Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	authority_n	church_n	receive_v	11,930	5	6.2995	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A58868	An answer to Dr. Sherlock's Preservative against Popery shewing that Protestancy cannot be defended nor Catholic faith opposed, but by principles which make void all reason, faith, fathers, councils, Scripture, moral honesty.	Sabran, Lewis, 1652-1732.	1688 (1688)	Wing S214; ESTC R28119	9,604	10

Command Fol. 9. Now the Doctor takes the Catholic's part and tho' saintly yet speaks well in so clear a Cause The intention of these Disputes is only to lead you to the Infallible Church and set you upon a Rock and then 't is very natural to renounce your own Judgment when you have an Infallible Guide But now for convincing Reasons against this plain Truth The first is They cannot with any sense dispute with us about the particular Articles of Faith because the sense given of Scripture and Fathers takes its Authority from the Church understanding it so This is false The sense takes its Authority from God who spoke that Word tho' we are certain that we have the true Sense of that Word because we receive it from the Church which is protected and guided in delivering us both the Letter and Sense by the Infallible Spirit of God that is to abide with her for ever according to Christ's promise Jo. 14. 16. If John and William dispute which is the right way to a place is John disabled from convincing William of his mistake by Reasons because he hath with him a Guide who certainly knows the way and that he would himself pass by those Reasons if his Guide assur'd him that he apply'd them ill and wrongly to that way Fol. 11. Must the belief of an Infallible Judge be resolved into every man's private judgment Must it not be believed with a Divine Faith and can there be a Divine Faith without an Infallible Judge There can be no Divine Faith without a Divine Revelation nor a Prudent One without a moral Evidence in the motives of Credibility on which may be grounded the evident Obligation to accept of it The Judgment being possest with that moral Infallibility rests not there but observing that Goodness and Mercy of God which cannot permit that Falshood should be propounded in his Name with all the apparent Marks of his Hand and Seal and without any like appearance on the contrary inclin'd by a pious motion of the will called by the famous Council of Orange affectio credibilitatis and strengthened by that Grace of God which bestows the Gift of Faith fastens on God's Veracity and with a submission not capable of any doubt embraces the revealed Truth If the Infallibility of the Church were more than morally evident it were impossible that any Heresie should be Fol. 17. No understanding Protestant can be disputed into Popery which owns an Infallible Church First because no Arguments or Disputations can give me an Infallible certainty of the Infallibility of the Church We saw Dr. Sherlock just now pleading for the Jews against St. Paul now he reasons even against Christ our God blessed for evermore His words prove that Christ who own'd himself Infallible did imprudently to Preach or work Miracles for since they could not give an Infallible Certainty an evident one he means by his whole Discourse no prudent Jew or Gentile could be disputed by him into Faith. Arguments so offensive to pious ears ought to meet with no other Answer than Prayers for him who offers them 'T is impossible by reason to prove that men must not make use of their own Reason and Judgment in matters of Religion That men must use Reason to come to the Knowledge that God hath revealed what they believe is very certain as the Jews Exod. 14. Crediderunt Domino Moysi servo ejus did believe God and Moyses his Servant all Nations Christ and his Apostles so each Christian now Christ and his Church the first as Author the second as Witnesses commissioned from God of their Faith by conceiving the Proofs they offered of their Commission So far Judgment So the Apostles believed Christ saying of himself that he was the Son of God their Judgment being convinced that God spoke by him which method appears most particularly in the man born blind whom he cur'd and who was thereby convinced that God was with him Nisi Deus esset cum illo but after that there is no further use of Reason if we believe St. Paul but in order to the bringing into Captivity all Understanding into the Obedience of Christ 2 Cor. 10. The Doctor frames a Dispute fol. 21. betwixt a sturdy Protestant as he calls him and a Catholic You may guess how well he manages the Catholic's part In the Couclusion he gives this topping reason for the Protestant Religion We have as much assurance of every Article of our Faith as you have of the Infallibility of your Church This is the great point indeed which if a Protestant loses he loses all for 't is certain and evident that the Catholic has the same assurance for each Article of his Faith proposed by the Church which he hath of the Churches Infallibility He proves it first because we are in general assured that the Scriptures are the word of God. Hitherto there holds some parity tho' but lame but suppose it were entire The Conclusion would be this Catholics are as certain of the Sense of Scripture as Protestants are that they have the Letter whence it follows demonstratively that when Protestants differ in the Sense from Catholics they have less assurance for it than Catholics who have always as much as the Protestants have for the Letter whereas Protestants must never be more certain of the Sense of the Letter than of the Letter it self 2dly And in particular we are assured that the Faith which we profess is agreeable to Scripture If he means they have the same proofs for this which Catholics have for the Infallibility of the Church that is for the being of that Church which declares her self Infallible for a Church erring in such a point would cease to be the Church of Christ then 't is evidently false since each Christian in this Age hath the same Evidence of her being the Church of Christ and of her teaching Truth and consequently of her Infallibility which he hath of Christ viz. Prophesies Miracles c. which no Protestant as much as challenges for the Certainty of the particular Sense of Scripture What other Sense this Proposition can have I do not conceive Fol. 23. If you must not use Reason and private Judgment then you must not by any Reason be persuaded to condemn the use of Reason I never read so much and so little of Reason there is such a rumbling of the word which for eight or nine lines occurs at least once in each and yet so little sense All he says might be with equal