Pighius Eccius the one calling the holy Scripture a nose of waxe and a dumbe iudge the other terming the Gospel written to be a blacke Gospell and an ynkie Diuinitie and that of Hosius acknowleging none other expresse word of God but onely this one worde Ama or dilige loue thou what other thing do they import but a shamelesse deniall of all bookes of the holy Scripture in deede how soeuer in worde they will seeme to admitte them MART. 2. An other way is to call into question at the least and make some doubt of the authoritie of certaine bookes of holy scriptures therby to diminish their credite so did Manicheus affirme of the whole new Testamēt that it was not writtē by the Apostles and peculiarly of S. Matthewes Gospell that it was some other mās vnder his name therfore not of such credit but that it might in some part be refused So did Marcion the Ariās deny the epistle to the Hebrues to be S. Paules Epiph. li. 2. haer 69. Euseb. li. 4. hist. c. 27 Alogiani the Apocalypse to be S. Iohns the Euāgelist Epiph. August in haer Alogianorii FVLK 2. We neither doubt of the authoritie of anie certaine booke of the holy Scriptures neither cal we any of them into question but with due reuerence do acknowledge thē all euery one to be of equall credit authority as being al inspired of god giuē to the church for the building vp thereof in truth and for the auoiding of fables heresies But the Papists arrogating to their Pope authoritie to allowe or refuse any booke of holy Scripture affirming that no Scripture hath authoritie but as it is approued by their church do bring al bookes of the holy Scripture into doubting vncertaintie with such as wil depend vpō their Pope popish churches authoritie which they affirme to be aboue the holy Scriptures saying they might as wel receaue the gospel of Nicodemus as of S. Marke by the same authoritie reiect the Gospell of S. Matthew as they haue done the Gospel of S. Bartholomew These blasphemous assertions although some of them would couler or mitigate with gentle interpretations yet their is no reasonable man but seeth into what discredite and vncertaintie they must needes bring the authoritie of the Canonicall bookes of holy Scripture with the simple and ignorant MART. 3. An other way is to expound the Scriptures after their owne priuate conceite and phantasie not according to the approued sense of the holy auncient fathers and Catholike Church so did Theodorus Mopsuestites Act. Synod 5. affirme of all the bookes of the Prophets and of the Psalmes that they spake not euidently of Christ but that the auncient fathers did voluntarily draw those sayings vnto Christ which were spoken of other matters so did all heretikes that would seeme to ground their heresies vpon Scriptures and to auouch them by Scriptures expounded according to their owne sense and imagination FVLK 3. We expound not the Scriptures after our owne priuate conceite and fantasie but as neere as God giueth vs grace according to the plaine and natural sense of the same agreable vnto the rule or proportiō of faith which bene approued by the auncient fathers and Catholike church of Christ in al matters necessarie to eternall saluation Not bringing a newe and straunge sense which is without the Scriptures to seeke confirmation thereof in the Scriptures as the manner of heretikes is rightly noted by Clemens but out of the Scriptures thēselues seeke we the exposition of such obscure places as we find in them being perswaded with S. Augustine that nothing in a manner is founde out of those obscure and darke places which may not be found to be most plaine ly spoken in other places And as for the approued sense of the holy auncient Fathers and Catholike Church of the eldest and purest times if the Papists durst stand vnto it for the deciding of many of the most waightie controuersies that are betweene vs there is no doubte but they should soone and easily be determined as hath bene shewed in diuerse and many treatises written against them In which if any thing bee brought so plainely expounding the Scripture against their popish heresies as nothing can be more expresse nor cleare then they are driuen to seeke newe and monstrous expositions of those Fathers interpretations or else they answere they are but those Fathers priuate expositions appealing to the Catholike churches interpretation which is nothing else but their owne priuate conceipte and fansie hauing no recorde to proue that Catholike Churches interpretation but the present hereticall opinions of this late degenerated Antichristian congregation And whē they haue discoursed neuer so much of the Catholike churches interpretation they reduce and submitte all mens iudgements to the determinatiō of their Councels the decrees of the Councels to the approbation of their Pope which as he is oftentimes a wicked man of life so is he ignorant and vnlearned in the Scriptures to whose most priuate cēsure the holy Scriptures themselues and al sense and exposition of them is made subiect vnder colour that Christ praying for Peter that his faith should not fayle in temptation gaue all Popes suche a prerogatiue that they could not erre in faith though they were wicked of life voyde of learning ignorant in the Scriptures destitute of the spirite of God as is proued moste inuincibly by example of diuerse Popes that haue bene heretikes and mainteyners of such errours as are not now in controuersie betweene vs least they should say we begge the principle but of the secte of the Arrians Monothelites Eutychians Saduces and such other MART. 4. An other way is to alter the very originall text of the holy Scripture by adding taking away or changing it here and there for their purpose So did the Arians in sundry places and the Nestorians in the first epistle of S. Iohn and especially Marcion who was therefore called Mus Ponticus the mouse of Pontus because he had gnawen as it were certaine places with his corruptions whereof some are sayd to remaine in the Greeke text vntill this day FVLK 4. The originall text of the holie Scripture we alter not either by adding taking away or changing of any letter or syllable for any priuate purpose which were not only a thing most wicked and sacrilegious but also vaine and impossible For seeing not only so many auncient coppies of the original text are extant in diuers places of the worlde which we can not if we woulde corrupt and that the same are multiplied by printing into so many thousande examples wee shoulde bee rather madde than foolishe if we did but once attempt such a matter for maintenaunce of any of our opinions As also it is incredible that Marcion the mouse of Pontus coulde corrupt all the Greeke coppies in the world as Lindanus of whome you borrowed that conceite imagineth in those places in which he
one Heretike not onely correcting his fellow euery day but one egerly refuting and refelling an other Bucer and the Osiandrians and c Sacramentaries against Luther for false translations Luther against Munster Beza against Castaleo Castaleo against Beza Caluin against Seruetus Illyricus both against Caluin and Beza The Puritanes controule the grosser Caluinists of our country yea the later translations of the selfe same Heretikes controule the former exceedingly not onely of ouersights but of wilfull falsifications as it is notorious in the later editions of Luther and Beza and in our Englishe Bibles set forth in diuerse yeares from Tindall their first translatour vntill this day yea which is more the Englishe translatours of Bezaes newe Testament controule him and his translation which they protest to followe being afraide sometime and ashamed to expresse in Englishe his false translations in the Latin FVLK 24. By false translations wilfully and of purpose to falsifie the truth of Gods word is as grosse as abhominable treacherie as to corrupt the verie text although I thinke S. Paule speaking of the couertures or cloakes of dishonestie and adultering of the worde of God 2. Cor. 4. meaneth a further cūning than false translations That those whom you call heretikes finde fault with one an others translations they do none otherwise than you Popish heretikes Do not you Gregorie Martin in the 7. chapter and 33. section of this booke finde fault with all the Catholikes as you terme them that translate Sheol Sepulchrum a sepulchre and not alwayes hell If Bucer or Zwinglius do iustly obserue any errour in Luther or Luther in Munster or Beza in Castalio the Anabaptist or Caluine in Seruetus the horrible heretike yea and if froward schismaticall Illyricus can discouer any errour committed by Caluine and Beza the truth leeseth nothing when the errours of men are found out by what meanes soeuer That you speake of the Puritanes controuling the grosser Caluinistes of our countrie I knowe not what you meane neither doe I thinke you can iustifie your words for translation of the Scriptures Where you say the later translations of the selfe same heretikes controule the former exceedingly not only of ouersightes but of wilfull falsifications it is a wilfull and impudent sclaunder yet you blushe not to say it is notorious Howe I pray you You aunswere in the later editions of Luther and Beza and in our Englishe Bibles set forth in diuerse yeares from Tyndall their first translatour That Luther Beza and the later translatours of the Englishe Bibles haue corrected some small faultes that haue escaped in their former editions it may be graunted But doe Luther and Beza therefore accuse them selues or the later Englishe translatours the former of wilfull falsifications I thinke those brute beastes to whome Ambrose ascribeth the arte of making syllogismes if they could speake would not conclude thus brutishly Certaine it is that Balaams asse did reason substantially But muche more you saye the Englishe translatours of Bezaes newe Testament doe controule him and his translation being somtimes afraid and ashamed to expresse his false translations If it be so they are more modest than you which seeme to bee afrayed or ashamed of nothing so much as least you might seeme to faile in vnshamefastnesse But to the purpose If they thinke Beza as all men may erre hath somewhat troden awrye is it a faulte to auoyde his steppe or a prowde controuling or accusing him of falsification Neuerthelesse wherein soeuer Luther Beza or the Englishe translatours haue reformed any of their former ouersightes the matter is not so great that it can make an heresie Yea if you were of Sainct Augustines iudgement you would acknowledge that the multitude and diuersitie of translations is for the benefite of them that be ignoraunt in the tongues yea of them also that be learned in them oftentimes that of diuerse mens translations they may iudge which is the aptest MART. 25. But in this Catalogue of dissentions falsifiers and disagreeing translatours I will not greatly rippe vp old faultes neyther abroad nor at home I leaue Luthers false translations into the Germaine tongue to the credite of Staphylus Apolog. part 2. and Emserus praef Annot. in no. Test. Luth. and other Germaine writers of his owne time that saw them read them and reckoned the number of them in the new Testament only about 1400. hereticall corruptions I leaue Caluines and Bezas french corruptions to so many worthie men as haue noted them in their french bookes against the said heretikes Tindals and his companions corruptions in their first English Bible to our learned countreymen of that age and namely to the right reuerend Father and Confessor Bishop Tonstal who in a sermon openly protested that he had foūd in the new Testament onely no lesse than two thousand If wee know it not or wil not beleeue it strangers in their Latine writings testifie it to the world FVLK 25. We are muche beholding to you that you will not rippe vp olde faultes abroad nor at home and leaue Luthers Dutch translation with a 1400. hereticall corruptions in the new Testament only with Caluins Bezaes French corruptions noted by Vigor and the rest Also Tyndals his companions corruptions in their first English Bible in whose translation of the new Testament Bishop Tonstal professed openly in a sermon that he found no lesse than 2000. corruptions This you know he protested with the same tongue with which he forsware the Pope sware to the kings supremacie and with which he preached a solēne sermō which is in print before the King against the Popes vsurped tirāny pride false doctrine couetousnesse crueltie treason peruerting of Scriptures as in the same Sermon more at large it appeareth and therefor we neede not Lindanus writing to testifie of his credit But thankes be to God that when you haue scraped all that vnto you seemed to haue any shewe of corruption you can not finde 200. faultes in the translation of the whole Bible nor in three seuerall translations of the same which pointes you are faine to dilate with such vaine tautologies and repetitions that all learned men are ashamed of your tedious writing and yet to make your booke to be of some tollerable lēgth you had no better shift than to note a sort of Bezaes corruptions in his Latine Testament Who if you woulde write against him in Latine any thing worth the noting woulde thanke you for your paynes and reforme his errours but if you brought nothing but cauils woulde so shake you vppe as you shoulde haue small ioy of your insolent inuectiue but you prouided well for that by writing against a Frenchman in Englishe And as for the number of errours or coruptions that you woulde haue the ignoraunt beleeue to bee in our Englishe translations you thinke is so greate as must needes make the simple abhorre it But looke homewarde a litle vnto
you so malitious an enimie vnto him hauing spent all your inuention to seeke holes in his translation can finde nothing but such childish cauils as when they be discouered men will maruaile that you were not ashamed to moue them MART. 56. But after this generall vewe of their wilfull purpose and heretical intention let vs examine their false translations more particularly and argue the case with them more at large and presse them to answere whether in their conscience it be so or no as hitherto is saide and that by seuerall chapters of such CONTROVERSIES as their corruptions concerne and first of all without further curiositie whence to begin in cases so indifferent of TRADITIONS FVLK 56. The more particularly you examine our translations the freer I hope they shall be found from falsehoode wilfull corruption And the more at large you argue the case and presse vs to answere the more you shall make the case to appeare worse on your side and the truth clearer on our parte And as God is witnesse of our conscience and sinceritie in setting forth his word without adulteration or corruptiō so I appeale to the consciences of al indifferent readers whether hitherto you haue gotten any aduantage against vs in this whole chapter which yet you professe to be the abridgement and summe of your whole treatise CHAP. II. Hereticall translation of holy Scripture against Apostolicall TRADITIONS Martin THis is a matter of such importance that if they shoulde graunt any traditions of the Apostles and not pretende the written worde onely they know that by such traditions mentioned in all antiquitie their religion were wholy defaced and ouerthrowen For remedie whereof and for the defacing of all such traditions they bend their translations against them in this wonderfull maner Wheresoeuer the holy Scripture speaketh against certaine traditions of the Iewes partly friuolous partly repugnant to the law of God there all the English translations follow the Greeke exactly neuer omitting this word tradition Contrariwise wheresoeuer the holy Scripture speaketh in the commendation of Traditions to wit such traditions a◠the Apostles deliuered to the Church there all their sayd translations agree not to followe the Greeke which is still the selfe same word but for traditions they translate ordinaunces or instructions Why so and to what purpose we appeale to the worme of their conscience which continually accuseth them of an hereticall meaning whether by vrging the word traditions wheresoeuer they are discommended and by suppressing the word wheresoeuer they are commended their purpose and intent be not to signifie to the Reader that all traditions are naught and none good all reproueable none allowable Fulke TRaditions in deede is a matter of such importance as if you may be allowed whatsoeuer you will thrust vpon vs vnder the name of vnwritten traditions the written worde of God shall serue to no purpose at all For first as you plainly professe the holy Scripture shall not be accounted sufficient to teach all truth necessary to saluation that the man of God may be perfect prepared to all good works Secondly with the Valentinian heretikes you accuse the Scriptures of vncertaine vnderstāding without your traditions vnder pretense of which you wil bring in what you list though it be neuer so contrary to the holy Scriptures plaine wordes by colour of interpretatiō as you do the worshipping of images many other like heresies As for the mention that is made of Apostolicall traditions in diuerse of the auncient fathers some of thē are such as you your selues obserue not not for the tenth part of those that you obserue can you bring any testimony out of the ancient fathers as is proued sufficiently by so many propositiōs as were set downe by the Bishoppe of Sarisburie M. Iewel whereof you can bring no proofe for any one to haue bene taught within 600. yeres after Christ. Now concerning the traditions of the Apostles what they were who can be a better witnesse vnto vs than Ignatius the disciple of the Apostles of whom Eusebius writeth that when he was led towardes Rome where he suffred martyrdom he earnestly exhorted the Churches by which he passed to continue in the faith and against all heresies which euen then began to bud vp he charged thē to retaine fast the traditiō of the Apostles which by that time he protested to be committed to writing for by that time were al the books of the new Testament written The words of Eusebius concerning this matter are li. 3. c. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he exhorted thē straitly to kepe the tradition of the Apostles which testifying that it was now for assurance cōmitted to writing he thought necessary to be plainly taught Against this tradition of the Apostles which for certaintie assurance is contained in their holy vndoubted writings we say nothing but striue altogither for it But because the word traditions is by you Papistes taken to signifie a doctrine secretely deliuered by worde of mouth without authority of the holy Scriptures we do willingly auoide the word in our translations where the simple might be deceiued to think that the holy ghost did euer cōmēd any such to the church which he would not haue to be committed to writing in the holy Scriptures in steede of that word so commōly taken although it doth not necessarily signifie any such matters we doe vse such wordes as do truly expresse the Apostles meaning the Greke word doth also signifie Therfore we vse the words of ordināces or instructiōs or institutiōs or the doctrine deliuered all which being of one sense the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doeth signifie and the same doth tradition signifie if it be rightly vnderstoode but seing it hath bene commonly taken and is vrged of the Papistes to signifie only a doctrine deliuered beside the word of God written in such places where the holy Ghost vseth the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that sense we translate by that worde tradition where he vseth it for such doctrine as is groūded vpon the holy Scriptures our translatours haue auoyded it not of any hereticall meaning that all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 traditions are naught but that all such as haue not the holy Scripture to testifie of them and to warrant them are euill and to be auoyded of all true Christians which can not without blasphemie acknowledge any imperfection in the holy Scriptures of God which are able to make a man wise vnto saluation if they shoulde thinke any doctrine necessarie to saluation not to be cōtained therein MART. 2. For example Matt. 15. Thus they translate Why do thy disciples transgresse the TRADITION of the Elders And againe Why do you also transgresse the commaundement of God by your TRADITION And againe Thus haue you made the commaundement of God of no effect by your TRADITION Here I warrant you all the bels sound tradition and the word is neuer omitted
