Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	air_n	earth_n	element_n	2,483	5	9.5484	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26898	Church-history of the government of bishops and their councils abbreviated including the chief part of the government of Christian princes and popes, and a true account of the most troubling controversies and heresies till the Reformation ... / by Richard Baxter ...	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1680 (1680)	Wing B1224; ESTC R229528	479,189	470

undivided The Eutychians thought How can that be called Vnity which maketh not one of two And no doubt the Natures are One But One what Not One Nature but One Person Yet to bring off Cyril it may be said that even the Natures are One in opposition to Division or Separation but not One in opposition to distinction He that had but distinguished these two clearly to them and explained the word Nature clearly had better ended all the Controversie than it was ended It 's plain that Cyril and the Eutychians allowed mental distinction though not that the Mind should suppose them divided And it 's certain that the Orthodox meant no more § 3. He that readeth but Philosophers Schoolmen and late Writers such as Fortun. Licetus de natura c. will see how little they are agreed about the meaning of the word Nature and how unable to procure agreement in the conception They that say it is principium motus Quietis are contradicoted as confounding divers Principia and as confounding Active Natures and Passive the Active only being Principium Motus and the Passive Principium quietis And on such accounts the Eutychians pleaded for One Nature because in Christ incarnate they supposed that the Divine Nature was the Principium primum motus and that all Christs actions were done by it and that the humane soul being moved by the Divinity was but Principium subordinatum which they thought was improperly called Principium As most Philosophers say that Forma generica is improperly called forma hominis because one thing hath but one form so they thought that one person had but one proper Principium motus § 4. Alas how few Bishops then could distinguish as Derodon doth and our common Metaphysicks between 1. Individuum 2. Prima substantia 3. Natura 4. Suppositum 5. Persona 6. and have distinguished a right essence and hypostasis or subsistence c. and defined all these Nature saith Derodon de suppos p. 5. is taken in nine senses But the sense was not here agreed on before they disputed of the matter Even about the Nature of Man it is disputed whether he consist not of many natures Whether every Element Earth Water Air Fire retain not its several Nature in the Body or whether the Soul be Mans only Nature and whether as intellectual and sensitive and vegetative or only in one of these And is it not pity that such questions should be raised about the person of Christ by self-conceited Bishops and made necessary to salvation and the world set on fire and divided by them Is this good usage of the Faith of Christ the Souls of Men and the Church of God § 5. But to the History At a Council of Constantinop under Flavianvs Eusebius Bishop of Dorileum accused Eutyches for affirming Heretically as aforesaid that after the Vnion Christ had but one Nature Eutiches is sent for He refuseth to come out of his Monastery After many Citations be still refusing they judge him to be brought by force He first delayeth Then craveth of the Emperour the presence of Magistrates that he be not calumniated by the Bishops He is condemned but recanteth not § 6. A meeting of Bishops at Tyre cleared Ibas Edess from the accusation of Nestorianisme made by four Excommunicate Priests two of them perjured and reconciled him to such Priests for Peace sake § 7. Another meeting of Bishops at Berythum cleared Ibas from a renewed accusation of Nestorianisme being said to have spoken evil of Cyril An Epistle of his to Maris a Bishop was accused which the Council at Calcedon after absolved and the next General Council condemned § 8. CXXIV Another Council is called at Constantinople by the means of some Courtiers in favour to Eutiches where upon the testimony of some Bishops that Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople condemned him himself before the Synod did it and that the Records were altered all was nullified that at the last Synod was done against him § 9. CXXV Theodosius calleth a second General Council at Ephesus an 449. and maketh Dioscorus Bishop of Alex. President Dioscorus forbad Ibas and Theodoret to be there as being Nestorians The Emperour himself was so much for peace and so deeply before engaged in Cyril's cause against Nestorius that he thought it levity to pull