Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	authority_n	prove_v	tradition_n	2,724	5	8.9814	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A16174	A reproofe of M. Doct. Abbots defence, of the Catholike deformed by M. W. Perkins Wherein his sundry abuses of Gods sacred word, and most manifold mangling, misaplying, and falsifying, the auncient Fathers sentences,be so plainely discouered, euen to the eye of euery indifferent reader, that whosoeuer hath any due care of his owne saluation, can neuer hereafter giue him more credit, in matter of faith and religion. The first part. Made by W.P.B. and Doct. in diuinty.	Bishop, William, 1554?-1624.	1608 (1608)	STC 3098; ESTC S114055	254,241	290

Rome vvhereas neither that Church then nor vve now doe reject the true fasting which the Scripture teacheth but only those opinions of fasting vvhich the Montanists first deuised and the Papists haue receiued against the Scripture to forbeare continually by way of religion such and such daies from such and such meates with a minde there in and by their very forbearing to doe a worship to God to satisfie for sinne to merit and purchase the forgiuenesse thereoff and to deserue eternal life WILLIAM BISHOP BEFORE we come to joine issue let this maxime of arguing be obserued He that vvil proue one to be the proper disciple of any Sect-master must doe it by producing the proper and peculiar doctrine of the same sect and not by alleaging such points of doctrine as are common to that sect vvith many others For example if I would proue a Protestant to be an Arrian I must not thinke to performe it by prouing that they beleeued in one God as the Arrians did or that they flie to the touch-stone of the Scriptures as the Arrians did refusing Traditions and that they relied much on the power of temporal Princes setting the Bishop of Romes authority at naught c. for none of these be proper branches of the Arrian sect but common to them with others Marry if I could proue them to affirme the Sonne of God touching his diuinity to be lesser then his Father or after his Father or not of the same substance vvith his heauenly Father I must needes be taken then to speake to the purpose Euen so if M. Abbot doe insist vpon those points of the Montanists errors which were proper to themselues and not common with others prouing vs to maintaine the same I then wil graunt that he acquiteth himselfe like a braue champion But if he doe make al his instances in such general circumstances of fastinges as the Catholike Church then did maintaine as vvel as the Montanists Yea that the Protestants themselues doe in part vphold and defend as wel as the Catholikes then euery man must needes acknowledge and take him for a wrangling Sophister and a vaine bragging writer that crakes of wonders and performes nothing Let vs now descend to his particulars and try what sharpnesse of wit and soundnesse of judgement he sheweth therein The Montanists saith he appointed certaine and standing daies for fasting and forbearing of certaine meates so doe the Papists I graunt vvhat be they therefore Montanists then the Protestants be also Montanists because they appoint certaine and standing daies of fastes as Friday Saturday the Imber and Lent-fasts and many feasts eues vvhich daies they appoint for the forbearing of flesh Is not this a proper peece of Montanisme that is common to so many Nay the Apostles themselues did the like as Tertullian in the same place graunteth vvere they also therefore Montanists see how M. Abbot beginneth to shame himselfe To the next The Montanists did not take any creature or meate to be vncleane but did only by way of deuotion forbeare at certaine times and the Papists doe also the same vvhich I also graunt And doe not the Protestants agree vvith them in the former part thinking no meate to be vncleane Now in the later they doe vvorse for they forbeare flesh at certaine times not of deuotion to chastise their bodies and to please God as the Montanists pretended but for worldly pollicy of fauouring the increase of flesh for the vpholding of the trade of fisher-men and to please their Prince Here let any Godly man be judge whether of these two endes of pleasing God or the Prince be more Christianlike and whether of them doe more sauour of the spirit of God he shal no doubt finde that herein it is much better to concurre with Tertullian then consort with the Protestants And that the best learned in the primitiue Church so thought and so taught I haue proued in the Question of fasting The Montanists being vrged with that place of S. Paul that it was the doctrine of Deuils to command to abstaine from meates answered that it touched Marcion and Tatianus who condemned meates as vncleane in their owne nature the same answere doe the Papists giue which I acknowledge vvillingly What are they thereby become Montanus disciples then vvas S. Augustine as a great Papist so no smal Montanist for he doth in most expresse tearmes so expound that place these be his wordes The Apostle doth in these wordes properly point at Aug. cōt Adimant Manichaeū c. 14. 