Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	believe_v	truth_n	word_n	5,302	5	4.1809	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A78622	A raging wave foming out his own shame. Or, An answer to a book lately published by Richard Hains (a person withdrawn from) entituled, A protestation against usurpation. Wherein appears such a measure of envies bitterness heaped up, pressed down, and running over, as the like in some ages hath not appeared, by his many false accusations, and malicious insinuations, thereby to provoke (if possible) both the chief magistrate, and all men of what degree soever, to have suspicious thoughts of the innocent, easily proved to have no other fouudation [sic] but his own evil imaginations. : Wherein also the church of Southwater by him contemptuously rendered papistical in their act of withdrawment from him, is vindicated and cleared, first, by apostolical authority, secondly, by Rich. Haynes his own pen. / Written by Matthew Caffyn ...	Caffyn, Matthew, 1628-1714.	1675 (1675)	Wing C207A; ESTC R173317	24,862	30

nor is there one word of that nature in the account which the Church gave him in writing of their proceedings Thirdly in that while the congregation with my self in the said account signified their being troubled and offended with this his injurious proceedings so much savouring of his preferring the gain of this world before the honour of the gospel thus lyable to reproach while he a professor thereof was both publickly in the market and elsewhere reproachfully spoken of to the great shame of some that heard it and the trouble and offence of all when they understood it while I say we thus signified our trouble and offence he abusively declares his withdrawment to be upon the account that his patent design was an offence to the weak brethren whom he saith he enquired after that he might know who they were as if there had been another party more strong that were not offended with him who yet to gratifie the weak brethren consented to his excommunication and the more intollerable is this abuse when it shall be considered with the account we first gave him wherein weak brethren is not so much as once named or signified together with our protestation since against it as a conceit of his own framing and which also as himself confesseth in this very page is denyed by us Fourthly in that while he knows that the congregation with my self did excommunicate him as himself confesseth pa. 4. he renders it here as if I singly after a Lordly manner did it Fifthsy in that while endevours were used by me and others and more might have been had he not obstinatly refused to reason the case with me to convince him from Gods word of the unlawfulnesse of his proceeding and as himself confesseth that Gods word was produced pa. 22. yet slanderously doth he here declare that without regard to the lawfulnes or unlawfulness thereof he was declared excommunicate without one word of God for it whose abuse herein may further appear in our answers to his exceptions against our proceedings only observe that while here he slaunderously saith that there was no regard to Gods word in the judgment given against him he elsewhere in pa. 29. speaking of what the congregation had regard unto in like manner slaunderously declareth that they did it only Mark to please their Idol forgetting surely what he had said in the 25. page namely that the congregation did it only Mark to please the cursing and reviling sons of Belial to which two only's of his I may well here add a third only and say that these malitious and inconsistant suggestions of his serves only to represent him a man making little conscience of what he saith and so his words deserving little credit The first exception which R. H. makes against our proceedings is with respect to the matter we having saith he p. 4. no just cause or warrant for the same In answer we first say that if it were deemed by him or should be so thought by any other that in our zeal and care to preserve the truth which we believe and profess blameless and that none should have occasion of stumbling or to speak evill of the good ways of God if I say upon this account we should be thought by him inregularly to have proceeded which yet we believe not surely were there not the spirit of malice and bitternesse for some other foregoing cause ruling in him he would not thus revile and reproachfully speak of us nor use those swelling words of usurpation tyranny Popish infallibility accompanied with abusive comparisons as if herein we might be numbred with the Church of Rome c. whose extravigant thoughts and pernitious expressions wherein he seems to out-strip the deeds of many men meerly moral we wish God may never lay it to his charge hereafter But secondly whereas Gods word declareth that to condemn or falsly accuse the just is abomination to the Lord. Pro. 17.15 2. Tim. 3.3 we judge our proceedings against R. H. is warrantable for that he as one too much governed by that spirit that is the accuser of the brethren thus did in his fury censure and condemn some of his brethren in the midst of the congregation and this without either offering proof to justifie the same or his humility to justifie him therein and whereas 't is written 1. Cor. 10.32.33 that Christians in order to their seeking the profit of others that they might be saved more then their own profit as also in order to their doing all things to the glory of God should give none offence neither to the Jew nor the gentile nor the Church of God but rather be thinking of and pressing after whatsoever things are of good report Phil. 4.8 it being saith the Apostle Rom. 14.15 contrary to charity yea and expresly evil to eat flesh or drink wine or any thing Mark whereby the brethren stumble or are offended or made weak Rom. 14.20.21 that is when the forbearance of eating or whatever else is offensive or scandalous is no transgression of Gods law whereas I say 't is thus recorded we judge our proceedings against R. H. just and warrantable for that he thus coveting and grasping after the wedge of gold did not only thereby greive and offend Christians here and elsewhere that heard thereof but also and more especially thereby deliver up the cause of the gospel as lyable to be condemned and crucified by the tongues of men while he a professor thereof thus to their great offence proceeded although his so much affected gain thereby as some think hath been put into such a bag of holes as that there will scarce remain thirty pence to be thrown up in the day of his recantation if God in mercy shall offer him such a blessing But whereas it possibly may be pleaded that the case of R. H. is not any thing that is sinful in it self and so no just cause for professors to be greived or offended nor others to stumble thereat or speak evil thereof My answer is that he may well know that professors generally never so esteemed his case but rather that his Patent-design savoured much of covetousnesse for that some parsons cleansing the same seed of non-such to his knowledge before his coveting the Patent and after another manner too and without any information from him whereby as good seed as his if not better was procured and whom R. H. confessed before witnesses ready to attest it if need be that by the law of God and man they might do it that some such persons I say are notwithstanding by this his Patent not only lyable to be hindred of this their lawful priviledge but also declared by him to have no right thereunto But if otherwise R. H. his Patent shall be deemed lawful in it self as by several it is yet is it no more then what might be pleaded concerning those meats which the Apostle pronounced clean and lawfull to be eaten both by the law of God and

