Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
england_n ambassador_n king_n pope_n 4,544 5 7.1893 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A51460 An historical treatise of the foundation and prerogatives of the Church of Rome and of her bishops written originally in French by Monsieur Maimbourg ; and translated into English by A. Lovel ...; Traité historique de l'établissement et prérogatives de l'Eglise de Rome et de ses evêques. English Maimbourg, Louis, 1610-1686.; Lovell, Archibald. 1685 (1685) Wing M289; ESTC R11765 158,529 442

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

assembled by order of the Cardinals to consult about that matter were all unanimously of the Judgment of the University of Paris and he affirmed that besides the Universities of France it was also the Judgment of the famous University of Bologna 1 June from which they had Letters and of that of Florence who had given it in writing under the Hands of sixscore Doctors Six days after the Process that was brought against Gregory and Benet having been proved and made out in a judicial manner the Council past a definitive Sentence whereby it declares Pietro de la Luna and Angelo Corario heretofore called Popes Benet XIII and Gregory XII obstinate Schismaticks and Hereticks convicted of enormous Crimes of Perjury Impiety and of Collusion to deceive Believers and to keep up the Schism which so long had rent the Church and as such deposes them from the Papacy This the Council did pursuant to the Decree whereby it had before determined that that Council represented the Church universal and that it was the only supreme Judge upon Earth to whom the Judgment of that Cause belonged though it was most certain that one of these two Pretenders was the true Pope After wards they chose Alexander V. who was acknowledged by the Universal Church except those two wretched Remains of Obedience who held out still for the two Antipopes and that Pope approved all the Decrees of the Council even a moment before his Death which was most holy and precious in the sight of God I have heretofore proved according to the Judgment of almost all the Churches of Christendom of that of Rome in particular nay and of the Universal Church represented by the Council of Constance which was but a continuation of this that it ought to be reckoned without contradiction lawful But since on the one hand it hath pleased some Doctors beyond the Alpes to doubt of it and that on the other I decline all dispute in this Treatise I will only stick to matter of Fact which cannot be contested to wit that this Council of Pisa hath been one of the greatest Assemblies that was ever seen in the Church For there were in it five and twenty Cardinals four Patriarchs six and twenty Archbishops an hundred fourscore and two Bishops either in person or by Proxy two hundred fourscore and ten Abbots amongst whom were all the Heads of the Orders the Generals of the Carthusians and of the four Mendicant Orders the great Masters of Rhodes of the Holy Sepulchre and the Teutonick Knights the Deputies of the Universities of Paris Tholouse Orleans Anger 's Montpellier Bologna Florence Cracovia Vienna Prague Cologne Oxford and Cambridge and of some others and those of the Chapters of above an hundred Metropolitan and Cathedral Churches above three hundred Doctors of Divinity and of the Law the Ambassadors of the Kings of France England Poland Bohemia Sicily and Cyprus of the Dukes of Burgundy and Lorrain Brabant Bavaria of the Marquess of Brandenburg Lantgrave of Thuringe and of almost all the other Princes of Germany besides that the Kings of Hungary Sweden Denmark Norway and in a word those of Spain except Arragon shortly after adhered to that Council and by consequent all these Prelates all these Doctors all these Orders all these Universities all these Kingdoms all these States that 's to say in a word almost all Christians in the beginning of the fifteenth Century when that Dispute was started concerning the Superiority of the Council or of the Pope believed conform to the Belief of Antiquity That a Council is above the Pope But you are to take notice of somewhat more particular and convincing still When five years after the Council of Constance was opened for continuing that of Pisa as it had been decreed in that Council which was rather interrupted than concluded the Dispute concerning the Superiority of the Pope or of the Council was started again with greater Heat than before For some Cardinals being arrived from Scaffhausen whither the Pope who had escaped from Constance had retired attempted in full Assembly where Sigismund the Emperour was present to prove that the Council was dissolved because John XXIII who had abandoned it being owned for true Pope by all that were present was above the Council which could have no Authority without him Then was there a general murmuring in the Assembly and many of those who had greatest Authority and Reputation by reason of their Dignity and Knowledge Et iis responsum fuit alacriter per plures de ipso concilio viros magnae authoritatis scientificos scilicet quod Papa non esset supra Concilium sed sub concilio facta est illie contentio magna hinc inde Niem in vit Joann J. Gers Serm. coram Concil undertook to refute them and to prove on the contrary That the Council was superiour to the Pope conform to the Sermon that the famous John Gerson had made to the Council a few days before wherein he had made it out in twelve propositions That a general Council representing the Universal Church is above the Pope not only in the doubt whether or not he be true Pope but also in the Assurance that is to be had whether he be lawfully chosen or not Etiam ritè electi as they did undoubtedly hold John XXIII to have been Wherefore that Question both before and after the Sermon of Gerson having been examined in the Conferences of Nations according to the Order appointed by the Council a Report of it was made in the fourth Session Act. Concil Constan t. 12. con Ed. Paris Anton. tit 22. c. 6. §. 2. where nine Cardinals and two hundred Bishops were present with the Emperour Sigismund the Ambassadors of the Kings of France England Poland Norway Cyprus Navarr and many Princes of Germany and there seeing it had been already declared in the preceding Session that the Council subsisted and still retained all its Force and Authority tho the Pope had withdrawn himself it was by common Consent thus concluded and defined That the Holy Council lawfully assembled and representing the Church Militant hath received immediately from Jesus Christ a Power which all and every one even the Pope himself are obliged to obey in all that concerns the Faith the extirpation of Schism and the general Reformation of the Church of God in its Head and Members And to the end that it might not be said what some have said since without having carefully read the Council of Constance that that is only to be understood during the time of a Schism it is added to the Decree in the following Session That whatever Pope refuses to obey the Decrees not only of this Council but also of any other that shall be lawfully called ought to be punished if he amend not The Council afterward exercises its sovereign Authority over Pope John XXIII acknowledged by them for true Pope by the Church of Rome and by all Christian
