Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	church_n	ghost_n	holy_a	7,758	5	5.3049	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

Aduersaries themselues are not able to deny it 3. This to haue byn the doctrine of the auncient Church sufficiently appeareth by the words of S. Augustine The vnhappy Iewes sayth he more vnhappy Heretikes whilst they attend only to the sound of the ●etter as a body without a soule so they remay●● dead and voyd of the spirit which quickneth And els where All Heretickes which receiue the Scriptures and their authority will seeme to follow them whereas indeed they follow rather their owne errors and are therefore Heretikes not because they co●ntem●e them but because they do not vnderstand them And before him S. Hilary that honour of the French Nation Remēber saith he that there is not one of the heretikes which doth not say that he preacheth now according to the Scriptures euen those things in which he blasphemeth albeit he lieth in so saying And a little after All of them speake Scriptures without the true sēce meaning they pretēd sayth without fayth indeed for the Scriptures consist not so much in the reading as in the vnderstāding neyther are they vnderstood of such as go into preuarication but continue and abide in charity Moreouer S Hierome Let vs not thinke sayth he the Ghospell to be in the words of the Scripture but in the sense not in the out side but in the inside or marrow not in the leaues of the words but in the sappe pith or roote of reason And a little after otherwise euen the Diuell himselfe speaketh Scriptures and all heresies according to Ezechiel make vnto themselues pillowes which they may lay vnder the elbow of euery age 2. By that which hath byn sayd answere may be made to our Aduersaries when they obiect against vs that we affirme the Scripture to be imperfect obseure like a nose of wax which a man may writh which way he will and lastly the origen and spring in a manner of all heresies for we affirme this of the naked and dead letter alone destitute of the true sense or rather of the letter to which the Heretikes adde their owne peruerse sense and meaning neyther haue our Aduersaries any cause to wonder at this seeing S. Paul himselfe saith of the bare letter alone that is killeth and bringeth eternall● death and damnation But neuer any Catholike did euer attribute any such thing to the liuing letter which hath conioyned with it the true and natiue sense and which alone is truly and properly the word of God CHAP. IIII. How we are to seeke out the true sense and meaning of the holy Scripture THERE is a great contentiō betweene vs and our Aduersaries about the meanes how to finde out the true and naturall interpretation of the lett●er a thing to necessary to eternall saluation They teach diuers thinges concerning this matter but deliuer nothing that is certayne One assigneth more rules to this purpose another fewer but when they haue sayd all they confesse at last that there was neuer any which hath not at sometyme erred in seeking out the true interpretation of holy Scripture For they giue not their assent either to the ancient Fathers or to their owne Maisters in all thinges they teach or write nay they cannot assigne any one whom they acknowledge not to haue erred sometyme nor dare affirme to be free from error seeing as they say euery man is a lyar and so at last all thinges are left by them doubtfull and vncertayne 2. But the Catholikes proceed after another manner who teach that the certayne vndoubted sense of the Letter is not to be taken from the iudgment of any particuler man but from the vniforme consent of the ancient Fathers and especially from the iudgment and interpretation of the Catholike Church to whome it appertayneth to iudge of the sense and meaning of the holy Scriptures as the holy and O●cumenicall