Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	appear_v	life_n	sin_n	4,010	5	4.7063	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19164	The attestation of the most excellent, and most illustrious lord, Don Carlos Coloma, embassadour extraordinary for Spayne. Of the declaration made vnto him, by the lay Catholikes of England concerning the authority challenged ouer them, by the Right Reuerend Lord Bishop of Chalcedon. With The answere of a Catholike lay gentleman, to the iudgment of a deuine, vpon the letter of the lay Catholikes, to the sayd Lord Bishop of Chalcedon.	Coloma, Carlos, 1573-1637.; Baltimore, George Calvert, Baron, 1580?-1632. Answere of a Catholike lay gentleman to the judgement of a devine. aut	1631 (1631)	STC 5576; ESTC S117323	60,660	174

actus in hoc quòd sit peccatum mortale Est ergo obligatiua ad ●uitandum magis actum illum quàm mortem corporalem quia mors animae fugienda est magis quàm mors corporis And after saith Nos autem secundum veritatem dicimus quòd vniuersaliter lex praeceptiua obligat ad mortem pro sui obseruatione in casu autem non ex benignitate legum From whence our Deuine concludeth that it is false and erroneous doctrine to teach that men are not bound to loose their estates ruine their posterities where necessity of profession of Fayth doth not oblige them but that they are bound to loose both estate life euer where the necessity of a lawfull commād doth oblige them vnder mortall sin And such no doubt it is to acknowledge and obey their lawfull Pastour as he sayth Heere you see Caietans Doctrine and our Deuines Inference To which I answere first that our Deuine cannot be ignorant how little Authority in many matters Caietan carrieth in schooles now a dayes though he were a great Doctor in his tyme and this in regard of his singularity in many points of great momēt and freedome in censuring other mens opinions Both which faults he seemeth somewhat to commit in this place For as for singularity he can hardly escape it hauing but one only man of the whole schoole of Deuines to hold with him who is Adrianus of his owne tyme or rather a little after him so as when he taught it it was singular among Deuines for any testimony that is extant since he hath not any one man but Adrian to follow him which being so then is it manifest that he falleth fowly into that other fault of censuring Doctrine as erroneous and false which was approued and taught in his owne tyme by learned men and that it seemeth with such likelyhood that all Deuines of ensuing tymes haue left his followed this Though in this he be not so much to be blamed not being able to forsee what men would say that came after as our Deuine who liueth now and cannot but know it to be allowed and taught by all learned men All whom this Deuine in alleadging and approuing Caietanes censure doth condemne which is a great fault in a man of his profession But to let that goe In my opiniō it had beene more for our Deuines purpose to haue alleadged Caietanes bare Authority without his reason This reasō which he bringeth being Caietanes best reason as is to be presumed in our Diuines Iudgmēt for sure he would bring the best and it prouing nothing worth it will appeare that he hath no reason at all for his reason is this An humane Law may oblige a man vnder mortall sinne as when a thing is cōmanded vpon paine of death but a mā is boūd rather to loose his life then cōmit a mortal sinne Ergo a man may be bound to loose his life for the obseruation of it To this I might answere first that his first Proposition is not altogether so certaine For that some great schollers not inferior to Caietan for Authority in schooles in morall matters are of opinion that no humane ciuill law doth bind vnder mortall sinne But I do not build vpon that And therefore I answere secondly that Caietanes reason is petitio Principij and consequently no reason taking the very thing in question though deliuered in other words for a reason of his saying For it is the same question whether an humane law can bind a man vnder mortall sinne to losse of goods or life but in case where there is some higher obligatiō proceeding from the law of God or nature and whether an humane law can oblige him to loose his fortunes and life where there is no necessity of profession of his Faith or other higher bond And this is it which Caietan with one other Deuine sayth and all other Deuines gainesay him in And the reason is manifest For a law being to be for the common good and the power by which it is made proceeding originally from the people if we speake of ciuill or Politicall power and giuen for that end it were a great abuse of that power to force men to so great domage as to hazard fortune and life but where it is meerly necessary for that end for men are not supposed to be so voyde of reason as to cast away themselues so freely Now in that case of common good the law of nature doth come in and fortify that bond The like we may say of Ecclesiasticall humane power which though it come originally from God not from the people yet reason doth prescribe the vse of it and a Law made thereby to the domage and hurt of mens fortunes liues without a necessity for their eternall good would rather proue preiudiciall then profitable and therfore no Law Nay to matters of extraordinary difficulty though otherwise good and holy euen Religious men are not many tymes bound That Ordinary Example which authors bring of a Religious man entring heere in Europe who they say by his generall Vow of Obedience is not bound vpon his Superiours commaund to go to the Indies through so many dangers by sea land How much lesse then can secular men be bound with daunger of life and ruine of their fortunes to thinges not absolutly necessary to fayth and saluation Such as is the not acknowledging and obeying of my Lo Bishop of Chalcedons Ordinariship And therfore no matter fit for so great an obligation as the losse of life and ruine of a mans posterity Wherefore that must needs faile which our Deuine buildeth vpon Caietanes Authority as the foundation to wit that men are bound to loose all not only for profession of Faith but also where the necessity of a lawful commaund obligeth them if he meane the necessity which a commaund doth bring with it subsequent as an effect which he must meane for his purpose For as I haue said all this while all cōmaunds do not bind in all occasions and then there is no such necessity or rather it is no law or commaūd in this case being not able to bind Therfore to auoyd all ambiguity equiuocation of the necessity of a lawfull cōmaund I distinguish and say If this necessity be antecedent and such as may be sufficient to ground such a commaund on because the thing is of necessity of it selfe for the saluatiō of a mans soule or the publique good this commaund is lawful the necessity sufficient to bind a man to the losse of life goods if not but only the necessity subsequent that is because it is commanded I say this is no sufficient ground for a man to hazard all neyther is it a commaund in this case hauing no power to oblige as I haue proued And so much for our Deuines Diuinity which hath foyled him in this point of Doctrine contradicting the whole current of Deuines Let him looke Bonacin