Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	body_n	church_n	head_n	7,573	5	6.7361	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A09274	Vindiciae fidei, or A treatise of iustification by faith wherein that point is fully cleared, and vindicated from the cauils of it's aduersaries. Deliuered in certaine lectures at Magdalen Hall in Oxford, by William Pemble, Master of Arts of the same house: and now published since his death for the publique benefit.	Pemble, William, 1592?-1623.; Capel, Richard, 1586-1656.	1625 (1625)	STC 19589; ESTC S114368	167,454	232

from the guilt of sinne and course of the Morall Law Secondly Truth for the Ceremoniall Law the substance being brought in and the shadowes vanished wherefore the Iesuite erres greately in this point when he makes the grace of the New Testament to consist in this That strength is thereby giuen us to fulfill the Law The grace of God in the Gospell is chiefely our Iustification and Redemption from the curse of the Law and in the next place strength afforded vs to Obey the Law in some measure not perfectly as our Aduersaries would haue it In the next point he erres as much in saying that the Law of Moses was giueu without grace to obey it A false assertion For although the Law of it selfe giue not grace yet t is certaine that grace was giuen by Christ euen then when Moses published the Law Sufficient for the proofe hereof are 1 These excellent properties ascribed vnto the Law of God as in other places of the old Testament so spetially in the Booke of the Psalmes And amongst them in the 19. and 119. Psalmes Where the Law of God is said to giue light to the ei●s to conuert the Soule to reioice the Heart c. which it could not doe of it selfe had not the grace of the Holy Ghost being giuen in these times without which the Law could worke no such sauing Effects 2 Experienee of those times in the Faith Patience and ●bedience and all sorts of graces shining in those ancient Saints who liued before and after the Law was giuen Which graces they receaued from the Holy Ghost shed vpon their hearts by vertue of Christs mediation whereby they receaued strength to liue holily in Obedience vnto the Law of God The difference betweene these times and those vnder the Law is not That we haue grace and they had none but only in the m●asure and extent of the same grace bestowed both on vs and them In those times as the Doctrine of the Gospell was more obscurely reuealed so the grace which accōpanies it was more sparingly distributed being confined to to a Church collected of one nation and bestowed vpon that Church in a lesser measure then now though yet suffitiently in that measure But in the times of the New Testament the light shines more brightly and grace is dispenced more liberally being extended indifferently to all Nations and poured vpon the Godly in a larger Abundance according as was promised Ieremiah 31. Though also this comparison must be restrained vnto whole Churches what generally is now done for no doubt in many particulars some men vnder the Law exceede for abundance of Grace many vnder the Gospell Wherefore it is a notable iniury vnto the Bounty of God and the honour of those Saints of old to exclude them from partaking of the Gospell to affirme that they were led only by the Spirit of Feare and not of loue that they receaued not the Spirit of adoption to cry Abba father as well as wee though not plentifully as wee and so that they were not Sonnes though vnder Tutors and gouernors as we confesse they were but very Seruants held in Bondage and excluded from the inheritance of Grace and glory till after Christs Death So that at best their adoptio● was but conditionall with regard of Time to come but for the presēt they were handled as slaues fear'd with temporall punishments allured by temporall rewards like a heard of Swine fed with base achors and huskes These be absurd Errors bred out of Scripture misvnderstood Especially that of Iohn 1. Grace came by Christ. Ergo not before Christs In●arnation A sily Argument Christ is as old as the World and his Grace as ancient as the Name of Man vpon Earth grace alwaies came by Crhist was in its measure giuen by him lōg before he appear'd in the flesh He was euer the head of his Church and that his Body which he alwaies quickned by the blessed influence of his Spirit ministered therevnto Whereby the Godly before as well as since his incarnation were made liuing members of that his misticall Body Wherefore it is apparant that grace is not to be tied to the Times of the Gospell and seuered from the Law Nay as of old the Law was not alwaies without grace so now many times the Gospel it selfe is without grace Christ himselfe being a stumbling stone and rocke of offence the Gospell a Sauiour of Death to those many vpon whome Grace is not bestowed to beleeue and embrace it I conclude then That this difference with our Aduersaries make betweene the Law and Gospell is false and that their Error is pernitious in makind the Gospel to be nothing but a Spirit added to the Law that man may fulfill it to his Iustification That thus a man may be saued by Christ through the perfect fulfilling of the Law Which