Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	church_n	scripture_n	truth_n	4,120	5	6.1161	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A17442	Adelphomachia, or, The warrs of Protestancy being a treatise, wherein are layd open the wonderfull, and almost incredible dissentions of the Protestants among themselues, in most (if not all) articles of Protesta[n]cy, and this proued from their owne wordes & writinges / vvritten by a Cath. priest ; whereunto is adioyned a briefe appendix, in which is proued, first, that the ancient fathers, by the acknowledgments of the learned Protestants, taught our Cath. and Roman fayth, secondly, that the said fathers haue diuers aduantages about the Protestant writers, for finding out the true sense of the Scripture.	B. C.	1637 (1637)	STC 4263.7; ESTC S1838	109,763	196

together with the Church of Ierusalem erred And D. Fulke speaking of the same matter is no lesse sparing thus saying Peter (e) Against the Rhemish Testament in Galat. 2. erred in Ignorance against the Gospell I will conclude these their wonderful Inuectiues against the Apostles with D. Whitakers accusation of them thus writing It is (f) D. Whitaker de Eccles contra Bellarm Controu 2. quaest 4. p. 213. manifest that euen after Christ his Ascension and the Holy Ghost descending vpon the Apostles not only the Common sort but euen the Apostles themselues erred in the vocation of the Gentills c. Yea Peter also erred concerning the abrogation of the Ceremoniall Law and this was a matter of Fayth Thus D. Whitaker Would any Christian euer thinke that such horrid words as these any Protestant contrary to the iudgment of other their brethren should disgorge against the Apostles themselues 2. I now hasten to the seuerall Translations of the sacred Scriptures about which there is no lesse contention among the Protestants then is touching which is true Scripture and which is forged and so to speake abastarded And First touching that translation which is commonly called the Vulgar Translation made by S. Hierome though it be much disliked by most Protestants and accordingly hereto D. Whitaker calleth it An ould (g) In his Answere to M. Reynolds Preface pag. 2. 26. rotten translation c. full of faults errours and corruptions of all sortes Yet Carolus Molinaeus a learned Protestant thus approueth it I can (h) In Nouo Testam pag. 30. very hardly depart from the vulgar and accustomed reading which also I am accustomed earnestly to defend His wordes in Latin are these Agerrimè à vulgari consuetaque lectione recedo quam etiam enixè defendere soleo Yea this Molinaeus further sayth I prefer (i) Molinas in Luc. 17. the Vulgar Edition before Erasmus Bucer Bullinger Brentius the Tigurine Translations also before Iohn Caluin his translation and all others D. Couell plainly affirmeth that he preferreth (k) In his answere to M. Iohn Burges pag. 94. the vulgar Translation before all others To conclude euen Beza himselfe contrary to most other Caluinists doth in these words aduance the vulgar Translation The vulgar (l) In praefat Noui Testament anno 155● Edition I do for the most part imbrace and prefer before all others But now leauing the vulgar Translation the which some Protestants as we see do allow far more do reiect so great disparity there is in their iudgments Let vs come to such Translations of Scripture as haue beene made by the Protestants themselues and let vs obserue what mutuall and interchangeable entertaynemēt the said Translations haue receaued from the Pens of others their brethren And to begin Luther made a Translation of the Holy Scripture yet this his Translation is condemned by Swinglius in this sort Thou Luther (m) To. 2. ad Luth. lib. de Sacr. p. 412. 413. dost corrupt the Word of God Thou art seene to be a manifest corrupter and peruerter of the Holy Scriptures How much are we ashamed of thee c. And Kekermannus the Protestant thus censureth this Translation of Luther (n) In System 55. Theolog. l. 1. p. 188. Lutheri versio Germanica c. The Translation of Luther of the Scripture in Dutch c. especially in Iob and the Prophets hath no small blemishes And the said Translation is in like manner condemned by Osiander (o) Osiander his condemnation is mentioned by Luther in Colloq Mensal Germ. fol. 245. The Deuines of Basill and Oecolampadius did compyle a Translation yet it is censured in these words by Beza The (p) Beza in respons ad defens resp Castal Translation of Basill is in many places wicked and altogether differing from the mynd of the Holy Ghost The Swinglians vndertooke to translate the