Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	apostle_n	church_n	word_n	1,489	5	3.9514	3	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A68658	A brief declaracion of the Lordes Supper, written by the syngular learned man, and most constaunt martir of Iesus Christ, Nicholas Ridley Bishop of London prisoner in Oxforde, a litel before he suffred deathe for the true testimonie of Christ	Ridley, Nicholas, 1500?-1555.	1555 (1555)	STC 21046; ESTC S115973	31,702	80

meat but not to open oysters This similitude serueth but for this purpose to declare y e nature of speche withall wher as the thing that is demonstrated and shewed is euidently perceaued and openly knowen to the eie But O good Loord what a wonderfull thing is it to see how som meÌ„ doo labour to teache what is demonstrated and shewed by the pronowne demonstratyue this in Christes wordes whan he sayeth This is my body This is my blood how they labour I saye to teache what that this was than in dede whaÌ„ Christ spake in the begynnyng of the sentence the worde this before he hade pronounced the rest of the wordes that folowed in the same sentence so that their doctrine maye agree with their Transubstanciacion which in dede is the very fouÌ„dacion wherin al their erroneous doctrine dothe stande And here the Transubstanciatours doo not agree amoÌ„g them selues no more than they doo in the wordes which wrought the Transubstanciacion whan Christ did furst institute his Sacrament Wherin Innocentius a bishop of Rome of the later dayes and Duns as was noted before doo attribute the worke vnto the worde Benedixit Blessed but the rest for the most parte to Hoc est corpus meum This is my body c. Duns therfore w t his secte bicause he putteth the chauÌ„ge before must nedes saye y t this whan Christ spake it in the begynnyng of the sentence was in dede Christes body For in the chaunge the substaunce of bread did departe and the chaunge was now done in Benedixit sayeth he that went before and therfore after hym and his that this was than in dede Christes body though y e worde did not importe so much but only one thing in substaunce which substaunce after Duns the bread being gone must nedes be the substaunce of Christes body But they that put their TraÌ„substanciacion to be wrought by these wordes of Christ This is my body and doo saye that whan the hole sentence was finished than this chauÌ„ge was perfected and not before they caÌ„not saye but yet Christes this in the begynnyng of the sentence before the other wordes were fully pronounced was bread in dede But as yet y e chaunge was not done so long the bread must nedes remayne and so long w t the vniuersal coÌ„sent of al transubstauÌ„ciatours the naturall substaunce of Christes body can not come and therfore must their this of necessite demoÌ„strate shewe the substaunce which was as yet in the pronouÌ„ceing of the furst worde this byChrist but bread But how can they make and verifie Christes wordes to be true demonstrating the substaunce which in the demonstracion is but bread and saye therof This is my body y t is as they saye the natural substaunce of Christes body except they wold saye that y e verbe is signifieth is made or is chaunged in to And so thaÌ„ if the same verbe is be of y e same effecte in Christes wordes spoken vpoÌ„ the cuppe and rehearsed by Luke Paule the cuppe or the wyne in the cuppe must be made or turned in to the newe testameÌ„t as was declared before Ther be som among the Transubstanciatours which walke so wylylie and so warely betwene these two aforesaid opiniones allowing them bothe and holding playnly nother of them bothe that me thynkes they may be called Neutralles Ambodexters or rather suche as can shifte on bothe sydes They plaie on bothe partes For with the later they do allowe the doctrine of the last sillable which is that transubstanciacion is done by myracle in an instaunt at y e sounde of the last sillable um in this sentence Hoc est corpus meum And they doo alowe also Duns his fantastical imaginacioÌ„ of Indiuiduum vagum that demoÌ„strateth as he teacheth in Christes wordes one thing in substaunce than being after his mynde the substaunce of the body of Christ. A maruailous thing how any maÌ„ can agree with bothe these two they being so coÌ„trarie the one to the other For the one sayeth the worde this demonstrateth the substauÌ„ce of bread and the other sayeth no not so the bread is gone and it demonstrateth a substaunce which is Christes body Tushe sayeth this thrid man ye vnderstaÌ„de nothing at al. They agree wel ynough in the chief poynt which is the grounde of al that is bothe do agree and beare witnesse that