sentences and words The first sentence is in i Math 9 25. In the Gospell on the 24. Sunday after Trinitie Matthew where you adde these words And said Damosell arise I. Beza tels you that some copies did insert these words out of Saint k Luke 8. 54. Luke it may be also out of l Marke 5. 41. Saint Marke N. Two other sentences are added by you in Luke The first in the Storie of the m Luke 16. 21. In the Gospell on the first Sunday after Trinitie richman And no man gaue vnto him I. It may bee those words were taken out of the Parable of the Prodigall n Luke 15. 16. childe Or else in some Copies they were put in by Consequence of the Storie For it is more then probable that no man gaue any thing to that poore Eleazar or Lazarus whom God and not o So answeres Junius in his Paralells vpon Heb. 1◠21. man helped N. The next sentence added in p Luke 19. 42. In the Gospell on the tenth Sunday after Trinitie Luke is this Thou wouldest take heed I. Beza doth out of Budaeus tell you That this patheticall exclamation hath in it a defectiue breuitie which may fitly bee supplied or explained by this or the like sentence which libertie of supplying who so grants not to all translaters shall shew himselfe more stiffe in opinion then studious for edification N. The words by you inserted are partly in the Old partly in the New Testament And here we cannot but maruell that you call q As Isaiah 40 55. 63. Ier. 23. Ioel 2. Apoc. 14. and the like Prophecies Epistles I. This we doe for two causes First in regard of the matter of these Chapters which is Euangelicall and Hortatorie not vnlike that which is found in the Epistles Secondly in regard of the forme For these being among the Epistles receiue their common name So we say the Psalmes of Dauid though Dauid made not all of them so we reckon the words of r Prou. 30. 1. Agur and of ſ Prou. 31. 1. Bathsheba among the Prouerbs of Salomon So Saint Luke stileth his second Booke The Acts of the Apostles though other mens actions besides the Apostles be there historified N. The first word added by you in the Olde Testament is found in t Isaiah 63. 11. In the Epistle on the Munday before Easter Isaiah where you haue patched the text with this word Israel whereas the place is meant of God as is plaine by the context I. Not so plaine as you pretend The wordes are intricate in the u As may appeare by Iunius his confused translation of this place Hebrew neither will there bee any incongruitie in the sense if we say that Israel remembred the dayes of old and so God in mercie remembred his penitent people Israel Surely though I were of Domitians minde I should bee wearie of killing these little flies N. Secondly you adde in x Ier. 23. 5. in the Epistle on the 25. Sunday after Trinitie Ieremie these words with wisdome I. The Hebrew word signifieth elsewhere to prosper with y 1. Sam. 18. 14. 30. wisdome N. The place in the New Testament is in the Epistle of Paul to the z Gal. 4. 5. In the Epistle on Sunday after Christmas day Galatians where you adde his word naturall I. Why are not wee the naturall sonnes of God by faith N. Christ only is Gods Sonne by nature wee by adoption I. Saint Paul calleth Timothy his naturall sonne in the a 1. Tim. 1. 2. faith N. He meaneth that he loued him in manner as a naturall sonne I. So God though in an other degree loueth vs as he doth his Sonne Christ Can you tell what Corne is shaken by this winde N. In the qualitie there is obscuritie and falshood Obscuritie comes by transposing or misinterpretation of words Of the former the first instance is in b Math. 27. 9. In the Gospel on Sunday before Easter Matthew where you reade whom they bought of the Children of Israel whereas it should bee rendred whom they of the Children of Israel bought or rather valued I. If they valued they bought by consequence As for the obscurity it is in the Greeke aswell as in our English The like Phrase is found in the c Acts 21. 16. Acts for there is a d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the like word in both places vnderstood N. A second instance is in the Gospell of e Iohn 1. 1. In the Gospell on Christmas day as you call it Iohn where you read God was the word whereas the words should thus bee placed And the word was God as both the Greeke f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Article sheweth which declareth the subiect as you terme it not the g Ramus doth terme these antecedens consequens predicate As also the sense and scope of the place doth conuince For it is as improper and indirect a speech to say God is the word or Christ as if one should say a liuing creature is a man or a Tree is an Oake I. Ramus did indeed exclude indirect predication out of his new inuented Logique as hee did also many other most wholsome things Namely the doctrine of Obiectum Modalis propositio Limitatio Distinctio Reductio Syllogismi Figurarum modi Besides he most negligently