1. Tim. c. 4. not them who therefore abstaine from such meates that they may thereby bridle their owne concupiscence or spare another mans weakenesse but those who thinke the flesh it selfe vncleane Doe you see how S. Augustine interpreteth those wordes of S. Paul euen as we doe who also answereth to euery of the Protestants objections against set fasting aboue a 1000. yeares before they troubled the world In like manner doth S. Hierome in the very wordes that M. Abbot sets downe for ours thus he writeth Lib. 1. cont Iouin ca. 41. The Apostle doth condemne them that forbidde to marry and command to abstaine from meates c. true but he aimed at Marcion and Tatianus and such other Heretikes that command perpetual abstinence as though the creatures of God were abhominable but we commend euery creature of God and doe only preferre fasting before fulnesse c. So that by this exposition of S. Paules doctrine vve are not proued Montanists but doe imitate therein the principal pillars of the ancient Roman Church S. Augustine and S. Hierome and doe therein also wipe away a sluttish imputation of Iouinian reuiued and set a foote againe by the Protestants that forsooth Lib. 1. cont Iouin cap. 3. We teach the doctrine of Deuils condemned by the Apostles and doe fal into the opinion of the Manichees because we command to abstaine on fasting daies from some kinde of meates which God created to receiue c. but of this more exactly in the Question of fasting Now to the rest of M. Abbots text The Montanists tooke that their fasting to be a seruice and worship to God vvherein they were not deceiued for it is written in the word of God Luc. 2. That Elizabeth a blessed widdow departed not from the Temple by fasting and praier seruing night and day seruing in Greeke Latreuousa that is doing seruice and worship to God as by praier so by fasting Againe by fasting watching and other bodily austerities we doe according to the common exposition of the auncient Fathers Rom. 12. exhibit our bodies to God a liuing bost as the Apostle speaketh holy pleasing God and a reasonable seruice It must needes then be a very holy and most acceptable seruice and vvorship of God that is resembled by S. Paul vnto a liuing and pure sacrifice Canon 5. And in the Councel of Nice it is said That we may offer to God the pure and solemne fast of Lent

meaning that it vvas in Ianuary past before he had seene my booke vvhich though he say not directly but that my booke was then sent to him yet he would haue his reader take it so that he might thereby and by that vvhich followeth gather vvhat expedition he had vsed in the answering of it wherein he giueth him vvrong to vnderstand For two monethes before that the booke vvas common to be had and great communication about the answering of it in the place of his abode and either he or one of his name had in short marginal notes assaied to giue answere vnto many points of the same epistle by that very Ianuary But admit that he saw not the booke before why did he not then goe in hand with it hauing receiued straight commandement from so high a personage to vse al expedition for the answering of it Forsooth the Barber-surgeon hauing his soare eies in cure would not giue him leaue to doe it Is it likely that the L. Archbishop was so euil informed of his estate that he would require him to make a speedy answere to a booke before he knew that he was in case to reade it But his Lordships letters perhaps found M. Abbot according vnto the season of the yeare frozen and could not as then vvorke in him any great resolution to answere but the spring following beganne to reuiue his drowsie spirits and in Iuly vvhen the heate of Sommer had throughly warmed him then ●●e his affection to answere was so feruent and his disposition so fiery that he bestirred himselfe beyond al measure dispatching within three moneths not only this booke of thirty sheetes of paper but preparing also woofe and warpe as he speaketh for three hundreth more Surely this vvere vvonderful celerity if we might be so bold as to beleeue him but vntil he make better proofe of his fidelity he must pardon vs if in hast we giue not credit vnto him For vvho can perswade himselfe that M. Abbot being injoined to vse such expedition in answering would haue staied one yeare and a halfe before he published his answere vnto one sheete and halfe of paper for my Epistle containeth no more if he could haue sooner compassed it and who knowes not that a dedicatory Epistle vvhere matters are summarily touched only is none of the hardest partes of the booke to be answered But the man meaning in this Preface to commend himselfe aboue the skies saw that it was necessary to remoue this