Selected quad for the lemma: city_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
city_n	bishop_n	church_n	rome_n	9,289	5	7.3911	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A20303	A sparing restraint, of many lauishe vntruthes, which M. Doctor Harding do the chalenge, in the first article of my Lorde of Sarisburies replie. By Edward Dering student in Diuinitie. With an answere vnto that long, and vncourteous epistle, entituled to M. Juel, and set before M. Hardings Reioinder	Dering, Edward, 1540?-1576.	1568 (1568)	STC 6725; ESTC S108150	240,683	364

denieth that councell to be general bicause there was not gathered together I know not how many Bishops out of christendome But if M. Harding had marked it better he should haue knowne it well inough that general might be applied onely to those twelue which he saithe were there gathered together If they did all well agrée sure that councell was more generall than their Chapter of Trident. If he will force the worde Oecumenicall there is no Counsell that euer was so generall If he will any thing restraine it why may he not bring it downe yea euen to twelue This vntruthe is but a cauil and if it were graunted yet were M. Harding neuer the neare his priuate Masse But bicause he saith so constantly that that Counsell was but of .xij. Bishops in Spaine as Peter Crab also noteth out of Isidorus it is more I thinke than he is able to proue for it is knowne that the Churche of Caesar Augusta Asturica Augusta an other Citie in Spaine and Emerica Augusta a Citie in Portingall ioyned in al matters and were of one felowship so that counsaile of the other xij Bishops had more ouer the consent of their great Cities This Caesar Augusta it self otherwise called Numantia was so populous a Citie that it kept war .xiiij. yeare with the Empire of Rome It was a Citie of so muche worthinesse for religion that what so euer had bene determined there the consent might well haue bene called generall Prudentius dothe séeme to glory that it was his Countrey In the time of Dioclesian and Valerian a great many of Martyrs were there put to death This is a very pore wrangling when sundry forain Bishops met in suche a Citie to denie their Decrées to be agréed on in generall Counsell The B. of Saris. He saith the thing that we receiue is no bread but so Tertullian saith not His words be these thy husbande will thinke it only bread and not that bread that it is called Harding The .116 vntruthe I say it not loke better on my words The .117 vntruthe These are not Tertullians words Dering If looking better on M. Hardings words wil helpe the mater we will not let for that Marke good Reader and loke diligently these are his wordes The thing reuerently and deuoutly receiued before other meates is not bread as the infidels then and the Sacramentaries now beléeue Looke well good reader and for M. Hardings pleasure looke againe doeth he not say it is not bread How is this then vntrue Nowe must I desire thée againe to loke diligently and if thou mark well thou shalt now heare of suche a distinction as in all this booke of distinctions there is none suche I say saithe maister Harding it is not bread I say not it is no bread there is great difference betwéene not bread and no bread Sure if thou looke not maruellous narowly thou wilt neuer vnderstand this distinction For my parte I would surely haue said it that which was not bread had bene no bread and that which was no bread had sure bene not bread and if it were not bread it could not be any bread and if it wer some bread then were it not no bread But let not bread be some bread and no bread be not bread and nothing be not any thing and not any thing be some thing As touching maister Iuell that good simple Bishop I dare sweare for him he neuer knewe of this distinction and so he is wrongfully charged with this vntruthe Yet least maister Harding shoulde please him selfe too well I must forwarne him that I can not alow well of this distinction If he be well aduised this is a Logike rule Aientia negantia acerrime inter se pugnant No things are so contrary as the affirming and denyall of the same thing But panis non panis bread not bread are contradictorie not panis nullus panis bread no bread Therefore maister Hardings saying that no bread dothe signifie more than not bread may séeme to haue no Logike and to speake not very wisely And sure I muse how he could be ouerséene in this considering the substaunce of it is in supposition about which his friendes haue wasted many good houres If he haue forgotten their Doctrine let him remember the verse Particulare prius facit o generale secundum But it may be that maister Harding and his friendes as they haue straunge deuises so they goe about to make newe Logike no doubt they are at some conspiracie For maister Nicholas Saunders whome his friendes thinke some body maketh this very distinction in his fourth booke of the Sacrament and with this common conceite of not bread and no bread would faine haue an vntruthe against maister Iuell And is it possible that these men should agrée in so