Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	court_n	lie_v	writ_n	2,231	5	9.8366	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19589	The sermon preached at the Crosse, Feb. xiiii. 1607. By W. Crashawe, Batchelour of Diuinitie, and preacher at the temple; iustified by the authour, both against Papist, and Brownist, to be the truth: wherein, this point is principally intended; that the religion of Rome, as now it stands established, is still as bad as euer it was	Crashaw, William, 1572-1626.	1609 (1609)	STC 6028; ESTC S118191	115,004	191

Gods the other a Chancery a Court of Mercy that is Maries these bee their verie wordes and further that if any man feele himselfe agrieued in Gods Court of Iustice let him appeale to the Court of mercie of his Mother Oh strange diuinity Can Gods iudgements be vniust or his proceedings erroneous and vnequall If they bee not then why do they talke of appealing to a higher Court For why doe Writs of error lie from one Court to another but that it is presupposed that they may erre and why is there a Chauncery but that the rigour and extremitie of the Lawe maie bee mitigated But if the Scripture saie true in the text Righteous art thou O Lord and iust in thy iudgements a Psal. 119 137 Then this is blasphemie of a high nature that there needes a Chancerie to rectifie his proceedings and mitigate his iudgements But as for this doctrine that the Chauncerie or Court of mercie is not Gods but his Mothers and that therefore Gods iudgements are to be mitigated by another and therefore that she and her Court are in this respect aboue God and his Court These blasphemies are so execrable and odious to Christian eares that I hope ther is not a papist in this kingdome that professeth to know and serue God but his heart hates them and all that hold them Against all this what can bee obiected but this that he being a priuate man spake wrot out of his priuate iudgement but this is not the generall doctrine of their teachers not their Church I answere If none in the world taught this but this one Frier yet how many soeuer knowing it do approue commend or defend it or if they do not reproue condemne it it is iustly to bee called their doctrine and by the lawe both of God man it is their sin as well as his For by the lawe of Accessaries he that anie waie approues or knowing it and hauing a calling to it reproues not a sinne makes himselfe guilty of the sinne but the Romish Church that is the Pope knoweth this hainous blasphemie and sayth that he hath authority to condemne all such therefore hauing not done so but contrariwise approuing it is guiltie of it Shewe me then that Pope Bishop or Inquisitour that hath condemned this blasphemie or this book for it I produce a Pope that allowed it namely Alexander the sixt who suffered it to passe vnder his name to the view and reading of the world let them bring one Pope since that hath condemned it or shewe one writer not reproued by them that euer reproued it or not condemned by them that euer condemned this blasphemie if they doe not this then it is apparant that in this wound Babylon is not yet healed But for better euidence that she lies rotting in this her filthinesse and incurable in this wound 6 The third wound not healed Posseuine the Iesuite their great and allowed Censor of al Authors giues his publike censure of this booke to bee Sermons of the excellency of the Queene of heauen and full of learning and godlinesse And this his censure no man that knoweth the present state of their religion can deny but that it is the censure of their Church and ought so to bee reputed for that worke of Posseuines was attempted continued and finished and printed and reprinted with as publick generall allowance as any thing can be And yet for better euidence that she is not healed nor reformed at all let it be obserued tha● this book is of so much estimation amongst them that it hath diuers times beene reprinted since Bernardine the Author set it out as namely in my knowledge once at Brixia in Italie almost twenty yeares agoe in three volumes corrected and amended as they pretende But that this impious doctrine is not amended I will make it euident for of late euen this present yeare this booke and all his other works were again printed at Colein in Germany in three volumes which when I perceiued out of the last Catalogue I could not rest till I had obtained this new impression from Coleine hoping that now at last they had for shame righted this cause of God and razed out that hainous blasphemie but hauing perused it I see to my griefe that they will not be healed for there the very same words and doctrine stand vnreprooued vncontrolled vnaltered nay not so much as hauing a Marginal note to explaine them but they are let to passe as good holy and Catholicke Romish doctrine And that this is true I here pawne my credit to this honorable assemblie and will be ready to iustifie it to anie desirous to be informed in the particulars by shewing the books themselues both new and old Which being so I hope no man wil denie but that it is apparant she is not healed And yet for the better satisfaction of all men that as she is not yet so shee purposeth neuer more to bee healed nor to reform any thing and that this is not the priuate opinion of that or any other one doctor I desire al that loue the truth to take knowledge that of late within these seuen yeeres an Italian doctor a Iesuite and an approoued writer writing a story of the miracles of our Lady of Loretto teacheth euen the same doctrine and makes no bones to bluster out almost the very same words which for better assurance I will put down The Virgin Mary both wil and can is both willing able to deliuer such as be compassed about with dangers on all sides and to heape vpon them all good blessings for Almighty God as farre as it is lawfull hath made his Mother fellow and partaker of his divine power and Maiesty c. See heere the new and refined diuinity of the Iesuites what is this but the same with that afore for if she be made partaker and fellow with God in his diuine power and Maiesty it is no maruell that God hath committed his mercy to her and if from these words we looke into the body of the booke we shall find hee ascribes such works and miracles to her as can belong to none but to him or her that is a fellow with God or rather God himselfe And as for this clause as far as it is lawfull is a strange word to be spoken of God for what can be vnlawful to God that is good whose will is the holiest law If therefore it be good to make a creature fellow with him in his deity it must needes bee lawfull and so the clause is idle If it be not good but impious and contrary to the nature of God then to think it any way lawfull or possible to be done is no losse then to think it any way lawful for God to lie or sin or denie himselfe so that take it any way this limitation of the Iesuite both grossely a●useth the Reader and containeth horrible impiety against God So far is it from

