Selected quad for the lemma: master_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
master_n	aaron_n	calf_n	peter_n	28	3	7.1715	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A13155	An abridgement or suruey of poperie conteining a compendious declaration of the grounds, doctrines, beginnings, proceedings, impieties, falsities, contradictions, absurdities, fooleries, and other manifold abuses of that religion, which the Pope and his complices doe now mainteine, and vvherewith they haue corrupted and deformed the true Christian faith, opposed vnto Matthew Kellisons Suruey of the new religion, as he calleth it, and all his malicious inuectiues and lies, by Matthevv Sutcliffe.	Sutcliffe, Matthew, 1550?-1629.	1606 (1606)	STC 23448; ESTC S117929	224,206	342

vncertaine whether the Pope be S. Peters successor and a lawfull Pope yea or no. In the Popes determinations also there is great vncerteintie and doubt for neither can the Papists that were not present in the Popes consistory beleeue for certeine that the Pope hath thus or thus determined vnlesse they will beleeue either this or that Masse-priest that telleth him so or the notary that subscribeth the decretale or the decretale it selfe nor can they assure themselues that the Popes determination is true If they beleeue euery Masse-priest or Notarie then is the faith of Papists built vpon euery pild pated Priests report or notaries subscription if they beleeue the Popes decretales because they find them written then doe they giue more credit to the Popes decretales then to holy scriptures which is most absurd and impious that the Pope determineth infallibly true how can they assure themselues seeing the scriptures pronounce all men liers and subiect to infirmities furthermore we reade that the chiese Priests vnder the law erred diuerssie as the offence of Aaron in making the golden calfe of Vriah the Priest that made an altar after the forme of that of Damascus of Annas and Caiphas that condemned Christ Iesus doth plainlie declare Peter also erred in denying his master and dissuading his passion and in Iudaizing and dissembling his religion the bishops of Rome haue erred as Lyra confesseth in Matth. 16. and may erre as Adrian lib. de sacrament c. de cōsirmat determineth The examples also of Marcellinus Liberius Felix Anastasius the 2. Vigilius Honorius the first Iohn the 23. and other Popes doe proue the same S. Augustine epist 19. doth testifie that the writers of canonical scriptures only are priuiledged so as they cannot erre of other writers he thinketh otherwise and this is also the opinion of other fathers finally reason may perswade vs to acknowledge this truth for we see no more in the bishops of Rome then other bishops and lesse then in other learned men but other bishops and learned men both haue erred and may erre if they say that Peters chaire is priuiledged then must they shew that the bishops of Antioch Alexandria which haue as much right to Peters chaire as Rome haue neuer erred but this they know cannot be done Thus we see that neither in the Romish traditions nor in the Popes decretales there is any certainty all depending of the Popes supposed determinations of which no certaintie can be had the same also may be shewed by the contrarie opinions of popish doctors in euery point of controuersie and for that all their errors are plainly conuinced both by scriptures and fathers but because they place their principall defence in the sacrifice of the Masse we will only shew their want of assurance in this point First then no Papist in the world is able to shew that either the whole Masse or the canon was instituted by Christ or the Apostles nay we see plainly words newly thrust into the forme of consecration of the cup and popish doctors themselues confesse that diuers parts of the Masse haue beene made by seuerall Popes Secondly they cannot shew for a thousand yeeres after Christ that any Priest was ordeined to offer Christes bodie and blood really for quicke and dead Lastly suppose the Masse were lawful the Priest lawful and all the rest of the lawlesse and superstitious tricks lawful yet can no man assure himselfe that the Priest hath truely consecrated for first no man can tell whether the man at the altar be a Priest vnlesse he know that he was baptized and that the bishop ordring him had an intention to doe it Secondly no man can assure himselfe that either he had an intention to consecrate or pronounced the wordes of consecration or not for they are pronounced softly Are not the Papistes then miserable who are so vncertaine of their Masse and know not whether they worship bread or God whether they serue God or creatures whether they be Christians or idolaters CHAP. XXXIIII That Popery is repugnant to the lawes of Nations BVt could