Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A07949
|
The tryall of the nevv religion Contayning a plaine demonstration, that the late faith and doctrine of the Church of Rome, is indeede the new religion. By Thomas Bell.
|
Bell, Thomas, fl. 1593-1610.
|
1608
(1608)
|
STC 1832; ESTC S101552
|
27,259
|
56
|
Io Gorsonus Michaell Baius and other famous papists not able to aunswere the reasons against Veniall sinnes confesse the truth with the Bishop That euery sinne is mortall Yea the Iesuite S. R. with the aduise of his best learned friends in his Aunswere to The downefall of Popery coÌ„fesseth plainly blusheth not thereat that the Church of Rome had not defined some sinnes to be Veniall vntill the dayes of Pius the fift and Gregory the thirteene which was not fiftie yeeres agoe These are the Iesuits owne wordes True it is that Bishop Fisher and Gerson were in that Errour but that was before it was condemned in the Church as it was since by Pius Quintus and Gregorius 13. Loe the Iesuite cannot denie that great learned Papistes held euery sinne to be mortall and therefore he had no other shift to defend Popery vvithall saue this onely which is a very silly one That the Church of Rome had not yet defined the matter O sweet Iesus what a world is this that silly foolish papists should bee so bewitched as to thinke Popery the Old Religion We see it plainely confessed by our Aduersaries that for the space of one thousand fiue hundred and threescore yeeres all sinnes vvere deemed mortall But because some sinnes to be Veniall made greatly for the life of popery as without which it could hardly liue continue pope Pius and after him Gregorius decreed it for an Article of popish fayth That some sinnes are mortall and some Veniall for vvhich Venialls God cannot iustlie condemne any one to hell if wee will beleeue the Pope and his doctrine First therefore seeing the Papists cannot agree among themselues what sinnes are against Gods law Secondly seeing their opinions in their Schooles are now adayes changed and not as they were in olde time Thirdly seeing all sinnes were beleeued and holden for mortall for the space of one thousand fiue hundred odde yeeres Fourthly seeing pope Pius and pope Gregorie could change sinnes mortall into Veniall Fiftly seeing the Pope siâ—ting in his Chayâ—e or â—yding on his White Palâ—ray so he doe it iudieially can make that a poynt of popish fayth which was of no fayth for the space of one thousand and fiue hundred yeeres before that time I cannot but needes I must conclude with this ineuitable illation Ergo the Popish distinction without all rime or reason of mortall and veniall sinnes is nothing in deede but a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 8. Of the Popes Fayth VVIsedom with the whole troupe of Vertues were needfull for him that should dispute of the holy Fathers fayth or power I therefore post deosculationem pedum humbly pray to be heard in defence of Truth wherein I will desire no more of his Holinesse but onely that he will graunt so much to be true as I shall proue to be true by the testimony of the best Popish Writers The popish Seminarie Priestes write of this subiect in this manner As the pâ—udent Greeke appealed froÌ„ Alexander furious vnto Alexander sober and Bishop Crostrate from pope Adrian priuate to pope Adrian publique and as Summus Pontifex in Cathedra Petri so may the Seculars notwithstanding any decree set downe by his Holines to the contrary by wrong information giuen appeale euen from the Pope as Clemens vnto his Holinesse as Peter Thus 〈◊〉 William Watson in the name of all the rest By this Doctrine thus plainly deliuered which is a constant position in the Romish Church the Seculars giue vs to vnderstand that execrable and neuer enough detested fallacie where-with the Pope his popelings haue a long time sedueed the greater part of the Christian World viz. That the Pope may Erre as a priuate man but not as a publique person This is a great wonderment obserue vvell the sequell First therefore if wee meane to wring any truth out of the Popes nose wee must haue recourse to his Holinesse at such time as he is sober not when he is furious least he become starke mad and forget the knowledge of the Truth Secondly wee must haue the Popes aduise when he is a publique person not when or as he is a priuate man Thirdly we must goe vnto him not as he is indeed this or that pope but as he is Saint Peter that blessed Apostle of our Lord Iesus Thus much is necessarily gathered out of this popish doctrine Which beeing well marked Poperie will be the Newe