Selected quad for the lemma: father_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
father_n	ghost_n	godhead_n	holy_a	18,157	5	6.0211	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A72527	The relection of a conference touching the reall presence. Or a bachelours censure of a masters apologie for Doctour Featlie. bachelours censure of a masters apologie for Doctour Featlie. / By L.I. B. of Art, of Oxford.	Lechmere, John.; Lechmere, Edmund, d. 1640? Conference mentioned by Doctour Featly in the end of his Sacrilege.	1635 (1635)	STC 15351.3; ESTC S108377	255,450	637

father whom it represents is God the sonne God the Father is the second person the first or is the Diuinitie of the sonne as manifested in his flesh the person of the Father if not then this instance proues not your distinction which manitaines a figure to haue a veritie ioyned with it Censure 1. Tim. 1. Some the Apostle saies will needes be Doctors of the law though they neither vnderstand what they say nor of what thing the speake and among these Doctors M. Mirth you take a place violating with a prophane temeritie the sacred mysteries of Religion and vndertak to teach diuinitie to graduates in Diuinitie before you can speak sence in matter of Diuinitie For which reason this worthie specimen of your improficiencie therein which being the first in your book I haue transcribed deserues not a relation yet since you giue it for a lesson to better then my self and call for good attention with pray Sirs D. Smith E. S. take notice that I will ouer it once againe with as many pauses for the reuerence to such a Master as there be parts in it Waf. I grant since the Diuiné essence was incarnat that the sonne is essentiallie the same with the father The sonne essentiallie the same with the father how not absolutlie but say you since the Diuine essence was incarnate Before it seemes he was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consubstantiall his generation was not eternall or if it were the essence which by this generatiō he receaued was not the same which God the Father hath but another for had he receaued the same as the Scriptures teach and the Catholik church beleeues he had beene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consubstantiall before the incarnation which is more then your Mastership doth admit A bad lesson that is Master Mirth which can-be learned without forgetting of the Creed Waf. Who though quoad hypostasim in respect of his fillation he be a distinct person from the father yet quoad naturam according to his essence he is equallie sharer of the same God head is not an other but the same God Hetherto it hath beene beleued in the Church that the sonne of God receaued by his eternall generation the Diuinitie all the whole nature or essence together with all the essentiall attributes That there is in him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Coll. 2. ● all the fullnes of the Diuinitie and our Sauiour himself to his father Ioan. omnia tua mea sunt thy creatures are my creatures thy perfections my perfections thy substance my substance and thou thy self art my Father but now the case is changed in M. Mirths lesson the Diuinitie is diuided betwixt the Father and the sonne and each hath an equall portion of it the sonne is a sharer in the Godhead and equallie sharer with the Father What part he leaues the Holie Ghost I doe not find whether he the Holie Ghost hath an equall share with the Father and the sonne or none at all as not being incarnate for the Sonne got his share this Master thinks since the Diuine essence in him was incarnate since which time he is essenti●llie the same with the Father Waf. But I pray Sirs take notice that those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are spoken of the Sonne as his Diuinitie manifested it self in his humanitie Why not rather if I may be so bold to speake to so great a Master of the Sonne as consubstantiall to the Father as the Auncients haue vnderstood it especiallie Ioan. 1. since it followes immediatlie that He caries or sustaines all things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the word of his power this he doth not as man but as God and as God also the world was made by him Hebr● 1. as you find immediatlie before and the like in S. Iohn per ipsum facta sunt omnia all things were made by him who was in the beginning before the Incarnation they were made by him by the word which was in God and was God by this intellectuall subsisting Word which doth expresly represent God the Father and is his liuelie image Imago Dei inuisibilis and his eternall Sonne the splendor of his glorie 2. Cor. 4 Coloss 1 Hebr 1 Sap. 7. Basil Hom 15 de fide Epiph. in Ancor Amb●l 2 Exam Greg. Nyss li de diff ess hyp the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his substance the spotles glasse wherein he beholdes his owne glorious maiestie Cādor lucis aeternae speculum sine macula Dei Maiestatis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imago totum in se monstrans pat●●m the expresse image shewing the