the Papists perswade themselues that their Massing sacrifice were lawfull and the rest of their religion were true yet who would not abhorre that religion which is grounded on such foundations and conteineth such impieties heresies and false doctrines and is so repugnant both to Catholike religion and all antiquity Further we finde that it ouerthroweth the lawes of nations dissolueth the bands of alliance and kinred preiudiceth the authoritie of Kings and Princes hazardeth their liues and persons oppresseth the liberty of Christians both for matters of conscience and their temporall estate and is maintained by lies calumniations forgeries periuries fire and sword and most dishonest and wicked means The lawes of nations require that oathes promises compactes leagues and treaties of trade and commerce be obserued and kept but all these bonds neither Popes nor Papists regard Formosus being deposed from his bishopricke swore that he would neuer resume the same againe yet regarded he not his oath Gregorie the 7. was made Pope contrarie to his oath as appeareth in the life of Henrie the 4. Paschal the 2. solemnely swore to Henry the Emperor to obserue certeine articles agreed vpon betwixt them but he was no soner out of his hands but he broke his oath rebelled against the Emperor and excommunicated him Charles the French King as Theodoric a Niem testifieth tract nemor vnion 6. c. 14. chargeth Gregory the 12. and Benedict the 13. with violating their oathes vowes and promises Violarunt sidem saith he fregerunt votum promissum non tenucrunt Omiphrius chargeth Alexander the 6. with more then Punicke persidiousnesse persidia plus quam punica Guicciardin in his history speaking of Clement the 7. saith he regarded his oath but little era di poca sede he sheweth also how Iulius the second endeuored to prooue that the church that is the Pope as he meant was not bound by any oath and that appeareth to haue beene most currant doctrine by diuers perfidious prankes plaied by Leo the 10. Clement the 7. and diuers other Popes mentioned by Onuphrius and diuers of the Popes owne friends and parasites Neither doe they only breake oathes themselues but perswade all their complices to doe the like the Bishop of Verdune as we reade in Conradus Traiectensis relateth how Gregory the 7. esteemed faith to be sacrilege and them to bee loyall that broke their othes to the emperor periuria sidelitatem dicit fidem sacrilegium sacit Henry the 4. also as we read in Helmoldus complained that his subsects by the instigation of the Pope rebelled against their lord and broke their saith and solemne oathes lenarunt manus contra dominum regem suum violauerunt sidem iuramentorum sacramenta In the councell of Constance the Pope and his complices persuaded the emperor most dishonorably to violate his safe conduct granted to Iohn Husse there also it was decreed that faith was

the Apostle Rom. 4. worketh wrath and ephes 2. he saith we are saued by faith and that not of our selues for that it is the worke of God not of workes least any should boast but our aduersaries confesse that Charity is a worke and not without the cooperation of freewill the fathers also teach otherwise Hierome dial aduers Pelag. opposing the law to the Gospell sheweth that the foundation of workes is laid on the law but that the building of faith and grace is laid vpon the same in the Gospell Theophylact. in praefat Euangel sheweth vs that the Gospell doth declare to vs good things as remission of sinnes c. and that we obteine them without our labour sinally herein the Papists dissent from their master Peter Lombard sent 3. dist 40. for he saith the decalogue is a killing letter but the decalogue requireth performance of all things commanded Fifthly Peter Lombard saith that only earthly things were promised in the old testament and only heauenly things in the new as we read sent 3. d. 40. but our Sauior Christ teacheth vs to aske for our daily sustenance in the Gospell and to those that performed Gods eternall law eternall life was promised in the old testament or else the reward had not beene correspondent to the worke Sixthly they teach generally that there are three euangelicall Counsels to wit of chastitie pouertie and obedience as if these were the principall points of the Gospell or as if the obedience to monkish rules and forswearing of mariage and giuing all to monkes were required of vs in the Gospell further it is absurd to thinke that chastity and renouncing all for Gods sake and perfect obedience is not commanded in the law of God Seuenthly the Friers purposing to ouerthrow Christs Gospell about the yeare of our Lord 1256. published another new Gospell which they called Euangelium aeternum as if Christs Gospell should continue but for a time and their Gospell were