Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	caluin_n	leo_n	saithe_v	18	3	16.3320	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A16704	Luthers life collected from the writinges of him selfe, and other learned Protestants, together with a further shorte discourse, touchinge Andreas Melanchton, Bucer, Ochine, Carolostadius, Suinglius, Caluine and Beza, the late pretended reformers of religion. Taken from the onely reporte of learned Protestants themselues. By Iohn Brerely priest and author of the Protestants apologie.	Anderton, Lawrence.; Anderton, James, fl. 1624, attributed name.	1624 (1624)	STC 3606; ESTC S106394	244,302	202

Nazianzeno Basilio Chrisostomo Eyewitnesses were the reporters hereof Nazianzen Basile and Chrisostom whome our aduersaries doe (*) maister D. Willet in his Synopsis printed 1592. pag. 258. chargeth the fathers with rigorouse and vnnaturall chastisinge of theire bodies contrarie to the rule of the ghospell reproueinge there allso Saint Basile and Gregorie Nazianzen for pluckinge downe them selues by immoderate fastinge and concludeth there sayinge Where in all the scriptures learned these men thus to punishe theire bodies therefore reprehend they (n) Caluin institut lib. 4. cap. 13. §. 9. yt is further sayde of them Non solum à vino carnibus abstinent c. abstayned from wine and fleshe o certaine of the fathers did euilly vnderstande (p) ibidem lib. 4. cap. 13. §. 13. fine Caluin saithe Fateor hunc locum à quibusdam ex patribus male intellectum atque hinc natam esse voluntariae paupertatis affectationem Math. 19.21 from whence did springe the affectation of voluntarie pouertie and againe he saythe further (p) Caluin institut l. 4. ● 13. §. 17. saith Hoc inquinut ab vltima memoria fuit obseruatum vt se alligarent continentia vot● qui totos se Demin● dicare vellent fateor quoque antiquitus receptum fuisse hunc morem sed eam atatem sic ab omni vitio liberam fuisse non concedo This saye the papistes was obserued from the furthest age that they who would wholly consecrate them selues to the lorde should bynde them selues with the vowe of continencie I confesse this custome was auncientlie receyued but that age not to be soe free from blame c. in soe much as he forbeareth not to reprehend S. Austine sayinge (q) Caluin lib. 4. c. 13. §. 16. saithe Interim non dissimulo vel in illa quam Augustinus commendat prisca forma monachismi esse non nihil quod mihi parum placeat I doe not dissemble but that euen in that auncient forme of monachisme which Austine commendeth is somewhat which I dislike in like playne sorte are the fathers charged with error in monachisme by diuers (r) maister Carthwrighte in his 2. replie part 1. printed 1575. saithe that monckes are antichristian notwithstandinge theire auncienty pag. 502. circa med and that Hieroms Monkes Hermites and Anchorites were at that tyme very grosse pag. 510. ante med other protestant writers Sixtenthlie as concerninge Saincte Peter Caluine saythe (s) Caluin institut l. 4. c. 6. §. 6. saythe Nam illae veteres ineptiae c. relatu quoque indignae sunt in Petro fundatam esse ecclesiam quia dictum sit super hanc Petram c. At nonnulli ex patribus sic exposuerunt sed quum reclamet tota scriptura quid eum authoritas aduersus Deum pratenditur Those auncient fooleries are vnworthie of rehearsal c. as that the churche was founded vpon Peter because yt was sayde to Peter vpon this rocke c. but certaine of the fathers haue soe expounded yt but the wholle scripture ys againste them c. and the verie like is affirmed by Danaeus (t) Danaeus in respons ad Bellarmin disput part 1. printed 1596. ad 3. controu cap. 25. pag. 277. post med saithe Dictum enim Christi Math. 16. Tu es Petrus super hanc petram c. pessimè de persona Petri sunt interpretati patres Caluines greate disciple Seauententhlie as concerninge Antichrists cominge not to be till the Roman Empier yett in beinge be firste ouerthrowne Caluine saythe therein of the fathers I (u) Caluin in omnes Pauli epistolas printed 1565. in 2. Thessal 2. vers 3. pag. 752. b. post med saithe Ac miror tam multos scriptores doctos alioqui acutos in re tam facili hallucinatos esse nisi quod quum errasset vnus turmatim alij fine iudicio sequuti sunt c. wonder that soe manie learned writers coulde be deceyued in soe easie a matter c. and the like acknowledgment is made by (x) See Iustus Molitor de Ecclesia militante printed 1605 pag. 110. Iustus Molitor and others Eightenthlie as concerninge the auncient primacie of the Romane churche Caluine affirmeth (y) Caluin institut lib. 4. cap. 7. §. 12. saithe Nulla est vox in eius scriptis qua superbius iactet primatus sui amplitudinem quam ista nescio quis episcopus non subiectus sit sedi apostolicae vbi in culpa inuenitur c. tribuit sibi ius corrigendi c. howe that S. Gregorie dothe in no place more proudlie boast of the amplitude of his sea then where he saythe I knowe not what Bishop is not subiecte to the Apostolicke sea if he be founde in faulte c. that also (z) Caluin ibidem lib. 4. cap. 7. §. 