stumbling-block out of the vvay and before hand to excuse his extreame slownesse that it might not seeme strange how so admirable quicke a pen-man should be holden occupied so long time about so little I may not omit to note that vvhich now three times M. Abbot hath repeated to wit That the answering of my booke was committed ●o him from great authority vvherein he seemeth by his often rei●erating of it to take no smal pride that such a charge should be ●ssigned him from so high a personage But good Sir if my booke be nothing else but A fardle of baggage and rotten stuffe as you ●earme it it must needes redound rather to your shame to be ●hought a fit man to giue it answere For as euery man knoweth 〈◊〉 bald beggarly scholler is the meetest match to deale with a fardle of baggage But if there be more in my booke then you sometimes would haue people to beleeue they that haue a good opinion of it may hap to thinke that those graue wise-men in high authority fore-saw that it would hardly be answered by laying nakedly testimony of Scripture and Fathers to testimony and reason to reason vvherefore they thought it best pollicy to make choise of some jolly smooth-tongued discourser that might with a ●ufling multitude of faire pleasing wordes carry his reader quite from the matter and then blinding him vvith some colourable shew of learning l●●de him into errour Proceede ROBERT ABBOT NOw the Treatise against which M. Bishop writeth is commonly knowne and entituled A reformed Catholike c. written by one M. Perkins since deceassed a man of very commendable quality and wel deseruing for his great trauaile and paines for the furtherance of true religion and edifying of the Church Against this booke M. Bishop so bendeth himselfe in his dedicatory Epistle as that with al he traduceth the whole doctrine of our Church and with such motiues and reasons as a badde cause wil afford him plaieth the part of Symmachus the Pagan Labouring vnder the name of antiquity Symmach relat ad Imp. Ambr. epistolarum lib. 5. to bring in Idolatry and to perswade his Majesty that that is Catholike religion which indeede is nothing else but errour and superstition In the due examination whereof waighing wel the sundry and slippery foundations wherevpon he buildeth I presume gentle reader that thou wilt be of my minde that he did not thinke hereby to preuaile any whit with his most excellent Majesty but only vsed the pretence of this dedication to credit his booke with them who he knew would take al that he said hand ouer head vpon his owne bare word Surely if he had not presumed of very wel-willing and friendly readers he would neuer haue dreamed to gaine any credit by writing in this sort What his Epistle is thou maist here see concerning the rest as yet I wil not say much only I aduertise thee and doe assure thee that if thou diddest like of M. Perkins booke before thou hast no cause by M. Bishop to dislike of it now Thou shalt see it assaulted with ignorance with impudency with vntruth and falshood with grosse and palpable heresie and that which he commendeth to be the marrow and pith of many large volumes thou shalt finde to be nothing else but a fardle of baggage and rotten stuffe For some tast thereof let me intreate thee to take wel in worth for the time this answere to his Epistle for the rest to haue me excused as yet both in respect of that weakenesse whereby I haue beene so long withholden from the following of this worke as also for the care I haue as wel to giue thee ful satisfaction in the questions here discussed as to stoppe the aduersaries mouth that he may haue nothing further to reply I haue propounded to my selfe the rule of Tertullian in such businesses alwaies to be obserued Decet veritatem totis vti viribus non vt laborantem truth is to vse it whole strength and not to fare as if it had much a doe to defend it selfe I am loth therefore to come hastily into the field and with mine owne sworde only to make an vncertaine fight but to take conuenient time to leuy such troupes and bandes ●as that I may not neede to doubt of the victory and it may appeare vnto thee that notwithstanding the crakes and brags of these Romish sicophants yet the truth is 2. Reg. 6. vers 16. That they that are with vs are more then they that

