argument against you That day wherein the Apostles did ordaine that Christians should weekely meete together to exercise themselues in hearing the word preached receiuing the Sacrament and giuing of Almes that same day did the Apostles ordain to be the Sabbath of Christians but the Apostle did ordaine that Christians should weekly assemble themselues vpon the first day of the weeke for the purposes before mentioned therefore the Apostle did ordaine the first day of the weeke to be the Christians Sabbath Pap. I denie the Maior for that being graunted if the Apostles did appoint moe daies in a wéeke than one for Christians to assemble themselues for the like Christian exercises by the same argument you a Non sequitur Looke the answere may likewise prooue two Sabbaths in one wéek and no doubt those Christians who liued together in the fellowship of the Apostles sold their possessions and had all thinges common b That is not their intent Act. 2.45 to the intent that they might be wholy employed in the seruice of God had moe dayes than one in a wéeke appointed for that purpose Your Minor proposition also which is that the Apostle did ordaine that Christians should assemble thēselues vpon the first day of the wéeke c. is false not warranted by either of the places of scripture by you alleaged In the 20. of the Acts the first day of the wéeke is not prescribed vnto Christians as a day whereon they ought to assemble themselues for the seruice of God but there only mentiō is made that the Disciples were assembled on the first day of the wéeke to break bread and that Paul intending to depart on the morrow continued preaching till midnight Let vs c Admit what you will yet the first of the weeke is the ordinarie appointed day admit that Saint Paul was to depart on the Tuesday and that the Christians were assembled on the Monday to breake bread and to heare Paul preach before his departure might not I in this case make as stronge an argument to prooue Monday to be the Christians Sabbath as yours is for the Sunday In the 16. Chapter of Saint Pauls 1. Epistle vnto the Corinths the Apostle doth prescribe the first day of the wéeke vnto the Corinths as a day whereon they ought to lay aside for the poore as their deuotion shall serue it is not preaching prayer or administration of Sacraments that is in this place enioyned but it is a laying aside for the poore Why doth the Apostle enioyne this contribution for the poore to be made at that time the answere followeth in the text That there be no gatherings when I come Why would the Apostle haue no gatherings when he came no doubt because hée would not haue such spirituall exercises as he determined to bestow amonge them at his returne vnto them d Then this day was not onely for collections but for spirituall exercises hindered or impeached by such collections if this were the meaning of the Apostle then is it not like that he would appoint the Sabbath for the making of such collections which is wholy e Not wholy so as no time should be spared for collections to be employed in such spirituall exercises as hée meant to vse amonge them at his returne and therefore this place would better serue a wrangler to prooue that the first day of the wéek was not appointed to be the christians Sabbath then it will serue you to the contrarie Pro. Out of this place it may be gathered that the Christians vpon the first day of the weeke did weekely assemble together for there is no time so fit for collections as generall assemblies and a weekely assembly vpon that day doth manifestly proue it to be the Sabbath Pap. You can wring no generall assemblies out of that place for the text saith Let euerie one put apart by himselfe and lay vp which argueth rather f Neither doe we imagine that all saw what euerie man gaue or tooke it from him but he himselfe layd it vp as the rest did in the cōmon purse else Paul must either gather it or tarry the gathering of it when hee came a priuate laying vp at home than a contribution in an assembly as your marginall note in the English Bible interpreteth for how can a man bée sayd to lay vp that which he doth deliuer to another in such a contribution Pro. It appeareth in the first of the Reuelation that in Saint Iohns time the first day of the weeke was called the Lords day which is as much as if hee had called it the Christians Sabbath Pap. You shall find in that Chapter that Saint Iohn was in the spirit on the Lords day whereupon you may conclude that in Saint Iohns time one day of the wéeke was called the Lords day which we doe graunt and more than that that the first day of the wéeke was then called the Lords day which would haue put you to your shifts to haue prooued out of the word yet haue you gained nothing for