4. saithe Quod autem scribit Gregorius oblatum fuisse Leoni hunc honorē in synodo Chalcedonensi nullam habet veri speciem Gregorie did without any color of truthe write that the honor of beinge called vniuersall Bishop was offred to Pope Leo in the councell of Calcedon that likewise (a) Caluin ibidem §. 11. saithe of Pope Leo fuit enim vir ille vt eruditus ac fecundus ita gloriae dominationis supra modum cupidus Caluin institut lib. 4. cap. 7. §. 9. confesseth this affirminge that the Roman Bishops did then alledge this councell as beinge the councell of Nice which he reproueth whereas yt was in verie deed celebrated not longe after the Nycen councell and manie of the fathers of the Nycen councell present thereat And see the protestante writer Osiander in centur 4. lib. 3. cap. 2. pag. 295. confessinge and recitinge the 7. Canon of this Sardicum councell which prescribeth appeals to Rome Pope Leo was aboue measure desirouse of glorie and rule and that the o auncient councell of Sardis was alledged in S. Austines time as in proofe of appeals to Rome Nintenthlie as concerninge reprobation and induration Caluine saythe The (b) Caluin institut lib. 2. cap. 4. §. 3. saithe Veteres religiosi interdum simplicem quoque veritatis confessionem in hac parte reformidunt c. ne Augustinus illa quidem superstitione interdum solutus est quemadmodum vbi dicit indurationem excacationem non ad operationem Dei sed ad praescientiam spectare at istas argutias non recipiunt tot scripturae loquutiones c. auncient fathers were affraide to confesse the simple truthe in this behalfe c. and not Austine him selfe was sometimes free from that superstition as where he affirmeth that induratiō excecation pertayne not to the workinge of God but to his foreknowledge Twentithlie as concerninge the Euchariste Caluine saithe of the real presence That (c) Whereas Hillarie l. 8. de Trinitate post initium affirmeth manentem in nobis carnaliter filiū to wit our naturall and corporall vnion with Christe because that nos verè sub misterio carnē corporis

neque enim videre se quo pacto illi excusari queant qui alterutram tantum partem sumunt aut porrigunt cum nominatim Christus de calice loquatur bibite ex hoc omn es c. see this in Hospinian vbi supra fol. 21. a. b. compare these with the deuils foresayde reasons made to Luther and you shall discerne the matter of them bothe to be all one reasons and arguments which were by the deuill as heretofore vrged in his saide disputacion had with Luther as also Luther himselfe in this his nowe alledged verie booke written so manie (r) See next heretofore at k. yeres after the saide disputacion still vrgeth and prosecuteth the verie same (s) see in Luthers booke his obiectinge of sayinge masse for money tom 2. fol. 236. a. circa med b. circamed 238. b. initio the priestes not preachinge but sacrificeinge tom 2. fol. 236. b. ante med 238. b. prope initium the preistes not communicateinge to the people in bothe kindes tom 2. fol. 238. a. circa med the turninge of communion into priuate masse ibidem fol. 231. b. fine 238. a. fine and Luthers discourse against the intencion and faithe of the churche ibidem fol. 234. b. post med 235. a. b. circa med all which as appeareth next heretofore at n. o. are the verie same poyntes which the deuill affirmed and vrged againste Luther and are nowe in the places heare cited vrged by Luther against vs in allmoste the verye same wordes that the deuill vsed in his disputation with Luther as may appeare by conferinge of them both together arguments against the Masse III. THe matter fallinge out to be in all apparance thus odiouse sundrie excuses are pretended in answere therto which I will not conceall or dissemble but brieflie examine accordinge to the truthe of the storie First maister Charke and maister Fulke doe answere that by Luthers foresaide discource of his disputacion hadde with the deuill is meant (a) so saithe maister Charke in his replie to the censure c. printed 1581. fol. D. 5. D. 6. allso maister Fulke in his treatise against the the defence of the censure printed by Thomas Thomas pag. 234. initio answerethe sayinge hereof Luthers cōfession is onelie of a spirituall fighte in minde and no bodelie conference as maister Charke answered at firste onely a spirituall fighte in mynde and no bodelie conference What no sensible or bodelie conference with what face can they affirme this doth not Lauather himselfe confesse it to haue bene an (*) see nexte hereafter in the margine at d. apparition he being awaked doe not the manie other precedent and confessed like fearefull apparitions hapninge to Luther likewise in the nighte argue this allso to be of the like kinde doth not Luther himselfe in his foresaide treatise of this matter report howe the deuil then (b) Luther describinge there the sounde of satans voice speakinge to him saithe Haec illo dicente c. the deuill speakinge thus to me I burste forth all on sweate and my hart beganne to tremble and leape voce forti graui vtitur The deuil hath a base and stronge voice c. and