Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	canonical_a	part_n	scripture_n	2,216	5	5.9140	4	false

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

about infallibility We have the concurrent testimony of all Churches that we have those Canonical Books But let us suppose a while that your Church were infallible what greater certainty for that is the point you know which the Doctor was upon have you of it than we have of any particular Point of Faith as for the certainty of Reason and Argument That we have and would fain see you shew more What we believe is according to Scripture and doth not Contradict either Sense or Reason nor any other Principle of Knowledge Answer Never was a starved Cause so pitifully defended No wonder a Footman only doth not blush to appear in its Defence the Learned and judicious Gentlemen of the Temple had each of them too much Honor Conscience and Wit and therefore none of them would Patronize so wretched a Cause and support such weak Contradictions as the Excellent Master of the Temple so the Preface-maker calls him had blundered out Pray Sir review this last Discourse blush that your License Authorises it and hereafter have some care of your Reputation and set not your Name to such Stuff This is the Case on one side there is supposed an Infallible Interpreter of the Christians great Law-Book for thus Dr. Sherlock states the Case on the other are some men far the greater part unlearned and weak who allow not any sense to this Book which seems to them to Contradict either their Sense or Reason or any other Principle of their Knowledge And I am asked whether I proceed more prudently in receiving the sense of the Law from that Interpreter which is actually supposed infallible or in proceeding by the second method Sir if you are so weak or wilful as not to declare that I have a greater certainty in submitting to that infallible Interpreter your Counsel is not worth the asking and I appeal to that of the judicious Gentlemen of the Temple But I must not omit the untruth couched in those words We have the Concurrent Testimony of all Churches that we have those Canonical Books For no part of the Catholic Church no part of the Greek Scismatic Churches own the same Canon of scripture-Scripture-Books which you do Preservative Ibid. In particular we are assured that the Faith which we profess is agreeable to Scripture Answer fol. 5. If he means they have the same Proofs for this which Catholics have for the infallibility of the Church that is for the Continued Being of that Church which assures us that She is infallible in directing us for a Church Erring in so Fundamental a Point would cease to be the Church of Christ then it is evidently fase since each Christian in this Age hath the same Evidence of Her being the Church of Christ and of Her teaching all Truth and consequently of Her being as She declares infallible in thus teaching which he hath of Christ to wit the ancient Prophesies those of Christ himself his Miracles and the Miracles wrought in that Church according to the Promises of Christ besides the Conversion of Nations to Christianity c. These things Protestants do not so much as pretend unto as Proofs of their particular Sense in Interpreting Scripture Defence fol. 10. This is a pretty Conceit the infallibility of the Church that is to say the Being of the Church can't a Church be without being infallible We have heard much of Miracles but could never see any Answer Do you allow such Answers Sir that have so little of Sense and less of Piety Can a Church remain the Church of Christ and yet teach her self to be infallibly guided by the Spirit of Christ whil'st she is abandon'd to the Spirit of Error and that so far as Idolatry and the Evacuating of the Passion of Christ Are we come to own that Herod might well be excused from believing in Christ because he had heard much of his Miracles but could never see any Well Sir when you License such an other Discourse add to your Titles that of a Christian that we may think you are one Preservative fol. 23. If you must not use your Reason and private judgment then you must not by any Reasons be persuaded to condemn the use of Reason Answ f. 5. I never heard so much and so little of Reason All he says might with equal weight be said by a sick Man who dissuaded from choosing his own Remedies and desired to send for a skilful Doctor should answer ' T is impossible by Reason to persuade me not to use my Reason in governing my self by Reason as my own Reason teaches me which would be to Condemn Reason and yet be guided by your Reason or the Doctor 's Reason Such a Discourse would prove the Sick party at least somewhat light-headed What 't is a Symptom of in Dr. Sherlock I will not be positive Defence f. 11. Is this Sick Man persuaded to renounce his Reason or rather is it not that he should submit his judgment not renounce his Reason in that case to that Person whom he hath all the reason in the world to believe hath better knowledge and understanding of those things which are to be used for his recovery than himself And all this while methinks he is governed by Reason though he doth not think fit to trust his own skill But this bears no comparison Religion is or ought to be the Concern of all Answer The Footman prevaricates here or is