Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	doctrine_n	scripture_n	tradition_n	6,474	5	9.3640	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65702	Dos pou sto, or, An answer to Sure footing, so far as Mr. Whitby is concerned in it wherein the rule and guide of faith, the interest of reason, and the authority of the church in matters of faith, are fully handled and vindicated, from the exceptions of Mr. Serjeant, and petty flirts of Fiat lux : together with An answer to five questions propounded by a Roman Catholick / by Daniel Whitby ...	Whitby, Daniel, 1638-1726.	1666 (1666)	Wing W1725; ESTC R38592	42,147	78

believes such Articles or asserts their truth he presently replyes because revealed in Scripture by that God who cannot lye whereas the Catholick must Answer because revealed by that Tradition or that Churches voice which is infallible to assure me of the Churches voice is the business of my Eyes and eares to ascertain me of the infallibility of that voice is the work of Reason Is now the faith of Catholicks resolved into their eyes or ears Is it resolved into the use of Reason and not into the Churches voice If not why must this be objected to the Protestant because his Reason doth assist him to evince his Scripture to be the product of Divine Veracity If then you take this prayse in its largest sense as it imports the enquiry into all its causes in their several kinds both Catholicks and Protestants do resolve their faith into humane Reason as giving them assurance of the infallibility both of Scripture and Tradition if in its proper notion as it it implyes the principal efficient cause of Faith 't is evident that neither of them do it Nevertheless I freely grant that all the certainty of our Faith in things not punctually expressed in Scripture depends upon the certainty of our Reason working upon the never sayling Rules of Logick which as it is no disparagement to the certainty of Faith so is it a thing common unto us with Catholicks who must acknowledge with my good Friend That many things have been delivered by the Church which were not formally contained in her tradition or the Rule of Faith but only thence concluded by the help of Reason Sure Footing P. 206. Prop. 3. The Fundamentals of Christianity i. e. all doctrines necessary to the Salvation of each person delivered in the Rule of Faith must be both evident and obvious to the eye of Reason for seing the proper end of a Rule is to regulate and direct and nothing unevident and obscure whilst such can do that office unto those to whom it is so for this were to require the intellect to be regulated by what it cannot know to be a rule what ever is the the Rule of Faith and so of Fundamentals must evidently declare them to such persons to whom it is a rule and is it not monstrous to imagine that God should have suspended our Salvation and Christ the very being of his Church on what 's obscure and void of evidence And secondly seeing what is not obvious cannot be evident to such persons as are unable to search into the depths of Reason and see into the coherence of a continued train of consequences that this Rule may be evident to such it must be obvious Obvious I say in delivering the affirmative heads of Christian Faith not in affording means to extricate the understanding from all the Sophistry of a Learned Adversary which to require from the Rule of Faith especially as applyed to the illiterate person and his certainty thereof is as absurd and monstrous as to require in order to his certainty that he sees walks or hears that he should have ability to Answer all the quirks of Zeno and demurs of a Gascendus to the contrary As therefore in these matters the clear and immediate evidence of sense is a sufficient preservative to the rudest person from all the Sophisms of Zeno and his Academy even so the full and pregnant evidence of Fundamentals especially if joynd with that internal evidence of the Holy Spirit which is promised by our Saviour to all those that do his will is sufficient settlement unto the meanest person capable of Religion against all the Fallacies of a subtle Heretick Coroll Hence I conceive it Sophistically objected by my Friend That we prove and defend our Faith by skils and languages history and humane learning and so make them our Rule of Faith For we aver the Fundamentals of our Faith are so perspicuously revealed in Scripture as to need no farther skill to apprehend them then what is necessary to understand that language in which our Rule of Faith is writ yea what is equally necessary to understand the Churches voice which constantly is delivered by her representatives in Greek or Latine and therefore the preceding skils are not of absolute necessity to Faith in General but only to some portions of it of which we may be ignorant without considerable prejudice to our eternal welfare of which nature is the legitimacy of Baptism conferr'd by Hereticks the Millenium c. and if we use such mediums in matters of the highest nature we do it still ex abundanti either to conclude the same things from obscurer places which are perspicuously revealed elsewhere or to obviate the evasions and