Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	day_n	place_n	sabbath_n	10,594	5	9.6630	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A09100	A defence of the censure, gyuen vpon tvvo bookes of william Charke and Meredith Hanmer mynysters, whiche they wrote against M. Edmond Campian preest, of the Societie of Iesus, and against his offer of disputation Taken in hand since the deathe of the sayd M. Campian, and broken of agayne before it could be ended, vpon the causes sett downe in an epistle to M. Charke in the begyninge.	Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610.; Charke, William, d. 1617. Replie to a censure written against the two answers to a Jesuites seditious pamphlet.	1582 (1582)	STC 19401; ESTC S114152	168,574	222

Apostolical and Euāgelical traditiō the doctrine of fathers haue taught it The second point is the proceeding of the holy ghost from the father the sonne equallie For this M. Charke quoteth vvhen the holye ghost shall come vvhiche I vvill send you from my father the spirit of trueth vvhiche proceedeth from the father But this proueth not expresselie that the holie ghost proceedeth equallie from the father and the sonne together but rather seemeth to inclyne to the heresie of the Greekes that it proceedeth onelie from the father And therfore the heretiques which denyed this equallye buylded their heresie especiallie vpon this place as S. Cyrill noteth Agayne this place telleth not whether it proceedeth by generation or without generation from the father and yet we must beleeue it to be without generation The third poynt is the vnion of the vvoorde vnto the nature of man not vnto the persone For which M. Chark citeth And the vvorde vvas made fleshe But what is this to the point thys proueth that the woorde tooke our fleshe but whether he tooke the nature of man onelye or the persone onelye or bothe together it expresseth not And heere is to be noted by the waye M. Charks lacke of iudgemēt not onelie in the matter but euen in the verie termes of diuinitie For he reprehendinge my woords as vnsounde in that he vnderstoode thē not he chaungeth thē thus That the vvoorde dyd take the nature of man to be one persone and not the persone VVhiche are bothe fond and erroneous For the woorde tooke not the nature of man to be one persone seeing the woorde was one persone before he tooke that nature of man vnto it selfe Nether could the nature of mā be that one persone as M. Charke semeth to weene for so should nature persone be cōfounded in Christ. But I thinke M. Chark neuer studied yet these matters and therfore he myght haue bene lesse malepert in reprehendinge yf he wolde The fowerth doctrine is of baptizinge of infantes For which M Charke quoteth these woordes of Genesis The infant of eight years olde shalbe circumcised in mankynde This hathe nothyng expresselye as yow see for baptisme And yf we had nothing but this lawe for our warrant in baptizing of infantes how chaunceth it that wee baptize infantes before or after the eight daye also why baptize we infantes of woman kynde also whiche were not circumcysed in the lawe Beza was strycken quyte dumme in the disputation of poysie in fraunce withe this demaunde as the byshope Claudius de Saynctes reporteth whoe was present VVherfore I had rather folow S. Austen who contendeth and proueth that baptizinge of infantes is onelye a tradition of the Apostles and not left vs by anye written scripture li. 10. c. 23. super Gen. ad lit And the same teacheth Origen ho. 8. in leuit The fyueth doctrine whiche M. Charke auoweth to be in scripture is the chaunge of the Sabboth daye into Sundaye For which he citeth these woords owt of the reuelations I vvas in spirit in our Lordes daye But heere is no mention of Sundaye or Saturdaye muche lesse of celebratiō of ether of them leaste of all of the chaunge of the Sabbothe appointed by God into any other daye Is not this chaunge then of the Sabboth daye appointed by the law substantiallie proued from this place of scriprure trow yowe The sixt poynt is abowt the fower Gospels and epistle to the Romanes whiche he sayeth to be proued scripture owt of scriptute But yet he quoteth no place of scripture where they are proued to be scripture but onely sayeth they are proued ovvt of the vuoords by the inscription there expressing the names of the vvryters therof But what a mockerie is this is the bare names of the Apostles sufficient to proue that they were written in deed by the Apostles whoe can proue owt of scripture that these names were not counterfayted The fayned epistle to the Laodicenses hathe it not the name of S. Paul in it and begynneth it not with the verie same style as his other epistles doe and yet is