Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	authority_n	jurisdiction_n	power_n	1,683	5	4.9363	4	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A06555	The English iarre· or disagreement amongst the ministers of great Brittaine, concerning the Kinges supremacy. VVritten in Latin by the Reuerend Father, F. Martinus Becanus of the Society of Iesus, and professour in diuinity. And translated into English by I.W. P.; Dissidium Anglicarum de primatu Regis. English	Becanus, Martinus, 1563-1624.; Wilson, John, ca. 1575-ca. 1645?	1612 (1612)	STC 1702; ESTC S121050	28,588	66

them to Idolatry Shall they then obay these Princes commaund â—ut then should they do against their Consciences Shall they refuse to obay Then farewell Primacy of the Church Perhaps they will answere that they will obay when they thinke good Shall therfore subiects be Iudges of their Kings May then the Catholickes in England say after this manner If it plâ—ase your Maiesty in this point we thinke good to obay your Maiestyes commaund but in that not XIII Question VVhether the King may constraine his Subiects to take the Oath of Prmacy or no 1. HITHERTO haue we treated of the Iarring disagreement of our Aduersaries abouâ— the nature offices origen of the Kingâ— Primacy Now there remaineth a certaine practicall question which toucheth the ConscieÌ„ce to the quicke to wit whether the King may constraine or force his Subiects to sweare that they acknowledge his Kingly Primacy wherof we haue spoken before Or whether they will acknowledg the King as Primate and supreme Head of the Church of â—ngland vnto whome as vnto their Primate supreme Head they will promise fidelity no lesse in Ecclesiasticall and Spirituall matters then in Politicke and temporall This question hath two points The first whether the King of England doth de facto exact or hath at any time exacted such an Oath of his subiects The other is whether his subiects are bound in conscience to take such an Oath if the King should exact the same Of both these points seuerally I meane to speake a word or two The first Point 2. The first point then is Whether the King of England doth exact or at any tyme hath exacted such an Oath of his subiects It is manifest that K. Henry the 8. did For so wryteth Doctor Sanders in his booke of the Schisme of England Laurentius Cocchus Prior Coenobij Dancastrensis vnÃ cum tribus Monachis duobus laicis Aegidio Horno Clemente Philpotto quÃ²d nollent Ecclesiasticum terreni Regis Primatum iuratÃ² confiteri exclusi Ã¨ terris ad caelestem aeterni Regis gloriam transmissi sunt Laurence Coch Prior of the Monasterie of Dancaster togeather with three Monkes and two Laymen Giles Horne and Clement Philpot for that they would not sweare to the Ecclesiasticall Primacy of a temporall King being excluded from earth were translâ—ted to a celestiall glory of the eternall King c. And then againe Proponebantur eis noua Comitiorum Decreta iubebantur iureiurando affirmare Regem Ecclesiae supremum esse Caâ—ut The new decrees of the Parlament were propounded vnto them they were commaunded to sweare the King to be supreme Head of the Church c. 3. Now that Queene â—lizabeth the danghter followed heerin her Father K. Henry it is manifest by the forme of Oath that she exacted of her subiects which is this â—go A. B prorsus testificor declaro in conscientia mea Reginam â—sse solam supremam Gubernatricem istius Regni Angliae alioruÌ„ omnium suae Maiestatis dominiorum regionum non minÃ¹s in omnibus spiritualibus atque Ecclesiasticis rebus vel causis quÃ m temporalibus Et quÃ²d nemo externus Princeps Persona Praelatus Status vel Potentatus aut facto aut iure habet aliquam iurisdictionâ—m potestatem superioritatem praeeminentiam vel authoritatâ—m â—cclesiasticam aut spiritualem in hoc Regno Ideoque planÃ¨ renuntio repudio omnes forinsecas iurisdictiones potestates superioritates atque authoritates c. I A. B. do verily testify and declare in my conscience that the Queene is the only supreme Gouernesse aswell of