Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	good_a	great_a	way_n	2,901	5	4.3688	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A03760	Certaine sermons made in Oxford, anno Dom. 1616 VVherein, is proued, that Saint Peter had no monarchicall power ouer the rest of the Apostles, against Bellarmine, Sanders, Stapleton, and the rest of that companie. By Iohn Howson, Doctor in Diuinitie, and prebendarie of Christ-Church; now Bishop of Oxon. Published by commandement.	Howson, John, 1557?-1632.	1622 (1622)	STC 13879; ESTC S104261	94,968	168

St. Peters and the Popes Monarchie which is founded saith he vpon our Sauiours verball institution Non vno tota momento sed gradatim Stapleton relec cont 3. q. 1. art 1. per partes à Christo facta tradita est was not made and deliuered all at one time by our Sauiour but it was giuen by degrees and by parts and therefore as it was instituted by degrees so it must be manifested and proued by degrees and so necessarily by degrees be confuted Thirdly because Gretzer tells vs Gretz defens Bellar. l. 1. c. 23. de Rom. Pontif. that the prerogatiues of St. Peter doe not proue his Monarchie Si considerentur solitariè non iunctim If they be considered apart and not ioyntly and therefore to disproue any one of his prerogatiues is not much to the purpose Finally because they falsly obiect that they being tyed as a Beare to the stake to defend those propositions which are deliuered in print and so professed to the whole world we take no fast hold nor come to handy-gripes but a snatch and away like the dog at Nilus Qui bibit fugit for feare of a Crocodile I will therefore at my next opportunity ioyne issue with them and proue first That the Apostle St. Peter had no Monarchy ouer the Apostles or Church of GOD as Bellarmine Stapleton and Sanders teach Secondly That Saint Peter had a Primacie of order as in an Aristocracie amongst the Apostles who were his equalls and that by the testimonie of the ancient Church Thirdly That the ancient Bishops of Rome of the purer times neither had nor chalenged any Monarchy in the Church or any part thereof Fourthly That by the iudgement of the Fathers they had the Primacie among other Bishops Lastly That this Primacie is not fastened to that See but may for their tyrannies and vsurpations vpon Churches and Kingdomes be remoued from it and conferred on another 62. My conclusion should be if the time did serue with an exhortation to beware how wee vndertake the defence of any vntruth either in Religion or Moralitie considering that neither the honour wit or learning of this great Cardinall can possibly maintaine it but vni sustinendo mendacio necesse est accumulari plura Vntruths are onely maintained by vntruths and one corruption or falsification begets another Truth and a good cause are fairely defended suâ claritate as Lactantius saith by her owne clearenesse Via illa mendax saith hee the way of lying and falsifying and corrupting c. Via illa mendax quae ducit ad occasum multos tramites habet That false deceitfull way which leades to destruction hath many crosse wayes and many trickes too but being examined as you see shame followes after and as he saith Ab aniculis quas contemnunt à pueris nostris error illorum stultitia irridebitur Their error and folly shall be laughed at by our olde women and children whom they scorne 63. God who is the author and defender of truth and reuenger and reuealer of falshoode and lies so possesse your hearts with the loue of truth that it may be the scope and end of all your studies and actions and at length direct you to that true way which leadeth to the true euerlasting life This GOD grant for Christ Iesus sake to whom with the Father and the Holy Ghost be all honour glorie praise and dominion for euer and euer AMEN THE SECOND SERMON Luke 12.41.42 c. Then Peter said vnto him MASTER tellest thou this parable vnto vs or euen to all And the Lord said who is a faithfull Steward and wise whom the Master shall make ruler ouer the houshold to giue them their portion of meate in season c. 1. I Haue heretofore diuided this Text into certaine conditions requisite for a good Steward but because we are to enquire Quis sit Who he is before we come to the question Qualis sit What his qualities and conditions are I shewed you that Bellarmine disputing against the Presbyterians affirmed out of St. Hilarie and the rest of the Fathers that the Bishops and Prelates of the Church were this Steward but discoursing against