Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
faith_n	build_v	church_n	rock_n	7,063	5	9.4065	5	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A20679	An aduertisement to the English seminaries, amd [sic] Iesuites shewing their loose kind of writing, and negligent handling the cause of religion, in the whole course of their workes. By Iohn Doue Doctor in Diuinity.	Dove, John, 1560 or 61-1618.; Walsingham, Francis, 1577-1647.	1610 (1610)	STC 7077; ESTC S115461	57,105	88

spake as I certainly perswade my selfe it is it cannot be any way of equall authority with the Greeke and Latine besides that many things are found in that edition distasting to men both godly and learned Againe Valde probabile est Euangelium Matthaei epistolam Sancti Pauli ad Hebraeos SyriacÃ linguÃ scripta esse There is great probability onely that S. Matthew his Gospel and S. Paule his Epistle to the Hebrews were written in the Syrian tongue There he doth not take it as a cleare case that S. Matthew his Gospell was written in Syriac by himselfe but onely he leaueth it as a probable coniecture But the Greeke he will haue to be without exception Constat nouum testamentum GraecÃ¨ scriptum ab ipsis Apostolis vel Euangelistis quorum nomina in titulis singulorum librorum vel epistolarum praefiguntur exceptis duntaxat euangelio Matthaei Marci et Epistola ad Hebraeos It is manifest that the new testament was written in Greeke by those Apostles or Euangelists whose names are praefixed to euery booke or Epistle excepting the Gospels of S. Matthew and S. Marke the Epistle to the Hebrews But Athanasius existimat ab Apostolo Iacobo Matthaei euangeliuÌ„ in Graecam linguam esse translatuÌ„ alij verÃ² IohaÌ„ni Apostolo at alij ipsi Matthaeo eam translationeÌ„ attribuunt sed cuiuscunque sit it a recepta est ab EcclesiÃ¢ illa traÌ„slatio acsi eÃ¢ linguÃ¢ scriptuÌ„ fuisset euangeliuÌ„ Mathaei Athanasius thinketh S. Matthews Gospel was translated into Greeke by S. Iames the Apostle others by S. Iohn the Apostle others by S. Matthew himselfe but by whomsoeuer it was translated the Greeke translation is so approued by the Church as if it had bene originally written in that tongue Againe Itaque Graeca editio noui testamenti vniuersa Apostolos Euangelistas authores habet Therefore all the Greeke edition was set forth by the Apostles and Euangelists And as for the vulgar Latine edition it is by the Councell of Trent imposed vpon all Romish Catholickes vpon paine of excommunication to be receiued as authenticall and without exception Therefore according to the rules of their Catholicke religion I argue against the Catholickes more safely and firmly out of the Greeke and Latine which are plaine and of whose authority they make no question then Bellarmine doth against vs out of the Syriac which is both ambiguous and of no authority in the Church to build vpon So then for asmuch as by the decree of that Councell nothing can be held for truth in the Syriac which is repugnant to the Latine but the Latine maketh for vs I conclude that my Analysis of the text is without exception let him refute it if he can Now this being the question whether the Church be founded vpon the person or vpoÌ„ the doctrine of Saint Peter If they say vpon his person I reply the Church was from the beginning of the world and it stood as firme as now it doth before the conuersion of S. Peter When S. Peter was not the Church was one and the same which now it is and it could not stand without a foundation But the faith which he professed was more ancient then himselfe euen from the beginning common to the whole Church so that the Church might well be builded vpon that faith though not vpon Saint Peter nor vpon the person of any sinfull man And therefore our Sauiour saith he will build his Church that is the members of the Church vnder the Gospell which make but vnam Ecclesiam aggregatam one Church ioyntly with that which was vnder the time of nature and the time of the law vpon the same foundation being all stones of the same building But Bellarmine alledgeth out of Saint Chrysostome Hom. 55. in Matth. Where he saith Tues Petrus super te aedificabo Ecclesiam meam Thou art Peter and vpon thee will I build my Church And Hom. 4. in Esaiae cap. 6. Quid autem Petrus ille basis Ecclesiae What shall we say of Peter the foundation of the Church As if Saint Chrysostome did not acknowledge the doctrine but the person not the confession but the confessor himselfe to be the foundation of the Church To the first place I answer I haue examined but finde no such place in that Homily but that which is contrary to it But supposing that to be true which he hath so faisified I answer to it as likewise to the secoÌ„d place which is rightly by him produced that it is but the fallacy of aequiuocatioÌ„ For he alledgeth that out of Chrysostome as a speech proper which is but metonymically vnderstood It is a figure called Metonomia causae So Abram speaketh to the rich man They haue Moses and the Prophets meaning not the men themselues which were dead but their bookes which were extant So Saint Paul teacheth that we are built vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles that is vpon the faith which is taught in the Propheticall and Apostolicall writings so that there is but one faith one ground or foundation vpon which the old Church from the beginning and the new Church vnder the Gospell are builded vpon these two being but one as before I haue deliuered And that the meaning of Saint Chrysostome is metonimicall and not proper it appeareth by his owne exposition of himselfe where he saith in the same Homily contrary to that which Bellarmine hath alledged super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam id est fidem confessionem I will build my Church vpon this rocke that is vpon this faith and confession which thou hast made And it is iustified to be a true exposition by the consent of other Fathers as of Saint Hilary which saith super hanc confessionis Petram aedificatio Ecclesiae est vpon this rocke of confession is the Church founded And of Cyrillus which saith Petram opinor nihil aliud quÃ m inconoussam firmissimam discipulifideÌ„ vocauit He called the faith of S. Peter arocke because it was stedfast as a rocke that cannot be moued And by the way to preuent that which may in subtilty but not in sincerity be obiected against vs that the foundation must be answerable to the building but we which are builded vpon that foundation are all liuing stones and we come to him which is also a liuing stone disallowed of men which is Iesus Christ as the building is personall so there must be a personall foundation the persons of men are these liuing stones I answer the onely true and proper foundation of the Church is Christ as the Apostle teacheth No other foundation can any man lay then that which is already layed which is Iesus Christ I will therefore explaine the meaning of Saint Chrysostome Saint Hillary and Saint Cyril in what sort faith may be verified to be the foundation of the Church and yet with a due reseruation of that prerogatiue which

belongeth to our Sauiour Christ and which Saint Paul ascribeth to him and so I will reconcile Luther which saith faith is the rocke vnto Caluin which affirmeth that this rocke is Iesus Christ As a gold ring of very small weight hauing a precious stone in it of great value may be iustly estimated at an high price not for the due value of the gold it selfe but for the worth of the precious stone which is set in it it may be said to be worth an hundred pounds so faith is said to saue though saluation belong to Iesus Christ and to be the foundation of the Church though Christ be properly that foundation because he is the obiect of our faith and our Sauiour Christ and faith are so inseparably ioyned together that they cannot be diuided one from the other or conceiued one without the other Thus haue I briefly declared how the Church is not founded vpon S. Peter But suppose it could be proued how can it be deriued from him to the Pope The office of Apostleship was personall and died with S. Peters person The Apostles were equall in authority It was said to them all Go and preach as well as to Peter That which was said seuerally to Peter To thee will I giue the keyes was said ioyntly to all the Apostles Whose sinnes ye remit they shall be remitted And this confession of Peter was made in the name of them all so saith Theophilact and Saint Ambrose But if it were granted that Saint Peter was aboue all the rest of the Apostles this giueth no preheminence to the Pope being no Apostle For Apostleship consisteth in these things They were immediatly called of God they saw our Sauiour in the flesh they could giue the holy Ghost by imposition of hands the Spirit of God did so direct them that in their writings they could not erre which things belonged personally vnto them but are not left hereditary to the succeeding ages The foundation being thus shaken the building falleth of it selfe That I may come nearer to the man of Rome to discusse this question whether there ought to be one head ministeriall of the Church vniuersall militant vpon the earth or no Bellarmine to proue the affirmatiue part argueth out of Aristotle in this manner A Monarchy is the best most absolute state of gouernment therefore the gouernment of the vniuersal Church ought to be monarchicall I answer It is a fallacy called Ignoratio Elenchi in so much as Aristotle his Antecedent and Bellarmine his Consequent are not vnderstood Ad idem secundum idem c. A Monarchy is the best state of ciuill gouernment and for one country but not of Ecclesiastical gouernment nor for the whole world No one secular Prince is sufficient to gouerne a world neither if any one man could be supposed sufficient could it stand with iustice that one should gouerne a world because no man can attaine to be such a Monarke but by oppression and violent inchroching vpon the dominions of other Princes Againe a Monarchy is the best state of ciuill gouernment of one country but the Ecclesiasticall gouernment cannot simply be so but onely when the Church so gouerned is in such a country as is subiect to one secular Prince and not in an Aristocraticall or Democraticall state because the Ministers of the Church