Selected quad for the lemma: son_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
son_n	ghost_n	holy_a	trinity_n	32,243	5	10.2915	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A52134	Mr. Smirke; or, The divine in mode: being certain annotations upon the animadversions on The naked truth : together with a short historical essay, concerning general councils, creeds, and impositions, in matters of religion / by Andreas Rivetus, Junior, anagr. Res Nuda Veritas.	Marvell, Andrew, 1621-1678.	1676 (1676)	Wing M873; ESTC R214932	95,720	92

and unnecessary Next it is an hard thing for the Exposer who ought rather to have proved that they were necessary to shift it back thus upon the Author I have not spoke with him nor know whether I shall as long as I live though I should be glad of the opportunity to know his mind But suppose he should think them One Two or Three Unnecessary who can help it But so much I think upon the State or sum of this Controversie in his own 〈◊〉 I may adventure for him that 〈◊〉 Confessions of Faith he does not disapprove them taking it granted there is nothing in any of them flatly against the Word of God but that if any thing be therein drawn up in such or such an exact Forme of Words not Expressed in Scripture and required to be Believed with Divine Faith as necessary to a Man 's own Salvation and without Believing which he must Declare too that no Man else can be saved that this is Dangerous and the imposing of it is Unwarrantable by Reason or Scripture He adds in this same Paragraph that the Authors Censure upon Constantine is so bold and upon some Godly Bishops whom he conceives more Zealous then Discreet and so do some Godly Bishops conceive of this Author and his Pique at the New Word Homoousios carryes such as ugly reflection upon the Creed that he scarce 〈◊〉 understand him And I on the other side take his Fears and his Hopes to be alike inconsiderable His words are p. 6. I am confident had the most prudent and pius Constantine the First and Best of Christian Emperours pursued his own intention to suppress all Disputes and all new Questions about God the Son both Homoousian and Homoiousian and commanded all to acquiesce in the very Scripture Expressions without any addition that the Arrian Heresie had soon expired I note that the Exposer very disingenuously and to make it look more ugly take not the least notice of his Pique against 〈◊〉 too and the Arrian Heresie But what is there here to fright the understanding Animadverter out of his Wits or what to make some Godly Bishops who it seems must be numberless or nameless to conceive the Author 〈◊〉 Zealous then Discreet But for this Censure of the Author as well as for the Godliness of the Bishops we must acquiesce it seems upon the Credit or Gratitude of one Nameless Exposer He then blames the Author p. 3. for saying p. 1. that he would have men improve in Faith rather Intensive then Extensive to confirm it rather then enlarge it Still and alwayes to make things a little more ugly and of less value he clips the Authors good English You would have men improve in Faith so would I but rather Intensive then Extensive 'T is good to know all Gospel Truths no doubt of that the more the better still but the Question is not what is Good but what is Necessary This is a pious and undonbred Truth and confirm'd by the Author out of several Places of Scripture May I add one Marke the 9. 17. Where one brought his Son being troubled with a Dumb Spirit to our Saviour v. 23. Jesus saith to the Father if thou canst Believe all things are possible to him that Believeth The Father coyes out with tears Lord I Believe strengthen thou my Unbeliefe And this Confession of the Intensive Truth of his Faith with his relyance upon Christ for the strengthening of it was sufficient to cooperate with our Saviour toward a Miracle and throwing that Dumb and Deaf Spirit out of a third Person Whoever indeed will deny this Truth must go against the whole current of the New Testament But the Exposer is Deaf to that 't is all one to him Yet he is not Dumb though as good he had for all he has to say to it is And yet it is certaine that all formal and mortal Hereticks that are not Atheists are justly condemn'd for want of due extension in their Faith What pertinence But there goes more Faith I see to the ejecting of a Talkative then of a Dumb Spirit There is no need of further answer to so succinct a Bob then that it had been well those terms of Formal and Mortal and Hereticks and no less that of Condemned had in this place been thorowly explained For we know that there was a time when the Protestants themselves were the Format and to be sure the Mortal Hereticks even here in England and for that very crime too For want of due extention in their Faith they were Condemned whether justly or no it is in the Exposers power to determine For some of our Ruling Clergy who yet would be content to be accounted good Protestants are so loath to part with any hank they have got at what time soever over the poor Laity or what other