Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
doctrine_n holy_a scripture_n tradition_n 3,735 5 9.1394 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A08426 A true report of the disputation or rather priuate conference had in the Tower of London, with Ed. Campion Iesuite, the last of August. 1581. Set downe by the reuerend learned men them selues that dealt therein. VVhereunto is ioyned also a true report of the other three dayes conferences had there with the same Iesuite. Which nowe are thought meete to be published in print by authoritie Nowell, Alexander, 1507?-1602.; Day, William, 1529-1596. aut; Fielde, John, d. 1588.; Fulke, William, 1538-1589. aut; Goad, Roger, 1538-1610. aut; Campion, Edmund, Saint, 1540-1581. aut; Walker, John, d. 1588. aut; Charke, William, d. 1617. aut 1583 (1583) STC 18744; ESTC S113389 169,017 230

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Church supposing alwayes a true Church I pray you of what Church are you Charke We talke of the true Church and therefore this question is needles Are we to obey any thing contrary to the worde of God You can imagine nothing left to the Church that is not manifestly conteyned in the scripture Camp Call you manifestly particularly Charke To what purpose is that question I must bring you to a Syllogisme lest you auoyde disputation by digressing into other matter If any thing be left obscure or not fully handled by the Apostles it was either because the Apostles could not or because they would not write manifestly and fully But it is a blasphemie to say they could not and it is false to say they would not Therefore they haue written all manifestly and fully Here Campion repeated the Argument and then sayd thus Camp I answere to the word manifestly either in generall or particular termes manifest and this the Apostles both could and would For this is manifest enough Beleeue the Church but it is not particular Charke While we dispute of the manifest and full contents of the scripture leaue to choppe in the needles terme Particular manifest generals include particulars And where I pray you are we commaunded to beleeue the Church in matters not contained in the written worde By this vncerteine rule you may warrant all former traditions and bring in any newe absurdities Camp That is not the question Charke But it is a necessary note for the confutation of your answeres and doctrine of vnwritten verities Therefore I thus proue against you To leaue a doore open to any chaungeable or doubtfull traditions is not to teache things manifest enough in the scriptures But to send vs to your Church prelates in matters not expressed in the written word is to leaue a dore open to chaungeable and doubtfull traditions Therefore to sende vs to your Church prelates in matters not expressed in the written worde is not to teach thinges manifest enough in the scriptures Camp To leaue a doore to traditions which the holy ghost may deliuer to the true Church is both manifest and seene as the baptisme of Infants the holy ghost proceeding from father and sonne and such other things mentioned which are deliuered by tradition Proue these directly by the scripture Charke Which proposition in the Syllogisme doe you deny Camp Proue the baptisme of children and the proceeding of the holy Ghost not to be traditions Charke I maruayle you thus auoyde the Syllogisme and what you meane to match doctrines contained in the word of God with vnwritten and vncerteyne traditions of men It is plaine that the baptisme of children is proued by the analogie of Circumcision with baptisme childrē being circumcised the eight day Also by that the Sacraments of the old Testament are the same with the Sacraments of the newe The proceeding of the holy ghost is euidently proued by this that our Sauiour promiseth to send the holy Ghost Camp Proue the proceeding of the holy ghost Ex parte filii That is on the sonnes part For that is the point Charke It is proued by my former words and where Christ breathed vpon his disciples and said Receiue the holy ghost Camp Well leaue that talke of baptisme which this company vnderstandeth better Suppose that I am an Anabaptiste And y● Anabaptist denieth this argument because children should not be baptized till the eight day and the scripture willeth them to be baptised that beleeue so that first they must haue Faith or els they may not be baptized Charke I reply to you that Infidels of age to vnderstand and beleeue must beleeue before they be baptised and admitted to the Church but the children of beleeuers being the seede of the faithfull they may receiue the seale of the couenant of God made to the Fathers and to their seede according to that of the Apostle If the first fruites be holy the lumpe also If the roote be holy the branches also are holy But to the question Notwithstanding the scriptures be the only rule triall of