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 scripture_n write_v 2,879 5 5.9738 4 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
A45831 Rome is no rule, or, An answer to an epistle published by a Roman Catholic who stiles himself Cap. Robert Everard and may serve for an answer to two Popish treatises, the one entituled The question of questions, and the other Fiat lux, out of which books the arguments urged in the said epistle against the authority of the Scriptures and the infallibility of the Roman Church are collected : in which answer, the authority of the Scriptures is vindicated and the arguments for the Roman infallibility refuted / by J.I. Ives, Jeremiah, fl. 1653-1674. 1664 (1664) Wing I1103B; ESTC R41015 38,546 134

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

the sense of the Councels by which you understand what Doctrines are Catholick and what Expositions of Scripture are true and what are false then I demand Fourthly How do you believe with a Divine Faith that what this private Priest teacheth is according to the Infallible Doctrine of the Church since he is a Man and may err and so teach his own private Opinion for the Infallible Doctrine of the Church Fifthly Whether you may not be more subject to mis-understand the Scriptures either by the errour of the Priest in Preaching or the frailty of your understanding in hearing then others are in the reading of the Holy Scriptures And if so why should you say the Scriptures are no guide because they may be mis-interpreted For shame forbear to blame the use of a thing because of the abuse of it What if some are to blame in that they have wrested the Scriptures to serve their own interests Are not you more to blame to wound these men through the sides of the Scripture What if as one well observes That some are blind and miss their way and others are drunk and stagger out of it Must we all conspire to wish the Sun out of the Firmament that we might follow a Will with a Wisp And yet this is your kind of reasoning that because some are perverse and froward and others are full of darkness prejudice and corrupt affections by which they cannot perfectly and infallibly judge of every truth that is contained in the Scripture therefore they must throw away the blessed word of God from being their rule and guide You proceed in p. 18. and tell us That the third Reason which you thought was forcible was that those who are thus far for sole Scripture do not say that one or any particular number of the Books of Scripture but all Scriptures written by inspiration of God do being joyned together make up this Rule and Judge Hence you say you concluded that if any of these Books were lost this Rule was not perfect Now that many of these Books were lost you say you proved from those that remain Num. 21.14 The Book of the Wars of the Lord and this you say is lost It is said of Solomon 1 King 4.3 2. that he spoke 3000 Proverbs and his Songs were 1000 and 5 You conceive you say that upon a just reckoning some of these will be wanting We finde named 2 Chron. 9.29 The Book of Nathan the Prophet the Prophesie of Ahijah and the Visions of Iddo these you say are lost as also those named 1 Chron. 29.29 The Book of Samuel the Book of Nathan the Book of Goda and it is clear from Mat. 27.9 That part of Jeremy is lost So also from Mat. 2.23 Where it was foretold that Christ should be called a Nazaren and 1 Cor. 5.9 Tells us that the Epistle which our Canon calls St. Pauls First Epistle was not truly his first for there he sayeth I wrote to you in an Epistle not to keep company with Fornicatours St. Paul also wrote an Epistle from Laodicea and yet you say you do not finde this Epistle In Answer hereunto I cannot but take notice that you say you THOUGHT this Answer was forcible but where was your Mother that she did not inable you to say you were SURE it was forcible But let us see wherein this force lyeth you say Protestants do not believe a certain number of Books to be their guide but all the Scriptures written by Inspiration from God make up this Rule and Guide and many of these Books are lost therefore this Rule is not perfect I Answer First That the Law of the Lord is perfect and every word of God is pure and therefore there can be no imperfections in the word of God but Secondly How doth it appear that any of those Books which you say were lost had a Divine Image and Superscription upon them or that they that did write them we●e inspired by the Holy Ghost in the writing of those particular Books For it is very possible that they wrote many things upon particular occasions as Hezekiah wrote to Ephraim and that sometimes their writings were of no more inspiration from Heaven then Davids Letters were that he sent to Joab by Uriah or then Peters practise for which Paul withstood him to the face But Thirdly What Infallible reason have you to prove that these sayings recited out of these Scriptures may not refer to the Books of Samuel and the Kings which we have extant rather then to any Books that are lost Fourthly How do you know that those writings however the Pen-men were inspired were intended by God for the perpetual use of his Church in all Ages Fifthly How do you Infallibly know that all the Canons or your Church even of those which you say are necessary to Salvation are preserved and that some very material things are not lost Sixthly If you say there is none lost then whether you do not make God in his wise providence more carefull to preserve intire and unmaimed the Canons of your Councels then he hath been to preserve the Writings of his Holy Prophets and Apostles And if you suppose any of the Decrees of your Councels hath been lost or maimed then how do you know Infallibly whether some that are lost are not as material as those you have Thus the edge of your sword is turned against your self But Seventhly If any of the Books of the Old Testament were lost that were by God intended for the perpetual use of that Church to whom his Oracles were committed how then can you say that the Church of the Old Testament was infallible since she failed in that trust that was committed to her viz. the keeping of the Scripture And if this was not a failing in her in that she lost part of the Scriptures then she had not failed if she had lost all and then it followeth that the Scriptures are so far from being a sole Guide that they are no guide at all for if they are a guide and a directer in any sense or if they are of any divine use then it must be an errour either of ignorance or wilfullnesse to suffer them to be lost or maimed Eighthly Whereas you say that the Epistle of St. Paul which your Canon calls the first to the Corinthians was not TRULY his first I Answer then your Canon doth falsely call it the first and then how shall we believe when your Canons are true You had best tell your Mother she lyes as soon as you can speak and then shew a reason for it by telling her That St. Paul saith he writ to the Corinthians an Epistle before Ergo there is an Epistle before that which your Canon calls the first But Chrysostome understands it of the words going before wherein he had charged them to deliver the incestious person to Satan and to purge out the old leaven And that you may see how little cause you have
