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	soul_n	union_n	7,019	5	9.6724	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A57656	Medicus medicatus, or, The physicians religion cured by a lenitive or gentle potion with some animadversions upon Sir Kenelme Digbie's observations on Religio medici / by Alexander Ross.	Ross, Alexander, 1591-1654.; Ross, Alexander, 1591-1654. Animadversions upon Sir Kenelme Digbie's Observations on Religio medici.	1645 (1645)	Wing R1961; ESTC R21768	44,725	128

then upon mans owne wickednesse saith the same Father Aug. de Gen. ad lit c. 17. Who in another place to wit in his Commentarie on the Psalmes sheweth that the Converts of S. Paul Act. 19. had been Astrologers and therefore the books which they burned were of Astrologie But is not Astrologie repugnant to Divinity and impious when it robs God of his honour which it doth by undertaking to foretell future contingencies and such secrets as are onely knowne to God this being his true property alone By this Esay ch 41. distinguisheth him from false gods Declare what will come to passe and wee shall know you to be gods And hee mockes these Diviners ch 47. and so doth Ieremy ch 10. and Solomon Eccles. chap. 8. and 10. sheweth ●he knowledge of future things to be hid ●rom man of which the Poet was not ig●orant when he saith Nescia mens hominum fati sortisque futurae ●herefore both the Astrologer and he that consults with him dishonours God in a high nature by giving credit to or having commerce with those excommunicate and apostate Angels and so endanger their owne soules Is it because there is no God in Israel that you consult with the god of Ekron Now that Astrologers have commerce with evill spirits besides the testimony of Austin de civit Dei lib. 5. cap. 7. and lib. 2. de Gen. ad lit c. 17. and other ancient Fathers the proofes of divers witnesses and their owne confessions upon examination doe make it apparent Not to speake of their flagitious lives and their impious and atheisticall Tenents for this cause Astrologers are condemned by Councels and Decrees of the Church Conc. Bracar 1. c. 9. in Tolet. 1. sec. part decret c. 26. 6. The Angels in the very instant of their creation actually knew all that they were capable of knowing and are acquainted with all free thoughts past present and to come They knew not so much then as they doe now because now they have the experimentall knowledge of almost six thousand yeares and many things revealed to them since their creation Secondly they know not our free thoughts even because they are free and variable at our pleasure not at theirs it 's onely Gods property to know the heart yet some thing they may know by outward signes or by revelation Thirdly they know not things future for first they know not the day of Judgement secondly they know not future contingentcies thirdly they know not infallibly naturall effects that are to come though they know their causes because all naturall causes are subordinate to God who when hee pleaseth can stay their operations What Angel could fore-know if God did not reveale it that the Sun should stand at the prayer of Iosua that the fire should not burne the three Children or the Lions devoure Daniel Fourthly as they know ●ot future contingencies because they ●ave not certaine and determinate causes ●o they know not mans resolutions which depend upon his will because the will is onely subject to God as being the principall object and end of it and he onely can ●encline it as hee pleaseth therefore as Esay of the Gentile Idols so say I of Angels Let us know what is to come to wit infallibly of your selves and all and wee shall know that you are gods 7. Sir Kenelme sayes he hath proved sufficiently light to be a solid substance and body These proofes I have not seen therefore I can say nothing to them but this I know that if light be a body when the aire is illuminated two bodies must be in one place and there must be penetration Secondly the motion of a body must be in an instant from the one end of the world to the other both which are impossible Thirdly what becomes of this body when the Sun goeth downe Doth it putrefie or corrupt or vanish to nothing all these are absurd Or doth it follow the body of the Sun then when the light is contracted into a lesser space it must be the greater but wee find no such thing And if light be a body it must be every day generated and corrupted why should not darknesse be a body too But of this subject I have spoken else where therefore I will say no more till I see Sir Kenelme's proofes 8. The soule hath a strange kind of neere dependance of the body which is as it were Gods instrument to create it by This phrase I understand not I have already proved that the soule hath no dependance on the bodie neither in its creation essence or operation it hath no other dependance on the bodie but as it is the forme thereof to animate and informe it So you may say the Sun depends upon the earth to warme and illuminate it The body is the soules instrument by which it produceth those actions which are called