all questions in religion and do fully proue the matter in hand yet because you wil not be cōtented without them answere a place or two out of the Doctors Eusebius lib. 3. cap 35. of his ecclesiasticall storie writeth that Ignatius being caried prisoner to Rome did exhort the Churches to cleaue vnseparably to the tradition that is to the deliuered doctrine of the Apostles which for safetie it was necessarie to put downe in writing that we might not depart frō it Which excludeth the generall bringing in of vnwritten verities vnder the colour of that text Obey your prelates Camp Reade the place Charke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In English thus He exhorted the Churches to cleaue vnseparablie to the traditition of the Apostles which he supposed and testified nowe for safeties sake necessarily to haue bene set downe euen in writing Camp What word doe you inferre Tradition I graunt is not alwayes taken for vnwritten veritie This place maketh for those traditions which were not then written Ignatius was S. Iohns scholler and he was Oculatus testis An eye witnesse of things that were not then written but went from hand to hande and therefore he thought it necessarie to leaue in writing such trueth as he had heard and was not written before For the Gospels were not then written Ignatius wrote no Gospell and the text noteth that the things whereof he spake were such as himselfe wrote Charke You mistake the meaning of the place For Ignatius spake not of your doubtfull and multiplied traditions but of the certayne Tradition that is of the deliuered and written doctrine of the Apostles to the which we must cleaue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is so stedfastly that no force no arte may cut vs off or withdrawe vs from it no not an Angell from heauen much lesse any mortall man howsoeuer magnified with the high titles of Popedome or Prelacie or Apostolicall authoritie Walker You haue graunted that all things are written in the worde and that such traditions as can not manifestly be gathered out of the Canonicall Scriptures are not to be receaued Thereupon I reason thus The same that the Apostles wrote the same they deliuered in tradition But they haue written and deliuered the same things that they read in the Canonicall scripture Ergo their writings and traditions be all one and the same Camp The same that is to say nothing contrarie Walker The same and no other is needefull to saluation Heare the Apostles wordes 1. Cor. 4. Hac de causamisi vobis Timotheum qui est filius meus dilectus fidelis in domino qui vobis in memoriā reducet vias meas quae sunt in Christo quemadmodum in omni ecclesia doceo Who is my beloued sonne and faithful in the Lord who will put you in minde of my wayes which are in the Lorde euen as
with error therein and also for that it is in deede a matter of the chiefest controuersie betweene vs. And first for that you doe in your booke vntruely charge Luther and vs by him with the cutting away of Saint Iames epistle for that the wretche as you saie of Luther was by this epistle vanquished and ouerthrowen and for that that epistle doth so manifestly conuince his and our error in this matter of iustification as you do write we do protest that we will neither refuse nor make any exception to that epistle of Saint Iames nor to any other part of the newe Testament which you vntruely haue charged vs to haue cut off from the bodie of the holy scriptures It is well said they that you doe receaue this Epistle of Saint Iames. We haue euer receiued it saide we Howe much the more vntruely haue you charged vs with the contrarie And so entering into the matter we said Whereas you doe charge Luther with him vs all for teaching a newe and false doctrine yea heresie also in that we saie and write that we are iustified by faith onely we say for our defence against this your slaunder that the same doctrine is taught both in many places of the holy scriptures most effectually and is also expressely affirmed and pronounced by the ancient holy fathers and doctors of Christes Church both Greekes and Latines in the verie same wordes that wee do vse Let vs heare your scriptures and doctors sayd they Thē for that we came purposed to examine y● vntruthes of Campions booke rather then to dispute we did very briefly as our memorie did then serue vs note rather then thorowly alleage many places out of the holy scriptures for the proofe of our iustification by faith and consequently by faith onely to this effect Our sauiour Christ saide we as it is in sundrie places of the Euangelistes recorded saith often Thy faith hath saued thee Onely beleeue beleeue onely They shall receaue remission of their sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in me As many as beleeue in me to them hath God giuen power to become the sonnes of God Whosoeuer beleeueth in me shall not be