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	scripture_n	son_n	10,113	5	5.8747	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A15420	A retection, or discouerie of a false detection containing a true defence of two bookes, intituled, Synopsis papismi, and Tetrastylon papisticum, together with the author of them, against diuers pretended vntruths, contradictions, falsification of authors, corruptions of Scripture, obiected against the said bookes in a certaine libell lately published. Wherein the vniust accusations of the libeller, his sophisticall cauils, and vncharitable slaunders are displayed.	Willet, Andrew, 1562-1621.	1603 (1603)	STC 25694; ESTC S114436	136,184	296

expressed in other letters but in the common character as it standeth in the first edition pag. 566. lin 2. 2. The text onely then is not here vrged but an argument therefrom concluded and therein included that because a man is iustified without the workes of the law it followeth that he is iustified by faith alone So Origen inferreth vpon this place Dicit sufficere solius fidei iustificationem ita vt credens quis tantummodo iustificetur etiamsi nihil ab eo operis fuerit expletum He saith that the iustification of faith onely sufficeth that one beleeuing onely may bee iustified though hee haue fulfilled no worke lib. 3. ad Roman Say now that Origen also corrupteth S. Paul So likewise Ambrose in 3. ad Rom. Iustificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque fidem reddentes sola fide iustificati sunt dono Dei They are iustified freely because working nothing nor rendring nothing they are iustified by faith onely by the gift of God Againe in 4. ad Roman Cum videant Abramum non ex operibus legis sed sola fide iustificatum When they see Abraham iustified not of the workes of the law but by faith only Ambrose thus concludeth only faith out of S. Paul without any corruption at all out of which Father I haue twentie like pregnant testimonies at the lest at hand for iustification sola fide by faith onely 3. Where you say there is no Scripture for onely faith though this place of the Apostle be equiualent to that speech yet somewhat to satisfie your contentious spirit I will name you such a Scripture as Luk. 8. 50. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beleeue onely c. and she shall be saued 4. Your euasion of workes that goe before grace that the Apostle onely speaketh of such will not serue your turne for euen such workes are excluded which God hath prepared for vs to walke in Ephes. 2. 8. 10. This was the old shift of the Pelagians as it should seeme which Hierome remoueth thus writing vpon these words By the works of the law shall no flesh be iustified Quod ne de lege Mosi tantum dictum putes non de omnibus mandatis quae vno legis nomine continentur idem Apostolus scribit dicens consentio legi Dei secundum interiorem hominem Which least you should thinke spoken only of the law of Moses and not of all the commaundements which are contained vnder this one name of the law the same Apostle writeth saying I consent to the law of God in the inward man c. ad Ctesiphont 5. Whereas S. Iames saith that a man is iustified of workes and not of faith onely 2. 24. hee speaketh not of that iustification wherby we are made iust before God but of the outward probation and testification thereof as it may appeare out of the 22. verse Was not Abraham our father iustified through workes when he offered Isaac his sonne vpon the altar But Abraham was iustified before God by faith at the least thirtie yeeres before Genes 15. 6. Abraham beleeued God and it was counted to him for righteousnes therefore by this worke his faith was proued and made knowne as the Angell saith Now I know that thou fearest God Gen. 22. 12. he was not thereby iustified before God This distinction of iustification Thomas Aquinas alloweth Iacobus hîc loquitur de operibus sequentibus fidem quae dicuntur iustificare non secundum quod iustificare dicitur iustitiae infusio sed secundum quod dicitur iustitiae exercitatio vel ostensio vel consummatio res enim fieri dicitur quando perficitur vel innotescit Iames speaketh here of workes following faith which are said to iustifie not as the infusion of iustice is said to iustifie but as it is said to be the exercise shewing or perfecting of righteousnes for a thing is said to be done when it is perfected and made knowne in epist. Iacob 5. 