confute the cavils of the Hereticks all which the Catholick doth and must do both when engaged with him and us Thus when again he tels us That our Rule is deal Characters waxen-natured and plyable to the Dedalean Phancy of the ingenious moulders of new opinions P. 194. Ans 'T is true some passages there are in it which are may be wrested to such evil purposes but still the Fundamentals of our Faith are such as are by no means plyable to any other sence Prop. 4. Reason in judging of the sence of Scripture is regulated partly by principles of Faith partly by Tradition partly by Catholick maxims of her own 1. By Principles of Faith for Scripture is to be interpreted secundum analogiam Fidei that is say we particular Texts of Scripture when dubious are so to be interpreted as not to contradict the Fundamentals of Faith or any doctrine which evidently and fully stands asserted in the Word of God and 2ly since Scripture cannot contradict it self When any Paragraph of Scripture absolutely considered is ambiguous that sence must necessarily obtain which is repugnant to no other paragraph against what may be so and thus may Scripture regulate me in the sence of Scripture and what I know of it lead me to the sense of what I do not Secondly By tradition for since tradition is necessary to assure us that there were once such men as the Apostles who delivered that Christianity and these Scriptures to us which we now embrace to question the sufficiency of the like tradition to assure me of the sence of Scripture is virtually to call in question the motives which induce us to believe it such this then would be an excellent help unto the sence of Scripture only the mischief is that where it can be had we do not want it and where we want it 't is but too visible it cannot be had Note only that I speak here of a like tradition to which two things are requisite First That it be as general as that of Scripture And Secondly That it be such as evidenceth it self by Reason to have been no forgery as here it doth it being morally impossible that the whole Church in the delivery of Scripture to us should deceive or be deceived For the

perfection and remove the contrary he being therefore incomprehensible because infinite in perfection whence albeit I do not comprehend his nature yet can I rationally conclude him not corporeal because that necessarily subjects him to varietie of imperfections 6. This doth not prejudice the use of Reason in other matters any more then the Asymptoticks of the Mathematicks the cruces logicorum the Insolubilia of other sciences do prejudice our getting knowledge in these matters by the use of Reason Corol. Hence evident it is That Scripture must not alwaies be interpreted according to the Letter or Grammatical importance of the words because that often is contradictory both to reason tradition and the Analogie of Faith this cannot be disputed by any person who is not professedly industrious to render Scripture odious and ridiculous there being nothing more abhorrent from humane nature then some Scriptures are in their Grammaticall importance but you object Ob. If Reason must guide you sometimes so as to denie the clear letter of Scripture or to deny the Spouse of Christ is properly whatever she is stiled in the Canticles by what principles must Reason be regulated in this enquiry Whether God hath hands and feet c. pag. 193. Ans 1. By Principles of Faith or those perspicuous Scriptures which dogmatically aver that he is a Spirit invisible and without all shape lastly attribute unto him many things repugnant to a body this you see is done antecedently to the known sence of some Scriptures though not of all And 2. by Reason assuring me that corporeity is incompatible with that power which is every where infinite That it is an imperfection and so not incident to this all-perfect Being that it interferes with his simplicity and independance degrades him beneath the ranke of Angels and humane Souls which Scriptures represent as incorporeal that to ascribe such Phrases properly unto him must represent him the worst of Monsters as having wings and seaven eyes and putting on more shapes then ever Proteus did and render his reproofs of Heathen Images irrational and absurd Ob. But is not this to flie back for refuge to the old rule Humane Reason which you seemingly renounced when you had found your new Rule of Faith Ans It s power to pass judgement of the truth of what is revealed in Scripture I did and do renounce its assistance in finding out the sence of Scripture I cannot renounce without the sorfeiture of Reason Corol. 