Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	divine_a	humane_a	person_n	30,362	5	6.1832	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19345	The non-entity of Protestancy. Or a discourse, wherein is demonstrated, that Protestancy is not any reall thing, but in it selfe a platonicall idea; a wast of all positiue fayth; and a meere nothing. VVritten by a Catholike priest of the Society of Iesus	Anderton, Lawrence.	1633 (1633)	STC 577; ESTC S100172	81,126	286

these he taketh not from himselfe but borroweth them from the Catholike Church This is euidēt for at the tyme of Luthers first reuolt who was the first Protestant in these dayes as his owne (g) Conrad Sl●es in Theol. Caluin l. 2. fol 17. saith It is im●udency to say tha● any learned men in Germany before Luther did hould the doctrine of the Gospel See Luther of this point in loc cōm class 4. p. 51. brethren do teach from whence did Luther learne that Christ was the Sauiour of the world that there is diuine Scripture Grace Sacramēts or from whence receaued he his Ordination if not from the Catholike Church The confessed Inuisibility of the Protestāt Church not only at the first rising of Luther but also for many ages before proued in this Treatise doth conuince the truth of this point And therefore D. Field had iust reason to say (h) D. Field in his Treatise of the Church lib. 3. c. pag. 72. In the known Church of the world wherin our Ancestors liued and dyed Luther and the rest were baptized receaued their Ordinance and power of Ministry If now any other should at last expostulate and say that the Protestant is wronged by comparing him to the Heathen Philosophers seeing many of those Philophers were Idolaters to this I reply and say that the comparison heer made is not with such wicked Philosophers but only with those most learned Philosophers who acknowledged a Deity and neuer taught nor formally practised Idolatry and such were Plato Xenophon Aristotle Seneca and many others Againe the cōformity in faith heere made is not touching those points which the Philosophers affirmatiuely belieued or practised but only in such negatiue Positions which are also denyed by the Protestant And with this I will heere rest concluding nothing of my selfe but will referre it to the censure of the most iudicious Reader whether this great affinity and brotherly association between the learned Heathen Philosopher and the symbolizing Protestant in their both promiscuously denying such Articles as are affimed by the Catholiks do carry any blemish to the Protestants Gospell or no or whether if the Heathen haue no reall Fayth in the sayd negatiue points it followeth not that the Protestant as a Protestant can haue in like sort no reall fayth in his belieuing the same Negatiue points But by this we may discerne that the cloudes of partiality and contradiction being once gathered about the mās iudgment doth make him thinke others to seeme lesse and to erre when indeed they doe not That Protestancy is but a Nullity of fayth and consequently with reference to fayth a Non-entity proued from the definition of faith and other Conditions necessarily annexed to Fayth CHAP. VII EVery definition of a thing is the Touchstone wherewith we try what other things can truly come within the Orb or cōpasse of the thing defined what not I will exemplify this in the definition of fayth deliuered by the Apostle and so see if the Fayth of a Protestant can be called fayth or rather in respect of Faith a Nōentity absence of fayth We finde that the Apostle defineth Fayth in these wordes (a) Heb. 11. Fides est sperandarum substantia rerum argumentum non apparentium That is fayth is the substance of thinges to be hoped for the argument of thinges not appearinge This definition sheweth by the iudgement of all learned men that Fayth is a supernaturall vertue and the obiectum thereof is that which throgh its owne abstrusnes and sublimity cannot be apprehended or conceaued by force of mans owne wit it transcending all naturall reason To exemplify this in the supreme Articles of the most blessed Trinity and the Incarnation the two Cardinall-mysteries of Christian fayth Fayth teacheth vs that in the Trinity there is one peculiar Nature in three different Persons Now mans naturall vnderstāding cannot apprehend how this Indiuiduality of Nature can be in three Persons without distraction or multiplication of the nature the rather seeing euery one of these Persons is identifyed really formally with this Nature the strickest vnion that can be conceaued In like sort touching the Incarnation by meanes whereof the Creatour of all flesh suffered in flesh mans reason cannot lay any true leuell to conceaue how one Hypostasis or person cā be in two natures or how this Hypostasis or person is identifyed made the same really with the diuine nature and yet is vnited most inwardly with the humane nature Thus in regard of the difficulty of belieuing Articles of fayth the conclusion among all the Schoole Deuines resulting out of the former definitiō of fayth is that (b) S. Thomas part 2 2. q. 1. quae fidei sunt non possunt esse scita so certayne it is that betweene mans Capacity and the Nature of supernaturall Fayth the proportion lyes onely in disproportion and that in matters of fayth euen reason dictates to vs to belieue against Reason Now to apply this if Protestancy be a supernaturall fayth or els it is no true-sauing fayth then the Obiect of this Protestanticall fayth is of that difficult nature as Man through the force of natural reason cānot giue any assent therto without the special concurrency of Gods Grace But heer now I demaund that seeing the Obiect of Protestancy as Protestancy is meere negations and denials of things to be as aboue is proued what supernaturality as I may terme it or force of Gods speciall concurrency is required that man should giue his assent to belieue that such or such a thing is not as for example that there is no Purgatory no place but Heauen for children dying vnbaptized no praying to Saints no inherent Iustice and so of the rest denyed by them I heer say that mans naturall reason euen of it selfe without any other externall help is propense inclining to giue assent to these all other negations except the affirmatiues to these negations can be conuinced for true eyther by diuine or humane proofes and authorityes so litle is any supernaturall assistance needfull heerto If then the obiect of Protestancy by reason of its Negations be most easy to be belieued and that the beliefe of it doth not surmoūt the force of mans naturall reason but rather most sorting and agreable thereto then if the Apostles definition of Fayth be true as I trust no Protestant is of that supercilious and froward disposition as to deny it followeth that Protestancy is not the Obiect of Supernaturall Fayth but in respect of true infused sayth is a Non-entity and bare Intentionality But to proceed further The Schoole-men (c) S. Tho. part 2 q. 5 teach that true and Supernaturall Fayth hath a necessary reference to two things the first is called prima veritas reuelans which is God who reuealeth all truths points of fayth This first is styled by the diuines Obiectum formale fidei The second thing required to Fayth especially after the Church