that the Church founded the Rite of baptizing Infants upon the Tradition of the Apostles or what wise men that ever sided with the Reformation ever observed that the Anabaptists can by the same probability of Scripture inforce a necessity of communicating Infants upon us as we do of baptizing Infants upon them Cardinal Perron indeed being about to prove the insufficiency of the written Word and to establish the necessity of unwritten Traditions brings among other things Infant Baptism as an instance of a point that may be proved by Tradition and not by Scripture Adv. Reg. Mag. Brit. p. 571. but Bellar. lib. 1. de Sacram. Bapt. cap. 9. disputes for Paedobaptism and that by such arguments as are taken out of Scripture which he saith Nullâ ratione solvi nullâ arte eludi possunt Laud To the Baptism of children I add the Communion of women Id. ibid. Pacif. Do you then think that the Communion of women cannot be proved out of Scripture as well as out of Tradition I believe there is no express instance of a woman receiving the Sacrament but we have reasons grounded on Scripture that make it the duty of women as well as men and it would be perversness seeing {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} signifieth a woman as well as a man to affirm that both sexes are not included But let us to the Controversie of Episcopacy Are all Ordinations invalid which are done by meer Presbyters without a Bishop what think you of the Reformed Churches Laud For my part I know not what to think the question hath been so often asked with so much violence and prejudice and we are so bound by publick interest to approve all they do that we have disabled our selves to justifie our own Episcop asser p. 190. Supposing that Ordination by a Bishop is necessary for the Vocation of Priests and Deacons and therefore for the founding and perpetuating of a Church either God hath given to all Churches opportunity and possibility of such Ordinations and then necessity of the contrary is but mockery or if he hath not given such possibility then there is no Church there to be either built or continued but the Candlestick is presently removed Id. p. 193. Pacif. Our Church did alway retain Episcopacy and so she might have done still had not Bishops been more faulty then ever Episcopacy was But that Ordinations by meer Presbyters were not valid was never affirmed by our Church or any of her eminent members but rather the contrary which will appear if we consider that the transmarine Churches have alway been acknowledged as true Chnrches and their Ordinations justified and maintained to be valid against the oppugners of them by our English Controversie Writers and Professors Dr. Holland Dr. Willet Dr. Field Dr. Downham Mr. Mason If at any time any ordained by meer Presbyters were made Bishops in our Church their Ordination by Presbyters was supposed to be valid and was not renewed at least not till of late years but what think you of Bishops being made Lords and taking secular employment Laud It was not in naturâ rei unlawful for Bishops to receive an Office of secular employment St. Pauls tent making was as much against the calling of an Apostle as sitting in a secular Tribunal is against the Office of a Bishop Episc. Asserted p. 352. The same Author in sundry following pages much endeavoureth to prove that Bishops may take upon them the affairs of Secular Interest Pacif. Bishops taking upon them secular affairs hath been alway exclaimed against by our Divines as well Prelates as others that have been sensible of the charge of souls committed to them this it will not be amiss to exemplifie in several ages John Wickliffe in the raign of Edw. 3. taught That Popes Cardinals Bishops might not Civiliter Dominari absque mortali peceato and that no Prelate ought to have any Prison to punish offenders and that no King should impose upon any Bishop or Curate any secular matter for then both the King and Clerk should be Proditor Jesu Christi Wals. in R. 2. p. 205. William Swinderby also a Professor in Rich. 2. time held That the more Lordship a Priest hath the neerer he is to Antichrist and that the Priests of the old Law were forbidden Lordship and that Christ himself refused and forbad his Priests Lordship saying Reges Gentium c. the Kings of the Heathen bear rule c. but you shall not so do Acts and Mon. p. 451 453. Tindall in his works p. 124. writes That it was a shame of all shames and a monstrous thing that Bishops should deal in civil causes and p. 140. What names have they My Lord Bb. my Lord Archbishop if it please your Lordship if it please your Grace Bishop Hooper in his Comment on the Commandments hath these words p. 184 185. Edit. 1548. look upon the Apostles chiefly and upon all their Successors for the space of 400. years and then thou shalt see good Bishops and such as diligently applyed that painful office ofa Bishop to the glory of God and honour of the Realms they dwelt in though they had not so much upon their heads as our Bishops have yet had they more within their heads as the Scriptures Histories testifie for they applyed all the wit they had unto the Vocation Ministry of the Church whereunto they were called our Bishops have so much wit they can rule and serve as they say in both States of the Church and also in the civil Policy when one of them is more then any man is able to satisfie let him do always his best diligence If he be so necessary for the Court that in Civil Causes and giving of good counsel he cannot be spared let him use that Vocation and leave the other for it is not