Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
truth_n apostle_n faith_n gospel_n 1,967 5 6.2363 4 false
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
A42050 A modest plea for the due regulation of the press in answer to several reasons lately printed against it, humbly submitted to the judgment of authority / by Francis Gregory, D.D. and rector of Hambleden in the county of Bucks. Gregory, Francis, 1625?-1707. 1698 (1698) Wing G1896; ESTC R40036 38,836 57

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

is this There is no medium between Men's judging for themselves and giving up their Judgments to others We grant it but what then His Inference is this If the first be their Duty the Press ought not to be restrained But why not His Reason is again the same because it debars Men from seeing those Allegations by which they are to inform their Judgments That 's his Argument to which I answer thus We must distinguish betwixt Man and Man betwixt such as can judge for themselves and such as cannot where the Scripture is express the Words plain and the Sense easie every Man who hath a competent use of Reason and can read his Bible may judge for himself But when several Interpretations are given of any Texts when Doubts are raised when Arguments are produced to defend both Parts of a Contradiction there is a vast number of Men who are no more able to judge which is true and which is false than a blind Man is to distinguish betwixt a good Colour and a bad one 'T is the great unhappiness of such Persons that in matters of Controversy they cannot rely upon their own weak Reason but must either suspend their Judgments or else give it up to the Conduct of some other Person and who is so fit to be trusted with it as their own Ministers provided they be as every Minister should be Men of Piety and Parts able to satisfie Doubts remove Scruples and convince Gainsayers But if Men give up their Reason to the Clergy this Author who vilifieth our Clergy as much as possible he can gives our People an intimation that by so doing they make us the Lords of their Faith But how doth that follow suppose two Persons are engaged in a doubtful Controversie about an Estate claimed by both these Persons being of themselves unable to determine the Case appeal to the King's Judges but do they thereby make those Judges the Lords of that Estate which is contended for surely no the Judge doth no more than according to Evidence and Law declare to which Person that Estate doth justly belong So it is in our present Case several Parties of Men lay Claim to Truth as theirs and produce Evidences for it Now a Man unable to satisfie himself which side Truth is to be found consults his Minister who by Evidence of Scripture which in this case is the only Law assures his Neighbour the Truth lieth here or there And indeed that the Minister is the most proper Judge in Controversies relating to Religion we cannot doubt if we dare believe the Prophet who saith The Priest's lips should preserve knowledge and they should seek the Law at his mouth for he is the messenger of the Lord of Hosts This Text doth not constitute us nor do we pretend to be Lords of our People's Faith but as the Apostle speaks Helpers to the Truth We do not require any weak Believer's assent to any one Article of Faith whereunto God requires it not though the Church of Rome doth so And how unjustly then without Modesty or Truth doth this Man stigmatize us as Lords of our People's Faith But beside those weak Christians who in controverted Points cannot judge for themselves there are some other of clearer Heads and more improved Understandings that can and for their sakes this Author saith that the Press ought not to be restrained and his Reason is this Because the Restraint of the Press debars them from seeing those Allegations by which they are to confirm their Judgments This Argument in effect hath already been offered once and again and hath as often been replied to but for the greater satisfaction of my Reader I shall again consider and enlarge my Answer to it and this it is Not knowing and intelligent Christian who is well able to judge for himself can want any new Allegations from the Press to confirm his Judgments in any disputed Points of Faith or Worship because we have already sufficient Rules to judge by For 1. We have the Scripture preached in our publick Churches and if we please we may read and consider them in our private Families and Closets And here I do again affirm that all matters of revealed Religion must be examined proved and determined by the written Word of God This is the only sure balance to weigh and touch stone to try all Matters of Faith and Worship To this our Lord sent his hearers Search the Scriptures and again How readest thou And which is remarkable the ignorance of Scripture did he make the only occasion and ground of Error in Points of Faith so he told the Sadducees Ye err but why not knowing the Scriptures by which our Lord himself proved that great Doctrine of the Resurrection which they denied And when our Lord would prove himself to be a greater Person than David he did it by that Text The Lord said unto my Lord c. This course took our blessed Saviour and so did his Apostles too and so must we we must take the Scripture for our Guide in Matters of Religion for that is the only and infallible Rule and unalterable Standard to measure all the Doctrines and Practices