Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	apostle_n	doctrine_n	time_n	1,729	5	3.4946	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A01008	A plea for the reall-presence Wherein the preface of Syr Humfrey Linde, concerning the booke of Bertram, is examined and censured. Written by I.O. vnto a gentleman his friend.	Floyd, John, 1572-1649.; Lynde, Humphrey, Sir.	1624 (1624)	STC 11113; ESTC S115112	24,472	65

A PLEA FOR THE REALL-PRESENCE WHEREIN The preface of Syr Humfrey Linde concerning the booke of Bertram is examined and censured WRITTEN by I.O. vnto a Gentleman his friend VVith permission Anno 1624. TO HIS MVCH HONOVRED FRIEND SYR I haue receaued the Booke of Bertram translated into English reprinted by Syr Humfrey Linde with a dedicatory and a longe Preface before it and togeather your request to haue my iudgement aswell concerning the credit of the treatise as the verity of the Preface Your singular affection and manifold curtesies shewed towards me ioyned with your so religious loue of the Catholike truth haue so obliged my selfe and my studyes vnto you as I may not be backeward in yeelding vnto your so pious and iust request For I know your require this Censure not for your own satisfaction who are better grounded then to be remoued or moued with the vanity of such a trifle but for the more full information of some of your friends whome Syr Humfrey would engage to run the same vnaduised course with himselfe who doth (a) Praefa fol. 3. b. lin 21. fol. 14. b. lin 16. engage the credit of his Religion the surety of his Saluation vpon the worthines of this Tracte I haue heerin exceeded the breuity of a Censure as being desirous to lay open not only the insufficiency of this Preface to preuent the Readers danger but also briefly the verity of the Reall-presence for the Prefacers by me desired conuersion vnto the Catholike church The worke being wholly and totally yours by the free full gift of the Authour you may dispose thereof at your pleasure and if you iudge the same prolixe you may select such particles thereof as you shall esteeme most fit to be sent to your friends and to accept of the whole as I know you will with the same affection as it is offered vnto you by him who doth euer rest Your seruant in Christ Iesus I.O. A PLEA FOR THE REALL-PRESENCE THERE are fiue points about which you may require satisfaction touched in Syr Humfreys Preface First concerning the deuided Iury of the dissension of Catholike Authors about Bertram Secondly the truth concerning the Author and authority of the booke Thirdly concerning the fidelity of the translation therof into English Fourthly concerning the sentence of Gods word about the Reall-presence Fiftly concerning the belief in this point of the Church of the nynth age wherein Bertram liued whereof Syr Humfrey doth much presume and seems to preferre the same before the word of Christ as shall appeare These pointes I will declare with the most breuity and clarity I may THE FIRST POINT Syr Humfrey conuicted eyther of falshood or grosse ignorance about the Iury. COncerning the Iury of Catholikes about Bertram the Preface vttereth many vntruths shewing if this be done wittingly the falshood if vnwittingly the ignorance of the authour and that aswell about the nature of thinges as in the latin tongue In the first kind he hath six grosse errours and mistakings vpon which are grounded the six pretended dissensions of the twelue Catholick by him chosen Iurors to goe vpon Bertram his doctrine and booke The first is not to distinguish betwixt writing darkely of the truth and openly against the truth By this mistaking he imposeth a falshood vpon Cardinall Bellarmine the Foreman of the Iury and so maketh a iarre betwixt him and (c) Preface fol. 7. b. lin 1. fol. 4. b. lin 6. 