Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	aaron_n	church_n	israel_n	19	3	7.5655	4	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A01099	A shield of defence against the arrovves of schisme shot abroad by Iean de L'escluse in his advertisment against Mr. Brightman Here vnto is prefixed a declaration touching a booke intituled, The profane schisme of the Brovvnists. By Iohn Fovvler. Clement Saunders. Robert Bulvvarde.	Fowler, John, Brownist.; Saunders, Clement. aut; Bulwarde, Robert. aut	1612 (1612)	STC 11212; ESTC S102487	39,669	46

the clearing of himself by writing against the booke if it were a sin to have a hand in the printing thereof theÌ„ how foolish is he to think he could by an after testification cleare himself from that sinne which he did first willingly commit If this were a watrrantable course why might he not still follow his old trade of cardmaking then afterwardes cleare himself by witnessing writing against them why might he not also make idoles or images afterwardes cleare himself froÌ„ partaking with the sinne of Idolatours by testifying against them Behold here the extreme absurdity of the Brownistes who condemne our communioÌ„ where we duely testify against the evilles coÌ„mitted by others whiles they think to iustify themselves by testifying against those evilles in the committing whereof they them selves have a hand 2. In a due testification against evill the testimony ought to be as large as the evill the plaister ought to be as large as the soare but Delescluse is vncertayne whether his writing which he countes a plaister for the errours and sores in Mr. Br. his booke shall ever spread so far as Mr. Br. his booke therfore it must needes be folly and sin in him that shall voluntarily and wilfully publish such thinges which he accountes as stumbling blockes layd before the blinde while he is ignorant whether his labour shall ever come so far as to help the removall thereof in many places 12. IN the subscription of his Epistle he vnder writes thus Thine as thou art the Lordes Iean Delescluse that is to say Thine as thou art a Brewnist and a separatist for al the promises of God and of salvation they do oft appropriate vnto those that separate Those onely they declare to be the lords as touching their visible estate Therfore howsoever he wold seeme to professe friendship it is but hypocrisy beware of such fâ—endes 13. LEt vs now come from his Epistle to the book it self where in he takes vpon him to shew how corruptly Mr. Brightman hath taught that the church of England is not to be separated from not withstanding all the sinnes and abhominations that are in the same This poynt he sets downe both in the title of his booke and in his Epistle againe as the butte or white at which he meanes to shoote against this make he bendes his bow and prepares his arrowes vpon the stinge And for the proofe of this poynt he sets downe ten speciall speeches which Mr. Brightman hath vttred touching the corruptions of the church of England The first speech he alledgeth are these wordes of Mr. Brightman I could not but mourne from the bottome of my heart when I beheld in her Christe loathing vs and very greatly provoked against vs. Here vpon Iean Deslescluse inferreth thus I desire the reader to observe the word which he vseth of Christe lothing them which word of loathing seemeth to be taken from the 95. Psal vers 10. Where the Prophet speaking in the person of the Lord him self sayth that fourty yeares long he had loathed that generation saying that they are a people â—rring in their heart and not knowing his wayes wherfore he sware in his wrath that they should not enter into his rest So that by Mr. Brightmans owne grant this church of England is in no better estate then were these rebelles in the wildernes all which were consumed and entred not into his rest as he had sworne First this inference of Delescluse is vtterly false for though Mr. B. should grant the same phrase to be vsed both of England Israel yet doth it not follow by this grant that England is in no better estate then those rebelles in the wildernes for the holy ghost often vseth ore the same generall worde or phrase touching divers sinners which yet not with standing may not therfore be all alike so condemned but that some of them may be in better estate then others for example it is sayd that the Lord was angry with Israel in the dayes of Iehoahaz 2. kin 13. 3. It is also sayd in the like phrase of speech that the wrath of the Lord was kindled against Israel in the dayes of David 2. Sam. 24. 1. Doth it now follow that Israel in the dayes of David was in no better estate then in the dayes of Iehoahaz The contrary is most evident plaine Israel being at one time a true church at th' other a false church by the confession of the Brownistes themselves It is sayd in one generall phrase I hate all false wayes Ps 119. 128. Now it is one false way to be hated or loathed that the high places were reteyned in the dayes of Iehoash others 2. kin 12. 3. 14. 