which such or such a Church doth teach recommend or require from us But if it shall be again demanded who must be the Judg whether amongst different Interpretations of Holy Writ this or that be the true one whether in controverted Points such or such a Text do certainly warrant such or such a Doctrine as is grounded thereon I answer again 2. We have the united Judgment and Decrees of several Councils those I mean that were convened in the first and purest times before the Superstitions and Idolatries of Rome had crept in by degrees thro' carelesness vice and ignorance and over-spread the Church The grand Controversie now on foot amongst us concerns the Divinity of Christ the Personality and Deity of the Holy Ghost that Christ in the most strict and proper Sense of that Notion is truly God that the Holy Ghost is a Person and a Divine Person we affirm but our Socinians who are the spawn of old Arius make bold to deny To justifie our Doctrine we cite such and such Texts and to establish their Opinions as well as they can they do the same thing as for the Scripture which we produce to prove the Doctrine of the Trinity because humane Reason cannot comprehend it they do either question the Authority of such Texts or else they wrest them to such an intolerable Sense as every sober Man's Reason may justly abhor Now the Question is Who must judge betwixt us and them Who must determine whether the Scripture be on their side or ours I answer That Heterodox Opinion now much contended for which we call Socinian did appear under some other Names very early in the Christian Church In the first Age the Godhead of Christ was denied by the Jews and particularly by Ebion in the Third Century by
World And if so How could the trial of Religions depend upon the Press in those early days when as yet it had no being And because the true Christian Faith is the same in all the Ages of the Church since the Apostles days we must measure our own Religion by the same Rules by which the Primitive Saints measured theirs and what were they Not the voluminous Writings of Men which the Press hath now brought forth but the sacred Oracles of God This is the Course to which the Prophet directs us To the law and to the Testimony This Course did the Bereans take when to examine the Doctrines even of the Apostles themselves They searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so and for their doing so they are highly commended And indeed the Scripture is the lapis Lydius the Touchstone the Canon the only Authentick Rule of Manners Faith and religious Worship a Rule so plain and easie in all necessary points that in order to the trial of our Religion we have no absolute need of any Book but Gods though other good Books do well towards the better understanding of some passages in this 'T is the great Privilege of our Church that we have this Rule of Scripture in such great Quantities that every Man who can and will may at an easie rate have it in his custody and thereby examine his Religion when he pleaseth Nor can we justly blame the restraint of the Press so long as it is permitted to Print our Bibles and prohibited to publish no Man's Book but such only as are contrary to Gods Indeed were the Press in England restrained as it is in Popish Kingdoms from printing the Bible in our Vulgar Tongue this Authors Argument would have had much strength in it but since it is otherwise since we have the Scriptures those Tests and Standards of our Religion preached in our Publick Churches and easily to be had and read as oft as we please in our private Families this Author's Argument against the Restraint of the Press is invalid and unconcluding for it doth not prove that for which he pleads it But to proceed SECT IV. II. THE Second Allegation which this Author urgeth as a grand inconvenience against the Restraint of the Press is this Such a Restraint saith he deprives Men of the most proper and best means to discover truth To which I answer thus There is a very close Connexion betwixt this Argument and the former a Connexion as between an Antecedent and a Consequent or between the Premises and the Conclusion In the former Argument he mentions the examination of Religions and in this as the end and consequence of that the discovery of Truth for to what purpose should any Religion be impartially examined were it not to discover whether it be true or false And for this reason the same answer which I have given to the former Argument might serve well enough for this for since the restraint of the Press doth not as I have there proved prevent the due Examination of Religion it cannot prevent the discovery of Truth But that so it doth our Author is very positive yea and he tells us by what means it doth so namely By hindering Men from seeing and examining the different Opinions and the Arguments alledged for them But let this Author tell us how this can be true can a Restraint of the Press for time to come hinder any Man from seeing and examining the different Opinions of Men and their Arguments for them Are there not already great numbers of printed Books exposed to common Sale wherein the different Opinions of Men about matters of Religion are throughly discussed May not every Man that will and can sufficiently inform himself by Books already extant what Arguments have been pleaded by all Sects of Christians in the defence of their respective Professions And since the Press hath already brought