Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	bishop_n	church_n	jurisdiction_n	5,357	5	9.3309	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19951	An oration made on the part of the Lordes spirituall in the chamber of the Third Estate (or communality) of France, vpon the oath (pretended of allegiance) exhibited in the late Generall Assembly of the three Estates of that kingdome: by the Lord Cardinall of Peron, arch-bishop of Sens, primate of Gaule and Germany, Great Almenour of France &c. Translated into English, according to the French copy, lately printed at Paris, by Antoine Estiene. Whereunto is adioyned a preface, by the translatour.; Harangue faicte de la part de la chambre ecclésiastique en celle du Tiers-estat sur l'article du serment. English.	Du Perron, Jacques Davy, 1556-1618.	1616 (1616)	STC 6384; ESTC S116663	77,855	154

who seeth not that it is a Sacriledge that hath at all times drawne the Ire Wrath and Vengeance of God aswell vpon Kinges and Princes as vpon particuler Persons who haue attempted the same Euery one knoweth that Saul (a) 1. Reg. 13 15. was deposed from the right of his Royalty and died a miserable death because he would take vpon him the office of a Sacrificer We know that Oza (b) ● Reg. 6. was punished with a sudaine death for putting his hand to the Arke that seemed to sway to the one side We know that King (c) 2. Paralip 26. Ozias was stroken with leprosy and excluded from the administration and gouernment of his Kingdome for taking the Censar into his hand And holy Writ saith (d) Malach 26. The lippes of the Priest shall keepe knowledge and the Law they shall require of his mouth because he is the Angell of the lord of Hostes. And the Prophet Esay (e) Esay 54. saith to the Church Euery tongue resisting thee in iudgment thou shalt iudge And againe (f) Idem 60. The King shall walk in thy light the people in the brightnes of thy rising And King Iosaphat distinguisheth the boundes of the one and the others Iur●diction in these wordes (g) 2. Paral●p 19. Amarias saith he the Priest and your Bishop shal be chiefe in these thinges that appertayne to God and Zabadias the sonne of Ismael who is the Prince in the house of Iuda shal be ouer those workes which perteyne to the Kinges office And our Sauiour (h) Matth. 19. saith himselfe VVhosoeuer shall not heare the Church let him be vnto thee as an Ethnick and a Publican And S. Paul speaking vnto Pastors (i) Act. 20. saith The Holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne bloud And speaking to the Laytie he saith (a) Heb. 3. Obey your Prelates for they watch hauing to render an accompt of your soules And againe (b) Heb. 5. Neither doth any man take the honour to himselfe but he that is called of God as Aaron And therefore we see that the first Christian Emperours were euerso respectiue and Religious as they would neuer make themselues Iudges neither of matters of faith nor of matters of the Churches discipline nor of the Bishops causes among themselues for feare of violating the rectitude that Gods Ministers ought to bring to Ecclesiasticall Iudgments by the feare of temporall Iurisdictions And that if they published any lawes in such cases it euer was after the Bishops had passed them and to further the temporall execution of the decisions formerly made by Ecclesiastique authority It is not lawfull forme saith (c) Ruff. l. 10. Eccles h●st c. 2. Constantine the Great who am placed ouer temporalities to censure and iudge the causes of Bishops And the Emperour Valentinian (d) Sozom. l. 6. c. 7. the first said It is not lawfull for me who am of the Laitie to arrogate to my selfe the curiosity of searching into these matters And the Emperour Theodosius the second (e) Epist ad Sinod● Ephes writing to the Councell of Ephesus sayth It is not lawfull for him who is not of the ranke of Bishops to intermeddle himself with the decision of the affaires of the Church And the most glorious and victorious of all our Kinges which was Charlemaine confirming the answere that Censtantine made saith (f) Carol. m●g● l. 6. cap. 301. The Emperour Constantine answered vpon the accusations of the Bishops To me who am placed ouer temporalities it is not lawfull to iudge the Bishops causes And confirming that which the Emperour Valentinian had said he vsed these words (a) Ibid. Your busines is aboue vs and therefore iudge among your selues of your owne causes For you are aboue vs. And when on the contrary the hereticall Emperours would take vpon them to meddle with Ecclesiasticall iudgmentes the holy Fathers resisted them contradicted them with all manner of constancy We are not permitted said Hosius to the Emperour (b) Epist ad