you not against the rule of Pythagoras digged in the fire with a sword But now to reuisite your argument First I might denie your Maior and render foure reasons for it First the Epistle written from a Coll. 4 16. Laodicea was read in the Church and yet it was out of the Canon vnlesse you thinke it was some Epistle of Saint Paul which is lost some thing therefore not Canonicall may be read in the Church N. I thinke no Canonicall Epistle could bee lost For it were to derogate too much from Gods prouidence and the faithfulnesse of the Church which should bee the Keepresse of the Volumes of the Couenant I rather suppose that it was some Epistle written from the Laodiceans to Paul to the demands whereof this Epistle to the Colossians did answere And therefore that it might more plainly be vnderstood it was meete that the other of the Laodiceans should bee read in the Church also For such a like thing is probably collected to haue beene done by the b 1. Cor. 7 1. Corinthians I. To sift the ground of your assertion were now vnseasonable But you haue giuen in a faire euidence against your owne Maior as shall hereafter appeare My second reason is this Nine Chapters of the Booke of Iob wherof foure were vttered by c Iob 4. 5. 15. 22. Eliphaz three by d Chap. 8. 18. 25. Bildad two by c Chap. 11. 20. Zophar are read in the Church But these Chapters are not of the Canon seeing no doctrine can be establisht by them forasmuch as Go himselfe disallowed the f Iob 42 7. saying of Iobs three friends wee may therefore in the Church reade some thing which is not of the Canon N. The generall positions of Iobs friends are true howsoeuer they erred in the application of them to Iob himselfe as if hee had beene an hypocrite I. That is but a shift for the maine maxime of all the Dispute is taken from Iob's wiues g Iob 2. 9. speech The summe whereof may thus bee demonstrated He that fals into great miseries is an hypocrite But Iob is so falne He is therefore an hypocrite So then let him not continue in defending his vprightnesse but blesse h Ios 7. 19. God in the acknowledgement of his hypocrisie and so let him die with repentance and patience By this it is plaine that the Maior Proposition was false and not the Assumption onely as you pretend N. I hope you will not exclude these nine Chapters out of the Canon considering they containe an historicall though not a positiue truth For it is true that these men so spake though they erred in their speech I. You haue made a faire distinction whereby you will cut off your owne arguments made against the Apocryphall Bookes as shall bee shewed in due place My third argumeÌ„t is this Sundrie Bookes of Traditions were read in the Church of the Iewes and yet were neuer of the Canon Or else how could the names of i 2. Tim. 3. 8. Iâ—â—nes Iambres the k Heb. 12. 21. foure of Moses the time of the famine in the dayes of l James 5. 17. Elias the combat of Michael with the m Iude 9. Deuill the prophesie of n Iude 14 15. Enoch haue bin rehearsed as things vulgarly knowne My fourth last reason is this Set Prayer may bee read in the Church and yet is no part of the Canon as was proued in the first o Lib. 1. Chap. 2. conference Besides this your Maior admits of a distinction which is this Whatsoeuer is read in the Church must either bee the Canon of faith or manners To this latter kinde we may referre the Apocryphall Bookes N. This is a rotten deuice They cannot bee the Canon of manners seeing that in the Doctrine of manners they may erre I. This answere shall bee sifted in your Minor But now wee tell you further that things may be read in the Church for the explanation of the Canonicall Scriptures For as you remember you said the Epistle of the Lacdiceans was read for the explanation of Saint Paul's Epistle to the Colossians N. But the Bookes Apocryphall doe rather obscure then explaine the Canon I. The Booke of Wisdome doth open the Storie of Exodus concerning the ten p See Wisdome 16. 17. plagues of Egypt Ecclesiasticus is a Commentarie to the Prouerbs The Sixt of Baruch is a most famous epitome of sundrie things in Moses the Psalmes and the Prophets against Idolatrie The first Booke of Maccabees is a key to the mysteries q Especially to the 8. 