before yet was it not ratified and confirmed till then for that is an undenyable rule of her own Canonist Leges instituuntur quùm promulgantur firmantur quùm moribus utentium approbantur Grat. Par. 1. Dist. 4. cap. 3. Whence it follows That neither this Decree of Siricius nor any other of the like nature could properly be called a Prohibition till that time when it was first generally received imto Practice and that was not til the year 1074. a longtime sure after the Apostles And this same Truth is attested by Gratian in the first words of his 31. distinction Tempus quoque Quia nondum erat institutum ut sacerdotes continentiam servarent where your new Glossator is very much troubled to prove that Sacerdotâ—…s is put for Subdiaconi Priests for Subdeacons that so he may rather elude then expound the Text It doth therefore neerly concern you as a Trustee of Gods Truth not of any mans mistakes or insolencies and as a member and Minister of Christs Catholick Church to mitigate if not recall those words That the Apostles themselves were the first that taught and decreed that Priests ought to abstain from wives And those other For Priests to marry contrary to the Churches precept Siricius might well say is to be in the flâ—…sh because it is to be in a continuall state of sin and damnation unless you will say That the Apostles taught and decreed that in word which they have contradicted in writing that the whole Church wittingly and willingly sinned against their Decree for above a thousand years together by which means you may chance teach others to say and we now find many Schollars most ready to learn such a wicked lesson That for so long together Christ was without a Catholick and Apostolick Church For my part I dare not be so far an Accuser of my Brethren but sure I will never be brought to be so far an Accuser of my Mother 8. But least it may be thought that Sampsen-like you have smitten us poor Philistines hip and thigh and have carried away our Gates by the vertue and strength of the Council of Carthage I will now look after a Razor that shall very much endanger that lock wherein your great strength lyeth for I have yet only clipped it a little by Valerius his hand and must now labour to cut it off which I shall endeavour to do by cutting the Africane Church from the Catholick and that Council you have alledged from the Africane Church and that Canon you have alledged from the Africane Council I say therefore 1. That the Africane Church was but a particular Church and could not pass the sentence may not have either the repute or the authority of the Catholick Church And for this answer I have your own Cardinals precedent Bellar. lib. 2. de concil cap. 8. 9. Where that objection against the Popes being called Summus Pontifex which is brought from the 26. Canon of the Council of Carthage Ut primae sedis Episcopus non appelletur Princeps sacerdotum aut summus sacerdos aut aliquid hujusmodi sed tantum primae sedis Episcopus is by him thus answered Quùm hoc Concilium nationale fuerit non universae sed tantùm Africanae Ecclesiae leges tulisse potuit Itaque hoc Canone non prohibuit neque potuit prohibere ne Rom. Pontifex diceretur sacerdotum princeps vel summus sacerdos sed tantuÌ„ ne ita appellaretur ullus Metropolitanus Africae This Council being but nationall could not make Canons for the Catholick Church and therefore by this Canon could not prohibit the Bishop of Rome to be called an high Priest but only the Bishops of Africa to be so called Pray shew me a reason why this answer is not as good for the Priests of Europe as for the Bishop of Rome for all the world cannot make one National Church the whole Catholick Church no more then it can make a particular an universal or one corner of the South or West all the world 2. That second Council of Carthage scarce deserves to have the credit and cannot have the authority of the particular Africane Church First because for ought that can be collected out of the acts thereof there were not above seven Bishops present at it no more then were at a Collation with the Donatists v. Bin. Conc. Tom. 1. Col. p. 624. whereas Africa afforded above two hundred Bishops and they were all by their Canons strictly bound to be present at National Synods Secondly because there is a plain and a gross untruth set down in the first words of that Council as it is in the Latine Copy which only befriends your assertion for there it is said Gloriosissimo Imperatore Valentiniano Augusto 4. Theodosio viris clarissimis consulibus i. Whiles Valentinian the Emperour was Consul the fourth time and Theodosius with him these Bishops met at Carthage whereas it is evident by the Archives of Chronologie That Valentinian the Emperour never at all was Consul with Theodosius