Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	ancient_a	church_n	father_n	2,262	5	4.7708	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A11015	A treatise of Gods effectual calling: written first in the Latine tongue, by the reuerend and faithfull seruant of Christ, Maister Robert Rollock, preacher of Gods word in Edenburgh. And now faithfully translated for the benefite of the vnlearned, into the English tongue, by Henry Holland, preacher in London; Tractatus de vocatione efficaci, quae inter locos theologiæ communissimos recensetur, deque locis specialioribus, qui sub vocatione comprehenduntur. English	Rollock, Robert, 1555?-1599.; Holland, Henry, 1555 or 6-1603.; Bèze, Théodore de, 1519-1605.	1603 (1603)	STC 21286; ESTC S116145	189,138	276

things false some things fabulous and some things impious Therefore these bookes be not canonicall I proue the Antecedent Tobit 3. 8. and 3. 25. 5. 15. and 11. 12. Iudith 8. 6. and 9. 2. and 9. 13. and 16. 8. Baruch 6. 2. the Additions of Daniel 13. 1. and 14. 32. the Additions to Hester 15. 1. 2 Mach. 2. 1. 7. 8. 27. and 12. 43. and 14. 37. and 15. 39. The 7. ARG. These bookes containe contrarieties and points repugning one another Conferre 1. Mach. 6. 8. with 2. Mach. 1. 16. and 2. Mach. 9. 5. Conferre 1. Mach. 9. 3. and 2. Machab. 10. 1. Conferre 1. Machab. 4. 36. and 2. Mach. 10. 1. Conferre 1. Mach. 6. 17. and 2. Mach. 10. 11. The 8. ARG. is taken from an humane testimonie first of Councels secondly of Fathers the ancient first next the latter writers The Councels which giue canons touching the canonicall bookes and the Apocryphal are these for the most part The Laodicen Councel which was held in the yeere after Christs incarnatiō 300. The 3. Councel of Carthage in the yeere 400. The Trullan in the yeere 600. The Florentine in the yeere 1150. The Tridentine in our age Of these we may reason thus The Laodicen Councell the most ancient here numbred reiects these bookes as Apocryphall See the 59. Canon of that Councell Ergo. But the aduersaries obiect heere that at this time before the third Councell of Carthage the canonicall bookes were not distinctly known I answer first that this councell was not held till foure hundred yeeres after Christ but it is absurd to say that there was no Canon knowne or that the canonicall books were not discerned till this time Ergo. Secondly I answer that Councell was not general but prouinciall But a prouinciall Councell may not prescribe any canon for the Catholike Church Ergo. But they say this Councell was confirmed by that of Trullan I answer that the Laodicen Councell also was approued by this and that the Trullan Councel is reiected by the Papists themselues in manie things Thus far of Councels now for the ancient Fathers they also did reiect these bookes as Apocryphall Ergo. I proue this by an induction 1. Athanasius in his Synopsis 2. Cyril of Ierusalem 3. Hilary Bishop of Pictauia 4. Melito bishop of Sardinia 5. Nazianzen in his poem 6. Hierom in his prologo Galeato which is prefixed before the books of Kings 7. Gregorie the Great 8. Ioseph against Appian 9. Ruffin in the exposition of the Symbole Apostolicall 10. Augustine The aduersaries here except saying But these men haue spoken of the canon of the old Testament of the Hebrues say they not of Christians I answer first as if the Hebrues had one canon the Christians another Secondly they did approue that very canon of the Hebrues But it may be say they that then peraduēture there was no Canon known or determined of by the Church I answer and I demand then when was this decreed and in what Councell was this done in the Councell of Trent but this is too late for this Councell was euen in our age Was it decreed in the Florentine Councell that is but little elder Was this Canon agreed vpon in the third Councell of Carthage But that Councell 1. was but prouinciall 2. and this is reiected of the very Papists themselues in some things as in the canon of the high Priest which in number is the 26. They will say this Councell was confirmed by the Trullan Councell I answer 1. So was the Laodicen 2. So the canon was concluded or established later to wit in the yeare of Christ 400. 3. The Trullan Councell is reiected in many things of the verie Papists 4. After the Trullan Councell there were Fathers which would not receiue the Apocryphall bookes And so now let vs come to the second classe of Fathers that is to the latter Writers Heere then I reason thus The late Writers doe not reckon these bookes among the Canonicall Ergo. This I proue by an induction * Lib. de Officiis Isidore Iohn Damascen Nicephorus Leontius Rabanus Maurus Radulphus Lyranus Carthusianus Abulensis Antoninus Hugo Cardinalis Erasmus in some of his writings Cardinall Caietanus All these were after the Trullan Councell yea some of them were reputed for sonnes by the Church of Rome after the Florentine Councell By these testimonies first of Councels next of Fathers it is euident that none of these bookes was accepted for Canonicall in anie lawfull iudgment for if there had beene anie such matter so manie ancient and late Writers would no doubt haue so acknowledged Wherefore these bookes are Apocryphall and so to be accounted