possible he should do both well And a great oversight it is of the Princes and higher Powers of the earth thus to charge them with two burdens when none of them is able to bear the least of them both they be the Kings Subjects and meet for his Majesty to choose the best for his Court that be of the Realm but then they must be kept in their Vocation to preach only the Word of God and not to put themselves or be appointed by others to do things that belong not to a Bishops Vocation I will not now relate the speeches of old holy Father Latimer to the same purpose though far exceeding any that have been yet mentioned because they are many and may be easily seen in his Sermon of the Plough But now that we are on the business of Church-government What think you of the persons commonly called Lay-Elders Laud Lay Judges of Causes Ecclesiastical as they are unheard of in Antiquity so they are neither named in Scripture nor receive from thence any instructions for their deportment in their imaginary office and therefore may be remanded to the place from whence they came
Arminian or Popish but be it known to you That I disclaim all aspersion of Popery and am further from it than any Puritan in the Kingdom I am indeed well acquainted with such imputation as Popish and I know not what the ordinary language of our precise Professors against any man that is not as themselves More furioso Calvinista and having had this measure often meted out to me from their very great zeal and very no charity I contemn their malice a Scold cannot any better be charmed than by contempt As for Arminius if he in Tenents agreeth unto Scripture plain and express if he hath agreeing unto his Opinions the Practice Tradition and Consent of the Antient Church I imbrace his opinions let his person or private ends if he had any alone I nor have nor will have confarreation therewith If Calvin so far in account and estimation before Arminius dissenteth from Antiquity and the Universal ancient Church I follow him not No private man or peculiar spirit ever did or ever shall tyrannize upon my belief I yeeld only to God and the Church App. p. 4 5 12. Pacif. Your flings at Puritans Precise Professors Furious Calvinists might well have been spared so might your Apologie for your self as to Popery and Arminianism with which my discourse did not in the least charge you I could easily quote you sentences out of Sacred and Prophane Writers concerning such as make defences before they are impleaded but being resolved not to exasperate I forbear any thing of that nature and humbly take leave a little further to explain my self lest I should be mistaken in what before I said 1. I make not consent of Fathers but Scripture the Rule of my Faith 2. Nor do I account the Fathers fit to be appealed to in some Controversies now a foot in Christendom 1. Because there are some Heresies newly sprung up of which they took no notice in their writings yea in the favour of which they may seem to speak being engaged against such as were in the contrary extream That none should be pressed with the judgements of Fathers in matters that were not throughly discussed till after they were dead and gone hear not me but St. August de Praed. Sanct. cap. 14. Quid igitur opus est ut corum secrutemur opuscula qui priusquam ista haeresis oriretur non habuerunt necessitatem in hac difficili ad solvendum questione versari quod procul dubio facerent si respondere talibus cogerentur unde factum est ut de gratiâ Dei quid sentirent breviter quibus dam Scriptorum suorum locis transeuntes attingerent immorarentur vero in iis quae adversus alios inimicos Ecclesiae Disputabant To the like purpose writeth he in his Euarration on the 54. Psal. Nunquid enim perfecte de Trinitate tractatum est antequ an eblatrarent Arriani nunquid perfecte de poenitentiâ tractatum est antequam obsisterent Novatiani sic non perfecte de Baptismate tractatus est antequam contradicerent foris positi rebaptizatores nec de ipsâ Christi unitate enucleate dicta sunt quae dicta sunt nisi posteaquam separatio illa urgene cepit fratres informos ut jam illi qui noverant haec tractare atque dissolvere ne perirent infirmi sollicitati quaestionibus impiorum sermonibus suis disputationibus obscura legis in publicum deducerent yea the very Appealer p. 131. hath these words That the Fathers those before Augustine being to deal against Fatal Necessity urged by Paynims Philosophers in those dayes as also against the execrable impiety of the Manichees extended the power of Free-will unto the uttermost and set it upon the tenters especially having then no cause to fear any enemie at home unto the contrary ante mota certamina Pelagiana there being yet no Pelagians sprung up in the world enemies to Grace advancers of Nature and Natural Power beyond degree of Power and of possibility Yea p. 129 130. He professeth plainly that in and concerning this point of Free-will those Fathers did so far out-lavish and speak so inlargedly that the very Jesuites post mota certamina Pelagiana fore fear of seeming to Pelagianize dare not say so much as they have said 2. The Fathers of Prime Antiquity did either write nothing at all or but very little and what of theirs is come to our hands is so interpolated that it is extreamly difficult to find out their meaning yea the Editions are so various that I know not which to prefer e. g. If I follow Vedelius his Edition of Ignatius I could not but think the Father to be of the opinion that the making of any one a true Christian is a work not of moral suasion but of strength and power for these are his words according to him {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} yet should I quote this passage in the controversie about free-will I should be told that the words do not run so in some other Editions and so occasion much strife of words Laud You must expect nothing from the Geneva Printers but deceits and impostures nor hath that importune Vedelius brought any thing to fill his Pages with but impudence and singular ignorance Montacutius Apparat. 