Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	catholic_a	church_n	visible_a	3,379	5	9.5057	5	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A13235	A defence of the Appendix. Or A reply to certaine authorities alleaged in answere to a catalogue of Catholike professors, called, An appendix to the Antitdote VVherein also the booke fondly intituled, The Fisher catched in his owne net, is censured. And the sleights of D. Featly, and D. VVhite in shifting off the catalogue of their owne professors, which they vndertooke to shew, are plainly discouered. By L.D. To the Rt. VVorshipfull Syr Humphry Lynde.	L. D., fl. 1624.; Sweet, John, 1570-1632, attributed name.	1624 (1624)	STC 23528; ESTC S120948	43,888	74

vpon paine of damnation to belieue a thing so incredible as that Christ being Crucified was risen againe in his owne flesh and ascended into Heauen if many other Myracles which the Apostles wrought in confirmation therof had not made it euidently credible as S. Austen disputeth in his booke de Ciuit. Dei lib. 22. cap. 7. and in the former Epist. 49. quaest 6. albeit he well obserued that this kind of proofe was euer lowdly and extremely laught at by the wicked Pagans yet most true it is which there he also affirmeth that we should not belieue Christ to be risen againe froÌ„ the Dead if the Fayth of Christians did feare in this point of Myracles the laughter of Pagans Wherefore to answere those places of the Fathers which you obiect not only agaynst so many of their owne Testimonies alleaged by your Aduersary but also against Scripture and against Christian beliefe it selfe grounded vpon Myracles as hath beene noted you must further vnderstand that the world hauing beene once perswaded by myraculous operations and workes of woÌ„der to belieue the Doctrine of the Apostles with this firme promise that it should alwayes remaine with them and their Successors the visible Pastors of the Catholike Church vniuersally spread ouer all the world it ought not to belieue any other Doctrine or any other Myracles pretended to be done in opposition to that Doctrine which by continuall Tradition hath beene receaued froÌ„ them For as there can be no after-after-word of God contrary to that which was first preached soe there can be no latter Myracles contrary to the testimony of those by which the world first belieued but rather as S. Paul saith If an Angell from Heauen should preach otherwise then we haue receaued we should hold him accursed This made Tertullian in the Booke you cite de Praesc cap. 44. to protest against all Myracles supposed to be done against the Tradition of the Church whereof S. Augustine in his Booke de vnit Eccles obiected by you giueth the reason yet more plainly shewing that the Catholike amplitude or vniuersality of the Church by conuersions of Nations in all Ages doth more euidently proue it to be the true Church of Christ then any other worke which is done therein for it is more manifest to sense and human reason that the cleare Prophesies of the true Church in holy Scripture are fullfilled and accomplished only in the Catholike Church which accordingly in all Ages doth visibly spread it selfe ouer all the world then it can possibly appeare that any worke of admiration is truly a Myracle surpassing the force of Nature or power of the Diuell whereof it followeth that the true Church is more manifestly knowne by the accomplishment of those promises then by the wondrous effects of any Myracles and that Myracles doe not soe well and cleerly proue any Church to be Catholike as the Church being visibly Catholike doth manifest those Myracles to be true which are approued by it Whereof it followeth againe that all Myracles which are done against it or agaynst the vnity thereof are as firmely and constantly to be reiected Which is it that he also teacheth lib. 13. cont Faust. cap. 5. and Tract 13. in Ioan. and lib. 22. de Ciuitat Dei cap. 8. obiected by you And heere by the way I beseech you to note how much Saint Ansten esteemeth the former Argument of the conuersions of Nations in all Ages according to the promises therof in holy Scripture which he maketh such an euident marke and such an infallible proofe of the true Church that he preferreth it before Myracles And for the same cause lib. 22. de Ciuit. Dei cap. 8. he spareth not to say That he who seeketh to be confirmed by Wonders now is himselfe to be wondred at in refusing to belieue that which all the world or the visible Church through the world belieueth Which your selfe also hauing obserued you may woÌ„der at your self both in refusing to belieue what you know the visible Catholike Church for a thousand yeares through the world belieued and wherin I also wonder my selfe at your not obseruing that S. Augustine doth wonder at you in that very place wherein you suppose he agreed with you as by and by I shall make it appeare Adde in the meane tyme to that which hath beene sayd that the Myracles whereunto the holy Fathers alleadged by you forbid vs to giue credit as vnto Arguments not sufficient to proue the Truth of ReligioÌ„ were eyther Myracles in apparence only and such wherewith Heretikes might easily be deceaued or so deceaue as