Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	blood_n	body_n	wine_n	4,504	5	8.0226	4	true

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A01664	A treatise againste the preuee masse in the behalfe and furtheraunce of the mooste hylye communyon made by Edmund Gest. Reade gentyll reader and then iudge. M. D. XLVIII.	Gest, Edmund.	1548 (1548)	STC 11802; ESTC S110813	48,391	180

deuise to the vtteraÌ„ce and reprofe of the faultes incideÌ„t to thee pryuate masse eueÌ„ now by gods assistance do I wryte Therfore good reader gyue heedy attendaunce therto PRyue masse after the doctryne of the Popishe boke entituled Antididagma is facyoned of fowre partes namelye of thee Sacryfyce of Christes bodye and bloude of the receypt of the communion of prayer and of doctryne These partes orderly wyl I declare and conferre them wyth goddes wrytten worde vpon the confereÌ„ce and tryall whereof it shall I doubt not appeare ful true that eche parcel of the pryuate masse is vngodlye and so consequently the masse selfe exceadynge vngodlye The fyrste parte of the sayd masse is thee sacryfyce wherunto be incydente alwaye consecration transubstanciation and the worshippe of Christes body and bloude And by reason consecracyon for goethe transubstanciation and transubstanciation the sacryfyce and the worshyppe aftergoethe them all I wyll fyrste talke vpon consecratyon and them orderly vpon the remnaunte CoÌ„secracyon is that percel of the masse wherein thee priest presumeth to consecrat and hallow Chrstes bodye and bloude The whyche as it is an attempte too vnreasonable and vnable so passynge wycked presumptuouse detestable For howe can it possible be that christes bodye whych cannot be made holyer and perfecter thaÌ„ already it is shuld or myght be consecrat of the priest Thys muste nedes be that / that is hallowed was before his coÌ„secration eyther throughly prophane nothing holy at al eyther else not so holy in consyderacyon wherof whiles the prest do presume to coÌ„secrate christes body nedes must they acknowledge and graunt by that theyr enterpryse not so godly as presumptuouse that the sayd body was before the consecration eyther nothyng holy at al else not so holy which graunt as it is erronyouse and vnbeleueable so vngodly and exchuable In case the prestes presumed only by theyr coÌ„secratioÌ„ to hallowe christes body that theyr coÌ„secratioÌ„ were not so haynouse a dede but for asmoche as therby they contend not so learnedly as stoutly not so truly as falsely Christes body to be forged and made of the chosen bread therfore endeuour theÌ„ selues therby to forge the body of the purposed bread it is exceding haynouse for ther is no creature so worthy puissaÌ„t entier as the sayd body is whyche thyng could not be true yf the priest or any maÌ„ else dyd or coulde make the same For the ofte making of any thing as of christes body is an vndeceyueable proufe of the vnperfytenes vnworthines feblenes of the same Ther is no man be he neuer so moch priested or byshopped the caÌ„ make the feblest basest vnperfytest creature in thys worlde moch lesse christes body the perfytest noblest creature ther is no creature be it neuer so imperfyte that is ofte made howe thaÌ„ can christes bodye be oft made that is the most perfyte These wordes take eate in these wordes of the institution of the lordes supper take eate thys is my bodye be no wordes of makinge of the lordes body but of presenting exhibiting the same to the receauers of the ryghte supper of the lord So that it is full open that the prieste can nether consecrate Christes body neyther make it Howbeit this is alwaye graunt able the minister both coÌ„secrateth maketh though not christes body bloud yet thallotted bread wyne the sacrameÌ„tes exhitiue of the same For where as the bread wyne vsed at the lordes supper were prophane vnholy before the wordes of the institution of the sayd supper were duely reported vpon them Nowe after thee due reporte and vtteraunce of thee sayde wordes by thee mynister vpoÌ„ the before named bread and wine they be consecrate and made of prophane the holy sacramentes exhibitiues of Christes body and bloud Thus also meaned the fathers by these wordes consecratioÌ„ and making in this sacramente Nowe to transubstantiatyon or tornekynde thee next entreatable matter whyche is no lesse disallowable then deceaueable How can thys stande wyth our fayth that Christes body whose creatyon is vnrenuable shulde be agayn made of the bread a vyle creature throughe thexchaunge of the nature therof into hys Howe were it true that the blessed wyne broken bread were bred wyne as Paule termethe theÌ„ yf theyr natures were throughlye altered into christes body bloud Can they be bread wyne styl