1. p. 19. Pacif. I 'm not ignorant that such a severe censure is passed upon Vedelius and his Edition but he hath answered for hinself in his Preface to his Tract De Deo Synagogae And Bishop Vsher who hath taken more pains about Ignatius then that bilious writer speaks honorably of the Geneva Edition yea Dr. Hammond prefers it to the very edition of Isaac Vossius judged the most perfect and incorrupt in one particular but this is a diversion 3. I say thirdly That I frequently see just occasion to prefer the expositions of Scripture made by our later Writers before those which are given by the Ancient Doctors this is acknowledged even by Romanists Stella in Luc. c. 10. Bishop Fisher in his confutation of the Lutheran Artic. Art 18. We scarce find any setting themselves to making of Homilies or Commentaries till about the third Century and many of those who have commented on Scripture were so ignorant either of Hebrew or Greek or both that they have fallen into sad mistakes as no Scholar conversant in their Writings can deny 4. I have much wondred and do still wonder how it comes to pass that the Systems and Models of Divinity or Catechisms composed some by our own some by Transmarine Divines are so exceedingly decryed for I am sure heretofore they were recommended to Tutors to read to their Pupils as good means to keep them Orthodox which appears by a Decree of Convocation made Anno Domini 1579. which I shall take the boldness to recite verbatim because it shews what Authors were then in credit and may possibly provoke the present University to revive the long neglected but very necessary work of catechiting and examining young
accommodato adorationi erectam aut constitutam modus autem aecomodatus adorationi est cum imago depicta aut sculpta est per se non veluti appendix additamentum alterius rei in ornatum illius rei Beware lest thou make to thy self i. e. to any religious use any grauen image Homily Perill of Idol p. 42. Laud The examples of the Seraphims and Brazen Serpent tell us that to make pictures or statues of creatures is not against a natural reason and that they may have uses which are profitable as well as be abused to danger and superstition Now although the nature of that people was apt to the abuse yet Christianity hath so far removed that danger that our blessed Law-giver thought it not necessary to remove us from superstition by a prohibition of the use of images and pictures and for the matter of images we have no other rule left us in the New Testament the rules of reason and nature and the other parts of the Institution are abundantly sufficient for our security And possibly St. Paul might relate to this when he affirmed concerning the fifth that it was the first Commandment with a promise for the second Commandment had a promise of shewing mercy to thousand generations but because the body of this Commandment was not transcribed into the Christian Law the first of the Decalogue which we retain and in which a promise is inserted is the fift Commandment G. E. part 2. p. 111 112. Pacif. Do you then think that the second Commandment is not retained by us Christians I never thought but that it was if not natural yet moral of universal and perpetual obligation of this judgement were the Ancients Irene lib. 4. cap. 31. August lib. 19. contra Faus cap. 18 Epis 119. cap. 12 Not to speak of Clem Alex. who in his Adhortatory Oration to the Gentiles plainly saith that the Commandment obligeth us as well as the Jews though he seem to be mistaken in giving the sense of it this way also go all Protestants though indeed the Papists do make this law but temporary In a word God allowed the Jews a civil use of Images and other he alloweth not to us under the Gospel who are not so much out of danger of Idolatry and superstition as you seem to imply Laud Images have three uses assigned by the Popish Schools instruction of the rude commonefaction of History and stirring up of devotion they and we also give unto them Gagg p. 300. The pictures of Christ the blessed Virgins and Saints may be made had in houses set up in Churches respect and honour may be given to them the Protestants do it and use them for helps of Piety in rememoration and more effectual representing of the Prototipe Ans. to Gagg p. 818. Pacif. The Church of England teacheth her children quite another lesson Hom. against the peril of Idol Part 3. p. 42. It is unlawful that the Image of Christ should be made or that the Image of any Saint should be made especially to be set up in Temples to the great and unavoidable danger of Idolatry we grant Images used for no Religion or Superstition rather we mean Images of none worshipped or in danger to be worshipped may be suffered but Images placed publickly in Temples cannot possibly be without danger of Idolatry many such passages may be picked out of that Homily which are the more considerable because of all our Homilies it seemeth to be penned with most exactness Laud It is the Consecration that makes Churches holy and makes God esteem them so which though they be not capable of