5. And no otherwise Origen saith that Abraham was iustified by workes Quia certum est eum qui verè credit opus fide● iustitiae operari Because it is certaine that hee which truly beleeueth doth worke the worke of faith and righteousnes lib. 4. ad Rom. Thus S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled the one speaketh of our iustification that is the infusion of iustice before God which is by faith the other of the testification thereof by workes The 12. Corruption SYnops. pag. 532. I am the bread Ioh. 6. 35. the text is corrupted by leauing out two words of life which if he had put to his argument against transubstantiation had bin destitute of all force The Correction 1. IF it bee corruption of Scripture sometime for breuitie sake to leaue out a word you had best charge our Sauiour with that corruption who saith out of Esay The spirit of the Lord is vpon me Luk. 4. 18. whereas the Prophet saith of the Lord Iehouah 2. He might haue considered that the argument taken out of this scripture is set downe from Bellarmines report together with his answere lib. 3. de Euchar. cap. 24. argum 1. So that herein is no deceite nor corruption in rehearsing that which is by others propounded although it were graunted that some ouersight might passe in the first propounders which is not yet proued otherwise when this text is alleaged by himselfe all the words are expressed I am the bread of life pag. 509. lin 1. 3. It was not necessarie nor pertinent to adde the rest of the words neither haue they any aduauntage in putting of them to for where Christ saith I am the liuing bread or bread of life so he likewise saith this is my bodie pointing to the bread which is giuen for you but he gaue his liuing not his dead bodie for them As then Christ is not chaunged into bread when hee saith I am the bread of life but it is a figuratiue speech so the bread is not chaunged into his liuing bodie where he saith this is my bodie giuen for you But here of necessitie also a figure must be admitted as Augustine saith Corporis sanguinis sui figuram discipulis commendauit tradidit Hee gaue and commended a figure of his bodie and bloud to his Disciples Enarrat in Psal. 3. So Tertullian before interpreted this is my body that is a figure of my body lib. 4. cont Marcion So then as Christ is not materiall bread but spiritually so the bread is not his materiall body but likewise spiritually This comparison then standeth still betweene these two speeches though the word of life be supplied that in both a figuratiue kind of locution must be admitted The 13. Corruption THe Scripture saith that Christ was giuen onely for those that are giuen to him to whom he giueth eternall life Iohn 17. 2. the word onely is maliciously added Libell p. 278. The Correction 1. HEre not so much the sentence as the sense of the Scripture is applied doth the

aduised to alleage this text whereby he doth but display and lay open his ignorance in the text and blindnes in the true sense thereof And further that Saul was not truly iust before God it appeareth by that Samuel saith 1. Sam. 13. 14. The Lord hath sought him a man after his owne heart that is Dauid Saul then was not a man after Gods owne heart Secondly Hierome saith the Detector lib. 3. aduers. Pelagian proueth that Iudas was once iust by these words of our Sauiour Ioh. 17. 12. Whom thou gauest me I haue kept and none of them perished but the sonne of perdition Cont. 1. He should haue done wel to haue alleaged Hieromes words seeing that booke is long and not distinguished into chapters but he sheweth himselfe as well seene here in Hierome as before in the Scripture The contrarie elsewhere may be gathered out of Hierome as where hee thus writeth to Hedibia quaest 10. Deus non saluat irrationabiliter absque iudicij veritate sed praecedentibus causis quia alij non susceperunt filium Dei alij sponte sua susceperunt God doth not saue without reason or true iudgement but by causes going before because some receiued not the son of God some willingly receiued him Therefore because Iudas was not saued he did not receiue Christ truly or aright beleeue in him 2. Augustine out of this Scripture concludeth the contrarie that Iudas was a reprobate Filius perditionis dictus est traditor Christi perditioni praedestinatus The betrayer of Christ is called the sonne of perdition because he was predestinate to perdition tract ●07 in Ioann If he were a reprobate from the beginning he was neuer a right good man in deede 3. That Iudas in his holiest course was but an hypocrite a theefe the Scripture testifieth Ioh. 6. 