Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	answer_v	believe_v	faith_n	3,063	5	5.4239	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A70260	Several tracts, by the ever memorable Mr. John Hales of Eaton Coll. &c. Viz. I. Of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. II. Paraphrase on St. Matthew's Gospel. III. Of the power of the keys. IV. Of schism and schismaticks, (never before printed by the original copy.) V. Miscellanies	Hales, John, 1584-1656.; Hales, John, 1584-1656. Tract concerning sin against the Holy Ghost.; Hales, John, 1584-1656. Tract concerning schisme.	1677 (1677)	Wing H276A; Wing H280; ESTC R14263	61,040	260

private Persons Churches may err in Fundamentals if they list for they may be heretical for Churches may be wicked they may be Idolaters and why then not heretical Is Heresy a more dangerous thing than Idolatry For whereas it is pleaded that Churches cannot fall into Heresie because of that promise of our Saviour That the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church is but out of mistake of the meaning of that place and indeed I have often mused how so plain a place could so long and so generally be misconstrued To secure you therefore that you be not abused with these words hereafter for they are often quoted to prove the Churches Infallibility I shall indeavour to give you the natural meaning of them for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Gates of Hell is an Hebraisme for in the Hebrew Expression the Gates of a thing signifies the thing it self as the gates of Sion Sion it self and by the same proportion the gates of Hell signifies Hell it self Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we English Hell as in no place of Scripture it signifies Heresie so very frequently in Scripture it signifies Death or rather the state of the dead and indifferently applied to good and bad Let us then take the Word in that meaning for what greater means can we have to warrant the signification of a Scripture word than the general meaning of it in Scripture So that when our Saviour spake these words he made no promise to the Church of persevering in the Truth but to those that did persevere in the Truth he made a promise of victory against death and hell And what he there says sounds to no other purpose but this that those who shall continue his although they dy yet death shall not have the Dominion over them but the time shall come that the bands of Death shall be broken and as Christ is risen so shall they that are his rise again to Immortality For any help therefore that this Text affords Churches may err in Fundamentals But to speak the Truth I much wonder not only how any Churches but how any private man that is careful to know and follow the Truth can err in Fundamentals For since it is most certain that the Scripture contains at least the Fundamental Parts of Christian Faith how is it possible that any Man that is careful to study and believe the Scripture should be ignorant of any necessary part of his Faith Now whether the Church of Rome err in Fundamentals yea or no To answer this I must crave leave to use this Distinction To err in Fundamentals is either to be ignorant of or deny something to be fundamental that is or to entertain something for Fundamental which is not In the first sense the Church of Rome entertaining the Scriptures as she doth cannot possibly be ignorant of any principal part of Christian Faith all her error is in entertaining in her self and obtruding upon others a multitude of things for Fundamentals which no way concern our Faith at all Now how dangerous it is thus to do except I know whether she did this willingly or wittingly yea or no is not easy to define If willingly she doth it it is certainly high and damnable presumption if ignorantly I know not what mercies God hath in store for them that sin not out of malitious wickedness Now concerning the merriment newly started I mean the requiring of a Catalogue of Fundamentals I need to answer no more but what Abraham tells the rich man in Hell Habent Mosen Prophetas They have Moses and the Prophets the Apostles and the Evangelists let them seek them there for if they find them not there in vain shall they seek them in all the World besides But yet to come a little nearer to the Particulars If the Church of Rome would needs know what is Fundamental in our conceit and what not the Answer as far as my self in Person am concerned in the Business shall be no other than this Let her observe what Points they are wherein we agree with her and let her think if she please that we account of them as Fundamentals especially if they be in the Scriptures and on the other hand let her mark in what Points we refuse Communion with her and let her assure her self we esteem those as no Fundamentals If she desire a List and Catalogue made of all those she is at leisure enough for ought I know to do it her self Last of all Concerning the imputation of Rebellion and Schism against Church-Authority with which your Catholick Disputant meant to affright you all that is but meerly