of Matter or that he hath a Soul unless he can make it clear how an immaterial and material Substance can be so united as our Soul and Body are Or that the Sun shines unless he can demonstrate whether the Sun or the Earth moves Or that we have any certainty of things unless he can assign the undoubted criterion of Truth and Falshood in all things These things I mention on purpose to let you see that the most certain things have difficulties about them which no one thinks it necessary for him to Answer in order to his assurance of the Truth of the things but as long as the evidence for them is much more considerable than the Objections against them we may safely acquiesce in our assent to them and leave the unfolding these difficulties to the Disputers of this World or the Knowledge of another Is it not far more reasonable for us to think that in Books of so great Antiquity as those of Moses are written in a Language whose Idiotisms are so different from ours there may be some difficulty in the Phrases or computation of Times or Customs of the People that we cannot well understand than that all the Miracles wrought by Moses should have been Impostures and that Law which was preserved so constantly maintained with that resolution by the wisest of the People of the Jews who chose to dye rather than disown it should be all a cheat Is it not more reasonable for us to suspect our own Understandings as to the Speeches and Actions of some of the Prophets than to think that Men who designed so much the advancing Virtue and discouraging Vice should be a pack of Hypocrites and Deceivers Can any Man of common sense suspect the Christian Religion to be a Fourb or an Imposture because he cannot understand the Number of the Beast or Interpret the Apocalyptick Visions I could hardly have believed any Man pretending to Reason could object these things unless I saw them and were called upon to Answer them Therefore Sir my serious and impartial advice to you is in the first place to consider and debate the main point i. e. the proofs of the Christian Doctrin and not to hunt up and down the Scriptures for every thing that seems a difficulty to you and then by heaping all these together to make the Scriptures seem a confused heap of indigested stuff which being taken in pieces and considered with that modesty diligence and care that doth become us will appear to contain nothing unbecoming that Sacred and Venerable Name which the Scriptures do bear among us If therefore you design not cavilling but satisfaction you will joyn issue with me upon the most material point viz. Whether the Christian Religion were from God or from Men For if this be proved to have been from God all the other things will easily fall off of themselves or be removed with a little industry In the Debate of this I shall consider first what things are agreed upon between us and then wherein the difference lies 1. You grant an absolutely perfect and independent Being whom we call God 2. That the World was at first Created and is still governed by Him 3. That He is so Holy as to be the Author of no Sin although he doth not hinder Men from sinning 4. That this God is to receive from us all Worship proper to Him of Prayers Praises c. 5. That it is the Will of this God that we should lead holy peaceable and innocent Lives 6. That God will accept mens sincere Repentance and hearty endeavours to do his Will although they do not perfectly obey it 7. That there is a State of Rewards and Punishments in another World according to the course of Mens Lives here 8. That there are many excellent Precepts in the writings of the New Testament inducing to Humility and Selfdenyal and to the Honour of God and civil duty and honesty of Life and these in a more plentiful manner than is to be found in any other Profession of Religion publickly known The Questions then remaining are 1 Whether the matters of Fact are true which are reported in the Writings of the New Testament 2 Supposing them true Whether they do sufficiently prove the Doctrin to have been from God 1. Whether the matters of Fact were true or no And as to this point I wish you had set down the Reasons of your doubting more clearly and distinctly than you have done What I can pick up amounts to these things 1. That there can be no certainty of a matter done at such a distance of time there having been many fictitious Histories in the World 2. That it is probable that these things might be written when there was no one Living to detect the falshood of them and thus you say the Grecians Romans Egyptians and other Nations were at first imposed upon by some Men who pretended to deliver to them the History of their Gods and Heroes and the Wonders wrought by them 3. That these things might more easily be done before Printing was used and that there is reason to suspect the more because of the Pious Frauds of the Primitive Christians and the Legends of the Papists 4. That there may have been many more Deceptions and Impostures in the way of propagating false Revelations and Miracles than we can now discover 5. That we ought not to take the Testimony of Scripture or the Christian Writers in this case because they may be suspected of partiality and that the Testimony of Josephus is suspected by divers learned Men to be fraudulently put in by Christians 6. That there are susficient grounds from the Story it self and the Objections of Enemies to suspect the truth of it because of the contradiction and inconsistency of the parts of