Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
authority_n believe_v church_n infallible_a 7,894 5 10.4883 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A58886 Dr. Sherlock's preservative considered the first part, and its defence, proved to contain principles which destroy all right use of reason, fathers, councils, undermine divine faith, and abuse moral honesty : in the second part, forty malicious calumnies and forged untruths laid open, besides several fanatical principals which destroy all church discipline, and oppose Christs divine authority : in two letters of Lewis Sabran of the Society of Jesus. Sabran, Lewis, 1652-1732. 1688 (1688) Wing S217; ESTC R16398 73,086 90

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

the rest If therefore Protestants are in the wrong we are certainly in the right as far as we are opposite to them And besides since that all the positive Proofs that can be brought for the infallible Authority of Church-Teachers express also in what Church they are by evident Marks not to be found but in our Catholic Church it follows if the Protestants be in the wrong as to that Principle we are certainly in the right as to each Point of our Religion taught us by an unerring Interpreter Preserv f. 80. This that the Protestant Faith is uncertain may signifie two things First That the Objects of our Faith are uncertain and cannot be proved by certain Reasons Secondly That our Persuasion is wavering Answ f. 7. Besides the two mention'd it fignfies a Third thing also to wit That whatever Reasons there may be for a thing he who believes it hath not for the Motive of his Belief those certain Reasons There are for Example certain Reasons whereon to ground a Faith in Jesus Christ yet he that believes in Christ meerly because his Mother or a Minister hath taught him so to do hath a very uncertain and no Divine Faith. Defence f. 18. What can be the Gentleman's meaning I cannot conceive unless it be this That because Protestants take the Reason of their Faith from Scripture and not from the Church of Rome that therefore they can have no certain or Divine Faith which if it be I pity him if it be not I must desire him to explain himself Answer The honest Footman is grown very tender-hearted But is not this very plain that altho' there be very good Reasons for the belief of an Article of Christian Religion yet one that should believe it on the account of some silly Motive only such as I cited would have no Divine Faith But how can this be applied to Protestants who take the Reasons of their Faith from Scripture This I had shewed Fol. 6. but the Footman passes it by with this Answer only I shall say nothing to that Harangue so often Answered by our Divines It seems he had forgot those Answers or was conscious of their weakness Thus I discoursed there The Catholics prove that an uncertain or wavering Faith is no Divine Faith which the Protestants can never have of any one Article of their Religion because they never can have a certain one 'T is easily proved because they cannot have an act of Faith of any one Article till their Rule of Faith proposes it i. e. till they know certainly by their private Reading and Judgment what the Scriptures teach of it not by some one Text or two but by comparing all the Texts that treat of that Subject for the Sense of a single Text for Examp. My Father is greater than I cannot be had but by expounding it by other Texts on the same Subject Till a Protestant then hath a certain knowledge First that he hath all the Books of Holy Writ Secondly that all those he owns for such were really written by inspired Pens Thirdly that he hath a true and sound Translation in case he understood not the Original Languages and in case he doth a true Copy not altered by the Error or Malice of our Forefathers Fourthly since the Letter kills that he understands the true Meaning and Sense of each Text which relates to the Object of his Act of Faith Fifthly that he remember them all so as comparing them to see which be the clearer that must expound the obscurer and what is the true result of them all for any one which he understands not or hath forgotten may possibly be that one that must expound the rest he cannot have one Act of Faith. Now Catholics say this is impossible to most if not to all Protestants who are in each of these Points to Judge for themselves and not to submit to any Authority where a Doubt arises therefore few or no Protestants can in their whole Life-time frame one Act of Divine Faith concerning any one Mystery not that Scripture is not a very certain Rule but because they have chosen an useless because impossible and uncertain way of applying it Preservat ib. We believe the Apostles Creed and whatever is contained in the Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles This is all we believe and I hope they will not say these things are uncertain Answer They are very certain but not to any Protestant whose Rule of Faith considering the Method he applies it by cannot make him certain of any one Article But the pleasant Answer which Justifies Turk Jew and Gentile For this is a Rule of Faith most sufficient according to Dr. Sherlock and a good Plea We believe all that God hath revealed and nothing else is not all that he hath revealed certain Here lies the Doctor 's gross Mistake that no one is an Heretic for not believing that what God hath revealed is true 't is impossible to fall into so mad an Heresie But Heretics are such for not believing him to have revealed what in effect he hath tho' he hath given sufficient Methods to come to the knowledge of it if they would use them Defence Do Jews Turks and Gentiles believe