the not promoting of it to compell them to desert their Stations and abandon their livings in which their very vitality and livelihood consisted Fol. 127. Then which there could be nothing more uncharitably or untruly said This as he makes there the first project of exasperation which Archbishop Laud and his confederates of the same stamp pitched upon to let his professed Enemies feel the dint of his spirit so doth he call it in the King a profane Edict a maculating of his own honour and a sacrilegious robbing of God All which though afterwards left out declare his willingnesse to make both Prince and Prelates and the dependants of those Prelates the poor Doctor of Cosmography among the rest feel the dint of his spirit and pity 't was he was not suffered to go on in so good a purpose Our Author having intimated in the way of a scorn or jâ—ar that the Divinity of the Lords day was new Divinity at the Court was answered by the Observator that so it was by his leave in the Countrey too not known in England till the year 1595. c. The Observator said it then I shal prove it now and having proved it in the Thesis or proposition will after return answer to those objections which the Pamphleter hath brought against it And first it is to be observed that this new Divinity of the Lords day was unknown to those who suffered for Religion and the testimony of a good conscience under Henry 8. as appeareth by John Fryth who suffered in the year 1533 in a tract by him written about Baptism Our fore-fathers saith he which were in the beginning of the Church did abrogate the Sabbath to the intent that men might have an Ensample of Christian Liberty c. Howbeit because it was necessary that a day should be reserved in which the people should come together to hear the word of God they ordained in stead of the Sabbath which was Saturday the next day following which is Sunday And though they might have kept the Saturday with the Jew as a thing indifferent yet they did much better Next to him followeth Mr. Tyndall famous in those times for his translation of the Bible for which and for many of his Doctrines opposite to the Church of Rome condemned unto the flames annâ— 1536. in the same Kings reign who in his Answer to Sir Thomaâ— More hath resolved it thus As for the Sabbath we be Lords over the Sabbath and may yet change it into Munday or into any other day as we see need or may make every tenth day holiday only if we see cause why neither was there any cause to change it from the Saturday but to put a difference between us and the Jewes neither need we any holy day at all if the people might be taught without it The same Doctrine publickly defended in the writings of Bishop Hooper advanced to the Miter by King Edward and by Queen Mary to the Crown the crown oâ— Martyrdome in a Treatise by him written on the Ten Commandements anno 1550. who resolves it thus We may not think saith he that God gave any more holinesse to the Sabbath then to the other daies For if ye consider Friday Saturday or Sunday in as much as they be daies and the work of God the one is no more holy then the other but that day is alwaies most holy in the which we most apply and give our selves unto Holy works No notice taken by these Martyrs of this new Divinity The first speaking of the observation of the Lords day no otherwise then as an institution grounded on their forefathers a constitution of the Church the second placing no more Morality in a seventh-seventh-day then in a tenth-tenth-day Sabbath and the third making all daies wholly alike the Sunday no otherwise then the rest As this Divinity was new to those godly Martyrs so was it also to those Prelates and other learned men who composed the first and second Liturgies in the reign of King Edward or afterwards reviewed the same in the first year of Queen Elizabeth anno 1558. in none of which there is more care taken of the Sunday then the other Holydaies no more divine offices performed or diligent attendance required by the old Lawes of this Land upon the one then on the other No notice taken of this new Divinity in the Articles of Religion as they were published anno 1552. or as they were revised and ratified in the tenth year after no order taken for such a strict observation of it as might entitle it unto any Divinity either in the Orders of 1561. or the Advertisements of 1565. or the Canons of 1571. or those which â—ollowed anno 1575. Nothing that doth so much as squint towardâ— this Divinity in the writings of any learned man of this Nation Protestant Papist Puritan of what sort soever till broached by Dr. Bound anno 1595. as formerly hath been affirmed by the Observator But because the same truth may possibly be more grateful to our Author from the mouth of another then from that of the ignorant Observator I would desire him to consult the new Church History writ by a man more sutable to his own affections and so more like to be believed About this time saith he throughout England began the more solemn and strict observation of the Lords Day hereafter both in writing and preaching commonly call'd the Sabbath occasioned by a book this year set forth by P. Bound Dr. in Divinity and enlarged with additions anno 1606. wherein the following opinions are maintained 1. That the Commandement of sanctifying every seventh day as in the Mosaical Decalogue is moral and perpetual 2. That whereas all other things in the Jewish Church were taken away Priesthood