handled Relation Definition Demonstration h See more in Kekermans Booke called Praecognita Method Euerie Logician can tell you that indirect predication is vsuall For here it is vsed by Saint Iohn in the i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 originall What doe you make words of Scripture like Complementall Pharisees striuing for places Besides if a man should examine you Cuius est haec praedicatio This word was God Could you answere It is not Generis de Specie Speciei de Indiuiduo Nor Differentiae de Specie Much lesse Proprij or Accidentis de Specie seu Subiecto N. We haue hissed the Predicables out of Logique I. You may depart out of the Schooles with them for company For without the Predicables Diuision Definition and Demonstration cannot be vnderstood N. Obscuritie by misinterpretation of words is found in that place of the Epistle to the k Gal. 4. 25. In the Epistle on the fourth Sunday in Lent Galatians where you translate bordereth for answereth I. Doe you meane that it answereth in neerenesse of situation N. Nothing lesse For there is a great distance betweene Mount Sinai and Ierusalem Wee meane it answereth in allegoricall proportion I. The same doe wee meane by bordering Namely not Locall but Relatiue or contrarie N. Other obscure places are in the Epistle to the Ephesians The l Ephes 3. 5. In the Epistle on the 16. Sunday after Trinitie first is where you reade which is father of all that is called father whereas the words should thus be turned Of whom is named euery family I.
can it not bee ballanced with reason I. Obserue First that by this place in Daniel we proue Archangels to bee which some haue disliked For Chiefe Princes and Archangels seeme to vs equipollent Secondly though we stile Michael an Archangell yet by this we doe not simply pronounce him to be Chiefe of all Angels For though many Chiefe Priests doe seeme to bee reckoned yet each of these was not High Priest but some one or at the Mat. 26. 3. most two in the corruptedst times The like may be said of the word arch-heretique or Patriarke Thirdly neuerthelesse we doe probably thinke both that there is one Chiefe created Diabolus found only in the singular number Daemon and Daemonium plurally Angell seeing Beelzebub is the Prince of Deuils as also that this Archangell is Michael not only because no other name of any Archangell is extant in Scripture but principally because the last and greatest worke of Angels 1. Thess 4. 16. namely the raising of the dead is said to bee committed to his Ministerie N. But Michael is called the Prince Now the Prince and Captaine of the Church is Christ I. Though we should yeeld that story in Ioshua to be meant of Christ which yet hardly will Ioshua 5. 14. be euinced notwithstanding wee deny it here to be so taken First because a Prince may either be absolutely so named so is Christ alone or by power delegate and this may aswell agree to an heauenly Angell as to an earthly King Secondly because hee is called here Prince with a tearme diminishing at least in your construction as you shall hereafter vnderstand for the Angell saith There is none that holdeth with me in these things but Michael your Prince Againe wee proue Michael to be a creature out of the Thessalonians before cited For first the word Archangell seemeth to signifie rather a principall Angell then the Prince of Angels Secondly it is there said The Lord shall descend with the voice of an Archangell by the Lord wee vnderstand Compare Iohn 17. 3. with 1. Cor. 8. 6. Christ as being opposed in relation to God This speech then will haue no Coherence Christ shall descend with the voice of the Archangell that is of Christ N. It seemeth the latter words the trumpet of God doe interprete these that come before the voyce of the Archangell Besides it is certaine that Christ's voice shall raise the Dead Ioh. 5. 26. 28. I. It is the voice and trumpet of God the Father and the Sonne in regard of the authoritie and power thereof and yet of Michael in respect of his Ministerie As the same is tearmed the Sword of the Lord and of Gideon Again we proue the same by Saint Iude where Iudges 7. 20. Iude 9. it is said Michael durst not which word little beseemeth the maiestie of Christ N. The Greeke word may bee translated hee could not indure that is hee could not abide to reuile because it was a sinne And it may seeme the Story is taken out of Zachary So that by the Zach. 3. 1. bodie of Moses it may seeme we are to vnderstand the Religion of the Iewes I. That signification is new to Interpreters As for your exposition it is so violent as if it were allied to the Inquisition The Literall sence may not bee relinquished till necessitie doe inforce Lastly we confirme the same by the Prophesie of Michael where it is said that Apoc. 12. 7. 