Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n new_a scripture_n testament_n 8,305 5 8.0705 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
A59220 Errour non-plust, or, Dr. Stillingfleet shown to be the man of no principles with an essay how discourses concerning Catholick grounds bear the highest evidence. Sergeant, John, 1622-1707. 1673 (1673) Wing S2565; ESTC R18785 126,507 288

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

many others give Living voice an incomparable Advantage over Dead Characters in point of Intelligibleness and Expressiveness And though Dr. St. may contend that whatever advantage in signifying That has over This may possibly be put in writing and exprest by means of many large Explications writ by the person himself that was to deliver his mind yet he can never show that those Multitudes of words in those very Explications have the same degree of Significativeness and Intelligibility as if they had been spoken vivâ voce by their Author since they will still want all or most of the Advantages now spoken of which manifestly determine the signification of words To omit that all this will little make for his purpose when he comes to apply it since Scripture has no such large Explications writ upon it to supply that less clearness of expressing which the way of writing is necessarily subject to if compar'd with that of speaking much less if daily practise go along with living voice to declare mens minds as is found in Tradition As for what he adds and builds on that Scripture may be known to be the word of God If he means it may be known to be such according to the Grounds he proceeds on he ought either to have put it amongst Principles agreed on by both sides or else have prov'd it which he no where attempts but afterwards Princ. 15. very solidly and learnedly disproves and confutes while he denies the necessity of any Infallible society of men to attest or explain those VVritings For since in the bare Letter as it lies there are found many passages which contradict one another and abstracting from all Interpretation and Attestation of the Letter no part of it is to be held truer than other for if it once lose the repute of being Gods word as in that case it must 't is all equally liable to be false it follows that if there be neither any men Infallible in attesting nor in explaining those Writings all the World may be deceiv'd in performing both those duties and so all Mankind may be deceived both in judging the Scriptures which we now have to be the same book which was writ at first since there is no INFALLIBLE Attestation of it and also may be deceiv'd in judging there are not Contradictions in it since there is no Infallible Explanation of it to secure it from many such Imputations Evident in the bare Letter taking it as un explain'd or uninterpreted Any man of reason would think that to leave Scripture in such a pickle were but a slender provision to give it such a Certainty as will fit it to be a Rule of Faith if he but reflects that that Rule must be the Basis of all our Knowledg that God ever reveal'd any thing at all that is of all Mankinds way to salvation But suppose it thus granted that the will of God can be fufficienty declared to Men by writing in the manner declared above let 's see what follows 11. It is agreed among all Christians that although God in the first Ages of the VVorld did reveal his mind to men immediately by a voice or secret inspirations yet afterwards he did communicate his mind to some immediatly inspir'd to write his VVill in Books to be preserv'd for the benefit of future Ages and particularly that these Books of the New Testament which we now receive were so written by the Apostles and Disciples of Iesus Christ. This is granted only it is not agreed among all that bear the name of Christians of what nature this benefit is which God intended men in future Ages by the Scriptures whether of strengthening them in Faith and stirring them up to good Life or teaching them their Faith at first and assuring it to them nor how this benefit comes to be deriv'd to the Generality whether by Immediate reading and penetrating it themselves or through the Preaching and Instruction of some others deputed by God for that end who have Faith in their hearts already by some other Means But we are to expect Dr. St. will in the process of his discourse clear this point solidly and throughly for 't is the main hinge of all this Controveesie He goes forward thus 12. Such Writings have been received by the Christian Church of the first Ages as Divine and Infallible and being deliver'd down as such to us by an Vniversal consent of all Ages since they ought to be owned by us as the Certain Rule of Faith whereby we are to judge what the Will of God is in order to our salvation unless it appear with an Evidence equal to that whereby we believe those Books to be the Word of God that they were never intended for that end because of their obscurity or Imperfection This whole Paragraph amounts to one Proposition which is this such Writings viz. penn'd by men divinely inspir'd for the benefit of future Ages receiv'd at first and deliver'd down ever since as Divine and Infallible are to be held the Certain Rule of Faith unless there be Evidence of their Defectiveness equal to that of their being Gods Word Which is a bare Assertion neither