Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
blood_n	body_n	bread_n	consecration_n	9,959	5	11.0641	5	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A73451	Bels trial examined that is a refutation of his late treatise, intituled. The triall of the nevve religion By B.C. student in diuinitie. VVherein his many & grosse vntruthes, with diuers contradictions are discouered: together with an examination of the principal partes of that vaine pamphlet: and the antiquitie & veritie of sundry Catholike articles, which he calleth rotten ragges of the newe religion, are defended against the newe ragmaster of rascal. In the preface likewise, a short viewe of one Thomas Rogers vntruthes is sett downe, taken out of his booke called. The faith doctrine and religion, professed and protected in the realme of England, &c. with a short memorandum for T.V. otherwise called Th. Vdal.	Woodward, Philip, ca. 1557-1610.	1608 (1608)	STC 25972.2; ESTC S125583	118,782	210

and other articles of Christian fayth and I make no doubt but had Bell liued in the tyme of Constantius the Emperor the same argument should haue gone in behalf of Arrianisme for with as much probability might he haue vrged the same If he take it not in good part to haue his reputation so touched to omitte his changeable disposition let him giue some reason why this maketh more against Transubstantiation then against the consubstantialitie of the sonne of God That Transubstantiation was first hatched by Innocentius in the yeare one thowsand two hundred and fiftene he bouldly affirmeth but how truly remayneth nowe to be examined For either he meaneth only the name or the thing imported by the nametyf the first we easyly graunt it as he must also that the name consubstantiall was not heard of till the Nicene Councell for newe names may be inueÌ„ted by the Church the better more plainely to explicate an auncient mystery of fayth as Vincentius In suo Commâ—nitoriâ— Lirinensis that auncient father learnedly teacheth wherefore if he hath no other quarrell against Transubstantiation but the bare name it is very rediculous and foolishe for if the doctrine it self be found in the fathers and scriptures a poore spight it is to cauill at the name and with like grace may he descant vpon the words Consubstantiall Trinity Incarnation Deipara or Mother of God c. which if he like not to do then let him neither do it here or els giue some good reason of his so diuers a disposition But if by Transubstantiation he meaneth the very pointe of doctrine it self that is the chaunginge of the substance of bread into the body of Christ by the wordes of consecration then is it a most intolerable vntruth that Transubstantiation was first hatched by many pregnant profes being alleageable to the coÌ„trary To begin in the tyme of Leo the ninth about the yeare of Christ one thousand and fifty in a Romane Councell Berengarius was condemned whose heresy as thâ— Magdeburgians suppose came then to light vpon thâ— intercepting of his letters written to Lanfrancâ— concerning his opinion of the sacrament Berengariâ— Contur 9. col 454. 455. Andegauensis c. Berengarius say they deacon of Anioâ— perceiued that it was not truly taught that after the speakiâ— the words of the supper the supper the substance of the elemenâ— did quite vanishe and were transmutated or chaunged inâ— the very body and bloud of Christ Behould transubstanâ— tiation by the confession of our mortall enem yeâ— was taught in the Church much more then aâ— hundred years before the tyme which he assignet for the first beginning thereof The same Berengariâ— abiuring not long after his heresy in the Counceâ— of Rome vnder Nicholas the second and yet not lonâ—ge after returninge to his former vomitte and puâ—blishing a booke in defence thereof such a worth Bâ—rengarius father of the Sacramentaries a periured person Cent. 9. col 459. pillar and constant father haue the Sacramentarieâ— for their heresie Lanfrancus as the same Magdeburbians reporte opposed himself against it setting forth that booke against Berengarius which is yeâ— extant Primum autem But first of all say they he goetâ— about with many words to defend the doctrine of Transubâ—stantiation which which Berengarius did find fault with to witâ— that after consecration the bread was essentially conuerted into the body of Christ and the wine into his bloud Transubstantiation then was not first hatched at the tyme he speaketh of when as it was oppugned and defended many a faire yeare before that is about the year of Christ one thousand and three score as Bels deere brothers confesse An other brother of his one Perkins thoughâ— caste in a more precise moulde acknowledgeth Transubstantiation about fower hundred years before the time he mentioneth for speaking of the auncient fathers thus he writeth Et teneÌ„dum eos c. Rroblem verbo Realis presentia And it is to be houlden that they knewe not TransubstantiatioÌ„ at least for eight hundred yeares False it is that TraÌ„substantiation was not taught before as shall straight waies be iustified against Perkins but in the meane tyme the good reader hath to note how he giueth thely to Bell affirming Transubstantiation to haue bene about some fower hundred yeares before the time in which by Bels calculation it was first hatched The former Magdeburgians note S. Chrisostom and Centur. 