Sacrifices and Sacraments his Sabbath was so changed as it still remaineth 3. That there is a great reason why we Christians should take our selves as strictly bound to rest upon the Lords day as the Jewes were upon their Sabbath it being one of the moral Commandements where all are of equall authority lib. 9. sect 20. After this he goeth on to tell us how much the learned men were divided in their judgements about these Sabbatarian Doctrines some embraced them as ancient truths consonant to Scripture long disused and neglected now seasonably revived for the increase of piety others conceived them grounded on a wrong bottome but because they tended to the manifest advance of Religion it was pity to oppose them seeing none have just reason to complain being deceived into their own good But a third sort flatly fell out with these positions as galling mens necks with a Jewish yoke against the Liberty of Christians That Christ as Lord of the Sabbath had removed the rigour thereof and allowed men lawful Recreations that his Doctrine put an unequal lustre on the Sunday on set purpose to eclipse all other Holy daies to the derogation of the authority of the Church that this strict
necessary which some say he doth either they must accuse him of much inconstancy and forgetfulnesse or else interpret him with Rivet In Decalog as speaking of an Ecclesiastical custome not to be neglected non de necessitate legis divinae and not of any obligation layed upon us by the Law of God Neither is he the only one that hath so determined Simler in Exod. 20. hath said it more expresly Quod dies una cultui divino consecratur ex lege naturae est quod autem haec sit septima non octava nona aut decima juris est divini sed ceremonialis That one day should be set apart for Gods publick worship is the Law of nature but that this day should be the seventh and not the eighth ninth or tenth was not of divine appointment but ceremonial Aretius Loc. 55 also in his common places distinguished between the substance of the Sabbath and the time thereof The substance of it which was rest and the works of piety being in all times to continue tempus autem ut septimo die observetur hoc non fuit necessarium in Ecclesia Christi but for the time to keep it on the seventh day alwaies that was not necessary in the Church of Christ So also Francisc Gomarus that great undertaker against Arminius in a book written purposely De origine institutione Sabbati affirms for certain that it can neither be made good by the Law of Nature or Text of Scripture or any solid argument drawn from thence unum è septem diebus ex vi praecepti quarti ad cultum Dei necessario observandum that by the fourth Commandement one day in seven is of necessity to be dedicated to Gods service And Rivet as profest an enemy of the Remonstrants though for the antiquity of the Sabbath he differeth from the said Gomarus yet he agreeth with him in this not only making the observance of one day in seven to be meerly positive as in our first part we observed but laies it down for the received opinion of most of the reformed Divines Vnum ex septem diebus non esse necessario eligendum ex vi praecâ—pti ad sacros conventus celebrandos in Exod. 20. p. 190. the very same with what Gomarus affirmed before So lastly for the Lutheran Churches Chemnitius makes it part of our Christian Liberty quod nec sint allegati nec debeant alligari ad certorum vel dierum vel temporum observationes opinione necessitatis in Novo Testamento c. That men are neither bound nor ought to be unto the observation of any daies or times as matters necessary under the Gospel of our Saviour Though otherwise he account it for a barbarous folly not to observe that day with all due solemnity which hath for so long time been kept by the Church of God Therefore in his opinion also the keeping of one day in seven is neither any moral part of the fourth Commandement or parcel of the Law of Nature As for the subtle shift of Amesius Medull Theolog l. 2. 15. finding that keeping holy one day in seven is positive indeed sed immutabilis plane institutionis but such a positive Law as is absolutely immutable doth as much oblige as those which in themselves are plainly natural and moral it may then serve when there is nothing else to help us For that a positive Law should be immutable in it self and in its own nature be as universally binding as the moral Law is such a piece of learning and of contradiction as never was put up to shew in these latter times But he had learnt his lirry in England here and durst not broach it but by halves amongst the Hollanders 7 For the next Thesis that the Lords day is not founded on divine Commandement but the Authority of the Church it is a point so universally resolved on as no one thing more And first we will begin with Calvin who tels us Institut l. 2. c. 8. n. 3. how it was not without good reason that those of old appointed the Lords day as we call â—it to supply the place of the Jewish Sabbath Non sine delectu Dominicum quem vocamus diem veteres in locum Sabbati subrogarunt as his words there are Where none I hope will think that he would give our Saviour Christ or his Apostles such a short come off as to include them in the name of Veteres only which makes it plain that he conceived it not to be their appointment Bucer resolves the point more clearly in Mat. 12. Communi Christianorum consensu Dominicum diem publicis Ecclesiae conventibus ac requieti