all that is contained in the Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles Answer No Sir nor you neither If they believed all that God hath revealed as they pretend they would believe all that is delivered in the Bible which you pretend but upon as little ground What they think in their Judgment God hath revealed they believe what they think he hath not revealed they disbelieve that 's their Rule of Faith and 't is yours your own private Judgments being on both hands your Guides and not any Authority Established by Almighty God. Preservat f. 81. If these things which are believed by those who take their Faith from the Bible interpreted by their own final Sense be not built upon certain Reasons their Infallible Church can have no certainty of the Christian Faith. Answer Even this is most notoriously false since she is not Infallible by any Light of her own but by the Guidance of the Spirit of Truth Were not the Apostles when they had once acknowledged Christ to be the Son of God certain of all he revealed to them before he had given them certain Reasons for it It were a blind Impiety to think so Defence f. 19. Was there in that Case of the Apostles a certain Faith without a certain Reason An infallible Man must know things as they are or else he is mistaken Answer The Footman is very dull here and cannot distinguish between a certain Reason moving me to believe him that speaks and a certain Reason in the things that are delivered moving me to believe them This Second Dr. Sherlock requires saying That if these things which are believed be not built upon certain Reasons the Infallible Church seeing not any such Reasons can have no certainty of the Christian Faith. An
this Principle of Dr. Sherlock be reasonable the Jews ought when he disputed in their Synagouge not to have stirr'd an inch not to have hearkened to him till he had disowned infallibility In the Defence the Honest Footman is ashamed of so unchristian a Principle and would disown it saying That it appears plain and natural to him that he may submit his judgment to an Infallible Judge and yet the Church of Rome may not be that Judge true but this is contrary to Dr. Sherlock's Principle For how long is the Protestant not to stir an inch till the Catholic hath proved his Churches infallibility There would have been some common sense and reason in that Advice but not so says Dr. Sherlock but till he disowns infallibility 'T is as evident then as Noon-day-light that Dr. Sherlock lookt upon infallibility pretended unto as inconsistent with disputing and pretending by reason to convince an other of the truth and that consequently he takes the Jews's part against St. Paul. The Footman Mistook here his Masters Errant Preservative fol. 6. Dr. Sherlock asks this Question What difference is there betwixt mens using their private judgment to turn Papists or to turn Protestants I answered the same as betwixt two sick men the one whereof chooses to put himself in an able Doctors hands whom he knows to have an infallible Remedy whilst the other chooses his own Simples and makes his own Medicin As between two at Law the one whereof is guided by his Reason to take Advice from a wise Counsellor the other to be his own Council c. The Doctor 's second Answers by this Question And is not here private Judgment used all this while A shrewd Question indeed Dr. Sherlock had asked what difference there was in these two uses of private Judgment I produce the difference then as if the Question had been forgot still says the Footman there is use made of private Judgment it were as nice a Reply had one asked what difference is there betwixt an Ounce of Gold and an Ounce of Silver if when the different value is express'd he should wisely return this answer why there is still an Ounce in both cases Is there no difference then betwixt one who follows his fancy in choosing his way and him who chooses a good Guide and follows him because both choose do both equally rely on their fancy What Position can more abuse common sense Certainly the Ingenious and Learned Gentlemen of the Temple cannot but smile at this strange way of Reasoning in their Master so different from theirs Preservative fol. 9. They cannot with any sense dispute with us about the particular Articles of Faith because the sense given of Scripture and Fathers takes its Authority from the Church understanding it so I Replyed that the sense takes its Authority from God who spake the Word though we are certain that we have the true sense of that Word because we receive it from the Church which is guided in delivering to us both the Letter and Sense by the infallible Spirit of God that is to abide with Her for ever according to Christs promise Joh. 14. 16. I added that if John and William dispute which is the right way to a place John is not disabled of convincing William of his mistake because he receives the Reasons he uses from an infallible Guide This was plain and full what answers the Doctor 's second He cites some Catholic Divines how truly it belongs not to my present purpose saying that the words of Scripture brought in proof of Transubstantiation might be taken in a different sense from that which the Catholic Church hath ever received and delivered and that had not the Church ever taught that sense one might believe otherwise for all the Letter of Scripture Let it be so but what follows here But the necessity of an unerring Interpreter So that Text 1 Joh. 5. 