Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	catholic_n	church_n	roman_a	2,613	5	8.9971	5	true

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

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