publicae dicatum esse ipso statim Apostolorum tempore viz. That in the Apostles times the Lords day by the common consent of Christian people was dedicated unto publick rest and the Assemblies of the Church And Peter Martyr upon a question asked why the old seventh day was not kept in the Christian Church makes answer That upon that day and on all the rest we ought to rest from our own works the works of sin Sed quod is magis quam ille eligatur ad externum Dei cultum liberum fuit Ecclesiae per Christum ut id consuleret quod ex re magis judicaret nec illa pessime judicavit c. in Gen. 2. That this was rather chose then that for Gods publick service that saith he Christ left totally unto the liberty of the Church to do therein what should seem most expedient and that the Church did very well in that she did prefer the memory of the Resurrection before the memory of the Creation These two I have the rather thus joyned together as being sent for into England in King Edwards time and placed by the Protector in the Universities the better to establish Reformation at that time begun and doubt we not but that they taught the self-same Doctrine if at the least they touched at all upon that point with that now extant in their writings At the same time with them lived Bullinger and Gualter two great learned men Of these the first informs us Hunc diem loco Sabbaâ—i in memoriam resurgentis Domini delegisse sibi Ecclesias in Apoc. 1. That in memorial of our Saviours Resurrection the Church set apart this day in the Sabbaths stead whereon to hold their solemn and religious meetings And after Sponte receperunt Ecclesiae illam diem non legimus eam ullibi praeceptam That of their own accord and by their own authority the Church made choice thereof for the use aforesaid it being no where to be found that it was commanded Gualter in Act. Apost Hom. 13 more generally that the Christians first assembled on the Sabbath day as being then most famous and so most in use But when the Churches were augmented Proximus à Sabbato dies rebus sacris destinatus the next day after the Sabbath was designed to those holy uses If not before then
left remaining as one that rather seems resolved as well in this as many other things besides not to alter any thing than to take any hint for it from such an inconsiderable fellow as the Observator or one of so mean parts as his alter idem Doctor Heylin must be thought to be I see our Author is past cure by any ordinary means and applications No way to bring up these hard words but that prescribed by Ben Iohnson to his Poetasters and practised by Coln and Cupes on their Ignoramus and to that I leave him And first with reference to his style so high as the Observator noted that no English Reader could climb over it he telleth us that it is a wooden conceit made by as woâ—den an Observator who had not his Head all but the face been made of blocks or had he consulted with ancient Authors he might have known that the word Style used by writers was not made of wood as this Observator supposeth but of metal the very same with his own face c. Fol. 2. Now the Thunder-Thumping Jove transfund his Dotes into the Pericranion of our learned Author who seems like Rhombus in Sir Philip old Father Rhombus well may the bones rest of that good old Father to be even gravidated with Child untill he hath endoctrinated our Plumbeus Cerebrolities in the adâ—equate sence and perceptibility of the word Stylus which neither that unconcerned fellow the Observator whose head is made of blocks and his face of brass nor that Dull piece of ignorance the poor Dr. of Cosmography of whom wee shall hear more anon ever heard before But Sir in good earnest can you think that neither the Doctor or the Observator could understand the meaning of a common ordinary word with the help of a Dictionary at the least untill they were instructed by your learned commentary Assuredly but that the Gentleman lieth continually at rack and manger with my Lady Philologie and is so conversant with Authors of the noblest remarque in several languages that a poor English writer cannot get a good look from him he might have known that in the first Edition of his Cosmography writ but when 20 years of age or not much above the Doctor understood the meaning of the old word Stylus It is an Instrument saith he pagina 741. of the Book called Micorocosm with which they wrote was a sharp-pointed Iron which they called Stylus a word now signifying the original hence taken the peculiar kind of Phrase which any man used as negligens Stylus in Quintilian and exercitatus Stylus in Cicero And if the Doctor and the Observator make but the same one person as our Author telleth us the Observator is as free from this piece of ignorance as the Author himself how poorly and scornfully soever he is pleased to think and speak of the one and the other To clear our way to that which followeth I think my self obliged to present the Reader with a Catalogue of those scornfull names and reproachfull charges which he hath laid upon the Observator and the Doctor too that I may shew what manner of man we have to deal with what necessity there is of wiping off those slanders and calumniations which with a prodigal hand he bestoweth upon them For if they be such men as our Author maketh them the very truth will prove unwelcome for their sakes little credit being commonly given unto any such thing as is commended by the Pen of unworthy Persons