condemned shall not perish but haue euerlasting life Thus saith our sauiour Christ c. And Saint Paul saith Beleeue in the Lord Iesus Christ and thou shalt be saued God doeth iustifie thorowe faith Wee are saued by grace thorowe faith We are blessed by faith We are the children of Abraham yea we are the children of God by faith The righteousnes of God by the faith of Iesus Christ vnto all and vpon vs all that beleeue If thou confesse with the mouth the Lorde Iesus and shalt beleeue in thine heart that God raised him vp from the dead thou shalt be saued For with the heart man beleeueth vnto righteousnes and with the mouth man confesseth vnto saluation We are freely iustified by his grace thorowe faith Then said they we knowe right well that the scriptures doe conteine great commendations of faith but in all these there is not this worde faith onely which is your doctrine But the ancient holy fathers said wee vpon these groundes of the scriptures by vs alleaged doe gather and plainly pronounce that onely faith iustifieth as you shall heare anone And howe many thinges saide we doe you your selfe teach vs as necessarie articles of religion not hauing for you one plaine worde therefore but doe affirme that in effect they are conteined in the holy scriptures And you haue heard that iustification and righteousnes yea saluation and the kingdom of heauen are attributed to faith and that without any addition of any other thing And you haue heard the wordes of our Sauiour beleeue onely only beleeue And of Saint Paul you are freely iustified by faith which are in effect as much as faith onely and to more effect exceedingly then are your proofes of a great many of the principal pointes of your Popish religion And where as we meane none other by faith onely but faith without the workes of the Lawe and without our good workes if the former place can not satisfie you heare what Saint Paul sayeth further Know ye that a man is not iustified by the workes of the Lawe but by the faith of Iesus Christ. The righteousnes of God is made manifest without the Lawe by the faith of Iesus Christ vnto all and vpon all that beleeue We holde that a man is iustified by faith without the deedes of the Lawe It is one God that iustifieth circumcision by faith and vncircumcision through faith Euery one that beleeueth is absolued from all from the which they could not be absolued by the Lawe of Moses Thus saith Saint Paul and to the like effect in exceeding many places declaring that we are iustified by faith and not by the Law by faith and not by workes which is all one as to say by faith onely No it is not all one sayd they But the ancient doctors of the Church said we do vpon these very places of the holy scriptures by vs alleaged gather and in expresse wordes set downe as we doe that we are iustified by faith onely as ye shall see Saint Hillary quoth we sayeth thus reading his wordes out of the booke it selfe Mouit scribas remissum ab homine peccatum hominem enim tantum in Iesu Christo contuebantur remissum ab eo quod lex laxare non poterat fides en●…m sola iustificat That is to say It moued the scribes that sinne was remitted by man for they behelde man onely in Iesus Christ and that was remitted by him the which the Lawe can not release for faith onely doeth iustifie Thus farre Saint Hilary who as you doe see of this doctrine of Saint Paul by vs alleadged for iustification by faith without the Lawe gathereth and setteth downe the same doctrine in the same wordes that we doe teach that faith onely doeth iustifie But he saith not so in the same sense that you doe saith Master Campion We shall see of the sense anon saide we but we pray you heare the other doctors also who doe agree with vs in the same wordes Saint Ambrose also vpon the place by vs alleaged out of the third to the Romanes among many other sentences hath this Non iustificari hominem apud Deum nisi per fidem That a man is not iustified before God but by faith And shortly after Saint Ambrose saith Tam Gentiles quam Iudeos non aliter quam credentes iustificauit Quia enim vnus Deus est vna ratione omnes iustificauit That is both the Gentiles and the Iewes God hath iustified none other wayes but beleeuing For because there is one God he hath iustified all by one meanes And most plainely vpon the wordes by vs before alleaged he sayeth Iustificati gratis per gratiam ipsius Iustificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque
blasphemies for euen as Lucifer by pride woulde haue made him selfe equall with God so this Lucifers vicar in earth woulde by a Luciferian pride make his worde Canons and writings equall with the Maiestie of Gods worde and the Canonicall Scriptures Matt. 18. Act. 15. Miser Confossus diruptus Matth. 9. Mark 5. 10. Luk. 7. 8. 12. 18. Act. 26. 18. Iohn 1. 12. Iohn 3. 16. Act. 16. 31. Galat. 3. 8. Ephes. 2. 8. Rom. 4. Rom. 3. 22. Rom. 3. 24. Galat. 2. 16. Rom. 3. 21. 22 28. 30. Act. 13. D. Hillarius in Matth. cap. 8. Faith onely doeth iustifie Rom. 3. D. Ambros●…in cap. 4. 9. ad Rom. Basil. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gregor Nazianzen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A●…an in Galat 3. Chris●…st in Hom. 2. in Rom. Origen in Rom. cap. 3. August de fide operibus Rom. 4. Psalm 32. D. Basil. de Humilitate 1. Cor. 13. Mat. 7. 22. 23. Galat. 5. Ephe Ephe. 2. 8 9. Apoc. 22. The pamphleters do say that we refused to subscribe not shewing M. Campions addition of merites Matth. 10. 1. Corinth 1. 29 30 31. Ephe. 2. 8 9. Rom. 3. 27. Rom. 4. 2. Mark 16. Both Basill Nazianzen were offred but it was Nazianzen not Basill as they report August De fide operibus Here was speache that nothing was meant by the noting but a priuate matter to preuent false reports And this he spake with great iolitie scoffingly Here was much a do about writing yet I neuer knewe any thing imprinted that might preiudice him 1. Argument Here the wordes of the text were read Bolde asse●…●…rations Tobias was of another time for it was frō the dayes of Achab vnto Salmanazar 140. yeeres at the least Campion ●…greeth not with others of his owne side 2. Argument Pillars were erected in euery place with this blasphemous inscription superstitione Christi vbiq deleta c. The Papistes call iustice for treason persecution for religion Strange Diuinitie The third argument Homil. in Math. 24. There is no other proofe there is none other way to knowe the Church or true Christianitie but only by the Scripture 4. Argument Camp ratione secunda Hanc peruestigemus ex verbis adiacentibus voces clausul●… tota connexio Absurditie ergo preceptes giuen to the M. his calling are giuen to the familie Here M. D. Goade was turning for Chrys. vpon this place and he willed that it might be shewed at the next meeting Ad nauseam ●…sque Here Camp after his bold maner did insolently insult by these vaine questions The discipline of the Church perpetuall necessary though it be not alwayes had put in practise Therefore it is not alwayes visible Ephes. 1. Absurde The commandement in the institution bindeth Christians to receiue the cup. And Paul saith 1. Cor. 11. That which I receiued of the Lord wherby he teacheth that he had a commandement Absurde Who can dispute with him that denieth the groundes of disputation This discontented others also that stood by They may be reconed borne within the couenant but they are not his children if they be not elected thogh we iudge thē not because their not being elected doth not appeare vnto vs The second argument Here was promise that the place should be shewed Here there was a litle whispering amonges the company as if it had bene a soft hissing Scripture most absurdly applyed Campions absurdities 3. Argument And yet who knoweth not that generall Coūcils haue bene contrary one directly against another Here the Papists in a libell brought out of Lācashire do report this far otherwise as they do all the rest but none truely they that were present can tell 4. Argument Here for lacke of the booke present it was referred to the shewing of the place afterward Absurde For there is as great necessitie of the one Sacrament as the other The Greke testament being reached vnto him he refused to reade it in the Greeke All this is but a vaine brag for his sight in Greke was very litle or none at all as may appeare in the first dayes conference here al so and afterwards Argumēt 5. Here Campiō interrupted him saying there was no such place made much a doe Augustins argument Here the booke was promised to be brought the place to be shewed 6. Argumēt Here it was promised that it should be shewed The seuēth argument This D. Fulke read out of his note booke Concilior Tom. primo de ord celeb concilii Argumēt 8. 9. Argument Ad Dard. Epist. 57. A fancie in philosophie Here it appeared that many were offended with the indignitie thereof The questions Here M. Lieutenaunt was content that any learned man present might moderate but none would take it vpon them Concil To. 3. fol. 139. Argumēt 1. 2. Argument Some of these wordes were then omitted not read for breuitie sake 3. Argument 4. Argument 5. Argumēt Here D. Fulke was admonished to rehearse the place in English that the people might vnderstande 6. Argumēt Argumēt 7. 8. Argument 9. Argument Here M. Lieutenant admonished them that the time was past 10. Argument 12. Augument The question 1. Argumēt 2. Argumēt 3. Argument 4. Argum Argumēt 5. 6. Argumēt Gene. 17. Exod. 12. Absurde Substance must be in a certaine vacaunt or voyd emptines and yet forsooth in quantitie and qualitie 8. Argumēt Argumēt 9. 10. Argument 12. Argument 2. Pet. 2. 1. Cor. 11. 2. Thes. 2. The questiō●… A prouerbial speach signifying thus much If you take any pleasure in speaking euill you shall lose it in hearing euill 1. Argument 1. Argum. Ignorance of the storie 〈◊〉 Pet. 1. 