Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	apostle_n	holy_a	teach_v	4,620	5	6.0021	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A68730	Certain general reasons, prouing the lawfulnesse of the Oath of allegiance, written by R.S. priest, to his priuat friend. Whereunto is added, the treatise of that learned man, M. William Barclay, concerning the temporall power of the pope. And with these is ioyned the sermon of M. Theophilus Higgons, preached at Pauls Crosse the third of March last, because it containeth something of like argument	Sheldon, Richard, d. 1642?; Barclay, William, 1546 or 7-1608. De potestate Papæ. English.; Higgons, Theophilus, 1578?-1659. Sermon preached at Pauls Crosse the third of March, 1610.; Barclay, John, 1582-1621.	1611 (1611)	STC 22393; ESTC S117169	172,839	246

Chapter of Bellarmine the which also in this place we will and that by good right fit to our purpose in this maner If it be true that the Pope hath temporall power indirectly to dispose of the temporalties of all Christians he hath the same either by the law of God or of man If by the law of God That should appeare by the Scriptures or surely by the tradition of the Apostles Out of the Scriptures we haue nothing but that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen were giuen to the Pope of the keies of the kingdome of earth there is no mention as for tradition of Apostles the aduersaries produce none neither Canonists nor Diuines If by mans law let them bring foorth their law that we may be all of the same opinion with them But if they shall say that they neede neither expresse word of God nor tradition of Apostles for the confirmation of this power since it appertameth to the Pope onely indirectly and by a kinde of consequence as a certaine and inseparable accession and appurtenance of that Spirituall power wherewith the supreme Pastor of soules is indued ouer all the sheepe of the Christian flocke We also will require of them some testimonie of this accession and coniunction either out of Scriptures or traditions of Apostles Wee doe require I say that they teach vs either out of Scriptures or tradition of Apostles that this is an accession and consequence necessarie and inseparable to that Spirituall power which the Pope hath and that it belongeth to the Popes office in some manner that is indirectly as they speake to dispose of all temporall matters of Christians seeing it is verie vnlikely if that belongs to his office that so great an extent of power and which there is nothing higher amongst men hath beene omitted in so deepe silence in the Church so many ages both by Christ our Sauiour and also by the Apostles and their successors for if each power may be seuered from other the Spirituall from the Temporall and contiarily there will be some place for that opinion which determines that that which is not permitted to be done directly cannot be done indirectly for so haue wise men defined as oft as any thing is forbidden to bee done directly that the same can neither bee done indirectly or by consequence vnlesse that which is forbidden doe follow necessarily to another thing lawfully permitted so as the thing permitted cannot proceed without the thing prohibited and vnlesse as I may speake with the Ciuilians The cause of both be so commixed that it cannot be seuered Whereby it is concluded that hee who is alone cannot alien any thing cannot yeeld to a sute moued vpon the same thing for that by this meane he should obliquely indirectly alien Therefore if the Pope as he is Pope hath no temporall power directly ouer Christians which they do grant it seemeth to be proued by the former sentence of the law that he can haue none not so much as indirectly Therefore that they may perswade men to their opinion they ought to bring testimonie out of Scriptures or traditions of Apostles or at least make plaine that this temporall power whereof they speake is so ioined with the Spirituall that by no meanes it can be pulled and diuided from it I meane that the Spirituall cannot consist without it Which because they could not performe they haue followed nothing but vncertaine opinions and such reasons as seeme not sufficiently to conclude that which they assume which we will examine in their order and place CHAP. VI. THe former opinion of the temporall power which they say the Pope hath indirectly is vehemently shaken euen by this that neither practise nor example nor any mention of such a papall power hath been heard of the space of a thousand yeeres in the Church when as in those times many christian Princes did abuse their Kingdomes and Gouernments impiously cruelly peruersly and to the great preiudice and mischeefe of the Church whereof one of the two must needs follow that either the Bishops of those times were wanting to their duties or that the Bishops of the times ensuing did and at this day doe gouerne the Church with greater power and command because these later haue openly challenged to themselues this temporall power and haue endeuoured to pull the same in and at their pleasure ouer Kings and Princes but the former haue not at any time acknowledged that any such right belongeth to them I am not ignorant what answers haue been made by diuers to