Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	begin_v	great_a	time_n	1,599	5	3.2122	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A16183	A large examination taken at Lambeth, according to his Maiesties direction, point by point, of M. G. Blakwell, made Arch-priest of England, by Pope Clement 8 Vpon occasion of a certaine answere of his, without the priuitie of the state, to a letter lately sent vnto him from Cardinall Bellarmine, blaming him for taking the oath of Allegeance. Together with the Cardinals letter, and M. Blakwels said answere vnto it. Also M. Blakwels letter to the Romish Catholickes in England, aswell ecclesiasticall, as lay.	Blackwell, George, 1546 or 7-1613.; Bellarmino, Roberto Francesco Romolo, Saint, 1542-1621.	1609 (1609)	STC 3104; ESTC S121306	104,118	220

necessary for preseruation of the Realme from vniust vsurpation of Tyrants and auoyding other inconueniences which they had proued and might easily fall againe by the disorder of some wicked king Vnto this report as it seemeth and to some other idle conceits a Polonian of late hauing relation and making mention of the purpose aforesaid of king Henry the second and of king Iohn he writeth this Examinate saith in this sort speaking of the Parliament and of the oath of Allegeance Illud impiè legislatores per iusiurandum extorquent à Stanisla Cristanouie Examen Cathol fol. 34. Catholicis vt negent posse à Pontifice Regem deponi de ipsius Regnis ditionibus disponi Si enim honorariè piè tributarium regnum Pontifici quare disponere quare refractarium inobedientem Principem deponere nequit That is The law-makers doe impiously by an oath extort this from the Catholicks to denie that the King may be deposed by the Pope and his kingdomes and countries by him disposed of For if by an honourable and pious graunt the kingdome haue become tributarie to the Pope why may he not dispose of it why may he not depose the Prince being refractarie and disobedient 19 Concerning the which aforesaid assertions touching both the said kings this Examinate affirmeth they are vntrue Henry the second neuer made any such accord with Alexander the 3. as is aboue mentioned for ought this Examinate could euer reade in any Chronicle of credite He sware to Pope Alexander that he for his owne part would not depart from him or his successors Ro. Houeden Annal fol. 303 quamdiu ipsum sicut Regem Catholicum habuerint so long as they should entreate him as a Catholicke king And touching king Iohn inasmuch as his fact that way is of some more probabilitie but of as little trueth and that from the said reportes of them both Stanislaus Cristanouic doth inferre that the Pope may depose his Maiestie being but a tributarie King vnto him he this Examinate by taking his oath that the Pope had no Imperiall or Ciuill power ouer the king to depose him did thereby discharge his conscience for the iustifying of a trueth against the said false reports that of king Iohn being as vntrue as the former Which this Examinate saith he doth the more boldly affirme because he hath one of no small account in that he died for the Popes supremacie to take his part therein besides some other rules of regalitie in that behalfe Thus Sir Thomas More writeth against the author of the Beggers Supplication in king Henry the 8. time If he the authour of that supplication Sir Tho. More supplic of soules pag. 296. say as indeede some writers say that king Iohn made England and Ireland tributarie to the Pope and the See Apostolike by the grant of a thousand markes wee 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 the Realme to the Pope or make the land tributarie though he would And this to bee agreeable to this Examinates owne iudgement hee doeth acknowledge as he saith with all his heart hoping that the same shal no way preiudice his constant resolution as touching the Popes supremacie nor offend any that loueth the Crowne and State of England 20 And as concerning his relying vpon his Maiesties words in the sense approoued by the Magistrate when he this Examinate tooke the oath of Allegeance and insinuating to Cardinall Bellarmine that the summe of it was accordingly Summum Pontificem non habere Imperialem ciuilem potestatem ad libitum ex suo appetitu deponendi Regem nostrum that the Pope hath not an Imperiall and ciuill power to depose our King when he pleaseth and at his owne appetite he hopeth likewise to giue therein some reasonable contentment For which purpose he saith it is to be obserued that there is an opinion long since broached by the Canonists which hath begun of later times to be more stiffely and with greater heate prosecuted and maintained