Powder without Shot and can never hurt you For since it hath been sufficiently evidenced unto us that the Church of Rome hath adulterated the Truth of God by mixing with it sundry Inventions of her own it was the Conscience of our duty to God that made us to separate For where the Truth of God doth once suffer there Union is Conspiracy Authority is but Tyranny Churches are but Routs And suppose we that we mistook and made our Separation upon Error the Church of Rome being right in all her Waies though we think otherwise yet could not this much prejudice us For it is Schism upon wilfulness that brings danger with it Schism upon mistake and Schism upon just occasion hath in it self little hurt if any at all SIR I Return you more than I thought or you expected yet less than the Argument requir'd If you shall favour me so much as to carefully read what I have carefully written you shall find at least in those Points you occasioned me to touch upon sufficient ground to plant your self strongly against all Discourse of the Romish Corner-creepers which they use for the Seducing of unstable Souls Be it much or little that I have done I require no other reward than the continuance of your good Affection to Your SERVANT whom you know A PARAPHRASE ON S. Matthew's Gospel By the ever Memorable Mr. JOHN HALES of Eaton-Colledge c. Printed 1677. A PARAPHRASE on St. Matthews Gospel CHAP. XII Scholar SIR I Thank you for the pains you have taken in facilitating to my Understanding the scope and purpose of the XI of St. Matthew If I might not be too troublesome to you I would also desire you to take the like pains with me in the Twelfth Master I shall with all my heart provided that you will make your Objections as they rise within you for peradventure I may think you understand that which you do not and not understand that which you do and so lose my Labour Scholar I shall obey you readily and therefore to begin with the beginning of the Chapter I pray Sir how is it said 1. that At that time Jesus went through the Corn with his Disciples when in the very next Chapter before it is said That he sent all his Disciples away from him Master By these Words at that time

God as it is verse 11. of that Chapter which may serve for a comment upon the Verse now in question And it is worth our noting that the Text doth not say if we sin wilfully there is no sacrifice for sin this had been an hard saying indeed but the words are there remains no more sacrifice for sin there is some comfortable difference I hope between these two propositions there is no sacrifice and there remains no more sacrafice for sin So that if we do not believe in that one sacrifice as sufficient but look every day for some new sacrifice for every new sin we must expect nothing but judgment As to the third place 1 Ioh. 5. 16. many would conclude there is a sin for which we may not pray First because it is irremissable and this they think must needs be the sin against the Holy Ghost meant by St. Iohn Their best argument is Iohn's not saying we should pray is a saying we should not pray his silence to them is prohibition This is bad Grammar and worse Logick For we find that St. Stephen prayed for them that stoned him and yet told them they resisted the Holy Ghost And St. Peter exhorted Simon Magus to Repentance and yet both he and those that stoned Stephen are commonly reputed sinners against the Holy Ghost St. Ambrose is of that charitable opinion that he thinks the sin against the Holy Ghost may be pardoned by Repentance because the people of the Iews that had said of Christ that he cast out Devils by Belzebub afterwards at the preaching of St. Peter are said to be converted Acts 2. St. Austine in a Retract concludes we must despair of no Man no not of the wickedest as long as he liveth and we safely pray for him of whom we don't despair For though it be expresly said That the Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven yet these words may justly receive a qualification if we will but allow the same mitigation of these words which all Men confess we must needs allow to the precedent words in the same verse to which these have relation where it is said generally all Sins and all Blasphemies shall be forgiven it cannot be meant of all sins always and to all Men for then no sin could be damnable but the sin against the Holy Ghost which is most false and therefore the meaning must be all sins shall be forgiven ordinarily and for the most part so on the contrary Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not ordinarily but hardly be forgiven Even those who are most strict to maintain the Sin against the Holy Ghost to be unpardonable will yet acknowledge that some times in Scripture Impossibility is used to note a difficulty and those things are spoken indefinitely to all which belong but to a part only Thus the difficulty of a rich Mans entering into the Kingdome of Heaven is presented to us by our Saviour under the similitude of an impossibility Having dispatch'd these Texts of Scripture which do either name or are thought to concern the sin against the