1 tB1t 116 The Reafonablene f$ Art* ' Scripture we do underfland thofe Canonical Books of the Old and New Teflament, of wbofe authority there never was any doubt in the Church. And in the fame article the Apocryphal Books are number'd up, andcall'd theother Books ; and it is profef-- fed, that the Church doth not apply them to eflablifh any do1rine. NOW, can any one fuppofe after this, that this Church reads thofe Books under the notion of Holy Scripture ? Nay, is it poilible the Church íhould be fo incondiftent with it felf? You can produce no fentence out of all it's - publick offices, or declarations, in which the Apocrypha is called the Holy Scripture. TheOrder which you cite for this, fol.3 lows the Order concerning the Pfalter, and is intituled, The Order how the re of Holy Scripture is appointed to be read. And in it there is not one word of any thing but the Old Tefiament and the New. The Apocrypha is not named. I grant indeeed that in the Rubric the Firfl Leto is. faid to be a Leffon out of theOld TO- ',tent, and yet fome of the Fir ft Lefons are out of the Apochrypha. But, becaufe this is thus expreffed, where exa& nice- nefs was not at all neceffary g muff this be the foundation of an Objection which yoU
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=