Protestants Cic. de Orat. Tanquam Academicus nonus qui contra omnes dicere solebant hee makes the Pope this Steward imagining these words to be spoke to St. Peter onely and to that purpose he corrupted as I then noted euery circumstance of this Text for as St. Augustine saith Aug. li. 83. quest q. 69. Non possit ijs error oboriri palliatus nomine Christiano nisi de scriptur is non intellectis aut malitiosè expositis 2. This counterfeit columne of the Popes Monarchie I then shooke asunder but it is seldome seene Cicero that in vno praelio fortuna Reipub. disceptat and this Monarchie was not collated by our Sauiour with any one speech or at any one time as Stapleton saith but by many and sundrie donations nor the great prerogatiues which were giuen to St. Peter and so consequently to the Pope are to be considered solitariè but iunctìm as Gretzer saies wherefore they must be confuted seuerally and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Tullie hath it exactly Cic. de Orat. and with a iust proportion Vt verba verbis quasi demensa paria respondeant 3. But because all the reasons and arguments which the Iesuites now make in defence of this Monarchie by vertue of any prerogatiue Monarchicall which they attribute to St. Peter Adiunante misericordiâ Domini as St. Augustine saith anteà sunt antiquorum patrum praeuentione refutata Aug. cont epist 2. Gaudentij lib. 2. cap. 6. quam illorum circumuentione prolata are preuented by the ancient Fathers interpretations before we could be circumuented by their obiections as appeareth by sundry answeres which haue beene framed of late as also because it is an argument more beseeming many volumes then a fewe Sermons I will therefore as I then promised proue to all indifferent hearers First that S. Peter had not any Monarchy ouer the Apostles or Church of Christ by our Sauiours institution Secondly that St. Peter had a Primacie of order as in an Aristocracie among the Apostles who were his equalls as the Fathers affirme Thirdly that the ancient Bishops of Rome of the purer times neither had nor challenged any Monarchie ouer the Church or any part thereof Fourthly that by the iudgement of the Fathers they had the Primacie among other Bishops Lastly that this Primacie is not fastened to this See but may for their tyrannies and vsurpations ouer Churches and Kingdomes be remoued from it and conferred on another 4. The first is that our Sauiour bequeathed no Monarchie to S. Peter nor to his Church and so consequently that the spirituall gouernement is not Monarchicall 5. This argument hath beene copiously and learnedly handled of late but especially by those two worthies of our Church the most learned and reuerend Bishops of Winchester and

are spoke to Peter and of Peter himselfe and for proofe he brings Chrysostome and Ambrose Certe saith he hunc locum disertè explicat Chrysostomus de Petro successoribus eius Lib. 2. de Sacerdot circa principium Cui Ambrosius assentiens c. 18. Hee quoteth S. Chrysostome curiously the booke and the part of the booke but alleageth not his words and no maruell for Certè hunc locum disertè explicat Chrysost de discipulis Christi non de ipso Petro certainely Chrysostome doth expresly interprete this place of the Disciples of Christ and not of Peter for not farre from the beginning of that second booke hee saith Chrys de Sacerd. lib. 2. Dominus cum discipulos alloqueretur ait Quis est fidelis seruus c When our Sauiour spoke to his Disciples he said Who is a faithfull seruant c. And although he say not farre from the beginning of that booke Christus curam ouium tum Petro tum successoribus Petri committebat which may be verified of any other of the Apostles yet hee offers not to proue that by this Text but comforts his friend S. Basil who was newly made Bishop and repented himselfe of accepting it charging S. Chrysostome that he by sleights had drawen him into it Longa est narratio longae Ambages You cannot vnderstand that second booke except you reade ouer very diligently the former he comforts him I say by telling him that if he proued to be fidelis dispensator prudens that is a good Bishop not a good Peter not a good Pope but a good Bishop in Greece and performed well the feeding of his flocke which would argue his loue to his Master then hee should receiue the reward mentioned in this Parable Super omnia bona eius constitueret cum and so interprets this Text of the Disciples in generall and the Bishops their successours as other Fathers doe Thus