8. fol. 5. lin 5. F. Persons the second of the Iury who sayth that Bertram dyed Catholike and neuer taught hereticall doctrine but this booke after his death hath been corrupted by heretikes This verdict is the truth as shall afterward appeare Neyther doth Cardinall Bellarmine say to the contrary that Bertram was a singular Nouelict or that he was opposed for his hereticall doctrine These are Syr Humfreys mistakings not Bellarmines assertions Bellarmine only sayth that Bertram and Scotus before him writ doubtfully of the truth moued questions about the Reall presence yet sayth (d) Bellar. l. 3. de Eu. char c. 8. §. iam sententia he neither they nor any other in that age did teach openly against it So that by Cardinall Bellarmines iudgment Bertrā might be Catholicke in his opinion as F. Persons sayth though for his darke writing he were misliked The second errour is to thinke that if one write truely in sense he is not to be condemned for vsing darke doubtful speech against the style of the church Vpon this errour is built the second opposition betwixt the two next Iurors Because Langdalius sayth Bertram (e) Preface fol. 5. a. circa finē b. init for sense held the Catholicke doctrine Aug. epist 188. but transgressed in the forme of wordes Syr Humfrey inferres that then Garetius had no reason to say that Bertram writ fondly or dotingly As though to crosse the tradition of the Church though but in forme of words were not Dotage or insolent madnes and against the prescript of the Apostle (g) 1. Tim. 6.20 Shune prophane nouelty of speech Vse (h) 2. Tim. 1.13 the forme of sound words The third errour is to make the publishing of doctrine against the truth and the publishing of a booke that writs darkly of the truth to be the same By this errour he putteth variāce (i) fol. 6. lin 4. betwixt D. Sanders saying The Sacramentarian doctrine was not published in Bertrās age And M. Reynoldes who affirmes That Bertram as Scotus had done before him writ doubtfully of the truth of the Sacramēt What oppositiō I pray you betwixt these two sentences that Syr Humfrey should say they hold togeather like (k) fol. 5. lin vltim a rope of sande Yea doth not the saying of M. Reynolds confirme the saying of D. Sanders For if as M. Reynoldes sayth euen Bertram and Scotus that are most challenged in this matter taught not sacramentarian doctrine openly but only writ doubtfully of the truth then most true is the saying of D. Sanders that the sacramentarian doctrine was not published or taught publiquely in that age Is it not great seelines to challenge those speeches as contradictious and holding togeather as a rope of sande which so agree and are so knit togeather as the one includeth the other The fourth errour to thinke that one cannot be the disciple or follower of one that is dead many hundred yeares according to which errour men now liuing could not be the disciples and followers of the Apostles and of their doctrine This is the ground of the discord he deuiseth betwixt the seauenth and eighth of the Iury. Because Valentia sayth that Bertrams book is taynted with the leuen of Berengarius his errour Syr Humfrey (l) Fol. 6. a lin 20. vrgeth his saying as opposite vnto Posseuinus that Oecolāpadius corrupted the booke and set it out vnder Bertrams name for sayth Syr Humfrey Berengarius liued 600. yeares agoe and Oecolampadius an hūdred

that this Tract on which Syr Humfrey doth engage the credit of his Religion is darke obscure intricate corrupted since the first writing therof by heretikes not fit to be vulgarly read Secondly by the Iury of his owne falshoodes and errours and the Round Councell-table of the Protestant historians of Magdeburge as Iudge pronoūcing sentence and censuring this booke of Bertram to be papistical euē in the point of Transubstantiation so condemning syr Humfrey of want of iudgement that builds his Religion against this point of Papistry vpon it Thirdly by the Iury or rather iniury of mistranslations offered vnto the booke particulerly in twelue besides many other passages thereof Syr Humfreys owne conscience being Iudge and condemning both this booke as being so papistical as not fit to be truely set forth in English and himselfe of vnsincerity in thus corrupting the works of ancient Authours Fourthly by the Iury of the writers in Bertrams age professing the substāce of bread and wine to be turned into the substāce of the body and bloud of Christ not metaphorically but litterally not by figure but by truth not by shaddow but in verity not only sacramentally but essentially The generall Councell of Nice about the same tyme as Iudge pronouncing the sentence accordingly that bread and wine to be made the body and bloud of Christ not by figure not by metaphore but in verity really Whereby