grace yet by their consecration they receive a spiritual power whereby they are made fit for Divine Service and being consecrated there is no danger in ascribing holiness unto them Tedder his Visit Sermon licensed by Dr. Baker an. 1637. Pacif. That Churches do by Consecration receive any spiritual power whereby they are made more fit for Divine Service than other places or that the same company meeting in a private house and praying by the same Spirit should not be as acceptable to God as in the Church is Superstition to affirm nor did the Church of England ever teach any such Doctrine yet I easily grant that in peaceable times and under Christian Princes the people of God ought to have their {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and that it is a broach of civil decency to employ these places set a part for Gods Worship to any common uses ordinarily Laud We use signing with the sign of the Cross both in the fore-head and elsewhere witness that solemn Form in our Baptism for which we are so quarrelled by our factions the flesh is signed that the soul may be fortified saith Tertullian and so do we Ans. to Gagg p. 320. Pacif. If any one besides the Minister useth signing with the Cross or if he use it at any time but in Baptism or on any place but on the forehead 't is done without any warrant at all from the Church of England and our Church retained the sign of the Cross in Baptism only as an outward Ceremony and honorable Badge but it doth not ascribe any efficacy unto it of fortifying the soul and declares the child to be perfectly baptized before it be signed with the sign of the Cross as plainly appears from the Book of Canons agreed upon 1603. Chapter Of the lawful use of the Cross Laud Baptism of Infants is most certainly a holy and charitable Ordinance and of ordinary necessity to all that ever dyed and yet the Church hath founded this Rite on the Tradition of the Apostles and wise men do easily observe that the Anabaptists can by the same probability of Scripture enforce a necessity of communicating Infants upon us as we do of Baptizing Infants upon them if we speak of an immediate Divine Institution or of practice Apostolical recorded in Scripture and therefore a great Master of Geneva in a Book he writ against Anabaptists was faign to fly to Apostolical Traditive Ordination and therefore the Institution of Bishops must be served first as having fairer plea and clearer evidence in Scripture then the baptizing of Infants and yet they that deny this are by the just Anathema of the Church Catholick condemned for Hereticks Dr. Tayl. Episc. Asser. p. 100 101. Pacif. 'T is gratis dictum that the Institution of Bishops hath fairer plea and clearer evidence in Scripture then the baptizing of Infants nor can you prove that they who deny the Baptism of Infants are under the just Anathema of the Church Catholick much less that they who deny the Institution of Bishops superior in order to Presbyters are under the just Anathema of the Church Catholick Hath a whole Book been written to prove that none are to be anathematized who consent to the Articles of the Apostles Creed and must it now be worthy an Anathema to deny Infant Baptism who but a Papist ever said
Scripture and when the Grammatical sense is found out we are many times never the nearer nor is it that which was intended for there is in many Scriptures a double sense a literal and spiritual for the Scripture is a Book written without and within Apoc. 5. and both these senses are subdivided for the literal sense is either natural or figurative and the spiritual is sometimes Allegorical sometimes Anagogical Lib. Prop. p. 64. Pacif. You rather use the language of Ashdod then Canaan whereas I count it a thing commendable rather to express our selves so as reformed Divines have been wont then as the Popish but I 'le not quarrel at any thing which is capable of a good construction yet let me have leave to say 1. That the place Apoc. 5. hath quite another sense then that to which you apply it 2. That I understand not how this consideration if admitted makes any thing to the proof of that for which you produce it that there should be a toleration of all who own the Apostles Creed Laud There being such variety of senses in Scripture and but few places so marked out as not to be capable of divers senses if men will write Commentaries as Herod made Orations {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} what infallible {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} will be left whereby to judg of the certain Dogmatical resolute sense of such places which have been the matter of question Lib. Proph. p. 65. Pacif. That if men will write Commentaries {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} no certain {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} will be left is beyond dispute but it is as much beyond dispute that if men will proceed with sobriety not leaning on their own understanding but humbly begging the Spirits illumination they shall not want an infallible {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} to find out the certain Dogmatical sense of such places which have been the matter of question nor is there any truth in that assertion that there are but few places so marked out as not to be capable of divers senses I undertake to produce very clear places of Scripture against the errors of Popery Socinianism c. Laud There are divers places of Scripture containing in them mysteries and questions of great concernment and yet the fabrick and constitution is