Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	body_n	natural_a	reason_n	1,505	5	4.9161	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19951	An oration made on the part of the Lordes spirituall in the chamber of the Third Estate (or communality) of France, vpon the oath (pretended of allegiance) exhibited in the late Generall Assembly of the three Estates of that kingdome: by the Lord Cardinall of Peron, arch-bishop of Sens, primate of Gaule and Germany, Great Almenour of France &c. Translated into English, according to the French copy, lately printed at Paris, by Antoine Estiene. Whereunto is adioyned a preface, by the translatour.; Harangue faicte de la part de la chambre ecclésiastique en celle du Tiers-estat sur l'article du serment. English.	Du Perron, Jacques Davy, 1556-1618.	1616 (1616)	STC 6384; ESTC S116663	77,855	154

yet these be at this day the writers whome they celebrate extoll and whome they haue in their eyes For so an authour say something against the Pope and that he put as much as he please the safetie of Kinges vnder the peoples feete him they imbrace applaude and adore And of this we neede not any better proofe then the edition of Gerson which they who haue beene the first authors of the Article that is now proposed vnto vs haue caused to be imprinted eight yeares since with inscriptions pictures and elogies or testifications of his prayses because he seemeth vnto them to haue writen against the Pope For in his sermō made in the presence of King Charles the 7. in the name of the Vniuersitie of Paris Gers serm ad Regem Fran. nomine vniuersit Paris after he had made Sedition to speake which wills that vse without exception and indifferently be made of this rule of Seneca There is not a sacrifice more pleasing vnto God then the killing of Tyrants and that it is to be put in vre against all sortes of persons accused of Tyranny and vpon all manner of suspitions and of defamatory libels and Dissimulation that wills on the contrary that we neuer vse it but that we endure all Tyrants he bringeth in Discretiō that teacheth when it is to be vsed in these wordes Gers ibid. We conclude further that if the head or any other member of the Commō wealth should incurre such an incōuenience as he would swallow vp the deadly poyson of Tyrany euery member in his place should oppose himself by al his possibility by expediēt meanes such as should not make the matter worse seing it were to small it purpose when the head aketh that the hand should strike it but rather folly For nether is it necesary to cut it off by by to separate it from the rest of the body but we must cure it sweetly aswel by good words as otherwise lyke prudent wise Phisitians There could not be any thing more against reason of greater cruelty then Tyrany by a seditiō I cal sedition a rebellion of the people without cause and without reason which is oft tymes worse thē tyrany c. There needeth great singuler discretion prudence and temperance about the expulsion thrusting out of tyranny and therefore we must heare and giue credit to wise Philosophers Lawyers Deuines to men of good life of good and naturall prudence of great experiēce of whom it is said In old men is found experience For though a Prince and Lord sinne in many cases yet he must not for that be presently censured a Tyrant So he there And in his worke of ten Considerations against the flatterers of Kings where he recapitulateth a part of the discourse of his Sermon Gerson Considerat 7. contra adulat he sayth It is an errour to belieue that a terrene Prince is not bound in any thing during his raigne to his subiects For according to diuine right and naturall equity and the end of true gouernement as the subiects owe fidelity ayd succour and seruice to their Lord So the Lord oweth agayne faith and protection to his subiects And if the Prince manifestly pursue and persecute them and with obstinacy in iniury and by fact then this naturall rule It is lawfull to repell force by force and this saying of Seneca There cannot be a more acceptable Sacrifice immolated and made to God then by taking away of a Tyrant taketh place And notwithstanding this which is more strange those who haue caused this to be reprinted haue not vouchsafed to add either in the beginning of his workes or in the margent of these wordes any obseruation or note for the censuring of them or for aduertisement of the Reader to take heed But indeed how could they haue done it without condemning themselues Themselues I say who during the fury of these last troubles had been Ensigne-bearers or rather had caried the burning torches of this pernicious doctrine and had maynteyned and publisht it against King Henry the third by propositions disputed and printed For these be their words It is most certaine that by right both diuine and naturall the Estates be aboue Kings And againe It was lawfull for all the people of France most iustly to take armes against the Tyrant that is to say agaynst King Henry the third And a litle after They who consider matters attentiuely and diligently will iudge that the eternall enemies of the Religion and of the Country ought to be pursued not only by publique armes but also by the sword and plotts of particuler persons And that Iames Clement the Dominican was not put forwards by any other desire then by the loue of the Lawes of his Country and of the zeale of Ecclesiasticall discipline by which this restorer of our Liberty hath put vpon his owne head