reason that the Writ de Haeretico Comburendo though desired to be abolish'd is still kept in force to this day So that it is of more concernment then one would at first think how far mens Faith least afterwards for Believing short their Persons and Estates be Extended or taken in Execution He proceeds page the 3. and several that follow to quarel the Author for quoting to this purpose Acts 8. and then saying I pray remember the Treasurer the Exposer will do it I warrant you and the Chancellor too without more intreaty to Candace Queen of Ethiopia whom Philip instructed with in the Faith His time of Catechising was very short and soon proceeded to Baptisme But Philip first required a Confession of his Faith and the Eunuch made it and I beseech you observe it I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and straight way he was Baptized How no more then this No more This little Grain of Faith being sound believed withall his heart purchased the Kingdom of Heaven 'T is not the Quantity but the Quality of our Faith God requireth Here the Exposer pretending now to be a learned Expositor hopes to win his Spurrs and layes out all his ability to prove that Philip in a very short time for so much work as he finds him had instructed the Treasurer thorow the whole Athanasian Creed concerning the Equality Inseparability Coeternity of the Three Persons in the Trinity For saith the Ezposer the very Forme of Baptisme if thorowly explained is a perfect Creed by it self In the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost For it seems the name of the Son was by a Divine Criticisme interposed between the other two Persons whose Godhead was confest and acknowledged by the Jewish Church rather then that of the Word to de●…te the second Person c. I should be glad to know where the Exposer learnt that the Jewish Church acknowledged the Godhead of the Holy Ghost as of a Distinct Person which if he cannot show he is very far out in the Matter as he is in that Expression of Divine Criticisme Therefore he may do well to

Few of the Few for above these forty years have been carrying on a constant Conspiracy to turn all Upside-down in the Government of the Nation But God in his mercy hath alwayes hitherto and will I hope for ever frustrate all such Counsels In his 7. p. it is that he saith the Author in his 4. p. implicitly condemns the whole Catholick Church both East and West for being so Presumptuous in her Definitions However if he does it but Implicitly the Exposer might have been so Ingenuous or Prudent as not to have Explicated it further but conceal'd it least it might do more harme but at least not to have heigh●…en'd it so the whole Catholick Church and not only so but the whole Catholick Church both in the East and West too why did he not add in the North and South too for being so Presumptuous a term far beyond and contrary to the Modesty and Deference of the Authors expressions But this is the Art and Duty of Exposing Here it is that he brandishes the whole dint of his Disputative Faculty and if it be not the most rational I dare say and yet I should have some difficulty to perswade men so that it is the most foolish passage in the whole Pamphlet It is impossible to clear the Dispute but by transcribing their own words In the mean time therefore I heartily recommend my self to the Readers patience The Author pursuing his point how unsafe and unreasonable it is to Impose New Articles of Faith drawn by humane Inferences beyond the Clear Scripture Expressions instanceth in several of the Prime and most Necessary Principles of the Trinity especially that of the Holy Ghost Are they not things saith he far above the Highest Reason and sharpest understanding that ever man had Yet we Believe them because God who cannot lye hath Declared them Is it not then a strange thing for any man to take upon him to Declare one title more of them then God hath Declared seeing we understand not what is Declared I mean we have no Comprehensive Knowledge of the Matter Declared but only a Believing Knowledge To which the Exposer will have it that if the Author be here bound up to his own words and 't is good reason he should he hath said that we understand not that the matter is Declared and moreover he saith that he is sure he has done him no wrong in fixing this meaning to the Authors words No it is no wrong it seems then to say that to understand That and to comprehend What is the same thing As for example if our Ignorance may be allowed in things so infinitely above us to allude to things as far below us because I understand That the Exposer here speaks Nonsense I must therefore be able to Comprehend What is the meaning of his Nonsense and be capable to raise a Rational Deduction from it I am sure I do the Exposer right in this Inference and should be glad he only would therefore wear it for my sake for it will fit none but him 't was made for But let us come down to the particular The Scripture saith the Author plainly tells that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and