Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	believe_v	scripture_n	tradition_n	4,646	5	9.4477	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25853	The nevv heresie of the Jesuits publickly maintain'd at Paris in the Colledge of Clermont, by conclusions, printed 12 Decemb., 1661, denounced to all the bishops of France / translated out of the French original.; Nouvelle hérésie des Jésuites. English	Arnauld, Antoine, 1612-1694.	1662 (1662)	Wing A3730; ESTC R15927	16,007	24

unto him Confertim autem percussit cum Angelus Domini eo quod non dedisset honorem Deo And yet how much lesse criminal was the flattery of that people then this of the Jesuites theirs might have passed for a sudden transport of joy not regulated by reason and sometimes the Holy Scripture it self gives the Name of God to Supream Judges and Princes But here is given to the Pope deliberately upon a laid Defign and by way of establishing a Dogmatical Assertion of Theologie not an empty and insignificant name but one of the most glorious Attributes of God and most incommunicable to a creature to wit that his Word should have entailed upon it such an infallibility as to deserve that submission of divine Faith which cannot without Idolatry be rendred to any but the first and soveraign Verity For the like cannot be said in this question which those who maintain the Popes infallibility in matters of Faith are wont to answer That in beleeving the decisions of the Pope they do not build their Faith on the word of a man because he doth but propose what hath been formerly revealed by God in Holy Scripture and Tradition and so their faith relies still on the Word of God Nothing I say like this can be applied to the matter in hand in regard whereof the Jesuites pretend That the Pope is as infallible as Jesus Christ and that his decision is an Object of Divine Faith For when the Pope shall propose a fact of the 17 th Age as that certain Heretical Propositions were taught by an Author of those times it cannot be pretended that he proposes a matter revealed in Scripture or Tradition He may well say I judge it to be thus but he cannot say God hath revealed it He may speak as from himself but he cannot say God hath spoken Dominus locutus est And as it is a man that speaks and not God all they who hold that one may beleeve with divine Faith a decision of this nature do most visibly commit the like abominable excess which that blinded people did by crying out with them Voces Dei non hominis And albeit the Popes piety be a sufficient Antidote to preserve him from being poisoned with this sacrilegious opinion nevertheless they who present this poison unto him cannot excuse themselves from being as guilty towards him as were those wretched Sycophants towards their King of whose death they were the cause by their impious flatteries For a man is not then only esteemed a murderer either of the soul or body when effectively he takes away the life of one or the other but also when he lays a cause which of its own nature is sufficient to work the death of either though the effect do not follow So S. Cyprian calls those Christians Parricides who through fear of persecution offered up to the Idols their sucking Infants because although they could not really deprive them of the life of Grace which they had received in Baptism by this Idolatry whereunto they were in no sort consenting as S. Austin remarks they did notwithstanding what lay in them to bereave them of it In illis quidem interfectionem non faciunt sed quantum in ipsis est interfectores fiunt Flatter not your selves saith S. Austin speaking to those who give occasion to others of committing sin upon account that your brother is not dead by the scandal you gave him it is true he is not dead and yet you are murderers Et ille vivit tu homicida es One may say the same to the Jesuites in respect of the Pope whom they go about to poison with so pestiferous an opinion Non sibi blandiantur quia ille non est mortuus ille vivit isti homicidae sunt But it is not the Pope only before whose feet they cast this stumbling block but even the generality of the faithful by perswading them to build their belief on the word of a man and to submit their judgements thereunto as to the first Verity which as hath been shewed cannot be done without a kinde of Idolatry Insomuch that the Jesuites are near upon the same impiety with those Hereticks who would have Divine honours exhibited to the Blessed Virgin for as the true respect and veneration due to her as the most holy of Creatures took not any thing off from the crime of those Hereticks and their followers even so the reverence which all the faithful ought to bear to the Head of the Church will in no sort exempt them from a heavy sin before almighty God if through the deceit of the Jesuites they give unto the words of a man how eminent soever he may be in the Church that soveraign difference of divine Faith which cannot without impiety be given to any thing but the Word of God himself Worldly men make small accompt of these kind