to continue for euer Of this Gospell thus writeth Matth. Paris in his collection for that yeare Fratres noita quaedam praedicabant legebant docebant deliramenta ex libris Ioachimi abbatis incipitque eorum liber Euangelium aeternum c. that is the Friers did preach read teach certaine new fooleries out of the bookes of abbot Ioachim and their booke began thus The eternall Gospell so it appeareth what respect these fellowes Faue of the Gospell of Christ Nay albeit the booke was most blasphemous yet did not the Pope punish the authors but onely commanded the same to bee abolished secretly Finally all the comfort that the Papists giue their followers out of the Gospell is this that Christ is the meritorious cause of our saluation but the rest they assigne to mens owne labours and workes teaching them how to merit heauen by giuing to Monkes and putting on Friers coules and how they are to goe on pilgrimage and to buy indulgences and how to passe through Purgatory and this is the Gospell of Papists of saith they talke only as of a disposition to iustification and little do they trust in Christs mercy flying to Angels to our Lady and Saints and to Christs iustice remitting our sins and accepting vs freely through faith in him they giue nothing CHAP. VI. Of the impious doctrine of Papists concerning Christ our Sauiour AS Christ is made vnto vs by God wisedome iustice sanctification and redemption so those which teach false doctrine concerning him do goe about to turne our wisdome into foolishnesse and to depriue vs of true righteousnesse holinesse and redemption but whether the Papists haue done so or no that resteth now to be discussed we doubt not to challenge them as infinitly guilty herein for first they say that Christ was vir perfectus a perfect man from the first instant of his conception but this destroieth not only the distinction of ages but ouerthroweth Christs humane nature for rules of reason teach vs to distinguish children from men and this is the course of nature man is first conceiued then borne then a child and so in time he groweth a man of perfect years the same is also contrary to scriptures that shew how Christ was conceiued and borne and was first an infant and then a man of perfect age this error proceeded of the false vnderstanding of these words of the Prophet mulier eircumdabit virum Secondly Peter Lombard lib. 3. sent 10. dist teacheth that Christ as he is man is not any thing but in respect of the vnitie of the person quidam dicunt saith he Christum secundum hominem non esse personam nec aliquid nisi forte secundum sit expressiuum vnitatis personae and this opinion he alloweth and would haue the distinction to be remembred but all Christians that professe the faith of Christ and rehearse the Creed of Athanasius confesse that he is not only somewhat as man but also a perfect man they also know that the opinion of the master of schoolemen followed by diuers ouerthroweth Christs humanity Thirdly they take from Christ both faith and hope and all vpon their vaine conceit that Christ was not viator but comprehensor that is was not in the way but alwaies as man was glorified and enioyed the vision of the God-head in Christo non fuit sides saith Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 7. art 4. ergo nec spes that is Christ had neither faith nor hope he speaketh of Christ according to his humane nature and this opinion is commonly followed of others so that which they falselie obiected to Caluin concerning the vttering of certain words of desperation that doth rightly fall vpon the Papists who blasphemously make him not only a desperate man without hope but also an infidell without faith Fourthly the master of sentences lib. 3. dist 1. determineth that the Father and the holy Ghost might haue beene made man and yet may sicut filius homo factus est ita puter vel spiritus sanctus potuit potest as the sonne was made man so likewise the father and holy ghost might and yet may which is not farre from the heresie of the Patripassians for they held that the father did suffer death for vs these holde that he might haue taken our nature vpon him and haue suffered death for vs. Fiftly Thomas Aquinas 3. q. 3. art 6. teacheth that the three persons in the Trinitie might assume one humane nature tres personae diuinae subsistunt vni naturae diuinae sayth he ergo possunt etiam vni naturae humanae subsistere so he sheweth that the Patripassians held no incommodious opinion and introduceth an absurd heresie of the passion of the holy Ghost Sixtly they holde that the body of Christ may be in many yea almost in insinit places at one time and that the same is wont so to be Multis adeoque ferè insinitis simul locis adesse potest solet sayth Bellarmine lib. 3. de Christo c. 11. and so it must needs be if