11. Chapters thereof of Daniel N. Because you cauill so much at my Maior I will change both it and my whole reason Whatsoeuer is read in the Church ought either to be Canonicall Scripture or agreeable thereunto But the Bookes betweene Malachie and Matthew are neither And therefore may not be read I. As the change of your Maior is to the better so is that of your Minor to the worse whereof wee desire the first part to bee explained the latter to be confirmed N. That these Bookes are not Canonicall it is plaine because they are Apocryphall I. Some Serpent lurketh vnder this grasse why call you them Apocryphall N. First because they containe sundrie errours I. How many errours thinke you there be in the Booke of the Petition to the Parliament defended by T. C N. Wee suppose no errour can bee found therein I. A Booke Apocryphall hath errours But this Booke hath none and therefore is not Apocryphall and is by consequent Canonicall N. It may be Ecclesiasticall and so neither Canonicall nor Apocryphall I. You see then that your reason is infirme These Bookes are not Canonicall because Apocryphall and therefore Apocryphall r Non causa pro causa because they containe errours N. Secondly then they are tearmed Apocryphall because they are capable of errours as being the writings of men I. This is to make them Apocryphall in possibilitie not in act Now euery possibilitie is reducible to some act Tell then what is the actuall cause why they are Apocryphall N. Can a priuation haue an actuall cause I. The cause may be actuall though rather deficient then efficient N. Thirdly then They are deemed Apocryphall because their Authour is not knowne I. No more is the Authour of Ioshua Iudges Ruth Samuel Kings no nor of the Epistle to the Hebrewes in your opinion N. Their Authour is knowne to bee Gods Spirit though we doubt of the Penman I. But how is that knowne N. The Propheticall Church receiued the Bookes as from God and hath deliuered them to vs by Succession Fourthly then these Bookes are Apocryphall because the Iewish Church neuer receiued them For neither were they written in any tongue which the Iewes vnderstood neither doe the Iewes at this day admit of them but as of Interludes I. You haue at the last stumbled vpon the true cause
N. That part of the Minor is to bee applyed to Orders and Matrimony I. Belike then you affirmed that ioyntly of all the Sacraments which should haue beene deuided among them N. We most insist vpon the last clause Namely that they haue no visible signe I. Neither is that built vpon a Rocke For haue not Confirmation and Orders the visible signe of imposition of hands Can you conceiue of Matrimonie without hand-fasting Or of Extreame Vnction without Visible Infusion of oyles Nay if Sensible bee Visible and Audible be Sensible Is not Confession in Penance directly Audible so Visible by your owne interpretation N. What then Doe you reuiue the Seauen Popish Sacraments I. Nothing lesse But onely I manifest vnto you with what leaden weapons you impugne the iron enemie namely the Papist Against whom while you deferre to fight our Church becomes like the Oake cleft with wedges made out of her owne bodie N. If this Argument be weake you condemne the Booke of Articles which propoundeth the Art 25. same reason I. You mistake the meaning of the Booke yea and the words also The words are thus Being such as are growne partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles Partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures but yet haue not like nature of Sacraments with Baptisme and the Lord's Supper for that they haue not any visible Signe or Ceremonie ordained of God Here first you perceiue that the word Partly was twice left out of your argument wherevpon came your fallacie of Compounding and Diuiding And so it may bee the hauing of a visible signe taking Visible in his proper sence doth exclude Penance They being onely a state allowed in Scripture doth shut out Matrimony as the corrupt imitation of the Apostles doth Anoyling Some such like thing may bee thought of Confirmation and Orders But it is vncertaine N. Yea but they all fiue are denied to haue a visible signe I. Some coniecture that by Visible is meant that which is perceiued by many senses and this kind of Signe may bee proper to Baptisme and the Lords Supper But the plaine answere is That no Sacraments excepting those two haue a visible signe generally necessarie to saluation N. Without Orders there can be no Ministery without the Ministery no Visible Church without which there can bee no ordinary salution I. Orders are mediately necessarie for all but immediately for Ministers alone N. From the number of the Sacraments I come to their end Namely their necessity against which I thus argue Those things without which saluation may be obtained are not necessary to saluation But such are the Sacraments Ergo. I. I thus encounter your Maior Those things without which saluation may bee obtained are not necessary to saluation But without Miracles Saluation may be had And therefore Micracles euen those of Christ shall bee needlesse to saluation N. Miracles are no ordinary meanes to saluation but extraordinary I. So Sacraments are not extraordinary Which