21. Here was a cōmon good liking of this way Campion did often adde alter his answeres while they were in writing Before he desired it now being straightned he disliketh it and counteth it losse of time The aduersary against himselfe and yet turned from all his shifts In English If so be I haue done wel as agreeth with a storie this I do desire if not so worthily it must be pardoned in me Iudith 10. 3. 4. Iudith 10. vers 12 13. 11. 19. and 12. 14. Iud. 9. vers 10. Let him be taken with the snare of his eyes set on me and smite him with the lippes of my loue Turne my speach into fraude By Campion●… doctrine no practise is vnlawfull so it be for the deliuerie of their Church Rom. 3. 8. Moreouer Iudith doth praise that act which the holy ghost doth flatly cōdemn vide Iud. 9. 2. gen 49. 5. c. Iob. 13. 7. Camp knoweth not his owne translation Arg. prim prouing that the scriptures cōteine sufficient doctrine to saluation In the forme or maner of the Church Arg. 2. Rom. 4. 11. Colos. 2. 11 12. Gen. 17. 12. 1. Cor. 10. 1. Luke 22. 49. Ioh. 15. 26. Iohn 2. 22. Campion was readier to moue 2 newe matters then to answere one argument Rom. 11. 6. If the Apostles proued all by Scripture as Campion graunteth why should not all others doe the like Iohn 5. 46. 〈◊〉 Argum. By Campions owne answere the Apostle speaketh of faith onely Here againe it appeareth by his answere that the Apostle teacheth faith onely Nothing to the matter 1 2 The very worde 3. Argum. Exformula Gal. 3. 11. 12 Gal. 3. 12. Argumēt 4. Canisius in Ca●…ech Payu Andr. lib. 9. Orthodox Expl. Matth. 11. 19. Luke 7. 29. Arg. 4. Arg. 5. Arg. 6. To trifle and shift by childish words In facte and deede
must eate The wordes which the Apostle vseth here are both the imperatiue mode in the Greke text Let him examine him selfe and let him eate and drinke Campion I graunt there are two precepts but this is the summe and ende Vt dignè edat That he may eate worthely Fulke Here is the booke see it and reade it this is the originall giue him the booke it is a reasonable great printe Campion You are stil vrging me to reade Greeke what childish dealing is this can I not see the imperatiue mode aswell in the Latine as in the Greke shall this disaduantage the cause I haue I thanke God and you shall know it asmuch Greke as wil serue my turne and when there is occasion to vse it I will shewe it But is not the Latin tōgue as good a tōgue as the Greeke c. Fulke You were best confesse your ignorance We make not tongues the measure of the truthe but we bring the originall to preuent your cauillations and your finding faulte with translations But I will deale with you with an other argument The whole Church did thinke it necessarie for infantes to receaue Ergo the whole Church hath erred c. Campion Nowe we shall haue a question whether infantes may receaue so we shall runne into all questions Fulke Not so But I will proue that Innocentius Bishop of Rome and all the Church with him as S. Augustine confesseth held this error that it is necessary for infantes to receiue the communion which you your selfe holde to be an error seeing you affirme it is not of necessitie by Christes commandement that any lay men should receiue it You shal heare the wordes of Augustine and of Innocentius both as Augustine citeth them Why are you afraide of the place before you come at it let me reade it Saint Augustine citeth the wordes of Innocentius out of his Epistle to the Bishops of Numidia Lib. 2. ad Bonifacium contra duas epist. Pelag. cap. 4. Haec enim eius verba sunt Illud vero quod eos vestra fraternitas asserit praedicare paruulos aeternae vitae praemijs etiam sine baptismatis gratia posse donari perfatuum est Nisi enim manducauerint carnem filij hominis biberint sanguinem eius non habebunt vitam in semetipsis qui autem hanc eis sine regeneratione defendunt videntur mihi ipsum baptismum velle cassare For these are his wordes But where as your brotherhoode affirmeth them to preach that litle children may be rewarded with the gift of eternall life euen without the grace of Baptisme it is a very foolish thing For except they shall eat the flesh of the sonne of mā and drinke his blood they shall haue no life in them selues But they which defende this vnto them without regeneration seeme to me that they wil make frustrate baptisme it selfe Upon which wordes of Innocentius Saint Augustine inferreth Ecce beatae memori●… Innocentius papa sine baptismo Christi sine participatione corporis sanguinis Christi vitam non habere paruulos dicit Behold the Pope Innocent of blessed memorie saith that litle children cannot haue life without the participation of the body and blood of Christ. In these wordes Saint Augustine sheweth the generall practise of the Church was that infantes should receaue because it was thought necessary vnto saluation Campion It was onely a