down all so soon again the Eutychians perswading him that they stuck to Cyril and the Ephesine and Nicene Council Dioscorus thinking the same that Eutiches and Cyril were of one mind and that it was Nestorianisme which they were against carried matters in this Synod as violently as Cyril had done in the former The Bishops perceiving the Emperours the Courtiers and Dioscorus mind could not resist the stronger side The Bishop of Rome was commanded by the Emperour to be present He sent his Legates with his Judgment in Writing of the Cause The Emperour for bad those to be Speakers that had before judged Eutyches The Roman Legates excepted that Dioscorus presided It seemeth the Eastern Empire and Church then believed not that the Popes precedency was jure divino Dioscorus declareth that the Council was not called to decide any matter of Faith but to judge of the proceedings of Flavianus against Eutyches The Acts of the Constant. Synod after the Emperours Letters being read Eutyches is absolved Domnus Patriarch of Antioch Iuvenal Patriarch of Ierusalem the Bishop of Ephesus and the rest subscribed the absolution which after they said they did for fear when another Emperour changed the Scene This being done the Acts of the former Ephes. Council were read and all Excommunicate that did not approve them So that this Council of Eutychians thought verily the former was of their mind Four Bishops Flavianus Eusebius Doryl Ibas Edes and Theodoret Cyri are condemned and deposed All the Bishops subscribed except the Popes Legates so that saith Bimius In hoc tam horrendo Episcoporum suffragio sola navilula Petri incolumis emergens salvatur p. 1017. Judge by this First Whether Councils may erre Secondly Whether they are the just Judges or Keepers of Tradition Thirdly Whether all the World always believed the Popes Infallibility or Governing power over them when all that Council voted contrary to him Flavianus here offering his appeal was beaten and abused and dyed of the hurt as was said in Concil Calced and by Liberatus But this was no quenching but a kindling of the fire of Episcopal Contentions Theodosius missed of his end § 10. CXXVI Leo at Rome in a Synod condemneth this Ephesian Council § 11. CXXVII Dioscorus in a Council at Alexandria Excommunicateth Leo. § 12. CXXVIII Theodosius the Emperour being dead Martian was against the Eutychians Anatolius at a Synod at Constantinople maketh an Orthodox Profession of his Faith like Leo's § 13. CXXIX And at Milan a Council owneth Leo's judgment § 14. CXXX Now cometh the great Council at Calcedon under the new Emperour Martian where all is changed for a time Yet Pulcheria who marryed him and

the fear of God is much more to be believed than a worldly wicked bloody unconscionable man 7. Caeteris Paribus many agreed honest impartial men are more to be believed than one or a few odd and singular persons who have no more advantage than the rest to know the truth 8. The young and unexperienced owe some eoverence to the judgment of their Seniors as more credible by age and experience than their own 9. Accordingly Children to their Parents and Scholars to their Masters and Tutors owe such belief as is answerable to their difference and the use of their learning of them By this you may see on the contrary who is not worthy of belief I. One that pretendeth Inspiration Vision Revelation and giveth the hearer no sufficient proof of it II. One that pretendeth to tell you things beyond his reach as many Philosophers do about the mysteries of Nature spiritual and corporeal Elements or mixt bodies above and below of which the Books of many are full and malignant men that take on them to tell you other mens hearts without just proof that they are hypocrites and intend that which they never did or meant ill when they said or did well and when false Historians will tell you with what unproved ill purposes or deceits persons a thousand miles off and perhaps a thousand years past whom they never knew did say and do all that is reported of them III. When there are but few reporters of things pretended to be known publickly in the world especially when more credible persons contradict them IV. When the person is deeply ingaged in a Party and carrying on all for the interest of his Party doth give you but his word or the report of his own Party for what he saith so that you may perceive that interest byasseth him to partiality V. When the Historian sheweth a malignant spirit that extenuateth or denieth all the good that was in his Adversaries and fasteneth on them as much Odium as he can without just proof and justifieth all the reproach that is used against them VI. When the Historian liveth so far off from the place and time that