Const apud Athā in ep ad solit vit agent Constance to hold the Empire on earth nor to You to lay hand on the Censar and to vsurpe the authority of Religion And S. Athanasius sayth (c) Athan. epist ad solit vitam agen When was it euer heard in the memory of man that the iudgments of the Church tooke their force from the Emperour And againe (d) Ibidem He treateth not of matters of the Roman Cōmon wealth where there may be credit giuen to you as to an Emperour but he speaketh of a Bishop And a little after (e) Ibidem Who is he who seeing an Emperour occupying the chiefest place in matters of the Church would not iudge that it were the abomination of the desolatiō fortould by Daniel And Gregory Nazianzen (f) Greg. Naz. orat adcities ti percuis Princip irascent saith Will you heare a free word which is That the law of Iesus Christ subiecteth you to my Iurisdiction to my tribunal For we are Emperours also namly in an Empire greater and perfecter then yours And S. Ambrose (g) Ambr. ep 32. ad Imper. Valent innior saith Who maketh any doubt if we regard the order of the Scripture or the antiquity of the Church but that the Bishops in causes of faith haue a custome to iudge of Christian Emperours And againe Your Father said It is not for me to iudge betweene Bishops And your Clemency saith It apperteineth to me to iudge And S. Martin the renowned ornament of the Gaules saith (h) Apud Seuer Sulpit l. 2. sacrae hist It is an impiety new and not heard of before that a secular Iudge should iudge of matters of the Church And against this it helpeth not to alleage that the Emperour Constantine did call himselfe (a) Euseb l. 4. de vit Constant cap. 24. a Bishop out of the Church For Constantine by that meant nothing lesse then to say that he had iurisdiction and superintendency ouer the externall forme and discipline of the Church Els wherfore should he haue desired with so great instance the authority of the Councell of Nice for the decision of the day of Easter But he meant only to say that what the Bishops did by their preachings among the Christians within the Church that did he out of the Church by his Edictes against the Infidells He ordayned sayth ●usebius by his Edictes and gaue order to the Gouernours of the Pagans to cause them to keep the Sunday also aswell as the Christians and to honour the dayes of the Martyrs and the feastes appointed in the Churches And therof it came that hauing one day feasted some Bishops he called himselfe Bishop in their presence saying vnto them God hath placed you Bishops within the Church and me a Bishop out of the Church But me thinkes I heare You already say that

time the Christian people hath by the conuersion of Emperours and Empires and by the reduction of Kinges and Kingdomes beene gayned and consecrated to Iesus Christ his temporal raigne it cannot any more be vsurped nor possessed by way of right by the enemies of Christs name And hence it is that whatsoeuer Conquest the Turke maketh of the Christians and whatsoeuer possession of long continuance it be he cannot by any tract of tyme gaine the least inch of prescription ouer Christian people who were formerly subiect to Christes temporall tribunall before any such Conquest by him made And to say the contrary were not only to imbrace and hod one of Luthers errours who hath taught that the warre that the Christians made against the Turkes was vniust and vnlawful not only to cōdemne the authority of so many Councells which haue decreed the expeditions of the holy Land for the ayding of the Christians of the East for the deliuering of them from the yoke and seruitude of the Infidells which had beene a thing vniust For the Accessary followeth the Principall and if the Christians of the East had beene lawfull subiectes to the Mahometan Princes they neither could haue reuolted from them nor rebelled against them But also euen to anathematize and accurse the memory of so many Christian Worthies and to affirme that so many Knightes Princes and Kinges among them our most glorious S. Lewis who dying in that warre as Champious maynteyners of Christes cause pretended to gayne the Crowne of Martyrdome dyed in a cause vniust and worthie of damnation But those who defend the negatiue part reply and say that in tyme of the first Arian Emperours Constantius and Valens before whome the Empire had already acknowledged Christ Iesus the Church vsed not such manner of proceeding nor acquited the Christians of their obedience On the contrary that the Bishop Hosius writing vnto the Emperour Constantius Apud Athana in epist desolit vit agen saith vnto him in these wordes As he who would spoyle you in your Empire should resist Gods ordenance So I