A letter to Father Lewis Sabran Jesuite in answer to his letter to a peer of the Church of England : wherein the postscript to the answer to Nubes testium is vindicated and F. Sabran's mistakes further discovered.
Gee, Edward, 1657-1730.
1688
Approx. 22 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 5 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images.
Text Creation Partnership,
Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :
2008-09 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).
A42570
Wing G455
ESTC R177350
12424601
ocm 12424601
61801
This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of
Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal
. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.
Early English books online.
(EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A42570)
Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 61801)
Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 939:9)
A letter to Father Lewis Sabran Jesuite in answer to his letter to a peer of the Church of England : wherein the postscript to the answer to Nubes testium is vindicated and F. Sabran's mistakes further discovered.
Gee, Edward, 1657-1730.
Gee, Edward, 1657-1730. Answer to the compiler of the Nubes testium.
8 p.
Printed for Henry Motlock ...,
London :
1688.
Reproduction of original in Huntington Library.
Attributed to Edward Gee. cf. NUC pre-1956.
Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.
Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors.
EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.
EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).
The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.
Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.
Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.
Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.
The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.
Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).
Keying and markup guidelines are available at the
Text Creation Partnership web site
.
eng
Sabran, Lewis, 1652-1732.
Church of England -- Controversial literature.
Catholic Church -- Controversial literature.
2007-01 TCP
Assigned for keying and markup
2007-01 Aptara
Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images
2007-02 Jonathan Blaney
Sampled and proofread
2007-02 Jonathan Blaney
Text and markup reviewed and edited
2008-02 pfs
Batch review (QC) and XML conversion
A
LETTER
TO
Father
Lewis
Sabran
JESUITE
,
In
Answer
to
his
LETTER
to
a
PEER
OF
THE
Church
of
England
.
WHEREIN
The
Postscript
to
the
Answer
to
NVBES
TESTIVM
is
vindicated
.
And
F.
SABRAN's
Mistakes
further
discovered
.
LONDON
,
Printed
for
Henry
Motlock
at
the
Phoenix
in
St.
Paul's
Church-yard
.
1688.
Imprimatur
,
A
Letter
to
Father
Lewis
Sabran
.
Guil.
Needham
R
mo
in
Christo
P.
D.
Wilhelmo
Archiepiscopo
Cant.
a
Sacris
Domest
.
Nov.
25.
1687.
Reverend
Sir
;
SInce
I
am
altogether
a
stranger
to
that
Honourable
Person
,
to
whom
your
Letter
is
dedicated
,
I
would
not
presume
to
write
my
Vindication
to
his
Lordship
,
but
thought
it
more
proper
for
me
to
address
this
to
your self
.
What
I
put
down
in
a
Postscript
in
relation
to
your
Sermon
at
Chester
,
hath
,
I
perceive
,
given
you
no
little
disturbance
.
I
do
not
wonder
at
it
,
since
few
men
are
content
or
able
to
bear
the
justest
censure
that
can
be
past
upon
them
.
But
tho'
I
do
not
wonder
at
your
displeasure
,
yet
I
do
very
much
at
your
attempt
to
vindicate
your self
in
a
matter
that
is
not
capable
of
any
defence
,
as
I
shall
quickly
shew
you
.
I
intend
this
Letter
for
a
Vindication
of
my self
to
the
world
,
as
well
as
to
you
,
and
therefore
will
take
leave
to
repeat
what
you
said
in
that
Sermon
,
and
what
it
was
that
I
animadverted
upon
in
my
Postscript
to
the
Answer
to
the
Nubes
Testium
.
In
the
second
page
of
your
Sermon
you
have
these
words
;
If
I
presume
not
to
present
them
,
[
yours
and
your
Auditours
Prayers
]
without
taking
along
the
joynt
Intercession
of
the
Mother
of
God
,
I
follow
therein
the
Advice
of
St.
