Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	call_v	church_n	pillar_n	6,253	5	10.5659	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A13642	Keepe your text. Or a short discourse, wherein is sett downe a method to instruct, how a Catholike (though but competently learned) may defend his fayth against the most learned protestant, that is, if so the protestant will tye himselfe to his owne principle and doctrine, in keeping himselfe to the text of the scripture. Composed by a Catholike priest	Véron, François, 1575-1649. Adrian Hucher ministre d'Amyens, mis à l'inquisition des passages de la Bible de Genève. aut	1619 (1619)	STC 23924; ESTC S107525	31,396	48

and shall eate her flesh and burne her with fire Now how can the Whore here signifie Antichrist or his seate if at his comming she is to be ouerthrowne and demolished Next you may shew that the Expositions of the Fathers are different concerning what the Whore of Babilon here signifieth yet not any of them can bee applyed to the Pope for (q) In Psal 26. Austine (r) In hunc locum Aretas (Å¿) Ibidem Haymon and S. Bede doe vnderstand by the Whore which sitteth on seuen Hills and hath domination ouer the Kings of the earth not Rome but the vniuersall Citie of the Deuill which in the Scripture is often called Babilon and is opposed to the Citie of God which is his Church and called Ierusalem And by the seuen Hills these Fathers vnderstand the generall state of all proud Men and chiefly of earthly Kings But (t) L. contra Iudaeos Tertullian and (u) Epist 17. ad Marcell Ierome doe indeed meane by the Whore of Babilon Rome to wit Rome Ethnike as it worshipped Idols and persecuted Christians but not Rome Christian which Exposition doth nothing preiudice the Pope or vs Catholikes Heere now if your Minister will not rest satisfied with these Expositions will him to refute all or any of them from the Scripture alone as hee hath obliged himselfe by his owne doctrine to doe in acknowledging the Scripture for sole Iudge of all Religious Controuersies To conclude you may for the close of all tell your Mi-Minister that rhis and the other Text alleaged are so farre from prouing the Pope to bee Antichrist that diuers learned Protestants as holding the proofes deduced from them to be most in consequent doe maintaine that Antichrist is not yet come Of this Opinion to wit that Antichrist is not yet come and consequently that the Pope is not Antichrist is Zanchius (x) In Epist Paul ad Philip Boloss Thess p. 246. and Franciscus (y) In his Booke entituled Antichristus siue Prognostica finis mundi p. 74. Lambertus both markable and learned Protestants And from hence you may tell him it proceedeth that Mr. Doue in his Sermon touching the second comming of Christ thus writeth Some Protestants make a doubt whether Antichrist bee yet reueiled or no. A point so euident that our English Puritanes in their mild defence of the silenced Ministers Supplication to the High Court of Parliament doe charge and censure most seuerely our English Protestants besides for other things disliked by them for teaching that the Pope is not Antichrist And thus farre of this second example and of the Method to be holden herein in disputing with your Minister where you are to aduertize him that seeing in his Disputes hee must relye much vpon conference of Scriptures that this course is holden most vncertaine euen in the iudgements of the Learned Protestants to wit of D. (z) L. de Eccles contra Bellar. contr 2. q. 4. p. 22. Whitakers aboue alleaged of (a) Vbi supra Beza and of Mr. (b) So vrged by Hooker in the Preface of his Eccles Politie p. 28. Hooker And here according to this method of answering I could wish the Catholke to bee well practized in the Question it selfe of the Scripture being sole Iudge when the Protestant seeketh to proue the same only from Scripture seeing this Question containeth implicitly in it selfe all other Questions and Controuersies of faith Now against this former Method of disputing and answering if it should be obiected by any that the learned Catholike when he maintaineth at any time the part of the opponent stands exposed to the same danger and so dum capit capitur to the which the Protestant in this Discourse is said to lye open since the Catholike often insisteth in consequences drawne from Scripture vrgeth Reasons deduced from Naturall or Morall Philosophy warranteth his owne Expositions of Scripture by the testimonie of Men to wit of the Pope and generall Councels and so Meteor-like in regard of Diuine and Humane Authorities hangeth betweene Heauen and Earth To this I answere that learned Catholike is not preiudiced by this my Method And first concerning Consequences drawne from Scripture though the Catholike doth freely embrace them as not holding the expresse Scripture alone to bee the rule of faith yet so farre forth as concernes only Scripture he insisteth not in them alone but he is able to produce expresse plaine and literall passages of Scripture prouing his Articles of faith without any helpe of Scripturall consequences though neuer so necessary Of which kind of proofe the Protestant is wholly depriued and therefore flyeth for refuge only to supposed illations from Scripture or to some obscure passages thereof which in expresse termes speake nothing of the Question for which they are alleaged but only are strangely detorted by his most wilfull mis-application For example of the perspicuous Texts of Scripture in defence of our Catholike faith I will insist in some few of them for some delibation and taste of the rest And first concerning the Reall Presence afore mentioned wee vrge those plaine wordes of Christ To (c) Mat. 26. wit this is my body c. This is my bloud c. In like sort for the Primacie of Peter we vrge that passage Thou (d) Mat. 16. art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not preuaile against it For the not erring of the Vniuersall Church wee insist besides in the former Text in those words of the (e) 1. Tim. 3. Apostle Who calleth the Church the pillar and foundation of truth How then can the Church erre That Priests may truly forgiue sinnes we rest vpon the promise of Christ made to his Apostles who were Priests and in them to his Successours Whose sinnes (f) Iohn 20. you shall forgiue they are forgiuen them and whose sinnes you shall retayne they are retayned What more euident That Baptisme truely remitteth Originall Sinne contrary to the Protestants Doctrine wee prooue from that most perspicuous place (g) Iohn 3. Except a Man be borne againe of Water and the Spirit hee cannot enter into the Kingdome of Heauen Finally to omit infinite other passages of Scripture of the like conuincing euidency for our Catholike Articles and Religion that Workes doe iustifie and not only Faith wee produce Saint Iames saying in expresse words thus (h) Iames 3. Doe you not see that a Man is iustified by Works and not by Faith only How literally and punctually hee proues the Point controuerted In all which places we find the Catholike Conclusion it selfe for which they are vrged literally set downe and our Aduersaries therefore as acknowledging so much are forced to flie to figuratiue constructions of them Neither doe we neede to forge any strange or mysticall construction of them as the Protestant in his allegations of Scripture is accustomed to doe saying only by our owne warrant This the Scripture here