and it is as clear by the same Archives that when Valentinian the Emperour was Consul the fourth time Neotorius not Theodosius was his partner See Helvicus An. Christ. vul 390. So I shew you plainly we have a false Consul put upon the Council and I have some reason to suspect we have also a false Council put upon the Church For it is clear that this Council was not held in the year 390. when Valentinian was Consul the fourth time because Genedius who speaks first in it and was President of it was not taken by Aurelius to be his Coadjutor at Carthage till after Saint Augustine had been taken by Valerius to be his Coadjutor at Hippo as saith Binius Aurelius factum Valerii Hipponensis imitatus onus Episcopale in Genedium stranstulit And it is asserted by Helvicus That Saint Augustine was made Priest of the Church of Hippo but in the year 391. that is the year after this Consulage And sure he lived some years a Priest of that Church before he was made Bishop thereof perchance so many as to satisfie the custom of the Church but sure so many as to write full thirteen Books as appears by his Retractations lib. 1. cap. 14. notwithstanding his continual Preaching all that time For he was required and authorized by his Bishop to be a Preacher whiles he was yet a Priest which till his daies had not been known in the Africane Church and he preached both privately and publickly against the Donatists Manichaeans and Pelagians saith Possidius and sure the more time he spent in Preaching the less time he had for writing But to let pass collections and conjectures we see Genedius the President of this Council was not a Bishop till after Saint Augustine And Saint Augustine was not so much as a Priest till one year after the date of this Council so it is certain the Council hath a false date and it is possible we may have a false Council
have not strained this Canon in my interpretations I assure you they are not mine but your own Authors The first is Gratians Par. 1. Dist. 28. c. 15. Si quis discernit Presbyterum conjugatum tanquam occasione â—…ptiarum quod offerre non debeat ab ejus oblatione ideo se abstinet Anathema sit The latter is the new Glossators upon Gratian in the edition authorized by Greg. 13. Si quis secernat se à Presbytero qui uxorem duxit tanquam non oporteat illo liturgiam peragente de oblatione percipere Anathema sit And he tells us That Dionysius exiguus had in effect so interpreted it before him 7. And this one single Canon might I alledge not only as the Jugement and Decree of the Catholick Church from the Code of her Canons but also as the Judgement of your own particular Roman Church from Dionysius and as the Decree of the same Church from Gratian But that both the antient Judgement and Decree of your Church are more clearly proved by the practice of it For in your very Church of Rome have heretofore been no less then nine Popes which were the sons of married Priests and Deacons whereas if Priests and Deacons marriage had been forbid by the Apostles or by the Catholick Church I might say They were the sins of Priests not sons and you might say They were very unfit Popes because very unfit successors for Saint Peter but more unfit Vicars for his master But so saith Gratian Par. 1. Dist. 56. cap. 2. Osius Papa fuit filius Stephani subdiaconi Bonifacius Papa fuit filius Jucundi Presbyteri Felix Papa filius Felicis Presbyteri de titulo Fasciolae Agapetus Papa filius Gordiani Presbyteri Theodorus Papa filius Theodori Episcopi de civitate Hierosolymâ Silverius Papa filius Silverii Episcopi Romae Deus dedit Papa filius Stephani subdiaconi Felix etiam tertius natione Romanus ex Patre Felice Presbytero fuit Item Gelasius natione Afer ex Episcopo Valerio natus est Item Agapetus natione Romanus ex Patre Gordiano Presbytero originem duxit complures etiam alii inveniuntur qui de sacerdotibus nati Apostolicae sedi praefuerunt See here are nine Popes named which were all the sons of married Clergy-men and yet Gratian concludes this Chapter saying These were not All divers more might be found if he had a mind to look after them yet these are enough to prove the practice of the Church of Rome for having married Priests till the year of our Lord 158 when Anastasius flourished who writ the lives of the Popes saith Bellarm. de script Eccles. with this emphatical asseveration Ut notum est denying Damasus cited by Gratian to have been the author of of that Book as well he might For Damasus lived in the year 367. So that very few of these men not above three at most had been Popes before his time for it is evident That Agapetus who is reckoned fourth in this Catalogue lived in the time of Justinian that is above 500. years after Christ For by his couragious answer he kept Justinian from embracing