Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	ecclesiastical_a	king_n	temporal_a	3,017	5	8.3913	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43610	The black non-conformist discover'd in more naked truth proving that excommunication & confirmation ... and diocesan bishops are ... of human make and shape, and that not only some lay-men, but all the keen-cringing clergy are non-conformists ... / by Edm. Hickeringill ...	Hickeringill, Edmund, 1631-1708.	1682 (1682)	Wing H1796; ESTC R3140	128,573	98

County of Essex and Everert of the said Parish Widdow Et Objicimus Articulamur ut supra 8. Item Objicimus Articulamur quod praemissa fuerunt sunt vera publica notoria manifesta pariter famosa ac de super eisdem laboravit in Praesenti laborat publica vox fama unde firma side de jure in hac parte requisita petit pars ista proponens jus justitiam sibi fieri Ministrari cum effectu nec non prefatum Edmundum Hickeringall pro tanto suae temeritatis excessu in delictis criminibus suis praedictis Canonice corrigi puniri a dicta sua Rectoria omnium Sanctorum in Villa Colcestria praedicta per triennium juxta Canones Constitutionis praedictꝰ suspendi ac pro sic suspenso denunciari declarari doctumque Edmundum Hickeringill in expensis Legitimis ex parte per partem Thomae Doughty in hujnsmodi causa factꝰ faciendum eidemque se ad omnia singula promissa probanda sed quatenus probaverit in premissis catenus obtineat in petitis officium Domini Judicantis humiliter implorando To which Libel at my second appearance before them in Doctors-Commons of which this is the News November 12. 1681. I gave in over and above the Protestations to be seen in my first Printed News from Doctors-Commons This following Answer CHAP. VII ALLEGATIONS humbly propounded in the Court vulgarly called the Arches held in Doctors Commons London in further Protestation Plea and Answer to certain Articles in a Libel against Mr. Edmund Hickeringill Clerk Defendant Exhibited before Sir Robert Wiseman there upon a Citation at the Promotion of Thomas Doughty Gent. alias at the Promotion of Henry Bishop of London Novemb. 21. 1681. THIS Defendant saving to himself all Advantages and Benefit of Exceptions already made by Protestation against the Proceedings of this Court by reason of the Statute 1 Edw. 6.2 against all Process Ecclesiastical wherein the Name and Style and Seal of the King is not inserted which with the Penalties at the Peril of the Transgressors thereof is now in force as this Defendant is informed by his Councel learned in the Law notwithstanding some Opinion given to the contrary during the Awe and Terror of the High-Commission-Court now blessed be God abolished Saving also the benefit of such other Statutes and Reasons by this Defendant formerly alledged in the said Protestation All which being saved to this Defendant he further Protesteth and saith First That under Favor of this Court and with submission to better Judgments this Defendant humbly conceives that there is a Statute made in 16 Car. 1.11 whereby not only that branch of 1 Eliz. 1. is repealed But also It is further Enacted by the said Statute That no Archbishop Bishop Archdeacon Commissary Official Statute print c. shall inflict any Pain Penalty c. for any Misdemeanors or Contempt c. in pain of One hundred pounds and Costs and Damages to the Party grieved Upon which it is acknowledged by 13 Car. 2.12 that doubt did arise whether by 17 Car. 1. and yet there never was any Statute made in that 17 Year All Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction was not thereby suspended which doubts whether well-grounded this Defendant does not take upon him to determine but rather thinks that Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as to purely Spirituals and purely Spiritual Weapons is not thereby taken away nor should the Weapons of their Warfare be Carnal but Spiritual But this Defendant humbly conceives That the said Statute comes fully home to this his present Case in the said Articles and is without doubt The last Article of the said Libel threatning this Defendant with no small Pain and Penalty but no less than that of being suspended for Three Years from his Rectory of All-Saints in Colchester in that County of Essex And also to pay money for Costs Both which are great Pains and Penalties though not so bad as corporal Punishment yet they are Punishments not Spiritual but Temporal Pains and Penalties All which that Statute takes right and good reason from their Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical or Spiritual as well as Corporal punishments As ill becoming Church-men that never learn'd this of their Saviour