Selected quad for the lemma: diversity_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
diversity_n	faith_n	peace_n	unity_n	538	5	10.6349	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A15419	Loidoromastix: that is, A scourge for a rayler containing a full and sufficient answer vnto the vnchristian raylings, slaunders, vntruths, and other iniurious imputations, vented of late by one Richard Parkes master of Arts, against the author of Limbomastix. VVherein three hundred raylings, errors, contradictions, falsifications of fathers, corruptions of Scripture, with other grosse ouersights, are obserued out of the said vncharitable discourse, by Andrevv Willet Professor of Diuinitie.	Willet, Andrew, 1562-1621.	1607 (1607)	STC 25693; ESTC S120028	176,125	240

Dominus non secundum formam Dei c. Our Lord prayed not according to the forme of God but according to the forme of a seruant according to the which he suffered For if he will stil stand vnto it that Christ as God prayed vnto his father and not as man hee will make Christ a Priest as he is God and so inferiour vnto his father as God and so fall apparantly into Arrianisme from the which hee cannot shift himselfe with all the ●●eights that a subtile head and froward wit can affoard him 8. He would wrest a sentence of Augustine to shewe that he thought Abrahams bosome to be in hell producing this place if the holy Scripture had said that Christ after his death came into that bosome of Abraham not mentioning hell and the sorrowes thereof I maruell if any durst haue said that he descended to hell c. It is a strange thing that a man should so cast off all modestie as so apparantly to fasten vpon Augustine an opinion contrary to his owne words for a little before he said ne ips●s quidem inferos c. I cannot finde hell in any place of the Scripture to be called for good and immediately after he inferreth that the bosome of Abraham that is the habitation of quiet rest is not to be beleeued to be a part of hell yea and in these words which he ignorantly presseth as much may be gathered for in saying that vnlesse mention were made in Scripture of hell and the sorrowes thereof but onely of Christs going to Abrahams bosom no man durst haue said that Christ descended to hell hee insinuateth that Abrahams bosome was not hell for then any durst haue so said without any further mention of hell Thus he confoundeth himselfe with his owne testimony 9. He citeth a place out of Augustine to prooue that vnity is a note of the Church quoting lib. 2. cont liter Petilian c. 54. Dissentio diuisio facit haereticos c. Dissention and diuision maketh heretiks but peace and vnitie maketh Catholiks But in that place no such sentence at all is to be found which sheweth what vaine oftentation hee maketh of his reading in the Fathers beeing vtterly ignorant in them The place which he aimeth at is the 96. not the 54. chapter of that booke which he corruptly alleadgeth for Augustine saith Dissentio quippe vos diuisio facit haereticos c. Dissention and diuision maketh you heretiks peace and vnity maketh Catholikes But hee leaueth out you wherein the force of Augustines speech lieth His meaning is that not the diuersity of faith or dissenting in religion but diuision onely and seperation from the Catholike Church made them namely the Donatists heretikes for the Donatists confessed of themselues and Augustine denied it not nobis vobisque vna est religio c. You and we haue the same religion the same sacraments nothing diuers in Christian obseruation Other heretiks were discerned then by their hereticall opinions the Donatists by their schismaticall seperation Againe Augustine meaneth not that vnity simply is a note of the Church but vnity with the Church of God for the Pagans had vnity among themselues As Augustine in another place saith Non proferant nobis quasi concordiam suam hostem quippe quem nos patimur illi non patiuntur Let them not obiect vnto vs as it were their concord for they suffer not that enemie whom we suffer Therefore he two waies abuseth Augustines sentence both in clipping his words peruerting his sense in making vnity and dissention in the Church the cognizances and causes distinctiue c. wheras Augustine speaketh not of vnitie and dissention in the Church and among themselues but of vnitie with the Church and of dissention seperation from the Church Wherefore this sentence was impertinently alleadged against the Replyer who thus saith That one bond of faith in the diuersitie of some priuate opinions may containe and keepe vs in peace There may be some diuersitie in opinion in the Church and yet neither faith peruerted nor peace violated 