Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	ghost_n	holy_a	jesus_n	15,155	5	6.0417	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30650	A vindicaton of churches, commonly called Independent, or, A briefe answer to two books the one, intituled, Twelve considerable serious questions, touching church-government, the other, Independency examined, unmasked, refuted, &c. : both lately published by William Prinne ... / Henry Burton ...	Burton, Henry, 1578-1648.	1644 (1644)	Wing B6176; ESTC R20892	61,118	78

never so wicked But to your reasons First For else say you Paul and Barnabas being Apostles themselves might have decided that controversie at Antioch without sending to Ierusalem Answ. 1. By your favour brother Barnabas was not to speak properly an Apostle though an Apostolicall man 2. They argued with those Legalists at Antioch sufficiently to convince them but they comming from Judea and pretending the use of circumcision and Moses Law to be still in force in the Church at Jerusalem and the controversie being between two great parties the Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles hereupon the Church at Antioch thought it requisite for the fuller satisfaction to all parties to send Paul and Barnabas to the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem And 3. because Paul and Barnabas are thus sent doth it follow that they were not sufficient yea Paul alone as an Apostle infallibly guided by the holy Ghost to have decided the question at Antioch As no doubt sufficiently they did though not so satisfactorily to all And 4. that they are thus by the Church at Antioch sent to the Apostles and Church at Jerusalem here is a good example for the use of communion of Churches as in doubtfull cases to consult one with another 2. Else say you the Church at Antioch would have sent to none to resolve their doubts but to the Apostles onely and not to the Elders I answer In that they sent to the Elders also it shewes the respect that one Church should have to another 2. Those Elders were men endowed with the gifts of the holy Ghost 3. Though they had not infallibility as the Apostles had yet their assent to the determination was a witnesse-bearing to the truth thereof 3. Else say you Paul and Barnabas would have put the question to the Apostles onely not to the Elders and Church as well as to them vers. 4 5 6. This is answered in the former 4. Else the Apostles would not have called all the Elders and brethren to consult v. 6. when themselves might have done it alone I answer 1. Though the Apostles might have done it alone yet they would not but called together the Elders and Brethren yea and the whole Church at Jerusalem vers. 4 22. hereby to give a precedent to all Presbyters or Elders of Churches that in cases of difference arising they call the whole Church together for assistance and counsell therein 2. In so doing the Apostles diminished nothing of that Judicial power and authority which Christ left with them for deciding of controversies being infallibly guided by the holy Ghost while they thought it not fit to doe such things in a corner which concerned the whole Church 5. Peter and Iames say you would not have argued the case so largely and proved it by Arguments and Scriptures as they did one after another but have peremptorily resolved it without dispute had they sate and determined it by their extraordinary infallible power I answer This followes no more then the former For the Arguments they used with the conclusion were by the direction of the holy Ghost And 2. The holy Ghost is not so peremptory but will have his truths examined by the Scriptures as Acts 17. 11. The Bereans are commended by the holy Ghost for examining Pauls Sermon by the Scripture though hee were an Apostle and spake by the holy Ghost And 3. the Churches assent was taken in for a witnesse ex abundanti 6. The finall resolution say you Letters and Canons of this Synod had run onely in the Apostles names had they proceeded onely by their Apostolicall infallible authority and not in the names of the Elders and brethren too I answer There is as little reason in this as in all the rest of your reasons for then by this reason sundry of Pauls Epistles which were all dictated by the holy Ghost did not proceed from that infallibility of Spirit alone wherewith the Apostle was guided because we find others not Apostles joyned with him As 1 Cor. 1. 1. Paul called to be an Apostle of Iesus Christ and Softhenes a brother to the Church of God c. And 2 Cor. 1. 1. Paul an Apostle of Iesus Christ and Timothy a brother to the Church c. And Gal. 1. 1. Paul an Apostle c. and all the brethren that are with me to the Churche of Galatia c. So Phil. 1. 1. Col. 1. 1. 1 Thess. 1. 1. Paul and Sylvanus and Timotheus to the Church c. In all which places though there was but one Apostle guided with infallibility of the holy Ghost to write the Scriptures yet many brethren are joyned in the salutation of the Churches and yet Paul as Apostle did write those Epistles and not simply as a brother or fellow-servant with them of Jesus Christ Neither are those brethren so named accounted the Pen-men of the Scripture as Paul of right is Thus you see brother there was no necessity that either the Apostles names should be put alone because they only were guided by the Spirits infallibility or that the names of the Elders and Brethren should not be put without a necessary conclusion deduced thence that the Decree there was therefore binding as being the Decree of a Synod and so exemplary for all Parliaments Councels Synods to make the like binding Decrees But good brother for all your punctuall quotations of that Scripture you doe not all this while tell us which is the main of all that which we find in the 28. verse of that chapter IT SEEMED GOOD TO THE HOLY GHOST AND VS TO LAY VPON YOU NO GREATER BVRTHEN THEN THESE NECESSARY THINGS Now brother we chalenge you to shew us any Parliament Councell Synod ever since the Apostles that could or can say thus IT SEEMED GOOD TO THE HOLY GHOST AND VS to determine controversies of religion to make and impose Canons to bind all men c. Shew this to us at this time and we will obey But if you cannot as you never can never let any man presse upon us that Scripture that Synod which hath no parallel in the whole world and so is no precedent pattern for any Councell Synod Parliaments Let me conclude with a passage of the learned and famous Chamierus that grand Antagonist of Bellarmins Bellarmine upon the same Scripture you alledge Act. 15. as also our late Prelates have usually done would deduce the same conclusion that you doe for humane authority in binding mens consciences To which Chamierus thus answereth that this consequence holds not Quia non eadem sit authoritas Apostolorum reliquorum Ecclesiae Pastorum Because there is not the same authoritie of the Apostles and of other Pastors of the Church For with those the Holy Ghost was extraordinarily present so as what they propounded did simply proceed of God But other Pastors have no such extraordinary assistance of the Spirit and therefore their Decrees are not to be paralleld with the Apostles Decrees Which is a speciall difference