forth such a numerous issue of this kind methinks every future birth of the same sort would be but a Superfetation I am persuaded that should all the Presses in the Christian world be absolutely forbidden to print any more New Books of Controversy and Polemick Divinity it would be no injury to the Catholick Church nor to any one Member of it for nihil dici potest quod non dictum est priùs Prints indeed may be new but Arguments either for old Truths or against old Errors can hardly be so But when all is done Religious Truths cannot be discovered by Humane Arguments any further than those Arguments are grounded upon the infallible word of God 'T is a Rule in Mathematicks Rectum est index sui Obliqui He that would discover the Rectitude or Obliquity of a Line must bring it to and compare it with such a Rule as is already found to be exactly streight So in our present Case he who would discover the truth or falshood of any Opinion in matters of Religion must apply them to and judg them by that infallible Rule which St. James very deservedly Styles The word of Truth And this Rule in all Points necessary to Salvation is so plain and easie that every Man who hath not lost the use of common Reason may thereby judg for himself There are indeed in the word of God as the Apostle saith Some things hard to be understood but in what Texts do these difficulties lie St. Austin answers Non quoad ea quae sunt necessaria saluti c. The Scriptures are not difficult in any of those Points which are necessary to Man's Salvation So thought St. Chrysostom who thus demands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what Man is there to whom all the necessary Truths of the Gospel are not clear and manifest He saith elsewhere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Husbandman the Servant the Widow the Boy Persons of very mean Capacities may easily understand what the Scriptures teach about such Points as are Fundamental That this was the Doctrine of the Primitive Church before St. Chrysostom's time is evident from that Testimony of Irenaeus Universae Scripturae Propheticae Evangelicae in aperto sine ambiguitate similiter ab omnibus audiri possunt The whole Scripture the Prophets the Evangelists in such Points as most concern us are so plain express and open that all sorts of Men may equally apprehend them Now if a Man may discover the truth of all those Doctrines which are necessary to Salvation by Scripture Rules if his Faith be grounded on them and his Practice be suitable to them what hazard would that Man run should he never see the different Opinions of Men about them nor weigh their Arguments against them Suppose a Man being well informed by the express word of God do stedfastly believe the Resurrection of the dead what were this Man the worse should he never see nor examine the reasonings of Pagans and Sadducees against this great Article of our Creed Suppose a Man be
but of one medium and that a false one too for 't is nothing else but a groundless supposition that Men would want due means for the examination of their Religion were the Press any whit restrained I say any whit for we do not plead for a total Restraint but for a just and due Regulation And were the Press so regulated yet would it not be attended with any of these ill Consequences with which this Author is pleased to charge it for since Men have sufficient means for the trial of their Religion if they do it not their fin and folly must be imputed not to the Restraint of the Press but to their own Ignorance or Negligence for as some cannot so others will not But our Author goeth on and so must we SECT VII 5. THis Author's fifth Allegation against the Restraint of the Press takes up more than three Pages but the full Substance of it is this It prevents Acts of Charity to the Souls of Men it invades the natural Rights of mankind and destroys the common Tyes of humanity so he This is Dogmatically and Magisterially delivered and since it is such ● grievous Charge it had need be very well proved And how doth our Author make it out He tells us That all Men are obliged especially in Matters of Religion to communicate to one another what they think is the Truth and the Reasons by which they endeavour to prove it To which I answer thus That we are indeed concerned not only to profess a Religion but promote it too I think that he who hath one jot thereof will never deny We are bound by several Obligations to instruct and teach our Neighbour in the Principles of that Religion which we own our selves St. Paul commands it Edify one another and so again Teach and admonish one another We are engaged by the frequent Commands of God and that eternal Law of Charity in our Capacities and as occasion is offered to propagate our Religion to plant it where it is not and to water it where it is But then methinks before we do this we should not only think as this Author saith but secure our selves and others too that the Religion which we advance in the World be indeed the Religion of God we must be sure that we plant not Weeds instead of Flowers that we sow not Tares instead of Wheat For to promote a Religion which may possibly be false were a desperate Venture indeed and he that doth it hazards the Honour of God and the Souls of Men. I find that our blessed Saviour and his Apostles taught no Doctrine but what they were sure of We speak that we know saith our Lord and thus St. John We know that we are of