An answer to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Jesuit in confidence whereof…An ansvvere to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Iesuit in confidence wherof…

only that you might probably in show convince Luther of blasphemy, you demanded of our men their judgment of this Epistle. They clearly answered that they accounted this Epistle of S. James, as all other the Epistles and books of the new Testament, to be Canonical. Affirming that all our Churches were of the same judgement. And from this you would conclude, that Luther therefore was blasphemous, because he had written that some probably called the authority of this Epistle into question. To this our men replied, the consequence was naught, from our reverent opinion of this Epistle, to infer, that whosoever made any question of it, did blaspheme. And here you plainly yielded; For when you boasted of two other reasons that you had, you produced none at all. After this you came to the old Testament, where you accuse us to have raced many books out of the true Canon. The testimony of Antiquity was laid before you, whence ⟨p. 13⟩it was clear that those books were not Canonical. Here you preferred the late Councils and Fathers before the ancient, which may not be permitted you. And you set Austin in opposition against Hierom, when it had been fitter you would have reconciled them. Augustine, he affirms these books to be Canonical, Hierome denies them, yea expressly, plainly, and evidently. For Augustine our men answered, that he used the word Canonical doubtfully, or in divers signification. And that they showed plainly out of Augustine's own words, and Cardinal Caietans. Augustine you shifted off, and Caietan you audaciously reproached, affirming that the Cardinal lost all his grace and elegance, when he once began to Comment upon the Scriptures. At length, Campian, you were forced even in Gratian, not without blushing, to acknowledge this ambiguity of the word. And whereas you could not be ignorant of ancient records, it was a wonder to our men to see you write, that we had of a sudden raced out these books. Surely this word escaped you very unlearnedly and inconsiderately; we have store both of ancient witnesses, and of others succeeding them, who will and can free us from such imputation of Novelty. To pass by Origen and Eusebius, Cyprian, or whosoever he was that writ the exposition of the Creed, we find among his works after he had reckoned up all the Canonical books of the old and new Testament, he addeth:

only that you might probablie in shew conuince Luther of blasphemie, you demaunded of our men their iudgment of this Epistle. They cleerly answered that they accounted this Epistle of S. Iames, as all other the Epistles and bookes of the new Testament, to be Canonicall. Affirming that all our Churches were of the same iudgement. And from this you would conclude, that Luther therefore was blasphemous, because he had written that some probablie called the authoritie of this Epistle into question. To this our men replied, the consequence was naught, from our reuerent opinion of this Epistle, to inferre, that whosoeuer made any question of it, did blaspheme. And heere you plainely yeelded; For when you boasted of two other reasons that you had, you produced none at all. After this you came to the old Testament, where you accuse vs to haue raced many bookes out of the true Canon. The testimonie of Antiquitie was laid before you, whence