ther is transubstanciacion They do agree in dede in that conclusion I graunt But their processe and doctrine therof do eueÌ„ aswel agree together as did y e false witnesse before Annas and Caiphas agaiÌ„st Christ or the two wicked iudges against SusaÌ„na For against Christ the false witnesses did agre no doubt to speake all against hym And the wicked iudges were bothe agreed to condemne poore Susanna but in examinacion of their witnesses they dissented so farre that all was founde false y t they went about both y t wher in they agreed also those thinges which they brought for their proues Thus muche haue I spoken in searching out a solucion for this principal questioÌ„ which was what is the material substaunce of the holy Sacrament in the Lordes supper Now least I shoulde seme to set by myne owne conceate more than is mete or lesse to regarde the doctrine of the olde ecclesiastical wrytours than is conuenient for a man of my poore learning and simple wytte for to doo And bicause also I am in dede persuaded y t the olde ecclesiasticall wrytours vnderstode the true meanyng of Christ in this mater and haue bothe so truly and so playnly set it furthe in certayn places of their wrytinges that no maÌ„ which will vouchesafe to reade them and without preiudice of a corrupte iudgement wil indifferently weighe theÌ„ coÌ„strue their myndes non other wise than they declare them selues to haue ment I am persuaded I saye that in reading of them thus no man can be ignoraunt in this mater but he that will shutte vp his owne eies and blyndfelde hym selfe Whan I speake of ecclesiastical wrytours I meane of suche as were before the wicked vsurpacioÌ„ of the sea of Rome was groweÌ„ so vnmeasurably great that not only with tyrannical power but also with corrupte doctrine it beganne to subuerte Christes gospel to turne the state that Christ his apostles set in y e church vpside downe For the causes aforesaid I wil rehearse certayn of their sayenges and yet bicause I take them but for wytnesses and expouÌ„ders of this doctrine and not as the autors of the same and also for that now I wil not be tedious I will rehearse but fewe y t is three olde writours of the Greke churche and other three of the Latine churche which doo seme vnto me to be in this mater most playne The Greke autors are Origene Chrisostome and Theodoret. The Latyne are Tertulliane S. Augustine and Gelasius I knowe ther can be nothing spoken so playnly but y e craftye witte furnished with eloquence can

reuealed the spirituall and godly exposicion vnto S. Augustine But I haue taried longer in setting furthe y e forme of Christes wordes vpon the Lordes cuppe written by Paule and Luke than I did inteÌ„de to do And yet in speaking of the forme of Christes wordes spoken vpon his cuppe cometh now to my remebrauÌ„ce the forme of wordes vsed in the latine Masse vpon the Lordes cuppe Wherof I doo not a litell maruaile what shoulde be the cause seing the latine Masse agreeth with the euangelistes and Paule in the forme of wordes sayed vpon the bread why in the wordes sayed vpon the Lordes cuppe it diffreth from them all yea and addeth to the wordes of Christ spoken vpon the cuppe these wordes Misterium fidei that is the mysterie of faith which ar not redde to be attributed vnto the sacrament of Christes blood nother in the euangelistes nor in Paule nor so farre as I knowe in any other place of holy scripture yea and if it maye haue som good exposicion yet why it should not be aswell added vnto the wordes of Christ vpon his breade as vpon his cuppe surely I doo not see y e mysterie And bicause I see in the vse of the latine masse the sacrament of y e blood abused whan it is denyed vnto the laye people cleane contrary vnto Goddes most certain worde for why I doo beseche the should the sacrameÌ„t of Christes blood be denyed vnto the lay christiaÌ„ more thaÌ„ to y e priest Did not Christ sheade his blood aswell for y e laye godly maÌ„ as for y e godly priest If thow wilt saye yeas that he did so But yet y e sacrameÌ„t of the blood is not to be receaued without the offring vp sacrificeing therof vnto God the father bothe for the quicke and for the dead and no man maye make oblacion of Christes blood vnto God but a priest and therfore the priest alone that but in his Masse only maye receaue the sacrament of the blood And call you this Maisters Misterium fidei Alas alas I feare me this is before God Misterium iniquitatis the misterie of iniquitie suche as S. Paule speaketh of in his epistle to the Thessalonians The Lorde be mercifull vnto vs and blesse vs lighten his countenaunce vpon vs and be mercifull vnto vs. That we may knowe