Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	able_a	arrive_v	great_a	30	3	2.0649	3	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A11509	An apology, or, apologiticall answere, made by Father Paule a Venetian, of the order of Serui, vnto the exceptions and obiections of Cardinall Bellarmine, against certaine treatises and resolutions of Iohn Gerson, concerning the force and validitie of excommunication. First published in Italian, and now translated into English. Seene and allowed by publicke authoritie; Apologia per le oppositioni fatte dall' illustrissimo & reverendissimo signor cardinale Bellarminio alli trattati, et risolutioni di Gio. Gersone. English	Sarpi, Paolo, 1552-1623.	1607 (1607)	STC 21757; ESTC S116732	122,825	141

for the Prelate I ought not to obey him if it fall out to bee preiudiciall to the profit of my soule though it would proue exceeding greatly behoofefull to those ends which were aimed at by my Prelate The whole error stands in this that we giue power to the Prelate ouer matters temporall and transforme the ecclesiasticall ministery into a secular Court judiciall For to the secular power hath God committed the care of publique tranquillitie and giuen them authority to impose temporall punishments for feare of which it is requisite that wee bee subiect to them which is meant by for wrath besides the commaundement of God which enioyneth vs to obey them which makes vp the other branch for conscience sake But to the Ecclesiastical ministery hath God committed the care of soules which is not to meddle directly with temporall punishments and therefore hath he not commaunded to obey them for wrath Of the temporall power Saint Paul saith For he beareth not the sword without cause but of the ministery ecclesiasticall it is exercised by the sword of the Spirit which is the word of God The conclusion therefore which the author makes that to the Viccar of Christ all Christians are by the law of God obliged to bee subiect obedient is to be meant in things spirituall and appertayning to the saluation of soules and in the court of God and when hee commaundeth according to his diuine law But in temporall thinges absolute Princes are not s biect to any other then to God himselfe from whome their power is immediately deriued And if the weake hold the Pope to be a God and that he hath al power in heauen in earth more pleasing to almighty God is this their weakenes then their strength who seeming to be wise endeuour to abase the authority of the vicar of Christ as at this day all Heretiques do It is not so great a matter that the Pope should be reputed a God vpon earth seeing in the psalme he saith of all Princes I haue said ye are Gods Neither is it incoÌ„uenieÌ„t that one shold say that the Pope hath all power in heauen and in earth seeing Christ hath said whatsoeuer thou shalt bind vpon earth it shal bee bound also in the heauens Which yet is expounded and meant soundly by true and learned Catholiques And in summe I think it may be said with all truth that the power of the high Bishoppe is so great that few men arriue to comprehend it For hee is able to do all that which is necessary to the conducing of soules to Paradise and can take away all the impediments which the world or the Deuil with al their force or craft are able to oppose Whence it is that Saint Cyril cited by S Thomas in his Opuscle de primatu Petri saith that as Christ had from the Father all plenitude of power ouer all the Church so Christ gaue to S. Peter and to his successors all plenitude of power ouer all the Church Frier Paolo Because Gerson saith that they of weake and scrupulous conscience must be instructed who repute the Pope for a God to haue all power in heauen and in earth The Author makes answere that this their weaknes is more pleasing to God then the strength of Heretiques who esteeme themselues wise in despising the authority of the vicar of Christ As if we would contradict him that condemned auarice by saying it more pleaseth God to be a niggard of his own then to spend it in riot other superfluities as though there were not the true meane which is liberality The right maÌ„ner of speech were it lesse displeaseth God to be niggardly then to be prodigal in riot but both displease him The sinne is most grieuous to deny the true authoritie graunted by Christ to his vicar yet his ignorance that giueth him more authority then is conuenient is not praiseable Truth is acceptable to God ignorance when it is inuincible is not good but excusable it implieth great contradiction to say that any false thing pleaseth God The Author beâ—ing accustomed to speake properly might haue said this weaknes of theirs is lesse displeasing to God then the strength of Heretiques and we would haue commended him For so should the truth haue beene vnfolded that neither the one nor the other of the foresaide extreames do please at all And let not the Author think it inconuenient if one should say that it is good to instruct the simple people not to giue more authority to the Pope then that which is right lawfull for so saith S. Gregory 2. Quest 7. and yeelds his reason Admonendi sunt subditi ne plusquam expedit sint subiecti