it the want of accomplishment of the Promises and Prophecies of it the obscurity and unintelligibleness of other parts the defects of the Persons mentioned therein St. Paul 's oftentation the jarrs between Peter and Paul and Paul and Barnabas 7. That from these things you have just cause to doubt the Apostles sincerity and you think they might have indirect ends in divulging the Miracles recorded in Scripture and that Men might be contented to suffer to make themselves heads of a new Sect of Religion and to rule over the Consciences of Men and that they had time enough to make a considerable interest before the Persecutions began This is the force of all I can find out in the several parts of your Papers towards the invalidating the Testimony concerning the matters of fact reported in the Writings of the New Testament In Answer to all these things I shall shew 1. That matters of fact done at such a distance of time may have sufficient evidence to oblige Men to believe them 2. That there is no reason to suspect the Truth of those Matters of fact which are contained in the History of the New Testament 3. That the Apostles
the Law allowed so severe a Trial in Case the Wife after admonition did not forbear such suspected familiarity but if you had looked on the Law as it is Num. 5. 12 13. c. you would have found that the design of it was to keep Women from committing secret Adultery by so severe a Penalty yet withall allowing so much to a reasonable suspicion for so the Jews understand it with many Cautions and Limitations that rather then Married persons should live under perpetual jealousies he appointed this extraordinary way of Tryal whereby Adultery was most severely punished and the honour of Innocency publickly vindicated which certainly are not ends at all unbecoming due Conceptions of God The last of the Jewish Laws which you quarrel with is the prohibition of Usury in several places of Moses his Law and the Psalms And from hence you fall into a long Discourse to prove the lawfulness of Usury But to what purpose I beseech you For you were to prove that God could never forbid it you might have spared your pity for Men as you think Blinded with superstition and cheated with New and Aëry Notions For by all that I can see by these Papers some pretended Enemies to superstition have no better Eyes than their Neighbours and are as easily cheated with groundless Fancies and Aëry imaginations The only thing to the business in that long Discourse is this That you cannot imagine that God should make a Law so much to Mans inconvenience and forbid him so nice and indifferent a thing as Moderate increase of profit by letting out of Money when it is allowed upon Lands Houses and Trade c. To this I Answer that the prohibition of Usury to the Jewish Nation was upon political Grounds peculiar to the constitution of that People as appears by the words of the Law Deut. 23. 19 20. Thou shalt not lend to Usury unto thy Brother Unto a Stranger thou maist lend upon Usury but none of the Laws which are founded upon common and Moral Reasons have such Limitations as this for God would never have said Thou shalt not commit Adultery with thy Brothers Wife but with the Wife of a Stranger thou maist But there was this particular Reason for the prohibition of Usury to the Jewish Nation It pleased God to fix their Habitation not upon the Sea-side as Tyre and Sidon stood but within Land where they had no conveniencies of Trading but the Riches of the Nation lay in Agriculture and Pasturage In which the Returns of Money are neither so quick nor so advantageous to make sufficient compensation for the Interest of the Money in the time they have it For the main thing valuable in Money is the advantage the borrower makes of it and where that is great it seems reasonable that the person whose the Money is should have a proportionable share of the advantage made by it but where persons borrow only for present occasions to supply their necessities there it is only an Act of kindness to lend and it would be unreasonable to press upon or take advantage by anothers necessities And this seems to have been the case among the Jews they were only the Poor that wanted Money for present necessities the Rich had no way to imploy it in Trading unless that they lent to the Tyrian Merchants which it was lawful by their Law to do now if they took Usury of their own people it must be of those whose urgent necessity and not hopes of a mighty increase by it made them borrow and therefore it was a very just and reasonable Law to forbid Usury among them which I believe he would never have done if he had placed the Jews upon the Coasts of Phoenicia where Trading was so much in request These are all the Laws which you have picked out of the whole Body of the Jewish Law to represent it unbecoming the Wisdom of God And now I pray Sir look back again upon them see how few how small how weak your Objections are and compare them with the weight and justice and prudence and piety expressed in all the rest and I hope you will find cause to be ashamed of speaking so harshly of those Laws so well accommodated to those Ages of the World and the Condition of that People for whom they were appointed 2. I now consider what you object against the story of the Bible 1. That passage of Moses Exod. 32. 