Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	image_n	worship_n	worship_v	2,495	5	9.2639	5	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A15732	Whyte dyed black. Or A discouery of many most foule blemishes, impostures, and deceiptes, which D. Whyte haith practysed in his book entituled The way to the true Church Deuyded into 3 sortes Corruptions, or deprauations. Lyes. Impertinencies, or absurd reasoninges. Writen by T.W. p. And dedicated to the Vniuersity of Cambridge. Cum priuilegio.	Worthington, Thomas, 1549-1627.	1615 (1615)	STC 26001; ESTC S120302	117,026	210

Councell consisting of many scores of Fathers so happy a progresse M. Whyte haith made in his profession of corrupting Now for the conueyance though it be not to be paralleled with diuers of the former extensiuÃ© as the schoole-men speake in multitude and stoare of wordes corrupted it lying onely in slye transposition of one or two wordes yet intensiuÃ© for the art thereof it may be equalled with any This then it is Our minister there pag 344. to ouerthrow the religious vse of Images produceth the 36. Canon of the Councell of Eliberis to wit No picture is to be made in the Church lest that be adored which is paynted on wales The wordes of the Canon are these Placuit picturas in Ecclesia non debere ne quod colitur adoratur in partetibus depingatur It pleased the Councell that pictures should not be in the Church leste that which is worshipped and adored be painted on the wales Be obseruant here Reader and marke the difference which is made of the same wordes by a witty interchange of their place in their translation thou shalt see that my delicate minister here euen transcends him self The Councell saith Images are not to be in the Church lest that be painted on the wales which is worshipped M. Whyte translateth lest that be worshipped which is painted on the wales Thus the difference breefely resteth in this lest that which is worshiped be painted And lest that which is painted be worshipped A small difference in shew of wordes but great in sence For the wordes of the Councell acknowledging the worship of Images maketh the worship due to them to be the cause why they are not to be painted on wales But M. Whyte saith that they are not to be painted on wales because they are not to be worshiped and so maketh the Councell to speake lyke good protestantes Now the reason why the Councell would not haue the wales of Churches to be painted with Images was in reguard of the due respect they bare to them not as M. Whyte falsly suggesteth For being so painted they were subiect to be defaced either by the inuasioÌ„ of the enemies in those tymes or els by the rayne and bad wether whereas Images drawne in Tables of which the former Councell maketh no restraint in that they are portable and remoueable do not lye open to the same daunger Therefore the intention of the CouÌ„cell herein was the same with the intention of that decree by the which it was ordained that in reuerence to the Crucifix no Crosse should be made vpon the plaine ground because it being so made must needes be often irreuerently be tramped with the feete of meÌ„ Thus is M. Whyte in seking to disproue the lawfull vse of an Image become him self a perfect Image of deceate fraude and collusion But here now I make an ende of his corruptions deprauations hasting my self to the second Part of his scene which is his lyes and falshoods Onely I must say that in reguard of the impurity and conse onlesse deportment of him in his whole Treatise I can not but commiserate all such poore credulous soules as do highly Preiudge of his booke as beiug writen in all sincerity and plainesse and free from the least touch or aspersion of any wilfull deprauation And therefore I hould it most strange that M. Purchase a scholer and ingenious though extremely maliuolent should in his owne booke pag. 100. entytle M. Whyte Via Lactea alludinge perhaps both to his name and his supposed candor in wrytinge But since his mistakinge is not iustifiable I will allow to M. Whyte the same tytle though through a differeut reason For as the Via Lactea appeareth to a vulgar sight to be a part of heauen and yet indeede is not being if we follow the iudgment of the auncient Philosophers far lower then the heauens as it is necessarily euicted from the different parallayes and variations thereof taken from seuerall places So is M. Whyte reputed in the comon eye and censure of vnlearned protestantes as a man which in all truth haith much laboured in that heauenly course of dilating the Gospell and faith of Christ whereas we fynd that the contrary is most true as haith fully appeared from his seuerall exorbitant deprauations of so many Catholick Authors and others Wherefore to be short I greatly feare that except hereafter there follow a feeling remorse of this foule and vnchristianlike dealing the wordes of S. Iohn the Euangelist may be more truly applyed to our Sir Iohn the minister Nomen habes quo viuis mortuus es Apoc. 3. The ende of the first part WHYTE DYED BLACK THE SECOND PART Contayning sundry notorious vntruthes or Lyes proued to be such euen by the confession of the most learned Protestantes And first is preuented a weake euation which may be vsed by M. Whyte against this second parte FROM Corruptions good Reader we