of sins because being wholy buried in flesh and blood none but grosse and material Objects make Impression on them Deluded devotes permit themselves to be easily carried away with these excesses because they imagin it to be a part of their false Piety to imbrace blindly whatever contibutes to the honour and advantage of those things and persons for which they ought to have a respect and from this root are sprung all those opinions which they call pious without ever examining whether they be true or false as if a falsity could be the object of piety or that God who is truth could be honoured with the unclean Sacrifice of a Lie But you My Lord know that all those who have been nourished with the true spirit of Christianity make a far different judgement hereof they equally hate a lie to whose advantage soever it redound whether of the Pope or the Blessed Virgin or of Jesus Christ himself which yet would a little startle a man to hear had not St. Austin expresly taught it For this Holy Father fears not to maintain that if a lye or calomny which one makes use of to take away the temporal life of Man be a detestable crime That is yet a far greater which tends to the destruction of his spiritual life as all manner of lyes in matter of Religion even though employed in giving false praises to Jesus Christ For which reason the same Father says that a Christian would commit a notorious folly who would not rather expose himself to all manner of indignities even those that strike the greatest horror into pious Souls then condescend to the insolence of a person that would force him to corrupt the holy Gospel thereby to bestow false praises upon Jesus Christ Since then according to the Judgement of this great Father it would be a crime of abomination to give false honours to Jesus Christ himself who being God is above all our praise and honours how much more abominable is it to give a mortal Man invironed with infirmities as the Scripture sayes the honours that appertain to God alone

certain facts which we are sure were never revealed by God as whether such Propositions be found in a Book compos'd in the 17 th AGE These are not consequences drawn by others out of their Doctrine They themselves infer them and make them passe for Catholick Assertions according to the Title of their Conclusions There is then in the Church an infallible Judge of controversies of Faith even out of a General Council as well for questions of right as of fact And that we may not doubt of their meaning by questions of Fact though the word it self of Fact taken in opposition to that of Law or Right doth sufficiently clear it they alleage for an example and a consequence of this new infallibility of Jesus Christ communicated to the Pope that after the foresaid Constitutions one may beleive with Divine Faith that Jansenius his book is heretical and that the five Propositions are truly this Authors Vnde post Innocentij X Alexandri VII Constitutiones fide divina credi p●test librum cui titulus est Jansenij Augustinus esse haereticum quinque propositiones ex eo decerptas esse Jansenii Behold the Proposition which they publickly advance in the face of the greatest City of the World nor will it be amisse to take notice of the origin and date thereof For these same men that now so boldly maintain it had for some time agoe laid the seeds of it in their other writings and it was easily discernable that their whole conduct was to be built upon this error They had severally exposed the Inferences in one place and the Principles in an other but still with certain windings and intricacy of words that might as occasion served be a cloak to them It is now in fine that they discover to the Church without any maske what they pretend to establish Let the whole Church then hear and take notice that the 12 of December in the year 1661. was the day on which the Jesuits brought to light this monstrous opinion whereof they had been so long in labour that this was the day on which they proposed as a Catholick assertion that the Pope speaking out of his Chair hath the same infallibilitie with Jesus Christ not only in questions of Right but also in those of Fact and consequently that one may believe with Divine Faith that the five propositions are the opinions of Jansenius It is not conceived needful My Lords to use many words to make appear that there is not here a simple Error nor a simple Heresie but a Source of Errors and as one may say a General Heresie which overthrows all Religion For your Lordships know that the first and principal ground of Christian Religion is this that our Faith doth not depend on the word of Men but on the word of God who is truth it self that this is it which makes it inconcussible and wholly Divine whereas it would be purely humane did it rely upon any Authority lesse than That of God or that we could not bear the like Testimony to our selves which St. Paul did to the Christians of Thessalona●a to have received the word which God was pleased to propose to us by his Church not as the word of Men but