That he is sent also by the Father That he is sent also by the Son but whether he Proceeds From the Son or By the Son the Scripture is silent I grant that by Rational Deduction and Humane way of Argument 't is probable that the Holy Ghost Proceeds from the Son as from the Father But we understand not What the Procession or Mission of the Holy Ghost is and therefore we cannot prove they are Both one And therefore to determine it or any such Divine and high Mysteries by Humane Deductions in Humane Words to be Imposed and Believed with Divine Faith is Dangerous And much more the Author adds demonstratively to the same purpose but the Exposer culls out by the Duty of his Place what may best serve for his neither will that do the turn unless he also pervert it Here again is the That and the What the same thing●… Is it the same thing to say or understand That the Holy Ghost is sent by the Son which is Declared in Scripture and to understand and comprehend What the Nature of that Mission is or What the Nature of Procession that a man may safely say that he Proceeds From or By the Son as from the Father which is not Declared in Scripture but by Humane Deduction and exact the Divine Belief thereof under Eternal and Temporal Penalties Yet this is the Exposers Logick And away he goes with it as if the world as this inference is were all his own and knocks all on the head with a killing Instance which that I may still open more visibly to the Readers I must beg pardon that I am necessitated to repeat over again their own Words sometimes upon occasion The Exposer saith But he means we have no Comprehensive knowledge His meaning is good and true but his inference is stark naught if he means therefore we understand not at all that this or that is Declared But the Author neither says nor means any such thing and the Exposer does him notwit●…hstanding his ave●…ment to the Contrary the most manifest wrong imaginable for as much as he would not only fix a false meaning upon the Authors words which I first mentioned in the beginning but upon these other words also which contrary to their plaine signification he produces for proof against him They are by the Exposers own relation If then our Reason understand not what is Declared which is the very Equipollent of what the Author had said that we have no Comprehensive knowledge of the matter Declared how can we by reason make any Deduction by way of Argument from that which we understand 〈◊〉 No more From whence it is evident from that virtual repetition and natural reflection that every Conclusion hath of and upon its Premisses that the full sense of the words must be from that which we understand not Comprehensive And yet he saith that he does him no wrong he is sure he does not in affixing this meaning unto those words And proceeds Is it even so Then let us put the Case with reverence that Almighty God who assuming I suppose the shape of an Angel treated with Abraham face to face as a man doth with his Friend Should for once have spoken in the same manner to Arrius or Socinus and made this one Declaration that the Catholick Churches Doctrine of the Trinity was true and his false then I demand would not this have been demonstration enough of the Faith which we call Catholick either to Socinus or Arrius And yet all these contradictory Arguments which either of them had once fancied so insolable supposing them not answered in particular would remain against it and stand as they did before any such declaration and yet all this without giving him any comprehensive knowledge This

instance is made in Confutation of his own false supposition that the Authors words if then our reason understand not with comprehensive knowledge what is declared how can we then make any deduction by way of Arguments from that which we understand not did in their true meaning signifie how can we by reason make any deduction by way of Argument from that which we understand not to have been declared or that I may p●…t it the furthest I can imaginable to the Exposers purpose or service how can ●…e by reason understand that it is declared which is to impose a most ridiculous and impossible sense upon the Authors plain words for if we neither understand That nor What there is an end of all understanding Yet admitting here sayes the Exposer I have stated you a Case which proves the contrary for here Arrius or Socinus have no comprehensive knowledge of what is declared and yet they understand that it is declared and doubtless the Author would say so too without ever meaning the Contrary yea and that this revelation would have been demonstration enough of that Faith which we call Catholick But what would become of their former Contradictory Arguments which the Exposer saith would stand as they did before and remain against it I cannot vouch for the Author that he would be of the same opinion For I cannot comprehend though God had not answered those Arguments of theirs in particular as the Exposer puts it that those Arguments would or could remaine