it reiected as counterfaite and that onelye by tradition The fayned gospell of S. Bartholomew had it not his name in it and yet was it not reiected The fayned Gospell of S. Thomas had it not his name and yet Origen sayeth he reiected it onelie for that the tradition of the churche receyued it not The three counterfait Gospells among the hebrewes had they not as holy titles as the rest and yet they were reiected by tradition of the churche as Epiphanius sheweth VVhen Faustus the Manachie denyed the Gospell of S. Mathew sayeth not S. Austen Mathaei euangelium prolatū aduersus faustum Manachaeum per traditionem The Gospell of Mathew was alleaged against Faustus the Manachie by traditiō VVhat can be more euident than all this to proue our opinion of the necessitie of tradition and to confound the fond madnes of this poore minister that will haue the bare titles of bookes sufficient to proue their authoritie and so certainlie as the true scripture it selfe once knowen is to be beleeued The seuenth doctrine whiche he holdeth to be expresselie in scripture is that God the father begatt his sonne onelie by vnderstanding hym selfe Marye he citeth no place fort it but reprehending the darkenes of the woordes which notwithstanding are most playne and vsuall to those whiche haue studyed any thing i● diuinitie he flyeth to an other matter sayeing vve beleeue by testimonie of the vvoorde that Iesus Christ is the onelie begotten sonne of the father And for this he quoteth a place or two of scripture whiche needed not For we holde this to be expresselie in scripture more than in fortye places But the question is of the manner howe this generation may be whiche though it appertaine not to the simple to trouble them selues with all yet the Church must defend it agaynst aduersaryes whoe will obiect as often they haue done hovve can God beyng a spirit begett a sonne and yet the sonne not to be after his father in tyme or nature but equall vvith hym in them bothe vvhat mean you saye they to holde that the holye ghost proceedeth from the father that the sonne proceedeth not but is begotten vvhye is it heresie to saye that the sonne proceedet● from the father or that the holye ghost is begotten vvhat difference is there betvveene theese speeches hovv doeth the father begett and the lyke All these are poyntes of diuinitie to be discussed And though M. Charke seemeth ignorāt in them all not to vnderstand so much as the verie termes them selues moste playnlie sett downe yet Catholique diuines kuowe what the Churche hath determined heerin against heretiques and infideles And albeit these thynges be not expresselye sett downe in scripture yet are they no lesse to be beleeued thā the other mysteries of the Trlnitie VVherof I

at one tyme where Luthers woordes are these Con●igi● me semel sub mediam noctem subitò expergesieri Ibi Sathan m●cū coepit eiusmodi disputationem Audi inquit Luthere doctor perdocte ce It happened that once I awaked about mydnight sayth Luther and then Sathan began this disputation with me Harken sayeth he right learned doctor Luther And then the deuyll layeth downe fyue long argumentes against the masse adding in the ende Age prome vbi scriptum est vbi iussit aut praecepit hoc deus Goe to now shew me where is the Masse writen in scripture where hathe God commaunded yt After this Luther putteth hys owne answers to the deuyll and the deuilles replies to whiche in processe his being not able to answer finallie yeelded to banishe the masse vpon the deuils appointement And this was the honorable beginning of Luthers conuersion and of all protestancie by the expresse woordes and confession of the first beginner hym selfe But heere william Charke hathe a shyft for this fowle matter sayeing that this conference of Luther vvith the deuyll vvas no other than suche a temptation or conflict as Christ and Saint Paul had vvith Sathan that is it vvas no bodilie conference but a spirituall fight in mynde sayeth this minister O fond and blasphemous euasion Suppose it had bene onelie a spirituall temptation in mynde suche as the conflictes of Christ and S. Paul were yet the cōparison is impious for nether Christ nor S. Paul dyd euer yeelde to the persuasions of the deuill as Martin Luther dyd in banishing the masse And this is the difference betwene euill and good men in this lyfe that bothe beinge assaulted with persuasions from the deuill the one yeeldeth to them and the other resistethe Secōdlie it is euidēt that this cōferēce of Martin Luther was more than spirituall as appeareth by the deuilles preface wherein he calleth the fryar right learned doctor according to the veine of pryde wherwith he saw hym puffed vpp and therby redye to receyue his