11. hee and his Angel ouercame the Dragon by the bloud of the Lambe N. But the name Michael signifieth who is like God which appellation can agree to none but Christ I. This reason is weake being built vpon the sand of Etymologie Againe why may not this word signifie who is like to the strong one and so fitly bee applied to a created Angell N. From Angels I come to Apostles Where I obserue first That you haue disanulled the holiday of Pauls Conuersion as also of Barnabas and yet to them haue yee assigned Epistles and Gospels I. It was thought conuenient that the Church should not be oppressed with multitude of holidayes wherefore only the twelue Apostles were remembred of which number Paul and Barnabas were not N. You seeme to intimate that Barnabas was an Apostle and so indeed you stile him in his Collect. I. The reason thereof is First because hee was chosen with Saint Paul yea and seemed at that time to be preferred before him Secondly because hee chose Marke the Euangelist for his attendant aswell as Saint Paul did Silas Acts 13. 2. Acts 15. 39 40. 1. Cor. 9. 5. 6. Thirdly because he seemeth to be reckoned amongst the Apostles N. Next after the Apostles I descend to the Martyrs amongst whom you haue placed the Children of Bethlehem whom I wonder you terme Innocents I. Were they not innocent whose Parents were Iewes who were in the Couenant of Circumcision N. But it may seeme That this Diuine iudgement ouertooke them because their Parents inhumanely refused to lodge Ioseph and Marie I. Saint Luke yeeldeth a milder censure Luke 2. â— namely because there was no roome in the Inne as it might bee by reason of the multitude of them which hastning to bee taxed preuented their comming N. Could they bee Martyrs who could not vnderstand much lesse acknowledge Christ I. Martyrs they were not either as Saint Stephen in will and suffering or as Saint Iohn in will but not in suffering yet they were Martyrs insuffring for Christ as the Children of the Israelites drowned by Pharao were in like manner Martyrs vnder the Law N. Not the punishment but the cause makes a Martyr which they could not vnderstand I. The cause was Christ a most fit cause of martyrdome which though they vnderstand Math. 18. 10. Heb. 1. 14. not yet because Gods Angels defend infants aswell as the rest of the Elect God vpon his diuine knowledge might auenge vpon Herod their bloud aswell as of other Martyrs N. Your diuision of Martyrs is vntrue For Matb 20. 23. compared with Ioh. 18. 11 Iohn died a violent death as appeares by the prophesie of Christ concerning him I. First it may be the Cup may signifie aswell affliction as death Now that Saint Iohn was afflicted it appeares by his confining in Pathmos which is said to be vnder Domitian Secondly the speech of Christ may bee conditionall not positiue as if he had said though you should drinke of the cup of my death yet might you not sit at my right hand c. Now an hypotheticall speech doth not inferre a positiue assertion Thirdly though Saint Iohn were a Martyr like Stephen yet because Steuen was the first voluntary Martyr Saint Iohn though best beloued must be placed after him yea and after them both the Innocent Children as being Martyrs in another kind dying for Christ besides or before knowledge N. But Herods daughters childe who then was at nurse in Bethelem is said to be slaine
if they did returne home would bee found by our Lawes to bee little lesse then Felons N. Certaine it is that you breake Saint b 1. Cor. 7. 15. Pauls rule I. It is more certaine that your fellowes vnderstand not Saint c 1. Cor. 7. 12. Paul For first it is plaine by that which goeth before that the Separation must be passiue in regard of the beleeuer not actiue that is the beleeuer may marrie after desertion but may not forsake the vnbeleeuer Secondly reconciliation must be vehemently sought before the second Marriage bee attempted Thirdly it must bee considered that a Papist is not an Infidell but a Lib. 1. c. 1. p. 5. Christian as was declared in your first generall obiection Fourthly this Apostolique Canon is not in force with vs because our Prince being a Christian both can and doth inforce by Law the person departing to return Whereas this rule was only then effectuall whilest Princes were vnbeleeuers N. Yea but adulterie is an absolute cause of seperation and yet you enforce the innocent partie to remaine vnmarried I. We iudge the second Marriage of the innocent partie during the life of the partie nocent not to bee absolutely vnlawfull but yet very vnexpedient First because it is fit hee should something feele the smart of his owne bad election if any such were Secondly if that were not it is not to be doubted but God if hee be importuned by Prayer will giue the gift of chastitie considering the temptation is occasioned by a cause extrinsicall Thirdly there bee sundrie cases wherein the partie nocent may be receiued againe after diuorce As first in case the woman were rauished Secondly if shee erred in the person of her husband Thirdly if she married vpon his long absence and report of his death Fourthly if hee be a Pandar to his owne wife Fiftly if after the first offence hee haue pardoned her and she hath offended no more Sixtly if she may plead Compensation namely that he offended aswell as her selfe Seuenthly if he haue denied her due beneuolence In all which cases it is necessarie to receiue her home But in case shee doe shew the outward signes of repentance it is expedient also to admit her againe Apprimè si primum tempus because wee are moued thereunto not only by the example of the good d Iudges 9. 