excuse those first Pastors but I know that they are such that if they be diligently examined they can not be allowed by the opinion of any indifferent iudge There came foorth a booke printed at Rome the yeere of our Lord 1588. published vnder a fained name of Franciscus Romulus with this title An answer to certaine heads of an Apologie which is falsly intituled Catholike for the succession of Henry of Nauar into the Kingdome of France The author of which booke whome Bellarmine knowes and loues very well labours to take away this most important obiection by the change of the state of the Church and by the diuerse reason and condition of times and persons which oftentime brings in diuersity of law For thus he saith And now where as the aduersarie obiecteth in the fourth place touching the custome of our ancestors who endured many hereticall Princes as Constantius and Valens Arius Anastasius an Eutychian Heraclius a Monothelite and others besides it makes nothing to the matter For the Church ought not rashly and inconsideratly to abuse her power Moreouer it falleth out not very seldome that the power of certaine Kings is so great being also ioined with wickednesse and cruelty that the Ecclesiasticall censure neither profiteth any thing to restraine them and doth very much hurt to Catholike people vpon whom these Princes prouoked do rage the more For I pray you what had it auailed the Church in times past if she had assaied to excōmunicate to depose either the Ostrogoth Kings in Italy or the Visegothes in Spain or the Vandales in Afrik although she might haue done it very iustly and the very same ought to be vnderstood of Constantius and Valens and others aboue named and indeed then the times were such as that the Bishops ought rather to haue been ready to suffer Martirdome then to punish Princes But when the Church perceiued that now some place was opened to her power either with the spirituall profit of the Princes themselues or at least without the mischeefe and hurt of the people she was not wanting to her selfe as the examples alleadged before doe prooue For thus the Church iudged that Leo Isaurus was to be depriued of halfe his Empire and Henry the fourth of the whole and Childerike of the Kingdome of France and indeed afterward both Leo wanted part of his Empire and Henry the whole and Childerike his kingdome of France

and vncleannesse hee obeied the will of the Bishop and that hee might obtaine of him the benefite of absolution hee performed at the admonition of the Bishop a temporall office which seemed to bee profitable for the common wealth Vpon which occasion the Author of the history saith For this so great vertue both the Emperour and the Bishop were famous For I admire both the liberty of the one the obedience of the other Againe the burning of the zeale of the one and the purity of faith in the other Ambrose then constrained Theodosius iust as our Confessaries at this day doe constraine their Poenitents to whome they often deny absolution of their crime where they seriously promise that they will performe that office or burden which in place of Poenitence they lay on them when as yet they haue no temporall iurisdiction ouer them He forced him likewise euen as any of vs vseth to force his neighbour or fellow Burgesse when we deny that to him which hee desireth to be done or giuen him by vs vnlesse hee first do that which wee desire for our friends sake or our own To be short it is a common thing that a man is constrained or enforced by reason by loue by griefe by anger and by other affections and passions of the mind without any authority of temporall and spiritual iurisdiction These things standing thus it is worth the obseruation in this example that the Ecclesiasticall power doth often with feare of spirituall punishment enforce men to performe temporall duties as in this place Ambrose did the Emperour and of the contrary that the ciuill power doth many times by feare of temporall paines driue others to performe spirituall offices as when a Prince compelleth heretickes or schismaticks to returne to the Church for feare of bodily punishment or losse of goods and yet neither can the one impose temporall punishment nor the other spirituall but by accident as they say The fourth followeth The fourth saith he is of Gregory the first in the Priuiledge which he granted to the Monastery of S. Medardus and is to bee seene in the end of the Epistles If saith he any King Prelate Bishop or person whatsoeuer shall violate the decrees of this Apostolicke authority and of our commaundement of what dignity or honour soeuer he be let him be depriued of his honour If Bishop Gregory should liue at this day and vnderstand that these words of his are taken in that sense as though he had authority to depriue Kings of their honour and dignity hee would surely cry out that it is a calumnious and a wrested interpretation and that he neuer so much as dreamed of any such matter and indeed those things which in other places are left written by him doe vtterly discredite this exposition These then are the words not of a commaunder but of a curser whereby he chargeth and adiureth all kind of men that they doe not violate the priuiledge granted by him which if they shall