Scriptures against the authours of which Translation Luther thus belcheth They (q) Vbi supra 388. are Fooles Asses Antichristes Deceauers and of Asslyke vnderstandings In so much as when a Copy of that Translation was sent to Luther he would not receiue it but reiected it as Hospinian (r) In Hist Sacram. part altera fol. 1●3 witnesseth Castalio his Translation is censured by Beza to be (s) Beza in Test ●●e●i 1558. in praefat Sacrilegious wicked and Ethnicall Caluins Translation is also reiected for Carolus Molinaeus the forsaid markable Protestant sayth thus thereof Caluin in (t) In sua Translat Test Noui part ●1 fol. 110. his Harmony maketh the Text of the Gospell to leape vp and downe He vseth violence to the letter of the Gospell and besides he addeth to the Text. Beza also for the vp shot of all made a Translation of which translation the foresaid Molinaeus thus speaketh Beza (u) In Translat Testam Noui. pag. 64. 65. 66. de facto textum mutat Beza euen actually changeth the text of the Scripture And Castalio the foresaid Protestant by way of retaliation thus writeth thereof To note (x) In defens Translat pag. 170. the errours of Beza his Translation would require a great volume And Castalio particularly insisteth in that false Translation of Beza against Freewill in the first Chapter of Iohn where it is in the Greeke As many at receaued him he gaue them Power to be made the sonnes of God Beza translating Dignity to be the sonnes of God Castalio thus saying Beza (*) Castalio vbi supra pulcherrimum maximique momenti locum deprauat c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est Potestas nunquam Dignitas c. Now touching our English Translations of the Bible The Disagreements of our English Protestants are no lesse violent implacable For First we find one English Authour thus to condemne them The English Translations (y) Carleyle lib. That Christ descended not into Hell pag. 116. 117. 118. haue depraued the sense obscured the Truth and deceaued the ignorant and in many places they detort the Scripture from its true sense Another Protestant thus censureth them How (z) M. Burges in his Apology Sect. 6. can I approue vnder my hand a Translation which hath many Omissions many Additions which sometimes obscureth sometimes peruerteth the sense being sometimes sensles sometimes contrary The Ministers of Lincolne Diocesse thus write The English (a) In the Abridgment of a booke deliuered to King Iames by the said Ministers pag. 11. 12. Translation taketh away from the Text addeth to the Text and this sometimes to the changing or obscuring of the meaning of the Holy Ghost They further enlarging themselues in these words A Translation (b) Vbi supra which is absurd and sensles peruerting in many places the meaning of the Holy Ghost Other Puritans are no lesse sparing in their Censures for diuers Puritans with one consent thus write only of the Translation of the Psalmes Our Translation (c) In a Treatise entituled A Treatise

Profession of the truth of Christ. To contract this point D. Couell thus expresly teacheth We (r) In his Defence of M. Hooker pag. 77. affirme them of the Church of Rome to be parts of the Church of God and that those who liue and dye in that Church may notwithstanding be saued charging other Protestants teaching the contrary to vse his owne words with ignorant Zeale Thus much touching the dissentions of the Puritans and the moderate Protestants concerning the saluation of Papists dying Papists cōcluding this point with the iudgment of the Deuiues of Geneua contrary to other their brethren who teach that the Baptisme of Catholike Children either by Protestant Ministers or Catholike Priests is aualeable because say they the (s) So teach the Deuines of Geneua in the Propositions and Principles disputed 〈◊〉 Geneua p. 128. Children are comprehended within the Couenant of eternall life by meanes of the Fayth of their Parents Which very point is in like manner taught to the great dislike of many Puritans by D. Whitguift (t) In his Defence pag. 62● and M. Hooker (u) Eccles pol. l. 5. pag. 1●● For most if not all the Puritans teach that Papists dying Papists cannot be saued seeing say they their Fayth is Idolatry and superstition The X. Paragraph I Next come to the Ancient Fathers because they were the most learned and eminent members of the Ancient Church where we shall see the strang diuersity of the Protestants Iudgments of them Some of the Protestants reuerencing and imbracing their Authorities others wholy betrampling their testimonies and entertayning them with all contempt and