grace and vpon our neck a coller of gold and the heauenly collers of the Church Thus there This I say not to scandalize them for I conceale their names nor to reproach them with that that the bounty and clemency of the King hath buried vp and forgotten but to shew that they should be content to attend the rest of their dayes to the cancelling and washing away of their offence with their teares and not to meddle themselues with the making of lessons of the seruice of Kinges to them who alwaies well and faithfully serued them euen then when they persecuted them But these are violent spirits who being transported to one extreme and not being of power to hold the meane thought that the best meanes for the iustifying of themselues was to passe ouer to the other extreme and to put their hand to pen to write and fight against the Pope Wherin as they are found conforme or at least very like vnto the Churches enemies they haue beene so set on and plyed by those our enemyes and by some that dissembled with them as they haue beene induced thrust on vnder a pretence of the Kinges seruice to sow the seedes of schisme But Syrs the King desireth not to be serued after this sort his will is not that prouision be made for his safety by schisme and by the Churches diuision In the ruines whereof is comprehended the ruine and ouerthrow of his owne safetie spirituall and temporall he is a Catholike and the eldest child of the Catholike Church he is the first Catholike of all the Kinges and the first King of all the Catholikes He feareth not to fall into Heresy and standeth not in doubt of the Popes censures nor dreadeth the Churches threates against Heretikes He is the prime and principall protect our of the one and the other He is the heire both of the Crowne and of the name and of the faith of that glorious S. Lewis who was the Churches support and piller and the Popes defence retrait He is descēded from a mother no lesse Catholike pious and

forme of his appellation saith (b) Act. inter Bonif Phil. Pulch. Wee appeale to the said Generall Councell which we most hartily craue may be assembled and to the true and lawfull supreme Bishop that shal be and to others to which or to whome it shal be meete to appeale For the King and his maynteyned that Boniface was not the true Pope but was intruded and thrust into the Popedome by fraud simony (c) Ibidem Celestine his predecessour the true lawfull Pope still liuing And they further added that he was an (d) Ibidem Heretique and consequently not Pope for as much as said they (e) Ibid. in appell fact per reg regni col art 18. he had reuealed a confession and more then that he pretended that he beleeued not in the presence of Christes body in the Holy Sacrament And for this the Coūt of Artois caused his Buls to be burnt not as of the true Pope but as of a false one intruded heretical symoniacal and for this cause the King appealed not frō the Pope but from the person of Boniface to the Councel to the Sea Apostolique when it should haue a true Pope he sent two Knights to signify his appeale the one an Italian named Schiarra and the other a Frenchman named Nogaret who surprized by intelligence the Cittie of Anagnia wherin Pope Boniface was whence being deliuered vp and sent to Rome he dyed within awhile of sorrow In place of Boniface was chosen Benedictus to whome presētly after his creation the King gaue sufficiently to vnderstand that what he had done against Boniface was done but against his person and not against the Sea Apostolique For he wrote vnto him with this superscription (a) Act. inter Bonif Phil Pulch. fol. 94. To the most holy Father in our Lord Benedict by the diuine prouidence Supreme Bishop of the sacred holy Church Roman and vniuersall Philip by the grace of God King of France deuoutly kisseth his blessed seete And further with this cōgratulatiō (b) Ibid. f. 95. The Order of the Preachers do glorie to see sitting in the supreme throne of iustice such a father of the Vniuerse and of the faith such a successour of S. Peter and such a vicar of Christ And together with this concludeth (c) Ibid. f. 96. We recommend confidently the Realme in the gouernement whereof we doe by the grace of God sit and withall we recommend the Church of France to the fauours of your Holines And to Benedict who continued in the Sea but eight monethes succeeded Clement the fifth vnder whome the affaires of reconciliation were in such sort accorded and brought to an end as the temporall rightes of the Realme continued in their integrity And Clement himselfe came to Lions where the King to honour in him the spiritual power of Christ put himselfe on foot togeather with his brethren to receaue him Our Chronicles saith du Haillan (d) Du Haillan en la vie de Philip le Belle. doe affirme that the King of France and his two brethren were on foote by the Popes side holding his horses bridle To the second instance which is of the complaint of Lewis the 12. the defendors of the exception make the very same answere That the source and origen of that difference was not matter of religion but cases meerely temporall that is of the league and association that Pope Iulius and King Lewis the 12. at that time Duke of Millane had made and entred into against the Venetians For the Pope seeing how the King grew as great as he could desire in Italy fel of from that alliance with him and reconciled himselfe with the Venetians The King incensed with this separation and the Popes deportement and bad