men who nevertheless strictly charged the Christians of those times as they tendred charity on the one hand and their avoiding evill on the other hand not to eat the same when any thereby was greived or offended and surely much more reason have Christians in all humility to yeild their necks to this Apostolical yoke when not only the offences of their brethren within but also manifest danger of stumbling those that are without shall be inviting and obliging them thereunto nor may this be restrained to such meats only because the Apostles words doth not only imply but plainly express any thing else besides that might as well as meats occasion stumbling or offence ver 21. to which agrees the Apostles advice elsewhere saying whether ye eat or drink or whatsoever mark ye do do all to the glory of God which that they might effectually do in the next words he adviseth them to give none offence to any c. 1 Cor. 10.31.32 But oh that R. Haines would consider from his own pen if not from the Apostles the justnesse and legalitie of our proceedings against him lest otherwise he give further cause and ground to men thereby to believe that 't is a spirit of envie for some other cause and not conscience of his duty towards God as he would insinuate that provokes him to this kinde of undertaking however thus he declareth pag. 22. that if the sence of the Apostles words had been That Christians should give no offence to the cursing and reviling sons of Belial or to the Church of Antichrist as for laws and prerogatives what have we to do with them that then Mark our practise had been somewhat authentick that is to say undeniable and approved of all men Now that the unbelieving Jews and gentiles whom Christians on the one hand were obliged to give no offence unto as on the other hand not to offend the Church of God were very many of them such that is men greatly polluted with sin is against all contradiction true for that not only the publicans and sinners of the Jews but also the professing scribes and phraisees were found defaming and reviling both Christ and Christianity nor surely can R.H. as clouded as he is think otherwise of the prophane and Idolatrous Gentiles and so were they truly the Church of Antichrist that is as surely he intends such as were against Christ and so doubtless no more deserving nor yet so much Christians carefulness not to offend them then the many persons that profess Christ in our times nor may he think himself innocent nor free from transgression if he should or any others with him conceive the Apostles charge to intend only that Christians should give no offence to those Jews and Gentiles that were more sober serious and honest then those publicans and sinners amongst them were since even such men in this case as well as others if we may not say more then others they being so much concerned therein were in like manner offended with him and condemned his practise or will he think it becomes him to publish those that have shewed their dislike to his proceedings to be such only as are the cursing reviling sons of Belial if so and that such his publication were upon just grounds yet should he not if he had learned of Christ who so much tendred the good of publicans and sinners be regard-less of or by any means despise their low estate but alas it seems he has rather of late learned of that pervese and froward generation of the Pharisees and so is found walking in their steps upbraiding Christians now as they did Christ then for being such friends to publicans and sinners the reviling and defaming sons of men while they only now as their master Christ did then tender the good of their souls and therefore at all times unwilling that any occasion of stumbling should be given them But if R. H. shall still object and say that although the Apostles charge in relation to the not giving offence to sinful men should be as aforesaid and so your practise thus far justified yet it may not be thought that the principles of the Apostles could admit them to say also as for laws and prerogatives what have we to do with them upon which also I concluded the authentickness of your practice My answer is that so far their principles did admit as their practise declares as to endeavour that Christians should forbare their right to and privilidge of eating those meats which by the civil laws and prerogative of the chief magistrate they might partake of and so practically they declared that they had nothing to do with the laws and prerogatives of their rulers as from thence to plead the lawfulnes of eating those meats when the eating thereof apparently tended to the greiving and stumbling others though they deemed it their weaknes to be greived at it and so that great and mortal duty of charity thereby neglected towards them and although the Apostles had many bitter and cruel adversaries yet was there none at least wise as we read of so vile and base as thereupon to publish them as such that contemned the laws and prerogative of the civil Magistrates and yet alas R. H. ceaseth not thus unworthily to deal with me for no other cause save only that I with others endeavoured to stop him in his Patent-designe and not to have pleaded the priviledge of the law and his Majesties prerogative when his design so apparently tended to the grieving the brethren and stumbling others though he had deemed it their weaknes to be grieved at it and so that great and moral duty of charity thereby neglected towards them But oh how great is the obscurity of the much to be lamented fruit of this mans enmity that he doth not consider while he so much speaks of contempt of authority that there is no law commanding or requiring men that they must have or else rebels by law but rather that persons whose ingenuity justly requires it may have Patents marked as a priviledge grantable by his Majesties prerogative whose prerogative therein what Christian ever questioned therefore as himself pleads there being no law requiring it there can be no such transgression as the contempt of authority in the perswading from it those pious ends aforesaid being the ground of such their endevours so that still the reader may observe that our proceedings against R. H. is not only justified by Gods word but by his own pen also If yet this be not sufficient the reader may here also read his own words which elsewhere we have under his hand as thus if saith he my brother being a Jew newly converted to the faith and whilst he is young and weak dares not eat swines flesh and therefore will have no communion with those that he knows to eat thereof because the law forbids it shall I therefore eat swines flesh whereby to offend this weak brother God forbid saith R. Haines