ashamed of his Master 's gross Sophistry and will not stand by it 'T is Dr. Sherlock who pretends that a Catholic by following an infallible Guide renounces his Reason I contend that all the while he is governed by Reason and chiefly because that in a matter of that Concern he thinks not fit to trust his own skill which God hath as often declared to be too weak in any private person as he hath declared he would give to all such Pastors and Teachers as should guide them and Commanded each to repair to them to be guided by them But Religion is or ought to be the Concern of all a wise Observation So is or ought to be each ones health and the preservation of his life as therefore each one ought to advise with a good Doctor concerning his Health a good Lawyer for the preservation of his Fortune so and much more with a good Guide and since it can be had an infallible one for the securing of his Souls eternal happiness the Practice of Religion is the duty of all but the teaching it of those Doctors whom God hath appointed to that end as St. Paul teaches us Eph. 4. is not this Sir a most evident truth Preservative f. 25. Thou shalt Worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve is such a plain and express Scripture that no reason can justifie the Worship of another Being Answ f. 6. A rare Consequence to Infer a Negative for an Affirmative Antecedent that bears no opposition with it 'T is like this a Subject must

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 Principles which destroy all Church-Discipline and oppose Christs Divine Authority In Two Letters OF F. LEWIS SABRAN of the Society of JESUS With Allowance LONDON Printed by Henry Hills Printer to the King 's Most Excellent Majesty for His Houshold and Chappel And are sold at his Printing-house on the Ditch-side in Black-Fryers 1688. TO THE READER YOU will find in the Postscript an Answer to the Preface set before the Defence which being a Heap of undigested Untruths and ill-contriv'd Calumnies I conceived it most proper to expose them that relate to me in particular after I have wiped off the Dirt which the Defence hath cast upon the Churches Doctrin Besides I thought my self bound in Justice and good Manners to yield the Preference to the Honest Footman whose Style is not near so Lewd and Unmannerly as the outragious Preface-maker's who may with reason be supposed a Minister that CANONICAL GOWN having these late Years been a constant Sanctuary to so many Libelling Slandering Prophane Reviling Peevish and Uncharitable Pens that the greatest part of those Books which in any of these kinds have appeared of late Years in this Kingdom have been the notunnatural Issues of these Meek Charitable Humble and Loyal Levites SIR THO' you have declared to some Friends That you do not conceive your self under any Obligation of Answering my first Letter the Licensing of a Book being I perceive but a Friendly Office and a cheap one too when Conscience only and Reputation may be concern'd in it and not obliging the Licenser to boggle at any Calumnies he meets with in it nor at any Falshood that imposes upon the Readers tho' in a Concern of so high a nature as the True Faith and Eternal Salvation However I will tempt your good Nature and Civility once more hoping that you may at least make use of Dr. Sherlock's happy Contrivance and when you are sensible that Five or Six Weeks Endeavors cannot suggest any Answer that may appear to Public View without betraying the weakness of your Cause and the unwarrantable Methods us'd in its defence you will find out some Honest Footman who will not blush to own all the Wrong and impertinent Reasoning which must make up a seeming Answer I am confident how unkindly soever you may deal with others that you owe Dr. Sherlock so much Deference as not to License a Book Printed in his Defence without his Perusal and Allowance Wherefore not to trouble the Footman whose Circumstances as we are told can expect but a small allowance of time I shall look on the Answers given by Dr. Sherlock's Second as offered or at least owned by him and Examin how he supports those Principles by which I pretend that he overthrows First All right use of Common Sense It is a Catholic Principle That he who has an Infallible Guide need not mistrust him so as to enquire farther whether he be in the right Way tho' he may and ought to improve himself in the knowledge of the Way he is directed in Dr. Sherlock in opposition to this self-evident Principle Preservat Fol. 3. charges the Catholic Church with this great Crime That it will not allow the reading of Heretical Books adding That God not only allows but requires it This seemed to me extravagant not to say impious and to all those who have inherited from St. Paul that Faith to which he exacts so firm and unwavering an adherency that if an Angel from Heaven should teach us Gal. 1. 