organicall onely but that God used the body as it were an instrument to create the soule by is a new phrase unheard of hitherto in Divinitie God immediately createth and infuseth the soule into the body hee used no other ●●strument in the workes of creation but ●●xit mandavit 9. Sir Kenelme thinkes that terrene ●ules appeare oftnest in Cemeteries because ●●ey linger perpetually after that life which ●●ited them to their bodies their deare con●●rts I know not one soule more terrene ●●en another in its essence though one ●●ule may be more affected to earthly ●●ings then another Secondly that life ●hich united the soule to the body is not ●ost to the soule because it still remaines in 〈◊〉 as light remaines still in the Sun when ●ur Horison is deprived of it Thirdly if ●●ules after death appear it must be either 〈◊〉 their owne or in other bodies for else ●hey must be invisible if in their own then ●hey must passe through the grave and en●er into their cold and inorganicall bodies ●nd adde more strength to them then ever ●hey had to get out from under such a ●●ad of earth and rubbish if in other ●odies then the end of its creation is over●hrowne for it was made to informe its ●wne bodie to which onely it hath rela●ion and to no other and so we must acknowledge a Pythagoricall transanimatio● Fourthly such apparitions are delutions o● Sathan and Monkish tricks to confirme superstition 10. Soules he sayes goe out of their bodie● with affections to those objects they leave behin● them Affections saith Aristotle are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that unreasonable part of the soul● or rather of the whole compositum for th● soule hath no parts and though whilst i● the body it receiveth by meanes of its immediate union with the spirits some impressions which we call affections yet being separated is free from such and carrie● nothing with it but the reasonableand inorganicall faculties of the Intellect and Will And to speak properly affections are motions of the heart stirred up by the knowledge and apprehension of

the object goo● or bad the one by prosecution the othe● by avoiding so that where the heart i● not nor the externall senses to conveig● the object to the phantasie nor the animal● spirits to carry the species of the object from the phantasie to the heart there ca● be no affection but such is the estate of ●he soule separated it hath no commerce 〈◊〉 all with the body or bodily affections ●nd of this the Poets were not ignorant ●hen they made the departed soules to ●rink Securos latices longa oblivia ●f the river Lethe which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the wished for goddesse by ●hose that are in misery 11. He thinkes that when the slaine body ●uddenly bleedeth at the approach of the mur●erer that this motion of the bloud is caused by ●he soule But this cannot be for the soule when it is in the body cannot make it ●leed when it would if it could we should ●ot need Chirurgions to phlebotomise and ●carifie us much lesse then can it being se●arated from the body Secondly in a ●old body the bloud is congealed how ●hall it grow fluid againe without heat or how hot without the animall and vitall spirits and how can they worke without the soule and how can this operate without union to the body If then any such ●leeding be as I beleeve that sometimes ●here hath been and may be so againe I thinke it the effect rather of a miracle t● manifest the murtherer then any natural● cause for I have read that a mans arme● which was kept two years did at the sigh● of the murtherer drop with bloud which could not be naturally seeing it could no● but be withered and dry after so long time yet I deny not but before the body be cold or the spirits quite gone it may bleed some impressions of revenge and anger being left in the spirits remaining which may move the bloud but the safest way is to attribute such motions of the bloud to the prayers of these soules under the Altar saying Quousque Domine 12. No annihilation can proceed from God it is more impossible that not-being should flow from him then that cold should flow immediately from fire 'T is true that God is not an efficient cause of annihilation for of a non-entity there can be no cause yet we may safely say that hee is the deficient cause for as the creatures had both their creation and have still their conservation by the influx of Gods Almighty power who as the Apostle saith sustaines all things by the word of his power so if he should suspend or withdraw this influx all things must returne to nothing as they were made of nothing There is then in the creature both a passive possibilitie of annihilation and in God an active possibilitie to withdraw his assistance and why should we be afraid to affirm such a power in God Before the world was made there was annihilation and yet God was still the same both before and since without any alteration in him So if the world were annihilated God should lose nothing being in himselfe all things Againe as God suspended his worke of creation the seventh day without any diminution of his power and goodnesse so hee may suspend if hee please the work of conservation which is a continuated production Besides as God created not the world by necessity of his nature but by his free will so by that same freedome of will hee sustaines what hee hath created and not by any necessity and therefore not only corruptible bodies but even spirits and angels have in them a possibility of annihilation if God should withdraw from them his conservative influence Ieremy was not ignorant of his owne and his peoples annihilation if God should correct them in fury Ierem. 