32. Blot me out of thy Book which thou hast written Where your design is to shew that Moses prayed to be Damned and that this was a very irrational thing And savouring more of passion than of the Spirit of God But what if Moses meant no such thing as Damnation As there is not any word in the Context relating that ways but all the design of that Chapter is about a Temporal punishment which was a present Destruction of the People for their sins And the Book out of which he prayed God to blot him seems to me to be no other than the Roll of Gods chosen people who were to possess the Land of Canaan For so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifies a Roll or Register Psalm 69. 28. We meet with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Roll of the living or the Book of the living we render it because all ancient Books were in the fashion of Rolls In that Chapter Moses intercedes with God on behalf of the People that he would make good his promise to them of bringing them into the Land of Canaan v. 13. and v. 30. He goes up to make an Atonement for the People i. e. as to the cutting them off in the Wilderness and therefore he desires rather than the People should be destroy'd that God would strike him out of the Roll that he might Dye in the Wilderness rather than the People And God gives that Answer to this purpose v. 33. Whoever hath sinned against me will I blot out of my Book the sense of which is the same with those words of the Psalmist he sware in his wrath that they should not enter into his Rest. Psal. 95 11. And according to this interpretation which is most natural and easie all your long Discourse against praying to be Damned comes to just nothing there being no pretence for it either in the Text or Context 2. The story of Ruth doth not please you as savouring in your opinion of a great deal of Immodesty but you would have a better opinion of it if you consider that the reason of her carriage towards Boaz in such a manner was upon Naomies telling her that he was one to whom the right of redemption did belong and by consequence by their Law was to Marry her Ruth 2. 20. And this Ruth pleaded to Boaz Ruth 3. 9. By which it appears that she verily believed that he was legally her Husband and Boaz we see speaks of her as one that was a vertuous Woman and known to be such in the whole
IMPRIMATUR hic Liber cui Titulus A Letter to a DEIST Feb. 8. 1676. Guil. Jane R. P. D. Henr. Episc. Lond. a Sacris Domest A LETTER TO A DEIST In Answer to several OBJECTIONS AGAINST THE TRUTH and AUTHORITY OF THE Scriptures LONDON Printed by W. G. and are to be sold by M. Pitt at the Angel in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1677. THE PREFACE THis following Discourse was Written for the satisfaction of a particular Person who owned the Being and Providence of God but expressed a mean Esteem of the Scriptures and the Christian Religion Which is become so common a Theme among the Scepticks of this Age that the Author of this Discourse thought it worth his time and care to consider the force of the Objections that were made against them Especially being written in a grave and serious manner and not with that Raillery and Buffonry which the rude Persons of this Age commonly bestow upon Religion It might be justly expected from such who pretend to Breeding and Civility that they would at least shew more respect to a thing which hath prevailed so much among Men of the best Understanding and Education and who have had no Interest to carry on by it For it is against the ordinary Rules of Conversation to affront that which others think they have great Reason to esteem and love and they would not endure that scorn and contempt of their meanest Servant which they too often shew towards Religion and the things belonging to it If they are not in earnest when they scoff and mock at sacred things their own consciences will tell them it is a horrible impiety if they are in earnest let them debate these things calmly and seriously and let the stronger Reason prevail Men may speak sharply and wittily against the clearest things in the World as the Scepticks of old did against all Certainty of Sense and Reason but we should think that Man out of his senses that would now dispute the Being of the Sun or the Colour of the Snow We do not say the Matters of Religion are capable of the same evidence with that of Sense but it is a great part of judgment and understanding to know the proportion and fitness of evidence to the Nature of the thing to be proved They would not have the Eye to judge of tasts nor the Nose of Metaphysicks and yet these would be as proper as to have the senses judge of Immaterial Beings If we do not give as good Reason for the Principles of our Religion as the nature of Religion considered can be given for it let us then be blamed for our weakness in defending it but let not Religion suffer till they are sure nothing more can be said for it There is a late Author I hear is mightily in vogue among many who cry up any thing on the Atheistical side though never so weak and trifling It were no difficult task to lay open the false Reasonings and inconsistent Hypotheses of his Book which hath been sufficiently done already in that Language wherein it was written But if for the Advancement of Irreligion among us that Book be as it is talked Translated into our Tongue there will not I hope want those who will be as ready to defend Religion and Morality as others are to decry and despise them A Letter of Resolution to a Person unsatisfied about the Truth and Authority of the Scriptures SIR ALthough I do not pretend to any skill in the depths of Theology yet I am heartily concerned