the Truth Certainly whosoever undertakes and is obliged to instruct another in matters of Religion had need be very well informed himself For if our Directions should chance to prove wrong What Excuse could we make Suppose we instil into the minds of Men Error and Heresie instead of Truth What were this but to ruin the Souls of Men though we might think to save them It 's true our good Intention and Ignorance may excuse such an ill Act à tanto but though such a mistake may somewhat extenuate the Fault yet can it no way lessen the fatal Consequence that doth attend it Suppose a Physician who really intends to cure his Patient by a mistake of his Remedy should chance to kill him the poor Patient who dieth only by a mistake suffers as great an injury as if his Physician had poysoned him knowingly and with design 'T is indeed an Act of Charity to instruct the Ignorant and lead the Blind but withal the Man who undertakes it must have Eyes in his own Head lest if the blind lead the blind they both fall into and perish in the Ditch Certain it is we are much engaged very strictly to sift the Grounds of that Religion which we are to propagate in the World and teach our Neighbours lest otherwise through our own mistake and his confidence we become guilty of cruel Charity and prove instrumental to damn that Person whom we should endeavour as far as we can to save And as it is a dangerous thing for private Persons to promote any false Religion though they themselves being mistaken do think it true so to permit other Men to publish heretical Doctrins cannot be the Duty of those Persons who have Authority and should have Zeal to prevent it To restrain this unchristian Liberty of the Tongue Pen and Press is not as this Author doth boldly assert To invade the natural Rights of mankind nor to destroy the common Tyes of humanity For if it be a Man's natural Right to persuade his Neighbour either by his Tongue or his Pen to entertain an Opinion really heretical whether he thinks it so or not 't is also his natural Right to draw him into Sin for if he prevail that will be finis operis though not operantis it will be the issue of the Act though it were not the intention of the Agent We cannot doubt but that St. Paul very well understood what natural Right every Man hath to use his Tongue and in what cases he ought to do it and thereby to communicate his Thoughts to his Neighbours but suppose a Man's Thoughts be wild and his Opinions heretical must he be left at Liberty to impart such Thoughts and vent such Opinions even as he pleaseth See what St. Paul saith concerning Hereticks Their mouths must be stopped i. e. they must not be permitted by personal Conferences to communicate their ill Opinions to inform or which is all one to corrupt the Judgments of other Men so thought St. Paul Now he who pleads for an universal Liberty as the natural Right of all Mankind to communicate to other Men whatever they think to be a Truth whether it be so or not must censure St. Paul as a Man either ignorant or else an invader of Men's natural Right since he so positively declares that some Men's Mouths must be stopped And in order to this the same Apostle gave Bishop Titus this Direction A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject i. e. excommunicate him cast him out of the Church and certainly if the Person of an obstinate Heretick must be rejected his Books may not be admitted for as to his Person his Breath is infectious His words eat like a Canker and as to his Writings there is in his Ink more Poysons than one Now since there are so many heretical Pens at work amongst us there is great need now if ever that some spiritual Argus should attend and watch the Press lest more venemous Doctrins should steal from thence to infect and kill the Souls of Men. And this I think is a sufficient Answer to this Author's fifth Allegation SECT VIII 6. THis Author's sixth Allegation against the Restraint of the Press
one Theodatus Artemon and Beryllus and Sabellius in the Fourth Century by Arius Eunomius and some others And in the same Age the Personality and Divinity of the Holy Ghost was denied by Macedonius and some others who were there branded by a particular Name and called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Oppugners of the Holy Ghost These Heterodox Opinions beginning to spread and disturb the Peace of the Christian Church and some other ill Opinions arising too several General Councils were summoned by several Christian Emperors the Nicene Council by Constantine the Great whose main work was to examine the Opinion of Arius the Council of Constantinople called by Theodosius the First to debate the Opinion of Macedonius the Council of Ephesus called by Theodosius the Second to consider the Opinion of Nestorius and the Council of Chalcedon summoned by the Emperor Martian to consult about the Opinion of Eutyches These Councils consisting of some Hundreds of Bishops having the Glory of God in their Hearts the Settlement of the Church in their Eyes and the Bible in their Hands did after a mature deliberation pronounce the Opinions of these Men to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Gospel and the obstinate defenders of them to be Hereticks And certainly the determinations of these General Councils which were made up of Persons exemplary for their Piety and eminent for their Learning who resolved on nothing without mature Advice and Deliberation