scorne And First we will alledge the iudgments of diuers Protestants admitting their Authorities and worth according hereto we fynd that D. Iewell in his Sermon at Paules Crosse thus cryed out O Gregory O Austin O Ierome c. if we be deceaued you haue deceaued vs And after in the said Sermon As I said before so I say againe I am content to yield and subscribe if any of our learned Aduersaries or if all the learned men that be aliue be able to bring any one sufficient sentence out of any old Catholike Doctour or Father or out of any old Generall Councell for the space of six hundred yeares after Christ Which challenge D. Whitaker after iustified in these words writing to Father Campian Audi (x) Whitak in respons ad ration Camp rat 5. Campiane c. Heare O Campian that most true and constant Challenge which Iewell that day made when he appealed to the antiquity of the first six hundred yeares c. That is the proffer and Challenge of vs all we do promise the same with Iewell and we will make it good D. Sutcliffe thus auerreth The (y) In his Exam. of D. Kellisōs suruey Fathers in all points are for vs and not for the Pope D. Willet is no lesse confident herein thus protesting I take (z) In his Antilog p. 263. God to witnes before whom I must render an account c. that the same Fayth and Religion which I defend is taught and confirmed in the more substantiall points by those Histories Councells and Fathers that liued within fyue or six hundred yeares after Christ. Kempnitius We (a) In Exam. Concil Trident. part 1. pag. 74. doubt not but that the Primitiue Church receaued from the Apostles and Apostolicall men not only the text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense thereof And againe We are greatly confirmed in the true and sound sense of the Scripture by the testimony of the ancient Church The Confession of Bohemia The (b) In the Harmony of Confessions pag. 400. ancient Church is the true and best Mistris of posterity and going before leadeth vs the way D. Bancroft speaking of Caluin and Beza thus sayth For (c) In his Suruey of the pretended holy Discipline M. Caluin and M. Beza I do thinke of them as their Writings do deserue But yet I thinke better of the ancient Fathers I must confesse I will conclude this their acknowledgment of the Primitiue Church and Fathers with D. Iewell with whom I first did begin he thus writing The Primitiue (d) In his Defence of the Apology Church which was vnder the Apostles and Martyrs hath euer beene accounted the Purest of all others without exception But now let vs see how Diametrically and repugnantly other Protestants stand to these former Protestants touching the Authority and dignity of the ancient Fathers And to forbeare the former Confessions of Protestants touching the Inuisibility of their Church during the first fiue or six hundred yeares after Christ aboue related which euidently demonstrateth that such Protestants who teach so long an Inuisibility do consequently teach and grant that the Fathers of those tymes were in iudgment Papists and not Protestants for if they had beene Protestants then the Protestanticall Church had most remarkably beene visible and conspicuous in the said Fathers To forbeare the iteration I say therof I will descend to the particular Reproualls giuen by the Protestants against them And first do we not find the same D. Whitaker obserue the inconstancy of this man who aboue so much maintayned D Iewells appeale thus to write Ex (e) Whitak contra Duraeum l. 6. p. 423. Patrum erroribus vester ille religionis Cento consutus est Your Popish Religion is but a patched Couerlet of the Fathers errours sowed together Pomeran the Protestants thus writeth Nostri Patres siue sancti fiue non sancti c. Our (g) Pomeran in Io●au ancient Fathers whether they were holy or not holy I not much rest vpon were blinded with the spirit of Montanus and through humane Traditions Doctrines of the Deuills c. they did not teach purely of Iustification c. Neither were they sollicitous to preach Iesus Christ in his Gospell Iacobus Acontius the Protestant thus condemneth the Fathers Quidem (h) In stratagem Satanae l. c. p. 196. eò redierunt c. Certaine men meaning Protestants are gone so far as that they would haue all points to be tryed by the authorities of the Fathers c. But this custome I hould to be most pernicious and altogether to be auoided D. Humfrey so smally pryaeth the Fathers as that he rebuked D. Whitaker for renewing D. Iewels challenge in appealing to the ancient Fathers aboue related in this manner D. Whitaker (i) Lib. de vita Iewel li. printed at London pag. 212. gaue the Papists too large a scope was iniurious to himselfe and after a manner spoyled himselfe and the Church Melancthon (k) In 1. Cor. cap. 3. Presently (k) In 1. Cor. cap. 3. from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the Doctrine concerning Iustification by Fayth encreased Ceremonyes and deuised peculiar worships Beza thus ballanceth the Fathers with the Protestants of this age saving Yf we (l) In Epist Theolog Ep. 1. compare our tymes next to the