ne cum student plusquaÌ„necesse est hominibus subiici compellantur etiam vitia eorum venerari could this holy personage more plainely confirme the doctrine of Gerson Gerson saith that those who in scrupulosity of conscience take the Pope for a God must not be suffered to rest in their simplicity and S. Gregories words are that subiects must be admonished that they make not themselues more subiect then is conuenient but that which is more of importance giues the reason of it because they are inforced to flatter them in their vices whose subiects they make themselues more then they should be Then can you not err if you adde hereunto that mans custome is to imitate the thinges he reuerenceth and you may conclude it to be both good and necessary to take away this false suggestion That which follows in the Author that it is no great matter though the Pope be thought a God since all Princes haue the stile of Gods hath no inconuenience in it so as we be not ouertaken in the ambiguity of the words but whilst that out of this proposition which hath good sense in it we draw a consequence Papa et Deus constituunt idem tribunal Papae Dei idem consistorium we shall ascribe to him a kind of diety which Gerson doth not allow The Author thinks it no inconuenience to say that the Pope hath all power in heauen and in earth because it is said quodcunque ligaueris superterram erit ligatum in coelis and yet may it appeare to any that this conclusion is not well drawne from this place because power belongs to the actiue property and quodcunque appertaines to the matter If I should say the Parish-priest is he that makes all marriages it doth not therefore follow that he hath all power in matter of marriage For to say quodcunque ligaueris super terram erit ligatum iâ— coelis therefore quocunque modo ligaueris followes not And this is it which Gerson doth not approue and thus do I thinke would the Author himselfe vnderstand it wheÌ„ he saith that thus it is declared and truly vnderstood by true and learned Catholiques because that this proposition The Pope hath all power in heauen and in earth being taken absolutely is false or being tied

when the high steward of Gods house doth mis-behaue himselfe it is not Gods pleasure that the familie should proceede against him but reserues to himselfe the power both to judge and punish him so that according to the Scripture the Church and consequently the Councell which is a representation of the Church hauing no power ouer the Pope it followeth that it is vnlawfull to appeale from the Pope to the Councell but contrarily that it is lawfull to appeal from the councell to the Pope There was no necessity of writing so much vpon this matter in regarde of those few words wherewithall Gerson hath touched it and for my part I would forbeare to alledge that which Gerson others of the same opinion do answere Frier Paulo were it not that I woulde not interrupt the course which is begun of handling euery pointe in that order which is obserued by the author First he affirmeth that the holy Scripture doth nowhere giue the Church power ouer the pastours much lesse ouer the supreame pastor to this Gerson answereth that our Sauior Christ sent S. Peter to the Church when he said vnto him dic Ecclesiae for Gerson in his time read the place according to the auncient Missall and not according to the newly corrected Respiciens Iesus in discipulos suos dixit Simoni Petro si peccauerit c. As the author may see both in his workes as also in the text of the scripture which hee alledgeth to this purpose But to proue that the contrary is to bee founde in the scripture the author doth alledge a place Act. 20. where S. Paul saith that God hath placed the Bishops to gouerne his Church be it that S. Paul saith so although in truth there bee great difference betweene Posuit vos Episcopos and posuit Episcopos But though that bee granted he can conclude nothing out of this place that the Pope is aboue the Church no otherwise then any other Bishop is But from hence a man might strongly conclude that all Bishops haue their authority immediately froÌ„ God which peraduenture would not be very pleasing to our author Who would euer haue inferred this consequence God hath placed Bishoppes to gouerne his Church ergo Papa est supra concilium but this had beene a strong inference God hath placed Bishops to gouerne his Church therfore if they do not gouerne it they do not discharge that office whereunto they are assigned This is a true proposition God hath placed a King to gouerne a kingdome doth it follow therfore that a king is superior to his whol kingdom assembled together the author anone will tell vs that it is no good consequence and certainely it is not good neither in our authours opinion nor in the opinion of Iohn Mariana the Iesuit but I may say truly that it holdeth not in all kingdomes In the second place he alledgeth Matthew 16. Super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam c. where he saith that Christ maketh Peter the foundation of his Church which as Gerson will not deny because S. Paul affirmeth that the Church is builded vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets And in the