must be subordinate to the supreme secular magistrates and the Ecclesiasticall gouernment of the Church must be subordinate and answerable to the ciuill gouernment of the country where that Church is Againe as one man cannot gouerne the ciuill state of the world so much lesse can one man be head of the whole Church all authority both ciuill and Ecclesiasticall being deriued from our Sauiour Christ which is both the head of the Church and the Prince of the Kings of the earth and all power is giuen to him from God his Father both in heauen and earth Our Sauiour Christ is considered two manner of wayes as he is God so is hee the King of the whole world by the right of his creation as he is the Redeemer so is he the Head of the vniuersall Church by right of his redemption as he is God he hath his Vicegerents ouer the world and they be his secular Magistrates Ego dixi vos dij estis I haue said ye are Gods But as hee is the head of the Church he hath no Copartener nor Vicegerent no copartener for so he were an vnperfect mediator no vicegerent among men for no man is able to supply his place in that behalfe which I proue by this argument The office and worke of his mediation proceedeth from his two natures God and Man which concurre in one action of the same person so that he which supplyeth his office must be of an infinite power which is not to be found in any man besides himselfe Now lest it should be obiected that he hath said of Ministers also Ego dixi vos dij estis I haue said ye are Gods as well as of Princes and therfore it should be concluded that they are his vicegerents for the Church as Princes for the common wealth I answer the argument doth not hold For as both Princes Ministers haue their authority deriued from him so after a different manner Princes as vicegerents Ministers onely as actiue instruments For the keyes of the Church being in number but two the one of the Word Sacraments the other of Gouernment In the opening and shutting with these keyes which is the execution it selfe are to be considered two things the actiue instrument and the principall agent The Ministers are onely the actiue instruments to preach to the outward eares of men when God alone giueth the gift of Faith conuerteth the heart inwardly as the principall agent they conferre the outward elements only in the ministration of the Sacraments hee alone sealeth remission of sinnes and giueth inward graces they lay hands vpon men to ordeine them Ministers which is the outward calling he doth call them inwardly and make them able by giuing them his holy Spirit they testifie and pronounce before the congregation in iure fori that wicked men are excommunicated out of the Church but God onely ratifieth it in iure poli and cutteth them off from being members of Christ and shutteth the kingdome of heauen against them From the Head to all the members must be such an influence as possible cannot be from any sinfull man as I haue deliuered in my former Treatise Thus you see how idly and weakly the Popes supremacy is by them defended And therefore vnlesse stronger arguments be alledged and more substantially proued they cannot iustly blame vs for withdrawing our neckes out of the obedience to the sea of Rome CHAP. 2. Of Image Worship BEcause they write that worshipping images they commit no idolatry in that they distinguish betweene an image an idoll that an image is the representation of somthing that

Rome Page 29. 30. I spake of the Popes supremacy and my words are these What authority soeuer the Pope had ouer the Latine Church or West part of the world it hath bene giuen him by humane constitutions onely and generall consent of Princes and States which they suffered him to enioy during their good liking and no longer And hauing thus shewed that the Popes authority ouer other Churches was not by diuine institution but onely by humane permission not certaine but during the pleasure of Princes and States my words fauour not his supremacy ouer vs in England out of which by consent of Prince and Parliament hee hath beene abandoned long since And therefore I say the Bishop of Rome is little beholding to me for his title of supremacy This is a very loose and negligent kinde of disputation Seuenthly saith he Doue Persw pag. 15. referreth the question what books be Canonicall Scriptures to the two Doctors S. Augustine and S. Hierom. His words be these Catholikes proue them to be Canonical out of S. Augustine we that they be Apocripha out of S. Hierome both which Doctors are of no smal authority in the Church of Rome therefore in this we differ no more from them then S. Hierome did from S. Augustine Therefore I hope for many causes Protestants will giue place to us in this question I deny not but the question being propounded concerning the bookes of Toby Iudith Baruch Ecclesiasticus Wisedome the Maccabes and the fragment of Esther whether they were Canonicall as the Church of Rome doth hold or Apocripha as our Church maintaineth I answered that forasmuch as there is Canon fidei morum One Canon or rule of good life another of faith and that may be Canon morum quodnon est fidei Arule