heresie denieth all outward Sacraments but direct and ordinary meanes for vnlesse you be a Swingfeldian you must acknowledge that neglect or contempt of Sacraments is a Barto life eternall And so both the doubtfulnesse of your Maior and falshood of your Minor doe at once appeace in their colours N. My second reason is this Things necessary to saluation doe conferre grace But Sacraments do not and so are not necessary I. Your Maior is not well poised For is therefore the Sabbath needlesse to saluation because it doth not conferre grace Againe your Minor wants the bridle of bondage and limiting distinction For though Sacraments doe not actiuely Physically and by infusion conferre grace yet none but publique enemies to all Sacraments will denie that they bring grace passiuely and by the assistance of the concurrent Spirit of God Euen as the Circles of Magicians and Spels of Witches are said to bee operatiue not of themselues being meere quantities but by the concurrent assistance of Satan with whom the bloudie couenant is stricken Now that Sacraments are necessary to Saluation it appeares by three things First because they are Gods Ordinances and so most needfull Secondly because they are markes of the Church visible out of whose bosome there is no ordinary saluation Thirdly because faith is begun in Baptisme and strengthned in the Lords Supper The necessitie whereof is greater then of water and fire nay then of friendship N. This shall bee tried in the particular Sacrament to which wee now descend It seemeth then that you make fiue Sacraments Baptisme Confirmation The Lords Supper Penance and Orders which last because it is not expressed in the Liturgie we will now omit I. You confest before that wee made only two Sacraments generally necessary why doe you then place Confirmation betweene Baptisme and the Lords Supper And where doe you finde our Sacrament of Penance N. The reason of these things shall afterwards be z In Confirmations and the Visitation of the sicke declared Now I come to Baptisme In the dignitie you giue to Baptisme we note two errours First you corruptly cite the words of Christ to Nicodemus Vnlesse a man be borne of water and of the Holy Ghost For by water you vnderstand the Baptisme of the Floud as you terme it Whereas indeed by water you should conceiue nothing but the purging efficacie of the holy Spirit I. Wee embrace the literall sense why doe you flie to a figure without important necessitie N. Yea necessitie doth vrge vs so to doe For else we should grant the necessitie of externall Baptisme to saluation I. You heard before that Sacraments were thus necessarie Why doe you now rowle the same stone N. Proue in particular now Baptisme to bee necessary to saluation I. First Circumcision was thus necessary For the soule vncircumcised was to be a Gen 17. 14. cut off from the people of God Yea God would haue slaine Moses because hee neglected the Circumcision of his b Exod. 4. 24. Sonne Nay the necke of the Asse-coult not c Exod. 13. 13. redeemed was to bee broken which redemption was proportionable to Circumcision as appeares by the d Exod. 22. 30. time thereof But Baptisme is answerable to e 1. Pet. 3. 21. Circumcision therefore equally necessarie Secondly Baptisme is tearmed the lauer f Titus 3. 5. of regeneration whereby the Church is g Ephes 5. 26. sanctified It is also called the Baptisme of repentance vnto remission h Marke 1. 4. Acts 19 4. of sinnes Yea Peter and Paul being demanded what men should doe to be saued The one in direct words both in practise did vrge i Acts 2. 37 38. 16. 30 33 34 Baptisme aswell as beliefe Yea Christ himselfe saith Hee that beleeueth and is baptized shall bee k Marke 16. 16. saued And Peter peremptorily auerreth that Baptisme l 1. Pet. 3. 21. doth saue N. First it seemes by these places That saluation is not ascribed to Baptisme
causelesse doubts touching the assistant cooperation of the Spirit N. I secondly thus argue Paul came not to 1. Cor. 1. 17. baptise Therefore Baptisme is not necessarie to saluation The Consequence is apparant For Paul without controuersie came to procure all things necessary thereunto I. Your Consequence is ambiguous For an ordinary Pastor's office is necessary to the saluation of many And yet Saint Paul being an Oecumenicall Apostle who had the care of all Churches could not attend that function Againe your antecedent is impertinent The meaning is open That hee was sent rather to preach then to baptize For that hee baptized some appeares out of that place The like Phrase is in these words I will haue Math. 12. 