veteri Romano sequitur à ligno eoquo modo affertur à Sancto Cyprian Just Mart. Tertulliano Sancto Leone Papa in hymno Ecclesiastico Regnavit à ligno Deus Besides this most ancient Father and Martyr and the most Learned too of all others in and before his time has produced a great many Examples of the like kind and not a few whole Periods or smaller Sections intirely expung'd which the Jews then living and disputing with him were not able to deny or any ways palliate So that all the pretended Care of the Jews notwithstanding the Hebrew Copy had been corrupted early in the Second Century and according to Vossius soon after the Destruction of Jerusalem by Vespasian and remains so unto this present time I must not pass over Vossius's main Argument but will represent it in very few words He shews that the Ancient Jews believed their Messiah would come about the 6000 Year from the Creation and that they expected him about the time when Jesus was born those two Periods being coincident It follows hence 1. That they believ'd the World 6000 years old at the Birth of Jesus 2. That the Ancient Hebrew Copies reckon'd 6000 years from Adam to Jesus else the Jews could not have been in expectation of the Messiah when Jesus was born if their Chronology had then been the same as it is this day 3. From the whole it must be confest that the Modern Hebrew Copies are corrupted the World according to them being at the Birth of Jesus but about 4000 years old The 2000 years wanting in the present Hebrew are supply'd in a great measure by the Seventy's Copy in the Chronology of the Patriarchs the Remainder are made good out of the Intervals of the Judges of Israel and the Reigns of the Persian Kings which the Jews have shorten'd and drawn the Christians into their Error Hereunto may be added another Observation near of kind unto the former St. Luke Chap. 4. 35 36 v. affirms Sala was the Son of Cainan Cainan the Son of Arpbaxad But Gen. 11. 12 v. Sala is reckon'd the immediate Son of Arphaxad and Cainan quite left out in the Hebrew Copy whereas the Vatican Seventy agrees with St. Luke which is a Demonstration that the Jews have corrupted the Hebrew By this one Artifice of theirs are lost 130 years I expect here the Remarker or the Note-maker will for the sake of the Hebrew give the Holy Evangelist such another Character as upon the like occasion their Friend Jerom did That Corruption of Psal 22. 16. v. is known and acknowledg'd by all The Jews read it thus As a Lion instead of They pierced my hands and my feet So the Evangelist Mark 15. 24. and the Seventy more truly have it the difference is but the half of a very small Letter sc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is less than that between Y and W and the Epenthesis of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is common among 'em in other Cases But after all this it was nothing to me or to my Argument in the Sermon whether the Jews corrupted the Seventy only or the Hebrew also or both I 'll suppose it was the Seventy only which is all Mr. O. contends for yet still my Bill of Indictment laid against the Jews must be found For the Scripture is the Word of God in whatever Language 't is written They who would excuse the Jews for Corrupting the Seventy only and not the Hebrew in good time will defend the Corrupting the English Version only and not the Original Greek But if the latter Defence will not bring off the false Cameronian neither will the former justifie the faithless Jews I wish then the Jews the Scotch Presbyterians and Mr. O. in the name of his Brethren in England to concert these Matters among ' emselves for the Good of Christendom The Rector briefly noted that the Samaritans and Sadducees rejected all but the Five Books of Moses and the Minister calls this a Vulgar Error let us see on what Grounds Mr. Owen pleads that whereas Josephus affirms The Sadducees to have receiv'd the Law only the Historian in another place explains himself as if he meant The written Law in Opposition to the Oral In proof whereof he sends me back unto the 13th b. and 18 Chap. I am there and read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But now I will shew that the Pharisees having receiv'd from the Fathers many things as legal which were not written in the Law of Moses deliver'd them unto the People And for this cause the Sadducees rejected them alledging that those things only were to be accounted Legal which were written sc in the Laws of Moses but that they ought not to observe the Traditions of the Fathers I will not insist upon this that some Learned Men have thought the Prophetical Books of Scripture were by the Sadducees reckon'd among the Oral Traditions of