10. But though there be a possibility in the creatures if God withdraw his power of annihilation yet wee must not think that this possibility in them flowes from the principles of their owne nature for in materiall substances there is no such possibility seeing the matter is eternall and much lesse can it be in immateriall substances in which there is neither physicall composition nor contrariety As the Sun then is the cause of darknesse and the Pilot the cause of shipwrack the one by withdrawing his light the o●her by denying his assistance so may God be the cause of annihilation by suspending or subtracting his influence 13. He thinkes it is a grosse conception to think that every atome of the body or every graine of ashes of the cadaver burned and scattered by the wind should be raked together and made up anew into the same body it was But this is no grosse conceit if he consider the power of the Almighty who can with as great facility re-unite these dispersed atomes as he could at first create them utpote idoneus est reficere qui fecit The Gentiles objected the same unto the Christians as a grosse conceit of theirs as Cyril sheweth to whom Tertullian returnes this answer That it is as easie to collect the dispersed ashes of thy body as to make them of nothing Ubicunque resolutus fueris quaecunque te materia destruxerit hauserit aboleverit in nihil prodegerit reddet te ejus est nihilum ipsum cujus est totum 14. But Sir Kenelme in his subsequent discourse to salve this grosse conception as hee calls it of collecting the dispersed ashes of the burned body tells us that the same body shall rise that fell but it shall be the same in forme onely not in matter which he proves by some reasons First that it is the forme not the matter that gives numericall individuation to the body Secondly that the matter without forme hath no actuall being Thirdly that identity belongeth not to the matter by it selfe Fourthly that the body of a man is not the same it was when it was the body of a childe Fifthly he illustrates this by some Similies As that a ship is still the same though it be all new timbered The Thames is still the same river though the water is not the same this day that flowed heretofore That a glasse full of water taken out of the sea is distinguished from the rest of the water but being returned backe againe becomes the same with the other stocke and the glasse being againe filled with the sea-water though not out of the same place yet it is the same glasse full of water that it was before That if the soule of a newly dead man should be united to another body taken from some hill in America this body is the same identicall body hee lived with before his death This is the summe of Sir Kenelm's Philosophy and Divinity concerning the resurrection In which are these mistakes First the resurrection by this opinion is overthrowne a surrection wee may call it of a body but not the resurrection of the same body This is no new opinion but the

and therefore are not the objects of his omnipotencie but that is only the object which is possibile absolutum So I think it is good manners to say God cannot lie or die because it cannot ●gree with his active power to suffer or to die So he cannot sin because it agreeth not with right reason In a word Deus nequit facere quod nequit fieri I think then it were breach of good manners to say that God could do any thing which were repugnant either to his wisdome goodnesse or power And though his power and will make but one God yet they are different attributes ratione for the will commands and the power puts in execution You say that they who deny witches deny spirits also and are a kind of Atheists A strange kind of Atheisme to deny witches but is there such a strict relation between witches and spirits that hee that denies the one must needs deny the other Sure the existence of spirits depends not upon the witches invocation of or paction with spirits We reade that Zoroastres was the first witch in the world and hee lived after the Floud were there no spirits I pray till then This is as much as if you would say there were no divels among the Gadarens till they entered into their swine You thinke the Angels know a great part of our thoughts because by reflexion they behold the thoughts of one another That the Angels know one another is out of doubt but how they know one anothers thoughts is unknowne to mee This I know that none knowes the thoughts of man but man himself and God that made him it being Gods prerogative