A brief reply to a late answer to Dr. Henry More his Antidote against idolatry Shewing that there is nothing in the said answer that does any ways weaken his proofs of idolatry against the Church of Rome, and therefore all are bound to take heed how they enter into, or continue in the communion of that church as they tender their own salvation.

His Answer to the Argument in the fourth Paragraph.

To this he Answers, This is indeed a fair demonstration that Dr. More is acquainted with Plautus his Come∣dies, and can when he pleases descend from the Di∣vinity-chair to a piece of unseasonable mirth an•• stage Drollery. But let this pass as a pleasant skirmi•• before the main charge.

The Reply.

If it was not indecorous for St. Paul to quot•• Heathen Poets, as Aratus and Epimenides, yea Co∣medians as Menander in his Thais, how can it be below such an one as I to quote a Comick Poet▪ 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in any point of Drollery, but for an earnest 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ration, That ••t never was seen nor is it possible that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 body can be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 two places at once. But if this Testim••••

does not like you, you may remember how I showd you above, That Athanasius and Anastatius ancient Christians declare, ••hat an Angel himself, nor a Soul separate can be in two places at once. But the stress of my Argument yes not in the ••uthority of P••autus, but in t••e sense of all mankind as I have in••ima••ed, who by common suff••age, unless infinitely prejudiced, do ratifie this 〈◊〉〈◊〉 That one body cannot be in two places at once. Which distinct force of this my first Argu∣ment 〈◊〉〈◊〉 A••versary endeavoured to smother, by a Rhetorical flourish, and nimble-paced Transition 〈◊〉〈◊〉 those fetc••ed from Arts and Sciences, &c. To which you shall now hear his Answers.