S. Augustine speaketh in the former place vpon Ioan not such as might reasonably induce any prudeÌ„t man to belieue theÌ„ As Dreames and Visions and exauditions of Prayers like vnto those of the Donatists against whome wrote Saint Augustine lib. de Vnit. Eccl. cap. 16. Or such as were Testimonies of the Iustice and mercy of God in generall and not of Doctrine in particuler as were those whereof S. Hierome speaketh Or finally such as being wrought by wicked men exceeded not the power of the Diuell as S. Augustine obserueth lib. 20. de Ciuit. Dei cap. 19. Tract 13. in Ioan. Or were not sufficiently testified but rather sayd then proued which Tertullian lib. de Praeser derideth and sayth that the power of Heretiks was nothing like but rather contrary to the power of the Apostles for their vertue was not to rayse the Dead but rather to kill the liuing literally fullfilled in Caluin Bolsec in vita Caluini who pretending by his prayer to rayse a counterfaite dead man being then truly aliue was thought to be the cause that he was instantly slaine eyther by God or the Diuell In the same sense also Epiph. lib. 1. de haer cap. 30. vrgeth Ebion to rayse some dead man c. assuring himselfe that he could not doe any true Myracle by meanes of his false Faith yea though he called vpon the name of Christ. Not so the Myracles alleaged by your Aduersary which hauing beene wrought and belieued and most authentically testified by soe many most holy most prudent and learned Witnesses in confirmation of that Doctrine which is professed against you need no more to feare the laughter of Protestants theÌ„ the Myracles of former tymes as S. Austen saith had cause to feare the laughter of Pagans And such as belieue them not may iustly feare to be condemned as Pagans for belieuing nothing To deny therefore this Doctrine of Myracles seemeth noe lesse impious then to deny Christianity it selfe and to affirme that myracles haue ceased sithence the tyme of the Apostles were noe lesse vnreasonable then to reiect all humane Testimonies and in particuler the Authority of S. Augustine himsefe in those very places obiected by you For in that very place of S. Aug. de Ciuit. Dei lib. 22. cap. 8. which you alleage against Myracles That they were necessary before the world belieued to induce it to belieue And That he that

seeketh to be confirmed by wonders now is himselfe to be wondred at in refusing to belieue that which all the world or the visible Catholike Church through the world belieueth which being well considered maketh little for you In that very place I say you could not choose but read these other words directly against you That now also Myracles are wrought in his Name eyther by his Sacraments or by the prayers and memories of his Saints togeather with the relation of many Myracles done in his owne tyme and of those in particuler wrought by the Reliques of S. Stephen which though not necessary after the World had once belieued as S. Austen there disputeth yet God in his mercy hath euer shewed them in all Ages as well to confound the obstinate that would not belieue the visible vniuersall Church as also to confirme those in their Fayth that already belieued In this place therefore you haue plainely falsified the sense of the Author eyther very fraudulently or very ignorantly choose you whether Section VI. Merits of VVorkes defended according to the Doctrine of the Fathers and Syr Humphry answered IN the next place against the Merit of Workes you obiect many places of the Fathers but none to the purpose You know full well that the Catholikes distinguish betweene works that goe before Faith workes that follow Workes going before Faith and proceeding only from the light of Nature or from the knowledge of the law of Moyses called therefore by S. Paul Rom. 3. The workes of the Law your Aduersaries doe all hold neyther to saue nor to be needfull to saluatio according whereunto S. Paule also saith That a Man is iustified by Faith without the workes of the Law But that workes following a liuely Faith formed with Charity and proceeding from it doe iustifie and are needfull to saluation your Aduersary proueth not only by expresse Scripture Iames cap. 2. Yee see then how that of workes a man is iustified and not of Faith only But also by the lyke Testimonies of all the holy Fathers noting and condemning the contrary opinion of the Protestants as hereticall in Symon Magus in the Gnostickes and in Eunomius as hath beene shewed And further he alleadgeth S. Aug. de fide oper cap. 14. testifiyng of the Apostles themselues that because this opinion of Faith only sprung vp in those dayes by peruerting the words of S. Paules Epistle before related the Epistles of S. Peter S. Iohn S. Iames and S. Iude were principally written vt vehementer astruant vehemently to vrge and contest that Fayth without workes doth profit nothing Agaynst all which manifest proofes you bring only some Authorityes of the Fathers shewing that our owne workes and righteousnes as Basil hom de Humil. or workes of the Law going before Fayth as S. Chrysos with S. Paul Hom. 7. in 3. ad Rom. and before Sinne pardoned as S. Ambrose and forgiuen as Theodoret comment 2. S. Bernard in