Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	church_n	pope_n	rome_n	4,587	5	6.8117	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A07782	A Christian dialogue, betweene Theophilus a deformed Catholike in Rome, and Remigius a reformed Catholike in the Church of England Conteining. a plaine and succinct resolution, of sundry very intricate and important points of religion, which doe mightily assaile the weake consciences of the vulgar sort of people; penned ... for the vtter confusion of all seditious Iesuites and Iesuited popelings in England ...	Bell, Thomas, fl. 1593-1610.	1609 (1609)	STC 1816; ESTC S101425	103,932	148

handle the holy Mysteries S. Hierome in like manner saith of Hilarius the heretike that he could neither baptize nor administer the Eucharist because he was but a Deacon whē he went out of the church and what are you but Deacons nay what are you but meere Lay-men for you are neither consecrated after the old manner nor confirmed by the Pope as the Iesuits beare the world in hand Remig. I answere first that if méere Lay-men should presume in our Churches either to preach teach or handle the holy mysteries they could not escape condig●e punishment according to their demerites Secondly that the want of your greasing and other begge●ly Ceremonies wherewith the primitiue Church was neuer acquainted as holy writ teacheth vs cannot make the consecration of our Bishops vnlawfull Thirdly y● our Bishops are consecrated confirmed according to the ancient manner of the primitiue Church for three things onely are necessary all which God be thanked for it are this day practised in our Church of England to wit election of the whole Congregation confirmation of the Prince and consecration with godly praiers and imposition of hands Of the last of these thrée that is of the imposition of hands with praier mention is made to Timothie and else where For the confirmatiō of the Prince and not of the Pope which is the second point this is enough for the tryall viz. that these thrée Popes Pelagius the second Se●erinus and Benedictus the second and all other Bishops of Rome till the sayd Benedict inclusiuè were euer elected and confirmed by the Emperours commandement which verity is freely confessed in expresse termes by foure famous Popish writers who therefore are and ought to be of more credit and force against the Papists then any other authors whatsoeuer The names of the popish Doctors are these Baptista Platina Bartholomaeus Carranxa Anastatius Bibliothecarius and Onuphrius Panuinius Piatina hath these words Ni● enim tum in eligendo Pontifice actū erat nisi eius electionem Imperator approbasset for at that time which was about the yeere of our Lord God ●●0 nothing was done effectually concerning the election of the Bishop of Rome vnlesse the Emperour had confirmed the same Touching the creation of Seuerinus for the other testimony was of Pelagius the same Platina writeth in this manner Vana enim tunc habebatur Cleri ac populi electio nisi Imperatores aut eorum Exarchi confirmassent For the election of the Clergie and the people was of no force at all in those dayes vnlesse the Emperours or their Lieutenants had confirmed the same this was done about the yéere 637. Concerning the creation or making of Benedict Platina hath these words ad hunc Constantius Imperator sanctionem misit vt deinceps quem Clerus populus Exercitusque Romanus in Pontificem delegislet eundem statim verum Christi Vicarium esse omnes crederent nulla aut Constantinopolitani Principis aut Italiae Exarchi expectat authoritate vt antea fieri cōsueuerat id enim ratum erat in creando Pontifice quod Princeps confirmaslet vel qui eius vices in Italia gerebat The Emperour Constantine sent a decrée to this Pope that whomsoeuer the Clergy people and Romaine Souldiers should henceforth choose for their Bishop all people should by and by beléeue him to be the U●car of Christ scilicet if they would This was done in anno 68● Bartholomaeus Carranza a famous Dominican Frier