father all within himself by him I say by this Word mundus factus est reuolutions of ages the whole world was made not by him as appearing in flesh as man no● but by him as God Had you rather heare a Protestant speake then me His diuine nature hath no lesse then three to expresse it sonne brightnes and character and two to proue it the making and supporting all Agreeablie to these three we beleeue of him that he is consubstantiall as the sonne coeternall as the brightnes coequall as the character against the new heads of the old Hydrasprung vp againe in our daies Andr Serm. vpon this text Hebr. 1. you proceede Waf. So then as the Diuinitie of the sonne did manifest it self in the flesh he had the image of his fathers person engrauen in him so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies Be it that it signifies to engraue an image this grauing is not proper neither the Diuine not the humane nature is carued or graued properlie but metaphoricall signifying the expressing of an Image And what Christiā Diuine doubts but that the sonne of God being Verbum aeternae mentis is and from all eternitie an expresse image of his Father infinitelie more expresse more liuelie more cleare then the nature or soule or vnderstanding or arte of man as shewing the whole Diuinitie within it and comprehensiuelie representing God the Father Will you denie this Master Mirth will you denie that the Sonne of God did still represent his Father and that he is his eternal Image if you do you blaspheme and if your words as they are by you intended in way of answer be wel considered you do But we must on to your Conclusion which is Waf. Tell me then is this Image the same with the father whom it represents is God the sonne God the father is the second person the first or is the Diuinitie of the sonne as manifested in his flesh the person of the Father Birckbeck Featlies companion obiecteth that the signe and the thing signified cannot be the same in that verie respect and point wherein they are opposite If he meanes by that his manner of speach in that verie respect and point that the relations be distinct or not the same there is no question of it one relation is not the other If he meanes that the same thing in

proue that one the same proposition could not be proper absoluté simpliciter and improper or figuratiue absoluté simpliciter your labour was impertinent since the proposition in Question was neuer said by my Lord or S. E. to be such neither haue they said that any other proposition had the two sences mentioned in that manner That the same man may be white secundum quid and absoluté black the same speach improper secundum quid and absoluté proper hath beene said and the speach obiected hoc est corpus meum is such That this or anie other is absoluté proper and absoluté figuratiue or improper or the same man absolute white and absolutè black is the meteor of your braine which like an Ignis fatuus leads your argument still out of the right way The sence of a place of Scripture is either literall or mysticall Some places haue both as that Abraham (a) It is written that Abraham had two sonnes the one by a bond-maid the other by a freewoman But he who was of the bond-woman was borne after the flesh but he of the free-woman by promise 24. which things are said by an Allegorie for these are the two testaments the one from the mount Sina which gendreth to bondage which is Agar c. 26. But Hierusalem which is aboue is free which is the mother of vs all c. Now wee brethren according as Isaac are the children of promise 29 but as then he that was borne after the flesh persecuted him that was borne after the Spirit euen so it is now Ad Galat. 4. duos filios habuit vnam de ancilla vnam de libera sed qui de ancilla secundum carnem natus est qui autem de libera per repromissionem Gal. 4. The mysticall sense is threefold allegoricall tropologicall and anagogicall and the same place may some times haue all three For example in the place now cited and as it is expounded by the Apostle there is the Allegoricall Haec sunt duo testamenta c. v. 24. the Anagogicall illa autem quae sursum est Hierusalem c. v. 26. and the tropological sed quomodo tunc is qui secundum carnem natus fuerat persequebatur eum quisecundum spiritum ita nunc v. 29. Concerning literall senses it is the tenet of S. Augustine lib. 12. Confes that there may be diuers tWo three four or more in the same words and since a word may haue many significations why might not the Holie Ghost vnderstanding all verities and all significations of all words vse the same words in the same speach as that in the beginning God created Heauen and Earth in many significations at once This speach in Isaie generationem eius quis enarrabit the Fathers vnderstand sometimes of the temporall sometimes of the eternall generation of our Sauiour and that of God the Father in the Psalmes Filius meus es tu Ego hodie genui te the Apostle takes in one sense Act. 13. and in an other sense Heb. 1. Touching the mixture of proper figuratiue it hath beene tould you that the same