Selected quad for the lemma: ground_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
ground_n	believe_v	faith_n	holy_a	1,461	5	5.2636	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A59219	A discovery of the groundlesness and insincerity of my Ld. of Down's Dissuasive being The fourth appendix to Svre-footing : with a letter to Dr. Casaubon, and another to his answerer / by J.S.	Sergeant, John, 1622-1707.	1665 (1665)	Wing S2564; ESTC R18151	61,479	125

exprest to be the Scripture and on this Expression he so strongly builds that p. 10 11. he concludes thence and Certainly too thus The Religion of our Church sayes he is therefore certainly Primitive and Apostolick because it teaches us to believe the whole Scriptures of the old and New Testament and nothing else as matter of Faith What mean the word Scriptures Any determinate sence of it or the dead Characters Alas their Church is far from teaching them the first or from having grounds to own such a pretence but puts the Book in their hands and bids them find the sence of it or their Faith for there is their Rule 'T is the bare Letter then unsenc't he means by the word Scriptures and so he must say 't is the outward Cuaracters his Church teaches us to believe and nothing else as matter of Faith that is their whole Faith has for its object Ink thus figur'd in a Book A worthy Argument to proove their Church is certainly Primitive and Apostolick whereas itis known Faith was before those Characters and besides if this be to be Apostolical we owe nothing to the other Apostles for our faith but onely to those six who writ But we mistake him he means neither sence of the word Scripture and hates these distinctionswith all his heart which would oblige him to either He meant to talk of Scripture indeterminately and confusedly which might make a fine show and yet expose him to no Inconvenience by giving any particular account of his meaning His Inference from this his First Principle being an Immediate one will utterly overthrow the Papists without doubt Therefore saith he p. 11. unless there can be New Scriptures we can have no New matter of Belief no new Articles of Faith No my Ld Yes as long as by Scriptures you mean no determinate sence of Scriptures but the bare Letter onely whose sence is fetch 't out by Interpretations and these as we experience depend on menes private Judgments and Fancies if menes Fancies may vary every hour you may have diverse Interpretations every hour and so new Articles of Faith every hour Is not this a mad kind of arguing to conclude as absolute an unerrableness in Faith as if they had not onely a determinate Principle but even as self-evident and unmistakable as the First Principle in Metaphysicks to guid themselves by whereas our daily eysight and their own sad experience every day teaches us by the practice of this Principle and yet their differing in the Sence of Scripture in most high and most concerning Points that the Speenlation is naught and the Principle it self a false and mis-guiding Light Nay I doubt my Ld. himself has no hearty value for this his First Principle though he sayes he wholly relies on it For I never saw Protestant Book in my Life thinner and sleighter in Scripture-Citations than is his Dissuasive so that if that be his First Principle he makes little use of it 35. Many other Propositions or Supposals are imply'd in his book to give it force As that It matters not how a Citation is qualify'd so it be but alledg'd 'T is no matter whether the question be rightly stated or no. The Tenets of our Church are not to be taken from the use of definitions found in approved Councils speaking abstractedly but from the particular Explications of some Divines Every Foppery is a proper Effect of the Churches Doctrin Points of Faith ought to be comprehensible to Reason and Spiritual things sutable to Fancy The Act of an Inquisition Sayings of a few Divines or Casuists are all Catholik Faith and the Doctrin of the Church That is rationally dissuasive which is confessedly Uncertain No Answer was ever given to the Citations or Reasons produc't in the Dissuasive Talking soberly and piously about a point is oftentimes as good as prooving it That t is Self-evident Scripture's Letter can bear but one Interpretation as wrought upon by Human Skills These and multitudes of such like though not exprest yet run imply'd in his carriage all along this book and suppos'd true to give it any force yet so evidently false and weak that to pull them out thence and make them show their heads is enough to confute them I conclude and charge the Dissuader that he not onely hath never a Principle for his Dissuasive to subsist by but farther that 't is Impossible but himself should know in his own Conseience that he has none nay more that the Protestant Cause and the same I say of all out of the Church can have none The first part of my charge I have manifoldly prooved in this present Appendix The other part of it which charges him with Consciousness of having no Grounds hath two branches and for the former of those I alledge that the wayes he takes all along to manage his Dissuasive are so evidently studious so industrious so designed and perfectly artificial that though one who is guided on in a natural way is oftentimes not aware of his thoughts or their method till he comes to reflect yet 't is Impossible he should not be aware of his which he postures with such exquisit craft and such multitudes of preternatural sleights to render his Discourse plausible For the later of those Branches namely that he cannot but know the Protestant Cause can have no Principles to make it Evident I discourse thus ad hominem what I have prov'd in Sure-Footing out of the nature of the Thing 'T is their most constant and avow'd Profession and his p. 9. that they do wholly rely upon Scripture as the foundation and final resort of all their Persuasions This being so Fathers and Councils are not held at all by them but as far as they are agreeable to Scriptures that is their Testimony has no basis of Certainty from themselves or of their own but what they participate from Scripture Wherefore either they are No Principles or else Subordinate ones to their First Principle Scripture Unless then It be Certain or deserve the name of a Principle They can never be held by Protestants such nor consequently can merit the name of Principles even Subordinate ones because then pretended First Principle from which onely they can derive Title to that dignity is in that case none it self To Scripture then le ts come By which word if they agreed to mean any determinate Sence of it certainly known to be the true one their Discourse were well-built But since their Church can own no determinate Sence of the Scripture deriv'd down from Christ and his Apostles in antecedency to the Scripture's Letter but having renounc't that Way or Tradition must say she has it meerly from that Letter as yet unsenc't She must mean that 't is the Scripture Letter She relies on as the foundation and final resort of all her Persuasions nay for her Persuasion that this is the Sence of it Since then Principles are determinate Sences not characters or Sounds neither is