Augustin
,
which
I
address
to
you
in
his
words
;
Let
us
by
the
most
tender
Application
of
our
whole
heart
,
recommend
our selves
,
to
the
most
Blessed
Virgin
's
Intercession
;
let
us
all
,
with
the
greatest
eagerness
,
strive
to
obtain
her
Protection
;
that
whilst
with
Assiduity
we
pay
her
our
Devotions
on
Earth
,
she
may
intreat
for
us
in
Heaven
by
her
earnest
Prayers
;
for
undoubtedly
she
who
brought
forth
the
Price
of
Redemption
,
hath
the
greatest
Right
to
intercede
for
those
who
are
redeemed
.
This
was
the
passage
that
I
reflected
upon
there
,
since
with
a
very
little
pains
I
found
that
that
Sermon
out
of
which
you
quoted
these
expressions
,
was
not
St.
Austins
,
and
therefore
I
said
in
that
Postscript
that
I
could
not
but
conclude
you
guilty
either
of
great
Ignorance
,
or
of
notorious
disingenuity
,
who
would
ascribe
to
the
venerable
St.
Austin
this
Notorious
Forgery
.
These
Expressions
of
my
Postscript
I
do
still
own
notwithstanding
your
Vindication
,
and
intend
this
Letter
for
a
Defence
of
them
,
and
a
full
Confutation
of
what
you
have
so
weakly
and
so
unwarily
offered
towards
the
clearing
of
your self
.
You
have
prefaced
your
Letter
to
that
Honourable
Lord
with
some
hard
words
against
the
Church
of
England
about
her
Reformation
by
meer
Lay-Authority
,
about
her
want
of
Succession
,
Mission
,
and
about
her
undermining
one
third
part
of
the
Apostles
Creed
.
I
am
so
very
desirous
to
come
to
the
Controversie
betwixt
us
,
that
I
will
only
tell
you
here
,
that
every
word
of
what
you
have
said
there
against
the
Church
of
England
is
very
false
,
and
very
absurd
.
You
next
make
two
or
three
Reflections
upon
my
Answer
to
the
Compiler
of
the
Nubes
Testium
;
I
will
pass
over
these
at
present
also
,
since
I
am
not
at
leisure
here
to
defend
that
Book
,
and
which
is
more
,
I
need
not
against
what
you
have
said
there
.
You
next
come
to
the
Dividing
of
my
Accusation
against
you
,
and
tell
the
World
,
I
accuse
you
first
of
Ignorance
in
saying
,
you
followed
the
Advice
of
St.
Austin
,
when
you
recommended
your self
to
the
Most
Blessed
Virgins
Intercession
.
In
Answer
to
which
I
must
tell
you
,
Sir
,
that
you
abuse
words
in
dividing
them-into
the
charge
of
Ignorance
about
Using
the
Intercession
of
the
Blessed
Virgin
,
and
Disingenuity
about
quoting
the
Sermon
as
St.
Austins
.
Your
design
I
easily
foresee
,
which
is
to
draw
me
into
a
Controversy
about
Invocation
of
Saints
,
that
so
the
heavy
charge
laid
against
you
may
be
either
dropt
,
or
buried
in
a
multitude
of
words
about
other
things
.
But
to
be
plain
with
you
,
Sir
,
now
you
have
drawn
me
into
the
field
,
I
am
resolved
not
to
be
diverted
with
the
throwing
in
of
other
matter
about
Invocation
,
which
I
have
sufficiently
answered
once
already
in
my
Answer
to
the
Compiler
of
the
Nubes
Testium
:
I
am
resolved
to
finish
this
dispute
about
the
Sermon
of
St.
Austin
,
before
I
begin
any
other
with
you
;
When
you
have
either
cleared
your self
,
or
owned
your
obstinate
Mistake
,
then
I
shall
be
at
your
service
either
in
the
DEFENCE
of
my
Book
,
or
of
my
Mother
the
Apostolical
Church
of
England
.
You
must
not
be
angry
therefore
if
I
throw
aside
as
nothing
to
the
purpose
of
the
present
Controversy
what
you
have
set
down
out
of
the
Nubes
from
your
third
to
your
sixth
page
,
where
I
was
glad
to
find
that
you
did
recollect
with
your self
that
our
dispute
was
about
those
words
as
taken
out
of
the
thirty
fifth
Sermon
de
Sanctis
:
Which
I
said
could
not
be
St.