impressions The same appeareth also by the sound of Sathans voyce described in the place alleaged in the Cēsure but especiallie for that in this place Luther confesseth some of his felowes to haue bene slayne by this conferēce For these are his woordes Et ego plane persisasus sum Emserum Oecolampadium similes ●iis actions horribilibus quassationibus subitò extinctos esse And I am plainlie persuaded that Emserus and Oecolampadius and the like were killed sodainlie with these terrible blowes and shakinges of the deuill Finallie the bushell of salt whiche Luther confessethe hym selfe to haue eaten together with this deuill proueth that he had bodilie conference with hym And that this Sathan was become now verie gentle and familiar to Luther albeit he was churlish and kylled other hys companions Towching M. Luthers dronken deathe from his deceitfull deuell as is coniectured M. Charke thinketh it lacke of discretion in me to publishe the same from so insufficient witnesses as he callethe them the cōntrarie being writen by men more indifferent as he sayeth And in the margent in counterpease of all my wittnesses he quotethe onelie Iohn Sleidan a lutheran and the protestants historiographer But what reason is there whie one Sleydan should be preferred before so many learned men and reuerend byshops that haue auowed the matter whoe lyued in Luthers time and many of them were Germanes and dyd know bothe his lyfe and his deathe especiallie seynge of all the historiographers that euer toke penne in hād Iohn Sleydan is the moste infamous for lyeing as may appeare in particular by Fontanus and Pontanus that haue discouered the same as also by Gaspar Genepaeus whoe hath done the same most substantiallie and of purpose And more than all the rest Bartholomeus latomus a singular learned man hathe set furth a book of the Eleuen thovvsand lyes of Iohn Sleidan And Gropperus one of the rarest men that euer oure age had commonlye calleth Iohn Sleidans storie das lugen buck that is the book of lyes The fame thereof cōming at a time to the eares of Charles the Emperour whiche had best cause to know how matters passed being cheefe agent therin hym selfe caused diuerse partes thereof to be redde ī his hearing and in the presence of his captains whoe hearing so infinite vntruethes reported could not contayne but often wolde interrupt the reader sayeing there the knave lieth And a litle after againe there the knave lyeth And so finalie reiecting the booke he commaunded one Gulielmus Mule●aeus a moste eloquent man to refute the same So that Sleidan alone is not sufficient to ouer-beare so many witnesses in this case wherein he was moste partiall that is touching Luther he beinge luthers scholar and writing purposelie bothe at his appointement and in his commendation But yet because you shall not want a sounde testimonie also in this matter I will alleage you IVSTVS IONAS Luthers deare freend and cooke as partiall towards hym as Sleydan hym selfe but onelie that being at his deathe and writinge a booke of the same by the prouidence of God he vttered this point among other For thus Pontacus writeth Martinus Lutherus quem tertium Eliam quidam ausi sunt vocare cum bene potus H●laris in lecto cubuisset manè repertus est mortuus Iustus Ionas eius coquus libro de eius vita obitu refert cum Paulo ante mortem sibi Caelio aliis qui tunc aderant dixisse Orate deū pro domino deo nostro eius euāgelio That is Martine Luther whome some dare call the thyrd Elias goeing to bed well typpled merye was found dead the next morning being the first day of Marche the yere of our Lorde 1544 and the 63. yere of his age Iustus Ionas his cooke affirmeth in a booke written of his lyfe death that he sayd to hym a litle before his deathe and to Celius and others that were present do you pray to God for our lord and God and for his gospell Heere now by Iustus Ionas his reporte Luther praied for Christ at his deathe which ether you must a-scribe to dronkennes or to s●me worse affection he being in his perfect wittes as the author affirmeth And this shalbe sufficient touching the deathe of doctor Martine Luther And now we come to Luthers disse●tion with his owne broode as the Censure sayeth that is to his deadlie warre with his owne folowers and to the discorde betwene Lutheranes Zuinglians which our English protestāts doe beare men in hand to be all one in faith and of one churche and M. Charke heere in this place with the same foreheade as in other matters affirmeth moste confidentlie that they had alvvayes a singular care of vnitie in the gospell And citeth for proofe thereof an acte of cōcorde agreed vpon at Marpurge Anno 1529. But this is intolerable impudencie For Brentius hym selfe