Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	authority_n	bishop_n	church_n	2,934	5	4.3576	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B10081	A letter to the author of the Vindication of the deprived bishops, in reply to his reasons for the validity of the lay-deprivation of the bishops by the statute of 1 Eliz. c. 1.	Stephens, Edward, d. 1706.	1692 (1692)	Wing S5428B; ESTC N33861	4,326	5

then brought in no doubt but he And his Consecration has been much questioned took one too and he was the first promoted by Patent from Ed. 6. and Story and Intruded into the place of Vesey frighted out v. Harmar p. 100 129. Coverdale also held by Patent from Ed. 6. These also were ordained by Cranmer and you know they could receive no more from him than what he did intend actually to give c. 22. Of Schism 6. and by his Commission could give Nor could they give more to Mat. Parker than they had received So that all depends upon Cranmer's presumable Intention which is sufficiently manifest by his Principles and Commission to have been only an Authority derived from the King and dependent upon him His Acceptance of a Commission was an implicit Renunciation of his former Authority and whether not a great Sin and displeasing to our Lord I leave others to judge But their Original Authority was by Commission and what more was done was then looked upon but as a Formality It is apparent enough by the Act 1 Ed. 6. c. 2. that no Bishops of his time could be made or promoted but by Patent and there were no less than Seven of them at a dash deprived upon that account in the beginning of Queen Mary's Reign what-ever is pretended of special favour to the Protestant Bishops which could be no more than to hold quam diu instead of durante bene placito But none held by Commission in Q. Mary's time after she had repealed the Acts of her Father and Brother and restored all again to the old Posture And this I hope is a sufficient Reply to your first Reason and something more for you to consider Your next Reason is such another that those Bishops were then notoriously of another Communion different from the Protestants But 1. there were then no Protestant Bishops in being but those now mentioned such as they were and of them one had resigned and the other two were actually deprived and justly according to your former Reason And 2. there could therefore then be no Communion of Protestants but Schismatical The Bishops then in Possession were all compleat Bishops without all question and their Possession good and lawful also beyond all question Their Deprivation was by meer incompetent In both Execution and Constitution without Spiritual Sentence lay-Lay-Authority and for an unjust and wicked Cause in them who deprived them but a just and glorious Cause in them who suffered for their refusal of an Nor of Fidelity to the Prince but of Unfaithfulness to the Church Oath which you your self cannot think tolerable in the plain sense of the words or without such Exposition as with all your Skill and Pains you cannot so prove as to satisfie a conscientious intelligent Person who well considers it And for this Cause and by such Authority were all the Bishops of England and Wales except one despicable Temporizer besides Deans Prebends and other of the Clergy c. deprived and others put in their Places by no commendable or justifiable Election or other Consecration than as aforesaid and so questionable and questioned at that time that 7 or 8 years after by reason of divers Questions then grown upon the Making and Consecrating Arch-Bishops and Bishops it was thought convenient to make a new Act to justifie and ratifie the same 8 Eiz c. 1. So that here was not only Schism but It may well be questioned whether the Dissenters Ordinations be not as good as yours Ordination invalid in it self besides in this Case And was this such a different Communion as might make the Judgment of a Synod needless and justifie the Lay-Authority in driving away as you call it Catholick Bishops and Clergy What Communion of Schismaticks hath ever appeared since the Apostles more gross and notorious than this What Persecutions of Arians or Donatists or what you will but may be thus defended excused and justified as well as this In what I have already said is the Summ of the Cause and the Principles and Grounds of all the rest that is to be said and therefore as I think it needless to proceed farther in my Reply to a Man of Learning and Parts who by what is already said may perceive what is farther to be said so I am willing to spare my Pains not only for my own sake but for yours for I am sorry that you who have deserved so well in the former Cause should be so unhappily ingaged in this and expose your self in Defence of what may afford matter for Exercise of Wit and Skill like Carneades disputing against Justice but nothing for Demonstration of more commendable Qualities unless you will generously give up the Defence and ingenuously declare the Truth And in good earnest if you will believe me to be so much your Friend as really I am I can give you no better Advice for the Recovery of your Credit and just Esteem among Men and for Expiation of that unhappy Fault before God than to do so and save me the Labour of any farther Reply by doing it your self which 'tis like will then be more accurately perform'd than possibly I should have done it For so that Truth be promoted I care not by what hand it be And for that purpose I shall here leave it to you But if you dislike the Motion and desire my farther Pains I shall be ready to serve you in it as well as I can Your Faithful Friend and Humble Servant