70. Haue I not chosen you twelue and one of you is a diuell This was spoken long before Iudas betrayed Christ when hee was newly chosen and daily conuersant with Christ and did the office of an Apostle with the rest When was hee holier in shew then while he walked with Christ preached with the rest and wrought miracles but euen then hee was a diuell and when he sate with Christ at the table and dipped his hand with him in the platter and as Origen thinketh was admitted ad mensam corporis Christi to the table of Christs bodie tract 35. in Math. yet euen then and before hee was a theefe Ioh. 12. 6. 4. I will conclude with that testimonie out of their owne Canon Caus. 2. quaest 1. c. 6. where Christ is brought in thus speaking of Iudas Although he be not yet excluded from you à me tamen qui omnia certissime noui separatus diuisus est yet I that know all things haue separated and diuided him et si ego per occulti iudicij sententiam damnatum habeo vos tamen adhuc illum per tolerantiam sustinete although I by the sentence of my secret iudgement hold him condemned yet you must tolerate him a while How then was hee truly iust before God when he was alreadie separated and condemned in the iudgement of Christ Now sir Detector let the Reader iudge whose mouth hath now ranne ouer such lips such lettice we present you your berries as a fit dish for your tooth the lies which you haue here forged as counterfeit stuffe we returne to your owne shoppe These are your proper colours such slaunderous spirits most of your sect are led by One may say of you as Leo●●●hidas of Demaratus sons that spake euill of him Non miror bene enim eorum nemo loqui potest I marueile not at it for none of them can speake well Bernards counsell had been good to such swift tongues Modicum membrum lingua sed nisi caueas magnum malum facile volat atque ideo facile violat charitatem The tongue a little member but worketh great mischiefe it flieth fast but of charitie soone maketh waste serm de triplic custod The twelfth Slaunder HEre the Libeller obiecteth foure vntruths together 1. That Bellarmine is at variance with himselfe in one place making the Pope the chief iudge of all controuersies in another the Pope with the Cardinals which both may well stand together without any variance 2. That it is affirmed that Bellarmine for exposition of Scripture referreth vs to the Fathers of the Church wherof he maketh no mention at all 3. False also that hee referreth vs from generall Councels to the Pope and Cardinals 4. False also that hee maketh mention of Cardinals of whom he saith nothing The Defence 1. WHether there be not variance and diuersitie in these two places of Bellarmine one while to make the Pope Iudge another while to ioyne the Cardinals with him as though hee were not sufficient without them for why else are they ioyned with him I leaue it to the Readers iudgement it is not a matter worthie to be contended about and I am ashamed to spend time in such friuolous stuffe but that a brabler must be answered 2. For the other three points they are not first of my deuising that worthie professor Master Whitakers doth so collect Bellarmines sense contr 1. quaest 5. cap. 3. And it seemeth to be Bellarmines meaning altogether for his words in this place are not by vs alleaged First that we should haue recourse to the Fathers for the exposition of the Scripture for he referreth vs to the Councell of Trent sess 4. which prescribeth that sense of the Scripture to bee followed which either the Church holdeth or the ioynt consent of the Fathers 3. Bellarmine referreth vs to a Councel confirmed by the chiefe pastor or to the chiefe pastor cum concilio aliorum pastorum with the counsell of other pastors these two being disioyned with this disiunctiue siue or cannot be taken in any good construction for all one as the Libeller doth insinuate p. 147. But Bellarmine must be expounded by himselfe who other where would haue appeales made from generall Councels to the Pope lib. 2. de concilior authoritat cap. 17. And so in this place this order is prescribed that where a Councel cannot resolue of doubts it shuld bee determined by the Pope with his assistance 4. Though the name Cardinals bee not here expressed in Bellarmine yet his concilium pastorum councell of pastors assistants to the Pope can be no other but the Colledge of Cardinals 1. For if he did meane any other Councell it were a vaine repetition of the same thing to say a Councell confirmed by the chiefe pastor or the chiefe pastor with a councell 2. It seemeth to be such a councell as is alwaies readie at hand so is no other councell but of the Cardinals that are alwaies resiant in Rome 3. Whereas the last reuolution of matters is to the Apostolike sea distinct 20. ● 1. By the sea Apostolike they vnderstand not the Pope onely sed concilium illud quo pontifex

