Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	believe_v	faith_n	revelation_n	2,830	5	9.5573	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B21416	A sermon preach'd at Colchester, June 2. 1697. Before the Right Honourable and Reverend Father in God Henry Lord Bishop of London, at a conference with his clergy upon His Majesty's late injunctions. / By H. De Luzancy ... ; Printed by his Lordship's special command. ; To which are prefixed some remarks on the Socinians late answer to the four letters written against them by the same author.	De Luzancy, H. C. (Hippolyte du Chastelet), d. 1713.	1697 (1697)	Wing D2423A; Interim Tract Supplement Guide 226.f.17[10]; ESTC R26743	22,530	34

L. I hope it will not be taken amiss if I make some Remarks upon it 1. It is very diverting to see a Writing call'd an Answer to the four Letters and not so much as a Page or Line or Tittle of the four Letters touch'd I confess that this is an easie way of answering and that at this rate any Book upon Earth may be answer'd Any Body may have the Pleasure to be an Author But I am not altogether satisfied that this is consistent with that reputation of Learning and Eloquence which these Gentlemen men have so justly acquir'd One or two more such Answers will I am afraid sink or at least endanger a part of it 2. They give a rare reason for not meddling with the four Letters I know not says the Author p. 47. whether we are concern'd in them till I know more certainly in what Sence he holds a Trinity of Divine Persons and the Divinity and Satisfaction of our Saviour I beg leave of these Gentlemen to assert that they know as well as I do my self what is my sence in those Matters Obscurity is none of the many defects which the four Letters may be charg'd with But they were not willing to intangle themselves in the discussion of so many Citations or to make good the weak side of their Writings which they were sensible could not be maintain'd They have found of late a shorter Cut and that is the famous distinction of Real and Nominal Trinitarians They steal away with this on all occasions and still maintain a running Fight It is their last refuge and had it not been for the rare contrivance there had been before this an end of the Socinian Controversie To answer a solid Argument is a hard and generally an unfortunate Task But if they can but bring you right or wrong within the Verge of the fatal Distinction then they have always a large Field for Discourse They act in this like ingenious but whether altogether like conscientious Men I am not willing to determine 3. They are so full of that beloved distinction and so fond of meeting with any thing that looks like it that in what they call an Answer to the Four Letters they have done to themselves and to me a real Injury To themselves by a flat contradiction in the space of four Pages and to me by charging me with that which I never said or thought They make me say that the Divine Persons are Three Infinite Spirits Pag. 43. He says Three Infinite Spirits each of them a God are all of them but One God I averr that there is nothing in the Four Letters which directly or indirectly looks like that It is not the Language of Scripture nor that of the Catholick Church It never was and I hope shall never be mine But this they have contradicted Pag. 47. by desiring to know in what Sence I hold a Trinity of Divine Persons One would be apt to say that this betrays a great deal of Incogitancy 4. The Four Letters then are still sound and safe but the Preface is engag'd and I must endeavour to bring it off Two things in it are excepted against The one that I said That the Consent of the whole Christian World must be a strong Inducement to a modest Socinian to mistrust all his Arguments and that to oppose all that is great and good in the Church of God in a Point of Faith which Word the Author of the Answer has overlook'd is too much for the most presuming Disputant He says to this p. 40. that the case is this one side has Argument the other has Authority and Number And that in a Clash between Argument and Number that whole World and all that is great in it when weigh'd against but one Argument is as if you had put nothing at all into the Scale I say that he absolutely mistakes the Case We maintain that the Church has Reason as well as Authority and Number and that on this very Account a modest Socinian must lose much of his Confidence By all that is great and good I mean the Sacred Councils the Holy and Learned Fathers and the different Societies of Christians all the World over who have been baptiz'd in the Name of that Blessed Trinity and look upon Iesus Christ as the Author and Finisher of their Faith In a Point of Faith and much less in the Foundation God will not suffer the Catholick Church to err Had I said that it had been a Reason to a modest Socinian to mistrust all his Arguments I had said nothing but what is exactly true I confess I was too modest my self in calling it only an Inducement 5. The other Exception is against an Assertion which I thought no Divine in the World would have disputed That Faith and Reason are two different things and