Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	new_a	scripture_n	testament_n	8,305	5	8.0705	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00294	A booke intituled, The English Protestants recantation, in mattersof religion wherein is demonstratiuely proued, by the writings of the principall, and best learned English Protestant bishops, and doctors, and rules of their religion, published allowed, or subscribed vnto, bythem, since the comminge of our King Iames into England, that not onely all generall grownds of diuinitie, are against the[m], but in euery particular cheife question, betweene Catholicks & them, they are in errour, by their owne iudgments : diuided accordingly, into two parts, whereof the first entreateth of those generall grounds, the other of such particular controuersies, whereby will also manifestely appeare the vanitie of D. Morton Protest. Bishop of Chester his boke called Appeale, or, Ansuueare to the Catholicke authour of thebooke entituled, The Protestants apologie.	Broughton, Richard.	1617 (1617)	STC 10414; ESTC S2109	209,404	418

them Apochypha is vtterly ouerthowne For an opinion fownded vppon old Iewish Cauills against Christians singularly held or renewed reclaymed by the Author and generally gi●●ing offence as these Protestants affirme this was is not probable to be true D. Couell against Burges the Puritane answeareth the obiections against these Couell ag Burges pag. 8● 86. 87. 88. 89 90. 91. bookes as Catholickes doe And sheweth that these bookes haue without cause beene accused of faultes by Protestants onely to deny them to be canonicall as Catholicks esteeme them And further hee addeth thus They ar moste true and might haue the reconcilement Couell sup pag. 87. of other scriptures And againe in these wordes If Russinus be not deceaued they were approued as parts of the old testament by the Apostles For when S. Hierome writt so scornefully of the historie of Susanna and the songe of the three children hee chargeth him therein to haue robbed the treasure of the holy ghost and diuine Instrument which the Apostles deliuered to the Churches And S. Hierome whoe is not vsually slowe to defend himself leaueth that point vnansweared pretending that what hee had spoken was not his owne opinion but what the Iewes obiected And for his paynes in translateing the booke of Iudith which Protestants deny hee giueth this reason because wee reade that the Councell of Nyce did reckon it in the number of holy scriptures Hitherto D. Couells words and much like vnto this of Russinus hee citeth from S. Augustine S. Ciprian and others Temporibus Apostolorum proximis in the next ages to the time of the Apostles And thus wee see how weake that Protestant Religion is that by their owne testimonie is fownded vppon so singular new reuiued Iewish Cauills disclaymed and generally offensyue and disliked opinion From hence I argue further All Bookes which were approued by the Apostles for parts of the old testament were the treasure of the holy ghost and diuine Instrument which the Apostles deliuered to the Churches which ar moste true and might haue reconcilement of other scriptures ar to be allowed for such But all these things ar verified of bookes which these Protestants deny and by themselues as is cited from them before Therefore ar to be allowed for canonicall scriptures bothe propositions be graunted by these Protestants before and so in this argument nothing remayneth to be proued And againe thus I argue whatsoeuer a generall Councell in the primatiue Church the highest Rule by Protestants before to approue scriptures and bynde all men vnto the definitions of it receaued for scripture ought to be receaued for such But more bookes then Protestants allowe were so receaued as these Protestants tell vs Therefore more are to be admitted Both propositions ar here also graunted before by Protestants and so the Argument concludeth truely against them Further I argue thus Those Bookes which the Iewes before and at the comminge of Christ for their greatest or greate part dwelleing out of Iury vsed as parts of the old testament and deliuered as a canon to the Christian Churches and were Ioyned in one volume read by them of the Latine Church then the acknowledged true Churche of Christ and were receaued in the third Carthagenian Councell which was confirmed in the sixt generall Councell ar now to be receaued and allowed for canonicall scriptures But those bookes which Protestants denie and Catholicks allowe be such Therefore they ar to be now allowed for canonicall The Maior proposition is euidently true for if the Iewes before and at the commeing of Christ the primatiue Christians of that time and their practice the authoritie of the true Church of Christ the moste principall Church before by D. Feild and other Protestants a fomous prouinciall Councell and the confirmation of a generall Councell ar not to be admitted to direct and instruct vs there is no meanes left for instruction in this case these beinge by these Protestants before the greatest warrants and Rules wee can haue in such causes The second proposition is proued in this manen D. Feild haueing spoken how the Hebrue Iewes had made their Hebrue canon accordeing to their Iewish reckoninge of the number of their letters how probably I leaue to Hebritians and may not now entreate