great a folye if they laid not their heades together Well God be thanked their generall councels conclude very vnwisely Now resteth this other vntruthe about Tertullians wordes which as maister Harding saith are falsified bicause breade is not in the latter ende of the sentence as master Iuell doeth alleage them Tertullians wordes are these Non sciet maritus quid secreto ante omnes cibum gustes si scierit panem non illum credet esse qui dicitur Héere saithe maister Harding illum must not be referred to panem and thereupon he quoteth his vntruthe Euen as he did before for want of Logike so it may be thought he doeth héere through want of Latine Illum saith he is not referred to panem and yet the Grammarian saith the adiectiue must be alway referred to a substantiue except it be put substantiuely in the Neutre gender Now if master Harding can not make illum the Neuter gender nor yet finde any other substantiue in the sentence than panem then his Grammer hath as euill hap as his Logike and this is no vntruthe The B. of Saris. The translating illum him meaneth that it was the very person of a man which the woman had in hir hand Harding The .118 vntruthe It was the person of Christ God and man Dering What meaneth M. Harding to wrangle When M. Iuel saithe he meaneth the persone of a man to be in the fourme of bread can M. Harding vnderstand it of a mortall man Or is the controuersie betwene vs whether in the sacrament be any earthly mannes body If M. Harding would haue let scape this vntruthe no man would haue gathered this absurd sense of M. Iuels saying And yet if we would examine it what manner of vntruth is this where it is said it is a mans body to note it as vntrue and say it is Christes body bothe God and man If it be so yet is it a mannes body vnlesse we deny our sauior Christ to be perfect man suche vntruthes are sone answered The B. of Saris. The story that S. Cyprian reporteth as it sheweth the maner of keping the Sacrament so it seemeth also to shew that

of heauen gate Vrbanus saith that the sentence of a Bishop is greatly to be feared yea though he 〈◊〉 wrongfully and so consequently would mak● God an vnrighteous Iudge that should ratifie an vniust sentence Such wicked doctrine these epistles doe conteine so vnlearnedly they be written so vnwisely the same words are fathered vpon diuerse men and which is a sure token that they be coūterfet they are not mencioned by any aūcient writers Yet saith Maister Harding these Epistles are authentical But let him say so still As that saying is vntrue so this vntruthe is impudent where he saith that Gracian doeth not witnesse that these Epistles haue ben doubted on The B. of Saris. The decretall epistles manifestly depraue and abuse the scriptures Harding The .140 vntruthe They doe not so Dering Now M. Harding is in his biasse He makes vntruthes at auenture and for want of good proofe he falls to railing This pelfe saith he may serue for your pulpit when you want better stuffe This to disproue y e decretall epistles is to minister like But thus to stand rayling when one hath no reason is to like a Louanist More modest behauiour in so meane learning would better stand with honestie This vntruth is sufficiently proued before The B. of Saris. Anacletus commaundeth that all bishops once in the yeare do visit the entrie of S. Peters church in Rome which they call limina Petri. Harding The .141 vntruth He commaundeth no such thing concerning Peters Church Dering This vntruth doeth rise vpon these wordes limina Petri whether they signified Peters church For Maister Harding graunteth that now they signifie the Church but then they signified his graue Here it were reason before we beleue him he should tell vs how long limina Petri did signifie the buriall place and when it left his graue and became the name of his church who gaue it to the graue and who toke it from it Undouted proues must be had for so incredible a matter It is a straunge case for things to lose their names and if it be done as sometime it chaunceth it is by the cōsent of whole coūtries regestred by diuers authors If in this case we sée like authoritie we will alow the better of M. Hardings saying Graues as it may be thought were neuer called so churches had that name long before Peters time Religiosa deorum limina saith Virgill the holy temples of the Gods Calixtus the Pope saith Ecclesiastica limina meaning the church Hereby it appeareth that limina Petri was Peters Church And Nauclerus writing of Totilas more than a thousand yeare agon saith Cum ad beati Petri limina peruenisset meaning when he came to Peters Church Now let Maister Harding shew that it signified the graue ere he require credit Yet what if it did so Is it not al one superstition to visit y e graues of godly men to visit their temples Is either of both commaunded by the Lord God In this vntruth Maister Harding sheweth little matter against Maister Iuel and lesse good diuinitie in him selfe The B. of Saris. Fabianus writeth of the comming of Nouatus into Italie And it is clere by S. Cyprian and by Eusebius that Nouatus came