7 8. There be three which give Testimony in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three be one and there be three which give testimony on Earth the Spirit Water and Blood and these three be one in the sense the Church hath ever received it in proves the strict Unity of God in the Trinity of Persons The Arians gave it a contrary and as natural a sense doth this prove that we follow not Scripture and this very Text in our belief of the Holy Trinity Once more I appeal to the Learned Gentlemen of the Temple hoping they will join with me maintaining against their Master that all the Judges of the Land may very reasonably convince by Law an impertinent Party though he should oppose that they may not do it because their Interpretation of the Law is to deliver the true sense of it The Preservative fol. 11. moves this Question Must the belief of an infallible Judge be resolved into every mans private judgment Must it not be believed with a Divine Faith and can there be a Divine Faith without an infallible Judge I gave this answer There can be no Divine Faith without a Divine Revelation nor a prudent one without a Moral evidence in the Motives of Credibility on which may be grounded the evident obligation to accept it The judgment being possess'd with that Moral infallibility rests not there but observing that goodness and mercy of God which cannot permit that falshood should be propounded in his Name with all the apparent marks of his Hand and Seal and without any like appearance on the Contrary inclined by a pious motion of the Will called by the famous Council of Orange affectio credibilitatis and strengthen'd by that Grace of God which bestows the Gift of Faith fastens on Gods Veracity and with a submission not capable of any doubt embraces the revealed truth If the infallibility of the Church were more than Morally evident it were impossible that any Heresy should be To this the Second of Dr. Sherlock hath nothing to oppose and is willing to submit if I can shew a Revelation that there is an infallible visible Church I will comply with so reasonable a demand and since not one in a thousand of those who oppose our Doctrin in this fundamental Point which once being cleared bears away all disputes understands what that infallibility means on which we ground the admirable certainty of each Point of our Belief give me leave Sir to be somwhat more prolix on this Subject than the narrow compass of a Letter would otherwise allow What is and whence proceeds this infallibility Many do suppose and object unto us that we hold a Man or many to be infallible in themselves a Title to which God alone can lay a Claim who only as he is truth so he is alone infallible They wilfully suppose that we place this infallibility in the sense and judgment of men so that whatever by their own Light they resolve and order must infallibly be true and just that such may frame new Articles
Sacrament considered with the Eyes of Faith and believe that this Sacrifice helps much to a holy life but not at all without it 30. Amongst them one can Merit for twenty so there is no need above one in twenty should be Good. Merit with us is Personal and not Communicative no one is better in the sight of God for the Piety of another and in what ever sense one may satisfie Gods Justice for the Penitential works he exacts from an other whose sin is remitted no one hath a title to the least degree of Glory and consequently hath any Merit by an others Sanctity or Merit Many more of this Man's Calumnies I pass by these Thirty and the other Ten I have laid down being a clear Evidence that he is the most confident Calumniator that ever Preached or Writ who dares say any thing without the least respect to Truth without any regard to Charity Honor or Conscience Now Sir give me leave to offer you some few of the many Fanatical Principles he advances as destructive to what you call your Church as to Christianity in general that in your second thoughts you may blush if you are capable of it for having set your Name to them and Licensed them to the Press The First God being a Spirit must not be sought for in Houses Fol. 48 50 51. of Wood and Stone because he must be worshipped in Spirit he must not be worshipped by any material or sensible Representations Those words Except your Righteousness exceeds the Righteousness of the Fol. 38. Scribes and Pharisees you shall in no wise enter into the Kingdom of Heaven cuts off every thing that is External in Religion Do not these Principles remit all Christians to the Silent Meetings of Quakers Exclude the use of Churches rather than Barns Singing of Psalms and such other material Representations of the God whom we Praise The Second God and Christ are not present in the Assemblies Fol. 37. of Christians by any Figurative or Symbolical Presence There is no Symbolical Presence of God under the Gospel 'T is a great Fol. 34 55. Absurdity to talk of more Symbolical Presences of God than one for a Symbolical Presenc confines the unlimited Presence of God to a certain Place in order to certain Ends as for Example to receive the Worship which is paid him Now to have more than one such Presence as these is like having more Gods than one To say nothing of the absurdity of this Discourse which makes that Christian an adorer of two Gods who by Faith adoring God in Heaven and in his own Soul worships him in both places doth not this destroy the very Essence of your Sacrament the Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper which you own to be a Symbolical Presence of Christ The Third If God be better worshipped before an Image than Fol. 53 54. without one then the Worship of God is more confined to that Place where the Image is I cannot see how to avoid this whereas there is no appropriate Place of Worship under the Gospel And 't is the same tho' the Image be not appropriated to any Place but carried about with us for still