An answer to a certain book, writtenAn answere to a certeine booke, written

For your exorcism in baptism, argument you say you made none of Christs saying to the dumb and deaf Ephpheta. ¹If no argument, no proof,if no proof, then no cause to use by example of Christ such exorcism in you baptisms.²³

For your exorcisme in baptisme, argument you saie you made none of Christes saying to the dombe and dease Ephpheta. ¹If no argument, no proofe,if no proofe, then no cause to vse by example of Christ such exorcisme in you baptismes.²³

1. 1Mat. 7.34.
2. 2pag. 505.
3. 3Luk. 1.3.

Saint Lukes preface before his gospel cannot by any means excuse the second book of Maccabees from being Apocryphal, ⟨p. 393⟩wherein the Author craveth pardon for his so slender writing of that history. There is no likeness of comparison at all between the Evangelists endeavour to learn and write the certain truth, and that authors confession of his infirmity and imperfection in writing his book. One thing it is to enquire the truth with all diligence, and so having found the same to set it forth in writing most exactly: an other having written a book, to desire the readers favour and forgiveness, in respect of the writers simplicity and unskilfulness. The first detracteth nothing from the wisdom & majesty of Gods spirit, to search the truth by all such means, as by which the same may be learned: the other argueth a conscience & acknowledgement of wants in writing, which cannot be applied to the holy Ghost, who whatsoever he taketh in hand, most wisely and excellently performeth the same. Doth Saint Luke any where excuse his want of utterance, his rude, slender, and unlearned manner of writing? Nothing less: nay he protesteth in the same preface that he hath attained to the exact knowledge of every thing, and that he writeth a most