Apoc. the wall of Gods Citty hath twelue foundations with the name of the twelue Apostles so he will not beleeue that the authour would condemne another exposition which doth interpret super hanc Petram vpon Christ and vpon the confession of the faith of Christ especially seeing S. Augustine admitting both the expositions doth notwithstanding allow best of the second By this it doth appeare that the authour vppon a place of scripture which hath two interpretations and both probable will cull out that which serueth best for his purpose and make it absolutely a ground of an article But because it is true that Peter is a foundation is hee therefore superior to all the building Gerson will say it followeth not because hee is not a principall foundation but such a one as is it selfe founded vpon Christ and not a totall foundation but onely a twelfth part according to the meaning of the Apoc. And lesse then a 25. parte according to the meaning of S. Paul as concerning our authors comparison where he saith that when Christ maketh S. Peter the foundation of his Church he maketh him the head of his Church because a foundation to a building is the same which a head is to a body although it be true that S. Peter be a head notwithstanding the Analogie is not intelligible viz. that there should bee the same proportion betwixt a foundation a building as there is between a head and the body I do not see where it is possible to finde any part of this proportion who will say that as the foundation supporteth the house for that is the property of a foundation so the head supporteth the body this doth not hold Againe who vvill say that as the head giueth sense and motion to the body that the foundation doth so likevvise to the building vvhat then doth it communicate the propositions that wee entend to establish for doctrines ought not to be grounded vpon similitudes especially vpon such similitudes as are them selues grounded vpon similitudes but why do we trouble our selues with the proofes seeing we are both agreed of the conclusion that S. Peter is a head but what then the Illustriss Cardinall Pinelli is the head of the inquisition is he therefore superiour to the whole congregation of the inquisitors being assembled this followeth not in my vnderstanding vpon the like reason it is that Gerson will not admit this proposition viz. that the rest of the body hath no power ouer the head especially being such a head as the body it selfe hath constituted but as I said before articles are not to be grounded vpon similitudes In the 3. place he bringeth in Pace oues meas and lastly he to doth alleadge the 12. Luke Quis est fidelis dispensator prudens c. both which places Gerso will make one answer to wit that it cannot bee collected out of any place of Scripture that Christ instituting pastors in the Church hath exempted them from the Churches obedience shee being the common mother of all Christians as well Ecclesiasticall as secular the practise of those times which were freest from corruption euen when the holy Martyrs were Bishops was that Pastors were subiect to the censure of the Church whereof Saint Cyprian Lib. 1. Cap. 4. giueth an expresse testimony where speaking of the people he saith Quando ipsa maxime habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes velindignos recusandi quod ipsum videmus de diuina auctoritate descendere vt Sacerdos plebe praesente sub omnium oculis deligatur c. Lib. 1. Epist 4. Our Author affirmeth that Christ doth euidently declare that a Bishoppe in his particular Church and the Pope in the Church vniuersall is as it were a high Steward in Gods family and hath power ouer the family and not

do agree is the litterall sense of this place howbeit besides this generall exposition some men with an argument a minori do as it were by a singularity applie it to the pastors but the author doth well to conceale that all the fathers when they apply this place to the pastors add these words also Quod si coeperit percutere seruos ancillas edere bibere inebriari c. and make long digressions against their faults and errours And peraduenture this percutere seruos ancillas is that which wee see is come to passe in the present occasion Gerson therefore will not denie but this parable spoken to all but more especially to Pastors is most properlie to be appplied to the Pope and therefore let it be saide vnto him that if he giue himselfe ouer to surfetting and to iniury his neighbours the Lord will come and punish him when he lookes not for him howbeit we cannot conclude that he is therefore subiect to no other punishment for by that reason it would follow that no fornicatour or adulterer could bee punished of men because it is written Hebreues 13. Fornicarios adulteros iudicabit Dominus by that reason no sinne is punishable by man because it is written iustum impium iudicabit Dominus Ecclesiast 3. in like sort it is not permitted to meÌ„ to judge because our Sauiour in the 5. of Iohn saith Omne iudicium dedit filio it is not well that the scripture should be thus wrested and peruerted all these texts are to be vnderstood of the iudgement of the world to come wheruÌ„to it is not repugnaÌ„t that there