to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If they know our thoughts 't is either by revelation from God or by some outward signe and demonstration from our selves for whilest they are immanent and in the Understanding they are only knowne to God because he only hath the command of our Wills from which our thoughts depend The light which wee stile a bare accident you say is a spirituall substance where it subsists alone and may be an Angell Let us see where and when it subsists alone without a subject and then wee will beleeve you that it is a spirituall substance And if your light may be an Angel that must needs be an Angell of light What a skipping Angell will ignis fatuus make The Chandlers and Bakers trades are honou●able those can make lights which may in ●ime become Angels these wafers which ●n time become gods This Section consists of divers errours First you call the Heavens the immateriall world so you confound the celestiall world with the intellectuall which only is immateriall and had its being in the divine intellect before it was made Secondly if the Heavens be immateriall they are not movable for matter is the subject of motion Why then doe you call the great Sphere the first movable Thirdly an immateriall world cannot be the habitation of materiall substances where then will the bodies of the Saints after the resurrection have their residence Fourthly if the Heavens have not matter they have not quantity and parts Fifthly nor are they compounded substances of matter and forme but simple as spirits Sixthly though they have not such a matter as the elementary world yet immateriall they are not they have a matter the subject of quantity though not of generation and corruption Your second errour is that you call Gods essence the habitation of Angels and therefore they live every-where where his essence is Divinitie tells us that Angels are in a place definitivè and that they as we all live and move in him as in our efficient protecting and sustaining cause but not as in a place for Angels move out of one place to another and while they are on earth they are not in heaven but if Gods essence be their habitation then they never change place for his essence is every-where and so you make them partakers of Gods proper attribute Ubiquity Your third errour is that God hath not subordinated the creation of Angels to ours but as ministring spirits they are willing to fulfill Gods will in the affaires of man Then belike God made them not to be ministring spirits to the heires of salvation but they are so of their owne accord if so wee are more beholding to them for their comfort protection and instruction of us then to God who made them not for this end but as you say for his owne glory But if you were as good at Divinity as at Physick you will find that Gods glory is not ●ncompatible with their service to us but ●n this is God glorified that they comfort ●nstruct and protect us for this charge hee hath given to his Angels over us and so we are bound to them for their care much more to him for his love in creating them to this end Your fourth errour is that both generation and creation are founded on contrarieties If creation were a transmutation which still presupposeth a subject I would be of your opinion but seeing it is not and hath no subject without which contrarieties cannot be in nature I deny that creation is founded on contrarieties neither is non-entity contrary but the totall privation of being which God gave to the creature You wonder at the multitude of heads that deny traduction having no other argument of their beliefe but Austins words Creando infunditur c. But I wonder as much at you who is not better acquainted with our Divinitie for wee have many reasons to confirm us against traduction besides Saint Austins authority At first that the soule is immateriall therefore hath not quantitie nor parts nor is subject to division as it must be if it be subject to traduction or propagation Secondly the soule existeth in and by it selfe depending from the bodie neither in its being nor operation and by consequence not in its production nec in esse nec in fieri nec in operari Thirdly if the soule were educed out of the power of the matter it were mortall as the soules of beasts are which having their beginning and being from the matter must faile when that failes Fourthly the effect is never nobler then the cause but the soule in regard of understanding doth in excellencie far exceed the body Fifthly a body can no more produce a spirit then an horse can beget a man they being different species Sixthly if the soule were propagated in or by the seed then this were a true enunciation Semen est animal rationale and so the seed should be man Seventhly if the soule of the son be propagated by the soule or of the soule of the parent then we must admit transmutation of soules as we doe of bodies in generation Eighthly we ●ave the Churches authoritie Ninthly ●nd the testimony of Gentiles for Aristotle ●cknowledgeth the Intellect to enter into ●●e body from without And Apuleius in ●is mysticall