faith imputed to hir for righteousnes without workes or iustice as you wil haue it called we doubt no more of hir than of Abraham But that shee was also sanctified with moste excellent graces and indued in hir soule with al christian vertues Beza and all that esteeme Beza in the word wil confesse as muche as is conuenient for hir honour so nothing bee derogated from the honour of God That which Athanasius saith we do likewise admit and that which Hierome writeth also But this is all the controuersie whether the Virgine Marie were freely accepted and beloued of God so by his spirite indued with gratious vertues or whether for her vertues which she had of her selfe she were worthie to be beloued of God and deserued that honour whereof she was vouchsafed to become the mother of God Athanasius saith expresly that all those graces and giftes were freely giuen her by the obumbration or ouershadowing of the holy Ghost which the Angel promised should come vpon her MART. 7. Now let the English Bezites come with their new terme freely beloued and controll these and all other auncient fathers both Greeke and Latine and teach them a new signification of the Greeke worde which the◠knew not before Let Iohn Keltridge one of their great Preachers in London come and tell vs that the Septuaginta and the beste trāslatiōs in Greeke haue no such words as we vse in the Aue Marie but that the word which the Septuaginta vse is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Who euer heard such a iest that the preacher of the worde of God in London so he is called in the title of his booke and preacher before the Iesuites and Seminaries in the tower which is next degree to the disputers there whose sermons be solemnely printed dedicated to one of the Queenes Councell who seemeth to be such a Grecian that he confuteth the vulgar Latin translation by the significatiō of the Greeke word and in other places of his booke alleageth the Greeke texte that this man for all this referreth vs to the Septuaginta either as authors of S. Lukes Gospel which is too ridiculous or as trāslators thereof as though S. Luke had written in Hebrue yea as though the whole newe Testament had bene written in Hebrue for so no doubt he presupposed and that the Septuaginta had translated it into Greeke as they did the old who were dead three hundred yeares before S. Lukes Gospell and the new Testament was written FVLK 7. Concerning Iohn Keltridge agaynst whose ignorance and arrogancie you insult I can say nothing because I haue not seene his booke But knowing how impudently you slaunder me M. Whitaker Beza and euery man almost wyth whome you haue any dealing I maye wel suspecte your fidelitie in this case and thinke the matter is not so hard against Iohn Keltridge as you make it seeme to be If he haue ouershot himself as you say he is the more vnwise if you slaunder him as you do others you are moste of al too blame MART. 8. Al this is such a pitiful iest as were incredible if his printed booke didde not giue testimonie Pitiful I say because the simple people count such their preachers iolly fellows and great Clearks because they can talke of the Greeke and of the Hebrewe texte as this man doth also concerning the Hebrue letter Tau whether it had in olde time the forme of a Crosse or no euen as wisely and as skilfully as he did of the Septuaginta and the Greeke worde in S Lukes Gospel Whose incredible follie and ignorance in the tongues perhaps I would neuer haue mentioned because I thinke the reste are sorie and ashamed of him but that he boasteth of that whereof he hath no skill and that the people may take him for a very paterne and example of many other like boasters and braggers among them and that when they heare one talke lustily of the Hebrewe and Greeke and cite the text in the said tongues they may alwaies remember Iohn Keltridge their Preacher and say to themselues what if this fellow also be like Iohn Keltridge FVLK 8. Reseruing Iohn Keltridge to the trial defence of himselfe I say you haue shewed your selfe as ridiculous in this booke diuerse times and so haue many that beare a greater countenance among you tentimes than Iohn Keltridge doth among vs how so euer it pleaseth you to make him the next degree to the disputers But if Iohn Keltridge haue shewed him selfe to be a vaine boaster of that knowledge whereof perhaps he is ignorant what reason is it that other learned men which know the tongues in deede should be drawne into suspition of ignorance for his follie But that you delight by al meanes to discredite their learning and good giftes of God in them to whom if you were comparable your selfe yet it were not tollerable that you should seeke their reproche before their vnskilfulnesse may plainely be reproued MART. 9. But to proceede these great Grecians and Hebricians that controll all antiquitie and the approued auncient Latine translation by scanning the Greeke and Hebrue wordes that thinke it a great corruption Gen. 3. to reade Ipsa conteret caput tuum she shall bruise thy head because it pertaineth to our Ladies honour calling it a corruption of the Popish Church whereas S. Ambrose S. Augustine S. Gregorie S. Bernard and the rest reade so as being the common receiued texte in their time though there hath bene also alwaies the other reading euen in the vulgar Latine translation and therefore it is not any late reformation of these new correctors as though the Hebrue and Greeke texte before had bene vnknowen these controllers I say of the Latine texte by the Hebrue against our Ladies honour are in an other place content to dissemble the Hebrue worde and that also for small deuotion to the B. Virgin namely Hierom 7. and 44. Where the Prophet inueigheth against them that offer sacrifice to the Queene of heauen this they thinke is very well because it may sounde in the peoples eares against the vse of the Catholike Churche which calleth our Lady Queene of heauen But they know very well that the Hebrue worde doth not signifie Queene in any other place of the Scripture and that the Rabbines and later Hebricians whom they gladly folow deduce it otherwise to signifie rather the whole corps and frame of heauen consisting of all the beautiful starres and planets and the Septuaginta call it not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Queene but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the host of heauen c. 7. Hierem and S. Hierom not onely reginā but rather militiam coeli and when he nameth it reginam Queene he saith we must vnderstand it of the moone to which and to the other starres they did sacrifice commit idolatrie But the Protestants against their custome of scanning the Hebrue and the Greeke translate here Queene of heauen for
your authenticall vulgar Latine translation howe manye faultes bee in that which your Tridentine Councell hath authorised And here I will not charge it with the aduersaries thereof as you doe ours but with great friendes of it and your doctrine Lindanus Bishoppe of Ruremonde and Isidorus Clarius Monke of Casine and Bishoppe Fulginatensis of whiche the former writeth a whole booke discussing howe he woulde haue the errours vices corruptions additions detractions mutations vncertaynties obscurities pollutions barbarismes and soelecismes of the vulgar Latine translation corrected and reformed bringing manye examples of euerie kinde in seuerall chapters and sections The other Isidorus Clarius giuing a reason of his purpose in castigation of the sayed vulgar Latine translation confesseth that it was full of errours almost innumerable which if he shoulde haue reformed all according to the Hebrue veritie he could not haue set forth the vulgar edition as his purpose was Therefore in many places he retayneth the accustomed tanslation but in his annotations admonisheth the reader howe it is in the Hebrue And notwithstanding this moderation he acknowledgeth that about 8000. places are by him so noted corrected This Epistle the Deputies of the Councell of Trent could not abide and therefore in the later edition of this Bible set forth with obseruation of their censure 1569. it is cleane left out as also a godly collection of the same Isidorus of places of Scripture exhorting to the studie of holy Scripture and a like sound confession of those thinges which the Scriptures teach c. MART. 26. But I omit these as vnknowen to our countrie or to this age and will deale principally with the English translations of our time which are in euery mans handes within our country the corruptions whereof as they are partly touched here and there in the annotations vpon the late newe English Testament Catholikely translated and printed at Rhemes so by occasion thereof I will by Gods helpe to the better commoditie of the Reader and euidence of the thing lay them closer togither and more largely display them not counting the number because it were hard but esteeming the weight and importance of so many as I thought good to note specially in the new Testament Where I haue to aduertise the Reader of certaine speciall things which he must obserue FVLK 26. You should rather omit them as vntrue for albeit it can not be denied but some faults may escape the most faithfull and diligent translator yet so many heretical corruptions either in the Dutch or English are incredible and turne rather to the discredit of the accuser in all wise mens iudgement than to the parties so charged In like maner as Surius noteth no lesse than 11000. lyes in Sleidan more to his owne reproche than to the defacing of Sleidans credit You professe wisely therefore not to count the number but to esteeme the weight and importaunce of suche faultes as you thought good to note if there were as great faithfulnesse in your performance as there is wisedom in your profession But now to your nine aduertisements to the Reader MART. 27. First that in this booke he may not looke for the proofe or explication and deciding of controuersies Which is done in the Annotations vpon the new Testament but onely therefuting or controlling of their false translations concerning the said controuersies which is the peculiar argument of this â—reatise FVLK 27. I thinke their is no wise reader woulde loke for the deciding of so many coÌ„trouersies in so smal a booke he that shal seeke them in your Annotations shall find euen as litle to the purpose except he will take your determinatioÌ„ without proofe for a sufficieÌ„t decisioÌ„ As for the doctors you quote without iudgment fraudulently falsly truncately and otherwise abusiuely haue all or the most bene answered long agoe And if neede shal be with litle labour may be answered againe MART. 28. Secondly that we refuâ—e sometime one of their translations sometime an other and euery one as their falshood giueth occasio Neither is it a good defense for the falshood of one that it is truely translated in an other the reader being deceyued by any one because commonly he readeth but one Yea one of them is a condemnation of the other FVLK 28. That sheweth your malice rather than either wisedome or honestie For if we our selues in our later translations haue corrected some small and few errours that haue ouerslipped vs in our former traÌ„slatioÌ„s we haue shewed our sinceritie and care of setting out the truth by al meanes And where you say it is no good defence the reader being deceiued by any one because coÌ„moÌ„ly he readeth but one I answere you first there is not in the worst translation any fault escaped that may of it selfe lead him into a damnable errour Secondly he hath the word of God expounded by catechizing sermons lectures in which he may learne the substance of Christian religion Thirdly he hath at hand euery where learned Diuines vnto whose counsell he may resort if he be offended with any thing that he readeth in his Bible souÌ„ding contrarie to the publikely receiued doctrine of the Church In that you say the one of our translations condemneth the other it had bene sufficient to haue said reproueth which is only where there is a manifest error in the one for otherwise the diuersities of traÌ„slations as S. Augustin teacheth you may much profit the simple readers they that be diligent studeÌ„ts of the Scriptures in the English tongue will not satisfie them selues with euery translation but wil seeke for the best approued MART. 29. Thirdly that we speake indifferently against Protestants Caluinists Bezites and Puritans without any curious distinction of them being all among themselues brethren and pewfellowes sometime the one sort of them sometime the other more or lesse corrupting the holy Scriptures FVLK 29. A wise aduertisement But this is to be noted that now you acknowledge them to be all brethren among them selues and pewfellowes But when you list they shall be at deadly feude one against an other and no communitie or fellowship betwene them MART. 30. Fourthly that we giue but a taste of their corruptions not seeing so farre nor marking all so narrowly and skilfully as them selues know their owne subtilties meanings who will smile at the places which we haue not espied FVLK 30. He that considereth your quarrels pickt to words of one signification as Church Congregation iustice and righteousnes Elder and Priest Image and Idol workes and deedes and such like will not thinke that you haue past ouer any great matters worth the writing of but that you would set a vaine bragge of the case as though there were much worse matter than you haue witte to conceiue Yet you say confidently that we as guiltie of our owne subtilties and meanings will smile at the places which you haue not espied You are like to those southsayers mentioned
Christ as I haue shewed before MART. 43. Well let vs goe forwarde in their owne daunce You allowe at the least the Iewes Canonicall bookes of the olde Testament that is all that are extant in the Hebrewe Bible and all of the newe Testament without exception Yea that we doe In these bookes then will you be tried by the vulgar auncient Latine Bible onely vsed in all the West Church aboue a thousandyeares No. Will you be tried by the Greeke Bible of the Septuaginta interpreters so renowmed and authorised in our Sauiours owne speaches in the Euangelistes and Apostles writings in the whole Greeke Church euermore No How then will you be tried They answere Only by the Hebrue Bible that now is and as now it is pointed with vowels Will you so and do you thinke that only the true authenticall Hebrue which the holy Ghost did first put into the pennes of those sacred writers We do thinke it say they and esteeme it the only authenticall and true Scripture of the old Testament FVLK 43. Where so many of your owne Popish writers do accuse your vulgar Latine text of innumerable corruptions what reason is there that we should follow that translation onely especially seeing God hath giuen vs knowledge of the tongues that we may resort to the fountaines them selues as S. Augustine exhorteth As for the Greeke translation of the Septuaginta from which your owne vulgar Latine varieth although we reuerence it for the antiquitie and vse it for interpretation of some obscure places in the Hebrew why should you require vs to be tried thereby which will not be tried by it your selues If I were as captious as you are with Iohn Keltrige about the Greeke Bible of the Septuaginta Interpreters I might make sporte with you as you doe with him but I acknowledge your Synâ—cdoche that you meane the olde Testament onely whereas the word Bible is commonly taken for both But to the purpose we acknowledge the text of the olde Testament â—n Hebrew and Chaldee for in the Chaldee tongue were some partes of it written as it is now printed with vowels to be the onely fountaine out of which we muste draw the pure truth of the Scriptures for the olde Testament adioyning herewith the testimonie of the Mazzoreth where any diuersitie of pointes letters or wordes is noted to haue bene in sundry auncient copies to discerne that which is proper to the whole context from that which by errour of the writers or printers hath bene brought into any copie olde or newe MATT. 44. We aske them againe what say you then to that place of the Psalme where in the Hebrue it is thus As a lion my handes and my feete for that which in truth should be thus They digged or pearced my hands and my feete being an euident prophecie of Christes nailing to the crosse There in deede say they we followe not the Hebrue but the Greeke text Sometime then you follow the Greeke and not the Hebrue onely And what if the same Greeke text make for the Catholikes as in these places for example I haue inclined my hart to keepe thy iustifications for reward and Redeeme thy sins with almes might we not obtaine here the like fauour at your handes for the Greeke texte specially when the Hebrue doth not disagree No say they nor in no other place where the Greeke is neuer so plaine if the Hebrue worde at the least may be any otherwise interpreted drawen to an other significatioÌ„ FVLK 44. We say to you first that you haue falsely pointed the Hebrue word in the margeÌ„t for all the printed bookes that euer I haue seene as Bomberge both in folio and quarto Stephanus Basil Plantine Arias Montanus CoÌ„plutensis al place Camets vnder Caph where you make Patach But perhaps your Hebrue is most out of MuÌ„sters Dictionarie where it is pointed as you make it But for answere to your question we say that their is a double testimonie of the Mazzorites to proue that in the most auncient and best corrected copies the Hebrue was Caru they haue digged or pearced this is testified not onely by our translators but also by Ioannes Isaac your owne Rabbin against Lindanus a prelate of yours And this the auctors of the Complutense edition doe acknowledge for thus they haue pointed it Caru where is nothing but the redundans of Aleph whiche is vnderstood in euery Camets differing from the vsuall reading and declining of the Verbe Carah that signifieth to pearce or digge Againe where it is redde otherwise if it be rightly pointed as it is in Arias Montanus Caari it cannot signifie Sicut leo as a lion as both the Mazzorites do teach and Iohannes Isaac a Grammarian out of theÌ„ by the points the note ouer iod doth plainly demonstrate For what should shureâ—h sound in iod or if you would contend it should be Daghes to what purpose should it be in iod if the worde should signifie as a lion Therefore howsoeuer this varietie of copies came either by negligence of some writers or by corruption of the Iewes wee haue sufficient warrant for the auncient and true reading whiche the Greeke translator did followe whiche also was in S. Hieromes copie otherwise hee woulde not haue translated out of the Hebrue Fixerunt they haue pearced Therefore Rabbi Ioseph which made the Chaldeâ— Paraphrase vpon the Psalter laboured to expresse both the copies as well that which hath plainely they haue pearced as that whiche hath it corruptly as though it spake of a Lion and yet can not rightly be so translated because the points are imperfect euen for that reading Therefore he hath saide Nikethin Heich Cheariah They haue indented and pearced like a lion my handes and my feete as it is in the Venice print of Daniel Bomberg although Arias Montanus in his Bible haue no more but Nachethin which he traslateth biting my handes and my feete I haue played the foole to vtter these matters in the mother tongue to ignorant men that can make no triall of them but you haue not only giuen me example but also enforced me with your vnsoluble question as you thought by one word somewhat out of frame to ouerthrow the whole Hebrue text But you are to be pardoned for that you follow your M. Lindanus herein who hath nothing else in effect to quarrel against the Hebrue text but this therfore he repeteth it in many places to make greater shew of it as you doe In other places where the Hebrue worde hath diuerse significations who shall forbid vs to chuse that which is most agreeable to the circumstance of the text and to the analogie or rule of faith MART. 45. We replie againe and say vnto them why Is not the credit of those Septuaginta interpreters who them selues were Iewes and best learned in their owne tongue and as S. Augustine often and other auncient fathers say were inspired with the holy Ghost in translating the
