Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	judge_n	king_n	ruth_n	1,639	5	10.6479	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A69143	Miscellania or a treatise Contayning two hundred controuersiall animaduersions, conducing to the study of English controuersies in fayth, and religion. VVritten by N.N.P. and dedicated to the yonger sort of Catholike priests, and other students in the English seminaries beyond the seas. With a pareneticall conclusion vnto the said men.	Anderton, Lawrence, attributed name.	1640 (1640)	STC 576; ESTC S115142	202,826	416

good prayers is so vehem●●●●●d vnaffected as that I earnestly beseech you euen 〈◊〉 the most precious Passion of our Lord and ●auiour suffered for the cancelling of our sinnes by ●ur owne charitable Disposition towards others for ●resume those words of the Apostle to be imprinted 〈◊〉 your soules (a) Rom. 5. Charitas Dei diffusa est in ●●ordibus vestris Finally by what is most sacred and holy that yo● would vouchsafe now and then your particular remembrance of me either yet aliue or hereafter dead in that your most retired and Religious Memento vsed in the celebration of the most Blessed and Reuerend Sacrifice of the Masse for the expiating of my manyfold sinnes This I humbly beseech this in all prostration of soule I implore and begge a● your hands and in such your performance ech of yo● iustly may comfort your selues in those words of ou● Sauiour Beati (b) Matt. 5. misericordes quoniam ipsi misericordiam consequentur And thus in th● good hope thereof I cease referring you to the perusall of the Treatise it selfe Yours in our Lord Iesus N. N. P. MISCELLANIA Contayning certaine Controuersiall Animaduersions Animaduersion I. I WILL begin with the approuall or reiecting what is or hath beene accounted the Scripture or the written Word of God which point concernes the Bookes of Ecclesiasticus Toby Judith Hester Machabees c. Where we are to vnderstand that the Canonicall Scriptures are to vs at this day discerned and made knowne not by that which either the Iewes for a time or certaine Fathers do omit deny or doubt of in their Canon of Scripture but by that which many Fathers do constantly affirme Since otherwise and vpon the con●rary ground we might deny with the Lutherans the Epistle of Iames Iude the second of Peter the 2. and 3. of Iohn the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalyps seeing all these bookes (a) Ofiand in Epic. Cent. 4. p. 299. are denied by the Lutherans Now the reason of this Thesis or Proposition is because in the Primitiue Church the Canonicall Scriptures were not generally all at once receaued but in so great a variety of pretended Scriptures great care and search was requisite wherby to determine which Scriptures were Canonicall which not wherby it came to passe that sundry bookes were for the tyme misdoubted o● by some Fathers or Councells omitted o● not receaued which yet afterwards were vpon greater search and consideration generally acknowledged And according herto D. Bilson Bishop (b) In his suruey of ●hrists suffering printed 1604. pag. 664. of Winchester thus truly sayth The Scriptures were not receaued in all places at once no not in Eusebius his ●yme Animaduersion II. D. Whitakers (c) In his answ to M. Reynolds ●efut p. 2● 23. and other of our Aduersaries do reiect the former bookes of the Old Testamēt to wit Ecclesiasticus Toby c. because they were not first written in Hebrew and in that they had not for their knowne Authours those whom God had declared to be his Prophets This Argument is weake For it is a rash assertion so to measure the Scriptures by the tongue wherein they are written as to restrayne the Spirit of God to one only language The ●anity of which said assertion is sufficiently disproued by Example of Daniel a great part whereof to wit from cap. 2. vers 4. v●que ad ●●em cap. 7. though not written in Hebrew is yet by our Aduersaries acknowledged for Canonicall And touching the second point of this Argument it cannot be proued that God would direct by his holy Spirit no Authors in their Writings but such as were knowne and also further declared by certaine testimonies to be Prophets For our Aduersaries cannot yet tell who writ the seuerall bookes of Judges the third and fourth of the Kings the two of Chronicles the booke of Ruth and Iob all which bookes neuerthelesse they admit for true and Canonicall Scripture And hereupon it is that D. Whitakers though crossing his former assertion thus writeth (d) L. de sacra Script ●ag 603. Multorum librorum authores ignorantur c. The authors of many bookes of Scripture are vnknowne as of Iosue Ruth Paralipomenon Hester c. Thus