so to ascend to the Old we find touching Luthers Condemnation of the Apocalyps Bullinger thus to complayne Doctour Martin (e) Vpon the Apocalips Englished cap. 1. serm 1. fol. 2. Luther hath as it were sticked this booke by a sharpe Preface set before his first Edition of the New Testament in Dutch for which his iudgment good and learned Men were offended with him With Luther herein agree Kempnitius and Brentius in the places next herea●ter noted in the Margent and yet Caluin and the Protestants in England admit it for Canonicall In like sort the Epistle of Iames is tearmed by Luther Epistola (f) In pro legom b●ius Epist straminea An Epistle swelling Contentions Strawy and vnworthy altogether an Apostolicall spirit In the same manner the Magdeburgenses (g) Cent. l. 2. c. 4. col 55. Kempnitius (h) Exam. 4. Sess Concil Trident. and Brentius (i) Confess Witiemberg l. de sacra Scriptura do condemne the same Epistle with Luther as Apocryphall notwithstanding Caluin the Church of England acknowledge it for Canonicall Scripture In like sort Luther (k) Luther in Annotat. in hanc Epistol the Centurists Kempnitius and Brentius in the places aboue noted in the Margent condemne as Apocryphall the Epistle of Iude the second Epistle of Peter they rest vncertaine and doubtfull of the Authority of the second and third Epistle of Iohn But Erasmus more fully speaketh thereof his words are these The (l) In Prolegem ad hanc Epist Second and Third Epistle of Iohn are not to be taken as his Epistles but as written by some other man And yet all these are acknowledged for Scripture by Caluin the Caluinists and the Church of England Beza reiecteth the History of the adulterous Woman recorded in the Gospell of S. Iohn c. 8. And Bullinger (m) He is so charged by Laurentius Valla. a Sacramentary reiecteth that addition to our Lords Prayer For thyne is the Kingdome the power and glory c. And yet these parcells are taken for Scripture by other Sacramentaries Luther in like manner discanoneth the Epistle to the Hebrews (n) Prolegom Epist ad Haebreos maintayning that it was not written either by S. Paul or by any other Apostle for it contayneth sayth Luther certaine things contrary to the Apostolicall Doctrine With him conspire in iudgment Brentius Kempnitius the Magdeburgians in the places aboue quoted Touching the Foure Ghospells Luther to (o) Luth. Praefat. in Nouum Testam lib. de Scripturae Ecclesiae authoritate c. 3. extenuate depresse the Authority of three of them cēsureth that the Gospell of Iohn is the only fayre and true Gospell and to be preferred before the other three by many degrees he further maintayning that the generall Opinion of foure Gospells ought to be abandoned and relinquished he protesting that he ascribeth more Reuerence to the Epistles of Paul and Peter then to the other three Euangelists To come to the Old Testament The Booke of Baruch is accounted as Apocryphall by (p) L. 3. Instit. c. 10. §. 8. Caluin and (q) In Exam. 4. Sess Concil Trid. Kempnitius and yet is taken as Canonicall by most other Protestants since we do not find it in their writings to be reiected by them The Canticles is wholy reiected by (r) In Translat Latin suorum Bibliorum Castalio who maintaynes that it contaynes matter of wanton loue for which his Censure he is grieuously and sharpely reprehended euen by Beza (s) Beza in Praefat. in Iosue The Booke entituled Ecclesiastes is thus scurrilously traduced by Luther The Authour (t) Luther in Conuiuialibus titulo de Patriarchis Prophetis of Ecclesiastes seemes to ryde without spurrs or bootes only with bare stockings Yet is it taken for Scripture generally by the Caluinists The Booke of Iob is reuerenced for Canonicall Scripture by the Protestants of Englād and by Caluin and the Caluinists and yet Luther so contemneth it as that he thus plainly condemneth the said Booke The Argument (u) In Conuiuialibus ser titulo de Patriar● is Prophetis of Iob is a meere fiction inuented only for the setting downe of a true and liuely example of Patience Thus far of such parts only of the New and Old Testament