feare that your vsurping the authority of the Church will make you culpable of a great cryme To this then the defendants of the affirmatiue part answere two thinges The one that the Custome of obliging Princes to make an expresse oath vnto God and to their people to liue and to die in the Christian and Catholique Religion had not yet place in the tymes of the first Heretique or Apostata Emperours was not brought in but afterwards namely then when they would stay and hinder Religion from falling into the same perills wherin it was vnder them The other that the Church vsed not this proceeding not for default of Right but for want of force and strength not for want of power in it to ordeyne it but through want of ability in the Christian people to execute it For it is not inough to bind the Church to declare Princes Infidells to haue lost their rightes to exhort their subiects to depart from their obedience that she may lawfully do it but it is further necessary that she be able to do it prudently and profitably And therefore S. D. Tho. 2.2 2. q. 10. art 10. Thomas after he had said Infidells by the desert of their Infidelity be worthy to loose their power ouer the faithfull addeth But this the Church sometimes doth and sometimes doth it not And if we should conclude that because the ancient Church hath not declared the first Arian Emperours excluded from the right they had from God of commaunding Catholiks that therefore she had not the authority to do it we then should conclude the very same that because it excommunicated them not it had no authority to do it For we find not that any either Pope or Councell did euer namely and personally excommunicate the Arian Emperours Not for that the Church cānot excōmunicate them as wel as other Ariās whome it excōmunicated from tyme to tyme but for that it deemed it a matter of imprudency and pernicious to Religion to exasperate them not hauing forces to represse and curbe them And as touching Hosius they āswere that he saith not that the Church cānot absolue in the spiritual Court the Catholiks from the obedience of Cōstantius if she should haue thought it profitable possible and necessary for them to attempt the deliuery of themselues from his tyranny Neither saith he that if the Emperour Constance being a Catholique Prince had not beene dead and that he had declared and proclaymed warre against his brother Constantius as he threatned he would do if he ceased not to persecute the Catholikes the Catholikes of the East would not haue ioyned taken part with him and would not haue belieued that the Church could haue dispensed with them about their oath of fidelity they had made to Constantius Theod. hist Eccles lib. 2. cap. 9. alibi But they say that Hosius speaketh of them who of their priuate authority and of their owne ambition raised themselues against Constantius to depriue him of the Empire and to become Tyrantes themselues Yet Lucifer Calaritanus maketh no difficulty Lucif Cola. rit lib. de non parcend in Deum delinq to call Constantius himselfe A Tyrant and the Antiochus of his age and protesteth that he is not bound towardes him to obserue the modesty of wordes which the Apostle commaundeth to be obserued to Princes and Magistrates for as much as the Apostle speaketh of Princes who haue not yet belieued in Christ and not of such Princes as haue reuolted from Christ I adde saith he that the Apostle speaketh of Princes and Magistrates which haue not yet belieued in the only Sonne of God whome we should by our humility and meeknes and long patience in aduersity and most great obedience in thinges reasonable prouoke to belieue in him But those who hold the negatiue part Socrat. hist Eccl. lib. 3. cap. 19. reply that the Christians might well haue deposed the Emperour Iulian the Apostata For when the Emperour Iouian who was elected after his death Theod. lib. 4. cap. 1. answered the soldiers of the Army Sozom. lib. 6. cap. 1. that he would not haue a commaund ouer men who were not Christians they replyed that they were Christians And to this againe they who maynteyne the affirmatiue part want not their answere For on the contrary they auerre that the Church could not do it prudently nor profitably For besides that the Christians were so deuided as the faction of the Arians alone ioyned with the Heathens without speaking of other Heretikes or of the cold Catholikes who as S. Gregory Nazianzene saith Greg. Naz. in Iul. orat serued the tyme and had not as he further addeth other law then the Emperours will held their foote vpon the Catholike Churches throate And besides when Iulian was Emperour he was so far from persecuting the Catholikes at the first as that in