Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	henry_n	king_n	queen_n	6,833	5	7.4628	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A41989	Autokatakritoi, or, The Jesuits condemned by their own witness being an account of the Jesuits principles in the matter of equivocation, the Popes power to depose princes, the king-killing doctrine : out of a book entituled An account of the Jesuits life and doctrine, by M.G. (a Jesuit), printed in the year 1661 and found in possession of one of the five Jesuits executed on the 20th of June last past : together with some animadversions on those passages, shewing, that by the account there given of their doctrine in the three points above-mentioned, those Jesuits lately executed, were, in probability, guilty of the treasons for which they suffered, and died equivocating.	M. G. (Martin Grene), 1616-1667.; M. G. (Martin Grene), 1616-1667. Account of the Jesuites life and doctrine.; Hopkins, William, 1647-1700.	1679 (1679)	Wing G1826; ESTC R13202	29,605	24

the Society in the Year 1626. or the 13th of August made a precept of obedience by which all Jesuits are obliged upon pain of damnation never to write dispute teach or print any thing concerning that matter The Precept is extant in an Epistle of Father Mutius and from thence inserted as a perpetual Precept into the eighth Congregation in fine it runneth thus Ordinamus in virtute Sanctae Obedientiae nequis in posterum materiam de Potestate summi Pontificis super Principes eos deponendi c. tractet aut libris editis aut scriptis quibuscunque nec publicè disputet aut doceat in Scholis ut occasiones omnis offensionis querelarum praecidantur This is the Precept which hath now steed this 35 years and never was infringed by any one since the year 26 nothing hath been said of this Question in Schools or Sermons p. 112. or public discourses nothing hath been Printed of it in the Society This care the Society hath had to avoid all offensive Questions c. Answ How little effect Aquaviva's precept had or how little it was regarded may be plainly seen by the Publishing of Sanctarellus his Book in the year 1625. and that approved by Father Mutius the self same General of the Jesuits who Published the Precept of August the 13th 1626. This Precept upon pain of Damnation was but necessary to a tone for approving Sanctarellus's Book and manifestly appears to have been intended meerly to prevent clamor and maintain the reputation of the Society more than the Authority of Princes It provides but slenderly for securing their rights for though it prohibits writing Books publick Disputations and Lectures on that Subject yet it leaves them at liberty to instill that Doctrine in private wheresoever they see it likely to find a favourable reception Nay for ought appears Libris editis out scriptis quibuseunque nec publicè disputet out doceat in Schuli it may be still vented in Sermons we have only our Authors bare word that nothing hath been said in Sermons for 35 years for the Prohibition extends only to Writing publick ●isputations and Lectures in the Schools if they forbear it in the Pulpit their obedience outgoes the precept Since the publishing of this Account we have reason to believe as we are informed upon Oath that this Doctrine hath been preached by some Fathers of the Society in Spain And if we observe the 0151 0146 V 2 consideration upon which F. Mutius was induced to prohibit the publishing of this Doctrine Ut occasiones omnis offensionis quirel exam praecidantar viz. To take away all occasions of offence and quarrel we shall not find the Princes of Europe much obliged to him for this precept For first hereby if there ever should be any of the Society so honest as to assert the rights of Princes against the Popes Usurpations they are prohibited doing it under pain of Damnation And Secondly there is no regard had to their Interests but meerly to the credit of the Society M. G. p. 113. The fourth Objection against the Jesuits Doctrine is that they teach the killing of Kings p. 114. though under the name of Tyrants So Mariana the Spanish Jesuit teacheth and therefore had his books burnt at Paris Answ This fourth Objection he propounds very blindly and not in those terms we make it That we charge them with is plainly this That they hold that Princes excommunicated by the Pope may be deposed and murthered by their Subjects This we put them to renounce in the Oath of Allegiance And upon Trial we find more Patrons of the King-killing Doctrine than a single Mariana whom they so freely give up M. G. I answer that Mariana did in the year 1599. print a book intituled de Rege Regis institutione which he dedicated to Philip the second King of Spain in this Book he did teach a Doctrine after Dominicus Soto l. 5. de Justitia Jure qu. 2. Art 3. contrary to the Judgment of the Society of killing not Kings but Tyrants which Doctrine the Society condemned and forbid and the other Doctors of the Society all unanimously impugned it Answ There is a great deal of craft in thus frankly giving up Mariana 1. As Bellarmine was excused before he borrowed his Arguments from Sanders a Secular Priest so here Mariana is not the first Author of this Doctrine he learned it of Soto 2. It is represented as a small slip a single Proposition that is saulty 3. They give him in composition for the whole Society and pretend that all the other Doctor Etors of the Society unanimously impugned it Whereas besides that it discovers the Authors passion for Mariana it shews that 't is not the King-killing Doctrine they disavow but have politickly picked out a single Proposition that they may have somewhat to condemn for their credit Whereas no less than two whole Chapters are hable to exception for that scandalous Doctrine And the King-killing Doctrine in the terms we charge them with it is as much the Doctrine of all Jesuits who have written on that Subject as 't is Mariana's M. G. That you may know the truth I must do as in the last Objection that is give you a Narrative of the passage When then the General of the Society Claudius Aquaviva understood that Mariana had put out an opinion of so dangerous consequence he writ to the Fathers of the Society in France who had acquainted him with the whole matter in these words as Father Coton sets them down in a Letter to the Queen Regent of France p. 115. We have been very sorry that no body perceived the fault until the Books were Printed the which notwithstanding we have presently commanded to be corrected and will use great care hereafter that such things happen no more This passed in the Year 1606. four years before the Sorbou condemned Mariana's Book which was An Dom 1610. July the 4. Answ Clandius Aquaviva's Epistle to the Fathers of the Society in France is Apocryphal it is extant no where save in Father Cotons letter to the Queen Regent and he who consulted an Astrologer teaching the Death of the King and betrayed his Confessions to the Spamard as Father Coton did would not stick to sorge a Letter from Clandius aquaviva to the Fathers of the Society in France at a time of need as that was when Father Coton wrote to the Queen Regent after the Murther of Henry the 4th by Ravilliack who was said to have been animated to commit that Parricide by reading Mariana But admit Clandius Aquaviva did write such an Epistle and at the time pretended is it credible considering that strict correspondence the Provincials of all Order throughout the world keep with their General at Rome that a Book which made so much noise should sell off a whole Impression and be Re-printed twice pass seven years and yet the General of the Order know nothing of that