Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	father_n	heart_n	son_n	17,006	5	5.6134	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A55740	A case of conscience propounded to a great Bishop in Ireland viz., whether after divorce the innocent party may not lawfully marry : with the Bishop's answer to the question, and a reply to the Bishops answer, and also some quæries, whether the silencing of godly ministers be not near of kin to the killing of the two prophets, Revelation the 11 chap / by George Pressicke.	Pressick, George.	1661 (1661)	Wing P3296; ESTC R24474	28,523	38

conclusion of your discourse you plead for liberty to marry and urge 4 reasons for your selfe which if they were all true signify nothing as to that purpose for which you urge them Suppose she have been so long absent suppose she cut you in the face suppose she were an occasion that you were imprisoned 25 dayes suppose you have a Divorce under two Bishops hands upon a reference from his Majestie yet there is a great difference between a temporary divorce and a perpetuall dissolution of marriage What you plead for your selfe I have seen what your wife hath to plead for her selfe I do not know but if every thing be as your selfe say I cannot give way to your second marriage whiles your old wife lives without contradicting the Commands of our Saviour delivered by three Evangelists and one Apostle and therefore I must commend you to your proper remedy that is prayer hoping that you will never thinke more of wedding whilst your old wife lives but bear your Crosse with patience which Christ hath laid upon you November 16 th 1661. Mr. Pressicke's Reply to the Bishop's Answer Right reverend Father in God I Beseech you once more to hear me with patience what I have further to say I have received your Lordships Answer to my paper and I do humbly conceive it will admit of some Except●ons as followeth In the first place you say and that truly that they who expound Scripture according to their own private fancies do often change but they say you who expound it in the same sence which was deliverd to the Catholique Church with the Scriptures can hardly vary from themselves To this I humbly reply that you do not declare who you mean by the Catholique Church that we should seek the sence of Scripture from whether the Church of Rome or the Protestant Church joyntly or severally or who else we must take for the Church and therefore I will deliver my opinion which I think is not a private fancy By Catholique Church I understand all the true Beleivers that hath been from the begining of the world is now and shall be to the end of the world of which Catholique Church I am one and to this Church the Scriptures was given and none can understand the sence and mind of God in the Scriptures but such as God doth reveale it unto by his spirit 1 Cor 1.9 As it is written eye hath not seen nor ear heard neither hath it e●tred into the heart of man the things which God hath prepared for them that love him But he hath revealed them to us by his spirit and we h●ve not received the spirit of the world but the spirit which is of God that we might know observe the words that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God But the naturallman receive●h not the things of the spirit of God for they are foolishnes unto h●m nei●her can he know them because they are spiritu●lly discerned and Mat 10.27 No man knowes the Father save the Son and ●e to whom the Son will reveal him I do with all my heart and soul reverence learning because I find the want of learning in my selfe and we are debtors to those that have translated the Scriptures into our Mother-tongue yet such as have naturall learning and understand the originall Tongues may be in a naturall estate and in that respect the Apostle saith they cannot know the things of the spirit of God for they are foolishnes unto him because they must be spiritually discerned But I say he is a good Scholer that hath learn't his Lesson of Christ and it matters not who is the scholer so that Christ be the Schoolmaster I have never read that Christ doth speak to his Children or Scholers only in Hebrew Greeke or Lattine but he hath and doth declare his mind and will to them in English and other Languages as well as in the originall Tongues I hope th●s is no expounding of Scripture according to private fancy for it is plain Scripture if the Scripture be right translated if it be not the fault is not mine To the first objection you own the words of St. Paul 1 Cor 7.15 If the unbeliever depart let him dep●rt a brother or a sister is not in bondage in such Cases and you say there is a great difference between the marriage of Infidells and the marriage of Christians the marriage of Infidells being only a civill contract and may be dissolved by consent the marriage of Christians is a signe of the mysticall union between Christ and his Church and the●efore you say undissolvable To this I reply by plain Scripture and agree with you that the marriage of Infidells is dissolvable if but the one party be an Infidell and refuse to co-habit with the husband or wife as 1 Cor 7.15 and at verses 12 13. If a husband have an unbelieving wife or a wife an unbelieving husband if the unbeliever be pleased to dwell with the believer the believer ought not to put the unbeliever away and though my wife be an unbeliever and is departed yet I have waited 6 years c. for her returning before I got a Bill of divorce and the Text saith if the unbeliever depart a brother or a siter is not in bondage in such cases and you have granted that the marriage of Infidells is dissolvable by consent and she gave her consent to the divorce therefore by your own words the bone of marriage is dissolved between her and me for this is my case my wife is an Infidell or unbeliever and hath departed from me above 7 years and 5 months I did not put her away but she put her selfe away and by her departing she put me away from her as Marke 10.12 But St Paul saith If she depart let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her hu●band 1 Cor 7.11 the reason is because she is the nocent party therefore she must remain unmarried or be reconciled but St. Paul doth not say let him remain unmarried o● let h●m wait 7 years as I have done or 17 years to see whether she will be reconciled to her husband or not but he saiah expresly ver 15. if she depart he is not in bondage in such cases this is plain Scripture But what greater outward bondage can there be if he have need of a w●fe than to be restrained from marriage or in what sence can any man take that Scripture a brother or a sister is not in bondage in such cases I humbly conceive that to say as you do in another place that he is freed from all conjugall duties towards her it is neither the meaning of the Text nor is the plaister broad enough for the soare for if she desert him and will not come at h●m nor suffer him to come where she is what conjugall duties is he like to performe towards her it is impossible therefore the text must have another meaning which I conceive must