Ratisbone betweene the Diuines of Witemberge and certaine Iesuites one Iacobus Gretserus a Iesuite vttered this horrible blasphemie of the Scriptures Spiritum sanctum per scripturas loquentem non posse esse indicem controuersiarum That the spirit of God speaking by the Scripture can not be iudge of controuersies And added further St potest me spiritus sanctus condemnare per hanc scripturam age faciat veniat dicat Iacobe Gretsere tu erras statim transibo ad scamnum vestrum If the spirit of God can condemne me by this scripture goe to let him come and say thou Iacob Gretsere art in an error and I will straight way go vnto your side ex Egid. Hunnio If the Lord were not a most gracious and long suffering God wee might wonder how such blasphemers could goe vnpunished Gods bountifulnes as the Apostle saith Rom. 2. 4. leadeth them to repentance which God send them if they belong vnto him that they may repent them of their blasphemies toward God and their slaunders against men otherwise their iudgement sleepeth not but shall be reuealed in time For as Ambrose saith Si pro otioso verbo ratio poscitur quanto magis pro sermone impietatis poena exoluitur If account shall be rendred for an idle word how much more for wicked speech shall punishment be inflicted Bias said to a certaine lewd man He feared not least he should not be punished but least he should not see it But wee as we feare their punishment in the end so wee desire not to see it but pray for their repentance and amendment The 2. Contradiction SYnops. p. 263. it is affirmed that mariage was lawfull for all men vntill Pope Nicholas the 2. and yet in the same page it is said that Gregorie the 1. inioyned his Clergie to liue single and pag. 266. the iniunction of single life first proceeded from Siricius which two were long before Nicholas 2. Alexander 2. or Gregorie the 7. who began by publike decree to restraine Ministers mariage The Reconciliation FIrst here is no contradiction at all if these words may finde a fauourable interpreter for notwithstanding that diuers decrees were made before to restraine Ministers mariage and some attempted to impose single life yet till a thousand yeeres after Christ there was not a generall and constant restraint of such mariage 1. Siricius indeede began first to inhibite the mariage of Priests about anno 428. yet after him succeeded Siluerius sonne of Hormisda who was also Bishop of Rome ann 534 ex Caranz Concil summ 2. Before this in the Nicene Councell they would haue inioyned single life to the Clergie but that by the wise aduice of Paphnutius the Synode altred their minds Sozomen lib. 1. c. 11. Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 11. 3. Gregorie 1. though at the first hee liked well of single life yet seeing the inconuenience thereof when in his mote or pond many childrens heads were found he then altering his minde confessed with S. Paul that it was better to marrie then to burne ex epistol Hulderic ad Nicolaum Papam This Gregorie liued anno 603. yet after him anno 636. came Theodorus Bishop of Rome the sonne of Theodorus a Bishop so that wee see that all this while the restraint of Clergiemens mariage was not receiued generally as a law necessarily to bind till the time before expressed Secondly whereas the Councell of Neocesaria and second of Carthage are obiected that forbid the mariage of Ministers I answere that sometime it was decreed against and sometime decreed with as Concil Ancyran can 10. Gangrens c. 4. which see at large Synops. pag. 265. and that all degrees of the Clergie might take them wines vntill this generall restraint it is there further declared p. 269. to the which places I referre the Reader Neither neede I to spend much time in ●ifting the authorities of Councels hauing to deale with a man vtterly ignorant in them which receiueth thē but at the second hand as it may appeare for that whereas the 37. canon of the Africane Councel is thus translated Placuit Episcopos c. vxoribus abstinere It pleaseth vs that Bishoppes Priests Deacons abstaine from their wiues he chargeth the translator very simplie and ignorantly with corruption because he ●aith their wiues for it is euident that this Canon inioyneth abstinence from their owne wiues as it may appeare by the 5. Carthage Councel 3. from whence this Canon is taken word forword as it is alleaged by Gratian. dist 85. cap. 4. Cum de quorundam Clericorum quamuis erga vxores proprias