in the Council of Constance even before and after the Sermon of John Gerson Besides after that Assembly wherein all that the Cardinals who were sent from the Pope objected had been convincingly refuted it was so well examined that all the four Nations acquiesced in the Point I know very well there were great Debates about it and that the Cardinals opposed it I even grant him what he hath found in his Manuscript and which he confesses had never been known before and which perhaps is not true that the Cardinals nay and the Ambassadours of France made a private Protestation in the Chamber of Presence that it was only for avoiding of Scandal that they assisted at the fifth Session and not for consenting to what they knew was to be defined in it What can he conclude from thence Hath not he read the History of the Conclaves where after a thousand Intrigues a thousand Oppositions and a thousand other things more than I can tell at length a lawful Election is made to which all the Cardinals who were so divided before consent Let him read the Histories of the Council of Trent written by Fra. Paolo and Cardinal Pallavicini there he will find a great many Debates about Points that were to be decided in the Sessions and nevertheless the Holy Ghost which unites all minds into one Judgment made all the Decrees of that Council to pass with the unanimous Consent of all the Fathers who had been so divided before It is just so with this Council of Constance I grant there may have been Oppositions Contests private Protestations and whatever M. Schelstrate pleases to inform us of from his Manuscripts yet when all is done these Cardinal and all they who debated and protested privately were present at the fifth Session and seeing the Holy Ghost unites all minds in a Council to the end they may say Visum est spiritui sancto nobis the two Decrees of that Session past by common Consent as the Acts say to which M. Schelstrate has nothing at all in his Manuscripts that can be objected Quibus articulis sive constitutionibus lectis concilium cos cas uniformiter approbavit conclusit This is the Language of the Acts These Articles and Decrees having been read the Council with a common Consent approved them In fine the third Argument he makes use of to weaken the Authority of the Decrees of these two Sessions is that the Council being then only made up of those of the Obedience of John XXIII could not represent the Universal Church Now to convince him of the Insignificancy of that Argument which without doubt is the weakest of all I need only tell him in two words that what he supposes after Bellarmine who hath supplied him with all his weak Objections is very false For almost all the Cardinals of the two Obediences of Gregory XII and Benet XIII were united in the Council of Pisa where these two pretended Popes who by Collusion played upon all Christendom were declared Schismaticks and Antipopes and Alexander V. chosen who was acknowledged for true Pope by most Churches without any Competition and especially by the Church of Rome Now the same Cardinals and Bishops who constituted that numerous Council continued it at Constance as Pope John XXIII owned by the same Council for true Pope declares in express terms in the Bull whereby he calls that Council according as it had been decreed at Pisa five Years before So that the Obedience of John XXIII besides the Concurrence of almost all the Kingdoms of Christendom nay and of the Church of Rome also was over and above composed of the greater and sounder part of the two other who were re-united at Pisa and continued that Council at Constance If M. Schelstrate pretend that the Absence of those who held for the one or other of those two who had been declared Schismaticks and Antipopes hinders the Council from being Oecumenical he must know that his unjust Pretence would ruine most of the Oecumenical Councils for the Hereticks that have been condemned in them might say that those of their Party who had right to be present in them either were not there or would not own them for lawful and Oecumenical Councils And Protestants might say the same especially of the Council of Trent where neither the Bishops of the Church of England nor of Denmark Norway Sweden and that part of Germany who followed the Confession of Ausbourg nor the Bishops of Greece of the East and of Egypt who own not the Pope for Head of the Church and who are no more of his Obedience than those at the time of the Council of Constance who held for Pietro de la Luna or Angelo Corario were present All these Bishops I say of so great a part of the Christian World were absent from the Council of Trent when it made its Decrees and would not own it Is there any thing more certain And nevertheless M. Schelstrate is obliged to confess with all other Catholicks that their Absence could not hinder that Council from being Oecumenical because for making it universal it is enough that all be invited to it as they were and that they might be present there if they pleased or if the Princes on whom they depend gave them leave So that the Absence of the Prelates who were the Dregs of those two Obediences hinders not but that the Decrees of Constance are the Definitions of an Universal Council and that they have an infallible Authority But there is still somewhat that presses more home for if it were not so and if it were to be approved which Bellarmine says before M. Schelstrate that these Decrees have no Authority by reason of that Absence and that there was no Pope in Council when they were made strange things would follow from thence In the first place the Condemnation of the Errors of Wicleff and John Huss would be null because they were condemned in the fifteenth Session Sess 15. before the Union of the remnant of those two Obediences and when as yet there was no Pope there in the Council Secondly that detestable Proposition of John Petit that any private man might meritoriously kill a Tyrant any way whatsoever would not be lawfully condemned of Heresie by the same reason And lastly that the Condemnation and afterwards the Deposition of John XXIII Sess ● which happened long before the Union of the two Obediences must have been made without any lawful Power Cardinal Julian who presided in the Council of Basil for Pope Eugenius wrote this to him to take him off of his design of dissolving it because of the Decrees of the second Session And would to God Cardinal Bellarmine and M. Schelstrate had read and considered that Letter before they made an Objection that draws after it so dangerous Consequences Nam ●quis dixerit decreta illius concilii non esse valida ne●ess● babet sateri privationem oli●● Joannis