hath the very same assertion ad verbum Anastasius and Onuphrius haue these expresse words Pontifices qui deinde fuerant creati con●ecrati sunt sine Constantinopolitani Imperatoris iussione The Popes or Bishops of Rome that liued afterward were made and consecrated without the Emperour of Constantinople his cōmaund as if they had said in the old time and auncient Church no Bishop of Rome could haue bin admitted at any time vnles he had brought letters patents frō the Emperour though now y● practise be farre otherwise Now M. Theophilus tell me what you gather out of this discourse Theoph. Out of this doctrine of this famous papists I gather to the confusion of the late Bishops of Rome their Iesuits and all Iesuited papists these three euidents golden and most necessary corollaries First that the vulgar and common sort of people are grosly deceiued when they terme popery the old religion and repute them for the auncient Catholikes for we are indeede the true and auncient Catholikes I put my selfe in the number because God now hath made me a true reformed Catholike and the papists are become flat heretiques in many points of the true faith though not apostataes from the whole For this Benedict the second could not be made Bishop of Rome 684. yeeres after Christs sacred aduent without the Emperours letters Patents so then the Emperours had the soueraignty ouer the Bishops of Rome for the space almost of seuen hundren yeeres after Christ so long the Popes acknowledged the Emperours for their soueraigne Lords as without whose letters Patents they could haue no iurisdiction in the Church I adde as consectary hereunto that as in ciuill causes many are debarred from their lawfull inheritance through the violent dealing of mighty men euen so we the true reformed Catholikes haue beene many yeeres excluded from the free vse of our owne Church and Sacraments by the force violence and tyrannie of the blood-thirsty Romish Bishops and partly by remissenes of sundry Emperours who vpon a blind zeale not grounded vpon Gods word yeelded vp their soueraigne rights vnto them and as temporal men are in time restored to their auncient right by zealous and godly Magistrates euen so were we and are we God make vs thankefull for it by the goodnesse of God and most Christian Princes King Henry the eight King Edward the sixt Queene Elizabeth and King IAMES our most gratious soueraigne now happily regnant ouer vs restored to the old Christian Catholike and Apostolike religion and with all Christian freedome placed again in our owne Churches the spirituall birth-right of our selues and our ancestors Secondly thath our Bishops in England are made and consecrated according to the auncient Christian Catholike Apostolike and old Roman maner that is to say by the letters Patents of the Prince Thirdly that the Emperours of Constantinople for the space of 200. yeares and odde after the dissolution of the Empire in the west had still the soueraignty ouer the Bishop of Rome for the west Empire was dissolued in Anno 471 and Benedict the second obteined of the Emperour Constantine in Anno 684 that the Bishops of Rome might from thenceforth be chosen confirmed and enioy their iurisdiction without the commandement and letters Patents of the Emperour Remig. You haue marked well the discourse and for all that haue not obserued one point of great consequence Theophilus What is that I beseech you heartily Remig. The late Popes or Bishops of Rome tel

