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	deny_v	err_v	18	3	9.7311	5	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