Selected quad for the lemma: blood_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
blood_n	body_n	bread_n	consecration_n	9,959	5	11.0641	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A50343	A vindication of the primitive church, and diocesan episcopacy in answer to Mr. Baxter's Church history of bishops, and their councils abridged : as also to some part of his Treatise of episcopacy.	Maurice, Henry, 1648-1691.	1682 (1682)	Wing M1371; ESTC R21664	320,021	648

the Puritans Euseb l. 6. c. 43. Novatian in like manner withdrew from the Communion of the Church before he was excommunicated and the reason of his being renounced by the Church was because he had first renounced their Communion this Pharisaical Saint could not vouchsafe to enter into the same Church with Sinners and if it were not purged of all Dross and Corruption it must be unworthy of his Communion yet this severe Refiner of all others had least reason to exact this Purity whose Entrance into the Church as well as the Ministry was by extraordinary Dispensation and Indulgence he was baptized in his bed in great danger of Death he neglected to be confirmed by the Bishop he was made Priest against Ecclesiastical Laws that forbid Clinicks to have any share in the Government of the Church by the intercession of the Bishop who promis'd the People who were generally against his Admission that this Act should never be drawn into Precedent Being made Priest he became no great credit to his Friends that promoted him for in time of Persecution being desired to assist some of the Brethren that were in distress he renounc'd his Office and Religion saying that he would be Priest no longer and had an inclination to betake himself to another sort of Philosophy than the Christian this is the man that was so rigid and cruel as not to receive the Repentance of such as had fallen in time of Persecution but insinuating himself into the good opinion of the Confessors such as had endured the fiery Tryal he began to bring them into a dislike of the Church since it did receive those that had abjured that Religion for which the Confessors had so gloriously suffered and equalled them to these holy Martyrs in all the Priviledges of Communion Some of these good men were carried away with his dissimulation to do countenance to the Schism and their Authority brought off several others from the Communion of the Bishop but these at last discovering the Wolf in Sheeps clothing forsook the Impostor and return'd to the Unity of the Church he in the mean time uses all diligence to widen the breach and to make it perpetual by setting up himself for a Bishop which then was thought necessary to the Being of a Church although he had sworn solemnly before never to take the Office upon him To compass his Design he sends some of the subtilest of his Agents to three plain ignorant Bishops to invite them to Rome under pretence that this wretched Schism might be ended by their good Offices These good men suspecting no trick came and overcome with his good Entertainment with too much Wine and Perswasion were forc'd at last to lay their hands on him and consecrate him a Bishop and not thinking himself secure enough yet under this Title he makes every one of his Congregation engage himself by Oath never to forsake him or to return to Cornelius and this in a manner so Solemn that the relation of it is sufficient to strike a horrour on the mind of the Reader for when he administred the Sacrament after Consecration he made every one that received when the Bread was in his hand to swear to him by the Body and Blood of our Saviour that they would never forsake him or return to their former Bishop These were the men these were the means by which the Schism of the Novatians was begun and carried on a Schism no less execrable in the Conduct of it than infamous in its Authors and which is yet worse than all this most blasphemous in its Doctrines Mr. B. is too favourable in his representation of the Novatian Doctrine for in the place above-cited he makes these two Observations in favour of them First that Novatus did not deny the laps'd pardon of Sin with God p. 39. but only Church-Communion Secondly That he did not deny this to other great Sinners repenting but only to those that laps'd to Idolatry or denying Christ but the Novatians long after extended it to other heinous Crimes as upon suppos'd parity of Reason As to the first lib. 4. c. 28. Socrates does endeavour to excuse them by saying that those who had sacrificed to Idols in times of Persecution were to be exhorted to Repentance though not to be admitted to Communion and as to the Pardon of their Sin they were to leave that to God who alone has power to forgive Sins It must be confess'd that Socrates is an Historian of good credit and it seems well acquainted with the History and Doctrine of the Novatians who probably in his time might have grown more moderate in their Opinion concerning Remission of Sin but nothing can be more evident than that the Authours of that Schism denied not only the Communion of the Church but God's Pardon to those who had sinned after Baptism for this all the Writers of that time who must be suppos'd to understand their Tenets do unanimously affirm Dionysius Alexandrinus who lived the same time with Novatian and writ to him to advise him to return and be reconcil'd to the Church and lay down that Honour of a Bishop which he pretended was forc'd upon him this ancient Writer gives us this account of their Doctrine Euseb l. 7. c. 8. Novatian sayes he I justly abhor because he has divided the Church and drawn aside several Brethren into Impiety and Blasphemy and brought in a most wicked Doctrine concerning God representing our most merciful Saviour as cruel and void of pity Besides this be evacuates holy Baptism and overthrows the Faith that was before him And lastly He banishes the Holy Ghost irrevocably from those in whom there is great reason to hope that either it Remains still or may return to them again So far Dionysius Cypr. ad Nov. Haer. S. Cyprian argues in several places upon the same Supposition and looks upon their Severity in not admitting Penitents to Communion as the Effect of a more cruel Doctrine that God would never receive them into favour idem ad Anton. l. 4. ep 2. This was the main Argument against the lapsed He that denies me before men him will I deny before my Father which is in Heaven and consequently they denied them Communion because they believed Christ would finally reject them This the same Father uses great diligence to explain and confutes their Inference from it by the Example of St. Peter who deny'd his Master and yet was received into Grace He does acknowledge indeed frequently that Novatus did exhort those to Repentance he refused to receive but then he urges that nothing can be more impertinent than to press men to repent and yet to take away from them all hopes of Pardon and therefore he notes this as a pernicious Effect of their Doctrine That it frighted men out of their Religion and made them turn Heathen upon despair of Mercy and cast away all thoughts of Repentance since it would not avail them to