coniecturall opinions and peraduentures Also how he taketh Infernum for any lower place in so much that he calleth this worlde Infernum Wherefore much more may Infernum signifie the graue and be so sometimes translated MART. 10. His wordes be these in effect If a man wil say vnto me that Lazarus was seene in Abrahams bosome and a place of refreshing euen before Christs comming true it is but what is that in comparison Quid simile infernus regna caelorum What hath hell and heauen like As if he should say Abraham in deede and Lazarus and consequently many other were in place of rest but yet in hel till Christ came and in such rest as hath no comparison with the ioies of heauen And S. Augustine disputing this matter sometime doubting whether Abrahams bosome be called hel in the Scripture and whether the name of hell be taken at any time in the good parte for of Christes descending into hel and of a third place where the Patriarches remained vntil Christs cōming not heauen but called Abrahams bosome he doubted not but was most assured the same holy doctour in an other place as being better resolued doubted not vpon these wordes of the Psalme Thou hast deliuered my soule from the lower hell to make this one good sense of this place that the lower hel is it wherin the damned are tormented the higher hell is that wherein the soules of the iust rested calling both places by the name of hell FVLK 10. I haue set downe his very words in deed which being well weighed make nothing so clearly for your phātasied Limbus as you wold haue mē weene You say Augustine doubteth whether Abrahams bosome in the Scripture be called hell Ep. 99. de gen ad lit lib. 12. ca. 33. But there he doth vtterly denie it in Ps. 85. as by his wordes cited before appeareth he doubteth So that where he flatly denieth with you he doubteth where he doubteth with you he is better resolued Wherefore this matter of Abrahā the faithful being in hell is no article of faith except you will say that S. Augustine was not resolued in the articles of our faith who touching the thirde place whatsoeuer at diuerse times he speaketh doubtingly in his Hypognosticon he affirmeth resolutely that he findeth in the scriptures that there is none MART. 11. And surely of his maruelous humilitie and wisedome he would haue bene much more resolute herein if he had heard the opinion of S. Hierom whom he often consulted in such questions and of other fathers who in this point speake most plainely that Abrahams bosome or the place where the Patriarkes rested was some part of hell Tertullian Li. 4. aduers Marcion Saith I knowe that the bosome of Abraham was no heauēly place but only the higher hel or the higher part of hell Of which speach of the fathers rose afterwarde that other name Limbus patrum that is the very brimme or vppermost and outmost parte of hell where the fathers of the olde Testament rested Thus we see that the Patriarches themselues were as then in hell though they were there in a place of rest in so much that S. Hierom saith againe Ante Resurrectionem Christi notus in Iudaea Deus ipsi qui nouerant eum tamen ad inferos trahebantur that is Before the Resurrection of Christ God was knowne in Iurie and they themselues that knewe him yet were drawen vnto hell S. Chrysostome vpon that place of Esay I will breake the brasen gates and bruse the yron barres in pieces and will open the treasures darkened c. So he calleth hell saith he for although it were hell yet it helde the holy soules and pretious vessels Abraham Isaac and Iacob Marke that he saith though it were hell yet there were the iust men at that time till our sauiour Christ came to deliuer them from thence FVLK 11. As wise humble as he was he was not readie to yeeld to euery opinion of Hierom as his Epistles writtē to Hierom do declare Neither was Hierome sore solute in this matter whereof he speaketh vnder a cloude and in an Allegorie as it is playne where he saith the bodies that were raised at the resurrection of Christ were seene in the heauenly Ierusalem whereas it is certaine they were seene only in the earthly Ierusalem actually But he meaneth the effect of Christes redemption was acknowledged either in the Catholike Churche which is Ierusalem aboue in one sence or else that they shal be seene in the new Ierusalem blessed felicitie of the godly at the worldes end whereof a testimonie was giuen in that sight of their appearing and particuler resurrection knowen at Ierusalem on earth But you cite an other place out of Tertullian lib. 4. aduersus Marcionē and in the margent you say Loco citato but I wote not where And these be Tertullians wordes if you be an honest man I knowe that the bosome of Abraham was no heauenly place but onely the higher hell or the higher parte of hell I see you will bee as bolde with the auncient doctours workes as you are with my poore writinges whome you make to saye euen what you liste In the last Section before you sayde S. Augustine Epistol 99. de gen ad lit Lib. 12. Cap. 33. Doubted whether Abrahams bosome were called hell Quod si nusquam c. If it bee neuer reade in the holy Scriptures scilicet that hell is taken in the good parte verily that bosome of Abraham that is the habitation of a certaine secrete reste is not to bee beleeued to be any parte of hell And againe by reason of the infinit Chaos Satis vt opinor appareat It may appeare as I thinke sufficiently that the bosome of that so greate felicitie is not a certaine parte and as it were a member of hell In the other place he speaketh to the same effect vpon the same ground that he neuer findeth in the Scriptures hell taken in good parte and cap. 34. where he proueth that paradise is heauen he sayth Quanto magis ergo How much more then may that bosome of Abraham after this life be called paradise This sayth Augustine and much more to this purpose wherein I thought to haue forborne you but that you come vpon vs still with newe forgeries Tertullian in the booke by you quoted pag. 274 of Frob. printed 1550 thus writeth Sed Marcion aliorsum cogit c. But Marcion driueth it another way so forsooth that he determineth both the rewardes of the Creator either of torment or of refreshing to be layd vp for them in hel which haue obeyed the law and the Prophets But of Christ and his God he defineth an heauenly bosome and heauen We will answer and euen by this selfe same Scripture conuincing his blindnesse which against hel discerneth this Abrahams bosom to the poore man For one thing is hell as I thinke and
not be true that the lambe was slaine since the beginning of the worlde seeing without violence you can not distract 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the lambe slaine whom it doth immediatly follow MART. 45. But if in points of controuersie betweene vs they will say diuers pointing is of no importance they knowe the contrarie by the example of auncient heretikes which vsed this meane also to serue their false hereticall purpose If they say our vulgar Latine sense pointeth it so let them professe before God and their conscience that they doe it of reuerence to the saide auncient latine text or because it is indifferent and not for any other cause and for this one place we wil admit their answere FVLK 45 We say that wrong pointing may greatly alter the sense but good composition and placing of wordes in a sentence is a good rule to direct pointing where it is either lacking or falsly signed Wee refuse â—ot the testimonie of the vulgar Latine where it agreeth with the truth of the Greeke or Hebrewe yea before God our consciences we reuerence it as a monument of some antiquitie from which wee neither doe nor are willing to dissent except the same dissent from the originall text Otherwise the truth of this assertion that Christ was slaine from the beginning of the world hath not only testimonie of the ancient fathers but also may bee confirmed out of the Scripture For by the obedience of Christ Saint Paule Rom. 5. teacheth that many are iustified meaning all the elect of God who except Christes death had bene effectuall to them before he suffered actually on the crosse must haue gone not into Limbâ— patrum but into hell Diabolorum which is the place appointed for all them that are not iustified freely by the grace of God through the redemption of Christ Iesus whom God before hath set foorth to be a propitiatorie in his bloud Rom. 3. v. 24. c. The title of this chapter threatneth a discouerie of heretical translations against Purgatorie especially but in the whole discourse thereof which is shamefull long one containing 45. sections there is not one place noted against Purgatorie Amphora coepit institui currenâ—e rota cur vrceus exit CHAP. VIII Hereticall translation concerning IVSTIFICATION Martin ABout the article of iustification as it hath many branches and their errours therein bee manifolde so are their English translations accordingly many wayes false and hereticall First against iustification by good workes and by keeping the commaundements they suppresse the very name of iustification in all such places where the woorde signifieth the commandements or the Lawe of God which is both in the olde and newe Testament most common and vsuall namely in the bookes of Moses in the Psalme 118. that beginneth thus Beati immaculati in the Psalme 147. ver 19. 1. Mach. 1. ver 51. and cap. 2. v. 21. Luke 1. v. 6. Rom. 2. v. 26. In all which places and the like where the Greeke signifieth iustices and iustifications most exactly according as our vulgar latine traÌ„slateth iustitias iustificationes there the English translations say iointly with one coÌ„sent ordinances or statuts For example Rom. 2. If the vncircumcision keepe the ORDINANCES of the lawe shall it not bee counted for circumcision And Luc. 1 6. They were both righteous before God walking in all the commaundementes and ORDINANCES of the Lord blamelesse Why translate you it ordinances and auoide the terme iustifications is it because you would followe the Greeke I beseech you is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iust 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be iustified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustifications or iustices In the old Testament you might perhappes pretend that you follow the Hebrue word and therefore there you translate statutes or ordinances But euen there also are not the seuentie Greeke interpreters sufficient to teache you the signification of the Hebrue word who alwaies interprete it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in English iustifications Fulke THese matters were driuen so thinne in the first chapter that you shall sooner presse out bloud than any more probable matter For the olde Testament which we translate out of the Hebrue you your selfe doe set foorth our aunswere that we giue the Englishe of Chukim when we say ordinaunces or statutes and not of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which of the Septuaginta is vsed in the same sense for preceptes and commaundementes as you your selfe confesse cap. 1. sect 50. that verie often in the Scripture it signifieth commaundementes But the Septuaginta you say are sufficient to teache vs the interpretation of the Hebrewe worde who alwaies interprete it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If they had alwayes interpreted it so it is not sufficient to teache vs then there needed none other translation but according to theirs then must you depart from your vulgar translation which in many things departeth from them But where you say they alwaies interprete the Hebrue word Chukim by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is false For Exod. 18. v. 20. they translate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Praecepta which your vulgar translation calleth Ceremonias ceremonies as it doeth also Gen. 26. v. 5. where the Septuaginta translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which you see that iustification is not alwayes the Englishe for the Greeke worde which the Septuaginta doe vse Also Num. 9. v. 3. for Chukoth they translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the lawe which the vulgar Latine calleth Ceremonias ceremonies and for the Hebrewe worde Misphatim they giue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comparation the vulgar Latin iustification by which you may see how your traÌ„slatour vseth euen the Latin word that you make so much a do about Likewise in the foureteenth verse of the same Chapter the Septuaginta translate Chukath twise togeather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that which the vulgar Latine calleth iustification of the passeouer the Greeke calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the order of the pascall Deut. 4. your vulgar Latine turneth Chukim thrise Ceremonias ceremonies And Deut. 5. twise and Deut. 6. twise Deut. 7. once and so commonly almost in euerie chapter But in the chap. 11. v. 32. the Greeke for Chukim hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where as in the beginning of the chapter he had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Latine in both Ceremonias ceremonies By which it is euident what the Greekes and Latines meant by those wordes chap. 20. for this Hebrue word and in an other the Greeke hath nothing but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commaundementes So hath he 1. Reg. 2. v. 3. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 coÌ„mandements Also 1. Reg. 8. v. 58. for Chukim he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and for Misphatim he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he hath it twise in the nexte verse where Salomon prayeth that God will defende his cause and the cause of his people Israell
are such about which meÌ„ are not agreed as in this place you should rather coÌ„mend our equity that suffer such traÌ„slations to be in the peoples handes in which is some colour of maintaining your errors against vs. But if you be so rigorous that a booke of Scripture may not be red in which there is any fault I charge you call in your translation of the new Testament for therein are shamefull faults and such as you can not defend or excuse except it be by the fault of the Printer whereof yet you haue not admonished the reader I will giue you a tast of some and let all men iudge whether they be not intolerable faultes For they are no lesse than detracting and taking away from the word of God As 1. Cor. 14. v. 38. where both the Greeke and the Latine is If they will learne Your translation is If they learne any thing Likewise Actes 5. v. 4. where bothe the Greeke and Latine is Festus answeared that Paule is kepte at Caesarea you translate Festus answered that Paule is in Caesarea leauing out the worde kepte as before you lefte out the worde will or desire whiche altereth the sense very much But in a place of greater moment and in a matter of some controuersie of Gods particuler preordination and fore appointment you leaue out a whole clause Act. 10. v. 41. For where it is bothe in the Greeke and in the Latine that God made the resurrection of his sonne manifest not to all the people but to the witnesses chosen before of God to vs which did eate and drinke with him c. Your English translation hath no more but thus Not to all the people but to vs who did eate and drinke with him c. Leauing cleane out that which is in your Latine text Testibus praeordinatis à Deo Also in the Epistle to the Hebrues cap. 7. v. 28. where bothe the Greeke and your vulgar Latine hath The law appointeth Priests men that haue infirmitie your translation is the lawe appointeth Priests them that haue infirmitie leauing out Homines a word very material in this place to obserue the oppositioÌ„ betweene the Priesthood of meÌ„ the Priesthood of the sonne of God These faultes in the new Testament being some of them whiche I by no diligent reading haue obserued nowe you be admonished of them we shall see whether you will call in your translation or coÌ„maunde your disciples to burne their bookes If you will not I pray you be good maister to vs and let our Bibles goe abroad stil for any faults we haue our selues amended and admonished all diligent Readers thereof by our later translations And because you cracke so much of the exposition of the Doctors and of the whole Churche of God against vs I muste let the Reader vnderstand that the whole Greeke Churche which for the most parte knewe none other text but the Septuaginta must needes expound the place of Abel as we do because the Greeke text is manifestly in the Masculine gender And so doth Chrysostome in Gen. Hom. 18. expound the place in these words Ne putes inquit licet tuum auersatus sim sacrificium ob prauam meÌ„tem fratrisque oblationem acceptam habuerim ob sanam intentionem quod ideo primatu te destituam primogeniturae dignitatem à te auferam Nam licet honore ego illum prosecutus fuerim acceptaque fuerint illius dona c. Thinke not sayeth he that although I haue refused thy sacrifice for thy naughtie minde and haue receiued thy brothers oblation for his good and sound meaning that therefore I will depriue thee of the primacie and take away from thee the dignitie of the birthright For although I haue vouchsafed him of honour that his gifts haue bene receiued yet vnto thee belongeth his conuersion and thou shalt rule ouer him And this I permit after thy sinne that thou mayest enioy the priuiledges of thy birthright and I commaund him to be vnder thy power and dominion You were best now to rayle vpon Chrysostome and charge him with heresie and schismaticall exposition contrarie to the holy Doctors and the whole Church of God against freewill of man Which because it is your quarrell you haue S. Ambrose also your enemie De Caine Abel lib. 2. cap. 7. Who although as he redde it in Latine did thinke it must be referred to him and not to his brother yet he expoundeth it not of the strength of free wil but chargeth Came to be author of his owne errour Culpae ipsius ad â—e conuersio est The coÌ„uersion of the fault it selfe is vnto thee For his brother is not added to him but errour is ascribed whereof he him selfe is author to him selfe The crime sayth he will returne vpon thee which began of thee Thou hast not whereby to accuse necessitie more than thyne owne minde The wickednesse is retorted backe vpon thee thou art Prince of it He sayth well thou art Prince of it for impietie is the mother of sinnes c You see therefore that if you could obtaine that these relatiues were referred to him yet your free will were not by and by to be builded vpon the place and that all be not heretikes which drawe that text to an other exposition than standeth with your good liking MART. 13. Againe they translate in some of their Bibles agaynst free wil thus Christ when we were yet OF NO STRENGTH died for the vngodly Rom. 5. v. 6. The Apostles word doth not signifie that we had nostrength but that we were weake seeble infirme Man was wounded in free will by the sinne of Adam as he that in the Gospell went downe from Hierusalem to Iericho which is a parable of this thing he was not slayne altogither But I stande not here or in any place to dispute the controuèrsie that is done else where This onely I say because* they falsely holde that free will was altogither loste by Adams sinne therefore they translate accordingly When we had no strength But the Greeke worde is well knowen both in profane authors and Ecclesiasticall and specially in the newe Testament it selfe throughout to signifie nothing else but weake feeble sicke infirme Looke me through the newe Testament wheresoeuer infirmitie feeblenesse languishing and the like are spoken of there is founde this Greeke worde to expresse it What Grecian knoweth not be he but simply acquainted with phrases and nature of wordes what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe signifie When the Apostle sayth Quis infirmatur ego non vror Who is weake and infirme and I am not much grieued shall we translate who is of no strength c. or let them giue vs an instance where it is certaine that this word must needes signifie of no strength Will they pretend the etymologie of the word a ridiculous and absurd euasion we aske them of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a worde of the very same
why is not this confessioÌ„ a Sacrament where them selues acknowledge forgiuenesse of sinnes by the Minister These contradictions and repugnance of their practise and translation if they can wittily and wisely reconcile they may perhaps in this point satisfie the reader But whether the Apostle speake here of Sacramentall confession or no sincere translators should not haue fledde from the proper and most vsuall word of confession or confessing consonant both to the Greeke and Latine and indifferent to what soeuer the holy Ghost might meane as this word acknowledge is not FVLK 7. Of the word of penance and therevpoÌ„ to wring in satisfaction we haue heard more than enough but that penance is a Sacrament wee haue heard neuer a worde to proue it But what say wee against confession Forsooth Iames 5. wee translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acknowledge your selfes Why sir dothe acknowledging signifie any other thing than confessing you want then nothing else but the sounde of confession which among the ignoraunt woulde helpe you litle whiche terme your Popishe acknowledging rather shrifte than confession It is maruaile then that you blame vs not because wee say not shriue your selues one to an other A miserable Sacrament that hath neede of the sounde of a worde to helpe it to bee gathered But how I pray you should the reader gather your auricular shrifte or Popishe confession if the worde confesse your selues were vsed by vs I weene because the Priests are called in a little before It is more than mough if you might gaine your Sacrament of anealing by their comming in But shrifte commeth to late after extreeme vnction Well admitte the Apostle forgotte the order and placed it after which shoulde come before must wee needes haue Priestly confession proued out of that place doth not S Iames say coÌ„fesse your selues one to an other as he saith pray one for an other Then it followeth that the Lay man muste shriue the Prieste as well as the Prieste muste shriue the Laye man And the Priest muste confesse him selfe to the people as well as the people muste pray for the Prieste But you haue an obiection out of the Communion booke to proue confession to be a Sacrament which appointeth that the sicke person shal make a speciall confession to the minister and he to absolue him c. Will you neuer leaue this shamelesse cogging and forging of matters against vs The Communion booke appointeth a speciall confessioÌ„ only for them that feele their conscience troubled with any waighty matter that they may receiue counsaile and comforte by the minister who hath aucthoritie in the name of God to remitte sinnes not only to them that be sicke but also to them that be whole and dayly dothe pronounce the absolution to them that acknowledge confesse their sinnes humbly before God But hereof it followeth not that this confession is a Sacrament for by preaching the people that beleeue are absolued froÌ„ their sinnes by the ministerie of the Preacher yet is not preaching a Sacrament A Sacrament must haue an outward element or bodily creature to represent the grace of remission of sinnes as in Baptisme and in the Lordes supper But where you conclude that sincere translators should not haue fledde the proper and moste vsuall worde of confession you speake your pleasure for the worde of acknowledging is more proper and vsuall in the English tongue than is the worde of confessing And if you can proue any Sacrament out of that texte beholde you haue the Greeke and Latine vntouched and the English answereable to both make your Syllogisme out of that place to proue Popish shrift when you dare CHAP. XV. Hereticall translation against the Sacrament of HOLY ORDERS and for the MARIAGE OF PRIESTS and VOTARIES Martin AGAINST the Sacrament of Orders what can they doe more in translation than in all their Bibles to take away the name of Priest and Priesthood of the new Testament altogether and for it to say Elder and Eldership Whereof I treated more at large in an other place of this booke Here I adde these fewe obseruations that both for Priestes and Deacons which are two holy orders in the Catholike Church they translate Ministers to commend that newe degree deuised by themselues As when they say in all their Bibles Feare the Lord with all thy soule and honour his ministers In the Greeke it is plaine thus and honour his Priests as the word alwayes signifieth and in the very next sentence themselues so translate Feare the Lorde and honour the Priestes But they would needes borowe one of these places for the honour of Ministers As also in the Epistle to Timothee where S. Paul talketh of Deacons and nameth them twise they in the firste place translate thus Likewise muste the Ministers be honest c. And a litle after Let the Deacons be the husbaÌ„ds of one wife Loe the Greeke worde being one and the Apostle speaking of one Ecclesiasticall order of Deacons and Beza so interpreating it in both places yet our English translators haue allowed the first place to their Ministers and the second to Deacons and so because Bishops also went before they haue found vs out their three orders Bishops Ministers and Deacons Alas poore soules that can haue no place in Scripture for their Ministers but by making the Apostle speake three things for two Fulke FOR the names of Priest and Elder wee haue spoken heretofore sufficiently as also for the name of Minister which is vsed for the same that Elder and Prieste althoughe the word signifie more generally That the worde Ministers is put for Priests I take it rather to bee an ouersight of the firste translatour whome the rest folowed because that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commeth immediatly after than any purpose against the order of Priest or to dignifie the name of Ministers For seeing Syrachs sonne speaketh of the Priests and Ministers of the â—awe his saying can make nothing to or froe for the names of the Ministers Priestes or Elders of the new Testament That some translatioÌ„s in 1. Tim. 3. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reÌ„der Ministers it is because they supposed the Greeke word to be taken there in the generall sense as it is in manye other places not to make three degrees of twoo as you do fondly cauil For the orders of Bishops Elders or as you cal them Priests and as they be commonly called Priests and Ministers is all one in authoritie of ministring the word the Sacraments The degree of Bishoppes as they are taken to be a superiour order vnto Elders or Priestes is for gouernment and discipline specially committed vnto them not in authoritie of handling the worde and the sacraments MART. 2. There are in the Scripture that are called Ministers in infinite places and that by three Greeke wordes commonly but that is a large signification of minister attributed to al that minister waite serue or attend to doe any
