Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
power_n	ceremony_n	church_n	rite_n	2,845	5	10.3412	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A51288	A brief discourse of the real presence of the body and blood of Christ in the celebration of the Holy Eucharist wherein the witty artifices of the Bishop of Meaux and of Monsieur Maimbourg are obviated, whereby they would draw in the Protestants to imbrace the doctrine of transubstantiation.	More, Henry, 1614-1687.; Wake, William, 1657-1737.	1686 (1686)	Wing M2643; ESTC R25165	52,861	96

Articles of Faith not proved to be the Opinion of the Protestant Churches 4. That our English Church is against it largely proved out of her Articles 5. No Article of Faith pre-existent in Scripture that cannot be fetched thence but by interpreting against the Proleptick Principles of rightly circumstantiated Sense and Common Notions ingrafted essentially in the Humane Understanding 6. Of Decision of points necessary to Salvation and to the justifying the Christian Worship and those that are less necessary and less clear and lastly those that have an Insuperable Difficulty on both sides 7. Monsieur Maimbourg's general Maxime that it is not agreed in by the Protestant Churches abundantly demonstrated with a Note of the Subtilty of the Romanists in declining the Dispute of the particular merits of their Cause and making it their business to perswade first that their Church is Infallible 8. A Meeting with Monsieur Maimbourg once more in his own Method and thereby demonstrating that Transubstantiation is grosly false and consequently the Church of Rome fallible with an hint of a true peaceable Method of reconciling Papists and Protestants 1. WHerefore it seems needful to take notice of this distinction of the Doctrinal Decisions of Synods that some pass into or rather are of the nature of the Articles of Faith the knowledge of them being necessary to keep us from Sin and Damnation And such were the Doctrinal Decisions of those ancient Primitive Councils who out of Scripture plainly declared the truth of the Divinity of Christ and Triunity of the God-head without which the Church would be involved in gross Idolatry And therefore the Decisions of the Controversies did naturally pass into professed Articles of the Christian Faith and such as our Salvation depended on But to imagine that every Doctrinal Decision of a Synod passes into a proper Article of Faith without which there is no Salvation and that a Synod has power to make that an Article of Faith before which men were safe and sinless as to that point is to put it into the power of a Synod to damn God knows how many Myriads of men which Christ dyed for and had it not been for these curious or rather mischievous Decisions might have been saved than which what can be more prodigious 2. Whence we see plainly it is most necessary to make this distinction in Doctrinal Decisions of Synods that some may be Articles of Faith others only Articles of Communion that if any oppose or disparage the said Articles whether they be of the Clergy or Laity they make themselves obnoxious to Excommunication and if a Clergy-man does not subscribe to them he makes himself uncapable of Ecclesiastical Imployment This is all that Monsieur Maimbourg can squeeze out of all his Citations out of the story of the Synod of Dort so far as I can perceive or his Translator in his Preface and Appendix out of those he produces touching the Church of England 3. And that which his Translator in his Preface would make such a great business of viz This wise Kings answer to M r Knewstubs at the Conference at Hampton Court when he was asked How far an Ordinance of the Church was to bind men without impeachment of their Christian Liberty to which he said he would not argue that point with him but answer therein as Kings are wont to speak in Parliament Le Roy s'avisera And therefore I charge you never speak more to that point how far you are bound to obey when the Church has once ordained it I say nothing more can be collected out of this answer but that he modestly intimated his Opinion that he meant not that all Synodical Decisions passed into Articles of Faith but may be only Articles of Communion in the sense I have already explained And what I have already said if seriously and considerately applyed to what he produces in his Appendix will easily discover that they prove nothing more touching the Church of England than what we have already allowed to be her Doctrine touching the Authority of Synods But that a Synod without any limitation or appeal to certain Principles in which both the Synod and Parties contesting are all agreed in may by her bare immediate Authority give what sense she pleases on places of Scripture alledged in the Controversy and that her Decision passes into an Artiticle of Faith which the Parties cast are bound to assent to under the pain of becoming Hereticks and Schismaticks Nothing can be more contrary than this to the Declarations of the Church of England So far is it from truth That all the Protestant Churches are agreed in his grand Maxime above mentioned 4. Let the Church of England speak for her self Artic. 19. As the Church of Jerusalem Alexandria and Antioch so also the Church of Rome has erred not only in their Living and Ceremonies but also in Matters of Faith And Article 21. General Councils may not be gathered together without the Commandment and Will of Princes And when they be gathered together forasmuch as they be an Assembly of men whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of God they may err and sometimes have erred even in things appertaining to God wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to Salvation have neither Strength nor Authority unless it may be declared that they be taken out of the Holy Scriptures Here our Church plainly declares that forasmuch as a Council or Synod consists of fallible Persons they can determine nothing necessary to Salvation but what they can make out that it is clearly to any unprejudiced Eye contained in the Scripture not fetched out by weak and precarious Consequences or phanciful Surmises much less by a distorted Interpretation and repugnant to Common Sense and Reason which are necessarily supposed in the understanding of any Scripture or Writing whatsoever as I have intimated above And even that Article 20. which the Translator produces in his Preface in the behalf of Monsieur Maimbourg's grand Maxime do but produce the whole Article and it is plainly against it For the words are these The Church has power to decree Rites and Ceremonies and Autority in Controversies of Faith and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's Word written neither may it so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another Wherefore although the Church be a Witness and Keeper of Holy Writ yet as it ought not to decree any thing against the same so beside the same ought it not to inforce any thing to be believed for Necessity of Salvation It is true the Church is here said to have Authority in Controversies of Faith As certainly if any should raise new Stirs in any National Church touching such points as the Antient Primitive Synods have concluded for in the behalf of the Divinity of Christ and Triunity of the God-head pretending they have clearer demonstrations than ever yet were proposed against