6. who to proue it doth cite euen the very same vvordes out of Hieremy And so 1200 yeares before him that famous Father S. Chrysostome did alleage the like out of the same chapter of the Prophet to the same purpose saying Homil. 55. in Mathaeum The Father said to Hieremy I haue put thee as a pillar of yron and wal of brasse c. yet the Father placed him but ouer one nation to vvit that of the Iewes but Christ hath placed Peter ouer the vniuersal world Briefly we granting the like power to be in the Bishop of Rome that was in Hieremy the Prophet whose wordes he vseth it can be no more deduced thence that Kings hold their Princely diademes of him then that the King of Iuda did his of Hieremy vvhich was neither mediately nor immediately for only a certaine spiritual power to roote out Idolatry errour and iniquity and to plant religion and vertue vvas by those vvordes giuen to men of the Church Which if it doe in some certaine case extend to the deposition of a Prince as I reade it hath beene practised by most juditious learned and holy Personages though I doe not reade vvhere it is by the Church defined to be any article of our faith yet no man is so simple as not to deeme it more holsome and expedient for the vniforme and peacible estate of Christendome that such supereminent power should rather rest in the supreme Pastor of Christs Church then be left vnto the discretion of the Ministers and Clergie of euery country according to the Protestants opinion and practise It being I say granted that the Bishop of Rome may in some case depose any temporal Magistrate yet can it not there hence be gathered that Kinges doe hold their Kingdomes of the Popes Holinesse For vvhen one King vvil not let his neighbour Prince liue in peace by him but doth extremely wast his Dominions kil his subjects and make hauocke of his country the Prince so molested if he cannot otherwise haue remedy may most lawfully by force of armes proceede euen to the deposition of that injurious King And yet the inuader did not hold his Kingdome of the other any more then the other did depend vpon him but was an absolute King himselfe as the other vvas notwithstanding by his intollerable outrages offered to his neighbour Prince he made himselfe punishable and subject to the other against whom he so grieuously trespassed In like manner if a Prince by most extreme persecution of Christs flocke doe become subject to the correction of the chiefe Pastor thereof yet thence it followeth not that that Pastor had power to dispose of his Kingdome at his pleasure or that the King did hold his Diademe of him either mediately or immediately howbeit the Prince through his owne exorbitant and otherwise remedilesse fault doe justly fal into the Pastors handes to be punished Here I doe by the way most humbly craue of them to whom it doth appertaine that it may without passion be duly considered whether we Catholikes doe not his Majesty more faithful seruice and shew our selues much more careful of the quiet continuance of his glorious happy estate when by al humble and faire meanes we doe labour most diligently to entreat his most excellent Majesty to deale more gratiously and mildly with his poore Catholike subjects then those hot-spurre Ministers vvho labour tooth and naile to cast their louing Soueraigne into such a brake of briars by incensing his Highnesse to hold so extreme a course against them For if his Majesty may be vvonne to follow the gentle and sweet inclination of his owne nature and to qualifie the rigour of the lawes against recusants in such temperate manner that the said recusant Catholikes may not be oppressed thereby the Popes holinesse without al doubt wil neuer goe about to depriue his Majesty of his regal dignity how forward soeuer he be otherwise to imbrace and aduance his owne religion for not so much for fauouring the Protestants as for extreame persecution of the Catholikes as the former example of neighbour Kinges doth shew that most seuere censure of the supreme Pastor of the Church is inflicted Wherefore vvhen it shal please his Highnesse to condescend gratiously vnto our humble and daily supplication for more moderation and mercy then shal his Majesty vvithout al doubt as euery man may easily perceiue take away al jealousie of those buzzes which seeme so greatly to disquiet the whole state Now to that point wherein the Kinges supremacy lieth according to M. Abbots declaration If it were only by lawes to prouide and to take special order that God be wel serued his word truly taught his Sacraments duly administred and that al Bishops and Pastors performe their duties then I should thinke him a badde Christian that would not acknowledge that his supremacy And I most willingly admit that the good Kinges of Israel did so but the man is so shallow shuttle-witted and vncertaine that there is no trust to be giuen to his declaration M. Perkins goeth more substantially to worke and affirmeth the Supremacy to consist not in the points aboue mentioned Reformed Catholike page 285. but in authority to declare which bookes of Scripture be Canonical which not and to determine finally of al controuersies and doubtes rising thereupon to cal general Councels and to ratifie their decrees to make Ecclesiastical lawes that binde al the Church and to excommunicate whosoeuer shal obstinately resist or breake them to consecrate and institute Patriarkes Metropolitanes and many such like vvhich when M. Abbot shal proue to appertaine justly to Kinges and Princes whether they be men