haue wee a good Chrysostome falsly alleaged to sway an ill cause 19. To S. Chrysostome saith he Ambrose assents but this Ambrose neither nameth Peter nor yet this my Text but in his Commentaries vpon 1. Tim. 3. he hath those very words quoted by Bellarmine Domus Dei est Ecclesia Ambr. sup 1. Tim. 3. cuius bodie rector est Damasus which will neuer proue by any consequent that these words were spoken by our Sauiour Petro de ipso Petro though we should yeeld to the Pope all Peters prerogatiues Bellar. lib. 2. de Concil cap. 17. But what author thinke you is this In his second booke de Concilijs hee alleageth him with S. Chrysostome to this very purpose and there calls him Ambrose as the other Chrysostome but here he saith with addition or rather detraction Ambrosius vel quicunque est autor illius Commentarij You must value him high because he is coupled with Chrysost then they opposed to S. Hilarie all the Fathers 20. But when Bellarmine speakes not Polemicè but historicè when hee hath him alone in a corner and makes no vse of him he tells vs that in these Commentaries vpon S. Pauls Epistles which are found in St. Ambrose his workes Sunt non pauca Bellar. de scriptor Eccles quae Pelagij errores continere videntur and thinkes that the author of them was one Hilarius not Arelatensis nor Pictauiensis but Hilarius Diaconus Romanus qui Luciferi scisma propagauit A good author no doubt who fauoured the heresie of Pelagius and the scisme of Lucifer Calaritanus 21. Thus wee may see that these wranglers Hilar. lib. 1. de Trin. in controuersies non referunt seusum deliuer not the receiued sense of the Scripture sed afferunt but they vary it at their pleasure as best fits their purpose This Steward was first all the Bishops and Prelates of the Church as Hilarie and all the Fathers are said to affirme Secondly He was euery Bishop in his priuate See and the Bishop of Rome in the vniuersall Church Et sine dubio sententia scripturae illa est Thirdly It is Peter alone and so consequently the Pope and to proue it a true Chrysostome is alleaged falsly and a false Ambrose is alleaged vainely Et talibus fundamentis tota domus nititur And vpon such foundations as these their whole edifice relies 22. But because these three false pillars are too weake to support so high ample a building as the Popedome is now vpon the foundation of this Text he addeth a fourth sleight to deceiue his readers We all confesse ioyntly that Ecclesia vna est Cyprian de vnit Eccles as S. Cyprian saith there is one Catholike Church Quae in multitudinem latiùs incremento foecunditatis extenditur Which by a miraculous increase and fecundity is extended and diuided into many particular Churches There is vnum Lumen one great Catholicke Light but multi radij many beames of that great light Arbor vna tenaci radice fundata One maine Catholicke tree fastened and founded with a sure roote and there are rami arboris multi many branches of this Catholike tree Finally vna gens one Catholicke nation or kindred who were first called Fideles and afterwards Christiani Christians at Antioch Et multae familiae many particular families or Churches Now because Oeconomus quem constituit Dominus super familiam suam doth literally or naturally as Bellarmine confesseth by the interpretation of Fathers signifie euery Bishop in his peculiar Diocesse in his peculiar Sunne-beame in his peculiar branch in his peculiar family and so consequently the Bishop of Rome in his Diocesse onely or particular family That the Text may reach home to the establishing of the Popes vniuersall Monarchie and proue that hee is Summus oeconomus in Ecclesiâ vniuersâ Hee addeth vnto the Text as before a word of Summitie or Supremacie so now a word of Vniuersalitie that as before hee made him by a sleight the supreame Bishop Supra quem nemo Hee might make him an vniuersall supreame Bishop Qui supra omnes an vniuersall Monarch ouer all the Church 23. For Bellarmine disputing against Barkley for the maintenance of the Popes vniuersall supremacie perceiuing that Familia one onely Family signified by the word of my Text was not spacious enough to entertaine that great Monarch vniuersall But if his Cardinals should attend him they would compasse him in Et coarctarent eum vndique Luk. 19.43 He inlargeth it as much as may be Bellar. cont Barc cap. 34. Et dilatat terminos vsque ad Euphratem and saith that the Pope Constitutus est super omnem familiam Cap. 34. And againe Cap. 24. Jb. c. 24. Qui toti familiae proe est And so where our Sauiour said Quis est fidelis oeconomus quem constituit Dominus supra familiam He chops and changes and addes to the Euangelist and makes him say Quis est summus oeconomus quem constituit Dominus supra omnem familiam or supra totam familiam and so beates off

