Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	blood_n	body_n	eucharist_n	2,932	5	10.6147	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61579	Origines Britannicæ, or, The antiquities of the British churches with a preface concerning some pretended antiquities relating to Britain : in vindication of the Bishop of St. Asaph / by Ed. Stillingfleet ...	Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699.	1685 (1685)	Wing S5615; ESTC R20016	367,487	459

Eusebians should really believe the Consubstantiality of the Son and yet so vehemently oppose the use of the word Would any Men of common sense who did believe the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist to be turned into the very Body and Bloud of Christ set themselves with all their force and interest to overthrow the term of Transubstantiation So if the Eusebians did believe the Son of the same Substance with the Father to what purpose should they caball so much as they did all the Reign of Constantius to lay aside the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If it be said It was by way of Comprehension to take in dissenting Parties then it is plain they were really dissenting Parties still and consequently did not differ onely about the Vse of a word but about the Substance of the Doctrine And as those who do believe the Doctrine of Transubstantiation are for the Vse of the word and those who believe it not would not have the word imposed so it was in all the Councils under Constantius those who chiefly opposed the word Consubstantial did it because they liked not the Doctrine and those who contended for it did it because they knew the Doctrine was aimed at under the Pretence of laying aside an unscriptural word And the same Author tells us from St. Hilary the Consequence of shutting out the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was that it must be decreed either that the Son was a Creature made out of nothing or out of another substance uncreated and distinct from the Divine Nature And when he gives an account of the Council of Seleucia held at the same time with that of Ariminum he saith They brake into two Parties of the Acacians who defied the Council of Nice and all its Decrees and the old Eusebians who pretended to stick onely at the word Consubstantial and upon their Appeal to the Emperour there are these two things remarkable 1. That those who were for laying aside all discriminating words were Arians of the highest sort viz. Aëtians who held the Blasphemy of Dissimilitude 2. That those who were for retaining the word Substance went on this Ground That if God the Son exist neither from nothing nor from any other substance then he must be of the same substance with the Father Which was the very Argument he saith approved by the Council of Nice for settling the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is a sufficient Argument to me that those who from the Council of Nice did chiefly oppose that word did it with a Design to overthrow the Doctrine of the Son 's being of the same substance with the Father Which will more fully appear by a brief deduction of the Arian History from the Council of Nice to that of Ariminum not from modern Collections but from the best Writers about that time The Arian Faction finding themselves so much overvoted in the Council of Nice that they despaired to carry any thing there by fair means betook themselves to fraudulent Arts hoping thereby to hinder either the passing or the executing any Decree against them At first they endeavoured to blind and deceive the Council by seeming to profess the Orthodox Faith but they made use of such ambiguous Forms of words as might serve their ends by couching an Heretical Sense under a fair appearance of joining in the same Faith with the rest This being discovered by the more sagacious Defenders of the old Christian Faith they at length fixed upon the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the onely effectual Test to discriminate the Arians from others and when they had used their utmost skill and endeavour to keep this Test from passing and found they could not prevail they bethought themselves of another way to keep the Faction alive although the Heresie might seem at present to be totally supprest And that was by suffering Arius and his two fast Friends Secundus and Theonas to be condemned by the Council and to be banished by the Emperour but the chief Heads of the Faction Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nice with others resolved upon an Expedient to clear themselves and yet to keep up the Faction which was by subscribing the Confession of Faith and denying to anathematize Arius and his Followers This is plain from the Epistle of Eusebius and Theognis extant in Socrates and Sozomen wherein they own their Subscription to the Decree of Faith but declare That they utterly refused to subscribe the Anathema against Arius and his Adherents because they did not believe them guilty of the Heresie charged upon them as they found both by Writing and Conversation with them This Epistle was written by them during their Banishment in order to their return to their Bishopricks from which they had been driven by Constantine's own Order and the Reason of it is given is his Epistle to the Church of Nicomedia viz. for communicating with the Arians whom he had caused to be removed from Alexandria for their Heresie and Disturbance of the Peace of the Church there and the same Account is given of it in the Synodical Epistle of the Bishops of Egypt extant in Athanasius Which shews their Resolution to keep up the Faction in spite of the Council of Nice For if they had any regard to the Decree there past they would not have presumed to have communicated with those who were expresly anathematized by the Council and had very hardly escaped it themselves as Constantine there upbraids them in his Epistle But upon this notorious Contempt they were deposed from their Bishopricks and sent into Banishment where they grew very uneasie and resolved upon any Terms to be restored knowing that if they continued there the Faction was indeed in Danger to be wholly supprest and for that end they wrote that submissive Letter to the leading Bishops promising an universal Compliance upon their Restauration And the main ground they built their Hopes upon was because Arius himself upon his submission was recalled as they declare in the end of that Epistle Which Intrigue was carried on by a secret Arian Chaplain to Constantia the Emperour's Sister recommended to the Emperour at her Death who being received into Favour whisper'd into his Ear very kind things concerning Arius and his Adherents adding that they were unjustly banished and that the whole Controversie was nothing but a Pique which the Bishop of Alexandria had taken against one of his Presbyters for having more Wit and Reputation than himself and that it would become Constantine in point of Honour and Justice to recall Arius and to have the whole matter examined over again Upon this Arius is sent for and bid by the Emperour to set down his Confession of Faith plainly and honestly which is extant in the Ecclesiastical Historians under the Name of Arius and Euzoius and was framed in such a specious manner as made the Emperour believe that Arius was indeed of

