Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	church_n	error_n	faith_n	4,873	5	5.2360	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62586	A seasonable vindication of the B. Trinity being an answer to this question, why do you believe the doctrine of the Trinity? : collected from the works of the most Reverend, Dr. John Tillotson, late Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, and the right Reverend Dr. Edward Stillingfleet, now Lord Bishop of Worcester.	Tillotson, John, 1630-1694.; Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699.; Assheton, William, 1641-1711.	1697 (1697)	Wing T1221; ESTC R10019	21,341	116

no less Contradiction than Transubstantiation why can't we say that it cannot be contained in Scripture We say Transubstantiation cannot be found in Scripture because it is a plain Contradiction to our Reason but if the Trinity be also a plain Contradiction to our Reason why shan't we be allowed to say that it cannot be contained in Scripture V. Def. of Brief Hist. of Unit. p. 4 and 6. But oh were the Press as free for the Unitarians as 't is for other Protestants how easily would they make it appear that the Follies and Contradictions so justly charged on Transubstantiation are neither for Number Consequence nor Clearness any way comparable to those implied in the Athanasian Creed and that the Trinity hath the same and no other Foundation with Transubstantiation So that we must of necessity admit Both or neither V. Acts of Athanasius p. 16. This is the Sum of what they Object To which I expect an Answer according to your Promise A. As preparatory to a just Answer I cannot but observe how exactly these Socinians do Symbolize with the Papists For as on the one hand they of the Church of Rome are so fondly and obstinately addicted to their own Errors how mishappen and monstrous soever that rather than the Dictates of their Church how absurd soever should be called in question they will question the truth even of Christianity it self and if we will not take in Transubstantiation and admit it to be a necessary Article of the Christian Faith they grow so sullen and desperate that they matter not what becomes of all the rest And rather than not have their Will of us in that which is Controverted they will give up that which by their own confession is an undoubted Article of the Christian Faith and not controverted on either Side In like manner These Unitarians are so impertinently zealous in their designs against the Trinity that rather than admit that Fundamental Article of the Christian Faith they will plead for Transubstantiation and this even contrary to the Light and Dictate of their own Conscience For the Socinians are hearty Enemies to Transubstantiation and have exposed the Absurdity of it with great advantage V. Arcbishop Tillotson ' s Serm. on 1 Tim. II. 5. p. 30. Q. Have you nothing further to say in this matter A. You must give me leave to add I did not expect to have found this Parallel so often insisted upon without an Answer to Two Dialogues purposely written on that Subject at a time when the Doctrine of the Trinity was used as an Argument to bring in Transubstantiation as that is now now alledged for casting off the other But I must do them that right to tell the World That at that time a Socinian Answer was written to those Dialogues which I saw and wished it might be Printed that the World might be satisfied about it and them But they thought fit to forbear And in all their late Pamphlets where this Parallel is so often repeated there is but once that I can find any notice taken of those Dialogues and that in a very superficial manner for the main Design and Scope of them is past over V. Vind. of Trinit p. 287. And I must needs remind these Unitarians that it is not fair nor Scholar-like so insultingly to repeat the Parallel between the Trinity and Transubstantiation which hath been so fully confuted in those Two Dialogues Q. You promised an Answer and you bring me a Challenge Which I shall send to the Unitarians Who indeed are obliged in point of Honour to give Satisfaction by a just Reply to those Two Dialogues A. If they would consult their Reputation and credit their Cause they ought not to defer it For those Two Dialogues were writ by an Author Who to give you the very words of an Unitarian hath all the Properties for which an Adversary may be either feared or Reverenced He understands perfectly the Doctrine of the Church and the Points in Question He will commit no oversights through Ignorance Hast or Inadversion He is too experienced and Judicious to hazard his Cause as others have lately done on the Success of a Half-thought Hypothesis a Crude Invention a pretty New Querk In a word we can only say of him since there is no Remedy Contenti simus hoc Catone V. Consid c. in a Letter to H. H. p. 3. Such an Adversary as this is worthy the Pens of their Ablest Writers If therefore at this Juncture when the Press is open these Unitarians shall not Answer those Dialogues I must with freedom tell them It is not because they dare not but because they cannot Q. Leaving these Unitarians to defend their Parallel at their leasure let me now hear your Answer which you were pleased to Promise A. I shall endeavour to return a more particular Answer to this Objection and such a One as I hope will satisfy every considerate and unprejudiced Mind that after all this confidence and swaggering of theirs there is by no means equal Reason either for the receiving or for the rejecting of these two Doctrines of the Trinity and Transubstantiation Vid. Archbishop Tillotson's Serm. on 1 Tim. II. 5. p. 30. Q. First Let us examine whether there be equal Reason for the Belief of these Two Doctrines A. If this Suggestion of theirs be of any force we must suppose that there is equal Evidence and Proof from Scripture for these Two Doctrines Q. How do you prove there is not A. From the Confession of our Adversaries themselves For several Learned Writers of the Church of Rome have freely acknowledged that Transubstantiation can neither be directly proved nor necessarily concluded from Scripture But this the Writers of the Christian Church did never acknowledge concerning the Trinity and the Divinity of Christ but have always appealed to the clear and undeniable Testimonies of Scripture for the Proof of these Doctrines And then the whole force of the Objection amounts to this That if I am bound to Believe what I am sure God says though I cannot Comprehend it then I am bound by the same reason to believe the greatest Absurdity in the World though I have no manner of assurance of any Divine Revelation concerning it Q. You think then that as there is not equal reason for the Believing so neither is there equal reason for the rejecting of these Two Doctrines A. This the Objection supposes Which yet cannot be supposed but upon one or both of these Two Grounds Either 1. Because these Two Doctrines are equally Incomprehensible Or 2. Because they are equally loaded with Absurdities and Contradictions Q. As to the First Is not the Trinity as Incomprehensible as Transubstantiation and as such equally to be rejected A. It is not good ground of rejecting any Doctrine merely because it is Incomprehensible as I have abundantly shewed already But besides this there is a wide difference between plain matters of Sense and Mysteries concerning God And it does by