then heretofore concerning the Popes authoritie in causes temporall the authors whereof doe with great confidence affirme that the Pope is as directly Lord of the whole world in temporalibus in temporalties as hee is the head of the vniuersall Church in spiritualibus in matters spirituall and that hee hath directly as souereigne an authoritie in respect of such his worldly dominion ouer all Emperours Kings and Princes to dispose of them and their kingdomes when occasion shall require as hee hath in regard of his spirituall supremacie ouer all Bishops and Cleargie men to aduance and depriue them when hee thinketh it conuenient and that they deserue it The chiefe patrons of this opinion are noted by Cardinall Bellarmine to be these Augustinus Triumphus Aluarus 〈…〉 Pelagius Hostiensis Panormitane and Syluester to whom this Examinate doeth adde Henricus Gandauensis Redericus Sancius Alexander Alensis Celsus Mancinus Tho. Bozius Franciscus Bozius Isidorus Mosconius Card Baronius Laelius Zecchus and Alexander Carerius who nameth diuers others as principall defenders of that opinion and 〈…〉 is himselfe so violent therein as hee doeth in effect anathematize all that do oppose themselues against it not sparing Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe against whom forasmuch as his drift is principally throughout his whole booke hee was much to blame this Examinate thinketh to entitle it to be written aduersus impios politicos nostritemporis haereticos against the wicked politickes hereticks of our time With this Carerius 〈…〉 such as are on that side doe resolutely concurre insomuch as they doubt not this Examinat consesseth to renew againe the long disliked and impugned assertions of the old Canonists and to publish them now vnto the world more eagerly then heretofore as aboue he hath touched for sound and Catholicke doctrine they saying 21 That Dauid did foretell that the Priesthood of 〈…〉 Anno 57. pag. 432. Christ should be according to the order of Melchisedech That when Christ being a King and a Priest receiued all iudgement of the Father that is most full iudiciall power hee ioyning the same with his priesthood did institute in the Church a Regall priesthood Bar. Ibidem pag. 433. translating in suos that is to S. Peter and his successours all the power hee had of his father That Franc Bezius de temporall Ecclesiae Monarchia in praesat ad Clemen S. except there should bee one supreme Monarch in the Church in all things the vnitie of the Church could not be preserued for seeing the Church by diuine institution doth consist of a Kingdome and a Priesthood is it were otherwise there should bee in the same absolutely one Monarch of the Kingdome and another of the Priesthood That if for the auoiding of the dissensions about sacred causes one supreme head is appointed

first three hundred yeres after Christ likewise his vtter dislike of sundry assertions propounded vnto him Sect. 49 some whereof maintaine contrary to Tertullians relation how Christians stood then affected that in those dayes armes might lawfully haue beene borne against the Emperours if the professors of the Name of Christ had beene able and some as touching sundry other vnsound and vncatholike matters in them contained concerning the losse of Kingdomes c. vpon excommunications Sect. 39 and also his opinion of the time when the deposing of Kings and absoluing their subiects from their alleageance were first made adiuncts to excommunication for ought he hath read Sect. 52. But yet he is contented as he saith a little further to enlarge himselfe according to the motion propounded and to that end affirmeth that hee doeth concurre in iudgement with these authors following and so out of his pocket-notes set downe their words in this maner 60 Apostoli nihil vi gerebant tantùm vtebantur gladio spiritus neminem agebant in exilium nullius inuadebant facultates Haec omnie Erasmus non minùs disertè quàm verè That is The Apostles did nothing by force they onely vsed the sword of the spirit they draue no man into exile they entered vpon no mans possessions All this saith Erasmus no lesse elegantly then truely Costerus in fidei demonstrat pag. 96. Si aliqui Reges cum populo se tradiderunt Romanis Pontificibus vt traditur de Anglis nihil ad nos Non tamen opinor quòd Angli vllo modo permitterent Pontificem destituere suum Regem alium constituere nunquam enim aliquem Romanorum Pontificum hoc facere permiserunt That is If any Kings with their people haue subiected themselues to the Bishoppes of Rome as it is reported of the English but vntruely as this Examinate hath before shewed that toucheth not vs. And yet I doe not