what consequent is this the first day of the wéeke was of the Apostles called the Lords day therefore the Iewes Sabbath is to be abolished and the first day of the wéeke is to be obserued for the Sabbath of Christians might not the first day of the wéeke be called the Lords day in regard of Christs resurrection and yet the Iewes Sabbath remaine or be abolished as other of their ceremonies were without substituting another Sabbath in place thereof Or will you rather reason thus Saint Iohn could be in the spirit but on the christians Sabbath only Ergo the first day of the wéeke is the Sabbath of christians if this be your argument you doe but clauum clauo pellere for when you shall haue prooued your antecedent by the word then will I graunt the consequent and as easily may you prooue the one as the other but let it be admitted that you can prooue by scripture that the Christians were enioyned by the Apostles to assemble themselues wéekely vpon the Sunday to ioyne together in prayer hearing the word preached yet what word haue you to prooue that g Neither doe we say neither can you proue it is all bodily labour is vnlawfull vpon that day they might well assemble in prayer vpon that day and heare 2. or 3. sermons and yet spare some time to bestowe vpon their labours and the commaundement forbiddeth labor on the seuenth day and not h The first day is now become the seuenth on the first day of the wéeke Thus you may sée while you do nodum in scirpo quaerere by séeking to prooue that by scripture which the Church doth hold by tradition how you are driuen to wrest the scripture and how weake and ridiculous your arguments be If the obseruation of the feast of Easter and other festiuall dayes prayer for the dead or the Sacrifice of the Masse had found the same entertainment
remained euer from the beginning now if it be sayd that hee meaneth the Church vnder the Gospell Rom. 15.8 Heb. 2.3 it will trouble him to prooue that the Apostles were the first planters of that Church in Iudaea seeing Christ himselfe was minister of the circumcision and first began to preach saluation before it was confirmed by them that heard him Moreouer that the Church was euer dispersed through the whole world by the ministery of the Apostles is sooner said than prooued for though Paul say that the fall of the Iewes was the riches of the world yet doth hee not meane the whole world simply without exception no more than Saint Luke doth when he saith that Augustus Caesar decreed that all the world should bee taxed Luk. 2.1 Math. 28.19 Luk. 24.47 Mark 16.15 Act. 16.6 c. 2. Cor. 10.13 c. and so must wee vnderstand all Nations in Matthew and Luke and all the world and euerie creature in Saint Markes Gospell for though the words be generall and without limitation yet the Apostles were kept in and guided more particularly by the holy Ghost Lastly it would bee agreed vpon what faith or beleefe your Papist meaneth when hee saith Doe you beléeue the catholicke Church whether iustifying or historicall For though he seeme to fetch his question out of the Creed wherein the articles of iustifying faith are recorded and so to make the catholicke Church inuisible for faith is the euidence of thinges not seene Heb. 11.1 yet when hee addeth planted by the Apostles in Iudaea c. he maketh it visible and so not to be beleeued Wherefore though this first question haue neither head nor foot yet thus in charitie I conceiue of it that it demaundeth whether we beleeue historically that there were orderly Churches or companies professing catholicke doctrine taught by the Apostles first among the Iewes and then among the Gentiles which profession and professors shall continue in one place or other to the worlds end if this be the question then haue you answered catholiquely first that you beleeue this and then secondly that the Protestants onely are the visible and knowne members of Gods church Now where it is demaunded in the third and fourth place how wee knowe this whether by outward meanes or by inspiration it is answered that the canonicall word of God doth so testifie and better witnesse than this we desire none and touching this word of God the Papists graunt all those bookes to bee canonicall which wee call canonicall though they adde other Bookes which wee admit not for grounds and foundations of faith but if wee cannot make good our profession by those bookes which both sides agree vpon and by the same bookes ouerthrow all that the Papists hold against vs at this day then I for my part will soone yeeld to the Pope and craue absolution vpon my knees Nowe forsooth the discerning of these canonicall Scriptures is called into question and they must bee subiected to the infirmity of man howbeit your answere though it be true