hee concludeth thus These onely did Feild l. 4. c. 23. pag. 245. the auncient Church of the Iewes receaue as diuine and canonicall Neither much meruaile all the others being the last that were written and in the time of their decayeing state and afflictions Of these hee writeth thus in the next words That other bookes were added vnto Feild sup these whose authoritie not being certayne and knowne ar called Apocryphall fell out on this sortè The Iewes in their later times before and at the Act. 6. c. gloss ordinar lyr in eandem locum comminge of Christ were of two sortes some properly and for distinction sake named Hebr●es commorant at Hierusalem and in the holy land others named Hellenists that is Iewes of dispersion mingled with the Gretians These had written sundry bookes in Greeke which they made vse of together with other parts of the old testament which they had of the translation of the Septuagint But the Hebrues receaued onely the two and twentie bookes before mentioned Hence it came that the Iewes deliuered a double Canon of the scripture to the Christian Churches Thus wee see that the greatest parte of the Iewes Proselytes and all our of Iurie did add these bookes with the other for scripture vsed them as part of the old testament deliuered them to the Christian Churches as part of the canon of scripture and the primatiue Church consequently so receaued them otherwise they were not thus deliuered Therefore thus farre the Minor proposition is proued for I doe not expect D. Feild to say or not say expressely that these be or be not canonicall but what in true consequence hee must say by his owne graunte before and hereafter Then hee telleth vs they in S. Augustines time were receaued Feild pag. 246. by him the fathers of third Councell of Carthage and Innocentius then Pope of Rome in the best estate of that Church when it was as before by Protestants Kings speach sup a Rule vnto all in the catalogue of canonicall scriptures Now that the Canons of this Carthagenian Councell were confirmed in the sixt generall Councell holden at Trallo to vse his words and which Protestants acknowledge Feild l. 4. cap. 23. pag. 258. for a generall Councell their highest Rule hee testifieth after in the same chapter Neither is his exception because the Laodicean Councell which nameth not all Ob. them is there also confirmed of any purpose Answ for that generall Councell by Protestants approueing and confirminge bothe that which named them for canonicall and that doth not name them all must needs confirme them for canonicall otherwise against supposition this Councell of Carthage had not beene confirmed as they teach it was Further I

argue thus all those Bookes which Protestants in their authorised communion booke and bookes of Honolyes allowed by their conuocation and parlament and our Kinge doe prescribe to be vsed as canonicall scriptures as well as others and are so cited and practized ought to be receaued and allowed for canonicall But those Bookes which they denie and Catholicks receaue for canonicall are suche Therefore they ought to admitt them into the Canon of Holy scriptures The Maior proposition is euident for bookes Rules lawes and directions proposed by true authoritie as those be supposed of Protestants ar to be obeyed and followed The Minor proposition is likewise l. 1. homel l. 2. homel Artic. 25. Communion B. Tabl. direct of seruice Suruey of the Booke of comm prayer pag. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. Petit of 22. Preach exc ag hom and except 4. ag comm Booke Articl of Relig. Articul 6. moste certaine for their bookes of Homelyes receaued in the 25. Article of their Religion doe ordinarily so cite them and their Communion booke so termeth and vseth them too often to be alleadged in this place Whereuppon to be breife the Protestant Author of the Suruey of the booke of Common prayer affirmeth playnelye and often vrdgeth it That the Protestants of England must approue with the Romane Churche these bookes for canonicall So likewise doe the 22. preachers of London in their petition If any man shall Answeare that the Articles of their Religion exclude them from the canon of the scripture and so they cannot be saide to receaue them I answeare him againe that this is so farre from freeinge them in this point that it both excludeth them defineing and embraceing so contradictorie doctrines in so important busines from all hope of truthe and further proueth that these men buildeing all vppon scriptures haue either no scriptures at all or els such doubtfull vncertaine and vnresolued scriptures that true Religion which must be moste assured and infallible cannot be grownded or mayntayned by them For proofe whereof I will first recite their subscribed Article in this question and then frame my Argument Their Article is sett downe in these Articl of Rel. articul 6. definitiue wordes Holy scripture conteineth all thinges necessarie to saluation so that whatsoeuer is not read therein nor may be proued thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be beleeued as an Article of the faithe or be thought requisite or necessarie to saluation In the name of holy scripture wee doe vnderstand those canonicall Bookes of the old and new testament of whose authoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche Of the first part of this Article I am to entreate in my chapter of Traditions hereafter Of the later part I will speake in this place onely first admonisheing my Readers in what ample maner D. Feild and others of that Religion Feild l. 3. c. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. pag. 60. 62. 63. 64. c. Feild l. 3. Titul c. 1. 2. take this worde the Churche for breuiate whereof the Titles of the first and seconde chapters of his third booke be these Of the diuision of the Christian worlde into the Greeke Latine Armenian Aethiopian and Nestorian Churches c. 1. of the harshe and vnaduised Censure of the Romanists condemninge all these Churches as Scismaticall and Hereticall cap. 2. Now this supposed I argue thus No bookes whose authoritie haue at any time beene doubted of in the Churche are by this Protestant Article to be allowed for Canonicall scriptures But all bookes that either Protestants or Catholicks receaue for canonicall haue in the Iudgment of these Protestants beene doubted of in the Church Therefore by these Protestants there be no canonicall scriptures at all The Maior proposition is euidently proued by their recited article defineing those bookes canonicall of whose authoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche The Minor proposition is directly proued by D. Willet who writeth Willet Synop quaest 1. of scripture pag. 2. 3. edit An. 1594. and after published againe directly and at large how euery booke both of the old and new testament haue not onely beene doubted of but also denyed in this their Churche I suppose the laste edition of his booke was since the commeing in of his Maiestie my prescribed time otherwise it is so directly there proued by him that no Protestant can deny it And to shew the pitifull case of this their Protestant Article and Religion their Protestant Bishop of Wincester D. Bilson suru pag. 664. Bilson within my limitation writeth thus The scriptures themselues were not fully receaued in all places no not in Eusebius time Hee saith the Epistle of Iames of Iude the second of Peter the seconde and third of Iohn ar contradicted The Epistle to the Hebrues was contradicted the Churches of Syria did not receaue the seconde epistle of Peter nor the seconde and third of Iohn nor the Epistle of Iude nor the Apocalipse the like might be saide for the Churches of Arabia Will you hence conclude that these partes of scripture were not Apostolicke or that wee neede not receaue them now because they were formely doubted of Therefore the Protestants of England haue no certayne and vndoubted scripture if they will stand to their suscribed Articles and their owne subscription Which this Protestant Bishop before seeing the absurditie thereof hath refused to doe Therefore they may not as they doe denie those other bookes which Catholicks admitt vppon so greate and highest warrants before in Protestants Iudgment because in former tymes they haue beene doubted of as those laste recited by the testimonie of their Bishop and all the rest as D. Willet hath wittnessed haue beene To these I might add more Arguments from these Protestants true Greeke Churche and the generall Councell of Florence both allowed by some of these writers and yet alloweing and warranting for canonicall all bookes receaued by Catholicks And other Arguments by them but these ar sufficient for this matter at this time And as demonstration is made that these Protestants either haue no true scriptures at all or not the true Canon of holy scriptures So it is as euident that their Religion cannot be proued true and infallible as true Religion is by euidences that in their proceedings ar doubtfull fallible or no holy canonicall scriptures but by them excluded from that number and sacred Canon CHAPTER V. OF THE INTEGRITIE AND excellencie of the Latine vulgare translation of scriptures vsed in the Romane Church and Protestants false corrupt and erroneous Translations in their owne Iudgment and Censure NOW lett vs entreate of the vulgare Latine translation of holy scriptures handled in the next Chapter for whose allowance by these Protestants I argue by them in this maner That Latine Translation of scriptures which is to be vsed in scholes and pulpits and for antiquitie to be preferred before all others was vsed in the Church thirteene hundred yeares agoe by S. Augustine preferred

and the Hebrue Greeke Apostles also as Athenians But now sixe yeares triall hath taught that it is one thinge to dreame of tongues an other to knowe them And now they are said to be at a stand And would willingly giue ouer but that the Kings authoritie requireth an end But that your most learned Maiestie may se what is to be hoped for from them least the Churches be forced to buy bables for the word of God I will in few words deleuer that it may appeace that such pore students are not to be suffered to lest with the Kinge and the flocke Hitherto this greate linguists oration his exceptions are to tedious to be recited Onely because these men haue so magnified the Hebrue text of the old testament in respect of the septuaginta and vulgare Latine now this greate searcher of Hebrue monuments can heare onely for hee neuer se either of them of two perfect Hebrue copies of the old testament in all the world and both they be in the Iewes custodye one in Hierusalem and the other at Nehardegh in Mosopotamia