4. It was an other false way that the goldeÌ„ calves Baal were worshipped by the kinges of Israel doth it now follow that these people were one of them in no better estate then the other because the phrase of hating or loathing might be vsed against both of them Nothing lesse To come neerer vnto them Mr. Robinson accounting it a false way a violation of Gods ordinance in Mr. Ainsworthes company that they have no separation of their aimes among them it followes herevpon that in his account also the word of loathing or hating may be vsed against them seing every false way reteyned is to be loathed And further Mr. Robinson holdes it a false way order of government that is practised in Mr. Iohnsons church which is therfore also to be loathed by them Doth it now follow from hence that by this graunt Mr. Ainsworthes company is in no better estate then Mr. Iohnsons because of the same word of loathing attributed vnto both of them Nothing lesse The matter being thus made plaine vnto them the simplest among them may see what a corrupt blinde maner of reasoning is here vsed by their elder Delescluse Secondly suppose it were granted that the church of Tsrael were in no better estate then Israel in the wildernes yet what is this to the scope and purpose of his booke Doth this prove that the church of England is therfore to be separated from Nay the contrary appeareth hence seing it is vndeniably true that even Israel in the wildernes notwithstanding all their abhominations which the Lord loathed were yet a true church and communion with them was lawfull as appeares in the example of Moses Ioshua Aaron and other faithfull servants of God remayning among them And therfore so might it be with England also though being in no better estate And thus the same arrow that he shootes at vs returnes vpon himself and pearceth the side of his owne separation 14. IN the next place he procedes labours to perswade his reader that the Lord hath more iust cause to wath the church of England then that of the Israelites in the wildernes VVel suppose now that this also were granted vnto him would this prove that we should

then separate from England In no sort for the Lord had more cause to loath the church of Israel in the dayes of Christe then in the wildernes And yet even then also there was a lawfull communion with that church when the measure of their iniquity was greater and when there was a greater then Moses to convince them of that wickednes And thus we see how that still he comes short of the mark he shootes at seing greater abhominations then those of Israel in the desert are yet no sufficient ground of separation 15. FOr the further declaration of this matter let vs a litle examine his particular instances here alledged by him first sayth he that church had a true ministery and true offices and officers and so hath not the church of England by Mr. Brightmans owne graunt First let it be considered how vnworthy a thing it is that this man which is himself an vsurper and a false officer should thus take vpon him to dispute about the ministery and the offices in the churches of God for first when he was yet with Mr. Iohnson he was then a false officer that whole company being in schisme therfore a false church yeelding no lawfull officers 2ly suppose Mr. Iohnsons company had bene a true church and he a true officer in it yet seing he hath now schismed from that company and was also deposed from his office by Mr. Iohnson and his assistants how can he in this schisme be reputed a true minister 3ly when he was yet a member of the french chuch and did there earnestly seek an office after tryall of his giftes he was repelled and iudged insufficient and vnmeete to be a minister Now then shall he that was both Kept out from entring into an office as vnworthy and againe thrust out of an office as vnworthy after he had entred and this both by a true reformed church and by the Brownistes themselves shall this vnworthy person come now and in the middes of his vnworthines pronounce sentence touching the truth or falshood of offices ministeries in the church Secondly let it be considred how he abuseth wrongeth Mr. Brightman in saying that the church of England hath not a true ministery offices officers that by Mr. Brightmans owne graunt for though Mr. Br. do iustly complaine that the church of England wanteth some offices which it should have againe that it hath some officers which it should not have yet doth he not affirme a true ministery to be altogather wanting he doth not deny but that there are some true offices officers therein Thirdly though there be that defect in the ministery of the church of Engl. which Mr. Brighman noteth how doth Delescluse prove from thence that separation must reedes follow for this he bringes not so much as any shew of proofe from the scriptures to iustify such a consequence 16. THat second particular exception which he bringeth touching persecution by the officers in the church of England is againe repeated by him in his tenth speech of Mr. Brightmans which he alledgeth is there answered for which see the 38. section following 17. THe third particular differeÌ„ce which he affirmeth to have bene betwixt Israel Eng. is that their governmeÌ„t in Israel was not a mixt governemeÌ„t partiy of the Egiptians partly of the Moabites and Edomites or Cananeans but simple and and