Religion and turne it selfe vpside downe For first it is a constant Maxine in all popish doctrine that the Pope and none but the Pope must iudge in all Controuersiâ—s of fayth doctrine This notwithstanding we see by this popish doctrine so contrary is popery to it selfe that if the Pope judge of any matter as he is furious and not sober as he is a priuate man and not a publique person as hee is Clemens Sixtus Adrianus or some other like Pope and not S. Peter himselfe then he may Erre and so both he deceiued and deceiue others O my sâ—rable Papists how are ye led headlong into pernicious Fayth and Doctrine and eyther doe not or will not see the same Your Pope say you may Erre as a priuate mâ—n but not as pope or publique person This distinction may fitly be termed a tricke of fast and loose For if the Pope define a truth they may say he defined it as a publique person but if he define an error then say they he defined it as a priuate man Behold heere gentle Reader vppon what rotten stuffe the Papists would haue vs to ground our Fayth when we proue as I haue done elswhere that pope Anastasius pope Honorius pope Iohn pope Celestine and others haue both holden and taught false Doctrine they tell vs they did that as priuate men not as popes of Rome That their pope cannot erre in fayth iudiciallie it is this day with papists an Article of their fayth The famous papist Dominicus Scoto shal be the spokesman for the rest Albeit saith hee the Pope as Pope cannot Erre that is to say cannot set downe any Errour as an Article of our Fayth because the holy Ghost will not that permit neuerthelesse as hee is a priuate person so may he Erre euen in fayth as he may doe other sinnes But how old is this Romish Doctrine Of vvhat age is this strange Fayth Of this sâ—biect I haue written at large in my Golden Ballance of Tryall This onely will I now say that this popish Article The Pope cannot Erre in fayth was neuer heard of in Christes Church for the space of 1500. yeeres Many famous papists I might alledge but one Alphonsus will suffice We doubt not saith he whether one man may be a Pope an hereticke both together For I beleeue there is none so shamelesse a flatterer of the Pope euer except our Iesuites and Iesuited Papists that will ascribe this vnto him that hee can neither Erre nor be deceiued in the exposition
Papists Absolutus Theologus knew right wel that Popish Pardons are but a toy for Chyldren to play withall these are his wordes The Popes Pardons saith he were neuer knowne to vs by the Scriptures although some alledge S. Paule for that purpose neither were they knowne by the auncient Fathers but onely by lare Writers Saint Antoninus theyr popish Saint and famous Archbishoppe had the selfe same opinion And Petrus Lombardus their famous Maister of Sentences who collected with great diligence into one Volume all the woorthy Sentences of the auncient Fathers could neuer find the Popes Pardons or any mention thereof in any of all theyr writings For as Syluester truly said The olde Writers were not acquainted with any such thing Yea their famous Martyr and Bishop Maister Fisher in his aunswere to Maister Luthers Articles was inforced to admit the newnes of the Popes pardons and withall forsooth to yeeld this reason for the same viz. That Purgatory was not then so well knowne to the Church as it is now adayes Peruse and note wel the next Chapter which is of Purgatorie so supposed paynes First therefore seeing the great popish Syluester confesseth plainly and boldly to the popes Holines that his popish pardoning is neither found in the holie Scripture nor in auncient Fathers Secondly seeing Antoninus Fumus and many other learned Papists grant freely that Syluester saith the truth heerein Thirdly seeing their famous Bishop Fisher vvas enforced to graunt the young age noneage of popish-pardons when hee could not aunswere Ma. Luthers reasons Fourthly seeing their Maister of Sentences could not find any mention of them in all the the Fathers writings I must perforce thus conclude Ergo the Popes pardon is a rotten ragge of the new Religion brought into the Church after 1300. yeres by Pope Bonifacius the eyght CHAP. 5. Of Popish Purgatory COncerning the originall of Popish-purgatorie it shal be enough to set down the words of Iohn Fisher the late Bishop of Rochester the popes canonized Martyr these are his expresse words The Greekes to this day doe not beleeue that there is a Purgatory Reade who will the Commentaries of the auncient Graecians and he shall finde either very sildome mention of Purgatory or none at all For neither