Veteris testamenti duo exemplaria tam accurata atque mens humana prouidere potuit seruantur à Iudaeis Hierosolymis alterum alterum Nehardeghae in Mesopotamia Then if wee haue no better comfort from these Hebritians for a true Hebrue text then that England neither hath had or can procure any and none is to be had but from our Enemyes the Iewes and yet if they could procure a true copie which they haue not done there is not any one in England by their owne Iudgments able truely to translate it and these last translators were weary of their entreprise and would haue giuen it ouer after sixe yeares experience of their disabilitie but that the Kings Maiesties pleasure was to haue one end or other wee may not easely admitt such translations for holy scriptures nor Religion deduced from them for a true Religion And ●his the rather because since the birth of this new translation it is condemned by their owne approued writeings I will omitt others and onely cite one place out of their late commended history of the world in these Histor of the world l. 1. cap. ● §. 14. Chron 2. cap. 21. v. 16. The Protest new transl sup words The ill translation of Ethiopia for Chus is amonge other places made moste apparant in the second of Chronicles in these words So the Lord styrred vpp against Iehoram the spiritt of the Philistines and the Arabians which confine the Ethiopians The Geneua translation hath it which were besides the Ethiopians the new English readeth thus more ouer the lord stirred vpp against Iohoram the spiritt of the Philistines and of the Arabians that were neare the Ethiopians Now how farre it is betweene the Philistines and the Negros or Ethiopians euery man that looketh in a mapp may Iudge For hee Philistines and Arabians doe mixt and ioyne with the land of the Chusites and are distant from Ethiopia about two and thirtie or three and thirtie degrees and therefore not their next neighbours but all Egipt and the deserts of Sur and Pharan are betweene them And to aggrauate this matter the more these new Protestant translators takeing vppon them to translate the old testament out of the Hebrue and new out of the Greeke and onely alloweing those texts in words are so farre from performing it in deeds that in the old testament they haue forsaken the Hebrue text diuers thowsands of times as may be proued by their owne merginall obseruations of that matter my leasure was not to recompt them all but in Genesis the first booke they haue thus behaued themselues aboue two hundred tymes and after the same rate in all the rest As in the 5. 20. and 25. chapter of the booke of Iudges fourtye times Fyfteene tymes in Sam. l. 1. cap. 18. in the 2. Booke of Samuel in cap. 22. thirteene times in cap. 1. 7. 18 20. in fower chapters aboue fyfty times in the third booke of Kings And so they deale with the Greeke in the new testament and in the old testament where the scripture is written in the Chaldy and Hebrue mixed as in the time of captiuitie so they vse the Chaldy tongue as in Esra cap. 4. they forsake the Hebrue thrise and the Chaldye eleuen or twelue times in the second chapter of Daniel they leaue it thirteene times in the third chapter twelue times in the 5. chapter neyne times c. and in these and other places where they refuse the originall tonge as for example the Hebrue they doe it not many times to preferre either the vulgare Latine Septuagin●a or Syriacke but their owne conceipt and Imagination Yet in places where they forsake the originall to preferre any of the other it is euidently against their owne profession and Religion and in places of their former translations censured by Mr. Gregory Martyne or other English Catholicks they often times neither regard their owne or ours but giue vs new scriptures and reuelations of their owne thoughe not many times in greate matters and so in this multiplication and chaunge of scriptures they haue also multiplied and chaunged Religion deduced from them and for that one Article of their auntient creed I beleeue in the holy ghost may now say by such proceedings wee beleeue in the foure and fourtie English Protestant holy Ghosts For whosoeuer reiect all texts of scripture as their owne marginall obseruations tell vs they doe though as before often not in great things yet sometimes otherwise and deny vnwritten traditions of this kinde must needs be in such estate CHAPTER VI. PROVETH BY THESE PROtestants that the true and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures is against them and for the doctrine of the Romane Church AFTER these I am to entreate of the true lawfull and Iuridicall Exposition of holy scriptures And that it belongeth to the Church of Rome haueing both the true scriptures the true translation of them and it self haueing power and authoritie being the true Church of Christ to propose it to all Christians and not to these Protestants for no companie or congregation of men wanting and denying diuers bookes of scriptures in which diuers Articles of Religion as prayer to Angels their patronadge prayer and sacrifice for the Deade meritt of good workes c. are directly proued not so apparently taught in other scriptures besides followeing and alloweing erroneous and corrupt translations can haue the true and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures especially hauing no Iurisdiction ouer others by their owne graunt But the English Protestants are in this state Therefore they haue not this true lawfull and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures Bothe propositions are graunted before and so nothinge remaineth to be proued in this argument Further I argue thus No priuate Interpretation of scriptures by conference of places and such Rules as Protestants assigne for Interpreteinge scripture is bindeing or iuridicall But all Protestant Expositions in respect of true byndeing