Cant. Ser. 22. doe not iustifie but only Fayth without them which is nothing to the purpose because therein your Aduersary agreeth with you But you bring not a word to proue that workes following Faith doe not iustify nor are needfull to Saluation which opinion of yours your Aduersary hath shewed to haue beene often tymes condemned by the Apostles themselues by the Auncient Fathers in other Heretikes that haue gone before you Section VII Free-will defended and Syr Humphry answered IN the Controuersy of Free-will you seeme first to suppose your Aduersaries belieue that Man hath Free-will to performe supernaturall actes and workes of Pietie without Grace and then you proceed to dispute against them How can you imagine they are so absurd as to thinke by the power of Nature alone to doe that which they theÌ„seues confesse to be aboue the power of Nature wherin there appeareth not only a great deale of passion in you which hanges lyke to a Cloud betweene the Eye of your minde and the light of truth but also as it seemeth great want of conscience For you know they hold that without grace it is impossible eyther to belieue or to do any other acte which may auayle or so much as dispose to Saluation This also you know to be the Doctrine of Bellarmine euery where in that whole Booke out of which you seeme to cite his words in a contrary sense and the words that immediatly follow in the very place you cite do plainely shew that against your CoÌ„science you falsify his meaning His words are these A Man before all grace hath Free-will not only to naturall and morall workes but also to workes of piety and supernaturall as you faythfully cite them but then it followeth Thus S. Augustine teacheth l. de Spiritu litera cap. 33. where he sayth That Free-will is a naturall and middle power which may be inclined to fayth and infidelity Thus Bellarmine whereby it is manifest his meaning to be that by Grace Free-will is not made or giuen vnto vs but that we haue the power thereof by Nature which afterward by Grace is inclyned and strengthned to doe those things which by the force of Nature without Grace we are not able so much as to will or to thinke much lesse to performe or perfect according whereunto in the same place he citeth also S. August de Praedest Sanctorum cap. 5. teaching that the Posse or power to haue Fayth and Charity is in man by Nature And in the same Booke cap. 11. he alleageth S. Augustine againe Epist 49. quaest 2. to the same purpose saying Free-will is not taken away because it is holpen by Grace but because it is holpen therefore it is not taken away If it be giuen by Nature and not taken away by Grace most certaine it is that still we haue it In this sense therefore your Aduersaries not only affirming that we haue Freewill by Nature but also teaching that it is so excited and strengthned by Grace as we cannot so much as thinke much lesse accomplish or performe any supernaturall acte without it they would easily graunt with S. Basil con de Hum. that we owe all euen that we liue to the Grace and gift of God but that you falsely translate it They graunt with S. Bernard de Gratia lib. Arbit That to will Good is a gift of Grace And with S. Augustine That it is God who maketh that we worke by adding to our will most efficacious strength That vnlesse he make vs willing and then worke with vs we shall neuer bring to passe any good worke And againe with S. Augustine de correp grat cap. 1. That though we haue Free-will to doe good yet none can be free in will and acte to do it that is to say perfectly or in actu secundo as the Scholmen speake vnlesse he be freed by the grace of God And againe That all is to be giuen to God not the first part vnto our selues the rest vnto God as the Pelagians

as the Sonne of the substance of his Father so as he himselfe hath sayd it is true Flesh which we receaue That is to say not by grace or by Fayth only but in Truth and in Substance Finally in the place which you cite for your selfe lib. 4. cap. 5. de Sacram. where there is nothing to be found in your fauour he hath these expresse words Therefore before Consecration it is Bread but after the words of Christ come to it it is the Body of Christ. And before the words of Christ it is a Cup full of Wine and Water when the words of Christ haue wrought then it is made the Bloud which redeemed the People To conclude our Lord Iesus testifieth vnto vs that we receaue his Body and Bloud Ought we to doubt of his Fayth and Testimony Heere if I had concealed the name of S. Ambrose would not the Reader thinke the man had liued in our tyme that wrore so forcibly and vehemently agaynst you Finally in the former Chapter of the same Booke he saith againe The bread is bread before the words of the Sacrament but after the words of Consecration of Bread is made the flesh of Christ And againe in the same little Chapter as if by often repeating the same thing he meant to vexe or confound euery obstinate Protestant that should reade it he saith Therefore that I may answere thee It was not the Body of Christ before Consecration but after Consecration I say vnto thee it is the Body of Christ And agayne a little after repeating the same againe as if he had