heauens IESVS the Sonne of God But Bellarmine in this proposition tells vs that we haue the Pope Pontificem maximum two degrees of comparison aboue our Sauiour which is in English our Highest high Priest 33. What not enough to be Summus Pontifex with certaine additions of reference to our Sauiour but it must be absolutè not comparatè but simpliciter not in vniuersâ Ecclesiâ which words though they be high may carry a moderate sense of Primacie among many who are Episcopi in vniuersâ Ecclesiâ but he must be Pontifex summus simpliciter absolutè supra vniuersam Ecclesiam an highest high Priest ouer all the Church and vsurpe a Monarchie 34. But I will not farther exaggerate this Luciferian proposition I speake this by the way ex abundantiâ cordis and conclude with S. Bernard Ser. 69. super Cant. Audet quis peruadere locum vnigeniti tui O good God doth any man dare to challenge the place and prerogatiue of thy Sonne thy onely Sonne c. Praecipitetur O cast him downe headlong as Lucifer from heauen Ponit sibi sedem in excelso Doth hee make himselfe a Monarch in thy Church Subuertatur cathedra pestilentiae and let all that behold it say Numquid iste vir est Es 14.16 qui conturbauit gentes concussit regna Is this he that so troubled the world and the kingdomes thereof to establish his Monarchy 35. But let vs consider how Bellarmine proues this proposition for thereupon depends my note What by Scripture no it contradicteth the very phrase of the Scripture How then by Fathers no Tertullian scoffed at the title St. Gregorie detested it What by bare reason no he knew well enough St. Augustines rule Aug. Epist 56. Quasi regularis est omnium haereticorum temeritas conari stabilissimam authoritatem fundatissimae Ecclesiae quafi rationis nomine pollicitatione euertere It is the vsuall rashnesse of all heretickes to striue to ouerthrow the most firme authority of the most established Church by the name and promise as it were of reason How then will hee proue it Ratione in scripturis fundatâ and founded vpon this Scripture my very Text. 36. We can aske no better for Bellarmine maintaining a good cause against the Anabaptists and Arians of Transiluania viz. Licere Christianis gerere magistratus ciuiles That it is lawfull for Christians to exercise ciuill power and authority hee proues it happily ratione in scripturâ fundatâ by reason founded on this Scripture Bellar. de Laicis lib. 3. after this manner Non repugnat libertati Christianae praefectura vel subiectio Ecclesiastica Ecclesiasticall gouernment or subiection is not repugnant to Christian libertie as appeares saith he Math. 24. Quis est fidelis seruus c. Who is a faithfull and wise seruant whom the Master shall make ruler ouer the houshold Ergo saith Bellarmine non repugnat praefectura vel subiectio Politica therefore Politicall gouernment or subiection is not repugnant to Christianity You see how in a good cause he can dispute well Ratione in hac scripturâ fundatâ If now it be as lawfull to haue one spiritual Monarch the Pope ouer the whole Church as to haue temporall Kings and Monarchs in their seuerall Kingdomes and that the reason be also in hâc scripturâ fundatâ it will force as farre as the other doth But if you examine it you will finde that he doth super alienum fundamentum aedificare build vpon reason altogether auerse from this Scripture 37. His proofe or reason is this Omnia nomina quae in scripturis tribuuntur Christo vnde constat eum esse supra Ecclesiam eadem omnia tribuuntur Pontifici All the names which are giuen in Scripture to Christ whereby it is manifest that he is ouer all the Church all those are giuen the Pope he might haue added and greater names too for Christ is called Pontifex magnus and he calls the Pope Pontificem maximum or summum He proues that reason by an Induction and takes one instance or example out of my Text First saith he Christus est pater-familias in domo suâ quae est Ecclesia Pontifex in eâdem est summus aeconomus Christ is the Master of the family in his owne house which is the Church and the Pope is the chiefe Steward in that house If this reason had beene founded vpon this Scripture hee should not haue said Summus aeconomus but aeconomus onely that