Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	day_n	time_n	year_n	9,302	5	4.9795	4	true

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

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

Vdal to insringe his solutions which giueth me iust cause to suspect that he is with the preconceipted sincerity of his owne doctors carryed away into error and so looketh little into the Originals which if he did he could not but finde that which he pretendeth to seeke for if he shutte not his eies against the truth as he professeth he will not VVhich that he may doe I shall not forgett to coÌ„mend him to his mercy who desireth not the death of a sinner but that all should com to the knowledg of his name But yf it shall sal out that he will stil proceede forward in his fourmer course yet I would wishe him in writinge to abstayne from all biting and bitter words which somtyme he breaketh into that the quarrell of God may not he prosecuted like the quarrels of this world but with that modesty which becometh the prosessors of diuinity and religion And for my part sory I am that Bell hath so far giuen the raynes to his passion as with such virulent termes and insupportable insolency to cast forth his gantlet of defiance and to insult against the whole Church of God which hath made my stile before in the Preface more stirring and quicke then otherwise I would or thought conuenient least we might be condemned of cowardize or seare to the preiudice of truth which so often and so opprobriously he obiecteth against vs. Thus much of these matters now it remaineth to encounter Bell and to examin and make triall what substantiall stuffe is contayned in his Triall of the newe religion B. C. BELS TRIAL EXAMINED CENSVRED AND REFVTED The Proeme ENtending to note the principall vntruthes of Bels Pamphlet the principall part and fundamentall substance thereof I haue thought goode to take my worke orderly before me first to salute his Epistle and see what holsome stuffe he presenteth in that to his Patrones Bells Epistle Dedicatory THE 1. VNTRVTH THE Minister standeth vppon coales till his fingers be at worke and his penne busied about his harts delight and therfore not to loose any time hefalleth roundly to the matter presenting his patrons with a tricke of his occupation in his very first entrance His wordes be these The visible church quoth he as writeth Egesippus Egesip apud Eusebium host lib. 3. cap. 32. remayned a virgin free from all heresies and corruptions during the lise of the Apostles that is to say about one hundred yeares after Christ to which time S. Iohn the Euangelist was liuinge But after the death of the Apostles sayth he errors by litle and litle crept into the church as into a voyd and desert house This assertion is dolefull ynoughe and yet very profitable against all Popish Recusants of our time as who are not ashamed impudently to auouch that after so many hundred yeares from Christes ascension there hath bene no error at all in their Romish Babilon This collection will proue dolefull ynough to him selfe and not very profitable to the congregation by that time we haue sifted his words and examined the authoritye alleadged for it is powdreed with lies and iugling tricks thicke and three-sould For first if he meaneth any such error as may stand with the integritie of the Catholike faith most false it is that we deny any such error may creepe into the Church for we willingly confesse that Papias S. Ireneus and some others held the error of the Chiliastes as him selfe mentioneth straight after that S. Ciprian and diuers others with him were carryed a way in to the error of rebaptization but yet notwithstandinge these their errors they were true members of the Catholicke church seing that in questions newly springing vp error may be incurred but not allwayes heresy which importeth not only an error in the vnderstandinge but also malice and obstinacie in the will by contemninge the Church her decree and determination But if by error he meaneth heresie as no question he doth both because he saith that during the liues of the Apostles the Church was free from all heresies and corruptios but after their death error by litle and litle crept in and also for that he termeth our Church Romish Babilon or as he speaketh in his Suruey where he handleth the very same matter whorish Babylon by which Page 342. wordes it is plaine that he meaneth hereticall errors for such only maketh our Church Babylon and to forsake her true spouse Christ and to comit spirituall fornication by cleauing to newe damnable and hereticall opinions and lastly for that otherwise he proueth nothing against vs the scope of his booke being to shewe that our religion is not old but newe as being far different from the pure faith of the Apostles This then being his meaning most false it is I say that any such errors crept into the Church I meane with the corruption of the Churches sincere doctrine though I willingly graunt that diuers of the Church haue by heresie falne from true doctrine as namely the minister him selfe eyther in the Apostles time or shall doe vntill the worldes end and that by the singular prouidence of Christ who promised that hell gates should not preuayle Math. 16. against his Church and many like places to that purpose might be alledged But what say we to the authoritye of Egesippus who liued straight after the Apostles cited by Bell for iustification of that he affirmed Nothing els but that he belieth both Egesippus and also Eusebius whome he quoteth in the third booke of his history cap. 32. as the relator of those wordes of Egesippus Reade the place he that please no such thing shall there be found nor the name of Egesippus so much as once mentioned The minister was not content to Bels epistle dedicatorie borrowed froÌ„ his suruey pag. 341. 342. present his Patrons with a cast paragraffe of his Suruey makinge it the begininge of his Epistle for almost two pages together but he must also abuse both them and others with a notorious vntruth of his owne fatheringe that vppon Eusebius which is not there to be found Neyther can this dealing of his proceede from other roote then meere malice for immediatly after this sentence cited out of Eusebius in the 32. chapter of his third booke he produceth out of the 33. chapter of the same booke how Papias and Ireneus were infected with the error of the Chiliastes and that very truly which sheweth that he perused the place And in his Suruey the foresayd Pag 341. 342. places be found in like manner alleadged the one truely and the other most falsely Can this procedinge of his stewe from any other sinke then the filthy puddle of his owne corrupt conscience Beside this who knoweth not acquainted any thinge in antiquitie that Simon Magus set his heresie abroach in the Apostles time and before the death of S. Peter as Eusebius recounteth whose Lib. 2. hist cap. 12. death was long before the death of S. Iohn