thinke that the English would by any meanes permit the Pope to depose their King and constitute another for they neuer suffered any of the Bishops of Rome so to doe Iohan. Maior in 4. Sentent distinct 24. quaest 3. De ratione potestatis laicae est poenam ciuilem posse infligere vt sunt mors exilium bonorum priuatio c. sed nullam talem poenam ex institutione diuiná infligere potest Ecclesiastica potestas imò nec incarcerare vt plaerisque doctoribus placet sed ad solam poenam spiritualem extenditur vtpotè excommunicationem Reliquae autem poenae quibus vtitur ex iure purè positiuo sunt That is It is of the nature of lay power to bee able to inflict ciuill punishments as are death exile losse of goods c. but the Ecclesiasticall power cannot by the diuine ordinance impose any such punishment nay not imprison as the most Doctors doe hold but is extended to spirituall punishment alone as Excommunication The other punishments which it vseth are meerely out of positiue Law Iacobus Almain de Dominio naturali ciuili in vltima editione Gersonis pag. 696. 61. Here this Examinat being tolde that although he hath to some good purpose repeated what he had formerly said and a litle more enlarged himselfe then before in that hee hath acknowledged that what the Pope can doe more then Excommunicate he hath it ex iure purè positiuo meerely by positiue Law yet considering that he made no scruple to shew his dislike of the opiniō touching the Popes pretended authoritie in temporalibus directly in the 20. Sect but seemed loath to deliuer his iudgement concerning the other opinion of the Popes authoritie in Temporalibus in ordine ad Spiritualia indirectly in order to things spiritual it was further vrged against him that if he be indeed of Bellarmines minde in the points by him cited out of his booke it seemeth to be impossible that he this Examinat being a graue and learned man should thinke that that which Bellarmine hath said vpon very weake and simple grounds God knoweth for proofe of the Popes indirect authority in ordine ad Spiritualia is of sufficient force and moment to ouerthrow all that hee hath written before in his second third fourth and fifth Chapters of his said booke one of them being countenanced for offending too much with the word directè his arguments being in effect simple and absolute because it is most apparant to euery man that will not wilfully hoodwinke himselfe that hee the said Bellarmine hath giuen the Pope such a blow and deadly wound by many his so sound and substantiall arguments against his pretended direct authority as all the courses how indirect soeuer that can be deuised by the finest wits will neuer bee able to salue and cure it And therefore this Examinate was required very strictly herein to expresse himselfe more clearely 62 Whereupon this Examinate saith that he must indeed needs confesse and acknowledge that he hath wished with all his heart that either Cardinall Bellarmine had not intermedled with that question of the Popes authoritie in temporalibus indirectly or els that hee had bene able if it haue any trueth in it to haue handled it more pithily and throughly that the weakenes of his arguments for that point compared with the positions set downe by this Examinat out of his said booke as is aforesaid hath beene an especiall cause as he thinketh why many of later times doe so earnestly labour to refell them as foreseeing that if the Popes authority in temporalibus to depose Kings c. should stand vpon this point viz. that he had it but indirectly the same would be subiect to great hazard considering the oppositions in these dayes to the Church of Rome and that therefore insomuch as the thing it selfe viz. whether the Pope hath any authoritie at all to eradicate and depose Emperours and Kings for any cause which is aimed at on both sides aswell by them who affirme that he hath such an authoritie directly as by those who say hee hath it not directly but indirectly is notwithstanding left as yet vndetermined by the Church hee this Examinate desireth that hee may not bee further vrged to interpose his opinion otherwise then he hath done already in matters of so great moment and difficultie 63 This onely as appertaining hereunto he saith that he is much grieued to see the Popes Supreme authority in causes Ecclesiasticall so much entangled with these pretences of another supreme authority in temporalibus to be held directly and immediatly of Christ or indirectly per accidens and by a certaine consequence as if otherwise Christ should not haue sufficiently prouided for the necessitie of the Church nor furnished the Pope with abilitie to discharge his duetie considering that without these deuises so much insisted vpon though with very great vncertaintie to the great in dangering of the Popes vniuersall charge ouer all Churches in Spiritualibus Saint Peter and his successors did sufficiently prouide for the necessitie of the Church when the