Summitie of his is not in this Scripture nor founded here in this Text his ministery or seruice is founded But as some Philosophers said Cicero In cerebro animi esse sedem So Pontificis summi sedes whom they make the very soule of the Church is not found in my text but in laborante cerebro in some braine that is greatly distemper'd 38. Here now you see is corruptor stylus the word or style of the Scripture corrupted and Summus put in stead of Fidelis but let vs goe on and we shall find also Tortul that there is adulter sensus the sense of the Scripture strangely adulterated for saith he Christus est Pater-familias in domo suâ quae est Ecclesiâ Pontifex in eâdem domo est summus aeconomus id est Pater-familias loco Christi Christ is Master in his owne house which is the Church the Pope is the chiefe Steward in that house that is the Master in stead of Christ Obserue I pray you Oeconomus id est Pater-familias loco Christi a Seruant that is a Master Cic. de diuin li. 1. 39. Tullie saith Vbi sunt multa ambigua multa obscura explanationes adhibendae sunt interpretum Where there are many things doubtfull many obscure the expositions of Interpreters must be added If there be any obscurity any equiuocation in the word aeconomus the Euangelist explaines it and makes it vniuocall in the next verse we need not Bellarmines interpretation aeconomus id est Pater-familias for the Euangelist saith aeconomus id est seruus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a seruant as if the holy Ghost would preuent this interpretation so preiudiciall to our Sauiour and to his Church speaking of the same man he calls him once onely and that in this Text aeconomum but he calls him seruum Mat. 24. foure times in the fiue next verses And S. Matt. deliuering the same Parable neuer calls him aeconomum but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen foure sundry times in the same Parable And yet Bellarmine dares say aeconomus id est Pater-familias loco Christi Vtricroditis Giue you credit to the holy Ghost by the pen of two Euangelists who say eight times aeconomus id est seruus or to Bellar who reads aeconomus id est Pater-familias or dominus as it is in the Text 40. O fratres Censore opus est an Aruspice nobis Juuen Whether haue we more need of an Index or Ignis expurgatorius to quit the

sanctum Domini Psal 2. Et regni huius non erit finis Luc. 1. and of his Kingdome there shall be no end whether wee intend extent of place or continuance of time but our question is whether our Sauiour appointed ouer his militant Church one Steward oeconomum vnum viz. St. Peter as the Papists holde as the sole spirituall Monarch of it from whom all spirituall power should be deriued or many Stewards viz. the twelue Apostles and their successors as equall and ioynt commissioners from him 16. This word Monarcha or Monarchia which is the Praedicatum in our question is no antient Ecclesiasticall word but nouus ascriptitius ciuis and but lately admitted into the Church gouernement or spirituall common-wealth of Christ Iesus it was neuer found in the Fathers applied to the Church I thinke I may be bolde to say for more then a thousand yeares not very frequent till our age in which Sanders wrote his visible Monarchie Now Franciscus à victoriâ Francis victor Relect. 7. sets downe this rule Theologis non licet in suis disputationibus sicut Iurisconsultis aliquid insolens nouum inauditum contra maiorum autoritatem asserere It is not lawfull for Diuines as it is for Lawyers to maintaine any thing that is strange new and vnheard of against the authoritie of the Fathers Notwithstanding this Non licet Sanders Stapleton Suarez Bellarmine Gretzer with that whole societie or rather conspiracie take vpon them the defence of this Monarchical Papall Church-gouernement no doubt directly against their consciences and certaine knowledge as may appeare by their slye subtill and various defence of it 17. For Bellarmine entitles his bookes plainely De Romani Pontificis Monarchiâ but with feare and a kinde of blushing Cic. Bellarl l. 1. c. 19. Verecundiam timiditas imitatur feare imitates bashfulnesse for when he comes to the issue and heart of the question hee changeth his copie as if he should say Timidè dito sed tamen dicendum est though I feare to offend my violent brethren yet I must affirme but this onely Ecclesiasticum regimen praecipuè Monarchicum esse debere which is the title of that ninth chapter praecipuè Monarchicum a word slyly put in that when