confirmation of it as Baronius tells you Neither did Constantin recall Arius from his banishment vntill he thought he was canonicaly pardon'd or cleer'd and restored by the Synod of Hierusalem But why name you not at least the Bishop whose exile by the sole temporal authority was iudged by the Church for a sufficient deposition of such a Bishop Now Mr. Walsh I will giue you a general rule or obseruation against which you can not find any exception and it is that the general practise of the Church is eo ipso that a Clergyman is declared an heretik and therfore deposed or degraded in that declaration or sentence is inuolued and vnderstood exile imprisonment or whatsoeuer corporal punishment the lawes prescribe This appears by the ancient Canons of Councells and true practise of the Church and yourself grant it by what you quote pag. 348. out of the Councel of Calcedon Act. 4. Si autem permanserit turbas faciens seditiones Ecclesiae per extraneam potestatem tanquam seditionem debere corripi If a Churchman will continue to make tumults and seditions in the Church he ought to be punisht as a seditious man by the secular power Reflect Mr. Walsh vpon yourself and consider whether according to this generall rule of the Church you ought not be punished by the secular power as a seditious man You continue still your seditious doctrin You would fain set the Church and state by the eares and incense temporal Soueraigns against their spiri●ual Fathers and Pastors God gaue the temporal sword to Princes that they may protect his Church and that is the principal end of their power and hitherto most of the Christian Soueraigns haue employd their power and sword that way therfore it s neither necessary nor decent that Churchmen should take the sword out of their hands or manage it against heretiks and Preachers of sedition That 's don to their hand But indeed rather then such an heretik and seditious fellow as you should pass without correction the lay Brothers of your Order if they had you in any of S. Francis his Conuents would imprison and whip you soundly and that I dare say without offending any one of those temporal Soueraigns you flatter and would fain persnade that if such a seditious Friar as you be corporaly punished by your spiritual Superiors they are in danger of loosing their Kingdoms And as we grant that the temporal sword is more properly in the hands of temporal Soueraigns than of the Clergy so we deny not but that it hath bin a constant custom in the Church to let Treason and murther be tryed and iudged by the Princes themselues to take away the occasion of ialousies Treason being against the Princes person and murther so horrid a crime that the Church thinks not fit any way to excuse or exempt Clerks who commit them from the cognizance and sentence of Secular Courts This is the reason why S. Athanasius when he was fasly accused both of treason and murther to Constantin was content to leaue the cognizance of those crimes to his Officer Dalmatius as were also the Catholik Egyptian Bishops whose words you quote pag. 348. But you thought it not for your purpose to quote Constantins own words after that Athanasius had presented himself before him The pious Emperor writ to the Bishops of the Prouince of Alexandria as Athanasius a Athan. Apol. 2. Theod. lib. 1. c. 17. himself and Theodoret testify these words Vestri autem est non mei iudicij de ea re cognoscere It belongs to your iudgment not to mine to take cognizance of that matter But the matter was treasonable for Athanasius was accused to haue sent a quantity of gold to abett the rebellion of Philemenus against the Emperor Mr. Walsh you are accused both of treason and murther Why do you not imitat S. Athanasius and cleer yourself of both Why do you not present yourself before the King b All applied to Mr. Walsh himself or his Lieutenant in Ireland and say Sir I am charged with a barbarous murther of