Nor as this Defendant is informed by his Councel learned in the Law is this Statute of 16 Car. 1.11 repealed nor whether any reason it should be repealed this Defendant thinks it not proper for him to determine but humbly thinks that it is impossible that the repealing the 17 Car. 1. should repeal 16 Car. 1. But doubts not but it is available to him to defend him from the force of the said Article and to keep his said Rectory Tythes and Profits from the reach of this Spiritual Court. Besides The said Article threatning to suspend this Defendant from his Rectory for Three Years and the said Rectory being this Defendants Freehold the validity of this Defendants Title thereunto ought not to be tried in any Ecclesiastical Court but in the Courts of our Lord the King as in the Statute of Provisors 16 Rich. 2.5 For the Plenarty of a Benefice or whether a Benefice be full shall not be tried in the Ecclesiastical Court or Court Christian says the Lord Cook but in the Kings Courts as in the other Statute of Provisors 25 Edw. 3. 9 Edw. 1.2 18 Edw. 3.5 16 Car. 1.11 And in cause of disturbance as this is concerning the Right of Tythes pertaining to a Rectory when it is deraigned then shall the Plea pass in Court Christian as far forth as and no further at their peril then it is deraigned in the Kings Courts as in the said 9 Edw. 1.2 18 Edw. 3.5 28 Edw. 3.3 A Jury not an Official or Commissary Bishop nor Archdeacon shall determine Mens Freeholds such are all Rectories and Vicaridges Secondly In the said Process or Citation the ground or leading Process to the after-proceedings against this Defendant in the said Court the said Defendant is cited to answer certain Articles at the Promotion of Thomas Doughty Gent. But such Articles at the said Doughty's Promotion are not deliver'd to this Defendant nor were exhibited against him at his first appearance upon the said Citation as is provided by 2 Hen. 5.3 nor such Libel or Declaration answerable to the Process charged upon this Defendant to this day and therefore he ought by the said Statute to be dismist with Costs But instead thereof another Libel was deliver'd to this Defendant wherein Henry Bishop of London is Promoter Richard Nucourt the Proctor in presence of this Defendant blotted out for the Ink was not dry when the Libel was deliver'd Thomas Doughty the aforesaid Promoter and in his Room very sawcily and no doubt without the said Bishops privity being absent inserted Henry Bishop of London as Promoter nor will the said Bishop have very much cause to thank him for the Place or Preferment it being much below the Grandeur of a

course at Law with him and bring a Clausum Fregit or Action of Trespass against him before the Roman-Magistrates in their Courts of Judicatory as you may against a Heathen-man that is a Gentile or a Publican For the Publicans though many of those Excise-men Toll-gatherers or Custom-gatherers were Jews by Nation and Religion too and some of them Jewish Christians yet they were Herodians that is true Conformists to the Roman-yoke and Government and therefore odious to the Puritanical-Bygots the Hypocritical Pharisees that lookt with scorn upon all Man-kind and as Dogs despis'd and hated all if they were not of their Religion or rather foolish Superstition The best Comment upon Holy-Scripture is its self and the best Interpreter of our Blessed Saviour's sayings are his own and his Apostles Words and Actions A like Saying to this of Matt. 18.17 we have in Luk. 17.3 4. where our Saviour says If thy Brother trespass against thee if he repent forgive him that is if he pay the Trespass and make thee satisfaction and confess his fault and be sorry for it and promise amendment for without these there is no true Repentance then forgive him seven times and seventy seven times even as often as he shall sin against thee and neither Court him nor Sue him in the Spiritual-Court before the Sanhedrim or High-Priests-Court nor yet in the Temporal Courts of the Gentiles or Heathen-men and Publicans For our Blessed Saviour does not say Let him be to the Church as a Heathen-man or a Publican which the Pope to colour the Authority and Jus Divinum of his Excommunications as he does that of Christ to Peter Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church does without any ground or colour as politickly as sencelesly Construe and Interpret But our Blessed Saviour only says Let him be to thee to thee not to the Church as a Heathen-man or a Publican that is thou mayst lawfully then Sue thy Brother Jew at Law as well as any Gentile or Heathen-man or Publican Nor did ever any solid Scholar or Divine that was not prejudic'd and forestall'd