Three lectures (1047, 1824, 1842), and it is the proof of unity Neville prefers because it does not require anyone to dissolve. There is one son, David, and everyone who awakes is called Father by him; two fathers of the same son are one father. The move that makes it usable is the refusal of the obvious consequence: you will not lose your identity - you are individualized and you will tend towards ever greater and greater individualization - so the oneness is not absorption but a shared parentage, and he names the resulting relation exactly. Behind these masks we are eternal brothers, all forming the one Father. He then runs it through the relations his audience actually has, and this is where it bites: my own wife is the father of my son, so friendship, marriage and every earthly tie is a relation above this level being seen from below. At 1824 the same argument is put in answer to a question about forgiving someone who has injured you - you are his father and your mother is his father, and your grandmother - so the unity is demonstrated on the person one is least inclined to be one with. M1089 draws the harder conclusion from the same premise. PROVENANCE. Coined out of sequence at the request of the attach lane, which found the passages while attaching other motifs and reported that nothing in the catalogue held them. The canonical and the occurrences below were read in full before coining; the rest of the corpus-wide set was supplied by the lane and is attached, not read, so the occurrences here carry confidence 0.95 rather than 0.99.