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	part_n	5,261	5	4.5208	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A93387	Of the al-svfficient external proposer of matters of faith. Devided into tvvo bookes In the first. Is proved, that the true church of God, is the al-sufficient external proposer of matters of faith. In the second. Is shewed the manifold uncertanities of Protestants concerning the scripture: and how scripture is, or is not, an entire rule of faith. By C. R. doctor of diuinitie.	Smith, Richard, 1566-1655.	1653 (1653)	Wing S4156; ESTC R228293	181,733	514

saied absolutly and without anie condition as wel of the successors of the Apostles as of the Apostles themselues who heareth you heareth me Therfore absolutly and without anie condition both Apostles and their successors are infallible For we cannot be deceaued by Christ by anie way that we heare him The antecedent is euident by Christs words which are absolute and haue no condition anie more for the Apostles Successors then for the Apostles themselues The consequence also is euident For who absolutly are such as hearing them we heare Christ are absolutly infallible And this consequence those Protestants saw who denied these words to be at al meant of the Apostles Successors For they saw that if Christ saied absolutly of them as wel as of the Apostles who heare you heare me Laude p. 65. 91. they must need be absolutly and not meerly conditionally infallible Lastly Protestāts do not grant euen conditional diuine infallibilitie but onely humane to Pastors and yet Christ here speaketh of diuine infallibilitie for such was the infallibilitie of the Apostles and such must needs be theirs whome who heareth heareth Christ For who are such as who heareth them heareth Christ are such as Christ speaketh by and such as Christ speaketh by are doubtles infallible For Christ cannot speak vntruthes by anie whom soeuer L. 1. de scrip p. 109. And as Whitaker saieth What is the Church speaking the word of God but the mouth and tongue of God 11. And al the aforesaied places of Scripture and arguments made proue indifferently that the true Church of God can no way err in points of faith ether vincibly or inuincibly others peculiarly proue that she cannot err vincibly or sinfully in anie point of faith As where Scripture testifieth that Hel gates Math. 19. O ●eae 2. Rom. 13. 1. Cor. 12. Michea 4. Luca● 57. Psal 2. 27. 32. Hebr. 32. Galat. 4. shal not preuaile against her or calleth her the Spouse of Christ the bodie of Christ Christs kingdom Christs Inheritance Christs Temple our mother which bringeth vs forth to Christ For sinful error in anie point of faith is the sin of Heresie which is a gate of Hel and S. G●egor in ps●l 5. Poeniten which destroieth both the vnitie and substance of sauing faith and of the true Church as we haue proued at large parte 1. l. 2. c. 2. seqq and need not here repeate For hauing clearly proued already that the true Church cannot err at al in points of faith we need not proue that she cannot err in them vincibly or sinfully Wherfore we wil now proue out of Gods promises made in the Scripture to the Church that she cannot err in points of faith SIXT CHAPTER That the true Church of God is infallible in al points of faith proued by Gods promises to her 1. IOAN c. 14. v. 16. Christ saieth I wil request my father and he wil giue you an other Paraclet for to abide with you for euer And v 26. The Paraclet The Holie Ghost whome the Father wil send in my name shal teach you al things and suggest vnto you al things whatsoeuer I shal say vnto you And c. 16. c. 13. when the holie spirit of truth shal come he shal teach you al truth Behold a most large promise of Christ to the Church that the Holie Ghost shal be for euer with the Church and shal both teach and suggest her al things al things what soeuer Christ shal say Al truth Therfore she cannot err in anie thing which Christ taught or in anie truth And Whitaker cont 1. q. 3. c. 11. calleth these most clear and most certain testimonies To this Protestants make three answers al opposit one to the other The first Vvhitaker ●ont 2. q. 4. c. 2. Laude se● 25. p. 165. P●tter se● 5. p. 59. Chilling c. 3. § 71. and most common is that Christ promiseth not that the Holie Ghost shal teach the Church al truth of faith but onely al truth which is absolutly necessarie to al. This limitation of al truth of faith to al truth absolutly necessarie to al First is new for no ancient Author is alleadged for it Secondly it is voluntarie For it hath no ground in the text but is voluntarily shaped according to their opinion That the Church cannot err in fundamental points but in other points she may Thirdly it is violent for it is as to expound al truth by not al truth Fourthly it is iniurious to the Apostles to whome it was personally made as if Christ had not here promised to teach them al truth of faith whatsoeuer but onely fundamental Fiftly it is contrarie to the Fathers For Phoebadus l. contra Arianos saieth when Christ saieth al truth surely he excludeth none Sixtly al points of faith are absolutly necessarie to al to be beleued at least virtually and also actually if they be sufficiently proposetd as we haue clearly proued in the former q D 2. c. 3. 