Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	add_v	holy_a	scripture_n	1,651	5	5.5616	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A03944	An adioynder to the late Catholike new yeares gift, or explication of the oath of allegeance Wherein certaine principall difficulties, obiected by a very learned Roman-Catholike, against the sayd New-yeares gift, and explication of the oath, are very clearely explained. Published by E.I. the author of the New-yeares gift.	Preston, Thomas, 1563-1640.	1620 (1620)	STC 14050; ESTC S100127	50,683	158

Apostelike for Catholikes not to obey the Popes commandement whensoeuer they haue doubt that it is vniust Sotus de detegendo secreto memb 3 q 2. Vasques and others cited by Wriddringt in the discouetie of Schulcken his slanders §. 15. and in preiudice of a third person who is in possession of his goods good name so that they doe most humbly propound to his Holinesse the reasons of their doubt This assertion is in plaine expresse tearmes set downe by that most learned and religious Dominicus Soto approued by Vasques and many other Diuines grounded vpon manifest reason and sufficiently confirmed by the Canon Law it selfe in Cap. si quando extra de Rescriptis where Pope Alexander the third giueth this aduertisement to the Archbishop of Rauenna that he ought either to obey the said Popes commandement which he enioyned him by his Breues or else by his letters to yeeld a reasonable cause why he ought not to obey it Whereupon obserue saith the Glosse expounding that Canon that the Superiours commandement ought either to be obeyed or a cause to be yeelded why it is not obeyed Seeing therefore that Mr. Widdrington hath by diuerse publike and printed letters signified to his Holinesse in most humble manner the reasons why English Catholikes thinke themselues bound not to obey his Breues forbidding the Oath as conteyning in it many things flat contrarie to faith and saluation because they are grounded by the bad information of Card. Bellarmine and his adherents vpon two very false suppositions The one that the Popes power to excommunicate is denyed in the Oath which is manifestly false The other that his power to depose Princes is an vndoubted point of faith which is no lesse vntrue neither as yet hath he or other Catholikes receiued from his Holinesse or any other any answere or satisfaction of these their doubts truely they cannot be iustly taxed of any disobedience or irreuerence against his Holinesse for not obeying his Breues in the aforesaid case but contrariwise as in a case not much vnlike very well obserueth and proueth that holy and learned Bishop of Lincolne S. Robert d Apud Matth. Paris pag. 843. in vita Henrici tertij in answere to certain Breues of Pope Innocentius the fourth which he thought vniust it were disobedience irreuerence and rebellion against God and the See Apostolike to obey any such Breues which are grounded vpon false informations and suppositions and tend to so great dishonor and iniurie of his Maiesty and the whole kingdome 7 So that with farre greater reason might be taxed with disobedience and irreuerence against the See Apostolike not only the aforesaid holy Bishop S. Robert for the cause alleaged but also that most learned and religious Dominicus Soto and other famous Diuins for contradicting the Popes Breues concerning their dispensations in actuall but not consummate marriage and for saying that the Popes erred therein following the doctrine and opinion of the Canonists as hauing in it no shew or shadow at all of probabilitie * Sotus in 4. Dist 27. q 31. ar 4. then Mr. Widdrington and other English Catholikes may be iustly taxed of any disobedience or irreuerence against the See Apostolike for contradicting the Popes Breues which forbid the Oath as conteyning in it many things flat contrarie to faith and saluation and for saying that he erred therein following the bad information and opinion of Card. Bellarmine other Iesuites which hath in it a farre lesse shew and shadow of probabilitie then hath the doctrine of the Canonists concerning the Popes power to dispence in actuall but not consummate Marriage for that all the world now seeth plainly that neither the Popes power to excommunicate is denied in the Oath nor the doctrine for his power to depose is an vndoubted point of faith but a great controuersie among learned Catholikes and which therefore ought not to hinder the reunion of those who should desire to be reconciled to the Church e See Card. Peron aboue num 3. Considering therefore that the aforesaid foure generall positions are now made so plaine and manifest that no man of learning and conscience can with any colour of reason contradict them and that by