women or children then we vvil allow the supreme temporal Magistrate to be also supreme gouernour in causes Ecclesiastical In the meane season we vvil pray that God wil vouchsafe to make them good and dutiful children of the one holy Cacholike and Apostolike Church and that they may humbly learne those high misteries of religion vvhereof most Princes as al the world seeth vvould be very vnmeete judges and also very euil dispensours What variety of religions hath growne by that kinde of supremacy what dissolution of Church discipline vvhat corruption of ciuil justice vvhat iniquity and deceit in contracts and bargaines vvhat oppression of the poore and generally what loosenesse and leudnesse of conuersation euery true Christian man doth see and lament and daily pray to almighty God our most merciful Father for amendment That vvorldly peace and temporal prosperity be no assured markes of Gods fauour nor of his true religion King Dauid is a sufficient witnesse Psal 72. Whose feete as he writeth were almost moued and beganne to slippe through his zeale against the wicked because he saw them suffered to liue in such prosperity and to die in so great peace And our Sauiour in expresse tearmes teacheth Math. 5. vers 45. That our Father in heauen maketh his Sunne to rise vpon good and hadde and raineth

not a word out of him that wil greatly helpe their cause For what saith he that we say not we hold with him that the want of knowledge of the Scriptures is the cause of heresie for he that knoweth and vnderstandeth wel the holy Scriptures can neuer fal into errour or heresie Besides vve denie not but that it is expedient for al men either to reade the Scriptures or to heare them to reade them themselues if they be men of judgement and indued with a lowly spirit carrying with them this rule of S. Peter 2. Pet. 1. vers 19. That the Scriptures as they were not written by a priuate spirit so they must not be vnderstood by a priuate interpretation vvherefore in al darke and doubtful places they must not trust to their owne wit but make their recourse vnto the Catholike Church Ioh 14. v. 26. Ioh. 16. v. 13. 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. Which is directed by the spirit of God into al truth and therefore called the pillar and ground of truth for the true sence and meaning of them Al the rest both Men Women and Children we would haue to heare the holy Scriptures read vnto them and expounded by their lawful Pastours and approued Preachers who are chosen and sent to feede their soules with that heauenly foode of the word of God So that Gregory the ninth differeth nothing from Paul the fift the present Pope of Rome who is fully of the same opinion And M. Abbots audatious assertions to the contrary are but meere slanders For we hold it not pernitious for al sortes of people to reade the Scriptures vnlesse it be in such false translations as the Protestants haue made but haue our selues translated them into the vulgar tongue that al Godly wel minded people of any reasonable capacity may diligently and deuoutly reade them at their good oportunity M. Abbot vvas wont heretofore to alleage some authour or other to giue the better countenance to his lies but now he is faine to face them out himselfe without the helpe of any other and hauing put his special confidence in lying as they did of vvhom the Prophet speaketh Esai 28. Posuimus mendacium spem nostram We haue put our hope in lying he thrusteth them out lightly by huddles False then it is first that we teach the people to be secluded from the reading of Scripture as dogges are from holy thinges for vve would haue none other debarred from reading of them but wauering wilful and peruerse fellowes 2. Pet. 3. vers 16. Who as S. Peter teacheth abuse the holy Scriptures to their owne destruction and to the seducing of others Secondly it is a lie in graine to auouch that we teach the knowledge of the Scriptures to breede errour and heresie vnlesse he meane the corrupt and peruerse knowledge of them which is rather to be tearmed the ignorance of them for the true knowledge of them deliuereth vs from al errour and heresie and settleth vs in the sound doctrine of the Catholike Roman Church True it is that many now a-daies vvho haue some smattering in the vvordes and verses of the text hauing itching eares and wauering minds are the sooner lead away through their little skil in the Scriptures and ouer-great presumption of their owne wits for hearing Heretikes cite for proofe of their heresie some texts of Scripture which they know to be Gods vvord and hauing neither sufficient learning to answere them nor grace to aske counsel therein of the true Pastors of Christs Church vvho would rightly informe them become a pray to the rauening vvolues Againe the very experience of this age doth sufficiently informe an vnderstanding man that the ouer common reading of Gods word by the