doe that God will be the reuenger to depriue them of honour which kind of admonition and imprecation is at this day wont to bee added to the ends of the Popes Bulles and constitutions in this manner Therefore it may be lawfull for no man to in fringe this page c. or of presumption to contrary the same but of any shall presume to attempt it let him incurre the indidgnation of Almighty God and of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul or that which is the same let him know that he shall incurre CHAP. XL. BY that which hath beene said the Reader will easily see that it is true which before I set down that there cannot bee found either in the holy Scriptures or writings of holy Fathers any printe or example of the temporall authority of the Pope and therefore that they do not well nay that they offend very greeuously who labour to strengthen an opinion most false in it selfe by arguments and examples so remote and impertinent By these meanes they deceiue the vnlearned and are derided by the learned I haue already proued very plainely that there is no force in the former examples to proue that which the aduersaries affirme And for the examples following I take lesse thought to answer For although some of them doe fit the purpose of the aduersaris and shew that Popes did sometimes vse temporall authority in the last ages of the Church notwithstanding because they containe nothing but the singular actions of Popes who no man denieth but that they were men and might commit faults and slippes after the manner of men in so much as it is now celebrated by a common Prouerbe which we remembred before out of Sotus Factum Pontificum non facit fidei articulum that is The act of the Popes doth not make an article of faith therefore touching their acts wherin they haue endeauoured to exercise such an authority the question and disputation is behinde touching the lawfulnesse thereof whether they were done lawfully yea or no Neither ought that to moue vs at all the writers of the stories who haue in their writings recorded the acts of the Popes haue added no note or touch of reprehension but rather haue allowed and commended them For I see that there were many reasons for that First because all the writers of that time were either Monkes or at the least Clergy men who tooke most care to increase and amplifie the dignity of the Popes and therefore they were very wary and heedfull not to reprehend or checke any actions of the Popes and to accuse them of iniustice Secondly for that in those times so great was the opinion of the Pope that the multitude receiued and embraced in estimation all his actions as if they had beene done by God himselfe in which respect Iohn Gerson said not without reason That the common people doth imagine the Pope as a God who hath all authority in heauen and in earth My selfe haue seene aboue fifty yeares agone in Scotland when as that Kingdome did as yet stand sound in faith and religion that the name of the Pope of Rome for so they spake Scotishly the Pape of Rome was had in such reuerence with the multitude that whatsoeuer was told them to haue beene said or done by him was esteemed of all men as an oracle and as a thing done by God himselfe Lastly for that a present danger did hang ouer their heades which danger to this day bindeth the hands and mussles the mouthes of many lest if they should write any thing which was harsh and vnpleasing to the Pope or should taxe and find fault with his actions as well the writer as his writing should forth with be stricken with the Popes curses which cannot seeme strange to those who doe know that the anger and arrogancie of Pope Sixtus V. did burne so farre that as I touched before hee had determined to destroy and quite extinguish the trim and goodly disputations of Bellarmine because hee

to the other although both of them may concurre in the same person For the same person may bee both a temporall Prince and a Bishop but neither as a Pope can hee chalenge to himselfe the actions offices dignities and other rights of Temporall things nor as a Prince of Spirituall If therefore these powers be ioyned together neither in dignities offices nor actions let Bozius tell vs wherein they are ioyned If he say in that because one is subordinate and subiect to the other that is it which we deny and which if it were true it would follow necessarily that those powers are distinguished neither in dignities nor offices but onely in actions and so this opinion of Pope Nicolaus should bee false for dignitie and office which is in the Person subordinated cannot but be in the Person which doth subordinate seeing it is deriued from him into the Person subordinated Hence it is that the Prince takes himselfe to be wronged while his Ministers are hindred in the execution of their offices and the Pope thinketh himselfe and his Sea Apostolike to be contemned if any Contempt be offered to the authoritie of his Legate sent by him But all things and Persons are proclaimed to be free and not subiect vnlesse the contrary be prooued And if these things be so it is very ridiculous and a meere fancie of Bozius his braine that he saies how it appeares by the former speeches of Pope Nicolaus That hee doth not affirme the