set downe by his Holinesse to the contrary by wrong information giuen appeale euen from the Pope as Clemens vnto his holines as Peter for this cause doth the Iesuite Parsons or S. R. in his pretended answere to the downe ●all of Popery proclaime it lustily to the work that Bishops must not examine the doctrine which the Pope ●●●inereth i●ditially out of S. Peters chaire as suprethe pastor of Gods Church but onely that wherein he vttereth his owne priuate opinion For this cause doe the Popes decrées roundly tell vs that it is sacriledge to dispute of the Popes power So then on the one side the Pope may be deposed if he speake write or hold hereticall opinions as a priuate man but on the other side whatsoeuer the Pope shall define or decrée as Pope and publike person that we must receiue reuerence and constantly beléeue otherwise we must be adiudged Heretiques and be burnt with fire and saggot at a stake What a religion eat yee this the Pope may decrée things at his owne good pleasure either as a priuate man or as a publique person the one way he cannot erre as Papists doe and must beléeue but the otherway hee both may erre and hath de facto erred in very déede it therefore standeth with all reason piety and good conscience that the Papists shall examine his decrées whether they procéede from the Pope as a publique person or as a priuate man le●t they receiue errors for faith falshood for truth poyson for wholesome medicine Howbeit they must beléeue all things resolutely they may doubt or dispute of nothing curiously lest they be accused of sacriled●● or heresie For if the Pope when he spake or wrote sate in S. Peters chaire at Rome an old rotten and worme-eaten thing which the silly people adore reuerence and kisse as my selfe sometimes haue done and Saint Peter perhaps neuer saw or knew the same then the case is cléere the Popes decrée is as sound as the holy Gospel and procéedeth from the holy Ghost Theoph. All this is very true and we are taught to beleeue that Saint Peter sate in that chaire indeede and that it hath beene reuerently kept from Saint Peters death to this day insomuch that they are likewise taught to bring girdles to touch the said chaire which therefore are called Saint Peters girdles for the safe deliuerance of women which are with child and doe vse them neither did I euer heare to this day that any Pope taught false Doctrine or decreed any vntruth out of Saint Peters chaire Remig. Whether Saint Peter euer sate in that chaire or not it is not much materiall this one thing is certaine that it is this day most superstitiously abused and that the real sitting in the material chaire cannot preserue him that sitteth in it from false doctrine or erroneous faith whereof more at large hereafter as your demandes or difficulties shal minister fit occasion that many Popes haue béene Heretiques and flat Apostataes is already proued out of your owne best approued Doctors Now will I likewise proue vnto you God willing euen by the expresse testimonies of most renowned Popish writers that sundry Popes haue taught and decréed false doctrine and that as publique persons sitting in Saint Peters chaire as they call it and that done I will answere to all your obiections against the same M. Gerson sometime Chauncellour of the famous Uniuersity of Paris and a man of high estéeme in the Councel of Constance writeth plainely and auoucheth it for a constant knowne truth that Pope Iohn the 22. of that name taught publiquely that the soules of the iust doe not sée God till the day of generall Doome as also that his false doctrine was publiquely condemned with the sound of trumpets euen before Philip then King of France Yea Adrianus who was Bishop of Rome himselfe doth constantly auouch the same truth as testifieth Alphonsus a zealous and learned Popish Writer in these expresse wordes Nouissime fertur de Iohanne 22. quod c. Last of all it is reported of Pope Iohn the 22. that hee publiquely taught declared and commaunded all to hold the same that the soules of the iust before the day of iudgement generall haue not the stole which is the cleare and faciall vision of God and he is reported to haue induced the vniuersity of Paris to this that none should take degrée of Theology in the same but those that did first sweare to defend this error and to adhere to it for euer Thus writeth Adrian who was himselfe Pope or Bishop of Rome And Alphonsus a man of good credite with the papists after he had rekoned vp fiue heresies setteth downe this for the ●i●th heresie viz that the soules of the iust doe