by Hengist and Esca his Son which he places Anno Dom. 473. when he saith the Britains fled from the Saxons as from Fire Fabius Ethelwerd agrees with the Saxon Annals and Florentius in these Particulars And so doth Asserius in his MSS. Annals as to Vortigern's fighting with Hengist Wherein they very much differ from the British Traditions But after the Translation of the British History by Geffrey the Monkish Historians generally follow that as to the Success of these Battels and as to the Treachery used towards Vortigern by Hengist upon Salisbury Plain near Ambresbury Where it is said by Geffrey that the Saxons killed 470 of the British Nobility under a Pretence of a Treaty of Peace Nennius saith but 300 and that Vortigern was then taken and was forced to give Estsex Suthsex and Middlesex for his Redemption This Story passes for current among the Monks and our late Collectours of English History And that which seems to add most weight to it is That William of Malmsbury relates it but he reports it much as he found it in Nennius onely inlarging on the drinking part that went before the Massacre But when I find the same Story in effect in Witikindus between the Saxons and the Thuringers and the very same Word given NEM ET EOVR SEAXES I am apt to think one was borrowed from the other But I cannot but take notice of the Disingenuity of Verstegan who lays this to the Charge of the Thuringers whereas Witikindus not onely saith the Saxons did it but adds That the Saxons struck terrour into their Neighbours by it and saith They were thought to have their Name from it as Verstegan himself thinks Which were ridiculous unless the Seaxes belong'd to the Saxons All the certainty we have as to the matter of the Proceedings between the Britains and Saxons is what Gildas relates which is very Tragical viz. That all the Cities and Churches were burnt to the Ground from the East to the Western Ocean The Inhabitants destroyed by the Sword or buried in the Ruines of Houses and Altars which were defiled with the Bloud of the Slain in which horrible Devastation the Rulers of the Church and the Priests suffered together with the Common People So that he applies to this Desolation the Words of the Psalmist They have cast Fire into thy Sanctuary they have defiled by casting down the dwelling Place of thy Name to the Ground And O God the Heathen are come into thine Inheritance thy holy Temple have they defiled c. And Bede saith A Fire was kindled by the hands of the Heathens which executed Vengeance on God's People for their Sins not unlike that of the Chaldeans which burnt Jerusalemto the Ground So here saith he the wicked Conquerour prevailing or rather the just Judge so disposing there seem'd to be one continued Flame from one Sea to another All publick and private Buildings demolished the Priests Bloud spilt upon the Altars the Prelates and People destroy'd together by Fire and Sword and no Man durst to give them Burial Many of those that escaped at present as Gildas saith had their Throats cut and were thrown on Heaps in the Mountains or delivered themselves up to Slavery to avoid being famished and thought it a Favour to be presently dispatched and others hid themselves among Mountains and Rocks and Woods to escape the Fury of their Enemies where they lived in continual Fear and others went over into foreign parts Which was the Foundation of the Aremorican Colony of Britains as will appear afterwards But that which prevented a total Destruction of the Britains now was that it seems both by Gildas and Bede the Saxons having burnt so many Cities and Towns and driven the Remainder of the Inhabitants into inaccessible Places did go home for some time And in that Interval the dispersed Britains gathered together and after most earnest Supplications to God that they might not be utterly destroyed they made choice of Ambrosius Aurelianus as their King and under his Conduct God was pleased to give them Success And from that time saith Gildas now one Party prevailed and then another whereby God made a farther Tryal of the Britains whether they would love him or not to the Battel on Badon Hill wherein the Saxons suffer'd so great a Loss Which was forty four years after their first coming hither as appears more plainly by Bede But Gildas adds even at this time their Cities were far from being inhabited as formerly And when their Enemies gave them respite they desperately quarrell'd among themselves So that we have here a Conjunction of so much Severity and Patience such Fears and Hopes and yet such Defeating of these Hopes by their own Follies and Divisions as commonly fore-run a Churches Destruction and a Peoples Ruine This is the best and truest Account of the British Affairs from the Saxons coming till the Government of Ambrosius by which we are to judge of the probability of Nennius his Traditions As to the particular Conduct of the British Affairs under Ambrosius we have little more light than what Traditions and Conjectures give us However it may not be amiss to lay together what we can find about them Nennius saith little more of him than that Vortigern was afraid of him and afterwards he confounds him with Merlin when he tells Vortigern after the Story of his being without a Father that he concealed his Father's Name out of Fear but that his Father was one of the Roman Consuls and so Vortigern gave him the command of the Western parts of Britain But Geffrey gives a more ample account of him not onely that he was one of Constantine's Sons But that he understanding the condition of the Britains came over from Aremorica with his Brother Vther Pendragon and considerable Forces and after his Revenge upon Vortigern burning him in his Castle he makes the Saxons to retire beyond Humber through the terrour of his Name Whither Aurelius pursued them and overcame Hengist in a set Battel who fled to Caer Conan or Conisburgh where they fought again and Hengist was taken by Eldol Duke of Gloucester and beheaded by him according to the Advice of Eldad then Bishop of Gloucester Matthew Westminster transcribes these Passages out of Geffrey and puts them to such years as he fansied but it is observable that he makes Aurelius Ambrosius to have fought the Battel at Wippeds fleet with Hengist and his Son Aesc 16 years before this which according to him was seven years after his coming into Britain So that even Matthew Westminster durst not wholly rely on Geffrey's Relation But as to the death of Hengist Florentius saith he died after he had reigned in Kent thirty four years and Aesca succeeded him Anno Dom. 488. The Saxon Annals take no notice of Hengist's death but place Aesc's Reign Anno Dom. 487. Henry of Huntingdon saith That Hengist died the fortieth year after his coming