Holy Ghost it remains to examine those common Definitions of this sin which are now current though different in the terms by which they define it some call it a total or final falling away from faith or a wilful Apostacy or a malicious resisting of the truth yet when they come to explain their meaning the difference among them is not considerable I shall chiefly apply my self to Mr Calvin's definition because his judgment hath gained the greatest reputation among the multitude as also for that he himself promises such a true definition as shall easily by it self overthrow all the rest In his Institut Lib. 3. Chap. 3. he saith they sin against the Holy Ghost Qui divinae veritati cujus fulgore sic perstringuntur ut ignorantiam causari nequeunt tamen destinata malitia resistunt in hoc tantum ut resistant Arminius also useth Mr Calvins words The Rhetorical Parenthesis which might well have been spared in a definition being reduced to plain and brief terms this definition of Calvin may be thus Englished They sin against the Holy Ghost who of determined malice resist the known Truth of God to the end only to resist In this Mr Calvin doth not define what the sin is but who they are that commit it whereas by the Rules of Logick Concretes admit of no definition but only Abstracts But taking the definition as it is it consists principally upon these three terms First Truth Secondly Known Thirdly Resisted or a resisting of the known Truth The words being general and doubtful we will consider them singly First If by the truth Mr Calvin understands the Word of God or the whole Doctrine revealed in the Scriptures then the sense of this Term will be too large for even the Pharisees which spoke against the Holy Ghost did not resist the whole Truth of God in the Scripture for they believed in the Law of Moses and had confidence to be saved by the keeping of it And in defence of that Law as they thought they did Blaspheme the Holy Ghost Therefore properly by the Truth of God Mr Calvin must confine his meaning to the Truth of the Gospel or Doctrine of Faith for so both he himself and others expound themselves by terming the sin against the Holy Ghost a falling away or turning away from Faith or Apostacy Secondly By this word Known Mr Calvin must mean belief for Faith is properly by believing not knowing the truth Thirdly The Word Resisting must mean unbelieving for if receiving of the Truth be by belief then Resisting of the Truth must be●● unbelief And indeed Mr. Calvin explains himself in the same Chapter saying there is no place for pardon where knowledge is joyned with unbelief Non esse veniae locum c. So then by this definition to resist the known Truth is all one as if Mr Calvin had said in proper terms for a Man at once to unbelieve that which he doth believe which two things it is impossible to do together and if they be not together there can be no resistance It is true that for some reasons a Man may be brought not to believe that which he formerly believed This cannotbe in an instant but successively unbelief comes in the place of belief And this may not be called a resisting for that all resistance consists in a violence between two at the least but where two succeed one another and are never together it cannot possibly be I confess a Man may resist the Truth when it is a Truth in it self only or in the understanding of some other but to resist the Truth which is known and believed by the resister himself is a direct contradiction for the nature of Truth is such that if the understanding apprehend it for Truth it cannot but assent unto it No Man can force himself to believe what he lists or when he lists Sometimes a Man knows

committed To him therefore in the first place Satisfaction is due by submission and acknowledgment since there remains no other way of composition with God But there are some sins committed against God some committed against God and Men. In the former it is sufficient if we pacifie God alone in the latter our Neighbour against whom we have trespast must receive Satisfaction for the wrong done him at least if it be in the power of the Trespasser Your Primer of Sarum will tell you That not to make restitution if you be able and not to pardon unavoidably exclude from the Kingdom of Heaven Now might the Doctrine of Confession and acknowledgment in case of Offence given have been permitted to run fair and clear as it descends from God and good reason the first Fountains of it There needed no more to be said in this argument than I have already told you But I know not what intempestive foolish Ambition hath troubled the stream and it hath past now for a long time till the Reformation altered it for a general Doctrine in the Church That in all kind of sins whether against God or our Neighbour there can be no reconciliation betwixt the parties offending and offended but by interposition of a Priest a thing utterly besides all reason and common sense that you should open your private imperfections to one whom they concern not for it is granted that all Parties concerned in an Offence must have reason at