for the Truth and Honour of the Christian Religion which it is the design of your papers to undermine When I first looked them over I could not think them so considerable as to deserve a particular Answer especially from one in my circumstances who have so much other business lying upon me and so little leisure and health to perform it but I found at the conclusion of your Papers so earnest and vehement a desire expressed by you that I would return an Answer in order to the settlement of your mind that I could not refuse an Office of so great Charity as you represent it to be I confess when I considered the nature of your Objections and the manner of managing them I could hardly believe that they proceeded from a doubtful Mind that was desirous of any satisfaction but since you tell me so I will first shew my Charity in believing it and then in endeavouring to give you my poor assistance and impartial advice in order to your satisfaction And in truth I think impartial advice will contribute more to that end than spending Time and Paper in running through all the difficulties which it is possible for a cavilling Mind to raise against the plainest Truths in the World For there is nothing so clear and evident but a Sophistical Wit will always find something to say against it and if you be the Person I take you for you very well know that there have been some who wanted neither Wit nor Eloquence who have gone about to prove That there was Nothing in the World and that if there were any thing it could not be understood by Men that if it were understood by one Man it could not be expressed to another And besides such extravagant undertakers as these how many have there been who with plausible and subtle Arguments have endeavoured to overthrow all manner of Certainty either by Sense or Reason Must we therefore quit all pretences to Certainty because we cannot it may be Answer all the Subtilties of the Scepticks And therefore I am by no means satisfied with your manner of proceeding desiring all particular difficulties to be Answer'd before we consider the main evidences of the Christian Faith For the only reasonable way of proceeding in this matter is to consider first whether there be sufficient Motives to perswade you to imbrace the Christian Faith and then to weigh the difficulties and to compare them with the Reasons and Arguments for believing and if those do not appear great enough to overthrow the force of the other you may rest satisfied in the Christian Faith although you cannot Answer every difficulty that may be raised against the Books wherein our Religion is contained I pray Sir consider with your self do not you think it possible for any man to have Faith enough to save him unless he can solve all the difficulties in Chrâ—â—ologie that are in the Bible unless he can give an account of every particular Law and Custom among the Jews unless he can make out all the Prophetick Schemes and can tell what the Number of the Beast in the Apocalypse means If a Man may believe and be saved without these things to what purpose are they objected for the overthrow of the Christian Faith Do you think a Man hath not reason enough to believe there is extended Matter in the World unless he can solve all the difficulties that arise from the extension or divisibility
he may be trusted or no and for this he can expect no better satisfaction than that his History hath been in great reputation for its integrity among the most knowing Persons but how shall he be sure this was the History written by Thucydides since there have been many counterfeit Writings obtruded upon the World Besides the consent of learned Men in all Ages since we may compare the Testimonies cited out of it with the History we have and the Style with the Character given of Thucydides and the Narrations with other credible Histories of those Times and if all these agree what reason can there be not to rely upon the History of Thucydides All learned Men do acknowledge that there have been multitudes of fictitious writings but do they therefore question whether there are any genuine Or whether we have not the true Herodotus Strabo or Pausanias because there is a counterfeit Berosus Manetho and Philo set forth by Annius of Viterbo Do any suspect whether we have any of the genuin Works of Cicero because an Italian counterfeited a Book De Consolatione in his name Or whether Caesars Commentaries were his own because it is uncertain who Writ the Alexandrian War that is joyned with them By which we see that we may not only be certain of the Fidelity of Persons we converse with but of all things necessary to ouâ— belief of what was done at a great distance of time from thâ— Testimony of Writers notwithstanding the many supposititious Writings that have been in the World But it may be said That all this only relates to meer matters of History wherein a Man is not muâ—h concerned whether they be true or false but the things we are about are matters that Mens Salvation or Damnation are â—id to depend upon and therefore â—reater evidence should be given of these to oblige Men to believe them To this I answer 1. That â—â—y design herein was to prove â—hat notwithstanding the possibility of deception there may be sufficient ground for a prudent and firm assent to the Truth of things done at as great a distance of time and convey'd after the same manner that the Matters of Fact reported in the New Testament are and hereby those general prejudices are shewed to be unreasonable