Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	age_n	time_n	write_v	2,053	5	5.4074	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A14777	A moderate defence of the Oath of Allegiance vvherein the author proueth the said Oath to be most lawful, notwithstanding the Popes breues prohibiting the same; and solueth the chiefest obiections that are vsually made against it; perswading the Catholickes not to resist souerainge authoritie in refusing it. Together with the oration of Sixtus 5. in the Consistory at Rome, vpon the murther of Henrie 3. the French King by a friar. Whereunto also is annexed strange reports or newes from Rome. By William Warmington Catholicke priest, and oblate of the holy congregation of S. Ambrose.	Warmington, William, b. 1555 or 6.; Sixtus V, Pope, 1520-1590. De Henrici Tertii morte sermo. English.	1612 (1612)	STC 25076; ESTC S119569	134,530	184

of their kingdome c. but this is not to be granted And in the same question Si aliqui Reges c. If some Kings with the people haue deliuered ouer themselues to the Popes of Rome as it is said of Englishmen it is nothing to vs. Yet do I not thinke that Englishmen by any meanes would permit the Pope to depose their King and set vp another for they neuer yet suffered any of the Bishops of Rome to do it But lest any man here take hold and say that King Iohn was brought to yeeld his crowne to the Popes Legate and for redeeming it granted an annuall tribute to the Sea Apostolike let him reade S. Thomas More for his better satisfaction herein who plainely denieth it thus More supplic of soules pag. 296. If he the Author of the Supplication of beggers say as indeed some writers say Platina and others that King Iohn made Englād Ireland tributarie to the Pope the Sea Apostolike by the grant of a thousand markes we dare surely say againe that it is vntrue and that all Rome neither can shew such a grant nor neuer could and if they could it were nothing worth for neuer could any King of England giue away to the Pope or make the land tributarie though he would To conclude this point of deposing Princes I will note vnto you onely one place more to this purpose out of the Decrees of the Church of France collected by Bochellus a late writer Bochel ex Cod. libert Eccles Gallie li. 2. tit 16. c. 1. Regnum Franciae eiusque pertinentias dare in praedam Papa non potest c. The Pope cannot giue away for a prey the kingdome of France and the appertenances thereof or dispose therof in any other sort whatsoeuer And notwithstanding whatsoeuer admonitions excommunications or interdicts the subiects are bound to performe due obedience to their King in temporals neither can they be dispenced or absolued from the same by the Pope The reason hereof is that such obedience is due by the law of God and nature against which no man may dispence according to S. Thomas In his quae sunt de lege naturae c. In such things as are of the law of nature and in diuine precepts Tho 2.2 q. 88 ar 10. no man can disp ence O that French-men if that their doctrine be currant in France would vouchsafe to teach their doctrine here in great Brittaine In them it seemeth tollerable and would be doubtlesse vnpunishable But certaine English priests no lesse Catholicke then well affected subiects for teaching the like in defence of their King and countrey must be subiect to the losse of faculties the onely meanes that many haue of their reliefe calumniation obloquie of tongues reputed as schismatikes little better then heretikes and esteemed of some vnworthy of foode to maintaine life diuerse hauing bene forbidden to visite such in prison or relieue them This is too true would God it were not so O tempora O mores Wel may we cry out with S. Paul Miserabiliores sumus omnibus hominibus 1. Cor 15. Psal 13. we are more miserable then all men But though the throate of some be an opē sepulcher and with their tongues they deale subtilly and the poison of aspes be vnder their lips yet we neede not one eye looke to his mercifull and most wonderfull care of Daniel feeding him imprisoned in the middest of Lions and with the other behold his daily relieuing the beasts of the field and fowles of the aire all made for man as man for God Then confortamini in Domino nolite tim●re multis passeribus pluris estis vos Comfort your selues in our Lord and feare ye not you are much more worth then many sparrowes you I meane that intend not to derogate from the spiritual authoritie of Christs Vicar but to render no lesse vnto him his due then to Caesar his But to returne whence we haue digressed if it be true that a Councell may not iudge punish or depose the Pope though he endeuor to destroy the Church of God Li. 2 de Rom. Pont. c. 29. as Cardinall Bellarmine writeth which belongeth to none but to a superiour a Councell not being aboue the Pope as many hold why are we not to beleeue the same of Kings though they persecute the Church Li. 3. c 19. Tert. ad Scapulam praesid Carthag when as witnesse the same Author they acknowledge no superior no iudge on earth in temporals Well let such Doctors as teach deposition in schooles withdraw themselues from speculation to practise from scholasticall distinctions and disputations to Magistrates examinations such as haue potestatem crucifigendi vel dimittendi haply they may change their subtile shifts into a simple proposition that it is small wisedome to band with the supreme Magistrate in a matter so important as is Caesars right neuer any thing being yet determined