yet is it insufficient for howsoeuer the vniforme consent of antiquitie is not to be neglected yet as our Sauiour saith Ioh. 5.36 that he had greater witnesse than the witnesse of Iohn so hath the holy Scripture greater witnesse than the witnesse of the Fathers namely the puritie and incontrolled antiquitie of it the Maiestie of the stile the conformablenesse of the precepts thereof to the lawe of nature and diuers other outward meanes noted by Master Caluine in his Institutions Lib. 1. Cap. 8. otherwise it were hard to tell how the men of Beroea and other ancient Christians discerned the Scripture in the Apostles time and after Act. 17.11.12 before any one of the ancient Fathers was borne or had written a syllable and herehence it is easily gathered how vaine the sixt question is for traditions are not confirmed by such pregnant euidence as the Scriptures are but hange in the winde vppon the conceits of men which may be deceiued and therfore a Christian man may well beleeue the one though he neglect the other Rom. 1.16 Heb. 4.12 1. Cor. 2.4 1. Cor. 14.24.25 Luk. 24.32 the powerfull working of the word of God described by Saint Paul and the Author to the Hebrewes and the Disciples of Christ in Saint Lukes Gospell are sufficient witnesses to the soule that Traditions which haue not the same image and superscription may be refused as the commandements and doctrines of men The Dialogue Sectio II. PA. Do you not perceiue that by this description of the Church you haue giuen two mortall wounds vnto your owne cause first you haue excluded the Protestant and Puritane out of the Church by you described and secondly you thrust out all the ancient Fathers and Doctors that euer flourished in the Church since the Apostles time Pro. The wounds you speake of surely are not mortall for as yet I feele them not Pap. They will prooue sensible when they come to the searching first you haue excluded the Protestant and Puritane who hold many points of Doctrine not a These points are warrantable by Scripture as it shall appeare warranted by the Scriptures as the obseruation of the Sunday in stead of Saturday which was the Sabbath of the Iewes that Christians may eat bloud notwithstanding the decrée of the first generall Councell to the contrarie that a christian Magistrate may punish theft with death which in a Iewish Magistrate was a breach of the commaundement that it is a greater offence in a christian to haue Concubines and many wiues then it was in Dauid who notwithstanding was a man according to Gods owne heart that Christians should be tied vnto the law prescribed vnto the Iewes for marriage within degrées of affinitie and not vnto the like law prescribed to the brother to raise vp séede vnto his brother dying without issue For all which you haue no warrant out of the scriptures Pro. For all these points of Doctrine wee haue sufficient warrant out of the booke of God and first concerning the Sabbath of Christians it is euident in the 20. of the Acts that the Christians did assemble themselues the first day of the weeke to heare Paul preach and to breake bread likewise in the 16. Chapter of Saint Pauls 1. Epistle to the Corinths it appeareth that Saint Paul did ordaine in all the Churches of Galatia that collection should be made for the poore vpon the first day of the weeke where hee doth also exhort the Corinthians to doe the like vpon the same day whereby it is euident that the Sunday was appointed by the Apostles to be the Christians Sabbath which is nothing else but a day of rest from labour and a day to bee bestowed in hearing the word preached breaking of bread whereby is meant administration of the Sacrament giuing of almes and other workes of deuotion and pietie for proofe whereof out of the places aboue alleaged I doe draw this
with Iohn Caluine as the obseruation of the Sabbath hath done I doubt not but that although he would not haue allowed of traditions yet hée would haue found you as sufficient proofe for any of them out of the word as hée hath done for the Sabbath for so great a mote in your eyes is the tradition of the Church that if your appetite serue to take liking of any point of doctrine grounded thereon you will make any homely shift rather than you wil acknowledge the true i Tradition a fountaine in Poperie fountaine from whence it springeth and no maruell for acknowledge the authoritie of those traditions which k If you may doe what you lift we cannot stand by the testimonie of all antiquitie were first deliuered by the Apostles and haue euer since béen obserued and deliuered ouer as it were from hand to hand by succession of Bishops and your heresie wil fall to the ground The next point of doctrine which you doe hold without warrant of scripture is that