which some Protestants repute as Apocryphall and therefore reiect them other Protestants acknowledg them as Canonicall and therefore take them for the true and vndoubted word of God Here before I leaue speaking of the reiecting or approuing of the Scripture I will adioyne thereto that whereas the most learned and moderate Protestants do so reuerence Moyses and the Apostles teaching and belieuing that their Pens were so directed by the Holy Ghost as that they did not nor could erre in their writings yet heare what is said to the contrary by other Protestants And first Luther thus conuitiateth Moyses Moyses (x) Luth●● tom 3. Wittenberg in Psalm 41. fol. 423. tom 3. German fol. 40. in Colloq mensal German fol. 152. 153. had his lipps vnpleasant stopped angry c. Do you collect all the Wisdome of Moyses and of the Heathen Philosophers and you shall fynd them to be before God either Idolatry or Hypocriticall Wisdome or if it be politick the wisdome of wrath c. Moyses had his Lips full of gaule and anger c. Away therefore with Moyses Luther and other Protestants further rayle in great acerbity of language and intemperate words at the Apostles for thus he writeth expresly against S. Peter Peter (y) Luther in Epist. ad Galat. c. 1. after the English Translation fol. 33. 34. tom 5. Wittenbeg anno 1554. fol. 290. the chiefe of the Apostles did liue and teach extra verbum Dei besides the Word of God The Centuristi thus taxe S. Paul Paul doth turne (z) Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 10. col 580. to Iames the Apostle and a Synod of Presbyters being called together he is perswaded by Iames and the rest that for the offended Iewes he should purify himselfe in the Temple whereunto Paul yeeldeth which certainly is no small slyding of so great a Doctour D. Bancroft alledgeth out of Zanchius his Epistles that a Caluinist thus said Yf (a) In his Suruey of the pretended Discipline pag. 37● Paul should come to Geneua and preach the same houre that Caluin did I would leaue Paul and heare Caluin Caluin thus bouldly affirmeth of S. Peter Peter (b) In Comment in omnes Pauli Episto●as p. 510. erred to the schisme of the Church to the endangering of Christian liberty and the o●erthrow of the grace of God Conradus Schluffeth 〈◊〉 chargeth Caluin to maintayne and say that The Apostles (c) In Theolog. Caluinist l. 2. fol 40. alledged the Prophets in anoth●● sense then was meant Brentius playnely writeth thus S. Peter (d) In Apol Confess de Con●t●ijs p. 900. chiefe of the Apostles and Barnabas after the Holy Ghost receaued

directed to her Excellent Maiesty of the Psalmes compared in our Booke of Common Prayer doth in Addition Substraction and Alteration differ from the truth of the Hebrew in two hundred places at least M. Parkes censureth the English Bibles with the Notes of Geneua in these words As for (d) In his Apology concerning Christes descending into Hell those Bibles it is to be wished that either they may be purged from those manifould Errours which are both in the Text and Margent or els vtterly prohibited To conclude with M. Broughtons Condemnation of the English Bibles This great Hebritian thus expresly writeth The publike (e) In his Aduertisment to the Bishops Translation of the Scripture in English is such as that it peruerteth the Text of the Old Testament in eight hundred forty and eight places and it causeth Millions of Millions to reiect the New Testament and to runne into eternull Flames And hence it is that D Reynolds in the Conference at Hampton-Court being the speaker for the Puritans openly denyed before the King to subscribe to the Communion Booke because said he It warranted a corrupt and false Translation of the Bible Thus far of the immortall Disagreements of the Protestants both touching the Authority of the many Bookes of Scripture and of the Translations of the Scriptures made by the Protestants 3. I will here in this next place rest in the easines and difficulty of the Scripture seuerally maintayned by seuerall Protestants We find (f) In Prolegom● contra Patrum à Soto Brentins to write that it belongeth through the easines of Scripture to euery man to iudge from the Scripture of the Doctrine of Religion and to discerne truth from falshood In like sort D Whitaker thus writeth touching ech vnlearned Mans reading the Scripture The (g) de sacra script p. 529. vnlearned in the exposition of Scripture is to demand the Opinion of the learned and to read the Commentaries of Interpreters but they must take heed ne nimis illis tribuant that they do not ascribe too much to them but so as