he is no competent reporter having all his notice but by the fame of his own Faction as uncapable as himself VII When the sober moderate men of his own party contradict him and speak well of the persons whom he reproacheth VIII When the reporter is manifestly a proud worldly wicked unconscionable man especially of a bloody hurtful disposition For as Gods threefold Influence or the Vnderstanding Will and Life is but one so the Devil doth usually vitiate together the Vnderstanding Will and Life and he that is from the beginning an Enemy and a Murderer is also a Lyar Though a wicked malignant and cruel man may yet have an opinionative faith and knowledge and preach the truth when it is for his carnal interest yet when his malice and interest tempteth him against it there is no trusting his word IX When an ignorant proud man thinketh that he must be believed meerly for the reverence and authority of his place X. When the reporter liveth in a time and place where carnal interest hath got the major Vote for falshood and it passeth commonly for truth especially where Tyranny Civil or Ecclesiastical silenceth the truth in Press Pulpit and Discourse that it dare not be spoken by which the Papists have not only made their own writings and reports incredible but by their Indices Expurgatorios and base corrupting of ancient Writers have weakned our certainty of much of the old History and Fathers XI When the reporter is a weak and silly man that hath not wit to sift out the truth XII When he is passionately rash and of hasty judgment and hath not patience to stay and suspend his judgment till he hear all XIII When it is a Novice or raw Student that hath not had time helps and experience to know what he pretends to know and yet contradicteth wiser men of more advantage and experience XIV When present experience telleth us that the party that he writeth against as unlearned or wicked are men of Eminent Learning and the fear of God and that the party that he magnifieth as such are contrary by such marks incredible History may be discerned Qu. But how can we know mens wisdome and piety and honesty and impartiality when we never knew the men Ans. Though hypocrites may much counterfeit truth and goodness its hard so to do it but the contrary which ruleth in them will break out as a s●ink will get through narrow passages and though truth and honesty may be much clouded they have like light a self-revealing power To give you some instances as among Physitians Hypocrates and Galen and Celsus of old and of late Montanus Crato Fernelius Platerus Hildanus and such others do speak with that self-evidencing honesty and many Paracelsians with that palpable vanity that one of them will constrain belief and the other unbelief even in them that never heard what they were So among Historians Eusebius though counted an Arrian and Socrates and Sozomen though called Novatians and Theodoret and Liberatus and some others do write so as to constrain belief of things which were within their notice and with honest impartiality Among the Papists what clear footsteps of understanding honesty and impartiality and so of truth is there in Thuanus and much in Commines Guicciardine Father Paulus Servita Hist. of Trent Council and divers others Though Doctor Iames bid us keep Crab because the later Councils are corrupt and all of them must be taken with due Antidotes yet because most of the matter is fetcht from publick Acts and Records they are more credible than most single History Acosta speaketh impartially of the West Indies and Godignus of the Abassians Matth. Paris of England and the Pope and so of some others Of Protestants some do but recite recorded testimonies or publick acts and the very writings themselves of the times they speak of when others do but tell you stories on their bare word Goldastus Ruberus Freherus and Pistorius do but give us Collections of the writings of those former Ages and nothing of their own So doth Mr. Rushworth now in his three Volumes of Collections and Mr. Fuller hath partly done so and writeth moderately Mr. Gilbert Burnet thus writeth the History of the Reformation laying not the credit on his word but on his Evidences and Cambden impartially thus writeth of Queen Elizabeth and in his Brittania Vsher hath done the like de succes Eccles. of the Waldenses and in his de Primordiis Eccl. Brit. of the Pelagians not saying but proving by Records and old Evidences what he delivereth besides the advantage of his known extraordinary learning honesty and impartiality so doth Fox for the most part in his Martyrology give you but the publick Record or proved Histories though Cope call him lyar Melancthon and Bucholtzer were men of such known sincerity as