2. Hence it must follow that to be expresly contained in Scripture is not to be the mind of God contained in Scripture for that God is a Shepheard and a Roaring Lyon a Lanthorn and a wall of fire that he begat Israel and doth continue to beget Believers That the Messiah is a Lamb a Lyon and a Stag a Worm Plant Fagle Root and Cedar this and much more is expressly told us from Scriptures letter but to infer hence that Reason guided by Scripture cannot otherwise interpret them but it must Violently wrest the Scripture and be so absolutely the Rule of Faith as to controle and baffle Scripture though clearly revealing p. 192. is to make Christ the worst of Monsters to out do all the Fables of the Poets and represent the God of Heaven more ridiculous then an Heathen Jupiter Secondly I defire to know whether the Church of Rome doth own and sence these places according to the letter or contradict and wrest baffle and controul the clearest revelations of the word of God by doing otherwise Qu. But if to be in express terms in Scripture be not to be clearly revealed there what is it to be thus revealed Ans T is manifestly to be the mind of God contained in Scripture Which being so if you continue to imagine that every thing contained in Scriptures letters is clearly manifested to be the mind of God in Scripture then must you either contradict what is clearly manifested so to be or cut off hands and feet and pluck out eyes that you may be Christs Disciple if you enquire farther amidst all the varietie of Tropes and Figurative Expressions used in Scripture how any thing can be manifested to be the mind of God revealed I Answer by the very same means and circumstances by which we know the mind of one another notwihstanding all the variety of Tropes and Figures which we use in ordinary Discourse or Writing how often doth the Divine the Poet the Historian and especially the Orator flourish in all the arts of Rhetorick and Grace his subject with the chiosest flowers of Eloquence and yet presents it in a dress as clear as it is pleasant and were not men wilfully perverse they would have less reason to complain of the obscurity of the Scripture in matters necessary to Salvation upon this account When therefore you thus Argue That God hath Hands Feet Nostrils is plainly writ in your Rule of Faith p. 121. and therefore is revealed in it the inference must be weak the Foundations of it are already overturned And yet however you suppose it all along I peremptorily deny that it is possitively asserted in any Scripture that God hath Hands Feet Nostrils True we are told the Heavens are the Workmanship of his hands c. But to infer it from such places would force you to acknowledge that the Word of God is Milk and that Milk is Rational because Saint Paul hath stiled it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here therefore is no need to captivate my Reason much less to Answer as you would have me That the contrary is plain in Scripture too pag. 191. and so that Scripture holds forth plainly contradictions this Answer so dishonourable to God and Scripture so repugnant unto Faith Reason and Tradition I permit to be your own CHAP. III. Of the Rule of Faith Prop 1. SEeing Divine Faith in the proper import of the words is an assent to Divine Authority revealed whatever I assent to as an Article of Faith I must assent to as being the revealed will of God whence evident it is That the mind or will of God revealed and nothing else must be my Rule of Faith Again What is the proper office of a Rule but to examine what is to be ruled by it Must we not pass a Judgement on our Weights and Measures by bringing them to the Rule and Standard In like manner Do we not examine each Theological conclusion by this Enquiry Whether it be the minde of God revealed or not and from the Answer made unto it pass Judgement on the thing in Question This therefore is the Rule of every Theological conclusion And so of Faith Corol. 1. Hence it will follow That not Tradition but the minde of God revealed in Scripture or Tradition is the Rule of Faith And indeed Tradition where it as certain as Mr. S. supposeth it would be the formal Object but not the Rule of Faith which two things are miserably confounded through the whole Series of my Friends Discourse

otherwise men must renounce their reason reject the guidance of their conscience and so of Gods Vicegerent act in the concernments of their eternal souls at all adventures who shall pass judgement on the final and irrefragable judge thus Fiat lux Ep. 2. p. 198. Ans The Conscience being subject unto none but God who only knows the secrets of it he only can pass judgement of its actions and pretences and he assuredly will convince the Shismatick and Heretick t was not their Reason but their lusts that did betray them to such errors but the results of such a Judgement which interfere with the received doctrine or customes of the Church must so far be condemned and censured by the Superiors of the Church as they do interrupt the Peace and Unity thereof The Jews were bound to hearken to the Scribes and Pharisees the Sanhedrim and High-Priest and they had power to chastise their disobedience in lawful matters and yet I hope with that discretion which was requisite to preferve them from condemning our Messias for a cheat or for embracing those Traditions which did evacuate the Law of God for otherwise our Saviour was very much to blame when he so often taught the contrary and put in so many caveats against the leaven of the Scribes and Pharisees Thus Rulers are appointed for a terror unto evil doers and an encouragement unto the Good and consequently must have surficient means to be instructed in that Good or evil which they are to reward or