did the Latine Church conceiue the veritie of this matter at one time but by leysure Neither vvas it without the great dispensation of the holy Ghost that after so many yeeres Catholicks both beleeued purgatory receiued the vse of pardons generallie So long as there was no care of Purgatory no man sought for pardons For of it dependeth all the estimation of pardons If thou take away purgatory to what end shall wee neede pardons for if there be no Purgatory we shall neede no pardons Considering therefore how long Purgatory was vnknowne then that it was beleeued of some by little and little partly by reuelations and partly by the Scriptures and so at the last beleeued generally of the whole Church we doe easily vnderstand the cause of pardons Since therefore purgatory was so lately known receiued of the whole Church who can admire pardons that there was no vse of theÌ„ in the primatiue Church Pardon 's therefore began after the people stoode in some feare of purgatory Thus writeth the popish Bishop Fisher. Whose words I hartily wish that the indifferent Reader may ponder seriously with me For if he so doe hee cannot chuse but abhor late popery and know it to be the new Religion This Bishop was a learned man a great papist said for popery what possibly he could yet he graÌ„teth many things of such force is the truth which quite ouerthrow popery and turne it vpside downe First we see that the Greeke church neuer beleeued purgatory to his dayes and so it was vnknown to theÌ„ 1517 yeres Secondly that the church of Rome belieued it not for the space of 250. yeres after which time it increased by little and little Thirdly that the church of Rome did not beleeue purgatory all at once but by little and little Fourthly that the inuention of purgatory was the birth of Popish-pardons as which could haue no place till purgatory was found out by fained reuelations and the people brought into some feare thereof Fiftly that the primatiue Church was neuer acquainted with the Popes pardons nor yet with his counterfeit and forged purgatory Of which as the popish Bishop telleth vs the silly people doe stand in feare Thus therefore I must coÌ„clude Ergo Popish purgatory is a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 6. Of Popish Auriculer Confession SCotus who for his great subtile learning was of the Papists termed Doctor subtilis affirmeth resolutely that popish Auricular-confession is not grounded on the holy Scripture but onely instituted and commanded by the Church of Rome The popish Glosse of great credit with the Papists telleth them roundly that Auricular-confession can no way be defended but by tradition of the Church Panormitanus Rhenanus Richardus Durandus Bonauentura Hugo and all the popish Canonists generally approue and follow the same Glosse To this I adde that Auricular-confession was not an Article of fayth in the Romish Church for the space of 1215. yeeres All which I haue prooued at large in my Suruey of Popery and in my Motiues First therefore seeing popish Confession cannot be proued out of the Scriptures Secondly seeing it is onely commaunded by the Pope And thirdly seeing it was no matter of fayth with the Papists for the space of one thousand two hundred and fifteene yeeres I must needes conclude that it is a rotten ragge of the New Religion CHAP. 7. Of Popish veniall sinnes THE newnes and young age of Popish-Religion may be sufficiently knowne by the coyning and inuenting of Veniall sinnes if nothingels could be said therein the Thomists will haue some sinnes not against the Law but besides the law and those sinnes they call their Veniall sinnes But Durundus a famous popish Schoole-Doctor many other learned Papists affirme euery sinne to be against Gods Law And this opinion doth nowe preuaile in the popish Schooleâ— as Iâ—sephus Angles in his Booke dedicated to the Popes Holinesse 〈◊〉 vs His words are these Et hae 〈◊〉 in schol◠〈◊〉 coÌ„mâ—nior and this opinion seemeth now adayes to bee more common in the Schooles Where I wish the Reader to 〈◊〉 by the way this word modâ— now adayes because it doth most â—â—â—ely and sufficiently set before our eyes the mutability of the late Romish Religion For in that he saith niodâ— now adaies hee giueth vs to vnderstand that their Doctrine is now otherwise their it was of old time and in former ages Behold heere the new Religion and that popish doctrine is vncertaine Againe Ma. Fisher late Bishop of Rochester granteth to Ma. Luther when he was ouercome with the force of his Reasons that euery sinne is mortall of it owne nature Iaeobus Almaynus Durandus