3. Leuite who peraduenture did erre in that matter but euen of Christ himselfe who hath oftentimes beene reconciled to the Church his Spouse after her manifold and manifest idolatrous adulteries Fourthly because hereby is hindered the readines both to accuse and offend whereas otherwise the flames of malice and lust would bring an vniuersall combustion Fiftly because hereby is auoided the confusion of Families the neglect of the education of Children with many other mischiefes which were more lamemtable to indure then easie to recount or otherwise then thus to preuent N. From the bond of Marriage I proceed to the honour thereof wherein wee dislike both your contradiction and your errours First then though you grant Marriage to be honourable yet you seruillifie the husband causing him to say to his wife with my bodie I thee worship I. The plaine interpretation of these words may be fetcht from Saint Paul's Canon The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Cor. 7. 4. man hath not power of his owne bodie but the woman c. The Greeke word doth signifie to haue priuiledge propertie libertie or authority as appeares by the word from which this is deriued which differeth little from worship for what greater ciuill d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iohn 1. 12. From which worship is deriued worship or dignitie can there be then for a man to surrender to his wife the propertie of his bodie And tell mee I pray you were the words thus deliuered in Latine Corporete meo dignor seu dignum censeo what great Idolatrie or Seruillitie should be in them N. To leaue your Contradiction I haste to your errours which are two First in the Authour you cite Secondly in the degrees of honour which you ascribe to Marriage Touching the first when you alleadge a place of the Epistle to the e Heb. 13. 4. Hebrewes you definitiuely auouch Saint Paul to bee the Authour thereof I. Are you offended that wee call the Apostle Saint Doe you now doubt of his Saintship N. Nothing lesse But wee maruell that you call not Abraham Iob and Moses Saints aswell as Paul and Peter I. Wee maruell that you call not Paul and Peter Masters aswell as Luther and Bucer N. Not because they were lesse worthy of this title but because the phrase of these times and countries was different from ours I. The like may be said of the terme Saint which was not taken vp till the Primitiue Church which began after Christ did much vse it for the dignifying of the Apostles and Martyrs which were Lights not of a Church confined within Palestina but extended as farre as the line of Heauen N. But wee are more displeased that you thus confidently auouch that of Saint Paul which scarce amounteth to the credit of an Ecclesiasticall Tradition I. Although the Tradition of Antiquitie bee most venerable with vs yet besides it wee haue other proofe that Saint Paul was f 1. Pet. 1. 1. 2. Pet. 3. 1. Authour of this Epistle For Saint Peter writing his Second Epistle to the Dispersed Hebrewes thus speaketh to them as our brother g 2. Pet. 3. 15. Paul wrote vnto you N. He wrote that in his Epistle to the h Rom. 2. 4. Romans For it appeares in the same Chapter that hee directeth much of his speech to the Iewes which as it seemeth were then at Rome I That place is alledged out of the Epistle to the i Heb 10 23. 32. ad finem Hebrewes where that argument is copiously handled As for the place by you quoted it is impertinent For if you make a iust Analysis of the second Chapter to the Romans you shall finde that the Apostles speech directed to the Iewes by the way of a Prosopopeia beginneth not till the seuenteenth Verse whereas the words by you cited are in the fourth For whereas you imagine that hee writ to the Iewes that were at Rome you must remember First that Saint Paul had not as yet beene at k Rom. 1 15. Rome Secondly that when hee came thether the chiefe of the Iewes told him that they had heard of l Acts 28. 21. no letter concerning him which could not be if this Epistle had beene in part directed to them N. But the Apostle doth not prefixe his name before the Epistle to the Hebrewes I. He might forbeare that because his name was scandalized among the Iewes Will you denie that Moses was authour of Genesis and Exodus Or Ezra of the Chronicles and Ester because their names are not set before those Bookes N. But this stile differeth from the other Epistles