Eutychianism saying He thought he 〈◊〉 come to a Christian Emperour but he had found a Pagan persecutor the reason was The Emperour had laboured to perswade him to be an Eutychian And that Silverius who was this Agapetus his next successor may by the way be added to Gratians list for he was the son of Hormisdae not of Silverius Bishop of Rome I have no mind nor leisure to make any special enquiry after the rest and I need not For if you will consider this testimony seriously you will find in this one Catalogue not only Priests and Bishops of Rome to have been Fathers of Popes which is enough to prove the marriage of Priests allowed in that particular Church but also Theodorus Bishop of Hierusalem in Asia and Valerius Bishop of Hippo in Africa to have been Fathers of two of your antient Popes which is enough to prove the marriage of Priests then allowed in the Catholick Church that is to say not only in Europe but also in Asia and in Africa But I do intreate you to take special notice of Valerius Bishop of Hippo for he alone may very well make you misdoubt if not the truth yet the authority of your own alledged Canon since it is incredible that such a married Bishop should live at Hippo at the very same time in which such a Canon was made at Carthage against Priests marriages and neither confute the Canon having such a Learned Priest under him as Saint Augustine nor be confuted by it having so many enemies about him as the Donatists but however in that so many Fathers of your own Church have been the sons of married Priests it will be discretion in some of your Zealots hereafter to bestow better language upon the children of married Priests for fear they be constrained to reproach not only many of their own Popes but even the whole Church of Christ For so far doth your own Gratian justifie this Truth as to assure us That the marriage of Priests was lawful at that time in every Countrey over all the Christian world Dist. 56. c. 13. Quum ergo ex sacerdotibus natiin summos Pontifices supra leguntur esse promoti non sunt intelligendi de fornicatione sed de legitimis conjugiis nati quae sacerdotibus ante Prohibitionem Ubique licita erant in orientali Ecclesia usque hodie eis licere probatur When as therefore the sons of Priests as we we read before viz. cap. 2. which I alledged have been promoted to be Popes we may not think they were born to those Priests in fornication but in lawfull marriage for it was lawfull everywhere that is in all the Christian world for Priests to marry before the Prohibition and in the Eastern Church it is at this day proved to be lawfull So we see that the Clergy both of Eastern and Western Church did plainly shew by their Practice That the marriage of Priests was not prohibited by the Apostles or the Catholick Church and therefore generally used their liberty till some after-prohibition denyed the same to the Clergy of the Western Church And the new Glossator himself who confidently saith that Gratian was mistaken as to the Latine Church sheweth little reason for his own confidence because no pretence or proof for the others mistake till this Decree of Siricius which was not made till almost 400. and not generally ratified or received in his own Diocess till above a 1000. years after Christ For so Baronius himself hath recorded that in the year 1074. this Decree of prohibiting Priests marriage was forced upon the Bishops of Italy Germany and France by Pope Gregory the seventh after they had unanimously gainsayed and most earnestly deprecated and opposed it v. Bar. An. 1074. nu 37 38 39. Now if this Decree were not generally received in the Latine Church till then though it were made
Accordingly Binius is forced to confess That the second Council of Carthage though it was so in Title yet was not so in Truth but was such a second as had at least five before it Post quinque saltem anteriora hoc quod secundum appellatur habitum fuisse oportet Which he proves first from the Bishops names recited in the Acts of this Council Genedius Alypius Faustinus who were not Bishops till long after the year that Valentinian was the fourth time Consul Secondly from the very words of this very second Canon which you have alledged For that begins thus Quùm in praeterito consilio de continentiae castitatis moderamine tractaretur relating to a fore-past Council which fore-past Council saith Binius was that Africane Council celebrated the first year of Pope Coelestine which was the year 424. after Christ according to Helvicus A great distance sure from 390. And the 37. Canon of that Africane Council saith Binius is that which is here related to The like he affirms concerning Fortunatus his words in the third Canon Memini praeterito consilio fuisse statutum I remember in a fore-past