Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	humane_a	person_n	union_n	11,677	5	9.6253	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A12484	Of the author and substance of the protestant church and religion two bookes. Written first in Latin by R.S. Doctour of Diuinity, and now reuiewed by the author, and translated into English by VV. Bas.; De auctore et essentia Protestanticae Ecclesiae et religionis libri duo. English	Smith, Richard, 1566-1655.; Bas., W.	1621 (1621)	STC 22812; ESTC S117611	239,031	514

that the Church may for a tyme swarue from the truth euen in some fundamentall points and be notwithstanding safe And Zanchius lib. 1. epist pag. 221. will not haue vs forsake any cōpany on occasion of false opinions which swarue from the groundwork of fayth D. Hall likewise in sua Roma irreconc sect 1. sayth that the true Church may foster such errours As by deduction and consequence destroy the foundations of beliefe D. Fulke in his serm vpō the Apocalips hauing made this obiection to himselfe that seing the Church is the Espouse of Christ it cannot be that he suffered it to be possessed so many ages with damnable errors answeares it in this manner VVhat Christ himselfe hath sayd that the errors of false Prophets should be exceeding great in as much as the very elect if it might be should be led into errour And lib. de Succes Eccles pag. 122. he sayth It seemes not fitting to take from the Grecians the name of a Church whome notwithstanding he confesseth to be ensnared with grieuous errors Now a grieuous errour according to D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 4 cap. 1. dissolues the foundation and may therfore be termed fundamentall M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 790 VVhen an errour is repugnant to the foundation either directly or by necessary consequence if it proceed of weaknes he in whome it is ought to be reputed a member of the vniuersall Church And vpon 1. Galat. v. 2 If a Church through frailty fall into errour although it concerne the foundation notwithstanding it remaynes yet a Church as is certaine by the example of the Galathians And vpon the epistle of Iude v. 19 The Church of Gaelatia through weaknesse remoued it selfe vnto another Ghospell and erred in the foundation yet Paul writeth to it as to the Church of God D. Willet affirmeth the same in his Synopsis cont 2. q. 3. pag. 104. And Melancthon tom 2. lib. de Eccl. pag. 123. toucheth the same string when he sayth The true Church it selfe may haue errours which obscure and darken the articles of fayth And tom 4. in cap. 9. Rom God gathereth alwayes some company in which the foundation is kept sometymes lesse pure sometymes more D. White in his way pag. 111 Some articles lying in the very foundation may be belieued not so clearly Nay sometymes they dare auouch that those very Corinthians that denyed the resurrection and those Galatians also that changed the Ghospell of Christ into another Ghospell were of the Church Luther in 1. cap. Galat fol 215. Perkins loc cit For thus the Switzers Confession c. 17 VVe are not ignorant what manner of Churches those of the Corinthians and Galathians were in the Apostles tyme which the Apostle accuseth of many and grieuous crimes and yet termeth them the holy Churches of Christ And Caluin 4. Institut cap. 1. § 27 Most greiuous sinnes possesse sometymes whole Churches The Apostasy of the Galathians was no small offence the Corinthians were lesse excusable then they howbeit neither of them are excluded from the Lords mercy Sadeel in his answere ad Thes Posnan cap. 12. pag. 866 The Galathians and Corinthians though corrupted with errour and disagreeing each from other about the cheife groundwork of beliefe and that not concerning the manner but touching the matter it selfe retained notwithstanding the name of a true ●hurch And hence he gathereth that the debate and disagrement betweene the Lutherans and Caluinists concerning the Eucharist doth not let either of them from being of the true Church 5. The deeds of the Lutherans and Sacramentaries yeld vs a second kind of proofe For the Electorall or milde Lutherans in colloq Aldeburg scripto 8. call themselues Lutherās professe that thēselues differ fundamentally Fellowes and companions of the same Ministery fellow-cittizens and fellow-soldiers of those of Saxony or rigorous Lutherans of whome notwithstanding scripto 6. pag. 111. they giue this censure They haue shewed themselues to dissent from our Churches in the foundation Againe VVe will make it euident that they impugne the fundamentall doctrine And scripto 4. pag. 4 Our opinion is that we disagree not about impertiment matters only or things of no consequence but about the maine