carriage towardes him thereon following caused a Councell to be held at Pisa and after againe at Millan by the Cardinals and other Prelates of his side where the Pope was declared susspēded frō the administration of the vniuersal Church The Pope sore moued at this attaint caused another to be held at Rome where to requite the King he declared him and his adherents deposed from the administration of their temporall Estates But the French both Ecclesiastike and Laike knowing that the first source beginning of that discord proceded from passion of matter of State not of religion interteyned vnion in such sort with the King as nothing could separate them from him For as touching the losse that happened vnto Iohn de Albret of the Kingdome of Nauarre the Continuer of Paulus Aemiltus though he was a sore enemy of the memory of Pope Iulius confesseth not that the sentence of the Pope was the true cause on the contrary he maynteineth that the cause for which Iohn de Albret lost the Kingdome of Nauarre was for breaking of from the alliance he had with Ferdinand King of Aragon which alliance Ferdinand affirmed was ratified vpon condition that if the Kinges of Nauarre did violate the same then the Kingdome of Nauarre should returne to the Spaniardes and he did put himselfe into that alliance of King Lewis the 12. vnder promise that he should procure the soueraignity of Berne to be restored vnto him This then the Continuer of Paulus Aemilius auerreth to be the true cause of the losse of the Kingdome of Nauarre And the other neither to haue beene the true cause nor true pretext but only a help of a pretext of which Ferdinand not hauing taken his aduantage did not yet leaue to pretend that the Kingdome of Nauarre appertained vnto him and so to take possession of it The King of Nauarre saith he (a) Ferrō Continuat Pauli Aemil. in Lud. 12. denied in the beginning that he could refuse to giue passage to the King of Aragon to passe into France saying first that he was hindred to declare himself enemy to Ferdinand by the alliance he had with him and Ferdinand himselfe vaunted that when the Kingdome of Nauarre was by the Spaniardes rendred vp into the handes of the race of Albret it was by caution written and prouided That in case their successors should breake their alliance the Kingdome should returne to the Spaniardes And a litle after (b) Ibid. Whereupon Ferdinand hauing vnderstood that the King of Nauarre was entred into amity with the King of France turned against him the forces which he had prepared for his iourney into France And this was the cause for which Ferdinand did thrust his neighbour next bordering King out of his Kingdome And more then this he added the pretext of another matter namely that the Pope had declared the King and his adherentes excomunicate their Kingdomes exposed To the Third Instance which is taken from the Arrest or Decree of Parlamēt which Mousieur Chancelour of the Hospitall caused to be made against Tanquerell there needeth no other answere then the Answers going before For the Arrest toucheth not in any sort

notwithstanding what Azarias the high Priest said vnto him taken the Censar in hand to offer incense before the Altar the high Priest iudging it to be the leprosy did thrust him out of the Temple and from conuersing with the people by that meanes caused that the administration and gouernment of the Kingdome was taken from him and transferred to his sonne though among other nations the leprosy depriued none of conuersation with others nor of the gouernment of the Common wealth witnesse wherof is Naaman 4. Reg. 5. who was Generall of the warfarre of the King of Syria and Gouernour of his whole Kimgdome Finally to passe from thinges figured to things literal 1. Mach. 2. seq they allege the story of Matathias high Priest the head of the family house of the Machabees who seeing Antiochus who raigned in Iury to haue an intent to force the Iewes in their ancient customes and to ouerthrow their law and to persecute them by punishmentes torments death tooke armes gathered Gods dispersed seruantes together who effected wrought so much vnder his cōduct and his sonnes as they deliuered the people from the yoke of the Seleucides and tooke from them the Kingdome of Iury and by that meanes conserued the religion of the Iewes which without such a resolution fauoured by Gods visible assistance had els beene quite exterminated and abolished out of the land Those who hold the negatiue part come downe to the new Testament and cite for themselues this passage of S. Rom. 13. Paul where he writeth Let euery soule be subiect to higher Powers 1. Petr. 2. For he that resisteth the power resisteth the order instituted of God And this of S. Peter Be ye subiect whether it be to Kings as more excelling or to Rulers And by this they inferre that obedience to Kinges is of Right Diuine and therefore cannot admit dispensation by any authority neither spirituall nor temporall The maynteyners of the affirmatiue part answere to this that these passages do not in any sort touch the knot or difficulty of the controuersie For the question say they is not whether it be de Iure diuino to obey Kinges whilest they are Kinges or knowne for Kinges But the question is if it be de Iure diuino that he who hath beene once known acknowledged for King by the body of Estate may cease to be that is that he may do some thing by which he commeth to loose and forgo his rights to cease to be acknowledged for King Now