Selected quad for the lemma: opinion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
opinion_n	church_n	hold_v	true_a	2,532	5	5.1114	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A64381	A true account of a conference held about religion at London, Septemb. 29, 1687 between A. Pulton, Jesuit, and Tho. Tenison, D.D. as also of that which led to it, and followed after it / by Tho. Tenison.	Tenison, Thomas, 1636-1715.	1687 (1687)	Wing T723; ESTC R18602	49,387	102

left every one to his own understanding in such Interpretation without obliging him to submit his judgment to any others D. T. interrupted him and said he was drawing them away from their point And upon this occasion M. M. and D. T. talk'd a little while about a Guide in Controversie and D. T. did tell him in short That a Man after using all Christian means and the help of all Ministerial Guides possible must at last judge for himself and that this was not to run on his own head as also that our People could know the Voice of our Church it being in their own Language but not so readily the Voice of the Church of Rome it being in an unknown Tongue for the true Interpretation of which the unlearned depended upon the particular Priest that instructed them Then D. T. and Mr. P. came again to the Quotations and D. T. waved for a time that out of S. Ambrose in relation to which he us'd a word somewhat too sharp saying Mr. P. falsified instead of saying he had quoted a spurious Author So they came to S. Cyril's Catechism to which D. T. said He knew the place Mr. P. meant and that it was answered nigh twelve Years ago at the end of the Conference betwixt some Gentlemen of the Church of Rome and Dr. Stillingfleet and D. Burnet Mr. P. said That Conference as written by D. St. and D. B. was answered and that he would give D. T. the Answer Something was said to Mr. M. about that Conference which needs not as I imagine to be here repeated After this D. T. desir'd Mr. P. to read out of his printed Paper the place out of Justin Martyr which he did The words were these S. Justin Mart. in Apologiâ Antonio Pio Imperatori pro Christianis oblatâ Now this Food saith he amongst us is called the Eucharist which it is lawful for none to partake of but those who believe our Doctrine to be true c. For we do not receive this as common Bread or common Drink but as the Word of God Jesus Christ our Redeemer being made Man had both Flesh and Blood for the sake of our Salvation Just so are we taught that That Food over which Thanks are given by Prayers in his own Words and whereby our Blood and Flesh are by a change nourish'd is the Flesh and Blood of the Incarnate Jesus For the Apostles in the Commentaries written by them called the Gospels have recorded that Jesus so commanded them D. T. answered That those words prov'd the Bread to remain Bread because it nourish'd the Body and was call'd Bread after Consecration and that they did not at all establish the Roman Article of Transubstantiation Mr. P. answered He brought it for the proof of the Real Presence D. T. reply'd A Lutheran held that yet would not be of their Communion He then asked D. T. what his opinion was of the Real Presence He answered He would defend the true Sense of his Church even in those mistaken words in the Catechism The Body and Blood of Christ are verily and indeed taken and received by the Faithful in the Lord's Supper One in the Crowd said not very loud Hold him to that I think here was further talk about the Roman Corporeal Presence And Mr. D. A. C. ask'd Mr. P. what kind of Philosophy that was which maintain'd that Accidents subsisted without substances He said 't was true Philosophy D. T. ask'd whether it was true Philosophy to say there was whiteness without a white thing and breaking without a thing broken and the body of a Man without the dimensions and figure of such a body It was answer'd God could do this It was reply'd there was no need no promise supposing God could do it Mr. D. A. C. said then or afterwards in the next Room that God could not do what was a contradiction it being an imperfection Mr. P. continued the discourse and said we accused them of Idolatry whereas they worshipped not the Bread but Christ under it To which D. T. answered that he also ador'd Christ when he took the Sacrament but not that substance which they said was under the shew of Bread and that if it proved to be Bread it was a Creature and the worship of it would be the worship of a Creature adding that Costerus the Jesuit owned if it should prove to be Bread the worship of it would be worse Idolatry than that of the Laplanders who worshipped a red Cloth. Mr. P. reply'd Mr. Stillingfleet had cited that place D. T. rejoyn'd that it was rightly cited for he had read it in Costerus Mr. P. was silent Mr. P. here asserted that the Bread was annihilated and being shown by D. T. that his Opinion was contrary both to truth and his own Church he salv'd it by saying 't was annihilated so far as it was Bread. About this time as I think Mr. Meredith removed and went to a Window and Mr. D. A. C. had there some discourse with him And there was other occasional talk with a Roman by M. S. about the Cup in the Sacrament the Roman saying 't was taken away for fear of being spilt About this time also as I think Mr. P. was desir'd to stick to something particularly to the place of Scripture long ago cited by him If he will not hear the Church and he was asked by D. T. where the place was He could not tell At which some of the people upbraiding Mr. P. Mr. M. asked D. T. if he could tell Chapter and Verse throughout the Bible D. T. answered he would by no means pretend to it But if he cited a place as a proof of a Fundamental point he would first know where it was that by the Antecedents and Consequents he might be the better assured of the sense of it After which D. T. turned to the place in S. Matthew the 18th and read it out of the English Bible and ask'd if the Translation were faulty Mr. P. would not say it was Then D. T. explain'd the sense of the place as meant of Trespasses and not Articles of Faith and said to a very honest Gentleman whom he espy'd not far from him 't is as if it should be said to you by one to whom you owe any thing though pardon me the Obligation is on the other side Sir I come privately to you pray be just to me You say you will not Then he comes with a Friend and says Pray do me right and the matter shall go no farther you say you will not Then he puts you into the Ecclesiastical Court supposing it proper for their cognisance you will not stand to their sentence Then you are Excommunicated and treated as such a One. What a consequence from hence is this Therefore the Roman Church is to be heard as an infallible Guide in matters of Faith Mr. M. said being returned from the other part of the Room when there is a controversie about the meaning of