the Fathers nor will I deny tho' there be reason to doubt that Josephus's Passage in his Eighteenth Book is to be understood in the same Sense as that in the Thirteenth Book and that they explain one another However this be he speaks only of the Traditions added unto the Laws of Moses which the Sadducees rejected but not a Syllable concerning the Prophetical Writings which whether the Sadducees rejected or not remains still to be examin'd Mr. O. assures us 't is a Vulgar Error But Mr. Pool in his Synopsis informs me 't was the constant Opinion of the Fathers and never contradicted til Scaliger and Drusius of late advanc'd the contrary Opinion I hope the Minister will not thrust down the Fathers into the Vulgar Forme The Sadducees in all Probability would never have deny'd the Resurrection if they had entertain'd a just esteem of the Prophetical Books Hence our Lord overlooking all the other more plain and convincing Testimonies in the Prophetical Writings singl'd out that of Moses Exod. 3. 6. I am the God of thy Father the God of Abraham c. as the most proper and effectual Argument ad Hominem in proof of the Resurrection which the Sadducees on their own Principles cou'd not deny tho' they might have avoided the other But the Remarker sends me to the Learn'd Dr. Lightfoot for further satisfaction herein Vol. 2. pag. 541 542. I am content to stand to this Gentleman's Judgment Dr. Lightfoot then pag. 541. grants that the Samaritans might so reject all the Books of the Old Testament except the Pentateuch as to forbid their being read in the Synagogues Even this Concession alone were I should think sufficient to my purpose The Sadducees and Samaritans forbad the rest of the Scripture to be read in the Publick Congregations If the Hagiographa and Prophets were now by a Positive Order forbid to be read in our Churches we should have Mr. O I question not soon about our Ears as Men that put a
Libeller thro' every Paragraph or Page It shall suffice to observe that he has impeach'd us expresly as the Persons who have been the Cause of that Deluge of Atheism Socinianism Popery Lewdness of Manners ay and of the Schisms too which have crept into the Church and Kingdom and this he has done without any other Occasion or Provocation pretended than the Bishop of Salisbury's supposing the Dissenters Separatists in his Letter to his own Clergy or I may rather say than the too gentle Expressions which he in vain bestow'd upon these Schismatics the Foxes and the Firebrands of this Poor Church and Nation as he might more truly have styl'd ' em A little after the ' foresaid Libel was come to my Hand I was presented with another call'd a Sermon preach'd at the Opening of a Separate Chappel by Mr. Baldwin This Gentleman being greatly pleased I was told as much by one that heard him say it with the Note-makers admirable Performance and declaring that there were a great many biting Truths in it that is that we of the Church of England are all of us Promoters of Atheism Socinianism Popery Schism and decay of Morals in this Nation suffer'd his said Sermon to peep abroad thinking doubtless with himself to reap some of the Honour due to that mighty Undertaking of trampling underfoot the establish'd Church of Englâ—nd I have already in another way delivered my Mind of this Sermon of Mr. Baldwins and perhaps shall hereafter let the World see how weak and absurd it was Here only let it be observ'd that he took upon him to revile the Church of England with Arminianism and with Popery and now and then according to his weak Power for he had a willing Mind to give us an impertinent Wipe on some other Acts How justly it makes no matter with such Men it sufficeth them that they have some pretence to reproach us and Confidence enough to load us with Calumnies Semper ego Auditor tantum Nunquamne reponam Vexatus toties Rauoi Theseide Codâ—i Do these Men in good earnest think after they have first brav'd us and openly provok'd us with Lies and Slanders to cast us into a sleep with a dose of Opium to stop our Mouths with Maxims which they are not at all careful themselves to observe I mean those of having sincere Affection to the Truth Deference towards Superiours and Charity towards Neighbours especially in a Conjuncture whenour Civil as well our Religious Interests do so loudly call for the Exerciss of ' em To say nothing here of the Want of Charity of Truth and Sincerity in those Notes has the Author paid due Deference to his Superiours If he has why did he not own his Libel by affixing his Name to it At least why not the Name of the Printer That we might have gratify'd our Curiosity with the knowledg of so celebrated a Writer The matter is Plain The