and cheifest matters And scripto 7 This one thing they ayme at and bend all their endeauours to vndermine and ouerturne the groundwork of sauing doctrine And pag. 374. they complaine that those of Saxony do often cry out of them that they are worse then any idolaters And the Sacramentaries in Praefat. Apologet. Orthodoxi consensus write thus of the Lutherans They haue hitherto suffered among them such as call in question the doctrine of iustification of originall sinne of free will of the Ghospell of the law and vse thereof of Christs descent into hell of his person of the election of Gods children and many other articles of no small moment which things they easily put vp because all these go vnder the name of Lutherans Now that the Sacramentaries likewise acknowledg the Lutherans for their brethren is apparent by the Apology of the Church of England by the consent of Poland by the preface of the Syntagme of Confessions Sacramē●taries challenge Lutherās by the Conferences of Marspurg and Montbelgard and other publike writings and registred acts and yet they see and openly exclaime against their errours in fundamental points of fayth Of Luther thus writeth Zuinglius tom 2. Resp ad Luther fol. 401 And yet say they differ fundamētally from thē VVe iudge thee a worse seductour impostour and denyer of Christ then was Marcion himselfe And fol. 430. Luther as yet is entangled and sticks fast in two errours exceeding grieuous and in most foule ignorance Of Melancthon thus sayth Caluin epist 183 Either he openly impugneth true doctrine in the cheifest heads or else hideth his meaning craftily or not very honestly And epist 179. he complaineth that Melancthon endeauoureth to ouerthrow his doctrine of predestination VVithout which sayth he the knowledge of Gods free and vndeserued mercy is vtterly lost The like he sayth epist 141. Sturmius lib. de Ratione incundae Concordiae sayth plainly that the Lutherans do pluck vp the foundation of Christian Religion And Bullinger in fundamento firmo writeth that the very infidelity of the Iewes and Gentils is by the Lutherans brought into the Churches Cureus in Exegesi Sacramentaria pag. 91 Surely the controuesy between the Lutherans and Sacramentaries is concerning the foundation The Sacramentaries in the Preface of the Conference at Mulbrun say that the Lutherans Teare in preces and adulterate the articles of the incarnation of the true humane nature c. VVhich articles say they no Christian man can doubt but are the groundwork of saluation And in the foresayd preface They are at variance not about the Lords supper only but touching the person of ●hrist touching the vnion of his diuine and humane nature touching the vbiquity of his body and corporall manducation thereof

common both to good and bad touching his ascending vp to heauen and his sitting at the right hand of his Father of all these points they contend and that with such exceeding heat of disputation as that old heresies not a few long since abolished and condemned begin againe to lift vp their head as if they were recalled from hell The like they haue ibidem in Prolegomenis Of the controuersy which is betweene the Lutherans Sacramentaries about the ●eall presence of Christs body in the Eucharist Martyr in locis tom 2. p. 156. giues this iudgement The contention and difference therein concernes the cheife heads of Religion Caluin epist 292. sayth that the opinion of the Lutherans doth By mischeiuous iuglings and legierdemains ouerturne the principles of fayth Beza in his 5. epist that it destroyeth the verity of Christs body And epist 81. that it recalleth from hell the folly and doting errours of Marcion and Eutiches Bucer cited by Hospin part 2. Hist fol. 84 It followeth thereupon that Christ is not true man Paraeus in cap. 3. Galat. lection 37 There is nothing more directly opposite to Christian Religion then to think that the body of Christ doth indeed lye hid really vnder the bread and that the same is truly eaten with the mouth Sadeel in tract de Coniunctione c. pag. 369. that it ouerthroweth the true nature of the true body and bloud of Christ VVhich thing sayth he we still lay to their charge And tract de Sacramentali manducatione pag. 26. that it is a word of euils pag. 267 That it traines after it idolatry And pag. 268 that it ●annot stand with the verity of Christs body Hospin part 2. citat fol. 2. that it is the foundation of Papistry And fol. 181 The base and pillar which sustaineth all the whole blended and disordered heape of abuses and all the bread-worship whic● hath vnder the Popedome byn deuised and brought in Lauaterus lib. de dissid Euchar. fol. 7. that it is the Foundation of the Popedome Cureus in Spongia that it is the foundation