for except one onely Bristowe who obseruing no good order of replying but gathering here and there at his pleasure whatsoeuer he thought himself best able to reproue hath made a shew of defence of Allens Articles and Purgatorie none other haue as yet set foorth any iust replication to the rest of my writings And as for Bristow he hath my reioynder vnto his reply these two yeares in his hand to consider vpon the other that of late haue set forth Popish treatises haue indeuoured themselues almost cuery one of them to haue a snatch or two at some one od thing or other in my bookes wherin they would seeme to haue aduantage that belike they would haue their simple readers thinke to be a sufficient confuration of al that euer I haue written against them I haue thought good therefore as neere as I can to gather all their cauils together and briefely to shape an answere to euery one of them that the indifferēt reader may see iudge what sound matter they haue brought against me wher with in shewe of wordes they would haue it seeme as though they had confuted me First Master Allen in his late Apologie fol. 63. accusing the Protestants to feigne an appellatiō vnto the iudgement of the most auncient fathers of the primitiue Church and yet not to abide by it not esteeming them better than the present gouernment of the Popish Church but as of men deceiued as of humane traditions c. As in their writings saith he it is most euident where from Peters time downward they make the chiefest fathers the ministers and furtherers of Antichrist For this euidence he quoteth Beza in 2. Thess. 2. Retentiue p. 248. How vniustly Beza is slandered to be a witnesse of this accusation they that vnderstande y ◠Latine tongue may see in the places quoted But touching my selfe the booke which he quoteth hauing scarse halfe so many pages I might intreat him for a new quotation but that I gesse he meaneth a place in my confutation of Sanders booke which he calleth the Rocke of the church which was printed with the Retentiue and continueth the number of pages from it In that booke pag. 248. there is nothing that soundeth toward such a matter except it be these wordes As for Leo and Gregorie bishops of Rome although they were not come to the full pride of Antichrist yet the mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that seat neere fiue or sixe hundred yeres before them and then greatly increased they were so deceiued with the long continuance of error that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellow Apostles than the holy scriptures of God against which no continuance of errour can prescribe doth either allowe or beare withall Wherefore although he haue some shew out of the old writers yet hath he nothing directly to prooue that Peter did excell the other Apostles in bishoplike authoritie and out of the worde of God no one iote or title that Peter as a bishop excelled the other Apostles not as Apostles but as bishops First it is manifest euen to the eye that Allens slander is not expressed in these wordes Then let vs see if it may be imployed The mysterie of iniquitie did worke in the see of Rome from the Apostles time taking increase by litle litle vntill sixe hundred yeares and more after Christ when Antichrist began to be openly shewed and manie of the ancient fathers not espying the subtiltie of Sathans secret purpose were deceiued to thinke something more of Peters prerogatiue of the bishops of Romes dignitie than by the worde of God was granted to either of them this is in effect as much as I affirme but here of it followeth not that I make them the ministers and furtherers of Antichrist For those are the ministers and furtherers of Antichrist which willingly lend all their power to maintaine and vphold his kingdom after he hath inuaded the tyrannie The auncient fathers meant nothing lesse by admitting of the bishops of Romes prerogatiue vnder colour of Peters successour than to serue him or aduance him into the throne of Antichrist Not euerie one whome Satan hath seduced that he might prepare a way for the aduauncement of his tyrannie is a minister and furtherer of Satan or his tyrannie for then should all men be counted ministers or furtherers of Satan seeing the kingdome of sinne is increased by the frailtie of all men which by temptation of the diuell fall into sinne Beside that manie of the auncient fathers openly resisted the vsurped power of the bishops of Rome when it began onely to budde vp and was yet farre off from Antichristian tyrannie although it tended somewhat toward the same So did the bishops of the East churches countermaund Victor bishop of Rome contending about the celebration of Easter So did Irenaeus Polycrates and many other godly fathers in publike writings openly reprehend him So did Cyprian in diuerse Epistles expostulate with the bishops of Rome for medling with causes that pertained to his iurisdiction So did all the bishops of Aphrica make decrees against the vsurped authoritie and titles of the bishops of Rome denying all appeales vnto the sea of Rome excōmunicating all them that would appeale to any place beyond the sea discouering also the forged Canon of the Nicen Councel by which the bishops of Rome challenged that prerogatiue So that M. Allen by this his slander hath done iniury to mee and hurt to himselfe while men by this example may iudge of his synceritie in other matters Next commeth in the discouerie of I. Nicols denying that they make the Catholike religion locall or of one prouince as he chargeth mee with some scornefull termes of reproche to affirme in my bad answere to Howlet I said in deede that S. Augustine De vnit Eccles Cap. 4. doth cleare vs of schisme who willingly communicate with all the whole bodie of Christs Church dispersed ouer the world and charge the Popish faction both of schisme heresie of schisme because they maintaine the Church to be onely in a part of Europe as the Donatistes did in Aphrica c. And what iniury haue I done to the Papistes in so saying The Donatists sayd the Church was perished out of all the worlde remained only in Aphrica not assigning any place of Aphrica whereunto the Church must be regardant as the Papistes do the citie of Rome but affirming that true Catholikes remained onely in Aphrica being consumed out of all other partes of the earth And what say the Papistes of all the Oriental churches of Greece of Asia of Aphrike that acknowledge not the Popes authoritie Doe they not accompt them all for heretikes or schismatikes Then it followeth that they acknowledge the Church to remaine only in those partes of Europe that are subiect to the Pope and Church of Rome But perhaps they wil alledge their newly founded Churches
vntruths that in such matters as you may be conuinced in them by ten thousand witnesses What credit shal be giuen to you in matters that cōsist vpon your owne bare testimonie when you force not to faine of other men that wherin euery man may reproue you And as for the only pretence you speake of Caluine doth so litle esteeme it that notwithstanding the same he doubteth not to receiue the Epistle of S. Iames because it is agreable to the whole body of the canonical Scripture as if you had read his argumēt vpon that Epistle you might easily haue perceiued MART. 9. Marke gētle reader for thy soules sake thou shalt find that heresie only heresie is the cause of their denying these books so farre that against the orders Hierarchies particular patronages of Angels one of them writeth thus in the name of the rest We passe not for that Raphael of Tobie neither do we acknowledge those seuē Angels which he speaketh of al this is farre from Canonical Scriptures that the same Raphael recordeth sauoureth I wote not what superstition Against free will thus I litle care for the place of Ecclesiasticus neither will I beleeue free will though he affirme an hundred times That before men is life death And against praier for the dead intercession of Saincts thus As for the booke of the Machabees I do care lesse for it thā for the other Iudas dreame cōcerning Omas I let passe as a dreame This is their reuerence of the scriptures which haue uniuersally bin reuerenced for canonical in the church of God aboue 1100 yeres Con. Cart. 3. particularly of many fathers long before Aug. de doct Christ. l 2. c. 8. FVLK 9. The mouth that lieth killeth the soule The reader may thinke you haue small care of his soules health when by such impudēt lying you declare that you haue so smal regard of your own But what shal he mark That heresy c. You were best say that Eusebius Hierom Ruffine al the churches in their times were heretiks that only heresie was the cause of their deniall of these bookes For such reasons as moued thē moue vs some thing also their authority But how proue you that only heresie moueth vs to reiect thē Because M. Whit. against the orders Hierarchies particular patronages of Angels writeth in the name of the rest That we passe not c. Take heede least vpon your bare surmise you belie him where you say he writeth in the name of the reste as in the next sectiō following you say he writeth in the name of both the vniuersities for which I am sure he had no cōmissiō frō either of thē althogh he did write that which may well be aduouched by both the vniuersities yet I knowe his modestie is such as he will not presume to be aduocate for both the vniuersities and much lesse for the whole church except he were lawfully called therto This is a cōmon practise of you Papists to beare the world in hand that whatsoeuer is writtē by any of vs in defense of the truth is set forth in the name of al the rest as though none of vs could say more in any matter than any one of vs hath writtē or that if any one of vs chaūce to slip in any smal matter though it be but a wrong quotatiō you might open your wide sclaunderous mouths against the whole church for one mans particular offense Now touching any thing that M. Whit. hath written you shal find him sufficient to maintaine it against a strōger aduersary thā you are therfore I wil medle the lesse in his causes And for the orders patronage or protection of Angels by Gods appointment we haue sufficient testimonie in the Canonical Scriptures that we neede not the vncertain report of Tobies booke to instruct vs what to thinke of thē But as for the Hierarchies patronage of Angels that many of you Papistes haue imagined written of neither the canonical Scriptures nor yet the Apocryphal bookes now in controuersie are sufficient to giue you warrātise The like I say of freewil praier for the dead intercession of Saincts But it grieueth you that those Apocryphal scriptures which haue bin vniuersally receiued for canonicall in the church of God aboue 1100. yeares should find no more reuerēce amōg vs. Stil your mouth rūneth ouer For in the time of the Canon of the coūcel of Carthage 3. which you quote these bookes were not vniuersally reuerenced as canonical And Augustine him selfe speaking of the booke of Machabees Cont. 2. G and. Ep. c. 23. cōfesseth that the Iewes accoūt it not as the law the Prophetes the Psalmes to which our Lord giueth testimonie as to his witnesses saying It behoueth that all things should be fulfilled which are writtē in the Law in the Prophets in the Psalmes cōcerning me but it is receiued of the Church not vnprofitably if it be soberly read or heard This writeth S. Augustine whē he was pressed with the authority of that booke by the Donatists which defended that it was lawful for them to kil themselues by exāple of Razis who is by the author of that booke commēded for that fact He saith it is receiued not vnprofitably immediatly after Especially for those Machabees that suffred paciently horrible persecution for testimony of Gods religiō to encourage Christians by their example Finally he addeth a condition of the receiuing it if it be soberly read or heard These speches declare that it was not receiued without all controuersie as the authenticall word of God for then should it be receiued necessarily because it is Gods word especially how soeuer it be read or heard it is receiued of the Church not only necessarily but also profitably Beside this euen the decree of Gelasius which was neare 100. yeares after that councel of Carthage alloweth but one booke of the Maccabees Wherfore the vniuersal reuerence that is bosted of can not be iustified But M. Whitaker is charged in the margent to condemne the seruice booke which appointeth these books of Toby Ecclesiasticus to be read for holy Scripture as the other And where finde you that in the seruice booke M. Martin Can you speake nothing but vntruths If they be appointed to be read are they appointed to be read for holy Scripture and for suche Scripture as the other canonicall bookes are The seruice booke appointeth the Letanie diuerse exhortations and praiers yea homelies to be read are they therefore to be read for holy canonicall Scriptures But you aske Do they read in their Churches Apocryphall and Superstitious bookes for holy Scripture No verily But of the name Apocryphall I must distinguish which somtimes is taken for all bookes read of the Church which are not canonicall sometime for such bookes onely as are by no meanes to be suffered but are to be hid or abolished These bookes
therefore in controuersie with other of the same sort are sometimes called Hagiographa holy writings as of S. Hierom praefat in lib. Tobiae sometime Ecclesiastica Ecclesiastical writings and so are they called of Ruffinus Because sayth he they were appointed by our Elders to be read in the Churches but not to be brought forth to confirme authoritie of faith but other Scriptures they named Apocryphall which they would not haue to be read in the Churches So sayth S. Hierom in praefat in Prouerb Euen as the Church readeth in deede the bookes of Iudith Tobias and the Machabees but yet receaueth them not among the Canonical Scriptures so let it read these two bookes of Ecclesiasticus and wisedom for the edifying of the people not for the confirmation of the authoritie of Ecclesiastical doctrines These auncient writers shal answer for our seruice booke that although it appoint these writings to be read yet it doth not appoint them to be read for Canonicall Scriptures Albeit they are but sparingly read by order of our seruice booke which for the Lordes day other festiuall daies commonly appointeth the first lesson out of the Canonicall Scriptures And as for superstition although M. Whitaker say that some one thing sauoreth of I know not what superstition he doth not by and by condemne the whole booke for superstitious and altogither vnworthy to be read neither can he thereby be proued a Puritane or a disgracer of the order of dayly seruice MART. 10. As for partes of bookes doe they not reiect certaine peeces of Daniel and of Hester because they are not in the Hebrew which reason S. Augustine reiecteth or because they were once doubted of by certaine of the fathers by which reason some part of S. Marke and S. Lukes Gospell might nowe also be called in controuersie specially if it be true which M. Whitakers by a figuratiue speech more than insinuateth That he can not see by what right that which once was not in credit should by time winne authoritie Forgetting him selfe by by in the very next lines admitting S. Iames epistle though before doubted of for Canonicall Scriptures vnles they receiue it but of their curtesie so may refuse it when it shall please them which must needes be gathered of his wordes as also many other notorious absurdities contradictions and dumbe blanckes Which onely to note were to confute M. Whitakers by him selfe being the answerer for both Vniuersities FVLK 10. As for peeces of Daniel of Hester we reiect none but only we discerne that which was written by Daniel in deede from that which is added by Theodotion the false Iew that which was written by the spirit of God of Esther from that which is vainly added by some Greekish counterfecter But the reason why we reiect those patches you say is because they are not in the Hebrew which reason S. Augustine reiecteth Here you cite S. Augustine at large without quotation in a matter of controuersie But if we may trust you that S. Augustine reiecteth this reason yet we may be bold vpon S. Hieroms authoritie to reiect whatsoeuer is not found in the canō of the Iewes written in Hebrew or Chaldee For whatsoeuer was such S. Hierom did thrust through with a spit or obeliske as not worthy to be receyued Witnes hereof S. Augustine him selfe Epist. ad Hier. 8. 10. in which he disswaded him from translating the Scriptures of the olde Testament out of the Hebrew tongue after the 70. Interpreters whose reasons as they were but friuolous so they are derided by S. Hierom who being learned in the Hebrew Chaldee tongues refused to be taught by Augustine that was ignorant in them what was to be done in translations out of them Also Hieronym him selfe testifieth that Daniel in the Hebrew hath neither the story of Susanna nor the hymne of the 3. children nor the fable of Bel the Dragon which we saith he because they are dispersed throughout the whole world haue added setting a spit before them which thrusteth them through lest we should seeme among the ignorant to haue cut of a great part of the booke The like he writeth of the vaine additions that were in the vulgar edition vnto the booke of Esther both in the Preface after the ende of that which he translated out of the Hebrew There are other reasons also beside the authoritie of S. Hierom that moue vs not to receiue them As that in the storie of Susanna Magistrats iudgement of life death are attributed to the Iewes being in captiuitie of Babylon which hath no similitude of truth Beside out of the first chapter of the true Daniel it is manifest that Daniel being a young man was caried captiue into Babylon in the dayes of Nebucadnezer but in this counterfect storie Daniel is made a young child in the time of Astyages which reigned immediatly before Cyrus of Persia. Likewise in the storie of Bel and the Dragon Daniel is said to haue liued with the same king Cyrus and after when he was cast into the lyons denne the Prophet Habacuck was sent to him out of Iurie who prophecied before the first comming of the Chaldees and therefore could not be aliue in the daies of Cyrus which was more than 70 yeares after The additions vnto the booke of Esther in many places bewray the spirite of man as that they are contrary to the truth of the story containing vaine repetitions amplifications of that which is contained in the true historie that which most manifestly conuinceth the sorgerie that in the epistle of Artaxerxes cap. 16. Haman is called a Macedonian which in the true storie is termed an Agagite that is an Amalekite whereas the Macedonians had nothing to doe with the Persians many yeares after the death of Esther Haman I omit that in the ca. 15. ver 12. the author maketh Esther to lie vnto the king in saying that his countenance was ful of all grace or else he lyeth him selfe v. 17. where he saith the king beheld her in the vehemēcy of his anger that he was exceding terrible As for other reasons which you suppose vs to follow because these parcels were once doubted of by certaine of the fathers it is a reason of your owne making and therefore you may confute it at your pleasure But if that be true which Maister Whitaker by a figuratiue speech doth more than insinuate parte of S. Markes and S. Lukes Gospell may also be called in controuersie Why what saith M. VVhitaker Marie that he can not see by what right that which once was not in credit should by tyme winne authoritie But when I pray you was any part of S. Marke or S. Luke out of credit if any part were of some person doubted of doth it follow that it was not at al in credit you reason profoundly and gather very necessarily As likewise that he forgetteth him selfe in the very next lines admitting