place may be proper absolutè simpliciter and figuratiue secundum quid you crie out for one such and do not mark that before your face you haue alreadie two nisi manducaueritis carnem filii hominis c. and hoc est corpus meum That this is proper according to the substance of the thing signified we proue by the common rule of interpreting the Scripture when it proposeth dogmaticallie matters of Diuine beleefe and the same is confirmed to vs abundantlie by other places of Holie Scripture which do concerne this Sacrament and sacrifice and by the testimonie of the Holie Ghost in the Catholik and vniuersall Church which did euer beleeue it since our Sauiour truth it self spake these wordes That the same speach is figuratiue improper in regard of and respectiuelie to the manner of the thing which māner vsuallie the word corpus doth import it is euident for the bodie hath not in the sacrament extension of parts in order to place but is there all in euerie part of the dimensiōs of bread according to the manner of a Spirit When M. Mirth had come thus farre imagining poore man that he had got some victorie he puts a crowne vpon his head and snatching the trumpet giues notice of a new battle wherein he meanes to set vpon the little digression of S. E. which digression he cruellie dismembers and spurnes the pieces of it ouer the rest this Section to and fro contemptiblie I cannot without pittie see the thing so misused perhaps if the parts be gathered together the discourse may stand againe and affright him in the middest of his triumph Apologist Next I will runne ouer againe this section and page by page will answer the daintie subtilities of Master S. E. and iustifie our Doctors discourse against his Notes Censure If you will proue your tenet you must ouer againe and a thousand times againe and then will find your self as the mill-horse doth after all his labour euen there in the end where you were in the beginning Did not this appeare in your Doctors first argument and in this you now prosecute which is the second can you do more then he but now forsooth you will answer page by page and in matter of Logick Philosophie We haue lost allreadie to much time in hearing your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and this though the matter come neerer to your cap will most liklie be lost also but you teach wee must harken you will answer subtilities you say page by page that is exactlie Fortasse cupressum Scis simulare Apologist you say words do signifie conceptions I would haue you know there is a great deale of differēce betwixt conceptio and conceptus Censure Satis pro imperio What S. E. meant by a conception you haue presentlie in his next words The conceptiō is an Image representing the thing which wee think on This Image vitallie proceeding in the minde is properlie in English named a conception of the vnderstanding Confer pag. 8. Some name your Mastership will allow it in our language such as may distinguish it from the obiect or the thing conceaued I pray you turne your Dictionarie and find what name this is turne to which word you please conceptus or conceptio S. E. vsed neither but onlie said words do signifie the conceptions of the mind which English you cauilling at should haue mended seeing you will needes make your self his Master and haue taught him and your owne Dictionarie to speake it better in good English and such english as doth not equallie signifie things obiected whether they be feigned or not feigned For proofe of this Assertion words do signifie the conceptions of the mind he needed not your helpe hauing cited in the margine these words of Aristotle which it seemes you do not vnderstand sunt ergo ea quae sunt in

quod Christus fecit vt maiori Charitate nos astringeret vt suum in nos ostenderet desiderium non se tantum videri permittens desiderantibus sed tangi manducar f Idem in eadē Hom. Why doth he adde which we break this in the Eucharist wee may see not vpō the Crosse but quite otherwise you shall not bruise a bone of him But what he suffered not vpon the Crosse that he suffers in the oblation the Masse g Idem Hom. 26. in Matth. Then what sun-beames had not that hand need to be more pure that breaketh vp this flesh that mouth which is filled with this spirituall fier that tongue which is embrued or sprinkled with this wonderfull blood h Idem de Sacerdotio l 3. O the miracle o the benignitie of God! he that sitteth aboue with the Father is touched at the same time with euerie ones hands i Idem de Sa. cerd l. 6 Dare you Mirch Featlie Morton publiklie call your cōmunion bread so when he the Priest hath inuocated the holy Ghost and celebrated the most reuerend and dreadfull Sacrifice touching dailie with his hands the Lord of all I demaund of thee in what rank or order wee shall place him k Idem Hom 46 in Ioa. Who would graūt to vs to be filled with his flesh this Christ hath donne to oblige vs vnto him with more loue and to demonstrate his affectiō to vs suffering himself not onlie to be seene of such as desire it but to be touched also and eaten Reflect