the Image makes the Place of Worship This is an Argument for all Dissenters from you and all Fanatics against a Set Liturgy a Set Form of Prayer for if God be better worshipped by a Set Form of Prayer than without it then the Worship of God is more confined to that Place where that Set Form of Prayer that Set Liturgy is used and 't is the same tho' no set Place be appointed for that Set Form of Prayer c. The Parallel is exact The Fourth Having laid this Principle All that is meerly Fol. 34 36. External in Religion is taken away all Rites believed to be in themselves Acts of Religion and to render the Worshipper acceptable to God and this because God must be worshipped as a meer Spirit To defend the use of Baptism and the Lord's Supper he brings this only Reason Mankind by Sin hath forfeited all natural Right to Gods Favor they can challenge nothing but by Promise and Covenant such Covenants require a mutual Stipulation on both Sides Therefore they must be transacted by some visible and sensible Rites whereby God obliges himself to us and we to him Is not this last Inference destroyed by the former Principle taking away all Rites that are Acts of Religion all that is meerly External And on this Principle ought he not to teach that the mutual Stipulation betwixt God and us must be made by his interior Graces and our interior Worship because God must be worshipped as a meer Spirit Upon whatever account that interior Covenant requires a visible sensible Mark and our actual Communion with Christ another all the Communications of Gods Graces to us all our return of Worship and Adoration will equally admit of sensible Signs and Rites To avoid farther Prolixity I will end with the following Principle of his most injurious to Christ and an open and never to be coloured Blasphemy Fifth Principle There never was never can be an Infallible Fol. 68 69 70. Judge Christ himself was not an Infallible Judge altho' he were an Infallible Teacher I must my self judge of his Doctrin before I know that he is Infallible therefore Men were to judge of Christ's Doctrin before they believed him and they are thus to this day to Examin his Doctrin by the Law and Prophets and he never required that they should submit to his Infallible Authority without Examination He could not be an Infallible Judge obliging Men to receive all his Dictates as Divine Oracles without Examination 'T was impossible to know him to be Infallible but by judging of his Doctrin by the agreement thereof with the Principles of Reason and of former Revelations Doth a Christian teach this and a Christian approve and license it What JESVS our God blessed for evermore even when owned the Son of God even from us Christians cannot exact a Submission to his Infallible Authority without Examination of the truth of what he says by comparing it with the Principles of Human Reason He cannot oblige us to receive all his Dictates as Divine Oracles Was Christian Faith was the Author of it JESVS ever thus affronted Did the Apostles err did they act against Sense and Reason when they believed what he had taught of his Flesh being meat indeed Joh. 6. v. 69. only because he had the words of Eternal Life because his Dictates were Divine Oracles Were all men of this mind Christ would not indeed find any Faith on Earth What tho' we certainly know Christ to have taught and declared a Truth must we not upon his word submit to it and embrace it till we have consulted our Reason and found it can object nothing against it Were the weapons of S. Paul's 2 Cor. 10. 5. warfare such as could humble what raised it self against the science of God and bring into captivity all understanding in obedience to Christ and had the Word and Preaching of Christ less power Christ teaches it is not yet a sufficient Motive for me to believe Should an Angel from Heaven teach me this I would with St. Paul return him no other Answer than Anathema and do you Sir approve this Do you License men to teach to Christians they are not to submit to Christ's Word as to Divine Oracles that they must make themselves his Judges and Examin by their Reason whether he spoke truth or no Well Sir were it but not to give occasion to the spreading so horrid Blasphemies against our Lord and God I take my leave of you and of such Books Licensed by you and end with this Profession of my Catholic Faith Christ is an Infallible Judge I must not Judge of his Doctrin but believe it and submit to him I submit to his Infallible Authority without Examination I receive all his Dictates as Divine Oracles If tho' Summoned by me you still refuse to Subscribe to this Doctrin I will obey St. John's Counsel I will have nothing to do with you nor return to you so much as Ave or any Greeting but content my self with Subscribing to this Profession of my Faith LEWIS SABRAN Of the Society of JESUS