practise it was no opinion of necessitie of saluation Fulke Saint Augustine writeth against the Pelagians that held that Baptisme was not necessarie for infantes and that infantes might be saued without Baptisme against whome he reasoneth thus Infantes cannot be saued without they receaue the communion but they cannot receiue the communion vnles they be first baptized ergo infantes cannot be saued vnlesse they be baptized And to proue that they cannot be saued except they receaue the communion he alleaged the decree or diffinitiue sentence of Innocentius Campion Saint Augustine sayth not that the whole churth thought it necessarie to saluation But when Innocetius commanded that infantes should communicate it was but a necessitie of the commandement the necessitie was not in the thing but to keepe the vnitie of the Church and so no error of faith but a lawful practize of the Church but shewe the decree Fulke You haue heard the wordes of Innocentius out of his synodicall Epistle and thus Saint Augustine citeth his decree Ecce beatae memoriae Innocentius papa sine baptismo Christi c. Lo Innocentius the Pope of blessed memorie c. Campion There is no such decree I will beleeue none of your notes He saith they be damned vnles they be baptized but he sayeth not they be damned except they receaue the communion Fulke He saieth both you shall see the booke seeing you will not credit my notes Goade Upon supposition as before I will suppose as you beleeue cōcerning the Church of Rome The head as you hold him of that Church hath erred in matter of faith ergo the Church being the members are subiect to error Campion I denie your Antecedent Goade Saint Peter did erre in faith and that after the sending downe of the holy Ghost vpon him and the rest therefore the principall head of the Church as you accompt of Peter Campion He did not erre in faith I knowe the place Gal. 2. It was a matter of manners not of doctrine For it was but a litle dissimulation Goade It was matter of doctrine for it was somewhat concerning that where about the Coūcill was gathered at Hierusalem touching Circumcision Campion Ye vtterly mistake it for it was about the obseruation of the Lawe by the Gentiles and not concerning Circumcision Goade I nowe well remember it was not directly about the question of Circumcision But it is certaine Peter was in that error that the Gospell pertained not at all to the Gentiles vntill hee was reformed by vision Act. 10 For then at lēgth he said Nunc tandem comperio c. Now at length I finde c so hee was for a time in error But for the place Gal. 2. it is saide Non ambulauit recto pede ad veritatem euangelij Hee walked not with a right foote according to the truth of the Gospel c. Camp It was but a small matter of dissimulation in maners Goade The text saith Paul withstoode him to the face because he was blame worthy and iustly to be reproued therefore it was no small matter And Augustine against Hierome De Petro iure reprehenso Epist. 19. doth iustifie this open reproofe by S. Paul though Hierome laboured to lessen this faulte c. Campion And so do I. But this proueth not that it was any matter of faith Fulke It was against the truthe of the Gospell Truthe is contrary to error Ergo it was an error of faith Camp I haue saide the faulte was in maners for dissimulation When I sawe that he did not walke well or right c. as at
that but let it be tryed by the authority of the Scriptures not the proper witnesses of any but common to both let matter with matter cause with cause and reason with reason trye it c. And Hierome writing to Laeta de institutione filiae fol. 58. willeth not to reade some without doubting and other some warely but he sayth Caueat omnia Apocrypha Let her beware of all the Apocrypha which he nameth in Prologo Galeato Et si quando ea non ad dogmatum veritatem sed ad signorum reuerentiam legere voluerit sciat non eorum esse quorum titulis praenotantur multaquè ijs admixta vitiosa grandis esse prudentiae aurum in luto quaerere And if at any time she will reade them not for the trueth of opinions but for the reuerence of signes let her knowe that they are not theirs whose titles they beare but that many vitious thinges are mixt with them and that it is a point of great wisdome to seeke out golde in dirt Loe here you see that he biddes her to beware in the reading of them Camp The Scripture is principally to be admitted but I would we might haue an argument Walker Then thus I reason That which he biddeth to beware of is not to be holden authenticall But he biddeth to beware of the Apocrypha Ergo the Apocrypha is not to be holden authenticall Camp Apocrypha are taken two wayes First for those bookes which are doubted of and then for such bookes that are not allowed Such were the prophecie of Enoch Iacobs testament and such like which he calleth Somniolenta deliramenta vitiosa c. of those Hierome