such that there is no certain mark to determine whether the sense of them should be literal or figurative nothing in the nature of the thing to determine the sense and meaning but it must be got out as it can and therefore it is unreasonable that what is in it self ambiguous should be understood in its own prime sense and intention under the pain of either a sin or Anathema I instance in that place Hoc est corpus meum the words are plain and apt to be understood in a literal sense which yet doth violence to reason but if you expound these words figuratively besides that you contest against a world of prejudices you give your self the liberty which if others should take when they have either a reason or necessity so to do they may perhaps turn all into Allegory and so may evacuate any precept and elude any Argument Lib. Prop. p. 67 68 69. Pacif. Do these words become one who wisheth well to the Protestant reformation Have our Martyrs alway understood those words Hoe est corpus meum in a figurative sense and have they upon that account ventured the loss of life and all things that were dear unto them and must the World now be told that in such an interpretation they gave rhemselves the liberty which if others should take all Scripture would be turned into an Allegory Irascor referens and I pray you how is it possible to quiet weak and tender consciences if some places of Scripture do contain mysteries of great concernment and yet there is no certain mark to determine whether the sense of them be figurative or literal Is the merciful God wont to set his poor creatures on the rack to bring them into labyrinths to set down things which are apt to breed scruples in their minds and to leave no certain rule by which they may determine in what sense the words in which such things are comprehended are to be taken Absit absit Laud There are some places of Scripture that have the self-same expressions the same preceptive words the same reason and account in all appearance and yet either must be expounded to quite different senses or else we must renounce the Communion and the charities of a great part of Christendome And yet there is absolutely nothing in the thing or in its circumstances or in its adjuncts that can determine it to different purposes I instance in these great exclusive negatives for the necessity of both Sacraments Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aquâ c. Nisi mandua caveritis carnem filii hominis c. Liber Prophes. p. 69. Pacif. A prodigious assertion must I renounce the Communion and Charities of a great part of Christendome unless I will expound places of Scripture to a quite different sense that have the self-same expressions and that though there be absolutely nothing in the thing or in its circumstances or in its adjuncts that can determine them to different purposes if so then farewell the Communions and Charities of Christendome for to take such a course would be to do violence to my judgment reason and every thing by which I am denominated a man As for the two places you instance in the sense of them is quite mistaken by the Papists as our reformed Divines undeniably prove and me thinks the Romanists should easily yield they are mistaken or else they must needs leave themselves under horrible doubts about their eternal salvation for if they that dye unbaptised go to some part of Hell and none are baptised but those whom the Priest had an intention of baptizing when he sprinkled them with or dipped them in water how many of them must lose the joys of Heaven on that account And if those words are to be understood literally Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood c. What will become of their Laity who are not permitted to drink of the consecrated Wine their device of concomitantia will not sure make eating only to be eating and drinking It is a good sport to a Scholar who hath wear ed himself with other studies to observe how the Popish Writers are put to it to excuse their Church for not administring the Eucharist to Infants and I cannot but wonder what moved the Papists to such a practice seeing they give so much to the Sacrament viz. to confer grace by the work done and to fortifie the soul against Satan But what think you of the fulness and perspicuity of the holy Scriptures Laud There are some points of good concernment which if any man should question in an high manner they would prove indeterminable
by Scripture or sufficient reason Liber Prop. p. 89. Pacif. Points of good concernment not determinable by Scriptures nor yet by Reason How contrary is this to what is quoted out of Chrysostom and Fulgentius in the Homlly Exhorting to the reading of the holy Scripture p. 2. Besides such an assertion doth very much tend to discourage men from making enquiry into Truth for if such points are not determinable by either Scripture or Reason how shall they be determined If by the Church I say the Church in her determinations must be guided by Scripture and Reason or else her members are not obliged to regard her determinations Laud I must negatively conclude that all things necessary to the Salvation of all are not of themselves clear in the Scripture to all understandings whereby I say not that all such things are not contained in the Scriptures as if some things necessary to the salvation of all were to be received by Tradition alone Nor that being in the Scriptures they are not clear and discernable to the understandings of those that are furnished with means requisite to discern the meaning of Scripture But that which I stand