prov'd from any Principle agreed or not agreed on and therefore perfectly Groundless and unprov'd and False into the bargain though the main stress of his whole discourse relies on it Now that 't is False I prove because its Contradictory is True For there may be writings penn'd by men Divinely inspir'd and deliver'd down to us as Divine and Infallible and yet we need not be bound to hold them the Rule of Faith though we have not equal Evidence of their defect as we have that they are the VVord of God Since to be writ by men divinely-inspir'd to be Divine Infallible and the word of God signifies no more but that they are perfectly Holy and True in themselves and beneficial to mankind in some way or other and this is the farthest these words will carry but that they are of themselves of sufficient Clearness to give sincerely-endeavouring persons such Security of their Faith while they rely on them as cannot consist with Error which is requisit to the Rule of Faith these words signifie not They may be most Holy they may be most True in themselves they may be exceedingly Vseful or Beneficial to mankind and yet not be endow'd with this Property which yet the RVLE OF FAITH must have And whereas he says they are for these reasons to be owned for the Rule of Faith that is we are for these reasons to judge and profess them such unless it appear with an equal evidence c. that they are defective sure he never understood what Iudging and Professing is built on who can make such a Discourse Our Assent or Iudgment is built on the Grounds or Reasons which conclude the thing to be as we judg and not on our seeing nothing to the contrary for in case the reasons produc'd conclude not the thing to
Notion fits that is whic hath trnly the Nature of the Rule of faith And this is perform'd by examining which of them is of its own Nature if apply'd and held to able to assure us infallibly that Christ taugbt thus and thus 10. And for the Letter of Scripture not to insist that if it be deny'd as many if not all the parts of the New Testament have been by some or other or mention that those who receive the Bo●ks do often and always may doubt of almost any particular Text alledged whether some fault through Malice Negligence or Weakness be not crept into it in which Cases the Letter cannot evidence it self but needs another Rule to establish it I say not to insist upon these things which yet are undeniable We see by experience Multitudes of Sects differing from one another and some in most fundamental Points as the Trinity and Godhead of Christ yet all agreeing in the outward Letter And it is not onely Uncharitable but even Impossible to imagin that none among so v●st Multitudes do intend to follow the Letter to their power while they all pro●ess to reverence it as much as any read it frequently study it diligently quote it constantly and zealously defend the sense which they conceive of it fo far that many are even ready to die for it Wherfore it cannot be suspected but they follow it to their power and yet 't is so far from infallibly teaching them the Doctrine of Christ that all this notwithstanding they contradict one another and that in most fundamental points The bare Letter then is not the Rule of Faith as not being of its own Nature able to assure us infallibly though we follow it to our power what Christ has taught I would not be mistaken to have less Veneration than I ought for the Divine Books whose Excellence and Vsefulness as it is beyond man to express so peradventure among men there are not many who conceit this deeper than my self and I am sure not one amongst those who take the confidence to charge us with such irreverent thoughts But we are now about another Question They are the Word of God and their true Sense is Faith We are enquiring out the Rule of Faith whose office t is not to satisfy us that we ought to believe what God has said which none doubts of but What it is which God has said And I affirm That the Letter alone is not a sufficient means to assure us infallibly of this and the experience of so many erring Thousands is a lamentable but convincing proof of it 11. On the other side there needs but common sense to discern That TRADITION is able if follow'd to ones power to bring infallibly down to after Ages what Christ and his Apostles taught at first For since it means no more but delivery of Faith by daily Teaching and Practise of Immediate Forefathers to their respective Children and it is not possible that men should be ignorant of that to which they were educated of that which they daily saw and heard and did let this Rule be follow'd to ones power that is let Children resolve still to believe and practise themselves what they are taught by and practis'd with their Fathers and this from Age to Age and it is impossible but all succeeding Children which follow this Rule must needs from the Apostles time to the end of the World be of the same Faith which was taught at first For while they do thus there is no change and if there be no change 't is the same Tradition then thus understood has in it the Nature of the Rule of Faith as being able if held to to bring down infallibly what Christ and his Apostles taught 12. We have found the Rule of Faith there remains to find which body of men in the World have ever and still do follow this Rule For those and onely those can be infallibly