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	person_n	personal_a	4,224	5	9.5510	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A31440	Independencie a great schism proved against Dr. Owen, his apology in his tract of schism : as also an appendix to the former discourse, shewing the inconstancy of the Dr. and the inconsistency of his former and present opinions / by D. Cawdrey ...	Cawdrey, Daniel, 1588-1664.	1657 (1657)	Wing C1630; ESTC R8915	103,968	258

must be taken cum gra●● salis or else they may prove insipid if not worse As 1. Christ took upon him our nature essentially but he bestows his flesh and blood upon us spiritually and mystically 2. The union of the two natures in Christ was proper and personal into one person hypostatically as the Soul and Body in us make one man But the union of many persons with Christ is not into one nature properly but mystically into one person we are members of his body flesh bones but mystically otherwise the union of many persons into one nature should be like that of Christs two natures into one person hypostatically And like unto the union of the three persons in the Trinity into the same nature or essence which is incomprehensible 3. We are made parts of him of his mystical body that he and we become thereby as it were that is improperly and mystically one Christ 4. We are made partakers of the Divine nature not essentially and personally as Christ but in its graces and operations as generally all Divines understand it renewed by the Spirit into that Divine Image which we had by nature but lost by the fall 5. The same Spirit is indeed in Christ and in us but with this assigned difference In him dwelleth the fulness of it fulness of grace and truth Joh. 1.14 it is bestowed on us in measure 6. This same Spirit makes us one with him that is still mystically not as the Soul of man being one makes with the body one man for that is hypostatically and personally one The words thus expounded and candyed may passe for Orthodox otherwise not to be admitted But now in his Tract of Schism p. 94. of Schism he is declined into that Heterodox opinion so judged by most and best Divines that the holy Spirit dwells personally and essentially in us For 1. he tells us he cannot consent that the Divine nature given us should be no more than the new creature 2 That it is in the person of the Spirit wherof we are by the promise made partakers he is the Spirit of promise pag. 95. and in the participation of the Divine nature consists the union of the Saints with Christ 3. That the union of the head and members is the oneness of the Soul whereby the whole is animated and that which answers hereunto in the mystical body of Christ is the animation of the whole by his Spirit Now every body knows that the Soul is the form of a man and the union of Soul and Body is personal So then must the union of Christ and his body the Church be personal as animated by the same Spirit if the person of the holy Spirit be the Soul that animates the body of Christ And so he saies it is The form of the Church Catholick p. 236. absolutely so called is the unity with Christ and in it self by the one Spirit whereby it is animated I shall not enter upon the contest at this time it being a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the main businesse its enough to shew the difference of himself from himself then and now § 5 We now return after this digression to consider with him the evidences and signs of an extraordinary vocation which some of late pretend unto There is only one thing briefly to be taken notice of that is Whether the Ministers of the Gospel are by the Scripture to be called Priests which name some have arrogated and ascribed to the Clergy O which he affirms peremptorily p. 25. The name of Priests is no where in the Scripture attributed distinctly to the Ministers of the Gospel Priests and Prelates are a sort of Church Officers whom Christ never appointed c. These were his then thoughts and its like are so still only I would desire to know why he gives that name its suppo●ed in scorn to the Ministers of our particular Congregations calling them Parochial Priests or Schism p. 235. I leave him to give or others to guesse the reason of that Appellation and so proceed to what I named before § 6 There are but three waies given by him to receive and be assured that a man is extraordinarily called to the Teaching of others or to be a Preacher 1. p. 30. By immediate Revelation 2. By concurrence of Scripture Rules 3. By some outward acts of providence Concerning w ich in general it may be said 1. That p. 28. he thus resolved In cases extraordinary it may perhaps be affirmed that every one that is allowed to teach or preach the Gospel for such an undertaking must have a warrant by an immediate call from God But of all his three wayes named only one of them is by immediate call from God viz. that of immediate Revelation such as the Patriarchs Prophets and Apostles had the other by Rules of Scripture and Acts of providence are but mediate calls or warrants and may be common to all Christians as the case may be 2. Before this p. 15. and again p. 40. In such extraordinary cases of a corrupt Church c. no more is required but Gifts in the man and consent of the people which latter is an outward call and that by men and the former a call from God inward indeed but not immediate These things do not well agree § 7 But come to the particulars The first way of extraordinary calling is immediate Revelation This is specially in two cases p. 33. 1. Either the inchoation of some divine worke to be established among men by a new revelation of Gods will 2. Or a restauration of the same when collapsed and corrupted by men The only question will be Whether there be any revelation to be expected now with respect to either of those And he answers negatively to both To the first thus Nothing in such a way shall again take place God having ultimatly revealed his mind concerning his worship and our salvation c. To the second thus There being an infallible Rule for the performance of it making it fall within the duty and ability of men partakers of an ordinary vocation and instructed with ordinary Gifts God doth not alwaies immediatly call men unto it But grant that he doth not alwaies immediatly call men to it as oft he did heretofore it would have been resolved Whether sometimes God do now immediatly call men to the work of Restauration of Religion To which he saies nothing If he shall say he does not he contradicts himself who said p. 28. In this case of a corrupted Church every one for such an undertaking must have a warrant by an immediate call from God If he say he does sometimes immediatly now call men to it I would say 1. This is needless by his own grant For there being an infallible rule it falls within the duty and ability of men partakers of an ordinary vocation instructed with ordinary Gifts as he newly said 2. And then I would call for those