8. any thing in opposition to it we ought not to mind him or to return him any other Answer than Anathema How can said I this positive Certainty stand with an Obligation of reading Heretical Books which oppose that Faith to frame by them and settle a Judgment By what Text doth God deliver this Injunction I asked farther how standing to the first Principles of Common Sense a Church that declares all Men bound to Judge for themselves could Countenance Laws which exact of Dissenters that they stand not to that their Judgment but Comply against it and that constrain their liberty of Judging by the dread of Excommunications Sequestrations Imprisonments Exclusion from the chiefest Properties of free-born Subjects even by Hanging and Quartering which is to make it Death not to act against a strict Duty of Conscience acknowledg'd by the Persecutors to be such These were three material Questions I waited Six Weeks for an Answer and he returns me at last by his Footman this wonderful one That I leave out what was said of the Bible Dr. Sherlock blaming the Church of Rome for not suffering her People to dispute their Religion or to read Heretical Books nay not so much as to look into the Bible it self that I take it for granted that all the Writings of Protestant Divines are Heretical Books nay the Bible it self too I wonder not the Doctor should give this his Answer by a Footman he hath yet I conceive some remnants of Modesty But is there here one word of Answer to my three Questions No not a syllable nor of Truth neither I reflected on no Divines of any Persuasion I found Heretical Books in the number of those which he blames our Church for not recommending and which he assures us God requires the reading of This being an Objection of a new Coin and a Proof of his own Invention I shew'd the Unreasonableness of the one and asked an Instance of the other passing by that trivial Calumny so often Answered That the Catholic Church suffers not her People to look into the Bible it self which supposes that we lock up the Bible as the Romans did their Sybillin Books whereas many thousands are commanded by the Catholic Church setting aside all temporal Concerns to make the reading of the Word of God their continual study and to teach daily the Doctrin of it to those who not having learnt to read or being of too weak a Judgment to carry away the Sense of a Book or too much taken up by their Trades and Employs by which they support their Families and earn themselves a necessary Livelihood have not the Leisure or Capacity to gather the Articles of Christian Belief or the different Parts of Christian Duties from it for to all others who conceive they may reap a Benefit from it leave is never deny'd to read the Bible translated to that end into all vulgar Tongues In the close an Answer is attempted and the Author of the Defence tells me He is not content with an Implicit Faith That we are commanded to try the Spirits and to try all things These are the Texts produc'd to maintain Dr. Sherlock's three Positions That we are obliged to read Heretical

infallible Person must know what he knows as it truly is but needs not see how or why it can be so Preservat f. 82. 'T is their common Argument That there is a great variety among Protestants and that they condemn one another with equal confidence and assurance Answer 'T is one of your usual Artifices to leave out always the pressing part of our Arguments you should have added Tho' they use the same Rule of Faith and apply it by the same Method Thus proposed 't is an unanswerable Argument against your Rule of Faith and evidently proves it uncertain Defence f. 19 20. Here the honest Footman sends me for an Answer to Dr. Stillingfleet and bids me try my Skill upon him Thus he delivers the Answer given to J. S. first Letter and applied to the present Case 't is divided into five Propositions which to avoid repeating I 'll set down with the following Answer Answer First Arithmetick says Dr. Stillingfleet prescribes a certain way by Addition and Substraction to find out any Sum. 'T is granted Secondly Therefore it must be such that they who take it shall arrive by it at the exact Sum. That 's true also Thirdly But two Men who have made use of the same way differ at least a Hundred in casting up the Sum. This is impossible if they both really made use of that way as the words of Dr. Stillingfleet express But 't is very possible if the meaning be one of them doth not know the Rules of Arithmetick but only thinks he knows them or both know well the Rule but one blundered and set down one Figure for another Fourthly Therefore they who take only that way cannot by it arrive at the certain Sum. This is evidently false and the contrary true to wit Therefore they who take precisely that way and not another for it erring in the Theory or the Practice cannot but arrive by it at the certain Sum. But this following Conclusion might have been drawn from the Third Proposition taken in its Second most improper Sense which Dr. Stillingfleet gives to it Therefore those who err in the Knowledge or miss in the Application of the Rule of Arithmetick tho' they believe never so much in their own Judgment that they know and use the Rule right tho' they have used their best Endeavors tho' they firmly believe they have cast the Sum right yet certainly they have missed and are in the wrong This is the Conclusion which the Dean of Pauls should have drawn and then he might have concluded Still the Rule is certain to those who use it right But is this the Reverend Dr. Stillingfleet's full Answer and that in Dr. Sherlock's Case Stupidity it self would not own it T is an evident Demonstration against Dr. Sherlock's Position and Dr. Stillingfleet's Tenet It proves