Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	case_n	defendant_n	plaintiff_n	1,918	5	10.3007	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61870	A censure upon certaine passages contained in the history of the Royal Society as being destructive to the established religion and Church of England	Stubbe, Henry, 1632-1676.	1670 (1670)	Wing S6033; ESTC R32736	43,471	70

represented as such by our Historian The third Proposition therefore carries something of prevarication in it So those Advocates which would betray the causes of their Clients propose a wrong state of the Case the vanity whereof being once discovered renders the Plaintiff contemptible in the sight of all men and reduces him to a necessity of complying with the injured Defendant There is a great deal of ignorance and intricateness the Consequent thereof in the Proposition of our Author as it is by him worded for Infallibility and a sovereign Dominion over our Faith are not equipollent Termes nor termes indifferently used No Papist did ever ascribe unto the Bishop of Rome except some Parasitical Canonist whose Credit is little in that Church a sovereign dominion over our Faith He that is Sovereign knows not any Superior nor any coercive Law but his will the objects about which his power is conversant are liable to what alterations he pleaseth and he rules by the Lex Regia but what Divine did ever ascribe such a power to the Pope in matter of Faith Place the Chair where and how you will none of that Church ever assumed so much nor did that Church ever attribute so much to the Bishop of Rome There have been those that have taught that if by way of supposal it could be imagined that all the Pastors of the Church Catholick should erre in a Decree of Faith the Laiety were bound to submit thereunto but such a Sovereignty in matters of faith none except some Iesuits and Parasites ascribe unto the Pope's person his Briefs and Decretals have not that credit amongst the Romanists as to authenticate such Assertions nor is the belief thereof a necessary condition to communicate with that Church upon If we look upon the contests in Germany that introduced Protestancy at first we find the erroneous doctrine about Indulgences to be the primary occasion there In Switzerland and in France and Holland abuses and Idolatrous practises or false Doctrines are the first subjects of Disputes and occasion the Reformation there Transubstantiation Communion in one kind the propitiatory sacrifice of the Masse Image-worship praying to Saints and such like Controversies are the first and most fiercely debated In England under Henry the VIII the Pope's Supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes and appeals to Rome c. give the the first occasions of discontent and that change which was afterwards carried on to a total Reformation of the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England then came in question the power of the Bishop of Rome the nature of his Primacy the Authority and Fallibility of General Councels the power of National and provincial Churches to reforme themselves during the interval of Councels or without dependance thereon whether the Scripture were the sole rule of faith how obligatory were Traditions the interest and influence of the Civil Magistrate in ruling Ecclesiastical Affairs these came next into agitation The usurpation of Infallibility and a pretended Sovereignty in matters of faith to be lodged in the Pope was neither the occasion of the Protestant separation nor a material part of the first controversies though perhaps some Italianated persons and Canonists might assert some such thing and since the growth of the Iesuites tenets of that nature have been much advanced thereby to justifie their Vow of blind obedience to the Papal commands The memory of the Councils of Basil and Constance was fresh in the minds of men and the superiority of a Council above the Pope a common and authorized tenet in that Church The personal infallibility and the supremacy of the Bishops of Rome had of old received too great a check in the cases of Vigilius and Honorius and in the declared sentences of the Councils of Pisa Constance Basil and of the Universities of Paris Loven Colen Vienna and Cracovia not to mention particular Writers to be the occasion of that rupture The Sorbone to this day continues its former judgment and even the present King of France hath asserted the liberties of the Gallick Church in that point See Arrest de la Cour de Parliament portant que les propositions contenues en la declaration de la Faculte de Theologie de Paris c. Da. 30. May. 1663. And Declaration du Roy pour l' Enregistrement des six propositions de la Faculte de Sorbonne c. A Paris 4. d' Aoust 1663. What the Popish Church now holds and requires amounts not to any such Authority as our Author asserts if you will believe Cardinal Perron before our Virtuoso Scribis de Romano Pontifice nolle te verba facere quum vel mediocriter in Historiâ Ecclesiasticâ versatis compertum sit primorum seculorum Patres Concilia Imperatores Christianos primas illi semper detulisse praecellentis dignitatis praerogativam in omnibus negotiis ad religionem aut Ecclesiam spectantibus atque hoc solum exigere Ecclesiam vestram pro articulo fidei credendum ab iis qui communioni suae se adjungunt If this Cardinal understand any thing the Romish Church demands no more of her Members then that they own the Pope's primacy not Supremacy or Infallibility nor have the the books of such as derogate from the excessive greatnesse of the Papal power been ever called in or censured in that Church or communion denied to the Assertors of the infallibility of Oral Tradition or of General Councils in opposition to the personal Infallibility of the Bishop of Rome It was and is still a common opinion amongst the Papists that the Pope may be an Heretick I learn'd it from Franciscus Victoria in his Relections Haereticus potest esse non solum Presbiter sed Pontifex etiam summus ergo caput Ecclesiae And Bellarmine himself doth not assert the Infallibility of the Pope no not though He be assisted with a provincial Council In libr. 2. de concil c. 5. fatetur hanc propositionem scilicet Concilia particularia à summo Pontifice confirmata in fide moribus errare possunt non esse fide Catholicâ tenendam ejus tamen contradictoriam temerariam erroneam pronunciat Nay the same Writer in his solemn Lectures at Rome teacheth that it is true the Pope maybe an Heretick But it is probable and godly to be thought that he cannot be an Heretick In the conference betwixt Dr. Raynolds and Hart I find this passage Raynolds The Pope may not onely erre in doctrine but also be an Heretick which I hope you will not say that Peter might Hart. Neither by my good will that the Pope may Raynolds But you must no remedy It is a ruled case Your Schoolmen and Canonists Ockam Hostiensis Turrecremata Zabarella Cusanus Antoninus Alphonsus Canus Sanders Bellarmine and others yea the Canon Law it self yea a Council a Roman Council confirm'd by the Pope