assured of what Christ taught that is can onely have true Faith Whereas all the rest since they have but Fallible grounds or a Rule for their Faith which may deceive them cannot have right Faith but Opinion onely which may be false whereas Faith cannot 13. And first 't is a strong presumption that those many particular Churches in communion with the Roman which for that reason are called Roman-Catholicks do hold their Doctrine by this infallible Tenure since they alone own Tradition to be an Infallible Rule whereas the Deserters of that Church write whole Books to disgrace and vilify it And since no man in his wits will go about to weaken a Tenure by which he holds his Estate 't is a manifest sign that the Deserters of that Church hold not their Faith by the Tenure of Tradition but rather acknowledge by their carriage that Tradition stands against them and that 't is their Interest to renounce it lest it should overthrow their Cause Wherefore since Tradition § 11. is the only means to derive Christs Doctrin infallibly down to after Ages they by renouncing it renounce the only means of conveying the Docttine of Faith certainly to us and are convinc'd to have no Faith but only Opinion And not only so but even to oppose and go point-blank against it since they oppose the only-sure Method by which it can with certainty come down to us 14 Besides since Tradition which I always understand as formerly explicated to be the Teaching the Faith of immediate Forefathers by words and practise hath been proved the only infallible Rule of Faith those who in the days of K. Henry VIII and since have deserted it ought to have had infallible certainty that we receded from it formerly for if we did not but still cleav'd to it it could not chuse but preserve the true Faith to us and if they be not sure we did not they know not but we have the true faith and manifestly condemn themselves in deserting a Faith which for ought they know was the true one But Infallible Certainty that we had deserted this Rule they can have none since they neither hold the Fathers Infallible nor their own Interpretation of Scripture and therefore unavoidably shipwaack themselves upon that desperat Rock Which is aggravated by this Consideration that they built not their Reformation upon a zealous care of righting Tradition which we had formerly violated nor so much as Testimonial Evidence as shall be shown presently that we had deserted It but all their pretence was that we had deserted Scripture and because they assign no other certain means to know the sense of the Holy Books but the Words and those are shown to be no certain means § 10. 't is plain the Reformers regarded not at all the right Rule of Faith but built their Reformation upon a weak Foundation and incompetent to sustain such a building Whence neither had the first Reformers nor have their Followers Faith at all but only Opinion 15. On the contrary since 't is known and
agreed to by all the World at what time all Deserters of our Church of what name soever broke from us as also who were the Authors and Abettors and who the Impugners of such New Doctrins besides in what places they first begun and were thence propagated to others but no such thing is known of us even by our Adversaries whom it concerns to be most diligent Searchers after it seeing they are in a hundred mindes about the Time when and the Persons who introduc'd these pretended New Doctrins of ours which they say vary from Scripture as may be seen by their own words in several Books and amongst others one call'd The Progeny of Protestants and this for every point in which they pretend we have innovated 't is plain that when we charge them with deserttng the known Doctrin of the former Church and the Rule of Faith we speak open and acknowledg'd evidence when they accuse us of the same their charge is obscure and unknown even to the very Accusers nay plainly prov'd false by the necessity of the things being notorious if it happen'd and the constant disagreement of those who alledge it when or how it happen'd 16. I say Notorious for since Points of Faith which ground all Christian practise are the most concerning Truths in the World it cannot be but the denyal of such Truths must needs raise great commotions before the opposite Truths could be nniversally spread and the change of Christian Practise and Manners which depend on those Truths must be wonderfully manifest and known to every body wherefore had we been guilty of such a change and introduc'd New Tenets and propagated them over the Christian world as is pretended it must needs be manifestly and universally known that we did so neither is it possible the change should be so Insensible and invisible that our very Adversaries cannot find it out especially this alone making their Victory over us so certain and perfect For seeing we own TRADITION as an Infallible Rule We are irrecoverably overthrown if they make out that we ever deserted It and surely nothing should be more easie than to make out That than which if True nothing can possibly be more Notorious 17. Moreover since it cannot be that Multitudes of men should profess to hold points both infinitely concerning and strangely difficult to believe and yet own no ground upon which they hold them if we ever as 't is said we have deserted Tradition we must till the time we took it up again have proceeded