these two questions be farre different For to take an example euen of him vnder whome S. Peter suffered martyrdome it was de Iure diuino to obey Nero whilest he was Emperour But it was not de Iure Diuino say they that he could not fall from his Imperiall rightes and be deposed and declared an enemy of the Common wealth It was de Iure diuino so long as Antiochus was by the Community of the Iewes acknowledged for King that the Iewes should obey him in matters that were not against God For he was no lesse temporall soueraigne of the Iewes then was the Emperour Claudius vnder whome S. Peter wrote But after that Mattathias the high Priest and the rest of the nation of the Iewes who liued conforme to their owne law had declared him a Tyrant and a violatour of the consciences of the people of God therefore no more their lawful Prince the particuler Iewes were then no longer bound to yeild him obedience And not only the defenders of the affirmatiue parte but euen M. Barcklay himselfe who is the principall propugner of the negatiue part vseth this distinction and sayth Controuers Menarch Mach. l. 4. cap. 16. There is not any case wherin the people can rise against a Prince ruling after an insolent manner so long as he continueth King For this commandement of God is alwaies against it Honour the King and he that resisteth power resisteth God And therfore the people cannot haue by any other means authority ouer him vnles he do something by which he by right ceaseth to be King And els where they adde 1. Petr. 2. what S. Peter writeth Rom. 13. Be subiect to euery creature whether it be to King as excelling or to Rulers as sent by him And S. Hebr. 13. Paul Let euery soule be subiect to higher powers And the same Apostle writeth els where in more expresse words thus Obey your Prelates and be ye subiect vnto them For they watch for your soules as those who ought to render accompt Hence it ariseth that it is as wel de iure diuino to yeild spirituall obedience to Prelates as it is to yeild temporall obedience to Princes And yet it followeth not that it is de iure diuino that the Prelates no not the Pope himselfe cannot fall from their rights of Prelacy nor that it is de Iure diuino to continue to obey them after they haue lost their right But the defendours of the negatiue part obiect that the Church which liued vnder the first Pagan Emperours neuer made vse of this right of absoluing in the spirituall Court the Christians from the Oath they had made vnto them And contrariwise that the first Christians preached not any other thing then obedience that they yeilded to the Emperours To this againe the maynteyners of the affirmatiue part answere many thinges For first they say that the Church not hauing absolued the Christians of the Oath of fidelity by thē made to the Pagan Emperours all the Christians in particuler were bound euen in conscience to obey them and pray to God for the safety and prosperity of their Empire And as touching the cause for which the Church did not take away the spirituall obligation the Christians had to obey them they bring three reasons The first is For that it had beene ouer great imprudency and folly to irritate and incense the Pagan Emperours by such a declaration in a time when they were the Lordes of the whole world for that such an act could haue beene not only vnprofitable but also absolutly domageable pernicious to the Christians against whom to incense the Emperour at such time as they had all the forces and the world within their handes was not to succour or promote religion but to precipitate ouerthrow it cleane For it is not sufficient to say that the Church is bound to doe some thing because she may lawfully do it vnlesse she also can doe it with prudence and profit The second reason is For that there is great difference betweene the Pagan Emperours vnder whome the Church began to lay her first foundations and to take the first rootes and the Princes who should now fall into Heresy or into Apostacy from Christian religion and should become either Arians or Mahometans or Pagans For the Pagan Emperours who then were had not yet at that tyme done homage to Christ nor yielded

Apostacy cannot be secured To this obiection the answere is short and easy For the Church intermedleth not her selfe with the absolution of the subiects but in the Ecclsiasticall Court and therin besides this payne and that of excommunication it imposeth not any other By meanes wherof it is so far from consenting that any attempt be made vpon the life of them whom it hath excommunicated as it abhorreth all fortes of killinges and murtheringes and especially such as be sudaine and vnexpected in regard of the losse of both body and soule which cōmonly go therin accompanied togeather And if they say that the Church ordayneth it not but that it is the cause that it is done for as much as the Common wealth conforming it selfe to the Churches iudgment and making the same decision in the tribunall politique if the Prince keepe on his former course declareth him a Tyrant and an enemy of the state and consequently subiecteth him to the power of the Lawes politique which permit the conspiring against Tyrantes for the making of them away and for killing of them we bring first this exception that there is great difference betweene Tyrantes of vsurpation whome the Lawes permit to extirminate by all manner of wayes and Tyrantes of administration and gouernement who are lawfully called to their Principality