5. 5. col 517. Theodoretus for teaching Transubstantiation Chrysostomus Transubstantiationem c. Chrysostom say they seemeth to confirme Transubstantiation for he writeth thus in his sermon of the Eucharist doest thou see bread doest thou see wine do they passe like other meates into the draught God forbidde doe not thinke so for euen as waxe putte into the fire is made like vnto it no substance therof remayneth nothing aboundeth euen so thinke here the mysteries to be consumed with the substance of the body and to this same effect they report straight after certayne words out of Theodoretus The same authors note how that S. Ambrose in his preparatiue praiers before the masse maketh mention of Transubstantiation and application for the liuinge and the dead True it is that they stile him only by the name of the author of the first praier preparatiue to Masse amongest S. Ambroses workes citing nothing els for prooffe but the censure of Erasmus as though the phantasticall and partiall affection of a moderne mutable man were an infallible rule to measure the fathers monuments Perkiâ— also very pertly censureth it for none of S. Ambrosâ— his workes but yet giueth a reason and that a pretty one ibi adoratio sacrameÌ„ti There quoth he is adoration of the sacrament Let such reasons as these runnâ— for sounde they are none of the fathers workeâ— because they are against vs and our doctrine and it will not be any difficulty at all to answear quickly whatsoeuer is produced out of antiquity yea or out of sacred scripture it self Did strong reason more preuaile then preconceipted fansy they would rather inferre thus adoration of the sacrament is allowed by S. Amhrose ergo it is no false superstitious or idolatrous doctrine Furthermore the same Lutheran historiographers reprehende Eusebius Emissenus who died in Contur 4. col 975. the time of Constantine as the same men report out of S. Hierom about Transubstantiation De caena Domini c. Concerning the supper of our Lord say they he spake nothing commodiously of Transubstantiation vpon the words of Christ vnlesse ye eat the fleshe of the sonne of man c. Behould a priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech hath by his vnspeakable power turned bread and wine into the substance of his body and bloud Diuers other notable authorities might haue been alleadged but I made choise of these as being so playne that the mortall enemyes of Transubstantiation can not deny but that they make cleerly for that point and beside there

godlesse vntruth as himself I suppose will not deny when as he telleth vs in diuers others of Funeral lib. 1. cap. 4. pag. 4. Suruey pag. 536. pag 57. his bookes that Popishe inuocation and adoration was not knowen till the year three hundred and seauenty which though it be a loud lye as I haue proued in the Dolefull knell shewing the vse of inuocacation and adoration before the yeare three hundred and seauenty yet is it nothing comparable to this here vttered making that article a thousand yeares younger then in his former bookes and playnly contradicting here what he saith in those former places Content he was that his ignorant reader shoulde gather that sence and for that ende deliuered the wordes in such a cunning manner but let him be vrged with that which he teacheth elâ— where and then his refuge will be that he speaketh not of the inuocation of Saintes in generallâ— but of the particular manner of praying by their merites or by the bloude of Thomas such be theâ— slightes of the minister But to prosecute himâ— flyinge albeit that be his meaning yf it be so forâ— it may be that I haue construed his wordes to aâ— better sence then euer he intended yet I say thatâ— praying to God by the merits of his Saints is alsoâ— older then the yeare one thousand fower hundred and seauen and that both by his owne confession who in the precedent words saith that it was neuer knowen to the Church of Christ for the space of one thousand yeares and odde signifying that not long after it came