it is lawfull for Christians to eat bloud which was forbidden by the decrée of the first generall Councell where the Apostles were present l I will finde you scripture for this in Saint Pauls Epistles what scriptures haue you to doe contrarie to a Canon of so great a councell Pro. It is manifest that in the infancy of the church the Apostles hauing to do with the Iewes a people wonderfully addicted to the strict obseruation of their law did not thinke good to take from them all the ceremonies thereof at once but rather by little and little to seeke to winne them by tolerating many things for a time which in the Gospell were abolished and to that intent Paul did circumcise Timothy Acts 16. Pap. What warrant of scripture haue you to prooue that the commandement was giuen to be obserued but for a time in regard of the weaknesse of the Iewes Pro. Wee haue the word to prooue that the ceremoniall lawes were abolished by the death of Christ whereof abstayning from bloud is one and it is euident by the 15. of the Acts that the assembly of the Apostles in the first generall Councell at Ierusalem was vpon this occasion they of the circumcision which beleeued were greatly scandalized because the Gentiles who were ioyned with them in the vnitie of the same faith had vtterly reiected their law whervpon much controuersie did arise between them the Iewes contending that the beleeuing Gentiles ought to be circumcised and to obserue the lawe of Moses and the Gentiles to the contrarie For appeasing whereof the sayd Councell assembled and decreed that the Christians should abstaine from blood by eating whereof as it seemeth the weake Iewes were greatly offended intending thereby somewhat to satisfie the Iewes and yet not to lay too heauie a yoke vpon the Gentiles Thus you see how by the word the eating of bloud was prohibited vnto the Christians of those times and how by the word it is permitted vnto vs. Pa. By what word can you prooue that the m This fellow loues to beare himself speak else would he not make such an idle repetion eating of bloud which was both prohibited vnto the Iewes before the Gospell and to christians in the Gospell is now lawfull for vs to doe that the law prescribed to the Iewes concerning marriage within degrées of affinitie is still to be retained and that the like law which commandeth the brother to raise vp séede vnto his brother deceased without issue is to be abolished that it is lawfull for a Christian Magistrate to take away a mans life for 12. d. which was not lawfull by the law of God to doe but in such cases onely as in the same law are specified with many other such like instances too long to repeat when you haue tired your selfe in searching and wresting of scriptures you shall finde n Else are you deceiued no other warrant for them than the continuall practise and tradition of the Church Pro. It appeareth in the 5. Chapter of the 1. to the Corinths that Paul did disallow of marriage within degree of affinitie which is warrant sufficient for the retaining of the lawes prescribed to the Iewes on that behalfe Pap. You haue no such warrant out of that place for the text saith onely There is a o The fornication had not been so haynous if the Sonne in law might marry his Mother in law fornication among you not once named among the heathen that a man should haue his fathers wife it will be hard for you to prooue out of this place that the Fornication here specified was committed by a marriage betwéen the Sonne and the Mother in law p All this is but vaine talke that helpes him not awhit for the lawes of the Corinthians would permit no such marriage to be celebrated as it may be gathered out of the text for if such a fornication be not named among the heathen much lesse is it permitted by the lawes of the Corinths and therefore this Fornication was committed by hauing his fathers wife as a Concubine or a Whore and not as a wife as you imagine The Answere YOur Papist heere talkes in his sleepe of two mortall wounds which wee by our description of the Church haue giuen to our owne cause and therefore your description must bee had in memorie which as it bindeth the true Church to the voice of Christ sounding in the canonicall Scriptures so it giueth vs to vnderstand that the false Church heareth the voice of stangers and will not bee ruled by the written word of the Almightie yet notwithstanding the true Church may mistake the voice of Christ and so erre whereby the first wound is fully healed and if it should be graunted that the Church in generall cannot erre yet it followeth not that euerie one in particular that buildeth hay or stubble vpon the foundation is therefore no member of the Church And so the second wound which speakes of the exclusion of the