is a monstrous and vncouth Doctrine laying an vnsupportable burthen vpon the conscience of man and hazarding his soule to ●ternall distruction whiles by this meanes he frustrates the Grace of God in Christ and withall frustrats his owne hopes of life expecting to obtaine it by that Law which he is neuer able to fulfill SECT 5. CHAP. I. Iustification by fulfilling the law ouerthrowes Christian libertie the parts of our Christian libertie SO much of the Third Argument The last followes drawne from the Nature of Christian Liberty Which is this 4. Arg. That which ouerthrowes our Christian Liberty purchased for vs by the death of Christ that 's no Euangelical but an Haereticall Doctrine But Iustification by the workes of the Law ouerthrowes the spirituall Liberty of Man obtained for him by Christ. Ergò 'T is an Haeresie against the Gospell For the proofe of the minor Proposition let vs in briefe consider wherein stands that Liberty wherewith Christ hath made vs free that so we may the better perceiue what part thereof this doctrine of Iustification by works doth nullifie and depriue vs of The Liberty wee haue in Christ is either in regard of the Life to come or of this praesent life The first is the Liberty of Glory consisting in a fu●l deliuerance from that state of vanity and misery both sinfull and painfull wherevnto we are now subiect And not we only but the whole Creation which with vs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 groaneth and trauaileth in paine till with vs it also be deliuered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From the bondage of Corruption into the Glorious libertie of the Sonnes of God as the Apostle declares Rom. 8. 19. seq This Liberty we haue in hope not in possession The next we actually injoy in this life and that is the Liberty of Grace This we may diuide not vnfitly into 3 branches 1 Freedome from Sinne. 2 Freedome from the Law 3 Freedome from Men. 1 Our Freedome from Sinne stands in 2 things 1 In our deliuerance from the Punishment of Sinne. For whereas euery Sinne of it's owne Nature brings with it guiltines and

reason of such a defect Now of such a Wiseaker they dispute If God had created a Man thus in puris naturalibus neither good nor bad then What then As the old word is If the Heauens fall we shall haue Larkes good cheepe Suppositions framed by our Imaginations touching what might be done are vaine and needlesse when we see what is done This we see that Man was created in God's Image invested with all reall Qualities of Righteousnes and Holinesse This we see also that Man being falne is borne in Originall corruption depriued of God's Image thereupon depraued in his whole Nature by sinfull infirmity Wherefore a man in his pure Naturals one that hath neither Grace nor Corruption was neuer found in this world yea 't is a contradiction to imagine a man thus naked without his Qualities that he hath Reason but neither enlightened nor darkened a will but meerely indifferent neither enclined to good or euill affections but neither vertuously nor vitiously disposed In a word that he is a Man capable of Vertue or Vice Holinesse or Sinfulnesse and yet hath neither That were to make a Man litle better then an vnreasonable Beast But to follow them a little Suppose a Man were made in his pure Naturals would such disorderly motions be found i● him Yea say they and that boldly Si Homo crearetur a Deo in puris naturalibus proculdubiò constaret duabus partibus repugnantibus Spiritu Carne haberet duos app●titus contrarios Rationalem Sensitivum ergo naturaliter haber●t quosdam motus repugnantes Rationi Without doubt the Iesuite is deceiued in this his Imagination and his Argument is not worth a Button A Man in his pure Naturals should haue two parts a Soule and a Body Spirit and Flesh he should haue two appetites Reasonable and Sensuall ergo these parts in their motions and desires would be contrary one to the other This consequent is false They would be diuerse not opposite and repugnant The Body and the Sensitiues would lead a Man to those things that are agreeable to the Body The Soule and reasonable appetite or will would incline him to those higher and more noble objects agreeable to the Soule But neither of these inclinations would crosse and trouble one another the inferiour faculties like the lower Spheares would moue differently from the superiour but yet most orderly according to their owne nature without impeaching the Motions of the other Each faculty in it's place would worke orderly in sweet harmony and agreement each with other had not Sinne brought in confusion and discord into the world as betweene God and Man so betweene Man and himselfe This we further make good by this argument Whatsoeuer is naturall and so without blame in Man that Christ took one him But these inordinate Motions of the sensitiue appetite repugnant vnto Will and Reason Christ tooke not on him Ergo they are not naturall and without blame The Maior we proue by that Phil. 3. 7. He was made like vnto Man and Heb. 2. 17. In all things it behoued him to be made like vnto his Brethren And againe Chap. 4. 