And all that I desire from this discourse is that you would give an assent of the same nature to the History of the Gospel that you do to Caesar or Livy or Tacitus or any other ancient Historian 2. As to the greater obligation to assent â— say it depends upon the evidence of Divine Revelation which iâ— given by the Matters of Facâ— which are delivered to us Anâ— here give me leave to ask you 1. Whether it be any ways repugnant to any conception you have of God for him to make use of fallible Men to make known his Will to the World 2. Whether those Men though supposed to be in themselves fallible can either deceive or be deceived when God makeâ— known his Mind to them 3. Whether on supposition that God hath made use of such Persons for this end those are not obliged to believe them who do not live in the same Age with them If not then God must either make no Revelation at all or he must make a New one every Age If they are then the obligation lies as much on us now to believe as if we had lived and conversed with those inspired Persons 2. That there is no reason to suspect the Truth of those Matters of Fact which are reported in the New Testament For since it is universally agreed among Men that Humane Testimony is a sufficient ground for assent where there is no positive ground for suspicion because deceiving and being deceived is not the common Interest of Mankind therefore we are to consider what the general grounds of suspicion are and whether any of them do reach the Apostles Testimony concerning the Matters of Fact reported by them And the just grounds of suspicion are these 1. If the Persons be otherwisâ— known to be Men of artifice anâ— cunning full of tricks and dissâ—mulation and that make nâ— Conscience of speaking Truth so a Lye tends to their greatesâ— advantage which is too mucâ— the Papists case in their Legends and Stories of Miracles 2. â— they temper and suit their Storâ— and Doctrin to the Humour anâ— Genius of the People they hopâ— to prevail upon as Mahomet did in encouraging War and Lasciviousness 3. If they lay the Scene oâ— their Story at a mighty distance from themselves at such an Age wherein it is impossible either to prove or disprove which is the case of the Brachmans as to their Brahmà and their Veda and was of the Heathens as to their Fabulous Deities 4. If there be any thing contained in the Story which is repugnant to the most authentick Histories of those times by which means the Impostures of Annius have been discovered 5. If there be evident contradiction in the Story it self or any thing repugnant to or unbecoming the Majesty Holiness Sincerity and Consistency of a Divine Revelation on which account we reject Fanatick pretences to Revelations If there were any thing of this nature in the Writings of the New Testament we might then allow there were some ground to suspect the Truth of what is contained therein But I shall undertake by the Grace of God to defend that there is not any foundation for suspicion as to any one of these 1. As to the Persons such whâ— go about to deceive others musâ— be Men that are versed in business and know how to deal with Men and that have some interest already that they have gained by other means before they can carry on such a design as to abuse Mankind by Lyes and Impostures in Religion Therefore the Atheists lay the deceiving the World by Religion to the Charge of Politicians and Law-givers to Men versed in the practice of Fraud such as Numa or Lycurgus or Xaca or Mahomet such as understood the ways of cajoling the People or to subtle Priests that know how to suit the hopes and fears of the superstitious multitude whence came the multitude of Frauds in the Heathen Temples and Oracles But would any Man in the World have pitched upon a few Fishermen and illiterate Persons to carry on such an intrigue as this Men that were rude and unexperienced in the World and uncapable of dealing in the way of Artifice with one of the common Citizens of Hierusalem When was it ever heard that such Men made such an alteration in the Religion of the World as the Primitive Christians did against the most violent persecutions And when they prevailed so much the common charge still against them was that they were a company of Rude Mean Obscure Illiterate Simple Men And yet in spight of all the Cunning and Malice and Learning and Strength of their Adversaries they gained ground upon them and prevailed over the Obstinacy of the Jews anâ—
City v. 11. And he confesses he was her near kinsman only he saith there was one nearer v. 12. By which it seems if there had not Boaz had made no Scruple of the matter And the Jews say in such Marriages very little Ceremony was required if the next of kin did not renounce his right because the Law had determined the Marriage before hand If you had but considered this one thing you would have spared the many Observations you make on this story 3. You Object against 2 Sam. 12. 8. as too much countenancing either Incest or Adultery because it is said that God gave to David his Masters Wives into his Bosom But 1. It is very strange to bring this place as a countenance to Adultery which was purposely designed to upbraid David with the sin of Adultery and you will find it no easie matter by the constitution of the Mosaical Law to prove Polygamy to be Adultery 2. The Jews give a fair Interpretation of this place for they say that the Wife of a King could never Marry after her Husbands decease as the Gemara on the Title Sanhedrim expresly saith although some among them follow the opinion of R. Jehuda that she might Marry the succeeding King but that is built chiefly on this place of which the rest give a better account viz. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not imply Sauls Wives but the Maids of Honour or Attendants on the Court of Saul which all fell into Davids power and out of whom he might choose Wives without danger of Incest and even some of those who assert it lawful for one King to Marry his predecessors Wife yet say in this case of David that the Word only implies that they were of Saul's Family as Merab and Michal were but not Saul's Wives So that all the difficulty here arises only from the Interpretation of an unusual word in which we have much more reason to trust the Jews than other Writers 4. You are much offended at Hosea's Marrying an Adulteress But all the formidable difficulties of that place will presently vanish if you allow the Prophetical Schemes wherein those things are said to be done which are intended only to represent in a more lively manner the things signified by them And so you may see the Chaldee Paraphrase fully explains this place of Hosea and Maimonides purposely discourseth on the Prophetick parables and brings this as one of the instances of them and with him the rest of the Jewish Interpreters agree But you Object against such a way of Teaching as tending to the encouragement of Vice which it is very far from being designed to represent the odiousness of it For the whole Scope of the Prophet is to let the People understand that their Idolatry was as hateful to God as the sin of Adultery and that the consequence of it would be their Misery and Ruine And yet that God expressed as much tenderness to them as a Man that was very fond of a Woman would do in being unwilling to put her away although he knew she were false to his Bed the former is intended in the first Chapter and the latter in the third And what is there tending to Immorality in all this May not God make use of one Vice whose evil is more notorious to represent another by whose evil they are more hardly convinced of May not he set forth a Degenerate People by the Sons of an Adulteress And by the Names given to them express his detestation of their wickedness Especially when the Parabolical Terms are so clearly explained as they are in the second Chapter But you will say these things are related as plain matters of Fact with the several circumstances belonging to them It is true they are so but so Parables use to be so was Nathan's to David so is that of the Rich Man and Lazarus in the New Testament so is Jeremies going to Euphrates to hide his Girdle for it is not very likely the Prophet should be sent 18 or 20 days Journey into an Enemies Country for no other end So is Ezekiels lying on one side for 390 days and having his Head and Beard contrary to the Law as Maimonides observes And his digging in the Walls of the Temple at Hierusalem while he was in Babylon And many other things of a like nature which are set forth with as punctual a Narration of circumstances as this of Hosea and yet they were only figurative expressions We that are accustomed to another way of Learning think these things strange but this was a very common way in the elder times and it is to this day much used in the Eastern Countries to represent Duties to some under the Parables of things as really done by others As may be seen in Locman and Perzoes besides what Clemens Alexandrinus and others have said concerning the Antiquity and common use of this Parabolical way of Teaching I now come to your Objections against the New Testament but I find them so few and those so slight and inconsiderable as to the end for which you produce them that I may easily pass them over To that about the continuance of Miracles I have already Answer'd And I find not one word in the places mentioned by you which implies the necessity of the continuance of them in all Ages of the Christian Church That place Mark 10. 29 30. speaks of no more but such a recompence in this life as is consistent with persecution and therefore must chiefly lie in inward contentment which all wise Men have valued above external accommodations although withall by the account St. Paul gives of himself and his Brethren God did abundantly provide for them one way or other As having nothing and yet enjoying all things Which amounts to a Hundred-fold in this life But certainly you are the first Man Who have Objected the obscurity of the Book of Revelations againgst the Authority of the Scriptures Which is just as if one should Object the quadrature of the Circle against Mathematical certainty If we grant that there are some things in that Mystical Book we do not yet well understand what then Must neither that Book nor any other of the Bible be of Divine Revelation I will not pursue the unreasonableness of this way of arguing so far as I might but I leave your self to consider of it and of all that I have Written in order to your satisfaction If you think fit to return an Answer I pray do it clearly and shortly and with that freedom from Passion which becomes so weighty a Matter And I beseech God to give you a right understanding in all things I am Sir Your Faithful Servant June 11. 1675. FINIS Books sold by Moses Pitt at the Angel in St. Paul's Church-Yard Folio THeses Theologicae variis Temporibus in Academia Sedanensi editae ad disputandum propositae Authore Ludovico le Blanc verbi Divini Ministro Theologiae