pure according to the true patterne shewed to Moses in the mount but that of England is not so for Mr. Brightman affirmeth it to be partly Romish and partly reformed etc. First if it be true that Mr. Robinson writeth viz. that the church officers the priests levites in the Iewish church to whoÌ„ the charge of the whole congregation for the service of the tabernackle did appertayne had no authority by the order of their office to inflict any censure spiritually vpon the people but onely to interpret the law ett Answ to Mr. Bern. pag. 198. then is all this idle which Delescluse doth here speak of their government If the ecclesiasticall officers did exercise no government at all then is it in vayne to dispute of the purity of a thing that was nothing Secondly if that excommunication or dissynagogueing noted Ioh. 9. 22. was but a Iewish devise and without warrant of the scriptures as both Mr. Robinson doth write and Mr. Smith also hath written before him then was the governmeÌ„t of the Iewes a devised governemeÌ„t an Impure aÌ„d mixt governemeÌ„t partly divine and partly humane and yet not with standing this mixt government we see there was then a lawfull communion that mixture of devised governemeÌ„t was no ground of separation as this Delescluse would vainely collect against Mr. Britghman and against the church of England Thirdly if a mixt governement be a ground of separation then is Mr. Ainsworthes company to be reiected seing it doth exercise a popular confused and mixt government consisting partly in the power of the officers but chiefely in the power of the people And thus the collection of Delescluse serves to overthrow his owne governement And the shame of this their mixed governemeÌ„t which Mr. Iohnson hath affirmed to be worse then the goverement of the church of England doth in this respect lye the more heavily on them in that Mr. Iohnson hath also in a printed booke condemned the same which booke the Ainswort hians have not yet answerd 18. THe fourth particular instance which he bringeth to prove the difference betwixt Israel England is this None of that church sayth he were admitted vnto any office but onely such as were lawfully called therevnto as Aaron was but so it is not in England etc. First it is onely the bare affirmati of Delescluse that sayth of the church of Israel that none were there admitted vnto any office but onely such as were lawfully called as Aaronwas where is his proofe from the scriptures where of he boasted in his Epistle Secondly it is a false affirmation of Delescluse for when Annas Caiaphas did enterchangeably execute the high priestes office as appeareth Luk. 3. 2. Ioh. 11. 51. it was not possible that both of them could be lawfully admitted vnto the execution of that office which was peculiar vnto one man during his life Thirdly seing Mr. Iohnson hath offred to prove vnto Mr. Ainsworth his company that in their popular governement they are like vnto Korah his company ambitiously vsurping an office wherevnto they are not lawfully called that vpon the Korites ground Numb 16. 3. it had bene much fitter that Mr. Ainsworth or Delescluse should have defended cleared themselves of the evill which they lay vpon others by writing against Mr. iohnson about these thinges while he is yet alive to auswer for himself rather then to wriâ—e against Mr. Bright man that is dead now resteth from his labours in the Lord especially seing Mr. iohnson hath so often entreated provoked

and his Apostles taught vs both by their word and example and therfore let Delescluse heare the Prophet Esay which he alledgeth turning vnto him and saying vnto the maynteyners of schisme wo vnto them that call that communion evill which the Lord hath shewed to be good and lawfull 27. FRom a fourth speech of Mr. Br. he reasoneth thus Moreover in his fourth charge where he maketh the state of the poore blinde Papistes far better then the condition of the angell of the church of England and that also such as are the angelles such becommeth the church for the most part I do observe that by his owne doctrine the estate of the church of England is worse then Babylon it self which Babylon is graunted by all to be that Synagogne and church of Anti-christe devoted vnto destruction etc. First he falsmes Mr. Br. his speech by adding a degree of comparison which Mr. Briâ—ghtm vsed not in saing that he makes the estate of the poore blinde papistes farr better It had bene far better for Delescluse to have to have omitted that clause to have repeated Mr. Brightmans comparison simply truely with out such addition but it seemes he he favours his owne cause more theÌ„ true dealing Secondely he corrupts falsifies Mr. Brightmans speech againe by saying that he makes the estate of the poore blinde papistes far better then the condition of the angel of the church of England as though Mr. Brightman had spoken generally and without exception touching the whole ministery of the church of England whereas even by Delescluses owne former allegation of the wordes Mr. Br. speakes of those angelles who bewitched with ambition and covetousnes do refuse holy reformation where yet also he leaves out the word onely being a word of