in his Judgment which is usually the same with that of their Mothers and Catechisers for few men have wit enough to see and chuse their own way and know why and wherefore following like Horses in a Teame with Nose in Tayl of their Predecessors I say never an unbyass't man that ever I yet met with could prove Excommunication out of Matt. 18.17 But what may be concluded from the next Ver. 18. shall be examin'd by and by But Matt. 18.17 to my understanding sounds much like that of St. Paul 1 Cor. 6.1 2 3 4 5 6 7. Dare any of you having a matter against another go to Law before the unjust and not before the Saints Do ye not know that the Saints shall judg the world and if the world shall be judged by you are ye unworthy to judg the smallest matters Know ye not that we shall judg Angels how much more things that pertain to this life If then ye have judgment of things pertaining to this life set them to judg who are least esteemed in the Church I speak this to your shame Is it so that there is not a wise man amongst you no not one that shall be able to judg between his brethren But brother goeth to Law with Brother and that before the unbelievers Now therefore there is utterly a fault amongst you because you go to Law one with another Why do ye not rather suffer wrong Why do ye not rather suffer your selves to be defrauded So that when Jews or Christians happen to live in subjection under a Gentile or Heathen-Government than that of our Saviour Matt. 18.17 and this of Saint Paul 1 Cor. 6. is a Rule for them to walk by as to going to Law But if the Romans had not Conquer'd and given Laws to the Jews as they did in our Saviour's time and also if Christians do not live under a Heathen-Government then Matt. 18.17 and 1 Cor. 6. has no place nor is there any occasion for those Rules but they are Rules only in such cases nor is it heard of in an Age I know it that have liv'd amongst the Jews that the Jews go to Law one with another before the Christians or put them into a Court-Christian or Court-Mahometan But in a Kingdom or Country where the chief Magistrates are Christians or Jews there is no place nor occasion for this Rule namely Let him be unto thee as an Heathen-man or a Publican And therefore this Text is nothing to prove or colour Excommunication at this day nor ever was in our Saviour's time 't is nothing to the purpose but a foolish Popish groundless Comment But as this Comment arose from Popish Politicks and Prelatical Usurpation so it was grounded and is yet countenanced by and from a vulgar error Namely That the Synagogue or Sanhedrim amongst the Jews was only a Spiritual-Court or Kirk-Administration and that all the weapons they had was putting out of the Synagogue or debarring and excluding from the Sacraments Ordinances Divine-Service and all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical-Communion And not one of a thousand at this day but so accept it Whereas in truth the Sanhedrim Kirk or Synagogue was no more a Spiritual Ecclesiastical Court than those amongst us in Westminster-Hall or at the Assizes For the Sanhedrim or Synagogue acted by a standing Commission of Oyer and Terminer there was not amongst the Jews especially in our Saviours time when he spoke those words Matt. 18.17 two distinct Jurisdictions Ecclesiastical and Temporal one for the Soul another for the Body for such differen Courts are apt to clash and keep a quarrelling or ado with Prohibitions Consultations and I know not what But the Lord-Chief Justice was also High-Priest and Chief Magistrate and all the Inferiour Courts had Jurisdiction over all Persons and in all Causes Ecclesiastical and Temporal called the Sanhedrim the great the less and sometimes and usually the Synagogue Which Synagogue I say was carried on by Commission of Oyer and Terminer and never Excommunicated any man that is never debarr'd any man from the Sacraments Sacrifices and never shut any man out of the Church or Temple if he was a Jew though never so prophane But the Kirk or Synagogue Church or Judges or Justices of Peace Magistrates call them what you will for they were one and the same men as they are at this day in Turky Persia and the greatest part of the well-govern'd World as well as in the Theocratye of the Jews the Government of Gods own making Moses was Lord-Chief-Justice and Priest too and Consecrated and Ordain'd Aaron and his Son Moses Promulgated Canons and Constitutions not only temporal but Ecclesiastical Joshua nor Eleazar was commanded by God to look to and take care that the Israelites should be Circumcised the second time neither was he to except any amongst them or debar them from the Ordinance although