is and must be deduced to wit the cause why the Englishe congregatioÌ„ admittinge S. Iames hath reiected those other and we shall straightwaies finde not only that he ouerthroweth himself which is a comoÌ„ tricke amoÌ„gst such good writers but also concludeth the contrarie of that which here he preteÌ„deth The Church readeth the bookes of Iudith Tobie and the Machabees saith S. Hierome but reckeneth them not amongst the Canonicall scriptures In that the Church at solemne times read them it is a great argumente that she much honoured them although she admitted them not as then vniuersallie into that highest roome of supreme authoritye But of S. Iames we heare not so much but contrariwise Eusebius directlie affirmeth if M. VV. saie true and iudgeth wold all other men so to iudge that that epistle of S. Iames is a false and bastard epistle and Hierome a prieste after the order of the Romane Church and not a minister after the fashion of the English congregation is brought to proue the same Who seeth not now what greate difference there is betweene these two verdits geuen in by these auncient fathers the first being read in the Church had a degree to Canonicall scriptures the later had no such Of the first he bringeth in S. Hierome saynge onlie that as then it was not acknowledged for Canonical he bringeth in S. Hierome to saie as much of the second and for a surcharge he ioyneth Eusebius directlie affirming it to be a bastard epistle and withall wishinge all men so to iudge of it him self inferreth that Luther in his rashnes which we condemne folowed the iudgement and testimonie of the auncieÌ„t primitiue Church he affirmeth farther as a general principle namely treatinge of this epistle Quod principio statim non habet diuinam authoritatem non potest tempore hominum approbatione fieri diuinum That vvhich at the first hath not presentlie diuine or canonicall authoritye as in their opinion S. Iames had not can not be made canonicall by the approbation of men yet now of these he wold haue vs learne this distinction that the primitiue Church vniuersallie reiected the bookes of Iudith Tobie the Machabees some onlie and those without iust cause refused S. Iames epistle and therefore that the English congregation hath done verie discretelie to authorize the one disauthorize the others let him not playe to much the Sophister but answere as becoÌ„meth a Diuine saue him self in this froÌ„ opeÌ„ folie contradiction he shall shew more wisedome learning theÌ„ hetherto he hath geuen vs occasion to deeme in him And that he may the better waye the veritie and substance of his aunswere and the reader haue occasion to consider what a variable tottering gospel these men preache and how iustlie we obiect to them that at their pleasure they make hauocke of scripture I will laye to M.VV. reasoning the effecte of the late disputation had in the Tower with F. Campian touching this pointe This they make the mayne grounde of their whole argameÌ„t Those bookes vvhich olde fathers and Councels haue not receaued for canonical bookes to ground our faith vpon them can not nevâ— meâ— nor the Tridentine Councel make canonical This proposition standâ—ng for good which they so confidentlie vrge and M.VV. thinketh yâ— moste assured let vs see vppoÌ„ this rule what waste they make of the sacred bookes vppon that ground thus they buylde or rather pull downe Aug. li. 2. cap. 8. de doct Christiana leaueth out Baruch and the tvvo last bookes of Esdras Hierom in his preface vppon the booke of Kinges saith that Sapientia Salomonis Iesus the sonne of Sirach Iudith and Tobias are not in the Canon Eusebius in his sicâ—e booke and 18. chapiter it is the 19. leaueth out the third and fourth of Esdras Tobias Iudith Baruch Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and the bookes of Machabees and concerning the epistle to the Hebrevves though him selfe say plainly it is S. Paules yet he confesseth that many haue doubted thereof also coÌ„cerning the second epistle of S. Peter he saith it vvas doubted of many so of some vvere the last tvvo epistles of Iohn The same Eusebius li. 4. ca. 26. it is 25. speaketh of Melito bishop of Sardis vvho reckening vp the volumes of the old testament omitteth Esdras Tobie Hester Iudith Baruch VVisdome Sirach the bookes of Machabees And the CouÌ„cel of Laodicea omitteth Lukes gospel the Apocalyps you see therefore that these olde Fathers haue leaste these books out of the canon yet vvere not called heretikes nor blasphemers Thus farre they Afterwards they define those to be not Canonical but Apocriphal that are not in the auncient Canon receaued and allovved to haue proceeded vndoubtedly from the holy Ghost and those Apocriphal are forbid to be read and though they may be read for moral lessons yet not for matters of religion Afterward the same argument is resumed againe and especially that parte vrged that the Councel of Laodicea leaueth out those former bookes in the olde Testament Tobias Iudith the booke of vvisdome Ecclesiasticus and in the nevv Testament Luke and the Apocalyps And when F. Campian answered that that Councel was but particuler reply was made that the Councel vvas prouincial and farther confirmed by the sixte general Councel holden in Trullo Constantine being presideÌ„t as Bartholomeus CaraÌ„za vvriteth fol. 71. And therefore vve may leaue out of the canon Tobie Iudith c. vvhich your Councel of Trent thrust in as autentical Hetherto your brethren in the fourth dayes conference In the first day vpon like warrant they recken amongst Apocryphal bookes that which you labour so much to saue S. Iames which there is called a counterfeit or bastard epistle by iudgement of Eusebius Item the epistle of Iude the later of Peter the second and thirde of Iohn And against these they alleage Eusebius Hierome Epiphanius and the Councell of Laodicea confirmed as they say there againe by the general Councel holden in Trullo And yet such is their inconstancie in the same place some of these in worde they professe to receaue but only as at pleasure of curtesie and liberalitie not as of fayth dutie and necessitie For the summe of all commeth to this and it is the effect of that disputation Such bookes as of olde haue bene doubted of we are not bound to admit for Canonical but may refuse now These particuler bookes here named haue bene doubted of in olde time ergo these bookes we are not bouÌ„d to admit for Canonical but may refuse them now This being your reason and the same so manifestly approued by them and you out of the same for our presente purpose against you this I note First how iustly we accuse you for defacing and renting out so many parcels and whole bookes of scripture In the olde Testament Tobias Iudith Hester Baruch The booke of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus The two bookes of the Machabees
In the nevv Testament S. Lukes Gospel The Epistle to the Hebrewes The Epistle of Saint Iames. The 2. of S. Peter The 2. 3. of S. Iohn S. Iude. The Apocalyps Vnto these partly your selues in your common bibles partly your brethren ioyne certayne other peeces both of the olde Testament and of the new as The prayer of Manasses Paralip lib. 2. The songe of the three children The story of Bel. Canticum canticorum and a parte of S. Iohns Gospel some of these held for canonicall these fiftene hundred yeares some these twelue hundred all aboue a thousand Nexte your distinction of the vvhole Church and some of the Church were it true as it is most false is vtterly refuted by these your owne doctors for by their sentence whatsoeuer hath bene doubted of not onely in the whole Church but in a part for they goe not about to proue that these were doubted of in the whole Church and leaste of all S. Lukes Gospell that may you doubte of and number amongst the bookes Apocriphal and both you and they proue as substantially that S. Iames was doubted of as you proue the same of Iudith Hester the Machabees or any other sauing that they fowly ouerreach them selues when they affirme that S. Lukes Gospell with those other was leaft out and not receaued for Canonical in the Prouincial Councel of Laodicea and the same confirmed by a general Councel afterward Then commeth to my remembrāce your profoūd argumēt against M. Campian in defence of Luther Luther despiseth S. Iames his epistle saith M. Campian you answere Bene habet crimen hoc omne Iacobi epistolam attingit c. That goeth vvell All this fault toucheth only Iames epistle Luther doth not in a vvorde violate Matthevv Marke Luke or Iohn nor Paule nor Peter only he somevvhat shaketh vppe Iames epistle A deepe reason as though S. Iames beinge canonical scripture were not to be esteemed as honorably and violated as litle as S. Peter or any of the other and as though he in so writing and you in so defendinge doe not lay the way open to shake of and violate all the reste as wel as that For now if a man burden you with the refusal of S. Luke your defence is already prouided bene habet al goeth vvel Al this faulte toucheth only S. Luke Our doctors doe not in a vvorde violate Matthevv Marke Iohn nor Paule nor Peter only vve somevvhat shake vp Lukes Gospel and so peece-meale til none be leafte you may and will shake out one after an other stil Bene habet all goeth vvell vntill you fall to open profession of Atheisme in the broade way whereof you are farre wel gone already Fourthlye because in the end of your preface yow bragge so much of your forefathers that they haue euer vāquished ours here you put vs in mind what forefathers those are Hetherto your forefathers were knowen to be Aerius in denying prayer sacrifice for the dead Vigilantius of whom yow learned to condemne the inuocatiō of Saintes honor done to them in the Church Iouinian in breaking vowes of chastitie deliberatelye made to God and making the state of matrimonye touching merite equal in the sight of God with the state of virginitie continentie Which men notwithstanding were forced to yeld to our forefathers S. Epiphanius S. Hierom and S. Augustine as hetherto al Christendom is witnes and therefore were not such victorious capitaynes as you woulde make them In this place as though your purpose were to ouerbeare vs with number and make your armye so much the more stronge you multiplye and set in ranke againste vs more fathers For whereas you so blasphemouslye speake of the booke of Iudith that it is far vnvvorthy to be called scripture and yet match S. Luke and the Apocalyps with it whereas you saye most plainlye of these and al the forenamed bookes that yow are not bound to admit them but may refuse them that they be read for moral lessons not for matters of religion you simplye disallow for canonical those two bookes And who are your fathers herein but those auncient Archheretikes Marcion and Cerdon those other for ther brutishnes called Alogi or Bruti In which your doinge as the reader may easely perceaue how yow trotte forwarde to playne Apostasie from Christe by callinge now the verye Gospel into questiō so why we should number you amongest those olde Brutishe heretikes your selues yeald vs more abūdāt reasō thē our fathers had in calling them by that name For your self M.VV. cōfesse and proue your doctors and maisters to be the most sensles and brutishe creatures that euer wēt on the earth For to auoide directe answeringe to the question proposed you hovv you knovv the bookes vvhich you call scripture to be heauenlye and penned by diuine inspiration that is by vvhat testimonie you knovv those vvritinges to be canonical or holye vvhich be so called you say and I vvith as good reason vvill demaund of you hovv you knovve the sunne to be the sunne or hovv you assure your self that God is God for vve knovv as assuredlye that these are the holy scriptures cōmēded by God to his Church vvritten by the Prophetes and Apostles and deliuered by diuine authorytie as vve knovv the moone to be the moone or at a vvord any other thinge vvhatsoeuer vve comprehend by most certaine knovvledge and this ansvvere Caluine also geueth you And this answere I admitte from you and Caluine and hereof I conclude that you are more trulye called Alogi and brutishe then were those other auncient heretikes For was there euer in the worlde any so notable a Choraebus or Grillus hauinge the shape of man that fell at brawlinge disputinge with his friēdes whether the sunne which we see were the sūne or the moone the moone as you do against Luther your churches against the Lutheranes whether S. Iames epistle be canonical then yf you thinke right as I truste you wil speake wel of your selfe with the same breath you condemne your father Luther and your brethren the Lutheranes for the veriest sottes and stockes that euer liued for they know not the moone they know not the sunne which to you shineth so bright cleare And to oppose your self vnto your brethrē at home and to your owne self how say you to S. Luke to the epistles of S. Peter Iude Iohn the Apocalyps be they canonical or no yf you say yea as I thinke you will or at the lest that was your opinion in September laste as your booke sheweth then your doctors now denyinge the same you see what is to be concluded that one parte of you is as wise as those former who know not the sunne from the moone Yf you denie and be of their iudgmente as it may be very wel your faith beinge as mutable as is the moone yet so you proue your self
Paris Louane and other catholike Vniuersities And if there be any fault in our english translation it is this that this parcel was not added in the margeÌ„t as it was in the latin which we folowed Wherefore this proueth no corruption but rather great fidelitie in our latin testament that it agreeth with S. Hierom consequently the greeke examples which he interpreted with S. Ambrose S. Austin S. Bede Haymo S. Anselmus and the rest of the latin writers which in a matter not doubtful and otherwise in no respect preiudicial to any veritie of Christian profession are of that authoritie that Beza him self in this case would not disallow our doing and M.VV. him self also in iustifying his english translations for pure and perfit doth consequently approue and iustifie ours so anâ—wereth â—im self in this obiection for the later clause before noted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the lord said they haue added to their english testaments after Beza vpon the only authorite of our latin against al the auncient greeke albeit now it is thrust in to the coÌ„mon greeke prints of Geneua Basile Zuricke therefore he should not be offeÌ„ded if we attribute so much to our testament who professe to honour it seing he his felowes do as much who professe a perpetual hatred against it And this I trust may suffice for these few words to quitte our testament of any faulte considering that first they coÌ„cerne not any controuersie theÌ„ that the sense of it is in worde and deed fully euideÌ„tly coÌ„prised in the same place againe if we preferred our latin before al greeke we do no more then doth Beza then doth M.W. then do al the English and Scottish congregations in their owne pure and immaculate bibles Last of al our reading is coÌ„firmed not only by al the later ages of the church these seuen or eight hundred yeres as by S. Anselmus Haimo S. Bede and others nether only by the more auncieÌ„t latin fathers S. Austin S. Ambrose S. Hierom but also it was according to the greeke copies which S. HieroÌ„ had the same agreing in substaÌ„ce with S. Chrysostome no doubt many other and therfâ—re hath sufficieÌ„t ground to defend it self although vve confesse the other reading to be vsed of many fathâ—rs which vve therefore mislike not yet rashâ—y presume not to thrust it in to our text And this is the only fault and yet al the faultes vvhich M.VV. findeth in our latin testament The rest he supplieth vvith a lustie bragge that there are at the least Six hundred other vvherein against the faith of al the greekes and their perpetual coÌ„sent the errors of the latin traÌ„slatioÌ„ are retained of vs. Of which reckning I dare at first without any farther stay strike out fiue huÌ„dred yet the suÌ„me vvhich remaineth is sufficieÌ„t to conuince him of a maine lye But for a farther refutation he turneth vs ouer to Benedictus Arias Montanus a good priest one that serueth in the Catholike Kinges court and submitteth al his labours to the iudgmeÌ„t censure of the Vniuersitie of Loâ—ane and therefore very vnlike it is that ether he vvil bestovv so vnfruitefully his labours as to vvrite against the Sacred TrideÌ„tine CouÌ„cel or that that Vniuersitie vvil approue his endeuours if he should so heretically employ theÌ„ whatsoeuer shal become of him hereafter in his hebrew bibles alreadie set forth we see that in the places before noted he altereth not the latin according to the hebrew but letteth it stand as autentical VVhat speake I of him a catholike man and a priest whereas your selues though otherwise most obstinate and stonie harted against the truth yet dare not alter it according to the hebrew but leaue it as you found it in our bibles And therefore why you cal vs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bible-beaters I wonder and muse what brainsicke conceite you haue therein or what reason moueth you thus to raile Because we defend the sinceritie of our bibles against your peeuish and vnlearned and fantastical and contemptible talking for what one tolerable argument bring you because we defend the inheritance left vs by our forefathers because we prefer the Church Spouse of Christ before the sinagoge of the Iewes because at their wicked appointment vve vvil not raze out so many places touching our Sauiours honour and the truth of our religion is this the cause why your wisedome termeth vs Bible-beaters Nay let the reader consider and the world iudge whether sith Christs time or before Christs time there were euer any beaters and circumciders and gelders and manglers and defacers and corrupters of those holy bookes comparable to you and your sect Who haue rent out of the bible so many partes which our auncient fathers deliuered vs and we hold fast as sacred and canonical Who haue reiected out of the old testament so many entier books as I haue noted in the beginning the prophecie of Baruch the storie of Iudith of Tobias of Hester of the Machabees and Ecclesiasticus who in the new testament haue cut out S. Paules epistle to the hebrews S. Iames one of S. Peters two of S. Iohns S. Iude and the Apocalips and the whole gospel of S. Luke who in those other which you pretend to keepe haue lopt of great peeces so many as pleased your arrogant and heretical spirit peeces of S. Iohns gospel peeces of the prophete Ieremie peeces of the prophete Daniel peeces of the booke of Cronicles or ParalipomenoÌ„ besides many lesser parcels pared away both in the epistles and gospels and al the rest by your traÌ„slations miserably corrupted Who by the same reason authoritie by which you iudge and condemne these bookes geue like authoritie libertie to euerie phantastical minister to contemne and condemne the rest For thinke you a lying reason may not be found against the gospel of S. Iohn as wel as against the gospel of S. Luke Or may not a man pretend as good arguments of humane spirit to be in the second epistle to the Corinthians or to Philemon as in that of S. Iames or to the hebrewes Or may M. VVilliam Charke oppose him selfe against the vniuersal Church of Christ by the mouth of those most holy and Apostolical fathers gathered together in the great CouÌ„cel of Nice acknowledging for Canonical the booke of Iudith and may not any other minister of like qualitie and learning do so by like example Because the booke of Tobie maketh expressely for the patronage of angels may you say disdainfully VVe passe not for that Raphael mentioned in Tobie nether acknovvledge vve those seuen angels vvhereof he maketh mention Al that differeth much from Canonical scriptures which is reported of that Raphael and sauoureth of I knovv not vvhat superstition Nether vvil I beleeue free vvil although the booke of Ecclesiasticus affirme it a hundred times c. and may not a