them all the chiefe arguments which can be obiected either against any particular clause of the Oath or against the Oath in generall in regard of the Popes Breues forbidding the same only in generall tearmes are most clearly answered I beseech and adiure you my deare Catholike brethren by the loue you beare to God by the dutie you owe to your Prince and Countrey and by the care you ought to haue of your eternall saluation that you will not any longer for feare or flatterie seeke to impugne especially by indirect sinister and vncharitable courses so manifest a truth to the great iniurie and dishonour of your Soueraigne to the great scandall of your Religion and to the great danger of your temporal and spirituall ouerthrow For assure your selues that Truth is great and will in the end preuaile f 3. Esdr 4 and rather then it shall be ouercome God almightie the Authour of all Truth yea and Truth it selfe will raise vp Babes Infants to defend it to the confusion of the greatest Rabbins that shall impugne the same and into what danger you cast your soules either by coyning new articles of faith or concurring and consenting to the coyners thereof and by seeking in that respect to make a Schisme and Disunion among your Catholike brethren you may with feare and trembling perceiue by this which the beloued Disciple of Christ S. Iohn threatneth in the end of his Apocalyps If any man shall add to these things God shall add vpon him the plagues written in this booke For vndoubtedly whosoeuer shall add to the holy Scripture that which is not Scripture or to Catholike beliefe that which is not Catholike or shall belieue with Catholike faith that which is not Catholike or shall forge new articles of faith or consent to the forgers thereof especially in things belonging to temporall allegiance and shall separate himselfe in Ecclesiasticall communion from those who contradict such forgeries and cause a Schisme or Disunion in regard of opinions which ought not to hinder the reunion of those who should desire to be reconciled to the Church * For so Card. Peron expresly saith about num 3 can not in that respect be accounted a loyall subiect a true Catholike or right beleeuer but endangereth himselfe to be blotted out of the booke of life and to be punished in the next world with Traytors Schismatikes and Misbeleeuers and in the meane time he will haue much adoe to cleere himselfe in this world from the guilt penaltie and imputation of manifest Treason Schisme and Misbeliefe of all which crimes besides most manifest forgerie detraction and slandering those violent hot spurres that exclaim so bitterly against the Oath and their Catholike brethren who fauour the same will to

any man his goods yet it is not cleare in Scriptures although it be otherwise certaine that these goods are an other mans but this must be proued out of Scripture And although it be cleere in Scripture that we must not kill and consequently an vndoubted lawfull King yet it is not cleare in Scripture although it be otherwise certaine either that this particular killing of a priuare man is don by priuate and not by publike authoritie or that part cular man to bee a lawfull King or a King yea or to be a man but these must bee proued by principles which are no Scriptures Many other examples may be brought out of the new Testamēt as of Priests to remit sins of Popes to be the chiefe Pastors of the Church of Sacraments to be effectuall outward signes of inuisible grace for that out of Scripture only we cannot proue any man whatsoeuer to bee a true Priest any Pope whatsoeuer to bee a true Pope or any Sacrament whatsoeuer to bee a true Sacrament but to proue them to bee such one of the premisses must be taken out of the holy Scripture 2 But least you should obiect that to draw one to an inconuenience is not to solue the argument Secondly I answere directly that it is very vntrue in my iudgement and also repugnant to the common doctrine of Diuines that to make a Conclusion to bee faith and the contrarie hereticall both the premisses must be expresly and formally conteyned in the holy Scriptures but it is sufficient that one onely of them bee expressed in the holy Scripture and the other certaine by naturall reason Ad fidem aliquîd pertinet dupliciter c. To faith a thing belongeth two waies saith S. Thomas 2.2 q. 11. ar 2. one way directly and principally as the Articles of faith an other way indirectly and secondarily as those things from which doth follow the corruption of some article Which words of S. Thomas Bannes declareth more plainely distinctly in these words Illa secundùm D. Thomam indirectè sunt fidei c. Those things according to S. Thomas are indirectly of faith by the denying wherof