speaketh in this place and not of those others For what point is there in Ecclesiasticus the booke of Wisdome that is to be found fault with that is vitiosū not good Walker They are called Apocrypha that are not in the Canon receiued and allowed to haue proceeded vndoubtedly from the holy Ghost these Apocrypha are forbidden to be read And Hierome in praefat in lib. Reg. saith Hic prologus scripturarum c. Si quid extra hos est inter Apocrypha est ponendum c. They are not in the Canon therefore Apocrypha are onely to be read Camp Woulde Hierome forbid the gentlewoman to reade Ecclesiasticus where there are giuen so many morall precepts Non sunt in Canone Hebraeorum sed in Canone Christianorum They are not in the Canon of the Hebrewes but they are in the Canon of the Christians Walker They may be read for morall Lessons but not for matters of religion which must be proued by Canonicall scripture What say you to the second booke of Macchabees Thinke you that to be holden for Canonicall scripture Camp I thinke so What should let Walker What say you to that sentence 2. Macch. 12. thrust into the text Salubris est oratio pro defunctis and to that which followeth Et si quidem bene vt historiae competit hoc est vt ipse velim sin autem minus digne concedendum est mihi And if I haue done well and as is meete for a storie this also my selfe did wish c. Camp It is marueile that you should say that it is thrust in Walker It is noted so by other and the duetie of an historiographer is to reporte things done truely and plainely without arguing like a Logitian but he sayeth Ergo salubris est oratio pro defunctis Therefore prayer for the dead is healthfull which appeareth first to haue bene set in the margent But howe auoyde you the last Can such asking of pardon be of the holy Ghost wherein hath hee fayled or of whome shall hee be pardoned Camp The interpreter asketh pardon of his speach for his style and not for the doctrine The holy Ghost asketh no more pardon then Paul did when he saide Rudis sum sermone I am rude in speach when he spake in a base and lowe stile Charke Campion howsoeuer you labour to auoyde the direct course of disputation and haue obteined some change of the question I must call you home by and by Notwithstanding I minde a while to followe this your course and to finde you out in your owne trace where I maruaile howe you dare thus speake in this assemblie For what a blot is it to the holy Ghost to affirme he should aske pardon and to the Apostle Saint Paul to say his stile to the Corinthians is a base and lowe stile But to vse no further preface I will thus proue that the 2. booke of the Macchabees was not indited by the holy Ghost Whatsoeuer needeth pardon either for matter or maner was not indited by the holy Ghost But the story of the 2. booke of Macchabees needeth pardon either for matter or maner Therefore it was not indited by the holy Ghost Camp This man would be angrie with me if he knew why Charke If I woulde knowe I not why to be angrie with you a notable and vowed enemie of the trueth of God and a seditious man against the state But I come not to deale with your person but against your errors Answere the argument Camp I say the writer of the Macchabees asketh pardon of his speach neyther doeth Paul blotte the holy Ghost when he saide that he was rudis sermone that he spake not so eloquently nor so finely as sometimes he might Charke You answere not directly and beside you affirme an error For S. Paul craueth no pardon for his stile but setteth his plainesse against the set and curious speach of the false Apostles who did come in gay apparance and shewe of wordes as if they had had al the power of trueth that might be and yet in this plaine style the Apostle was of al others most mightie most eloquent As for the 2. booke of Macchabees which you make Canonicall seripture here I will make this challēge if you dare answere it to proue many lyes in it through 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that therefore it was written by a prophane spirite for the matter But to come to the Syllogisme and to disproue your distinction I reason thus The writers of holy Scriptures aske not any pardon at all either for the matter or for the manner Therefore they aske no pardon for their style Camp I deny your Antecedent Paul sayeth Rudis sum sermone Charke If Saint Paul saith Rudis sum sermone doeth he I pray you in those wordes craue pardon for his stile howe hang your wordes together I will proue my Antecedent by the place of Peter None that haue written as they were directed by the spirit of God craue pardon either for matter or for manner But all the holy men of God that wrote the Scriptures haue written as they were directed by the spirit of God Therefore none of the holy men of God that haue written the scriptures craue pardon either for matter or manner Camp This acknowledging