Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	holy_a	scripture_n	speak_v	14,888	5	5.2608	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A03881	A treatise of the vvritten VVord of God. Composed in Latin, by the Reuerend Father Iames Gordon Huntley of Scotland, Doctour of Diuinity, of the Society of Iesus. And translated into English, by I. L. of the same Society. The first part of the first controuersy; Controversiarum epitomes. English. Selections	Gordon, James, 1541-1620.; Wright, William, 1563-1639.	1614 (1614)	STC 13996; ESTC S115737	32,568	73

I meane as despise the sense and consent of the holy Fathers yea and of the whole Catholike Church but to little ones and such as are humble who follow in al things the foresayd sense cōsent it is manifest and perspicuous The testimony of our Lord is faythfull sayth the Psalmist giuing wisedome to the little ones that is to such as are humble and not proud and Christ our Lord sayth thou hast hidden these thinges from the wise and reuealed them to little ones that is to the humble The Scripture indeed is obscure to such as want fayth are destitute of the holy Ghost but easy playne to those which abide perseuere in the faith of the Church by that meanes are guided gouerned by the holy Ghost 4. The Word of God shineth brightly the Word of God I say not the word of men not the word of the Diuell for that only is the true Word of God which is in the true sense not in the bare letter for the letter depraued by a false sēse is not the Word of God but the word of men or rather the word of the Diuell the word of God doth illuminate the eyes but the eyes of such as haue eyes to see and not their eyes whose mindes Satan hath blinded so as the light of the Ghospell cannot shine to them 5. In vaine therefore do our Aduersaries heape togeather so many places of Scripture in which it is said that the Word of God is said to be cleare ful of light perspicuous for this is not attributed by the Scripture to the bare letter but to the letter ioyned with the true sense which true sēse cannot be had out of the Catholike Church 6. Neyther doth the Scripture say that the Word of God is manifest to all indifferently but to such only as being indued with the true fayth are humble o● hart and therefore inspired by the holy Ghost if therefore our Aduersaries will haue the Scripture to be full of light and easy to be vnderstood of them it is necessary that they returne againe to the true Church in which only is true faith 〈◊〉 humility the true sense of the Scripture the true spirit of God without whi●● the holy Scripture will neuer be plaine cleare and manifest for it is great imprudency I will not say impudency to contend so eagerly and with such hostility about the plainenes and perspicuity of the holy Scripture and to haue no will to returne into that way the which only leadeth to that plainenes and perspicuity CHAP. XIII Whether the holy Scripture be to be translated into the vulgar tongue THAT we may briefly dispatch that which hath beene so largely treated of by many concerning this matter we will reduce all vnto foure generall assertions The first is There is not doubt but the Word of God is to be preached to the people in the vulgar tongue so as the question is only of the bare written letter 2. The second assertion is Neyther the example of Christ nor of the Primitiue Church do cōuince that the Scripture is to be translated into the vulgar tongue but rather the contrary for Christ neuer commaunded the Iewes to translate the Scriptures out of the Hebrew tongue into the Syriac and yet in Christs tyme the auncient Hebrew tongue was to the Iewes as the Latin is to the French Italians and Spanyards and only the Syriac tongue was in vse amongst the common people which euen our Aduersaris confesse such I meane as are the more skillfull in the Syriac and Hebrew tongue as namely these Sebastian Munster in his preface before his Siriacal Chalda●cal Grammer Francis Iunius in his preface before the new Testament in the Syriac tongue of Termel●●● Peter Martin Morentine of Nauarre in the preface of his Caldaicall Grammer printed at Rochell the yeare 1590. 3. Neyther did S. Paul write in Latin to the Romanes but in Greeke though not the Greeke tongue but the Latin was their vulgar tongue So S. Luke did write the actes of the Apostles at Rome in Greeke and not in Latin And euen to S. Augustines tyme foure hundred yeares after Christ the Byble was not extant but in the three learned tongues Hebrew Greeke and Latin no not in the tyme of Rabbanus Maurus who liued eight hundred yeares after Christ as himselfe testifyeth in expresse words 4. Neyther can our Aduersaries alleadge any authenticall example of the auncient Church for the translation of the Scripture into the vulgar tongue they tell vs indeed of one Vulphilas a Bishop of the Gothes who is said to haue translated the Scripture into the Gothish tongue but he was not a Catholike but an Arian Heretike as witnesse Theodoret Socrates Sozomenus and Cassiodorus 5. For as for that which certayne late writers alleadge of S. Chrysostome his translating of the Scripture into the Armenian tongue as also of S. Hierome his translating of the same into the Dalmatical tōgue there can no certayne proofe be brought thereof And they who write this do not affirme that all the Scripture was translated by them but certayne partes only