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 ...…

II. Have they all things common? Dissenters would have excepted Wives and Husbands, (th• the Canons called Apostolical do not;) Why should the Essence of a Church lie in this, and not the Essence of a City or Kingdom? Tories in Ireland would have all common; Merchants and Tradesmen, Knights, Lords and Princes here would not. But it's no Schism here also to distinguish simpliciter & secundum quid, Propriety and the use of Propriety: There is no Community without Propriety: Men have first a Propriety in themselves, their members, their food, the acquests of their Labours, their Wives and Children, and Goods. And they consent to Community to preserve this Propriety, because every man loveth himself: And yet they must use their Propriety, (even of Life) for common good, because all are better than one: But if they had no Propriety they could not so use it for the Common-wealth.

And I never conformed to the Doctrine that denieth Propriety in Church Members and Particular Churches, and thought all simply common. I'll tell you what Particular Churches have to individuate them, not common to all.

And I never conformed to the Doctrine that denyeth Propriety in Church Members and Particular Churches, and thought all simply common. I'le tell you what Particular Churches have to individuate them, not common to all.

1. They consist of individual natural Persons, many of which as much differ from many other Persons, (those in England from those in Spain) as one man doth from another.