Lay power to be disioyned from the Spirituall so as a Person Ecclesiasticall may not haue it but that a temporall Person may not haue an Ecclesiasticall For where can this appeare seeing in that letter there is not one word to be seene whereby that may be gathered in any probabilitie And hitherto haue I said enough of this Bozius his error And I am perswaded that no man is so madde that in the determination of this businesse touching the distinction of these powers will not giue credit rather to Hosius then to Bozius CHAP. III. I Would here annex other examples of Bozius his error but that I know that this opinion which he endeuoureth to reuiue being now laid asleep and almost extinguished seemeth in these daies to the learned so absurd and that it is refuted and ouerthrowen with so many and so cleere reasons that now a man need not feare least any be inueigled and ouertaken therewith For first it is certaine that neither Bozius nor al his abetors although they weare wrest the sacred writings and works of the fathers neuer so much shall euer be able to produce any certaine testimony whereby that same temporall iurisdiction and power of the Pope which they dreame on ouer Princes and people of the whole world may be plainly confirmed Nay but not so much as any token or print of any such temporall power deliuered by hand from the Apostles and their successors can be found from the passion of Christ for seauen hundred nay I may say for a thousand yeeres For which cause the most learned Bellarmine in the refutation of this opinion doth very wittily and shortly vse this strange reason If it were so saith he that the Pope be temporall Lord of the whole world that should plainly appeare by the Scriptures or surely out of the tradition of the Apostles Out of the Scriptures we haue nothing but that the keies of the kingdome of heauen were giuen to the Pope of the keies of the kingdome of the earth there is no mention and the aduersaries bring forth no tradition of the Apostles The which matters and with all the great diuision about this matter between the Diuines and the Canonists and of each of them one with another maketh that this question of the temporal power of the Pope seemeth very doubtfull and vncertaine and wholly to consist without any ground in the opinion and conceipt of men and therefore that the truth thereof is to be searched and sisted out by the light of reason sharpnesse of arguments and that it is no matter of faith as they speake to thinke of it either one way or other for that those things which are matters of faith are to be held of all men after one manner But for mine owne part although I doe with heart and mouth professe that the chiefe Bishop and prelate of the city of Rome as being the Vicar of Christ the lawfull successor of S. Peter yea the vniuersall and supreme pastor of the Church is indued with spirituall power ouer all christian Kings and Monarchs and that he hath and may exercise ouer them the power to bind and loose which the Scripture doth witnesse that it was giuen to the Apostle Peter ouer all soules yet notwithstanding I am not therefore perswaded that I should alike beleeue that he comprehendeth secular Kings and Princes with in his temporall iurisdiction or when they doe offend against God or Men or otherwise abuse their office that he may in any sort abrogate their gouernment and take their Scepters away and bestow them on others or indeed in a word that he hath any right or iurisdiction temporall ouer any lay-persons of what condition or order and ranke so euer they be vnlesse he shall purchase the same by Ciuill and lawfull meanes For as much as I haue obserued that the opinion which affirmeth the same hath beene assaied indeed and attempted by diuers but hitherto could neuer be prooued of any sufficient and strong reason and for the contrarie opinion much more weightie and more certaine reasons may be brought For my part in regard of the zeale I beare to the Sea Apostolike I could wish with all my heart that it might be prooued by certaine and vndoubted arguments that this right belongs vnto it being very ready to encline to that part to which the weightier reason and authority of truth do swaie But now let vs come nearer to the disputation it selfe That it is euidently false that the Pope hath authority and rule ouer Kings and Princes it is certaine euen by this that it were an absurd thing and vniust to say that heathen Princes are receiued by the Church in harder and worser termes then other particular men of the commons whosoeuer or that the Pope hath at this day greater power ciuill ouer christian Princes then in times past S. Peter the rest of the Apostles had ouer euery priuate man that was a child of the Church but they in those times had neuer any right or power temporall ouer christian lay-persons therefore neither hath the Pope now a daies any temporall power ouer secular Princes The assumption is prooned by this because it is most certaine that in the time of the Apostles the Ecclesiasticall power was wholy seuered from the ciuill I doe not hereweigh Bozius fooleries and that this ciuill power was wholly in the hands of heathen Princes out of the Church In somuch as the Apostles themselues were within the