Dividing therefore all these slanders and calumniations which are meerly verbal from such as carry with them some charge of consequence we will only make a generall muster of the first and so pass them over knowing full well convitia spreta exolescunt that obloquies of this nature have been better contemned than answered by the wisest men And for such charges as our Author hath reproached them with we doubt not but we shall be able to wipe them off and to retort the intended imputation on the Authors head First then he telleth us of the wooden Observator that his head is made of blocks and his face of metal Fol. 2. Sends him to Squire Sanderson to learn wit and manners Fol. 4. Gives him the name of an impudent Observator Fol. 9. Of Canis Palatinus Court-curre a fellow so unconcerned c. Fol. 12. of This man in the Moon Fol. 15. of Doctor Coale whom the Bishop of Lincoln carbonadoed Fol. 27. of one between Hawk and Buzzard Fol. 30. of the light-fingered Observator Fol. 35. of a modern Poet and a wit every inch of him Fol. 36. of an ill-looking Fellow Fol. 36. of as arrant an errant as ever was Fol. 39. accuseth him of metaphysical whim-whams Folio 5. of failing and forging fouly Fol. 9. of notorious corrupting and falsifying Fol. 45. of juggling and supposititious foistings Fol. 10. of being more shamefully out than ever man was out of the story beyond all measure and out of charity beyond all Religion Fol. 41. Then for the Doctor he honoreth him with no other title than that of a Doctor in Cosmography Fol. 22. the which he so vehemently affected that though it was damned in one of the unpublished sheets yet he must needs vent it in this second Pamphlet in which unpublished sheets he makes him amends indeed and we thank him for it by calling him the bold Champion of the Prelates or Prelalatical party to all which they need say no more but that the accusations shall be answered in their proper places than as a wise man once did upon the like provocations viz. Tu linguae nos aurium domini sumus that is to say that they have as much command of their eares to hear with patience as our Author hath of his tongue to speak his passions our Author being like those who love to say with our tongue we will prevail our lips are our own who is Lord over us Psal 12. v. 4. Then for the charges they stand thus First for the Obsetvator that he hath fouly forged and failed in leaving out a word in the Authors Preface Fol. 9. for which called impudent Observator there and taxed with notorious corrupting and falsifying in the latter end of this present Pamphlet And 2ly That the Observator doth save him part of his labour that is to say in naming any of those men whom he had accused of being vicious even to scandall in naming himself for one of them Fol. 28. Then of the Doctor it is said that Cosmography was a work very proper for him there being none fitter to describe the world than he who all his life hath loved the World none like him Fol. 22. 2ly That in the business of the Sabbath he hath falsifyed the words of Pareus by changing quando into quomodo it being submitted thereupon unto all the World to consider what it is for a Doctor of Divinity for so great a Champion of Antiquity against
observance was set up out of Faction to be a character of difference to brand all for Libertines who did not entertain it sect 21. He telleth us finâ—lly that the Book was afterwards called in and commandâ—d to be no more printed The Doctrine opsed by the Archbishop and the maintainers of it punished by Judge Popham though by the diligence and counterworking of the brethren it got ground again This being said we shall proceed unto the answering of the Pamphleters arguments not more remarkable for their paucity then they are for their weaknesse He telleth us first that Archbishop Whitgift in his defence of the Answer to the Admonition saith in the present tense that the Sabbath is superstitiously used by some and speaks soon after of a Sabbath then commanded by the fourth Precept The Pamphleter hereupon inferreth that he could not mean the Jewish Sabbath and if not that it must of necessity be the Lords day Fol. 23. Here is a stout argument indeed able to knock down any man which thinks the contrary for mark the inference thereof Archbishop Whitgift gives unto the Lords day in a Metaphorical and figurative sense the name of Sabbath Ergo which is in English therefore it must be kept with all the rigors and severities which were â—equired unto the observation of the Sabbath by the Law of Moses or therefore which is in Latine Ergo there is as much divinity in the Lords day now by whomsoever it was ordained as had been heretofore ascribed to the Sabbath-day of Gods own appointing And then again the Lords day is by him called a Sabbath and said to be there commanded by the fourth precept therefore there is such a Divinity in it as Dr. Bound ascribes to his Lords daies Sabbath according to his Articles and petitions laid down Did ever man so argue in a point which he makes to be of so great concernment or make so ill a choice both of the Medium and the Author which he groundeth upon First of the Medium for may we not conclude by the self-same Logick that there is a Divinity in all the holydaies of the Church because all grounded on and warranted by the fourth commandement as all learned writers say they are and that there is a Divinity in Tithes and Churches because both places set apart for