Fathers Doctors is neither mortall nor sensible Now touching the first wound which cencerneth the Protestant and Puritane it is here brought to certaine particular points which I will speake of in order The first is the obseruation of the Sunday which you proue syllogistically out of the Scripture after this manner 1. The day whereon the Apostles did ordaine that Christians should weekely meet together to exercise themselues in hearing the word preached receiuing the Sacraments and giuing of Almes that same day did the Apostles ordaine to be the Sabbath of Christians 2. But the Apostles did ordaine that Christians should weekely assemble themselues vpon the first day of the weeke for the purpose before mentioned Ergo The Apostles did ordaine the first day of the weeke to be the Christians Sabbath Now where your Papist saith That if the Maior were true then the Apostles appointing moe dayes than one for such exercises should appoint moe Sabbaths in a wéeke
than one his answere hath no colour or shewe of reason for though euerie day in the weeke had beene so appointed yet had they not beene all Sabbaths vnlesse they had weekely continued as the first day did from weeke to weeke till Saint Iohns banishment at what time still wee finde that day kept holy and dedicated to the Lord as appeareth by the name which the holy Ghost giueth it in the Reuelation Cap. 1.13 Againe where he saith That the first Christians sold their possessions to the intent they might wholy bestow themselues vpon the seruice of God It would be knowne by what tradition or inspiration he found that out seeing the scriptures informe vs Act. 2.45 that their intent was to supply the necessitie of their poore brethren I trow the other Iewes that were to attend dayly vpon the morning and euening houres of praier and sacrifice did not vnload themselues of their possessions moreouer this lawe and sale of possessions though it were vsed at Ierusalem yet was it not in force in Galatia and Achaia and other Churches of the Gentiles 1. Cor. 16.2 Gal. 6 6 c. which had of their owne to put aside and lay vp for the poore And touching the Minor your Papist sayth that the Troiane Christians were assembled the first day of the wéeke to breake bread but not appointed so to doe by the prescription of the Apostles belike they came together by hap hazard or by their owne appointment howbeit hee that planted the Church of Troas cannot be so forgetfull as to leaue euery man separately to himselfe and not to appoint when they should assemble themselues for the continuall watring of that which was planted Act. 20.7 now to note what time that was Saint Luke names the first day of the weeke otherwise there is no reason why it should bee mentioned moreouer whereas Paul and his companie came to Troas the second day of the weeke and tarried there iust seuen dayes yet no day of assembly is registred but this one onely day and yet we may not think that Paul and his companie lay idle sixe daies together and forgat the worke of their calling yea but let vs admit saith your Papist that Paul was to depart on the Tuesday and that the Christians were assembled on the Monday c. Yea marry then should we be wise men but the Disciples of Troas met not to heare Paul preach for most of them had heard him preach before sixs dayes together but to breake bread which they would haue done though Paul had not beene amongst them and therefore this supposition is cloudie and riculous Touching the place to the Corinthians your Papist saith that Saint Paul doth not prescribe the first day of the week for prayer preaching and administration of Sacraments but for a laying aside for the poore according to euery mans deuotion and I graunt all this to bee true for those holy exercises were inioyned the churches of Galatia and Achaia when they were first planted and so was the collection for their owne poore for this collection for the Saimes at Ierusalem was extraordinarie but that the Apostle Paul would bee so troublesome as not to content himselfe that this collection should be made as their other collections were vpon their ordinarie meeting day but to appoint another day weeke by weeke to the hinderance of their seuerall callings is vtterly incredible nay see further I pray you how your learned Papist doubleth the power of the argument which he goeth about to weaken for when he asketh why the Apostle inioyneth this collection to be made vpon that day and answereth himselfe out of the text that there be no gatherings when I come and then asketh againe why the Apostle would haue no gatherings when he came and answereth with a no doubt because he would not haue such spirituall exercises as hee determined to bestow among them hindered by such collections what