in which is almost two hundred yeares before the tyme here assigned as also by the verdict of his brother Perkins who censureth S. Leo that liued twelue hundred yeres agoe for the same doctrine but according to truth it self it is as auncient as the Gospel and the former daies of the Patriarches and Prophetes as before was said Lastly that very particular praier to S. Thomas which he mentioneth is as I make no doubt more auncient then the tyme he noteth seing S. Thomas was martired more then fower hundred yeares agoe and canonized straight after his death and so in no sence his words can by any meanes be excused from an vntruth and in that which they represent to common vnderstanding from a monstrous ly and palpable contradiction Bels XII Chapter Of the Communion vnder one kinde THE XLVI VNTRVTH THe Minister speaking of the Communion vnder one kinde and desirous to shewe that we haue broken the institutioÌ„ of Christ like a godâ—esse Gospeller corrupteth the very text of sacred Scripture And S. Paul saith he vrging Christes instiâ—ution to the Corinthians telleth them playnely and reliâ—iously that they must receiue the holy Eucharist vnder both 1. Corint 11. v. 27. kindes which last words he printeth also in a distinct letter to shewe that they be the Apostles wordes and quoteth accordingly in the margent the particular place vz 1. Cor. 11. 27. but viewe it he that will if he finde S. Paul to haue those words we yeld him the victory if not let his fauorites consider how they venture their soules with such a minister that offereth violence to the very word of God which he would seeme so much to reuerence The words of S. Paul be these Therfore whosoeuer shall eate this bread or drinke the chalice of our Lord vnworthyly he shall be guilty of the body and of the bloud of our Lord which be far different from these That they must receiue the holy Eucharist vnder both kindes affirmed by him to be the very sentence of S. Paul The most that can be gathered out of S. Paules wordes truly cited is that in his tyme the Eucharist was ministred to lay people vnder both kindes which we deny not but they proue nâ— that it neither was nor might be giuen vndâ— one kind Mary out of the wordes as he citeâ— them the matter is made cocke-sure and tâ— text framed fitte for their purpose giue him tâ— leaue that he may coyne scripture as he pleaâ— and no question but as he hath vpon a doubâ— change of religion alwaies found the word God for his warrant so will he still chaunâ— what chaunce may neuer lacke it to back him all his actions No shelter can shrowd him from the crynâ— of corruption For to tell vs that it is the meâ—ning of S. Paul as it is most false so can it nâ— iustify his falsification for then might any ciâ— the text according to that interpretation whicâ— he thinketh agreable thereunto and as the veâ—â— wordes of the text which is most impious â—â— be saide For example The Catholiques alleadgeâ— against the Arrians to proue Christ to be of oâ— and the same nature with his father this sentence of S. Iohn I and the father are one which plaâ—â— Ioan. 10. v. 30. in truth by the circumstance of the letter anâ— exposition of venerable antiquity proueth sâ— much yet who euer haue presumed or noâ— dare to cite it after Bels manner and say thâ— Euangelist S. Iohn reporting Christes wordes affirmeth plainely and religiously that Christ anâ— his father be all of one nature and substance for allow this and the Arrians may with likâ— authority cite it to the contrary and rehearsâ— the texâ— after Bels manner thus The Euanelist S. Iohn reporting Christes words teacheth â—laynely and religiously that Christ and his faâ—her be not one in nature and substance but in â—onsent of will which licentious proceeding being once brought in nothing will be found sincere nothing true and sound but the broade gate sett open to all corrupt dealing and falsification Let vs but acknowledge any tradition of Christ or his Apostles not expressely found in the written word though neuer so much warranted by antiquity and straight in great zeale he is vpon vs with the curses and threats out of Deutronomie and the Apocalipse of them that adde or take away any thinge from the word and yet himself I knowe not vpon what dispensation corrupteth choppeth and changeth as hath bene said and would be loth for all that to be reputed for any other then a sincere preacher of the word and one that handleth the scripture with great respect and reuerence but I hope such as carry due regarde to their soules will looke better to his fingers and vpon triall of his treachery auoide him for a false teacher and detestable Doctor THE XLVII VNTRVTH PRosecuting still the same matter of communicating vnder both kindes he saith This was the practise of the auncient Church for the space of one thousande two hundred and thirty yeares after Christ aboâ—â— which tyme they began in some odde Churches to leaue the cuppe and to minister the sacrament in bread only bâ— that was done as Aquinas consesseth in some fewe places onlâ— 3. Part. quaest 80. art 12. in Cor. An vntruthe it is that the communion vnder onâ— kinde was not in vse till the yeare one thousanâ— two hundred