that in the meane tyme they retaine their owne liberty that is that euery illiterate fellow must finally iudge of the sense of the Scripture This point needeth no further allegations for we see that euery Mechanicall Fellow if so he can but read and thinks himselfe to be of the number of the Faythfull vanteth of his easy vnderstanding of the Scripture And this deportment is the Character of ech ignorant Puritan Yea ech silly ignorant Puritan-Woman will assume so much to herselfe in the interpretation of Scripture And yet to crosse this their Vanity we find Luther thus to write Scio (h) In praefat in Psalm esse impudentissimae temeritatis c. I know it to be a signe of most shameles temerity and rashnes for any Man to professe that he truly vnderstandeth in all places but any one booke of the Scriptures And D. Field maintayneth the same and sheweth Reasons in defence thereof thus writing There is no (i) L. 4. of the Church cap. 15. Question but that therebe many difficulties of the Holy Scriptures proceeding partly from the high and excellent things therein contayned which are without the compasse of Naturall Vnderstanding so are hidden from naturall Men c partly out of the ignorance of tongues c. And the truth of this point is warranted from the practise of the learned Protestants many of whom haue written Commentaries and Expositions of most bookes of Scripture which Commentaries and Expositions had beene needlesly vndertaken if the Scripture were of that facility and easines as the Puritans seeme to suggest Here now in this last place concerning the Protestants disagreements about Scripture I will descend to shew how they disagree in seuerally expounding seuerall texts of Scripture To goe through all such texts of their disagreements would be most laboursome and needles therefore I will insist in some few And First to begin with those words of the Institution of the blessed Eucharist Hoc est corpus meum Touching which text after all the Protestants haue wholy disclaymed from the Catholikes exposition thereof they presently dissent among themselues 1. For First (k) In lib. suo ca●●o Basiliae anno 1526. Carolostadius the Protestant will haue the Aduerb Hîc to be vnderstood by the Pronoune Hoc he thus meaning Hîc sedet corpus meum 2. Bucer (l) In R●tract●● suis affirmeth that the Pronoune Hoc signifieth the whole action of the supper So as the sense must be This action signifyeth my body 3. Swinglius (m) L. d● vera falsa Religi● cap. de Eucharistia teacheth that the words of the Institution are to be taken Figuratiuely And the Figure to consist not in the Pronoune Hoc but in the Verb Est Which ought sayth he to be taken for the word Significat he thus meaning This signifyeth my body 4. Petrus (n) In examen libri Hothusi● prop●i●●tium Boquinus affirmeth that the bread is truly called the Body of Christ propter communicationem Idiomatum as by the same forme of speach we truly say of Christ This Man is God 5. Oecolampadius (o) In lib. de genuine exposit horum verborum doth not rely either in the Pronoune Hoc nor in the verb Est but in the Substantiue Body For he maintayneth that the bread is called the Body by the Figure Metonymia by which Figure the name of the thing signified is attributed to the signe So as the sense sayth he is this Hoc est corpus meum that is this bread is a Figure of my body 6. Caluin (p) Lib. 〈◊〉 Instit. c. 17. ● 11. teacheth in part with Oecolampadius that the Figure Metonymia lyeth in the word Corpus But withall he addeth that the bread of the Eucharist is not a naked Figure of Christs body but it is a Figure which doth exhibit and present the thing it selfe And therefore Christ did not say This bread is a Figure of my Body but is the body it self And Peter (q) L. de ver aque natura Christi Martyr conspireth with Caluin herein 7. Certaine other Caluinists mentioned though their names not expressed by Cornelius (r) In Comment cap. 59. Concord in illa ve●ba Nisi manducaueritis Iansenius do teach that the word Corpus ought to be taken for the Mysticall body of Christ that is for the Church So as the sense of the words of the Institution should be this This is my body that is you Disciples are my body 8. Iohannes (s) Vti testatur Lutherus insua bre●i Confess edita anno 46. Campanus a Sacramentary thus expoundeth the words of the Institution This is my body that is This body is created and made by me See here Good Reader the wonderfull disagreements of the Protestants in the exposition of these few words who all conspire togeather in reiecting the Catholike Interpretation but then