Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	person_n	personal_a	union_n	7,677	5	9.6215	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00003	A sermon preached at Paules-Crosse the second day of Iune, being the last Sunday in Easter terme. 1622. By Thomas Ailesbury student in diuinitie	Ailesbury, Thomas, fl. 1622-1659.	1623 (1623)	STC 1000; ESTC S101513	32,856	62

relate But why it hath that denomination seeing Iehosaphat was not there buried but in the Citie of Dauid none of them declar● ſ Supplem 4. p●rt q 88 art 4. Res ondeo dicendum non potest multum per certitudinem sciri sed probabiliter potest colligi ex Scripturis Caluin Gualter in Ioel. Aquinas after he had said what the Iesuite out of him hath repeated and somewhat more yet doth not certainly determine but probably coniecture that to be the place And with Riberaes leaue it is more consonant to the literall sense That God will deliuer his people from the hands of the Assyrians to whom they were now captiuated And that hee might comfort them the more he doth allude to that miraculous victorie t 2 Chron. 20. that God gaue to Iehosaphat For listen Ribera as the Lord did then cause a ciuill discord and mutinie to arise in the Enemies campe wherein the children of Ammon destroyed those of Mount Seir therefore the place was called the valley of Beracah or blessing So is the Lord able to deliuer you out of the Assyrian yoke and to gather you from among the Nations Therefore whether Christ shall iudge in the ayre or on the earth in Mount Caluary or in the Valley of I●hosaphat we place it inter scita Scholae to be discussed in School●s not inter articulos fidei to be imbraced as an Article of our beleefe The circumstance of the place where m●kes me call to minde the time when the day of iudgement shall be which is ●s much or more vncertaine then the former so sealed vp that u Math 24 3● of that day and houre knoweth no man no not the Ang●ls saith our Lord but my Father onely It transcendeth the knowl●dge of man It transcendeth the knowledge of Angels and as it seemeth by Saint Mark● of the Sonne too who addes * Mark 13.32 not the Sonne but the Father Of man there is no maruaile who is ignorant of many things he is bound to know Neither is there any great scruple of th● Angels for though they see him that seeth all things yet in him they doe not see all things but thos● obiects that concurre to their Beatitude as the x Non 〈◊〉 ad intel●●●● 〈…〉 alia 〈…〉 14 〈…〉 Schoole-men haue bounded that * 〈…〉 too too large spe●ch of Gregory All th● doubt all the scruple and difficultie lyeth in Christ how he should be said not to know the day of iudgement Some haue thought this clause neque filius to haue beene crowded into the Text by the Arrians and Agnoaetae y Lib. 8. Epist 42 S. Gregory ad Eulogium layeth downe three expositions of the Fathers The first is that it is not to be referred to Christ the head but vnto vs the body as in the Scripture by reason of the mysticall vnion things are viz. Whatsoeuer you doe vnto these you doe it vnto me So it will be Christ knew it not in his members that is the Church knew it not But this is iustly discarded by z Bellar. lib. 5. de anima Christi cap. 5. Bellarmine for if Christ had not knowne it but in his members why doth hee adde no man no not the Angels seeing men and Angels are members of the mysticall body Secondly he knew it not because he hath not made vs to know it As God said to Abraham a Gen. 22.12 Now I know thou fearest me that is I haue made thee and all that know thee for to know it As we say now the Sunne shineth clearely now it is darkned not that euer claritie is separated from the body of the Sunne but that sometimes his light and beames are withdrawne from vs. So we say it is a ioyfull or sorrowfull day not in it selfe but because it is to vs either ioyfull or sorrowfull So our Sauiour knew not th●s day because he hath not made vs to know it Thirdly Christ knew this day in natura humanitatis but not ex natura humanitatis The man-Christ knew it but not as man in ipsa but not ex ipsa in the manhood but not by the manhood but speciall priuiledge of reuelation The b 〈…〉 4. q. 1. 〈◊〉 4. 〈…〉 Schoole-men tell vs of a twofold knowledge in Christ in verbo and in genere proprio The first whereby he seeth all things in the eternall Word The second whereby he seeth them in themselues And this againe is twofold either infused or acquisite His infused knowledge was powred into his manhood in the act of his conception when all knowledge the finite creature could be capabl● of was granted vnto him wh●reby he discerned all things But besides this he had an acquisite and experimentall knowledge whereby experience acquainted him with many things that practically he knew not before And in this respect if in any may he be said not to know the day of iudgement ●●●●nst Vbiq 〈◊〉 One thing more occurres vnto mee Christ saith not Vbique corpus but Vbicunque not that his body is euery where but wheresoeuer As he tooke on him the nature of man so that nature was finite had all the properties of a created natur● therefore had an vbi was contained within the limits the superficies and bounds of place Therefore locall motions are ascribed vnto him in the Scripture where he is said to descend and ascend and goe vnto the Father And after his resurrection Surrexit non est hic He is risen he is not here therefore he is not euery where The monstrous and new sprung error of Vbi quitie as c 〈…〉 carnal cap. 12 Bellarmine excellently obserueth euerteth all the Articles of our Creed that we beleeue touching the manhood of our Sauiour of his conception how could he be contained within the straites of blessed Maries wombe if hee be in all places how was he nayled to the Crosse if euery where how wrapped in linnen cloathes how intombed in a Sepulchre if his body be so spacious that it knoweth no limits how ascended he into heauen and d Acts 3 2● how doe the heauens containe him if hee bee not contained in any compasse It is true we acknowledge a Communication of properties and that not Rationall but Reall yet not of the natures but personall vnion not inherently in the natur●s but personally in the person of the Sonne of God So wee say that Christ is euery where and that the Virgins Sonne created the world not by the propriety of natures but by the communication of properties as e Non per proprietatem naturarum sed p●r communicationem proprietatum L●b 3. Sent. di●● 22. ● 2. Al●d est diuinitatem communica● humanitati aliud inhabitare Bellar. lib. 3. de Incar Christi cap. 16. Bonauenture acutely Neither are we ignorant of that of the Apostle In him dwelleth the fulnesse of the Godhead bodily yet it is one thing to dwell and another thing to bee communicated because of