A REFVTATION OF SVNDRY REPREHENSIONS CAVILS AND FALSE sleightes by which M. Whitaker laboureth to deface the late English translation and Catholike annotations of the new Testament and the booke of Discouery of heretical corruptions By WILLIAM RAINOLDS Student of Diuinitie in the English Colledge at Rhemes 2 Timoth. 3. v. 8 9. As Iannes and Mambres resisted Moyses so these also resist the truth men corrupted in minde reprobate concerning the fayth But they shal prosper no further For their folly shal be manifest to al as theirs also vvas Veni vide Come and see Iohn 1. v. 46. Printed at PARIS the yere 1583. THE PREFACE TO THE READER BEING appointed by those vnder whose gouernement I haue put my selfe and to whose direction I haue willingly committed whatsoeuer facultie or abilitie is in me for the benefite of our countrie and reducing to the fold of Christs Catholike church the soules of our poore countrymen so miserably seduced appointed I say by such my Superiors to examine and answere M. W. booke of Antichrist first principally so far forth as touched this Seminarie that is the Translation of the new Testament lately published with the Annotatiōs thereof and M. Martins Discouerie of their heretical corruptions next and afterward the other argument concerning Antichrist I confesse my self to haue bene so loth to take the matter in hand as ether my duetie and obedience suffered or the loue and charitie of my countrymen and brethren permitted One reason was because I sawe many in this societie for good zeale and forwardnes as willing and for ripe knowledge in diuinitie more able to vndertake and dispatch a greater matter then that An other reason was because I thought I could not without some iniurie done to Catholikes dispute against that sauage barbarous paradox making sometime the order successiō of Popes to be Antichrist as M. VV. doth in one page sometime the whole Catholike and vniuersal Church vvhereof the Pope is head to be Antichrist as he affirmeth within 5. lines after ether of which in the iudgment of any Catholike is as notorious and palpable a lie as any of Lucians True Histories So that as if a man would with sage reasons go about to disproue some of those toies which he reporteth As that his ship being taken vp with a strong wind caried in the ayre seuen dayes seuen nights thē arriued at an Iland in the middest of the ayre where he saw a terrible battayle fought and many a thousand slayne and yet the field whereon both camps pitched was nothing els but the web or weauing of spiders which is not to be marueiled at spiders being as big there as prety Ilandes are with vs here that afterward he came to a land where mē tooke their eyes out of their heads at night time or otherwise whē they meāt not to vse them put them vp in cases at other conueniēt seasons they tooke them out thence put them on againe such like stuffe of riuers of wine seas of milke and Ilands of cheese c. as if I say a mā would go about with sober reasons to refute these reports he should thereby note his auditory of smale wit discretion who needed helpe to find out such incredible fables the very like is to be deemed of this idle inuention concerning Antichrist in the iudgment of al Catholikes Lucians fables being no more false vnreasonable and vnprobable against nature and philosophie then this deuise is peeuish lying absurd vncredible and vnpossible against Christian faith and diuinitie A greater reason was for that I vtterly abhorred in the middest of my course of studies and better exercises to spend any good houres ether in reading or refuting heretical bookes which neuer edifie to vertue deuotion and saluation but distract mens mindes from the meditation of al such religious spiritual and heauenly exercise and fil their heads only with contentions disputes and brawles of wordes Pugnis verborum as the Apostle calleth them the end where of as Tertullian of old noted is commonly no other but to wearie our selues offend the readers and exasperate the aduersarie whose proud spirite of contempt and contradiction is lightly incorrigible And of this I make the more sure reckening if at this present I write ought against our English aduersaries because by certaine experience of things past I see assuredly what must be looked for in time to come For as they passe other common heretikes in pride arrogancie and good opinion of them selues and the same ioyned with intolerable ignorance euen in the first principles of our religion so for this reason they bluntly dash into any kind of absurditie be it neuer so foule and blasphemous As that the image of Christ is as very an Idol as the image of Venus or Iupiter that S. Peter vvas neuer at Rome that Christ is not begottē of the substāce of his father that he is not god of god the father but god of him selfe that he was a Priest and offered sacrifice to his father according to his diuinitie vvherevnto may be added that The succession of popes is Antichrist or if that like you not then that The vniuersal Church is Antichrist such strange articles in our religion that Christian men ought rathet to stop their eares and shut vp their eyes from hearing them or reading them then expect any ansvver or refutation of them And vvho vvould not be greued to put pen to paper whē he knoweth he shal be troubled vvith multiplicatiō of such vnreasonable assertions of such old rotten execrable heresies such propositions as euery Christian man naturally doth abhor al aūcient stories monuments vniuersally vvithout exception reiect and refel al aūcient churches and coūcels since the time of Arrius vvith one vniforme consent haue accursed cōdemned But the chiefe and maine cause why I most of al lothed this maner of writing vvas because I find in our aduersaries doctrine no kind of stay or assurance no maner of certaintie or stedfastnes their vvhole faith being like Maie flovvers for some few monethes or yeres florishing and in estimation vvhich vvithin a short space after wythereth avvay is of them selues neglected changed and forsaken And thē vvhereas to dispute seriously of any matter requireth some certaine groūdes fountaines or heads of disputation vvherevnto euery man of learning ought to stand as we see in al other sciences of Logike Philosophie Law any kind of learning humane or diuine these men haue quite remoued and abolished al such and haue brought the whole course of their diuinitie to an idle lose vaine fantastical kynd of talking consisting most in denial of principles of religion where he is counted best diuine that can maintaine talke longest he is counted to beare the bel away that most arrogantly can preferre him self before al other be they few or many old or new
one substance vvith the father Yet M.W. defending the Autotheisme of Caluin and affirming Christ to be begotten not of his fathers substance but of his person and to be God of him selfe not God of God besides the abominable heresie vvhich in so sayng he maintaineth he also manifestly gainsaith the publike confession vvhich in their Communion booke they seeme to holde In Germany it is lawful for the Lutheranes to take armes and wage battayle and bid defiance and renounce al obedieÌ„ce to the Emperour likewise for the Gewes in Flanders the Hugonots in France against their seueral princes and the principal diuines yea Luther him self that Elias Apostle and Euangelist after long deliberation wel liked that the Protestants should in warlike maner bande them selues against the Emperour and those that died in such warres were of the chiefe preachers accounted for Saintes and martirs And it was resolued by al the states Ecclesiastical and Temporal of the Lutheran religioÌ„ against Charles the Emperour that Quia religioni molitur exitium atque libertati causam praebet cur ipsum oppugnemus bona conscientia CuÌ„ enim in eum casum res deuenit licet resistere sicut sacris prophanis historiis demonstrari potest Becaue the Emperour intendeth the ouerthrovv of religion and libertie he geueth vs cause to vvarre against him vvith safe conscience For vvhen the matter coÌ„meth to that issue it is lavvful to resist as it may be proued both by sacred and prophane stories And Beza in his epistle to the Quenes maiestie holdeth those FreÌ„ch Protestants who died in warre against their king for Saints Martirs vvho by their bloud consecrated happely to God the first foundation of Christian religion vvhich vvas then to be restored in Fraunce And vvhat preacher vvas there in England of any name vvho in publike sermons commended not their cause as iust agreable to al lavves humane and diuine and therefore in al respectes allovvable Likevvise M. Fox doth extolle and magnifie the most barbarous and Turkish factes committed by the BohemiaÌ„ heretikes rebelling against their Prince for the gospel and religion of Iohn Husse For whereas the Emperour Sigismund being then in Germanie had said That he vvould shortly come into Bohemia and rule the kingdome after the same order as his father Charles had done before him the Hussites or Protestantes I vse M. Foxes ovvne vvordes vnderstanding thereby that their sect and religion should be vtterly banished vvhich vvas not begonne during the raigne of the said Charles they rebelled out of hand which rebellioÌ„ in his whole storie he much coÌ„mendeth So that the Lutheranes of Germany mâ—y lawfully take armes against their Emperour for defense of Lutheranisme and the Caluinistes of FraÌ„ce may warre against their King to bring into that realme the religion of Caluine and the Hussites of Bohemâ—a may rebelle against their soueraine Prince for the religion of Iohn Husse and Hierom of Prage far more differing from the Protestante then from the Catholike and by like right and reason euery other sect may do the like for furthering increasing their seueral faithes and religions And yet in England inâ—ocent men who neuer in fact attempted ought and neuer in word approued any such disloyaltie against the Princes estate being draweÌ„ by craftie circumuention to say that in certaine cases as if the Prince should fal to professioÌ„ of Arrianisme Turcisme or Atheisme the subâ—ecte might vvithdravv his obedience vvere therevpon defamed for heynous traytours and the same imagined supposal published at the time of their death as a matter deseruing most extreme punishment In Quene Maries time the English Protestants retired to Geneua set out sundry bookes wherein by manifold textes of scripture both of the old testament the new they excluded womeÌ„ froÌ„ al regiment Princely iurisdiction euen in matters temporal which they accounted called monstruous vnnatural against the law of God and man and therefore in no wise to be suffered Yet al this notwithstanding the next yere folowing the same men found it agreable to al scripture and al lawes that a woman might haue supreme authoritie not only in matters temporal and ciuil but also in spiritual and ecclesiastical and by terrible punishmeÌ„t euen of extreme and exquisite death were content to bynde the subiectes generally to this point of beleefe yet with this distinction that the Nobilitie and Barons of the realme should be exempted from the same as though they might haue a faith dâ—uers from others of the same realme or one and the selfe same faith might be necessarie and not necessarie true and false enlarged and restrained according to the diuers degrees of nobilitie and coÌ„munaltie Briefly concerning the whole forme of their ecclesiastical Seruice in the first Communion booke it is thus appointed that The minister at the time of the Communion and at al other times in his ministratioÌ„ shal vse such ornamentes in the church as vvere in vse by authoritie of Parlament in the second yere of the reigne of King Edvvard the sixt I appeale now to the knowledge of euery man how wel that acte of Parlament is obserued through out the realme in how many Cathedral or parish churches those ornamentes are reserued whether euery priuate minister by his owne authoritie in the time of his ministration disdaine not such ornamentes vsing only such apparel as is most vulgar prophane I omit other particular differences of feastes of holy daies of crossing in baptisme of communicating the sicke c. in which their continual alteration is wel knowen by their dayly practise and their verie Communion bookes printed in diuers yeres Only I wish the reader of his owne wisedom and consideration to marke the general chaunges which from time to time our realme hath fallen into since this schisme first began there In the later yeres of king Henry the eight we were touchâ—ng many pointes Catholikes as the Parlament holdâ—n the yere 1540 doth testifie wherein by authoritie of Parlament these articles were accorded and agreed vpon That there is the real presence of Christes natural body and bloud in the most blessed sacrament vnder the formes of bread and vâ—yne That the Communion in both kindes is not necessarie ad salutem by the lavv of God to al persons That priestes after the order of priesthod by the lavv of God may not marry That vovves of chastitie or vvydovvhead made to God aduisedly ought to be obserued by the lavv of God That priuate Masses are to be continued and admitted in the kinges English church congregation as vvhereby good christian people do receaue both many and goodly consolations and benefites and it is agreable also to Gods lavv That auricular Confession is expedient and necessary to be retained and continued vsed and frequented in the church of God In the same Parlament and