more rude and vnruly sort hath rather ingendred a corruption of manners then bredde any amendment thereof for euery peeuish scripturist puffed vp with the opinion of his owne learning wil rather take vpon him to be a teacher of others then a practiser of them himselfe And often very preposterously Women wil teach Men Children their Fathers Sheepe their Pastours in a word many wil be jangling about matter of religion and very few studious to liue religiously These disorders I graunt doe not spring directly out of Gods word but out of our corrupt nature too too prone to presumption on our owne skil And there fore let any reasonable man judge vvhether they did not more vvisely who vsed to bridle this itching appetite of reading in the curious and thought it better to binde them to follow the aduise of their spiritual guides which haue charge of their soules then our new bretheren who allow euery Man Woman and Child to read vvhat bookes of Scripture they list and to wrangle about them so commonly S. Paul insinuateth that al places of Scripture are not fit for al sortes of men but in some parts 1. Cor. cap. 3. vers 2. There is milke for sucklings and in others Strong meate for the more perfect And our Sauiour Christ IESVS spake much in parables vvhich are not for euery ones capacity A sword is a good weapon but put it into the hand of a madde man it wil doe more harme then good so if some men get a smattering in holy Scriptures they wil vse it ful madly Wherefore the Catholike Church though shee wish euery child of hers to know so much of the Scriptures as vvil doe them any way good yet shee knowes it to be holesome and very necessary that a moderation be vsed therein according to the discreet aduise and judgement of Godly and prudent Ghostly Fathers ROBERT ABBOT HIEROME and RVFFINVS by the doctrine of the Church of Rome Hier. in Prolog Galiat in Praefat. lib. Salomonis Ruffin in expositione Simboli excluded from Canonical Scripture the same bookes that we doe the bookes of Iudith Tobias Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Baruch and the rest they say plainly Non sunt in Canone non sunt Canonici They are not Canonical nor in the Canon The Church readeth them for instruction of manners not to giue any authority to any Ecclesiastical doctrine But now the Church of Rome wil haue them to be receiued and beleeued for Canonical Scriptures and of equal and like authority withal the other bookes WILLIAM BISHOP I Obserue first that M. Abbot forgetting himselfe vvhich is a foule fault in a liar and leauing his owne prescript order is now fallen cleane from S. Peter and S. Pauls successours the Bishops of Rome Secondly that he neuerthelesse holds his old custome in lying I winke at that petty lie that he thrusteth in Baruch among the rest vvhich his Authors doe not but may not dissemble this greater for whereas he saith Hierome and Ruffinus by the doctrine of the Church of Rome exclude from Canonical Scripture the same bookes that we doe therein he fableth for though they so did yet did they it not by the doctrine of the Church of Rome For Innocentius the first Pope of Rome

vvhom S. Augustine alleageth stiling him a Saint and ranking him with S. Ireneus S. Cyprian and S. Ambrose in these wordes August lib. 1. cont Iulianū cap. 4. Cùm hijs etiam ipse considet etsi posterior tempore prior loco In time somewhat after some of them but in dignity of place before them This holy and learned Bishop of Rome I say vvho flourished in S. Hieromes daies or else S. Augustine vvho was in manner his equal Epist. 3. ad Exuper cap. vltimo could not haue cited his testimony doth expresly declare those very bookes to be Canonical Scripture I trust his declaration that ruled that See of Rome wil rather be taken for the doctrine of the Church of Rome then any other mans besides Againe Pope Gelasius the first who liued not long after him which also is one of M. Abbots chosen patrons did in publike assembly In Decret de Libris sacris in 2. tomo Cōciliorum assisted also vvith 80. other Bishops define the same bookes to be Canonical Scripture who can then doubt but that the Church of Rome in S. Hieromes and Ruffinus daies tooke those bookes to be Canonical Scripture wherefore it was but M. Abbots addition to the text to affirme that Hierome and Ruffinus according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome did so say Besides the third Councel of Carthage holden at the felfe-same time Cōcil 3. Carthag cap. 47. doth declare the said bookes of Tobias Ecclesiasticus c. to be Canonical Scripture affirming also that therein they followed the sound judgement of their Ancestours Lib. 2. de Doctrina Christ cap. 8. Lib. 18. de Ciuitat cap. 36. S. Augustine in sundry places of his workes doth by name declare the bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Tobias Iudith and the two bookes of the Machabees to be Canonical