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	church_n	emperor_n	2,345	5	7.0417	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A42386	A brief examination of the present Roman Catholick faith contained in Pope Pius his new creed, by the Scriptures, antient fathers and their own modern writers, in answer to a letter desiring satisfaction concerning the visibility of the protestant church and religion in all ages, especially before Luther's time.	Gardiner, Samuel, 1619 or 20-1686.	1689 (1689)	Wing G244; ESTC R29489	119,057	129

13. Epist 39. Lib. 7. Epist 30. ad Eulogium he rejects the name given to himself this name of Singularity or consented to use it as Popes now do And who is he who contrary to the Gospel and the Decrees of the Canons presumeth to take upon him this foolish and proud Name Did ever any Protestant inveigh more bitterly against the Popes Universal Episcopacy I would gladly know whether both parts of a contradiction can be true Whether the antient or modern Roman Bishops or both be infallible Do not the modern Popes assume and earnestly contend for this foolish proud and Antichristian Name And lest we should imagine that Pope Gregory condemn'd this Name in other Patriarchs only not as to himself he addeth in the before-mentioned Epistle to Mauritius the Emperour Gracious Lord Nunquid hac in re propriam causam defendo c. Do I in this speak for my self or plead my own cause and not rather the cause of the whole Church Where note he acknowledgeth the Emperour to be his Lord and to whose judgment he is willing to refer the whole cause Did Pope Gregory make the Emperour supreme Judge in an Article of Faith Let Papists judge Notwithstanding all this zeal his successor Boniface soon after Ann. 607. as Sigebert Marianus Scotus Martinus Polonus and other Historians testifie Epist 32. ad Maurit lib. 2. Epist 61. ad Maur. Beda de aetate Anastas vita Bonifacii 3. Ad. Chron. l. 1. In Praefat. Reipub. Eccl. by the favour of that execrable Regicide Phocas obtained this proud foolish and prophane Title and the present Pope not onely owneth the Name but contrary to the judgment of his Predecessors who are supposed to have been infallible executeth an Universal jurisdiction over all Princes Bishops Churches as far as he is able to the diminution yea almost abrogation of their due Rights Priviledges and Authority as Marcus Antonius de Dominis Arch-bishop of Spalato justly complained So much for the Popes Supremacy Art. 7 Concerning the sacrifice of the Mass The next Article is the proper and real Sacrificing Christ his very Body and Bloud in the Mass by the Priest as a Propitiation for the sins both of quick and dead This Error in all probability arose from want of a discreet understanding of some Rhetorical or Hyperbolical expressions used by the Antient Fathers in their popular Sermons and Discourses concerning the Sacrament of Christ's death and Passion Christus in seipso immortaliter vivens iterum in hoc Mysterio moritur Greg. M. de Concil Dist 2. Quid sit But that it was no part of their Faith to believe that Christ is really and properly sacrificed in the Mass we shall evidently prove out of their own Writings I shall begin with Justin Martyr Apol. ad Antonin who discoursing of the Holy Eucharist sheweth how the Christians then used to offer Bread and Wine to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Minister who receiving them offereth up to God not Christ himself but Glory Thanks and Praise for those his gifts i. e. Bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mal. 1.11 which relates to all Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Wine which after the Ministers Prayers and Thanksgivings are distributed to every one that is present Where note First They termed Bread and Wine after the Ministers Prayers or Consecration Secondly Both Bread and Wine were given to all present not Bread onely much less neither one nor the other as in Private Masses But of sacrificing or offering up Christ himself to God he hath not a word in that place The same Father in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew P. 201. treateth at large concerning the abrogation of the Jewish Sacrifices and coming to mention the Christian Sacrifice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Dialog pag. 270. which Malachy foretold should be offered up to God by the Gentiles in every place he interprets it as Tertullian Eusebius and the rest of the Fathers do of Prayers and Praises Which saith he I account the onely perfect sacrifices pleasing to God. Which Spiritual Sacrifices a little after he opposeth to all the Sacrifices Offerings and Oblations of the Law. Surely had Saint Justin believed that in the Eucharist Christ himself his Body and Bloud were by the Priest really and properly sacrificed to God he would no doubt have made mention of this Christian Sacrifice far exceeding in virtue and value no onely all Jewish Offerings but the Prayers and Thanksgivings of all Christians at least he would never have affirmed that the latter were in his opinion the onely perfect Sacrifices under the Gospel pleasing to God. But