Note-maker has paid such Deference to his Superiour my Lord Bishop of Salisbury as happily would have cost him dear if he had not been Incognito But this is not the first time that the Rulers of the People have been evil spoken of by Authors who walk the Streets in Masquerade and wound their Honour behind the back It will perhaps be ask'd what 's this to the Minister at Oswestry If an unknown Person at Manchester has writ a tart Book against the Episcopal Party And I also ask what was it to the Minister at Oswestry if the Rector of Bury preach'd a Sermon in Vindication of the Church of England against the Lancashire Dissenters But there is no great Mystery in this The Rector had in another Treatise discover'd the Ministers design'd Corruption of St. Chrysostom a piece of pious Fraud which ought never to be forgotten and therefore the Minister with the help of his Friends at Manchester was to give his Adversary a Diversion on some other Subject and to patch up his broken Credit with Remarks on the Rectors Sermon I said with the help of his Friends at Manchester but I rather believe the Note-maker was Principal in the Remarks Mr. Owen is the pretended Author of 'em and as I suppose sign'd 'em Yet any one who reads the Minister at Oswestry his other Writings may easily discern such a different Air in the Remarks from his other undoubted Performances as will force him to conclude that Mr. Omen is but the reputed Father of this spurious Off-spring Or what if one should guess the Remarks to be the Work of a Club of Ministers of which he at Manchester was President pro tempore This is certain that the Remarks in their way to London took a Tour to Manchester there we heard of 'em long before their Publication and had some Account of 'em also There they receiv'd their last finishing Strokes 't is thought and there they were drest up with all the gaudy Feathers and Embellishments which the Wit of the Party could furnish them with So that if one ask'd the Remarker his Name and he would please to return a fair Answer he must say my Name is Logion for me are many But the great Question is who is this Note-maker who from behind the Curtain like the Heathen Priests delivers his Oracles What is his Name Unto whom does he belong 'T is no difficult Matter to resolve this Knot That he is a Dissenter no one can doubt that he is one of that Party in Manchester was once fairly acknowledg'd unto me by another who is in their Interest and of no small Reputation among them who also added that the Notes were but a Preface to another Work which the Author intended to set forth I suppose to the Remarks So then this Solomon's Porch is as big as his Temple his Preface as large as his Book and the mighty Work we were put in hopes of is dwindled into a few sorry Remarks upon the Rectors Sermon But we may make yet a clearer Discovery of the Note-maker if we will but consider that a Dissenter within the Parish of Machester frankly own'd that a certain Minister of the Gospel at Manchester wrote those Notes We need no more Evidence Only it deserves to be observ'd that the Defence of c. a Book since Publish'd by the Minister at Oswestry was sent down not to the Author at Oswestry but to the Minister at Manchester to be Revis'd and Corrected as if Mr. Owen were not able to rectify the Mistakes committed in the Printing his own Book This manifests a Confederacy and Correspondence between 'em and from hence it may be fairly gather'd that the Notes and the Remarks have been done in a great Measure by the same Hand at Manchester But especially when we see 'em so like one another both in their Features and their Drapery we cannot suffer our selves any longer to doubt but the Remarks were hammer'd out at the same Forge or at least polish'd by the same skilful Hand as were the Notes But
Clause is a Forgery said the Libeller not to be sound in the English or Latin Articles of Edward the Sixth or Q. Elizabeth Ratify'd by Parliament The Archbishops Answer unto this heavy Charge is That the aforesaid Clause was by these Men or at least by some of their Faction razed out of the Article to weaken the just Power of the Church to serve their Turns that the said Clause was in the English Articles Printed 1612 1605 1593 and in the Latin 1563 which was the first or one of the first Copies Printed but some few Months after the Articles were agreed on The A. B. further confirm'd this from the Publick Records in his own Office under the Hand of a Publick Notary viz. that the said Clause was in the 20th Article What then and where lies the Mystery of Iniquity why he tells us that in the year 1571 there were some who refus'd to subscribe that in the same Year 1571 the Articles