Councell of Trēt teacheth very well for there is no doubt but that it is nore safe to follow such an interpreter as cannot erre then such a oners erreth sometymes or at leastwise may erre but the Church cannot erre in her iudgment seeing that Christ and the holy Ghost remayne with her to teach her all truth wherof more herafter when we shall come to treat of the Church 3. It shall suffice to obserue and note here that according to the doctrine of our Aduersaries nothing either solide or certayne is contayned in the holy Scripture for wheras all dependeth of the true sense of the Letter and with them there is no certayne or sure meanes by which to finde out this sense it followeth that they call all into doubt which is in the Scripture wherby who seeth not how much they iniure them But contrariwyse according to the Catholike doctrine all thinges are euident and certayne which are contayned in the holy Scriptures appertayning eyther to faith or good manners the Catholikes hauing euer a certayne and faithful Interpreter to wit the Catholike Church And surely whosoeuer reiecteth the sense which the Church giueth and in place therof substituteth another altogeather repugnant to it doth all one with him who reiecting the holy Scripture should in place therof bring in a new Scripture of his owne forging the sense of the Scripture being no lesse a part of the word of God then the letter which in these few wordes Tertullian confirmeth out of the tradition of the auncient Church The sense adultered or falsified is no lesse repugnant to the truth then the letter or stile corrupted 4. And to conclude it may be inferred that saluation is to be found in the Roman Church only and none at all out of it which I proue thus Both the Scripture testifyeth all mē confesse that diuine fayth is necessary to saluation but such as forsake the Romā Church cannot haue diuine ●aith which wholy relieth vpon the word of God only but meerly humane seeing their fayth is founded not in the word of God interpreted by the Church which cannot erre but in the word and interpretation of Luther Caluin or some other priuate man who as they themselues graunt may erre and be deceiued such an humane fayth then so doubtfull and vncertayne and only warranted by mans authority cannot iustify or bring a man to eternall saluation CHAP. V. How we may know which is the true letter of the holy Scripture ALL such as forsake the Roman Church and make little account of her authority are not only doubtfull vndertayne which is the true sense of the Scripture but they can haue no assurance at all eyther of the whole or of any part of the letter therof For whilst they goe about to call in question and make doubtfull certayne bookes only of the old Testament before they are aware they take away all authority from all other bookes both of the old and new Testament For whereas there is but one certaine and vndoubted Canon of these

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

easy a thing it is to corrupt the Scripture by other places of Scripture but that the prouidēt and dayly ca●e of the holy Catholike Church opposeth it self against such corruptions worthily therfore called the Pillar and firmament of truth against which the gates of hell shall neuer preuaile FINIS Rom. ● v. 19. 20. Hebr. 11. vers 1. 1. Thessal ● vers 13. Thes. c. 2. ● 14 1. ad Cor. 15. v. ● ad Gal. 1. v. 8. 1. Petr. 1. v. vltimo August serm 78. de temp August'● Epist. 222● 〈◊〉 l. ad Const. 〈◊〉 Hiero● in 〈◊〉 Gal. Matth. 4. v. 6. Ezech. 13. v. ●8 1 Cor. 3. v. 6. 7. 9. 〈…〉 Rom. 3. v. 4. Concil Trent s●ss 4. Matt. 28● c. vlc Ioan. 14. ● 〈◊〉 Ioan. ●6 v. 13. Tertul. de praesc c. 17 Mare vlt. Vers. 16. Ioan. 3. v. 18. Heb. 11. v. ● Lib. 1. Inst. c. 7. sect 2. in fine See Bell. l. 1. de verb. Det c. 17. 18. 