that it svvarueth from the Apostolicall doctrine and teacheth cleane contrarie to S. Paule and all scriptures if Luther flatly expresly deny it to be Apostolical and affirme it to conteyne no one title or letter of such matter as the Apostels are wont to haÌ„dle if WolfgaÌ„gus Musculus vse him so contemptuouslie as though he were some poore rascall not worth the naming and teache him what he should say and sette him to schole this being euident then F. Campions conclusion standeth strong that Luther with his complices contemne that parte of scripture howsoeuer he calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strawen or wodden And therefore ether let M. VV. lyke a good childe confesse with Luther vvhom gladlie he vvorshippeth as his father and vvith the Lutherans vvhom he embraceth as his most deere brethren in Christ that this epistle is no more worth then his father and brethren make of it or if he mislike such consanguinitie as sure I am they abhorre him let him then detest them as profane and wicked men who so impiouslie reiecte the written worde of God that is the foundation as they say whereon is buylte their newe congregation and so may the reader note downe one more capital and substantiall point of dissension betwene those two churches lutheran zuinglian then heâ—herto he hath consâ—dered although nether can he so doe precisely but rather note it as a diuision amonge the zuinglians also for so muche as it appeareth by Musculus that the Zuinglians of SuitzerlaÌ„d no lesse then the LutheraÌ„s of Germanye disagree from the Englishe churche in their Canon of scripture yea the Englishe church within it self as shal appeare in the nexte chapiter CHAP. II. Of the Canonical scriptures and that the English cleargie in accepting some and refusinge others are ledde by no learning or diuinitie but by mere opinion and fantasie AFTER S. Iames foloweth a questioÌ„ proposed by M. Martin how it chauÌ„ceth that the English church doth admit S. Iames epistle which sometime was not admitted and yet wil refuse Tobias Ecclesiasticus the books of Machabees which were no farther disproued then that of S. Iames. The reason in truth is the same in effecte geuen by M.VV. because these later contayne such proofe of the Catholyke religion as by no sophisticatioÌ„ can be eluded S. Iames they thinke is not so flat but shifts they haue to ridde their handes of him well inough So much writeth Caluin Some there are that thinke this epistle not vvorthie of authoritie but I because I see no sufficiente cause vvhy it should be reiected gladly vvithout controuersie embrace it for vvhereas the doctrine of free iustification semeth to be refuted in the second chapiter in his place I shall easelie ansvvere that matter As if he had sayd that therefore he admitted it because he had found out a quidditie to auoide that hard obiection agaynst only faith which answere notwithstaÌ„ding because it is false peeuish sophistical and cannot abide the tryall as wel proueth Illyricus Pomerane Musculus they therfore thought the other way more cleanlie rather vppoÌ„ preteÌ„ce of some doubte made in the primitiue churche cleane to shake it of with the rest then vppon a vaine toy which must in fine shame it selfe make hazard of their solifidian iustificatioÌ„ which must needes come to the grounde if this Apostle retaine his old credite This I say in deede is the reason but because thus to haue spoken plainlie had geuen a sure demonstratioÌ„ to the reader that they make no more account of scriptures then of fathers no more reckning of Iames or Peter then of Gregorie or Austin if they be against their conceaued heresies therefore M. VVhit semeth to shape a more cleanlie answere and this yt is All the church saith he reproued not the epistle of Iames and they that reproued it vvere moued so to doe by no sure reasons but these bookes vvhich you name Tobias Ecclesiasticus the Machabees the vvhole churche of old reiected nether vvere they vvritten in the Hebrevv tounge vvhereas no bookes of the old testament vvere Canonicall but onlie those vvhich the lord commended to the old churche Two reasoÌ„s he seemeth to geue the first that no bookes in the olde TestameÌ„t are Canonicall but such as were written in the Hebrew the proofe wherof consisting onlie in M.VV. authoritie without ether reason or probabilitye or Doctor or Councell if I oppose against him S. Augustine with the catholike churche of that age I trust the reader wil not greatlie stagger which syde he ought to take and if this reason hold I marueile what shall become of Daniel a great parte wherof is held of them for Canonical yet is not writteÌ„ in the Hebrew His other argument is of more force that the vvhole primitiue church refused the bookes of Machabees Iudith Tobie but certaine onlv that vppon no good reason refused S. Iames. These two partes if he proue and shew this difference he sayth somewhat I wil be of iudgement as he is if not whereof I assure my self then as before so here styll lust and fantasie ruleth them in mangling thus the scriptures not reason diuinytie let vs see how he proueth that the whole churche reiected the former S. Hierom sayth the church readeth the bookes of Iudith Tobias the Machabees but reckeneth theÌ„ not amongst canonicall scriptures This for them how may we fynd now that not the whole churche but some particuler men and they not vppon any good reason refused S. Iames For this part we must credit M.VV. vppon his worde for besyde his worde reason or coniecture he yeldeth none but coÌ„trariwise to disproue this his distinction and approue that without reason or conscience he and his fellowes haue made choyse of the one with condemnation of the other thus to do M.VV. him selfe ministreth vs mattet abundant for thus he wryteth in his first booke in iustifiynge frier Luther against S. Iames. Luther vvas not ignorante vvhat the aunciente church iudged of Iames his epistle Eusebius doubted not to vvrite of that epistle expresslie I vvold have all men to knovv that the epistle vvhich is ascribed to Iames is a bastarde epistle vvhat could be writteÌ„ more plainly but perhaps Eusebius pleaseth you not geue me a reasoÌ„ vvhy heare then Hierome vvhom you knovv to have bene a Priest of the Romane Church The epistle of Iames is auouched to have bene set forth by some other in his name the one affirmeth it to be a counterfeite the other saith it is supposed to have bene published not by the Apostle but by some other vvhy then are you angrie vvith Luther vvhom you see not suddenlie or rashlie first to have begon to doubâ—e of that epistle but therein to folovve the iudgement â—â—stimonie of the auncient Church Let vs now ioyne together these two proofes of M. VV. with consideration what thence
no wiser then they who in so shorte space haue falleÌ„ out with your self altered your iudgmeÌ„te and now esteeme that for apocriphal which then was to yow canonical that is now iugde that to be the moone which then you thought to be the sunne Our lorde geue his people grace to thinke of you as you proue your selues that is so fantastical inconstant that you know not what to say and whyles you seeke to keepe your selfe aloofe from the Catholike churche the sure piller grouÌ„de of truâ—he you plunge your selues ouerhead and eares in such foule absurdities as neuer did heretikes before you For what is the reason of al this because besydes the written word or scripture yow wil not acknowledge any traditioÌ„ of the Church wherevnto by this question yow are enforced of necessitie For if we are bound to beleeue certaine bookes as for example the Gospel of S. Matthew S. Marke S. Iohn and S. Paules Epistles to be Canonical that is heaueÌ„ly and peÌ„ned by diuine inspiration and yet the same can not be proued by scripture theÌ„ cleare it is that we are bound to beleeue somewhat which by scripture caÌ„ not be proued and so the tradition of the Church is established And marueyle it is that yow perceaue not how grosly yow ouerthwart your self and plainly refel that which yow would seeme most earnestly to confirme For if yow march your beleefe of scripture with knowledg of the Sunne and Moone and such like as are knowen by only sense the light of nature then you deny it to be any article of your faith For these two are directly opposite and the apostle confirmeth this reason wheÌ„ he defineth faith to come by hearing and hearing by the vvord of God ergo fides ex auditu auditus per verbuÌ„ Dei And therefore if you beleeue not with humaine faith as yow beleeue Tusculanes questions to haue bene written by Cicero but with Christian diuine faith as yow beleeue Christ to be your sauiour if thus you beleeue the Gospel which beareth S. Matthews name as likewise that of S. Marke and S. Iohn to haue bene written by them then yow beleeue so because so yovv haue heard it preached and so yovv haue receaued and consequently by the Apostles authoritie that verie matter so preached vnto yow is the vvord of God which word of God whereas yow find not in the scriptures hereof it foloweth manifestly that somewhat is the vvord of God which is not scripture and therefore yow and your fellowes beleeuing only scripture beleeue not al the vvord of God but only a peece thereof and so did the worste heretikes that euer were yea so do at this day the verie Turkes and Mahometanes But to end this special matter with yow M. VV. touching your distinction betweene S. Iames and Tobias Iudith the Machabees c. where you make this to be the difference that S. Iames vvas refused but of a fevv and the other generally of the vvhole Churche tota Ecclesia repudiauit say you for declaration of your truth herein I referre you to the moste euident testimonies of the same auncient Churche S. Augustine setting downe the Canonicall scriptures as they were read and beleeued in his time placeth S. Iames I coÌ„fesse in order with the Gospels Pauls epistles yet not excludiÌ„g those other but in the selfe same place numbringe Tobie Iudith and the Machabees with the bookes of Moses and the Prophetes his saith he 44. libris veteris testameÌ„ti terminatur authoritas In these fourtie and foure bookes is concluded the authoritie of the old testament Likewise the Councel of Carthage approueth for Canonicall S. Iames but in the same CanoÌ„ it approueth as far the other forenamed and teacheth of them as directlie as of the other that they are Canonicall scriptures Somewhat before S. Augustines daies they were not by publike decree of the Church receaued as appeareth by S. Hierome and the Councel of Laodicea but then when there was as greate doubte of S. Iames epistle S. Paule to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps touchinge the first it is manifest by that which hath bene said by you and your felowes Of the secoÌ„d there was more question then of the first and S. Hierome seldome citeth it but he geueth a note signifyinge that it was not in his time taken for Canonical In the Epistle to the Hebrevves vvhich the custome of the Latine Church receaueth not saith he it is thus vvritten Againe the blessed Apostle in his Epistle to the Hebrevves although the custome of the Latin Church receaueth it not amongst Canonicall scriptures Againe this authoritie the Apostle Paule vsed or vvhosoeuer he vvere that vvrote that Epistle In catalogo he saith that euen vnto his time it vvas not accounted the vvritinge of Paule and that Caius an auncient writer denyeth it to be his and in his epistle to Paulinus sette before the Bible he saith that a plaerisque extra numerum ponitur of the more part it is put out of the nuÌ„ber of Paules vvritinges The like might be declared by S. CipriaÌ„ Lactantius Tertullian Arnobius and S. Austine if it were needefull and the Apocalyps was yet more doubtful then ether of these two as wee see by the Councel of Laodicea leafte oute of the rolle of Canonicall writinges when both the other of S. Iames and S. Paule were put in Wherefore as false that is which M.VV. constantlie auoucheth of the auncient Church touchinge the seueringe of these sacred volumes so hath he not yet nor euer shalbe able with reason to satisfie M. Martins demaund why they of England haue coÌ„desceÌ„ded to admit the one rather then the other And here the reader may consider esteeme as it deserueth of that glorious 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in fine he singeth to him self settinge the crowne of triumphe vppon his owne head and his felowes Nothing saith he is novv more vulgar then the Papists arguments against vs. Quicquid afferri a quoquam potuit vidimus diluimus protriuimus vvhat so euer could be said of anie of them al vve haue seene it refelled it and trode it vnder foote he may consider I saie how like this man and his companions are to worke such maisteries who as yet knowe not what those weapons are which they should vse in atchiuing such conquests For whereas they vaunt to doe this by the written worde yet are not resolued amoÌ„gest them selues what that written word is and how farre it extendeth it is as fantastical a parte to bragge of victorie as if a mad man should ruÌ„ne into the field to slea his enemie and when he commeth there knoweth not with what weapon to begin the fight Wherefore wel may he and his felowes heare and see the Catholike doctrine as Esai speaketh of the Iewes concerninge the doctrine of Christ hearing shal you heare shall not vnderstand and seeing shal yovv
question Elizeus might haue and had no doubt his minde in heauen with Elias by your commentarie and sense far greater was the facte of Elias then that of Christ For the cloke was a far better and more liuely figure of Elias then youre bread and wine is of Christ By it Elizeus receaued greate grace strength as writeth S. Chrisostome as by the which he fought agaynst the deuill and vanquished him That your bread should geue any grace it is agaynst your whole doctrine and Zuinglius laboureth to proue it at large in sundrie places callinge it papisticall to say that any sacrament euen baptisme doth aliquid momenti conferre ad sanctificationem aut remissionem peccatorum profite any iote to sanctifie or take avvay synne Elizeus by that cloke wrought straunge miracles so did you by your figuratiue bread neuer nor neuer shall so longe as the worlde standeth Briefly whereas Elizeus cloke cariynge with it such vertue and power was a thing surmounting the abilitie and reach of man and could not be done but by the omnipotencie of god your bread being nothing but a signe or banner as it were a may-pole or token of a tauerne by Zuinglius his owne confession the king of Fraunce or Spaine can make ten thousande as good And the truth is they can make much better because theirs do no harme wheras yours leade men the hye way to damnatioÌ„ Wherefore youre answere to this place of S. Chrisostome is to to fond and childish And hereby we may haue a gesse how substanciallye you are like to deale with the next which is taken out of the same father I must needes write it doune somewhat at large for the readers better vnderstanding of vs both It is in his thirde booke de sacerdotio where he setteth forth the high estate of the priestes of the new Testament and that acte wherein priesthode especiallye consisteth that is the sacrifice thus he writeth This priesthode it selfe is exercised in earth but is to be referred to the order and revv of thinges celestiall and that for good reason because no mortall man no angell no archangell no creature but the holy Ghost him self framed this order Terrible vvere the thinges dreadfull vvhich vvere before the tyme of grace in the lavv of Moyses as vvere the litle bells pomegranats pretious stones in the breast of the prieste the mitre golden plate sancta sanctorum c. But if a man consider these thinges vvhich the tyme of grace hath brought to vs he vvil iudge all those thinges vvhich I called terrible and dreadfull to be but light and though glorious yet not comparable vvith the glorie of the nevv testament as S. Paule saith This being laide before as it were a preface or preparatiue to that which foloweth he then coÌ„meth to that place out of which M. W. culleth certaine wordes For sayth he vvhen thou seest our Lord sacrificed and the prieste earnestlie intent to the sacrifice and pouring out his prayers and the people about him imparted and made red vvith that pretious bloud thinkest thou thy self to conuerse amongest mortall men and remaine on the earth And immediatly ô miraculum ô Dei benignitatem ô miracle ô singular goodnes of God he that sitteth vvith his father aboue at the self same moment of tyme is handled vvith all mens handes and deliuereth him self to those that vvill receaue and imbrace him and this is done playnlie in the sight of all men vvithout any deceate or illusion Of this place M. Martin inferreth that M.W. reasoning Christ is in heauen ergo not in the Sacramet is wicked refuted by the old fathers But M.W. replyeth no. And I vvil geue you your ansvvere sayth he out of the same place for here Chrysostome affirmeth that vve see our Lord sacrificed in the supper and the people imparted and made red vvith the bloud and that this is done in the open sight of all that are presente But vvho seeth ether our Lord truâ—y sacrificed or one droppe of bloud vvith vvhich the people are made red so as all see it as Chrisostome vvriteth Therefore as vve see Christ sacrificed and the people embrued vvith his bloud so vve receaue him in our handes In these vvordes Chrysostome vvould both amplifie the dignitie of priestes vnto vvhom Christ gaue povver to minister the Sacrament of his bodie and bloud and make the people afrayde that they vvhich come to this supper should bring vvith them godlie and religious myndes as though they should take Christ him selfe in their handes The substance of the answere is this Chrysostome in the same place sayth we see Christ offered which in truth is not so but by a figuratiue speach therefore when he saith Christ is in heauen and in the Sacrament it is not simplie true but by like phrase and figure But whereunto then tende al these great wordes and perswasions of this father to honour the priests office and make the people afrayed and were there priestes in the church in those days No. but by priestes you must vnderstand mâ—nisters and then a simili by the sacrifice he speaketh of that is the masse you must vnderstand the CommunioÌ„ that is by Catholike relâ—gion you must vnderstande heresie and by light darkâ—es But I wil go thorough the branches of this answere in order First whereas you make that a thing most assured and certaine that no man seeth Christ offered except you meane in your English supper you are greatly deceaued For in the church Catholike we see Christ offered and that not in phrase of speach only as the protestaÌ„ts may be said to do iniurie to Christ when they abuse his image but in veritie and truth of doctrine And S. Chrysostome with the rest of the fathers neuer thought or spake otherwise How oft hath S. Chrisostome quâ—d summo honore dignum est id tibi â—n terra â—stendam That vvhich deserueth most honor that vvil I shevv thee on earth and in the same place The royal body of Christ is in heaueÌ„ vvhich novv in earth is set before thee to be seene I shevv vnto thee not angels not archangels not heauens not heauen of heauens but I shevv thee the verie Lord him selfe of al these Perceauest thou not hovv not only thou seest in earth and touchest but receauest also the soueraine and principall thing that is And in the same place This body vvhich thou seest on the altar the vvise men adored in the manger But it were tedious to note out such places which are common in euery booke This rather I would wishe M. W. to vnderstand that where it hath pleased God in certaine creatures to exhibite his presence after a more special and singular sort there in a more special and singular maner truely we may ought to beleeue that we see our Lord. God is by essence power and operation present in euerie creature yet in seing a