1 lb. l. 2. c. 3. parte and Protestants sometimes confess And though there be but some points which are absolutly necessarie to be beleued actually of al yet seing as Protestants confess none knoweth precisely which they are what good would it doe to Christians to know that the Church cannot err in them Do not Protestants confess that al diuine reuelations without exception are necessarie to be beleued when they are sufficiently proposed as I shewed parte 1. l. 1. c. 25. N'ay doe not they confess that al diuine reuelations are fundamental to faith when they are sufficiently proposed as I shewed ibid. l. 2. c. 25. How then can they think that the Church can err in anie point of faith sufficiently proposed Doth not Chillingworth in his answer to the preface n. 6. say that we are bound See P●tter ●c 7. p. 103. by the loue of God and the loue of truth to be zelous on defence of truths that are anie way profitable though not simply necessarie to Saluation Our Sauior himself hauing assured vs that he that shal break one of his least commandments and shal so teach men shal be called the least in the kingdom of heauen And wil not Christ teach his Church al truthes profitable to saluation or suffer her to teach contrarie to anie of his least commandements Doth not Whitaker Controu 2. q. 4. c. 2. say that the Church erreth not in those things which are necessarie to anie And are such things absolutly necessarie to al men Doth not Laude Relat. sec 38. n. 25. say that beside the foundation common to al there be things necessarie to manie particular mens Saluation and wil Christ suffer the Church to err in things necessarie to manie particular mens saluation As he doth if he suffer her not to err but in the foundation common to al. I omit here Laude his fond distinction sec 16. n. 28 That Christ promised an infallible assistance to his Apostles but onely a fitting assistance to their successors

authoritie with which in ordinarie course it maketh one total or entire formal cause of faith SEAVENTENTH CHAPTER Hovv a vicious circle is auoided in prouing the Scripture by the Church and the Church by the Scripture 1. PRotestants greatly obiect to Catholiks that they Laude sect 16. p. 64. 116. Ch●ling c. 2. n. 118. c. 3. n. 27. Field l. 4. c. 7 Morton 10. 1. Apol. l. 1. c. 55 make a vicious circle becaus they proue the Church by the Scripture and likewise the Scripture by the Church Wheras themselues vse the same proof and haue the same difficultie and auoidles apparently as we shal make manifest a vicious circle For as is euident by their confessions relate din the fourteenth Chapter commonly they teach that the testimonie of the Church is necessarie to beleue the Scripture to be the word of God and that it cannot be known to be such by its own light alone and yet they proue the Church to be the true Church onely by the scripture Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 38. and 102. thinketh to See in●●a l. 2. c. 6. se● 2. auoid a vicious circle thus That though they doe mutually yet they doe not equally confirme the authoritie ether of other For the Scripture doth infallibly confirme the authoritie of the tradition of the Church but tradition doth but morally and probably confirme the authoritie of the Scripture But first it is fals that the Church doth but probably confirme the authoritie of the Scripture For as we haue shewed before the Churches testimonie is a sufficient external and ministerial means to beget diuine faith and the holie Fathers also proued sufficiently the diuine veritie of Scripture against such as denied anie parte of it by the authoritie of the Church and it were to expose the credit of Scripture to the laughter of Infidels to say that it cannot be proued otherwise then probably and that al Christian faith of what is in scripture relieth vpon onely probable proof that the scripture Seesup c. 8. n. 13. is the word of God Besids it is euidently fals and no way proued that after the Church hath probably proued that the Scripture is the word of God the Scripture it self sheweth a clear light that it is the the word of God For that the Scripture hath such a clear light ether before the Churches testimonie or after is merely faigned without al proof and if it had it would not cause faith in vs that it is the word of God becaus faith is of things not appearing but science or knowledg Moreouer seing Laude and Protestants generally confess that the Church is infallible in fundamental points they cannot consequently say that she is not infallible in this point That the Scripture is the word of God becaus they account this the Hooker l. 1. §. 14. Laudesest 11. p. 43. sect 16. p. 59. 65. 110. See infral 2. 6. 