he is pressed hard with any argument he may slide instantly into the Primacie which we denye not confounding for his aduantage these two questions of the Monarchie and Primacie a common practise among them all that if they be vrged hard they may after the manner of vnconstant heretickes rapidè ad vnum delabi slippe sodainely to one of them and againe when they see their time and aduantage citò in alterum confluere returne quickly to their first error 18. But there is no Monarchie in the world praecipuè Monarchicum if it be Monarchicum it is absolutè Monarchicum and whatsoeuer is found in it either Aristocraticall or Democraticall it is by the fauourable and free concession of the absolute Monarch as wee see in this Kingdome others adiacent and the Monarchs bountie grace who yeelds so much for the ease good of his people must not preiudice his absolute prerogatiue or giue to his gouernement a new forged or commentitious title for multari Monarcham diminutione aliquâ honoris contumelio sum est it is a high disgrace to depriue a Monarch of the least part of his honour 19. Notwithstanding Gretzer who hath commandement from Claudius de Aquà viuâ general Gouernour of that societie to second Bellarmine in all his attempts and obserueth in his owne writings these two qualities temerè dicere astutè reticere to speake confidently in his greatest weakenesse and conceale subtilly his aduersaries strength seeing Bellarmine vrged by Danaeus prouing the Church gouernement not to be Monarchicall and himselfe not able to make it good as one full of clamour and indignation cries out like Mars in Homer hauing taken a wound Gretz l. 2. defen Bellar. de Pontif. Rom. li. 1. ca. 9. Vbi vnquam scripsit Bellarminus Ecclesiae regimen esse Monarchicum planè id est pure sine vlla admixtione ex Aristocrattâ Democrattâ Where did Bellarmine euer write that the gouernment of the Church was plainely that is purely Monarchicall without any mixture of Aristocracie or Democracie 20. We will answere him briefly Wheresoeuer Bellarmine calls the regiment of the Church Monarchicum or S. Peter or the Pope a Monarch simply without any diminishing particle there he saith the regiment of the Church is plane purè Monarchicum and the Pope is planè purè Monarcha But that we may Cic. in Top. Vi nominis argumentum el●cere the etymon of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implies not onely that one but one alone solus doth gouerne the state planè purè besides Bellarmine entitles his booke De Romani Pontificis Monarchiâ without any diminution and holds it affirmatiuely and saith that St. Peter was Primus Ecclesiae Romanae Monarcha Gretz l. 2. c. 2. and Gretzer saith Monarchia Monarcha supremam ab alio independentem authoritatem denotat which admits neither Aristocracy nor Democracie to be mixed with it for then it were not sola nor independens and after that absolute manner hee defines St. Peters spirituall Monarchie in his eight Chapter De Pontif. Rom. lib. 1. cap. 9. 21. And when Bellarmine saith Papam habere plenitudinem potestatis si comparetur cum Episcopis which notes the intensiue power and Papa est praepositus toti orbi Christiano in that fulnesse of power and notes the extensiue power and that he hath totam plenam eam potestatem quam Christus ad Ecclesiae vtilitatem in terris reliquit which is a plenarie power and many the like what doth he else but in plaine termes auerre the gouernment of the Church and the Popes power to be planè id est purè Monarchicum For the power Aristocraticall in other Bishops or Democraticall in inferiour Priests is not entended by Bellarmine to be with admixtion as Gretzer calls it with the Popes gouernment but by subordination to the Popes power or emanation from the Popes power as Suarez saith with which subordination De Leg. l. 4. c. 4. or emanation Aristocraticall or Democraticall as they holde it the Church regiment may be planè id est purè Monarchicum 22. Tullie saith Do Natu. Deorū lib. 3. that a man may wrong a good cause by ill handling it Rem minime dubiam argumentando dubiam facere as no doubt the rest of the Iesuits will censure Bellarmine for halting as it were betweene the Monarchie and Primacie whereas they are resolute obstinatione quâdam sententiae that the Pope is planè purè a perfect and absolute spirituall Monarch 23. For Suarez a chiefe Captaine of that coniuration affirming that our Sauiour gaue to S. Peter Munus Apostolicum and Potestatem legislatiuam De leg l. 4. c. 4. n. 15. 16. vt