Council it was ordained where saith the same Binius That fore-past Council was the forenamed Africane and Fortunatus reflected back to the tenth Canon of that Council But if this Council in which were so few Bishops and concerning which are so many uncertainties may deserve the credit and authority of the particular Africane Church yet sure it will be hard to prove That the words alledged by you deserve to have the credit or Authority of a Canon of this Council to that purpose for which and according to that sense in which you have alledged them 3. Wherefore thirdly I make bold to assert That this your Canon as you have applyed and urged it was no Canon of the Africane Council called the second of Carthage for the Fathers in Trullo Can. 13. do upon this very occasion of Priests continency cite that yery numerical Canon of Carthage with an addition of other words and in another sense saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. We know that those who met at Carthage and took care of the grave and sober behaviour of Priests did say That at some proper and set times they should abstain from their wives 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Propriis terminis à consortibus abstineant So that this and no other but this is the doctrine which the second Council of Carthage did say The Apostles had taught and antiquity had practised And this is no more then what we find in Saint Pauls writings Except it be with consent for a time that you may give your selves unto fasting and prayer 1 Cor. 7. 5. which though spoken generally of all married men yet may without any violence to the Text and with great zeal of and advantage to godliness be appropriated à fortiori to the married Clergy But for Priests total abstaining from wives you must find it in some other Canon or say the Trullane Fathers did either want Honesty in mis-citing this Canon or Learning in mis-understanding it or Iudgement in mis-applying it Whereas on the contrary they were so far from wanting any of these that they had moreover power and authority to have reversed it and would have used that power had they indeed found it a Canon of the Africane Church For they are so bold as plainly to reverse a Canon near of kin to it delivered in the Roman Church requiring married men if they were made Priests to promise they would after that time not co-habite with their wives And to assure us and all the world That these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning which in truth is all the controversie came not either by surreption or by mistake into their Canon The reason of this restriction is thus given in the ensuing words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Oportet enim eos qui altari afsident quum sacra manibus tractant in omnibus continentes esse not bidding Priests contain from marriage at all times but only at such times as they were to administer the holy Sacrament This was certainly the sense of your second Canon of the second Council of Carthage or not only Greece did not understand carthage but also Carthage did not understand it self Whence Balsamon is so bold as to assert in plain terms That they of Rome and their accomplices were much mistaken who inferred from this or any other Canon of the Councils of carthage That Priests and Deacons might not have their own wives 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But were bound to keep themselves single and unmarried vid. Bals. in Can. 3. 4. Concil 3. Carth. And he proves his assertion from the 70. Canon of the third Council of Carthage meaning the 73. as we commonly say the 70. when we mean the 72. interpreters where the injunction is plain That they ought to abstain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secundum proprios terminos At their proper or peculiar times viz. At the times of their Administration Nay yet more Aurelius who is said to have propounded this your Canon doth himself thus alledge or at least thus interpret it in the Greek Canons of the third Council of Carthage as they are entred and received in the Code of the Africane Church your own Binius being my witness For there Can. 25. he requires Priests to abstain from wives only at some proper times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Propriis terminis ab uxoribus abstineant v. Bin. Concil Tom. 1. edit Colon. p. 580. in alterâ editione quorundam Canonum Concilii tertii Carth. ex codice Africano But the Latine interpreter in Binius rendring these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secundum priora statuta priora instead of propria and Binius foâ—…lowing that reading in the 37. Canon concil Africani sub Coelestino Benifacio and preferring it as the better of the two in his notes upon Concil Carth. 