Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	crown_n	king_n	richard_n	3,753	5	8.8517	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A12064	A looking-glasse for the Pope Wherein he may see his owne face, the expresse image of Antichrist. Together with the Popes new creede, containing 12. articles of superstition and treason, set out by Pius the 4. and Paul the 5. masked with the name of the Catholike faith: refuted in two dialogues. Set forth by Leonel Sharpe Doctor in Diuinitie, and translated by Edward Sharpe Bachelour in Diuinitie.; Speculum Papæ. English	Sharpe, Leonel, 1559-1631.; Sharpe, Edward, 1557 or 8-1631.	1616 (1616)	STC 22372; ESTC S114778	304,353	438

neighbour Princes the faction of subiectes the treason of the nobles and the superstition of the people And doe you call this a moderate chastisement And safe for kings and good for subiects Wherein as there are many thinges very vniust and vnworthy so those are most of all that hee tearmeth these wicked treacheries holy counsells and pretendes that they tend in order to a spirituall end And doe in that manner sowe the scruples of conscience mingled with the seedes of treacherie in the harts of men as if the graines of religion and rebellion had sprung out of one and the same blade So it comes to passe that the Romane faith at this day doth beget and nourish most dangerous faction both to Kings and subiectes which so long is very demure and humble till as a wise man obserues it hath found the keye of power and authoritie For as all faction which springs out of the heate of desire is dangerous so that is most dangerous which riseth out of the scruple of conscience For when it riseth from desire it is like fire that taketh hold of stubble which though presently it rise vp into a great flame yet soone being consumed is extinguished But when it ariseth from the conscience it is like fire that heates iron which getting his strength but slowly keepes it surely as a very worthy and a wise Senator left it in writing Wherefore that which Bellarmine said of the Oath of § 88 allegeance that it was not therefore lawfull because it was offered someway tempred and qualified that may more iustly be said of the Popes temporall dominion as it is qualified and tempered by Bellarmine knowe therefore Argentine that such qualifications are nothing else but Satans sleights and deceits wherewith the maiesty of Kings is either openly or closely assailed which Christ hath fortified plainely with his commandements That these vaine pretences of Aduerbes are Sathans ginnes and stratagems whereby vnder the colour of religion he bringeth vtter destruction both to your soules and bodies But because you will not giue as good credite to vs as to your owne men and I think it not meete to take vpon mee Velbacellus part I pray you Calander entreat your Confessour that hee would lay open and vnfold the subtill and hurtfull fleights deuises of this working braine Yeelde so much saith Calander to the Catholikes your friends Velbacellus yeelde it to the Catholike religion which is necessary to bee discerned from these false Catholike opinions as you call them lest the consciences of Catholikes be corrupted § 89 Then Velbacell I will doe saith hee as you require me in respect of my duty to the King not vnwillingly but against the Popes inhibition not so willingly howsoeuer it bee I answer for the satisfying of the conscience sincerely and for the Catholike religion not vnfitly The Oath of Allegeance and Supremacy confounded by Bellarmine And I maruell much that Bellarmine beeing a learned man and of great wit did confound the Oath of Allegeance with the Oath of Supremacy but I am greeued at the heart that the supremacy of the Pope which he doth of right enioy in spirituall and ecclesiasticall causes is so enfolded with the worldly gouernment which is in temporall and ciuill causes that hee brings his lawfull authority in hazard to be lost Adde thereto that when he had ouerthrowen the direct dominion of the Pope in all temporall matters with sound reasons hee did maintaine the indirect gouernment in order to the spirituall as hee speaketh with such slight flaggy arguments that with this his playing fast loose hee seemes to haue left him no authority at all Although other thinke otherwise and thinke that hee doth aswell submit Kings crownes to the Popes feete as Baronius doth But let it bee as euery man takes it Hee cannot directly take away the crownes from Kings What then but he can indirectly hee cannot as Pope ordinarily depose Kings but extraordinarily he can as hee is the cheife spirituall Prince Hee hath not inherent authority but that is fetcht else where much forsooth what matter is it with what authoritie Kings be cast off if they may be cast off by the Pope But they be worse then mad who subiect the crownes of Kings to schoole-distinctions Heere Saturnine But although sayd hee it please § 90 you to scoffe at the distinctions of Catholike Doctors yet I hope you will not deny that the Pope is Lord of all the temporaltyes which doth belong to the Bishopricke of Rome But that England Ireland are portions of Peters patrimony and the Bishop of Romes temporalties it is plaine by the articles of