consequently that that which is the Object of Faith cannot be the Object of Reason He calls this p. 41. a very rash Proposition He says some lines before That the Apostle teaches Heb. 11.1 not only that the Object of Faith and Reason is the same but that there cannot be Faith without Reason and that Faith is the Product of Reason This Author should have consider'd before he call'd the Proposition rash that it is the Sence of all the Ancient and Modern Divines and that thô sometimes Faith and Reason are conversant about the same Object as for instance in the Existence and Vnity of God which Reason considers as well as Faith yet for all that their Object is different and even in this very case Reason assents to it as it is naturally known and Faith as it is supernaturally reveal'd The place of the Apostle should not have been mention'd at all For what is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Evidence of things not seen but a Revelation of those things which Reason cannot reach or penetrate and on this very account are said to be unseen and is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Demonstration which rising from an higher Principle is different from and has a greater Certainty than Reason But what this Author says That there can be no Faith without Reason and that Faith is the Product of Reason shews plainly the misfortune of writing Answers in haste If by the first of these Propositions he means that Faith is always rational and that Reason never wants strong Inducements to believe which the Schools in their rugged Language call Motives of Credibility I say so too But if he means that we cannot believe except we have a clear Notion of what is propos'd to our Belief I say that it is against the Nature of Faith which offers things above Reason and expects the submission of our Judgments to the Authority of the Revelation The second Proposition that Faith is the Product of Reason is capable of a tolerable Sence if by it is meant no more than that Reason is an introduct●on to Faith But if by it is meant that it is

the Cause of Faith I must beg this Author's leave to say that it is plain Pelagianism 6. This Gentleman asks me several Questions wherein I must take the liberty to tell him that I am not at all concern'd and consequently not oblig'd to answer He argues very smartly against Three Infinite Minds Spirits or Substances thô at the same time I doubt he makes his Adversaries to say more than really they do I leave him and them to dispute it yet one of them I think is a Question by no means to be offer'd and takes off much of the respect due to the Sacred Writings p. 42. This therefore says he is the first Question that I desire Mr. L. to resolve Will he believe a Doctrine that seems to imply manifest and incontestable Contradictions if such Doctrine or Proposition were indeed found in Scripture To this I answer that the Question is unreasonable because the Supposition on which it is grounded is impossible God cannot contradict himself A manifest and uncontestable Contradiction in Scripture is a thing not so much as to be thought of from him who is Light and in whom there is no Darkness at all But I well go farther with this Gentleman and thô I love and honour Reason as much as any Man in the World yet I will affirm that if it were possible that in any undoubted Scripture there should be in clear and express Terms a Proposition or Doctrine which seems to imply a manifest and incontestable Contradiction I ought not to reject it or make my Reason the Judge of God's Veracity But my Duty is humbly to resign my self to him and adore what I cannot understand 7. I know that this Gentleman will take this very ill and will say again as he has already p. 41. that I calumniate Reason the Light set up in us by God himself But that Light is not given us to impeach and reproach our Maker and reject what he commands us to believe or call it a manifest and incontestable Contradiction because it is above its weak Perceptions That Light ought to act in its due measure and proportion if it goes farther it is a Rebellion and an Attempt against the Majesty and Power of God He calumniates Reason who does detract from its Dignity and Energy in those things wherein it ought to be Judge It is an Affront to Reason to be brought below it self But he also calumniates Reason who exalts it more than it deserves as he no less maliciously injures a Man who commends in him Qualities which he has not than he who obscures and denies those which he has There are some General Principles wherein Reason cannot err and which Man ought to be guided by None is more plain and evident than this that he owes his submission and assent to what God proposes Whether it be comprehensible or not comprehensible is no part of the Inquiry Whether God has propos'd it is the true state of the Question Reason has a Right to examine Whether God has propos'd it or no The danger of taking things upon Trust is too great to deny Reason the power of examining But that Point once clear'd to say that we ought not to submit because it is incomprehensible or appears to us manifestly contradictory is an ill and an