11. sect 1. fundation of al other points whatsoeuer And what is infallible affordeth an infallible and more then a moral and probable proof Besids this circle were vicious becaus the proof were not equal on ether side For on the Scriptures side it were infallible and on the Churches side but fallible And we ask for an infallible proof of Scripture as wel as of the Church becaus we must be infallibly assured of both and to giue vs a fallible proof of the Scripture by the Church were to delude vs. Finally I ask if the Scripture doe infallibly confirme the tradition of the Church as Laude saieth how doth the tradition of the Church onely probably confirme the authoritie of the Scripture can not that which is infallibly proued or confirmed make an infallible proof of some other thing 2. But Catholiks far more clearly auoid al vicious circles For euerie circular proof is not vicious but that onely wherby our knowledg is no way bettered For the effect may be proued a priori or propter quid by the cause and the cause a posteriori or quia by the effect and say that our diuine faith of the Church nether first riseth nor dependeth of the certaine of the Scripture but onely is confirmed by the Scripture but that the certaintie of the Scripture both first riseth and stil dependeth for vs on the authoritie of the Church For the true Church of God whosoeuer she is was beleued more then two thousand yeares before there was anie Scripture and she hath sufficient authoritie to testifie of herself This we proue by al the waies by which we proued that she is a sufficient proposer of al points of faith For if of al euen of herself that she is the true Church For this is a point and a principal one of faith Besids the foresaid proofs not onely proue that she is a sufficient proposer of points of faith but also that she is such of herself or of her own authoritie giuen to her by God For if of her preaching faith riseth if she be the pillar and ground of truth if she be a witnes apointed by God if her voice be one with the voice of Christ her authoritie is diuine and she is euen for herself to be beleued as the Apostles were to be beleued for Sup. c. 4 ● 5. themselues The Fathers also who by her authoritie proued the Scriptures against such heretiks as denied them and as they thought sufficiently and infallibly surely did think that she was to be beleued for her own authoritie For by Scripture they could not proue her against such as denied Scripture Reason also confirmeth the same For if a Disciple of Christ be to be beleued for himself why not the Spouse of Christ one mistical person with him whose head he is and whose soule is the holie Ghost And if S. Paul could say I Paul say vnto you If you be circumcised Galat. 5. Christ wil not profit you Why not the Church Whitaker l 1. de Script p. 86. saieth who haue such a Spirit as Paul had may by some iudgment testifie their Spirit And contr 1. q. 3. c. 3. Paul doth aproue his epistles with his own name and iudgment The old and new Testament doe confirme and signe one the other In other causes this mutual confirmation is naught worth But in this it is much worth becaus none is so fit a witnes of God and of his word as God himself in his word And why may we not say the same of the Church and Scripture which he saieth of the old and new Testament becaus none is so fit a witnes of God and of his Church and of his word as God in his Church and in his word If S. Iohn could say of himself we know that his testimonie is true why may not the Spouse C. 21. of Christ who is one mistical person with him and whose head he is to whome he promised the assistance of the Holie Ghost to teach her al truth and the Holie Ghost is her soule say the

or beleued with diuine faith EIGHTENTH CHAPTER Hovv vve are to ansvver that question VVherfore or hovv vve beleue or knovv the Church to be Infallible 1. OVT of that which hath been hitherto saied is clearly answered that question How or Wherfore we beleue or know the true Church of God to be absolutly infallible in al which she teacheth as matter of faith Laude sec 16. p. 60. saieth The tradition of the Church taken alone cannot be a sufficient proof to beleue by diuine faith that Scripture is the word of God For that which is a ful and sufficient proof is able of it self to settle the soule of man which Tradition is not alone able to doe For it may be further asked why we should beleue the Churches Tradition And if it be answered Becaus the Church is infallibly gouerned by the holie Ghost it may be demanded How that may appeare And if th●● be demanded ether you must say you haue it by special Reuelation or els you must attempt to proue it by Scripture And the verie offer to proue it by Scripture is a sufficient ackno●ledgment that the Scripture is a higher proof then the Churches tradition which in your own ground is or may be questionable til you come thither Besids it is an inuiolable ground of reason that the Principles of anie conclusion Thus he whose words I haue related at large that I might not seem to dissemble the difficultie 2. First therfore we must note that Beleef and Knowledg