BELS TRIAL EXAMINED THAT IS A refutation of his late Treatise intituled THE TRIALL OF THE NEVVE RELIGION By B. C. Student in diuinitie VVherein his many grosse vntruthes with diuers contradictions are discouered Together with an examination of the principal partes of that vaine Pamphlet and the antiquitie veritie of sundry Catholike articles which he calleth rotten ragges of the newe religion are defended against the newe Ragmaster of RASCAL In the Preface likewise a short viewe of one THOMAS ROGERS vntruthes is sett downe taken out of his booke called THE FAITH DOCTRINE AND RELIGION PROFESSED AND PROTECTED IN THE REALME OF ENGLAND c. with a short memorandum for T. V. otherwise called Th. Vdal Ierem 7. v. 8. Beholde you trust to your selues in the wordes of lying which shall not profitt you Printed at Roane 1608. THE PREFACE TO THE GOODE CHRISTIAN READER IN my last booke goode Reader which I published against the challenging minister intituled The Dolefull knell of Thomas Bell I very well remember that I freed my self from writing ought against him vntill I had sett forth his Blacke Buriall contayning an answear to the mayne of all his blasphemous bookes and pestilent pamphlets ys iust reasons there specified hindred not my designement notwithstanding meeting not longe since with a newe toy of his tricked and trimmed vp with diuers patches and rusty ragges drawen from the dunghille of his former monuments and called by him The Trial of the newe religion I resolued to examine his depositions and to try the truth of his newe treatise and that both because it falleth out very fittely and in order that hauing rung Bels Dolefull knell this examination of his Triall as his winding sheete should follow before the solemnity of his foule Funerals and interring of his carcasse be kept and also for that I feare by the disastrous coniunction of the planets that a could frost of pouerty will yet keepe backe the springe of the promised worke and therefore I thought it not amisse to publishe this Treatise being not of any such bulke but that a fewe crownes may dispatch the impression And lastly to giue Bell sure and certaine intelligence that it was contempt of him and his bookes that made them passe so longe without answear and not any rare learning or stinginge stuffe as in the light of his darke dreaming conceipt proceeding from much vanity and litle humility small grace great pride he framed to himself His eies I hope by this time be opened to see that albeit he were an importune challenger yet he lay not so close but that his sides haue bene soundly bombasted and his quarters kindely curried ouer That disdainfull stile of his which before trampled vpon our silence those mounting words which in former tymes menaced nothing but death and destruction that insulting vaine which did so contemptibly caper vpon our quiet carcasses is nowe becom bankrupt and fled the countrey Those ouerlooking termes and fiery phrases those terrible taunts which with restlesse penne he runge in our eares and neuer ceased to iangle both in towne and countrey are vanished and blowne away like the locusts of Egipt The world is altered Toâ—nam is turned French his hoat courage is cooled the gospelling Golias lyeth sweating vpon the earth fetching his last gaspe and the false pleasinge lustre of his bookes faded and coin to nothing In former tymes this and such like were his vsuall songes No no they do in effect confesse Funeral lib. 1. cap. 2. pag. 6. so much whiles they neither dare answear any one booke at all nor any one chapter wholy but here and there an odde piece or sentence I protest vnto the gentle Reader I partly blushe on their behalf But neuer as I thinke shall I liue so longe to heare any more such musicke No no that tune is out of date the bloud hath left his cheekes and runne in poste to comfort his faintinge heart It was also no question a braue pangue of his vauntinge spirit when he came ouer vs in this insulting manner They Funeral lib. 2. cap. 1. pag. 4. are so nettled so pricked and goared with my bookes and their religion so battered with their owne best learned doctors and most skillefull Proctors that gladly they would