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	king_n	pope_n	3,740	5	6.7557	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A08377	A sermon preached in St. Maries Church in Oxford, March xxiv. MDCX. at the solemnizing of the happy inauguration of our gracious soveraigne King Iames Wherein is proved that kings doe hold their kingdomes immediately from God. By Sebastian Benefield D. of Divinitie, Fellow of Corpus Christi College.	Benefield, Sebastian, 1559-1630.	1611 (1611)	STC 1870; ESTC S115273	13,137	24

Lord said vnto Elias Go annoint Hazael king over Aram and Iehu the sonne of Nimshi shalt thou annoint king over Israel Of Nabuchodonosor Dan. 2.37 O king saith Daniel thou art a king of kings for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdome Of Salomon 2. Chron. 8.9 The Queene of Sheba saith vnto him Blessed be the Lord thy God which loved thee to set thee on his throne as king And to omit others of David in my text of whom it is also specially said 1. Chron. 28.4 That God did choose him and delighted in him to make him king over Israel and ver 3. Psal 21. that the Lorde did set a crowne of pure gold vpon his head These proofes generall or particular standing vpon so soveraigne autoritie as Gods word is of doe make good my propounded doctrine namely that kings do hold their kingdomes immediatly from God Whereto I doubt not but I haue your full assent What neede then is there of any further insisting vpon this point Surely none were there not a generation of men bearing in their foreheads the stampe of Christians that cannot brooke any proofe taken out of Scripture for the maintenance of any doctrine that may distast the bishop of Rome or want his allowance Tel such that by scripture it is plaine that kings hold their kingdomes immediately frō God their reply wil be what tel you vs of scripture Set aside the autority of the Church the autoritie of the Pope we take scripture to be no better thē a q Colloqium Wormat. apud Lubbert de princip lib. 1. cap 5. doubtfull vncertaine and leaden rule then a r Colloq Ratisbon Rungqu 2. matter of debate then a ſ Colloq Wormat. vbi supra booke of discord then a poore t Hosius de expresso Dei verbo kind of element then a u Pighius cōtrov 3. de Ecclesia dūb iudge then x Ludov. Canon Lateran dead inke then y Eckius inken diuinity then a z Pighius Hierar l. 3. c. 3. nose of wax then a Hosius Gretser c. Aesops fables Impious wretches had they not wiped all shame from their faces they would never haue laid such load of disgraces vpon Gods holy worde Their Cardinall Hosius staies not here he proceedes a degree farther He coines a distinction of scripture as it is vsed by themselues whom they call Catholikes and as by vs whom they call Heretikes His words are in the end of his third booke against Brentius his Prolegomena The scripture quomodo profertur à Catholicis verbum est Dei quomodo profertur ab haereticis verbum est diaboli as it is alleadged by vs so must it bee forsooth the word of the Devill but as by them so only shall it be the word of God Upon this ground and distinction of theirs I doubt not but that blasphemous b Apodix 1. Thes 8. p. 131 Dorhoff hath made an alteration in the beginning of our Creede and in steede of Credo in Deum patrem omnipotentem creatorem coeli terrae hath substituted Credo in Diabolum carnificem orcipotentem corruptorem coeli terrae For if scripture alleaged by vs be verbum Diaboli what is our beliefe What our religion You see of what validitie proofes drawne by vs from holy Scriptures for the confutation of any popish point are in the estimation of some Papists They hold vs for Heretikes and consequently the sense of scripture which we bring to be no sense of scripture Hence is it that the Author of the short Narration how Henrie the IV. late king of France and Navarre sent his Embassadours to Pope Clement the VIII for absolution from his heresie tels vs that though some doe mainetaine the king to hold his kingdome immediately from God yet that at Rome this is accounted a very ridiculous matter It is evident to be so by Cardinall Bellarmin who in his first book de Romano Pontifice cap. 7. parag Postremo distinguishing betweene secular and ecclesiasticall soveraignty affirmeth that the Ecclesiasticall is à solo Deo de iure divino from God alone and by the law of God but the secular is from mans institution and de iure gentium by the law of nations If we marke the antithesis and opposition betweene the lawe of God the law of nations as also between the soveraigneties Ecclesiasticall and secular we must needs acknowledge it for Bellarmines opinion that kings holde not their kingdomes immediatly from God This his opiniō is more clearely set downe in his booke de Clericis cap. 28. parag Ad confirmationem His expresse words there are Regna non sunt de iure divino sed de iure gentium proinde mutabilia sunt Kingdomes are not by Gods law but by the law of nations and therefore are changeable wherevpon dependeth his treasonable doctrine delivered in his fift booke de Rom. Pontif. cap. 8. where among other things Parag. Praeterea he affirmeth that not only Princeps Episcoporum the Pope but Episcopus quilibet every Bishop though but the Popes vassall may vse temporall power over kings and inforce them to make lawes yea and for some causes depose them too as appeareth by the precedents of that chapter But this and other like proditorious assertions there and elsewhere broached and defended by Bellarmine others of that faction vpon this ground That kings do not holde their kingdomes immediately from God I now let passe The immediate dependencie of kings and their kingdomes vpon God howsoever at Rome it be ridiculously entertained hath already bin prooved and warranted sufficiently to such as do beleeue the scriptures Unbeleevers I much heede not Yet if any will that the autority of the ancient fathers be produced let such know that a Ad utilitatē gentiliū terrenum regnū positum est à Deo sed non à diabolo c. Irenaeus in his 5. booke aduersus haereses b Christianus nulliꝰ est hostis nedū Imperatoris quem scien à Deo suo cōstitui necesse est ut ipsū diligat revercatur honoret salvum velit cum toto Romano Imperio quousque seculum stabit Colimꝰ ergo Imperatorem sic quomodo nobis licet ipsi expedit ut hominem à Deo secundum quicquid est à Deo consecutum solo Deo minorem Hoc ipse volet Sic enim omnibus major est dum solo vero deo minor est Et Apologet. cont gent. cap. 30. Sciunt Imperatores quis illia dederit imperium sciunt quà homines quis animam Sentiunt enim Deum esse solum in cujus solius potestate sunt à quo sunt secundi post quem primi ante omnes super omnes deos Quid-ni Cum super omnes homines qui ubique vivunt mortuis antistant Tertullian in the 2. cap. of his booke to Scapula c Super