Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	flesh_n	sin_n	sinful_a	2,809	5	9.4946	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B04950	The Virgin Mary misrepresented by the Roman Church in the traditions of that church, concerning her life and glory; and in the devotions paid to her, as the mother of God. Both shewed out of the offices of that church, the lessons on her festivals, and from their allowed authors. Part I. Wherein two of her feasts, her conception and nativity, are considered.	Patrick, Simon, 1626-1707.; Patrick, John, 1632-1695.	1688 (1688)	Wing P863A; ESTC R19085	135,709	190

other can imagine her to be And if the one Party apprehends a Wound to be given to the Honour of the Blessed Virgin by the Supposition of her being under that Sin it is healed you see by the other in far less time than the twinkling of an Eye or the quickness of the swiftest Thought And yet after all I assure you it is morally certain that these Two Parties will never be pieced together but eternally quarrel Fresh Combatants appear every day upon the Stage and they charge one another so furiously and engage the People in such Numbers in the Quarrel that neither General Council nor Pope whom both sides acknowledge only capable of doing it dare decide this doughty Matter for fear of worse Consequences to ensue thereupon So that all things considered never was a juster Censure than that severe one which a Poet of their own e Mantuan in S. Fest Decembr has passed upon them both Duae veniunt ista in certamina S●ctae Non unquam magno implentes subsellia risu Aequanimes autem volamus si vera fateri Vanus uterque labor pieras temeraria praeceps Religio levitas velata scientiae amictu Nec Natura potest illuc extendere visum Nec Deus hoc docuit nec re dependet ab ista Nostra salu● Quae nos igitur dementia torquet Vt studeamus in his consumere litibus annos That is Whilst these Two Sects in furious Combats chafe Their pleas'd Spectators only louder laugh For if we 'll freely say the Truth 't is plain Their Piety is rash both strive in vain All the Religious Zeal they seem t' express Is only Folly cloath'd in skilful Dress Natures short Sight cannot so far extend What God ne'er taught on that can ne'er depend Our Happiness What Madness then t' engage Or in such Fruitless Quarrels spend our Age Since therefore we are made Spectators of this Combat and need not as they have stated the Question trouble our selves much about it it may not be amiss to take a View how they have listed themselves and with what Weapons Offensive and Defensive they come appointed into the Field The Maculists tho their Infantry be not so numerous yet they are no ways daunted as having they judge a better Cause and more experienced Leaders f 260 Famous Doctors are named and their Words cited by Vinc. de Bandelis in tract de sing purit praerog concept J. Christi and Old Commanders on their Side The Fathers tho you take S. Bernard into the Number are wholly theirs g M. Canus Loc. The. l. 7. c. 1. Sancti omnes uno ore asseverant c. So Pet. Cellensis Sententiae omnium retro Sanctorum lib. 6. Epist 23. so are also the most ancient Schoolmen and those of greatest Note They think they are sure of the Master of the Sentences h Estius l. 3. dist 3. Sect. 3. and their Claim is not questioned to the Great Albertus and Alexander Alensis to Bonaventure Durandus S. Antoninus and a little Army of other Chieftanes mentioned by Vasquez i Ibid. disp 117. c. 1. But there are Two especially whom they glory in and who spirit the whole Party the one a School-man and the other a Father Aquinas k Part. 3. qu. 27. art 2. in corp ad 2. 3 4. of the first sort with his vast Train of Thomists must needs make a formidable Appearance to the Enemy when they cannot deny that Christ gave Approbation to his Writings in that fam'd saying Bene de me scripsisti Thoma Thomas thou hast written well of me And that Evasion is only to be laugh'd at which a Jesuit l Barth de Scobar conc 1. de concept B. Virg. p. 27. being sensible of the Force of it has given Forte dixit de me c. Perhaps he said on purpose those Words Of me by way of Restriction and Limitation lest any one should take Occasion to think that Christ approved whatsoever he wrote of Mary The Father I mentioned is S. Austin m 14 Places are cited out of him by Bandelis lib. citat part 1. c. 9. who may well stand for a great many because in his Writings against the Pelagians he had Occasion particularly to take Notice of it and always resolves it the same way making it the Privilege of Christ only to have no Original Sin but involving his Mother by Name in it To mention a few of the Places In his 5th Book against Julianus n C 9. thus he says Quod si dementis est dicere sine dubio caro christi non est caro peccati sed facilis carni peccati c. If it be undoubted and madness to affirm the Contrary that Christs Flesh is not sinful Flesh but like to sinful Flesh what can we conceive further but that excepting this all other human Flesh is of Sin And hence it appears that that Concupiscence by which Christ would not be conceived did cause in Mankind an evil Off-spring and altho the Body of Mary came from thence yet she did not transmit it into the Body which did not conceive from thence Now from hence it is that the Body of Christ is said to be in the Likeness of sinful Flesh because all other Flesh of Men is sinful Whoso denies this and so compares the Flesh of Christ with the Flesh of other Men that are born as to assert that both are of equal Purity he is found to be a detestable Heretick And elsewhere o De genes ad lit l. 10. c. 18. Virginis caro etiamsi de peccati propagatione venit c. The Flesh of the Virgin tho it came of a sinful Stock yet she did not conceive Christ from the Stock of Sin. Therefore the Body of Christ tho it was assumed from the Flesh of a Woman who was conceived of that Stock of sinful Flesh yet because his Body was not conceived in her as she was conceived neither was his Flesh sinful Flesh but the likeness of sinful Flesh In another place p De peccat merit remis l. 2. c. 24. Solus ergo ille homo factus manens Deus peccatum nullum habuit unquam nec sumpsit carnem peccati quamvis de natura carnis peccati alia Lect. Quamvis de materna carne peccati i. e. Therefore he alone who remaining God was made Man had never any Sin nor did he take sinful Flesh tho it was of the nature of sinful Flesh or tho it was of his Mothers sinful Flesh And again q In Psal 34. conc 2. Maria ex Adam mortua c. Mary deriving from Adam died because of Sin Adam dyed because of Sin and the Flesh of our Lord derived from Mary died to take away Sin. Saint Bernard also speaks the same Sence in his Words which were cited before p. 37. If their Adversaries were not convinced that the ancient Church knew no such Doctrine they need not trouble