vsed of old to be read in the prayers of the Church as the Psalmes Epistles Ghospels and Lessons which were song publickely at Masse in the Canonicall houres which we read to haue byn graunted by Pope Iohn the eight of that name to the Morauian● at their first conuersion to the faith of Christ but this was 880. yeares after Christ and this custome was of no long continuance amongst them as appeareth by that which Pope Gregory the seauenth writeth to the Duke of Bohemia is to be seene in Cesar Baronius 6. The third assertion To translate the Scripture into the vulgar tongue is neyther in it selfe vnlawfull nor forbidden by any Ecclesiasticall law so it be truly translated Nay such a translation serueth Preachers to great vse who are to cite and expound the Scriptures to the people in the vulgar tongue Hereticall translations are indeed forbidden especially of the new Testament because in them many places of holy Scripture are by false translating corrupted 7. The fourth assertion It is not a thing profitable to all to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue yea to many it is rather pernicious for we are taught by the Apostle S. Peter that in the Scriptures are many thinges hard to be vnderstood which vnlearned and vnstayed persōs depraue to their owne destruction Many also there are vncapable of meate and solid sustenance who are therefore to be fed with milke as the Apostle speaketh and for such it is more wholesome to be fed by the sermons and instructions of their Pastors then to feede themselues with reading the Bible It was therefore great prudence of the Church to forbid that the Bible though translated and set forth by Catholikes should be read of all indifferently and without the approbation and leaue of the Bishop

bookes to wit that which is receaued and appre●ued by the iudgment of the Catholike Church which cannot erre our Aduersaries reiecting this Canon make all the bookes doubtfull conteined therin for no certayne testimony can be had of these bookes but eyther by this Canon only or by the aunciēt tradition of the Church but they neyther admit this Canon nor wil stand to this vnwritten Traditiō or acknowledge it for the true Word of God 2. Now as for the Canons lately set out by themselues no man can safely belieue them seeing they neyther agree one with another nor with the auncient Canons of the Church nor are any where found in the writtē Word of God which as they teach is only to be belieued neyther can they bring any thing eyther concerning the Canon of the Hebrewes or any other auncient Canon which they haue not taken from the writings of the auncient Fathers whose authority without the expresse written Word of God they will haue to be in no wise sufficient to ingender fayth so as euen by the iudgment of our Aduersaries none of all these can establish fayth concerning this matter 3. Iohn Caluin indeed sayth that it is as easy for a faithfull man to discerne Canonicall Scripture from that which is not Canonicall as to one that seeth it is easy to discerne light from darknes and white from Black But in so saying he contradicteth both reason and experience for it is euident that in old tyme there was no small controuersy amongst the raythfull yea and amongst learned and godly men concerning many bookes of the old and new Testament yea and also euen now amōgst such as our Aduersaries esteeme faithfull men which Caluin himselfe in many places confesseth 4. Moreouer Caluins owne followers well perceauing this fly vnto their owne peculiar spirit by which they say they are chiefly perswaded and moued and not by the only consent of the Church But these speake nothing to the purpose for in faith two thinges concurre one is the cause or origen of fayth to wit God himselfe and the holy Ghost whereof there is no controuersy betweene vs and them for we all acknowledge the holy Ghost to be the principall cause of the assent we giue by fayth that is to say that it is the holy Ghost who chiefly perswadeth vs to belieue The other is the obiect of fayth or that which is to be belieued whereof we now dispute for the holy Ghost doth not induce vs to belieue the false vncertaine deuises of men but the pure and sincere Word of God only we aske therfore of our Aduersaries by what expresse Word of God he reuealeth vnto them that there are so many Canonicall bookes and neyther fewer nor more for we read not this any where in the Scripture and they admit only the written Word of God how can the holy Ghost then perswade thē●o belieue that which is not the Word of God for we are not now to expect new ●●uelations from God as do the ●nabaptists and Libertines whom for this cause our Aduersaries condemne It is necessary therefore that if they will haue vs belieue that they are perswaded by the holy Ghost to belieue such books only to be authenticall as they doe say are such that they first shew this to be a truth expressely contayned in holy Scripture which they will neuer be able to do wherfore there is no certainty with them eyther of the sense of the holy Scripture or of the Letter nor euer wil be vntill they returne vnto the Church agayne But we Catholikes are certaine of both for we haue a most faythfull Canon receaued in the Church more thē a thousand and two hundred yeares agoe confirmed by a generall and Oecumenicall Councell 5. And this to haue beene the faith and doctrine of the