serve for Christ will not have his people to be wandring sheep when they may have a fold nor to be individua vaga when they may be reduced to order The ninth Interrogatory This Interrogatory lays a charge upon Independents for refusing to admit to the Lords Supper such as are not notoriously scandalous nor grossely ignorant but professe repentance c. which you say is a very uncharitable arrogant yea unchristian practise contrary to Christs own example in admitting Iudas to the Lords Supper Also to that of Paul 1 Cor. 11. you calling it also a transcendent straine of tyrannicall usurpation over soules and consciences and Gods Ordinances worse then our most domineering Lordly Prelates c. yea Lording over Christ himselfe and more then ever the Apostles did but onely by their extraordinary calling c. I answer in one word omitting your copious aggravations and sharp censures that we look further then to a generall profession and conversation namely to their faith in Christ that it be sound intire and whole and namely whether they hold him to be as the onely Prophet and High Priest so the onely Prince of his People the onely Lord and Lawgiver to every mans conscience and over every Congregation or Church of his Saints If they thus acknowledge not Christs kingly office as well as his other offices we doe not we dare not receive them And what have they to do with the seales that refuse by covenant to own Christ for their King As for Judas he received the sop not the supper for after the sop he went out * immediately saith John So as it appeares the other Evangelists relate some other passages by a hysteron proteron as is not unusuall in Scripture story And none of them saith that he received the Supper And suppose ●e did the Churches Censure had not yet past upon him onely John by a secret signe knew he was to be the traytor For that of the Apostle 1 Cor. 11. 28. that was a true Church though now disordered and the Apostle refers the redressing of their abuses to themselves The case is otherwise here so as all your accumulated calumniations fall to ground And concerning the Apostles extraordinary calling if we must expect the like calling we must not in the meane time admit of any either to Baptisme or to the Lords Supper neither should there be any gathering of Churches at all as some from hence doe gather Besides what shall the authority be that Luther gathered the Churches by and those that followed him and what lawfull gathering then have the Reformed Churches For your marginall note of Moses David Solomon about setling Religion by Gods own direction herein you come home to that I said before alledged against your unlimited law But in that you now restraine by their example all Church-government to the Civil Magistrates you must make it out by holding close to the rule that is To settle Religion by Gods own direction as you here confesse and not to elect erect a forme of Religion and Church-government such as they shall conceive sutable c. as before you told us And Moses David Solomon were all types of Christ who put an end to all such And while you there exclude the Priests from having any thing to doe in Reforming or advising What will the Assembly say to you But they may advise you will say But the Priests might do nothing but according to Gods prescript law no more then Moses David Solomon And if the Priests as you say had no ruling votes then by this reckoning what votes do you allow the Assembly-men in their mixt Committees with the members of Parliament or in the Assembly it selfe Reconcile these I pray you The tenth Interrogatory This Interrogatory questions or rather as all the rest concludes that that Text Mat. 18. 15 16 17. is not meant of any Ecclesiasticall censure as of Excommunication but onely of the civill Court of Justice Brother if you did speake hereas a Divine and not meerly as a lawyer you would not have against the judgment of most learned Divines ancient and modern and not Papists c. so interpreted this place And what speak I of Divines The Text it selfe is its own clearest Interpreter For it is immediatly added v. 18. Verily I say unto you whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall bee loosed in heaven Which is without controversie spoken of Church-censure or of the power of the Keyes in exercising Church-discipline as that Matth. 16. 19 is spoken of doctrine as the learned Calvin well observeth So as this very context cleareth the former to bee meant of Church-censure as it was among the Jewes You alledge on the contrary that learned Lawyer whom wee all honour for his learning Good brother I could wish that all this zeale of yours against Independents might not arise from any jealousie as if Church-censures should prejudicate or trench upon your pleadings at the Barre of civill justice Farre be it that we should have our motion beyond our own Spheare Content your self with your own Orb and we shall confine our selves to ours I dare warrant you Again to what purpose do you urge this interpretation of this Text against us Do not all the Presbyterians expound it so And if this Text which is made the great pillar of Presbyterian excommunication be taken off you leave no more to a Classis then we scil. to consult and advise And with this foot you have dashed all the milk you gave them The eleventh Interrogatory This Interrogatory is to perswadeus that in that Assembly or Evangelicall Synod as you call it Acts 15. the Apostles voted not as they were Apostles infallibly guided by the holy Ghost but rather as they were in their ordinary capacitie as Elders and chiefe members of it Whereupon producing your six reasons for it you peremptorily conclude that this is an undeniable Scripture-authority for the lawfulnesse use of Parliaments Councels Synods under the Gospel upon all like necessary occasions and for their power to determine controversies of Religion to make Canons in things necessary for the Churches peace and concernment maugre all evasions exceptions of Independents to elude it But let us examine your six reasons why the Apostles sate not as Apostles but as ordinary Elders c. Where first we lay this ground for the contrary scil. that they sate as Apostles because not ordinary Elders as Elders can say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us But the Apostles as Apostles might say so because in any doctrinall point they had the promise of the Spirit to bee led into all truth as upon whom the Church was to bee built Eph. 2. 20. Secondly if they sate as ordinary Elders then their decrees did no further bind then as they might appeare to agree with Scripture otherwise Elders as Elders may bind the conscience let the decree bee