speach but either writtē by Barnabas as Tertullian holdeth or by Luke the Euangelist as some men thinke or by Clemens that after was B. of the Romane church whom they say to haue ordered adorned the sentēces of Paul in his own speach or els truly bicause Paule did write vnto the Hebrews because of the enuie of his name amōg thē he cut of the title in the beginning of the salutation These things cōsidered what neede those tragical exclamations in so trifling a matter Doth not the title tell it is S. Paules why strike they out S. Paules name what an hereticall peeuishnesse is this For lacke of good matter you are driuen to lowde clamors against vs but I will euen conclude in your owne wordes I reporte me to all indifferent men of common sense whether we do it to deminish the credite of the epistle which of al S. Paules epistles we might least misse when we come to dispute against your Popish sacrifice sacrificing priesthood or whether you do not craftily moue a scruple in the mindes of simple persons to make thē doubt of the auctoritie of that epistle whose double cannon shot you are not able to beare whē it is thūdred out against you vnder colour that it is not of sound credit among our selues that vse it against you Which of al the lies that euer Satan inuented taught you to vtter is one of the most abhominable MART. 12. I know very well that the authoritie of Canonicall Scripture standeth not vpon the certaintie of the author but yet to be Paules or not Paules Apostolicall or not Apostolicall maketh great difference of credite and estimation For what made S. Iames epistle doubted of sometime or the second of S. Peter and the rest but that they were not thought to be the epistles of those Apostles This Luther sawe very well when he denied S. Iames epistle to be Iames the Apostles writing If titles of bookes be of no importāce then leaue out Matthew Marke Luke and Iohn leaue out Paule in his other epistles also and you shall much pleasure the Manichees and other old Heretikes if the titles make no difference vrge no more the title of the Apocalypse S. Iohn the Diuines as though it were not S. Iohns the Euangelistes and you shall much displeasure some Heretikes now a daies Briefly most certaine it is and they know it best by their owne vsual doings that it is a principall way to the discredite of any booke to denie it to be that authors vnder whose name it hath bene receiued FVLK 12. If you know so well that the auctoritie of the Canonical scripture standeth not vpō the certaintie of the auctor as in deede it doth not For the bookes of Iudges of Ruth of Samuel the later of the Kings c. who can certainly affirme by whom they were written with what forehead do you charge vs to doubte of the auctoritie of this epistle because we reporte out of the auncient writers the vncertaintie of the auctor or leaue out that title whiche is not certainely true But yet you say to be Paules or not Paules apostolicall or not apostolicall maketh great difference of credite and estimation If by apostolicall you meane of apostolicall spirite or auctoritie I agree to that you say of apostolical or not apostolicall If you meane apostolicall that only which was writtē by some Apostle you will make great difference of credite estimatiō betweene the Gospell of Marke Luke and the Actes of the Apostles from the gospels of Mathew and Iohn But which of vs I pray you that thinketh that this epistle was not writtē by S. Paul once doubteth whether it be not of Apostolicall spirite and auctoritie Which is manifest by this that both in preaching and writing wee cite it thus the Apostle to the Hebrewes And if it were written by S. Luke or by S. Clement which both were Apostolike men seing it is out of controuersie that it was written by the spirite of God it is doubtlesse Apostolicall and differeth not in credite and estimation from those writings that are knowen certainly to haue bene writtē by the Apostles But I maruel greatly why you write that to be Paules or not Paules maketh great difference of credite estimation Those epistles that are Peters and Iohns are not Paules yet I thinke their is no great difference of credite estimation betweene them Paules What you thinke I know not but you write very suspitiously You aske what made S. Iames epistle or the second of Peter and the rest to be sometimes doubted of but that they were not thought to be the epistles of those Apostles Yes something else or else they doubted vainely of them and without iuste cause as I thinke they did But when their were two Apostles called Iames he that doubteth whether the epistle was written by Iames the brother of Iohn is persuaded it was written rather by Iames the sonne of Alphaeus doubteth nothing of the credit auctoritie estimation of the epistle No more doe wee which doubt whether the epistle to the Hebrewes were written by S. Paule seeing we are perswaded it was written either by S. Barnabas or by S. Luke or by S. Clement as the auncient writers thought or by some other of the Apostles or Euangelists we make no question but that it is Apostolicall and of equall auctoritie with the rest of the holy scriptures But Eusebius denied the epistle of S. Iames because he was perswaded that it was written by no Apostle or Apostolike man and therefore saith plainly that it is a bastard or counterset and so belike was Luther deceiued if euer he denied it as you say he did But if titles of bookes be of no importance say you then leaue out Matthew Marke Iohn and Paule in his other Epistles What nede that I pray you Is there no difference betwene leauing out a title whereof there hath bene great vncertaintie and diuersitie in Gods church and which in some Greeke copies both written and printed is left out and in leauing out those titles that neuer were omitted nor neuer any question or controuersie moued of them by any of the auncient catholike fathers But you will vs to vrge no more the title of the Apocalypse of S. Iohn the Diuine as though it were not S. Iohn the Euangelistes we shall please I know not what heretikes of our time except it be the Papistes whom it would most concerne that the reuelation of S. Iohn in which their Antichrist of Rome is so plainly described were brought out of credit But if you had read Bezaes preface before the Apocalypse you should finde that euen by that title he gathereth a probable argument that it was written by Iohn the Euangelist because it is not like that this excellent name THE DIVINE coulde agree to any Iohn in the Apostles time so aptly as to Sainct Iohn the Euangelist beside the consent of al antiquitie
ascribing that Reuelation to Sainct Iohn the Euangelist and Apostle Last of all you say it is most certaine and we knowe best by our vsuall doings that it is a principall way to discredit any booke to deny it to be the authors vnder whose name it hath bene receyued Howe certaine it is with you whereof no man else but you can see any light of reason or necessitie of conclusion I knowe not but wee are not so voyde of witte if we lacked honestie that we would discredite Paules Epistle by saying it was Peters or Augustines sermon by saying it was Ambrose or Chrysostomes worke by saying it was Basils But if wee would bring any booke out of credite by denying the auctor whose title it hath borne wee would rather intitle it to some other writer of lesse credite or later tyme or by some other argumentes proue it vnworthie of credite not by onely denying it to be the auctors vnder whose name it hath hene receyued MART. 13. But I come to the thirde point of voluntarie expositions of the Scripture that is when euery man expoundeth according to his errour and Heresie This needeth no proofe for we see it with our eyes Looke vpon the Caluinistes and Puritanes at home the Lutherans Zuinglians and Caluinists abrode reade their bookes written vehemently one secte against an other are not their expositions of one and the same Scripture as diuerse and contrarie as their opinions differ one from an other Let the example at home be their controuersie about the distinction of Ecclesiasticall degrees Arch-bishop Bishop and minister the example abroade their diuerse imaginations and phantasies vpon these most sacred wordes Hoc est corpus meum FVLK 13. That euery one of vs expoūdeth the scripture voluntarily according to his errour or heresie you say it needeth no proofe for you see it with your eyes You haue very cleere sight to see a mote in other mens eies but can not see a beame in your owne You make your demonstration by the Caluinists and Puritans at home the Lutherans Zuinglians Caluinists abroad the one for the distinctiō of Ecclesiastical degrees Archbishop Bishop Minister the other for their diuerse imaginations phantasies of these wordes Hoc est corpus meum But I beseech you sir touching the domestical dissentiō what is the text or what be the texts of Scripture vpon which these voluntarie expositions are made for the distinction or confusion of Ecclesiastical degrees If they had bene as ready as Hoc est corpus meum they should haue bene set downe as well as that But I suppose they are yet to seeke for that controuersie as I take it standeth rather in collections than interpretations and in question whether the political gouernment of the Church be distinctly expressed in the scripture or no. As for the cōtention abroad I confesse to stand a great part in exposition of that text wherin although the one part doth erre is that a sufficient cause to condēne thē both The church of Africa and the Church of Rome and the two principall lights of them both Cyprian and Cornelius dissented about rebaptizing them that were baptized of Heretikes The Aphricans not in one text onely but in the exposition of many differed from the Romanes from the truth yet it were hard to condemne them both for Heretikes least of all them that held the truth S. Augustine and S. Hierom dissented about a text of S. Paule to the Galathians of Peters dissembling as their contrary epistles doe testifie The truth was of S. Augustines side yet was not the other an heretike following a wrōg interpretation And to come nearer home vnto you the Dominicans Franciscans Friers were at daggers drawing as we say yea at most sharpe and bitter contention betwene themselues and all the Popish Church was deuided about their brawling concerning the conception of the virgin Marie whether she were conceaued in sinne or no where many texts of Scripture must needes receiue voluntarie expositions if not of both partes yet at the least of one parte which of those will you say were heretikes If you say neither of both then must you haue stronger reasons to proue vs all heretikes than voluntarie expositions where parties be in diuerse opinions especially in matter not ouerthrowing the foundation of Christian religion And when you haue gathered the most voluntarie expositions you can finde yet shall you finde none so grosse so absurde so impertinent as you Papistes haue coyned for maintenaunce of your errours and heresies of which you your selfe are ashamed though otherwise you haue iron foreheads and brasen faces A few examples among a great many shall suffice God made man according to his owne image that is to say we must haue images in the Church No man lighteth a candell and putteth it vnder a bushell the meaning is that images must be set vpon the altar God made two great lightes the Sunne and the Moone that is the Pope to be aboue the Emperour Beholde here are two swordes that is the Pope hath power of both the swordes Put on the whole armour of God that is the Priest must put on all his vestiments before he saye Masse I am become as sownding brasse or as a tinckling Cymbal that is the bels in the steeple signifie preaching of Gods word I might fill many leaues yea a whole booke of such popish expositions as the Papistes in our dayes dare not for shame abide by MART. 14. And if you will yet haue a further demonstration this one may suffice for all They reiect Councels Fathers and the Catholike Churches interpretation vnlesse it be agreeable to Gods word and whether it be agreeable or no that Luther shall iudge for the Lutherans Caluin for the Caluinists Cartwright for the Puritans and an other for the Brethren of loue briefly them selues will be iudges both of Councels and Fathers whether they expound the Scriptures well or no and euery youth among them vpon confidence of his spirit and knowledge wil saucily controule not onely one but all the fathers consenting togither if it be against that which they imagine to be the truth FVLK 14. We had neede of a better demonstration than the former by which you your selues are proued Heretikes rather than we But let vs see how handsomly you begin They reiect say you Councels and Fathers and the Catholike Churches interpretation vnlesse it be agreeable to Gods word Thus farre you say wel We doe reiect not only those that you name but euen an Angel from heauen except his message be agreeable to Gods word But all the rest that you assume to the ende of this section is a starke staring lye except that you saye of H. N. for the brethren of loue which are more like to you than to vs. For neither Luther nor Caluin nor Cartwright is iudge among vs whether any thing be agreeable to the worde of God but whatsoeuer any of them doe
Luke he doth giue a reason thereof both for the 70 and for the Euangelist that folowed them neither doubting of the truth thereof nor controlling them by the authoritie of Moyses as Beza speaketh that is by the Hebrue Others say concerning Cainan that Moyses might leaue him out in the Genealogie of Sem by the instinct of the same Spirite that S. Matthew left out three kings in the genealogie of our Sauiour Where if a man would controll the Euangelist by the Hebrue of the old Testament that is read in the bookes of the kings he should be as wise and as honest a man as Beza Lastly Venerable Bede thinketh it sufficient in this very difficultie of Cainan to maruell at it reuerently vather than to search it dangerously And thus farre of picking quarels to the originall text and their good will to alter and change it as they list if they might be suffered FVLK 22. Here of pittie you will shewe vnto vs a peece of learning how the Fathers reconcile the sayde Hebrue and Greeke without violence to the text as they do alwayes or else leaue the matter to God First S. Augustine De ciuitate lib. 18. cap. 43. de doctr chr lib. 2. cap. 15. of their agreement notwithstanding they were separated into seuerall celles gathereth that those Septuaginta were inspired with the same prophetical spirite of interpreting that the Prophetes were in foreshewing But this doth S. Hierome vtterly denie and derideth the ground of this imagination those 72. celles at Alexandria as a fable and a lie That S. Ambrose saith we haue found that many thinges are not idely added of the 70. Greeke interpreters We confesse as much where their addition serueth for explication of that whiche is contavned in the Hebrue and so meaneth Ambrose not that they had auctoritie to adde any thing which Moses had omitted And we acknowledge with S. Hierome that their may be many reasons giuen for the difference of the one frō the other But concerning this place of S. Luke now in question you say he giueth a reason therof both for the 70. for the Euangelist that followed thē neither doubting of the truth thereof nor controlling them by the auctoritie of Moses And for this you quote Comment in 28. Esa. and in question Hebrai in neither of which places is any mention of this place much lesse any reason giuen to reconcile it or the Septuaginta with the Hebrue It seemeth you redde not the bookes your selfe but trusted to much some mans collectiō which you vnderstoode not In the Preface to the Hebrue questions Hieronime excuseth him selfe against enuious persons that barked against him as though he did nothing but reproue the errors of the 70. saying That he thinketh not his labour to be a reprehension of thē seing they would not expresse vnto Ptolomaeus king of Alexādria certain mysticall thinges in the Scriptures and especially those things which promised the comming of Christ least the Iewes might haue bene thought to worship an other God whom that follower of Plato therefore did greatly esteeme because they were said to worship but one god But the Euangelistes also and our Lorde and Sauiour and S. Paule the Apostle bring foorth many thinges as it were out of the old Testament which are not had in in our bookes of whiche in their due places wee will more fully discusse Whereof it is cleare that those are the more true examples which agree with the auctoritie of the newe Testament Thus much Hierom in that place but neither in his questions vppon Genesis nor 1. Paralip the proper places for this texte is their any mention of this place of Luke Qui fuit Cainan In the place cited by you vpon the 28. of Esay hee sayth Legimus in Apostolo c. We reade in the Apostle In other tongues and lippes will I speake to this people and neither so shall they heare me sayth the Lorde Which seemeth to me to be taken out of this present chapter according to the Hebrew And this we haue obserued in the old Testament except a few testimonies which only Luke vseth otherwise whiche had knowledge of the Greeke tongue rather wheresoeuer any thing is said out of the old Testamēt that they set it not according to the 70. but according to the Hebrue folowing the translatiō of no mā but turning the sense of the Hebrue into their owne speach You see that Hierome saith nothing particularly that which he sayth generally concerneth this place nothing at all And very like it is that this corruption was not crept into S. Lukes text in his tyme especially seeing neyther S. Ambrose in his commentarie vpon S. Luke once toucheth this controuersie as hee doth all other questions about that Genealogie Where you say S. Hierome was a great patrone of the Hebrue not without cause being at that time perhaps the Hebrue veritie in deede It is without perhaps or peraduenture that not one iote or pricke of the lawe of God can perishe by the testimonie of our Sauiour Christe Math. 5. And if you will beleeue Arias Montanus an excellent learned Papiste he will tell you as much out of the same text doubtles in his Preface vnto the great Bible by him set out with diligent obseruation of all the Accents Hebrue points which Christ sayth he will neuer suffer to perish And if the Hebrue veritie were in Hieronyms time as doubtlesse it was whether he had a perfect copie therof or no the same Arias Montanus testifieth if you dare credite him being one of your sect for opinion though in sinceritie of minde and loue of the truth which I pray to God to reueale vnto him I thinke him far better than a number of you he I say affirmeth in the same Preface against the obiection that is made of the Iewes corruption of the Hebrue bookes Etenim apud nonnull for we reade in some auctors that through the fraude and impulsion of the spirit of errour some of the nation of the Iewes in times past were brought to that point of insolencie or madnesse that in the beginning of the Christian church they changed some words which might altogither breake of that their contention of oppugning the Christian veritie But those places so defiled by them were very fewe and in the bookes of our writers and also in the copies both printed written of the Iewes them selues are all for the most partnoted and shewed out For although either by the fraude of those men or by the ignorance of the booke writers or by iniurie of the times some change hath bene made in the Hebrew bookes which we vse yet is there not one word nor one letter nor point that is mentioned to haue bene of olde time which is not found to haue bene safely kept in that moste riche treasurie which they call the Mazzoreth For in that as in an holy and faithfull custodie appointed with vttermost diligence