now conuinced his Readers he concludeth You haue therefore learned that our Bread is made the Body of Christ and that Wine Water is put into the Chalice but is made Bloud by the Consecration of the heauenly Word But it may be thou wilt say I see not the forme of Bloud But it hath the likenesse for as thou hast receaued the likenesse of death so thou drinkest also the likenesse of Bloud and not the visible forme of Bloud that there might be noe horror of Bloud and yet the price of our Redemption which is the Bloud of Christ might worke in vs. Thou hast learned therefore that thou receauest the Body of Christ. Which you also might haue learned if you had read him your selfe and not trusted others that read him for no other purpose but only to wrest his words against his meaning Section XI S. Hierome falsly alleaged by Syr Humphry agaynst the Reall Presence NOW come we to S. Hierome who thinketh it noe blasphemy to say Epist 1. ad Heliod That Priests with their sacred Mouthes doe make the Body of Christ And Epist ad Euag. That his Body and Bloud is made at their prayer And in cap. 25. Matth. writeth as followeth After the typicall Passouer was ended c. he taketh Bread and passeth ouer to the Sacrament of the true Passouer that as Melchisedech the Priest of the most high God had done offering Bread and Wine to prefigure him he also might represent the truth of his Body and Bloud That is to say as Melchisedech offered Bread and Wine to prefigure him so he also taking Bread and wine offered the truth of his Body and Bloud to fulfill the figure According wherunto in Ps 190. speaking to our Sauiour he saith As Melchisedech offereth Bread and Wine soe thou also offerest thy Body and Bloud the true Bread and the true Wine In that sense true Bread as in Epist. ad Hedibiam quaest 2. he saith that Moyses gaue noe true Bread And as our Sauiour sayd Ioan. 6. That his Father gaue them true Bread from heauen Where also S. Hierome hath these words Let vs heare the Bread which our Lord brake to be the Body of our Lord and Sauiour And he adeth a little after He sate at the Banquet and was himselfe the Banquet he the eater and be that was eaten Finally lib. cont Vigil cap. 3. he reprehendeth Vigilantius for speaking against Reliques in this manner Therefore according to thy speach the Bishop of Rome doth ill who vpon the Bones of Peter and Paul which we call venerable but thou esteemest most vile dust doth offer Sacrifices to God and maketh their ToÌ„bes to be the Altars of Christ According wherunto in Prouerb 11. he also saith That after this life small sinnes may be taken away by paine by prayers and almes of others and by celebrations of MASSE Lastly in his Booke against Iouinian which you cite at randome without any number I find nothing but this that may any way please you In the type of his Blood he offered not Water but Wine lib. 2. cap. 4. This testimony I find alleaged by your Doctours as S. Hieroms for their meere figuratiue or typicall Presence wherin they discouer eyther ignorance or desire to deceaue their Readers For whosoeuer shall take the paynes to peruse the place will find the aforesayd words not to be S Hieroms but Iouinians whose discourse against Abstinence from flesh and wine S. Hierome there setts downe in that Heretike his owne wordes whereof these are a part In the Type of his Bloud he offered not water but wine And S. Hierome afterward coÌ„ming to answere this obeiction against drinking of water and Abstinence from Flesh sayth that Christ neuer vsed wine nor dainties excepto mysterio quo Typum suae passionis expressit pro probanda corporis veritate Where the Saynt tearmes the holy Eucharist a Type not of the Body and Blood of Christ as the Hereticke did but of his Passion which is represented in the Mystery of the Masse which is the ordinary Catholike Doctrine and phrase Notwithstanding seeing this Heretike erred not agaynst the Catholike Doctrine of the Reall Presence his wordes haue a true sense and make agaynst you Protestants For you deny that in his last Supper he offered any thing at all and say that only vpon the Crosse he offered himselfe once for all not only sufficiently by his Bloud and Passion Heb. 2. but also effectually agaynst Mal. 2. without any other cleane oblation for the application of the merit of his Passion vnto vs. This place therefore maketh not for you neyther is it any way against them though it were S. Hieroms for they graunt he offered Wine in type or figure of his Bloud but he offered also his Bloud answering the figure in Truth and Substance As he was Priest after the order of Melchisedech in Bread and Wine he offered Bread and Wine in figure As the offering of Melchisedech was a figure of his offering he offered also his Body and Bloud which was the Truth or Substance of that figure Which to be the meaning of S. Hierome may sufficiently appeare by that which hath beene sayd and these other wordes of his Epist. ad Marcellam doe make it yet to appeare more plainely saying Melchisedech in the Type of Christ offered Bread and Wine and dedicated the Mystery of Christians in the Body

Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Text snippets containing the quad