Petit. of 22. preachers except 21. ag comm Booke preachers write of the translation in the communion booke in this maner It conteyneth in it diuers corrupt translations of scriptures by leaueing out of wordes putting to of wordes peruerting the meaneing of the holy ghost The Protestant Suruey of the booke of Common prayer Suruey pag. 160. addeth There be many grosse corruptions as may partely appeare by the Abrigment of the Ministers of Lincolne Dyocesse Then how sownde a Religion these Protestants haue that must be fownded and proued by such translations I leaue to others consideration My next Argument is this No translations that be corrupt not answeareable to the truthe of the originall are not to be allowed cannot be defended c. euen in Protestants Iudgments are to be reiected and condemned as false and prophane But all English Protestant Translations of the Bible euen from the reuolt of Henry 8. from the Church of Rome are such by these Protestants Therefore by them to be reiected and condemned as false and prophane The Maior proposition is euidently true euen in Protestants Censure and the Minor is proued by them in this maner Their sentence in their publicke Conference is this The Conference at Hampt pag. 45. translations of the Bible allowed in the time of Henry 8. and Edward 6. were corrupt and not answeareable to the truthe of the originall And of the translations vsed in the time of Q Elizabeth Conference pag. 46. sup and his Maiestie since they testifie in these wordes The English Bible as it is translated is corrupt and not answeareable to the truth of the originall His Maiestie professed hee could neuer yet see a Bible well translated into English Therefore order is there taken in these wordes A new Pag. 46. sup translation is to be made and none of the former to be allowed The 22 Protestant preachers of london of their petition write in this maner Petit. of 22 preachers except 11. 12. The English Protestants in their publicke proceedeings translate scriptures corruptely by leaueing out of words putting to of wordes peruerting the meaneinge of the holy ghost Misapply places of holy scriptures to the countenance of errors Others of them write thus Wee haue diuers translations of holy scriptures Def. of the Minist reasons pag. 10. That which by our Seruyce booke this is the practicall Rule of their Religion is appointed to be reade is the worste of all and to be charged with sondry grosse and palpable errors And speakeing of Mr. Hutton takeing vppon him to excuse their translation their wordes be these Def. supr pag. 38. Mr Hutton takeing vppon him the defence of Protestants corruptions is no more able to make his parte good against the truthe of the exceptions with all his florishes then Goliath was against Dauid with all his blasphemies Therefore the Religion of English Protestants by themselues to their owne pleaseing deduced either from such false corrupt and erroneous translations or from Greeke or Hebrue or any other auntient or receaued text so corruptely and prophanely translated and expownded by no possibilitie can be iustified for true and holy If any man answeareth that these Protestant testimonies of their corrupt translations and my former Arguments against the validitie of deductions and conclusions from so false corrupted doubtfull or vncertaine texts and sentences of scriptures proceed onely against their former translations and Religion then vsed and so deduced amonge them But now they haue a new and better translation by his Maiesties order and commaundement and thus intituled The holy Bible conteyninge the old Title of the Protest new translation of the Bible An. 1614. testament and the new newly translated out of the originall tongues and with the former translations diligently compared and reuised by his Maiesties commaundement Imprinted by Robert Barker Printer to the Kings most excellent Maiestie To this I answeare that if this new translation be true and all the others as they acknowledge false corrupt and worthy to be condemned otherwise they haue vnworthely condemned them Then as all their Religion in their doctrine was deduced from such false translations They must needs come to a new correction and as they haue forsaken their translations for corrupt and adulterate from which their Religion was deduced So they must now alter chaunge and correct their Religion or some Articles thereof because it was deduced and fownded from corrupt translations and deceaueinge principles For their Religion wholly consisting vppon their conclusions which allwayes followe the worse part conclusio semper sequitur deteriorem partem Their Religion must needs be worse and more requireing correction then their translations Againe I onely dispute against their Religion which hitherto they haue practized not against any new Religion