not see God till the day of doome ascribing the said heresie to the Armenians as to the authors thereof and to the Greekes together with Pope Iohn as the patrons and defenders of the same So then it is cleare as the noone day that the Bishops of Rome both may erre and de facto haue erred not onely as priuate men but also as Popes and publike persons in their iudiciall sentences and decrées Bellarmine your romish Iesuits and Cardinal séeing the force of this testimony and ma●king well that it doth ouerthrowe the highest point of their late start vp popery doth bestir●e himselfe more then a little in defence of popish faith he would gladly perswade his reader that their Pope Iohn erred onely as a priuate man and not as a Pope or Bishop of Rome which is a subtile distinction but falsly inuented to seduce the silly people therewith lest they should forsake the Pope his new religion I proue it many wayes first because Pope Adrian himselfe saith docuit hee taught Secondly because he saith Publicé publiquely Thirdly because he saith Mandauit hée commanded all to hold it Fourthly because none could bee made Graduates in the Uniuersity which held not this opinion Fiftly because euery Graduate was sworne to desend it and to hold it for euer So then the Pope erred de facto euen in his publike decrée of faith and that euen by the consent of Adrian who sometime was Pope himselfe yea who for learning and knowledge was one of the rarest Popes that euer were at Rome What say you to this testimony M. Theophilus doe ye not sée it euidently proued euen by the testimony of approued Popish writers that the Pope both may erre and de facto hath erred and that not onely as a priuate man but also as a publique person Theoph. Your reasons are so strong so pithy and so plaine indeed that I know not in the world how in truth to answere them they make me to stagger in my old Romish faith and to doubt of that whereof I neuer doubted all my life before for we Catholiques haue euer holden it for an article of our Catholique faith that the Pope as Pope

Cypriā confoundeth the Pope Other Bishops were of Cyprians opinion Luk. 22. v. 32. S. Peter suffred at Rome Ioh. 17. v. 9. 20. Gers. vbi sup cap. 2. ●ug in quaest mixtis q. 5. t●m 4. Orig. Hom●● in Mat. ●a●or apud Syl● defido §. 9. de conc §. 5. Panorm de elect cap significati Ap●d Bel. lib. 4 cap. 3. de rom pontif G●rs 〈…〉 Coram Philip ●●ge Franc●● supra cap. 2. Bellarm. de verb. de●on script lib. 4. cap. 12. Ps. 116. v. 11. Iere. 16. v. 19. Rom. 3. v. 4 Mal. 1. v. 8. Esa. 28. v. 7 Eze. 7 v. 〈◊〉 Micach 3. v. 1● Soph. 3 v. 4 Offē●is adu Luth. art 32. Lege Ca●eta● in prefat in libr. M●●is Aug. ep 11. 19. Eze. 20. 10. Cyprian lib. 1. epist. 3. Cyprian vbi super He speaketh of one Felicissimus his bad companions S. R. pag. 31● See the ●esuits antepast pag. 13● The Romans being faithfull men would not giue eare to faithles lyars Bell knoweth Bellarmine right well Marke this point well Mat 16. ver 18. As in all assemblies of gouernment one for order sake and peace must bed ssigned to end and to moderate the actions so was a preminence giuen to Peter among the Apostles that all things might be done in peace order a primacy not of powers as ouer inferio●rs but of order as amongst equals 1. Cor. 3. 11. Mat. 16. 18 Apo● 21 14. Aug. de verb. Dom. serm 13. Chrys. serm de pent 10. 3. Apoc. 21. v. 14. Hilarius de trinit lib. ● p 103. Pan●rmit S●luester marke this point well for it is wonderfull and killeth the papists Mat. 16. ver 13. 15. Luke 22. ver 32. Mat. 18. ver 15. 18. 19. 20 The whole vniuersity of Paris teacheth this my doctrine Gal. 2. 7. Marke this poynt againe and againe To auoyde ●sme di Per hathe primacy of order but not of power Mat. 28. v. 19. Mark 16. v. 14. 15. ioh 21. v. 14. 15. Aug. de ogonae Christi cap. 30. Rom. 3. Cypr. de simplicit Prelaetorum p. 113. Cypr. de vnitate Ecclesiae p. 29● Couarr to 1. part 2 9. p. 242. col 4. prope finem Angl. in 4. q de clau di● fic 2. Concl. 