he To whose iudgment D. Willet subscribeth saying We (e) In his Synops p. 4. receaue many bokes in the Old Testament the Authours whereof are not perfectly knowne Animaduersion III. AGainst the writings of the Ancient Fathers the Protestants pretend seuerall difficultyes For example D. (f) Contra Duraeum l. 5. p. 300. K●mpu in his Exam. part 1. p. ●4 Whitakers and others obiect against the Epistles of Ignatius that (g) Dial. ● Theodore● and (h) Dial. 3. contra P●lag Ierome do alledge certaine testimonies from Ignatius his Epistle ad Smirnenses which are not found in that or any other of Ignatius his Epistles Wherto I answere First that the Auncient (i) By Austin in Psalm 95. by Tertull. lib. adu Iudaeos versus finem By Iustin in Triphon circa medium Fathers haue in like maner cited this sentence reguauit a ligno Deus as the saying of Dauid in his Psalms which yet is at this day wanting in them And in like manner some Sentences are alledged from Tully and Plato and the same are not to be found in their wrytings now extant Therfore this former Obiection only argueth that certaine parts of Ignatius his Epistles may be lost but maketh nothing against those now remaining In like sort our Aduersaryes do reiect as counterfeyte the writings of Dionysius Arcopagita as confessed to make for our Catholike Doctrine their chiefe argument is in that these his writings are neuer mentioned by Eusebius and Ierome To this may be answered that (k) Euseb hist l. 5. c. 29. Ierom. in Catal. prope init Eusebius Ierome do confesse that there are many bookes and Authors which neuer came to their knowledge A thing not vnlike if we but remember as incident to those precedent tymes the knowne want of printing and great difficulty of Manuscripts through the violent persecutions which then raigned Finally touching the Lyturgies of Chrysostome they vrge it making altogether for seuerall poynts of our Catholike and Roman fayth that as M. Jewell obiecteth (l) Iewell in his rep●y pag. 10. Chrysostomes Masse prayeth for Pope Nicolas who was Pope seuerall hūdred yeres after Chrysostome that also it prayeth for the Emperour Alexius who liued in like manner many ages after Chrysostome These are but friuolous Cauils For in all ould Lyturgies or Bookes of Cōmon prayer prayer is specially appointed to be made for Princes and Bishops for the names of whom are certayne places reserued which are subiect to alteration according to the change of succeeding tymes and persons The lyke course wherof for Princes we may discerne in the English Communion Booke composed in K. Edwards tyme where according to the change of succeeding gouerment are inserted the names of Queene Elizabeth

concerne Merit of workes as in Luc. 20. and 21. 2. Thess 1. wherein those said words are vsed they translate them To seeme to be worthy or to seeme only to be made worthy therby to weaken such texts for the prouing of Merit of works But in other Texts not touching the Doctrine of Merit they can be content to translate those words truly that is to be worthy and to be worthy indeed as in this Text O how (*) Heb. 20. much sorer punishment shall he be worthy of who treadeth vnderfoote the Sonne of God Thus much for a Tast Animaduersion CLXXIV THe English Protestant Translation of the Bible is not only by the Catholiks ack●owledged to be corrupt and impure but ●so by many Protestant themselues M. ●urges thus censureth of that Translation ●ying How (17) M. Burges in his Apology sect 6. shall I approue vnder my hād 〈◊〉 Translation which hath many omissions many ●dditiōs which sometymes obscureth sometymes peruerteth the sense being sometymes sensles sometymes contrary To whose Iudgment herein subscribe diuers Ministers in their ioint consent thereof in these words A (18) The ministers in their abridgment of a Booke deliuered to king Iames. pag. 11. 12. Translation that taketh away from the Text that addeth to the Text and this sometymes to the changing or obscuring of the meaning of the Holy Ghost And againe A Translation which is absurd and sensles peruerting in many places the meaning of the Holy Ghost All whose Censures herein agree with the like censure of D. Reynolds deliuered in King Iames his presence in Hampton Court who refused to subscribe to the Communion booke because said he it warranted a false corrupt translation of the Bible Now from hence I thus deduce The Protestants by their owne Confessiōs haue had as yet neuer any true English Translation of the Scriptures Therefore as yet the English Protestants neuer enioyed according to their owne Principles a sufficient and competent Iudge of Controuersies Since admitting the Scripture were the sole