popery fit for their pulpits and their people and after they be preached worthie to bee published to the world Surely if they graunt these be false doctrines then blame shame belongs to the Papists that preach them write them publish them and allow them for Catholicke doctrine but if they stand to them as true then mark what consequēces will follow vpon them first it is here taught that a man may appeale frō God Hereupon this argument is easily framed but I beleeue not so easily answered Popery teacheth there lies no appeale from the Pope and heere teacheth that there lyes appeale from God But in reason he from whō no appeal can lie is greater then he from whom one may Ergo by popish doctrin the Pope is greater then God This conclusion is ineuitable if their doctrine be true Again here it is taught that we may appeale frō God to the Virgin Mary if that be true let them answere this argument He vnto whom appeale doth lie from another● is greater then hee from whome it is made this is their owne doctrine But from the Lord God appeale doth lie to the Virgin Marie Ergo shee by popish doctrine is greater then God If this conclusion be heresie and blasphemie then Bernardine de busto his bookes are to be burnt yet they are both allowed commended by the Romish Church but let vs goe forward Thirdly here it is taught that God hath diuided his kingdome with a creature euen with a woman This being true here we learne many points First the reason why they call her in their Seruice booke allowed by supreame and soueraigne authoritie Reginam Coelorum the Queene of heauen for shee that hath got possession of the halfe of Gods kingdome may well and worthily be held the Queen of heauen Secondly heere is a very good reason why the Church of Rome keepes the Bible from the vulgar people and will not haue it divulged in their Mother tongues for if they had it in their own tongues they would startle at this doctrine and when they heard it deliuered in Pulpit that God had diuided his kingdome would soone haue saide that is false doctrine for the Psalme saith The kingdome is the Lords * Psal. 22. 29 and Dauid in his thankesgiuing at the preparation for the Temple building confesseth to God Thine O Lord is greatnesse power and glorie aeternitie and Maiestie Thine O Lord is the kingdome and thou excellest ouer all * 1. Chr. 29. 11. and if the Frier had obiected that the kingdome indeede is Gods yet not so but hee may diuide it to another then they would haue answered that cannot be for he himself sayth I am the Lord c. My glory I will not giue to another a Esa. 42. 8 and if hee still obiected that to be true in the olde Testament when there was none capable and worthy of this honour because then the Virgine Mary was not they would readily answere that in the new Testament after the Virgine Mary was and after shee was the mother of Christ Christ her son speaks to God his Father but not to her his mother Thine is the kingdome power glory b Mat● 6. 13. The kingdom is Gods and how long not till she be assumed crowned in heauen as they say but for euer and euer And whereas they further teach that he hath kept Iustice to himselfe but committed mercie to his Mother they would crie out vpon that doctrine him that taught it and tell him that they finde it sixe and twentie times in one psalme that Gods mercy endureth for euer c Psal. 136. in euery verse and that his mercy is ouer all his works d Psal. 145. 9 If ouer all then ouer her also or else she is not of his making and if his mercy be vpon her without which shee could neuer haue beene saued then how dare any say that Mercy is hers and not Gods And if mercy bee Gods and that mercy of his endureth his not for the time of the olde Testament onely but for euer Then it is foule and false doctrine to say that now since Christ God hath resigned vp mercie from himselfe to a creature Thus would the people come vpon him that taught this doctrine and vpon the Romish Church that alloweth it and therefore doth not that Church wisely to keep the people from reading the holy Scriptures Thirdly seeing it is doctrine currant in the Romish Church that God hath giuen vp mercie from himselfe to the Virgin Marie heere is a good defence of their Ladies Psalter wherein they turne the Psalmes from Dominus to Domina from GGD to our Ladie and when Dauid saith Lord haue mercy on me they say O Lady haue mercie on me in thee O Lady is my trust They say this was compiled by Bonauēture but tho he liued in il times yet his other writings giue cause to hope hee made it not for h●● saith that we must take heed wee so inlarge not the excellency of the Mother that we diminish the glory of the sonne Sure hee that saide so would not be so lauish and carelesse of Gods glorie as to turne the Psalmes from him to a creature Fourthly heere we see the reason why the popish Synagogue do maime the Lords prayer leauing out the conclusion For thine is the kingdome and power and glorie for euer and euer h See the Rhemish Testament in Mat. 6● Luke the 11. all their Mi●●als and Breuiaries Man●a●s and allowed primers in all which they cut short the Lords praier leauing out the words of the conclusion for thine is the kingdom c. For if the kingdom be diuided then it is not all his for euer no maruel therfore though they will haue their Pater noster in Latine for their common people for if it were in English there is none so simple but would see their vngodly dealing But to conclude leauing this robbery and sacriledge in cutting off part of the Lords prayer for another place and purpose it is heere euident that no papist in the World can with a good conscience say the whole Lords prayer For if God haue now diuided his Kingdome then how can he say with Dauid in the olde testament i 1● Chr. 29. 11. Christ in the new k Mat. 6. Thine O Lord is the kingdome for euer therefore he must either alter the Lords prayer and say Thine is halfe● the kingdome c. or neuer say it at all or else curse and detest his own teachers that write and his Lord God the Pope that alloweth such doctrine Alas poore ●oules what should a simple honest hearted papist do in this case See therefore in what pittifull state they liue who haue subiected themselues to such teachers Lastlie let it bee obserued that heere they teach that there bee in spirituall matters touching the soule 2. diuine Courts the one of Iustice and that is