Syr Humfrey that dares write that the Church would by no meanes take the word of Christ This is my body in the litterall sense and for the reall and substantial presence of his body in the Sacrament is condemned of being eyther desirous to deceaue soules in matters of their saluation a thing vnworthy of a Christian much more of a Christian Knight or els as exceedingly to blame to write and speake so confidently of thinges he doth not know nor vnderstand Finally by the Iury of Christs his owne expresse deposition and sentence so many tymes reiterated in holy Scripture and his Omnipotency is the Iudge that defines and declares that heere he meant according to the Letter or els is vnworthy of the title of Verity it selfe For is it the part of exact and infinite Truth to promise a thing often and earnestly in plaine and expresse wordes not to performe the same according to the letter if the performance thereof according to the Letter lye in his power Christ Iesus doth often and earnestly promise that bread and wine in the Sacrament should be and is in all ages to the worlds end his Body and Bloud it lyes in his power to performe this promise according to the letter by turning the substance of bread and wine into the substāce of his body bloud so making bread wine to become really and substātially according to the letter his body bloud in the christiā sacramēt vntil the worlds end And can they think him to be Verity it selfe who thinke that notwithstanding so many his expresse promises he doth not performe his word according to the Letter though it be in his power so to performe it Verily howsoeuer they may gloze the matter in wordes they doe not esteeme of his word as of the word of Verity in their hart which Syr Humfrey as being not very dexterous in applying Metaphores nor wise inough to ponder his words as is required in a writer doth openly professe euen also in wordes by comparing the word of Christ in this point vnto that notorious lye of the strumpet so famously recorded in Scripture as hath beene sayd I will end for what can I say What can I do more Verily if I might thereby reclayme Syr Humfrey from his opposing Christ Iesus and his Church I would be glad to loose as many drops of my bloud as I haue heere spent inke to shew his errour But if I cannot so preuaile with him I must leaue him to Gods iustice in the number of them described by the Apostle Tit. 3.11 Qui delinqunt proprio iudicio condemnati assuring him that these wordes of Christ This is my body howsoeuer he now would eneruate Epist ad Freder Miconium cap. 4. emasculate and disgrace them by foule comparison will proue as Melansthon sayth in the day of iudgemēt Thunderbolts against the denyers of the Reall presence who flye vnto Metaphores rather then submit their vnderstandings vnto the irrefragable euidency of the sacred Text because it is aboue the capacity of their carnal Reason Faults escaped in the Printing Pag. Lin. Fault Correction 4. 7. your you Ibid. in m. fol. 3. b. lin 21. fol. 3. a. lin 21. Ibid. in m. fol. 14. b. lin 16. fol. 14. a. lin 16. 9. in m. Preface fol. 7. b. lin 1. fol. 4. b. lin 6. 8. fol. 5. lin 5. Preface fol. 4. b. fol. 5. Ibid. ouer against lin 10   fol. 7. b. lin 1. 10. in m. fol. 6. lin 4. fol. 5. b. lin 5. Ibid. 9. shune shunne 11. 11. errour to errour is to Ibid. in m. lin 20. lin 10. 12. 9. this his Ibid. 22. errour that error Is that 13. in m. lin 18. lin 16. Ibid. 20. eyther of falshood eyther falshood 20. in m. Concord Gen. Conrad Ges Ibid. 26. challenged alleadged 21. 19. predecessor which predecessor which 23. in m. lin 14. lin 16. Ibid. in m. lin 21. lin vltim Ibid. 9. with administration without administration 24. 11. this his Ibib. in m. lin 12. lin 13. Ibib. in m. fol. 11. a. fol. 21. a 25. 19. First for to examine First to examine Ibid. in m. fol. a. can 19. fol. 9. lin 19. Ibid. in m. fol. 8. a. fol. 9. a 29. 21. he not he doth 31. 1. Fittly doth Thus fittly doth 32. 17. made made 33. 13. appeare appeares 35. 7. 8. the substance thereof the substance therof Ibib. 17. in into Ibid. 18. Christ Christs 39. 11. recorders recordes 40. 8. sequently frequently 42. 11. text truth 44. 18. then their 46. in m. fol. 6. lin 19. fol. 1. lin 19. 49. 8. Stratagonist Antagonist 53. 13. sustance substance FINIS