Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	common_a	deal_n	great_a	143	3	2.1542	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A27524	Bertram or Ratram concerning the body and blood of the Lord in Latin : with a new English translation, to which is prefix'd an historical dissertation touching the author and this work.; De corpore et sanguine Domini. English	Ratramnus, monk of Corbie, d. ca. 868.	1688 (1688)	Wing B2051; ESTC R32574	195,746	521

falsly that Ratram intended to dispute against the Real Presence yet since he treats his Adversaries as Catholicks and calleth them the Faithful the Question in dispute must necessarily have been some opinion of less moment than the Real Presence the belief thereof or of the contrary could never have been held indifferent by the Faithful Not to spend time in exposing his absurd pretence to suppose a thing when he immediately assumes and concludeth the contrary I deny this consequence viz. Ratram doth not call his Adversaries Hereticks but treats them as Brethren therefore he did not write against the Real Presence All that can be concluded thence is that the Adversaries of that Doctrin were then as they still are Persons of a more charitable and meek Spirit than those who maintain and propagate it There is a great deal of difference between Heresie and some gross Errors whose Patrons do not desert the Communion of the Church and therefore it doth not follow that because Ratram treats these Erring Brethren as Catholicks and includes them with their Adversaries in the common Notion of Faithful he must needs esteem the Question in dispute of so little moment that it was indifferent which way it was held It 's plain he (a) Num. 11. chargeth them with Consequences very absurd (b) Num. 15. with contradicting themselves with subverting what they pretended to believe (c) Num. 32. Sanctorum Scriptis Patrum contraire comprobantur and with contradicting the Authority of the Fathers which are no very slight Accusations and shew plainly that he did not esteem it a matter of no moment whether his own or his Adversaries Opinion were embraced His second Reflection is That Ratram could not possibly write against Paschase because he takes no notice of the Miracle of Christ's Apparition in the form of Flesh alledged by Paschase in the fourteenth Chapter of his Book To which I Answer 1. That there is no necessity that he should take notice of this Miracle any more than he doth of his other Arguments since as it hath been before observed that it is the Notion and not the Book of Paschase against which he disputeth He acts the part of an Opponent throughout and never answers one Argument save that he once N. 56. obviates an Objection from St. Ambrose 2. That admitting us to pretend that Ratram encountered the Book of Paschase we may as fairly from our Author's Silence infer that there were no such Miracles alledged in it but that those Fables were since foisted in M. Boileau saith that Blondel rejects the whole Chapter as spurious I have not his Book at command to see his Reasons but I cannot believe he did it without all Authority as is pretended M. Boileau (d) Pref. p. 52. himself saith enough to shew that the two last Miracles were foisted in when he acquaints us that one Old Manuscript hath all Three but another more Antient only One. If one Superstitious Monk took liberty to Insert those two why might not the first which doubtless was the Fiction of some Greek Monk after the Second Nicene Synod together with the Discourse that ushers it in be a Forgery too As for the Story of Gregory the Great and the Roman Matron which is likewise foisted into our Saxon Homily out of the Life of that Pope it was impossible that Paschase should alledge it Since that Life of Gregory was not written in many years after (e) According to F. Maubillon A. D. 831. Paschase had Published his Book and admitting him to have Lived till 865. which is fourteen Years after the time when Sirmondus saith he Died Paschase must have been at least seven Year in his Grave before (f) Vide Vossium de Hist Latin. l. 2. c. 36. de Joanne Diacono Joannes Diaconus wrote the Life of Gregory in which only it occurs and Dedicated it to Pope John the VIII who was Advanced to the Papal Throne A. D. 872. that is about forty Years after Paschase first Published his Book and above twenty after his (g) A. D. 851. Resignation of the Abby and consequently after his second Publication of it with an Epistle to Carolus Calvus in which he stileth himself Abbot As for the story of Plegils the Saxon Presbyter who prayed to see Christ in the form of a Child and obtained his Request it is a shrew'd Presumption against the Antiquity and Authority thereof that it is omitted by the Interpolator of the Saxon Homily who would hardly have neglected so remarkable a Miracle wrought in Favour of an English Priest But Thirdly not to stand exposing the Falshood and Impudence of these fained Apparitions or rather of their Fabulous Author (h) Joannes Diaconus lived neer 300 years after Gregory's Pontificate is a Fabulous Writer and Author of the story of Trajans Soul being Praid out of Hell by that Pope they all prove too much or else just nothing For either in these Apparitions they saw what really was under the forms of Bread and Wine and what really was Transacted in the Sacrament or they did not If they did not the whole was a meer Illusion and Fancy And on the other hand if they did Then Christ according to the description of the first and third Miracle is still an Infant both the Jew and the Saxon Priest are said to have seen a little Child Again Christ must be divided into several parts as the Jew saw his Body broken in Pieces in St. Basil's Hands Again every Communicant doth not Receive Christ Intire but only some part of him for the Roman Matron saw the Piece which she was to receive turned (i) him bam ƿear ð aeteoƿed seo snaed ðaes husles ðe heo ðicgan sceolde sƿylce ðar laeg on ðam disce anes fingres liþ aeal geblodgod Hom. Sax. Fol. 38. into a Joint of the little Finger all Bloody Again at this rate Christ must be actually slain and the Sacrifice of the Altar be a Bloody Sacrifice for the Jew is said to see his Body divided in S. Basils hands and our Saxon Miracle Monger tells us that the two Monks saw an Angel with a Sword at Consecration divide the Childs Body and pour his Blood into the Chalice and if so what becomes of the Doctrin of Concomitancy So that either these Miracles prove nothing at all or else they prove what will as little consist with the Romish Belief as with ours His Third Reflection is this That if Ratram had been against the Real Presen●e he would not have failed to have Reproached the Greeks with the Belief of it in his four Books Written against them But this is a very Trifling Remark for this was a point upon which the Greek as well as the Latin Church was at that time divided and as it had been unreasonable to Reproach the whole Church with the Errors of one Party so it had been Imprudently done to object to the Greek a Reproach which might have been