this Kingdome of England as of all other her Maiesties dominions and countâ—eys aswell in all spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters and causes as in temporall And that no forrayne Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath eyther by fact or right any Iurisdiction power superiority preheminence or authority Ecclesiasticall or spirituall in this Kingdome And therfore I do vtterly renounce and abandone all forrayne Iurisdictions powers superiorities and authorityes c. 4. The very same also doth now King Iames who byndeth his subiects not with one Oath alone but with two to wit of Supremacy and Allegiance The former Oath of Supremacy beginneth thus Ego A. B. palÃ m testor ex conscientia mea declaro quod Maiestas Regiaâ— vnicus est supremus Gubernator huius Regni omniumque aliorum suae Maiestatis dominiorum territoriorum tam in omnibus spiritualibus siue Ecclesiasticis rebus causis quÃ m in temporalibus Et quÃ²d nullus extraneus Princeps Persona Praelatus Status aut Potentatus habet aut habere debet vllam iurisdictionem potestatem superioritatem praeeminentiaÌ„ vel authoritatem Ecclesiasticam siue spiritualem intra hoc Regnum c. I A. B. do publikely testify and in my conscience declare that the Kings Maiesty is the only supreme Gouernour of this Kingdome and of all other his Maiesties dominions and territories as well in all matters and causes spirituall or Ecclesiasticall as in temporall And that no forraine Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to haue any Iurisdiction power superiority preheminence or authority Ecclesiasticall or spirituall within this Kingdome c. The later Oath called of Allegiance beginneth thus Ego A. B. verÃ¨ sincerÃ¨ agnosco profiteor testificor declaro in conscientia mea coram Deo Mundo qÃ¹od supremus Dominus noster Rex Iacobus c. I A. B. do truly and sincerely acknowledg professe and testify in my conscience before God and the world that our Soueraigne Lord King Iames c. 5. Boâ—h these Oathes are set downe at large in his Maiesties Apology and in both of them his subiects are required publickely and openly to professe acknowledgeâ— that King Iames is the supreme Gouernour and Lord of all England not only in politicke and temporall matters but in spirituall and Ecclesiasticall also And that neither the Pope nor any other forrayner hath any power or Iurisdiction in or ouer the Church of â—ngland Againe the former of these Oathes was brought in by King Henry the 8. as his Maiesty confesseth in his Apology in these words Sub Henrico octauo primÃ¹m introductum est Iuramentum Primatus sub eoâ—ue Thomas Morus Rofâ—ensis supplico afâ—â—cti idque partim ob eam causam quÃ²d Iuramâ—ntum illud recusarent Ab eo deinceps omnes mei Praedecessores quotquot sunt hanc Religionem amplexi idem sibi aut non multÃ² secus asseruerunt c. The Oath of Primacy was first brought in vnder K. Henry the 8. vnder whome Syr Thomas More and the Bishop of Rocâ—ester were beheaded and that partly because they refused that Oath From him all my Predecessours downward as many as haue imbraced this Religion did retayne the same Oath or not much different vnto themselues c. Now the later Oath was inuented by K. Iames himselfe The second Poynt 6. The Question then is whether all

disputed of The first is of assembling or calling togeather of Synods The second of enacting of Ecclesiasticall lawes The third of coÌ„ferring or bestowing of benefices The fourth of creating deposing of Bishops The fifth is about Excommunication The sixt and last is about the decision and determining of Controuersies The question then is whether these offices belong to the Kings Primacy I will speake a word of ech in order 2. First it may be demaunded whether the King by vertue of his Primacy may of his owne authority call or assemble togeather Synods and therin sit as chiefe and head This was certainly persuaded that it might be done in the tyme of King Henry K. Edward and Queene Elizabeth but now vnder King Iames the matter is called