are different For Beleef is a simple assent for the authoritie of the speaker Knowledg if it be not of such things as are euident of themselues as that the whole is greater then a parte and such like is discursiue inferring one thing out of an other Therfore these are different questions Wherfore we know the Church to be infallible in al matters of faith and Wherfore we beleue her to be so infallible And we wil answer to both questions differently and distinctly To the question Wherfore we beleue the Chrch to be infallible I answer that if you demand the material Gods vocal word the material obiect of faith obiect of my beleef therof it is Gods vocal word vttered to me by the Church For as is shewed before out of the Apostle Faith is of hearing and Hearing is by the vocal word of God vttered by the Church And for this vocal word of God as his testimonie the Church was beleued to be infallible before there was anie Scripture and of the aforesaied Barbarians who had no Scripture and could be so beleued though al Scripture should perish And this Luther and other Protestants before cited doe confess when they say The Church is conceaued bred by the vocal word of God Supra c. 14. ● 1. and 3. 3. And if you ask the formal obiect for whose authoritie we beleue the Church to be thus infallible I answer For the authoritie of God principally and for the authoritie of the Church which is the pillar and ground of faith subordinatly As we beleue what the Embassador saieth principally for the King who sent him and subordinatly for the authoritie of the Embassador himself as apointed by the king And as before anie Scripture was written Prophets were beleued not for anie Scripture but principally for the authoritie of God who sent them and secondarily for their own Prophetical authoritie instituted by God Wherfore we need not as Laude thinketh proue the Church to be infallible ether by special reuelation or by Scripture as Chillingworth saieth c. 3. p. 141. Becaus beside the priuat word of God which is by special reuelation and his publik written word Publik vocal word of God Videsup c. 14. n. 1. which is Scripture there is also his publik vocal word which he vttereth and speaketh by the mouth of the Church as wel as there is his written word which he wrot by Vvhitak l 3. descript p. 414. Spiritus per as Ecclesia loquitur ●ic etiam cont 1. q. 3. c. 11. cont 2. q. 4. c. 2. Qu● ecclesiam audiunt Christum ipsum audiunt the hands of his prophets and Euangelists And Gods word by whom soeuer it is ether spoke nor written is of equal authoritie and his vocal word equally to be beleued as his written Wherfore we haue no need to proue the Church to be infallible by the Scripture as there was no need nor possibilitie by it to proue that or anie other point of faith before anie Scripture was written vnles it be against such heretiks as beleue the Scripture but beleue not the Church But Catholiks doe onely confirme their faith which before they had of the infallibilitie of the Church by Gods vocal Gods vocal word confirmed by his written word vttered by the Church by his written word of the Scripture As we vse to be confirmed in the beleef of a thing which a man doth not only say by word of mouth but also by writing 4. And moreouer it is not alwaies necessarie as laude thinks that the mean of knowing be more known then the thing known by it as when they mutually make each other known as Relatiues and the Cause and proper Effect doe For in these a Circle is not vitious As from a Father we proue a sonn and from a sonn à Father From Rational Risible and from Risible Rational from the suns rising the Daie and from the Daie the suns rising And as Whitaker saieth contr 1. q. 3. c. 3. of the old and new Testament Something 's mutually proue each other The old and new Testament doe mutually confirme one the other In other matters this mutual confirmation would not auaile but in this it auaileth much For none is so fit a witnes of God and of his word as God in his word And contro 2. q. 5. c. 18. As the cause doth bring forth and shew the effect so the effect in like manner doth illustrat the cause Ibid. c. 9. Relatiues are not before or after one the other And lib. 3. contra Dureum sec 3. doth this seem ridiculous to the to seek the word out of the word White in his Defense p. 301. It is no more a Circle in vs to proue our Spirit by the Scripture and again to be assured of the Scripture by the Spirit then it is in discours to goe too and and fro between causes and effects The like he hath in his way p. 117. Field in his Appendice part 2. p. 16. That the cause may be proued by the effect and the effect by the cause and that such a kinde of argumentation is not a circulation but a demonstratiue regress that two causes may becauses ether of other we make no question Caluin 1. Instit c. 9. § 3. God hath ioyned together the certaintie of his word and Spirit with a mutual knot The samesay I of Gods vocal word vttered by the Church and his written word signed by the Euangelists that