were Printed both in Latin and in English and that this Clause was left out of both and that this could not be done but by the malicious Cunning of that opposite Faction and for some reasons there given it was no hard Matter to have the Articles Printed and this Clause left out The Archbishop adds out of the Records that all the lower House of Convocation subscrib'd the Articles that very Year 1571 with the said Clause in them and then concludes I do here openly charge upon that pure Sect this foul Corruption of falsifying the Articles of the Church of England Let them take it off as they can Let then the Ingenuous Reader determin whether I had not as good yea the same Reasons to impeach the Dissenters for this Corruption of Acts 6. at least for propagating it and whether the Archbishop's Charge laid against the Puritans is not lyable to the same or greater Objections than mine against the Dissenters But that 's admitted as Reason in one Man's Mouth which will not pass from anothers But to come nearer to my present Argument Besides the conjecture of Col. F. and the Suspicion of the German Gent. before spoken of which 't is natural for any Man in such Cases to discover I further add the Right Reverend Edward Lord Bishop of Cork and Ross in his Treatise Entitul'd Scripture Authentick and Faith certain p. 18. took Notice of this Corruption of Act 6. 3. and further says p. 19 'T is not improbable it might be done at first with design and particularly of those who would establish the Peoples Power not only in Electing but even in Ordaining their own Ministers I must now take notice of some things wherewith the Remarker has imbellish'd this Chapter of his to give it a more agreeable Relish unto the Reader 's Palate No Dissenters says he have ever urg'd this corrupt Reading against the Bishops and Ceremonies How came Ceremonies here to be brought in by the head and shoulders and who ever thought that Ye had any thing to do with the Ceremonies tho' we have These Mens Brains are so full of Ceremonies that they fancy they see 'em in every Book and in every Controversie So the Knight imagin'd he saw a Giant and prepar'd himself for the Combate but it prov'd a Wind-mill so fearful and superstitious Men see Spirits or Hobgoblins where ever they go Mr. Owen informs his Readers the greatest part of whom will doubtless take it for Truth that I confidently affirm without the least proof that the Scotch Bibles are generally faulty in this Passage Ser. p. 28. My Words there are Having now just Reason to suspect the Scotch Bibles generally faulty in this Passage Mr. O. changes 'em into Confidently affirms without proof Whether I have just reason or not to suspect it is submitted to the Judgment of the Impartial Reader why else did the Cameronian send a great Congregation to their Bibles where they might find it so but for Mr. Owen to make the World believe that I confidently affirm'd it without proof is an impudent Slander not to be parallel'd I think except in the Plea for Scripture Ordination and the five Disputations of Church Government and Worship of both which more anon That Mr. Owen a Minister of the Gospel as himself says modest Mr. Owen who has an Affection for Truth and Charity for his Neighbours should in the face of the World scandalize his Brother and not blush nor repent of it nor in a private way recal and correct it he knows my Meaning is extraordinary Tell it not in Gath publish it not in Ashkelon I beg pardon for gathering a Flower in the Ministers Garden I am not wont to make so bold with him But 't is a choice one I perceive I found it in his Plea p. 71. in his Defence p. 72. and we shall presently meet with it again in these Remarks p. 18. I was therefore ambitious to have it for once in my Posie 'T is no wonder to me that the Minister is so terribly frighted at the motion of a fire especially at his own door Tua Res agitur Paries cum proximus ardet Vcaligon I can't blame him then for being concern'd If Forgeries once begin to be sacrificed unto the Flames the Plea may happily take fire and receive its just Reward But it may be 't is the Light of the Fire which offends him more than the heat 'T is natural for such as the Minister whose Talent it is to corrupt Authors to love darkness rather than light Every one that doth evil hateth the light neither cometh to the light least his deeds should be discovered Joh 3. 