with which these late Heresies are patch'd up But the last Defence brought for Dr. Sherlock is surprising and I could well quarrel with you Sir as a Christian for Licensing it What do you own that we only are to look on the Faith even as Preached by Christ as necessarily Infallible Is it no part of your Belief that you are any way concerned in that that certain Faith which Christ exacted from the Jews St. Paul from each Christian must of necessity be Infallible 'T is impossible by Reason to prove that Men must not make use Preservative of their own Reason and Judgment in Matters of Religion That Men must use Reason to come to this Knowledge that Answer Fol. 5. God hath revealed what they believe is very certain As the Jews Exod. 14. Crediderunt Domino Moysi servo ejus Did believe God and Moses his Servant As all Nations believed Christ and his Apostles So each Christian now believes Christ and his Church the first as Author the second as Witnesses Commission'd from God of their Faith being moved by the Proofs they offered of their Commission So far Judgment Thus the Apostles believed Christ teaching himself to be the Son of God their Judgment having first been convinced that God spoke by him which Method appears more particularly in the Man born blind whom Christ our Lord cured and who Nin̄ Dominus esset cum illo was thereby convinced that God was with him taught by him and in consequence to that Conviction having barely heard from Christ that he was the Son of God he fell prostrate and adored him not exacting any farther proof beyond his Word After a full conviction that God speaks by those who Preach to us there is no farther use of Reason if we believe St. Paul but in order to the bringing into captivity all Vnderstanding in obedience to Faith. 2 Cor. 10. Defence f. 7 8. If my Sense and Reason will serve me to find out an Infallible Church it is a little severe to renounce it when I come there The Apostles were as Infallible as the Church can pretend to be now yet 1 Epist John 4. 1. Believe not every Spirit but try the Spirits if they be of God. 1 Cor. 10. 15. I speak to wise Men judge you what I say And Acts 17. 11. we have this particular Commendation of the Bereans that they were more noble than those of Thessalonica in that they received the Word with all readiness of mind and searched the Scriptures daily to see whether what they heard were conformable thereto or no. Answer Do I renounce my Reason when I embrace what my Reason hath convinced me to be infallibly true Sure Sir you have too much Sense not to own this to be a sensless Position But let us apply it to another Case When a Protestant is convinced and that if you please infallibly that the Word of God in the Bible delivers a Truth and his Reason hath convinced him of it is he not to abandon whatever Reason can object against the Mystery If you say he is not then a Man may doubt of the truth of Gods Word A very Christian Protestant Principle If you say he is then 't is not severe but most reasonable to renounce Reason when it opposes it self to a Truth infallibly Preached and received from an Authority acknowledged Infallible As for the three Texts I have before shewed how the First is wrested from its plain natural Sense to the opposite The Third is against him for the Bereans received First the Word with all readiness of mind and then searched the Scriptures to see in them those Texts which the Apostles used to convince the stubborn and so do Catholics The Second is neither directly nor indirectly to the purpose For St. Paul having brought a Reason why they were to abstain from such Meat and Drink as was offered to Idols to wit that since they did partake of the true Sacrifice of Christ's Body and Blood they could no more use what was Sacrificed to Idols than serve at two opposite Altars and adore the true God and the false ones he asks them Whether this Reason is not convincing Now I would know whether a Supreme Judge much more an infallible one doth disclaim his own Power because he offers evident Reasons for the Sentence he gives and shews the Parties obstinacy that should refuse to submit to them As for those words As to wise Men I speak the honest Footman little understands the meaning of them it being the Language of the Primitive Church when any thing was touched concerning the great Sacrament of our Blessed Lord's Body and Blood not to publish that high Mystery but to refer to the private Instruction about it which was given after Baptism and never trusted to the Catechumens an evident Proof that in this Sacrament there was a high Mystery beyond the Faith in Christ our Redeemer as Saviour of the World and Food of our Souls by his Passion without which no one was admitted to Baptism Thus St. Augustin ever expressed himself in this Subject The Norunt fideles norunt qui Initiaati sunt In Ps 39. 33. Ps 109. Hom 42. c. 4. l. 50. Hom. Orig. in Levit. Hom. 9. Chrys Hom. 27. in Gen. Hom. 5. ad Antioch c. Faithful know what I mean those understand me that have been Christned Thus Origen and St. Chrysostom before him and St. Paul himself I speak to you more boldly of this Mystery as to the wiser and more fully taught Pray Sir leave off Licensing such wretched Trifles and such wonderful wrested Texts or never expect there should be any Answer returned to them tho' how far this Motive will prevail with you I have some small reason to doubt Preserv f. 21. We have as much assurance of every Article of our Faith as you have of the Infallibility of your Church First because we are in general assured that the Scriptures are the Word of God. Answer f. 5. This is the great Point indeed which if a Protestant loses he loses all For 't is certain and evident that the Catholic hath the same assurance for each Article of his Faith proposed by the Church which he hath of the Churches infallibility as I have the same certainty of all that my Friend says to me which I have that he speaks nothing but certain truth He proves it first because he is in general assured that the Scriptures are the Word of God Hitherto there holds some parity though but lame but suppose it were entire the Conclusion would be this Catholics are as certain of the sense of Scripture as Protestants are that they have the Letter whence it follows demonstratively that when Protestants differ in the sense from Catholics they have less assurance for it than Catholics who have always the same assurance for the sense as Protestants have for the Letter Defence f. 6. and 7. You are Judges in your own Case