Austins
,
but
you
are
now
resolved
to
defend
that
it
may
.
As
for
my
Arguments
;
you
tell
his
Lordship
that
I
borrow
some
Proofs
,
of
this
Confident
Assertion
[
I
suppose
you
mean
of
the
Sermons
not
being
St.
Austins
]
of
Alexandre
Natalis
,
and
add
one
of
my
own
contrivance
.
Since
I
am
not
acquainted
with
that
Honourable
Lord
,
I
am
afraid
you
will
not
do
me
the
favour
to
tell
that
Lord
from
me
,
that
what
you
say
here
is
very
false
.
I
designed
and
drew
up
that
Postscript
,
and
had
it
Printed
in
half
a
day
;
I
had
not
lookt
into
Natalis
Alexandre
of
five
weeks
before
,
and
which
is
more
,
neither
looked
for
,
or
ever
saw
one
syllable
in
him
about
that
,
or
any
other
Sermon
attributed
to
St.
Austin
that
I
remember
.
I
must
own
that
I
have
been
acquainted
with
Natalis
Alexandre
,
but
it
was
meerly
to
find
out
the
stealings
of
your
Pious
and
Learned
Author
of
the
Nubes
Testium
,
who
as
I
have
thewn
in
my
Answer
,
did
not
only
steal
his
whole
Book
,
(
excepting
a
small
passage
or
two
)
out
of
that
French
Historian
,
but
stands
excommunicated
by
this
present
Pope
for
his
pains
,
After
your
false
account
whence
I
had
my
Proofs
,
you
come
next
to
examine
them
singly
.
My
first
was
that
the
Title
,
a
Sermon
on
[
not
in
as
you
translate
the
words
]
the
Feast
of
the
Assumption
does
not
at
all
agree
to
any
thing
that
is
near
St.
Austins
time
.
You
answer
that
there
is
no
consequence
can
be
drawn
from
the
Title
,
since
the
Title
(
as
I
suppose
your
meaning
is
)
might
have
been
afterwards
added
.
But
why
,
Sir
,
can
there
be
no
consequence
drawn
hence
;
my
design
was
not
only
from
there
being
no
Feast
of
Assumption
then
(
which
you
grant
)
and
therefore
no
Sermon
could
be
Preached
on
that
Solemnity
,
but
from
there
being
no
belief
of
such
an
Assumption
then
,
and
therefore
a
Sermon
on
that
subject
,
which
this
evidently
is
,
cannot
be
either
St.
Austins
,
or
near
his
time
,
since
there
was
then
and
long
after
not
only
no
Feast
,
but
no
belief
of
any
such
thing
as
the
Assumption
of
the
Blessed
Virgin.
But
you
endeavour
to
illustrate
this
shadow
,
or
rather
phantome
of
an
Answer
by
an
Instance
.
You
tell
his
Lordship
St.
Austins
fourteenth
Sermon
de
Sanctis
is
allowed
by
all
to
be
his
genuine
work
,
the
Title
whereof
,
is
in
the
Feast
of
all
Saints
;
yet
that
the
Institution
of
that
Feast
was
much
later
than
that
Sermon
,
which
was
made
for
,
and
preach'd
in
the
Solemnity
of
a
Virgin
and
Martyr
.
Surely
Sir
,
you
thought
your
putting
your
name
and
your
society
to
your
Letter
would
fright
the
nameless
Author
,
from
daring
to
give
one
word
of
Answer
to
that
Letter
,
and
therefore
that
you
might
take
the
Liberty
to
say
what
you
pleased
in
it
.
Without
such
a
supposition
,
I
am
not
able
to
rescue
you
from
a
more
odious
Character
,
than
I
am
willing
to
mention
:
For
this
is
one
of
the
falsest
passages
I
have
met
with
in
so
few
words
.
You
say
St.