to the Greeke text by one that fauoured Peters primacie Is it so then you will not stande to this Greeke texte neither Not in this place saith Beza FVLK 49. In graunting Peter to be the firste wee neede not graunt him to be the chiefe and if we graunt him to be the chiefe it followeth not that he is chiefe in auctoritie But if that were graunted it is not necessarie that he was head of the Church And albeit that were also graunted the Bishop of Rome could gaine nothing by it But what saith Beza where the texte saith the firste Peter If wee muste beleeue you hee saith No wee will graunt you no suche thing for these wordes were added to the Greeke texte by one that fauoured Peters primacie I praye you Martin where hath Beza those wordes will you neuer leaue this shamefull forgerie Beza in the tenth of Mathew doth only aske the question Quid si hoc vocabulum c. what if this worde were added by some that would establish the Primacie of Peter for nothing followeth that may agree with it This asketh Beza but as an obiectioÌ„ which immediatly after he answeareth concludeth that it is no addition but a naturall word of the text found in all copies confessed by Theophylact an enimie of the Popes primacie and defendeth it in the third of Marke where it is not in the common Greeke copies nor in the vulgar Latine against Erasmus who finding it in some Greeke copies thought it was vntruely added out of Mathew But Beza saith Ego verò non dubito quin haec sit germana lectio But I doubte not but this is the true and right reading of the texte and therefore hee translateth Primâ—inâ— Simonem the firste Simon out of the fewe copies Erasmus speaketh of Therefore it is an abhominable slaunder to charge him with following the common receyued texte where it seemeth to make against you when hee contendeth for the truth against the common text yea and against your owne vulgar Latine to giue you that which you make so great accompte of that Peter in the Cataloge of the Apostles was firste So greatly hee feareth to acknowledge that Peter was called first And so true it is that you charge him to say No wee will graunt you no such thing for these wordes were added to the Greeke texte by one that fauoured Peters primacie I hope your favourers seeing your forgerie thus manifestly discouered will giue you lesse credite in other your shamelesse slaunders at the leastwise this in equitie I trust all Papistes will graunt not to beeleue your report against any mans writing except they reade it thoÌ„selues Now â—â—at this worde the first argueth no primacie or superioritie beside those places quoted by Beza Act. 26. 20. Rom. 1 8. 3 2. You may read 1. Par. v 23 24. where the posteritie of Leui and Aaron are rehearsed as they were appointed by Dauid in their orders or courses Subuel primus Rohobia primus sors prima Ioiarib c. where least you should thinke of any headship or principalitie because the Hebrue is somtime 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you may see that Subuel is called primus of the sonnes of Gerson when there is no more mentioned more expresly Rohobia is called primus of the sonnes of Eleazer of whome it is sayd that he had no more sonnes that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth here the first in order it appeareth by those generations where the second third or fourth is named as in the sonnes of Hebron and of Oziel Also in the sonnes of Semei where Iehoth is counted the first Ziza the second Iaus and Beria becaused they increase not in sonnes were accounted for one familie In all which there is no other primacy than in the first lot of Ioiarib where the Hebrew worde is harishuon and so follow the restâ—n order vnto foure and twenty courses Therefore there is no cause why we should not stand to the Greeke text in that place neither did Beza euer deny to stande to it MART. 50. Let vs see an other place You must graunt vs saywe by this Greeke text that Christes very bloud which was shed for vs is really in the chalice because S. Luke sayth so in the Greeke text No sayth Beza those Greeke wordes came out of the margem into the text and therefore I translate not according to them but according to that which I thinke the truer Greeke text although I finde it in no copies in the world and this his doing is maintained iustified by our English Protestants in their writings of late FVLK 50. Still Beza speaketh as you inspire into him while he speaketh through your throte or quil The truth is Beza sayth that either there is a manifest Soloecophanes that is an appearance of incongruitie or els those wordes which is shed for you seeme to be added out of S. Mathew or els it is an errour of the writers placing that in the nominatiue case which should be in the datiue For in the datiue case did Basil read them in his morals 21. definition Neuertheles all our olde bookes sayth Beza had it so written as it is commonly printed in the nominatiue case Here are three seuerall disiunctions yet can you finde none but one proposition that you set downe as though it were purely and absolutely affirmed by Beza Likewise where you speake of no copies in the world you say more than Beza who speaketh but of such copies as he had who if he were of no better conscience than you would haue him seeme to be might faine some copie in his owne handes to salue the matter But the truth is that since he wrote this he found one more auncient copie both in Greeke and Latine which nowe is at Cambridge where this whole verse is wanting But of this matter which somewhat concerneth my selfe particularly I shall haue better occasion to write in the places by you quoted cap. 1. num 37. and cap. 17. num 11. where I will so iustifie that which I haue written before touching this place as I trust all learned and indifferent Readers shall see how vainely you insult against me where you bewray grosser ignorance in Greeke phrases than euer I woulde haue suspected in you being accounted the principall Linguist of the Seminarie at Rhemes MART. 51. Well yet sayewe there are places in the same Greeke text as plaine for vs as these now cited where you can not say it came out of the margent or it was added falsely to the text Aâ— Stand and hold fast the traditions c. by this text we require that you graunt vs traditions deliuered by word of mouth as wel as the written word that is the Scriptures No say they we know the Greeke word signifieth tradition as plaine as possibly but here and in the like places we rather translate it ordinances instructions and what els soeuer Nay Sirs
when they professe they are of thē selues vniust of Sacraments mysteries by which the benefits of Christ are sealed vp vnto them of altar when they beleue that Iesus Christ is our altar of Priests when they hold that al good Christians are Priests of deuotions when they dispute that ignorance is not the mother of true deuotion but knowledge of excommunication which they practise daily As for the names and thinges of procession shrines images traditions beside the holy Scriptures in religiō they haue iust cause to abhorre Neither do they vse the one sort of termes without probable ground out of the originall text nor auoide the other but vpon some good speciall cause as in the seueral places when we are charged with them shal appeare MART. 17. If in a case that maketh for them they straine the very originall signification of the word and in a case that maketh against them they neglect it altogither what is this but wilfull and of purpose See chap. 7. numb 36. FVLK 17. I answer we streine no words to signifie otherwise than the nature and vse of them will affoord vs neither doe we spare to expresse that which hath a shewe against vs if the propertie or vsuall signification of the word with the circumstance of the place doe so require it MART. 18. If in wordes of ambiguous and diuerse signification they will haue it signifie here or there as it pleaseth them and that so vehemently that here it must needes so signifie and there it must not and both this and that to one ende and in fauour of one and the same opinion what is this but wilfull translation So doth Beza vrge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie wife and not to signifie wife both against virginitie and chastitie of Priestes and the English Bible translateth accordingly See chap. 15. num 11. 12. FVLK 18. To the generall charge I answer generally we do not as you slaunder vs. Nor Beza whom you shamefully belye to vrge the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Cor. 7. v. 1. not to signifie a wife against virginitie and chastitie of Priestes For cleane contrariwise he reproueth Erasmus restraining it to a wife which the Apostle saith generally it is good for a man not to touch a woman which doth not onely conteine a commendation of virginitie in them that be vnmaried but also of continencie in them that be maried And as for the virginity or chastitie of Priestes he speaketh not one worde of it in that place no more than the Apostle doth Now touching the other place that you quote 1. Cor. 9. v. 5. Beza doth truely translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sister to wife because the word sister is first placed which comprehendeth a woman and therefore the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 following must needes explicate what woman he meaneth namely a wife For it were absurd to say a sister a woman Therfore the vulgar Latine Interpreter peruerteth the words saith Mulierem sororem It is true that many of the auncient fathers as too much addict to the singlenes of the Clergie though they did not altogither condemne mariage in them as the Papists doe did expound the sister whereof S. Paule speaketh of certaine rich matrones which followed the Apostles whithersoeuer they went ministred to them of their substance as we reade that many did to our Sauiour Christ. Math. 27. v. 55. Luc. 8. v. 3. But that exposition can not stand nor agree with this text for many causes First the placing of the wordes which I haue before spoken of Secondly this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were needeles except it should signifie a wife for the word sister signifieth both a woman a faithful woman and otherwise it was not to be doubted least the Apostle would leade a heathen woman with him Thirdly the Apostle speaketh of one womā not many wheras there were many that followed our Sauiour Christ whereas one alone to follow the Apostle might breede occasion of ill suspition and offence which many could not so easily Fourthly those that are mentioned in the Gospell our Sauiour Christ did not leade about but they did voluntarily follow him but the Apostle here saith that he had authoritie as the rest of the Apostles to leade about a woman which argueth the right that an husband hath ouer his wife or of a maister ouer his maide Fiftly it is not all one if women could trauel out of Galilie to Ierusalem which was nothing neare an hundred miles that women could followe the Apostles into all partes of the world Sixtly if the cause why such women are supposed to haue followed the Apostles was to minister to them of their substance the leading them about was not burdenous to the Church but helpeful but the Apostle testifieth that he forbare to vse this libertie because he would not be burdenous to the Church of Corinth or to any of them Seuenthly seing it is certaine that Peter had a wife and the rest of the Apostles are by antiquitie reputed to haue bene all maried It is not credible that Peter or any of the rest would leaue the companie of their owne wiues leade strange women about with them As for the obiection that you make in your note vppon the text to what ende should he talke of burdening the Corinthians with finding his wife when he himself cleerely saith that he was single I answer Although I thinke he was single yet is it not so cleere as you make it for Clemens Alexandrinus thinketh he had a wife which he left at Philippi by mutual consent But albeit he were single it was lawfull for him to haue maried and Barnabas also as wel as all the rest of the Apostles Againe to what end should he talke of burdening the Church with a woman which was not his wife when such women as you say ministred to the Apostles of their goods Wherby it should follow that none of the Apostles burdened the Churches where they preached with their owne finding which is cleane contrary to the Apostles wordes and meaning Wherefore the translation of Beza and of our Church is most true and free from all corruption MART. 19. If the Puritans grosser Caluinists disagree about the translations one part preferring the Geneua English Bible the other the Bible read in their Church if the Lutherans condemne the Zuinglians Caluinistes translations and contrariwise if all Sectaries reproue eche an others translation What doth it argue but that the translations differ according to their diuerse opinions See their bookes written one against another FVLK 19. Here againe is nothing but a generall charge of disagreeing about translations of Puritans Caluinists Lutherans Zuinglians and of all Sectaries reprouing one an others translation with as generall a demonstration See the bookes written one against an other which would aske longer time than is needeful to answer such a vaine cauil when it is alwaies sufficient
in 25. Eidyll 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in the 24. Edyll. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From Theocritus let vs passe to Hesiodus out of whome it were ouer tedious to cite how often he vseth the article prepositiue for the relatiue and not agreeing in case with the antecedent but an example or two shall serue where the verbe substantiue is vnderstood and not expressed nor any other verbe to gouerne the relatiue yet not agreeing in case with the Antecedent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Againe in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here me thinkes I heare you grudge against poetrie and poeticall licence as doubtlesse you would quarrell against profane authorities if I should bring you any like examples out of Prosaicall writers We must see therefore whether we are not able to bring examples of the like phrase out of the holy Scriptures First that Soloecophanes is found in S. Luke I wil referre you to the first cap. of his Gospell v. 74. and cap. 6. v. 4. Likewise Actes 27. v. 3. and act 13. v. 6. But for the like Soloecophanes to this in question Luc. 22. I will sende you first to S. Paule Col. 1. v. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In this verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must needes be the accusatiue case as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is by apposition then is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for all the world as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the nominatiue case signifying Quod absconditum fuit which the later part of the verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth most plainly declare For what else should be the nominatiue case to the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and euen so your vulgar Latine text hath it translated vt impleam verbum Dei mysterium quod absconditum fuit à saeculis generationibus nunc autem manifestatum est sanctis eius But because this is not so euident for that the nominatiue case the accusatiue of the neuter gender be of one termination I will bring you yet more plaine examples out of the reuelation of S. Iohn cap. 1. v. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Grace to you and peace from him or from God as some copies haue which is and which was which is to come Would not your grammer say it is a plaine Soloecisme because he saith not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what haue you here to quarrel Is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same phrase that is in Luke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Well let vs goe a litle further to the next verse of the same chapter where we reade thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And from Iesus Christ which is a faithfull witnesse the first borne from the dead and Prince ouer the kinges of the earth The more vsuall construction would require that he should haue sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But that hevseth the same Soloecophanes which S. Luke doth ca. 22. If the reading be not altered where the article prepositiue is put in the place of the subiunctiue and agreeth not in case with the antecedent as often it doth but being the nominatiue case commeth before the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is not expressed but must needes be vnderstoode as euen your vulgar translator doth acknowledge rendring it in both verses thus ab eo qui est qui erat qui venâ—urus est and à Iesu Christo qui est testis fidelis c. These examples I doubt not but they are sufficient to satisfie any reasonable man to shew that I haue not inuented a newe construction that neuer was heard of to saue Bezaes credit and whereof I am able to giue not so much as one example But that I may ouerthrow M. Martines vaine insultation with a whole cloude of examples I wil yet adde one or two more In the same reuelation ca. 8. v. 9. Thus we read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and there dyed the thirde of all creatures which are in the sea which had liues Your vulgar Latine text turneth it thus Et mortua est â—ertia pars creaturae eorum quae habebant animas in mari And there dyed the thirde parte of the creatures of those thinges which had life in the sea In which translation although the order of the wordes which Saint Iohn vseth is somewhat inuerted yet the sense remayneth the same and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is translated quae habebant which agreeth not with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in case as euerye childe that can declyne a Greeke noune doth knowe where otherwise the moste common construction were to haue sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore the phrase and construction is the same which is Luke 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What can fine M. Gregorie which carpeth at my skill that speake so barbarously and rustically of Greeke elegancies what can Maister Gregorie Martin I saye the great linguist of the Seminarie of Rhemes alledge why these phrases are not alike or rather changinge the wordes in figure the very same And if he haue any thing to cauill against this example as I see not what he can haue yet haue I an other out of the same booke cap. 3. v. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And I will write vppon him the name of my God and the name of the cittye of my God the newe Ierusalem which descendeth out of heauen from my God The vulgar Latine translation differeth not from this which sayth Et scribam super eum nomen dei mei nomen ciuitatis dei mei nouae Ierusalem quae descendit de coelo à deo meo Here the antecedent is of the genitiue case the relatiue of the nominatiue which commeth before the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vnderstoode in the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in Luc. 22. it is in the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By these examples in seeking whereof I promise you I spent no great time you may learne to be wiser hereafter not to condemne all men beside your self out of your readers chaire at Rhemes of ignorance vnskilfulnes barbarusnes rusticity yea wilfulnes madnes where you your self deserue a much sharper censure through your immoderat insultation the matter thereof being both more false and forged than we might iustly haue borne if we had bene ouertaken with a litle grammatical ignorance By these examples I trust you see or if you will needes be blinde all the young Grecians in England may see that as in the Latine translation you confesse the relatiue standeth more likely to be referred to the word Sanguine than to the word Calix so in the Greeke there is no help to remoue it from the next manifest necessary antecedent to a worde further of with which the signification of the participle can not agree For who would say that a cup is shed for vs And though you make a metonymye of the cup for that which is in the cup