10. Augustine is brought in thus writing tract 12. in 3. Ioann Behold Christ was here and he was in heauen for so he came thence that he departed not thence and so returned thither that he left vs not here and what maruaile you this God doth for man according to the body both is in a place and goeth out of a place but God filleth all places and is whole euery where yet Christ was at that time according to his visible flesh in earth But Augustines words in that place are these writing vpon this text No man hath ascended into heauen but he that descended c. Ecce hic erat in coelo erat c. Behold he was here and hee was in heauen he was here in his flesh and in heauen in his diuinitie yea euery where in his diuinitie borne of his mother and not departing from his father c. And ●ome fewe lines after he saith mirari● c. Do you maruell that he was in heauen also he made his disciples such heare the Apostle saying our conuersation is in heauen if Paul the Apostle beeing man did walke in his flesh in the earth yet was conuersant in heauen could not the God of heauen and earth be both in heauen and earth The iudicious Reader may see what small affinitie and agreement there is betweene these two sentences and although Augustines testimonie had beene truely alleadged yet had it not beene to the purpose for the question is not of the meaning of these words of our Sauiour Iohn 3. 13. The sonne of man which is in heauen but of those Iohn 17. 24. I will that they c. be with me where I am Other places cited out of Augustine and other Fathers are handled with the like vncleane fists but these giuen in instance doe sufficiently bewray his cunning counterfetting of antiquity and the like fidelitie he sheweth in producing the new writers as now shall be seene 8. Caluinee falsified 1. In alleadging Caluin lib. 2. Institut c. 16. ser. 8. these corruptions are committed 1. Hee clippeth off diuers sentences for after these words There is no small force to the effect of our redemption this sentence followeth Quanquam enim ex veterum scriptis c. For although it appear out of the writings of the auncient that this particle was not of olde so much vsed in the Church yet in handling the summe of doctrine place of necessitie must be giuen vnto it thē follow the words next obtruded by him It cōtaineth a profitable mysterie c. then in the last part of the sentēce There is none of the auncient Fathers which doth not in his writings make mention of Christs descension into hell Hee quite cutteth off the words following tametsi interpretatione diuersa although in a diuers sense and interpretation the which words doe euidently shewe that

He chargeth the Replyer thus to say that the bodily death of Christ was not sufficient for mans saluation yea that his bodily sufferings made not properly to our redemption and because his forgerie should not appeare he confusedly shuffleth diuerse places together in the margen quoted out of Synopsis in the which no such words can be found The Replyer saith Christs blood we confesse in Gods omnipotencie to haue beene sufficient to redeeme vs though but one droppe had been shed but it so stood not with the decree and purpose of God p. 1000. By one part the rest are signified for if blood be taken strictly then Christs flesh is excluded and beside his blood there issued forth also water all these were necessarie parts of Christs passion p. 1003. We ascribe the redemption of our bodie and soule equally to the sacrifice of his bodie and soule Againe it is not affirmed that the compassion of the soule with the bodie did not properly belong to our redemption simply but to that redemption which was to be wrought by the soule Who seeth not how shamelesse this Cauiller is to charge the Replyer to affirme that the contrarie whereof he maintaineth 12. Your selfe make three descents of Christ to the crosse to hell to the graue and yet beside these you make three more in an other place whereas the Replyers words are these Bernard maketh the same degrees of Christs descension which we doe his descending to the flesh to the crosse to the graue He calleth them not three descents but three degrees of his descension Now may not his owne words with better reason be returned vpon his owne head If you know no difference betweene descension and the degrees thereof you are ill worthie of those schoole degrees which you haue taken But concerning himselfe howsoeuer he might goe out master of Art in the croud for forgerie railing vntruths falsifications and such like he may well be admitted to be a professor Beside the Replyer speaketh not in that place of descending to hell but to the crosse Neither in