Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	authority_n	church_n	scripture_n	3,566	5	6.5669	4	true

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A03883	A treatise concerning the ground of faith. VVritten in Latin, by the reuerend Father Iames Gordon Huntley of Scotland, Doctour of Diuinity, of the Society of Iesus. And translated into English, by I.L. of the same Society. The second part of the second controuersy; Controversiarum epitomes. English. Selections	Gordon, James, 1541-1620.; Wright, William, 1563-1639.	1614 (1614)	STC 13997A; ESTC S118149	27,760	72

the authority thereof by the Scripture therfore Scripture is rather the ground of fayth then the Church I answere first that the proofe of the Church which is taken out of Scriptures when we dispute against heretikes is an argument called by Philosophers ad hominem and it is deduced out of the premises already graunted in which manner also the first principles or grounds of euery science may be proued and out of those thinges also which of themselues are not very strong and certayne So out of the old Testament against the Iewes we proue the new testament albeit this also is the ground of our fayth because the Iewes do admit and receiue the old Testament but not the new yea also euen out of the Iewish Talmud we proue many things against the Iewes because they admit and approue it as the word of God but yet their Talmud is not the ground of our fayth because this only is as â—â€¦ sayd an argument deduced out of such thinges as they graunt vnto vs. So in like maÌ„ner because almost al heretikes admit the Scripture and reiect the authority of the Church therefore when we dispute against them we proue the authority of the Church by the Scriptures as premisses already graunted by them But if we were to deale with Infidells or others who doe not admit the Scriptures then the sayd Scriptures were to be proued by the authority of the Church and not contrarywise For it is a thing farre better and more commonly knowne that there is a Church then that there are the holy Scriptures as afterward we will shew more clearly 6. Secondly I answere that there is so great connexion betwixt the Scripture and the Church that the Scripture may very well be proued by the authority of the Church and againe the church by the authority of the Scripture Neyther should this seeme strange to our Aduersaries For Logicians also know very well that that which by it owne nature is more certayne better knowne may be proued by that which is more certaine and better knowne vnto vs by a demonstration called by them Ã posteriori And coÌ„trary wise that which is better knowne vnto vs may be proued by that which is better knowne and more certaine in his owne nature by a demonstration called Ã priori So the cause is proued by the effect the effect by the cause as fyte is proued by heate Ã posteriori and heate by the nature of fyre Ã priori So in like manner by the authority of the Church the which in regard of vs is more certayne and better knowne we proue the Scripture as it were Ã posteriorl and by the authority of the Scripture which in it owne nature is more certaine we proue the true Church of Christ as it were Ã priori 7. The fourth argument S. Paul testifyeth that the Church is supported by the ground and foundation of the Prophets and Apostles that is tosay by their Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine but if the foresaid doctrine be the ground of the Church it necessarily followeth that this doctrine appeared to be certaine in it selfe before the Church began to be The Church therefore must be that which giueth certainty to the doctrine or writings of the Apostles but rather their doctrine and writings do affoard sufficient certainty to the Church So Caluin I answere first if we will follow the inteÌ„rpretatioÌ„ of this place alledged by Beza Caluins argument wil be nothing worth For Beza will haue this to be the sense of those words that the Church is built vpon Christ who is the ground and foundation of the Apostles and Prophets and he will haue only Christ to be the ground-worke and the Apostles and Prophets he saith were only as the Architects and builders of this Church as also all faythfull Ministers of Christ are at this day but not the ground it selfe Beza also addeth that he is truly Antichrist who attributeth that vnto himselfe which belongeth only to Christ that is to say to be the ground and foundation of the Church 8. Out of which doctrine of Beza it followeth manifestly that Caluin is truly Antichrist For he attributeth vnto all Ministers of the Church and to their doctrine and consequently vnto himselfe and his owne doctrine that they are the foundations of the Church but according to Beza whosoeuer attributeth this vnto himselfe is plainly Antichrist because he attributeth that vnto himselfe which only belongeth vnto Christ. 