You are not vnlike one who would haue had Stripling put in for Youth in the m Psal 119. 9. Psalme For tell me Is there not in euery family a father Is not he our father of whom we receiue our name Besides the n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greeke word there vsed signifieth a company of men who haue their pedigree from one Father as the Israelites from Israel the Rechabites from Rechab and the like Is not this all one with a family N. The second place in the o Ephes 5 13. In the Epistle on the third Sunday in Lent Ephesians is where you reade euery thing that is manifest the same is light Whereas it should bee euery thing that makes manifest is light I. Beza declares out of the Greeke Scholiast that the Greeke word may bee rendred as wee doe it for it is passiuely taken in the words going p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before So that by light we vnderstand full of light In which sence the word is vsed in the same q Ephes 5. 8. Chapter N. After the obscuritie there remaines falshood violating the analogie either of faith or of the place Of the first kinde some transgresse the Law some the Gospell For the Law first you mistake the ceremoniall when in the Epistle to the r Heb. 9. 25. In the Epistle on Wednesday before Easter Hebrewes you reade with strange bloud for with other bloud namely with the bloud of beasts not his owne I. When you say in the first Commandement Thou shalt haue no other Gods but me Doe you not meane Strange Gods When Salomon bids you beware of a strange woman doth he not vnderstand another woman besides your owne wife N. Secondly you corrupt the Morall Law when you reade in the Epistle to the ſ Rom 12. 11. In the the Epistle on the second Sunday after the Epiphanie Romanes Apply your selues to the time for seruing the Lord. For if it should bee translated time it should bee thus rendred seruing the time as if Paul should say be time seruers which is a thing against the Morall Law I. Some Greeke Copies reade as we t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe The meaning of the Apostle may be that we should apply our selues to the season namely to take all occasions of doing good So the Prophet speaketh of himselfe according to your u Psal 75. 2. translation So the Apostle enioyneth x Gal. 6. 10. vs your obiection of seruing the time is light for we may serue the time as wee may serue men that is in y Gal. 5. 13. loue not vpon z 1. Cor. 7. 23. constraint N. From the Law to the Gospel which you first breake reading in a Luke 1. 48. In the Magnificat Luke Lowlinesse for Low Degree I. Some would contest with you in this point saying that Lowlinesse signifies meanesse and basenesse aswell as humilitie But put the case wee had translated it humilitie N. You had confirmed the Popish errour of Merit I. Why had not God respect to the sacrifice and faith of b Gen. 4. 4 Heb. 11. 4. Abel Will not God reward vs according to the things wee haue c 2. Cor. 5. 10. done and that with a reward of d 2. Tim. 4. 8. Iustice to the recompence of which reward Moses had e Heb. 11. 16. respect N. Secondly you doe iniurie to the Gospel when you make Paul doubt of his owne saluation translating f 1. Cor 9. 27. In the Epistle on Septuagesima Sunday a Cast-away for reproueable I. First it was possible that Saint Paul being made of flesh aswell as of spirit might doubt of his owne saluation Secondly it is lawfull for vs to feare damnation in regard of the cause thereof namely sinne For it is no seruile feare to feare to sinne least we be damned vpon God's pleasures against vs for sinne As for your in erpretation of reproueable it is not worth the reprouing it is so weake N. There remaine two places against the analogie of the text or present place The first is in the Epistle to the g Philip. 2. 7. In the Epistle on the Sunday next before Easter Philipians where you translate apparell for habit I. Is not habit an apparell in the tenth Categorie N. Wee haue banished all Categories out of Logique and Metaphysiques I. You are not vnlike the snake which being brought vp by an husbandman kild one of his children For you being nourished in the Vniuersitie would wound or slay two of her best children Logique and Metaphysique But to defer this to a time more conuenient what meane you by habit N. What but the flesh of Christ I. Doth not Antiquitie resemble Christ's flesh to Elias h 2. Kings 2. 13 cloake Besides may not this be the meaning that Christ put on the apparell of man which was not giuen to Adam till after his fall N. The second place is in Peter i 1. Pet. 3. 