Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	catholic_n	church_n	roman_a	2,613	5	8.9971	5	true

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A16171	A disproofe of D. Abbots counterproofe against D. Bishops reproofe of the defence of M. Perkins reformed Catholike. The first part. wherin the now Roman church is maintained to be true ancient catholike church, and is cleered from the vniust imputation of Donatisme. where is also briefly handled, whether euery Christian can be saued in his owne religion. By W. B.P. and D. in diuinity	Bishop, William, 1554?-1624.	1614 (1614)	STC 3094; ESTC S102326	229,019	434

order or bee it by disorder look you handle your weapons more handsomely then you haue done hitherto or els you are like enough to receiue the foile An answer vnto the second section of the first chapter MR Abbot to make a smoother waie to his doutie arguments by which hee striueth to proue the Roman church not to bee the Catholike church saith that hee entreth vnto them to note the absurdity implied in this comon stile of Catholiks the Catholike Roman church How now good sir have you so soone forgotten the errand wherabout you went did not you vndertake to demonstrate that his maiestie had alreadie imbraced the Catholike faith And if you will needs leave that which you professed to pursue in the suddes for a season and fall vpon the church of Rome do not stand triffling vpon tearmes and titles like an idle Caviller but as it beseemes a Doctor of the chaire prove soundly if you can that the now church of Rome doth not beleeve and professe all points of the Catholike faith whether the church of Rome may bee called absolutlie the Catholike church or no or in what sence it is so called are other by questions scarse incident at least nothing necessarie to that wee have now in hand for whether the church of Rome bee stiled the Catholike church or no so that it hold entirely the true Catholike faith then maie his maiestie lawfully and laudably receiue and defend the whole doctrine of the said church and to obtaine saluation must make himself a member therof which was all that I humblie craved of his most excellent Maiestie The issue then of this present question and the marke that M. Abbot should levell att is to shew that his maiestie embracing the faith of the church of Rome should not embrace the true Catholike faith if hee do not effect this hee doth nothing if leaving his issue hee fall to plucking of vizards as hee to excuse his vnseasonable digression doth write from I know not whose faces as though he going about this matter had mett by the waie with some maske or mummery may he not well bee resembled to a boy that sent on an errant falleth to blowing of feathers whither the wind will carrie them and lets his Masters busines alone till hee hath ended his owne sport but such is the mans humour hee must bee dispenced withall for observing anie good order well seing there is no remedy let him range at his pleasure let vs winke att the method so the matter bee tolerable thus then doth hee goe about to prove the Roman church not to bee Catholike No particuler church can bee the Catholike church but the Roman church is a particular church Ergo the Roman church is not the Catholike church Againe to the same effect No part can bee the whole but the Roman church is a part of the Catholike church therfore it cannot bee the whole Catholike church These be his arguments reviewed and put into the best frame that maie bee to avoide all disputes about the forme As I do verie willinglie also let passe his most idle bables of Balaams and Anianus Asses and his scarse sweet poem of horse balles singing in the poole Nos poma natamus bicause such scurrility becomes not divines yea is scarse tollerable in any sort of ciuil men to the Arguments then thus I answere If the conclusion were granted to M. Abbot he were no whitt the nearer to obtaine his intended purpose for what is there concluded aganist the church of Rome maie in the verie same forme bee concluded against the church of England for example no particular church can bee the Catholike church but the church of England is a particular church therfore it cannot bee the Catholike church which is soe apparant that M. Abbot cannot denie it whervpon it followeth most cleerly that this argument can serve no more for disswading his maiesty from admitting the doctrine of the church of Rome Page 13. then from entertayning the doctrine of the church of England therfore it is to be reiected as wholy impertinent to this purpose But M. Abbot saith that atleast it will serve to convince the absurditie of the papists stile who vse to coople together these two tearmes Catholike Roman which hangeth no better together saith hee here then vniuersall particular though afterward better aduised hee within the compasse of two leaves doth confesse that both these tearmes maie in good sence bee ioyned together these be his words Particular churches are called Catholike and particuler persons are Called Catholikes as a man would saie vniuersalists for maintayning communion and fellowship of the Catholike faith with the church of the whole world so that even after M. Abbots owne declaratioÌ„ a Roman Catholike is not as much to saie as a particular vniversall but a particuler man or church that holdeth coÌ„munion of faith with the vniversall church was it not then a great oversight in a man reputed to â—ee of some Iudgment to insist so vehementâ—â—e vpon trifling tearmes that were both besides the purpose and withall true in themselues as you shall heare afterwardes if they be evenlie and fairely taken Notwithstanding bicause the foresaid arguments bee as it were the coÌ„mon hackneys of protestants ever and anone in their mouthes and writings and haue not been formerly answered by any that I haue seen and for that the solution of them will serve to answere all that M. Abbot hath raked together against the church of Rome in fower paragraffes of this chapter I will more particularly and fully dissolue them I say then first the argument is mistaken and doth not conclude that which is in question the question is not whether the Roman church bee the Catholike church in vniuersall but whether the Roman church maie bee called the Catholike church or rather whether it maie bee couched togither in stile with the Catholike church M. Abbot saith no these bee his words For the pulling of this vizard from their faces I noted the absurditie that is emploied in that stile of the Catholike Roman church for the Catholike church I saie is the vniversall church the Roman church is a particular church therfore to saie the Catholike Roman church is all one as to saie the vniuersall particuler church This was M. Abbots first argument and the drift of it was to disprove that stile of ours the Catholike Roman church Now in his latter reformed argument hee is come to change the tearmes and in stead of that the particular Roman church cannot bee said called or stiled the Catholike church doth bring in his conclusion the Roman church is not the Catholike church wherin lieth a great fallacy for as the learned do well know tranfire a rebus ad voces vâ—lÃ¨ contra Ã vocibus adres est agere sophistam hee plaies the part of a sophister that passeth either from thinges to words or from words to things which all protestants doe when they vse this kind of