agreement betweene Alexander the third Pope of Rome and Henry the second King of England agreed on in the yeere of the Lord 1171. who when he was absolued by the Pope for the death of Thomas of Becket did couenant that none should afterward accept that Crowne of right or should be acknowledged for King till hee had his confirmation from the cheefe pastour of our soules Which couenant was renewed in the yeere 1210. by Iohn King of England who had confirmed the same by oath to Pandulphus the Popes Legate at the request of the Barons and Commons as a matter of great importance to preserue the common-weale to keepe it from the vniust vsurpation of Tyrants and to auoyd other mischeefes whereby before they had smarted and to preuent that they fall not into the like againe by the default of any wicked King thereafter Wherefore if it bee honourable and pious for the Bishop to dispose of the kingdome being made tributary why may hee not likewise depose a refractory and a disobedient Prince § 91 Then Velbacellus you alleadge saith hee a worme eaten and ridiculous charter whereby you make the King of England Tributarie to the Pope England not tributarie to the Pope neither can bee which was neuer done and if it were it neither could or ought binde the successours Kings of England For Rome neither can nor euer could at any time shew such a grāt as Thomas Moore that great Catholike doth argue and if it could it was to no great purpose for no King of England might at any time giue away England to the Pope or make his kingdome tributary though he were so disposed Therefore let vs passe by that counterfet compact and that friuolous deuise and let vs returne to the matter in hand The question is not Saturnine of the true temporalties of the patrimonie of Peter but of the true temporalties of the patrimony of Kings the soueraignty whereof either directly or indirectly is giuen to the Pope and it is giuen either by Law diuine or positiue and therefore the temporalties of Kings doe no more belong to the Pope then the temporalties of Peter belong to Kings And euery King may as well depriue a Pope as any Pope may depriue a King And an Emperour may aswell he called Lord of all the spiritualties as

King against the Pope that the● would maintaine to the houre of death against the papall citations suspensions excommunications and censures the crowne of England which they held as alway free subiect to no common-weale but immediately subiect to God and not subiect by name to the Byshoppe of Rome that they would vnite thēse●ues to the King against the Pope in all causes vndertaken by the Pope against the King his crowne and dignitie and wou●d liue and die with the King This was the loue and the ancient faithfulnesse of the whole English people toward their King namely against the Pope they were so far from suffering the King to be deposed by the Pope Now the Spaniards with what earnestnes they haue § 122 detested the treacherie of subiects against their king couered with anie pretence or colour of religion whatsoeuer Concil Teleta 4 Cano. 75. their manie Councels of Toled doe declare in that booke which is intitled the Apologie for the Oath of Allegeance The practice of Spaniards against Popes wherein they seeme to checke your equiuocation which they obserued in many things when as they made profession of their oath with their tongue and retained in their minde perfidious treachery Doe you not see how in the thicke darknesse of Poperie these noble Nations the I●●lians Germanes French English and Spanish did retaine this light and heat of obedience toward their Kings against the Popes and that in this businesse neither the Bishops dissented from the Nobles nor the Nobles from the Bishops but the Laickes with the Clearkes and the Clearkes with the Laickes Councels with Parliaments did fully agree to maintaine the dignitie of the King and the obedience and concord of subiects against the popish censures what is becom of this ancient nobility and this vertue of the people where is that magnanimity of the Italians French Germanes and Spanish when shall wee euer see a second Fredericke or another Philip the faire who will suppresse the Popes insolency in Germany and France when will these noble Kingdomes bring foorth such Catholike Bishops which will keepe the Kings crownes and the peoples consciences free from the Popes tyrannie They haue England Scotland and other famous countries going before them in this businesse But you call these schismaticall the Italian Germane French English and Spanish who with common consent resisted the Pope But marke if you beleeue Sigebert your Abbot if it bee not a harder matter for you to wipe away the note of heresie from the Pope who carries himselfe so proudly against Kings then to take away the aspersion of schism from those Catholike people who did maintaine their Kings against the popes § 123 But from these things which we haue spoken it doth sufficiently appeare Saturnine how that is very false which you alleadged erewhile that the Councels and nationall Parliaments did euer approoue the deposing of Kings by Popish censures when as they did publikely condemne their insolencie cruelty treacherie toward their Kings as you see For so