Scripture and seemeth to expound S. Hieromes sentence in these wordes The bookes of the Machabees the Iewes indeede doe not receiue but the Church of God taketh them for Canonical Scriptures Whence we after the auncient Lib. 7. Etimolog cap. ● learned and holy Bishop Isidorus doe collect this distinction The Canon of the Scriptures is twofold the one of the Hebrewes the other of the Christians that of the Hebrewes vvas compounded long before Christes daies in which these bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus c. are not comprehended because they vvere written in later times and not in the Hebrew tongue Prolog Galiator Of this Hebrew Canon speaketh S. Hierome in that Prologue as it wil be manifest to al that shal but reade it for he saith first That the Hebrewes haue but 22. letters and according to the same number but 22. bookes in their Canon then reckoning them vp by name inferreth therefore the booke of Wisdome c. be not in the Canon to wit that Canon of the Hebrewes whereof he there spake vvhich also appeareth more euidently by his answere to Ruffinus vvho objected against him as a shameful reproach that he rejected certaine Chapters of Daniël because they were not in the Hebrew though they were in the Septuaginta S. Hierome excuseth himselfe saying Lib. 2. cont Ruffinū versus finem That therein be shewed the opinion of the Hebrewes but did not deliuer his owne sentence And as he there saith That he who would calumniate that his doing should shew himselfe a sycophant so he doth thereby giue al others to vnderstand that he vvho would after that faire warning build any Catholike conclusion vpon his relation of the Hebrewes opinion should proue him selfe a foole in trusting to so sandy and slippery a foundation And yet further in his Preface vpon the booke of Iudith he teacheth That the Hebrewes did not take that booke of Iudith for Canonical yet the first Nicene Councel vvhich is the most authentike of al general Councels did account it in the number of holy Scripture so that in S. Hieromes opinion also though these bookes were not in the Canon of the Hebrewes yet they may be very sincere Canonical Scripture with the Christians vvho haue the spirit of discerning and judging of such Canonical bookes as wel as the ancient Hebrewes had But S. Hierome saith in the later place That the Church doth not vse them to establish Ecclesiastical doctrine I answere that the Churches of Afrike did vse them euen in his owne time and the Church of Rome which is the principal of al Europe at the least as hath beene proued before so that his vvordes must needes be restrained vnto some Churches in Asia where he liued for the most part or it may be said that the Church had not then when S. Hierome so wrote generally declared them to be Canonical though very shortly after euen before his dying day they were in the most principal places of the Church both declared and receiued for Canonical That the Church had sufficient author●ty by declaration to make bookes of Scripture Canonical that before were not generally taken for such the Protestants themselues must needes confesse because they take for Canonical the Epistle to the Hebrewes and diuers others with the Reuelation of S. Iohn which vvere doubted off by many of the learned Christians in the primitiue Church Lib. 3. Hist. Eccles c. 10. 19. as witnesseth Eusebius ROBERT ABBOT VIGILIVS borne at Rome and Bishop of Trent according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome that then was affirmeth That the body of Christ when it was vpon the earth Vigil cōt Eutich lib. 4. was not in heauen and that now because it is in heauen it is not vpon the earth But now the Councel of Trent and Church of Rome perswade vs that the very body of Christ though it be in heauen yet is really and substantially here vpon earth also vpon the Altar and in the Pix and in the Priests belly and in the bellies of as many as are partakers of the Sacrament WILLIAM BISHOP In vita S. Sisinnij THIS large amplification is shortly answered Vigilius though a holy Catholike Bishop as his praying to Saints doth demonstrate yet was none of S. Peters successours neither doth he speake any thing against Christs real substantial presence in the Bles Sacramēt if his wordes be taken in his owne meaning to wit that Christ since his ascention is not here in that māner and fashion as he did conuerse vpon the earth with his Disciples that is in the forme of man Which I gather out of Vigilius his owne wordes for he saith that Christ is departed from vs in the forme of a seruant and so according vnto that forme of a seruant in the habit and likenesse of a man he is not present with vs but the very same body vnder the forme of bread is in as many places as the blessed Sacrament is consecrated See for this more in the question of the Real presence ROBERT ABBOT Hier. in Catalogo TERTVLLIAN being for enuy of