stand Tecum principatus in die poteÌ„tiae tuae in decoribus sanctitatis ab vterâ— Ã Lucifero tibi ros natiuitatis tuae How euer it be framed great difference wil rise of necessitie amongst diuers interpreters And whence proceedeth that one great cause is the diuers significatioÌ„ of one word The first which the 70. turned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tecum vvith thee others populus tuâ—s thy people is in the hebrew one word with so smale a difference of one point as is possible The next expressed of the 70. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 principatus may be as well signified by the hebrew as spontanea oblatio The third which the 70. turned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Hierom fortitudinis the Protestants exercitus may truely signifie them al povver vertue strength liberalitâ—e and armie and so aurora or Lucifer is the same word But that which chiefely I note in this sentence whatsoeuer other difference was betweene the old hebrew text and the new is the diuersitie of sense rising through diuersitie of reading vpon occasion of similitude in the hebrew letters as for example The Septuaginta read in spâ—endoribus or decoribus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in brightnes whom commonly al the Protestants folow S. Hier. in mentibus in mountaines the difference commeth of the likenes of two hebrew letters daleth and resâ—h The last word the 70. rendered by genuite I haue begotten thee Which word of how great strength force it is in this place may be perceaued by vew of the Apostle Paules argument who out of that verse word proueth the eternal diuinitie of our Sauiour S. Hierom translated that word adolescentiae tuae as commonly do the Protestants What is the occasion of this difference the great likelines of two wordes the Septuaginta read the first S. Hierom the second The printes now vsed though in sense folow S. Hierom yet misse one of his letters and therefore come nearer to the reading of the 70. And this verse letter vau for iod hath certainly made disagreemeÌ„t in some other places As where the Septuaginta read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fortitudinem meam ad te custodiam my strength vvill I kepe to thee and so S. Hierom read and translated now it is in the hebrew fortitudineÌ„ eius his strength vvil I keepe to thee to the great peruerting of the whole sense and sentence A like error to that Genes 3. if it be an error as many verie probably rather thinke it is none ipsa conteret caput tuum for ipse or ipsum about which the Protestants keepe such a stur But what should I rehearse examples of such smale errors committed by learned men by Rabbines by S. Hierom by the Septuaginta vvhereas the protestants sticke not to charge directly the verie Apostle S. Paule with error in this kind For whereas S. Paule writeth That nether eye hath seene nor eare heard nether hath it entred in to the hart of man vvhat God hath prepared for those that loue him iis qui diligunt illum whereby we proue that heauen is prepared as a reward for charitie and the workes thereof and so refel their mathematical solifidian fansie many pretie answeres they geue vs as that S. Paule doth after his fashioÌ„ very finely writhe the place So Luther Paulus sententiam commodè detorsit Illyricus That to loue is as much as to beleeue and so charitie as much as faith and then to be saued by only faith why may we not interprete it To be saued by only charitie Qui diligunt saith he pâ—nitur pro iis qui ad eum supplices fide confugiunt Fides per effectum suum dilectionem declaratur Those that loue him that is those that by faith humbly flye vnto him Faith is noted by his effect that is charitie But Peter Martyr goeth an other way to worke and thinketh that the Apostle read not right Thus writeth he Diligentibus se habet Apostolus Propheta vero dixit expectantibus et diserimen agnoscitur prouenisse a magna similitudine duorum elementorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Apostle hath the vvord louing the Prophet hath trusting or expecting and it is vvel knovven that this difference grevve from the great similitude of tvvo hebrevv letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for so much as among the hebrevves the same verbe vvritten vvith one letter signifieth to trust or expect vvith the other to loue vehemently vvhich Paule folovved In which censure Christian reader besides his sacrilegious contempt in diuinitie wherein thou maist learne to care the lesse for their condemning and railing at the fathers when they are so sawcie with this singular Apostle besides this prophane wickednes in diuinitie I say he fowly belieth the Apostle against al humanity For the secoÌ„d word which he obiecteth hath no such significatioÌ„ if he meant some other word somewhat reseÌ„bling the first as other of his brethreÌ„ gesse yet nether caÌ„ they serue his turne for so much as the graÌ„matical rules wil not beare such construction as against Erasmus and him Beza hath truely noted But graunt we to P. Martir that which he would haue let S. Paule I wil not say indued with the holy Ghost so abundantly Paule that piller foundation of the Church so directed by God as he could not erre but only Paule brought vp from his infancy in the law of Moyses in coÌ„tinual studie of the law and Prophetes at the feete of Gamaliel so noble a scholemaister let this Paule be deceaued in reading the Hebrew then how intolerable is their peruersitie who wil not suffer so much to be iudged of the common base vulgar ignorant scribes so malitiously bent against Christ and al Christianitie as before is noted But hovvsoeuer M. W. speaketh of his fountaynes and originâ—ls knovv thou Christian reader that other of his side far more skilfull then he without any contradiction acknovvledge vvhat soeuer I say Sebastianus Castalio by occasion defending him self agaynst such a one as M. W. seemeth to be writeth thus Videtur esse in ea opinione sicut et plerique omnes Iudaei et noÌ„nulli hac in parte Iudaizantes Christiani vt in hebraicis bibliis nullum vsque mendum irrepisse putet c. This good felovv seemeth to be of that opinion as in maner all Ievves are and some Christians dravving to Iudaisme in this respect that they thinke no error euer to haue creapt into the hebrevv bibles that God vvould neuer suffer that any vvord should be corrupted in those holie bookes as though the bookes of the old testament vvere more holie then those of the nevv in the vvhich nevv so many diuers readinges are founde in so many places or as though it vvere credible that God had more regarde of one or other litle vvord or
disâ—greing from the mind of the holy Ghost Wil you vvishe vs rather to take Castalio vvhom D. Humfrey matcheth vvith the best and praiseth his bible as most painfull most diligent most thorougly conferred examined sifted and polished and Conradus Gesnerus simply preferreth it before al as the best that vvas euer yet set out by the Protestants Vertit biblia saith he ita diligenter ac suÌ„ma fide ad hebraica graeca exemplaria c. vt omnes omnium versiones hactenus aeditas longo post se interuallo reliquisse videatur Cast alio bath translated the bible so diligently and vvith so singular fidelitie according to the hebrevv and greeke that he seemeth far to haue surpassed al traÌ„slations of al meÌ„ vvhat so euer haue hetherto bene set forth Yet this notvvithstanding vve can not possibly so esteeme of it considering that Beza in so many places of his notes condeÌ„neth it not only for false corrupt peruerse but also for pestileÌ„t sacrilegious Ethnical Turkish such a one as coÌ„taineth the very seede laieth open the high vvay to manifest Apostasie froÌ„ Christ To come neerer home Caluin I suppose by M. W. iudgment should succede in place of our olde but so should vve make as euil a chaunge as if vve tooke any yet mencioned For Caluin vvhatsoeuer grace or good qualitie othervvise he had vvas as savvcie and malapert in altering the text of scripture as any of his felovv sectaries so vvriteth of him his ovvne brother Carolus Molineus Caluinus in sua harmonia textum euangelicum desuitare facit sursum versum vt res ipsa indicat vim infert literae euangelicae et illam in mul tis locis transponit et insuper addit literae Caluin in his harmony which is the very letter of his translation maketh the text of the gospel to leape vp and dovvne as the thing it self shevveth He vseth violence to the letter of the gospel and in many places cleane transposeth it and besides this he addeth to the text that is he geueth vs a text of his ovvne making What remaineth for vs to do now but to sticke to our old seing the Protestants them selues thus disswade vs from taking any new But there remaineth yet one sure felow whom I suppose M. W. could be content to substitute in place not only of our auncient edition but of Luther Occolampadus Castalio yea and Caluin him self that is Theodore Beza whom the english congregation seeme most to folow But he must tel vs what testament of what yere of what date because certaine it is that the first editions dâ—ffer notoriously from the middle and the middle from the later as hath bene touched before of al testameÌ„ts set forth by any herâ—tâ—ke no one hath bene more refuted coÌ„uinced of fowle and wilfull corrâ—ptions and that by the verâ—e heretikes them selues then those of Bezaes witnesses whereof are besides Catholike vvriters noted before Selneccerus the Germane and the Vniuâ—rsitie of Iena Seâ—astianus Castaâ—io in a vvhole booke and Carolus Molineus in vâ—rie many places of his notâ—s vpon the nevv testament vvhich he set forth VVhere often times he reprehendeth Caluin and Beza often times of Beza he saieth that he de facto mutat textum Altereth the text not only in sense but in the verie word and letter Againe Theod. Beza Mat. 10. v. 10. Luc. 9 3. defacto muâ—at textum vt hos ita conciliet Sed non pâ—acet mutari textum qui ab omnibus et antiquis et receÌ„tioribus doctâ—ribus retinetur quum sacile coÌ„ciliari possint Beza in S. Matthevv chap. 10. v. 10. and S. Luke chap. 9. v. 3. actually changeth the text so to make a reconciliation betvvene the euangelists But I like not that so to change the text vvhich is retained of al doctors both old and nevv and othervvise they may vvel be recoÌ„ciled and whether they may or may not surely that is a very mad way of reconciliation And commonly that writer preferreth our vulgar editioÌ„ before Erasmus Bucer Bullinger Brentius the Tigurine traÌ„slation Pagnines etiam Iohannis Caluini et omnibus aliis yea befâ—re Iohn Caluins to and all other And in the same place Here Erasmus did vvel to folovv the old edition and it had bene better for Beza to haue done so to And againe Peccat Beza antiquam versionem mutans IohaÌ„nis 3. v. 19 et 43. And the like is very common in Castalio Beza malè reprehendit veterem interpretem Melius transtulerat vetus interpres Iniustè reprehendit veterem interpretem c. vniustly and vvith out cause Beza reprehendeth the old interpreter The old interpreter had translated it better before And touching Beza he saith that to note al his errors committed in translating the new testament Opus esset nimis magno lâ—bro It vvould require a very great booke And hauing noted certaine faultes of Beza committed only in the first ten chapters of S. Matthew thus he concludeth In his decem Matthaei capitibus in quibus tameÌ„ plurimae quae merito repreheÌ„dere potuissem praetermisi quam prolixum passem c. I trust I haue shevved sufficiently by these ten chapters of S. Matthevv in vvhich notvvithstanding I haue omitted very many things vvhich iustly I might haue reprehended vvhat a long register of his errors I could gather out of his vvhole vvorke For this is true that oft times he erreth not only in vvords vvhich is not so daungerous and might be tolerated but also in things and the same most vvaightie and oft times he enforceth by vvrithing not the sentences only but also the vvords of the holy vvriters to serue his error So Iohn 1. v. 12. he corrupteth a most not able place and of greatest moment touching freevvil c. And in fevv to speake al for I should vvrite out vvhole treatises bookes if I vvould shew the vile abusing of scripture committed by that vvretch of damnable memorie vvhom our english Protestantes cheefely extolle as by M. VV. vve learne thus much Castalio noteth and shevveth by manifolde examples that Beza then principally laboureth in peruerting the scripture vvheÌ„ it appertaineth most to the benefite vertue of Christs passion and our redemption Thus he vvriteth vpon the 6. chapter to the Romanes and these vvordes of our latin text Vt destruatur corpus peccati in the english translation That the body of sinne may be destroyed both agreing exactly with the greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza saith Castalio turneth the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eneruetur may bevveakened and reprehendeth the old interpreter Erasmus and me for translating may be destroyed for this honest man vvil not haue sinne to be distroyed by Christ but only weakened vvherein he doth plainely diminish the benefite bestovved vpon vs by Christ Id quod multis aliis in locis eum facere animaduerti
steede of because she doth loue much And plaine it is that Christ spake not greeke or latin but hebrevv Therefore vvhereas Christ said Many sinnes haue bene forgeuen her he proueth it by that which folovveth because she loueth much as if he had said That she loueth me much it is no maruel she hath good occasion so to do For many sinnes haue bene forgeuen her So vve say that he hath obtained that vvhich he desired because he is mery laugheth he is verie hūgrie because he eateth much c. I wil not bestow time in examining this answere who told him that Christ vsed the preterperfect-tense for the present whereas S. Luke so flatly affirmeth the contrarie or that S. Luke in this phrase so strāgely affected the Dorical lāguage with the rest of his bold assertion but wanting al reason of reasonable coniecture to support them this only I wish thee to consider whether thou didst euer see a litle sentence so racked and torne as this is For cōparing this sentēce as it is novv fashioned by them with the same sentence as it was first pronounced by our Sauiour not one word of any momēt remaineth in such sort as Christ vttered them Christ said Many sinnes are forgeuen her because she hath loued much now with their correction thus it is Many sinnes haue bene forgeuen her For she loueth much Where first they rent in sonder make that two which Christ ioyned and spake as one Then they wrest one of Christs words bringe it to a Dorical phrase of speach And by and by backe againe they make the next which signifieth a thing past in greeke to signifie a thing present by the hebrewe maner of speach which hath no present tenses the cleane contrarie whereof is auouched in the other Dorical word going immediatly before Afterwards they enforce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to signifie a cause antecedent but a signe or effect consequent And finally in al and euery of these tricks S. Lukes authoritie is vnder foote and lieth dead For nether Beza nor Musculus in this tossing and turning euer consider what S. Luke wrote what sense the Apostolical Church gaue and the holy Ghost in the same hath alwaies continued what the very letter of the greeke requireth as now it standeth but how it may possibly be wrested if a man wil folow the spirit of contention if he will fetch the pointing of the sentence from Geneua the meaning of one word from Dorica in one corner of the world of an other frō Hierusalem of a third from Swytzerlād the entier summe of al from the deepe pit of hell For excepte the deuil him self stoode by thē suggested to them such construction I thinke the nature of man hauing some regarde of honestie of learning of modestie of Christ his Euāgelists could neuer breake forth into so much monstruous absurditie Of al which this I conclude that allowing men this libertie vnto which now by this libertine-gospel they are driuen I say there is no possibilitie to conteine men in faith or to reduce men to faith or to proue any parcel of Christiā faith For setting aside church Doctors Custome Councels and resting in the only Scriptures priuate exposition of the same this one example geueth vs a paterne to care nothing for al scriptures For it is a maruelous flat text which a man of meane learning by one of these shiftes may not auoide ether by refusing it as not Canonical because it is reiected novv of Protestants in these daies or hath bene doubted of by Catholikes in old time vvhich cutteth of a number of bookes or by obiecting some one or other greeke example in vvhich the vvords vvant vvhich is easie to finde heretiks of diuers sects hauing novv the printing of most greeke testamēts and euery one