first into Italie in the time of Cornelius which was next after him Harding The .142 vntruth It is not cleare Dering To an Owles eyes the clere Sunne bringeth darkenesse to one that will not vnderstand there is no sentence plain When God shal open Maister Hardings eies he wil then sée better These are Cyprians wordes vnto Cornelius speaking of Nouatus A te illinc prohibitū ab ecclesia cum venisset c. Of thee he was forbidden the Church when he came c. And it foloweth with such spirite as became a Bishoppe whereby it appeareth he was then also Bishop What can be sayd more plaine It foloweth further Cum animaduertis●em te minis atque terroribus eorum qui venerant esse commotum c. Whē I perceiued that thou weart moued with the feares and threatnings of those that came with him Then belike Cornelius was there before And Eusebius speaketh at the same time of Cornelius and calleth him Vrbis Romae Episcopus the Bishop of the citie of Rome and this also appeareth by Sozomenus that the first conflict of Nouatus was with Cornelius Therefore Maister Harding might easely haue séene this had not eyther his eies ben anointed or he disposed to wrangle The B ▪ of Saris. Neither S. Ierome nor Gennadius nor Damasus euer made any mention either of such epistles or of any such decrees Harding The .143 vntruth Damasus maketh expresse mention of such decrees Dering This is an expresse vntruth as many other are which Maister Harding frameth Damasus doeth speake of certaine decrées which were made by these Popes and that we may easely graunt but that he mencioneth these epistles or reciteth the decrées in those wordes that is not shewed And it may easely be that he who made these epistles would gather some decrées founde in other bookes This is a small proufe againste so many manifest arguments The B. of Saris. By Soters decree it is lawfull to say Masse hauing onely two in his companie Harding The .144 vntruth This decree speaketh not of companie present but of two to make aunsvvere Dering There is belike some subtile distinction in this vntruth For as the wordes lye they are somewhat obscure Of this I am sure seing Maister Iuel saith that Soters decrée requireth only the companie of two and Maister Harding sayth it requireth two to make aunswere if it may any way be proued that they that aunswere the Priest be in his companie then this vntruth is sone discharged As touching Soters owne decrée the words are plaine that no man shall say Masse without two persōs and to take away this cauill about two to aunswere and to verifie Maister Iuels wordes the title of the decrée is this Except he haue two presēt let no Priest presume to say Masse Now what néedeth this wrangling about the aunswering if there be two present they must nedes aunswere The B. of Saris. S. Augustine and S. Ierome haue recouered that that the people of Rome euen in their time vsed to receiue the Communion together euery day Harding The .145 vntruth Saint Augustine and Saint Ierome doe not report so Dering This vntruth hath ben made now thrée times by Maister Harding It is the .83 the .133 this the third Augustine saith some receiue euery day some certaine dayes Ierome saith the like Reade the place thou shalt not be deceiued Read more of this vntruth in the places alleaged The 83. .133 vntruthes .155 vntruth The B. of Saris. This word solennia which is here vsed semeth to import a solemne companie or resort of the people And yet this Soter requiring to this action onely the companie of thre persons neuerthelesse calleth it Missarum solennia Harding The .146

Romains was written about the beginning of the raigne of Nero and the yeare of our Lorde .56 at which time Peter was not at Rome as may be proued aboue all gesses and coniectures out of the worde of God First he saluteth diuers by name and yet he speaketh not of Peter a sure profe that Peter was not at Rome Againe he saluteth Andronicus and Iunia with this especial note which are notable among the Apostles and were in Christ afore me How muche more occasion had Paule thus to salute and commende Peter whome he calleth other where a piller of the Church and who was not only before Paule but before all men sauing Andrew his brother called to be a disciple Nothing may be here answered but that only which is true Peter was not at Rome If these reasons seme not strong inoughe then good Reader loke in the .15 to the Romaines thou shalt haue an other which by no meanes may be shifted off Thus he wryteth I enforced my self to preache the gosple not where Christ was named least I should haue built vpon an other mannes foundation but as it is vvritten to vvhome he vvas not spoken of they shall see him and they that heard not shall vnderstande him Then he addeth therefore also I haue bene oft let to come vnto you by which words it is manifest they had but weake maintenaunce of their faith and the true Disciples had no long continuaunce among them But how could this be if Peter were .25 yeare Bishop there Again he saluteth the houshold of Narcissus which Narcissus saith Ambrose vvas Presbiter eius ecclesiae a