without they reteygne theyr natures styll Can they be rightly named bread and wyne wythout theyr own proper mater substauÌ„ce in respect where of they were so named doo they not styll appere to oure senses bread wine not withstanding they ar become the sacrameÌ„tes exhibitiues of Christes body and bloud who euer sawe the exchaÌ„ge of any substaÌ„ce wtout the alteracioÌ„ of hys accedeÌ„tes outward shape wheÌ„ christ tourned marueylously water into wyne it had not only the nature of wyne but the externall forme also tast colour factoÌ„ of wyne no semblance of water at al AaroÌ„s rodde beyng altered into an adder had not only the substaÌ„ce therof but also the outward fassion of the same no similitude of a rodde at al. The water which moyses chaunged into bloude as it was iÌ„ nature bloud so outwardly it semed bloud EueÌ„ so questionles shuld the bread wyne leaue the outward shape wyth theyr inwarde substauÌ„ce yf they were altered into christes bodye and bloud By reason wherof sythe they reteygne styl theyr accidentes nedes must they also reteigne theyr wonted substance can ther be any sacrameÌ„t as S. Augustyne sayth without therin the due elemeÌ„t fyt word of god belonginge ther vnto be ioyntlye coupled togethers No verely How than can the outward apperaunce of bread wyne without theyr inward substaÌ„ce be the sacramentes of christes body bloud for the outward apperauÌ„ce of bread wyne be none elemeÌ„tes but only thexternal shewes of the same ElemeÌ„tes be substaÌ„ce not accideÌ„tal shewes Is it not true that in thee consacrate bread ther are wormes both engendered fosterd whych could not be yf ther endured the bread lyke natured after as it was before the consecracion For eche worme is a substance and none accydent therfore cannot be engendered or fedde of an accydente but of a substaunce alone In respect wherof sythe the wormes brede and fede not in Christes bodye but in thee consecrate bread we must remedyles acknowledge in the same bread to contynue thee verye proper substaunce therof The bread and wyne be sacrameÌ„tes of Christes body and bloude ordeyned of him purposely to enstructe oure senses outwardelye what is wrought inwardly by the sayd bodye and bloud in the soule For theyr vse is to declare too our outward senses assuredly the as the receaued bread and wyne norishe strengthen and glad our bodyes so christes body eaten hys bloud dronken accordyngly do oure soules Howe coulde the bread wyne serue to hys purpose yf they were vtterly diuoided of theyr accostumed nature Verely no

maner wyse For why it is the alone substaunce of bread and wyne and not the colour taste facyon of the same that fostereth and cherysheth the body Sacramentes sayth Augustyn vnlesse they haue certayne lykelyhode wyth the thynges wherof they be sygnes they be no SacrameÌ„tes at al. What semblance I beseche you is ther betwyxte the natureles bread and wyne and christes body and bloud questionles none at all For the sayde body and bloude and that after papysshe doctryne be not presented exhibited at the coÌ„munioÌ„ accideÌ„tally but substaÌ„cially only In respect wherof nedes must we graÌ„t eyther the coÌ„secrate bread wyne be not the sacrameÌ„te of Christes body and bloud whiche we ought not to do eyther else thee sayd bread wyne reteygne styl theyr owne natures whyche is grantable I maruel me muche that many of theÌ„ who stand in the defence of christes corporal presence at his supper haue in earnest meyntenaunce traÌ„substaÌ„ciation for as me semethe it doeth moch what hinder preiudice the sayd presence of christ in the sayd hys supper by reason the brokeÌ„ bread blessed wyne be institute purposely to resolue and ascertayn our senses that we as materially truly thoughe not grosselyer sensyblie but ghostly receaue and eate Christes body drinke his bloud as we do the foresayd In consideratioÌ„ wherof yf we take eate drinke but the accidentes of thee foresayde bread wine not the very substaunces of the same theÌ„ gatherable it were christes bodye and bloud be not truely but faynedly presented gyuen at hys supper For why â–ª yf the signe be couÌ„terfayt fayned theÌ„ nedes must the thing be in semblable sorte whyche is betokened thereby a true matter must remediles haue his tokeÌ„ also true In respect wherof the brokeÌ„ bread being the sygne geueÌ„ of the sayd body is material not mattierles thys thensuyng saying which graciaÌ„ reporteth fathereth vpoÌ„ Austyne de coÌ„secrat distint ii cap. qui manducat enforceth moche to the dysproue dampnation of transubstanciation That is sene is bread and the cup wherof the eyes also make euideÌ„t profe but that that faythe demaundeth to be instructed in is that the bread is Christes bodye and the cuppe hys bloud These