Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	bear_v	enter_v	kingdom_n	5,396	5	6.1932	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A06606	A treatise of the iudge of controuersies. Written in Latin, by the R. Father Martinus Becanus of the Society of Iesus, Professour in Diuinity. And Englished by W.W. Gent; De judice controversiarum. English	Becanus, Martinus, 1563-1624.; Wright, William, 1563-1639.	1619 (1619)	STC 1707; ESTC S101284	69,267	198

about the true and lawfull sense of Scripture But now letting passe all those which haue beene set abroach in the tyme of Arius Macedonius Donatus and other auncient heretikes Infinite they are that occur in this present tyme of which I will set downe some as for example there is a controuersy 1. In what sense those words of Christ are to be vnderstood This is my body The Lutherans vnderstand it so this bread is my body The Caluinists this bread signifieth my body The Catholikes agree with neither of them 2. How that of S. Iohn is to be vnderstood Ioan. 3. 5● Vnlesse a man be borne againe of the water and the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God The Catholikes and the Lutherans do vnderstand thereby the necessity of baptisme with water and also out of it do gather that infants without baptisme can in no wise be saued The Caluinists deny all this 3. What Christs meaning was when he spake these words to the young man of whom mention is made in S. Matthew If thou will enter into life keepe the comaundments Caluin interpreteth it to be spoken in iest the Catholikes hould it to haue beene sayd in earnest 4. Whether out of these words Iesus came the doores being shut and stood in the Ioan. 20. 26. midst of them may be gathered that Christ pierced the doores shut The Catholikes affirme it Others deny it And surely Oecolampadius he thinketh that whilest the doores were shut Christ crept in at the window others imagin I know not what chinkes by the which they say he entred in 5. Whether Christ spake of the Sacrament of the Eucharist when he sayd Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the sonne of Ioan. 6. 53. man and drinke his bloud you shall not haue life in you The Catholikes affirme it the Lutherans deny it 6. Whether Christ bindeth all lay men to receaue the Chalice when he saith Drinke yea all of this Caluin Cal. lib. 4. Instit c. 17. §. 47. §. 48. holdeth he doth There is a decree sayth he from the eternall God that all drinke And a little after They are wordes of him commaunding Drinke yee all of this Chalice But the Catholikes teach that these words only belonged to the Apostles as S. Marck declareth when he sayth Mark 14. 24. and they all dranke of it 7. Whether sinne he taken properly Rom. 6. 12. of the Apostle Let not sinne therefore raigne in your mortall body The Lutherans and the Caluinists hould that it is and from thence they gather that concupiscense of the which the Apostle there speaketh is originall sinne but the Catholikes teach that the word sinne is there improperly taken to wit for the cause of sinne because concupiscense though it be not properly a sinne yet it doth prouoke to sinne 8. Whether out of that place of S. Paul we account a man to be iustified by Rom. 3 28. fayth without the workes of the law may be gathered that only fayth iustifieth The Lutherans affirme it The Catholikes deny it 9. Whether that place of the Apostle But he shal be saued yet so as by fier be vnderstood of Purgatory fier The Catholikes do affirme it with S. Aug. vpon the 37. Psalme and other more ancient Fathers The Lutherans and the Caluinists deny it 10. Whether it may be gathered out of S. Paul that the Apostles had wiues where he sayth Haue we not 1. Cor. 9. 5. power to lead about a woman a sister as also the rest of the Apostles The Lutherans affirme it out of Luthers Glosse which is this of leading about a woman wi●e But truly the Catholikes will not admit this glosse 11. Of what fayth Christ speaketh when he sayth belieue only and she Luc. 8. 50. shal be safe The Lutherans interpret it to be iustifying fayth whose effect is the remission of sinne But the Catholikes vnderstand it of that fayth which Iarus Prince of the Sinagogue did beleeue that his daughter then dead could be raised againe by Christ 12. And what the sense of that place is Do good or euill if you can Out of Isay 41. 23. which Luther proueth that men haue not free will because they cannot do good and ill as they list The Catholikes laugh at this their argument because those words are not spoken to men but to the Idols of the Gentills which although they be worshiped of the Gentills as Gods yet they be not Gods because they can neyther profit their worshippers nor hurt their contemners 13. Whether out of that which is written of S. Iohn Baptist The infant in Luc. 1. 44. my wombe did leape for ioy may be gathered that all infants when they are baptized haue actuall fayth The Lutherans say yea the Catholikes no. 14. Whether God commaunded all to be maried when he sayd Increase Gen. 1. 28● and multiply The Lutherans hould that in those words are implied a precept to marry But the Catholikes take it as Gen. 9. 1. a blessing giuen to mariage already contracted as appeareth in the text it selfe 15. Whether this place of S. Paul 1. Tim. 2. 5. There is one mediatour of God and men man Christ Iesus doth exclude the inuocation and intercession of Saints as the aduersaries affirme Or do not as we Catholikes maintaine and proue because it doth not exclude the inuocation of Saints vpon earth otherwise the Apostle world not haue sayd Brethren pray for vs. 1. Thess 3. 25. 16. Who are these two witnesses of whom is made mention in the 11. of the Apocalips And I will giue to my two wittnesses and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred sixty daies clothed with sack-clothes Some of our aduersaries say that Luther and Caluin are meant thereby Others the old and the new testament but the Catholikes say Henoch and Helias or Moyses and Helias 17. What that signifieth which is written of Antichrist in the Apocalips And he did great signes so that he also made fier to come downe from heauen Our aduesaries do vnderstand by fier descending Pow. lib. 1. de Ant. cap. 26. Bald. in dispu de Anti●h cap. 6. from heauen the Pope his excommunication as Powell the Caluinist and Balduinus the Lutheran do hould and hereby they proue that the Pope is Antichrist The Catholikes contemne these follies The Scripture cannot be the Iudge of these and the like Controuersies IT is certaine that in these and such like Controuersies which are about the sense of the Scripture some certaine iudge is needfull who may decide the same and plainly pronounce that this is true and not the other But now I will proue with two arguments that the Scripture it selfe cannot be this iudge The first is drawne out of that which I sayd before in this manner The Iudge so ought to pronounce sentence that both parties at variance may well vnderstand it otherwise he should pronounce it to no purpose But the Scripture when