restraint vsed by Mr. Brightman of purpose to prevent the cavilles of such honest men as this Delescluse here shewes him self Mr. Brightman sayth that Christe in this place preferreth the blinde papistes onely before those angelles who bewitched with ambition etc. And thus the double falshood of Delescluse appeareth not onely in adding but also in omitting that which was most significant and specially to be considred Thirdly suppose Mr B. had spoken generally of the whole ministery in EnglaÌ„d yet is the observation of Delescluse most false vaine It would not follow therevpon that the estate of the church of England is worse then Babylon it self as he gathereth for even touching those angelles bewitched with ambition and covetousnes refusing holy reformation Mr B. speakes not simply absolutely of theÌ„ that they are worse then the papistes but onely in respect of the greater grace light which they have receyved for their reformation for so he doth also explane himself in the same place Mr B. knew well enough that the angelles or ministers of the church of Roome besides other greater evilles are also bewitched with ambition covetousnes do therfore refuse holy reformation c. onely he noted them to be something more excusable in respect of their ignorance because they knew not their maisters will so as those in England doe we may here fitly tell Delescluse in Mr. Ainsworthes wordes He may much abuse any mans words if that which is spoken respectively he will take and alledge as spoken absolutely VVhat though the Lord do in some respect pâ—efâ—ree Châ—â—tim Kedar before Israel Ier. 2. 10. 11. May it be observed hence that the estate of Israel was simply worse then those heathens or that Israel was to be separated from rather then they The papistes are in some respect worse ã€ˆâ€¦ã€‰ followes it not hence that they are simply absolutely worse ã€ˆâ€¦ã€‰ of the Ainsworthians that they are worse then the Franâ—â—â—scanes in respect of their contention vnquietnes disorder doth it follow hence that he accountes the AinsworthiaÌ„s to be simply the worse rather to be separated froÌ„ Nothing lesse By these examples let Delescluse learne to see his solly in ga thering such observations 28. AFter this false recitall of Mr. Br. his wordes togather with his false observation vpon the same he makes this question in the same place ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ where are then those great prayses of all manner of blessinges vpoÌ„ that church rehearsed in the second artickle but cheefely these spirituall blessinges of the word purely and sincerely taught in it First for those earthly blessinges whereof Mr. B. spake why might they not be found in that church of England suppose it had bene every way worse then Roome How blinde is Delescluse that makes this question so far from the purpose Secondly as for the spirituall blessinges of the word purely taught seing Mr. Br. doth blame but some of the ministers of that church why may not the word be purely and sincerely taught by others that are free from the blame there spoken of 29. A Seventh speech which Delesc bringeth from Mr. B. against the church of England is this that naughtines raigneth in it the hand of God is heavy vpon it and againe that in her the lawes of Christe are not kept Hence he inferreth But what is there then to be done even this that every soule who hath any care of salvation and of escaping the eternall flames of everlasting damnation be carefull to come out with speed from Babylon etc. This conclusion of separation which Delescluse here gathereth denounceth vnder paine of eternall flames of everlasting damnation is vayne for first all that Mr. Br. here sayth of England might also most truely be affirmed of that church of the jewes where in Christe did communicate for there 1. naughtines raigned prevayled in the Herods in the priestes elders scribes Pharisees Sadducees c. Mat. 2. 16. and 12. 24. and 14. 9. and 16. 12. 21. 2ly the hand of God was heavy vpoÌ„ them in their manifold oppressions miseries which they endured vnder the government of the Romanes their substitutes Mat. 2. 16. and 3. 10. and 17. 24. etc. Luk. 13. 1. and 2. 1. Ioh. 11. 48. 3ly the lawes of Christ were not kept there Mat. 15. 3. Ioh. 15. 20. 22. And now by the seÌ„teÌ„ce of Delescluse eternall flames of evelasting damnatioÌ„ must be the portion of Christe his Disciples that coÌ„municated with that church who will not detest such vile coÌ„clusions which are like vnto arrowes shot even against the breaste of Christe Iesus himself As he that makes himself mad casteth firebrandes arrowes and mortall thinges prov 26. 18. so Delescluse in this place casting abroad his firebrandes of eternall damnation shooting his arrowes against heaven throwing mortall thinges even vpon the Lord of life what doth he els herein but declare himself to be a mad man why might not this his booke which he entitles an Ad-vertisement be much more fitly entitled a Mad-vertisement Secondly all that Mr. Br. affirmeth in this place touching England hath bene affirmed by the Brownistes themselves touching one

Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Text snippets containing the quad