5. sub Anastasio cap. 3. even contrary to the reading of that same Canon as it is in its own edition makes me suspect that the Africane Canons have not been derived to us so entire and incorrupt in the Latine copies as in the Greek wherein if I am mistaken you may well pardon my mistake because your own new Glossator upon Gratian hath presumed to correct the Latine Copy of this very Canon as he had found it in the Books then commonly received by the Greek Copy leaving out exemplo after Apostoli docuerunt as I shewed before for this one reason amongst others That he found it not in the Greek Copies I know Binius is of another mind so impossible is it there should be Unity where there is not Verity and saith concerning the carthage Canons That the Latine Edition is of a greater authority then the Greek translation But confessing two various editions of the Latine Canons Secundum propria statuta and priora statuta and not being able to shew any more then one translation
that your Priests are convinced of their Idolatry in worshipping of Images because they are so willing to shuffle off the second Commandement which forbids it least that should also convince the common people wherein a late German Bishop and Clergy of yours shewed too much fraud to be accounted men of conscience and too little Art to be accounted men of cunning for commanding that the Lords Prayer the Angelical salutation the Creed and Ten Commandements should be distinctly and leisurably repeated in the German tongue every Lords day by the Parish Priests that the people might be able to repeat understand and learn them Distinctè ac tractatim ut populus legentem repetitione subsequi ea discere memoriae mandare possit Synod Augustensis cap. 25. yet left not so much as any blind footsteps of the second Commandement in their German translation which they appointed the Priests to read There was little conscience in leaving out one of Gods Commandements and as little cunning in commanding the Parish Priests to read them All when they themselves had left out One for they could not think by their false copy which quite left out the second Commandement and called the third the second to blind their Priests though they did think by it to blind the people They would be thought very zealous in teaching those committed to their charge all the Fundamentals of salvation yet purposely concealed one main practical fundamental because they had formerly mis-taught or at least mispractised the same finding it more agreeable with their honour though less with their honesty to let the people continue still in ignorance then to recall their own errour The like was the tender care and conscience of your Trent Fathers to instruct the people in their prayers Sess. 22. cap. 8. Etsi Missa magnam contineat populi fidelis eruditionem non tamen expedire visum est Patribus ut vulgari linguâ passim celebraretur Ne tamen oves Christi esuriant Pastores frequenter aliquid in Missâ exponant Though the Mass contain in it very great and necessary instructions for faithful people yet we do not think fit to put it in a language they can understand notwithstanding least Christs sheep should be bunger-starved the Pastors are required often to expound some parts of it A great seeming Fatherly care of souls to fear they might perish for want of food but no Fatherly kindness nor resolution rather to let them perish then make them able to feed themselves But the cause was the same in both The peoples ignorance was to keep them in their sinful obedience For the less they knew the more they would obey in things so plainly against the Law of God Therefore these two Synods had rather the common people should worship God without their Reason then with their Conscience though they could not worship as men without their Reason nor as Christians but with their Conscience But so it is Reason and Conscience must both be laid aside or lulled asleep when men are to act upon false Principles as in this particular The Commandment was to be thrown down that the Images might be kâ—…pt up For that is so plain in its Prohibition and so powerful in its Commination that if the people had understood it they would not have committed so gross Idolatry or would full soon have become very penitent Idolators And good reason for Images are but a relick of Paganism Ex Gentili consuetudine as saith Eusibius Hist. Eccles. lib. 7. cap. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of a Paganish custom and therefore long kept out of the Churches of Christians and longer kept out of their Religion though now they so abound in your Churches and Religion as if you meant that even in your most populous Cities these your new Gods should exceed and out-vie the number of their worshippers so that I might justly hint at your pictures and Images all my fault was I did only hint at them I will now make some part of amends and down-right strike at them though by other mens hands not mine own For in this case I have the primest Champions of Christendom to prove that Images were long kept out of the Churches of Christians and longer kept out of their Religion and either of these is enough to break them in pieces 16. First that Images were long kept out of the Churches of Christians and for this we have the testimony of Epiphanius for the Greek and of Saint Hierom for the Latine Church both in one Epistle to John of Hierusalem which was indicted or composed by Epiphanius translated and approved by Saint Hierom. The testimony is in these words Cùm ergo hoc vidissem in Ecclesiâ Christi contra authoritatem Scripturarum hominis pendere Imaginem scidi illud magis dedi consilum custodibus ejusdem loci ut pauperem mortuum eo obvolverent efferent Precor ut jubeas Presbyteros ejusdem loci deinceps praecipere in Ecclesiâ Christi ejusmodi vela quae contra Religionem nostram veniunt non appendi The story is this Epiphanius going to say his prayers in a Church at Anabaltha there spied a vail or curtain which had in it the picture of Christ or of some Saint at which he was so offended That he cut down the said veil or curtain and wished the Keepers of the Church to bury a dead man therewith alledging it was against the authority of the holy Scriptures and the purity of Christian Religion that such Images should be set up in Churches and desiring the Bishop of Hierusalem in whose Diocess it was to require the Clergy there to admit no more such pictures or images into that Church Contra authoritatem Scripturarum contra Religionem nostram No Christian Bishop can have stronger arguments or rather adjurations either for the casting out or the keeping out of Images from his Church then that the retaining or the receiving of them is against the authority of the Scriptures the custom of the Church and the conscience of Religion All which are here alledged by Epiphanius For he that saith Contra Religionem nostram against our Religion doth appeal to the custom of Christians as well as to the conscience of Christianity And this quotation is such a Gordian not to your Cardinal that after all his pains to loosen and untie it at last Alexander like he cuts it off saying Verior solutio haec verba esse supposititia Bell. lib. 2. de sanct cap. 9. The truest answer is The words are supposititious But words entailed upon the Church for so many hundred years together are not so easily cut off The same Authority had before troubled Waldensis yet he denies not the truth of the story only saith That Epiphanius did this thing in hatred of the Anthropomorphites and out of zeal not according to knowledge Wald. de Sacramental Tit. 19. c. 157. So likewise Alphonsus a Castro lib. de Haer. voce Imago denies not the
their Apostle I will instance in St. Paul who was not a whit behind the chiefest Apostles 2 Cor. 11. 5. though you now attribute all to Saint Peter we read that certain of the Jews banded together and bound themselves under a curse saying That they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul Act. 23. 12. This banding against an Apostle was fighting against God in the judgement of a Jew Act. 15. 39. how much more should it be in the judgement of Christians For we cannot but look upon St. Paul in this case as upon Godâ—… Trustee both for the Christian Religion and for the Christian Communion anâ—… accordingly invested with authority froâ—… God for the discharge of that Trust an doubt not but He looked upon himself aâ—… one that ought to be more zealous foâ—… Christs Religion and for Christs Communion than for his own Authority And so doubtless ought the Priest-hoodâ—… all Churches after him and why not all in your Church For the Churches fouâ—…dation or being is much more excelleâ—… and glorious in regard of her Religioâ—… and of her Communion then in regardâ—… her Authority 15. This I fear comes neerer your 〈◊〉 then I am willing to urge it sure I am comes very neer my position That formaliâ—… vocation of Saints such as is now coâ—…monly used in your Devotions being pâ—…vately used is against the three first Coâ—…mandements which concern the Religioâ—… and being publickly used is against 〈◊〉 fourth Commandement which conceâ—… the Communion of Gods Church aâ—… therefore in vain do you pretend in sin do you imploy the Authority of your Church to uphold either the private or the publicke use of it And this difference I cannot but observe betwixt your Trent Catechist and your Rome dogmatist The one goes to prove that Invocation of Saints is not against the Commandement because it is according to the