19 20. But why should the Note maker be so startled at my Proposal Time was when he had not such an aversion unto the burning of Books This calls to my mind how Lewis the 14th after he had burnt many Goodly Cities with his Bombs and forc'd the Confederates unto the same method of annoying their Enemies made hideous complaints of that Barbarous way of fighting which he would never be sensible of till it came to his own turn Well! but why burn the Holy Bible for one single Corruption Why because an Error which appears in Masquerade and under the disguise of Scripture being discovered deserves no pity being of so much the more dangerous Consequence A Spy when he is taken is always put to death but an open Enemy is only made a Prisoner of War The Concern which my Adversaries here shew least this Corruption should be publickly executed and their willingness to have it live still under the Protection of the Holy Bible render it impossible for 'em to dissemble its Parentage any longer If we will be govern'd by the Judgment of Solomon the Bantling must belong unto them at whose doors it has been laid Whose else should it be but theirs who palpably discover an Affection and Tenderness towards it and burn their own fingers rather than the Impostor
positively objected to the Church of England that she had left out of the Psalms some Original Parts meaning the Titles when 't is not certain that they are Original The Minister at Oswestry here takes fair leave of his Client and bids him shift for himself as well as he can having no more to say in behalf of Mr. Delaune Only whereas I put the question why the Titles were not all translated into plain English if they were so serviceable to the unfolding the Mysteries contain'd in the Psalms he surlily tells me the Bishops they being the Translators of the Bible into English could best resolve the Question I thank him heartily for this and desire the good People among the Dissenters to think of it Mr. Owen has herein done my Lords the Bishops some Justice before he was aware in acknowledging that the Scriptures being in the English Tongue is owing to their Labours Learning and Piety But 't will be objected that they have not Translated all the Titles True Neither have the Dissenters tho' they had power and opportunity in the Reign of the Long Parliament and Oliver and had more lately Liberty to do it if t were worth the while and a matter of so great moment as Mr. de Laune has made the World to believe If it might not be thought a digression from my present purpose I would observe that the Mysteries in the Psalms as far as I am able to judge are those which relate unto Jesus Christ or those principally but there is not one Title in the Hebrew which is at all useful to the unfolding any of these Mysteries For I do profess that after I am told it is a Psalm a Song a Song or Psalm a Psalm of David a Prayer of Moses a Psalm at the Dedication of Davids House a Psalm for the Sabbath sent to such or such a chief Musician on what Instrument it was to be sung a Golden Psalm a Psalm of Instruction of Degrees c. I am just as wise as I was before as to the Mysteries contain'd in such Psalms The like I affirm of the rest of the Titles 'T was therefore unfair in Mr. de Laune to bear his ignorant and unobserving Readers in hand as if the Titles unfolded the Mysteries of the Psalms To the other Questions I there put the Minister returns but a very sorry and evasive Answer thus They are not worth Answering However he might methinks have diverted his Friends in and about Manchester with a Jest or two They would have taken it for a solid Answer and cry'd him up as the Jews did Herod Act. 12. 22. But to the end the impartial Reader may see that at least some of my Questions were to the purpose and ought to have been reply'd to or else Mr. Delaune left in the lurch undefended and convict of dealing very dishonestly with us I will draw one or two of those Questions into the form of an Argument and then it will be seen whether they are worth Answering or whether Mr. Owen were able to answer 'em so as to vindicate Mr. Delaune or get any advantage of the Rector Setting aside then the Controversie about the Titles which I will now suppose are Cononical Scripture of a certainty yet Mr. Delaune had no Reason to accuse us of leaving them out of our Liturgy Translation which we sing or say because the Dissenters themselves leave 'em out of their Psalms in Meter nor do they sing 'em at their Divine Worship Mr. Delaune therefore had no room to complain of us when the Dissenters were guilty in the same kind It will be time enough to quarrel with us after they shall have amended their own fault In the mean while they are so much the more inexcusable that they have not to this day reform'd what they seem to be perswaded is amiss But the Truth is were it never so manifest and certain that the Titles are essential Parts of the Psalms yet I believe neither the Church of England nor Mr. Delaune nor his Vindicator nor