as the word of God as it tr●ly is Non ut verbum hominum sed sicut est vere verbum Dei All whatsoever is comprehended under the notion of Faith saith St. Bernard is founded upon the solid truth perswaded us by the Oracles of God confirmed by miracles and consecrated by the Child-bearing of a Virgin by the bloud of our Redeemer and the glory of Jesus raised from the dead Totum quod in Fide est certâ ac solidâ veritate subnixum oraculis miraculis divinitus persuasum stabilitum consecratum partu Virginis sanguine Redemptoris gloriâ Resurgentis Whoever then saith A thing not revealed nor attested by God as that certain Propositions are truly such an Authors of these later ages is an object of Divine Faith because the Pope hath declared it either establishes for the ground of Faith an authority purely human and the word of a man which is as much as to overthrow Faith or makes a God of the Pope and of his word a divine word and Holy Scripture which is not only an Heresie but a horrible impietie and a kinde of Idolatry For Idolatrie doth not consist onely in giving to man the name of God but much more in ascribing to him the attributes proper to God and the honour which is due only to him Now this submission of our understandings and intellective faculties implied in each Act of Faith is nothing els than the adoration which we exhibite to the primary Truth and so whoever pays it to the word of Man what rank soever he holds in the Church whoever professes he believes a thing with Divine Faith on no other motive then because a Man hath said it places a Man in the Throne of God transferres the honour due only to the Creator to a Creature and for as much as lies in him makes a kinde of Idol of the Vicar of Jesus Christ And that my Lords which will give you a greater horror of this Impiety is this that the Authors thereof imagin'd they should be able to foster it under favour of the respect which all the Catholicks bear the Pope and that no man would have the boldness to oppose it for fear of incurring his displeasure whereas on the contrary could any one commit a greater outrage against the first Minister of Jesus Christ then to imagine he could be honoured by a Blasphemy so injurious to Jesus Christ that it could be pleasing to him to be made equall to his Master by sharing with him the same Infallibility which he possesseth and that men should yield to his words that Supream Worship of Divine Faith which is due to God alone S. Paul and S. Barnabe perceiving the people went about to give them the same honours which they were wont to pay to their false Gods tore in pieces their garments thereby to express the extream displeasure which they resented and cast themselves into the midst of the Assembly to hinder it And we may with reason believe that the Pope himself were he truly advertised of this horrible excess would not fail to imploy his whole Authority to suppress these profane worshippers and would abhor it as a crime able to cause the loss of himself in the sight of God to give way to the least compliance in so detestable a flattery He would with trembling reflect on the just vengeance of God upon that last King of the Jewes for only suffering the tumultuary acclamations of a giddie brain'd people who hearing him speak cryed out It was the voice of a God and not of a man Dei voces non hominis For the Scripture teacheth us that immediatly the Angel of our Lord stroke him because he had not given to God the honor due

one that did not impugne a point of Faith For example who is there now a dayes that doth not esteem the Letters imputed to the first Popes not only not to be Theirs but contrariwise a Rapsody collected by some Forger and Impostor And notwithstanding both Pope Nicholas commanded the Bishops of France to receive them and his Successors inserted them into the book of Decretals which by their Apostolical authority they proposed to serve for a rule to the whole Church wherein they speak at least as much out of their Chair as in their ordinary Bulls How then can one without Impiety believe that these letters are suppositions as now all the ablest Church-men do even the Jesuits themselves if there be an obligation to hold the same Infallibilitie in the Popes as in Jesus Christ even in matters of Fact would the infallibility of Christ permit that one should propose to the Church false pieces instead of true ones There are scarce any matters of Fact of more importance to the Church then to know whether a Council be General or no whether Lawful or illegittimate Neverthelesse did the Kingdom of France become Heretick for not acknowledging the Council of Florence to be Oecumenical notwithstanding all the Bulls of Eugenius the fourth and all his declarations prefixed at the head of this Council to oblige the whole world to receive it as a General one Did the Cardinal of Lorraine fall into Heresie when he openly declared to Pope Pius the fourth his and the whole Kingdome of France's opinion on this subject in the following tearms For as much as concerns the last of the