Selected quad for the lemma: virtue_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
virtue_n	command_v	forbid_v	vice_n	1,917	5	9.6001	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00604	Transubstantiation exploded: or An encounter vvith Richard the titularie Bishop of Chalcedon concerning Christ his presence at his holy table Faithfully related in a letter sent to D. Smith the Sorbonist, stiled by the Pope Ordinarie of England and Scotland. By Daniel Featley D.D. Whereunto is annexed a publique and solemne disputation held at Paris with Christopher Bagshaw D. in Theologie, and rector of Ave Marie Colledge.	Featley, Daniel, 1582-1645.; Bagshaw, Christopher, d. 1625?; Smith, Richard, 1566-1655.	1638 (1638)	STC 10740; ESTC S101890	135,836	299

Indian to eate this mans flesh or excuse him from an horrible crime if he should eate it because it was not in propriâ specie 4. Did you live among the Lycanthropie men in the shape of wolves or meete with witches who delude the senses and take upon them the shape of a pig or cunny or goate would you preach it for good doctrine that a man might eate wittingly the flesh of any of these while it remained sub alienâ specie As For the argument you take not from any topick place but from the Apothecaries shop I meane your instance in Mumme I wish you some better drug of theirs I meane some strong confection of Helleborum to purge your braine For our question is not of the medicinall use of mans flesh altered by art but whether it be not a finne and that a horrible one to eate with the mouth and teeth the flesh of a knowne man nay of the Sonne of God 2. Against your second answer to Saint Austins conclusion I replied 1. That Saint Austin by figura meant such a figure as excludes the native and proper sense of the words His words are immediatly going before those I cited si autem hoc jam propriè sonat nulla putetur figurata locutio if it bee taken in the proper sense let it bee accounted no figure 2. Saint Austin speakes of such a speech which can in no wise be taken properly such a speech to wit where a vertue is forbidden or a vice commanded and in this very Chapter he instanceth in Romanes the 12. 20. Thou shalt heape coales of fire upon thine enemies head In which words because the Apostle seemed to command an evill act Saint Austin inferres ne igitur dubitaveris figuratè dictum Doubt not therefore but that it is spoken by a figure If a speech commanding a sin or forbidding a vertue might be taken in the proper sense hence it would follow that it should bee lawfull to sinne because expressely commanded by God and sinnefull to exercise some act of piety or charity because forbidden by him And here your Lordship touched the second time at Hercules Columna Non plus 3. Whereas you say that Saint Austin by sigura meant a figure mixt of a sigurative and proper speech dato non concesso supposing for a while that there might be such a figure I desire you to observe that Saint Austin speakes here of no such figure but of a speech meerely figurative For he declares that the meaning of the figure is that wee ought to partake of Christs sufferings and remember his death Now to compassionate Christ or to partake with him in his sufferings or remember his death is not to eate his flesh in any proper sense at all 4. Of one simple categoricall proposition there can bee but one true sense And this sense cannot be figurative and proper but either the one or the other for proper and figurative are proper and improper borrowed and not borrowed which cannot bee affirmed de eodem I conclude with Saint Austin his owne words The first thing that you must beware is this that you take not a figurative speech according to the letter to that belongeth the Apostles admonition the letter killeth the spirit quickneth For when we take that which is flguratively spoken as if it were proporly spoken it is a carnall sense neither is any thing more rightly tearmed the death of the soule then it Here S. E. puts a great deale of varnish upon a rotten post he tells us of a mingled colour and a garment of motley and distinguisheth of a meere figure and of a figure which hath the truth joyned with it in fine he alleadgeth what Tapper and Allen Suarez Gordon and Pittigarus have confessed upon the racke of our arguments concerning a figure in the words of the institution But one sad shower of raine will wash away all this his varnish 1. To his demand Why not a mixt figure as well as a mixt colour I answer because the opposition betwixt colours is inter contrarios terminos contrarie tearmes which admit a medium but the opposition betweene figurative and proper is betweene contradictorie tearmes which admit of no medium Wherefore although there may bee a mixt colour of white and blacke and a mixt temper of hot and cold and a mixt sawce of sweete and sower and a twilight betweene day and night because these are mediate contraries yet there cannot be a mixt element or a mixt truth or a mixt figure because simple and compound true and false proper and figurative that is improper stand upon flat tearmes of contradiction 2. His distinction of a figure which is a meere figure and of a figure which is not a meere figure but hath the verity joyned with it wherewith hee goes about to soder the bracks and flawes in your leaden discourse is altogether impertinent For the question betweene me and you was of tropes not of types of verball figures not reall of rhetoricall such as Metaphors and Metonymies and the like are not of physicall or naturall figures if speech be of the latter kinde of figures I denie not but that such a difference among them may be observed Some of them are meere figures and representations as Philips picture or image some are more as Alexander Philip his sonne Sacraments are according to this acception of figures not meere figures nor bare signes as is shewed at large in the former Paragraph for they doe not onely signifie but also really exhibit and are effectuall meanes to conveigh unto us those spirituall blessings and graces whereof they are signes and symbols But if the speech bee of figures in words or sentences such as all grammaticall and rhetoricall figures are I say that all such figures are meere figures every Metaphor is a meere Metaphor every Metonomie a meere Metonomie every Allegorie a meere Allegorie every Ironie a meere Ironie every Solaecisme a meere Solaecisme neither can any instance bee given to the contrary But because S. E. hath felt M. Waferer his feriler for his errour in Rhetoricke I leave him to con better his Susenbrotus and I returne to your Lordship who perswade your selfe that Saint Austin favoureth your carnall presence because hee saith Wee receive with faithfull heart and mouth the Mediator of God and Man the Man Christ Iesus giving us his body to be eaten and his blood to bee drunke and againe he bare himselfe in his owne hands when commending his body he said This is my Body and againe she onely desired to be remembred at thine Altar whence she knew the holy host was dispensed whereby the hand writing against us is cancelled and yet againe The Disciples and Iudas ate both they bread the Lord he the bread of the Lord against the Lord and yet againe Christ suffered Iudas that divell and thiefe to receive amongst the innocent Disciples the price of our redemption and lastly