are next to descend to vntruthes for lying indeede is the second piller which supporteth the whole weight frame of M. Whytes worke This passage I here make distinct from the former For although all the precedent deprauations of the first part do potentially include vutruthes and falshoodes yet our Doctors proteruity therein doth cheifly rest either in corrupting other mens wordes or in alledging them directly against the knowne intention of the Authors whereas here the reduplicatiue formality as I may terme it of his hereticall deportment consisteth in plaine lying to wit in setting downe and instifying certaine most false assertions and positions a course little sorting to one who styleth him self a minister of gods word in that his sacred word is altogether incompatible with falshood The floate of these his vntruthes is so greate as that our Doctor assordeth vnto vs many scoares of this nature yet because he would make shew to mantaine diuers of them vnder some prâ—text either of much reading or in wrasting the sence of such produced authorities if I should fortify the contrary truth from their particuler testimonies of Scripture Fathers Histories c. being a kynd of proofe in reguard of the often suggested doubtfulnes of the true sense directed by many wheeles of inferences and deductions Therefore to the end that I may euâ—n chokingly and irreplyably conuince him of such notorious miscariage I haue thought good to supererogate with him in disprouing his said falshoodes I meane in restrayning my self precysely to such his lyes as the contrary thereto is acknowledged for true euen by his own brethren and these not mâ—n obscure or vulgar but the most eminent and learned protestantes of Christendome and such as haue euer bene accompted starres of the greatest magnitude in their euangelicall Spheare Neither will I alledge so many of them as I could but for the greater expedition I will content my self for the most part with the testimonies of two or three of our learnedst aduersaries Now here I would haue the iudiceous reader to obserue

WHereas according to Catholick doctrine different degrees of honour are to be exhibited to god and his blessed Angels and Sainctes as to the first Adoration and to the other in a far lower degree not onely damned spirites but damnable beritykes their painefull schollers as enuious emulators of glorious Sainctes do euer labour by many subtiltyes to rob them quyte of all deserued veneration In which kynd M. Whyte willing to acte his part euen against the B. Virgin the Mother of God modele of all piety for better shadowing of his enuy pag. 344 he alledgeth Epiphanius c. her l. 3. haer 79. c. Collyridianos saying The Virgin Mary was a virgin and honorable but not geuen for vs to worship but her self worshipped him that tooke flesh of her But for the cleares reuealing of this illusion it is to be obserued that Epiphanius wryteth here purposly against certaine women who adoring a Chariot or foure squared seate and couering the same with linnen cloath did at one solemne tyme of the yeare bring forth bread and offer the same vp in the name of Mary which he proueth at large to be vnlawfull in that it was neuer permitted to women to offer vp sacrifice as also in that sacrfice is an honour onely peculiar to god yea he maketh an expresse difference betwene adoration and honour or woorship attributing the first onely to god and the second with vs Catholickes to the blessed Virgin and Sainctes which is further manifest euen by the wordes obiected being truly translated which are these Verily the body of Mary was holy but yet not God Verily the Virgin was a Virgin and honorable but not geuen vnto vs for adoration but her self adored him who was borne of her flesh As also Let Mary be honoured and the Father and SoÌ„ne and the holy Ghost adored Let no man adore Mary c. This mistery is due to God And againe Though Mary be must excellent and holy and honourable yet not for adoration And sundry other such lyke all which do euidently conuince that S. Epiphanius alloweth woorship and honour to be geuen to the B. Virgin but not adoration to wit with sacrifice which is an honour Peculiar onely to God The 2. Paragraph S. Gregory notoriously corrupted against the woorshiping of Images Speaking against Images pag. 152. he affirmeth that the Church of Rome forbade the woorship of them us appeareth saith he by the Epistle of Gregory to Serenus which he noteth in the margent to be Epist 109. li. 7. It is this ministers euill hap by most of his citatations to manifest to the world his foly and falshood For who not distracted would vrge that against his aduersary which impugneth him self and that in such a maner as will easely conuince him of fraude and wilfull malice For fiirst S. Gregory in the place cyted reproueth Serenus for breaking casting downe of Images which were set vp in Churches though the said Serenus did the same through zeale by reason of some who committed Idolatry thereby affirming further that therefore Pictures are vsed in Churches that those which know not letters at least should reade by seeing in the wales those thinges which they could not reade in bookes And then he concludeth Thy brotherhood therefore ought to haue preserued the pictures and to haue hindred the people from their adoration