auncient Church for the discerning of true and authenticall Scriptures that short but pithy sentence of S. Augustins whome Caluin acknowledgeth to haue byn the best and most faithfull witnes of antiquity sufficiently testifyeth saying I for my part would not belieue the Ghospell vnlesse I were moued by the authority of the Church of which place I will say more herafter in the Controuersy of the Church And else-where he saith VVe receaue the old and new Testamēt in that nūber of bookes which the authority of the holy Catholike Church deliuereth So S. Augustine 6. I know our Aduersaries obiect many thinges against many bookes contayned in our Ecclesiasticall Canon but their chiefe arguments do not only derogate authority from those bookes but also from many others which they receaue as Canonicall For they obiect that some Fathers did sometymes doubt of those bookes which they will not admit but they are not ignorant that some Fathers of old haue doubted of the Epistles of S. Iames and S. Iude of the second Epistle of S. Peter of the 2. and 3. of S. Iohn of the Epistle to the Hebrewes and of the Apocalyps of which bookes they dare not now doubt especially Caluins followers as is manifest by their confession of faith 7. They say further that in those bookes which they reiect there are many thinges obscure difficult and full of contradiction but what booke of Scripture in a manner is there in the which there do not occurre sometymes thinges obscure and hard to be vnderstood did not S. Peter acknowledge as much But as for true contradictions there are none at al howsoeuer there may be some things which at the first fight may seeme to imply contradiction yet indeed all thinges agree very well togeather such a contradiction is oftentymes found in those bookes which euen our Aduersaries receaue yea euen in the Ghospells themselues which for all that are not to be reiected but humbly soberly and piously to be ●nterpreted as S. Augustine many tymes admonisheth 8. To conclude all the arguments that our Aduersaries make against these bookes are fully answered by Catholike writers which haue set out Commentaries vpon those bookes to wit Cornelius Iansenius vpon Ecclesiasticus Ionnnes Laurinus vpon the booke of VVisedome Ioannes Maldonatus and Christopher à Castro vpon Baruch and Nicolas Serarius vpon the rest of the bookes of the old Testament which our Aduersaries call Apocriphall to omit the most Reuerend and famous Cardinall Bellarmine and his Champion Iacobus Gretserus as also Iames Gordon Lesmoreus For it is sufficient only to haue cited them seeing that I write only an abridgment of Controuersies not any long commentaries vpon the Scripture And therfore contēt my selfe to haue shewed in this place that our Aduersaries must either receaue the Canon of Scriptures approued by the Councell of Trent or be vtterly destitute of any certayne and assured Canon CHAP. VI. Of the Hebrew Text. OVR Aduersaries when they are vrged with Catholike argumēts taken from the Scriptures are wont to fly to the Hebrew text of the old Testament and

which thing is excellently declared by S. Augustin for hauing said that he thought Moyses intended diuers senses in his words he correcteth himselfe saying that without all doubt God who is the principall author of the Scriptures did so O ●ord sayth he seeing thou art God and not flesh and blo●d if man be short sig●ted can it be hidden from the spirit which will lead me into the right land whatsoeuer thoug mast in those words to reueate to posterity howsoeuer he by whome they were sp●ken though per adueenture but of one seme only 〈…〉 many other no lesse true so S. Augustin● seeing there●or● there are diuers litterall seme● of one and the same place one interpreter may follow one sense and another 〈◊〉 another so long as neyther of them do say any thing not agreeable to the word of God but both the one sense and the other is godly and conformable to other places of Scripture and this maketh much for the dignity of the Scriptures and profit of the Church according to that which S. Augustin writeth elsewhere How could God sayth he better commend vnto vs the plentifull fruit of his Deuine wordes then by so disposing as the same words may be vnderstood diuers wayes 7. Nay we see moreouer the holy Scripture it selfe to shew very manifestly that there are diuers senses of the same wordes For there is no doubt but that commaundment o● Deutero●omy Thou shal● not tye the mouth of the Oxe that thresheth according to the litterall sense doth signify that the mouth of an oxe is not to be tyed whilst he treadeth forth the corne in the floare for so according to the Letter the Iewes obserued it as indeed they were bound to do Neuerth●les S. Paul manife●●ly reacheth that God the proper Author of the holy Scripture intēded chie●ly another sense Is God sayth he so carefull of Oxen or doth he not so say in regard of vs for indeed these things are written for vs h●therto it also apper●ayneth that in the Hebrew tongue one word hath many ●ignifications as hath beene shewed in the seauēth Chapter in the Latin Edition 8. Out of this ground we affirme that there is no repugnance betweene the Septuagint Interprters and the Hebrew text and betweene the Hebrew text and the vulgar Edition or lastly betweene the interpretation of the vulgar Edition of the old Testament and that of the new how much soeuer the same