1. pag. 6. Lo Peter had the primacy of order as amongst equals not of power as ouer inferious for he was the first both in order and calling Ioh. 1 42. Mat. 10. 2. 〈◊〉 tollend● schismata Marke wel that all Writers teach this doctrine Marke this well for it striketh dead Mortuus est Ioannes A. D. 99. Let this be well marked 1 Tim. 3. v. 15. wee differ not in the thing but in the modification thereof Syluest de Eccles. §. 4. Lo not the Pope but the congregation of the faithfull is 3. the church that cannot erre Panorm de elect cap. significasti Cers idem docet p. 1. de exam doctrin Seo the antepast pag. 173. 175 177. Oh that this learned man durst haue spoken out ● Caus. 24. quaest 1. arecta 〈◊〉 glosia ● Vide Dur. in ration● ● Tim. 3. v. 15. Aug. in Ps. 47. in pref Vide Aug. lib. 7. de bapt c. 51. tom ● Ansel. in 1. tim 3. v 15. ● Gerson part 1. de examin doctrin Iesuites Antepast pag. 134. Marke this point well See the antepast 172. Marke wel this point The body of Christ which the wicked are not Ephe. 2. v. 22 23. 1. Tim 3. 15 Ps. 118. v. 23 Mat 28. v. 20. Esa. 59. 2● Iere. 33. v 20. Chrysost. in cap 5. M●● hom 15. Tom. 1. Aug. in ep 90. 4. 23 8. Maike wel these vnanswerable testimonies Mat. 24. v. 33. Ioh. 16. v. 13. Ioh. 14. v. 16. The holy Ghost taught no new doctrine but onely reucaled the true sense of such things as the Apostles did not vnderstand Ioh. 14. v. 16. It is the selfe same doctrine but more plainely declared Canus de lec●s lib. 3. c. 4. pag. 101. 〈◊〉 14. vet 16. Mat. 28. ver ●0 Mat. 23. ver 2. 3. dist 42. cap. multi Sacerdotes The faithful dealing of the Author Aug. tract 46. in Ioh an in medi● Rom 9. Hylar in Psal. 118. Pag. 698. Marke this doctrine and forget it not Lyr. in cap. 23. Mat. Carth in cap 23. Mat. Deut. 17. ● 9. 10. 11. Popery is plainely confuted by her owne doctors Lyr. in cap. 17 deuter Lo papistry is confuted by Papists even of the best sort Lyra. in cap. 23. Mat. The Iewish Church erred in matters of faith Lyra vbi super Carthus 23. cap. Mat. Ca lt in cap. 17. deut Canus lib. 3. c●p vlt. pag. 106. Deut. 17. v. 10. Mal. 2. v. 7. Deut. 17. v. 9. v. 10. Deut. 17. v. 8. 9. 10. Mal. 2. v. 8. Note this well Mal. 2. v. 8. Deut. 17. v. 9. 10. Deut. 10. 12. Exod. 28. 4 Leu. 26. 3. 25. Deut. 28. 1. Deut. 16. v. 18. Deut. chap 16 v 18. Deut. 17. v 10 11. Mal. 2. v 7. Deut. 16. 18 This point must be remembred Deut. 16. 18. Deut 17 9 Mal. 2. 8. Ephes 4. v. 11 13 14. Ephes. 4. v. 14. Gods will is his essence Psa. 46 80. Ps. 155. 6. Rom. 9. 19. Exo. 4. 22. 23 Mat. 23 v. 37. 1 Tim. 2. v. 4. Mat. 20. v. 16. Genuinu● loci sensus Exod. 32. v 4. 5. 6 Rom. 132 Vertually though not vocally Exod. 32 v 1 2. 3. 4. 5. 6 ●5 Deut. 17. ● 10. 11. Mat. 26. v 64. 65. The high Priest erred most grosly Ephes. 4. v. ●2 Ephes. 4. v. ●2 The Church of Rome wan teth formal succession Clem ep 1. Iren. lib. 3. cap. 3. Epi●h her 27. ●is seb lib 3. c. 13. 14. 15. Naucler pa●● 3● histor S. Peters doing is controlled Carranz in ●pit concil p. 370. p. 373. The cheefest Bishop dyed at Hierusalem 1 Tim. 2. 1● 〈◊〉 Pope Iohn was a woman Exod 8 19. Digitus Dei est hic The truth must preuaile in time Palmer Sigeber in Chron. Obraue succession of women Popes The Popes of Rome 4. can beare children but not preach Bernard a● Ganfrid ep 12. 5. Apoc. 13. v. 5. 7. The Authors protestation for his sincere dealing Naucler pag 713. histor Ps. 115 v. 2 Mark this The Church cannot erre that is the Pope cannot erre 1489. Victor de potest Pap● p●o●os 16. caus 17. q 4 cap. qui● Flat Idolatry euen by Popish ●a●h This woman-woman-pope liued A. D. 18. S. ● pag. 142. Ezec. 3. 18. cap. 33. v. 8. Psal. 79. v. 6 Luk. 12. 48. Caus. 17. q. 4 cap. siquis Esa. 55. v. 8. 9. 3. Reg. 8 39 Rom. 8. 17. 1 Par. 28. 9. ● Sam. 16 ● Psa. 7. v. 10. Mar. 2. 27. A. D. 1439. Loe the Councell deposed the Pope for his disobedience A Spaniard being but a Souldier was the author of the sect of the Iesuites A. D. 1540. A generall Councell is aboue the Pope by the verdict of best learned papists Carranz● ●ol 354. 355. Barth fumus A. D 1503.