The aduersaries for their defence alleage also humane testimonies and this in a manner is all they can say They cite the Councels before named as the third of Carthage the Trullan Florentine and the Councell of Trent But we reiect the two latter as tyrannicall and congregate purposely to oppresse the truth and light of God And touching the Trullan and the third Councel of Carthage we haue set downe our iudgment And as for Fathers they bring forth for this matter principally the Popes themselues as Pope Innocentius and Gelasius and Augustine in some place But I answer that they cannot bring so many as we can nor so ancient for themselues Secondly when these Fathers which they name call these bookes canonicall which we reiect as Apocryphall they take the name of Canonicall bookes more largely then we to wit for bookes which haue some such sanctity as in prophane Writers cannot be found and they call them so not for that they meane that they are of like authoritie with the Canonicall bookes of Scripture And we denie not but that in many of these such holinesse may appeare as cannot be found in the bookes of prophane authours And thus farre of the Apocryphall bookes CHAP. XVIII Of the authenticall Edition of the Bible WHereas there be extant many Editions of the Bible in diuers languages as the Hebrue Greek and Latine other proper tongues it is a question which of these must be reputed for authenticall I answer the Hebrue edition of the old and the Greek of the new Testament is authenticall so must be accounted so that all things are to be determined by these all other editions must be approoued so far as they agree with these Wee will therefore first speake of the Hebrue edition of the old Testament we auouch then that the Hebrue edition of the old testament is authenticall This proposition shall haue his confirmation after we haue giuen a short preface touching the Hebrue tongue and the writing of the old testament in that language and the preseruation of these bookes of the old testament written in the Hebrue tongue to this day The Hebrue tongue was the first and the * The Hebrue tongue onely before the floud Gen. 11. 1. only language on earth to the floud and to the building of the tower

bookes of the Prophets partly by the spiritual euidence they carry in themselues which the Sons of God instructed by his holy spirit can easily discerne The Canonicall bookes of the Bible are either of the Old or of the New Testament The Canonicall books of the Old Testament are these 1. The 5. bookes of Moses 2. Ioshua 1. booke 3. The booke of iudges 1. 4. Ruth 1. booke 5. The bookes of Samuel 2. 6. The bookes of Kings 2. 7. The bookes of Chronicles 2. 8. Ezra 1. booke 9. Nehemias 1. booke 10. Hester 1. booke 11. Iob. 1. booke 12. Psalmes 13. Prouerbs 14. Ecclesiastes 15. The book of Canticles 16. Esaiah 17. Ieremiah 18. Ezechiel 19. Daniel 20. The twelue small Prophets The Canonicall books of the New Testament are these which are commonlie receiued 1. The Gospel according to S. Matthew 2. The Gospel according to S. Marke 3. The Gospel according to S. Luke 4. The Gospel according to S. Iohn 5. The Acts of the Apost 6. S. Pauls Epistle to the Romans 7. S. Pauls Epistles to the Cormthians 2. 8. The Epistle to the Gal. 9. The Epistle to the Ephesians 10 The Epistle to the Philippians 11. The Epistle to the Colossians 12. The Epistles to the Thessalonians 2. 13. The Epistles to Timothie 2. 14. The Epistle to Titus 15. The Epistle to Philemon 16. The Epistle to the Hebrues 17. The Epistle of Saint Iames. 18. The Epistles of Saint Peter 2. 19. The Epistles of Saint Iohn 3. 20. The Epistle of Saint Iude. 21. The booke of the Reuelation of Saint Iohn And whereas some haue doubted for a time of some of these bookes as of the Epistle to the Hebrues the Epistle of Saint Iames the last of S. Peter the 2. and 3. of S. Iohn the Epistle of Iude and the Apocalypse yet they were neuer vtterly reiected but for a time onely doubted of whether they might be accepted as Canonical These Canonical books of the Old and New Testament were written by holy men as they were moued by the holy Ghost 2. Pet. 1. 21. And of these some are called the Prophets which wrote the bookes of the Old Testament so called because they were gouerned by the spirit of prophecy Some be called Apostles so called because of their function these wrote the books of the New Testament The books of the old new Testament some haue their writers names expressely set downe or noted by speciall characters or signes some haue no names at all annexed whereby the holy Ghost would signify vnto vs that these men were but instruments onely and not the very authors of such books wherefore we be not so much to respect their names nor so busily to inquire after them if they be not expressed Thus farre of the Canonicall bookes Now as concerning the Apocryphall bookes they be so called because the Church would haue them kept hid and not to be read or taught publickly in the Churches the priuate reading of them was onely permitted The Apocryphall bookes are such as were found onely annexed to the old Testament and they bee eleuen in number 1 Iudith 2 Tobit 3 Esdras third fourth booke 4 The Wisedome of * falsly so called Salomon 5 Ecclesiasticus 6 Baruch 7 The Epistle of Ieremiah Apocryphall bookes 8 Additions to Daniel 9 The Prayer of Manasses 10 The two bookes of Machabees 11 The supplement of Hester from the third ver of the tenth chap. Among these some there are which the verie aduersaries account to be Apocryphall First the prayer of Manasses Secondly the third and fourth booke of Esdras Thirdly the third and fourth booke of Machabees wherof Athanasius maketh mention in his Synopsis But we are to proue that all these before named bee Apocryphall The first Argument is from the Writers All the Canonicall bookes of the old Testament were written by the Prophets But these were not written by the Prophets Therfore they be not Canonical but Apocryphal I proue the Proposition Luk. 16. They haue Moses and the Prophets that is the bookes of Moses and the Prophets Luke 24. 27. of Christ it is written that he began at Moses and at all the prophets and interpreted vnto them in all the Scriptures the things which were written of him Therefore Moses and the Prophets were the writers of the old Testament To the Rom. 16. He cals the scriptures of the old Testament the Propheticall Scriptures And 2. Pet. 1. 19. The most sure word of the Prophets And for the assumption But these were not written by the Prophets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I proue it Malachie was the last of the prophets and betweene Malachie and Iohn the Baptist there arose no prophet But these bookes were written after Malachies time and this cannot be denied of some as of Ecclesiasticus the books of y e Machabees Ergo. 2. ARG. This is from the language wherin all the canonical Scriptures were written They were written I say in the language of Canaan in the Hebrue tongue which was the speech of the Prophets wherein they wrote their prophecies But these bookes be not written in the Hebrue tongue but all for the most part in Greeke therfore our proposition or assertion is manifest The Assumption is euident that I shall not neede to cite either the testimonie of the Fathers or the aduersaries owne confession ARG. 3. is from the testimonie of the old Church of the Iewes If these books were Canonicall the old Hebrues had heard some thing of them But they neuer heard of them Therefore they be not Canonicall The Proposition is cleere I proue the Assumption In Ezraes time all the canonicall bookes were gathered into one volume and the Iewes care was such of them that they nūbred all the letters which were found in the Prophets set down the sum of thē how much more would they haue had care of these whole bookes if they had heard of them The 4. ARG. is from the testimonie of the late Church of the Iewes which was in Christs time If these books were canonicall then the latter Rabbins or Iewish Writers would haue accepted them but they did not receiue them but reiect them Therefore they bee not canonicall I proue the Proposition For out of all question if they had not receiued the Canonicall bookes Christ would haue taxed them for it for that he so reprehends them for their sinister and false interpretations of the Canonicall Scriptures The Aduersaries grant the Assumption The 5. ARG. is from the testimonie of Christ and his Apostles If these before named books were canonicall then Christ and his Apostles would haue cited them somewhere for confirmation of their doctrines but that can neuer bee found they did no not in all the new Testament therefore they be not Canonicall The proposition is manifest The matter it selfe will make sure the Assumption The 6. ARG. These Apocryphall bookes containe some things differing from the canonical scriptures some things contrarie some

or common prayers of the Church ought to be in the mother tongue Thirdly whether it shal be lawfull for the common people to read the scriptures translated into their owne language or mother tongue To the first question we answer that it is lawfull yea also that it is expedient it should be so and this we proue by some few arguments First the sacred scriptures must be read publiquely before all the people therefore must they be translated into their owne known language for otherwise it were in vain to read them The antecedent is proued Deut. 31. ver 11. 12. The Lord commandeth that the books of Moses be read to all indifferently when they were assembled Men Women and Children with the strangers Ier. 36. chargeth Baruch the scribe that hee should read before all the people the book which he had Translating of the scripture into the vulgar tongues First argument written from his mouth But some will heere obiect that this precept was to indure but for a time I answer the end shewes it must be perpetuall Deut. 31. The end being this that this people may heare learne and feare the Lord. This end is perpetuall therefore so is the law in like manner specially seeing that the reading of the Scripture is the ordinarie and necessarie meanes whereby we be to come to this appointed end So the antecedēt being thus cleered it followeth necessarily that the scripture must be translated into our knowne mother tongue Arg. 2. The people are permitted to read y e Scriptures Second argu therfore they are to be translated into the vulgar tongue for otherwise the common people could neuer reade them The antecedent I proue thus The Sacred Scriptures do furnish vs with weapons against the Deuil as we be taught by Christs example Matth. 