wordes are diuersly translated to wit otherwise of the S●ptuagint and otherwise of the vulgar Latine interpreter or otherwise of the vulgar Edition of the old Testament and otherwise of the vulgar Edition of the new where in both places the same wordes are cited for the same places of Scripture are oftentymes otherwise cited by the Apostles in the new Testament then hath the Hebrew text of of the old But here is diuersity without any repugnance or contrariety And this hath place especially in the Hebrew text because in the Hebrew tongue there is so different reading of one and the same word See examples hereof in the Latine Edition of this Controuersy in this Chapter 9. It wil be easy out of that which hath byn said to answere that which our Aduersaries obiect against diuers places of the vulgar edition For albeit there be diuersity betweene it and the Hebrew text there is no repugnance or contrari●ty and if our Aduersaries think otherwise it proceedeth from their ignorance of the Hebrew tongue which hath many wordes subiect to ambiguity and very many phrases much different from the Latin and Greeke phrase as in the Chapters that follow may be seene in the Latin Edition from the 16. to the 20. CHAP. IX The place of Genesis she shall breake thy head is shewed to be well translated IT wil be too long and little to my purpose to examine all the places of the vulgar Edition to which our Aduersaries take exception for many of them differ little or nothing from the Hebrew text of the old Testament or from the Greeke of new we will handle some few of greatest difficulty and which our Aduersaries do most often and with great bitternes vrge against vs that by them iudgment may be giuen of the rest which are of lesse importance 2. The first place which they say is depraued and or which they often and eagerly complaine is that of the third of Genesis v. 15. Ipsa conteret caput tuum for it is not ipsa in the Hebrew but ipsum as if it were spoken of the seed of the womā and not of the woman her selfe The Lutherans crie out of great iniury done thereby to Christ as to whome alone it appertayneth to bruze the head of the Diuel which we attribute to another to wit to the Blessed Virgin 3. Caluin also affirmeth that we haue found out a sacrilegious exposition whilst we accommodate that to the holy Mother of Christ which was spoken of the seed Christ himselfe And as for the Lutherans we haue lesse cause to blame thē for reprehending our version seeing they stoutly mantayne that by the seed of the woman Christ only is meant 4. But as for Caluin he sheweth the greedy appetite he hath to calumniate whē he calleth our version a sacrilegious exposition for he conuinced by the truth cōfesseth that by the seed of the woman not only Christ is meant but all his member● yea euen all mankind It is therefore wōderfull that he saith it is a sacrilegious exposition to apply to the Blessed Virgin Mary that which was spoken of the seed vnlesse he will not that the Blessed Virgin be any mēber of Christ or to appertayn● any thing to mankind For seeing that the promise of bruzing Sathās head appertayneth to Chris● and euery member of his as Caluin writeth in expresse wordes it must doubtlesse principally appertayne to the Blessed Virgin as who next after Christ hath most strongly crushed Satans head VVherfore euen the Lutherans themselues obserue that Caluin ha●h no reason to obiect this vnto the Catholikes 5. But to the end we may the better vnderstand whether it be any fault at all that we retayne in the vulgar version the particle ipsa we are first to declare the literall sense of this place and to examine after whether it be any error that we retayne the particle ipsa in our version For it was not out of any ignorance or drowsy carelesnes that the feminine gender crept in heere insteed of the masculine or neuter as Caluin calumniateth but it was done of purpose and for iust cause as shal be shewed CHAP. X. Of the true sense of these wordes Ipsa conteret c. THAT we may find out the true sense of these wordes we must first re●ute the f●lse expositions of our Aduersaries The Lutherās by the seed of the womā will needes haue Christ only to be mean● we confesse indeed that he is principally meant therby and that therefore the place may

required that he should interprete the later part as he did by these wordes tu insidiaberis calcaneo eius which is as much to say as thou shalt crush her heele not by open warre but by taking her at vnawares See further of this matter in this Chapter in the Latin Edition the 8. § And you shall see that our Aduersaries make a great adoe about a matter of small moment if the wordes be rightly vnderstood For whether we reade ipsa and so referre it to the Church or ipsum that it may be referred to the children of the Church the sēse is all one for it is all on to say the seed of the woman shall crush the head of the Serpent or the Children of the Church shall doe it And heerehence it i● that the auncient Fathers whether they read ipse as S. Hierome and S. Chrysostome do or ipsa as read S. Ambrose S. Augustine S. Gregory and other Latin Fathers all of them expound this place of the Church 9. Howsoeuer it be the reading of the vulgar Edition is to be preferred before the other for this victory is rather to be attributed to the Church as to the Mother of all the faithfull and to her who continueth for