into question M. Salclebridge pag. 121. affirmeth that he can do it in these words Christiani Principes in Regnis suis cum laude propria auctoritate Synodos conuocarunt Constitutiones condideruÌ„t causas audierunt cognouerunt Christian Princes haue with great praise assembled Synods by their owne authority in their Kingdomes haue made Constituâ—ions heard and examined causes c. And againe pag. 146. Rex Angliae potest Synodos indiâ—â—re omnium Ordinum Oecumeniâ—as in ijsdem praesidere The King of â—ngland saith he may asâ—embâ—e Generall Councells of all Orders or degrees and therin sit as President or Chiefe c. And pag. 155. he saith in like manner Reges Angliae suprema sua authoritate de iure Synodos conuocarunt The Kings of â—ngland haue by thâ—ir owne supreme authority and by â—â—ght assâ—mbled Synods c. 3 Now M Toâ—ker in this poynt is very variable one while contradicting himselfe another while others And this is manifest out of the diuers testimonies he produceth The first is pag. 37. where he hath these words A quibus magis aequum est indici Conciliaâ— quÃ m ab illisâ— penes quos semper â—uit authoritas â—a congregandi CÃ¹m autem communitâ—r triplex ponâ— soleat Concilium Generale Prouinciale Dioecâ—sanum Concilium Gâ—nâ—rale solius Papae iussu celebrari vultis sed neque illud nisi ab Impâ—ratoribus Regibus simul consentientâ—bus hodie indici debet Prouinciale Ã Metropolitaâ—o cum suis Suffragancis Dioecesanum ab Episcopo cum Curatisâ— Râ—ctoribus Clericis Dioeceseos c. By whome is it more fit that Councells should be assembled then by those in whose power hath alwayes authority byn to call them togeather For wheras commonly there be 3. sortes of Councells Generall Prouiâ—ciall of a particuler Diocesse the Generall Councell you will haue to be celebrated only by commandment of the Pope but yet not so neyther now a dayes vnlesse Emperors Kings do agree therunto also A Prouinciall Counâ—ell is to be assembled by the Metropolitan and his Suâ—fragans thâ—t of the Diocesse by the Bishop therof togeaâ—her with the Curates Rectoâ—s and Clarkes of â—he same Bishopricke c. Out of which testimony we may gatâ—er that the K. of England cannot assemble a Councell of his owne authority Not a geneâ—all because that belongeth to the common consent of Kings and Emperours Not a Prouinciall because that pertayneth to the Metropolitan Not of the Dâ—ocesse because that belongeth to the Bishop therof What then I pray you is left vnto the King 4. Another testimony heerof is out of the same M. â—ooker pag. 41. in these worâ—s AbundÃ¨ liquet ex CoÌ„cilijs ipsis historia Ecclesiastica â—râ—uincialâ—a Concilia Nationalia ab Imperatoribus aâ— Regibus fuisse congregata It is abouÌ„dantly manifest out of the CouÌ„â—els themselues and the Ecclesiasticall Historyes that Prouinciall and Nationall Councels haue byn assembled by Emperours and Kings c. This now is plainely repugnant to his former testimony For there he affirmeth that Prouinciall Councells are to be assembled by the Metropolitans therof heere he saith â—hat they must be assembled by Kings and Emperours There is distinguished oâ—ly a threefould Councellâ— to wit Generall Prouinciallâ— â— and that of the Diocesse heere now is added a fourâ—h to wit Nationall 5. His third testimony is set downe pag. 42. where he propoâ—eth this question Quo igitur iure tantam sibi potestatâ—m arrogat Pontifâ—x solus Num diuino â—y what right then I pray you doth the Pope challenge vnto himselfe alone so great power Doth he do it by diuine right c. And a little after he addeth Erat Apostolorum omnium non vnius tantâ—mmodo indicere Concilium statuere cum verborum solennitate Visum est Spiritui sancto Nobis c. It belonged to all the Aposâ—les not to one alone to assemble a Councell and with solemnity of words to ordaine It seemes good vnto the Holy Ghost and Vs c. As if he would say That as by diuine right not S. Petâ—r alone but all the Apostles togeather with equall power did assemble the fiâ—st CouÌ„cell at Ierusalem therin