upon some other Ground or Rule of Faith And because none ever charged ●s with proceeding upon the Letter of Scripture or Phanaticism and besides th●se there is no other but Tradition 't is plain we never deserted but always stuck to Tradition 18. Besides 't is impossible that that Body of Men whi●h claim for their Rule of Faith an uninterrupted Tradition from the Apo●●les days should not have held to that Rule of Faith from the beginning For otherwise they must have taken it up at some tim● 〈◊〉 other and by doing so profess to the 〈◊〉 that Nothing is to be held of Faith but what descended by an uninterrnpted delivery from the beginning and yet at the same time acknowledge that all they then held was not so descended but received by another Rule this of Tradition or uninterrupted Delivery being then newly taken up which is so palpable a Contradiction that as Humane Nature could not fall into it so if it could the very pretence would have overthrown it self and needed no other confutation 19. Add to this that none of tbose many Sects who from time to time have deserted our Church's Faith and Discipline and so become her Adversaries ever yet pretended to assign the time when we took up this Rule of Tradition and yet a change in that on which we profess to build all the rest must needs be of all changes the most visible and most apt to justifie the carriage of those Revolters Wherefore 't is demonstrably evident on all sides that as this present Body of men call'd the Roman-Catholick Church does now hold to Tradition so their Predecessors uninterruptedly from the Apostles days did the same that is did hold to it ever And since 't is shown before § 11. that this Rule if held to will certainly convey down the true Faith unchang'd to all after Ages 't is likewise demonstrable that they have the true Faith and are the truly Faithful or true Church 20. And hence by the way is clearly seen what is meant by VNIVERSAL TRADITION and where 't is to be look'd for and found which puzzles many men otherwise very judicious and sincere who profess a readiness nay a duty to follow Vniversal Tradition but they are at a loss how we may certainly know which is Ie. For since 't is evident that to compleat the notion of the Vniversality of Mankind for example it were absurd to think we must take in brutes too which are of an opposite nature to Mankind but 't is sufficient to include all in whom the nature of Mankind is found so to make np the notion of Vniversal Tradition it were equally absurd to think we ought to take in those in whom the nature of Tradition is not found but its Opposit that is Deserters of Tradition or their Followers but 't is sufficient to include those in whom Tradition is found as in its Subject that is Adherers to Traedition or Traditionary Christians All therefore that have at any time deserted the Teoching and Practise of the immediately fore-going Church how numerous and of what name soever they behave no show of Title to be parts of Vniversal Tradition and only they who themselves do and whose Ancestors did ever adhere to it how few soever they seem are the only persons who can with any sense pretend to be those of whom as Parts Vniversal Tradition consists Whence also that Rule of Vincentius Lirinensis directing us to hold that which is believ'd in all places all times and by all which is so mis-apprehended by our Modern Dissenters is clearly understood viz. by taking it with Restriction to all those who hold to Tradition For otherwise should we not restrain it to those only who have adher'd to the Rule of Faith but enlarge it to the utmost extent of the words so as to comprehend also those who have deserted that Rule nothing could possibly be held of Faith whlch any Heretick had ever deny'd and so in stead of being a Rule to dist●nguish or know what we are to believe it would by thus confounding right Faith with all the Heresies in the world render it utterly Impossible ever to know what 's Faith what not or discern Christ's true Doctrin from Diabolical Errours But to return whence we digrest 21. It follows from the former discourse that those men who stick to Tradition can by applying that their Rule certainly know who have true Faith and which body of men is
Position abating the Degree of it for I take it to be equally or more absurd not to assent to the Infallibilty of a great body of men which is all that is pretended whatever Reason or Tradition appear for it without an evident Miracle The second part is likewise granted in case it suppose as it seems to do the knowledge of their Infallibility deriv'd only from those very books which they recommend and in passages which they are to explicate ere they can be sure of such an infallibility Otherwise 't is possible a book obscure in multitudes of other passages may be clear in that one which relates them to the Church or that body which they are to hear and obey as to the proper interpreters of the Scriptures in Dogmatical and controverted passages which belong to Faith But the Dr. should do well to shew us any society of men or Church that pretends to build her Infallibility only on the Scriptures interpreted by that very Infallibility Otherwise it will not touch our Church who claimes the Supernatural assistance of the Holy Ghost upon her Rule of Faith Tradition and as for her being naturally supported from errour in