A Seasonable VINDICATION OF THE B. Trinity Being an Answer to this Question Why do you believe the Doctrine of the Trinity Collected from the Works of the Most Reverend Dr. John Tillotson Late Lord Archbishop of Canterbury And the Right Reverend Dr. Edward Stillingfleet Now Lord Bishop of Worcester LONDON Printed for B. Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill MDCXCVII THE PREFACE OUR Modern Socinians who are pleased to call themselves Unitarians having not only Disputed but most Blasphemously Ridiculed the Doctrine of the B. Trinity for the Conviction of such Gainsayers and the Confirmation of Others it is thought fit to Publish the following Discourse faithfully Collected from the Learned Works of Archbishop TILLOTSON and Bishop STILLINGFLEET Concerning Bishop STILLINGFLEET I shall say nothing because he is alive to Answer for himself But as to Archbishop TILLOTSON I hope it will appear even from this Collection That his Grace was very far from being a Socinian however his Memory hath been very unworthily Reproached in that as well as other Respects since his Death A VINDICATION OF THE B. TRINITY Q. WHY do you believe the Doctrine of the Trinity A. Because it is a very Rational Doctrine that is there is the highest Reason to believe it Q. What do you mean by this word Trinity And What Doctrines concerning it are proposed to our Belief A. I shall Answer this Question in the very words of the Church of England Whose Doctrine I am fully perswaded is Orthodox and Catholick There is but one living and true God everlasting without Body Parts or Passions of infinite Power Wisdom and Goodness the Maker and Preserver of all things both visible and invisible And in Unity of this Godhead there be Three Persons of One Substance Power and Eternity the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Art 1. The Catholick Faith is this That we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the Substance For there is one Person of the Father another of the Son and another of the Holy Ghost But the Godhead of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all one the Glory equal the Majesty coeternal The Father is God the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God And yet they are not Three Gods but One God Athan. Creed It is very meet right and our bounden Duty that we should at all times and in all places give thanks unto thee O Lord Almighty Everlasting God Who art One God one Lord not one only Person but three Persons in one Substance For that which we believe of the Glory of the Father the same we believe of the Son and of the Holy Ghost without any difference or inequality Pref. on the Feast of Trinity O holy blessed and glorious Trinity Three Persons and One God have mercy upon us miserable Sinners Lit. This is what we believe concerning the Trinity And that this is very Rational Doctrine and that we have the highest Reason thus to believe I shall endeavour to evince when I have first explained the Nature of Faith in General by shewing What it is to Believe and what this act Believe doth denote when applied to any Object Q. What is Faith or Belief in General A. Belief in general I define to be an Assent to that which is Credible as Credible V. Bishop Pearson on the Creed p. 2. Q. What is meant by this word Assent A. By the word Assent is expressed that Act or Habit of the Understanding by which it receiveth acknowledgeth and embraceth any thing as a Truth Id. Ib. Q. But are there not several other kinds of Assent besides Faith by which the Soul doth receive and embrace whatsoever appeareth to be true A. This Assent or Judgment of any thing to be true being a general Act of the Understanding is applicable to other Habits thereof as well as to Faith Id. Ib. Q. How then is this Assent which we call Faith specified and distinguished from those other kinds of Assent A. It must be specified as all other Acts are by its proper Object Id. Ib. Q. What is this Object of Faith A. This Object of Faith is that which is Credible as Credible Q. Why do you repeat the word Credible and say Credible as Credible A. To denote the twofold Object of Faith viz. Material and Formal Q. What is the Material Object of Faith A. The Material Object of Faith is the thing to be believed or something which is credible Q. What is the Formal Object of Faith A. That whereby it is believed or the Reason why it is believed Q. What is it to be Credible A. That is properly Credible which is not apparent of it self either in respect of our Senses or Understanding nor certainly to be collected either antecedently by its Cause or reversely by its Effect and yet though by none of these ways hath the Attestation of a Truth V. Bishop Pearson p. 3. Q. What then is that kind of Assent which is called Faith A. When any thing propounded to us is neither apparent to our Sense nor evident to our Understanding in and of it self neither certainly to be collected from any clear and necessary Connexion with the Cause from which it proceedeth or the Effects which it naturally produceth nor is taken up upon any real Arguments or Relations to other acknowledged Truths and yet notwithstanding appeareth to us true not by a Manifestation but Attestation of the Truth and so moveth us to assent not of it self but by virtue of the Testimony given to it In plain terms When we therefore acknowledge a thing to be true for this only reason because we are told that it is so Then and in such a Case we do properly believe it And the Assent that we give to such a Truth thus attested is neither Science nor Opinion but Faith Id. Ib. Q. The nature of Faith in general being thus explained I am now prepared to be instructed by you in this important Question Why do you believe the Doctrine of the Trinity A. Though this Doctrine of the Trinity viz. That there are Three distinct Persons in One and the same undivided Divine Essence is neither apparent to my Sense nor evident to my Understanding for being a great Mystery I could never have known it unless it had been Revealed and now it is Revealed I am not able to comprehend it yet since it is testified and declared by an All-knowing and most just and faithful God who can neither deceive nor be deceived I do therefore give my Assent unto it as a most credible Truth and as such I do firmly believe it Now that God who is infinite in Wisdom and Knowledge doth fully know himself and perfectly understand his own Nature And also that He who is infinitely Good and Faithful cannot deceive us for it is impossible for God to Lye this I shall not pretend to prove but can fairly