7. mercy and not Sacrifice That is rather mercie then sacrifice What will you make Sacrifice not necessarie in the time of the Law By all this it appeareth That for feare of the necessitie of Baptisme you relinquish the letter of the text without necessitie N. Though this were yeilded yet for two other reasons we may not here expound water literally First because where the Holy Ghost and fire are conioyned fire may not be taken according Luke 3. 16. to the letter vnlesse wee will follow the vaine custome of the Aethiopians which set fierie prints vpon their Infants through the mistaking of this text I. We need not goe so farre as Aethiopia for our interpretation Compare the Storie of the Acts and there will be no ambiguitie for Acts 1. 5. 2. 3 4. as Iohn fore-told and Christ promised So the Apostles indeed were baptized with the Holy Ghost by the Ministerie of fiery tongues which if the Aethiopians could procure wee would not blame their fierie Ceremonie N. Our second reason is this The scope of Christs speech is to intreat of regeneration which is the worke of the Spirit alone And therefore Iohn 3. 8. it is not probable that there hee should speake of outward Baptisme I. Your sequell is euidently refuted by the words of Christ If when I tell you earthly Iohn 3. 12. things you beleeue not c. where by things earthly wee vnderstand things elementary which appellation may well agree to water in Baptisme In summe remember this That whereas many through a seeming subtletie do embrace tropicall expositions they bewray themselues to be of stomacks distempered not induring solid ordinarie meates N. The second thing whereby you magnifie Baptisme appeare in these wordes By the Baptisme of thy welbeloued Sonne Iesus Christ didst sanctifie the floud Iordan and all other waters to the mysticall washing away of sinne where finde you any warrant for this new deuice I. I wonder where the knot lieth for I conceiue it not as yet Is it in this That we say that all waters are sanctified to the mysticall washing away of sin in Baptisme Thinke you that Abana and Pharphar are better then other Riuers Can you prohibit any kinde of 2. Kings 5. 12. water to be vsed in Baptisme N. That is farre from our meaning But wee dislike that you ascribe the Sanctification of water to the Baptisme of Christ as to the cause I. Why was Christ baptised N. That all righteousnesse might be fulfilled Math. 3. 15. I. What doe you meane the righteousnesse of the Law N. I meane of the Gospell I. Did he fulfill it for himselfe or more principally for vs N. I am no Papist to dreame that he merited any thing for himselfe I. Nay was hee borne did hee liue or die for himselfe N. All for Vs without doubt I. He was then baptized for vs. N. I may not denie it I. Wherefore as his Birth Life and Death did sanctifie the same things in vs So by the water of his Baptisme all waters are sanctified euen as all beasts drinke safely when the Vnicorne hath put his horne into the water So that hee may bee called the first-fruites of the Baptized aswell as of the Dead N. Hitherto of the Dignitie and holinesse of Baptisme Now follow the actions of witnesses or Godfathers as you call them which are foure First you admit questions to bee propounded to them Secondly they promise sundry things for the Children Thirdly the Children by their meanes are said to haue Faith and Repentance Fourthly They impose names vpon the Infants Of which the three first are absurd vnreasonable and almost ridiculous and therefore prophane or blasphemous The fourth is vniust considering it is the parents due to giue names to their Children I. I should maruell much but that amongst Nouelists nothing is to bee wondred at that you can tolerate Godfathers But now I remember my selfe they bee suffered in Geneua Now tell me pray you by what Scripture do you allow them N. Some pretend an ancient custome begun by a Roman Bishop in the dayes of Antoninus Pius who first ordained that certaine choice witnesses should present the Children to the Congregation in case their Parents were dead or fled for persecution Others alledge the witnesses recorded in Isaiah the Prophet Isa 8. 2. I. But now you know are the times of peace and so the former cause is void As for the latter it was drawne from a Propheticall and singular practise and therefore hardly may be vrged as imitable Could we produce no firmer Scriptures for our Ecclesiasticall practice then such as those would you not cry out vpon vs as Hercules Furens or as Orestes N. What better proofes then haue you for your Godfathers I. Children are truly said to be baptized into the faith of others which speech is by many mistaken For they suppose they are baptised into the faith of their immediate Parents only which being granted the Children not only of Pagans and Turkes which are taken in Warre but euen of persons excommunicated yea of all