the Euangelist no lesse then fiftye yeares by Bels owne computation for S. Peter was crucified as he sayth Suruey pag. 172. at Rome vnder Nero the fourtith and fourth yeare after Christe Nay the same Eusebius noteth though breifely how Simon Magus was ouercome by S. Peter Cerinthus also the heretike was in the Lib. 2. hist cap. 1. Apostles time for Ireneus maketh mention how S. Iohn the Euangelist comming to wash him selfe Lib. 3. cap. 3. in the bath finding there Cerinthus suddainly departed saying that he feared least the bath would fall for as much as the enemye of truth was then in it But what doe I dispute further in a matter so euident for certaine it is out of sacred scripture that heresies were taught long before the death of S. Iohn S. Paule who was beheaded Suruey pag. 172. at Rome the same day and yeare with S. Peter as Bell confesseth writing that Hymenaeus and Philetus erred from the truth saying the resurrection is done 2. Tim. 2. v. 18. already and had subuerted the fayth of some which conuinceth playenly that their doctrine was hereticall otherwise it could not haue subuerted faith Doth not S. Iohn also him selfe speake of the damnable Nicolaites This being so could Egesippus or Eusebius men of greate learninge and conuersant Apoc. 2. in the scriptures be ignorant of this or knowing it can it enter into any mans imagination that they would write as Bell alleadgeth them directly contrary to the truth and opposit to their owne knowledge will not any soner beleeue that the minister hath grosly slaundered them and coyned this fâ—ction in the forge of his owne braines imployed about nothing more then the hammering of lyes cauils and corruptions against the Catholicke fayth The minister proceding forward laboureth to shew how errors crept in after the death of S. Iohn and telleth out of Eusebius that Papias and Ireneus were Chiliastes which I willingly graunt but withall deny that they were therefore heretikes as before hath bene sayd and so they helpe his cause nothinge at all for he speaketh of such errors as be ioyned with heresie from which they wer free Melchior Canus also quoth he opposeth him selfe against all the Thomists and Scotists both the old and latter Papists and this he bringeth to proue that hereticall errors haue crept into the Church He slandreth that great learned man and professor of diuinity when he woulde make him of his owne opinion what he thought of the Churches infallibility in not erring he deliuereth in these conclusions The first The fayth Lib. 4. de locu cap. 4. os the Church can not faile The second conclusion The Church can not err in beleeuing The third conclusion Not only the old Church could not err in fayth but neyther the church which now is and which shall be to the end of the world eyther can or shall err in fayth And yet the minister produceth him as I sayd to proue that heresies crept into the church after the time of the Apostles how truly let the reader iudge The question then wherof Canus speaketh concerneth not any poynt of faith as in expresse termes he there affirmeth but a matter debatable in scholes True it is that Bell maketh him to say that he doth oppose him selfe against all the Thomists and Scotists both the old and latter Papistes but the worde Papistes is foisted in by him selfe by which he would haue the reader to thinck that he spake of auncient fathers when as he talketh only of old and new Scholemen as he might learne out of the very title of that chapter which is Of the authoritye of the Schole Doctors The like may be sayd of Caietanus Nauarrus and Roffensis alledged for the same purpose by Bell all which liued in our age and were well known not to haue swarued from any thinge defined by the Catholicke church as I could shew and in particular demonstrat how he abuseth them were it not to be tedious especially about the Epistle wherof I was once determined to haue sayd nothinge at all Yet must I not omitt S. Augustin cited by Bell What sayth he any thinge perhapps to proue that the Church straight after S. Iohn was infected with hereticall error Mary quoth Bell he reputed Epist ad HieroÌ„ 19. no mans writings wholy free from errors saue only the writers of the holy scriptures This serueth not the turne S. Augustin must speake of hereticall errors or else he nothinge helpeth Bell but I trowe he will not make all others beside the writers of the scriptures to haue runn into any such errors No nor it is not be imagined that he will graunt that the Communion booke or the late Prouinciall councell of England confirmed by roiall assent and least of all his owne bookes to be stayned with any such errors yea or any errors at all and yet if S. Austens words be true as Bell alledgeth them how these will be excused I know not vnlesse he will tell vs that S. Austens spake of his owne former times not of those which shold follow after and so attribute more prerogatiue to moderne writers then to the venerable learned fathers of the Primitiue church which were a desperate shift meete for a man of his shifting conditions But where I beseche him hath S. Augustin these wordes He quoteth epis ad Hierom. ep 19. Where no such thinge will be founde only he faith that no bookes are comparable for truthe with the bookes of the Prophetes and Apostle which is not to censure all writers for erroneouâ— but not to match them with the Prophetes alâ— Apostles That holy doctor was far ynoughe froâ— thincking that the church could err Speaking the church of Rome and that blessed successiâ— he saith Number the Priestes yea euen from the veâ— In Psal cont parteÌ„ Donati seate of Peter and in that order of fathers see who succded whom that is the rocke which the proude gates of hâ— doe not ouercome And to generall councels Iâ— which the church is represented he did attribuâ— so much that he excuseth Cyprian from hereâ— Lib. 1. de Baptismo cap. 18. because in his time there was no generall Councâ— which had defined that question of rebaptization which sheweth euidently that he thought the could not err And the custome and authoritâ— of the church he reputed so infallible that hâ— saith To dispute against that which the vniuersall churâ— Epist. 118. holdeth is most insolent madnes Colde comfort dotâ— S. Augustin afforde Bell to proue that heretica errors haue crept into the churche An other sentence alleadged out of S. Austiâ— where that holy Father saith that he doth not repute CoÌ„t Crescon lib. 2. cap. 32. S. Cyprians writings as canonicall but iudge them â— the canonicall and whatsoeuer doth not agree with tâ— scriptures that by his leaue he doth refuse might ver well haue bene spared for who taketh them foâ— canonicall nay

Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Text snippets containing the quad