which they will make from their new translations not knoweing yet neither they temselues so often chaungeing what it will please them to be Thirdly I must deale planely with them to thinke they had done farre more excusably for themselues and their Religion still to haue faced out their old for tollerable rather then to haue giuen such a downefull to their Religion and scriptures so much troubled their foure and fourtie translators as Mr. Hugh Broughton their most admired H. Brough oratiuncul ad Iacob Reg. 1609. linguist telleth vs and yet still abuse vs themselues shall be wittnes with new and more false translations of holy scriptures For the same greatest Protestant Rabbine thus Intituleth his booke of exceptions against these Protestants sufficiencie and synceritie in this cause Oratiuncula de molitione versionis è sacrorum codicum fontibus in Riuulos Orat. supr in Imit Britannicos Ad Iacobum Regem magnae Britaniae A little oration of the entreprise of translation from the fowntaines of the holy bookes into the brittish gunnells To Iames Kinge of greate Britanny And to tell vs what indirect dealeinge was vsed by the Protestant Bishops in this matter how false both their former translations were and this can proue no other by any probable Iugdment thus hee beginneth his oratiuncula as hee calleth it O great Kinge the Brittish nation hath now longe desired to obtayne a better translation of the Bible And I haue meditated these thirtre continuall yeares well to performe it And your highnes pleasure was that I most exercised of all should take in hand this hard worke Vestraque Serenitas me voluit exercitatissimum omnium opus hoc arduum moliri But the Bishops as wee call two ways wrastled against it First that their vsuall translation might continue But your highnes the errors being throughly knowne thought that to be wickednes Then they themselues would doe it by chuseing of their fellowes or rather foure and fourtie vicars of their labour As though our nation were able to yeeld so many fitt men when there scarcely are or euer were two in all the world which could handle the Hebrue Prophetts as good Thalmudists

before all others and both by the Iudgment of S. Isidore and these Protestants themselues is thought the best translation and to be preferred before all others is accordingely to be allowed esteemed and preferred But the vulgare Latine translation by these Protestants is such Therefore euen by them so to be allowed and preferred The Maior proposition is manifestly true for that which is so auncient in the true Latine Church and to be preferred before all others must needs be allowed and preferred The Minor proposition is proued as followeth first their Bishopp D Doue writeth in these words of this vulgare Latine translation Wee Protestants graunt it Doue persuas pag. 16. fitt that for vniformitie in quotations of places in schooles and pulpi●s one Latine text should be vsed and wee can be contented for the antiquitie thereof to preferre the olde vulgar translation before all other Latine bookes so much wee doe yeeld to the Councell of Trent D. Couell entreateinge of translations of scripture against Burges the Puritan Couell against Burges pag. 94. answeareth in these words Wee are readie to confesse whether you vnderstand the Italian or that which goeth vnder the name of S. Hierome that they were vsed a●n●iently in the Church a thowsand and three hundred yeares agoe one of them by S. Augustine preferred before all the rest the other highly commended by Beza and that of the vulgar though with Pagnin and Driedo wee thinke it not S. Hieromes but mixt yet wee can be content to say as Isodore doth of it Interpretatio eius this translation is to be preferred before others Hitherto this Protestant Doctor who with their Bishop Doue before haue graunted as much as the Councell of Trent a Rule to Catholicks decreed in this matter yf wee may giue creditt Feild pag. 258. to D. Feild citeing and alloweing Andradius writeing in this maner The Church doth approue translations not pronownceing that there is no thing amisse in them but that the diuine mysteries are therein truely deliuered and nothinge that concerneth faith Religion or good maners ignorantly or fraudulently suppressed The Councell of Trent defined that the vulgare Latine translation shall be holden authenticall but hee saith Andreas Vega whoe was present at the Councell reported that the Fathers of the Councell meant not to determine that it is not defectiue or faultie but that it is not erroneous and faultie in such sorte as that any hurtfull or pernitious opinion in matters of faith or manners may necessarily be deduced from it And that this was the meaneninge of the Cowncell hee saith Andreas Vega alleadged the authoritie of the Cardinall of Sainct Crosse afterwards Pope whoe deliuered so much vnto him Hitherto D. Feilds allowance which alloweth that his Protestants before haue testified as much for the vulgare Latine translation as the Councell of Trent defined and consequently as much as Catholicks doe hold in this question Further I argue thus That Translation of scripture which was vsed 1300 yeares age when the Church was in her best and florishing estate and from which no hurtfull or pernitious opinion can be deduced is to be allowed and preferred But the vulgare Latine is such