satisfy their Iesuited Popelings wipe away that discredit which hangeth at their beardes for which ende they vse many coosenlnge trickes iuglings and lieger-demains so to stay the outcries of the people vntill I be dead and then by your fauour they will com vpon me with good speed Canis mortuus non mordet but before that day my life I gage in that behalfe they dare not for their guttes publishe any direct full aÌ„swear etc. because to snatch here a piece there a piece is no answear at all but a mere toy for young children to play withall But pardon him this he will neuer do so any more whiles he liueth it was the heate of his zeale and the longe gaping after an ouerseeing benefice that made so many madde and lofty words to runne forth whiles the doore was open Balams eies be now illuminated and he seeth verie well and the world knoweth that his bookes be not only answearable but also som of theÌ„ answered His Downefall of Popery which in the highe pitche of his soaringe pride he affirmed to be such tickling stuffe that euery article Funeral lib. 2. cap. 4 pag. 10. coÌ„clusioÌ„ propositioÌ„ therein coÌ„tained might truly be called Noli me tangere because they dare not quoth he for ten thousaÌ„d millioÌ„s of gould touch the same fully directly wheÌ„ as for al that euery article hath bene examined euery coÌ„clusioÌ„ coÌ„futed euery propositioÌ„ perused answered beaten in pieces so that the Minister may truly be called Noli mihi credere and deserueth for this and hundreds more of like qualitie ten thousand millions of whetstones for the rewarde of his workes the trophees of his labours and the perpetuall ensigne of his false foolishe and phantasticall monuments But to prosecute further in particular this present Pamphlet the due examination whereof I haue vndertaken two speciall things remayne yet to be spoken of The first concerning my self the second touchinge the Minister As for my self thou shalt vnderstand good Reader that I was once determined to haue answeared the treatise fully and wholy as thou maist perceiue by the first and second chapters but afterward infirmity of body hindering the course of my studies and desire of minde to haue it dispatched with all speed caused an other resolution which may perhaps reuiue Bels dead spirits and inflame his cooled bloud and make him com out once againe with his old complaint that I haue answeared him by pieces and patches and for my lugges and guttes durst not deale with Such are Bels phrases the whole and that I haue after much labour and study much siftinge and searching out of the whole tome of his Triall

and thirty as more bouldly theâ— truly he affirmeth Sozomenus and Nicephorus report Lib. 8. hist cap. 5. Lib. 13. cap. 7. how a certayne woman infected with thâ— heresy of Macedonius the better to conceale her religion came to the Church and receiued the sacrament from the hand of S. Chrysostome as it werâ— with a minde straight waies to eate it but shâ— cunningly gaue it to her maide and receiued of heâ— other bread brought from home which when she went about to eate she found it straight turneâ— into a stone This fact sheweth that all then receiued not the chalice for then this woman could not haue dissembled both because the chalice was not giuen into her owne hands as the consecrated hoast then was and though it had no such euasion is imaginable An other example we haue in Pope Leo the Serm. 4. de Quaâ—irages first who saith that the Manichees to conceale their heresy vsed to receiue the consecrated hoast with Catholiques but not the chalice which argueth that it was free at that tyme to receiue the chalice or not for had they bene all bound to receiue the chalice the Manichees could not but haue bene knowen as they which neuer tooke the chalice and therfore S. Leo commaundeth not to obserue them who somtyme did receiue the chalice and somtyme did not but those which did â—uer receiue it at all for at that tyme it was a â—te of a Manichee that sect detesting the drinâ—â—ge of wine as a thinge vtterly vnlawfull and â—â—linge it the deuils gall I omitt much more â—hich might be brought out of antiquity yea out â—â— scripture it self some thing before hath bene â—â—uched and more to that purpose very strongly â—ight be vrged but breuity to which I am inforâ—â—d maketh me to passe ouer many things Only for a conclusion I can not but note how â—â—norant Sir Thomas of Rascall entreateth learâ—ed S. Thomas of Aquine whom first he maketh by â—â—nning insinuation to say that about his tyme â—hey began in some odd Churches to leaue of the â—uppe and to minister the sacrament in bread â—nly whereof he hath not one word and no â—arualle when it was of far greater