cannot ordinarily depose princes euen for a iust cause yet hee saith that the Pope may change kingdomes and take them from one and giue them to another not as he is princeps Ecclesia politicus but as hee is summus princeps spiritualis when they hinder religion taking that course which bringeth detriment to mens soules will not otherwise be reclaimed 111 Vpon this declaration made by this Examinate vpon such apparant grounds and collections as he could not denie it was demanded of him what his iudgement was as touching the contents of it Whereunto he answereth that he hath elswhere sufficiently opened his mind in that behalfe where he hath often said that in his iudgment the Pope iure diuino hath no authoritie inherent in him or not inherent directly or indirectly whether it be termed spirituall or temporall or a mixt authoritie or howsoeuer it is or may be called to depose kings either for heresie or Apostasie or for any other cause whatsoeuer or to release their subiects from their obedience or to authorize them to beare armes against them or to excommunicate the subiects of any such kings that refuse to enter into any such disobedient rebellious and traiterous courses but continue their faithfull and loyall subiects notwithstanding hee should tell them neuer so confidently that such their former kings being by him deposed were no longer their kings or any other allurements or perswasions whatsoeuer to the contrary Whereunto this Examinate now addeth that in his iudgement it is a vaine conceit and repugnant to the Scripture for any to affirme that the Pope hath any power authoritie or iurisdiction either potentially or actually ordinary or casuall to deale with kings or princes or with their subiects as is aboue mentioned or to holde and maintaine that kings and soueraigne princes haue their regall authoritie from the Pope or that they are to him as the rulers and Iudges amongst the Israelites were to Moses or that hee hath any authoritie at all as he is Christs vicar and S. Peters successour to deale with kings and princes for any cause or at any time further then concerneth the health of their soules and the maintenance of the Catholicke faith by admonitions perswasions and good counsell and if those will not serue then by the spirituall censures of the Church and by S. Peters keyes only and not so neither but when it is apparant that such spirituall censures may in deede and truely turne to edification and not to destruction and that they may be vsed without hurt or danger of Catholickes either in their bodies goods or liues All further proceedings of the Pope with kings and soueraigne princes as the chiefe pastour of their soules this Examinate saith hee doeth vtterly dislike and prayeth from the bottome of his heart that hereafter they may neuer be practised 112 But heere this Examinate being put in mind of his own words aboue specified wher he acknowledged the Pope to haue casualiter some authoritie in temporalibus without the limits of S. Peters patrimonie though the same were not inherent in him and thereupon required to declare his meaning therein he saith that he neither had nor hath any other meaning then this that when any questions or controuersies arise amongst Kings Princes and such other great persons as they cannot amongst themselues compound but yet are contented to referre the decision or compounding of them vnto the Pope vnto whome they are all subiect in Spirituall matters hee the said Pope may lawfully in this Examinates iudgement vpon this occasion and so casualiter intermedle and deale in the said questions and controuersies and order them for the establishing of vnitie friendship and concord betwixt the said parties although the particulars so questioned or controuerted be meerely and altogether of temporall conusance And also this Examinate further saith that the Pope may so deale as he thinketh when any King Prince or other great person will bee content for the strengthning of his owne purposes in some especiall matter to desire the Popes approbation of it For example the King of Fraunce hauing left his former wife and married another had by her a Decretal lib. 4. cap. 13 qui filij sunt legitimi sonne and a daughter and being as it seemed in doubt that his sonne after him might in that respect receiue some preiudice in his Title to succeede him he the said King