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	call_v	flesh_n	7,962	5	7.0500	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A42243	The grounds and occasions of the controversy concerning the unity of God &c. the methods by which it has been managed, and the means to compose it / by a Divine of the Church of England.	Nye, Stephen, 1648?-1719.	1698 (1698)	Wing G2135; ESTC R12220	49,121	55

be apt to suspect that it was the Doctrine of our Church that God has given power to our Priests that now are to forgive sins but yet the generality of our Priests abhorring delusive Priest-craft make no more of it than a meer Declaration that God forgives the Sinner supposing he be truly penitent When they have thus explain'd themselves no Body can quarrel their Doctrine and who would fall out with them for an aukward way of expressing it Ever give me Catholick Orthodox Doctrine tho vail'd under obscure and less proper Phrase rather than gross affected Tritheism openly avow'd and in distinct plain words express'd in words and phrase so clear and proper that every understanding unbiass'd Reader may at first sight apprehend it Now by explaining and defining the occasion of Dispute is remov'd indeed some Disputants define ignotum per ignotius one obscure ambiguous word term phrase by another more obscure and ambiguous they mend the matter well but full plain and clear Definitions make short work of Controversy The Disputants quickly see by this means where 't is they differ if so be they do differ for not rarely it happens they discover that they were of one and the same mind tho they did not express their thoughts after one and the same manner I am very much mistaken or this is the very Case between the suspected Unitarians and the Nominal Orthodox Trinitarians who suspected them Indeed as to the Realists there is a wide difference between them and both the former their Tritheism is Innovation with a Witness and a just Motive for their Opposers to engage in Religious Controversy Again it may happen that the Innovation comes to no more than the reviving a long-buried Truth or the rubbing the rust off from a corrupted Usage for Truths certain and useful have run like Rivers under ground for several Ages and then their first appearance afterwards may be call'd Innovation but that will not justify any Man's contending for his old Errors no tho his old Errors have liv'd for several Ages The eating and drinking the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ by Faith t'other Day was a meer Innovation yet I do not believe that our Real Trinitarians will say that the Anthropophagous Romanists the human Flesh and Blood-eating Papists had reason with Fire and Sword to oppose it The cry of Innovation is sometimes made use of to secure a beloved false Doctrine from being contradicted a superstitious cheating Practice from being undermin'd Where a present Establishment is without fault no Innovation can be so but a departing from the Language of the Schools is not the same thing as departing from the Faith Yet that our Differences may be accommodated in some tolerable manner let sound Religion say I be taught in barbarous Language better so than Tritheism cloth'd with words pure and proper and phrase elegantly plain for that 's but like Martial's fine Amber-Box with nothing but a Viper and a dead Fly in it 3. Both Realists and Nominalists as themselves profess and I believe honestly have entred into Religious Controversy to vindicate the Christian Religion the main Foundation of which they once by mistake verily thought that the Unitarians were undermining and labouring to overthrow It is good to be jealous for the honour of the Christian Religion but nevertheless it is a fault and a very unchristian one to charge any Man unjustly for an unjust Charge of this high nature robs innocent Persons of the Comforts and Advantages which they might chance to have in the good opinion of others and not only so but exposes them to the dire Effects of that Zeal which is too hot ever to have mercy and too passionate ever to consider matters calmly deliberately and as they ought to be consider'd When the Realists and Nominalists first suspected the Unitarians of entertaining such wicked and detestable thoughts as to undermine and subvert the main Foundation of the Christian Religion it would have extreamly become them to have carefully weigh'd what are the sure and certain Truths which may be reasonably call'd the Foundation of the Christian Religion and what are the less certain Doctrines and Speculations concerning which Men that lead vertuous and Christian Lives are differently perswaded But now in their anger and their haste they have condemn'd the Unitarians as Hereticks for not giving the true sense of some Articles whose true sense they themselves have not yet found out or are not agreed upon One would think that a mistaken Exposition of an obscure Article did not tend to the Subversion of the Christian Religion but they have judg'd it otherwise yet to do them right for furious merciless Judges they use as much equity as could be wish'd carrying on their severe Censures with a remarkable Impartiality The Tritheistick Trinity says one of them is worse even than Socinianism The Nominal Trinity says another is as bad in which last Censures I shall not contradict them but one thing I must remark viz. That when the Purposes in which Men agree are none of the best the gaining their Point is but removing an Obstacle which hinders them from vexing one another There are some great Men who out of what Christian Principle neither I nor they can tell would have the Unitarians be Hereticks by themselves and by consequence burnt by themselves without the company of any of them who commit the very same or a more hainous fault For which purpose they solicit the Magistrates after the manner of Inquisitors Omni affectu quo possint but without the Hypocrisy of the Inquisitors for these great Men of ours call for Fire in plain words which the other mean when they require Mercy and to justify the Exemption of whom they please from Heresy and the Stake T'other day this Dream was told A Man may be very right in the belief of an Article and yet be mistaken in his Explication of it I call this a Dream meaning no disrespect in the World to the Author for quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus but because it appears at the very first sight an inconsistent Notion now pleasing Dreams Men are unwilling to part with therefore a Friend is call'd in to give credit to this but as ill luck would have it all which that Friend says is That a Man may quit his Explication without parting with the Article it self That is Dr. Sh may quit his Explication and so may every other Realist without parting with the Article of the Trinity But under favour he that quits the true Explication quits the Article it self or it is impossible to quit it To speak seriously one would wonder how it could enter into the thoughts of a wise Man being awake to imagine that an Article might be rightly believ'd that was not rightly understood If it be objected that I alter the Case and should have worded it that was not rightly explain'd I reply The thing is the same for I presume that the