being content to fauour his proper gospel and heresie or by producing some false translation and sticking to that vvith store of vvhich euerie prouince is pestered or by hunting out diuers significations of the greeke vvord and taking that vvhich maketh most for his aduantage or if that serue not then by corrupting one word by conferring an other with the greeke of this or that dialect a third with the Iewes or Chaldees or Suitzers maner of speaking and so patching vp a sense partly Christian partly Germane partly Ethnical and partly Iudaicall and finally which is al in al reseruing euer to him selfe supreme iudgement of al senses interpretations scriptures and languages As in this verie place whereof I speake Zuinglius folowing nether the words of the Euāgelist nor sense of the Church nor Cōmentarie of the auncient fathers nor inuention of Beza nor any of those manyfold shiftes of Musculus willeth vs rather for dilexit to put credidit for charitie faith and then geueth vs the meaning of Christs words thus Quoniā dilexit multum Ego puto dilectionem hic pro fide accipi quòd tantum mihi fidit tantum peccatorū ei remittitur Nam poste a dicit sides tua te saluam sec it Because she loued much I suppose that loue is here put for faith because she hath so great affiāce in me so many sinnes are forgeuē her for he saith afterwards thy faith hath saued thee that is hath deliuered and absolued the from thy sinnes which one distinction answereth al the places that in this controuersie vve bring out of the scriptures to refel their only faith By these fevv heretical sleights M. Whitaker knovveth his brethren haue many other as bad as these vsed in one particular controuersie any man may gesse hovv likely it is to tye an heretike hauing some vvitt and learning and sight in tonges vvith any text that gainsaith his opinion Hovv true vve finde by experience that vvhich Tertullian so many ages agoe spake of the heretikes of his time and prophecied as it may seeme of the heretikes of our time Ista haeresis non recipit quasdam scripturas c. These Zuinglian Lutheran Puritan Anabaptist Trinitarian c. heretikes admitt not some bookes of scriptures and those vvhich they doe admit by adding to taking from they peruerte to serue their purpose And if they receaue some bookes yet they receaue thē not intierly or if they receaue thē entierly after some sort neuerthelesse they marre them by deuising diuers interpretatiōs In this case vvhat vvil you do that thinke your selfe most skilful in the scriptures vvhē as that which you defend the aduersarie denieth that vvhich you deny the aduersarie defendeth Et tu quidem nihil perdes nisi vocem de contentione nihil consequeris nisi bilem de blasphematione And thou truely shalt leese nothing but thy vvordes in so contentious a brauling thou shalt gaine nothinge but greefe and anger in seinge an heretike so to blasphene And novv if I should shevv the like in the hebrevv and by examples manifest the same I should trouble my selfe
of Protestāts pa. 411. M. W. inuectiue against the Annotations of the nevv Testament page 476. The summe thereof pa. 477. Annotations of the new Testament vvhat they cōteine pa. 484.485 what fault M.W. findeth in them 484.491 Blasphemie in the Annotations touching Christes Priesthod pa. 528.529 Ansvvered 530. vsque ad 542. blasphemie touching merite of vvorkes pa. 543. ansvvered 544 c. Hovv the Protestants fel to cal the Pope of Rome Antichrist in praef pa. 42. M. W. knovveth not vvel vvhat that Antichrist is against vvhom he vvriteth Ibid. pa. 4. The absurditie of that assertion Ibid. pa. 4. The impossibilitie of that opinion 52.53.54 The end of that doctrine 72.73 Arguments ridiculous made by M. W. and attributed to vs. pa. 497.498.499.502.504.510.511.513 such arguments tend to make a mockerie of al faith 516.517.521.522.523 S. Leo the great called Antichrist by Beza pa. 155. The first Apostles of our nation were Papistes and Massing priestes by the cōfession of our aduersaries p. 165.166 Auncient archheretikes the protestants forefathers in sundrie partes of their faith pa. 31.32 S. Athanasius called Sathanasius by the heretikes pa. 84. S. Austin called a blind bussard pa. 166 S. Austin most filthily abused and mangled by the Sacramentaries pa. 166.177 S. Austin a priest 65. S. Austin S. Hierom old papistes 121. B BEza a fierbrand of sedition pa. 231. VVriters against him pa. 232. He correcteth S. Luke and our Sauiour 233.234.236.241 and is defended by M. VV. in so doing 236.237 His reasons 238.239 Refuted ibid. et 240.241 Refuted long ago by Luther 257.258 how he correcteth the new Testament 260.261 Bezaes fault in excusable for ought M. VV. ether hath said or can say 250. He doubteth of a part of S. Iohns gospel 363.364 He furthereth the Anabaptistes against Christes incarnation of the B. virgin 368.369 See Translation of scripture Bible-beaters pa. 400. The Bible neuer so mangled by any as by the protestants 400.401 Their bible is no bible 404.405 See Scriptures Ceremonies in Baptisme pa. 504.505 C Catholike doctrine vnpossible to be ouercome by any heresie least of al by this of our time pa. 41. The name Catholike not applicable to the English religion praef 87.88 Caluin condemneth the auncient fathers for approuing Melchisedecs sacrifice pa. 60.61 Caluin for the real presence pa. 223. Carolostadius exposition of Christes wordes Hoc est corpus meum pa. 254. allovved by Zuinglius 255. Castalios translation of the Testament much commended by the protestants pa. 380. His discours that Christ is not the Messias praef pa. 67.68 The Church catholike after Christes time is euer populous and spread in many nations pa. 350. et praef pa. 62.63 She is the ground of al faith 442. built vpō a rocke vnmoueable 479. No good worke or martyrdom profiteth to saluation out of the Catholike Church 116.117 Infinite difference betvvene the Catholike cause and the Protestante pa. 556.557.558 No stay in faith out of the Catholike Church praef pa. 24. To say that the vvhole Church hath fayled is to deny Christes incarnation pref p. 56.57 58.59 to make him a lyer ib. 66.67 to deny him to be the true Messias ib. 68.69.70.71 The inuisible Church a poetical fansie pref pa. 60. refelled by Melanchton 60.61 by Caluin Oecolampadius and others 62.63.64 the Protestants sensibly cōtradict them selues in deuising it 64.65 The foundation of the English Protestant church pa 480.481.482 The antiquitie thereof 524. It is ful of Atheistes 410. S. Chrysostom for the real presence p. 188.208.215.217.218 his place comparing Christ vvith Elias pa. 207. It proueth inuincibly the real presence a pa. 204. vsque ad 214. S. Chrysost for the sacrifice pa. 214.215 He is almost as ful of lies as words by the protestants doctrine pa. 227. S. Ciril for the real presence p. 198.199.200 D S. Damascene for the real presence pa. 201.202 Dauid George vpon vvhat ground he denied Christ pref pa. 66. Defendere is vvel translated to reuenge pa. 464.465.466.467 The Doctors of the primitiue Church condemned by euery priuate sectarie in that vvherein they gain say his heresie pa. 82.83 by the Zuinglians for approuing the sacrifice of Melchisedech pa. 60. and Masse pa. 69.70.71.72 and for disallowing the mariage of priestes and votaries 83. by the Puritanes for allovving holydaies in the honour of Christ his Saintes 84. by the Trinitarians for acknovvledging the B. Trinitie 84. by the Lutherans for denying the Vbiquetie of Christs body 85. by M. W. for their doctrine of penance and vvorkes 82 11◠and for sayng that Antichrist is one man pref pa. 44.45 See vvorkes E Elias cloke the Zuinglians supper compared together pa. 212.213 Elias shal come before the day of iudgment pa. 494.495 English vvriters 478. their maner of vvriting 284.285.475 and disputing 477. more absurd then others pref pa. 6.7 Those of the English religion are not Protestants pref pa. 88. they are properly called Zuinglians or Sacramentaries ibi 89.90.91 by vvhat names they cal them selues praef pa. 91. hovv they are called by Acte of parlament ibi 21. F The true meaning of Only faith iustifying pa. 280.411.412 Libertinisme the end thereof 127.128 The nature of true Christian faith pa. 517.518.519 hovv one part of faith is applied to the confirmation of an other 521. Ecclesiastical maner of fasting commeth from Christ and his Apostles pa. 89.90 The Zuinglians figure in Christs wordes touching the sacrament pa 251. The figure of the Catholikes ib. infinite difference betvvene these tvvo 252.253.254.255 Freevvil pa. 509. G Grace hindereth nothing the merite of workes pag. 102.103 To say God is the author of synne is to say God is an Idol or a deuil pa 451. The protestants say so 451.453 454. S. Gregorie much praysed by the Protestantes pag. 158. much rayled at by the Protestantes 164. A booke written against him by Vergerius 165. S. Gregorie a priest without al reason made minister by M. Iewel 164. The Greeke Testament more aduantageable for the Catholikes then the common latin pa 283.284 Our common latin Testament more pure then the greeke now extant 361.362.363 The greeke Testament now differeth much from the old 363.364 Additions rashly made to the greeke 365.366.367 Parcels of importance left out of the greeke 367.368.369.370 H HEauen is of grace vvorkes pa. 104.105.106.107 544.545 Of mercy and iustice 105.106 107.108.109 Heauen must receaue Christ Act. 3. v 21 maketh nothing against Christs presence in the sacrament pa. 179.180.181.193 handled at large a pag. 170. vsque ad 175. S. Paule to the Hebrevves as much doubted of in the primitiue church as the epistle of S. Iames. pa. 38.39 The Apostles cited not scripture alwaies according to the hebrue pa. 287.288.289 Bookes of scripture written in hebrue lost 290. S. Hierom preferring the hebrue before the latin in his time iustifieth not the hebrue of our time pa. 297.337 More probable that the hebrue hath bene corrupted then the latin pa. 297.298.299.300 Corruptions in the hebrue pa. 302. in Isai against
into the right way as is the dutie of Christians but only to keepe mens heads in musing expectation of new bookes to make them mispend their time to keepe the printers occupied and as it were to walke and talke on a stage for no other purpose but to passe away the time This is truly to be Carnifex papiri A murderer of paper as Illyricus cōmonly calleth the Zuinglians this is in deede to be Miserabilis librifex A miserable bookevvright as Luther malapertly nameth king Henry a learned prince and of famous memory This is thoroughly to approue and iustifie that which Luther in the beginning sentenced against Zuinglius and Oecolampadius the fathers of the Sacramentarie Gospel vvhich frō thē as it may seeme hath descended to their posteritie Isti boni spiritus saith he si parū admodū rethoricantur c. These good sacramētarie sprites if they can a litle play the Rhetocians though they touch not any one argument yet thinke they of them selues that they haue ansvvered the matter passing vvel sayd much to the purpose et putant causam suam consistere in scriptione multorum librorū et in cōmaculatione pap ri and they suppose that their cause stādeth in vvriting of many bookes blotting of much paper And no doubt it proceeded of some like crafte that M.W. against vs our English translation of the Testament wrote his reprehension in latin to the end pardy that nether our common countrimen vnderstanding only the English should know those faultes which he reproueth in latin nor straūgers vnderstāding only his latin know how iustly he refelleth that which was written in English Whereby notwithstanding he might obtayne thus much that both sortes should heare tel of some errors noted and refuted but what they were and how wel how truly and substantially the refutation was made nether the one nor the other should be able to examine much lesse to iudge the rest that vnderstand both tonges vvho only may espie his vniust accusations defaultes and ignorances being not so many nor alwaies so diligent nor at any time so free as to compare his latin pretensed reprofe vvith the truth set dovvne in English For so much as the aduersaries novv against their old pretense of honoring and allovving holy scriptures cruelly punish the readers and keepers of them spoile men of the nevv Testament it self the translation and notes vvhereof they shal neuer be able to reproue as vve inuincibly to the eternal shame of heresie haue reproued theirs And yet these men that vvil not suffer our translation to be read of such as vnderstand it with fayned hypocrisie protest that it nothing harmeth their cause and wish that straungers could reade it also These Christian reader are the false fleightes of lying of dissembling of bragging of remouing groundes of disputation of denying sundry principal partes of faith of continual altering their faith of preferring thē selues before al men of taking to them selues in particular the supreme iudgement both of al scriptures the true sense thereof these be the difficulties which may dissuade and withdraw any man from writing or disputing against such sophistical wranglers yet because we may not vpō any loth somnes in our owne behalfe or lost labour in respect of thē omit to do good to others whō we may any waye profite here thou hast so much as appertaineth to the defence of the Discouerie of the Translation and Annotations of the new testament The rest shal folow hereafter if those who haue the regiment of my life studies shal thinke the tyme not euil spent in refelling so vnseemely so vnprobable and vnchristian an argument AN ADVERTISMENT TO THE READER WHEREAS of late in the Tower disputations we haue seene that learned and holy man F. Campian so much disgraced both in priuate speach and publike writing because in citing a place of Luther touching S. Iames epistle he missed the print wherin the place was to be founde the later editions of his workes differing notably from the former which chopping chaunging is cōmon to the most heretical writers of our time for feare of like inconuenience I haue thought it good amongst many to note the print of certaine bookes which in this treatise are oftē times alleaged Know thou therefore Christiā reader that in citing Luther I alwaies meane the print of Wittēberg set forth by Melanch in diuers yeres the second Tome the yere 1551. the fift 1554. the seuenth 1557. In citing Zuinglius I meane his workes as they were set forth after his death by his sonne in law Rodolphus without name of place or printer M. Foxes Actes and Monumentes I vnderstād as they were printed the yere 1563 by Iohn Day Bezaes notes vpon the new testament I meane as they were printed at Geneua the yere 1556. Sleidan I cite after the printe of Strasburg the yere 1566. Castalios bible after the printe of Basile the yere 1556. Caluins Institutions as he last of al digested them into bookes and chapters and printed them at Geneua Thus generally except I note otherwise in the margent Other bookes which haue not so much varietie although some be in more prints then one be they latin or english I commonly note not only according to the chapter but also according to the page or leafe as I do also the forenamed that thou maist with so much the more facilitie finde out the places quoted and so better iudge of the matter rreated Next whereas some are offended with vs for that in writing or speaking of them we vse the names of Sacramentaries Zuinglians or Caluinistes Puritanes and Parlament Protestantes which they say are odious nicknames found out of vs and therefore one of their writers of late chargeth vs in speaking of them to vse no other names then Christians and Catholikes for our discharge herein thus much I must signifie vnto thee that if ether truth learning would beare vs vsing such termes as they require or any reader ether Catholike or Protestant vnderstand vs we would most gladly for loue of the truth and their contentation so speake and write But now consider thou how intolerably such speaches would soūd in the eares of any indifferent reader I haue occasion sometimes to produce Luther writing Contra fanaticos Sacramētariorū spiritus against the fanatical spirites of the Sacramentaries sometimes Contra Zuinglium et discipulos eius against Zuinglius his disciples sometime D. Whitgift against the Puritanes for so he calleth them sometimes the Puritanes against him and such as maintaine the Cōmunion booke and religion of England in such sort and so far forth as is approued by Acte of parlament Now citing these writers how can we cite them without a lie if we cited them in other wordes then themselues vse If I said Luther in his booke against the fanatical spirites of the Christians Catholikes or D. VVhitg in his Defense against the