any wise Dissenter would think fit to advise the Singing them or putting them into Meter at the head of the Singing Psalms Mr. Delaune's Exception therefore was nothing but noise and cavil and impertinence which was the thing I design'd and did effectually demonstrate in my Sermon Instead then of saying my Questions Are not worth Answering the Remarker should have done me right and his Client no Injustice by confessing fairly that Mr. Delaune impeach'd the Church of England without cause and that himself was not able to justifie him But he must be excus'd His business and his head lies another way viz. abusing the Rector and Bantering the ignorant and innocent People of his own Party He has been so far from Exercising Charity to his Neighbours that he has not been just to any side no not to himself In plain terms he has bely'd himself and pretended the contrary to what he could not but know sc that those Questions merited an Answer in the Controversie between Mr. Delaune and me 2. In the next place Mr. Delaune excepted against the Establish'd Church That we read some select Portions of Scripture commonly call'd Epistles and Gospels and not the intire Chapters which says he is a curtalling and mangling the Scriptures which thereby become quite another thing than the Evangelists intended in the Gospels or the Apostles in the Epistles altogether ruining the Scope and Connexion in divers Places To this I reply'd That the Dissenters sing some small Portions of Psalms which with them is not curtailing or mangling the Psalms That they read single Chapters into which the inspir'd Pen-men did not divide their Writings as well as not into those shorter Sections call'd Epistles and Gospels that 't is as lawful and perhaps as edifying to read these as whole Chapters that there is often a Connexion between Chapter and Chapter which binders not the Dissenters reading them severally that this is every whit as much disturbing the Scope of those Places as our reading the Epistles and Gospels is that those Paragraphs of Scripture have two senses a Relative and an Independent sense that tho' the Relative sense cannot be understood without its neighbouring Parts yet it is not ruin'd thereby to omit for a time is not ruining the Scope nor doing it the least Injury That the independent Sense however is still safe that by the Rule imply'd in this Objection the Dissenters who are not very fond of reading any at all will be oblig'd to read many Chapters together happily whole Books and to sing the 119. Psal at once And what says the Remarker to all this He suggests that we omit reading some Scriptures even whole Chapters and Books as he gathers from our Kalender which seems to be a diminishing from the Word of God This is nothing to the Defence of Mr. Delaune but a Digression from the Argument in hand which is call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
and is meer cavil and shuffling It betrays the weakness of Mr. Owen's Defence of Mr. Delaune Our omitting Chapters and Books will not vindicate Mr. Delaune's unjust Accusation of us about reading the Epistles and Gospels As for the rest of my Reply to Mr. Delaune the Remarker puts me off with this slight Answer I leave him and Mr. Delaune to argue c. But Mr. Delaune is long since dead where and when we shall meet God only knows I am pretty sure not in this World Mr. Owen perhaps with the help of our Lancashire Exorcists will undertake to bring Mr. Delaune back again Why not They who can cast out Devils 't is probable can raise the Dead One Miracle is as easily wrought as another yet still the mischief is tho' these Wonder-workers should conjure him up again as the Woman of Endor did Samuel I am not sure the Rector would have the courage to meet him In plain terms Mr. O. has declin'd the Cause being as little able to make good the Objection laid against us as the Accuser himself was 3. Mr. Delaune tax'd the establish'd Church That in the Liturgy Translation of the Psalms three whole Verses are foisted into the 14th Psalm immediately after the third Verse Hereunto I return'd That the inspir'd Pen-men of the New Testament had done the same 1 Cor. 15. 54 55 v. that is had put distant Passages of Scripture together and cited 'em as one single and intire Testimony That St. Paul had borrowed these very three objected Verses at least from other Psalms and Books of the Old Testament and inserted them with the other Parts of the Psalm into Rom. 3. 