shold be punishmeÌ„ts in this world both Ciuil Ecclesiastical neither is there any commoÌ„ persoÌ„ so ignorant but doth vnderstand that these ordinary phrases God shall iudge God shall punish c. tend not to the excluding of humaine iudgements and corrections and thus we see that this text serueth not to proue that the Pope is exempted from the ceÌ„sure of the Church and consequently of the councell and Gerson doth not insist vpon the parable but vpon the litteral sense of the place now let vs examine our authors other proofes wherein he proceedeth after this manner Vnto this truth which we haue proued by Scriptures Bellarmine the sacred Councels do also beare witnesse at what time Pope Saint Marcelinus for feare of death committed that sinne of offering sacrifice to Idols A great Councell was assembled in Sinuessa to treate of that matter but al that councell did acknowledge that it had no power to censure the Pope Prima sedes a nemine iudicabitur of this councell Pope Nicolas doth make mention in his epistle to the Emperour Michaell in like sort a Romane Councell assembled by the Pope Sainte Siluester in the last Canon of it doth declare that the first Sea namely the Sea of Rome is not to bee judged of any the Councell of Calcedon which is one of the foure first generall councels in the 3. Act of it condemned Dioscorus the Patriarch of Alexandria together with the whole second Councell of Ephesus because they tooke vpon them to iudge the Pope of Rome Now if that Patriarch which after the Pope possesseth the highest place in the church together with the whole Councell haue no authority to iudge the Pope it plainely followeth that the Councell is not aboue the Pope otherwise they might haue iudged him After this the 5. Roman Councell vnder Pope Simachus approued that opinion of Ennodius as if it had beene an opinion of their owne Aliorum hominum causas Deus voluit per homines terminari Sedis istius Praesulem suo sine questione reseruauit arbitrio Voluit Petri Apostoli successores Coelo tantum debere innocentiam in the Act. 7. of the 8. generall Councell we reade thus Romanum PontificeÌ„ de omnium Ecclesiarum Praesulibus iudicasse de eo vero neminem iudicasse legimus Paulus Emilius in his 3. book of his story writeth that a great CouÌ„cell of Bishops being assembled in the presence of Charlemaine by occasion of certaine matters obiected against Pope Leo the 3. all the Bishops cried out with one voice that it was vnlawfull for any man to iudge the Pope The generall Councell of Lateran vnder Alexander the 3. being to make a decree touching the forme to be obserued in the election of the Popes saith we are to proceede in this election with singular diligence for if any error be committed in it there is no Superiour to whom we may haue recourse there is none vpon earth superiour to the Pope Let him reade the chapter Licet extra de electione Finally in the Lateran Councell vnder Leo tenth in the Sess 11. it is expressely determined that the Pope is superior to any Councell whatsoeuer and therefore it appertained onely to him to summon the Councells to transfer and to dissolue them Now if these Councells themselues do acknowledge that they are subiect to the Pope who will be so hardie to say that the Councell is superiour to the Pope or that it is lawfull to appeale from the Pope to the Councell â—rier Paolo The first proofe which our authour bringeth is that when the Pope S. Marcelinus did for feare of death offer sacrifice to Idolles there was a great councell assembled in Sinuessa to treat of this matter and all the Councell did confesse that they had no power to iudge the Pope and that Pope Nicholas the first did make mention of this Councell which is true and which is more the Acts of it are extant to this day to this they of Paris do answere that this Councell was not generall and that vnder these wordes Prima sedes a nemine iudicatur a generall Councell is not comprehended it seemeth strange vnto them that the Councell being assembled onely vpon this occasion it should conceiue that it had no authority to determine it and it is more strange that Marcelinus denying the fact that the Councell had not eftsoone departed for so the matter had been at an end and not proceeded to conuict him as indeed they did producing first 7. witnesses which affirmed they saw him offer sacrifice after this they examined as many witnesses more as made vp the number fourteene The second day they produced 14 more who being interrogated by the Bishoppes affirmed the same The third day he examined 44. more so that the number of witnesses amounted to 72 called Labra occidua it is certaine that to examine witnesses is a iudiciall act of a superiour and it is as certaine that Marcelinus after the examination of these 72. prostrated himself vp on the ground and acknowledged his offence and the Teste saith that the Bishops Subscripserunt in eius damnationem damnauerunt eum and one of them said Iuste ore suo condemnatus est ore suo Anathema suscepit Maranatha quoniam ore suo condemnatus est nemo enim vnquam iudicauit Pontificem nec praeâ—ul

Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Text snippets containing the quad