Selected quad for the lemma: soul_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
soul_n	able_a	fear_v	kill_v	7,661	5	8.6491	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43647	An apologetical vindication of the Church of England in answer to those who reproach her with the English heresies and schisms, or suspect her not to be a catholick-church, upon their account.	Hickes, George, 1642-1715.	1687 (1687)	Wing H1840; ESTC R20398	73,683	104

together but three days after they assembled again reciting against Damasus those words of our Lord Fear not those who can kill the body but are not able to kill the soul Then they sang out of the Psalms The dead bodies of they servants have they given to be meat unto the fowls of the air and the flesh of thy saints unto the beasts of the field their blond have they shed like water on every side of Jerusalem and there was no man to bury them And often meeting together in the Church of Liberius they cryed out O Christian Emperor let all the Bishops meet at Rome let them try the Cause between Vrsinus and Damasus and drive the Murderer from St. Peter's Chair These Complaints of the People coming to the ears of the Emperor he called back Ursinus from Banishment the People met him with great joy but Damasus by bribing the Court gets him banished again After this he invited the Bishops of Italy to a Feast upon his Birth-day Some of them came whom he would have perswaded both by good words and money to depose Vrsinus but they desired to be excused telling him that they came to celebrate his Birth-day and not to condemn a man unheard This Account which I have given of the Schism between Damasus and Vrsinus is taken our of the Preface of Marcellinus a Roman Presbyter and Faustinus a Roman Deacon before the Libellus precum or humble Supplication which they presented to the Emperors Valentinian Theodosius and Arcadius I refer the Reader to it in the † A. D. 1628 Oxford-Edition of Faustinus and if he please to consult it there he will find all that I have written and some more remarkable passages which for brevity sake I thought fit to omit I know very well that Baronius hath said all he can to render this Account suspected because it invalidates the Title of Damasus and interrupts the lawful Succession to St. Peter's Chair First He pleads that Marcellinus and Faustinus were Hereticks and that their testimony is no more to be believed then the testimony of Thieves against those they have robbed But was the Luciferian Heresie so called an Heresie indeed * August de Heres ad Quodv Luciferianos a Larcifero Caralitano Episcopo exortos celeriter nominatos nec Epiphanius nec Philaster inter hereticos posuiticredo tantummodo schisma non haeresin eos condidisse credentes St. Augustine observes that neither Epiphanius nor Philastrius put the Luciferians in the number of Hereticks and is very willing to excuse them from Heresie Or if it were a Heresie was it of such a nature as to deprave and infatuate the Souls of men and to deprive them at once both of truth and common sense in making of them write a heap of Lyes to the Emperor while Damasus was alive with many more eye-witnesses of the Schism whom they might conclude would have publickly exposed their Account if it had been false Was not Lucifer himself a very holy and excellent Person notwithstanding the severity of his opinion and a great Champion of the Church against the Arians and might not those who stood up with him for the strictness of Church-discipline and purity of Communion out of hatred to Arianism notwithstanding their excusable error be as holy men as he I am confident no unprejudiced man that will observe what an excellent strain of Piety and Zeal runs through their Works can suspect them capable of writing such gross Forgeries as the Preface indeed contains if it be not true But Baronius objects that they assert Vrsinus to have been ordained Bishop before Damasus contrary to St. Hierom in his Chronicon who saith that Damasus was ordained first But by his favour their words in the Preface do not necessarily import so much as the learned Annotator in the Oxford Edition hath observed but if they did why is not their Testimony as good against St. Hierom as St. Hierom's is against theirs and why may not he be supposed to have strain'd a little in favour of his Master Damasus who had so obliged him as well as they to have prevaricated out of hatred to him secondly He opposes the Autority of Ruffinus against them who relates the Story in favour of Damasus But was not Ruffinus as learned men observe a very careless and oscitant Historian How many Mistakes doth the learned Valesius observe in his History in his Annotations upon Socrates and which is it most reasonable to believe an unaccurate man that writes by hear say and at a distance and in a general History or men that with great accuracy write of any Fact which they had all the means of knowing exactly and could not unless they would wilfully mistake Thirdly He most frigidly objects that Vrsinus must needs have been the schismatical Bishop because he was ordained by the Bishop of Tibur and not of Ostia to whom he saith it did belong to ordain the Bishops of Rome It is true it was the custom of the Metropolitans and Patriarchs to be ordained by some of their neighbouring com-provincial Bishops as St. Aug. observes in defence of Cecilian's Ordination against the Donatists and this he proves by the example of the Bishop of Ostia who usually ordained the Bishop of Rome But what tho' that Bishop did usually ordain the Roman Bishops Non expectaverit Cecilianus ut princeps à principe ordinaretur cum aliud habeat Ecclesiae Catholicae consuetudo ut non Numidiae sed propinquiores Episcopi Episcoporum Ecclesiae Carthaginis ordinent sicut nec Romanae Eccliesiae ordinat aliquis Episcopus Metropolitanus sed de proximo Ostiensis Episcopus Aug. in brev collat di●● 32. ● 3 doth it follow from thence that he was Judg of their election and that if the See was vacant or the Bishop of it sick or absent or superannuated and could not or had no mind and would not do that office that another for example the bishop of Tibur might not do it as well Some of these perhaps might be the Case when Vrsinus was elected for we do not read that the Bishop of Ostia ordained Damasus or if he had for certain ordained him might not Damasus have corrupted him as well as the Courtiers and Magistrates of Rome or Preface saith he would have engaged the Bishops of Italy to condemn Vrsinus and methinks if his had been the juster Cause he should for his reputation have committed the hearing of the whole Matter to a Council of Bishops and got him and his Party condemned as Cornelius got Novatus and his but this he never did which is no small presumption that his Election was not so justifiable and his Right so clear as Baronius would have it to be But whether it were or no doth not directly concern my present Design which is chiefly to shew what a violent dangerous and scandalous Schism this was which happened in the Roman Church It was so violent that according to *