Catholic communion defended against both extremes, and unnecessary division confuted in five parts ...…Catholick communion defended against both extreams, and unnecessary division confuted in five parts ...…

If it be said, that Mr. Thorndike and others tell us that it is not necessary that we do the same things which the Supreme Catholic Power commanded, but that we subject our selves to the same Power which may change their own Laws. I answer, 1. The asserting of that Universal Sovereignty is the greatest Crime and Heresy of all. 2. By this it seems that our Religion is very mutable, and very uncertain, and a man hath need to take heed of obeying any old ⟨p. 41⟩Canons, till he know the mind of the present Church; (and who those be▪ and how to know it.) 3. But what if the same man read Dr. Heylin (of Sab.) telling him that this custom against Adoration-kneeling continued a thousand years, and was never revoked by any true General Council, but changed by little and little by mens practice: And what if he question who those Changers were, and whether their practice was Rebellion at first, and whether they had power to repeal the Canons of the greatest Councils without a Council. Sure they that are for such Councils universal sovereignty, when they have cast men into these snares, should scarce tell them that they are damnable Schismatics, for joining with such Churches as obey these Councils, rather than with those that ruin men for not disobeying them.

If it be said, that Mr. Thorndike and others tell us that it is not necessary that we do the same things which the Supream Catholick Power commanded, but that we subject our selves to the same Power which may change their own Laws. I answer, 1. The asserting of that Universal Soveraignty is the greatest Crime and Heresie of all. 2. By this it seems that our Religion is very mutable, and very uncertain, and a man hath need to take heed of obeying any old ⟨p. 41⟩Canons, till he know the mind of the present Church; (and who those be▪ and how to know it.) 3. But what if the same man read Dr. Heylin (of Sab.) telling him that this custome against Adoration-kneeling continued a thousand years, and was never revok't by any true General Council, but changed by little and little by mens practice: And what if he question who those Changers were, and whether their practice was Rebellion at first, and whether they had power to repeal the Canons of the greatest Councils without a Council. Sure they that are for such Councils universal soveraignty, when they have cast men into these snares, should scarce tell them that they are damnable Schismaticks, for joyning with such Churches as obey these Councils, rather than with those that ruine men for not disobeying them.