Now, two points are signified in it, one of which is its _material_, the other its _formal_, or _essential_, part. Its _material_ part is, that the geographical extension of the true Church be such that its mass be _morally_[98] universal, _absolutely_ great, and eminently visible, but _comparatively_ with all heretical and schismatical sects, larger and more numerous. Of this _material_ meaning attached to the epithet, Catholic, we find abundant witnesses in all[99] the orthodox writers who defended the cause of the Church against the Donatists, and again, against the Luciferians,[100] and Novatians; and likewise, in those who have explained the creeds,[101] and, as occasion offered, have touched on the force of the term Catholic.[102] But the same first cited witnesses tell us that universal diffusion is not sufficient, and that we require another element to infuse a soul into this universally extended body, and to bring it to unity. For two properties are continually recurring in Christian records, one of which may be called _negative_, the other _affirmative_. The force of the former is to _expel from the circle of the one true Catholic Church all sects of heretics and Schismatics_: of the latter, that this Church _consist in one single communion and society, whose members cohere together by hierarchical subordination_. But is it true that both these points are so plainly and constantly inculcated? To remove all doubt we will quote the authors who most distinctly assert the one and the other. As to the first, there are [103]Clement of Alexandria, [104]Tertullian, [105]Alexander of Alexandria, [106]Celestine, [107]Leander, the Emperor Justinian;[108] then again the Councils of Nice,[109] Sardica,[110] and the third of [111]Carthage; nay, the heretics[112] themselves; and all these agree in asserting that _there is one only ancient Catholic Church_, outside of which the divine patience endures and bears with heresies, which are as thorns. Thus in language ecclesiastical and Christian nothing can be considered as more certainly proved than that the epithet of Catholic is _distinctive_, and shows the communion which rejects from its bosom all heresies and all schisms. It was with great reason, therefore, that [113]Pacian wrote what [114]Cyril of Jerusalem, and [115]Augustine very frequently repeated, "Our people is divided from the heretical name by this appellation, that it is called Catholic."