thy waye vpon earthe and among all people thy saluacion This kynde of oblacion standeth vponTransubstanciacion his cousyn germayne and they doo growe bothe vpoÌ„ one grouÌ„de The lord wede it out of his vineyard shortly if it be his blessed wil pleasure y e bitter roote To speake of this oblacioÌ„ how muche is it iniurious vnto Christes passion How it can not but with highe blasphemye and haynous arrogauncie intolerable pryde be claimed of any man other than of Christ hym self how much and how playnly it repugneth vnto the manifest wordes the true sense and meaning of holy scripture in many places especially in the epistle to the Hebrues the mater is so long and other haue written in it at large that my mynde is nowe not to intreate therof any further For onlye in this my scribling I intende to search out and set furth by the scriptures according to Goddes gracious gifte of my poore knowlage whether the true sense and meaniÌ„g of Christes wordes in y e institucioÌ„ of his holy supper do requyre any TraÌ„substaÌ„ciacioÌ„ as they cal it or that the very substauÌ„ce of bread and wyne doo remayne still in the Lordes supper and be the material substaunce of the holy Sacrament of Christ our saueours blessed body and blood Yet ther remayneth one vayne Quidditie of Duns in this mater y t which bicause some that write now doo seme to like it so well that they haue strypped him out of Dunces dustye and darke termes and pricked hym and paynted hym in freshe colours of an eloquent stile may therfore deceaue the more except the errour be warely eschued Duns sayeth in these wordes of Christ This is my body this pronowne demonstratyue meanyng the worde this if ye will knowe what it dothe shewe or demonstrate whether y e bread that Christ toke or no he answereth no but only one thing in substaunce it poynteth wherof the nature or name it dothe not tell but leaueth that to be determyned and tolde by that which foloweth y e worde is that is by Praedicatum as the logician dothe speake and therfore he calleth this pronowne demonstratiue This Indiuiduum Vagum that is a waÌ„dring propre name wherby we maye poynt out and shewe any one thing in substaunce what thing so euer it be That this ymaginacion is vayne and vntruly applyed vnto these wordes of Christ This is my body it may appeare plainly in y e wordes of Luke and Paule sayed vpon the cuppe coÌ„ferred with y e forme of wordes spokeÌ„ vpoÌ„ y e cuppe in Mathewe and Marke For as vpoÌ„ the bread it is sayed of al This is my body so of Matthewe and Marke it is sayed of the cuppe This is my blood Than if in the wordes This is my body the worde this be as Duns calleth it a waÌ„dring name to appoynt and shewe furthe any one thing wherof the name and nature it dothe not tell so must it be likewyse in those wordes of Matthewe and Marke vpon the Lordes cuppe This is my blood But in the wordes of Matthewe and Marke it signifieth and poynteth out y e same that it dothe in the Lordes wordes vpon the cuppe in Luke and Paule wher it is sayd This cuppe is the newe testament in my blood c. Therfore in Matthewe Marke the ê“nowne demonstratyue this dothe not wandre to poynt only one thing in substaunce not shewing what it is but telleth it plainlie what it is no lesse in Mathewe and Marke vnto the eie than is done in Luke and Paule by puttiÌ„g to this worde cuppe bothe vnto the eie and vnto the eare For taking the cuppe and demoÌ„strating or shewing it vnto his disciples by this ê“nowne demonstratiue this and sayeng vnto them Drinke ye all of this it was than al one to say This is my blood as to saye This cuppe is my blood meanyng by the cuppe as the nature of the speche dothe require the thing conteyned in the cuppe So likewise without all doubt whan Christ hade taken bread geuen thankes and broken it and giuing it to his disciples sayed Take and so demonstrating and shewing that bread which he hade in his handes to saye than This is my body to haue saied This bread is my body As it were all one if a man lacking a knyfe goiÌ„g to his oisters wold say vnto an other whoÌ„ he sawe to haue two kniues Sir I praye you lende me the one of your knyues Were it not now all one to answer hym Sir holde I will lende you this to eate your meate but not to open oysters withall and holde I will lende you this knyfe to eate your