the whole face of their church being as he raileth and writeth berayed with the filth of Idolatry if the church of Rome be such a monster as hee would make her I desire him to explicate in particular which be those fundamentall points that do constitute church a the true member of the Catholike church In the meane season it is pleasant to heare how roundly hee reckeneth vp without either staggering or blushing the Iolly agreement which hee takes to bee betweene their church and ours wee do not saith hee take vpon vs to bee any other church then that which they call the old but the same church reformed wee reteyne still the same scriptures which they acknowledge true saving that you haue cut of at one clap fiue books of the old testament wee retayne the same articles of faith which they professe you should for modesties sake haue added except some twentie or thirtie wee retayne the same sacraments of Baptisme and the supper of the Lord. Iust if bread and wine bee the same with the blessed bodie and bloud of Christ Besids how do wee agree about the other five Sacraments which wee retayne and you haue cast away They finally retaine the same forme of service except that they haue cut of the best parts of it and as it were pulled out the hart and bowells of the sacrifice and consecration leaving to themselues and their miserable followers onely the paâ—ings and offals Behold the goodlie conformitie of the old and new English church of late devised and published by M. R. Abbot minister of the word and teacher of the reformed church of England Hee is so farr of as hee saies from Donatisme as that he doth teach the church never to haue perished no not in the City of Rome it self why then hath hee taken so much paines to proue the church of Rome to be turned Donatisticall vnles hee will now also in a very calme and pitifull humour allow even the Donatists church it self to haue been a part of the true Catholike church And so consequently like a good Atheisticall libertine allow all heretikes that professed Christs name to haue been true members of his church Hauing thus confuted that which M. Abbot had to obiect against their agreement in the maine point of the Donatists heresie I now come to the second resemblance that is betweene the Anabaptists an ofspring of the protestants and the Donatists who now do teach rebaptisation as the Donatists did then which M. Abbot granteth but saith my foolerie therin needeth no answere because the Anabaptists bee exploded out of all protestant churches And to that comparison which I made betweene the diuision of the protestants into Lutherans Sacramentaries and Anabaptists with the partition of the Donatists into Donatists Maximianists and Rogatists hee saith that I should rather haue devided Papists into Anabaptists secularists and Iesuists what voluntary light babling is this who ever before M. Abbot tooke the Anabaptists to bee papists when as they as stifly deny the popes authoritie the sacrifice of the Masse the reall presence the merites of good workes and most other articles of our religion as any other protestants And albeit they differ from the Sacramentaries in some few matters as the Sacramentaries do also from the Lutherans yet they bee descended from them and do agree with them in most points of religion wherfore they may bee aswell sorted and ranked with them as the Rogatists and Maximianists were with the Donatists neither will it helpe M. Abbot to say that they cast the Anabaptists out of their congregation For the Donatists did no lesse excommunicate and chace out of their churches the Maximianists and Rogatists then the Sacramentaries do the Anabaptists It was then rather a foolery of M. Abbots vpon so foolish a reason to deny the Anabaptists to belong vnto the common body of the protestants and more impudent folly is it to associate them to vs from whom they dissent further then the other protestaÌ„ts do And because wee bee now entred into degrees of comparison let it bee taken for a superlatiue folly in M. Abbot to divide all men of our religion into Anabaptists Secularists and Iesuists for to returne the Anabaptists to themselues as their owne sweet brood with whom they consent against vs in most controversies of religion Do the other names of Secularists and Iesuists comprehend all Romane Catholikes bee there no lay Catholiks at all nor any other religious persons in our church besids secularists and Iesuists what was become of M. Abbots senses when hee wrote this The Seminarists and Iesuists being compared vnto all other Catholiks both religious and lay do scarse amount as I gesse vnto the thousand part of that body So that here M. Abbot infabling fumbling and confounding rather then in diuiding surmounts the highest degree of comparison R. ABBOT THE third resemblance that M. Bishop mentioneth is this They held not the faith of the blessed Trinitie entire For some of them like the Arrians taught the sonne of God to bee lesser then the father Though as S. Austin noteth this was not marked of their followers This hee applieth to vs in this sort sundrie of their principall teachers as Melancthon Caluin and others do corrupt the sound doctrine of the holy Trinitie as I haue shewed in the preface of my second part of the reformatioÌ„ of a deformed Catholike though the common sort of their followers do not greatly obserue it In which third point hee verie wilfully belieth S. Augustin the Donatists and vs. For S. Austin doth not saie that of the Donatists but only of a second Donatus who was a follower of the first who had an vnsound opinion of the Trinity which the Donatists were so farre of from approuing that there was scarse one among them that knew that hee thought so to him only is that to bee referred which S. Austin saith If any of them haue said that the sonne is lesser theÌ„ the father yet they haue not denied him to bee of the same substance S. Austin never vpbraided the Donatists with this error Aug. Epistola 50 though Theodoret do But hee spake by hearsay How M. Bishop dealeth with Melancthon Caluin and others I haue fully declared in my answere to that preface W. B. HERE is a whot charge and a peremptory condemnation before due examinatioÌ„ as you shall heare that I haue at one clap belied S. Austin the Donatists and their good Maisters Melancthon Caluin and others But if M. Abbot can make good no one of those imputations then it must bee granted that hee hath at once let slip a leash of slanderous lies Let vs descend to the particulars I write that S. Austin reporteth some of the Donatists to haue had a bad opinion of the blessed Trinity M. Abbot taketh mee vp short auouching that hee affirmeth that of a second Donatus onely well was not that second Donatus a great famous Donatist and had hee not many followers but not

Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Text snippets containing the quad