are of as great Authority and afford as much Satisfaction in Matters of Religion as any thing of Man can be or do For the Truths of God once taught the World by Christ and his Apostles being unchangeable for ever and our Bibles which are the only Rule to measure Religions by continuing one and the same for ever that which was an Error in those early days must needs be an Error still and that which was a Truth then must needs be a Truth now And if we cannot think of any more proper means for the right understanding of Scripture and the discovery of Truth and Error than the deliberate and unanimous Judgment of so many hundred pious learned and unbiassed Men assembled together then certainly the determinations of those antient Councils are very considerable Evidences for Truth and against Error And the rather because they consisted of such Persons who besides their eminent Piety and Learning had the great Advantage of living nearer the Apostles age and thereby were the better able to inform themselves and us what was certainly believed and done in the very infancy of the Christian Church SECT IX 3. THE Writings of the Antient Fathers those especially that lived within the first six Centuries where-ever they agree and are not since corrupted or maimed by the Frauds and Forgeries of the Roman Church are of singular use in this Matter too That Ignatius Clemens Origen Athanasius Cyril Nazianzene Basil Chrysostom Hierom Austin and many others both in the Eastern and Western Churches were indeed Persons of great Piety and excellent Parts our Socinians without breach of Modesty cannot deny And although some of these great Names in some particular Matters had their peculiar mistakes and shewed themselves to be but Men yet in all Points where we find an unanimous Consent amongst them we are to have so much Veneration for their Authority as not easily to suspect or contradict it True it is if we take these Fathers singly Man by Man where we find any of them alone in their Opinions as Origen in reference to the Punishments of Hell and St. Austin in reference to Infants that die unbaptised we are not in this case much more obliged to accept their Judgment than the Judgment of some single Person yet alive But if we take All the Fathers who lived within six hundred Years after Christ together and in a lump where we find them One in Judgment they are enough to make a wiser Council than any hath been since their time they are enough to inform us what is Error and what is Truth But SECT X. 4. BEcause Learned Men whose Fortunes are Mean cannot purchase and unlearned Men whose Intellectuals are weak cannot read and understand the voluminous Writings of the Fathers we have several Systems of Divinity Confessions of Faith short Abridgments of Christian Religion which are especially to unlearned Persons great helps in this matter too And here methinks those antient Creeds of the Apostles Nice and Athanasius which are so generally received by the Church of God are of great Authority to settle our Judgment in the main and most necessary Points of Faith Besides we have many Choice and Excellent Catechisms composed by Men that were Pious Judicious acquainted with Scriptures well versed in the Primitive Councils and Fathers These short Catechisms compiled by Persons of singular Endowments and approved by the Church are little less than contracted Bibles containing in them whatever Man is obliged to know and delivering enough in easie Terms to inform us in Matters of Practice to secure us from Errors and confirm our Judgments in all the great Points of Faith In short the substance of my Answer to this Argument is this since we have the written Word of God to be our Rule and since this Word in some material Cases according to the different Fancies and Interests of Men hath different Interpretations given concerning its true Sense and Meaning 't is our safest way for our better Satisfaction to betake our selves to the most able faithful and unbiassed Judges and they are the most antient Councils and the Primitive Fathers whose Judgments are declared in our several Creeds in other publick Confessions of Faith and Orthodox Catechisms set forth or approved by the Church of God And since we are very well stored with these excellent Helps I do once more conclude that no Man whether learned or unlearned can need any new Arguments from the Press to confirm his Judgment in Matters of Religion SECT XI 7. THis Author's seventh Allegation against the Restraint of the Press runs thus If it be unlawful to let the Press continue free lest it furnish Men with the Reasons of one Party as well as the other it must be as unlawful to examine those Reasons To this I answer thus We must distinguish between Party and Party between one who is Orthodox and one who is Heretical this distinction being premised I shall resolve this Hypothetical Proposition into these two Categorical ones That it is not lawful for many Orthodox Christians to Examine those Reasons which Hereticks may urge in defence of their ill Opinions And therefore that the Press should not be permitted to furnish such Christians with any such Reasons 'T is notoriously known that there are amongst us vast numbers of Persons who are of weak Judgments not firmly established in their Faith not able to distinguish Truth from Falshood in a fallacious Argument and therefore are apt to be Tossed up and down by every wind of doctrine now for such