Selected quad for the lemma: diversity_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
diversity_n	father_n	son_n	substance_n	392	5	9.2521	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A69095	The third part of the Defence of the Reformed Catholike against Doct. Bishops Second part of the Reformation of a Catholike, as the same was first guilefully published vnder that name, conteining only a large and most malicious preface to the reader, and an answer to M. Perkins his aduertisement to Romane Catholicks, &c. Whereunto is added an aduertisement for the time concerning the said Doct. Bishops reproofe, lately published against a little piece of the answer to his epistle to the King, with an answer to some few exceptions taken against the same, by M. T. Higgons latley become a proselyte of the Church of Rome. By R. Abbot Doctor of Diuinitie.; Defence of the Reformed Catholicke of M. W. Perkins. Part 3	Abbot, Robert, 1560-1618.	1609 (1609)	STC 50.5; ESTC S100538	452,861	494

and the same person onely termed diuersly But if for auoiding thereof he will say as all learned diuines say that the persons of the Trinity are really distinguished then let him vnderstand that hee saith no more than we say nor knoweth more than wee know who know how to speake as well as he Our Diuines doe sometimes indeed say that the one essence of God is distinguished really into three persons but meaning it no otherwise than according to the definition of Thomas Aquinas that c Tho. Aquin. sum p. 1. q. 28. art 3. in corp Oportet quòd sit in deo distinctio realts non secundum rem absolutam quae est essentia in qua est summa vnitas simplicitas sed secundū r●m relatiuam there is in God a reall distinction not according to that that is absolute which is the essence but according to that that is relatiue which is the diuers subsistence of the persons Or rather they meane it according to that which Saint Austin saith d August de fide a● Pet. diacon c. 1. Vna est patris filij sp sancti essentia in qua non est aliud pater aliud filus a●ad sp sanctus quan ●is person●tlitèr sit alius p●ter alius filius alius spsanctus There is one essence of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost wherein the Father is not one thing the Sonne another thing and the holy Ghost another thing and yet personally the Father is one the Sonne another and the holy Ghost another What is it but the same to say either that in one essence there are really three persons or that one essence is really distinguished into three persons He saith that if the diuine nature bee really distinguished into three there must needs be three diuine esserces or natures If saith he it be distinguished into three but three what for if he had added as he should into three persons then his folly had appeared to argue in that sort The sonne how vnderstood to haue a distinct substance from the Father that if one essence be really distinguished into three persons there must needs be three essences That which he addeth out of Caluin that the Sonne of God hath a distinct substance from the Father Caluin speaketh not of himselfe but of Tertullian nor by his owne phrase but by Tertullians phrase who though he differ from latter times in manner of speech yet defendeth the truth of the Godhead in three persons as other godly Fathers haue alwaies done Praxeas the heretike denied the Trinity affirming that the Father the Son and the holy Ghost were but onely names giuen in diuers respects to one and the same person Tertullian writeth against him and comming to the word the second person in Trinity he disputeth that the same is e Tertul. adu Praxed Ergo inquis das aliquam substantiam esse sermonem Planè Nouimus enim eum substantiuum habere in re per substantiae proprietatem vt res persona quae dam videri possit c. Nihil dico de deo maene vacuum prodire potuisse c. nec carere substantia quod de tanta substantia processit c. Quod ex ipsius substantia missum est sine substantia non erit Quaecunque ergò substantia sermonis fuit illam dico personam illi filij nomen vindico dum filium agnosco secundum a patre defendo not an empty or idle name but importeth some substantiall thing by propriety of substance that it cannot bee without substance that proceeded from such a substance and was sent of the substance of the Father But yet he presently expoundeth himselfe Whatsoeuer the substance of the word is that I call the person and challenge to it the name of the Sonne and whilest I acknowledge him the Sonne I defend him to be a second to the Father By substance therefore with Tertullian is not meant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the essence but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the personall and indiuiduall existence wherein each person distinctly hath the one true and perfect substance that is essence of one Godhead the word being purposely intended to crosse the hereticall conceit of Praxeas of voide and empty tearmes Euen as Hilary reporteth that a Councell of Antioch against the same heresie challengeth to euery person f Hilar. de Synod adu Arianos His nominibus significantibus diligenter propriam vniuscuiusque nominatorum sul stantiam ordinem gloriam vt sint quidem per substantiam tria per consonantiam verò vnum Ex●●cil Antiocheno his proper substance and saith that they are three in substance but in accord one g Ibid. paulo post Tres subst iutias esse dixerunt subsistentium personas per substantias edocentes non substantiam patris f●●ij spiritus sancti diuersitate dissimulu essentiae separantes meaning saith he by substances the persons subsistent not separating the substance of the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost by diuersity of vnlike essence The blasphemy of Praxeas and of the Sabellians was in these latter times reuiued by Seruetus Against him Caluin disputeth and bringeth in Tertullian in his owne language oppugning that damnable fancy and in that whole discourse with all integrity hee maintaineth our beleefe of one substance in three persons and is not M. Bishop ashamed thus by aduantage of anothers words onely by him alleaged and in the authours meaning vsed so ill to requite him and to charge him with that whereto he purposely defendeth the contrary in the same place But why doe I speake of shame for what are those men ashamed of And therfore he sticketh not heere againe very grosly to belie Melancthon also charging him to say that there be as well three diuine natures as there be three persons whereas neither in the place by him quoted nor any otherwhere euer any such matter proceeded from Melancthon Vpon his second point I will not stand because it is before handled in the sixt section of the Preface So is the third point handled there also in the eight section and the fourth in the tenth and that which he saith as touching the second article in the sixt and seuen His obiection as touching the third article is a very leaud and vnhonest slander None of vs affirmeth that Christ was borne with the breach of his Mothers virginity Christ borne without breach of his mothers virginity because her virginity stood in being free from the company of man not in that shee had not her wombe opened when she bare Christ For if the opening of her wombe in her childbirth were the breach of her virginity then the Euangelist shall be said to impeach her virginity in applying to the birth of Christ that saying of the law h Luk. 2.23 Exod. 13.2 Euery man-child that first openeth the wombe shall be called holy to the Lord. Which