endless way of arguing 8. This Author cannot digest the Epithets of Narrow and Corrupt which I gave to Reason He complains of it in several places of his small Writing But indeed is not our Reason such Can he who denies this pretend that he ever endeavour'd to know himself I have often wonder'd at the pains which some Men have taken to convince the Opposers of the Doctrine of Original Sin The shortest and easiest Method was to send them to themselves to find there the fatal consequences of the first Transgression I appeal to my ingenious Adversary who thô certainly a great Master of Reason yet upon second Thoughts will agree with me that the Reason of the best Men is very Narrow and Corrupt Whence do proceed so many Mistakes and Errors Misapprehensions and Inadvertencies but from that very Principle Is not this the Spring of so many hot and tedious Disputes And what Reason but this can be given of so many Books and Opinions which have divided Mankind In this the Excellency of Faith appears and for this we ought to praise its Author the Holy Iesus that it has rectify'd and improv'd Reason not only by making it more knowing but also more humble more sincere and more obedient to God I am sure that this is the Method of arguing of the Primitive Fathers in that mighty struggle with the Heathen Philosophers some of whom did so exalt Reason as to pretend to decide of every thing whilst others did so revile it as to be positive that nothing could certainly be known and consecrated that wild and extravagant Saying of Socrates Hoc unum scio nihil scio This I know that I know nothing Both disputed admirably one against another But when the Apologists for Christianity were oblig'd to take in hand the Cause of Religion althô they had the true Notion of Reason Res Dei Ratio says elegantly Tertullian and knew it to be the Light of God in us yet they own'd it to be narrow and corrupted and consequently not Reason but Faith and Revelation to be attended to Thus Justin Martyr Arnobius Tertullian Lactantius St. Austin and others Tertullian de Anima c. 1. Cui enim veritas comperta sine Deo Cui Deus cognitus sine Christo Cui Christus exploratus sine Spiritu Sancto Cui Spiritus Sanctus accommodatus sine Fidei Sacramento And St. Austin de morib Eccl. Cath. c. 2. A Book never enough to be read who speaks of Reason in Terms which must certainly please those Gentlemen calling it Perspicuitas sanctitas Rationis the Clearness and Sanctity of Reason yet says that it is so much obscur'd by Sin Passion and Prejudice that Saluberrime comparatum est ut in lucem Veritatis aciem titubantem velut ramis humanitatis opacatam inducat authoritas 9. This shews how much this Gentleman is in the wrong when he says p. 42. that I must be content to argue these Questions about the Trinity and Incarnation not from Scripture only but from Reason also nay from Reason chiefly and ultimately As far as Reason is subservient to find the Truth and Certainty of the Revelation I confess that I must argue from Reason and the Chiefly and ultimately is capable of a good Sence because the belief of our Mysteries is at last resolv'd into this most rational Proposition That I must believe what God has reveal'd and that to find that it is so in the sacred and undoubted Scriptures is certainly the Work of Reason But if he means that the Authority of God's Word laid aside we must bring those Mysteries to the Scrutiny of Reason and instead of Divine use only Humane and Philosophical

Disceptations I say that it is a new an unreasonable and an unchristian Assertion It is new For this very Author is too much conversant with Antiquity not to know that in the long Contests between the Orthodox and the Arrians Nestorians c. the Scripture was appeal'd to on both sides They never thought of pretended Impossibilities manifest and incontestible Contradictions The Certainty of the Revelation was the only proof aim'd at That the Scripture plainly taught it was affirm'd by the Church That it was not was maintain'd by Hereticks Indeed Tradition had a share in the Dispute For no Scripture being of private Interpretation the Sence of the Primitive Doctors was strictly inquir'd after but all still was resolv'd into the Testimony of God in the Sacred Writings Yet these Times had their Orators their Philosophers their Criticks and it is strange that none of them could perceive that one and one and one are not one but three and that this manifest and incontestable Contradiction should only be a discovery of the Socinians in this Age. It is also unjust and unreasonable For the manner of treating a Dispute must have some proportion with the thing in Dispute Physical Experiments are not search'd into with Metaphysical Speculations nor metaphysical Speculations clear'd by Physical Experiments Criticisms are unserviceable in Geometry and an excellent Geometrician may be a lamentable Critick Yet we have to deal with a sort of Men who will have Reason to decide of Matters above Reason will make Faith and Reason knowing and believing to be the same thing and under pretence of Reasoning will rob God of his Power over us and us of the Reward of our Obedience to him