he is altogether silent as to any such Sacrifice yea contrarily in that very place he addeth That these onely Sacrifices to wit Prayers and Praises Christians have learned to make and that in or at the commemoration or remembrance of their alimony both wet and dry i. e. the Eucharistical Bread and Wine in which they remember the Passion of Christ Where it is remarkable that Justin Martyr instead of proper sacrificing of Christ in the Holy Eucharist mentions onely the Commemoration or Memorial of his Passion and that the Prayers and Thanksgivings attending it for it 's called the Eucharist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were the onely Sacrifices Christians had learned in that most solemn Office of Religion to offer up to God. So much for Justin I pass on to St. Irenaeus who acknowledgeth that Christ teaching his Disciples to offer to God First-fruits of his Creatures Lib. 4. c. 32.32 34. lest they should seem ungrateful took that Bread which is of the creature or Creation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 possibly was the word and gave thanks and said This is my Body In like manner the Cup of Wine which is of the creature i. e. the Vine confessing it to be his Bloud and taught the Oblation of the new Testament which the Church receiving from the Apostles offereth to God throughout the World to him who granteth to us the First-fruits of his Gifts in the New Testament Here we find an Oblation but not a Sacrifice which two De Missa l. 1. c 2. as Bellarmine observeth are different things much less a sacrifice of Christs Body and Bloud Irenaeus plainly sheweth what kind of Oblation he meant when he declareth it to be not of Christ the Creator but of Gods creatures to wit Bread and Wine which the Church offers to God. De Euchar. lib 10. c. 27. V. Litur Chrysost Bellarmine grants this First as an expression of honour love and gratitude to him for his creatures bountifully bestowed on us for our sustenance Secondly That out of a part of them to wit Bread and Wine set on Gods Table or Altar by the prayers of the Priest they might become sacramentally and mystically his Body and Bloud Thirdly That out of the remains the poor might be relieved These Oblations Saint Cyprian after him calleth in an improper

under the subtle Usurpation and tyranny of Popery The answer given by the Proctors of the Romish Court to this Canon as that of Chalcedon Hunc Canonem Ecclesia Romana non recipit Coriolanus p. 285. Ad An. 381. l. 38. or any other that opposeth their Dominion is The most holy Church of Rome approveth or receiveth not that Council or Canon for all Councils saith their great Cardinal Baronius have more or less Authority as they are approved or not allowed by the Roman Church or Pope An Answer which scarcely deserves a reply and sheweth what esteem our Romanists have of even General Councils if they cross their ambitious designs I cannot omit that famous Synodical Epistle sent by the Bishops of Africa of whom St. Austin was one to the Bishop of Rome Pope Celestine which is an invincible Bulwark or Sea-wall against the inundation of Papal Supremacy It would be tedious to transcribe the whole Letter which is still extant and written directly against this new Article of Codic Canon Ecclesiae Africanae in fine not Catholick but Roman Faith. They first desire the Pope not easily to give Audience to such as appealed from them to him Ab aliis excommunicati ab aliis ad commumonem ne recipiantur sine synodo provinciali Concil Nicaen Can. 5. or to receive into his Communion such as they had as Apiarius a most scandalous Presbyter amongst others deservedly excommunicated Which was say they contrary to the Nicene Canons which respect Bishops as well as inferiour Clericks They tell him that the Canons of the Church had prudently provided that all Controversies should be determined in the places where they arose where the Grace of the Holy Ghost would not be wanting to direct unless any one can believe that God will inspire any one man the Pope with Justice i. e. just or right judgment and deny it to multitudes of Priests met in Council The African Bishops thought no Christian man could believe this but there are Roman Catholicks who have made it an unquestionable truth that though all Councils may err yet the Pope being infallibly assisted by the Holy Ghost cannot The Afri●●n Fathers go on How can a transmarine Sentence at Rome be firm and good V. Cyprian Epist 55. to which the necessary presence of Witnesses either in regard of Sex or infirmity of Age and many other impediments cannot be had That any should be sent from your side as Legates suppose à Latere we do not find in any Council of Fathers nor in the authentick Canons of the Nicene Do not send upon any ones request your Clericks as inforcers to wit of your Sentence upon Appeals lest we seem to bring the smoaky Pride of the World into the Church So these holy Bishops I had almost said Prophets without fear or flattery wrote of old to Christ's Universal Vicar at Rome As for the condemning Appeals to the Pope therein they trod in their steps and use almost the very words of