continuance â—s hath been said but more plainely doth he â—aunder him when he maketh him to say that to â—inister the Sacrament in bread only was done â—n some fewe places only his words are these Therefore prouidently in some Churches it is obserued that 3. par q. 40. art 22. â—he bloud be not giuen to the people to be receiued but be â—nly taken of the Priest Where he doth not say that â—his was in some fewe places only as Bell maketh â—im to speake but that in some Churches it was â—o obserued which might be very many as well as some fewe and that this was the reall and true meaninge of S. Thomas in the same very place is gathered out of his owne discourse for hauing propounded some arguments after the manner of Scholes against the truth to witt that it was not lawfull to receaue the body of Christ without his bloud he cometh to the contrary opinion which 3. par quast 80. ar 12. he there defendeth and saith But contrary to this iâ— the vse of many Churches in which the body of Christ auâ— not his bloud is giuen to the people that communicateth In which wordes blessed S. Thomas enformeth vs that the body of Christ and not his bloud was giuen to the people in many Churches Saintlesse Sir Thomas maketh him to say that the body of Christ was giuen in some fewe places only when as he hath neither the words nor the sence but the clean opposit wordes and meaninge Halensis also more auncient then S. Thomas as who was his master testifieth that in his time it was almost a generall custome to receiue vnder one kinde Very lawfull it is saith that learned man to receau Part. 4. quast 11. memb 2. art 4. num 3. the body of Christ vnder the forme of bread only alay men do almost euery where in the Church and yet all this not witstandinge the minister blusheth not to father the direct contrary opinion vpon blessed S. Thomas Bels XIII Chapter Of priuate Masse THE XLVIII VNTRVTH THat any Prieste in the Primatiue Churche said priuate Masse that is receiued the mysteries all alone none being to communicat with him our aduersaries generally denie houlding that they euer had other participants in that sacred ction This was saith Bell the vse and practise of the hurche euery where for more then a thousand yeares together But afterward when the peoples deuotion began to be remisse the Priestes then deuoured vp all alone This minister that hath deuoured vp all conscience little areth in what manner he speaketh of those myteries which antiquity so reuerenced that they would not speake of them but in couert tearmes before infidels and S. Chrysostom calleth tremeÌ„da mysteria Hom. 69. ad Pepulum dreadsull mysteries and yet he speaketh of them as homely as though he were talking of the English coÌ„munion wich is had in such high reuerence that the coÌ„munion booke prescribeth that the fragments remaininge shall be for the ministers priuate vses and so giueth him leaue to feede with them his chickens or to soppe his pottage To the matter an vntruth it is that priuate masses were not before the tyme he mentioneth The twelft Councell of Toleto almost nine hundred yeares agoe reprehendeth those Priests which offering sacrifice did not communicate Quale illud sacrificium c. what manner of sacrifice is Can. 5. that saith the Councell of whiche neither he that sacrificeth is knowen to be partaker which words do shewe that none was present to communicate and yet the Councell requireth only that the Priest himself doth communicate S. Augustin also recordeth how a Priest offered sacrifice in Lib. 22. de ciuit cap. 8. a priuate farme for the freeing of that place from the molestation of wicked spirits In so particular and extraordinarie a place and for so particular a busines no probability that there were any other communicants But to com vpon him with the authority â— his brother Perkins who confesseth that thâ— Problem verbo Missa priuata kinde of priuate masses were not knowen to thâ— Church for the space of eight hundred yeares nâ— denying but afterward they were vsed which â— two hundred yeares more then Bell will grauntâ— In the same place he coÌ„fe sseth that priuate masseâ— began first in monasteries for proosse whereof he citeth S. Gregory which both conuinceth Beâ— of ouerreaching and seemeth not very well tâ— agree with his former assertion for how werâ— not priuate Masses knowen to the Church for thâ— space of eight hundred yeares yf S. Gregory maketh mention of them two hundred yeares before The truth is good reader that no beginning here oâ— can be showen nor any authenticall author iâ— former tyme that complayned or opposed himself against any such

Selected quad for the lemma: blood_n

Text snippets containing the quad