evidently that altho' Scripture be as infallible a Truth and thereby a Rule of Truth for from Truth only Truth can follow as any Rule of Arithmetick Ex vero non nisi verum yet as in one Case if two casting up an Account by the same pretended Rule differ in the total Sum this following Principle would not only be false but also after such a trial most absurd and sensless Every one is bound in reason to believe the Account he hath cast up to be right if he hath a Book of Arithmetick by him hath read it believes he understands it and hath used his best Endeavors to follow it So is this like Principle which Dr. Sherlock and all his Party stand for If two Men have the Bible read it endeavor to understand it and believing they do draw from the same Scriptures two different Conclusions two opposite Articles of Faith both are bound to stand to their private Judgment and to believe themselves in the right tho' all the World should accuse one or both of them in lieu of the true pretended Rule to have used a false one But let us suppose farther that an eminent Master of Arithmetick should shew to one of these Men where he erred against the true Rule of that Science where he misplaced a cypher otherwise than the Rule directs that this Man in lieu of submitting should appeal to his Book of Arithmetick by the which also the other teaches and the Dispute should be carried on by the one saying the Book teaches and directs thus whilst the other as sturdily pretended it teaches and directs otherwise In this Case were it a reasonable Principle Both must stand to their private Judgment in Interpreting of the Book and well they may for the Rule is certain which both follow Never did Man give a fairer and easier Victory to an Adversary than Dr. Stillingfleet doth to his by this Simile The dullest School-Boy will easily discern the Dean of Paul's patent Parallogism whereby he compares the written Word of God to the Rule it self of Arithmetick whereas the natural and only true Comparison is of the Book or Letter of Scripture with the Book of Arthmetick the true Sense of Scripture with the Rule of Arithmetick A Right-Line-Rule and a Square are the Rule of a Carpenter suppose a Carpenter had a bent and crooked Rule and that what he calls his Square opened at an acute or obtuse Angle this Man working by these would certainly make his Work wrong I ask you now where the Fault would be Certainly in his Rule in his supposed Square and Rule But is not a Carpenter's Rule exact Yes a Carpenter's but not this Carpenter's the Rule he pretends to follow is most Just the Rule which he actually follows is most false and erroneous And if many Carpenters pretending to work by a Right-Line and Square applying them the same way did all differ in the Irregularity of their Work it would be evident they had a false Rule for that 's ones Rule not that he pretends to have but what he actually works by Now to apply this to our Case The Word of God is not the Letter but the true Sense of the Bible for the knowledge of Scripture as St. Hierom observes consists not Scripturae non in legendo sed intelligendo consistant in the Reading but the Vnderstanding of it The Rule of Faith then is the Sense of the Letter of Scripture The pretended Rule is the true Sense of Scripture The real Rule that Christians use is that Sense of the Letter of Scripture by which they square their Faith for that is any ones real Rule by which he in reality acts The true Sense of Scripture is a certain Rule The Sense given to the Letter of Scripture is a most uncertain and frequently a wrong Rule The Rule Protestants pretend unto is a certain infallible Rule for Truth never misguides But their Rule of Faith is the Sense which each Man 's private Judgment gives to the Letter of Scripture for they square their Faith by it believe according to the same The Letter of Scripture is their Material Rule

not to be Punished is to declare they value not Gods Love and Grace like Children but meerly fear the Lash like Slaves and all Catholics look on such a Disposition excluding positively all regard to Gods Grace and Love as incapable of receiving forgiveness of Sins Christ hath made Atonement for our Sins but his Blood is to be applied by Baptism and in case of Relapse by perfect Contrition or Penitential Works during Life or Punishment after Death before all Pain due to Sin be remitted thus applied it frees us from the whole Curse of the Law. No Suffering or Punishment is the Death of the Soul as Dr. Sherlock supposes but only the privation of Gods Grace which is her Life and which is enjoyed through Christ as much in Purgatory as by penitent Saints on Earth in their penitential Sufferings and the mercy of our Lord appears as much in purging his Members from all Stains of the least sin by the Fire of Purgatory as here by the toilsom Labors of a penitential Life such as his dearest Servants were ever purified by St. Paul never taught that all things that are not seen or of another World are Eternal or else God would be Eternally Judging and so never Rewarding his Servants or Punishing his Enemies so that Dr. Sherlock's Demonstration hath not so much as the least appearance of a seeming Reason Having thus represented our Faith I conclude with S. Augustin Enchirid. c. 10. against Dr. Sherlock It cannot be