that so the ignorant might haue from whence to gather knowledg of the history and the people not sinne in adoration of the picture Here S. Gregory alloweth the vse of pictures in Churches shewing the commodity arrisinge thereby and withall reprehendeth Serenus though through zeale for breaking and casting them downe what may we thinke then he would haue said against Whyte and other his brethren who through heresy and malice prohibite all vse or place thereof in Churches if they had bene then extant and made knowen vnto him But though with Catholickes he allow the placing of them in Churches yet M. Whyte will vrge that he forbiddeth their woorship The woorship which he forbiddeth according to his owne wordes is adoration which word the Fathers frequently vse for that honour which is onely proper to God And that S. Gregory ment no other is manifest by an other Epistle writen to the said Serenus Ep. 9. l. 9. vpon the self same occasion where hauing repeated the forsaid vtility of pictures and adding that not without cause antiquity admitted Histories to be painted in the venerable places or Churches of Sainctes he directethe Serenus in him all pastors how to instruct the people in theire lawfull vse as shewing them by testimonies of sacred scriptures that nothing made with hand ought to be adored seing it is writen Luc. 4. The Lord thy god thou shalt adore c. As also By sight of the thing done or the history let them conceaue the feruour of compunction and let them be humbly prostrated in the adoration of the onely omnipotent holy Trinity By which it is most manifest that the woorship here forbidden by S. Gregory to Images is onely that adoration which is proper to god And that otherwise he thought Images duly to be worshipped appeareth by his 7. booke and 5. Epistle wheare wryting to Bishop Ianuarius concerning one Peter lately conuerted from Iudaisine to Christianity who violently had taken a Sinagoug from the Iewes and placed therein the Image of the Mother of God and our Lord and the venerable Crosse c. In redresse whereof he exhortethe the said Bishope that the Image and the Crosse taken away againe from thence with that veneration or reuerence which it meete to restore that which was violently taken away to wit the Sinagouge So that in steed of impugning due worship to Images these poyntes folowing may all heritikes learne of S. Gregory First that he proueth the vse thereof from antiquity Secondly that he alloweth the placing thereof in Churches and impugneth the breakers or pullers of them downe though their excuse or pretence be feare of Idolatry in the People Thirdly that the same in steed of hurt do much profit the ignorant that can not reade And lastly that in plaine tearmes he calleth the Crosse Crucem veneran dam Venerable And directeth that both the Image of our B. Lady and the Crosse should be remoued cum ea qua dignum est veneratione with that worship which is meete or they deserue So that I could wish our needy minister to be better aduysed hereafter in his citinge of S. Gregory against Catholick religion The 5 Paragraph The Councell of Eliberis corrupted against Images Here now I am come to the last corruption which I intende to display the which I haue purposly reserued therewith to close vp the taist of my Reader so notorious it is for the Authors depraued and so pregnant and dextrous in the conueyance As touching the first whearas euery one of the former deprauations those of the Rhemistes onely excepted resteth in abusing the authority of some one particuler man this stryketh at a whole

haith bene no where externall and visible Now during all these ages when was M. W. company of men visibly professing the same faith that he doth Finally D. Fulke though not acknowledging so great an inuisibility yet wryteth that in the tyme of Boniface the third which was Anno 607. the Church was inuisible and fled into wildernesse there to remaine a long season To these testimonies we may adde the former heretofore alledged touching their Churches not being vpon the first reuolt of Luther From all which it is ineuitably concluded against this our Architect of lyes that the protestants imaginary Church consisting of aery supposales of certaine inuisibilistes had no subsisting or being in the world for these laste thousand yeres at the least before the Apostacy of that vnfortunate wicked Monke The 19 Vntruth In defence of Preistes mariage Page 343. The Doctor much Apologizing defending the mariage of the Cleargy affirmeth that the Church of Rome houldeth contrary herein to that which was taught in the Primitiue Church Now for the triall of this falshood let vs concurr to that which is confessed by our learned aduersaties concerning the same First then Cartwright confesseth of the first Councell of Nyce which was celebrated in the 3. Century or age after Christ that it taught that vnto those which were chosen into the ministery it was not lawfull to take a wyfe afterwardes only being maried before entrance into the ministery it was lawfull for them to vse the benefyte of the precedent mariage In lyke sort M. Iewell in the defence of the Apology page 195. after the editioÌ„ of Anno 1571. speaking of preistes mariages thus acknowledgeth Here I graunt M. Harding it lyke to find some good aduantage as hauing vndoubtedly