on this Christ himself the Lord of all he that sitteth aboue with the Father this is not bakers bread is touched with hands and * Et dentibus carni suae infigi Ibidem teeth also l Cyrill Hier. Catech. myst 5. Accedens ad communionem non expansis manuum volis accede neque cum disiunctis digitis sed sinistram veluti sedem quandam subijcias dextrae quae tantum regem susceptura est concaua manu suscipe corpus Domini Approaching to the communion come not with the palmes of thy hands spred out nor with thy fingars parted but holding thy left hand as it were a resting place vnder thy right hād which is to receaue so great a king that with the hollownes of thy hand thou maiest receaue the bodie of our Lord. Before you hea●d Saint Augustine saie that wee receaue the Meditatour Supra pag. 45. God and man with our mouth If against these Fathers you should obiect that the flesh of Christ is impassible in it self and that our Sauiour vnder the consecrated species doth not appeare in his owne forme to our eies they would Answer that yet notwithstanding he may be seene and touched with hands and mouth according to the Sacramentall forme wherein he is God in himself is impassible but because he was in the forme of man he might suffer and be nailed vppon the Crosse and this without driuing the nailes as you seeme to conceaue through the Diuinitie And according to the same humane forme he was trulie seene though the mens eies discouered him not according to the diuine forme within For had they knowne it they would hot haue crucified the Lord of glorie If secondlie you obiect the Capharnaites interpretation the Reader by that which hath beene said before out of S. Augustine will take notice of your willfull errour in that behalf and acquit these great Schollers heere cited from so foule an imputation Wee neither eate not touch with mouth or hands the flesh of our Sauiour according to it's proper forme which was the Caphernaietes errour but in the forme of bread we touch and eate it The bread which I will giue is my flesh Ioan. 6. Mat. 26. 1. Cor. 11. My flesh is meate indeede take with your hand and eate with your mouth this in forme of bread is what my bodie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this is my bodie which is broken for you Apologist To that part of the section where he mistakes S. Augustine to maintaine a corporall eating when he affirmes that Iudas receaued the price of our Redemption not by his faith for that was shut he being reprobated therefore into his bodie I answer that there are two kinds of eating in the Sacrament one both corporall and spirituall wherein the bodie feeds on the outward elements corporallie whilst the soule receaueth the true bodie and blood of Christ by faith the other onlie corporall wherein the receauer partakes onlie the outward signe and not the bodie signified So I say Iudas receaued the last waie onlie and not the first though his faith had shut out Christs bodie yet his mouth was open to let downe the Sacrament of his bodie He as all the wicked receaued panē Domini the bread of the Lord Sacramento tenus according to the visible signe the other eleuen as all the faithfull did also reuera indeed partake panem Dominum of bread which was the Lord. Censure It is well you confesse that your Answer is but to part of the discourse it hath hetherto beene your manner the rest is such as you know not how to cauill at it The words of S. E. which you pick out be these Iudas according to S. Augustine receaued the price of our Redemption not with the mind sure he was then a traitor but with the mouth The substance of your Answere is that he receaued bread and wine the signes or elementes but not the bodie and blood which answer is so farre from satisfying the place of S. Augustine that it is directlie cōtradictorie S. Aug. Epist 162. his words are Tolerat ipse Dominus Iudam Diabolum furem venditorem suum sinit accipere inter innocentes Discipulos quod fideles nouerunt precium nostrum Our Lord himself suffers Iudas a deuill a thiefe who sould him he lets him receaue amōgst the innocent Disciples that which the faithfull know our price That which the faithfull the Apostles knew to be the price of our redemption that he Iudas tooke what was that wine or blood non corruptibilibus auro vel argento redempti estis saith our Pastor sed pretioso sanguine quasi agni immaculati Christi 1. Pet. 1. You were not redeemed with corruptible things gold and siluer but with the precious blood of Christ as of a lambe without spot or blemish And the Saints in the Reuelation Apoc. 5. Redemisti nos in sanguine tuo thou hast redeemed vs in thy blood This is the price of our Redemption as the faithfull know and this Iudas though he was a traitor did receaue amongst the rest of the Disciples not with deuotion nor with faith neither not corde no he was one of those qui non crediderunt but ore tantum with his mouth onlie whereas the other both with heart Aug. l. 2. con Aduers leg c. 9. and mouth into themselues did receaue it And so did the Church in S. Augustines time Wee