to enveigh against Protestants for their private doubtfull and uncertain expounding of Scriptures Let me give you the exposition of a whole Colledge of Catholicks upon this very Text under debate Either say they St. Paul means this Epistle in the words before or some other See the Rhemists marginall Note upon the place Surely this is infallible indeed it is either this or some other At this rate of Infallibility any private spirit shall interpret Scriptures all day long viz. either this is the sense or some other Ninthly and Lastly If any Canonical Scripture be lost will not this redound to the prejudice of the Romane Church Since they acknowledge that they only are the Church and that the Church is the keeper of Divine Truths and that they have been the conservatours of the Scriptures to posterity Now if any Books be lost as you say there is how have they infallibly kept what they say was long since committed to their trust Thus you desperatly venture to wound the reputation of the Scriptures though you make the Sword by which you do it to pass through the reins of your darling infallibility In pag. 19. you come to a Fourth Reason Why the Scriptures cannot be a guide to conveigh Divine and Infallible faith to all and that is because they cannot be understood by all nay you say they are very subject to be mis-understood if we will believe the 2 Pet. 3.16 Where speaking of St. Pauls Epistles he saith there were some things hard to be understood which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest as they do also the other Scriptures to their own destruction It is in vain you say to urge that the Scriptures are plain and easie in fundamentals and in what concerns salvation for we have here a plain testimony that they are wrested to their own destruction therefore they cannot be a safe rule nor any rule at all to the ignorant c. Though this Argument be answered already yet I answer further in the words of a learned man That if the Scriptures are so hard to be understood and the Pope can infallibly interpret them what a madness and childishness is it for the Catholicks themselves to lie swaggering and contending with one another before all the world with fallible mediums about the sense of Scripture when they have one among them that infallibly can interpret them and that with such Authority as all men are bound to rest in and contend no further And the further mischief of it is that of all the rest this man is always silent as to exposition of Scripture who alone is able to part the fray Now methinks this argues a great want of good nature that the Pope can see his Children so fiercely wrangle about the sense of Scripture and yet will not give out the infallible meaning of every place and so stint the strife among them seeing he can do it if he will But again how doth it follow that because the Scriptures are hard to be understood and are by some wrested to their damnation that therefore they are either no Guides at all or at the best but uncertain ones Pray let me ask you a question or two May you not as well say that Christ was no infallible Guide because many of his words were wrested by the Jews to their destruction as that of his destroying the Temple and building it in three days Job 2.19 And did not they wrest his words to their own destruction when Christ said Mat. 26.64 65. that he was the Son of God and they thereupon said he had spoken blasphemy and therefore needed no other witness against him and likewise they said he blasphemed when he told the man that was sick of the Palsie that his sins were forgiven So that speech of Christ was hard to be understood to learned Nicodemus Job 3. Except a man be born again he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God Doth it follow from hence that Christ was not an infallible Guide Again are the Canons and Decrees of General Councils more secure from being misinterpreted then the Scriptures or do they use more plainness of speech then the Spirit of God used in the Scriptures or is nothing that they determine of necessity to salvation If so then why may not their words be wrested to the destruction of those that are unlearned or unstable as well or rather as ill as the Scriptures And if so I demand whether this be not as good nay a better Argument against themselves viz. some wrest the judgment and definitions of the Church to their destruction Ergo the Church is not an infallible Guide to all nor indeed any Guide to the ignorant which are the greatest part of mankind Is not this the same if not a better argument then to say the unlearned wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction Ergo the Scriptures are not an infallible Guide to all nor any Guide at all to the ignorant I come now to consider your 5 Reason which is That if the Scriptures be a Guide Rule and Judge it must onely be meant of their true Original and Authentick Writings and not of corrupted Copies and therefore if we have not the true Originals our rule is imperfect And again pag. 20. you say If we had the Originals it would be hard to find a man that doth so infallibly understand the Originals as to give us a true translation This you endeavour to prove out of several Protestant Writers pag. 20. 21. viz. That we have not the Originals themselves nor undoubted Translations and therefore the Scriptures are not an infallible Guide To which I answer That though what hath been spoken already might suffice to this Argument yet to make full measure running over let me add that this very Objection lieth with the like force against General Councils For first how do you know with a divine certitude that you have the true Original and Authentick Writings wherein those Decrees were contained Secondly How do you know with a divine certitude whether the Scribe that committed them to Writing was an honest man or not Thirdly How do you know with a divine certitude that these Councils Decrees and Canons are truly and infallibly translated since they were written in a Language that I know not If you say I have them translated by private Doctors then I query if private Doctors are infallible If they are what need is there of a Pope or a General Council If they are fallible why may they not fail when they tell me they have faithfully interpreted and translated the sense of Councils and Fathers But if they being private persons can give the true sense of Councils and Fathers why may not men of the same ability for Learning and Piety give as perfect a Translation and as infallible an Interpretation of the Scriptures of the Apostles and Prophets So that the Argument cuts as much with one edge as the other If the Scriptures be guide