by the Church of God to warrant them so to do And it may be in my iudgement admired that catholicke Princes permit such dangerous positions not onely to be disputed but also taught for truth within their dominions and to passe without controlement knowing that a sparkle of fire lying smothering in combustible matter if it be neglected and left vnquenched may cause in short space an vnquenchable flame so such a speculatiue doctrine litle regarded is not vnlike in time to breed a wofull practicall ruine of kingdomes and nations And this of the Popes temporall power Is it then by spirituall authoritie alone or by both that Princes maybe deposed for it seemeth by later Diuines that Popes may depose them directly or indirectly The mirror of this age for diuine literature Cardinall Bellarmine in his late booke against Barclai cap. 5. and elsewhere writeth not so plainely as were to be wished nor so as he satisfieth his reader whether it be spirituall onely or temporall onely but seemeth to incline more to the spirituall power yet mixt with temporall Iam dixi inquit potestatem de qua loquimur c. I haue alreadie said In Barcl c. 5. that the power wherof we speake is to be found expresly in the Scriptures but generally not in particular to wit in the 16. of Saint Matthew Tibi dabo claues regni coelorum And Iohn 21. Pasce oues meas and by these same diuine testimonies may be gathered that accession and coniunction of power to dispose of temporals in ordine ad spiritualia as more then once is declared And may it not I pray you be as well said with due respect to his dignitie that by those diuine testimonies no such glosse of accession or coniunction of power may be gathered because those places were euer vnderstood by all ancient Fathers of the sole spiritual authority of the Pope without accession or coniunction of temporall power yea in ordine ad spiritualia By the keyes of the kingdome of heauen promised to Peter yet not for Peter

in this point towards his liege Lord and secular Prince If it must be granted that Christians by the law of God are strictly bound to obey all iust determinatiue sentences and decrees that proceed from the Sea Apostolicke being the highest spirituall tribunall in Gods Church why must it not likewise be granted that subiects as wel Clercks as laicks are by the same law no lesse boūd in foro cōscientiae to be obedient to the King and his iust lawes the chiefest tribunall in the common wealth This I thinke no Christian wil deny as being most cleare and euident in holy Scriptures taught and practised by all ancient Fathers and holy Saints I confesse you will say that humane iust lawes haue their efficacie of binding all subiects to obey in the Court of conscience Tho. 1.2 q. 96. ar 4. from the eternall law of God of which they are deriued according to that of Salomon Per me Reges regnant Prou. 8 legum conditores iusta decernunt By me saith God Kings do reigne and Law-makers decree iust things But whether this law of the Oath which you aime at be such some make doubt for that Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus and father Parsons in his Catholicke letter affirme many things to be contained therein against the spirituall primacie of the chiefe Pastor and his authoritie of binding and loosing and concerning the limitation to vse father Parsons owne words of his Holinesse authoritie to wit what he cannot do towards his Maiestie or his successors in anie case whatsoeuer Moreouer besides promise of ciuill and temporall obedience in the Oath other things are interlaced and mixt therewith which do detract from the spirituall authoritie of the highest Pastor at least wise indierectly saith he Therfore this law is iniust as being preiudiciall to the law of God and holy Church Some I know will be carping at me for affirming father Parsons to be the author of that Catholicke letter who being ashamed as may be thought of the slender and insufficient clearing the important matter of the Oath by foure seuerall and distinct waies according to his promise denie that euer he wrote the same But will they nill they it is so well knowne to be his and was to the Inquisition in Rome if I haue not bene misinformed and by a verie credible person that heard it from a gentleman present in the citie in his life time and at his death that he could not denie it and vpon the acknowledgement thereof whether with sorrow and griefe for some points vnaduisedlie or erroneously written and brought in question in his old age or somewhat else in some other booke of his against Doctor Morton touching the lawfulnesse of the Oath of Supremacie in some case I cannot say soone after fell sicke and died within eight daies But to returne to our matter Then lawes are said to be iust Tho. 1.2 q. 96.24 first when they are made for the common good secondly when they exceede not his power that maketh them and thirdly when they haue their due forme to wit when the burdens or penalties are imposed on the subiects with a certain equalitie of proportion in order to the common good or vtilitie of the weale publicke as S. Thomas noteth Such is this law of the Oath of allegiance made by full authoritie in Parliament for the conseruation of his Maiestie and whole commonwealth in tranquillitie and peace Tho. 22. q. 67.2.4 Innoc. 