10. v. c. The which I suppose is sufficient to justifie us And what has the Minister reply'd unto all this Why just nothing at all He has not so much as taken the least notice of it so as to vindicate Mr. Delaune's groundless clamour against us that 's out of doors Ne'rtheless something he has to say against the Rector which whether it be to the purpose is no matter 't will make a noise among his Party and that 's all He acquaints us then from Jerome That the said three Verses were transcrib'd out of Romans into Psal 14. that they are not in the LXX and that none of the Greek Interpreters have commented upon them My Answer hereunto is 1. That this is nothing to the Argument before us It acquits us from the charge of Mr. Delaune It was not the Church of England then which foisted those three Verses into Psal 14. Besides we have the Authority of St. Paul and of the Primitive Church to warrant our continuing them in Psal 14. 2. As for Jerome I do here protest against him as unfit to be a Witness in this Case He too warmly espous'd the Defence of the Hebrew Text against the LXX and manifestly betray'd his Partiality He car'd not what in his heat he said or wrote for the support of his own opinion Let any one consult his Hebrew Questions and Traditions on Genesis and it may be he 'l be of my mind Here arguing for the Hebrew against the LXX because forsooth St. Luke Act. 7. 14. agreed not with the Hebrew Text but with the Septuagint he gives that holy Evangelist this scurvy Character Lucae qui ignotus vilis non magnae fidei in nationibus ducebatur I 'll not English the words because I will pay some deference to the Presbyterian Father This only I say He who sticks not to revile the inspir'd Evangelist after this manner is unworthy to be believ'd in any thing he affirms upon this Point in Controversie or indeed in any else 3. I would desire to know when and by whom those three Verses were transcrib'd out of St. Paul into the 14th Psalm 'T was done before St. Paul was born for any thing I know 4. Whereas Jerome affirms as Mr. Owen tells me that these Verses are not in the LXX Translation I ask where then did Jerome find 'em and how came he to enter into the Dispute about ' em Looking into the Place Jerome I find confesses the Verses are in vulgatâ Editione quae Graece 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicitur in toto orbe diversa est I do not well understand him but it seems the Copies of the Scripture then in ordinary use whence Eustochium argu'd had these Verses and Jerome acknowledges there was a Greek Edition call'd the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or vulgar which had the said Verses in it tho' Jerome's had 'em not if he is to be credited But by whom and when these Verses were put into this vulgar Edition of the Seventy Jerome says not The Vatican Copy Mr. Owen confesses to be one of the best that has these three Verses I dare not then believe that the Seventy Translation in Jerom's days was without ' em Be this as it will 't is manifest that the Church of England added 'em not to Psal 14. that St. Paul made no scruple to join distant Places of Scripture to one another and how this should become so heinous a Crime in us to follow those Examples Mr. Owen is yet in arrear to account for in behalf of Mr. Delaune Mr. Delaune moreover asserted That the three Verses are not in any of the Original Copies whereas if there be many as is imply'd in those words the Greek must be one as I noted and there they are And I further acquaint the Remarker that they are in the Arabick and Aethiopick Versions also Of this the Minister has ne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quidem not one Syllable Only because I took occasion hereupon to offer unto consideration whether the Greek Copy be not as good as the Hebrew at this day is and grounded my self upon the Judgment of the Learned Isaac Vossius he endeavours to make his Party believe I design'd to Depress the Authority of the Hebrew Copies Surely this Minister never considers what he writes If I had affirm'd roundly which I did not that the Seventy's Version is as good as the Hebrew this would not have been any disparagement unto the Hebrew tho' it would be an advancement to the Seventy Except Mr. Owen thinks that the Commendation of one Man is the reproach of another I don't think it any dispraise unto St. Matthew if in answer to Jerom's foremention'd disparagement of St. Luke one should affirm that St. Luke's Writings are of as good Credit as St. Matthew's In short tho' I am inclin'd to believe the Seventy to be of Divine Authority 't was never in my thoughts to depress the Hebrew So that it were sufficient for me to justifie the choice of my Text tho' it were to be found in the Hebrew only It has I do believe among them who are as ignorant as himself past for a current Piece of Wit when he thus speaks If the Seventy be of at good Authority as the present Hebrew