should not haue bene so straunge a matter vnto you to heare that our Sauiour Christ with great astonishment and terrour of mind was afraid of death where he vseth the wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was not for bodilye paine or bodily death which not onely thousands of holy Martyrs haue ioyfully embraced but infinite wicked persons haue contemned but for the feeling of Gods wrath which was infinitely more heauy vpon his soule than any torments were vpon his bodie MART. 42. Yea Beza sayth further to this purpose much more against his skill in the Greeke tongue if he had any at all that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the preposition can not beare this sense For which or in respect whereof and therefore he translateth the Greeke into Latine thus Exauditus est ex metu he was heard from feare not for feare or for his reuerence And because from feare is a hard speech and darke that seemeth to be the cause why our English translators say In that which he feared farre from Beza in word but agreeably in sense FVLK 42. When Beza hath shewed his skill in the Greeke tongue not onely in his translation and annotations but also in diuers Greeke Epigrams which he hath set forth who but one starke mad with malice blind with conceit of his owne slender skil would doubt whether Beza had any skill at all in the Greeke tongue As for that he sayth of the signification of the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he speaketh in respect of the propertie of the Greeke tongue for yet you bring no examples but Hebraisms out of the Scripture for that signification of the preposition MART. 43. But for this matter we send them to Flaccus Illyricus a Captaine Lutherane who disputeth this very point against the Caluinistes and teacheth them that no thing is more common than that signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For proofe whereof we also referre them to these places of the holye scripture Mat. 13. Luc. 22. and 24. Act. 12. Psal. 87. And Machab. 5. 21. where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a genitiue and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an accusatiue signifie all one which Beza denieth Gentle Reader beare with these tedious grammatications fitter to be handled in Latine but necessary in this case also good for them that vnderstand for the rest an occasion to aske of them that haue skill in the Greeke tongue whether we accuse our aduersaries iustly or no of false translating the holy Scriptures FVLK 43. And we by the same authoritie sende you to Bezaes answer in his last edition of his annotations And yet the Reader must know that Beza did not simply deny that the preposition might haue such sense But he sayde Non facile mihi persuaserim I can not easily perswade my selfe that any example can be brought wherein 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so vsed And in all these examples that you haue brought it signifieth rather prae which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than propter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as your vulgar translator obserueth the difference 2. Mac. 5. verse 27. translating prae superbia and propter elationem mentis But Beza requireth an example of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that may aunswer to the vulgar Latine pro reuerentia For who would translate in Saint Mathew 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pro gaudio propter gaudium or secundum gaudium or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pro dolore and so of the rest but of these let Beza him selfe giue account As for these tedious grammatications which you confesse to haue bene fitter to be handled in Latine it seemeth you vttered in English for that of many ignorant you might be thought to bringe some great learning out of the Hebrewe and Greeke tongues against vs whereas the learned if you had written in Latine of other nations as well as ours might haue bene witnesses of your fonde trifling and quarrelling against our translations As for the necessarye cause you pretende that the vnlearned may aske them that haue skyll in Greeke is very ridiculous For neyther can they haue at hande alwayes such as be able to resolue them neither if they be of your faction wil they aske any indifferent mans iugement but onely such as will auouch before the ignorant that all which you write is good and perfect MART. 44. And we beseech them to giue vs a good reason why they professing to followe precisely the Greeke doe not obserue truely the Greeke points in such place as concerneth this present controuersie For the place in the Apocalypse which they alledge of our Sauiour Christes suffering from the beginning thereby to inferre that the iust men of the olde Testament might enter heauen then as well as after his reall and actuall death according to the Greeke points sayth thus All that dwell vpon the earth shall worship him the beast whose names haue not bene written in the booke of life of the Lambe slayne from the beginning of the worlde Where it is euident that the Greeke text sayth not the Lambe slaine from the beginning but that the names of those Antichristian Idolaters were not written in Gods eternall booke of predestination from the beginning as it is also most plaine without all ambiguitie in the 17. chapter v. 8. If in a place of no controuersie they had not bene curious in pointes of the Greeke they might haue great reason sometime to alter the same FVLK 44. How faine would you obscure the light of that excellent testimonie euen contrarye to your owne vulgar Latine translation that you might not haue such a faithfull witnesse against your Limbus patrum You require a reason whye wee keepe not the Greeke pointes Apoc. 13. I aunswer we keepe those pointes which the most auncient written copies haue which the Complutensis Ediâ—iâ— hath and which the beste Greeke printes nowe haue If you would knowe a reason why we followe not them that point otherwise I aunswer you the composition of the wordes is against that pointing For except Saint Iohn had meant that the Lambe was slayne from the beginning of the world he would not haue placed those wordes from the beginning of the worlde next to those wordes the Lambe which is slayne but next the worde written And therefore Aretus that could not vnderstande howe the lambe was slaine from the beginning of the world is forced to imagine Hyperbaton in this text where none needeth the sense being good and plaine without it as the wordes doe lye Whose names are not written in the booke of life of the lambe that hath bene slaine since the beginning of the worlde And although it be true that the names of the Antichristian Idolaters were not written in Gods eternall booke of predestination from the beginning as it is said Apoc. 17. v. 8. Yet is that no reason why this also shoulde
than are the afflictions of all passions what soeuer Thus wee see plainely that short tribulations are true merites of endlesse glorie though not comparable to the same which truth you impugne by your false and hereticall translation But let vs see further your dealing in the selfe same controuersie to make it plainer that you bende your translations against it more than the text of the Scripture doth permit you FVLK 9. A man may see you are driuē to extreme shiftes when you will seeke Praemia meritorum in S. Augustine can finde it no where but among the Sermones de sanctis which beare no credite of Augustines workes but of some later gatherer The true Augustine in Ps. 70. Con. 1. thus writeth Nihil es per te deum inuoca tua peccaia sunt merita dei sunt supplicium tibi debetur cum praemium venerit sua dona coronabit non merita tua Thou art nothing by thy selfe call vpon God thine are the sinnes the merites are Gods to thee punishment is due and when the rewarde shal come he will crowne his giftes not thy merites Finally Augustine in nothing is more earnest than in denying the reward which is of grace to be due in respect of merite or worthinesse of workes MART. 10. In the booke of wisedome where there is honorable mention of the merites of Saincts and their rewardes in heauen you translate the holy Scripture thus God hath proued them and findeth them MEETE FOR HIM SELFE To omitte here that you vse the present tense whereas in the Greeke they are preter tenses God knoweth why only this wee knowe that it is no true nor sincere translation but to wincke at smaller faultes why say you here in all your Bibles that God findeth his Saincts and holy seruants meete for him selfe and not worthie of him selfe See your partialitie and be ashamed FVLK 10. The booke of wisedome writtē by Philo the Iewe as S. Hierome thinketh is no holy Canonical Scripture to cōfirme the credite of any article of beliefe Therefore whether he thought that mens merites were worthy of the fauour and grace of God the reward of eternall life or no it is not materiall But somewhat it is that you say that our translators for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 haue not translated worthie but meete For my parte I wishe they had reteyned the vsuall signification of that worde and said worthie of him selfe onely to take away your cauill For otherwise in the sense there is no difference if that he saith be true none is meete for God but they that are worthie of him which are not meete or worthie of thē selues but made such by grace not for merite of their workes but by the righteousnesse of Christe imputed to them by faith This if the wiseman meaneth not but that their vertues were such as deserued Gods fauour and eternall life we may boldely reiect him as going against the wisedome of God reuealed in the Canonicall Scriptures MART. 11. In the Apostles places before examined you saide negatiuely that the afflictions of this time were NOT WORTHIS OF the glorie to come the Greeke not bearing that translation but here when you should say affirmatiuely and that word for word after the Greeke that God found them WORTHIE OF HIM SELFE there you say MEETE FOR HIM SELFE auoiding the terme worthie because merite is included therein So that when you will in your translatiō denie merites then condignae ad signifieth worthie of when you should in your translation affirme merites then Dignus with an ablatiue case doth not signifie worthie of No maruell if such wilfulnesse wilnot see the worde merite or that whiche is equiualent thereto in all the Scripture For when you do see it should trāslate it you suppresse it by another word But this is a case worthie of examination whether the Scripture haue the worde merite or the equiualent thereof For we will force them euen by their owne translations to confesse that it is founde there and that they should translate it accordingly often when they doe not yea that if wee did not see it in the vulgar Latine translation yet they must needes see it and finde it in the Greeke FVLK 11. In the Canonicall Scripture it seemeth the translators had a religious care to keepe bothe the propertie of the wordes and the true meaning of the holy Ghost In the Apocryphall bookes they had a wise consideration to translate them according to the beste meaning that their wordes would beare Now whether you say worthie of God or meete for God you must vnderstand this meetenesse or worthinesse to be of grace and not of merite or else the saying is blasphemous against the grace of God For merite is not necessarily included in worthinesse The Kings sonne is worthie to succeede his father by right of inheritance not by merite of vertue alwayes A straunger may bee worthie of the kinges seruice which neuer deserued the kings entertainement but for such good qualities as are in him But after this tedious trifling it would somwhat awake our spirites if you could as you threaten in the margent proue the merite of good workes plainely by the Scriptures eyther by the worde merite which you can neuer doe or by any thing that is equiualent vnto it and to force vs by our owne translations to cōfesse that it is founde there if not in the vulgar Latine yet in the Greeke MART. 12. First when they translate the foresaid place thus The afflictions of this time are not worthie of the glorie to come they meane this deserue not the glorie to come for to that purpose they do so translate it as hath bene declared Againe when it is said The workemā is worthy of his hire or wages What is meant but that he deserueth his wages And more plainely Tob. 9. they translate thus Brother Azarias if I should giue my self to be thy seruaunt I shal not DESERVE thy prouidence And such like If then in these places both the Greeke and the Latine signifie to be worthie of or not to be worthie of to deserue or not to deserue then they must allow vs the same signification and vertue of the same wordes in other like places Namely Apoc. 5. of our Sauiours merites thus The lambe that was killed IS WORTHY to receyue power and riches c. What is that to say but DESERVETH to receiue For so I trust they will allowe vs to say of our Sauiour that he in deede deserued Againe of the damned thus Thou hast giuen them bloud to drinke for they ARE WORTHY or THEY HAVE DESERVED is it not all one lastly of the elect thus They shall walke with me in white because they are worthie Apocal. 3. that is because they deserue it And so in the place before by them corrupted God founde them worthie of him that is such as deserued to bee with him in eternall
called And for your Ouerseers he sayth Episcopos and not Superintendentes Which he might as well haue sayde as you Ouerseers But to saye the truth though he be too too profane yet he doth much more keepe and vse the Ecclesiasticall receiued termes than you doe often protesting it and as it were glorying therein against Castaleon especially As when he sayth Presbyterum where you saye Elder Diaconum where you saye Minister and so forth Where if you tell me that howsoeuer he translate he meaneth as profanely as you I beleeue you and therefore you shall goe togither like Maister like Schollers all false and profane translators for this Beza who sometime so gladly keepeth the name of Apostle yet calleth Epaphroditus legatum Philippensium Philip. 2. verse 15. Whereupon the Englishe Bezites translate your Messenger for your Apostle As if S. Augustine who was our Apostle should be called our Messenger FVLK 4. You can not leaue your olde byas in wresting mens sayings farre beyond their meaning Therefore you alledge against vs the saying of Beza for the terme of Apostles to be retained where meÌ„tion is made of the Apostles of Christ not onely those that are specially so called but also all the ministers of the worde But what is this to terme them by the honourable name of Apostles which are not sent by God but by men about some ciuil or Ecclesiastical busines For both he we cal Epaphroditus the Messenger and not the Apostle of the Philippians because he was sent by the Philippians vnto Paule and not by Christ vnto them As for that Augustine which was sent by Gregorie might better be called Gregories Apostle than our Apostle for he was not sent by vs but to vs not immediatly from God as an Apostle should but from Gregorie and by Gregorie Touching the termes of Bishops Elders Ministers Priestes c. enough hath bene sayd already Our translators haue done that which they thought best to be done in our language as Beza did in the Latine tongue MART. 5. As also when you translate of S. Matthias the Apostle that he was by a common consent counted with the eleuen Apostles Act. 1. v. 26. what is it else but to make onely a popular election of Ecclesiasticall degrees as Beza in his annotations would haue vs to vnderstande saying that nothing was done here peculiarly by Peter as one of more excellent dignitie than the rest but in common by the voyces of the whole Church though in an other place vpon this election he noteth Peter to be the chiefe or Corypheus And as for the Greeke worde in this place if partialitie of the cause would suffer him to consider of it he shoulde finde that the proper signification thereof in this phrase of speache is as the vulgar Latine Interpreter Erasmus and Valla all which he reiecteth translate it to wit He was numbred or counted with the eleuen Apostles without all respect of common consent or not consent as you also in your other Bibles doe translate FVLK 5. The election of Matthias to be an Apostle was extraordinarily and therefore permitted to the lot the maner whereof as it is not to be drawen into example so the proper election can not be proued thereby yet hath both Beza and the English translator faithfully expressed the Greeke worde which S. Luke there vseth although neyther Erasmus nor Valla beside your vulgar Interpretor did consider it Neither doth that common consent in accepting Mathias for an Apostle whome the lotte had designed more proue a popular election or derogate from the singularitie of Peter than that by common consent of the whole brotherhood two were chosen and set vp that the Apostleshippe should be layd vpon one of them MART. 6. Which diuersitie may proceede of the diuersitie of opinions among you For we vnderstand by Maister Whitegifts bookes against the Puritanes that he and his fellowes deny this popular election and giue preeminence superioritie and difference in this case to Peter and to Ecclesiasticall Prelates and therefore he proueth at large the vse and Ecclesiasticall signification of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be the giuing of voices in popular elections but to be the Ecclesiasticall imposing of handes vpon persons taken to the Churches ministerie Which he sayth very truely and needeth the lesse here to be spoken of specially beeing touched elsewhere in this booke FVLK 6. The diuersitie of the translation proceedeth of this that the former translators did not obserue the nature of the Greeke worde which Beza hath considered more absolutely than any interpretors before him Although it is not vnlike that Chrysostome did well acknowledge it when speaking of this election he vseth these words I am illud considera quam Petrus agit omnia ex communi discipuâ—orum sententia nihil authoritate sua nihil cum imperio Now also consider this thing how Peter doth all things by common consent of the Disciples nothing of his owne authoritie nothing with rule or commaundement And as for the popular election if you had redde those bookes you make mention of you might perceiue that neither of both parts allowe a meere popular election And that Maister Whitgift doth not so much contend what forme of election was vsed in the time of the Apostles and of the Primitiue Church as whether it be necessary that such forme of election as then was practised shoulde in all ages of the Church and in all places be of necessitie continued and obserued MART. 7. One thing onely we woulde knowe why they that pleade so earnestly against their brethren the Puritanes about the signification of this worde pretending herein onely the primitiue custome of imposition of handes in making their Ministers why I saye them selues translate not this worde accordingly but altogither as the Puritanes thus When they had ordayned them Elders by election in euerye Church Act. 14. verse 23. For if the Greeke worde signifie here the peoples giuing of voyces as Beza forceth it onely that way out of Tullie and the popular custome of olde Athens then the other signification of imposing handes is gone which Mayster Whitgift defendeth and the popular election is brought in which he refelleth and so by their translation they haue in my opinion ouershotte themselues and giuen aduantage to their brotherly Aduersaries Vnlesse in deede they translate as they thinke because in deede they thinke as heretically as the other but yet because their state of Ecclesâ—asticall regiment is otherwise they must maintaine that also in their writings howsoeuer they translate For an example They all agree to translate Elder for Priest and Maister Whitakers telleth vs a freshe in the name of them all that there are no Priestes nowe in the Church of Christ that is as he interpreteth himselfe This name Prieste is neuer in the New Testament peculiarly applied to the Ministers of the Gospell this is
their doctrine But what is their prastise in the regiment of their Churche cleane contrarie For in the order of the communion booke where it is appointed what the Minister shall do it is indifferently said Then shall the Prieste do or say this and that and Then shal the Minister c. Whereby it is euident that they make Priest a proper and peculiar calling applied to their Ministers and so their practise is contrarie to their teaching and doctrine FVLK 7. I haue satisfied your desire before if you list to knowe our translation must be as neere as it can to expresse the true signification of the originall words so it is in that place of the Acts. 14. v. 23. which being graunted by them that denie the necessitie of â—at forme of election to continue alwaies giueth no more aduauntage to the aduersaries than they woulde take out of the signification of the Greeke word how soeuer it were translated Your example of Maister Whitakers denying the name of Prieste to be applied to the ministers of the Gospel to proue that wee must mainteine our Ecclesiasticall state how soeuer we translate is very fonde and ridiculous as also the contradiction that you would make betweene him and the seruice booke touching the name of Prieste there vsed and allowed Maister Whitakers writing in Latine speaketh of the Latine terme Sacerdos the Communion booke of the English worde Priest is not this a goodly net for a foole to daunce naked in and thinke that no body can see him MART. 8. Nowe concerning imposition or laying on of handes in making their Ministers which the Puritans also are forced to allow by other wordes of Scripture howsoeuer they dispute and iangle againste 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 none of them all make more of it than of the like Iudaicall ceremonie in the olde Law not acknowledging that there is any grace giuen withall though the Apostle say there is in expresse termes but they will aunswer this text as they are wont with a fauourable translation turning grace into gift As when the Apostle saith thus Neglect not THE GRACE that is in thee which is giuen thee by prophecie with impositioÌ„ of the hands of Priesthood they translate Neglect not the GIFT and Beza most impudently for by prophecie translateth to prophecie making that onely to be this gift and withall adding this goodly exposition that he had the gift of prophecie or preaching before and now by imposition of hands was chosen onely to execute that function But because it might be obiected that the Apostle sayth Which was giuen thee with the imposition of handes or as he speaketh in an other place by imposition of handes making this imposition of handes an instrumentall cause of giuing this grace he sayth that it did onely confirme the grace or gift before giuen FVLK 8. Though we finde that by or with imposition of handes many rare and extraordinary giftes of prophecie of tongues and such like were giuen in the Apostles time yet we finde no where that grace is ordinarily giuen by that ceremonie vsed alwayes in the Church for ordination of the ministers therof But whether there be or not our translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into gift is true and proper to the worde For albeit the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be taken not onely for the fauour of God but also for his gracious giftes yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is neuer taken in the Scripture but for a free gift or a gift of his grace That Beza referreth the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the ende of the gifte he hath the nature of the worde to beare him out which may well abide that sense and yet he doth not reiect the other common interpretation by prophecie that by appoyntment of the holye Ghost vttered by some of the Prophets But where you wrangle about the gift of prophecie as though he were vtterly voyde thereof before he receyued imposition of handes I knowe not what you meane Woulde you haue vs thinke that he was ordayned Prieste or Elder or to anye office of the Church without competent giftes meete to discharge his office That the gifte of prophecie as well as of speakinge with tongues might be giuen by and with imposition of hands Beza doubteth not But it is out of doubte that to an office none was chosen or admitted by the Apostle and the reste of the Presbyterie of Ephesus but such as had sufficient giftes to answere that office MART. 9. Thus it is euident that though the Apostle speake neuer so plaine for the dignitie of holy Orders that it giueth grace and consequently is a Sacrament they peruert all to the contrarie making it a bare ceremonie suppressing the worde grace which is much more significant to expresse the Greeke worde than gifte is because it is not euery gifte but a gratious gifte or a gifte proceeding of maruelous and mere grace At when it is saide To you it is giuen not onely to beleeue but also to suffer for him The Greeke worde signifieth this much To you this grace is giuen c. So when God gaue vnto S. Paule all that sayled with him this Greeke worde is vsed because it was a great grace or gratious gifte giuen vnto him When S. Paule pardoned the incestuous person before due time it is expressed by this worde because it was a grace as Theodorete calleth it giuen vnto him And therefore also the almes of the Corinthians 1. Cor. 16. v. 3. are called their grace which the Protestants translate liberalitie neglecting altogither the true force and signification of the Greeke wordes FVLK 9. Here is no euidence at al that the order of Priesthoode is a Sacrament or gyueth grace but that God by the ceremonie of laying on of handes did giue wonderfull and extraordinarie giftes of tongues and prophecying in the beginning and firste planting of the Churche But that grace should alwayes follow that ceremonie there is no proofe to bee made out of the holie Scriptures And experience sheweth that hee which was voide of giftes beefore hee was ordered Priest is as verye an asse and Dogbolte as hee was beefore for anye encrease of grace or gratious giftes althoughe hee haue authoritie committed vnto hym if hee bee ordained in the Church though vnworthily with great sinne both of him that ordaineth and of him that is ordained But wee suppresse the worde grace you say bicause charisma signifieth at least a gratious gift See how the bare sounde of tearmes delighteth you that you mighte therein seeke a shadowe for your singlesolde sacrament of popishe orders The worde signifieth a free or gratious gifte and so will euerie man vnderstande it whiche knoweth that it is giuen by God As also in all places where mention is made of Gods giftes wee must vnderstande that it proceedeth freely from him as a token of his fauoure and grace But that the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