it followeth necessarily by a good consequence that to be false which is affirmed firmed by faith As if one deny Christ to haue power to laugh doth erre in the Catholike faith consequently and indirectly Because it well followeth by a consequence knowne by the light of nature that Christ is not a perfect man 3 Et notandum est aliquam propositionem esse de fide duobus modis c. And it is to be noted saith Franciscus de Christo h Pag. 23 that a proposition is of faith two waies one way proximè and immediately of which sort is euery proposition which is formally and expresly conteyned in the holy Scripture as that Abraham had two sonnes the other way a proposition is of faith mediatly of which sort is euery proposition which by a good consequence is deduced from that which is immediately of faith as that Christ had not power to vnderstand that he had not a will c. Therefore that proposition which is deduced from that which is formally conteyned in the holy Scriptures is of faith and the proposition repugnant to that is hereticall Thus he And Franciscus Pegna in his Annotations vpon the Directorie of the Inquisitours part 2. Comment 27. citing for the same Cardinal Turrecremata and other Doctours putteth in the second place or degree of Catholike verities those which are by a necessarie consequence deduced from the holy Scriptures And a little after he affirmeth that those propositions are to be accounted hereticall which are repugnant to these Catholike assertions And therefore I meruaile that you should conceiue that proposition not to be heretical which is deduced from two premisses whereof the one is expresly repugnant to the holy Scriptures and the other deduced necessarily from the light of naturall reason or sensible experience although wee should take hereticall in that sense wherein Widdrington doth take it For according to your principles M. Widdrington could not maintaine that it is hereticall to affirme that Christ had not humane vnderstanding and will and that euery Tyrant may and ought lawfully meritoriously be slain by any whatsoeuer c. which neuerthelesse are expresly condemned by Generall Councels for hereticall Because to proue these propositions to be hereticall one of the premisses is only deduced from the light of naturall reason which is no Scripture 4 And if perchance you should answere that these propositions are therefore hereticall because Generall Councels haue condemned them for heretical now you fly from taking the word hereticall in that sense wherein Widdrington with most Catholike Diuines and all Protestants doe take the word hereticall who hould that the definition or declaration of the Church doth not make any Catholike veritie or any doctrine hereticall but suppose it declare it make it known to all Catholikes which neuerthelesse before any declaration or definition of the Church was indeed Catholike veritie or hereticall doctrine and also knowne so to be to diuerse learned men who euidently saw the necessarie consequence from both the premisses For also as wel writeth Molina a most learned Iesuite Concursus Molina 1. part q. 1. ar 2 disp 1. quo spiritus sanctus praesto adest Ecclesiae c. The assistance wherewith the holy Ghost is present with the Catholike Church is not to make any thing of faith which before was not of faith but onely that she do not erre in declaring those things which mediately or immediately belong to faith Wherefore as in the Church there is not power authority to make any thing of faith which before was not of faith but only to declare to the faithful which is certainly to be held of faith so also neither is there power and authoritie to make any sacred Scripture or to add to it any canonicall booke or any part but onely to iudge betwixt canonicall bookes and not canonicall Thus he wherein as you haue seene aboue i In the third Sectiō he agreeth with the common doctrine of Diuines 5 Now to that Logicall maxime That the Conclusion followeth the weaker part which is the chiefe ground of your obiection I answer that althogh it bee frequent in euerie mans mouth yet you are not ignorant that it is not by learned men vnderstood and expounded alike And first if you will vnderstand it without exception limitation or declaration how will you make good Aristotles saying in his first booke of the Priors cap. 10. When the Maior proposition is necessarie and the Minor de inesse the Conclusion is necessarie and not de inesse if the Conclusion doe alwaies follow the weaker part 6 Secondly you know that many learned Diuines whom Molina the Iesuite in the place aboue cited doth follow expound it thus That the Conclusion followeth the weaker part quoad certitudinem euidentiam in respect of certitude