the sense thereof is obscure and doubtfull which falleth out often as I haue shewed aboue cannot so plainly pronounce sentence that it may be vnderstood of both parties at variance For if it should clearly pronoūce sentence in any such case the sense of the Scripture should not be obscure but plaine and manifest which is contrary to our supposition Therefore in such a case the Scripture cannot be iudge Perchance you will say that although the sense of the Scripture in one place be obscure yet notwithstanding in some other place it is very playne and therefore the Scripture by that place which is cleare may pronounce sentence of that place which is obscure I answere The heretikes harpe on this string but in vaine For first if it be so wherefore by that meanes do they not end all controuersies betwene them wherefore I say do not the Lutherans and the Caluinists seing they so long contend about some obscure place run presently to another which is plaine or if they do so why make they not an end of all their strife Here they are at a non-plus and know not what to say Furthermore that the words of the Scripture are playne is one thing but that the sense is plaine is another For the plainesse of the words dependeth vpon the knowledg of grammer but the sense vpon the intention and counsell of the holy Ghost And doubtlesse oftentymes it may happen that one may be perfect in the knowledg of his grammer and yet very ignorant of the meaning of the holy Ghost So that it may fall out very well that the words of the Scripture may be plaine yet the sense of the words as they be intēded of the holy Ghost may be obscure To shew this to the eye I will declare it with this example The words of Christ in the scripture be these This is my body This is my bloud Which words if they be taken according to their proper signification are so manifest and plaine that they may be well vnderstood of all men whether they be Christians Iewes Turkes or Ethnicks But about the sense of them intended by the holy Ghost almost infinite controuersies are amongst Christians The like is to be found in those words of S. Iohn Mary Magdalen cōmeth earely to the monument when it was yet darke And in those of S. Mark She came to the monument the sunne being risen Then the which wordes nothing could be spoken more plainly yet because the first do seeme to be contrary to the second it may be doubted and that with great reason what the proper sense of them is and how they may agree one with another Moreouer I say that oftentymes it happeneth that the one party thinketh that place cleare and manifest which the other houldeth to be obscure and intricate Now then what is to be done in such a case or what iudge is to be admitted doubtlesse the scripture cannot be the iudge seing the controuersy is about the sense of it when some thinke it plaine others obscure and of some it is construed in this sense of others in another What counsell shall we take therefore must not then another iudge be sought out For example There is contention betwixt vs and the Caluinists as concerning the true descending of Christ into hell which they deny we mantaine and do for our beleife bring a double testimony The one is out of the Creed He descended into hell the other out of the acts Thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell We say that both of these be cleare and euident The Caluinists deny both and with their obscure interpretation they make both places most obscure For they interpret the first in this sense He descended into hell that is say they he suffered vpon the Crosse most cruell and horrible torments of a damned forlorne man that pressed with anguish he was forced to cry out My God why hast thou forsaken me So Caluin But Cal. lib. 2. inst c. 16. §. 10. 11. catechism● Hidelberg● quaest 44. they take the latter in this sense Thou shalt not leaue my Carcase in the graue What is to be done here To what iudge shal we appeale If we aske counsell of the Scripture it will say the same that it sayd before It will not ad so much as any one iote to that set downe Now of that which is sayd before is the controuersy which can neuer be ended by that which is sayd before If then after the Controuersie begun the Scripture say no new thing at all but remaine still in the same ancient tearmes truly by it the contention cannot be decided but of necessity we must eyther go to some other Iudge or one of the parties contending must yield voluntarily or els they are forced still to continue in their endlesse strife and contention The other argument is this There are many testimonies of the Scripture which can by no meanes be interpreted according to the true sense but by the authority and tradition of the Church Therefore if a Controuersy should arise about these testimonies the Scripture only cannot be iudge but we ought to fly to the tradition authority of the Church as for exāple Christ sayth Teach ye all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost The true and lawfull sense is that in baptisme we are to pronounce these wordes I baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost And that baptisme without such a verball and expresse pronuntiation of those words is no true baptisme We and our aduersaries agree in this But if one should deny this to be the sense and should say that these words were not needfull In the name of the Father and the Sonne and the holy Ghost but that an inward will and intention of baptizing him in the name of the holy Trinity were sufficient how should he be confuted only out of the words of the Scripture Nothing lesse seing the wordes be these baptizing them in the name of the Father c. where there is not any vocall inuocation of the blessed Trinity insinuated to be of necessity From whence haue we then that it ought to be verily from the practise and tradition of the Church If thou dost reiect this thou shalt not haue helpe against the aduersary who shall deny the pronouncing of these words to be necessary Another example is this Christ sayth Vnlesse a man be borne againe of water and spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God This place according to the true and lawfull sense is vnderstood of the necessity of baptisme with water as the Lutheranes themselues do confesse yet the Caluinists notwithstanding deny it How therefore can they be confuted of the Lutherans Truly not out of the Word alleadged For although water be named there yet it is not so expresly named as though it ought to be vnderstood of true and