|Author:||Sweet, John, 1570-1632.|
|Title:||Monsig[neu]r fate voi. Or A discovery of the Dalmatian apostata M. Antonius de Dominis, and his bookes. By C.A. to his friend P.R. student of the lawes in the Middle Temple.|
|Publication Info:||Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan, Digital Library Production Service
2012 November (TCP phase 2)
This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this text, in whole or in part. Please contact project staff at firstname.lastname@example.org for further information or permissions.
Monsig[neu]r fate voi. Or A discovery of the Dalmatian apostata M. Antonius de Dominis, and his bookes. By C.A. to his friend P.R. student of the lawes in the Middle Temple.
Sweet, John, 1570-1632.
[Saint-Omer: English College Press], Permissu superiorum, M. DC. XVII. 
|Alternate titles:||Monsigneur fate voi. Or A discovery of the Dalmatian apostata. Discovery of the Dalmatian apostata.|
C.A. = John Sweet.
Place of publication and printer's name from STC.
With final errata leaf.
Some print show-through.
Reproduction of the original in the Cambridge University Library.
Louis, -- XIII, -- King of France, -- 1601-1643 -- Early works to 1800.
Henry, -- IV, -- King of France, -- 1553-1610 -- Early works to 1800.
Catholic Church -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
TO THE READER.
THE TABLE OF THE Sections.
THE DALMATIAN BISHOP DISCOVERED.
SECTION I. The Bishop his first Reason turned against him∣selfe: And from thence are deduced three arguments, which do plainly proue, that he was deluded by the Diuell.
SECTION II. The three former Arguments inforced by three other Circumstances.
SECTION III. The Bishop his second Negatiue Argument is discussed.
SECTION IIII. Of the Bishop his Affirmatiue proofes: and in particuler of those things, that disposed his mind to make mutation of Religion.
SECTION V. The Bishops Motiues to change his Religion are discussed: and the arguments of the ten books he promised are all reduced to one question alone, of the Popes Supremacy.
SECTION VI. Concerning the Popes Supremacy: The state of the question is proposed, and S. Peters Supre∣macy is proued by Scripture.
SECTION VII. The former Expositions of the two places afore∣sayd, togeather with S. Peters Supremacy in dignity, doctrine, and gouernement, are proued out of the testimonyes of the ancient Fathers.
SECTION VIII. The conclusion of the first poynt of this Contro∣uersy: which is also further confirmed by the Confession of the Protestants themselues.
SECTION IX. The continuance of S. Peters authority is proued by Scripture, and by the Fathers, and by the confession of many Protestants: and therof is inferred the succession of the Pope to S. Peter.
SECTION X. The Supremacy of the Pope and his succession to S. Peter, is proued by the titles of his supreme dignity, in the ancient Fathers; and by the foure first generall Councells.
SECTION XI. The Popes Supremacy is proued out of the point of the infallibility of his doctrine, by the Authorityes of the ancient Fathers.
SECTION XII. The Popes Supremacy is proued by his being priuiledged from errour in doctrine of Faith; out of the Authorityes of the Popes themselues.
SECTION XIII. The Popes supremacy in Iudiciall authority is proued out of the testimonies of the Popes themselues.
SECTION XIIII. The Popes Supremacy is proued by the auncient and continuall practise thereof, in the Catholike Church.
SECTION XV. The Conclusion of this discourse of the Popes Supremacy.
SECTION XVI. The absurd and pernicious grounds of the Bishops 10. Bookes, and his Christian Commonwealth, are further discouered and confuted.
SECTION XVII. The substance of the Bishops 10. bookes being thus confuted, the mayne poynt of this other Booke, which he maketh the ground of his Conuersion, That the doctrine of the Protestants differeth little or nothing from the do∣ctrine of the ancient Fathers, is dispro∣ued, by sundry generall reasons, and by the Fathers themselues, codemning the Protestants opinions for no lesse then Heresies.
SECTION XVIII. The dissent of the Protestants from the Fathers, is proued out of the Protestants themselues, condemning the Fathers.
SECTION XIX. That the Protestants dissent very much from the doctrine of the pure Church, is proued out of the Protestants themselues, condem∣ning one another.
SECTION XX. The conclusion of this Tract cōcerning the Bishops motiues, by occasion wherof the nature of a mo∣tiue is declared; and the first Catholike mo∣tiue, of the holynes, and sanctity of Ca∣tholike doctrine is propounded.
SECTION XXI. The former Motiue is confirmed: and by occasion thereof the necessity of keeping the Commaund∣ments to obtaine Saluation is declared.
SECTION XXII. The force of the second Motiue signifyed by the word Catholike, in the Creed of the Apostles, is declared.
SECTION XXIII. The force of the former Motiue, is further decla∣red, out of the authorityes of S. Augustine, and out of the effects of the contrary Doctrine.
SECTION XXIIII. Foure other particuler motiues, of the Conuersion of Nations, of the Miracles, of the Martyrdoms, and of the vnion of the members of the Ca∣tholike Church, are briefly propounded.
SECTION XXV. Of the authority of the Catholike Church in generall.
SECTION XXVI. The same Authority, and the grounds of Christian Fayth are further declared.
SECTION XXVII. VVherein two Motiues, that is to say, Feare of danger, and the Instigation of a certayne spirit, which induced the Bishop to change the place of his aboad, are propounded and examined.
SECTION XXVIII. VVherein the Bishop his zeale, and desire to try which is the last Motiue, that induced him to forsake his Countrey, is discussed.
SECTION XXIX. The first obiection of the Bishop against himselfe, is discussed: VVherin he affirmeth, tha al∣beit the King ought to be feared, and may not be reprehended: yet that the Pope is not to be feared &c.
SECTION XXX. Of Schisme, which is the last obiection of the Bi∣shop against himselfe, wherein hee is proued to be not only a Schismatike, but also a manifest Heretike.
SECTION XXXI. VVherein is shewed, that the authority and ex∣ample of S. Cyprian, alleadged by the Bishop against the Pope, ouerthroweth the principall grounds of the Protestant Religion.
SECTION XXXII. VVherein is declared, how the Bishop in alleadg∣ing the example of S. Cyprian and S. Ste∣phen, falsfieth the truth of the story, against himselfe.
SECTION XXXIII. VVherein the Bishop is manifestly conuinced of schisme, out of the Authority and example of S. Cyprian alleadged by himselfe: and the same authority, for as much as it seemeth to con∣cerne the Pope, is sufficiently answered.
SECTION XXXIIII. Many testimonyes and playne places are produced out of S. Cyprian, wherby the Bishop is euident∣ly conuinced both of Schisme and Heresy.
SECTION XXXV. The conclusion of the Bishops booke, togeather with a short Conclusion of this whole Treatise.
Faults escaped in the Printing.