decreed that law about eating of bloud and strangled meates so in like manner by diuine right not the Pope alone but all Bishops with equall power must assemble Councells and decree Ecclesiasticall lawes Surely if it be so then without doubt it followes that the power to call or assemble Councells doth not belong by the law of God to secular Kings and Princes but to the Apostles and their successâ—urs c. 6. His fourth testimony is pag. 63. where he saith Mixtum autâ—m ius râ—suitâ—ns â—x vtâ—oque iure Regio Episcopali est Legum sanctio Synodorum indictio praesâ—dendi in ijs praerâ—gatiuâ— controuâ—rsâ—aruÌ„ decisio aliorumque actuum qui his finitimi sunt exâ—rcitium quae fâ—rÃ¨ ab origine Primaâ—us Râ—gij descâ—ndunt communicantur Sacâ—râ—otiâ—u c The decreing or enacting of Lawes the assembling of Synodes Prerogatiue of â—itâ—ing therin as chiefe or head as also the exercise of all other offices in this kind is a certaine mixt Right proceeding from both Kingly and Episcopall power which things do in a manner come downe or descend from the origen of the Kings Primacy and are communicated or in parted vnto Priests c. This now againe as you see is contrary to that which he said next before For there he will needs haue the assembly of Synods or Councels to belong by diuine right to the Apostles heere forsooth he will haue the same chiefely to belong to Kinges and from them to be deriued vnto Bishops These things do not agree one with another VII Question VVhether the King can enact Ecclesiasticall Lawes or no 1. IT is cleere that K. Henry the 8. did aswell by himselfe as by his Vicar Generall Cromwell enact Ecclesiasticall Lawes For so saith Doctor Sanders in his booke of the Schisme of England His diâ—bus vigilantissimus hic Ecclesiae Pastor Henriâ—us quo in posterum sciretur quae cui rite nupta esset legem ediderat perpetuam de Nuptijs Comitiorâ—m etiam auctoritate â—onfirmatam qua

only for you are exempted from his iurisdiction and power c. And though he should haue so said yet no doubt but he had offended If now King Ieroboam could not exempt the Priests and Leuites of his owne Kingdome from the Iurisdiction and Power of a forraine High Priest by what right then doth now King Iames of England do the same especially seeing he auerreth that he claymeth no more right or iurisdiction vnto himselfe ouer the Church then the Kings of the old Testament did The Conclusion 1. ALL then that hath bene hitherto said may be reduced vnto three heads The first is that the Kings Primacy in the Church is a new thing and first brought in by King Henry the 8. nor hitherto hath bene heard of or vsurped in any other place then only in the Kingdome of â—ngland The second is that there be so many Iarres disagreements of the English Ministry among â—hemselues concerning this Primacy that it is not manifest nor certaine what the said Primacy is nor what force or authority the same hath The third that the Oath of this Primacy can neyther be exacted by the King nor may the Subiects take the same 2. Heerehence three other questions which might be made concerning the Subiects will eaâ—ily be solued There be three sorts of Subiects in England The first as some call them are Henricians who both aâ—knowledg sweare vnto this Kingly Supremacy The second sort are Puritans or pure Caluinists who indeed do not acknowledge the said Supremacy but yet do sweare therunto The third are Catholikes which neyther acknowledge it nor will sweare it 3. The first question then is What may be said of these Henricians which both acknowledge and sweare to the Kings Supremacy I answere that they do vnwisely and inconsiderately The reason isâ— Because it is folly and rashnes as before I haue said to sweare a thing that is doubtfull and vncertaine But the Primacy of the King is a thing altogeather doubtfull and vncertaine amongst the Henricians as is manifest by their iarres and dissentions which hitheâ—to we haue shewed Ergo to sweare to such a Supremacy is both folly and rashnes 4. The second