Selected quad for the lemma: friend_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
friend_n	answer_v	know_v	think_v	806	5	3.6946	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61804	A discourse of the Pope's supremacy. Part I in answer to a treatise intitled, St. Peter's supremacy faithfully discuss'd ... : and to A sermon of S. Peter, preached ... by Thomas Godden ...	Stratford, Nicholas, 1633-1707.	1688 (1688)	Wing S5932; ESTC R33810	93,478	130

Name * Nam si Paulo Apostolo satis est nihil scire nisi Christum Jesum hunc crucifixum quid amplius mihi desiderandum est seire quam Christum In uno enim hoc nomine Divinitatis Incarnationis expressio fides passionis est Et ideo licet caeteri Apostoli sciant Petrus tamen respondet prae caeteris Tu es Christus filius Dei vivi Complexus est itaque omnia qui naturam nomen expressit in quo summa virtutum est Ambros Comment l. 6. in Evang Luc. c. 9. col 116. Edit Paris 1614. Can any thing be more plain than 〈◊〉 what St. Ambrose here saith the other Apostles knew was what was expressed in the Name Christ viz. his Divinity and Incarnation And what St. Peter answer'd when he said Thou art Christ the Son of the living God in which is contain'd both his Name and his Nature So far was St. Jerom from thinking the Apostles ignorant of it that he thought the rude Sea-men knew his Divinity otherwise he spake absurdly in opposing their Confession to that of Arius * Ad unum signum tranquillitate maris reddita quae post nimias procellas interdum casu fieri solet Nautae atque vectores vere filium Dei confitentur Arius in Ecclesia pradicat Creaturam Hieron Comment l. 2. in Matth. c. 15. v. 33. Edit Bas 1553. St. Chrysostom says When Peter said AND WE HAVE BELIEVED Christ excepts Judas out of the number of Believers † 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In cap. 7. Evang. Johan Hom. 47. thereby plainly signifying that all of them save Judas believed Christ to be the Son of the Living God. The same says Cyril of Alexandria Add to these all those Fathers who tell us that Peter answered not for himself only but for all the Apostles which as Maldonate confesses ‖ Comment in Matth. cap. 16. ver 16. was the Judgment of St. Chrysostom Jerom and St. Austin and Barradius cites for it St. Augustin Ambrose Jerom Anselm and St. Thomas ‖ Comment in Concord hist Evangelic tom 2. l. 10. c. 22. Yea the Discussor himself tells us that St. Jerom acknowledges that Peter did profess this Truth ex persona omnium in the person of them all That St. Cyprian in his 55th Epistle declares that Peter answered for all of them That St. Austin fancies he only answered to preserve Vnity unus pro multis dedit responsum unitas in multis c. * Pag. 85. And in confessing this does he not fairly pull down with one hand what he labours to build up with the other For what the reason was why he answered for all is not now the question it suffices that he did so since if he did no Man can reasonably deny but that he knew what he answered was the Belief of them all But this Opinion saith the Discussor reflecting upon Dr. Barrow and Dr. Cave seemed to me very thin and silly The reason why it seemed so to him follows viz. that Christ should propound a Question to a dozen Persons which he knew any of them could solve and make honourable Promises only to him that should speak first seem'd to me says he a childish Fancy and beneath the Conceptions of a Doctor He here forgot his good Friend Maldonate who was of the same silly Opinion But is it indeed silly to think that Christ should propound a Question to a dozen which he knew any one of them could answer That Question which just before this he propounded to the same dozen Whom do Men say that I the Son of Man am did he not know that every one of them could answer it and so indeed they all did or at least so many of them as pleased That other Question propounded by Christ to all the twelve sometime before this Will ye also go back did he not know that every one of them could answer it so far as it concern'd himself And was not one Answer returned to it by St. Peter in the Name of them all as the Discussor himself grants But that Christ should make honourable Promises only to him that should speak first seem'd to him a childish Fancy But if we may believe St. Ambrose these honourable Promises were not made to him only for what is said to Peter says he is said to the Apostles ‖ Denique audi dicentem Tibi dabo claves regni Caelorum quodcunque ligaveris super Terram erit ligatum in Caelo quodcunque solveris Quod Petro dicitur Apostolis dicitur Enarratio in Psal 38. Or if the Promises were here made to him only the same were afterward made and the Reward promised was given to all the Apostles The Lord saith to Peter saith St. Cyprian Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church And I will give thee the Keys And although after his Resurrection he gives equal Power to all his Apostles * Loquitur Dominus ad Petrum Ego dico tibi inquit quia tu es Petrus super istam Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam portae Inferorum non vincent eam Et tibi dabo claves regni Caelorum Et quamvis Apostolis omnibus post resurrectionem suam parem potestatem tribuat dicat sicut misit me Pater c. Cypr. de Unitat. Ecclesiae p. 254. Edit Paris Hath Peter received those Keys says St. Austin and hath not Paul received them hath Peter received them and hath not John and James received them and the rest of the Apostles † Nunquid istas claves Petrus accepit Paulus non accepit Petrus accepit Johannes Jacobus non accepit caeteri Apostoli August Serm. 30. de Diversis And that the Promises were made to the other Apostles as well as to Peter is not only the Opinion of the ancient Church as I shall afterward more fully shew but of many great Men of the Church of Rome ‖ Ellies du pin de antiq Eccles disciplina dissertat 4. p. 307. Simon vigorii ad respons Synodal Concil Basil Comment c. 6. de Monarch p. 10 11 12 c. But since the Doctor 's Opinion seem'd to him a childish Fancy let us see what Man-like Reasons he hath produc'd for the contrary Peter is said to answer for the rest not as if he spake or knew their Opinion on this Point Now what are his Reasons for this For the Question Pag. 87. was asked by our Saviour on a sudden and it does no where appear that the Apostles had any precedaneous Conference or Consultation about it Are not these wise Reasons for a Man to give who had just before censured the Doctor 's Opinion as silly Grant the Question was sudden did the Suddenness of it render Peter ignorant of what he knew as I have already shew'd before the Question was asked Or needed he to consult the Apostles for