right to alledge either Scriptures Fathers or Councils I add Reason History or Instances See Corol. 12. 15 16 18 19. And it is done thus All discourse supposes that Certain on which it builds But if Tradition or the way of conveying down matters of Fact by the former Ages testifying can fail none of these are Certain therefore a Protestant or Renouncer of Tradition cannot with Reason pretend to discourse out of any of these that is Reason being Man's Nature he has lost his natural right to alledge any of these in way of proof Now that none of these are Certain if Tradition be renounc't is shown thus Scripture's Letter as to its Incorruptedness nay its very Being is Uncertain alone or without Tradition as is confest by Protestants and proov'd Sure-Footing Disc. 3d and 4th So are Fathers and Councils too For Fathers being Eminent Witnessers to Immediate Posterity or Children of the Churches Doctrin received and Councils Representatives of the Church their strength as Proofs nay their very Existence is not known till the notion of Church be known which is part of their very Definition and to which they relate Nor is the Being or Nature of Church known till it be Certainly known who are truly Faithful or have true Faith who not which must be manifested by their having or not having the true Rule of Faith Wherefore since the Properties of the Rule of Faith do all agree to Tradition our Rule and none of them to theirs as was evidently and at large shown there in my five first Discourses it follows the Protestant or Renouncer of Tradition knows not what is either right Scripture Father or Council and so ought not to meddle with them nor alledge them Again since pretended Instances of Traditions Failing depend on History Historical Certainty cannot be built on dead Characters but on Living Sence in men's hearts deliver'd from age to age that those passages are true that is on Tradition it follows that if the way of Tradition can fail all History is Uncertain and consequently all Instances as being matters of Fact depending on History And lastly since Reasons are fetch 't from the nature of things and the best Nature in what it is abstracting from disease or madness Unalterable is the Ground of the human part of Christian Tradition and most incomparable strength is superadded to it as it is Christian by the supernatural Assistances of the Holy Ghost Disc. 9. 't is a wild conceit to think any piece of Nature or Discourse built on it can be held Certain if Tradition especially Christian Tradition may be held Uncertain Third Way 5. THe Third Way is to examin the Method he takes in dissuading For common sence telling us 't is not to be expected any should be able to perform any thing unless he takes the right way to perform it 't is Evidert he cannot be held in reason to have power to dissuade unless the Method he takes be proper to that Effect that is not common to that Effect and a contrary one Now to dissuade is to unfix the Understanding from what is held before which includes to make it hold or assent that what it held before Certain is False or at least Uncertain The Way then he takes must be evidently able to oblige to some kind of Assent nay as he handles it for I suppose he aims to make them hold as Protestants to Assent to the contrary which therefore must needs require the Evidentest Method imaginable obliging their Reason to conclude that a man who takes this way of Discourse cannot but make good what he sayes at least that it may be strongly hop't from his method he will do it This reflected on let us weigh the Method my Ld. takes in his Dissuasive and if it be Evident to every ordinary capacity that as to the Godly part of it the Quakers out-do him and as to its quoting part the Smectymnuans us'd the same against the Protestants to confute Episcopacy for They too quoted and gloss'd Scriptures and Fathers both and indeed every Sect that has not yet shaken of the shame to disrespect all Antiquity then it is also Evident that this Method is Common to those Discourses which have in them power to satisfy the Understanding and those who have no such power Now that being most evidently no Method or Way to such an Effect which many follow and take yet arrive not at that Effect 't is plain to Common Sence that my Ld. of Downs miscalls his Book a Dissuasive and that it can have in it no power of moving the Understanding one way or other unless he can first vouch some Particularity in the Method he takes above what 's in others in which we experience miscarriage and himself professes we though taking it miscarry in it Let us then search after this Particularity in his way of writing Is it that he brings some stronger or more unavoidable sort of Testimonies then were ever yet produc't by others No Every Scholler sees they are so common that they have been hundreds of times produc't and himself p. 1. 2. acknowledges their vulgarness But perhaps he invalidates all the Answers our Controvertists have given to those Testimonies and presses them farther against us beyond what any has done yet Quite contrary He barely and rawly puts them down as if this were the very first time they had seen light nor takes the least notice of any Answer at all given to them formerly But it may be he layes Grounds to distinguish and press home his Testimonies and so gives them their full weight which others have not done Alas no I fear he never thinks of that but judges if we may conclude from his carriage the deed done so he but quote nor can I see one Principle laid in his whole Book strengthening any one Testimony by bringing it to its Ground Experimental Knowledge in the Authour he cites that the Churches constant Voice and Practice manifested this her Sence but as they are put down carelesly so they are past over slubberingly without the least enforeing them by way of laying Principles Is he at least Particular in his Sincerity and Ingenuity I know not how they will be satisfied with it who read his late Adversary Impeaching him for the contrary Vices and some passages in this present Appendix Where lies then this Particularity in his Method without which his Dissuasive can never in reason be held Creditable I speak ingenuously and from my heart All the Particularity I can observe in it lies in these two things First that he huddles together multitudes of his own sayings without any pretence of proof for the most part and when he brings any they are such as we have spoken of Next that instead of enforcing his Proofs by way of Reason he overflowes strangely with godly language and Scripture-phrases with which plaufible manner of Expression most unreasonably and unnaturally he strives to combat the Wills of his