Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	world_n	write_v	writing_n	381	4	8.5306	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A53931	A treatise proving Scripture to be the rule of faith writ by Reginald Peacock ... before the Reformation, about the year MCDL.	Pecock, Reginald, 1395?-1460?; Wharton, Henry, 1664-1695.	1688 (1688)	Wing P1043; ESTC R1772	67,273	88

comyng and of his incarnacioun and of the cause whi he came And longe tyme minethis mygte suffice for to bringe the peple into consent and bileeve of these fewe Feithis Also scolers in ech kinde of scole schulden not be oppressid in the bigynnyng of ther scole with overmanye maters to be mynistrid to them at oonys or suddenli or oversoone And therfore a good while bi yeeris scolers in the scole of cristendoom herden peces mele the Feith prechid eer the hool summe and birden therof was delyvered to them bi writing And thus myche for answer to thi first questioun If it be trewe that Joon the Evangelist wrote his Gospel eer than it is seid that he wrote and so that he wrote his Gospel bifore his comyng from exile as therto may be hadde greet motyve bi the writyng is of Seynt Denis Areopagite bi cause Joon hadde writen his Gospels eer Denys wrote hise bookis Thanne answere to the secunde questioun may be this Right as what is necessarie to a comonute is to be purveid fore so what is waast and comberose and chargeose to a comonute is to be left of and to be avoidid And for as much as whanne Mathew Mark Luk and Joon haden writen the othere Apostlis sithen these writingis and sithen these writingis were sufficient to expresse the comyng of Crist the birth of Crist the lyvyng of Crist the teching of Crist and therfore the othere Apostlis wolden not as for the same maters combre the peplis wittis with eny more writingis therupon And that what oon Apostle or a Disciple wrote alle the othere Apostlis and Disciplis knewen We mowe take mark bi this that Petir in his Epistil the laste knowlechith that he wiste of Poulis writing and bi a greet liklihode he knewe what the othere writers wroten and bi as myche greet liklihood Poul wist what Petir wrote and what ech othere writer wrote and therfore he himsilf wrote noon Gospel but helde him content with the Gospels writen of othere Namelich siithen Luk was felowe to Poul in mych of alle Poulis labouris and therfore to Poul mygte not be straunge and unwist the writing of Luk. And also that it was not to Poul unknown it seemeth wel herbi For in the first Epistle to Corinthies the XI ch Poul rehercith the processe of Luk the XXII ch wel nyg word bi word And thus myche Sone for answere to thi II. questioun To thi III. questioun y answere thus The Apostlis knewe wee l as thei mygten wel knowe bi resoun that the writyng of oure general Feith wole serve like wele to peple of each cuntre as to peple of oon cuntre and thei wisten that the oon same writyng mygte and schulde renne from oon cuntre into anothere cuntre like as Poul in his Epistle to the Colociens biddith that thilk same Epistle schulde be radde to the peple which ben callid Laodocenses And therfore it was no nede to make to dyverse cuntrees dyverse writingis in this wise dyvers that thei schulden conceyve dyverse maters thoug the writing of oon and the same mater mygte be writen or translatid into dyverse langagis And thus is the III. questioun assoili● Fadir y perceyve wel hou ye hav declarid ful wel that what was taken to prove the seid II. premysse in the first principal argument is untrewe and therfore it is to be denyed But ye hav not answerid to the argumentis for the prof of it what was so taken in to the prof of the same seid II. premysse Therfore Fadir answere ye to them Sone the first argument bifore maad for prof of it what was taken to prove the seid II. premysse goith upon processis and textis of the oold Testament whiche prove no thing the entent whitherto thou bringist them in thine argument For whi tho textis wole no more than this that God wolde the oold Lawe and the oold Feith be leerned bi heering of word But certis herof folowith not that God wolde or meened it to be leerned so and in lyk maner sufficientli And therfore the textis hurten not myn entent neither thei proven the entent wherfore thou brougtist them forth into thin argument Also the contrarie that is to seie that God meened thilk leernyng bi word herd was not sufficient to the Clergie therynne and to