3. cap. Per venerabilem Extra Qui filij sint legitimi which is both priuate and common good When I say full authoritie I meane in temporals for so the Prince hath and onely in temporals in the common wealth no lesse thē the Pope in spirituals in the patrimonie of the Church Which law was generaly enacted for all English subiects though principally intended as a distinctiue signe to detect not Catholickes from Protestants nor such as denie the Kings spirituall supremacie in causes Ecclesiasticall from the Popes spirituall primacy as Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus affirmeth but turbulent spirited Catholickes and these to represse from milde and dutifully affected subiects of the same religion such as disliking haply in words that most horrible conspiracy of Gunpowder King-slaying would in heart haue applauded the euent from those who in affliction for their conscience with patient perseuerance to the end how long soeuer God permit it to continue for our sinnes will in word and deede loue their enemies beare wrongs without murmuring and sincerely pray for the conuersion of their persecutors if they haue any following the example and doctrine of our blessed Sauiour and his holy Apostles That our dread Soueraigne in setting forth this Oath by Act of Parliament hath not exceeded the limites of his power is manifest in that it was framed onely for this end that his Maiesties subiects should thereby make cleare profession of their resolution Praefat monit Apolog. Reg. to vse his Maiesties owne words faithfully to persist in his Maiesties obediēce according to their naturall allegiance And so farre was his intent by the same Oath to detract from the Primacy or spirituall authority of the Pope of binding or loosing by Ecclesiasticall censures or sacraments as the Cardinall and father Parsons affirme that his Maiestie as it were by a most prudent preuention Praefat. monit to take away all scruples that might arise in Catholicke subiects consciences tooke speciall care that that clause inserted by the lower House into the Oath which detracted from the Popes spirituall authority of excommunicating his Maiestie should be forthwith put out And withall declared that the vertue or force of this Oath was no other then that the Popes excommunication might not minister a iust and lawfull cause vnto his subiects to attempt any thing by open or priuie conspiracies against his Maiestie or state What more I pray you could he haue done for clearing this controuersie and satisfying his subiects If then it be so that nothing is contained in this Oath but what appertaineth to naturall allegiance nor more by his Maiestie required then profession of ciuill and temporall obedience which nature prescribeth to all borne subiects as his Maiestie the interpreter of his owne law hath most sufficiently in his Premonition and Apologie made knowne to all by his pen nor that he intended by interlacing or mingling any thing to detract from the spirituall authoritie of the Pope no not indirectly nor against the law of God as is likewise manifest none can iustly say he hath exceeded his limits or that the law is vniust And wheras the Catholick letter hath That there are some things but specifying none of those some concerning the limitation of his Holinesse authoritie if he meane spirituall it is vntrue to wit what he cannot do towards his Maiestie or his successours in any case whatsoeuer That is a glosse of his owne inuention beside the text a notorious vntruth for there are no such words to be found in the

were contempt as some either caried away with passion or through ignorance and small consideration beare you in hand then a hainous sinne would it be to transgresse the precept of the supreme Prelate Christs Vicar for contempt of any superiour though in re leuissima is always a mortall sinne But it is not so in this our case it is not all one we know nolle obedire and non obedire conscience setled on good grounds is the onely motiue to such as take it not to obey beleeuing it to be most lawfull That his Holinesse hath affirmed in genere as his opinion many things to be contained in the Oath repugnant to faith and health of soules is manifest in the Breues yet because he hath not Specified any one particular clause which was much desired nor Father Parsons in his Catholicke letter nor Cardinall Bellarmine in Tortus or other booke of his haue explicated or cleared the Popes meaning what they be nor any other writers that haue handled this matter and written in defence of them as doubtlesse they would haue done if they could tell which were against faith his Holinesse in my iudgement cannot iustly condemne such of a contempt as with reason and vpon good grounds hold the contrary who are not bound to alter their opinions vpon any such assertion of any priuate Doctor vnlesse their vnderstanding be first conuinced either by good reason or authorities of Scriptures Fathers or some generall Councell If any man be scandalized and please to carpe hereat as at strange doctrine let him reade the famous and learned S. Tho. More in his Epistle to D. Wilson Tho. More in his epist to D. Wils p. 1445. where he shall see the very same taught in this manner Many things euerie man learned woteth well there are in which euery man is at libertie without perill of damnation to thinke which way he list till the one part be determined for necessarie to be belieued by a generall Councell And in another place of his workes In epist ad filiam pa. 1439. thus he writeth If it so hap that in any particular part of Christendome there be a law made that be such as for some part thereof some men thinke that the law of God cannot