then I learned howe it came to passe that sometimes earely in the morninge men were founde deade in they re beds which wordes the rather to giue colour to maister Charkes pretended onelie spirituall temptacion and no bodely conference are shamefullie falsified as beinge quite omitted by the diuines of Witemberge in theire later edition of Luthers workes but neuer the lesse are yett still extant in the more auncient edition of Luthers workes tom 6. Ien. Germ. fol. 28. and to the eternal discredit of the diuines of Witemberge who in manie other thinges haue likewise most shamefullie falsified him are yett allso acknowledged and verbatim recited by no meaner a protestant writer then Hospinian in histor sacram part 2. fol. 131. a. post med and by him there alledged out of Luther to 6. Ien. fol. 81. spake to him in a base and greate voice so fearefull as made Luther to sweate and his harte to tremble doth he not also reporte as before that the deuill spake sensiblie vnto him callinge him accordinge to the humor of his pride (c) see next here before at l. righte learned doctor Luther doth he not there also yett further affirme howe that (d) Luther tom 7. Witemb printed 1558. de missa priuat vnct sacerd fol. 230. a. post med saithe Ego planè persuasus sum Empserum Oecolampadium similes his ictibus horribilibus qua stationibus subit● extinct●s esse See also these wordes confessed by maister Fulke against the defence of the censure pag. 237. circa med and Lauather a learned Suinglian in his histor sacramentaria printed Tiguri 1563. fol. 24. a. prope finem acknowledginge the deuil to haue appeared to Luther saithe Scribit Lutherus diabolum noctu aliquoties sibi apparuisse secumque disputasse c. postea infert se credere quod Empserus Oecolampad alij illis similes ignitis his sagittis hastis diaboli tam subito expirauerunt Oecolampadius Empser and others were slayne with such horrible encounters This answere beinge therfore without all probabilitie and thoughe supposed for true yett whollie (*) Impertinent for in eyther case the persuasion and arguments whereto Luther here yeeldeth came confessedlie from the deuil and what difference then is there-whether the deuil made them to Luther by sensible cōference or inward suggestion impertinent A second answere of maister Sutlyffe is that Luther in his foresaide discource of this matter onelie (e) maister Sutlife de vera catholica Christi Ecclesia printed 1592. l. 2. c. 4. pag. 298. post med saithe Quod cum Luthero diabolum collocutum narrant primum est mendacium nam per somnum tantum diabolum secum colloqui visum vt est in libro dicit in what booke of Luther maister Sutlife is this founde you can alledge none and maister Sutlife ibidem pag. 299. paulo ante med further saithe hereof Lutherus autem nihil aliud peccauit quam quod vt homo Germanus non ita pridem monachus qui has de diabolorum apparitionibus monasticas fabulas è mente adhuc non eiecerat somnium narrat crasso filo monachis familiari quare si nullum aliud habeant huius calumnia fundamentum prater somnium quod etiam ipsi male detorquent nihil est c. Did euer man vse greater outfacinge bouldnesse declared his dreame What but his dreame maister Sutlyffe is there in Luthers wholle discource hereof so much as but mencion of anie dreame doth not Luther as before moste expresselie (f) see nexte heretofore at i. disclayme in dreames Are not also Luthers owne foresaide woords most directlie to the contrarie that he was first (g) see next heretofore at l. sodainelie awaked and that then after satan beganne the

disputation with him Againe doth not his foresaide affirminge of (h) next heretofore at d. Empser and Oecolampadius to haue bene slayne by such horrible encounters argue more then a dreame are men I pray you slaine by dreaminge or rather was not your selfe deepely dreaminge when you thought to outface and delude vs with an answere so groslie vntrue and thoughe wee should suppose yt for true yet no lesse plainly (i) Impertinent for what difference is there as in respect of the doctrine whether the deuill seduced Luther sleepinge or wakinge impertinent these foresaide answers of maister D. Fulke maister Charke and maister Sutliffe beinge so euidentlie vntrue Baldwinus betaketh himselfe to a thirde euasion And what saithe he First directlie against maister Charke maister Fulke and maister Sutliffe he acknowledgeth the conference betwene the deuil and Luther to haue bene not spirituall onelie nor yett a dreame but that it was a reall truth (k) Baldwinus in his book de disputatione Lutheri cum diabolo printed Islebij 1605. c. 4. fine pag. 83. fine saithe hereof Quapropter non est cur monachus miretur me fateri disputationem illam esse veram neque ioco neque hyperbolica sed serio historicè scriptam and againe there pag. 75. post med he saith Historiam illam tam prolixè tam consideratè Lutherus conscripserit quod enim eam scripserit quidem serio historicè etiamnum constanter fateor and see further there pag. 76. fine written saithe he by Luther not hyperbolicallie