the matter stands grace did neuer destroy nature or diuinitie ciuility faith did neuer ouerthrow ciuill iustice but made it better nor euer took away the affection of man but made it more humane And when men ought to behaue themselues reuerently toward the parents of their bodies much more reuerently ought they to carrie themselues toward their countrie and the father thereof for this loue of our countrie and reuerend respect of our Kings is not taught vs by a master but in bred and grafted by nature which whosoeuer doth vnder pretence of religion either weaken or blot out he opposing himselfe to God the author of nature is to bee accompted not a Pastour but an impostor not a holy father but a cruell tormentour of soules and bodies But you as if the Popish religion put all ciuill honestie out of the minde of men and as if Popish zeale did blot out all naturall affection you thinke that the glorie of your Pope must be builded vp with the blood of our Princes and the greatnesse of your Kingdome with the ruines and desolations of our Countrey And if Catholike Kings did retaine those Princely spirits of their ancestours proud Popes would not more boldly desire to rule without the commandement of God then they to forbid them being armed with the sword of God And by the exāple of most excellent Protestant Kings they would not onely prune and cut off these hurtfull sprigges of this vniust and poisonfull power but they would vtterly cut vp and plucke vp that poisoned tree from the verie roots out of their Kingdoms But the beginning of all this mischeife is the Popes spirituall supremacie whereby hee claimes to be the head of the visible Church the Vicar of Christ the Iudge and Father of Kings the vniuersall Bishop of Bishops to whom the originall of all spirituall iurisdiction doth forsooth immediately descend from Christ to be deriued mediately to others from him which whether it be done with greater wrong to Kings or to Bishops I cannot iustly set downe But all this spirituall supremacie from whence all the force and nature of that excommunication doth depend whereof so many things haue beene spoken and of the deposing of Kings and of releasing of subiects from the oath of obedience Patriott shall plucke it in peeces in the Creede wherein first he shall flie at the head of Popery after hee shall wound the bodie Thus wee haue seene Pragmaticall Antichrist vpon the stage now wee shall heare him disputing out of his chaire DOGMATICAL ANTICHRIST OR The Popes Creede OR The Pastor raigning The second booke of the Dialogue AFter that the most renowned Iames § 124 King of Great B●itaine had made answer to the Popes two buls Bellarmines Epistle for the Oath of Allegeance One Matthew Tortus vnder whose visard Bellarmine lay hid vttred both elswhere diuers articles blasphemous against God and those two reproachfull against Princes full of insolencie and crueltie one of the supreme dignitie the other of the depriuing power of the Pope and set them out being taken foorth of the Popes new creede with all the skill hee could This creede was composed of twelue new articles of the Romish-Catholike faith The diuision of the Popes creede taken in Councell of Trent as it it propounded in the bull of Pius the fourth about the oath of the profession of the Christian faith It may bee diuided into two parts one wherein the faith of Christians the other wherein their faithfulnesse toward Princes is corrupted From that spring out the articles of superstition and idolatrie from this of treason and sedition By them they are made euill Christians by these euill subiects that it is hard to say whether they haue more troubled the Church or this the common-wealth Hence Lionell Sharpe an English Diuine tooke vpon him to lay open the popes whole creede and to illustrate it in a Dialogue For when as the most learned Bishop of Chichester had

doth witnes which said my kingdom is not of this world From a possibilitie to a deed the argument is not of force in Christ much lesse in Peter O pleasant madnes of Bellarmine wherby he dreameth that the temporall power in possibilitie as hanging in the ayre is bestowed vpon his Bishop § 204 But marke the mans reason God hath appointed Christ to be heyre of all things How the temporall rule forsooth descendeth vpon the Pope Therfore if he would he could haue cast Tiberius out of his throne and Pilate out of his iudgement seate for he was the heyre of all things Peter could if hee would haue wrested Nero's scepter out of his hands for he was heyre to Christ And the Pope can if he will cast of the Crowne from the head of any King heretike or catholike if he begin to go astray for he is Peters heyre For all comes to this at last that the temporall dominion of the whole world descends from Christ to Peter from Peter to the Pope That the Pope forsooth might haue and exercise power ouer Kings which Christ had but vsed not but might haue vsed if hee had been so pleased A vant with all these foolish quiddities which inferre such dangerous consequences Austin and Maldonate against Bellarmine But if hee had consulted not only with Austin but also with Maldonat on of his owne side hee should haue vnderstood that that place was to be interpreted of