beare it and some other thinke yes the thing being in such manner in question that through diuers parts of Christendome some that are good men and cunning both of our owne dayes and before our dayes thinke some one way and some other of like learning and goodnesse thinke the contrary In this case he that thinketh against the law neither may sweare that law lawfully was made standing his own conscience to the contrary nor is bound vpon Gods displcasure to change his own conscience therein for any particular law made any where other then by the generall Councell and by a generall faith growne by the working of God vniuersally through all Christian nations nor other authoritie then one of these twaine except speciall reuelation and expresse commandement of God sith the contrary opinions of good men and well learned as I put you the case made the vnderstanding of the Scriptures doubtfull I can see none that lawfully may command and compell any man to change his own opinion translate his owne conscience from the one side to the other This he And in another Epistle to his daughter Margaret pag. 1440 If it be not so fully plaine and euident as appearing by the common faith of Christendome yet if he see but himselfe with farre the fewer part thinke the one way against far the more part of as learned and as good as those are that affirme the thing that he thinketh thinking and affirming the contrarie and that of such folke as he hath no reasonable cause wherefore he should not in that matter suppose that those which say they thinke against his mind affirme the thing that they say for none other cause but for that they so think indeed this is of very truth a very good occasion to moue him and yet not to compell him to conforme his mind and conscience vnto theirs By this doctrine of Sir Thomas More it is cleare that the Popes opinion of the Oath though it may seeme to some to be a verie good occasion to moue men not to take it yet it is not sufficient to compell them to conforme their mind and conscience vnto his when as they that haue taken it and also many others both vertuous and learned are of contrarie opinion nothing to be contained in that Oath against or repugnant to faith nor neuer hath this point in controuersie bene yet defined Will you say then that the Pope hath erred in setting forth this his opinion and prohibition No I dare not presume to affirme that therein he hath erred for the reuerence and honor I beare to the Sea Apostolick nor take vpon me to be iudge ouer him Qui parem super terram non habet to vse Saint Bernards words L. 2. de consid c. 2. Rom. 14. lest I be thought to neglect the doctrine of the holy Ghost taught by S. Paul Tu quis es qui iudicas alienum seruum and Tu autem quid iudicas fratrem tuum aut tu quare speruis fratrem tuum Who art thou that iudgest anothers seruant and why doest thou iudge thy brother If I be taught and forbiddē tp iudge or despise my brother my equall then much more ought I not to iudge or contemne him qui à nemine iudicatur that is not to be iudged by any man absit hoc à me let such temeritie be farre from me the least in Gods house But when in matters of fact he proceedeth by information of others as in this our case of the Oath he hath I trust it is no temeritie or any sin at all to say that he may erre yea and sometimes by false suggestions or wrong informations he hath erred in Rome it selfe And which is more Councels also in facts or particular iudgements may erre as Cardinall Bellarmine noteth In Scriptura saith he nullus potest esse error Li. 2. Concil cap. 12. siue agatur de fide siue de moribus c. At Concilia in iudicijs particularibus errare possent Nec non in praeceptis morum quae non toti Ecclesiae sed vni tantum aut alteri populo proponuntur In the Scripture can be no error whether it treate of faith or of manners c. but Councels in particular iudgements may erre And also in precepts of manners which are not proposed to the whole Church but to one or other people onely It seemeth also not to be any hereticall doctrine to hold that not onely in matters of fact but likewise in faith the Pope alone without a Councell may erre for that he is no God but a man subiect to errors to whom as he is Peters successor Christ neuer so promised the assistance of the holy Ghost that he in

the Sorbons in Paris holding peremptorily as I haue said a Councell to be aboue the Pope will any man of iudgement say that the position is her esie and they hereticks Costerus and other learned men do cleare them from such a note and they are still ready to defend themselues against any that shall accuse them thereof Likewise if any abhorre drunkennesse detraction sowing discord betweene brethren and friends as he abhorreth heresie can it be said that drunkennesse detraction or sowing discord though they be great sins and abound in too too many is heresie it were too fond and childish This As signifieth here a similitude not an equalitie and all know that nullum simile est idem which may serue for one answer And for a second let it be granted that such as sweare thinke it indeed to be heretical doctrine albeit the Church hath not defined it so that Princes which be excommunicated or depriued by the Pope may be deposed or murthered by their subiects c. what absurditie is like to follow I haue already as I trust sufficiently proued that neither Bishops nor the Pope by their spirituall censure haue authoritie to dispossesse any priuate man or Prince be he neuer so peruerse