question is What may be said of the Puritans or pure Caluinists who do not indeed acknowledg the Kings Primacy yet if they be coÌ„maunded do sweare therto I answere that they are periured persons and Politicians The reason is Because they belieue one thing and sweare another They belieue with Calnin that neyther Kings nor secular Princes haue any Primacy in spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters but only in temporall yet neuerthelesse they sweare Allegiance vnto the King togeather with the forsaid Henricians as to the Primate and supreme Head of the Church and this they do to make an externall and politicall peace which is more esteemed by them then their faith and Religion and therfore they are rather to be called Politicks then Christians Of whome his Maiesty gaue a most worthy testimony in his Preface Monitory to wit That he had found more truth and honesty in the high-land and bordering theeues then in that sort of people 5. The third question is what may be said of Catholickes who neyther acknowledge the Kings Primacy nor sweare therto I answere that they be iust vpright men who walke before God in truth verity They be sincere who professe with their mouth that which they thinke in their hart They are wise indeed who with good Eleazarus had rather dye then consent to any vnlawfull thing no not so much as in outward shew They be like vnto the Apostles who endeauour to obey God rather then men They be like to the Martyrs of the primitiue Church who freely professe themselues before the persecutours to be such as indeed they are 6. But you will say they be miserable For if they refuse the Oath they are forced to vndergoe imprisonments torments punishments Truly they are not therfore miserable but most happy For so did our Sauiour teach vs in the Ghospell Matth. 5.10 Blâ—ssâ—d are thâ—yâ— who suffer persecution for iustice for thâ—irs is the Kinâ—dome of heauâ—n But then you will say It is a hard thing to suâ—â—er How is that hard which is done with ioy and delight Heare what is said of the Aposâ—les Act. 5.41 And they went from the sight of tâ—e Councâ—ll reioycingâ— bâ—cause they were accompted wortâ—y to sufâ—er reproach for the name of Iesus Heare what â—â—e Apostle saith of himselfe 2. Cor. 4. Superabundo gaudio in omni tribulatione nostra I excedingly reioyâ—e in all our tribulations 7. And from whence commeth this ioy Truly from a twofold gift of the holy Ghost to wit Hope and Charity Hope of future glory that maketh vs ioyfull and full of comfort in all aduersityes Rom. 8.18 The sufferings of these tymes are not condigne to the future glory that shal be reuealed in vs. And againe Râ—m 12.12 Reioycing in hope and patient in tribulation And Hâ—br 10.34 The spoyle of your owne goods you tooke with ioy knowing that you haue a better and a pâ—rmanent substance Do not therefore leese your confidence which hath a great râ—ward For patience is nâ—â—â—ssary â—or you that doing the will of God you may recâ—yue the promise c. 8. Nor is the force of Charity lesse Rom. 8.35 Wâ—o thâ—n shall separate vs from the Charity of Christ Tribulatio or aâ—stresse or famiâ—â— or nakâ—dnes or dangâ—r or persecution or the sword c. But in all these things we ouercome bâ—bâ—cause of him that hath lâ—uâ—d vs. For I am sure that neyther death nor life nor Angells nor Principaliâ—yes nor Powers neythâ—r things prâ—sâ—nt nor things to come neyther might nor height nor depth nor other creature shal be able to separate vs from the Charity of God which is in Christ Iâ—sus our Lord c. 9. Heerto belong the examples of Christ of other Saints which haue great force and efficacy to styr vp and strengthen the harts of Catholickes to suffer patiently in this life prisons fetters torments yea death it selfe 1. Pet. 2.20 If doing well you sustaine patiently this is thanke before God For vnto this are you called because Christ also suffered for vs leauing you an example that you may follow his steppes who did no sinne nâ—yther was guile sound in his mouth