Therefore to be thus allowed and preferred The Maior proposition is euidently true and before graunted and Couell def of Hook pag. 29. D. Couell saith God hath so linked his worde and his Churche that neyther can stande where bothe are not The Minor is also before proued by these Doctors their Bishop Doue D. Couell and Feild so nothing remayneth to be proued in this argument And so it is proued and allowed by these Protestants that of all translations it is to be preferred that it contayneth nothing against Faith Religion or good maners nothing that is erroneous which suffiseth for my purpose Now lett vs see how these Protestants can iustifie their Translations from such defects for they haue graunted before that this vulgare Latine vsed and allowed in the Romane Churche is to be preferred before all their Protestant Translations Latine English Welch Dutch French or whatsoeuer named translations I argue thus No translation whatsoeuer is authenticall But euery English and other Protestant translation is a translation Therefore none of them is authenticall The Maior proposition consisteth of the verie wordes of D. Couell Couell ag Burg. pag. 94. Doue persuas pag. 16. which be these No translation whatso●uer is authenticall scripture D. Doue writeth thus all Tra●slations haue many faultes The Minor is manifestly true for a translation cannot truly be saide to be no translation for so contradictories might be true which is vnpossible Further thus I argue No translation which is not well translated but requireth new translations is to be allowed But all English translations ar such Therefore not to be allowed The Maior is euidently true for things not well done ar ill done because Non datur actus indifferens in indiuiduo No act singularized is indifferent Therefore being ill is not to be allowed The Minor is proued by the Kings speach in the Conference at Confer pag. 46. Hampton where hee saith that hee could neuer yet see a Bible well translated into English but the worste of all hee thought the Geneua to be And therefore a new translation should be made for our English nation And so D. Couell also Couell ag Burg. wisheth Againe thus I argue No translation that is peruerred in many hundreds of places is inferior to the Turkes Alcaron and denyeth Christianitie is to be allowed But the English Protestant Common translation it such Therefore not to be allowed The Maior proposition is more then euidently true The Minor is thus proued by the Protestant Author of the booke called Aduertisement Aduertism in an 1604. his words be these The Bible is peruerted in eight hundred and eight and fourtie places in the olde testament The English Protestant Bible is inferior to the ●urkes Alcaron And so Christianitie is denied in England by publicke authoritie My next Argument is this No translation that hath many omissions many additions which sometimes peruerteth the sence is sencelesse and sometymes contrary is a true translation or to be allowed But the English receaued Protestant translation is suche therefore not true nor to be allowed The Maior is palpably true The Minor is proued by Mr. Burges in these wordes Burg. apol pag. 93. in D. Couells Answ of the approued English translation it is a Translation which hath many omissions many additions which sometimes obscureth sometimes peruerteth the sence beinge sometimes sencelesse sometimes contrary Thus I argue againe No translation that is corrupt hath grosse corruptions by leaueing out of wordes by putting to of wordes and which peruerteth the meaneinge of the holy Ghost is a true or sufferable translation But the vsuall English translation by Protestants is such therefore not true nor sufferable The Maior proposition is apparantly true And the Minor is thus proued by these Protestants The 22

things appertayning vnto God but their priuate Interpretations and deductions suteing with their humour is the worde of God aswell as if it were sett downe in scripture worde for worde as M. Wotton hath told vs before My next Argument is this No people or professors of Religion freely acknowledgeing that all Rules in their Religion though their best approued and moste publicke to be moste reuerenced and respected be subiect to error may erre and haue erred in things belongeing to God are erroneous vnconstant variable often recant and correct their publicke proceedeings in such things can be saide to haue the true and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures otherwise there is a lawfull and true Iurisdiction and power to bynde them of their Religion both to errors in things against God and misbeleefe in this life and to eternall damnation the peneltie thereof in the next But the Protestants of England are in this Condition by their owne Iudgment Therefore they haue not the true and Iuridicall exposition and Interpretation of scriptures The Maior is proued before and directly by M. Wottons Wotton sup words all matters concluded logically out of the scriptures are the worde of God as well as if they were expressely sett downe in it word for word But the worde of God neither is nor can be erroneous to be recanted amended corrected c. therefore the Maior is moste certainely true by these men And the Minor also is proued by them in this order They haue graunted before that a general Councell is the highest Iudge And