sacred Actions and maintenance also for the persons which officiate in them as the Pamphleter afterwards alledgeth are included also in this precept If there be a Divinity in these let our Author speak out plainly and pleaâ— as strongly for the Divinity or divine Institution of Tithes and Churches as he hath done or endevours to do at least for the Divinity of the Lords dayes Sabbath If none in these and I conceive our Author will not say there is though grounded on the warrant of the fourth Commandement let him not dâ—eam of any such Divinity in the Lords day because now kept by vertue of that precept also But worse luck hath the Gâ—nt in the choice of his Author then in that of his Medium there being no man that more disrelished and opposed this new Divinity of the Sabbath and all the Sabbatarian errors depending on it then this most reverend Prelate did insomuch that he commanded Bounds Book to be called in upon the first discovery of the Doctrines delivered in it which certâ—inly he had not done if he had been of the same Judgement with that Doctor or had meant any such thing in his defence of the Answer to the Admonition which our Pamphleteâ— hath put upon him Assuredly unless the Pamphleter had been bribed to betray the cause and justifie the Observator he would have passed over the debating of this new Divinity or else found more then one man in the space of 36 years so long it was from the first of Queen Elizabeth to the coming out of Bounds Book to have spoken for him and such a man as had not shewed himself so professed an enemy to the newnesse of it by causing the Book to be called in that the Brethren commonly used to say that out of envy to their proceedings he had caused such a pearl to be concealed Let us next see what comfort he can finde from the book of Homilies of which he saith that there was not any thing more especially taught in them then the Divinity of the Lords day This he affirmes but they that look into that Book will finde many points more specially taught and more throughly pressed then this Divinity he talketh of witnesse those long and learned Homilies upon the peril of Idolatry against disobedience and rebellion of these last six at least in number besides many others But if it can be proved at all no matter whether specially or more specially that shall make no difference and that it may be proved he telleth us that they say God in that Precept speaking of the â—ourth commandeth the observation of the Sabbath which is our Sunday Fol. 23. If this be so and to be understood of such a Divinity or such a divine institution of the Lords day as our Author would fain put upon it first then we must have some expresse warrant and command from God himself altering the day from the seventh day of the week on which he commanded it to be kept by the Law of Moses unto the first day of the week on which it is now kept by the Church of Christ But secondly that Homily I mean that Of the time and place of prayer doth inform us thus That the goldly Christian people began to follow the example and commandement of God immediately after the Ascension of our Lord Christ and began to choose them a standing day of the week to come together yet not the seventh day which the Jewes kept but the Lords day the day of the Lords Resurrection the day after the seventh day which is the fiâ—st day of the week c. And thirdly it is said in the same Homily that by this commandement we ought to have a time as one day in the week wherein we ought to rest yea from our lawful and needful works c. Which passages being laid together will amount to this first that the Homilie doth not say that by the fourth Commandement we ought to have one day in the week which is plainly peremptory but that we ought to have a time as one day in the week which is plainly Arbitrary Secondly that being Arbitrary in it self and so esteemed of by the Christians in the Primitive times they thought it good immediately after Christs â—scension to choose a standing day of the week to come together in namely the Lords day or the day of the Resurrection Not that they were required so to do by the fourth commandement which limited the Sabbath the ordinary time of worship to the day foregoing nor commanded so to do by Christ this choice of the day not being made till after his ascension and no command of his approving
in the holy Scripture nor finally by any Precept or Injunction of the holy Apostles of which as the Scriptures are quite silent so the Homilie ascribes it wholly to the voluntary choice of godly Christian people without any mention made at all of their authority So the then meaning of those words produced by our Author for the ground of this new Divinity will be only this that as God rested on the seventh day and commanded it to be kept wholly by the Jewes so the godly Christian people after Christs Ascension following his example and warranting themselves by his Authority did choose a seventh day of the week though not the same which had been kept holy by the Jewes for the day of worship And this is all we are to trust to for the Divinity or Divine institution of the Lords day Sabbath from the Book of Homilies neither so positively nor so clearly rendred as to lay a fit or sure foundation for so great a building In the next place the Pamphleter quarrels with the Observator for making it a prodigie and a paradox too that neither the order nor revenues of the Evangelical Priesthood