punish and power so to do and yet inferiors are forbid to yeild obedience to their unlawful precepts and in such cases are to prefer obedience to the Laws of God which must suppose a judgement of discretion in them to discern what precepts are unlawful and when they intersere with the unerring rule of Scripture so well consistent is the judgement of discretion we allow to private persons both with the power of Superiors and Peace and Unity of the Church Ob. But I denyed them to be judges of Faith Now to be clearly revealed or evident in Scripture and to be of Faith is all one so that they must not be judges of what is evident in Scripture least by necessary consequence they become judges of Faith too p. 195. Ans This Argument supposeth that to be judge of Faith and to be judge of what is Faith are terms equivalent which is a great mistake to judge what is Faith and what is evidently revealed in Scripture is the business of each Catechist and Preacher who declares the Articles of Faith of each believer who assents unto them because his judgement tels him they are such and therefore signally the work of them with whom this Faith is visibly intrusted but to be judge of Faith or to be that person or cōmunity whose judgment in such matters must be infallibly received without farther scrutiny is a prerogative as clearly incompetent to any person or community as it is vehemently pretended to 't was Sir upon this slender Cobweb your doughty inference did hang. Ob. 2. You refuse to admit them as Guides of their Faith which signifies they may have power to require our assents in matters in which they have no power to guide us i. e. they may have power to require us to go wrong for any thing we or they know p. 195. Ans Let me again inform you that to guid others in their faith or to it and to be guide of Faith are things extreamly differring whoever doth instruct his Brother in any matter of Faith or reclaim him from his Error becomes a charitative Guide unto Faith whoever by the Church is authorized so to do becomes an Authoritative Guide unto Faith but to be guide of Faith especially in that sence in which this phrase is taken in our present Controversie is to be such a one whose judgement must determine for us what is Faith what not and thus our Reason onely is our Guide in matters dubious Ob 3. But what can be replyed to a Socinian answering when his assent to the Trinity is required That he humbly submitted to Scrip. that he used al means he could but discovered it not so evident there as you conceive it Answ The very same you would return unto your Brother Carpocratian pretending as humble a submission to your Rule of Faith and yet concluding thence for Heresie or to the Protestant asserting Tradition where it may be had to be as Authentick as the written Word and yet protesting That after all means used he could never finde therein one footstep of the Romish Faith or lastly to the Arrian of old or new Photinian who both laid claim to the Tradition of the three first Centuries In a word the onely answer you can make to such Enquiries must be this That your appeal unto Tradition is both true and just so was not that of the Photmian or Carpocratian Heretick And surely then the like return of Protestants to the Socinian Quaker Independant when pretending the same reason for their separation from the Church of England which we do from that of Rome if founded upon real Truth must vindicate our Church from all your clamors Object But upon the same right and title that we separated from Rome did Independants Quakers c. depart from us for since they do it upon their own discretion and so upon our Principle to deny it to be done by them so justly or so truly is to do wickedly and talk fondly Fiat Lux Ep 2. p. 198 199. or which is trantamount to do and talk after the manner of fiat lux Answ As if not onely the Carpocration but the Jew and Heathen should be thought to act as justly and as truly as the best of Catholicks because as vehement Alsertors of the Traditions of their Fathers and all the Actions and Sentiments of Mankinde should carry equal Truth and Justice in them as being equally the products of what they looked on as reason and discretion Thus Saul the Persecutor must act as justly as Paul the Doctor of the Gentiles because according to his Conscience and the Catholick when Preaching to convert and practising to destroy his Prince must do both with equal Justice provided that his good intentions to propagate the Roman Faith be alike in both Prop 5. In matters which belong not to the Foundations of our Faith to be content with such submission as is consistent with a liberty of opinion and binds us onely to reserve our Judgements to our selves in what they differ from the professed Doctrine of the Church we live in seems most serviceable to the ends of Peace and Unity to the ends of Peace because it lesseneth the Objects and so withdraws the fewel of Contention of Unity because it much enlargeth the conditions of it and rendreth them such as may more easily be submitted to Coroll Hence 't is apparently most safe and prudent to be content with this submission as being most conducive to