denied but that the Souls of the Dead are relieved by the Piety and Devotion of their living Friends as often as the Sacrifice of our Mediator is offered or Alms-deeds are done in the Church for them but these things do bring profit only to those who in their Life-time did merit to receive profit by the like after Death For there is a certain State of Life neither so good that it needeth not these Helps after Death nor so evil but that it may be helped by the same I have already Answered in the first Section all those Calumnies which are repeated here concerning the Blessed Saints Intercessions for us Our Doctrin directly opposite to the slanderous Misrepresentations here offered is 1. We look on the Prayers of Saints as meerly humble Supplications for we hold that Christ only standeth our Mediator challenging he alone in Justice and by his own Merits to be heard in favor of us 2. We conceive Charity to be at least as proper to and inseparable from the Seraphical Souls of Saints as from any of Gods Servants on Earth and as much inclining them to Pray for their Fellow-Members of Christ's Mystical Body engaged here below in Miseries and Dangers 3. We never required the Prayers of Saints to render God good and merciful but only when joyned with our Prayers to render these a fitter Object of Gods Mercy and to reconcile the Effects thereof to his Wisdom and Justice 4. Whatever pity the Saints may have on us we look on it as on a small St●●l●e situ●●e Drop compared to the Ocean of Gods infinite Mercy of which that very Pity and the Intercession of Saints is a free Gift to us given with all other Blessings together with and as an Effect of his greatest Gift to wit his Eternal Son with whom in whom and by whom he hath given us all things This Faith of ours doth I conceive most evidently expose the shameless Calumnies which Dr. Sherlock hath disfigured her by Thirty Misrepresentations and Calumnies offered by Dr. Sherlock in his Third and Fourth Sections and some of his Phanatical Principles NEver did Man speak more without Book without Truth and without any respect to Shame or Conscience this Preservative deserving more the Fate of defamatory Libels than those two which he prises and recommends Fol. 78. No Provincial Letters Jesuite Morals burnt by the Hangman Narrative of the Minister Oats contains more Lies and Calumnies against the Persons of Catholics than the Minister Sherlock's Preservative against their Religion the latter is infinitely more Impudent because he accuses with an equally shameless Scurrility not single Persons but most Princes Bishops Universities Kingdoms of the Christian World and all the General Councils to boot I do own and will maintain it That no man ever Lyed in Print with more Confidence ever was so deafned by Passion to all the Reproaches of Conscience and Honor And had not a long Custom of saying any thing in the Pulpit tho' never so monstrously false that could render Catholic Religion odious or ridicule it by disfiguring it dictated to his peevish Distemper this Second Part of his Preservative it would not I conceive have been possible that all the Gall that can drop from a Christians Pen should in one Pamphlet have heaped so many and so defamatory Calumnies Take the following Instances 1. The Catholics by unwritten Traditions that make up a part Fol. 73 74 75. of their Rule of Faith mean such things as may be concealed from the knowledge of the World for 1500 Years never heard of before in the Church of God kept very privately and secretly for several Ages and totally unwritten By Tradition we mean a Revelation received from God by the Apostles conveighed by the continual teaching and preaching of Lawful Pastors strengthned by the visible practice of Christian Churches found in the Books of succeeding Fathers and Historians though not in Canonical Scripture which St. Paul recommended 1 Tim. 6. 2 Thes 2. de Sp. S. c. 27. Ipsam fidei praedicationem ad nudum nomen Contrahemus to Timothy faithfully to be kept as a depositum And commanded the Thessalonians to observe which if it be laid by says St. Basil We shall retain of the Preaching of the Faith but an empty Name and which is delivered to us as Preached by the Apostles by the same means and with the same security at least as the Letter of the Gospel is conveighed to us as written by them 2. They teach several External Observances to be much more Fol. 79. pleasing to God and therefore much better in themselves than true Gospel Obedience Moral or Evangelical virtues that they supply the want of true virtue Compensate for sin and make men great Saints We teach that Gods inherent Grace only Sanctifies us and that whatever External observance void of Evangelical virtue is a sinful Hypocrisie and only can make one a greater sinner 3. They teach that when a Priest Absolves men that forsake Fol. 81 82. not their sins God must confirm the Sentence of his Minister and therefore they are Absolved and need not fear whence they believe that God can be reconciled to sinners whilst they remain in their sins And therefore they must believe that God hath given power to his Priests to Absolve those whom he could not Absolve himself We teach that to receive Absolution without a real forsaking of our sins in lieu of forgivness of them adds a hainous Sacrilege 4.