an hereticke of his lands goods or temporall dominions for that it is against the essence or nature of excommunication to worke such an effect It is likewise proued to be against the law of God for children seruants and subiects to disobey their parents maisters and Princes commanding iustly notwithstanding any excommunication denounced against them which is the Churches period beyond which she may not go it being onely a depriuing of the common goods of the Church appertaining to Christians Now what doctrine soeuer is repugnant to Scripture euery word thereof being de fide may well be accounted heresie and as such abhorred and abiured for haeresis est circa ea quae sunt fidei Tho. 2.2 q. 11. ar 2 heresie is about those things which belong vnto or are of faith Such is the dutie of subiects to their lawfull Prince and of all inferiors to their superiors Then is it heresie directly to say that it is lawfull for subiects or any other whatsoeuer who is not his Iudge and superior in that kind to murther him it being expresly against a diuine precept Non occides and this saying of our Sauiour Matth. 26. Omnes qui acceperint gladium gladio peribunt All that take the sword shall perish with the sword By which are vnderstood all such as assume to themselues authoritie to vse the materiall for reuenge Iansen in ●unc locum before it be granted them by the Prince who onely hath his authoritie by the diuine ordinance which ought not to be resisted by subiects or others For as Cunerus writeth Cun. de offic Princip l. 4. c. 12. Nulla pacta vel contractu● No couenants or contracts may preiudicate the diuine ordinance whereby a King hath his power that the people at any time may take armes against their King And in my iudgement it may be admited that any Catholick wil stick at this point here being no mention of the Popes deposing that which many stand vpon but of subiects or any other whatsoeuer vnlesse they will ranke him among these whatsoeuer which ought not so to be vnderstood But if they will vnder this generall word vnderstand also the Pope yet may it be said it is heresie to wit May be murthered which cannot be vnderstood but of killing vniustly and without authoritie If you say that the other part May be deposed was neuer declared nor adiudged heresie and therefore the Oath cannot be taken because bonum is ex integra causa and malum ex singulis defectibus then one part not being hereticall how can this clause be lawfully sworne that Princes which be excommunicated may be deposed to be damnable and hereticall doctrine This indeed is such an obiection as in the iudgement of diuers cannot be answered and whereupon many pretend to haue great reason to stand but let all passion be layd aside lending me an indifferent care with Gods assistance such a solution may be framed as shall satisfie I trust and solue the difficultie In our Oath no man sweareth nor is vrged to sweare nor by the law ought to sweare further then the expresse words of the Oath which are after this sort as is also noted before pag. 119. And I do further sweare that I do from my heart abhorre detest and abiure as impious and hereticall What Note wel this damnable doctrine and position What position Forsooth that Princes which be excommunicated or depriued by the Pope may be deposed or murthered by their subiects c. This position is sworne not per partes by peecemeale but coniunctiuely and wholly as it lieth and so it cannot be denied but it is impious and hereticall doctrine heresie here being affirmed not on the parts of the position separated but on the 〈◊〉 hole together For in a sentence affirmatiue disiunctiue proposition or booke if any part be defectuous false or hereticall albeit some part thereof be true and sound doctrine it may wel be said that the whole sentence proposition or booke is defectuous false Gress l. 1. consider Pag. 47. or hereticall as Gretserus writeth Then that May be deposed closed in one proposition with the other part or murthered which is hereticall the whole position as it lieth must needes ber said and may be sworne to be hereticall For example The Inquisition vseth to condemne as a scandalous or hereticall booke if there be but one onely Chapter or sentence of scandalous or hereticall doctrine contained therein though all the rest be found and Catholicke And may not any man lawfully sweare that booke so condemned to be scandalous or hereticall albeit all the whole is not such or that man to be an hereticke which erreth against one onely article of the Catholicke faith But if the two parts of the proposition you thinke are sworne diuisim and by parts not coniunctim or totally together then let impious go with the first part may be deposed and hereticall with the latter or murthered and I cannot see how you can deny but so it may besworne If any will yet stand vpon the word abiure as I heare many do saying It signifieth not onely simply to deny a thing with an oath as al Dictionaries vnderstand the word but by oath to deny that which once he held before then he that neuer held the doctrine and position aboue named cannot take this Oath because he may not abiure that opinion which he neuer held But this will manifestly appeare to him that hath any experience in the practise of the Church to be false For let any be conuented into the Inquisition for any one heresie whatsoeuer as Anabaptisme Brownisme c if afterwards he repent and conuert to the Catholicke faith he shall be required and must of necessitie abiure