that are destitute of true faith shall be interdicted the vse of Baptisme Whereas the truth is that Infants are receiued into the faith and bosome of the Church which is the Keepresse of the Couenant The Church therefore chuseth certaine witnesses as representatiue persons to whom the questions are tendered and by whom the promises are vttered in the behalfe of the Babes No maruell then though by their meanes Infants be said to haue Faith and Repentance and to receiue their Christian names from them as being their Fathers in God and therefore not vnaptly tearmed Godfathers The generall proofe of which thing is drawne from all Lawes which allow sundry actions done by Guardians in the minoritie of their Wards to be as firme as if the Pupils themselues had performed them in their owne persons being come to the yeares of discretion N. To admit this reason yet to preiudice the Parents who should haue the right of naming their Children cannot but bee very iniurious I. You are worse afraid then hurt For they are very contentions Godfathers which aske not the Parents consent in this matter But where be your Scriptures to proue that
but withall haue ouerwhelmed it with sundrie errours The first is this You pretend them to bee refused by the Iewes because they were written in a language not vnderstood by them What Did not Hierome out of Chaldie translate Tobit Did not the Iewes in their Dispersion vnderstand the Greeke tongue namely in the Greekish Septuagint Why was the Epistle to the Hebrewes written in Greeke if they were ignorant of the language The like is to be said of the Epistles of Saint Iames and Saint Peter Now tell me Doe not you acknowledge our Apocryphall Bookes to haue beene written in Greeke and yet was not Sirach's Sonne a Iew Did not Philo and Iosephus being Iewes write in Greeke The second is rather a scoffe then an errour Not vnlike that of some men partly Arrians and partly Barrowists which call the Athanasian Creed the Creed of Sathanasius This is like that which is more then yea and nay for it comes of euill Your third errour is that you acknowledge the traditionarie testimonie of the Church for the Bookes of Scripture and yet explode all tradition not only as needlesse but euen as damnable Your fourth errour is that you ascribe more to the Iewish Synagogue then to the Christian Church For you heard before out of Hierome that the Christians receiued these Bookes N. They receiued them but as Apocryphall I. And yet they read them in the Church N. They were men and might erre For wee are assured that these Bookes are not agreeable to the Canon as containing and maintaining manifold errours and therefore may bee the Canon neither of Faith nor of Manners I. Wee denie that you can finde any errour in these Bookes concerning Manners Now touching Faith fundamentall errours wee acknowledge none in them If any pettie fault or slip be found our subscription is safe But now bring forth the errours in their numbers and armies N. The Apocryphall Bookes are either such as are reputed so by the Papists themselues namely the third and fourth of Esdras and the prayer of Manasses besides some other Bookes not expressed in our Common Bibles or such as are so accounted of by the Protestants onely whereof some be not read some be Of the first kinde are certaine portions of Hester also Susanna Bell and the Dragon and the two Bookes of the Maccabees And here I maruell much that the first Booke of Maccabees is not read in your Church considering you say it is a key to the Mysteries of Daniel I. Euen for the same cause that wee reade not other Bookes of the Chronicles and Other Volumes of holy Scripture N. This cause shall hereafter be tried Now the Bookes that you read are Historicall or Dogmaticall The Historicall be either whole Bookes or a fragment Of the first sort are Tobit and Iudith The Booke of Tobit containeth errours of things to be beleeued or to be done The first sort concerneth either Angels or the Meanes of our preseruation Angels bee good or euill In the good we may consider the name and nature concerning the first The Booke setteth downe the name of an Angell calling him Å¿ Tobit 3. 17. Raphael whereas Angels names ought not to be enquired t Gen. 32 29. after as being u Iudg. 3. 18. secret I. The Bookes of x Dan. 19 21. â—0 21. Daniel of y Luke 1. 19. Luke of z Iud. 9. Iude and of Saint a Apoc. 12. 