chiefe ruler in that churche and hovv coulde Paule here haue forgotten Peter being Archpresbiter the chiefe of all rulers and Pope himselfe Thus are vve past .xj. yeare of this Bishoprike and yet vve can not once finde S. Peter in his diocesse In the yeare of our Lord .58 and the seconde of Nero Paule commeth to Rome and then Peter is not at Rome as appeareth by this saying of the Scripture vvhere the chiefe of the Ievves in Rome speake thus vnto Paule We vvill heare of thee vvhat thou thinkest for as concerning this secte vve knovve that euery vvhere it is spoken againste Then vvhen Paule had preached vnto them and some beleued and some beleued not The text saith vvhen he had said these the Ievves departed and had great reasoning among them selues Is it possible that Peter should now haue bene thirtene yeare bishop and yet the chiefe of the Ievves that vvere there vvhen Paule came had scarce any vnderstanding of Christ ▪ They may beleue it that vvill nedes be deceiued Tvvo yeare after this vntill the yeare of our Lorde 60. the fourthe of Nero Paule abideth in Rome All vvhich while vndoubtedly Peter came not once there as may plain appeare if thou reade the Epistles vvhich Paule vvrote in Rome To the Galathians he speaketh muche of Peter and of his conuersation vvith him about tvventy yeares paste but of his present being at Rome not one vvorde and yet he speaketh of him to this purpose to get the more credite vnto himselfe vvhy then doeth he not name him as novve present vvith him In like case vvryting to the Philippians he beginneth his Epistle thus Paule and Timothie vvhy coulde he not heere haue begon Paule and Peter Nay what folly vvas it to bring Peters testimonie many yeares past vvhich novv might be doubted of vvhen he might haue had his present and most certaine vvitnesse vvith subscription of his ovvne hande to confirme his doctrine Againe he vvryteth thus vnto the Philippians that many brethren in the Lord vvere boldned through his bandes and durste frankely speake the worde if bandes would haue made them faithfull no doubt Peter had long before confirmed them surely he would not haue shronke neither for chaines nor prisones It is his owne doctrine that heere vnto we are called he coulde not so sone haue forgotten his owne good councell Againe Paule wryteth he had no man like minded as Timothy was how coulde this be if Peter had bene there Againe he wryteth he had only Aristarchus his prisone felow sure Peter would haue bene in prisone too if he had bene in Rome Againe Marke and Iustus are onely my felow workers and shall we thinke that Peter was now bishop yet would not helpe Paule in preaching Read ouer all Paules Epistles written in Rome and if the spirite of truthe be within thee thou wilt say Peter was not in Rome yet now he shoulde haue bene euen in the floure of his bishoprike Nowe are there only lefte ten yeares behinde in which likewise it shall appeare whether Peter were in Rome At the latter ende of this ten yeare Anno Domini .7d Neronis .14 Paule commeth againe to Rome and is againe imprisonned whence he wryteth his seconde Epistle to Timothie as Ierome and Eusebius and diuers other doe thinke Then Peter is not in Rome Only Luke is vvith me saith S. Paule if this be true vvhere then vvas Peter Shall vve thynke he vvoulde not once see Paule a prisonner Againe at my first aunswering no man assisted me but all forsoke me O vnthankefull vvretches and deseruing yll of Peter that vvoulde novve thinke Peter vvere Bishoppe But heere are nowe nine yeares in the meane season in vvhich it is sone proued Peter coulde be no bishop Paule reioysed that he had escaped out of the hands of Nero. But what needed he if that Peter could set quietly bishop Seneca wryteth secretely epistles vnto Paule and Paule vnto Seneca but neuer a worde of Peter Nero made proclamation that no man shoulde speake either to Christian or to Iewe and howe coulde then Peter be bishop Nero when he had set the Citie on fire in the .9 yeare of his raigne to auoid the enuye of so great a mischiefe he layde all the fault vpon the Christians whereof Tacitus that wicked heathen wryteth thus Repressa in praes●ns exitiabilis supersticio rursus ●rump●bat That wicked superstition that was now well repressed sprang vp againe But is it like if Peter had bene then bishop that christianitie shoulde haue bene so quenched that no man did scarce remember it But be it that all this were true let Peter become vnfaithfull let him forget to professe Christ and feede his flocke were he neuer so vnthankfull yet sure he coulde not be then bishop of Rome For in the .10 yeare of his raigne Nero made suche great persecution of all Christians that in no place they coulde be sure but euery where were drawne forthe vnto moste shamefull deathes and this persecution continued .4 yeares without intermission and how vvas Peter then a bishop They had beastes skinnes put vpon them and then were weryed with dogges they laide them on heapes and burnt them to giue light in the night time they hong them vp quicke vpon gibbets they practised all kinde of