20. In the Epistle on Easter Euen where you reade was once looked for instead of did waite I. The Greeke word is of the meane voice and so may signifie either N. But in this place it must bee rendred did waite for the wicked did rather abuse then waite for God's mercie Noah did expect the floud I. Withall hee did expect the deliuerance of his family and so did prepare the Arke Thus your words haue beene weighed as the words of Euripides in the scales of the k Aristophanes in the Frogs Poet or rather in the Scales of Balthazar and haue beene found too light FINIS Let these faults be thus corrected and the rest as mispointing c. fauourably pardoned Errata IN Epist p. 2. l. 22. r. readers for reader in Epist p. 4. l. 23. for Rits r. Rites In the second Epitaph l. 18. some Copies haue beene printed Patrum for Patrem p. 2. l. 20 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And ibid. l. 23. r. Caere And ibid. in Marg. r. Ioh Epist 2. v. 10. pag. 7. l. 26. r. Cathedrall pag. 10. In the second Marg. quotat for Iohn 18. 12. r. Matthew 13. 2. pag. 12. l. 31. r. Nouelist pag. 15. l 25. all for ill pag. 17. l. 16. r. These for thus pag. 33. l. the last before though adde and p. 36. l. 21. and 31. r. superstition p. 41. l. 14. r. refuteth p. 99. l. 23. for of r. on p. 157. after enter adde into you p. 228. l. 13. r. vegetatiue p 237. l. 12. r. yea ihid l. 27. for by r. be p. 251. l. 30. r. yet p. 257. l. 11. before fable adde a p. 266. l. 28. r. Archimedes p. 270. l. 8. adde with p. 286. l. 11. for alone r. all-one and ibid. l. 14. for decres r. decrees
Church I. Touching the Antecedent I demand first How you proue that hee inuented Musique N. He is said to bee the Father of all that play vpon the Harpe and Organs vnder which words all kindes of Instrumentall Musique are comprehended I. To grant that which yet you can neuer euict yet the word Father doth not signifie an Inuenter For in the former verse Iubal is said to be the Father of cattle that is of feeding cattle Did not Abell keepe sheepe before him N. But here are meant greater cattle or else that he perfected the art of Shepheards begunne by Abel I. The force of the word will not establish Peculium à Pecudibus dictum Vnde pecuculari peccare the first considering it signifieth Possession which may agree aswell to Sheepe and Goats as to Oxen and Horses As for the latter though it bee not credible that Abel should want art yet to grant it By this you perceiue that Iubal did not inuent but adorne it The like is to bee said of Iubals Musique For you shall neuer perswade that a liberall art was inuented by a man Secondly did Iubal inuent Church Musique N No But if he being of the cursed race of Caine did inuent it we may not vse it in the Church I. This is your olde sandie consequence Genes 36. 24. Deut. 22. 10. 1. Kings 1. 33. vpon which you built your first generall obiection But did not Anah finde out Mules and yet neither Dauid nor Salomon refused to vse them Are therefore tents vnlawfull or the feeding of cattle or the workes in Iron Brasse because the two first as you expound it were inuented by Iubal and the two latter by Tubal Caine N. Things done in the Ceremoniall Law are to be abolished But such was Church Musique Ergo. I. Ballance the wordes of your Maior Was not saying and reading vsed in the Ceremoniall Law Will you haue these also abrogated N. These things did concurre with it but were not parts of it as was Musique I. Then is your Minor but a broken reed As may thus be proued All parts of the Ceremoniall Law were set downe by Moses Now Church Musique was not ordained by Moses But by Dauid and Salomon And therefore not Ceremoniall N. Your Maior seemes to want weight For Salomon not Moses did erect the Temple and yet I trust you will not denie it to bee a part of the Ceremoniall Law I. The Temple was but the Standing Tabernacle inlarged and so in substance all one withit N. Church Musique doth not edifie and therefore to be disallowed I. Touching your antecedent I demand first What Musique you intreat of Doe you dislike all singing in the Church which some of the Separation haue termed the croking of Rauens N. No but your artificiall Musique which because it is not vnderstood doth not edifie I. Secondly then I demand Did you 1. Cor. 14. 26. Ephes 5. 19. Col. 3. 16. euer heare of Musique that was not artificiall were not the Psalmes and Hymnes mentioned by Saint Paul made by art or that which is aboue art namely the spirit of Prophecie If your vulgar Psalmodie bee good as no doubt it is how much more excellent shall your Artificiall Musique be which also is so plaine that euery man of meane diligence and capacitie may conceiue it with reuerend delight And now let mee aduertise you of your double contradiction to your selfe First you said that Musique was not lawfull in the Church because it was inuented by Iubal and yet after made it a part of the Ceremoniall Law and could not denie the vse thereof by Dauid and Salomon Secondly yet stumbling againe you auouch that it doth not edifie As if any part of the Law Ceremoniall or any thing instituted by Dauid and Salomon were such as could not tend to edification N. Musique did edifie then but not now I. You should haue produced some reason of your assertion Meane time wee had rather beleeue Athanasius in the East Ambrose in the West Augustine in the South which did partly erect partly allow Church Musique then your bare spirit of Contradiction N. Saint Paul shewes that Musique cannot edifie 1. Cor. 14. 