therfore be named sacramentes for that in them one thyng is se able and another vnderstande that is sâ—ne hath bodelye fourme that is vnderstand hath ghostly fruytâ— What can be more effectually expresselye spoken agaynste tornekynde then thys the rehersed Englysshed sentence of Augustyne Fyrst he auoucheth therin the seable matter to be bread secondelye for an vndeceaueable argumente and tryall therof he alledgeth the testimonye of thee eyes Thyrdly he sayth not that is seeable is a bodelye fourme but hathe a corporall fourme leste anye man shulde here be occasyoned too adiudge the mattier to want in thys element and so to remayne nothynge else but thee outwarde and accydentall shape of breade For in that he saythe that that is seene hathe a corporal fourme he graunteth in thee elemente twoo thynges to bee remaynynge thee thynge hadde and thee thynge hauyng thee outwarde fassyon whych is seable and the subiecte and matter therof it is to wytt the bread substaunce and the excernall apperaunce of the same The sacramente of Thankesgeuynge saythe Irenee consystethe vpon twoo matters or substaunces thee one earthely thee other heauenlye Yf bread substaunce were departed theÌ„ could not Irenee leyfully call the one part of the sacrameÌ„t a substauÌ„ce but an earthlye accidente The worthy counsayl of Nece wryteth to the disalowauÌ„ce of traÌ„substaÌ„tiatioÌ„ in sorte thus Let vs not grossely beholde the bread wyne proposed set before our eyes but in faythe consyder the lambe yf god in that hys sacred table hauing our hartes eleuate vplifted loe here the worthy counsel nameth the feble portyon of the sacrament after the coÌ„secration bread wyne not the formes of the same Gelasius in open expresse wordes impugneth the sayd transubstanciatioÌ„ as erronyouse vncredyble in sorte as followeth The sacrameÌ„tes of the body bloud of christ which we receaue ar sureli godly matters therfore through by theÌ„ we ar made partakers of the godly nature yet do they not ceasse to be the substances of bread wyne but coÌ„tinue in the properties of theyr owne natures wher as Austyne sayth the lord doubted not to say thys is my body wheÌ„ he gaue a sygne of hys body he meanethe not that christes body is absented froÌ„ hys supper but that the consecrate bread is not the sayd body or turned substancially in to the same is but the signe of christes body notwythstaÌ„dinge it be named hys body Notwithstanding Tertullian Ambrose Ierome Chrisostome wythe others whyche expresly in theyr wrytynges the consecrate bread to represent Christes body to be a signe therof howbeit in those soch other semblable theyr speaches theyr meanyng is not that the sayd bread is deuoided of Christes bodely presence and presentment but that the consecrate bread is but thee sacramentall sygne of christes bodye and not christes body selue thoughe it be termed sacramentallye the sayd bodye Nowe wyll I assoyle certayne obiections and gayn sayinges facyoned of the catholiques agaynst the premysses Yf say they the bred nature were not tornekynded into christes body why dyd he name it hys bodye Can it be hys bodye onles it be exchaunged into it CaÌ„ I be you wythout I become your substance No verely No more can thee bread be christes body wythoute the exchauÌ„ge of the matter therof into the sayd body As for the accidentes of thee sayd bread it is not requisite ne nedefull that they shuld be together chaunged wythe theyr substaunce because christe in thys hys sayinge this is my body vseth the artycle demonstratyue thys not in the masculine but in the newtre gendre whyche implyeth but the alone matter of the bread and not accidentes of thee same therwyth as the masculine doeth Whereby christ doeth vs tunderstand that the bread nature is only altered not his accideÌ„tes iÌ„ lyke maner To this obiection soche is myne answere Christ in thys hys sayinge this is my body doeth institute the sacrament of hys bodye and bloud therfore he speaketh vpon the same sacramentally it is to wyt he termeth the signe by thee name of thee matter therby sygnyfyed He nameth the consecrate bread hys bodye for that it is resembled and presented therby baptyse is named the founteyn of our agayn byrth the renuinge of the holy ghost yet is it nether our newe byrth nether thee renuyng of the holi ghost ne chauÌ„ged into theÌ„ but so called for the therby the sayd byrth renuing be not only represented but also wraughte presented and contributed vnto vs Gene 15 CircuÌ„cistoÌ„ was not in very dede the couenaunt made vnto Abraham ne altered into it howbeit it was so turned in consyderatioÌ„ it dyd bothe represent and present the same couenaunt to

Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Text snippets containing the quad