who when he was reuiled did not râ—uileâ— when he suffâ—red he threatned not but deliuerâ—d himselfe to him that iudged him vniustly c. 10. And Hebr. 11.36 Others had triall of reproaches and stripes moreouer also of bands and prisons they were stoned they were hâ—wed they were tâ—mpted thâ—y died in the slaughter of the sword they went about in sheep-skins in goate-skins needy in distrâ—sse aâ—flictâ—d of whome the world was not worthy wandring in dâ—serts in mountaines and dennes and in caues of the eartâ— c. 11. And againe in the 12. Chapter and 1. verse And therfore by patiâ—nce lâ—t vs runne to the Combat proposed vnto vs looking on the author of Faith and the consummator Iesus who ioy being proposed vnto him sustayned the Crosse contemning confusion and sitteth on the right hand of the seat of God For thinke diligently vpon him who sustayned of sinners such contradiction against himselfe that you be not wearied fainting in your mynds For you haue not yet resisted vnto bloud c. 12. And yet more 2. Cor. 11.23 In very many labours in prisons more aboundantly in stripes aboue measure in deaths often Of the Iewes fiue tymes did I recâ—yue fourty stripes sauing one Thrice was I beaten with rodds once I was stoned thrice I suffered shipwracke night and day haue I byn in the depth of the sea in iourneying often in perills of waters perills of theeues perills of my nation perills of Gentiles perills in the Citty perills in the wildernesse perills in the sea perills among false brethren in labour and misery in much watching in â—unger and thirst in fastings often in cold and nakednes c. 13. And yet more in the 12. Chapter and 9. verse Gladly will I glory in my owne infirmity that the power of Christ may dwell in me For which cause I please my selfe in infirmityes in contumelies in necessities in persâ—cutions in distresses for Christ. For when I am weake then am I mighty c. 14. With these and the like testimonies of holy Scriptures were armed Syr Thomas More the Bishop of Rochester when they rather chose to dy then to take an impious wicked Oath With these places were others also animated who followed them in their glorious fight And lastly with these are they encouraged who now in England are kept in prisons bound in fetters spoyled of their goods and lyuings and purpled in their owne bloud S. Cyprian Epist. 9. Pretiosamors haec est quae emit immortalitatem pretio sanguinis sâ—i Pretious is that death which buyeth immortality with the price of it bloud And in the end of the same Epistle O beatam Ecclesiam nostram quam temporâ—bus nostris gloriosus Martyrum sanâ—uis illustrat Erat antea in operibus fratrum candida nunc facta est in Martyrum cruore purpurea O happy is our Church which the glorious bloud of Martyrs doth in these our dayes illustrate It was made white before in the works of our brethren but now is it made purple in the bloud of Martyrs And yet more in Epist. 24. Quid gloriosius aut felicius vlli hominum poterit ex diuina dignatione contingere quÃ m inter ipsos carnifices interritum confitâ—ri Dominum Dâ—um quam inter saeuieÌ„tia saecularis potestatis tormenta etiam extorto exâ—ruciato exâ—arnificato corpore Christum Deâ— fiâ—ium etsi recedente sed tamâ—n libâ—ro spiritu confitâ—ri quÃ m relicto mundo caelum pâ—tiâ—â—e quam dâ—sâ—rtis hominibus inter Angelos starâ— quam collâ—gam passionis â—um Christo in Christi nomine factum â—ssâ— What can happen vnto any man through Gods diuine bountifulnes more glorious or more prosperous then without all feare to confesse our Lord God then amidst the cruell torments of secular power to confesse Christ the Sonne of God with a free spirit though now departing from the bodie yea from the bodie tortured tormented and all to bemangled then by leauing the world to goe to heauen then by forsaking the company of men to be conuersant with angells and be made partaker of the Passion of Christ in Christ his name FINIS

Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Text snippets containing the quad