15. Wee haue not a high Priest which cannot be touched with a feeling of our infirmities but was in all things tempted in like sort yet without Sinne. Whence 't is manifest that Christ taking on him our Nature tooke on him all the properties of our Nature and with all such infirmities of our Nature as not sinfull in themselues or the effects or punishments of Sinne in vs. If therefore it be naturall vnto Man that the Motions of the sensitiue appetite should preuent and be repugnant vnto Reason and that this is no Sinne except consent make it so then certainly Christ had in him such motions and inordinate desires But to affirme that there were in Christ such disorderly Motions of his inferiour Faculties repugnant vnto his Reason and Will is a blasphemie against the immaculate Lambe of God Christ was indeed tempted as the text saith and in like sort as we are but will any Man heere vnderstand this of inward Temptations arirising from any thing within Christ as if he were like vnto vs drawne aside with Concupiscence and inticed the motions of his sensitiue faculties inclining him to that which was contrary to his vnderstanding and will We confesse that he was fiercely tempted by Satan and wicked Men from without but that he was tempted by any thing in himselfe by disorderly Motions of his heart tending vnto euill and ergo checked by his will and Reason this we account an abominable Errour touching the spotlesse humanity of our Sauiour Wherein we deny that there euer was any the least disorderly desire thought word or worke whatsoeuer And therefore we conclude that such motions are not naturall vnto Men becomming sinfull only by accident because they are consented vnto but they are accidentall vnto him being the fruit of originall Corruption and are in themselues verily and properly Sinnes For Conclusion of this point let vs heare that Argument which Bell. makes 4. Where there is no Law there is no sinne Rom. 4. 10. But there is no Law prescribed vnto sense and sensuall appetites Ergo The Motions thereof are not sinfull The Maior we grant The Minor he proues Because the Law praesupposeth Reason in all that whereto it is giuen But the sensitiue part of Man is without Reason and ergo not capable of a Law according as it is in bruite beasts to whom ergo no Law is giuen This he further proues by that place Rom. 7. 20. Now if I doe that I would not it is no more I that doe it but Sinne that dwelleth in me Where 't is plaine saith Bell. that the Apostle did not sinne because he lusted against his will 'T was not he did the worke but 't was the Sinne in him Wherefore he saith afterward That in his mind i. e. in his superior faculties he serued the Law of God and kept it although in his flesh i. e. sensitiue appetite and inferiour faculties he serued the Law of sin yet for all that he sinned not in so doing because sinne cannot be but in the minde and the Law is not giuen to those facul●ies that be vnreasonable To this we answere That God giues no Law to vnreasonable Creatures but such as haue Reason The sensitiue faculties of bruite-beasts haue no other Rule then Natures instinct which guides and moderates their seuerall motions in due order and measure But in man those inferiour faculties how euer vnreasonable are yet capable of Reasons Gouernment which according to Gods Law prescribes vnto the motions of the sensitiue appetite their measure and bounds beyond which they may not passe If a man were vncorrupt the appetite would obey this rule of Reason and keepe it selfe within those prescribed Bounds But being now corrupt by Sinne it breakes out beyond this compasse and ouerbeares Reason and will which in their sinfull weaknes

workes and faith are two Coordinate causes by their ioynt-force-working our Iustification but the Apostle vtterly excludes Faith onely from Iustification and attributes it wholy vnto workes For by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Faith onely he vnderstands faith alone that faith which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 17. alone solitary by itselfe without workes And such a dead faith whereof these hypocrites boasted S. Iames excludes wholly from justifying of a man I say then that he is not iustified by faith onely but that he is iustified by workes That is a working faith that is fruitfull in Obedience The Apostle goes forward from the Example of Abraham vnto that of Rahab verse 25. Likewise was not Rahab the Harlot iustified by workes That is in the same manner as Abraham so also Rahab was iustified by a working saith Which appeared to be so by that which shee did when she receaued the messengers entertained the two spies which were sent to search the land lodged them in her house without discouering them And when by accident they were made knowne hid them secretly vpon the roofe and afterwards sent them out another way conveied them away priuily not by the vsuall but by another way that is through the window letting them downe ouer the wall by a Cord as the story hath it Ios. 2. In this dangerous enterprise wherein this weake woman ventured her life in succouring the Enemies of her King and Country it appeares plainly that she had a strong and liuely Faith in the God of Israel and that the confession which she made with her mouth to the spies The Lord your God he is the God in Heauen aboue and in the Earth beneath Iosh. 2. 