Austins
14
th
Sermon
de
Sanstis
is
allowed
by
all
to
be
his
genuine
work
:
This
is
(
give
me
leave
to
speak
out
)
very
false
:
For
the
Benedictines
of
Paris
(
not
to
mention
our
Authors
,
whom
I
will
not
insist
on
to
prove
against
your
ALL
,
)
have
thrown
this
Sermon
into
their
a
Appendix
as
Spurious
,
and
shew
that
it
is
a
meer
Cento
,
made
up
of
pieces
of
Sermons
,
borrowed
here
and
there
.
You
tell
his
Lordship
next
,
that
the
Title
of
the
Sermon
,
is
in
the
Feast
of
all
Saints
.
This
is
as
false
as
the
other
;
for
not
onely
in
the
Louvain
,
but
in
the
Benedictine
,
as
well
as
in
Erasmus's
Edition
,
the
Title
of
this
fourteenth
Sermon
,
is
in
Festo
Conversionis
Sancti
Pauli
,
a
Sermon
on
the
Feast
of
the
Conversion
of
St.
Paul.
I
must
confess
Sir
,
that
I
was
wholly
astonished
at
your
asserting
these
things
with
so
much
assurance
to
a
Peer
,
and
to
a
Peer
also
of
the
Church
of
England
,
and
without
any
truth
:
I
lookt
again
and
again
at
it
,
and
lest
it
might
be
an
errour
of
the
Press
,
I
lookt
into
the
fourth
,
into
the
twenty
fourth
,
into
the
thirty
fourth
,
into
the
forty
first
;
I
lookt
also
into
the
two
next
Sermons
before
and
after
this
fourteenth
Sermon
de
Sanctis
,
but
no
news
could
I
find
of
your
Title
in
any
one
of
those
Sermons
,
and
therefore
must
lay
this
mistake
to
your
own
charge
.
You
lastly
tell
his
Lordship
,
that
this
fourteenth
Sermon
was
made
son
,
and
preach'd
in
the
solemnity
of
a
Virgin
and
Martyr
;
which
is
as
false
as
either
of
the
other
,
since
it
certainly
was
made
for
,
and
preach't
upon
St.
Pauls
Conversion
.
You
next
tell
his
Lordship
of
a
far
greater
mistake
in
this
my
Objection
,
much
to
be
wondered
at
in
so
great
a
pretender
to
reading
,
as
if
(
say
you
)
Feast
,
or
day
of
Assumption
in
the
Writings
of
Antients
,
did
almost
ever
signify
any
thing
else
but
the
Day
of
a
Saints
Death
.
But
pray
,
Sir
,
what
is
that
to
this
Sermon
,
if
the
day
of
Assumption
do
not
ever
signify
the
day
of
a
Saints
Death
,
why
may
not
this
be
the
exception
?
but
to
pass
that
;
you
know
very
well
that
that
cannot
be
the
meaning
here
,
since
this
Sermon
speaks
of
Assumption
of
the
Blessed
Virgin
;
and
that
it
was
the
Churches
Custom
to
believe
that
the
Virgin
Mary
was
on
the
day
of
that
solemnity
assumed
into
Heaven
.
But
all
this
is
but
to
raise
a
dust
about
nothing
,
for
were
the
Argument
from
the
Title
as
weak
as
you
could
desire
,
yet
what
follows
in
my
Postscript
,
is
more
than
strong
enough
to
convince
all
reasonable
men
that
that
Sermon
could
not
be
St.
Austins
.
I
next
urged
against
this
Sermon
,
that
the
Benedictines
of
Paris
in
their
late
Edition
of
St.
Austin
had
cast
it
into
their
Appendix
as
spurious
,
and
that
they
told
us
that
in
their
MSS.
it
wanted
the
name
of
any
Author
;
but
that
the
Divines
of
Louvain
told
us
that
in
several
Manuscripts
,
which
they
used
in
their
Edition
of
St.
Austin
,
this
Sermon
de
Sanctis
was
intituled
to
Fulbertus
Carnotensis
.
This
Argument
you
were
affraid
to
take
together
and
therefore
without
saying
a
word
to
the
Benedictine
Manuscripts
,
which
name
no
Author
for
that
Sermon
,
you
think
you
answer
the
Louvain
MSS.
about
its
being
intituled
to
Fulbertus
,
by
saying
St.