that other place quoted doth the Replyer make three more descents his words are these We also confesse that Christ by his death ouercame hell and shaked the powers thereof that he humbled himselfe to the ignominious death of the crosse and descended from thence to the graue and there continued in the state of the dead till the third day and whatsoeuer els may be comprehended in the article of Christs descension Here are not many descents affirmed but diuers senses and explications of one and the same descension deliuered all agreeable to the Scriptures 23. You imagine that Christs soule was depriued of his fathers presence while it was in hell but this is his owne imagination for the Replyers words are these to say that Christs soule did not enioy his fathers presence in heauen all the while it was absent from the bodie is contrarie to the Scripture thou wilt shew me the waies of life c. he speaketh not of the depriuing of his fathers presence in 〈◊〉 but of the enioying thereof in heauen 24. You hold he descended into hell yea into all the torments that hell could yeild whereas the Replyer affirmeth the contrarie in that place the whole punishment is the whole kind of punishment that is in bodie and soule which Christ ought to haue suffered though not in the same manner and circumstance neither for the place of hell locally nor for the time eternally nor for the manner sinnefully May not now this Momus iustly beshrew his vnblushing cheekes and bold face in accusing the Replyer of falsifying and corrupting his words seeing it is so ordinarie a thing with himselfe to falsifie peruert and corrupt the Replyers both sense and sentences He little remembred in this leud course the saying of our Sauiour whatsoeuer you would that men should doe vnto you euen so doe you to them He would be loath himselfe to haue his words thus clipped and curtalled chopped and changed which measure he hath meated with to the Replyer who if he had somewhere failed in his sayings the Confuter might well haue spared him beeing so vnconscionable himselfe in his doings and he might haue vsed toward him that saying of the Greeke Poet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as you dare not praise my sayings so neither can I commend your doings If herein he would haue beene without blame he should in repeating of the Replyers words haue obserued the same rule which Seneca prescribeth in citing of authors tota inspicienda tota tractanda sunt per lineamenta sua i●genij opus nectitur ex quo nihil subduci sine ruina potest the whole must be looked into the whole must be handled the worke of wit is tied together by lineaments from the which nothing can be withdrawne without the ruine of the whole It was therefore an easie matter for this vnderminer to ruinate the Replyers whole building in supplanting of it by parcels and racking and dismembring one peece from an other Wherein he may complaine that he hath bin dealt with as Origene sometime was who saith Alij tractatus nostros calumniantes easentire nos criminantur quae nunquam sensisse nos novimus some doe cauill with our treatises and doe blame vs to thinke those things which we know we neuer thought And so plaieth this Catchpole ascribing vnto the Replyer such things as he holdeth not and sheweth himselfe to be of that number whome Hierome complaineth of non meritum stili sed suum stomachum sequentes not following the merite and manner of the Replyers stile but his owne humor and stomake The 11. Imputation of the forged falsification of Fathers The Accusation 1. Origene pretended to be falsified 1. Whereas the Replyer saith that one bond of faith in the diuersitie of some priuate opinions may containe and keepe vs in peace that same vnum fidei linteum quod vidit Petrus quatuor Euangelijs alligatum that sheete of faith which Peter saw tied with the foure Gospels in the corners The Confuter crieth out he applieth it not as you vntruly report him vnto the diuersitie of opinions in matters of faith c. 2. Who would translate cum ligno crucis in the tree of the crosse 3. He saith he clippeth Origenes words because the Replyer leaueth out fere 4. So in an other testimonie cited out of Origene he saith that Origenes words are clipped 5. The Reader may see what little care you haue of credit or conscience thus to abuse so auncient and learned a father 6. So an other place of Origene he saith is abused in like manner p. 188. The iustification 1. IT is well that this false Accuser confesseth Origenes sense onely not to be followed and so graunteth his words to be rightly alleadged But he applieth it not saith he vnto the diuersitie of opinions in one particular