calling thereunto but onely an immediate call from God All I say for the change of his opinion is That he allows them this liberty now in cases ordinary as will appear hereafter § 3 The question then will be in cases more than ordinary when a Church is much degenerated and corrupted what may ordinary Christians do then to the Restauration of Religion Concerning which his judgement was what ever it be now this delivered and rested upon That in a collapsed and corrupted state of the Church pag. 15. when the ordinary Teachers are either utterly ignorant and cannot or negligent and will not perform their duty Gifts in any one to be a Teacher and consent in others by him to be taught are a sufficient warrant for the performance of it That is the duty of teaching or preaching But more expresly p. 40. In such a case of Apostacy in the Church I conceive he may nay he ought to preach and publish the truths discovered to him neither is any other outward call requisite to constitute him a Preacher of the Gospel than the consent of Gods people to be instructed by him I sh●ll only remember him That as he spake this of a lay man in Italy for that is his instance so he did not then take Rome to be no Church at all as now he does but a collapsed and corrupted Church but that by the way That which I observe is1. That he is not distinct enough in these Assertions for if he mean that in such a falling state of a Church p. 16. When it is ruinously declining every one of Gods servants hath a sufficient warrant to help or prevent the fall as a common duty of zeal and charity in a charitative way it s not denyed by any Doing it as a charitable duty not as out of necessary function even as Priscilla a woman expounded unto Apollos the word of God c. pag. 50. f. It s the duty of every Christian man or woman to publish truths re●ealed to others that will hear him as he speaks hereafter But if he take it in an Authoritative way as an act of the Keys as a Teacher or Preacher is taken under the Gospel for an Officer then its certain that Gifts and the consent of people to be instructed by him is not sufficient warrant to make him a Preacher And this appears upon his own former principles For being at that time a Presbyterian in judgement as we shall hear anon he knew did then hold that Ordination by the hands of the Presbytery was a requisite to make him a Preacher But this he now declines and hath renounced his Ordination and requires now no more but Gifts and peoples consent to make a man a Minister 2. And that not only in a collapsed or corrupted Church where Teachers are either ignorant and cannot or negligent and will not do their duty but now when neither of these can without injury be charged upon our Church-state he requires no more than Gifts and consent to make a man a Preacher in Office 3. Herein his discourse was dark and defective that he allows the people a liberty of preaching or publishing he truths of the Gospel in such a case but tells us not whether such a Preacher be a compleat Minister as to the administration of other Ordinances as the Sacraments not one word of that I suppose then he did not intend so much but now so is he changed he allows some that were never ordained and himself who hath renounced his Ordination not onely to preach the Gospel but also to administer Sacraments as compleat Ministers in the name of Christ Let them fear and tremble to hear one day those questions By what authority do you these things or who gave you this authority It is a dreadfull speech of his own p. 16. Who ever doth any thing in anothers stead not by expresse patent from him is a plain Impostor And yet how many such Impostors are there abroad who take upon them without commission from Christ or Authority from the Church not only to preach but to baptize and give the Lords Supper I have heard a sad story of a young forward man that did so and fell into great perplexity of mind for so doing and as I remember so dyed Many such there are who 〈◊〉 before they are sent having neither Gifts nor consent of people The Lord say it to their hearts and to the hearts of those that indulge them in it as guilty of such usurpation in them and the great contempt of the sacred calling of the Ministry Lastly how ever it might be sufficient in an extraordinary state of a corrupted Church to make a man a Minister to have such Gifts and consent of the people which was all the Dr. then asserted yet that those should be sufficient in an ordinary Reformed Church-state is his 〈◊〉 light and opinion unless they can shew some extraordinary signs of such a call from God which they cannot do For he speaks rationally below when he saies It is certain enough p. 34. that God never sent any one extraordinarily instructed only with ordinary Gifts and for an ordinary end But these his new Preachers have no more than ordinary Gifts some of them not so much wherein others are their equalls if not Superiors and the end is no more but ordinary the conversion of souls and settling the Ordinances in purity Then it follows that these being not 〈…〉 of God nor ordinarily 〈…〉 by the Church are no 〈◊〉 Impostors as he said afore § 4 How long the Dr. hath been of that opinion That the blessed Spirit of God is 〈◊〉 and personally in every true believer I cannot tell but he speaks suspitiously that way as on p. 94 95. and 236. of Schism was noted above c. 7. ● 11 so he speaks the same language here p. 21. with what difference we shall observe Thus he sales As in his Incarnation Christ took upon him our flesh and blood by the work of the Spirit so in our Regeneration he bestoweth on us his flesh and blood by the operation of the same Spirit yea so strict is this latter union which we have with Christ that as the former is truly said to be an union of two natures into one person so this of many persons into one nature for by it we are made partakers of the Divine nature 2 Pet. 1.4 becoming members of his body of his flesh and of his bones Eph. 5.30 We are so parts of him of his mystical body that He and we become thereby as it were one Christ 1 Cor. 12.12 And the ground of this is because the same Spirit is in him and us In him indeed dwelleth the fulness of it when it is bestowed upon us only by measure but yet it is still the same Spirit and so makes us one with him as the soul of man being one makes the whole body with it to be but one man These things