Ambrose
and
Chrysologus's
Sermons
have
appeared
in
MSS.
under
other
Authors
names
.
But
pray
,
Sir
,
what
would
you
prove
from
hence
,
because
such
a
thing
hath
happened
to
St.
Ambrose
,
therefore
this
Sermon
must
be
St.
Augustins
,
because
printed
among
his
works
,
tho'
it
bears
not
his
name
either
in
the
MSS.
used
by
the
Louvain
Divines
,
or
by
the
Benedictines
.
How
is
it
that
we
know
one
man's
Sermon
's
from
another's
,
is
it
not
either
from
his
style
,
or
from
its
being
attributed
to
such
a
person
by
the
most
and
best
Manuscripts
?
from
one
of
these
ways
it
is
that
St.
Ambrose's
or
any
other
Father's
Sermons
are
vindicated
to
their
true
Authors
.
But
both
these
Arguments
are
directly
against
this
Sermon
's
being
St.
Austins
;
the
style
is
dull
and
heavy
,
hath
not
any
thing
like
or
near
the
briskness
,
wit
,
and
great
sense
of
St.
Austin
;
and
further
the
MSS.
used
by
them
,
give
it
against
you
,
they
either
intitle
it
to
no
Author
,
or
to
Fulbertus
Carnetensis
.
Tho'
my
Arguments
were
not
very
weighty
,
yet
what
I
next
urged
I
thought
would
fully
satisfy
any
ones
scruples
;
I
mean
the
instance
of
Isidores
being
quoted
in
it
,
by
which
I
said
it
was
certain
that
this
Sermon
must
be
written
after
his
time
who
lived
in
the
beginning
of
the
Seventh
Century
.
What
I
say
is
certain
here
you
tell
his
Lordship
is
unprobable
.
You
give
this
as
one
reason
,
because
the
Author
of
that
Sermon
says
no
Author
among
the
Latins
could
be
found
,
who
treating
of
our
blessed
Ladies
Death
had
been
positive
,
and
express
;
whereas
Gregory
of
Tours
in
the
Sixth
Age
hath
a
most
full
account
of
our
blessed
Ladies
Assumption
,
and
therefore
the
Author
of
this
Sermon
must
have
lived
before
Gregory
,
and
consequently
long
before
Fulbertus
,
or
Isidore
of
Sevil.
But
I
do
not
see
this
Consequence
,
it
is
no
errour
to
suppose
the
Author
of
that
Sermon
had
never
seen
Gregory
of
Tours
Book
,
and
therefore
might
have
that
expression
concerning
no
Latin
Author
treating
of
the
Virgin
Maryes
Assumption
:
Or
we
may
very
well
suppose
that
if
he
had
,
he
reckons
his
story
among
those
Apocryphal
ones
which
were
then
writ
,
but
rejected
by
the
Church
of
God
:
And
I
cannot
see
how
it
should
be
a
fault
in
Fulbertus
to
reject
Gregory
of
Tours
(
if
he
knew
of
him
)
as
an
Apocryphal
Author
,
and
not
in
St.
Bernard
,
who
so
very
long
after
either
doubted
or
disbelieved
(
as
you
own
in
the
page
before
this
)
the
Story
of
the
Assumption
,
notwithstanding
the
most
full
account
of
it
in
Gregory
;
whom
(
with
the
Author
of
this
Sermon
)
he
either
did
not
know
,
or
did
not
regard
.
Your
Answer
about
St.
Isidore
is
very
strange
,
since
tho'
there
were
never
so
many
Isidores
before
St.
Austin
,
yet
can
you
,
or
dare
you
offer
to
shew
that
any
of
them
were
Writers
?
But
to
drive
you
from
this
weak
hold
,
we
are
certain
that
the
Isidore
quoted
here
is
he
that
lived
in
the
seventh
Century
.
If
you
did
look
into
the
Louvain
Edition
when
you
wrote
your
Letter
,
you
could
not
have
mist
seeing
what
book
of
his
the
passage
is
taken
from
.