supper vvithout them is described vsed and practised fully and perfitly and no man can shevv any reason or necessitie vvhy they should be there This is the proceeding of the Zuingliā gospel that which their eternal enemie spake in scorne and derision as a thing so ridiculous absurd that they would neuer admitte for shame that haue these good felowes without shame now receaued in good sooth sadnes Wherfore to help them forward if M. W. will take a litle paynes in searching old copies perhaps he may finde some one or other at lest some aunciēt father that readeth as Luther wisheth thē to reade And to geue him an entrance let him looke in S. Basil the next chapiter to that which he citeth and he shall find him to reade thus Caenantibus illis accepit Iesus panē c. vvhiles they vvere at supper Iesus tooke bread and blessed and brake gaue it to his disciples And then leauing out the rest putteth next et hymno dicto exierunt in montem oliuarum and hauing sayd an hymne they vvent forth to mount Oliuet And perhaps if Beza liue to sette forth his testamēt once againe well it may be with some good aduise of such brethrē he wil leaue the words cleane out of the booke or put in one syllable more non and so mende all as he hathe done in some other places vpon as smale reason as this as writeth Gabriel Fabricius whose words to cōclude withall I wil sett downe in latin because you shal perceaue that some man hath written against him whose tonge Beza vnderstandeth wel inough The booke is intituled Gabriel is Fabricii Responsio ad Bezam Vezeliam Eceboliam printed at Paris an 1567. In that booke amōgst many other notable things thus he writeth Id agis haec verba toties repetita hoc est corpus meum perinde accipiēda esse ac si dictum scriptūquè esset hoc non est corpus meum Et fortasse vt tandem te expedias et tot commentariorum plaustra facessere iubeas recurres ad talem emendationem Et quia nostri correctores dicunt in ipsis etiā Pandectis Florentinis saepe deesse negationem tu tali artificio statim te liberes et aduersariis os obstruas praesertim cum alios multos euangeliorum locos similiter scilicet emendaueris partim ex coniectura partim ex manuscriptis vt ais exemplaribus You labour to shevve that those vvords so oftē repeated this is my body are to be taken as though it had bene spoken and vvritten this is not my body perhaps at length that you may ridde your selfe and dispatch out of the vvay these cart-loades of commentaries you vvill flye to such a kinde of correction And because our correctors saye that in the very lavv bookes of Florence oftentymes there vvanteth a negatiue particle you also vvill vse such a shift to stoppe the mouth of your aduersaries especially vvhereas you haue already corrected in like sort very learnedly many places of the gospels partly by coniecture partly by hand-vvritten copies as you tell vs. Some such corrected copies if M. W. cā finde against the next time it wil ease him of much labour put vs to much trouble In the meane season this I dare promise him he shall neuer scoure his coate cleane from those spottes with which in this defence of Beza he hath fouly stayned and soyled him selfe so longe as the old copies of S. Lukes gospell stande in force CHAP. XI M.VV. general ansvvere to the booke of Discouerie and of the notable impietie committed by the translatours of the English Bibles AFTer these particular controuersies and reprehēsions M. W. commeth now to make a general answere vnto M. Martyns Discouery which although it be verie short yet is it verie sweete to the singular commendation of their English trāslations The summe is that al is wel nothing amisse euery word standeth right so as he marueleth that M. Mart. was not ashamed so notably to publish his owne ignorance vnskilfulnes to all the world Thus he writeth Albeit heretofore I liked vvell our translations yet novv I loue them much more vvhereas I see so fevv faultes those so smale trifling can be found out and reproued euē of our enemies For vvhat aduersary vvas there euer so blynded with malice that can not perceaue our translations to be disallovved of you vvithout iudgment learning or reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vve translate sometimes instructions sometimes ordināces sometimes preceptes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 images 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 congregation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an elder 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to amend our liues 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 misterie or secrete 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thankesgeuing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 freely be loued 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 god is not tempted vvith euil He must take and allow in like maner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 carcas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 graue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 table c. VVhat is there here that a man can find fault vvithall as not translated vvel and truly and vvho vvil not iudge him a reprehender to vvicked importune vvho vvhen he can finde no greater thing for these faults vvhich are none at al pronounceth that al the vulgar trāslations of our churches are to be reiected condemned Haec et ist iusmodi nugae nostra crimina sunt These the like trifles are our faultes This is M.W. defence of their English translatiōs or rather a frendly assertiō that al things in thē are very wel therefore the whole booke of the Discouerie is a peeuish deuise of M. Martin proceeding only of malice without iudgment learning or reason To shew the falsitie and malitious wickednes of the heretikes in translating these verie wordes so were to make an other booke and it is so well done by M. Martin touching euery particular notwithstanding any replye yet made that to hādle the same againe were to cast water into the Terns or light a candel at noone daye Only this will I say in general and proue it that M. Whitaker in affirming thus much sheweth him selfe not only to be voide of wit learning and common sense but also to be void of shame and modestie that he litle differeth from an Atheist or Sadducee that he is more hard-faced then the most reprobate heretikes of this age the worst of his owne brethren And first what wit or learning will allow him amonge Christians to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an image or amonge Pagans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a carcas more then minister talking of the English ministers a slaue or homo a dog He wil say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by his primitiue signification and deriuation may so signifie Doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so signifie a carcas But leaue we the second talke we of the first and in that of al other where is like reason I wil not enter in to any
now it is far othervvise and othervvise your selues translate it in your later bible their line is gone forth although in the bible of the yeare 1577. ye leaue the hebrew and folovv vs. Take heede saith the same Apostle lest that fal vpon you vvhich is spoken in the Prophetes See ye contemners and vvonder and perish which wordes in the hebrew are nothing so Shal we saie this is not scripture and the Apostle abused his audience and according to M. VV. diuinitie must needes tel them a lye when he telleth them this saith the Prophete this saith Esaie this Ieremie c. because he citeth the wordes not according to the original but according to the translation of the 70. which many times much varieth from that which we find now in the original The Apostle S. Iames reprouing the prowde and loftie mindes of some bringeth this text of scripture against them deus superbis resistit humilibus autem dat gratiam translated in your English testaments thus The scripture offereth more grace and therefore saith God resisteth the proude and geueth grace to the humble vvhich vvordes are taken out of the Prouerbes of Salomon but not according to the hebrevv but after the 70. vvhich Caluin cut cleane avvay and leaft out of his translation ether for this reason vvhich you geue or because belike they agreed not vvel vvith his proude and disdainful stomake notvvithstanding they remaine in the greeke testaments printed at Geneua But by your argument he doth wel therein and saueth S. Iames from a manifest lie who affirmeth the scripture to speake so whereas by yow it is no scripture And then it were wel done of yow to mend your testaments at the next edition and leaue out this so cleare a falshode except yow retaine it of policie that at a neede yow may haue one more reason to refuse this epistle which we see graueleth yow so sore I wil not multiplie exāples because it is a thing most euident and he knoweth litle that knoweth not this to be the common maner both of some Euangelists of S. Peter and S. Paule generallie to cite the scripture in this sort VVhereof S. Paules epistle to the Hebrues in euerie chapter almost geueth proofe as likewyse doth the first of S. Peter and Beza graunteth the same of the Euangelists the auncient fathers affirme both the one the other And what neede I to presse M. W. with sentences whereas I may dispute against him out of whole chapters and bookes For let vs suppose some part of the old testament to haue bene written first in hebrew or chaldee as is a part of Daniel and to haue bene translated into greeke or latin afterwardes the chaldee or hebrue to perish the greeke or latin to remaine as for example we see in the bookes of Tobie Iudith and one booke of the Machabees The two first of which S. Hierom translated out of the chaldee the third he found though he translated it not written in hebrue And the like is thought verie probably of the songe of the three children Shal we now be so fond as to imagine that as so one as the hebrue or chaldee was lost we lost our scriptures then what saie you to S. Matthewes gospel which certainly was written by him in hebrue as witnesseth Papias Ireneus Eusebius Pātenus Origenes Sophronius S. Hierom and al antiquitie Haue we not S. Matthewes gospel because vve haue not his hebrue text nay presuppose that a gospel of S. Matthevv in hebrue may be found as you knovv such a one is extant and setting aside the authoritie of the Church vvhich to yovv is nothing no reason can be brought but yovv ought as vvel to admit that for the original as the greeke of S. Luke and S. Iohn yet dare yovv prefer that before the greeke and count that the more autētical reforme the greeke according to that hebrue this one example if M. VV. had the grace to consider and the ground hereof it vvere sufficient to ansvvere vvhatsoeuer he saith in his idle discourse in praise of the greeke hebrue for defacing the latin But let vs examine his reason vvherein lieth the pith of this questiō Thus he declaimeth for the puritie of the greeke and hebrue VVhereas vve couet to attaine the meaning of the holy Ghost hovv shal vve do this more assuredly then if vve heare the holy Ghost speaking in his ovvne vvordes This is so cleare that the Papistes them selues confesse it to be necessarie if so be the first original copies vvere pure vncorrupt For now they crie that the old testament in the hebrue fountaine and the nevv testament in the greeke is most corrupt vvhy so vvhat causeth our Papistes so to refuse the hebrue and greeke fountaine and to hunt after the litle riuer of the latin edition vvho doubteth but it is done for that only reason because they find the fountaines to be not so commodious for them For if they had the fountaines fauorable inough they vvould rather take thence then from the diches and dregges of a corrupt translation Novv because they knovv that certaine destruction hangeth ouer their heads if they be called to the fountaines therefore are they constrained not only to auoyde the spring of the purest and most holesome vvaters but also they labour to proue that the litle riuers are purer then the fountaines Here Reader thou hast many wordes and litle matter much a doe and smale reason much craking and boasting of the pure fountaines by one who from his infancie neuer dranke but of the stinking puddles of Geneua lake In which discourse of his three thinges may be learned First that he confesseth of vs that we refuse not the fountaines but because we thinke them to be corrupt Wherein he saith truly and whereby thou maist note that in folowing the latin as we doe we are lead not as they are by fansie and panges but by conscience and iudgment The second is that he affirmeth it as a thing without al doubt that thus we say because the foūtaines be not so cōmodious for vs. once againe because the fountaines are not fauorable inough vnto vs. and yet once againe because vve knovv there is no vvay vvith vs but death and destruction if vve he called to the fountaines whereof because I haue spokē alreadie I wil say no more only this may serue for an example what a lustie courage they can shew in bragging and what a pretie feate they haue in so few lynes to varie a lye so many wayes And if M. W. had geuen but one example wherein he by his hebrue greeke text could so plage vs and bring vs certam perniciem assured destruction he had done somewhat like a professor of this new diuinitie and it were a readie way to end al these controuersies Because he doth not and I dare warrant him
they I shal I doubt neuer be vvorthie to be named scholers example vvhereof take thou Charkes scornful abusing of Father Campian in the Tower for ignorance in such trifles as these are or were I disposed to disgrace the fountaines and originals which I am not but honour them as I may and sauing the euident truth and faith of Christ which standeth fast and vnmoueable though heauen and earth fall much more though the Iewish Pharisees and Scribes write their text amisse this cause faith I say foreprised I esteeme of them as of things deseruing much studie and reuerence because how soeuer some grosse errors partly of malice partly of ignorance haue crept in yet commonly and for the most part the text I hold to be true and sincere And againe I suppose this kinde of writing can not be but tedious to the English reader whose profit I principally intend and therefore will go from these particularities so far as I may to talke of a few resonable the same general arguments and questions wherein M.W. if he haue some part of that wit intelligence and modestie which a scholer diuine should haue wil not I hope much stande against me And first gladly would I learne of him what reason he and his fellowes haue why they should thinke the hebrew text to be so inuiolate so sincere and vpright is it because of Gods promise and prouidence or of mans circuÌ„spection and wisdome if because of Gods promise where finde they any such how many examples in the scriptures haue they to the contrarie whole bookes of the prophetes are perished bookes of singular coÌ„moditie made by Gods owne appointment and they perished then in that time of the sinagoge when Iacob vvas the peculiar people of God and Israel the lot of his inheritance when of al nations they vvere to God a holy nation a kingly priesthode when al other people vvere suffered to go their ovvne vvaies the Iewes only were in Gods special protection For touching the bookes of the auncient prophets somtime extant and now not appearing we reade coÌ„monly in the old testameÌ„t as of Liber bellorum domini The booke of the vvarres of our Lord The booke of the iust men The booke of Iehu the sonne of Hanani The bookes of Semeias the prophete and Addo and Samuel vvrote in a booke the lavv of the kingdome hovv kings ought to rule laid it vp before our lorde and the vvorkes of Salomon vvere vvritten in the vvordes of Nathan the Prophete and in the bookes of Ahias the Silonite and in the visioÌ„ of Addo the Seer and many other which were to long to rehearse VVhich entier bookes of the warres of our lord of the iust of those excellent prophets of Iehu of Semeias of Addo of Samuel of Nathan of Ahias and others are quite perished and perished then when the Iewes were so chosen a people such a kingdome in such order gouernment of Kings and princes and Senate ecclesiastical regiment And now when they are no people haue no gouernment no king no Priest no comparable regiment may we reasonably thinke their diuine and ecclesiasticall bookes to haue bene so warelie kept that euerie parte is safe euerie parcel sound no points letters or titles lost al sincere perfit and absolute If the protestaÌ„ts will claime this to them by mans wisdome and policie see how notably they contradicte themselues Al the bishops and princes and states of Christendome were not wise inough by the protestants opinioÌ„ these thousande yeres past to keepe them selues in the true religion and Gospell of Christ But whereas vntil 600. yeres as we learne by M. Iewels chalenge they were protestants and enemies of the Masse of the Real presence of the Pope of Rome and as M. W. telleth vs here vniuersally protestaÌ„ts quo ad praecipuas religionis partes in the principall parts of religion they fell from that pure protestant-Gospel to serue Antichrist to worship bread and wine for God to adore Images which is most grosse idolatrie in steed of a true bible and word of God to haue our coÌ„mon translation which is most impure fullest of corruptioÌ„ Al this M.W. telleth vs and he telleth vs in this booke and it is the common songe of them al. And therefore how is it credible that al this while the Iewes should be so wise so prudent so politike and circuÌ„specte that they admitted no faults kept their bible so sincere and immaculate that there only the water of life was reserued and the minde meaning of the holie Ghost vvas to be found no-vvhere so assuredly as there what is this but to make the Christians al this while more brutish then beastes and the Iewes almost equal to Angels Againe so great likenes and similitude is there betwene some hebrew letters that excellent learned men haue bene deceaued by mistaking one for an other as appeareth by comparing the olde translations of the bible with the later and S. Hierom affirmeth the same of the Septuaginta This if a man would declare by examples I thinke he might gather some hundreds out of the psalter I wil note only one verse of a short psalme which also may serue for a higher pointe In the psalme 109 after our translation thus we reade with the Septuaginta Tecum principium in die virtutis tuae in splendoribus sanctorum ex vtero ante luciferum genuite The ProtestaÌ„ts for the more parte as we see by Marlorate folowing therein Bucere Musculus Caluine and Pomerane translate it thus Populus tuus cum voluntariis oblationibus in die exercitus tui in pulchritudine sanctitatis ex vtero ab aurora tibiros adolescentiae tuae The english bible of the last edition differing notably both froÌ„ olde and new from vs and the Protestants translate thus Thy people shal come vvillingly all the time of assembâ—ing thine armie in holie beauty the youth of thy vvoÌ„be shal be as the morning devv which translation is farthest from the hebrew farthest from al sense and reason for who would make youth to rule vvombe and ioyne them together being sundred so far and the bible geuen out two yeres before hath scant one worde like and touching the later part is cleane opposite for thus it translateth In the day of thy pâ—vvâ—r shal the people offer thee free-vvil offeringes the devv of thy birth is of the vvombe of the morning there is youth of the vvombe and devv of the morning here is devv of the birth or youth for that is one word in hebrew and vvombe of the morning If a man would translate it precisely vsing only the libertie to make choise of diuers significations which the hebrew words yelde and drawe it so far as the hebrew wil beare to the sense of the Septuaginta which I take to be the best then word for word thus it should