7. Iohn doe set downe the names of Angels after which we should not enquire because they be secret are they therefore Apocryphall N. These names are not secret to God's Spirit which hath reuealed them to vs in these Bookes I. And why may not God's Spirit reueale the name of Raphael in this Booke N. This name Raphael is not extant in any other Booke of Scripture and therefore it seemes to be a tearme Apocryphall I. If a Iew should thus reason I finde the names Gabriel and Michael specified no where but in Daniel it seemes therefore the Booke should be Apocryphall what answere would you returue if you were a Iew and beleeued neither S. Luke S. Iude nor Saint Iohn N. I would answer It is sufficient that these names are recorded in one Booke of Scripture I. So it is sufficient though Raphael bee named no where but in Tobit vnlesse you beg the question Besides the names of Angels are of two sorts Some expressing their nature some their office Of this latter kinde is the name of b Isa 6. 2. Seraphim which signifies burning because one of them touched the Prophets lips with a burning coale To this head wee may referre Raphael which signifieth one that healeth from God because he healed Sara and Tobit Lastly the place in Iudges by you alleadged is impertinent The Angell which appeared might bee Christ who said his name was Secret or Wonderfull The like Isaiah saith of c Isa 9. 6. Christ hee shall call his name the Wonderfull and so forth So that the Angell may seeme rather to haue reuealed his name to Manoah then to haue d God shewed the burning of Sodom to Abraham and yet not to Lot The time of death to Ezekiah not to vs. concealed it from him N. From the name of Angels we come to their nature wherein wee will trie their number and their office Touching the first this Booke determineth that their are seauen e Tobit 12. 15. Angels c. which is partly Magicall partly Popish For first the Magitians especially the Iewes numbred seuen Angels according to the seuen dayes of the weeke For Sunday Raphael then Gabriel Sammael Michael Izidkiel Hanael f See Iunius vpon this place Rephariel I. The Booke of Tobit doth not designe these Angels by dayes much lesse reckoneth their names though two of them namely Gabriel and Michael are found elsewhere in Scripture By what tradition the Iewes vnderstood the rest we know not But first we are sure the Angell tels Daniel that hee was one of the chiefe g Dan 10. 13. Angels Secondly this number of seuen may probably be thus collected The seuen eyes in h Zach. 3. 9. Zacharie are by Saint Iohn expounded to bee the seuen spirits which are sent into all the i Apoc. 5 6. world And what should be meant by these Spirits but Angels Againe Saint Iohn twice mentioneth seuen k Apoc. 8. 6. 16. 1. Angels it is not sufficient for you to exclaime that this is Magicall Wee rather credit the Scriptures affirming then your negatiue supposals N. The seuen spirits are expounded the Holy Ghost I. The exposition is but your owne N. What Doe you suppose that Iohn prayes for grace and peace from Angels I. Not as from causes but as from instruments Againe though they be interpreted of the Holy Ghost in the first Chapter yet in the Vision of the fift Chapter that exposition will be violent For there it is said that the Lambe had seuen hornes and seuen eyes which
c Iudg. 4. 18. feare not N. One mule may claw another For it seemeth this fable of Iudeth was taken from the Storie of Iael I. I wonder you called not that fable also considering that Debora being a Prophetesse did tearme Iael blessed among women d Iudg. 5. 24. for the very like fact Neither indeed is the phrase of Vzziah vnlike to this in the commendation of e Iudeth 13. 18 Iudeth N. But Iael first of all did breake the peace made betweene Iabin the King of Canaan and the house of her husband f Iudg 4. 17. Heber I. I pray you were you present at the contract of that peace was it made with a League or without it If the latter then no promise was violated If with a League was it a League of amitie so that each was bound to helpe other in all warfare Or was that a League of equalitie so that both were indifferently restrained from molesting and inuading the friends of the Confederate partie The former you can neuer euince If it were the latter the King of Canaan had first broken the league by inuading the Israelites and so Iael was free Besides howsoeuer there were a league yet if God by immediate instinct did ordaine the contrarie Iael was absolued from all humane bonds the like instinct may be supposed to haue beene in Iudeth N. But Iael said feare not when there was indeed true cause of feare I. Although she interdicted him to feare yet she promised no securitie N. It was an implicite promise I. But this is of small force with a sworne enemie to Gods Church such as was Sisera N. This will make good that which was confirmed in the Councell of Constance Namely that faith is not to be kept with Heretiques I. I will not now scan the meaning of that Decree only I answere That shee made no faith with Sisera when she said feare