upon is that it is not nor ought to be a presumption that this or that is not necessary to Salvation because it is not clear in the Scriptures which if it were admitted whosoever were able to make such an argument against any Article of Faith as all understandings interessed in salvation could not dissolve should have gained this that though it may be true yet it cannot be an Article of Faith Principles of Christian Truth p. 25. Pacif. It is beyond all dispute that all things contained in Scripture are not clear to all understandings there are some understandings to which nothing is clear it is also past dispute that they who understand Scriptures must be first furnished with all means necessarily requisite for the understanding of Scriptures and which is more they must make use of those means and pray to God for a blessing upon them but this is said by Protestants against Papists that God hath made nothing necessary for the Salvation of all men Necessitate praecepti medii but such things as are so clearly laid down in the Word that all who will make use of the abilities God hath vouchsafed may find them out and that men may safely conclude that is not a necessary Article of Religion which is not clear in some place or other of Scripture clear I say with such a clearness as may satisfie the conscience though not with such as may satisfie curiosity Laud The holy Scriptures in the first time of the Christian Church were not communicated to all men all at once for the Primitive Fathers wisely considered how extreamly perillous it might be to expose the whole Scripture unto ignorant mens use and judgement or indeed abuse rather and want of judgement surely more dangerous and pernicious it might prove unto mens souls then to leave a whole Apothecaries shop open to a diseased person who might as well choose and take deadly poyson to his destruction as a Soveraign medicine to the recovery of his health Had the souls of men been so carefully watched over by their Governors and such portions of Scripture wisely and fatherly dispensed unto them as might with such holy reservedness have met with mens proficiency surely such prodigious Monsters had not been counterfeited out of the Word of God by the spirit of Opinion as in these later dayes we have seen and lament to see Dr. Gell. Preface to his Essay about the amendment of our English Translation Pacif. That by the free reading of the Holy Scriptures some very dangerous Opinions have been occasioned accidentally is no question but that therefore any part of the Scripture should be locked up in an unknown Tongue from the Vulgar is no stronger an inference then if one should argue because some have burned their fingers and houses with candle and fire therefore the free use of those creatures is not to be vouchsafed in a Common-wealth And as I think the conclusion to be absurd so I am sure 'T is quite contrary to the whole scope and design of the Homilies called an Information of them that take offence at certain places of Holy Scripture Laud The further we proceed in the survey of the Scripture the Translation is the more faulty as the Hagiographa more then the Historical Scripture and the Prophets more then the Hagiographa and the Apocrypha most of all and generally the New-Testament more then the Old Idem near the end of his Preface Pacif. Such a censure might have been born from the pen of the Rhemish and Doway Divines but who can bear it from one pretending to be an English Protestant the Translation is Vsque ad invidiam aliarum gentium elaborata Translatio It was sufficiently defended in the parts that you find most fault with by Dr. Fulk and Cartwright against the Cavils of the Rhemists and may more easily be defended against the exceptions taken to it by you But there is another thing that offends me in your former words viz. That you seem to make the Apocrypha part of the Scripture which word when it is taken absolutely and without addition should suppose only for Canonical Scripture and I do the more doubt that you advance the Apocrypha higher then do our Reformed Divines because I find you ascribing the Book of Wisdom to Solomon p. 51. whereas that Book was sure written by one of a spirit far inferior to that which acted Solomon in his writings Laud Such is the boldness and ignorance of some that they have left out of their impressions the Apocryphal Scriptures whereby they have gotten this whereof to glory that they have done that which no wise or honest man hath done before them so far as I have yet known or I hope will adventure to do after them Dr. Gell Pref. Pacif. To devest all those who had an hand in leaving the Apocrypha out of our English Bibles of all wisdom and honesty is very hard for what if those Apocryphal writings be of some good use yet there 's nothing in them should make it necessary or expedient to bind them up with the Canon why may they not be kept in a Volume by themselves or indeed how can they be read by private Christians at all without apparent hazard and scandal seeing some of them contain notorious lyes some of them justifie such things as God Law and the Law of Nature too do condemn But before we proceed any further suffer me to know your mind about Reason and Councils Laud All Controversies are reducible to two heads Goodness or Truth so that the question is Whether right reason can infallibly judge what is good or bad true or false for a thing to be morally good for Metaphysical Goodness is all one with Truth depends by sure connexion from that Eternal Justice which is primarily in God