yet in publicke and subscribed Articles haue these Articl of Relig. art ●1 wordes Generall Councells may erre and sometime haue erred euen in things pertayning vnto God Wherefore thinges ordeyned by them as necessarie to saluation haue neither strength nor authoritie vnlesse it may be declared that they be taken out of holy scripture Therefore no certayne Interpretation with them for they haue assured vs Feild pag. 228. that a generall Councell may expownd scripture and by authoritie suppresse all them that gaynesay such Interpretations to excommunication and Censures of like nature and is by them the highest Iudge hath no more priuiledge but to erre and be examined and controlled by inferior for none is higher as before Reprouers and particular Interpreters amonge them whome as they haue also taught before wee are not bounde to beleeue but be so vile corrupt and erroneous as they haue confessed there is none amonge them to decide things in controuersie or define a truthe And least any man should absurdely say that their Conuocation Parlament or any other pretendeing superiotie among them in these matters should be better able to Iudge and interprett scriptures then Bishops assembled in a generall Councell Willet Antilog first D. Willet writeth thus In England the temporall prince is gouernour Ruler cheefe ouerseer praef Engl. pag. 71. 120. 150. 43. Pref. 19 the Reader in Antill and steward of the Church to whose Iudgment and redresse the reformation of Religion belongeth Yet hee addeth Neither hee nor their Church hath any priuiledge from error but playnely protesteth they must take out a new lesson and learne to reforme their erroneous conceites Which their Bishop D. Doue alloweth to haue beene their state from the first originall of their Doue persuas pag. 31. protestancie in England his wordes and graunt are these When the Mass● was first putt downe Kinge Henry had his English liturgie and that was iudged absolute without exception but when Kinge Edwarde came to the Crowne that was condemned and an other in the place which Peter Martir and Bucer did approue as very consonant to Gods worde When Q. Eliz●●eth began he● Raigne the former was Iudged to be full of Imperfections and a new was deuised and allowed by the consent of the Cleargie but about the middle of her Raigne wee were weary of that booke and greate meanes haue beene wrought to abandon that and establishe an other wee doe at the leaste at euery chaunge of prince chaunge our booke of Common prayers wee be so wanton that wee know not what wee woulde haue Hitherto this Protestant Bishop of the publicke proceedings in their Religion And hee freely confesseth errors in all these their states and chaunges And this their flitting from error to error findeinge no Center or hope of settleing in truth hath so perplexed euen their best learned that a late Protestant writer amonge them hath these wordes The late Archbishoppe of Canterbury D. Whiteguist as is credibly reported Suruey of the B. of com prayer pag. 159. 160. tooke such a greife when their communion booke was to be amended discouered by these or like wordes good Lord when shall wee know● what to trust vnto that hee presently fell into his palssy was curryed from the Court and dyed shortely after And D. Morton D. Couell M. Wotton Morton Apol. part 2. pag. 315. Couell ag Burg. pag. 75. 43. Wotton def pag. 42. c. M. Middleton and now the vniuersitie of Cambridge teacheth it is a generall position there is none in their Church whose Iudgment is Infallible Then I conclude their Interpretations be false and their Religion erroneous vncertayne and false for they haue graunted before that the worde of God which is Infallible moste certayne and vndoubted is the grounde of true Religion and euery article in it so fownded But these their highest and best sentences in Religion being so erroneous to be corrected fallible deceatfull c. must needs be the worde of lyeinge and deceatefull men or the wicked spiritt and in no wayes the holy Infallible and moste certayne word of God who can neither be deceaued in himself or deceaue others Further thus I argue whosoeuer teach not onely that the whole Christian world may erre in things pertayning to God but are bownde to receaue such errors vnder payne of excommunication and like Censures and yet teach this from scriptures cannot be said to haue their true Interpretation But the Protestants of England by their owne testimonie are in this state Therefore haue not this true Iuridicall Interpretation of scriptures The Maior proposition is euidently true for so God that is iust should ordayne Iurisdiction and power to bynde men to things vniust such as errors in Religion be and these Protestants though to excuse or alleuiate their owne Heresies they affirme that any particular Church or a generall Councell may erre in this maner yet they deny it of the whole Churche in which cause D. Feild pag. 203. l. 4. c. 5. Feild writeth in these wordes wee thinke that particular men and Churches may erre damnably because notwithstanding others may worship God aright but that the whole Churche at one time cannot so erre for that the Churche should cease vtterly for a time and so not be Catholicke being not at all times and Christ should sometimes be without a Church Thus it is euident by these Protestants for the wordes wee