the peple thanne apperith wel bi this that God bede the oold Lawe to be writen and forto so bidde had be yvel and in veyn if the teching and the leernyng of the same Lawe bi word oonli hadde be sufficient To the II. argument maad into the same entent y answere thus Thoug a fewe usagis and customes in monestaries mowe be born in mynde without writing hou schulde therof folowe that so long a tale as is the storie of the IV. Gospels mygte be born in mynde bi leerning of word without therof eny writing That this schulde folowe hath no colour and therfore thilk argument is ligt to be in this now seid maner answered and assioiled CAP. III. FAdir agens you metith this that the Feith which was in the beginning of the world and was contynued forth into the daies of Moyses was not writen For whi Moyses which was aftir the beginnyng of the world bi XX. hundrid yeeris wrote the book of Genesis and it is seid comounli he wrote it bi inspiracioun and bi such propheci wherbi thingis passid ben knowen above power to knowe them bi kinde and yitt thilke Feith was a long tale and a long storie as is opene be the book of Genesis with rehercels ful hard to mynde upon generaciouns of persoonys and upon the names of persoonys Wherfore it seemeth that as wel the stories of the Gospels mygte have be sufficientli taugt of the Apostlis and have be leerned of the othere Clergie and of the peple without writing Sone if thou or eny othere man ellis were sikir or hadde eny greet liklihood herto and gretter than to the contrarie that there was no writing of the Feith in the eldist tyme fro the bigynnyng of the world into the flood of Noe and fro thennes into the writing of Moyses thin argument were stronge But certis noon such sikirnes neither eny such liklihood to the contrarie is had For whi soon aftir the flood of Noe there was leernyng of the VII Sciencis and writing therof maad in II. pilers oon of brass and another of erthe and also in the same tyme there was leernyng and writing of Whicchecraft or of Nycromancie as the Maistir of Stories writith in the Chapiter of the Toure of Babel And if worldli men in that tyme were so bisi in worldli leernyng and writing it is not to be trowid but lyk bisi were summe of manye goostli men in leernyng and writing of goostli maters perteyning to the Feith and the servyce of God and to the eend wherto man was maad Wherfore it is more likli that in tho dais soone aftir the

for to understonde what he redith in the newe Testament though he not leerne the same Feith bi eny general Counseil or eny multitude of Clerkis tokider to be gaderid thoug peraventure he schal have nede at some while and in some textis of the seid Scripture seche to have expositioun hadde bi the eldist party of the Churche joyned to the Apostlis and lyvyng in tyme of the Apostlis as soschal be taugt in the book of Feith in Latyn and in the book of the Chirche Verily as y may trowe thoroug al the tyme of werre during these XL. yeer bitwixe Ynglond and Fraunce wiste y not scant III. or IV. men whiche wolden accorde thorug our in telling hou a toun or a castel was wonne in Fraunce or hou a batel was doon the though thilk men were holden rigt feithful men and trewe and thoug ech of them wolde habe swore that it was trewe what he tolde and that he was present and sawe it Wherfore bi all resoun in-lyk maner it wolde have be and was in dede of the report of the dedis and wordis of Christ eer thei were writen bi the Evangelistis And that in dede it was so therynne witnessith Luk in the prolog of his Gospel and seith that therfore he was movid for to write the Gospel which he wrote And so bi lyk skile for the same cause the othere Evangelistes gave them to writing Hou ever therfore mygte it have be wel and trewe of oure Feith if it schulde have come to us bi reporte of heering and bi mouth speking without therof the writing Also what that ever eny counseil of Clergie or eny Clergie without gadering into counseil techith as Feith even the Clergie referrith his so maad teching of Feith into holi Scripture And therfore needis the holi Scripture is more worthi ground for oure Feith than is the Clergie of the hool chirche on erthe And if thou wolt wite of what Scripture y meene ●ertis it is the writing of the oold Testament and of the newe Testament For it witnessith al the Feith or ellis at the lest wel nigh al the Feith which Crist sechith of us Yhe and the writing of the newe