It is unchristian If you design to dispute with a Philosopher then go and ransack Athens and Rome out with your Reason as splendidly and profusely as you can But for me who can say with Pacianus Christian is my Name and Catholick is my Surname I can I will hear nothing but out of the Sacred Scriptures Whatsoever you intend to teach me of God must be fetch'd from thence I never built the hopes of my Salvation upon Aristotle or Des Cartes Their Writings are good in their kind but to form Religion they are those Cisterns spoken of by the Prophet broken Cisterns that can hold no Water In a Word there we are to fix and we cannot avoid disputing eternally if this is not made the Touch stone of all our Arguments When we have indulg'd our Reason to the utmost degree it will prove an egregious Cheat to us and we shall at last be oblig'd to return whence we came and say as St. Austin Epist ad Volus Dandum Deo aliquid posse quod fateamur nos investigare non posse We must agree that God can do those things be capable of those Operations and Communications which we must be forc'd to acknowledge to be above all our Enquiries A SERMON 2 Tim. 1 13. Hold fast the Form of sound Words ALtho' the Church is a Divine Institution the Mystical Body of Christ and the Purchase of his Blood Yet the Experience of all Ages has made it appear from the beginning of its happy Establishment that evil Men and Seducers have attempted not only to ruine its Out-works but even to blow up its very Foundation This Christ had foreseen when he told his Apostles Matth. 18.7 that it must needs be that Offences come This St. Paul was not unacquainted with when he said to the Corinthians 1 Cor. 11.19 There must be also Heresies among you No Age or Society being without Men who love to abound in their own Sence have not Justice enough to acknowledge their Weakness and Ignorance and will rather yield to Passion and Prejudice than be led by the plain Assertions of Scripture and the calm and serene Dictates of Reason So great an Evil could not but vehemently affect that zealous Apostle who had incumbent on him the Care of all the Churches A truly Episcopal Spirit cannot sit unconcern'd and see them perish for whom Christ dy'd Nor could any way be found more effectual to prevent this than that Men should speak the same things and agree in uniform Expressions as well as in the same Profession of Faith 1 Cor. 1.10 Now I beseech you Brethren by the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ that you all speak the same thing and that there be no Schisms among you but that you be perfectly join'd together in the same mind and in the same Judgment This is the ground of the excellent Direction given in the Text to Timothy Hold fast the Form of sound Words An Advice which if necessary at any time is certainly now of a vast Importance when the Enthusiast on one side and the Disputer of this World on the other have rent Religion to pieces When Men think it a Discredit to their Parts and Abilities to think soberly And instead of uniting against the Common Enemy will rather suffer the War to be brought into their own Quarters than part with their private tho' crude and indigested Notions In speaking to these Words I will endeavour to shew I. What is the Form of found Words II. How dangerous it is to depart from it III. How we ought to behave our selves in relation to them who have departed from it First Then what is the Form of sound Words It is nothing else but a Collection of the several Verities diffus'd through the whole Body of the Sacred Scriptures An express Form as some have render'd it not much different in this from the Sence of the Greek Commentators But more truly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a short Account a Summary of Christian Doctrine by which Men come to know what to embrace and what to refuse This St. Paul intends when he tells the Romans Chap. 6.17 that they have obey'd from the heart that Form of Doctrine which was deliver'd to them But more agreeably to the Original into which they were deliver'd A noble Expression and elegantly treated by St. Basil in his Discourse of Baptism This the Apostle calls in the Verse next to the Text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that excellent Trust committed to the Shepherds of the Flock Rom. 12.6 He will have no preaching no establishing of any Doctrine but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All Sciences have their Axiomata their first Principles the ground of all their Demonstrations Christianity has its Axiomata 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on which all the rest is built Whatsoever we have to say must be reduc'd to that and without it ought not to be admitted These Axiomata 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these Fundamental Principles of Christianity are 1 st the Apostolical Creed 2 dly Those Enlargements on it which the growth of Heresies made necessary in the first General Councils These four which Gregory the Great profess'd to reverence next to the four Gospels First The Apostolical Creed that unchangeable Rule of Faith as Tertullian calls it Cordis signaculum