not For it may be she meant feare not in regard of Barak and the Israelites that pursue thee N. This is but an equiuocall shift which you can neuer confirme I. As your selfe said of Daniel so we say of Iael we will eather flie to any coniecture then acruse a woman commended by so great a Prophetesse as was Debora Now the fact of Iudeth was not vnlike that of Iael N. It is not likely that the Bethuliam were about to eate the things that were consecrated no such matter being else-where specified in the Storie I. Wee will rather beleeue her affirmation which had better meanes to know it then you that be ignorant thereof And thus your ten imputations and aspersions cast vpon this Booke are now become like painted dreames of the shadow of smoake being dreamed by a doting sickly waking man N. I weigh your words as winde and come from Whole Stories to a Fragment called the Song of the three Children out of which your Benedicite is taken rehearsed by you after the first Lesson instead of Te Deum I. If this offend you it lies in the discretion of the Minister whether hee will repeate it or not For in the place thereof hee may say Te Deum vnlesse it also be tedious to your quicksiluer minted eares But what is that in the Benedicite which moues your choller N. First it is said That the fire went out fortie nine g The Song of the three Children Verse 47. Cubits I. Where begins the Benedicite N. At these words O all yee workes c. I. That is ten Verses after the place by you h The Song of the three Chrildren Verse 57. alleadged So that it may bee that they which disliked the Storie could not disallow this Song read in our Church N. This Song is a Part of the Storie and therefore is to be reiected if the Storie be found reprobate siluer I. The Song may bee rehearsed for morall instruction howsoeuer the Historie which is not rehearsed should erre from some part of truth But now what is the hole in this relation N. It is vtterly impossible the Chaldeans should cast in Naphtha pitch towe and faggots into the furnace if the flame did issue there from so many Cubits I. Some Mechanicall Artizan could teach you a deuice how to cast fuell into a fornace without perill being distant aboue fortie nine Cubits though tripled Againe it will bee hard for you to proue that the fire went forward and did not ascend vpwards Lastly though this were granted yet no impossibilitie would follow For this may be the meaning of the place That the flame brake out of the fornace and went fortie nine Cubits and so burnt the Chaldeans This is confirmed by the words of i Dan. 3. 22. Daniel where it is said because the King's commandement was straight the fire slue the Chaldeans that is because they fearing the rigorous commandement of the King did ouer-heate the fornace the fire suddenly came out and slue them whereof the reasons may bee rendred First their preposterous haste Secondly their casting in of Naphtha pitch and towe which might wonderfully inflame the other fuell Thirdly because the Angell did shake the fire out of the fornace with a hissing k Song of the three Children verse 49 winde N. You heale one errour with an other For l Dan 3. 25. Nabuchadnezzar saith that the men walked in the midst of the fire I. This is the Kings meaning that they walked in the midst of the furnace being the place of the fire neither is it improbable that some winde or dew was brought by the Angell to abate the violence of the fire N. It were more miraculous to say that the fire was restrained from burning I. Miracles and Monsters are not to bee multiplied without necessitie It had beene more miraculous that the Hebrewes had beene fed with Manna in Canaan and yet the Manna there m Ioshua 5. 12. ceased In like manner it had beene more strange if the graue garments had falne from Lazarus of their owne accord yet Christ commanded him to bee n Iohn 11. 44. loosed by men For where the naturall strength of Angels or Men will serue why should we exact a miracle as it were to tempt and o Psal 78. 41. limit the Almightie N. Two fragments there bee separated from the beginning of Daniel commonly termed the thirteenth and fourteenth Chapters of that book namely the Storie of Susanna and of Bel and the Dragon In the Historie of Susanna wee dislike The Story of Susanna and of Bel and the Dragon the matter and the phrase As for the matter it is neither sound for substance nor circumstance For the first it is manifest that Daniel was not aduanced vpon that occasion that this Storie p Susanna v. 65 pretends namely for deliuering Susanna from death by his Propheticall sentence but rather for the interpretation of Nabuchadnezzar's Dreame as is to be seene in the true q Dan. 2. 48. Daniel I. We may easily conceiue