States Princes and nations who withstoode the bishop Sea of Rome as they do now Nullis temporibus defueruÌ„t sayth he nec Episcopi nec Presbyteri nec Imperatores nec populi c. There neuer vvanted at any time nether Bishops nether Priestes nor Emperours nor nations nor Priuate men vvhich had not rather be condemned of your church for heretikes then to mainteine the Catholike communion of your Apostasie wherefore hauing so large a scope let him repayre to that his owne church and succession of Protestantes and of them seeke for the true written bible of whom he receaueth the sense and meaning of the same not to our church and succession of Catholikes whom he chiefly condemneth for erring in the true sense and then reproueth as bitterly for corrupting the true text The conclusion of al is this if as a Christian as an obedient child of the Church and willing to learne if thus he demauÌ„d of the Church for true bibles she can serue him with more varietie of such in mo languages then it wil stande with his ease to reade If he demaund this as an heretike as a rebellious Apostata as to picke quarels and maintaine strife the Church hath nought to do with him She answereth as our sauiour answered the Pharisees Quid me tentatis hypocritae as he taught his Apostles Nolite dare sanctum canibus She sendeth him to his owne scattered and diuided coÌ„gregation in to whose communion he hath thrust him selfe vnder whose false banner he fighteth against her vvhom the vniuersal Christian vvorld in al times and ages vntil our daies hath acknovvleged for the only true catholike apostolike church of Christ And hitherto of the hebrevv fountaines and originals vvherein I haue staâ—ed somevvhat the longer first of al that the reader may see that not vvithout iust cause I charge M.W. vvith a manifest lie in saing vve flee the hebrevv for that vve knovv it to containe the assured bane and destruction of our cause He may here perceaue in part vvhat reason vvhat argument vvhat conscience moueth the Church thus to prescribe and vs to folovv the Churches ordinance herein That vve nether feare nor contemne nor refuse it but for the vnderstaÌ„ding of the true sense studie and honour it as much as he though vve hange not our faith vpon it so as if the Ievves depraue a text touching Christs diuinitie vve therefore vvil denie him to be God and if they raze out the only text that foreshevveth the maner of his passion and crucifying vve vvil not for al that geue ouer our faith that in such sort he vvas crucifyed for vs. Secondarely thus I haue done to satisfie M· VV. dâ—maund who chalengeth vs so confidently to shevve any error in the originals vvho affirmeth so peremptorily those places to be safe and vntouched which appertaine to the proofe of our Christian religion Which how true it is he now seeth if he wil beleeue ether reason or his owne maisters Besides that his argument is ouer slender when he wil conclude those originalles to be pure because there is no corruption in matters of coÌ„trouersie as though there could be no errors but those which proceede of wilfulnes and malice against Christian religion as though the Iewes could not erre by negligence ignorance and other humane infirmitie by which Caluine Beza the rest of that knot can imagine very many and the same very grosse errors to haue crepte in to our latin bibles But true is the old prouerbe Graculus graculo Like wil to like as I haue said Of the Iewes for neare alliance and brotherhode they iudge so diuinely as though they were halfe goddes who neuer erred ether of malice ether of wilfulnes or ignorance or slowthfulnes or want of due consideration or thorough any kind of like ether sinne or imbecillitie But of the Christian Catholike Church of the Bishops and Pastors by whom they haue that peece of Christianitie which yet they retaine they deeme most wickedly them they accompt more dissolute more irreligious more careles negligent in matters diuine then the worst people that liue vnder the cope of heauen These in the same kind haue erred both of malice and of wilfulnes and of contempt and of negligence by al maner of faulting voluntarie inuoluntarie wherevnto a man may possibly fal Thirdly some reason mouing me thus to doe was because nether M. Martin in his Discouerie much lesse the preface of the new testament handling only such thinges as were incideÌ„t to that booke that is geuing reason why in that translatioÌ„ the latin vulgar edition vvas folowed before the common greeke testamentes had any occasioÌ„ to treate of this matter For albeit M. Martin proueth errors in matters historical to be in our coÌ„mon hebrew bibles yet he maketh no stay therein but rather presupposing the hebrew text to be altogether true as the aduersaries pretend he so much the more discouereth their wilfulnes and peruersitie who in their translations depart sundrie times froÌ„ those hebrew originalls which they seeme to magnifie as altogether faultles and vnspotted One principal corruption of great moment and importance he obiecteth out of the 21. psalme where the prophet saith in the person of Christ They haue pearced my handes and feete which by the Iewes being maliciously altered by mutation of one or other letter in to As a lyon my hands and feete without wit reason or common sense whereby is euacuated the best and clearest prophecie in the whole body of scripture touching the maner and fashion of Christs crucifying who besides M. W. would so blindly haue dissembled it yet stil sing vs the old song of the pure fountaines It is written that not long sithence certaine euangelical Anabaptistes lately conuerted from Iudaisme reading that place of S. Peter in Castalios translation Iesum Nazarenum scelestis manibus comprehendistis et ad palum alligatum sustulistis Iesus of Nazareth you haue apprehended and binding him to a post or stake so made him avvay vpon this text fel to a great and daungerous contention among them selues in their congregations whether Christ were pearced hand and foote with nailes as the Church beleeueth or were only bound hand and foote to a gibbet as the fashion among the Turkes is now a daies as the other two theeues were done to death which were crucifyed with him And remoue the traditioÌ„ of the Church which these good felowes care not for and this place of Dauid and certainly out of the old testament it can not perhaps nether out of the new be clearely proued to a contentious heretike that he was crucified in such sort as the truth is and we beleeue For as the heretikes now a daies at home in our couÌ„trie gladly abhorre the name of the crosse al signes or memories there of both in priuate talking publike preaching and writing rather vse the name of
then the greeke if our latin be framed exactly though not to the vulgar greeke examples now vsual yet to more auncient and perfect examples as Beza hath obserued if the greeke testaments haue in them many faultes errors corruptions as Beza in word auoucheth and by manifold examples sheweth if this be so true that our english translators them selues at their pleasure leaue the greeke and folow our latin with what face reason or conscience can M.W. crie vpon the pure and vncorrupt originals which him self and his masters proue to be so impure and contaminated With what honestie can he cal vs to the greeke from which them selues depart so licentiously Vnto these I wil ioyne only three short obseruations which the diligent reader perhaps may amplifie by verie many particular examples and so wil come to confer our translator with our aduersaries The first may be the difference of our greeke copies now from the old whereof let this be an example Beza reiecteth the whole storie of the adulterous womaÌ„ whereof mentioÌ„ is made in the eight of S. Ihon. His reason is because the old fathers did so and it was not in the old greeke testaments which he proueth by the authoritie of S. Chrysostom of Theophilact of Nonnus and S. Hierom. and amongst 17 old copies of Henrie Stephen one vvanted it the rest had it but so that in their reading there vvas maruelous varietie whereof he inferrteh TaÌ„ta varietas lectionis facit vt de totius istius narrationis fide dubitem This great varietie of reading maketh me to doubt of the truth of the vvhole matter Yet notwithstanding this coÌ„trarie practise of the old greekes and greeke testaments and infinite varietie in the copies the new printes haue it for ought I can find vniuersally and agreably and in al our english testaments traÌ„slated after the greeke it is as canonical as any other part of S. Iohns gospel So that herein appeareth a great diuersitie betwene the old greeke testaments and the new and therefore daungerous it is to folowe these new if we can not do it but with condeÌ„nation of the old yet as daungerous is it to folow the old if we can not do it without condeÌ„nation of that which the church holdeth for a part of S. Iohns gospel The like noteth thae same writer in the epistle to the Ephes the 3. chap. a parcel whereof in S. HieroÌ„s time VVas not in the greeke bookes but only in the latin but saith Beza In omnibus veteribus libris et scholiis quoque graecis haec particula additur Novv it is added in al the old greeke copies scholies also A second obseruation may be the rash vnconsiderate additions which haue bene made in the greeke text an example whereof may be taken from the same Euangelist and the ende of the same chapter where in the greeke is added this peece Exiuit e templo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Transiens per medium illorum et sic praeteriit touching vvhich thus writeth Beza These vvords are found in verie auncient copies but I thinke as doth Erasmus that the first part is taken out of Luke the 4. v. 30. and creapt into the text by fault of the vvriters vvho found that vvritten in the margeÌ„t and that the later part 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvas added to make this chapter ioyne vvel vvith the next And thus to thinke I am moued not only because nether Chrysostome nether Augustine make any mention of this peece but also because it seemeth not to haÌ„g together very probably for if he withdrew him selfe out of their sight hovv vvent he through the middest of theÌ„ etc. so forth disputeth against this parte as altogether vnprobable not likely to be true Yet is it now generally in most greeke copies how beit the english translators leaue it out of their testaments The reason I take to be because howsoeuer they bragge of their greeke and hebrew originals the truth is they translate nether the one nor the other except sometimes some few words for a shew but only take that which Beza in latin deliuereth vnto them And yet whereof I marueil the freshest translation which professeth to folowe Beza inscribeth the booke thus The Testament of our Lorde Iesus Christ translated out of greeke by Theodore Beza and Englished by L. T. putteth this in which Beza leaueth out and against vvhich Beza disputeth so earnestly that it can not be scripture as being contrarie to it self But for excuse of the English translator it may be and true it is that Beza one yere thought thus an other yere thought otherwise And so in one Testament of his held that for false Apocryphal which in an other Testament he gaue out autorized as sacred Canonical Vnto this place thou maist referre that peece which the ProtestaÌ„ts so gloriously sing and say in the ende of the Lords praier For thine is the Kingdome the povver and glorie for euer and euer Amen which as Erasmus disliketh confessing it notwithstanding to be In omnibus graecis exemplaribus nulla latino In al greeke testaments and no one Latin so Bullinger himself counteth it to be a mere patch sowed to the rest by I knowe not whoÌ„ and alloweth wel of Erasmus iudgmeÌ„t reprouing Laurentius Valla for finding fault with the latin editioÌ„ because that lacketh it Non est saith he quod Laurentius Valla stomachetur c. There is no reason vvhy Laurence Valla should take the matter so hotely as though a great part of the Lordes praier vvere cut a vvay Rather their rasâ—nes was to be reproued who durst presume to peece on their toyes vnto the Lords praier A third obseruation may be that the greeke testaments omit vpon light occasions often times that which they should not and which the latin retaineth for autentical canonical Example where of may be the place before noted of the incarnatioÌ„ Quod nascetur ex te sanctum vocabitur filius dei That saith the Archâ—ngel to our blessed ladie vvhich of thee shal be borne holy shal be called the sonne of God In which sentence the two syllables ex te 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what force they cary against the Anabaptists hath bene declared Now consider the generâ—l corruption of the greeke copâ—es in that behalf Of them thus writeth Carolus Molineus a great Protestant in his new testament I haue read exte in most auÌ„cient bibles of vvhich one copie I haue printed at Lions the yere 1479. and that is the old vndoubted reading for so reade the old and nevv Breuiaries and Romane offices But Erasmus vvhom Bucer and Bullinger folovv seemeth only to haue fallen vpon a copie in this part vnpâ—rfite the error vvhereof is spread a broade in many copies both greeke and latin printed at Basil Zuricke Paris and Lions you and at Geneua also in the ordinarie
Christs diuinitie 303. confessed by Luther 304. cōfessed by Lyra. 306. Item in Ieremie 307. confessed and proued by Lyra. 308.309 in Isai against Christs passion 310.311 confessed by Luther 312.313 item in the psalmes 355. folowed by the Tigurine Translators 358. and Bucer 357. item in Daniel 313. General reasons why the hebrue text can not be so sincere as the heretikes pretend 317.318 c. Many bookes of the Prophetes and histories of the old Testament lost pa. 317.318 Great difference in the hebrue by mistaking one letter for an other pa. 322.323.325 That the hebrue bibles are faultie confessed by Castalio pa. 326.327 by D. Humfrey 327. by Conradus Pellicanus 327. It is a Iewish opinion to thinke them altogether faultles 327. They haue great diuersitie of reading 331.332 somewhat wanteth in them 332.333 Although S. Hierom appealed from the latin to the hebrue yet the like reason is not now pa. 333.334 He confesseth and proueth the hebrue to be faultie 334.335.336 An argument commonly made for the puritie of the hebrue pa. 338.339 answered 339 340. c. S. Iustine proueth the Iewes to haue corrupted their bible pa. 341.342.343.344 Hebrue knowledge much aduaunced by Catholikes pa. 352.440 The hebrue tonge much subiect to cauilling pa. 431.432.433 See Rabbines A man must haue a setled faith before he confer greeke and hebrue textes pa. 441.442 best Hebritians are not best Christians pa. 441. our first Apostles planted perfite christianitie without hebrue pa. 345. Heretikes generally geuen to scorning pa. 511. S. Hierom condemned as ignorant of al diuinitie pa. 371. I S. Iames epistle refused by Luther Lutherans Zuinglians pa. 8.9.10.11.12 et 17.22.23 Caluin mangleth it 288.289 M. Ievvels challenge pa. 133.138 The true image thereof 133. vsque ad 138. It is grounded vpon no reason or learning 138.139.140.141 It cōtaineth in effect only three articles the primacie of the Sea Apostolike the real presence and the sacrifice 133.136.137.138 See of them in their seueral places M. Ievvels passing vanitie in bragging and lying pa. 460. his maner of ansvvering D. Harding pref 75.76 Reuerence done to the name of Iesus pa. 513.514.515 The Ievves corrupt the text of scripture pa. 304. in despite of Christians 314.329 negligent in conseruing their scriptures 328.329 their malice against the Sea of Rome 329.330 Very probable that Christ reprehended them for corrupting the scripture 339. See Hebrue S. Iohn Baptist liued a monastical life pa. 492. K That the vvise men vvhich came to worship Christ were kings pa. 485. vsque ad 489. that they vvere three 489. 