Titles to be given to our Holy Father taken out of the Council of Florence I cannot deny but that I am a French man bred up in the Vniversity of Paris in which it is the common Tenet that the authority of a Council is above the Pope and all that bold the contrary are censured as Hereticks That in France the Council of Constance is held Oecumenical in all its parts That they adhere to That of Basile and hold That of Florence neither for a Lawful nor a General One and it were an easier work to kill all French men then to draw them from their said perswasion This Letter which the Cardinal of Lorrain writ to his Secretary at Rome to be communicated to Pope Pius the 4 th is to be seen in the collection of Memorials concerning the Council of Trent published by the deceased Mr. Du Puis and printed by Cramoisi During the first disagreement betwixt Pope Eugenius the 4 th and the Council of Basile he put forth a most authentick Bull by which he declared that he transferr'd this Council to Bolognia and that all those who should maintain this Translation was just and lawful were both out of the Truth and Catholick Faith Fuit igitur a Basiliensi civitate legitima pro tunc nostra Concilii dissolutio asserentes contra sunt penitus ab omni veritate fide Catholica alieni All which notwithstanding the Fathers of the Council of Basile maintaining that this Translation was injust and invalid Eugenius was forced by another Bull equally authentick to acknowledg that the said Translation was in effect null and that the Council had been duely held from its beginning to that very time Both these Bulls are to be seen in Raynald the first in the year 1433. the other in the year 1434. Now shall the one and the other of these Bulls be Articles of Faith and shall we be obliged to believe that the same Council was at the same time an unlawful conventicle and a Lawful Synod of the whole Church assembled in the name of the Holy Ghost The same Raynald makes mention of an other Bull of Eugenius the 4 th against the Cardinal of Arles who presided over the Council of Basile where he is called Iniquitatis Alumnus atque perditionis filius If the voice of Popes in the judgements which they make of persons in their Bulls ought to be esteemed as infallible as that of Jesus Christ we should be obliged to look upon this Cardinal as a most wicked person but what if God hath judged otherwise and if from obliging us to abhor him as a Child of Iniquity and a Son of Perdition he would have us bear respect and veneration to him as one of the Blessed confirming his Saintity by publick Miracles authorized by an other Pope to wit Clement the Seventh who by an authentick Bull has enrolled him in the number of the Blessed declaring not that he did penance after having been a Son of Iniquity but that he had ever a celestial chast and immaculate life as it is to bee seen in the Bull of his Beatification reported at length by Ciaconius These few examples may sufficiently shew the falsity of the Jesuits pretension But without seeking further the very Authors themselves of this new Doctrine fall into Heresie by the undeniable sequele of their error For in these very same Conclusions they maintain that Pope Honorius in his Letters taught nothing but what was most consonant to the Catholick Faith touching the two wills and two operations in Jesus Christ Duas in Christo voluntates operationes fuisse profitemur nec aliud a nobis sensit Honorius dum operationem Christi unicam esse scripsit Now if it be a point of Faith as the Jesuits pretend that the Book of Jansenius is Heretical and the five Propositions are his because two Popes have affirmed it and that one ought to consider what they say with the same regard as if Jesus Christ had said it with how much more reason may one say the same of the letters of Pope Honorius which were both strictly examined condemned and burnt by the Authority of a General Council of the whole Church in which the Pope presided by his Legats and which in this very point was confirmed by two following General Councils and by a great number of Popes For if ever Popes speak out of their chair it is then chiefly when they speak in General Councils and in the confirmation of them by their Apostolical power And so consequently one cannot doubt but that Leo the second spoke out of his Chair when in divers Letters which he wrote in confirmation of the sixth Oecumenical Council he in particular ratified the Condemnation of Honorius pronouncing an Anathema against him because in stead of inlightning the Church these are his words by the Doctrine of Apostolical Tradition he suffered it to be defiled by a profane corruption Qui hanc Apostolicam Ecclesiam non Apostolicâ Traditionis doctrinâ lustravit sed profanâ traditione immaculari permisit And consequently if when the Popes speak out of their chair of what matter soever they speak whether of right or of Fact they injoy the same Infallibility with Jesus Christ and that all they so pronounce is an Article of Faith it ought to be a point of Faith that the Letters of