Saint Cyprian Bishop of Carthage and his Colleagues to Cornelius Bishop of Rome ● Epist 55. vel ●ab 10. Epist 3. ad ●ornelium to whom he wrote in this manner Cum statutum sit ab omnibus nobis c. Whereas it is decreed by all of us in some National Council of Africa and is both just and fit that every cause Ecclesiastical should be there heard where the fault was committed and to all Pastors a part portio gregis of the flock of Christ not all the flock to one is entrusted which every one ought to rule as he that must give an account to God not the Bishop of Rome Cornelius it becometh not those whom we are over to run about to other Churches aiming particularly at the Roman and by their subtle and fallacious rashness to divide the Concord of Bishops and dissolve the Unity of the Church but there to plead their cause where Witnesses and Accusers may be produced against them Epist 68. The same St. Cyprian in another Epistle adviseth and encourageth the People of Spain not to receive Basilides again as their Bishop although he had been at Rome with Pope Stephen by whom he was he saith unjustly and as he supposed in a surreptitious manner restored for he had been deposed to his Bishoprick Can any one now believe that Saint Cyprian held the supreme Authority of the Bishop of Rome over all Bishops and Churches to be his lawful right or which is more incredible an Article of the antient Primitive and Apostolick Faith as Pope Pius hath declared it Surely he must then be a Person of very Catholick i. e. Universal Faith to believe any thing Hen. 1. Hen. 2. apud Matth. Parisien And what did Henry VIII as other Kings of England before him worse than Saint Austin and the whole African Church in forbidding Appeals and forbidding his Legates in their own Kingdom Why might not England do this as well as Africa Well however our Adversaries will relish it Can. 22. the Council of Milevis another African Council forbad all Appeals to transmarine Churches aiming no doubt especially at Rome under pain of Excommunication out of all the Churches of Africa and another at Carthage Concil Carthag 3. Can. 26. decreed that no Bishop whosoever no not the Roman should be called the Prince of Bishops but onely the Bishop of the first Seat or See. Gratian the Roman Canonist according to his excellent faculty of translating giveth us the meaning of the Canon thus That no Bishop is to be called the Prince of Bishops but the Bishop of the first Seat i. e. the Pope Glossa quae corrumpit textum I will onely add the Testimonies of two Bishops of Rome The former is Pelagius the 2d Gregor lib. 4. Epist 36. 38. who writing to his Rival for the Supremacy the Bishop of Constantinople saith Nullus Patriarcharum c. none of the Patriarchs and so neither the Roman may use or assume the Title of Universal Bishop for hereby the name of Patriarch is indeed taken from all the rest which saith he far be it from the thought of any faithful Christian This is upon Record in the Popes Canon Law. But his Successor Pope Gregory the Great Dist 99. Cap. Nullus Patriarcharum Lib. 4. Epist 34. speaketh out more plainly who writing to the Empress against John Bishop of Constantinople his Rival saith In this his Pride in affecting the Title of Universal Bishop appeareth the approach of Antichrist Wherefore I beseech you by the Almighty God give not any consent to this perverse Title In like manner Epist 32. to the Emperor Peter himself is not called the Universal Apostle Feed my sheep it seems proveth it not None of the Roman Bishops ever assumed though offer'd to them Lib. 4. Epist 38. ad Joann Constantin In isto scelesto vocabulo consentire nihil est aliud quam fidem perdere Greg. M. ad Sabinian lib. 4. Indict

any Saint As for the place usually quoted out of Justin M. to this purpose it is grosly perverted by false pointing The words are these But him i. e. God the Father and him who came from him and taught us and the Host of good Angels these things the Son and the Prophetick Spirit we worship and adore Bellarmine was not ashamed to render them thus But him the Father and his Son who came and taught us these things and the Host of good Angels and the Prophetical Spirit we worship and adore Thus by placing a note of distinction after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 teaching us these things he abuseth his Reader into a conceit that the Primitive Christians as Justin here witnesseth did adore not only the Father Son and Holy Ghost but the Host of Holy Angels also Yea if the Cardinals reading be right then they worshiped and adored the Holy Angels in the third place next to the Father and Son before the Holy and Prophetical Spirit which certainly was far from the least thought or practice of the Primitive Christians or their Apologist Justin Martyr who elsewhere declares in his own and the Christians names that they worshipped as the Father and Son so in the third place not the Holy Angels but the Holy Ghost But enough of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only we may observe by the way with what honesty and fidelity our Adversaries quote the Fathers There is another place