4. who gaue Sathan the repulse vsing none other weapons against him but testimonies of Scripture Ioh. 5. chap. Christ commaunded the multitude to search the scriptures Acts chap. 17. the Christians of Beroea are commended for searching the scriptures whether the points were sound and good agreeable to the sriptures which were taught by the Apostles But see more of this antecedent in the handling of the 3. question Arg. 3. The very Papists graunt the scriptures may be read before the people but they say it must be done in an Third argu vnknowen tongue wherefore I reason thus If the scriptures must be read before the multitude in an vnknowen tongue that shall be fruitlesse and without all edification therefore they must be translated into their knowen language The Antecedent is prooued by 1. Corin. 14. 6. If I shal come vnto you speaking in tongues what shal I profit you q. d. nothing And after in the same Chap. ver 19. I had rather speake fiue words with my vnderstanding that I might also instruct others then ten thousandwords in a strange tongue But of this point more hereafter The fourth argument God requires in his people wisdome knowledge and instruction Therefore the scriptures Fourth argu must be read and therefore translated into the vulgar tongues The antecedent I prooue thus Deut. 4. God wil haue his people to be wise of vnderstanding that the nations round about hearing of this might bee smitten with an admiration and say ver 4. Only this people is wise and of vnderstanding and a great nation The Apostle Col. 3. 16. will haue Gods worde to dwell in them richly or plenteously Paul in his Epistles euery where requires the Churches to whom he writes to be filled with all knowledge The aduersaries contend and dispute much against this knowledge which God requires in the common people The fift argument Christ while he liued among the Iewes spake and preached vnto them in their owne mother Fift argu tongue The Apostles of Christ in like manner did preach the Gospell in their vulgar tongue as in the day of Pentecost and after and for this very cause that they might speake to euery nation in their owne knowen language that gift of tongues was giuen them Thus then I reason If to preach the Gospell in the vulgar known languages was no profanatiō of the Gospell then so in like maner to write the Gospel in the vulgar known languages is no profanation of the same for there is like reason of both The sixt argument is from the perpetuall vse and practise Sixt argu of all the auncient Church For in the Primitiue Church the sacred Scripture was translated neere hand into all languages as the Chaldiac the Syriac the Arabian the Armenian the Egyptian the Ethiopian the Indian the Persian the Scythian the Sarmatian tongue There are not a few do auouch this a Homil. 1. in Io. Chrysostome * De corrigend Graecorum Affectib lib. 5. Theodoret c De doctr Chri. lib. 2. cap. 15. Augustine with others And at this day there be extant the Chaldiac the Syriack the Arabick the Egyptian and the Ethiopian translations all which the learned say were done in the Apostles times Chrysostome turned the sacred Scripture into the Armenian tongue as Sixtus Senēsis reporteth Ierom trāslated the scripture into the * Lingua Dalmatica Dalmatick tongue as these men do testify Alphonsus a Castro Eckius Hosius Erasmus Methodius translated it into the Sclauonian tongue as saith Auentine in his Chronicle * Socrates tripartita historia Vlphilas Bishop of the Gothes translated the same into the Gothes language * De ciuitate Dei lib. 15. Augustine writeth that the old Testament was translated into Syriack Harding against Iuel and Eckius write that the Muscouites and the people of Russia had the scripture in their owne mother tongue The historie of England written by Beda affirmeth that the scriptures were translated into the English tongue before his time Beda saith he translated part of the new Testament himselfe Thus far the practise of the old church whereby as by the rest of the arguments afore going it followeth that the sacred Scripture is to be translated into euery countrey vulgar language Now it resteth to see what the Papists answer to this question we haue in hand Some few yeares past they vtterly denied that the sacred Scripture might bee translated into any mother tongue * De choris canonicis Petrus Asoto Censura Coloniensis and Harding before named these write that some are of this iudgment The Scriptures are not to be translated into the vulgar languages And for this cause such as translated Scriptures they were banished and condemned by the Pope and their bookes were prohibited and burnt And when they saw this to be odious to all men these graue Fathers changed their minds and now forsooth they auouch the Scriptures may be translated into the vulgar languages yet by the Popes permission And this albeit it seeme to be something diuers from the former assertion yet in effect it is the verie same For the Pope will permit no man to