incontinentia referatur For as much as report is made to vs of the incontinencie of Clergy men though toward their owne wiues Then followe the very same words It pleaseth vs that Bishops c. abstaine from their wiues for whose wiues I pray you doth the Councell meane but their owne Thirdly the Libeller because Pope Gregorie the 7. is said to be a notable sorcerer and adulterer chargeth him that so writeth to be a notable lier and further saith that generallie all the historiographers of that time did highly commend him as Anselmus Marianus Scotus Guitmundus c. Contrà What two or three which were partially affected to the Pope might write in praise of him it is not much to be weighed for these three that are said to witnesse with him and yet are they but dumbe witnesses speaking nothing but onely named we can produce thrice three that discommend him Sabellicus and Blondus doe describe his great in●olencie when he suffered the Emperour in hard frost with bare legges to waite at his gate three daies Sab ellic Enead 9. lib. 3. Blond decad 2. lib. 3. Benno Cardinall saith he poysoned sixe Popes that hee was a Coniurer a raiser of Diuels and in his rage cast the Sacrament into the fire Anselmus Rid whom we set against your Anselme noteth his sedition saying that in the time of his Popedome both the temporall and Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction was shaken and broken with infinit miseries Sigebertus Gemblacens saith that he troubled the states of Christendome discharged the subiects from their oth of fealtie Sigeber anno 1074. Lambertus Scaphnaburg reporteth that the Clergie held him to be an heretike vesani dogmatis and of wicked doctrine Nauclerus The Clergie said that hee had defiled the See Apostolike with Simonie Heresie Murder Adulterie that he was an Apostata Naucler general 26. The Councell of Brixia called him a disturber of the Empire a subuerter of the Church Vrspergens anno 1082. The Councell of Wormes that he was spotted with many periuries Yea what neede we any other witnesse when hee confessed to one of his Cardinals in his sicknesse that he had fouly abused his pastorall office that hee had troubled mankind with malice and mischiefe by the procurement and counsell of the Diuell Sigebert anno 1085. If then a murderer adulterer sorcerer heretike Apostata if a seditious periured person bee a good

workes The Libeller should rather haue shewed himselfe and entred into the lists and handled some controuersie of religion and taken vpon him to confute SYNOPSIS which hee carpeth at But as one said to Philip when he had ouercome and destroyed Olynthus that he could not build such a citie againe so I think it would appose this Sophister and trouble his wit to set such another booke by it as that which he seeketh so much to disgrace But I will proceed to examine the rest of his accusations not fearing any thing which he can obiect THE SECOND CHAPTER OF supposed Contradictions The 1. Contradiction HEre the Libeller obiecteth 1. That Bellarmine is falsified to say that the spirit of God is witnesse vnto vs that the Scriptures are the word of God pag. 154. 2. That the Scriptures themselues are witnesses which words vttered by Bellarmine shew a far different meaning saith he p. 155. 3. Another vntruth is noted that Bellarmine should make no mention of the Church to be a probation vnto vs of the Scriptures pag. 156. 4. A contradiction is noted because it is confessed that Bellarmine should say that wee are not bound to take the Scriptures for the word of God without the authoritie of the Church pag. 148. The Reconciliation 1. FIrst what difference I pray you to say God himselfe is a witnesse to vs and the spirit of God is a witnesse for this is one exception which the libeller taketh is not the spirit of God God And think you that when Bellarmine said God himselfe is witnesse he excluded the spirit As though the inspiration interpretation protection and preseruation of the Scriptures be not the worke of the spirit of God 2. Timoth. 3. 16. 2. Pet. 1. 21. Yea but Bellarmine saith in another sense that God is a witnesse not by the inward testimony of his spirit but by defending the scripture from humane profanation by heauenly punishment Libel pag. 154. Cont. 1. Is this a good consequent I pray you God beareth witnesse to the Scripture sometime by taking vengeance Ergo not by the inward testimonie of his spirit Sir Sophister if your Logicke had not here failed you you would not haue made so slender a collection for whereas Bellarmine maketh the great number of miracles the fift witnesse doth not the Scripture say Hebr. 2. 