〈◊〉 Calu. pra●at in Epist. lacobi āte Epist. ad Heb. ante 2. S. Pe●ri Rupell cōfess art 4. Calu. l. 1. Instit. c. 9. sect 1. Innocēt 1. ep 3. c. vlt. Cōcil 3. Carthag can 47. S. Aug. Epist. 235. Cōcil Tridents sess 4. Lib. 4. Instit c. 14. sect vlt. Aug. Cō● Epist. Manich●i c. 5. Aug. serm 191. temp Rup●ll ● Confes●● art 3● 2. Petr. 3. v. 26. Aug. de Doct. Christian. l. 2. c. 41. deserm Domini in monte l. 1. c. 3. Bell. Grets Controu 1. l. 1. c. 7. sequ●nt Iesmoreus in sua Chro●ol 2. Cor. 3. v. 1● 1. Thessal c. 2. v. 15. 1● Rom. 8. v. 9. Ephes. 4. v. 14. 2. Cor. 121 v. 10. 28. 2. Petri 1. v. 20. 21. 2. Timoth. 2. v. vlt. Matth. 15. v. 14. Grets tractat denouis trāslation in defen Bellarm Caluin in Antidoto contra 4● sess Concil Tridentini Geneb i● Psal ● Calu. l. 4 Instit c. 1. sect 12. Rom. ● v. 8. Hiero●● Epist. 57. ●d Dam. 〈…〉 1598. 1. p. q. 1● art vlt. Aug. l. 12. confess cap. vltimo Lib. 3. de Doct. Christ. c. 27. Deut. 25. v. 4. 2. Cor. 9. v. 9. 10. Lutherus Lutherani in Genes ib. Calu. in c. ● Gen. v. 1● Calu. l. 1. Inst. c. 14 sect 18. Hunnius in Caluino Iudaizāte in ●●nti-pareo In Genes loco citato Calu. in Gen. loco citato Psal. 90 v 13. Luc. 10. v. 19. Rom. 16. v. 20. 1. Ioan. 2. v 13. Apoc. 12. v. 11. 1. Cor. 15. v. 57. In Gen. Ioco citato l. 2. Instit. c. ●3 sect 2. Ioan. 8. v. 44. Caluin l. 1. Instit. c. 14. sect 18. Ephes. 5. v. 32. 2. Cor. 11. v. 2. 3. Apoc. ● v. 13. 17. Matt. 13. v. 38. Apocal. 12. v. 17. Psal. 90. v. 13. Luc. 10. v. 19. Rom. 16. v. 20. Defuga saeculi c. 7. Oleoster in c. 3. Gen. Hier. in tradit Hebraicis Homil. 17. in Gen. Amb. de fuga saeculi c. 7. Greg. in Iob. c. 38. Matt. 1● v. 18. Iunius cōtra Bell. Cont. 1. l. 3. c. 3. nota 9. c. 9. nota 8. 10. Robertus Rolocc de vocation● effic c. 15. Luc. 10. v. 16. ● Cor. 4. v. 3. Beza de notis Eccl. Volu 3. p. 137. edit ann 1582. ● Cor. 3. v. 6. 7. 9. l. 3. de doct Christiana c. 7. 9 Psal. 18. v. 8. Matth. 11. v. 25. 2. Cor. 4. v. 4. Hier. de Script Eccles. in Luca. See S. Aug. l. 2. de doct Christ. c. 11. seq ● Rabb l. 5. de inst Cler. c. 8. Theod. lib. 4. hist. Ecc. c. vlt. Socrat lib. 4. c. 27. Sozom l. 6. c. 37. Cass. in hist. ●ripart l. 8. c. 13. Baron Tom. 10. ann 880. n. 19. Tom. 11. ann 1080. n. 1. 2. Pet. vlt. v. 26. 1. Cor. 3. v. 2. Heb. 5. v. 12. Index lib. prohibit Reg. 4. Psal. 142. v. 8. 10. Ioannes Coclaus de actis Luther ann 1522. Rom. 3 v. 28. Luth. To. 4. Germ. excuso VVi●emb anno 1551. fol. 475. pag. 2. Zuingl de vera falsa relig c. de Eu●b par 262. in lib. excuso Tuguri 1555. Calu. l. ● insti● c. 16. à sect 10 ad ●3 in c. 26. Matt. v. 39. in c. 27. Matth. v. 46. Item i● Catech Domi. 10. Beza in c. ● ad Heb. v. 7. in 〈◊〉 mai●ore Catech sm Calu. c. 16. ●it sect 10 in ●ine Beza in maiori Catechis Vol. ● tract Theol. pag. 657. ●uxta edit Geneuens 〈◊〉 1582. apud Eu●tathium Vignon Heb. 5. v. 7. Beza annot ann● 1598. Castal in de●en suae translationes ●ibli in ●ine Aug. l. 3 de doctrin a Christ. cap. 10. Matt. 26. v. 26. Calu. l. 4. Instit. c. 17. sect 21. Tob. 4. v. 11. Tob. 12. v. 9. Eccl. 3. v. 33. Apol. confess Augustanae tit de iustif Rom. 1. v. 8. Beza ibid. Lib. 4. Instit c. 14. sect vlt. Calu. in c. 6. Matt. v. 16. in c. 24. v. 82. Luc. 11. v. 41. Phil. in apol Confess Aug. tit de iustif Erasmus in ānot Luc. Calu. Beza in illa verba S. Luc. Ioan. 6. v. 48. 49. l. 4. Instit c. 14. sect 25. Calu. in illum v. 25 Matth. 12. Cal. l. 2. instit c. 1● sect 7. Coloss. 2. v. 17. Heb. 9 v. 9 13. Heb. 10. v. 11. Cal. l. 4. Instit. c 14. sect 25. Ioa● 15. v. 2. Calu. Ibid. Iacob 2. 24 Beza Calu ill● v●rba Calu in c. 6. Matt. v. 4. Matt. 12 v. 33. Calu. ibid. Matt. 19. v. 17. Luc. 10. v. 28. Calu. in 19. Matt. v. 17. Calu in c. 16. Luc. v. 28. Lib. 3. Instit c. 17. sect 7. Calu. Beza in c. ● ad Rom. Beza in c. ad Rom. v. 6. annot ●edit annis 1550. 1564. 1565. Calu. l. 3. Instit c. 19● sect 4. Luc. 22. v. 19. Anno 2577. ● ad Tim. v. 25. Matth. ●8