they bring out of Irenaeus Ut Maria Virgo sit Evae advocata Lib. 5. cont Haer. ultra medium That the Virgin Mary may be Eves Advocate Hence most impertinently they infer that Eve prayed or might pray to the Virgin Mary whereas all that can be concluded from those words is that the Virgin Mary prayeth for Eve. I wonder how it is possible to conceive that Eve should pray to the Virgin Mary some thousands of years before she was born The truth is those words of Irenaeus do not at all relate to any religious Advocation or Invocation for in that place he onely makes a Parallel or comparison betwixt Eve and the Virgin Mary that as Eve a Virgin brought sin and death into the World so Mary a Virgin brought forth a Saviour and Redeemer ut Maria sit Evae advocata that Mary might be an Advocate or Pleader to excuse the sin of Eve and defend the honour of the Sex. Take Tertullians Verses as a Comment on Irenaeus who speaks fully and clearly what he meant Virgo viro nocuit sed vir de virgine vicit Lib. 1. advers Marcionem V. Origen in Dialog p. 256. Tertul. de Habitu mulier c. 10. Virginis ut virgo caro carnis debita solvat That as by a Virgin came Death so also by a Virgin came deliverance from Death The Virgin Mary in and by her Son making full reparation or satisfaction for Eves transgression What Doth this concern religious Invocation of the blessed Virgin But I shall not satisfie my self much less others in bare Asserting Let us come to the trial of the Cause and produce our Witnesses Justin Martyr Ecclesia nec invocationibus Angelicis facit aliquid sed purè orationes dirigens ad Dominum Iren. lib. 20. c. 57. in fine Apol. 2. giving an account to the Emperor Antoninus of the Christian Religion saith We offer up the Sacrifices of Prayer and Thanksgiving to God We think him alone worthy of this Honour by whom all things were created And a little after We worship God alone The Church of Smyrna being accused by the Heathens Euseb Hist Eccl. lib. 4. c. 15. V. Lactant. Instit lib. 5. cap. 11. de vera relig c. 55. Cont. Faustum lib. 22. c. 21. as if they intended to worship their martyred Bishop Saint Polycarp answer in vindication of themselves We worship Christ the Son of God but Martyrs we worthily love 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his Disciples and faithful Servants whose memory on their Natalitia or Obit days we celebrate which exactly agrees with St. Austins's dogmatical resolution of this Question We honour Angels Charitate non servitute with love not service and in another place with the worship or honour of Love and Fellowship as holy Men are worshipped in this life Origen against Celsus Lib. 8 p. 386. Edit Cant. and the same he saith lib 5. c. 60. vet Edit The good Angels in some sense we reverence honour or worship as Gods Ministers but we worship one God and his onely Son with Prayers and supplications offering them to God by his onely begotten begging that he as our High Priest would present them to God. He saith not by the Intercession of Saints upon our Prayers to them or Angels but Christ the Son of God our High Priest whose peculiar Office it is as such to present our Prayers and spiritual Sacrifices unto God. And a little after God alone is to be prayed unto Prayers are to be offered also to his onely Son. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And whereas Celsus alledged as now Papists do the power of Courtiers to injure or help those who respect or disrespect them V. Ambros p. 300. in Rom. cap. 1. Origen adviseth him to commit and commend himself to God onely the Supreme Ruler of all things and to beg of him all that help and protection which cometh from Angels and just Men For saith he as the shadow follows the motion of the Body so he that pleaseth God hath the Friends of God V. Origen in Romanos 2. p. 140. Angels and blessed Souls favourable to him who will render God more favourable and will pray together with him although unrequested But of our praying therefore to them not a word is to be found in all his Books against Celsus yea in these words the ground of all Invocation of Saints or Angels is wholly taken away Not to weary the Reader lib. 5. in Cels p. 233. He saith all Prayers are to be offered up to God and that it is not fit or reasonable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to call upon Angels If not on Angels much less on Saints The same we find lib. 8. in Cels p. 402. Clemens Alexandrinus accounted it gross folly to beg of those who are no Gods as if they were Strom. 7. wherefore justly seeing there is one good God we and Angels beg of him the bestowing of good things Tertullian says Apologet. cap. 34. Praecepit Christus secretè orare ut quem ubique audire fideret ei soli Religionem offerret Tertullian Apologet. cap. 30. These things I can beg of none else but of him of whom I know I shall obtain them because he alone which Papists dare not deny granteth them and I to whom it belongeth to obtain them am his Servant whom not Saints or Angels I onely serve or observe And in another place We are to ask of him by whom something is promised i. e. God. Have Saints or Angels promised