but gouerne it ill and we add that the Hereticall Princes who persecute the faith and their Catholike subiects be of the number of Tyrantes of administration and not of the number of Tyrants of vsurpation against whome alone it is permitted to conspire by clandestine and secret practises And if they further vrge and say that the politique Lawes permit conspiracies against the one and the other we answere that they are politique prophane and heathenish Laws as those of the ancient Romans or of the Grecians in former tymes and not Christian politique Lawes For the Christian politique Laws consider not only in their Princes the respect due vnto them for the good of temporall pollicy and the regard of the Maiesty of the Estate which they represent but they further consider in them the Image and vnction of God who hath called them to that Dignity in so much as in them who haue once had the lawfull vocation of Royalty what Tyrany soeuer they exercise the Christian politique Laws neuer passe so farre as to permit the vse of proscription against their persons or that any do attempt by clandestine or secret coniuration or conspiracy against their persons or liues but they carry the same respect to them that did Dauid to Saul notwithstanding he knew he were reiected 1. Reg. 26. cast of and reproued of God when he said Who shall extend his hand vpon the anoynted of our Lord and shal be innocent In so much as if the Christians be constrayned to defend their religion and their life against Hereticall and Apostata Princes from whose allegiance they were absolued the Christian politique Laws permit not more then what is permitted by military Lawes and the right of nations that is to say open warre and not clandestine and secret 〈…〉 and conspiracies For there alwaies remayneth in them a certain habitude to the dignity Royall as it were a marke of a politique character that discerneth them from simple particulers and when the obstacle and impediment is taken away that is when they come to amend themselues and to giue satisfactiō it restoreth them to the lawfull vse and exercise of their regality And therefore we see that in so many controuersies that the Popes haue had with tēporall Princes neuer any Pope went so far as to coūsell or to assent to the murthering of Princes Contrariwise if any calumniators laboured to impute it vnto them they haue euer iustified themselues euen with the horrour and abhomination of such actes remembring themselues of these wordes of S. Gregory when the Lombards made war vpon him If I would haue medled with the death of men Greg. lib. 7. epist 1. the Nation of the Lombards should at this day haue had neither King non gouernors But because I stand in feare of God I will not haue to moddle or deale with the death of any person And touching the other point of the last Inconuenience which is that this medly maketh the remedies that they would bring to the daunger of the Kinges to be not only vnprofitable but also pernicious and domageable there needeth not much eloquence to perswade it For if those who made the attempts vpon the liues of our Kinges were moued to those horrible parricides by a false imagination which they conceaued to wit that our Kings did something in preiudice of religion how much more would they haue thought they had a greater better pretext if they had beleeued that our Kings had abused their authority by the bringing in of schisme and the ouerthrowing of Religion and that they had seene themselues in schisme separated from the communion of the Sea Apostolique and cut off from the other partes of the Church And more then this who vnderstandeth not that there cannot happen any thing of more and greater daunger for the life and authority of Kinges then intestine and ciuill wars which schismes do ordinarily draw after them Moreouer who knoweth not that the cōtempt and indifferencie of Religion which must needes follow vpon schismes engendreth and occasioneth Impiety and Atheisme and taketh quite away all the respect that men are wont to carry to Kinges for the loue of God and for the reuerence of Religion which is the strongest corps or Court of Guard and the surest rampaire for the defence and security of their persons For when Religion is had in contempt men are not any longer withholden from attempting vpon the persons of Kinges then by force and by feare of the temporall paynes and therfore when they thinke they may do it without beeing punished or that they contemne and make no reckoning of the temporall paynes they haue no more bridle to conteyne them or to hold them in Finally who seeth not that there can be nothing worse for the safety of the persons and of the estate of Kinges then to stir vp and drawe vpon them by an ouerture of a new schisme and diuision from the Church Psal 75. the wrath of him who taketh away the spirits of Princes from out of the earth And heere Gentlemen I will not with you vse more reasons and argumentes but wil passe ouer to exhortations and intreaties and wil coniure you to remember that you are French men and that you are also Christians and Catholikes and that in treating touching the securing of Kinges you must not only cast your eies vpon the earth but also lift them vp to Heauen and you must not remedy their temporall safetie in causing them to forgo and loose the euerlasting nor prouide for your bodily part which is France by destroying and ruyning the spirituall parte which is the Church The Pope tolerateth and