the strength the throne of the God Maozim and of the Popish state Caluin de Coena p. 8. in Cōs pag. 754. Beza in fo 6. v. 23.62 ad 4. Demonstr Illyrici Zan●hius in Confess c. 16. sect 12. And Vrsinus in Catechism quest 78. cap. 3. sayth As long as the opinion of the corporall presence is maintained Popish adoration and oblation and the whole Popish masse is kept on foot And there is not one Sacramentary but thinks the verity of Christs body and his ascention sitting at the right hand of the Father cleane taken away if he should say he were substantially in the Eucharist Whereupon Zanchius tom 1. Miscell in iudicio de dissidio Coenae pag. 553. sayth There are two maine reasons why the one party to wit the Sacramentaries renounce the presence of the body The one that the article of Christs ascension into heauen may be kept entire the other that the nature and verity of his humane body be not destroyed Nay some of the Sacramentaries in their Confessions of faith condemne the opinion of the Lutherans as mad and blasphemous For Confess Crengerina cap. de coena Domini sayth VVe condemne their madnes who auouch and maintaine flesh-eating that is who hold that Christs naturall and very body raw and bloudy without any change or transubstantiation at all is receiued with the very mouth And the Scots in their Confess pag. 159. say they Detest that blasphemous opinion which auoucheth Christs reall presence in the bread wine and that he is receiued by the wicked or taken into the belly This and much more of the like is sometymes the Sacramentaries plea against the reall presence of Christs body in the Eucharist and yet at other tymes they professe that this controuersy is not of so great weight and moment as that it should dissolue Ecclesiasticall Communion and fellowship For so teacheth Martir apud Simlerum in vita eius the author of the orthodoxe Consent Prefat Apologet. Hospinian part 2. Histor fol. 78. Caluin de scandalis pag. 95. In Consens p. 764. Beza lib. de coena cont Westphalum pag. 258. M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 792. and others Nay as we sayd before these men besought the Lutherans who stedfastly maintaine the reall presence to hold them for brethren and members of their Church They can then find in their conscience to haue fellowship and Communion with those men whose doctrine they condemne As Frantike blasphemous whose doctrine they say destroyeth Christs ascension What kind of men Sacramentaries challenge for brethren and the verity of his humane nature subuerteth the principles of fayth and cheifest points of religion recalleth the doting follies of Marcion and Eutyches establisheth the Kingdome of Antichrist traines after it idolatry and a world of euills Fy on these mē beliefe who think the maintenance of an opinion which as themselues professe ouerthroweth the principall articles of Christian fayth drawes after it idolatry and most foule heresies layeth the found●tion whereon Antichristianity is raised of so sleight consequence as it ought not to dissolue fraternity and Communion What regard of fayth or saluation may we think these men haue There is yet another point o● Luteranisme touching the vbiquity or presence of Christs body euery where reproued of the Sacramentaries and held in extreme dislike of which they likewise exclaime that it is (a) Beza respons ad acta montisb l. pag. 252. forged and composed of Eutychianisme and Nestorianisme that the heresies of (b) Caluin 4 Instit c. 17. p. 17. Marcion and Eutyches yea well nigh (c) Hosp pref par 2. all old heresies are by it raised againe from hell that it subuerteth the whole (d) Perkins expos Symb. coll 792. Creed that it takes away the (e) Sadeel de verit hum nat cheife heads of Christian Religion that there is scant any one article of Christian beliefe which it doth not vtterly abolish And yet these selfe same Sacramentaries stile them who defend this opinion (f) Sadeel sup Most flourishing Churches and made earnest sure to be held for (g) Beza in colloq mōtisbel pag. 462. brethren of those very men who vpheld this doctrine against them and maintayned it to their face Nay the particuler Churches of Sacramentaries themselues consist of parts mainly disioyned in matters of beliefe Sacramētaries say there is fundamētall differēce amōg them Examples hereof we need not seeke a broad Our owne Protestants tell vs how the Puritans their brethren allow not of the booke of common prayer but hold it to be full of (a) Whitgift resp ad Admonit p. 145. 157. corruptions and all abominations and teach that Protestants (b) Ib. resp ad schedas wickedly mangle and wrest the Scriptures that they haue no (c) Resp cit pag. 6. Pastours that they haue not a true Church