9. Secondly I answere that yet whatsoeuer Beza sayth Caluins exposition is the trewer agreeing therin with S. Chrysostome S. Augustine Theophilact and other auncient Fathers that is to say that S. Paul in this place calleth the Apostles and Prophets the ground and foundation of fayth or that which is al one their doctrine for in the same place he compareth Christ to the chiefe coner stone and the foundation of this spirituall building doth consist of many stones but there is one lowest and chiefest to wit Christ Iesus who supporteth all and who is that cornerstone which vniteth the Iewes and Gentills togeather as S. Paul sayth in the same Chapter 10. Hence it is that S. Iohn in the Apocalyps affirmeth that this heauenly Citty hath twelue foundations and not only one and Christ notwithstanding is the chiefest of all the foundations and the foundation of foundations as S. Augustine sayth that is to say of all those twelue foundations he is the foundation 11. And heere the Apostle vseth the Hebrew phrase in which it is all one to say Vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets to say Vpon the Apostolicall and Propheticall foundation For the Hebrews often vse the genitiue case of the substantiue for the adiectiue as a man of bloud deceit in the fifth Psalme signifieth a bloudy and deceitfull man 12. Furthermore that which Caluin sayth that the Apostolicall and Propheticall doctrine hath it certainty of it self before the approbation of the Church that indeed is true but this is the certainty which it hath of it owne nature from God himselfe but in regard of vs it receiueth it certainty from the Church as Caluin and Beza witnesse as we haue already declared 13. But Caluin erreth in this that he thinketh S. Paul to treate in this place of the Scripture only of the Apostles and Prophets For not only the Apostolicall Scripture is the ground of our faith but all the doctrine of the Apostles And few of the twelue Apostles to wit only fiue haue written any thing but of the other seauen there are no writings extant but yet they all taught the Apostle therfore speaketh of the Apostolicall doctrine and not only of the Scripture 14. But neyther do we deny that faith dependeth of the Apostles doctrine yea more then that we say that our faith dependeth of the doctrine of the present Church For when we affirme that the Church is the ground of our

the grouÌ„d of our fayth that is the true ground therof because our fayth cannot well nor must not be considered but in regard of men seeing that our fayth cannot be found but in men only if therfore in regard of men the Church is the gound of truth it is also most truly and necessarily the ground of our fayth 20. Furthermore that the ancient Church of the holy Fathers did coÌ„stantly hold the preaching and authority of the Catholike Church to be the ground of our fayth those excellent words of S. Augustine do manifestly declare when he writeth thus disputing against the Manichees I sayth he would not belieue the Ghospell but that the authority of the Catholike Church moued me therunto this seÌ„teÌ„ce of S. Augustine vexeth our Aduersaries very much Caluin goeth about to perswade the ignoraÌ„t people that S. Augustin speaketh of himselfe as yet remayning a Manichean heretike and not of himselfe as being conuerted and made a Catholike But this is a ridiculous euasion for the words which follow a litle after do shew that this is a false interpretation of Caluin If thou doest hold thy selfe to the Ghospell S. Augustine soeaketh vnto a Manichean heretike I would hold my selfe to those by whose commandment I belieued the Ghospell He speaketh therfore of himselfe as now being a Catholike and after a few words VVhose authority sayth he being infringed weakned I could not now euen belieue the Ghospel it selfe Where he sheweth plainly that our fayth doth so depend of the authority of the Church that it being weakned or taken away it could not remayne or continue by any fayth of the Gospell Wherby it is manifest that it is false which Iunius writeth that S. Augustine did only speake of the accidentary and not of the necessary cause 21. Others say that S. Augustine did speake of this or that booke of the Gospell and not of the whole Ghospell in generall But the very words of S. Augustine doe teach the contrary because he speaketh euery where of the Gospell it selfe in generall Moreouer one and the same reason is of one booke of the Ghospell