11. proceeded from a truely beleeuing heart insomuch as her words were made good by works that followed them Wherefore the Apostle iustly parallels these 2 examples of Abraham offering his sonne and Rahab in the kind vsage of the Spies because both those facts were singular trialls of a liuely faith which was able in that sorte to ouercome what was hardest to be conquered viz. Naturall affection In Abraham both fatherly affection to the life of a deere and only sonne and in Rahab the Naturall loue to ones Country and a mans owne Life did all stoope and giue way when once true Faith commands Obedience Here againe our adversaries trouble themselues and the Text with needlesse speculations telling vs that now the Apostle hath altered his cliffe and gone from the second Iustification in Abrahams example to the first Iustification in this of Rahab That Rahab was conuerted at this time of receauing the spies being made a beleeuer of an infidell a good woeman of a bad That she by this good worke did expiate her former sinnes and merited the grace and fauour of God notwithstanding that she committed a venial sinne in handling of the businesse telling a downe-right lie which though she should not haue done yet it hindred not the meritoriousnes of the worke with such other fond imaginations peruerting the simplicity of the Trueth But first they are not agreed among themselues whether the Apostle doe in that sort shift from one Iustification to another Bellarmine affirmes it and many moe But others deny it as may be seene in Lorinus his exposition of the. 21. v. of this Chapter And were they agreed vpon it sure I am they should disagree from the Apostle who makes this second instance of the same nature with the former 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In like manner saieth he was Rahab iustified viz. as Abraham was Againe when they say Rahab became a true beleeuer at that time of receauing the spies not before 't is more then they can proue By the circumstances of the story it appeares plainely that she beleeued before they came by the relation of the great workes which God had done for his people and the promises that were made vnto them that they should possesse Rahabs countrey This bred feare in others but faith in her by the secret working of the holy Ghost See Ioshua 2. 9. c. And certainly had she not had Faith before the spies came who can thinke she would haue giuen entertainment to such dangerous persons But she knew them to be the Seruants of the God of Israel in whom shee beleeued and therefore by this Faith she receaued them peaceably though Enemies of her Countrey Lastly to that of the Merit●riousnes of the worke of Rahab to deserue Grace and Life aeternall we reiect it not only as a vaine but an impious conceit which neuer entred into the humble hearts of the S● of old but hath bin set on foote in the last corrupt ages of the world by men drunken with selfe-Loue and admiration of their owne Righteousnes Thus we haue these 2 Examples whereby the Apostle hath proued sufficiently that the Faith which is separated from Obedience will not justifie a Man therefore that it is a dead Faith and not a true liuing Faith according as was proposed v. 20. Now for a close of this whole dispute he againe repeates that conclusion adding thereto anew similitude to illustrate it by in the last verse of the Chapter For as the Body without the Spirit is dead so faith without workes is dead that is As the Body without the Spirit i. e. the Souls or the Breath and other Motion is dead vnable to performe any liuing action whatsoeuer So Faith without workes is dead that is vtterly vnable to performe these liuing actions which belong vnto it What are those Two 1. To repose it stedfastly vpon the promise of life in Christ which is the proper immediate liuing Action of Faith 2. To justifie a Man in the sight of God which by a speciall priuiledge is the consequent of the former These liuing actions cannot be performed by that Faith which is dead being destitute of good workes That Faith which hath not power to bring forth Obedience is thereby declared to be a dead Faith deuoide of all power to embrace the promise with confidence and relyance as also to justifie A Man would thinke this were plaine enough and needed not to be troubled with any further C●villations But 't is strange what a coile our Adversaries make with this similitude writhing and straining it to such Conclusions as the Apostle neuer intende● Hence they gather 1. That as the Soule giues life to the Body as the ●●rme of the Body so Workes giue life to Faith as the forme of it 2 That as the Body is the same true Body without the Soule with it so Faith is one and the same true Faith without workes and with them which are nothing but sophisticall speculati●●● besides the purpose of the Text. The Apostle intends nothing but to shew the Necessity of the Copulation of a liuing Faith and Obedience together by the similitude of the like Necessitie of the vnion of a liuing Body and the Soule But his purpose is not to shew that the