the spirituall not temporall inheritance of the world granted to Christ by the Father For what he that refused the iudgement of diuiding a priuate inheritance would he take to him the publike inheritance of the whole world And he that willingly submitted himselfe to the authoritie of Pilate giuen from aboue euen to the death of the Crosse did hee shew himselfe a temporall Lord both ouer Tiberius and the whole world The power of Pilate saith Bellarmine was not ordeyned § 205 but permitted And this is the sense of the place that Pilate could do nothing against Christ if God had not permitted it As that place is also vnderstood this is your houre and power of darknesse Luc 22. but because S. Thomas saith he vpon the 13 to the Romanes vnderstandeth the place of the ordinarie power we do not disagree But that this power did extend it selfe to Christ we thinke that to be done out of Pilates ignorance who not knowing the worthines of Christ iudged him as some priuate Citizen of the country As if in our dayes a Clergie man were brought to the bar of a Secular Iudge vnder the name and habite of a Lay-man hee may be condemned by that power wherewith a Laicke may out of the ignorance of the Iudge yet it doth not follow thereby that Clarkes by law are subiect to the iudgement of Lay-men or that Christ was subiect to the iudgment of Pilate Thus far Bellarmine But Christ said that Pilates power was not permitted § 206 but giuen from aboue The permitted power was that power of darknes whereby God suffred that the Iewes should kill the Lord of Glory wherein they sinned most greiuously And therefore it is called the power of darknesse not giuen from aboue as was Pilates the Iudge which Austin called not an vsurped but an vniust power Which place saith he when I heard it to be expounded by S. Thomas of a lawfull power I do not withstand it Bellarmine contradicteth himselfe It is well that which before you did wickedly affirme being instructed by Thomas you honestly deny The man speakes out of a boate now enclining to this side now to that neither doth he somtime contradict others so much as himselfe But marke how by turning himselfe into all parts he hath found a starting hole to escape by Whereas Pilate did stretch out this power against Christ it was out of Pilates ignorance that knew not the worth of Christ As if a Clerke vnder the habite of a Lay man should bee brought before a lay-Iudge he might by the ignorance of the Iudge be condemned as a Lay-man which notwithstanding the Law doth not allow c. That which he imputes to the ignorance of Pilate Austin imputes it to his feare lest he should offend Caesar in loosing of Christ. But this may be ascribed to his ignorance that he beggeth the question Bellarmine begs the question For he takes it as granted which is in question that a Clerke may not by law be condemned by a secular Iudge though out of the Iudges ignorance he may being attired like a Layman As if he should say that Alexander the 3. being in his pontificalibus might not rightly be iudged by Fredericke the Emperor Alexander 3. but being in his cookes apparell he might by ignorance or that Bishop who bare armes against Richard the first King of England An English Bishop in K Richard the first dayes Odo brother to W. Conqueror could not be hanged in his Bishops attire but being found in a coat-armour hee might by ignorance Or that Odo the brother of William the first a very wicked traytor could not be committed to ward as Bishop of Bayon but as Earle of Kent Or that some trayterous Iesuite imagine some Gar●et or Oldcorne could not bee hanged in his massing robes but might by ignorance being clad in a Courtiers attire I could wish rather that such Clerkes were vnknowne than knowne But he doth very vntowardly make Christ his innocencie a cloake for a harmefull Clerke that because Christ could not be rightly condemned by Pilate therefore euery Clerke is exempted from the iudgement of a secular Iudge It is as I said a manifest begging of the thing in question For I can better dispute after a contrary manner There was no exempting of the person of Christ from the iudgement of Pilate Therefore there is no exempting of Paul the fift from the iudgment of the Emperor For if Christ the chiefe Bishop was not exempted from the iudgment of the Emperor whose power was from aboue then certainely the Bishop of Rome ought not to be exempted from the iudgement of the Emperors power The actions of Christ are rules for the Pope the actions of Popes are not rules for Christ But whereas the Cardinall brings in his Clearke in § 207 a Lay-mans weede before a secular Iudge hee doth very ill apply it to his purpose For he hauing got this freedome or exemption as is taught he should not say to the Iudge that hee hath power from heauen against him but the contrary you haue no power against me frō aboue for I am a Clerke but when Christ said not this but the cleane contrary you haue power against me frō aboue he allowed not the exēpting of a Clerke vnles the prerogatiue of a Clerke be greater than the prerogatiue of Christ But you haue brought in a very dull-pated Clerke who being endowed with a priuiledge as you call it cannot vtter it that he may be safe from danger being