shall not euer haue me with you For as coÌ„cernyng the preseÌ„ce of his fleshe the churche hade hym but a fewe dayes now it holdeth hym by faithe though it see hym not Thus muche S. Augustine speaketh repeting one thing so often and al to declare and teache how we should vnderstande the maner of Christes being here with vs which is by his grace by his prouidence by his diuine nature and how he is absent by his natural body which was borne of the virgin Mary died and roose for vs is ascended in to heauen and ther sitteth as is in the articles of our faithe on the right hande of God thence from non other place sayeth S. Augustine he shall com on the later daye to iudge y e quycke the dead At y e which daye the righteous shall than lifte vp their heades and the light of Goddes truthe shall so shyne that falshead and errours shalbe put in to perpetual confusion righteousnesse shal haue the vpperhande and truthe that daye shal beare awaye y e victorie al thenemies therof quyte ouerthrowne to be troden vnder foote for euermore O Lorde Lorde I beseche the hasten this daye than shalt thow be glorified with the glorie due vnto thy holy name and vnto thy diuine maiestie and we shal syng vnto thee in al ioye and felicitie laude and praise for euer more Amen Here now wold I make an ende For me thinkes S. Augustine is in this mater so full and playne and of that autoritie that it should not nede after this his declaracion being so firmely grounded vpon Goddes worde and so well agreing with the other auncient autors to bring in for the coÌ„firmacion of this mater any moo and yet I sayed I wolde allege three of the latin churche to testifie the truthe in this cause Now therfore y e last of all shalbe Gelasius which was a bishop of Rome but one that was bishop of that sea before y e wicked vsurpacion and tyrannye therof spredde burst out abrode in to all the worlde For this man was before Bonifacius yea and Gregorie the furst in whose dayes bothe corruption of doctrine and tirannical vsurpacion did chiefly growe and hade the vpperhande Gelasius in an epistle of the twoo natures of Christ Contra Eutichen writeth thus The sacramentes of the body and blood of Christ which we receaue are godly thinges wherby and by the same we are made partakers of the diuine nature and yet neuerthelesse the substaunce or nature of the bread wyne dothe not departe nor go awaye Note these wordes I beseche you and considre whether any thing can be more playnly spoken than these wordes be agaynst the errour of traÌ„substanciacion which is the grouÌ„de and bitter roote wherupon spring all the horrible errours before rehearsed Wherfore seing that y e falshead dothe appeare so manifestly and by so many wayes so playnly so clearlye and so fully that no maÌ„ nedeth to be deceaued but he that will not see or will not vnderstande Let vs all that doo loue the truthe embrace it forsake the falsehead For he that loueth the truthe is of God and the lacke of the loue therof is the cause why God suffreth men to fall in to errours and to perishe therin yea and as S. Paule sayeth why he seÌ„deth vnto them illusiones y t they beleue lies vnto their owne condemnacion bicause sayeth he they loued not the truthe This truthe no doubt is Goddes worde For Christ hym selfe sayeth vnto his father Thy worde is truthe The loue and light wher of almightie God our heauenly father geue vs lyghten it in our heartes by his holy spirite through Iesus Christ our Lorde Amen Vincit Veritas The. blessed martirs prayer Note Math. 2â— Mar. 14. Luce. 22. â— Cor. 11. Note what it is to lye The slauÌ„derous lies of the papistes wherin the controuersy consisteth Answer to the chief question ArgumeÌ„t Maâ— â–ª Antho. const Gardiner Act. 2.20 The. 2. reason The. 3. ArgumeÌ„t The papistes affirme they wotte not what Gardiner to the 48. obiection Petre and Paule had no such priesthode as the papistes haue Note well the Papistes errour confuted Aug. De Doc. christiana li. 3. ca. 16. Gardiner in his answers to the 161. 22â— obiection Note The Lordes cuppe as the priestes say 2. Thess. 2. Prayer Psal. 67. The masse sacrifice iniurious to Christes passioÌ„ Hebr. 9.10 Gardiner in the answer to the. 15. obiection Gard. to the. 13. obiection God makers agree not among them selues Gardiner a Neutral or Iacke of bothe Sydes Gard. to the. 84 obiection Godmakers agree against the truthe Note The consent of the olde autors Origene Eccl. Hist. Li. 6. ca. 3 The papistes obiection against Origene An other obiection Gard. to the. 166 â–ª Gard. in the same place Li. 3. ca. â—6 Chrisosto In opere imperfecto ho. 11. in Matth. Gardi to the â—98 obiection Gard. in the same place Gard. to the 201. obiection Theodores Dial â— D. More man in the conuocacion house Distinc. ca 4. Statuimus Tertullian â–ª Gard. to the .16 obiection Augustine Question â–ª 57. Cap. 13. Contra Maximinum li. ca. 2â— Gelasius Io. 17.

Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Text snippets containing the quad