the hands of the Offender and who can no ways help you For He that is conscientious of his sin and without trouble of Conscience I think none would ever repair to his Confessor knows very well that there is no sin so great but upon submission God both can and will pardon it and none so small but pardon for it must be sought or else he hath been ill catechised And more than this what can any Priest tell him Your Pliny somewhere tells you That he that is stricken by a Scorpion if he go immediately and whisper it into the ear of an Ass shall find himself immediately eased That Sin is a Scorpion and bites deadly I have always believed but that to cure the bite of it it was a Sovereign Remedy to whisper it into the Ear of an a Priest I do as well believe as I do that of Pliny The Patrons of this Fancy for defect of reason and common congruity are fain to betake themselves to Scripture and the mischief is there is there no direct Text for it and therefore they are constrained to help themselves with a meer conjectural consequence For since it is taken for certain that there is a Power to Remit and to Retain sins how shall they who have this Power given them know how fit it is to Remit or to Retain a sin except they know the sin and know it they cannot but by Confession For answer to this First We have found and proved That the Words of Scripture must receive such a sense as from whence no such Consequence can be inferred Secondly We have indeavoured to prove That the Dispensation or Application of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven being nothing else but the duty of saving of Souls is a Duty which pro Occasione oblatâ lies upon every Christian Which if it be true as in good faith I think it and the Clergy perceive it I think they would never go about to urge that Text although we should yield it them in their own meaning For they must needs see that it follows that you may as well make your Muletter if you have one your Confessor as your Parish Priest Tell me in good earnest if you can out of what good intent can this desire to know another mans sin which concerns you not proceed Is it to teach him that it is a sin he knew that or else he had never repaired to you to confess it Is it to tell him that he is to repent to restore to pray to give alms c. All this he knew or else he hath had his breeding under an evil Clergy Yea but how shall the Physician cure the Disease if he know it not Suppose all Diseases had one Remedy as all spiritual Diseases have and what matters it if the Patient be sick to know whether it be an Ague or the Meazels or the Pleurisie since one Potion cures them all Yea but if he know not the particulars how shall he judg of the Quantity of the Doses for the same Disease upon sundry circumstances may require Majus or Minus in the Physick This is the poorest scruple of a thousand for in the Regiment of Patients spiritually sick there can be but one mistake that is if you give too little Be sure you give enough and teach your Patients to think no sin to be little which in men spiritually sick is Error saluberrimus and you can never err For natural Physick is only Physick but spiritual Physick is both Physick and Diet and may be indifferently administred both to the sick and the sound Repentance perchance only excepted of which upon occasion assure your self you can hardly take too much What reason now can you give me why you should desire to dive into any mans Breast scire Secreta Domûs except it be that which followes in the next Verse indè teneri as I must confess I suspect it is The truth is some mistaken Customs of the ancient Church the craft and power of the Clergy the simplicity and ignorance of the Laity these begat the Tragelaphus of which we now speak It may be you take the practice of the ancient Church and the Point of Excommunication to make somewhat for you When those Cards shall come to be play'd though that of Church custom is not greatly material which way soever it looks I believe you will not find the Game you look for Indeed I was once minded to have considered something of that But I think you look for a Letter not for a Book and I perceive my self already to have gone beyond the compass of a Letter Another parley therefore if you please shall put an end to those and other scruples if any do arise And for the present give I pray you a little respite unto From my Study this 8 Day of March 1637. Yours J. H. A TRACT Concerning SCHISM AND SCHISMATICKS WHEREIN Is briefly discovered the Original Causes of all Schism By the ever Memorable Mr. JOHN HALES of Eaton-Colledge c. Never before Printed by the Original Copy Printed 1677. A TRACT Concerning SCHISM HEresie and Schism as they are in common use are two Theological 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or scar-crows which they who uphold a party in Religion use to fright away such as making inquiry into it are ready to relinquish and oppose it if it appear either erroneous or suspicious For as Plutarch reports of a Painter who having unskilfully painted a Cock chased away all Cocks and Hens that so