weight said by a sick man who dissuaded from choosing his own Remedies and desir'd 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 Such 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 in Fol. 25. We must allow of no reason against the Authority of plain and express Scripture we may reasonably conclude that God understands the Reasons and Nature of things better than We. This is a very true and Catholic Principle whence I may infer That our Doctor when he comes to apply it will sure enough be guilty of some most illogical Inference And behold I am in the right But Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve is such a plain and express Scripture Well go on therefore without any exposition no Reason can justifie the Worship of another Being A rare Consequence to infer a Negative from an Affirmative Antecedent 'T is like this A Subject must love his King and owe Allegiance to him alone therefore no reason can justifie the love of a Child for his Father or of a Wife for her Husband St. Augustin Q. 61. in Gen. drew the contradictory Conclusion from that Text he takes off all blame from Abraham who is said in Genesis to have adored or worshiped the people because 't is observable says the Saint that in the said Commandment 't is not said thou shalt worship God alone as 't is said and him alone thou shalt serve which in Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for such a Service of Latria is given to God alone Fol. 26. The Sense of the Law is the Law But when the Law is not capable of a different Sense or there is no such Reason as makes one Sense absurd and the other necessary the Law must be expounded according to the most plain and obvious sense of the words This Principle is sound you may then be sure of a false Inference at the heel of it He gives us that part of the first Commandment which he calls the second Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven c. and concludes so express a Law against Image-Worship that no reason must be admitted for it What if you be told that altho' the Jews had perhaps a Command of making no graven Image c. yet this being a positive Law and not confirmed in the Gospol doth not oblige us will this reason be admitted No. And yet you have no other motive to pass by as express a Law of sanctifying Saturday What if it be rejoyn'd That only the making to themselves by private Authority an Idol to adore it with Divine Worship is forbidden Can none of these Reasons be heard No. Then ●el●ze●● by God's Command making several Liknesses of things on Earth Salomon placing such in the Temple sinned against the first Commandment so do all Painters and Carvers and those who employ them and each Subject who stands bare-headed before the Chair of State. The truth is what sense they put on any Texts is the express Law against which no Reason must be heard so they challenge to themselves the Infallibility which they so sturdily deny to the Church of God. Yet this Topic he notably pursues for some pages against the Author of the Reasons for abrogatng the Test and in as many more against Catholic Tenets all and each misunderstood or misrepresented or no Articles of Catholic Faith. I conclude his admirable Principles and Inferences with one so singular that it deserves to be observed by all 'T is this fol. 45. No Argument from the necessity of a thing must be admitted to prove it is He instances thus If there be no Infallible Judge there can be no certainty of Faith which is requir'd in all Christians Tho' it be true and you think it to be true you must not allow this Consequence Therefore there is one The reason he gives for it is admirable Such Arguments do not prove that there be such a Judge but that there ought to be This is not only to misuse Human Reason but to deny Wisdom and Reason in God. Alphonsus the Royal Mathematician was ever look'd on as guilty of a horrid Blasphemy for having said he thought he could have order'd some things better than God did at the first Creation 'T is one of as deep a dye to think God ought to have done what we believe that he hath not done Principles of Dr. Sherlock which make void all Faith. The Catholics prove that an uncertain or wavering Faith is no Divino Faith which the Protestants can never have of any one Article of their Religion because they never can have a certain One. 'T is easily proved because they cannot have an Act of Faith of any One Article till their Rule of Faith proposes it i. e. till they know certainly what Scripture teaches of it not by any one Text but by comparing all the Texts that speak of that Subject For the sense of a single Text for Example My Father is greater than I cannot be had but by expounding it by other Texts on the same Subject Till a Protestant then hath a certain Knowledge first That he hath all the Books of Holy Writ secondly That all those he owns for such were really written by inspir'd Pens thirdly and since the Letter kills That he understands the true Sense of each Text which relates to the Object of that Act of Faith fourthly That he remembers them all so as comparing them to see which is the clearer that must expound the obscurer and what is the result of them all for any one he understands not or hath forgotten may possibly be that One that must expound the rest he cannot have One Act of Faith. Now Catholics say this is impossible to any or almost any man at least therefore very few Protestants if any at all can in their whole life have one Act of Divine Faith concerning any one Mystery tho' their Rule of Faith be never so good Now what says Dr. Sherlock to give Protestants any Certainty Fol. 78. Suppose the Protestant Faith uncertain how is the Cause of the Church of Rome the better Is Thomas an honest Man because John is a Knave If Thomas and John be accused severally of a Theft and the stolen Goods be found with John I conceive tho' this prove not Thomas so assuredly an honest man yet an honest Jury would I conceive bring him in Not Guilty That there is a true Faith and consequently a certain Rule of Faith all Christians acknowledge Protestants on one side choose one Rule how differently ever they apply it Catholics another I conceive then that if the Protestant Rule be proved uncertain 't is plain the Catholics Rule must be the certain One. Fol. 80. This may signifie two things first That the Objects of our Faith are uncertain and cannot be prov'd by certain Reasons secondly That our Persuasion is wavering One of the three modi sciendi or ways to come to the Knowledge of any thing Known to every Logician is Division But our Doctor it seems is not so far advanced for besides the Two mentioned it signifies a Third thing also to wit That