entreated the Pope for the legitimation of his issue whereunto hee yeelded the deciding of any mans right or interest to a Kingdome no wayes properly belonging to the Pope but casually as here it hapned when the King was contented to referre it vnto him and might haue done it himselfe but that he thought when the Pope ioined with him that which they did together would bee of greater force 113 This will appeare more plainely by Innocentius his owne words in an other suite of the same nature made vnto him where a Gentleman of Montpeliar hauing likewise put away his wife and married another by whom he had children Ibidem in glossa was encouraged by the example of the King of France to labour to the Pope of the legitimating of his children in like sort quatenus eis natalium obiectio ceu exceptio non noceret quo minàs sibi succederent that the exception against their birth might not hurt them but that they should bee his heires But Innocentius denying his suite amongst some other reasons why hee so did vsed these that the King of Fraunce had no superiour in his Kingdome in Temporall causes but this Gentleman was a Subject that the King of Fraunce might without any mans hurt referre the said matter to the Pope which this Gentleman could not doe in his cause that the King did neede the consent of no man for the approouing of that which the Pope had done on his behalfe whereas if he the said Innotentius should legitimate this Gentlemans children it would not availe him without the assent of the King or Lord his superiour that the King had power in that point to submit himselfe to the Popes iurisdiction which this Gentleman had not and that the King might in some mens opinions of himselfe haue legitimated his said sonne and daughter without any assistance from the Pope So as this Gentlemans cause was farre vnlike the Kings Hereof Innocentius himselfe did write to the said Gentleman in this sort Insuper cùm Rex superiorem in temporalibus minimè Ibidem Per venerabilem citatur à Bellar. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 5. cap. 3. recognoscat sine iuris alterius loesione in eo se iurisdictioni nostrae subijcere potuit in quo videretur aliquibus quòdper seipsum non tanquam pater cum filijs sed tanquam Princeps cum subditis potuit dispensare tuautem nosceris alijs subiacere vnde sine-ipsorum forsan iniuriâ nisi praestarent nobis assensum in hoc subdere te non posses That is Moreouer inasmuch as

Papali cap. 13. France except that which Zacharie did in the deposition of Hildericus may bee expounded deposuit id est deponentibus consensit sicut exponit glossa Zacharie deposed the King that is hee gaue his consent to those that did depose him as the glosse doth expound it that from such singular facts of deuotion to the Church or to the person or of fauour or for some other cause and not in right of law arguments may not bee made that whereas it is read in histories that Boniface obtained of Phocas the Emperour that the Church of Rome should be the head of all Churches because the Church of Constantinople did write herselfe so it might bee collected by such a like argument that it appertained to the Emperour to transferre the primacie of one Church to another as likewise whereas Isidore saith that Constantine the Emperour did decree that the See of Rome should hold the principalitie ouer the foure chiefe Sees Antioch Alexandria Constantinople and Hierusalem God forbid that thereupon we should say that the Church of Rome hath her Primacy ouer Churches and the disposition of them from Emperours So as this Examinate saith that which was done as touching the deposition of Hildericke the king of France doth no way alter his opinion before shewed touching the Popes authoritie in temporalibus casualiter when they are lawfully referred vnto him as in the Sect. 113. he hath specified 120 Here this Examinate was put in minde of certaine wordes of his in the said 113. Section where saying that the Pope as hee is Christs vicar could not otherwise deale in temporalibus casualiter then as here he hath said he seemeth to insinuate that in some other respect hee might deale in temporall causes with Kings for the deposing of them and proceeding with their subiects as hath bene before diuers times mentioned And the rather it so seemeth in that he hauing before cited out of Mancinus how the Pope hath authoritie to proclaime warre and so become a man at armes did let that point passe him without answere vnto it 121 For satisfaction whereof this Examinate saith that in his iudgement it is as lawfull for the Pope to make warre within his own Territories which he holdeth as a Temporall Prince when