Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	bishop_n	call_v	pope_n	1,405	5	6.2726	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A06606	A treatise of the iudge of controuersies. Written in Latin, by the R. Father Martinus Becanus of the Society of Iesus, Professour in Diuinity. And Englished by W.W. Gent; De judice controversiarum. English	Becanus, Martinus, 1563-1624.; Wright, William, 1563-1639.	1619 (1619)	STC 1707; ESTC S101284	69,267	198

also who are not of the stocke of the Iewes On the other side might be alleadged that of Deuteronomy Our Lord thy God will circumcise thy hart and the Deut. 30. 6. hart of thy seed Where it is insinuated that Circumcision of flesh is not to remaine in the new Testament but that the circumcision of the hart is to succeed in the place thereof As also that of Ieremy Be circumcised to our Lord and take away the prepuce of your harts as if he should say I do not require the circumcision of flesh but of the hart which consisteth in the inward contrition and greife for sinnes These and such like might be taken out of the Scripture for both parts But it was not so done For the Apostles being gathered together in Councell gaue sentence by the direction and assistance of God the which God had promised to them and their successours for euer After the tyme of the Apostles there arose other new controuesies in diuers places and ages which is certaine out of the Ecclesiasticall histories to haue beene decided eyther by the Romaine bishops or by some approued Councells And those who would not yeald to their sentence were accounted alwaies and condemned for heretikes I will bring forth some plaine examples euen of those which do first occure The first controuersy was whether the Pasch ought to be celebrated with the Iewes on the fourteenth day of the first month as many did hould Vide Euseb l. 5. hist Eccles cap. 23. sequent in Asia who for that cause were called Quartadecimani or only vpon Sunday as now it is This truly after many Councells and assemblies of diuers Bishops was decided and ended by Victor the Pope Anno Domini 198. The second was whether the Church might absolue thē from sinnes Vide Baron circa eundem annum who were fallen after baptisme Nouatian did deny it But he was condemned of errour in the Roman Councell by Pope Cornelius Anno Christi 255. The third was whether in God there was three persons really distinct Sabellius denyed it affirming that there was but one person which had three offices of creation redemption and Sanctification But he also was condemned Iuxta Baron in the Councell of Alexandria in the tyme of Pope Siluester Anno Christi 319 The fourth whether Christ be a pure man as other who be mortall hath nothing more in nature and person then we haue Paulus Samosatenus did affirme it But he also was condemned in the councell of Antioch in the tyme of Pope Dionysius Anno Christi 266 Iuxta Baron vide Euseb l 7. cap. 27. The first was Whether Christ were the eternall word of his Father and of the same substance with him Arius denyed it affirming that the word of the word not to haue beene from eternity but created of God in tyme of Vide duas epist Alexan E. pics Alex. quarum vna extat apud Socra lib. 1. c. ● altera apud Theod. l. 2. cap. 4. nothing and of another substance from God And therefore that God was not alwayes a Father but that there was some tyme when he was not Father But he was condemned in the first generall Councell of Nice in the tyme of Pope Siluester and Constantine the Emperour Anno 325. The fixt was whether in Christ there be two Persons as there are two natures diuine and human Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople did affirme it but he was likewise condemned in the Generall Councell of Ephesus in the tyme of Pope Celestine and Theodosiu● ●he Emperour Anno 434. and before by Cyrill in the Councell of Alexandria Anno 431. The seaueth was whether in Christ there be two natures Eutiches and Dioscorus sayd that before the hypostaticall vnion there was two natures Vide Ga● Vasq tom 1. in 3. par D. Thom. in disp 14. diuine and humaine But after the vnion that both two came into one and were made one But they both were condemned in the generall Councell of Chalcedon in the tyme of Pope Leo and Marcian the Emperour Anno 454. The eight whether there was one will only in Christ Macarius Patriarch of Antioch Cyrus of Alexandria Sergius of Constantinople and some others although they acknowledged two natures to be in Christ yet they sayd that there was in him but one will to wit the diuine In 3. p. 1. 18. art 1. as is recorded by S. Thomas and therefore they were called Monothelites this their opinion was condemned in the third generall Councell of Constantinople vnder Pope Agatho and the Emperour Constantine the 4. in the yeare 679. But whether these vnderstood by Vide Baro. the name of will the power or the operation is to be seene in Gabriel Vasquez The 9. Whether the holy Ghost be God The Macedonians deny it of Tom. 1. dis 73. cap. 1. whome thus writes S. Augustine The Macedonians came from one Macedonius who was bishop of Cōstātinople these of the Greekes are called also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because they cōtended about the holy Ghost For as concerning the Father and the Sonne they beleeue aright that they are of one the same substance nature and essence but they deny this of the holy Ghost saying that he is but a creature These were condemned in the first generall Councell of Constantinople vnder Pope Damasus and the Emperour Theodosius The tenth is Whether baptisme may be reiterated or one may be baptized twice Which controuersy may be two waies vnderstood First whether baptisme if it be once giuen well may be reiterated againe Marcion Epiph. haer 42. paulo post princip affirmed it as Epiphanius is witnesse for he writeth thus of Marcion After he had deflowerd sayth he a certaine Virgin in the Citty and was fled away but yet afterwardes found in that great fault the cousener inuented a second lauer to himselfe affirming that three were lawfull to wit three Baptismes for the remission of sinnes to the end that if any shall sinne after the first doing pennance he might take the second and also the third if he should be found in fault after the second Againe it may be vnderstood whether Baptisme giuen of Heretikes may be reiterated The Donatists affirmed it who did baptize again all those who were baptized of Catholikes as S. Augustin doth witnesse because they Aug. in l. de haer cap. 69. accounted Catholikes for Heretikes and so thought that Baptisme giuen of Heretikes was of no value as is to be seene in Vasquez These were condemned V●sq disp 146. c. 2. in the Roman Councell vnder Melchiades the Pope Anno Domini 313. The eleuenth is whether a man Apud Baron without the grace of God can fullfill the Law only by the force of nature if he be willing Pelagius and Celestius affirmed it but they were both condemned in the Councells of Carthage and Mileuitane in the tyme of Pope Innocentius the first Anno 416.