and of all the rest as concerning fayth 22. Others lastly do answere that S. Augustine did not speake of the Church of his tyme but of the primitiue Church wherin were the Apostles who approued the Ghospells But this solution is also easily refuted out of the words next following to whom faith S. Augustin I haue obeied saying Belieue the Gospell why should I not obey them then saying vnto me Doe not belieue Manicheus But it is manifest that the primitiue Church spake nothing of Manicheus but that Church only which was in S. Augustines tyme sayd vnto him doe not belieue Manicheus For Manicheus liued many yeares after the primitiue Church yea euen after S. Cyprian that is to say almost three hundred yeares after Christ as the same S. Augustine testifyeth and it is otherwise sufficiently well knowen that the Manichean heresy was vnknowne in the world before the yeare 277. See Baronius in his 2. Tom. in the yeare 277. in the 2. number and others following CHAP. VI. The arguments of our Aduersaries are confuted NOvv it remayneth we answere to the arguments of our Aduersaries for by our answers the difficulty of this whole controuersy wil be more perspicuously resolued Their first argument is if the authority of the Church were the ground of fayth then it would follow that our faith relied vpon men and not vpon God for the Church consisteth of men Our Aduersaries do often repeate and inculcat this argument vnto vs. I answere that the same argument if it were any thing worth would also proue that we should not belieue Scriptures because al those who wrot the books of the Bibles were also men but as we do belieue their writinges not because they were men but because they had a certaine peculiar assiâ—â€¦aÌ„ce of the holy Ghost who did so gouerne and direct the that they could not erre so in like manner we belieue the Church and make it the ground of our fayth not as it consisteth of men but as it hath a speciall and continuall assistance of the holy Ghost by whome she is continually gouerned and directed wherby it commeth to passe that she can neuer erre as we haue proued a little before 2. Wherefore to make the Church the ground of our fayth is nothing els then to make the holy Ghost and Christ himselfe the ground therof For it is he who speaketh vnto vs by the mouth of the Church according to that saying of S. Paul Seeke you an experiment of him that speaketh in me Christ And in another place speaking of his own doctrine he sayth therfore he that despiseth these things despiseth not man but God who also hath giueÌ„ his holy spirit in vs. But our Aduersaries do thinke speak too basely of the Church as though it consisted of men only as the Churches of Insidells and Heretikes seeing that the chiefe part of the true Church of Christ is the holy Ghost who is as it were the soule and spirit of the Church 3. But neither is this to make the Scripture or the holy Ghost subiect inferito our men as our Aduersarise are woÌ„r to cauil but oÌ„ly to shew that the holy Ghost is euery where conformable to himselfe that in all things he neuer differeth or disgreeth froÌ„ himselfe Whether he speake vnto vs by the holy Scripture or by the mouth of the Church as Caluin acknowledgeth disputing against the Anabaptists and Libertines who by such an argument went about to reiect the holy Scriptures to wit least the holy Ghost might be made subiect and inferiour vnto them 4. The second argument is that Christians may and ought to iudge and examine all things as the Apostle sayth therefore the spirit of euery Christian ought to be the grouÌ„d of al things I answere that by the same argumeÌ„t the Anabaptists Libertines reiected all the Scriptures that they might only retaine the spirit as witnesseth Caluin but badly for euen as Christians must discerne and iudge all things so must they also obserue the rule and method in iudging which the Scripture doth prescribe vnto them and which himselfe appointed but this rule is not euery ones priuate spirit but the spirit of the whole Church For it is altogeather necessary that the rule of fayth be most certayne free from all errors as the spirit of the whole Church is and not that of euery priuate man Hereupon sayth S. Iohn He which knoweth God heareth vs he who is not of God doth not heare vs in this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error We must therfore iudge of euery man by that they eyther heare or do not heare the Church c because they either agree or disagree froÌ„ the spirit of the Catholike Church 5. The third argument is that Catholikes proue the Church and

Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Text snippets containing the quad