7. because the vulgar knowes not what is piped I. First the Apostle speaketh of a Pipe in whose sound there is no distinction Secondly of such a Pipe he saith how shall it be knowne what is piped His meaning is how shall the most expert Musician know the meaning thereof Now can you charge our Musique with indistinction of sounds N. Your Musique is indistinct being barbarous 1. Cor. 14. 11. Barbarus bic ego sum quia non intelligor vlli And that so it is it appeares by the Apostle in the same place because the multitude doth not vnderstand it I. Doth not the multitude conceiue that the words of Te Deum are sung or some such like Hymne N. But they cannot vnderstand the Musicall Proportions and so the Musique doth not edifie I. If you meane an exact vnderstanding some will doubt whither any Musician hath it being a matter of so deepe contemplation But if you conceiue a confused and general knowledge this may not bee denied to the multitude N. I meane a competent vnderstanding of Musique without which no man can iudge thereof I. Though it require much skill to iudge yet a mediocritie of Science will serue to bee delighted and thereupon to giue a certaine confused iudgement For there is a naturall sympathy betweene mans soule and melodie Now obserue if your argument were good then the vulgar might not heare a Sermon because they cannot distinctly iudge of the method and ornaments thereof being taken from the Armorie of Logique and Wardrobe of Rhetorique nor of the truth of the Citations which are drawne from Hebrew Chaldee Syrian and Greekish fountaines And thus in stead of Church Musique you would abrogate Sermons especially before the multitude In summe As God loueth a cheerefull giuer so much more a cheerefull worshipper So that Musique is requisite that deuotion may be refreshed by delectation And take this for a Maxime An enemie to Musique an enemy to Muses N. From the forme wee come to the matter Luke 1. 46. 68. 2. 29. of Hymnes which are either taken out of Scripture or inuented by man Of the first kinde are these Magnificat Benedictus Nunc Dimittis wherein wee first disallow that being vttered at the beginning vpon a particular occasion they are now conuerted to a common vse I. First If that were true What thinke you of the Epistles of Saint Paul to the Galathians and to Philemon being written vpon most speciall and vrgent necessities N. There are contained in them most Oecumenical doctrines for the vniuersal good of the Church I. The same may be said of those Hymnes as you tearme them for indeed it may bee doubted whither things taken out of the Scriptures be Hymnes Forasmuch as properly they be termed Hymnes which be inuented
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
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
a double aduancement of Daniel First whereby he came into credit with the People by the occasion of the matter of Susanna Secondly whereby hee came into reputation before the King for expounding of his dreame Againe although the King tooke notice of Daniel's iudgement concerning Susanna Yet was it possible that hee should not aduance him either because hee was verie young or because hee thought this iudgement proceeded from dexteritie of wit not from diuine inspiration Or lastly because hee might bee as forgetfully ingratefull towards Daniel as afterwards was Balthazar till hee was aduertised thereof by the Queene r Dan. 5. 10. Mother N. The circumstance of time doth more conuince this Booke and that for two reasons First it appeares by this narration that the Iewes had yearely Iudges in Babylon and power to execute the ſ Susanna v. 5. 41. 62. Lawes of Moses which is no way probable I. First Nabuchadnezzar and Darius aduanced some of the Iewes in t Dan. 2. 48. 49. Babylon Secondly Hamman tels Ahashuerosh that the Iewes obserued their owne u Hest 3. 8. Lawes Thirdly the Romanes which kept downe the Iewes asmuch as the Babylonians yet gaue them leaue in some cases to keepe the capitall Lawes of Moses as appeares by Saint x Iohn 18. 31. Iohn and by Saint y Acts 7. 58. Luke Wherefore this is not so vnprobable as you would haue it N. Secondly against the time I thus reason Daniel is said to be a z Susanna v. 45 young childe and yet this Storie is reported to be done in the time of Cyrus a Susanna v. 65 but this is impossible For Daniel was carried away in the beginning of the b Dan. 1. 1. Captiuitie which lasted seuentie c Ierem. 29. 10. yeares euen to the first yeare of the raigne of d Ezra 1. 