should have any existence but in relation to the Divinity of the Lords day But Sir the Observator doth not only say it but he proves it too and proves it by the authority of the holy Scriptures mentioning the calling of the Apostles of the seventy Disciples of S. Paul and others to the work of the Ministery and pleading strongly in behalf of an Evangelical maintenance as belonging to them at such time as the Lords day no such existence no such Divinity of existence as our Author speaks of In stead of answering to these proofs the Pamphleter telleth us that there is not a man of note who treateth of the 4. Commandement himself especially for one and the chief one too that owneth not this prodigious opinion and therefore askeâ—h where this Observator haâ—h been brought up that this Tenet of his yeâ— of all learned men should be so wondred at to be called a prodigie Fol. 23. But the reply to this will be very easie For first all the men of note which write upon the 4. Commandement all learned men our Author too into the bargain are no fit ballance for S. Paul nor able to counterpoise the expresse and clear Authority of the holy Scriptures And secondly the Pamphleter after his great brag that all learned men almost all men of note which write upon the 4 Commandement are of his opinion is fain to content himself at the present with only one and such an one who though he be instaâ— omnium with the Pamphleter is not so with me nor with the Observator neither Not that we fail in any part of due honour to that Reverend Prelate whose name he useth to make good the point which is in question but that we think the work imputed to him by the Pamphleter to be none of his never owned by him in his life nor justified for his by any of relation or nearnesse to him therefore to undeceive so many as shall read these papers they may please to know that in the year 1583. Mr. Andrewes was made the Catechist of Pembrook-hall for the instruction of the younger students of that house in the grounds of Divinity that though he was then but a young man yet his abilities were so well known that not only those of the same foundation but many of other Colledges in that University and some out of the Countrey also came to be his Auditors that some of them taking notes of his Lectures as well as they could were said to have copies of his Catechizing though for most part very imperfect and in many points of consequence very much mistaken that after his coming to be Bishop he gave a special warrant unto one of his Chaplains not to own any thing for his that was said to have been taken by notes from his mouth And finally that hearing of the coming out of that Catechism as in discourse with those about him he would never own it nor liked to have it mentioned to him so he abolished as it seemeth his own original Copy which they that had command to search and sort his papers could not finde in his study and though this Catechism came out since in a larger volume yet not being published according to his own papers although under his name it can no more be said to be his then many false and supposititious writings foisted into the works of Ambrose Augustine and almost all the ancient Fatheâ—â— may be counted theirs Of all this I am punctually advertised by an eminâ—nt person of near admission to that Prelate when he was alive and a great honourer of him since his death and have thought fit to signifie as much upon this occasion to disabuse all such whom the name of this most reverend Prelate might else work upon which said there needs no Answer to this doughty argument which being built upon a ruinous and false foundation fals to the ground without more â—doe as not worth the answering We see by this that all the learned men which our Author brags of are reduced to one which one upon examination proves as good as none if not worse then nothing But the Pamphleter may be pardoned for coming short in this present project in regard of the great pains he had taken in writing a Book of the Doctrine of the Sabbath or Divinity of the Lords day published in the year 1640. unto which Treatise he refers all men who shall desire his judgement in that subject that Book being never yet answered by any as he gallantly braves it Fol. 24. In this there are many things to be considered For first it is probable enough that this Treatise to which we are referred for our satisfaction was either so short lived or made so little noise abroad that it was not heard of For had it either moved so strongly or cryed so loud that it intituled our Author the dear Father of it to any Estate of Reputation for term of life as Tenant by the courtesie of the gentle Reader it is not possible but that we should have had some tale or tidings of it in so long a time and therefore I conceive that it was still-born and obscurely buried and perhaps buried by the Man-midwife I mean the Bookseller or Printer who gave it birth before the Godfathers and Godmothers and the rest of the good Gossips could be drawn together to give a name unto the Inâ—ant or at the best like the solstitial herb in Plautus quae repentino orta est repentino occidit withered as soon as it sprang up and so came to nothing Secondly if it were not answered I would not have the Gent think that it was therefore not answered because unanswerable though he were apt enough to think so without this Praecaution but for other reasons For first the year 1640. was a busie year