doth he else but confesse that the first day of the weeke was the day that Paul purposed to keepe holy at his comming and therefore would not haue that day bestowed vpon collections when he came but before his comming otherwise if hee had meant to bestow spirituall blessings so plentifully among them vpon any other day then gatheringes made vpon that day could not hinder him Yea but if these collections were hinderances to the spirituall exercises of the Sabbath then it followeth that the first day of the week wherin Paul would haue these collections made was not appointed to be the Christians Sabbath Well wrangled but howsoeuer this extraordinarie collection inioyned by Saint Paul might hinder Saint Paul himselfe that preached at Troas till midnight nay till the dawning of the next day Rom. 15.29 and vsed to come with abundance of the blessing of the Gospell of Christ yet their owne ordinarie ministerie being farre lesse plentifull could not be so easily hindered Apol. 2. and therefore wee read in Iustine Martyr that in his time beside preaching and administring the Sacraments collections were made vpon this verie day in Christian Churches One wrangle more remaineth against the force of this place to the Corinths namely that no generall assembly can be wrung out of it because the text saith Let euerie one put apart by himselfe and lay vp which argueth a priuat laying vp at home for a man cannot be sayd to lay vp that which he deliuereth to another Well wrangled againe but what call you this a gathering and is this kinde of laying vp at euerie mans owne home a sufficient dispatch of all gathering so as there should be no gathering at all when the Apostle should come himselfe amongst them Wherefore little wringing will serue to prooue that this laying vp is not meant of euerie mans owne purse or cupbord at home which might be done any other day as well as the first of the weeke but of some publique Chest or Boxe prouided for euerie mans free beneficence as euerie particular man himselfe found himselfe able and willing Now followeth the place of the Reuelation where Saint Iohn saith that he was in the spirite on the Lords day or Cap. 1.10 Psa 74.16 as the Rhems Testament translates it the Dommicall day Out of which we learne first that albeit all the dayes of the weeke are the Lords yet this day is so called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being a more excellent or eminent day than the rest and so consequently a day consecrated to the seruice of the Lord. Secondly we learne that this day was famously knowne by the name of Lords day or Dominicall day in the Churches of Asia Reuel 1.4 to whome Saint Iohn dedicated his Reuelation for it had been to no purpose for him to tell them that hee was in the spirite on the Lords day if they knew not what day that was and how it was seuered by that name from the rest of the weeke and therefore as it was an
eminent day and chosen from amonge the other dayes of the weeke for the speciall seruice of the Lord so was it celebrated as an eminent day and so still kept in fresh memorie in the Churches of Asia now that this day was the first day of the weeke and no other it will bee easie to shew without shifts not onely because no other day was euer permanently kept holy but also because we may trace the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Dominica applied to this day as it were a Hare in the snow issuing out of this place of the Reuelation into all the Churches of Christendome Yea but saith your Papist Might not the first day of the wéeke be called the Lords day in regard of Christs Resurrection I say no for then it had been called the Rising day or the Resurrection day as the like dayes be namely Ascension Circumcision c. For to call it the Lords day in regard of Christs Resurrection is vtterly insensible When he demaundeth further Whether the Iewes Sabbath might not remaine or be abolished as other Ceremonies were Col. 2.16.16 without substituting another Sabbath in place thereof I answere that the Iewes Sabbath is taken away by Saint Paul so farre forth as it was ceremoniall but the morall parts thereof namely that one day in a weeke should be layd apart for spirituall meditations and exercises Exod. 23.12 and for the recreation of seruants and dum creatures was to be kept still inuiolable without any such substitution as he dreames of and so his other wranglements about bodily labour and resting the seuenth day not the first day of the weeke are cleane dasht Mat. 12.5.11 Mark 2.27 3.4 Luk. 13.14 c. Ioh. 5.8 c. 9.6.7.14 Iren. lib. 4. ca. 19. howbeit that which was the first day of the weeke is now become the seuenth day and bodily labour was neuer altogether vnlawfull no not in time of the lawe as