1. Cyrus So that Daniel could not be lesse then eightie yeares old in the first yeare of Cyrus I. First Some doubt not to auouch this to be another Daniel N. To what end then is this Storie annexed to his Booke I. That might be done because they were men of the same name nation spirit and happinesse But I relinquish this opinion as vncertaine and improbable The plaine answere is this that those words concerning Astyages and Cyrus in the end of Susanna are taken out of the beginning of Bel and the Dragon as is plaine by the Greeke Text Your calculation therefore is needlesse N. From the matter I come to the phrase For it semes by the Greeke that there should be an allusion in Daniels speech to the words e Susanna v. 54 58. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Elders which allusion is not found in the Hebrew or Chaldie tongues I. First no maruell if it cannot bee found For the names of Easterne trees are little knowne to the Grecians the rest in Europe as all Herbals doe witnesse Secondly though the Greeke Interpreter did allude it followes not herevpon that there was an allusion in the Hebrew or Chaldie Thirdly if all bee granted as also that the Storie is Apocryphall will you herevpon conclude that it is false and not to be read in the Church for morall vse namely to shew how God defendeth innocencie and conuinceth lust and malice N. I passe from Susanna to Bel and the Dragon wherein we disclaime two things First it is said that Daniel was six dayes in the Lions m den f Bel and the Dragon v. 31. whereas it is said in the true g Dan. 6. 19. Daniel that hee remained there but one night I. The Stories speake of two seuerall facts and times The first vnder Darius The second vnder Cyrus N. Darius was Cyaxares the Vncle of Cyrus and raigned with him in Babylon I. This Storie is vncertaine For Scaliger proues that Darius raigned ten yeares before Cyrus came which if it bee true your argument is at an end Againe h Master William Perkins in Digesto others thinke that Xenophon who tels your Storie is meerely fabulous and that Herodotus tels the truth saying that Astvages had neuer a childe but Mandana the Mother of Cyrus N. Secondly we wonder that Habacuk should i Bel and the Dragon v. 33. here be mentioned who was before the Captiuitie as appeares by his k Heb. 1. 5. prophecie I. If he were the same man yet might hee liue as long as Daniel Also you know how long Isaiah and Hosea prophecied namely at the least sixtie three yeares CHAP. III. Of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus and Baruch N. FRom the Historicall Books I passe to those Apocryphall Volumes which are tearmed Sapientall whereof the Booke of Wisdome commonly ascribed to Philo the Iew and Ecclesiasticus compiled by Iesus the Sonne of Syrach may be called Dogmaticall and the last namely the Booke of Baruch Propheticall I. Whither Philo penned the Booke of Wisdome wee dispute not But at this wee maruell that Doctor Iunius being a man of rare diligence could espie no errour in the Bookes of Wisdome or Baruch and yet your Eagle eyes haue found some of this kinde N. First wee blame the title then the matter of the Booke of Wisdome The title seemeth to make Salomon the Author thereof which is false without all controuersie I. It is not intended by this title that this Booke should bee ascribed to Salomon but it is only propounded as a Meditation or Soliloquie made in imitation of that diuine Wisdome of Salomon published in his Bookes of the Prouerbes the Preacher and the Canticles Of which kinde were the Meditations of Saint Augustine Bernard Anselme and a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 others N. In the matter of the Booke wee dislike two places First those b Wisdome 8. 20 wordes But rather being good I came into an vndefiled bodie wherein two errours are contained First that the soule is created before the bodie Secondly that according to the merit or demerit thereof it obtaineth a good or bad bodie which be the errours of Plato the Chiliasts and Origen Other plaine meaning of this place cannot be framed I. If you reiect the Booke because some place therein is not plaine what shall be done to the Epistles of Saint Paul wherein some things are c 2. Pet. 3. 16. hard to be vnderstood Nay what shall become of the Bookes of Iob Canticles Ezekiel Daniel and the Apocalips not to speake of Tertullian Possidonius Thucidides Sueronius Aristotle Archimidedes Lycophron and Persius which Bookes all will acknowledge to be as hard as profitable Furthermore two gentler interpretations may bee brought of this place The first is d Lyranus vpon this place vulgar namely thus But I becomming better that is making progresse in e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vertue I came into a bodie vndefiled that is obtained a bodie neither polluted with fornication when I was young nor with adulterie when I was married howsoeuer according to the custome of the time