against it and stand as they did before any such declaration to Arrius and Sacinus after they had received a sufficient demonstration from Gods own mouth by New Revelation They would indeed remain against it and stand as they did before to Mr. Sherlocke But when I have thus given the humorous Exposer his own will and swing in every thing yet this superlunary instance does not serve in the least to confirme his Argument that he makes against the Authors words after his transforming them For here Arrius and Socinus only bring their sense of hearing and having heard this from God do not by Reason make any Deduction by way of Argument but by a believing knowledge do only assent to this second further Revelation Nor can they then from this second Revelation make any third step of Argument to extend it beyond its own tenour without incurring the Authors just wise Argument again that seeing our reason understands not what is declared I mean we have no comprehensive knowledge of this Doctrine of Trinity which the Exposer supposes to be declared how can we by reason make any deduction by way of Argument from that which we understand not to wit not comprehensively As I have abundantly cleared But this instance was at first extinguished when I shewed in the beginning that he did impertinently tradnce the Authors words and forge his meaning In the mean time though he saith put the Case with Reverence when the Case so put cannot admit it I cannot but at last reflect upon the Exposers unpardunable indiscretion in this more then absurd and monstruous representation of God almighty assuming the shape of an Angel as he saith he treated with Abraham face to face as a man do●…h with his friend to Discourse with Arrius and Socinus These are small escapes wi●…h which he aptly introduces such an interview and conference that he treated our 4th Abraham face to face as a man doth with his friend for it is true Abraham is Stiled the friend of God and that God spoke to him but it is never said in Scripture that God did Treat that is a word of Court not of Scripture No nor that God spoke to him face to face But it is said in Sripture only of Moses Exod. 33. 11. The Lord spoke to him face to face as a man speaketh unto his friend But that was a priviledge peculiar to Moses Numbers 12. 5. And the Lord came down in a Pillar of Cloud and stood in the door of the Tabernaele of the Congregation and called Aaron and Miriam and they both came forth and he said hear now my words if there be a Prophet among you I the Lord will make my self known to him in a Vision and will speak unto him in a Dream my servant Moses is not so who is faithful in all my house with him will I speak mouth to mouth even apparently and not in darke Speeches and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold wherefore then were not you afraid to speak against my Servant Moses the Exposer is not afraid to do him manifest injury for Deut. 34. 10. And there arose not in Israel a Prophet like unto Moses whom the Lord knew face to face c. And much more might be said of this matter were the man capable of it But I perceive he neither reads nor understands Scripture and one Divine Criticism is stock enough it seems to set up an Exposer Neither is it so notorious an errour that he saith God assumed the shape of an Angel to treat with him I would be glad to know of the Exposer seeing he is so Cherubick what is the shape of an Angel Some humane Criticks have told me that it was the similitude of a Calfe But Gods appearing in a sha e to Abraham when he treated with him face to face was in the shape of a man Gen. 18 1. The Lord appeared to him in the Plane of Mamre as he sate in the Tent door and so three men stood by him c. These are easie slips and he that stumbles and falls not gains a step Yet for one as he mocks the Author p. 2. That appears as one drop'd down from Heaven vouching himself a Son of the Church of England teaching as one having authority like a Father to trip in this manner is something indecent But to bring God in to so little a purpose contrary to all rules that I have seen one with a better grace brought down by a Machine to treat with Arrius and Socinus no other Company those who have contended against the Son of God and his Holy Spirit whose Opinions have been the Pest of the Clergy for so many Ages to have them now at last brought in as Privado's to the Mysteries of Heaven and the Trinity what Divine in his Witts but would rather have lost an Argument What will the Gentleman I last named say to see such a reconciliation to behold Arrius and Socinus in so close Communion with God as to be admitted even to single Revelation He cannot then avoid thinking what he lately printed and now with more reason That God is all Love and Patience when he has taken his fill of Revenge as others use to say the Devil is good when he is pleased What a shame is it to have men like the Exposer who are dedicated to the service of the Church and who ought as in the place quoted by the Author in the present Argument they of