Iudge of Controuersyes in fayth yet this of necessity must be vnderstood of the Scripture as it is pure and incorrupt not 〈◊〉 it is impure and abastarded with false Translations From the Scripture I will descend to the English Communion booke or Booke of Common Prayer This Communion booke as it is euen at this present we fynd to be thus condemned by Protestan●s Twenty two preachers in London in (19) The Booke is intituled The Petition of twenty two Ministers in London one Petition did thus charge the Common Prayer Booke saying Many things in the Communion Booke are repugnant to the word of God And againe In the Communion Booke there be things of which there is no reasonable sense There is contradiction in it euen in necessary and essentiall points of Religion The holy Scripture is at graced by it A point so euident that D. Couell rebuketh and censureth other Protestants herein saying The (20) D. Couell in his Examen pag. 179. Communion Booke is boldly despised meaning by the Puritans Grosse errours and manifest impietyes meaning in their opinion are in the Communion Booke So he redargueth his owne brethren Now here in like manner as aboue I do thus argue Yf the English Protestants haue had no forme of Common Prayer published to them but such as is repugnant to the Scripture and in which there is contradiction euen in the necessary points of Religion them followeth that euen to this day the ignorant English Protestant neuer prayed to God auayleably For it is Prayer sorting to the word of God and not what is accompanied with errours which is piercing in Gods ea●es See here what dangerous Resu●tancies proceed to the English Protestants from their own Brethrens Confessions though most true that as yet they enioy not the Scripture as truly translated nor a p●ou● set forme of Prayer or Communion Booke Animaduersion CLXXV SEeing we who professe the Roman religion are commonly yea often euen by our Aduersaries called Catholikes therfore I will here briefly shew by laying open the Antiquity of that Title how much we are honored by being so styled whereas other false Doctrines commonly take th●ir Denomination from the first Authour thereof or from the Doctrine it selfe Well then (21) Cyril Cate●his 18. Cyrill thus writeth hereof Si iueris in aliquam vrbem c. Yf thou shalt goe into any Citty thou demaundest not wher● is the Church or house of God for euen the Heretikes say they haue the house of God the Church sed petas vbi sit Catholica Ecclesia c. quasi dicas si hoc petas nullus Haereticorum suam Ecclesiam ostendet But thou demaundest where the Catholike Church is for that name is peculiar to this holy Church the mother of vs all as if thou shouldest say if thou demaundest this no Heretike will ●hew to thee his Church Pacianus Christianus (22) In Epist. ad Sympronianum quae est de Nomine Catholico mihi nomen est Catholicus vero cognomen illud me nuncupat istud me ostendit A Christian is my Name a Catholike my surname by the former J am named by this other J am knowne or discerned And againe Catholicum istud nec Marcionem nec Apellem c. This Name Catholike neither doth it sound or meane Marcion or Apelles or Montanus nec haereticos sumit authores neither doth it admit any Hereticall Authours Now on the other syde how Heresies and their Professours take their appellation this one testimony of Chrysostome for greater breuity shall serue Illi habent (23) Chrysost hom 33. in acta Apost ol quosdam à quibus appellantur prout enim Haerefiarchae nomen ita secta vocatur c. Those men meaning Heretikes haue some men from whom they take their Name for as the Name of the Arch-Heretike is so is the sect called Which saying we find verifyed euen at this day by the words Lutheran Swinglian Caluinist c. Now whereas our Aduersaries by way of retortion call vs Papists To this I answere as is aboue in this Treatise touched that this word Papist is not deriued from any knowne Authour or Arch-Heretike as the words Lutheran Swinglian Caluinist c. but from the Pope and such was S. Peter yea Christ himself Add hereto that (24) Homil 33. in Act 4. Chrysostome as if it were by way of foreseeing we should be called Papists sayth Jt is not hurtfull if Catholikes be called by the name of those who gouerne the Church in the name of Christ so that they receaue not their name from any particular man as Heretikes are named Thus S. Chrysostome To conclude it is to be obserued that we are called Papists only by the Lutherans in Germany and Heretikes in some neere Countryes but we are not so called to omit Jtaly and Spayne in Greece Asia Affrike or in the Jndyes Animaduersion CLXXVI THough the many Controuersyes agitated betweene