use of the Church The other goes to prove that t is not according to the use of the Church because it is against the Commandement For so Bellarmine proves that the Saints are not to be invocated as the Authors of any blessing appertaining either to grace or glory but only as the impetrators or procurers of it and his two proofs are one from the Command of the Holy Scriptures probatur primo ex Scriptura The other from the Custome of the Church Secundo probatur ex usu Ecclesiae Bell. l. 1. de Sanct. beat cap. 17. though to make good his second proof He maintains this Unlogical and Untheological position That t is no matter for the words so as it be the sense of our Prayers which is Unlogical because it is against the very nature and institution of speech and Untheological because it is against that very Commandement which ordereth our Speech in our Prayers and therefore ordereth our Prayers only as they are Vocal and may be spoken not as they are Mental and may be thought and that is the third Commandement whereby God hath set a watch only before the doores of our Lips not of our Hearts He had ordered our Hearts in the first Commandement and ordereth our mouths only in the third when he saith Thou shalt not take the Name of thy Lord thy God in vain And in this respect the Psalmist prayeth Accept I beseech thee the free-wil offering 〈◊〉 my mouth O Lord Psal. 119. 10. Here is then very much in the Judgement of your own Cardinal though you say Here is nothing against Praying to Saintâ—… and Angels confirmed in grace and glory For to let pass that their bless in Heaven doth not make them God for Neighbour we may not pray to them for any blessing that tends either to Grace or Glory and all good Prayers are for blessings that do tend to one of these And t is a poor shift to talk of sense not oâ—… words when the question is only oâ—… words and to say you mean the Saintâ—… but as Procurers when you speak to then as Authors of the blessings you pray for For He that hath bid his Church daily to pray And lead us not into temptation hath above all forbid his Church daily to lead his people committed to her charge into Temptation by their very Prayers Therefore in vain did some of your Zelots seek to corrupt the Hebrew Text in Montanus his interlineary Bible of 1572. putting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though by Gods special providence the Press strangly miscarried for it is printed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in all that edition which word is a meer Tragelaphus in the Hebrew That since you were not contented with Gods Text you should be ashamed of your own And this discovery we owe to your own L. Bâ—…ogensis in his notations upon Genesis where he saith Gu. Fabritius Pici Mirandulani Principis autoritate nixus in Hebraicis illis Bibliis Regio operi adjunctis quibus Latina interpretatio inter contextus lineas inserta est excudi curavit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quanquam errore positum sit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I say in vain did some of your Zelots seek to corrupt the Hebrew Text putting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gen. 3. 15. Ipsa for Ipse to make good your Vulgar Translation Ipsa conteret caput Tuum For if it had been said See shall bruise thy head yet you had not found a sufficient warrant to Invocate the blessed Virgin because you cannot possibly bring Her into the first Table of the Decalogue to make Her a God or the Object of Religion Let my Prayer be set forth in thy sight as the Incense saith the Prophet Psal. 141. 2. Prayer is the Incense of the Soul and must be set forth only in his sight who seeth the secret recesses and sighs of the heart When the Jews went to burn incense and to serve other Gods whom they knew not where Note Burning incense is put for serving of God the Lord said to them O do not this abominable thing which I hate Jer. 44. 3 4. And doth he not still say the same to Christians is it less hateful now then it was then for any man to perform vâ—…ws or to burn incense to the Queen of Heaven may not God as justly swear against us if we do so as he did against them That his Name shall be no more named in our mouths v. 26. Are not all but himself as well to us as to them Gods whom we know not Is not this intruding into those things which we have not seen Col. 2. 18. Surely none but God alone is to be known or seen throughout the whole Bible in all the precepts and precedents of Religious worship Therefore Invocation being an elicite and proper act of Religion cannot be applied to any that is not the proper object of Religion The Jews might as well have offered their corporal Sacrifice to Abraham as the Christians can offer this spiritual Sacrifice to