attesting former doctrines 't is grounded by those who discourse of that point upon Humane nature as to its infallible Sensations and on its Rationality which renders it incapable to do any thing without a motive as they must do should they transmit a not-deliver'd that is an evidently-evidently-new doctrine for an old or deliver'd one 18. There can be no hazard to any person in mistaking the meaning of any particular place in those books supposing he use the best means for understanding them comparable to that which every one runs who beleeves any person or society of men to be infallible who are not for in this later he runs unavoidably into one great error and by that may be led into a thousand but in the former God hath promis'd either he shall not erre or he shall not be damn'd for it This whole Paragraph is built on a false and unprov'd supposition viz. that any Adversary of his beleeves any society of men to be Infallible which is not Other faults there are in it and that good store as granting in effect here what he lately deny'd that a man using the best means for understanding Scripture may mistake the meaning of any particular place though not with a hazard incomparable to that of the other whereas if Scripture be the Rule of Faith as he contended 't is impossible that a man relying and proceeding upon it and using that means in the best manner he can possibly should come to erre in his Faith for in this case the man having done all that can be done by him as to the understanding the Rule the fault must needs be in his judging that to be a Rule which is none But this main and fundamental error is coucht in the last words in the former God hath promis'd he shall not erre or shall not be damn'd for it what mean in the former case c. This certainly and nothing but this if we may trust his own words in mistaking the meaning of any particular place in th●se books supposing he use the best means for understanding them Now 't is a strange thing to me that God should promise that a man mistaking the meaning of these books should not erre in so doing But omitting this slip of Dr. St's Reason or memory I ask what means this disjunctive promise either of not erring or not being damn'd for it Why it means that Dr. St. knows not well himself what to say to the point or whether he should stand to it or no that a man using the best means for understanding Scripture that is according to him the best means lest by God for him to arrive at Faith should not erre and therefore he warily subjoyn'd or he shall not be damn'd for it and then he thinks himself secure enough from confute it being a hard thing to conclude of any particular well● meaning man when he is damn'd when not whereas it might perhaps be no such hard matter to prove whether what he held was true or not I could ask him whence or how he comes to this assurance of God's disjunctive promise here so confidently asserted on the truth of which the salvation of so many souls necessarily depends Not by Tradition For this would make him rely on a society of men or a Church which he hates with all his heart not by Scripture for this would make the same thing be the proof to it self not by Reason for we are to suppose he has done his best in that already and yet as is shown has effected nothing But I would demand of him seriously did God ever promise that if one takes such a way as for want of a due intelligibleness in proportion to his capacity is not able to secure him from error he shall not erre or that if he will needs be wiser than his Pastors and chuse a Means for such an end which God never intended for that end he shall yet be sure to arrive at that end by that means or that if by relying on it and erring he shall happen to fall short of sufficient means he shall notwithstanding miraculously be sav'd without sufficient means These are the points he is to consider well and speak to and not thus confidently call every thing a Principle which he thinks fit to say on his own head though never so extravagant In a word let him prove Scripture to have in it the nature of a Rule of Faith or which will fall into the same to have been intended by God for that end that is to be of it self such to people of all capacities that soberly enquire as secures them from erring in Faith while they rely on it and this of it self without needing any society of Men or Church to attest or explain it and then I shall yeild his discourse to run as currently as his own heart can wish but in proving this he hitherto hath and ever must fall short most miserably He hath often as I noted formerly instead of saying his Rule of Faith should preserve those who endeavour to follow it from error or from missing of truth substituted those words cannot miss of what is necessary for their salvation and such like The examination of which words I have reserved till now and that I may do him all right imaginable I will press his Argument or rather indeed bare saying in behalf of Scripture as far as my reason can carry it None can deny but that the knowledge of a very few points are sufficient for well-meaning particular persons as appears by the Iewe● that were sav'd and many silly and weak Christians since nor can it be deny'd but every one that reads Scripture or hears it read by one they dare trust may understand some few good things to which if they live up heartily and