but seriouslie and accordinge to the truth of the historie Howe then would he euade the contracted substance of his longer answere is that Luther had before and then quite abandoned the masse that therefore the deuill intended no disputacion with Luther but onelie as by waye of stronge temptacion (l) see this there pag. 127. ante med to putt Luther in mind of his then acknowledged oulde errors and so thereto to driue him to dispaire vrginge to such purpos such only knowne truthes and reasons againste the masse as Luther then and before knewe to be most true and wherin Luther was allreadie satisfied In regarde whereof saithe he the deuill speaketh allwayes to Luther (m) Semper enim in praeterito loquitur Satan c. talis sacrificulus fuisti c. there pag. 127. fine in praeterito as in the time past thou saydste masse thou haste donne this and that c. But howe extremlie false or impertinent is all this first as concerninge the matter of dispaire it is meerly supposed and without so much as the least mencion of it either by the deuill or Luther in any part of all that continewed disputacion from the first line thereof (n) whereas some vrge howe that Luther doth here tom 7. fol. 230. b. post med as in answere to catholicks whoe he sawe would obiecte to him that the deuil was a lyer labor to preuent the same by shewinge that the deuil did sometimes speake trulie to an euill purpose alledginge there to that end the example of Iudas whom the deuil tempted with vrginge to him that he betrayed the innocent blood and so brought him to despaire with like alledginge allso the example of Cayne all this thoughe true is yet impertinent for it is no parte of the conference betwene the deuil and Luther in all which or any part● thereof is not any one syllable but so much as pointinge to dispaire as allso the conference is fullie ended before the cominge in of these nowe obiected wordes which are the onely wordes of Luther himselfe by him vsed vpon the occasion beforesayde manie yeares after the saide conference the which hapned longe before Luthers publishinge the same in writtinge whereof see heretofore in the beginninge of this section in the margine at k. to the last Also the verie contrarie thereof is signified in that disputacion as where satan quite against all pretence of dispaire setteth forthe the greate mercies of Christe (o) Luther tom 2. Witemb fol. 228. b. paulo ante med alledgeth the deuil as sayinge to Luther Nos spiritus reiecti non fidimus illius misericordia neque habemus eum pro mediat●re aut saluatore sed exhorrescimus vt saenum iudicem eiusmodi fidem non aliam tu habebat c. ideo à Christo tanquam crudeli iudice confugiobatis ad S. Mariam sanctos illi erant mediatores inter ros Christu● sic erepta est gloria Christo c. vrginge there the same as a speciall argument against prayer to sainctes and no where in all that disputation extenuateth gods mercie furthermore thoughe wee should admitte this pretence of dispaire for true it is yet impertinent as makinge nothinge to proue that the deuill therefore did not instructe Luther against the masse for both of them maye well stand together Secondlie as concerninge the the deuils speakinge to Luther allwayes in praeterito as of the time paste it is egregiouslie false for as in regarde of his then former sayinge of masse the deuill sometimes speaketh to him as in the time paste so likewise in regarde of Luthers present custome then continewed in sayinge masse he speaketh allso verie often as in the time present whereof (p) In Luther tom 7. Witemb the deuil saithe to Luther Sicut tu facis in missa c. tua autem missa contra institutionem Christi fol. 229. b. ante med tu solus in angulo tacens mutus comedis solus bibis solus c. nemini tecum communicas fol. 229. a. paulo p●st med Forsitan dices etiamsi alijs in Ecclesia non portigam sacramentum tamen ipse sumo ipse mihi porrigo c. fol. 229. b prope initium and see next hereaf●●r at r. s. * diuers examples are euident Thirdlie as to the supposall of Luthers then haueinge abandoned the masse Whereof appeareth not so much as any one woorde or sillable in al that longe disputation set downe by Luther and the contrarie thereof is (q) see heretofore cap. 1. sect 2. in the margine at d. heretofore more speciallie signified Yt is likewise but supposed and false as appeareth further moste euidentlie and vnanswerable by the many examples heretofore alledged not onely of Luthers then foresaide iustifyinge against the deuill his then former sayinge of masse as where he saithe to satan (1) see next heretofore in the margine at o. and see also Luthers like defence next before in the margine at l. and in the text at m. I celebrated masse in the intentention and faythe of the churche and the churche did rightlie beleue c. but allso of the deuils then therefore (2) in Luther tom 7. the deuill replieth reprehendinge Luthers foresaide answere sayinge Non est vt tu doceas me intentionē Ecclesiae c. fo 229 b. prope finē tuae impietati praetexis nomē intentionem Ecclesiae misero hoc fuco