he is driuen thereunto through the disobedience of his subiects or in their defence against other Princes as it is for any King or ciuill State so to doe vpon such or the like occasions and that Iacobus Gretzerus saith well if this Examinate doth rightly vnderstand him to this purpose and to the iustification of all in effect which this Examinate hath set downe throughout the whole course of this his Examination touching his deniall of the Popes authoritie either directly as he is Pope or indirectly in ordine ad spiritualia as he is Summus Princeps spiritualis the Supreme spirituall Prince to depose Kings and release their subiects from the oathes of their allegeance c. where he writeth in this sort Cogit Pontifex Romanus poenis externis spiritualibus vt Excommunicatione Gretzerus defens controuers Bellar. colum 1404. item poenis externis temporalibus corporalibus quà ipse est Princeps politicus quà Principum politicorum opem implorare potest vt haereticorum petulantiam licentiam poenis temporalibus compescant that is That the Bishop of Rome hath authoritie to compell men by outward spirituall punishments as by Excommunication and also by outward temporal and corporal punishments as he is himselfe a ciuill Prince and as he may implore the assistance of other ciuill Princes that they may represse by temporall punishments the wantonnesse and liberty of heretikes 122 And this Examinate also further saieth that for ought he can Iudge whereas some exceptions were taken to the Popes sending of certaine small forces into Ireland about the yeere 1580. to assist the Earle of Desmond Cardinall Allen in answere of them doth politically iustifie that his fact where hee writeth in this manner The chiefe Bishops of Christs Church our supreme Pastors in earth by Gods prouidence and by the graunts of Card. Allens answere to the English Iustice pag. 144. our first most Christian Emperours and Kings and by the humble and zealous deuotion of the faithfull Princes and people afterwards haue their temporall states dominions and patrimonies whereby they most iustly holde and possesse the same and are thereby lawfull Princes temporall and may most rightfully by their Soueraigntie make warres in their owne and other mens iust quarrell as occasion shall vrge them there vnto 123 By reason of diuers particulars deliuered by this Examinate in this his answere to the last doubt propounded vnto him it was first demanded of him whether in his iudgement the Pope hath authority to command any king being held for a Catholicke to take armes against any his neighbour kings deemed by him for heretickes for the suppressing of them by temporall coertions when the Pope shall iudge it fit because it might seeme very strange for any man to conceiue that Christ euer gaue to S. Peter any iurisdiction authoritie or power in fauour of religion to set kings together by the eares It might haue some probabilitie that if a king who disalloweth of the Popes supremacie and of many other corrupt points of popish doctrine should send his forces into any other temporall princes dominions to make warres of purpose to abolish the Popes authoritie and plant there the reformed religion by him professed then in this case the Pope might sollicite some other kings adioyning to oppose them selues make warres against him But to imagine that when a King proceedeth no further then to order matters in his owne kingdome by the aduise of the States thereof both Ecclesiasticall and Temporall as it shal be iudged by him and them most expedient any Bishop or Spirituall person whosoeuer may take vpon him to proclaime or excite warre and thrust other kings to assaile him by force in his owne kingdome and countrey euery such conceit wanteth authoritie in the new Testament and hath no example for many yeeres in the purest and best times of the Church and besides it is repugnant to that which this Examinate hath before deliuered For kingdomes being neither founded vpon faith nor grace how can they be shaken vnder pretence that either of them is impugned Christianitie may well be thought to binde a king who reckoneth himselfe subiect to the Bishop of Rome in spirituall causes in them to submit him selfe vnto him but to command him to make warre and thereby hazard peraduenture his owne kingdome or spend the blood either of his owne Subiects or of the subiects of any other Christian King when the Pope thinketh good is a very bloodie and an vnchristian opinion 124 Vnto this question and the parts thereof this Examinate saith that he beleeueth that all Christian Kings and Princes are bound to doe what they can for the maintenance of the Catholicke faith