Testament confeermeth al the oold Testament in that that the writyng of the newe Testament referrith us oft into the writyng of the oold Testament as Matt. XXVI ch Mark XII and Mark XIV Johne I. Luke XXIV Johne V. XVII.XIX and XX. and in manye placis of the Epistlis of the newe Testament Ferthemore sone not oonli the writyng of the al hool Feith in the Gospels is so necessarie to the peple being a this side the Apostlis but also the same writyng maad and writen of the Apostlis were rigt necessarie as bi wey of kinde and of resoun to the same Apostlis that bi the writyng of the Apostlis whiche thei wroten thei himsilf migten holde in mynde the multitude of tho trouthis there writen And that bi recurse to be maad of them into the seid writyng left that therof the perfigt mynde schulde bi kinde falle away from them whilis thei were so moche in dyverse troublis occupied And so therfore ful opene it is that the writyng of oure Feith is more necessarie ground to us for oure Feith than is eny congregacioun of Clerkis biganne sithen the deeth of the Apostlis For answer to the Textis bifore alleggid of the oold Testament in the first argument it is to be seid that thoug bi tho Textis it is had fadris schulden teche bi mouth ther sones and ther sones sones the lawis of God and the benefits of God. Yitt bi tho Textis it is not hadde that thilk to be doone bi mouthe schulde have be sufficient teching to tho sones and sones sones without writing and therfore tho textis maken not into the entent into which the first argument them alleggith Namelich sithen in the processis of the same Textis it is had among that it is bede with al this that the fadris schulden teche ther sones bi mouthe it is had in the last of tho Textis that is to seie Deutron XI that tho same fadris and alle the peple schulde have Goddis lawis and Goddis benefeits in writing For whi it is seid there that thei schulden have tho lawis and benefits bifore ther igen And this is ynoug for answere to tho Textis More thing according to this answer and confeermyng it thou maist see soone in the booke of leernyng in thi vulgar tunge But thanne fadir if it was so necessarie writyng to be had upon Christen Feith whi was writyng of oure Feith so long tyme deferrid eer it was maad by the Apostlis as that Matthew wrote his Gospel in the VII peer aftir Cristis ascencioun and Mark wrote in the X. yere aftir Cristis ascencioun as may be had bi croniclis of Martyn and Luk wrote aftir othere writers of the Gospelis as he seith him silf in the prolog of his Gospel And Jon wrote aftir alle the othere as manye men trowen Also whi wrote not ech Apostle as wel as summe Also whi wroten not thei to ech Cuntre Sone answer to thi first questioun may be this Our Lord is wisist and he is for to lede us into oure kunnyng to be had in profitabilist maner alwey rediest And for as myche as peple to know bi experience hou necessarie it was to them for to have their Feith writen was to them more profitable than for to knowe it without experience therfore God so schope that the Feith schulde bi a notable time be prechid oonli bi word to the peple that thei mygten therbi take experience that preching of the al hool Feith bi word oonli were not sufficient without therof the writyng and thanne that therfore the peple schulde desire to have the Feith writen and the Apostlis schulden se the same treuthe bi experience and schulden consente for to write to the peple the same Feith which bifore bi parcellis thei prechiden bi word An othere cause mygte have be this A preciouse thing whanne it is ligtli and soone gotten without long bifore goyng desrie to have it schal be the lesse sette bi whanne it is receyved For as myche as the writyng conteyning oure al hool Feith is preciose and ougte not be sette litil bi neither be feyntli and unworthili receyved therfore God so schope that it was long of the peple desirid eer thei it receyveden as for lyk skile God differreth ful holi mennys boonys for that bither long desiring and priyng and abiding aftir it thei schulden the more joie have and the more thanke God whanne thei it receyveden An othere cause rennyng herwith mygte be that the Apostlis hadden not grettist leisers for persecuciouns that thei mygten anoon in the bigynnyng have writen and peraventure longe tyme in the biginnyng the Apostlis prechiden not neither mynystriden to the peple but a fewe articles of Feith as were these of Crists