Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	body_n	soul_n	union_n	7,440	5	9.4929	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B21416	A sermon preach'd at Colchester, June 2. 1697. Before the Right Honourable and Reverend Father in God Henry Lord Bishop of London, at a conference with his clergy upon His Majesty's late injunctions. / By H. De Luzancy ... ; Printed by his Lordship's special command. ; To which are prefixed some remarks on the Socinians late answer to the four letters written against them by the same author.	De Luzancy, H. C. (Hippolyte du Chastelet), d. 1713.	1697 (1697)	Wing D2423A; Interim Tract Supplement Guide 226.f.17[10]; ESTC R26743	22,530	34

Guide but his Reason intangles himself in inextricable Difficulties Of this sort were Paul of Samosatum Patriarch of Antioch Photinus Bishop of Syrmium Praxeas Noëtus Sabellius Arrius Apollinaris Nestorius Eutyches and in this very Age Socinus the Reviver of the Samosatenian and Photinian Heresie These have been the Incendiaries of the Church and the great Disturbers of its Peace The Men who have made it necessary to enlarge the Form of sound Words and were the occasion of the Creeds made in the Councils of which they bear the Names Sabellius own'd the Unity of the Divine Nature but struck with the Evidence of those Texts which speak the Son and the Holy Spirit to be God could not deny a Trinity but made it only to consist of meer Names or Denominations as St. Basil expresses it Hom. 27. pag. 602. Or as St. Athanasius has it one only Person the Father acting under different Names A Notion which the present Socinians seem too too willing to embrace Arrius own'd a Trinity of Persons and not of Names He saw that the poor shift of Sabellius was irreconcilable with that Oeconomy which so clearly appears in the Scriptures But by admitting three Principles he destroy'd the Unity of God and was the first Author of the chymerical distinction of a God made and a God unmade of a Son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the like but not of the same Substance Apollinaris own'd the Incarnation The Word was made Flesh was an Authority of that Weight and Clearness as gave not the least ground to Primitive Ages for Allegories and little Criticisms so much us'd in this But he destroy'd the Union of the two Natures by denying that Christ had a Soul and leaving the Divinity to inform his Body Nestorius Patriarch of Constantinople own'd the two Natures but deny'd their Union in one Person He would have two Persons as well as two Natures The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Man The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eutyches acknowledged the Incarnation but maintain'd a Singularity of Nature with that of a Person He would have the Humanity to be absorp'd and the God to have annihilated the Man All these the Church of God condemn'd by the Form of sound Words contain'd in the several Creeds The sober Church of England sensible that even in point of Reformation we are apt to out-run the Mark and under pretence of forsaking old Errors really fall into new ones has strenuously aim'd at this not to recede a Jot from the Form of sound Words and stick close not only to the Sence but even to the ways of speaking of the Primitive Church It has made the Apostolical and Catholick Creeds a part of its Liturgy and its very Articles concerning the Blessed Trinity Incarnation and Satisfaction of Jesus Christ are nothing else but a repetition of the Dogms of the Ancient Councils But before I conclude this Particular I must say something of that which tho' no part of the Form of sound Words has yet a very near relation to it and that is the Expressions us'd by the Fathers in their Debates about these Sacred Doctrines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. and since adopted by all the Divines and become the Language of the Church Concerning which I must presume to aver 1 st that whosoever will be conversant in those Disputes cannot without these Terms understand any part of them 2 dly That they are proof against all the Subterfuges and Equivocations of Hereticks 3 dly That tho' it is much safer to keep to the Simplicity of the Form and pretend to no Explication of that which we own to be incomprehensible yet if any can be pretended to it is that and that only which results from these Terms But I shall no longer insist on this and come to the second part of this Discourse How dangerous it is to depart from the Form of sound Words I am apt to think that it will give a great Light to what I have to say on this head if I endeavour to shew before-hand which ways we depart from it I conceive that it can be only these two 1 st By rejecting the Article it self which is propos'd to our Belief 2 dly By admitting the Article but using other Words than the Church to express or explain it by The one is absolutely to depart from the sound Words themselves The other from the Form in which they are put The first has been done by the Hereticks already mention'd The unfortunate Attempt has been renew'd by Socinus and his Followers but by none so wholly as by a sort of pretended witty People who asham'd of the inhumane and irrational Profession of unmanly Atheism have under the Name of Deists endeavour'd to explode all reveal'd Religion To these Socinus has lent most of their Arguments From that side who have oppos'd a part of the Revelation these have learn'd to reject the whole And tho' I should think it unjust and uncharitable to think that the present Socinians are Deists or give the Deists any design'd Encouragement yet I will beg leave to assert that taking an exact view of the Deistical and Socinian System there will appear no very vast difference Deism being nothing else but Socinianism improv'd and Socinianism nothing else but Deism contracted The second that is to keep to the Article but put it in other Words has been done by some amongst our selves Whether this has been the Effect of a too much indulg'd Curiosity or of an imprudent Zeal Whether the Heat of the Dispute and the pressing Efforts of the Enemy has driven them from their Anchors Whether they have been too fond of the Offspring of their own Brains or whether a mixture of all these together has been the occasion of it is difficult to judge But it is certain that the Press has groan'd under the burthen of new Discoveries brought forth a swarm of Answers and Replies fuller of Heat than Light and made it necessary for the Peace of the Church that a Curtain should be drawn over abundance of Writings where Learning Modesty and Candor should have had a greater share than really they can pretend to Of the first of these it is easie to shew how dangerous it is to depart from the Form of sound Words For what greater danger can we fall into than to make Shipwrack concerning the Faith A State so much the more dangerous because it destroys the very ground of our hopes For he that believes shall be sav'd He that does not believe is condemn'd already To differ from an Orthodox Church of which we are Members tho in point of Ceremony is very sinful if the difference is carry'd so far as to make a Schism Toleration tho' it secures us from the Laws of Men not acquitting us at all in the sight of God But how much deeper is that Guilt which lays the Ax to the Root