3. God bearing witnesse thereto with signes and wonders and diuers miracles God then is not a witnesse onely by punishments but by signes and miracles 2. Bellarmine himselfe saith afterward in the same chapter Non omnes per internum afflatum Deus docet c. sed per corporales literas quas legeremus cerneremus erudire nos voluit God teacheth not all by inward inspiration c. but by corporall letters which we should reade and see hee would instruct vs. We also refuse immediate reuelations and inspirations but God by the lection and inspection of the Scriptures doth instruct vs. God then doth vse the Scriptures themselues as meanes of this spiritual instruction which is the inward testimonie of Gods spirit by our outward reading and hearing of the Scripture inwardly witnessing the truth thereof vnto vs how much I pray you differ we now 3. Whereas Bellarmine maketh these the witnesses of Scripture first the trueth of the prophesies secondly the agreement of the holie writers thirdly God himselfe fourthly the perpetuall truth of the Scriptures may it not wel be gathered hereupon that Bellarmine thinketh that God inwardly working in our hearts by the Scriptures themselues which wee finde to be most perfect consonant true doth teach vs which is the word of God for I pray you who maketh vs to acknowledge the Scriptures by the truth harmonie constancie thereof doth not the spirit of God by these meanes mouing and perswading the heart Bellarmine then is not slaundered at all when it is affirmed that in this place he holdeth as wee doe concerning the meanes how to know the Canonicall Scriptures for we also teach that the Scriptures by no forren or extrinsecall meanes but from themselues the veritie harmonie holines thereof the spirit of God hereby working in our hearts are knowne to be the word of God 2. Secondly let it be seene whether in a different sense Bellarmine and wee in this place for I deale no further doe make the Scriptures witnesses to themselues These are his words Fourthly the Scripture it selfe is witnesse whose prophesies if they were true of things to come why should not the testimonies of things present be true The Scripture then beareth witnesse to it selfe by the constant and perpetuall truth thereof what other thing doe we say but that the Scripture from it self doth proue it selfe by the truth constancie maiestie thereof to be the word of God 3. Thirdly Bellarmine maketh here no mention of the Church among these fiue witnesses 1. The truth of prophecies 2. The consent of the holie writers 3. God himselfe c. 4. The Scripture it selfe 5. Postremò testis est c. Lastly is witnesse the infinite number of miracles Now I pray you sir Cauiller is here any mention made of the Church your dealing is too childish to send vs to other places for Bellarmines iudgemēt I know him to be elsewhere corrupt enough I onely vrge his testimonie against himselfe in this place 4. Fourthly so is your supposed contradiction also reconciled for to say that Bellarmine in this place among these fiue witnesses maketh no mention of the Church and y● otherwhere he would haue the Scriptures depend vpon the authoritie of the Church is no contradiction in him that noteth this diuersitie but in Bellarmine that varieth from himselfe But now somewhat to answere to your blasphemous railings as pag. 154. God may punish him for such trickes of falsification tending to the seducing and vtter subuersion of sillie soules c. I say rather with S. Paul God shall smite thee thou painted wall Act. 23. 3. God wil iudge all such hypocrites in his time as make no conscience to slaunder and reuile the members of Christ. And if God doe sometime giue witnesse to the Scriptures as most true it is by punishing them that prophane or blaspheme them then how shall your popish writers escape vnpunished that haue not been ashamed thus vnreuerently to speake of the Scriptures Hosius saith it is egenum quoddam elementum a beggerly element ex Nicol. Gall. Lodouicus saith Scriptura est quasi mortuum atramentum The Scripture is as dead inke Illyric in vorm concil The Bishop of Poicters Scriptura estres inanimis muta The Scripture is a dumbe and dead thing Sleidan lib. 23. Eckius calleth it Euangelium nigrum Theologiam atramentariam A blacke Gospel and inky Diuinitie Kemnit pag. 23. Pigghius Sunt velut nasus cereus The Scriptures are as a nose of waxe Hierar libr. 3. cap. 3. And that the children may fill vp the iniquitie of their fathers of late this present yeere 1602. in a certaine colloquie at