and patterne of good life for vs to follow which is not a sufficient ground of doctrine to build our faith vpon they were both Canonicall and Apocripha Canonicall according to Saint Augustins for rules of good life Apocripha according to S. Hierome because they were no true grounds of doctrine And so the Church of Rome and our selues rightly vnderstanding one another as Saint Hierome and Saint Augustine vnderstood themselues there needed not be any difference concerning this point betweene vs. But how can he inferre vpon this that therefore we must giue place to him in this question As Saint Hierome gaue no place to Saint Augustine so will we giue no place to any onely I wish they would better vnderstand both vs and themselues and giue place to the truth And forasmuch as they allow both of Saint Hierome and Saint Augustine to be Orthodoxall Doctors they cannot receiue S. Augustine his opinion but they must also embrace S. Hieroms exposition where it is explained what is the meaning of S. Augustine where hee alloweth those bookes to be Canonicall Eighthly saith he Concerning the vulgar Latine translation allowed among Catholikes D. Doue writeth thus pag. 16. We grant it fit that for vniformity in quotation of places in Schooles and Pulpits one Latine text should be vsed and we can bee contented for the antiquity thereof to preferre the old vulgar translation before all other Latine bookes and so much we yeeld to the Councell of Trent The praemisses are mine but what is his conclusion Because we ascribe to the vulgar edition more then to all other Latine translations and therein agree with the Church of Rome and because we yeeld to the Councell of Trent so farre as reason doth require and no further but disagree both from the Church of Rome and that Councel in things which are erroneous Concedendo vera negando falsa will he therefore take this for a Protestant proofe of his Catholicke religion Non taliauxilio nec defensoribus istis Roma caret If the Church of Rome had no better champions it would not stand Ninthly Doctor Couel writeth No translation whatsoeuer is authenticall Scripture And Doctor Doue addeth All translations haue many faults page 16. In so writing I write the truth For onely God is free from errour and therefore only the originall text is authenticall Scripture All men are subiect to errours Omnis homo mendax but all translations are the workes of men But how idlely is this brought in as a Protestant proofe of Recusancy well may it serue against Recusants which ascribe more to the translation theÌ„ to the originall If no translation be authenticall then it followeth as a firme consequent that the vulgar Latine edition cannot be authentical howsoeuer the Councel of Trent hath imposed it vpon vs as authenticall Tenthly For this time and place saith he I will only make amplification of Doctor Doue his grant confession which followeth in these words When the Masse was first put down King Henry had his English litourgie and that was then iudged absolute without all exception But when King Edward came to the Crowne that was coÌ„demned and another was in the place which Peter Martyr and Bucet did approue as very consonant to Gods word When Q. Elizabeth began her reign the former was iudged to be full of imperfections and a new was diuised allowed by consent of the Clergy But about the middle of her reigne we grew weary of that booke great meanes haue bene wrought to abandon it establish another which although it was not obtained yet we do at the least at euery change of Prince change our booke of Common praier we bee so want on we know not what we would haue Pag. 31. Hitherto his words and he freely confessed errours in all these states and changes For defence whereof besides that these words are written by way of obiection from them rather then any confession made by our selues I did not so much as intimate that there were errours in all these states and changes as he vniustly chargeth me but onely that in the Seruice bookes of King Henry and King Edward some things were iudged to sauor of the superstitions of the Church of Rome But as for the Seruice booke which was allowed by Queene Elizabeth it stood not only during her time without alteration but also it is ratified by his Maiestie and allowed of by the State albeit by some particularmen it hath bene impugned as nothing else can be by the wit of man so well deuised but mans wit can dispute against it And as for those errours which were reformed in the books of K. Henry and King Edward they were the superstitions onely of the Church of Rome the land being not then sufficiently reformed nor purity of religion so perfectly established as now it is because the Bishops Clergy men by whom those bookes were written their selues were too much so wred with the Romish leauen And our daily renouncing those superstitions and receiuing greater light of the Gospell could be no Protestant proofe that we should any way fauour their superstitions Eleuenthly he writeth thus Why may we not say with the Councell of Florence cited

Selected quad for the lemma: faith_n

Text snippets containing the quad