appeareth cleerely in many places of the new Testament Now iudge you or any reasonable man else in the world whether our arguments or his answeres be weake and ridiculous as for his Tradition the more he vrgeth it the more hee confuteth himselfe and confirmeth our exposition of these three places for if the Apostles deliuered the obseruation of the Sabbath by Tradition wee may not thinke they deliuered it to some Churches and not to other some and if they deliuered it to all without exception then was it deliuered to them of Troas to the Galatians Corinthians and the Churches of Asia if to them then can it not bee denied but that these places of scripture which I haue now disputed of doe cleerely containe the practise and continuall obseruance of the Lords day as it was deliuered to these Churches by the Apostles I will not vouchsafe to answere your Papists vnpowdered talke of Iohn Caluin that worthy seruant of God and wire-whipper of popish marchants out of the house of God onely this I will say that if Iohn Caluin were not a greater mote in his eie then Popish traditions are in ours he would haue spared this idle vagarie The next point is eating blood Act. 15 2â—.29 which was forbidden in the first generall Councell the circumstance whereof you haue well set downe howbeit your Papist still calls for Scripture whereby it may be shewed him that after the decree made at Ierusalem by the Apostles it was lawfull for Christians to eate blood which hee would neuer doe if hee were learned and had read the Epistles of Saint Paul with any diligence wherefore you may stoppe his mouth for this point out of these places which I haue here quoted 1. Rom. 14.2 3 6 14 20 c. 1. Cor. 10.29 Coloss 2.16 Timothie 4.4 Tit. 1.15 Now followeth the third poynt which hangs vpon Tradition and not vpon Scripture Leui. 28. 20 Deut. 25.5 namely the forbidding of marriage within degrees of affinitie as if Leuiticus were no scripture yea but may he say Deuteronomy is scripture too as well as Leuiticus yet the brother is there commanded to raise vp seede to his brother which in Leuiticus is made vnlawfull now tell vs why you receiue the one and refuse the other here must you call for the helpe of Tradition or els lie in the dust Alas good Papist you are much deceiued for the law of Leuiticus is morall and naturally ingraffed in the hearts of all nations as appeareth euidently in the conclusion of this law in Leuiticus from the foure and twentieth verse to the end of the eighteenth Chapter for if this Law had beene peculiar for the Iewes there is no reason why the Canaaniticall nations should bee punished so seuerely as there it is described for the non obseruance of the same as for the other law of Deuteronomy it is an exception or dispensation in that particular case for the common weale of the Iewes wherein God had a speciall care of the first borne and his inheritance againe being repugnant to nature and to the explication thereof twice told in Leuiticus Cap. 18.16 cap. 20.21 it might not continue longer vnrepealed Touching the example of the incestuous Corinthian which you propound it will sticke better to your Papists ribbes then he is aware of for how can that fornication be vnheard of among the Gentiles which a man committeth with such a one as hee may lawfully marrie if then this Corinthian might lawfully marry his mother in law verily single copulation with her could not be so abominable as that the very Gentiles could not abide it should be once named amongst them and if single copulation of the mother and sonne in law was so much abhorred then was it vnlawfull they should marrie and so the law of God in Leuiticus is confirmed and so indeed your Papist gently confesseth in these words the law of the Corinths would permit no such mariage as may be gathered out of the text c. The fourth poynt followeth namely that it cannot bee shewed by scripture thas it is a greater offence in a Christian to haue many wiues then it was in Dauid howbeit we read in Scripture that God gaue him his masters wiues into his bosome 2. Sam. 12.8 Rom. 4.15 Nulla lege prohibebatur August contr Faust lib. 22. cap. 47. Matth. 19.4 c. 1. Cor. 7.2 c. Eph. 5.31 if there be no transgression where there is no law as Paul saith then verily Polygamy being neither cleerely forbidden by any law nor reprehended by any Prophet from the beginning of the world to the comming of Christ it must follow that it was eyther no transgression at all in the fathers or a farre lesse transgression then it is in Christians whom Christ Iesus himselfe and the holy Apostle Saint Paul hath so manifestly instructed that nothing can be more euident Now touching the fift and last point of punishing theft with death it is confessed by your Papist that