490. their names 490.491 L S. Lukes gospel called in question pa. 27.28.29.32 Luthers vvorkes altered and corrupted by the Lutherans pa. 5 6.13 by the Caluinists 7. He denieth S. Iames epistle p. 11. his immoderate bragging 42. his extreme hatred of the Sacramentaries 43.44.45.46 his iudgment of their religion 52.53.483 he refuseth their bibles 45. singularly honoured by the English church 18.191 preferred by M. W. before al doctors 47. most absurdly 48.50 He derideth the Zuinglians fond arguments 258. Luther a shameful corrupter of scripture 377.378 Lucians true histories praef pa. 4.5 M Heretical martyrs damned pa. 117. S. Matthevv vvrote his gospel in hebrue pa. 290. the protestants hold the greeke translatiō more autentical 291. The protestants reason against the Machabees is as forcible against S. Luke S. Paul 506.507.508 Melchisedech did sacrifice pa. 57. graūted by M. W. denied by al other protestants pa. 58.59.60 acknovvleged by the auncient fathers 60. vvhy not expressed by the Apostle 61.537 c. Melanchthon for the real presence pa. 190. Merite of vvorkes See in Heauen and vvorkes N Noueltie of vvords daungerous in Christian religion pa. 266.267 exemplified 268.269 it induceth contempt of faith 270. and leadeth to paganisme 276.277.278 O Only faith See Faith P Penance what it is by the Protestants doctrine 86.90.91 It reiecteth external workes of fasting discipline ibid. which are required by the scripture 87.88.89 90. by S. Cypian and the primitiue church 124.125 the Catholike doctrine touching the value of them 92. the Protestantes contradictory argument against them 91. 93.94 S. Peters being at Roome denyed most absurdly pa. 130.131.132 his primacie 498.510 Pilgrimage to holy places pa. 502. 503.512.513 Primacie of the Romane Sea proued euidently by those fathers whom M. Iewel nameth his maisters to the contrary pa. 143. by Anacletus and Xystus 143.144 by S. Leo 146 147. S. Leo gouerneth in al partes of Christēdom 147.148.149 his authoritie ouer the bishop of Constantinople 148. he summoneth general Councels 152. he is head of them 153. no lawful Councel without his approbation 152. This primacie is grounded vpon Christes words and the Apostles ordinance 143.144.153 S. Gregorie accompteth the Romane Church head of al other pa. 156.158 his authoritie ouer the bishop of Constantinople 156. ouer the bishops of Europe Asia and Africa 156.157 158.162.163 The Protestants common obiection taken out of S. Gregorie answered pa. 159.160.161.162 the name vniuersal in what sort and sense disliked by S. Gregorie pa. 160.161.163 Priestes properly so called were appointed by Christ pa. 64. S. Austin such a priest 64.65.66 So was S. Leo and S. Hierom. 69. The church of Christ was neuer ruled but by such priests 67.68.69 Such were the orderers of our Ecclesiastical state and builders of our churches in England 68. S. Paules discourse of Christs eternall priesthod Hebr. 7. maketh nothing against the priesthod of the church pag. 74. vsque ad 79. The name of Protestants praef pa. 88.90 It agreeth not properly to our English gospellers ibi In their faith there is no stay or certaintie praef pa. 7.24.37 Exemplified by the Supremacie of princes ibid 9.10 by baptisme 11.12 Confirmation 13. Christs descending into hel 14. Christs diuinitie 14.15 Rebellion against princes 15.16 Regimēt of women 18. great difference in their Communion bookes 11.12.13 the diuers chaunges of religion in England since the time of schisme 20.21.22 In the Protestants vvriting and disputing there is no ground pref pa. 8. exemplified by their refusal of scriptures ibid. pa. 26. Apostolical Traditions and general Councels ibi Auncient fathers 27. Apostles Doctors of their owne 28.29.30 Martirs and whole Churches of their owne 30.31.32 They reduce al to priuate fansie 35.36.37.38 They passe the auncient heretikes in denial of al things pa. 38.39 their manifold Popes 33.34 The forefathers of the Protestants church pa. 349. of whom they must looke for the true scripture 348.351 a true confession of a principal protestant 407. their churches voyd of al truth and knowledge 407.408 they perswade Atheisme by scripture 408.409 al their preaching and writing tendeth therevnto 410.411.428 their vaunting of the cleare light of the gospel sensibly refuted 408. The Protestants maner of ansvvering the Catholikes pag. 412. They deny al Doctors 413. They deny sundry partes of scripture 413.414 They pretend the greeke 415. They falsely translate the greeke 416. They refuse the ordinary sense of the greeke
1. cal 4. v. 27. see before pag. 59 The end of M.W. doctrine touching Antichrist If the Pope of Rome be Antichrist there be many worse Antichristâ— in the world M. Iewels maner of answering D. Harding He leaueth out the best part of D. Hardings booke An vnconscionable way of answering Apud Sander pa. 764. Sander pa. 767. Ibid. pag. 770.771 â—â—g 774. Vnreasonable mangling corrupting and falsifying Apud Sander pa. 785. Apud Sand. pag. 789. Illyr Luther Luther To. 7. Defensio c. contra fanaticos sacramentariorum spiritus fo 381. The Protestants forbid the reading of scripture See after pa. 459. The heretikes alter their workes continually Of the name Protestants and Sacramentaries Ful. in the Answere to M. Martins preface pa. 17. Pag. 653. 1717. Those that professe the English religion are not Catholikes Brentius et Lutherani passim See before pa. 39. Nor Protestants Sleidan li. 6 fol. 102.101.109 Ibid. lib. 7. fol. 110. et 114. et lib. 8. fol. 128.131 Those of the English fayth are most properly called Zuinglians or Sacramentaries Apol. Ecclesiae Anglicanae d. â— Protestants Hussites Gospellers See before pa. 16. Actes and monumentes pa. 901.902 Ibid pa. 993. aeditionis postremae Sacramentaries Lutherans Zuinglians These names them selues vse besides a more general name vsed and confirmed by Act of Parlament see before pag 21. Sleid. lib. 8. fol. 128.131.133 et lib. 9. fol. 150. Ibid. lib. 7. fol. 107. et lib. 20. fol. 368. lib. 21. fol. 382.390 ibid. lib. 5. fol. 75.78 The proceding of the new gospel In prefat pag. 2. In respons ad episto Campiani prefa pag. 2. The Heretikes corrupt their ovvne vvryters Anno 1568. Colloq Alt. in respo ad excusa cor fol. 227. 2. RespoÌ„ ad Hipothe a fol. 284. ad fo 290. fo 353.355.441 442.443.526 Ibi. Saxoni ad respons de difcess fo 539.540 Vvestphalus in apologia contra caluÌ„ Cal. ca. 46. pag. 458. The vvorks of Luther corrupted by the Caluinistes in Geneua Detruncaeti Bull resp ad Cocle. ca. 3. Pag. 4. Ibid. Manifest contradiction Duraeus fol. 8. S. Iames epistle denyed by the ProtestaÌ„ts Pomeran ad Rom. ca. 8. In Annot. in â—o Test pag. vâ—i S. Iames epistle the Apocalips lefte out of the Protestants bibles Câ—â— 1. li. 2. c. 4. colum 54. Cent. 2. ca. 4. colum 71. Luther 10.5 in 1. Pc. ca. 1. Muscu in locis coÌ„mu ca. de lusti num 5. pag. 271. pag. 4. M.VV. notable vvranglinge pag. 3. Illirieus in praefa Iac. Had it not bene a goodly matter vvorthy the labour of such greate men in the Tovver disputations to discusse vvhether Luther called S. Iâ—mes Epistle stramineâ— made of stravve simply or oÌ„ly in comparison * Cont. Campi pag. 198. Pag. 4. Whit. cont Camp pag. 17 1â—.19 Cal. in argument ep Ia. The Heretikes sit in iudgemente vpon the scriptures allovv disallovve as they find moste fit for their sectes Whit. pag. 5. The reason why the english cleargie admitte some books of scripture and refuse others Aug. de doct chri li. 2. c. 8. A ca. 2. vers 4. vsque ad finem 7. ca. Pag. 5. Contr. CaÌ„p pag. 9. vide ibi pa. 10.12 M. VV. reasons make most against him selfe pag. 5. The summe of the Tower disputation touching the scriptures The fourth dayes conference Whit. pref pag. 4. 5. con Camp Pa. â—0 Ibi. A. 2. â— Ibi. 3. b. 8. The firste dayes conference in the Tower D. 1.2 Sundrye bookes of the scripture denied by the protestantes S. Lukes gospel doubted of Contr CaÌ„p pag. 9 exagitat The open way to deny al scripture pag. 24. Aug. de heresiâ— heresi 53. Epiph. here 75. Hiero. cont Vigilanti Ioâ—iniat The protestantes as in suÌ„dry other partes of their doctrine so in denying certaine books of scripture imitate the auncieÌ„t heretikes The 4. daies conference Epiph. here 42. Epiph. her 51. W. contra Cam. p. 28. Insti li. 1. ca. 7. ¶ 4 The protestants refusing the authoritie of the church can neuer geue reason how they know some bookes and not other to be canonical scripture Cont. Campian pag. 9. I. Tim. 3. v. 15. The protestats refusing the churche beleeue not the scriptures See after chap. 16. Rom. 10. ver 17. 1. Cor. 15. ver 11. Somewhat is the word of god besides scripture Aug. de doc Chris l. 2. ca. 8. Con. Cart. 4. ca. 47. Con. Laod. can 59. The epistle of S. Paule to the hebrewes as much doubted of in the primitiue Churche as that of S. Iames. and bâ—â—n as much as those books of the olde testament which the protestants reiect Hier. in Esai cap. 6. et 8. Latina coâ—suetudo IdeÌ„ in Hier. cap. 31. Hiero. in Catalogo Caius CoÌ„ei Laod. can 59. Pap. 24. M.VV. brag of coÌ„futing the catholike doctrine vayne and impossible Mat. 13. v. 14 Mat. 7. v. 6. Mat. 16. Luc. 22. Luther tom 2. contr Regem Angl. fol. 342. The coÌ„mon vaine spirit of euerie Secte of protestants Henricianae ecclesiae Pag. 6. Luthers extreme hatred against the Sacramentaries Zuinglians Cleâ—â—â—ius a Zuinglian made a booke intituled victoria venitatis â—utiâ—a papaâ—us Saxonici an 1561 Confess orthodox Eccles Tigâ—r tractat 3. â—o 108. Immaniter contra nos expuit Ibid. in prefat fol. 3. â— Lauatieâ— in historia Sacram. fol. 32. Luther reiâ—cteth the bible translated by the Zuinglians how much more ought catholiks to auoyded the same In coÌ„fessio Tigur vers supra fo 30. Confes Tigur tract 3. fol. 108. The Zuinglians condemne them selues in defending Luther M.W. distinctioÌ„ wheÌ„ Luthers iudgemeÌ„t is to be preferred before al the Church The folie of M.W. distinction Cone Chal. actio 1. Lirine cont haeres ca. 43. Mat. c. 4. v. 6. Ioan. c. 14. et 16. Ephes cap. 4. b. c. Esa ca. 59. v. 21. In this case the authoritie of the deuel as wel as of Luther is better theÌ„ all Fathers or al the angels of heauen Gal. 1. Ierem. 31. g. 33. d. Luthers iudgement with scripture against the Sacrametaries Luther to 7. A defence of the literal sense of our Sauiours wordes etc. against the fanatical sprites of the SacrameÌ„taries Ibi. fol. 383. The Sacramentaries enemies of the gospell by Luthers iudgmeÌ„t coÌ„firmed with scripture Euerie protestant soueraine iudge of scripture CouÌ„cels doctors old new See the 5. chap. in the beginning pa. 7 Mat. 10. v. 24. pa. 6. Who are truly priests Melchisedec did sacrifice The sacrifice of Melchisedec denied generally by the protestants though confessed by M. W. Gen. 14. Heb. c. 7. v. 6 Mus in loc com cap. de Miss papist pa. 492. Bib. printed anno 1579. Corruption of the scriptures Cal. in com in episto ad Heb. c. 7. v. 9 Ibid. Caluin reiecteth the auÌ„cieÌ„t fathers touchinge the sacrifice of Melchisedec Cal. in psal 110. Heb. 5. v. 11. 1. Cor. ca. 2. ver 5. ca. 3. ver 2. Hier. ep 126 ad Euagri Greg. Nazi Christ did sacrifice at his
no man geue any credit to the fair speaches and crakings of the Zuinglians For most certaine it is that they lye and lye agayne VVherefore Christian reader to leaue M.VV. and returne to thee and so make an ende if thou be in iudgement Catholike I know thou findest not nor euer shalt finde reason to make thee a Protestant of any sect and least of al after the English fashion And if thou feele in thy self any such temptation consider aduisedly but this only why thou shouldest encline to be of that side more then to be Lutheran a Puritan an Anabaptist a Trinitarian and so furth and thou shal neuer finde any probable cause why thou shouldest not as wel become any of these as a Caluinist or Zuinglian And vniuersally to make thee detest all Sectes if thou haue some feare of God and regard of the iudgement to come waygh only that which the very nature of our religion this treatise offereth to thy consideration and thou shalt easely find abundant reason why to reiect forsake them al. Consider the infinite difference betwene the Catholike pleading reasoning and disputing and their perpetual wrangling brawling and rayling VVe geue thee to stay thy selfe in our time vnitie of faith in al Christiā prouinces Churches wel gouerned and in due obedience florishing commō welthes quietly maintayning the doctrine which of their fathers they receaued They geue thee infinite varietie and difference of religions disordered cōgregations the sheepe controling their pastors and scholers presuming to teach their maisters And in the ciuil common-welth disobedience against the magistrate contempt of princely authoritie spoile ruine of churches of palaces of al things sacred and profane In the former ages we shewe thee consent and agreement in the religion which we professe Bishops Churches Princes Prouinces Peoples al realmes Christened ioyning in the same They tel thee of inuisible churches imagined congregations Mathematical deuises in the ayre as it were Minotautes and Hippocentaures sometimes chalenging to them selues the company of Berēgarius VVicleff Hus the like sometimes refusing them as heretikes and running per saltum vnto the Apostolical age or the first 3.4 or 5. hundred yeres after Christ condemning al the church folowing of superstition and Papistrie and sometimes yea commonly condemning those former ages no lesse then the later VVhen we treate of scriptures vve geue them vnto thee syncerely and perfitely vvithout any cutting or paring avvay of this or that booke or this and that peece of such a booke al expounded vniformely by excellent Saintes by most learned Doctors by general Councels by the most approued practise of the Catholike church in al antiquitie They geue thee scriptures so peecemele and patchedly that they cut of at the least the third part of them sometimes sentences sometimes peeces of chapters sometimes chapters commonly entier bookes And as for the exposition of them contemning al Saintes Doctors Councels of antiquitie al Doctors Fathers and Martyrs of their owne Congregations they reduce the final scope and determination of al to This is my opinion this is my iudgment and the Doctors may not take avvay from vs our liberty to iudge of them c. Consider this intolerable wilfulnes wherevnto they are now growen and the more they shew them selues to abhorre from al reason stay or moderation the more oughtest thou to obhorre from them Consider with thy selfe that neuer the founder of any common welth as Solon of Athenes or Minos of Creta was so brutish or voyd of common sense as to leaue his common welth so disordered that there should be no iudges to end controuersies no gouernours to keepe the people in peace and tranquillitie but that euery man should liue according to his lust and liking Then how much more abominable is it for vs to imagine that Christ Iesus the eternal wisedom of God should frame a larger common welth then euer was vnder the Sunne dispersed thorough al quarters corners of the world and yet for order quietnes should leaue the same worse policed then was euer the least citie or borough towne whereof we reade in any story For so much as he bound euery one of his subiectes not only to liue wel and in charitie one with an other but also vnder payne of eternal damnation he bound them al to beleeue a like and to haue the selfe same faith vnchangeably in al places times and ages touching a number of articles and yet leaft no order whereby to procure any such vnitie nay rather tooke order to driue thē into diuers innumerable faithes appointing so many supreme heads of churches as there vvere soueraine kinges princes dukes rulers in seueral kingdomes countryes prouinces and cities appointing a booke of the gospels vvhereby they should be gouerned but leauing the exposition of the same at randon in the discretion or rather fansie of euery preacher and minister Recal to memorie that which their owne principall writers and maisters teach thee who deny not but that they leade thee an other way then any of thy forefathers wēt for these thousand yeres Againe they deny not but they geue thee a faith far differing from the faith which the more auncient fathers folowed in the first fiue hūdred yeres Then whereas they praise vnto thee for most diuine and Apostolical men of later memorie those who within these 80 yeres haue restored as they cal it the gospel by those mē also thou art earnestly dehorted from the Sacramentarie faith as a faith wicked blasphemous and damnable Furthermore remember that a long time they vsed to reteyne at least the name and countenance of the written word of the Gospel of the scriptures that those were altogether for them whatsoeuer became of the Fathers Councels and Doctors But now that hold also haue they geuen ouer cōfessing thereby the scriptures to be as plainly against thē as the rest And with what conscience or reason can any man folow such blind guydes as these are who professe them selfes to folow none but to be at plaine defiance with all Fathers and Churches of this later thousand yeres with al Fathers and Churches of the other fiue hundred yeres and with the sacred scriptures and Gospel of Christ it self whom for these other reasons their owne doctors maisters and brethren condemne as heretikes most wicked and sacrilegious God indue thee with his spirite and send thee of his grace that thou maist take the right way and folow it that thou maist renounce al sectes heresies and become a true member of Christes Catholike Church without which there is no sanctification of the holy Ghost no remission of sinnes and consequently no hope of the fauour of God no hope of life eternal LAVS DEO A GENERAL TABLE OF THE PRINCIPAL THINGES conteyned in this booke A ACADEMIKES a sect of Protestants page 279. their beleefe pa. 280. Antinomi a secte