But
I
am
affraid
,
Sir
,
I
have
to
do
with
one
,
who
is
resolved
to
carry
things
by
his
own
wild
guesses
more
than
by
examining
things
fairly
.
The
passage
in
the
Sermon
is
in
Isidor's
Book
de
Vita
&
Morte
Sanctorum
.
b
So
that
all
your
dreams
are
vanished
;
and
this
one
passage
enough
to
have
answered
your
whole
Letter
.
I
shall
therefore
be
shorter
with
the
rest
,
and
tell
you
that
your
sleighting
the
Judgment
of
the
Louvain
Divines
,
and
the
present
Learned
Benedictines
at
Paris
,
especially
when
invincibly
strengthened
by
this
passage
from
Isidore
,
and
your
believing
this
Sermon
to
be
St
Austins
,
because
Thomas
Aquinas
believed
it
to
be
his
,
discovers
(
pardon
the
expression
)
a
very
unbecoming
obstinacy
;
You
cannot
but
have
heard
how
little
a
Critick
Monsieur
Launoy
hath
shewn
Aquinas
was
,
what
forged
Authorities
he
used
and
urged
as
from
S.
Cyril
of
Alexandria
;
whereas
there
was
no
such
things
in
his
works
.
This
instance
,
which
you
make
use
of
for
your
defence
,
is
an
evidence
as
well
against
him
as
you
,
however
far
more
excusable
in
him
than
in
you
,
since
he
lived
in
such
times
of
Ignorance
,
and
you
in
times
so
learned
;
I
am
very
confident
that
had
he
seen
how
much
is
now
said
against
this
Sermon
,
he
would
have
been
far
from
acting
like
you
,
or
have
been
obstinate
in
the
defence
of
such
a
noted
forgery
.
I
have
but
room
left
to
tell
you
that
the
Louvain
Divines
are
of
no
Authority
with
me
except
where
their
reasons
are
apparently
good
;
and
therefore
should
they
have
asserted
the
18th
Sermon
de
Sanctis
to
have
been
St.
Austins
as
you
say
they
do
)
I
should
not
upon
good
reasons
assent
unto
them
;
but
that
what
you
say
here
is
false
,
is
evident
from
that
note
set
by
them
before
this
Sermon
,
that
some
attribute
this
Sermon
to
Fulgentius
:
and
the
Benedictines
of
Paris
are
so
far
from
your
words
,
that
they
say
the
Louvain
Divines
leave
it
as
DUBIOUS
:
And
they
for
their
parts
have
east
it
into
the
Appendix
as
Spurious
,
and
give
this
reason
for
it
among
others
▪
that
it
is
the
work
of
some
ignorant
botcher
,
who
hath
patched
it
up
out
of
stolen
Sentences
:
So
that
your
quotation
for
Invocation
thence
ought
to
be
sleighted
by
that
honourable
Lord
as
much
as
your
other
in
the
Sermon
before
the
Court
at
Chester
,
Thus
,
Sir
,
I
have
given
you
the
trouble
of
a
Letter
;
if
you
intend
a
further
Vindication
of
your self
,
pray
oblige
me
so
far
as
to
hasten
it
out
,
that
so
!
may
stay
no
longer
for
it
,
than
you
have
done
for
this
.
One
thing
you
may
oblige
me
in
further
,
and
that
is
not
onely
to
quote
,
but
to
look
into
those
Authors
you
make
use
of
.
This
will
prevent
the
multiplying
of
the
Controversy
;
tho'
you
be
resolved
to
continue
this
any
longer
against
Reverend
Sir
your
Friend
in
all
Christian
Offices
.
FINIS
.
Notes, typically marginal, from the original text
Notes for div A42570-e220
a
Appendix
ad
Tom.
5.
i.
)
August
.
p.
316.
Edit
.
Paris
1683.
b
Isidor
.
de
Vita
&
Morte
SS
.
n.
68.
p.
168.
Edit
.
Paris
158●
.
*
Append.
a
Tom.
5
p.
321.