euer according to that promise of Christ the gates of hell shall not preuaile against her then to her children or mēbers which are euery day changed for this promise is an explication of the promise made by God in Genesis for the head of the Serpent and the gates of hell signify one and the same thing And if the victory be attributed to the woman that is to the Church all thinges are better explicated for God first did foretell the emnity that was to be betweene the woman the Serpent and afterward he maketh mention of the seede of the woman and the Serpents seede so as the woman is opposed to the Serpent and the seede of the one to the seede of the other but the victory pro●●sed is sayd to be gotten against the Serpent himselfe and not against the seed wherefore the same appertaineth rather to the woman her selfe then to her seed for the words following betweene thy seed and her seed do not properly signify any new combat but a continuance of that combat which was betweene the woman and the Serpent and are put in by way of parēthesis for the combat of the Church and of her childrē is all one combat 10. But the chiefe cause that moued the Church to retayne at this tyme rather the word ipsa then ipsum or ipse was to controle the error of the Lutherans for if the reading had byn ipsum or ipse one might haue thought this promise to haue appertayned only to Christ as they though erroneously would haue it but by reading ipsa this promise must needes be vnderstood to haue byn made to the whole Church For such is the custome of the holy Church whether she interprete the Scripturs or administer the Sacraments to do all as is most profitable and most for the edification of the faithfull Neyther is Christ hereby excluded but he is rather included in the name of the Church as is also the holy Ghost for the true Church of Christ cannot consist or do anything that is good without the help of her supreme head Christ and the assistance of his holy spirit That the reading according to the Hebrew text i● ipsa or ipsissima and not ipsum or ipse is learnedly proued in the next Chapter of the Latin Edition of this Controuersy to which I referre the Reader and to the Chapters following in which other places of the vulgar Edition are defended CHAP. XI That the written Word is no fit Iudge of Controuersies concerning matters of fayth OVR Aduersaries in the beginning did stifly mayntaine that the holy Scripture was to be the only iudge of all Controuersies which arise in matters of fayth but when they were told that to make the Scripture a iudge was as much as to say the Scripture did heare speake liue for all these appertayne to a iudge that nothing is more vnreasonable thē to assigne such a iudge of Controuersies as can neyther heare nor speake but is vtterly voyd of l●●e changing their opinion They begin now to ●ay that the Scripture is improperly called a iudge and that to speake properly the holy Ghost only is the iudge And thus hauing for many yeares togeather spoken vnproperly now a● last they fly to the holy Ghost of whome there is no doubt but that he is the supreme iudge of all 2. But they should haue added further that the holy Ghost at this tyme doth not immediatly propose any new reuelations to any particuler man concerning points of fayth but only proposeth veri●ies already reuealed and that by the mouth of the Church as shal be shewed heereafter in the next Controuersy where we shall haue occasion to say more of this matter Whosoeuer therefore contemneth the iudgment of the Church in so doing he despiseth the iudgment of Christ and of the holy Ghost for Christ himselfe saith he that despyseth you despyseth me Neyther doth the holy Ghost speake by the Scripture but when it is rightly vnderstood which is neuer but when we imbrace the interpretation of the Catholike Church as we haue already shewed in the fourth Chapter CHAP. XII Whether the Scripture be obscure or hard to be vnderstood THE Word of God is eyther written or vnwritten and preached Now certaine it is that the Word preached is not obscure for it is not hidden from such as perish the question thefore is of the written Word Our Aduersaries in the beginning did teach that the whole Scripture was easy and no part therof hard to be vnderstood but after that not only many obscure places but euen whole Chapters out of the Canticle of Canticles out of Izechiel and other Prophets were obiected by the Catholikes they changing their mind confesse that very many places of Scripture are obscure but that all points of doctrine necessary to saluation are be ●ound in places plains and easy 2. For resolution of this question we must answere with a distinction and say that if the word Scripture be taken for the bare Letter only then doubtlesse the Scripture is obscure or els S. Paul would not have sayd that it killeth and causeth death and damnation but if it be taken properly that is to say togeather with the true sense and meaning thereof then it is not obscure but plaine inough in al things necessary to saluation and in this sense speaketh S. Augustine as do also other Fathers whom our Aduersaries cite whē they say that al things necessary to saluatiō are manifestly conteyned in the holy Scripture 3. Moreouer the holy Scripture is both manifest and obscure but not in regard of the same persons It is passing obscure and not to be vnderstood of the proud such