a great number of holy Fathers on his side Lastly Chemniâ—ius graunteth that this doctryne that preistes can not mary is taught by Origen Ierome Ambrose Innocentius Ciritius Epiphanius Now here I referr to the iudgment of any indifferent reader whether we are to beleue these former learned protestantes ingeniously confessing the practise of this our Catholick doctrine in the primitiue Church to the preiudice and endangering of theire owne cause or M. Whyte denying the same for the better tecture and pretext of his owne sociable lyfe and his ministeriall copulation The 20 Vntruth Against Images page 344. Inueighing much against the religious vse of Images among other thinges he saith according to the tytle of that his digression that touching Images the Church of Rome houldeth contrary to that formerly was houlden And after alledgeth that the auncient Christians of the Primitiue Church had no Images But the contrary hereto is most true For first we finde that the Centuristes do wryte that Lactantius who lyued in the fourth Century or age affirmeth many superstitious thinges concerning the efficacy of Christes Image Doctor Fulke affirmeth that Paulinus a very auncient Author caused Images to be painted on Church wales In lyke sort touching the signe of the Crosse of which there is the same reason and ground the Centuristes teach that Ambrosius multa commâ—morat superstitiosâ— de cruce inuâ—nta The said Centuristes also affirme of the third age after Christ that Crucis Imaginem c. Tertulian is thought to affirme that Christians had the Image of the Crosse in the places of their publike meetinges as also priuatly in their owne houses So farâ— did M. W. erre from the truth in affirming that touching Images The Church of Rome bouldeth contrary to that which was formerly houlden But I see if it be proofe enough for M. Whyte onely to condemne the Church of Rome must not be innocent The 21. Vntruth Against Transubstantiation Page 346. The D. thus writeth Lastly I name Transubstantiation c. wherein it is plaine that they meaning the Catholickes haue altered the Faith of the auncient Fathers Here for the tryall hereof we are to appeale to the sayinges and confessions of his owne syde where we shall fynd that M. Whytes credit and estimation is particulerly in this as in the former most daungerously wonnded euen by the handes of his owne breethren For we fynd it confessed by the Centuristes that Chrisostomus transubstantiatiorem vid tur confirmare Chrisostem is thought to confirme transubstantiation In lyke sort by the Iudgment of other protestantes Theophilactus Dama ceâ—us plane inclinant ad transubstantiatiorem Theophilact D. mascen do euidently inclâ—ne to Transubstantiation Answearable hereto Occolampadius doth charge Damascen with the said doctrine Finally D. Hâ—mfrey writeth that Gregory the great brought in Transâ—bstantiation In Ecclsiam verÃ² saith he speaking of our conuersion quid inuexerunt Gregorius et Augustinus Intâ—lâ—runt c. Transubstantiationem Now I would demaund of our minister with what countenance he can auâ—rre that in the doctrine of TraÌ„substantiation we haue altered the faith of the auncient fathers if he obserue what is taught to the contrary by his owne brethren who not beleuing the doctrine it self yet do confesse the great antiquity thereof May we thinke that M. W. was ignorant of these Fathers myndes therein If so then are his followers much deceaued in ouerualâ—ing his good partes and literature and withall the obscurity of his owne iudgment touching the said fathers in this poynt haith thus farr preuailed that it haith ministred fitâ— opportunity to the Reader to take notice how cleare perspicuous shyning our Catholick faith of Transubstantiation was euen in those primitiue tymes So the Opacity and darknes of the earth is occasionally the cause of the dayes light The 22. Vntruth Against the conuersion of England by S. Augustine the Monke Page 354. and 355. to depriue S. Augustine the Monke of the honour and reuerence due vnto him by vs English for our conuersion the M. thus wryteth Touching the conuersion of England by Augustine the Monk in which our aduersaries make so much a doe I answeare two thinges fiâ—st that supposing he dâ—d conuert it it was not to the present Romane faith c. Secondly I say he conuerted not our Country at all excepting the planning of some tryfling Ceremonies Here you see that the first poynt of this passagâ— to wit touching Augustines connâ—rsion and his faith is Hipotheticall and deliuered with som hesitation and doubting the other recalling the first Categoricall absolute and peremptory Now in my reprouall of this his falshood I will vnyte together the two former disioynted parcels and directly proue from our aduersaries penaes that S. Augustine did conuert our Country to the present Catholick Romane faith in the euicting whereof I will content my self with the confessions of the Centuristes and of D. Humfrey For if we peruse the history of those Censorions Magdeburgians who reproue and controule at their pleasure all the Fathers of all ages we shall fynd that these Centuristes acknowledging S. Augustines conuersion of vs in their Alphabeticall Table of the 6. Century at

Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Text snippets containing the quad