and reasoning against al other interpreters both auncient later for the coÌ„trary yea and affâ—ming that S. Paul him self did foolishly if he spake there of other rich womeÌ„ Such a fansie he hath to make the Apostles not onely maried man but that they caried about their wiues with them that they were the Apostles wiues for so he translateth it Act. 1. v. 14 that returned with them after our Lordes ascension to Hierusalem and continued togither in praier til the holy Ghost came vpon them Whereas S. Luke there speaketh so euidently of the other holy and faithful women which are famous in the Gospel as the Maries and other that the English Bezites them selues dare not here folow his translation For I beseech you M. Beza to turne my talke vnto you a litle is there any circumstance or particle here added why iâ— should be translated wiues none then by your owne reason before alleaged it should rather be trsÌ„lated women Againe did Erasmus translate well saying It is good for a man not to touch a wife 1 Cor. 7. v. 1. No say you reprehending this translation because it dehorteth from mariage If not shew your commissioÌ„ why you may translate in the foresaid places wife wiues at your pleasure the Greeke being all one both where you will not in any wise haue it translated wife and also where you will haue it so translated in any wise FVLK 12. Nay great must be the impudencie of the Papists that imagine the Apostles which had wiues of their owne did leaue them behinde them and leade straung women aboute with them into all partes of the world The first that inuented that glose of coÌ„tinent women such as followed Christ was Tertullian the Montanist in his booke of Monogamy which he wrote against the Church condeÌ„ning secoÌ„d mariage reprouing the Latine translation of his time as it seemeth which in this text 1. Cor. 9. vsed the terme of vxor by the ambiguitie of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saying that if the Apostle had spoken of matrimonie he would haue vnderstood this of wiues but seeing he speaketh De victuaria exhibitione of the exhibition toward his liuing he vnderstandeth it of such women as followed Christe Than the which distinction nothing can be more absurde for speaking of exhibition towarde his liuing the Apostle sheweth that he might haue lawfully charged the Church with finding not only of him self but also of his wife as the other Apostles did Againe if rich womeÌ„ did folow the Apostles ministring to theÌ„ of their substance as they folowed our Sauiour this was no burden but an easement vnto the Church which the Apostle would not haue absteined froÌ„ as a thing burdenous to the Church of Corinth CoÌ„cerning the other place Act. 1. v. 14. although perhaps it be not necessary to translate wiues yet it is necessary to vnderstand wiues For to answere you in M. Bezaes name who telleth you that it was meete as also Erasmus thinketh that their wiues should be coâ—firmed who partly were to be companions of their trauaile and peregrinatioÌ„ partly to tarie patieÌ„tly at home while their husbaÌ„ds were about the Lords businesse and therfore their wiues also were present Againe what a shamefull absurditie were it to thinke that the Apostles would tarie in a close house so long togither with other women than their wiues and shut out their owne wiues which must needes haue bene subiect to great offense and obloquie And what deuilish malice haue you agaynst the Apostles wiues that you caÌ„not abide that they should ioyne with their husbandes in praier and supplication and be made partakers of the holy Ghost with them as well as other women which were also maried women Mary the wife of Cleophas Ioanna the wife of Chuza and other holy women the mothers or wiues of holy men Will you say the Apostles had no wiues Peters wiues mother will testifie againste you Will you saye she was forsaken by Peter the storie of his martiredome if it bee true affirmeth that she continued with him to his dying day will you say he had no matrimoniall companie with hir his daughter Petronilla will beare witnes against you so yong that she was desired in marriage by Flaccus the Comes Touching the place 1. Corin. 7. where Erasmus translateth vxorem I haue answeared alreadie the circumstance of the place doth argue that it is spoken generally of continence not of abstinence in marriage only And who is such a nouice in the greke tongue that he knoweth not that the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a wife or woman as the circumstaunce of the place requireth where it is vsed MART. 13. Againe to this purpose they make Sainct Paule say as to his wife I beseech thee also faithful yokfellow Phil. 4. v. 3. for in Englishe what doth it else sounde but man and wife but that S. Paule shoulde hâ—ere meane his wife moste of the greeke fathers count it ridiculous and foolishe S. Chrisostome Theodorete Oecumenius Theophilactus Beza and Caluin bothe mislike it translating also in the masculine gender S. Paule himselfe saith the contrarie that he had no wife 1. Cor. 7. And as for Clemens Alexandrinus who alleageth it for Paules wife Eusebius plainely insinuaâ—eth and Nicephorus expresly saith that he did it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the way of contention and disputation whiles hee â—arnestly wrote against them that oppugned matrimonie FVLK 13. The Greeke worde being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a fellow or companion in yoke they haue not therfore translated amisse when they say yoke fellowe whiche signifieth felow in any yoke whatsoeuer If it sound man and wife in Englishe what matter is that for so it soundeth in Greeke Men must not follow the sound of wordes onely but examine the matter And great probabilitie there is that he speaketh there of his wife as Clemens Alexandrinus thinketh neither dothe S. Paule himselfe say precisely he had no wife 1. Cor. 7. but that he liued without the vse of a wife whiche might be hys wife consenting to remaine at â—hilippi That the later writers mislike the iudgement of Clemens and specially that fabulous historiaÌ„ Nicephorê° it derogateth nothing to his credite nor to the likelihoode of the matter That Theophy lact saith the adiectiue should be of the foeminine gender he is not to be credited aboue Clemens Alexandrinus who knewe the puritie of the Greke tong as wel as he But whether it be to be vnderstoode of hys wife or no we leaue it indifferent and translate according to the Greeke word without preiudice of either opinion which kind of translation at other times you do highly commend MART. 14. Againe for the mariage of Priests and of all sorts of men indifferently they translate the Apostle thus wedlock is honorable among al men Where one falsificatioÌ„ is that they say among all men and Beza inter quosuis in
auncient passe the bounds which our holy forefathers haue set and appointed preferring your owne singularities newe deuises euen there where you can not iustly pretend either the Hebrew or Greeke When the Hebrew Lexicon hath giuen the coÌ„mon interpretation of this place then saith Quidam exponunt Some expound it otherwise why had you rather be of that lesser some that expound otherwise than of the great societie of all auncient interpreters FVLK 2. The Hebrew is as we haue translated how great is the summe of them So doth Kimchi expound it so doth Pagnin and to the same effect Iustinian And the same word â—atsemu missapel the summe of them is greater than can be numbred Psal. 40. Where the Prophet speaketh of the counsailes or thoughts of God as in this place Where you quarrel at vs for following the lesser number when Pagnin saith Quidam c. You may know if you list that Pagnine him selfe is one of those quidam that translateth euen as we doe Howe precious are their thoughts vnto me howe are the summes of them multiplied As for Hierom whom you would haue vs to follow in steede of Princes hath poore men And therefore you doe iniuriously to require vs to follow him whome you followe not your selues You must therefore indite Pagnine of hereticall translation beside all Protestants or els you are very partiall MART. 3. But this new fangled singularitie of teaching and translating otherwise than all antiquitie hath done shall better appeare in their dealing about our B. Ladie whose honour they haue sought so many wayes to diminish and deface that the defense and maintenance thereof against the Heretikes of our time is growen to a great booke learnedly written by the great Clerke and Iesuite father Canisius entituled Mariana FVLK 3. I thinke Canisius in all his great booke called Mariana medleth not with our English translations and therefore very idlely was this matter brought in to tell vs of Canisius booke called Mariana I haue seene a blasphemous booke against I may iustly saye though it were pretended in the honour of the blessed Virgine called Mariale I haue seene that horrible blasphemous Psalter of Bonauentur peruerting all the Psalmes vnto the honour of the Virgine Marie with intollerable blasphemie against God and the holy mother of Christ whose greatest honour is in the kingdome of her sonne and in his infinite glorie MART. 4. Concerning our purpose what was euer more common and is now more generall and vsuall in all Christian Countries than in the Aue Marie to say Gratia plena full of grace insomuch that in the first English Bible it hath continued so still and euery child in our countrie was taught so to say till the Aue Marie was banished altogither and not suffered to be sayd neither in Latine nor English What auncient father of the Latine Church hath not alwaies so redde and expounded What Church in all the West hath not euer so sung and sayd Onely our new Translators haue found a new kind of speeche translating thus Haile thou that art freely beloued and Haile thou that art in high fauour Why this and that or any other thing rather than Haile full of grace S. Iohn Baptist was full of the holy Ghost euen from his birth S. Steuen was ful of grace as the scripture recordeth of them both why may not then our Ladie much more be called full of grace who as S. Ambrose sayth onely obtained the grace which no other women deserued to be replenished with the author of grace FVLK 4. The salutation of the Virgine may be sayd still either in Latine or English as well as any parte of the holye Scripture beside But not to make a popish Orizon of an Angelike salutation That we haue translated Haile Marie freely beloued or that art in high fauour we haue followed the truth of the Greeke worde not so denying there by but that the virgin Marie of Gods special goodnesse without her merites as she confesseth was filled with all gratious giftes of the holy spirite as much as any mortall creature might be except our Sauiour Christe whose onely priuiledge it is to be free from sinne and to haue receyued the giftes of the holy Ghost without measure in his manhood MART. 5. They will say the Greeke worde doth not so signifie Doth it not I make them selues witnesses of the contrarie and their owne translation in other places shall confute them where they translate an other worde of the selfe same nature and forme and in all respectes like to this ful of sores If 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be full of sores why is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 full of grace Let any Grecian of them all make me a difference in the nature and significancie of these two wordes Againe if vlcerosus as Beza translateth be full of sores why is not gratiosa as Erasmus translateth full of grace or why doth Beza maruell that Erasmus translated gratiosa when him selfe translateth the like word vlcerosus All which adiectiues in osus you knowe signifie fulnes as periculosus aerumnosus Yet what a sturre doth Beza keepe here in his annotations to make the Greeke word signifie freely beloued FVLK 5. The signification of the Greeke worde with your foolish cauillation of Vlcerosus I haue discussed sufficiently cap. 1. sect 43. MART. 6. But hath it in deede any such signification tell vs you that professe this great skill of the tongues what syllable is there in this word that soundeth to that signification S. Chrysostom the Greeke Doctors that should best know the nature of this Greeke word say that it signifieth to make gracious acceptable beloued beautiful amiable so to be desired as when the Psalme saith The king shal desire thy beautie Beza him selfe saith that it is word for word gratificata made grateful yet he expoundeth it accepted before God translateth it freely beloued because he wil haue no singular grace or goodnes or vertue resident in our B. Lady but all by imputation acceptation wherof I haue spoken before S. Athanasius a greke doctor saith that she had this title 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because the holy ghost descended into the Virgin filling hir with al graces and vertues and I beseech the reader to see his words which are many moe concerning this fulnesse of grace and al spiritual gifts S. Hierome that knewe the Greeke word as wel as the Protestants readeth Gratia plena and findeth no fault with this interpretation but saith plainely she was so saluted full of grace because shee conceiued him in whom al fulnesse of the deitie dwelt corporally FVLK 6. Looke in the best Greeke Lexicons and you shal finde it the same signification that we translate and none other Chrisostome is of the same iudgement as I haue shewed in the place aboue mentioned That the Virgine Marie was iustified before God by
he adored in respect of things to come it is not otherwise easie to vnderstād but that he partly for saw the kingdō of Ephraim the posteritie of Ioseph partly the kingdome of Christ prefigured in Ioseph then Prince of Aegypt and so by faith adored his scepter or toward his scepier which is all one as the Greeke fathers for the most part expound it But let vs hasten towà rd an end FVLK 6. S. Hierom in deede denieth that Iacob did worship his staffe or his scepter or toward the toppe of his Sonnes scepter but onely towardes the beds head as the Hebrue text is For reuerent estimation of reliques the Holy land and the monuments of Christs doing and being as he sometime vpon contention perhaps was immoderate so for adoration of such things after such Idolatrous manner as is vsed in the popish Church he was farre off yea he saith expresly that hee dothe not allowe the adoration of any creature and that to adore any creatures is plaine idolatrie Has autem non dico martyrum reliquias c. But we doe worshippe and adore I saye not the reliques of martyres but neither the sunne truly nor the moone c. not Aungelles not Archaungels not Cherubin not Seraphin or any name that is named in this worlde or in the worlde to come least we should serue the creature rather than the creator whiche is blessed for euer But we honour the reliques of martyres that wee might adore him whose martyres they are Doe you not heare how Hierome alloweth the adoring of creatures I see no cause therefore why wee may not be tryed by his iudgement for adoration of holie things and namely reliques and whatsoeuer you will name beside seeing he maketh adoration proper onelie to God Finally the Apostle saith not that Iacob adored in respecte of things to come but that by faith he blessed his sonne concerning things to come and worshipped God whome no man can worshippe truely but by faith And Iacobs faith was the more commendable that being neere his ende and in that infirmitie of bodie he both beleeued the promises of God made to him concerning his sonnes and also gaue thankes vnto God for those benefites whyche hee shoulde neuer taste of in the flesh but was assured by them as tokens of Gods fauour towards him to the attainement of the lande of eternall life whereof the lande of Canaan was but a holie figure and sacrament CHAP. XX. Hereticall translation by ADDING TO THE TEXT Martin BEcause in the last corruption I spake of adding to the texte thoughe i◠bee their common and vniuersal fault in euerie controuersie as is to bee seene in euerie chapiter of this booke yet here I wil adde certaine places not yet mentioned As The reste of the actes of Iehoakim and his abhominations whych he did and CARVED IMAGES THAT VVERE LAID TO HIS CHARGE BEHOLDE THEY ARE VVRITTEN c these words carued images laid to his charge are more than is either in the Greeke or the Hebrewe Fulke YOu forget your self in the first place wherof made mention Chap. 3. sect 9. where I haue aunsweared that our firste translators added that which is the common interpretation and supply of them that write vpon this place but because that hadde beene better in the note than in the texte it is corrected in twoo later translations MART. 2. Againe Saule confounded the Iewes proouing by conferring one Scripture with an other that this is very Christe These wordes by conferring one Scripture with another are added more than is in the greeke texte in fauour of their presumptuous opinion that conference of scriptures is ynough for any man to vnderstand them and so to reiecte bothe the commentaries of the Doctours and exposition of holy Councels and Catholike Churche it is so muche more I saye than is in the Greeke text and a notorious corruption in their Bible read daily in their churches as most authenticall See the rest of their Bibles and thou shalte finde no more for al those wordes but affirming or confirming and the selfe same Bible in the first epistle to the Corinthians translateth the same Greeke worde thus Who shal instruct And indeede that is the true and vsuall signification of the word both in the olde Testament and in the newe as Deut. 4. Thou shalt teach them thy children And Esay 40. Who shal instruct our Lord The Hebrewe worde also in both places signifying no more but instructing and teaching And so doth the Apostle cite i◠to the Corinthians out of Esay and he vseth i◠to the Coloss c. 2. v. 2. in the same signification as the Churche readeth and expoundeth it and so consequently S. Luke in the place whereof we nowe treate saith nothing else but that S. Paule earnestly taught or instructed them that Iesus is Christe And yet our newe translators without respect of Hebrewe or Greeke haue coined a new signification of conferring one scripture with an other So ignorant they are in the signification of Greke wordes or rather so wilfully malitious FVLK 2. Either you make aloude lie or else some one print whych you haue of the Bishops Bible whiche you cal Bib. 1577. hath put that into the line that should be the note in the margent For of four translations that I haue neuer a one hath that addition The Bishoppes Bible hathe that 22. verse Chap. 9. this But Saule increased the more in strength and confounded the Iewes which dwelt at Damascus affirming that this was very Christe The Geneua Bible thus But Saule increased the more in strength and confounded the Iewes that dwelt at Damascus confirming that this was the Christ where the note in the margent vppon the word confirming is this proouing by the conference of the scriptures Thomas Mathews Bible translateth that verse thus But Saule increased in strength and confounded the Iewes which dwelt at Damascus affirming that this was verie Christe Maister Couerdales Bible 1562. hatla it thus But Saule increased the more in strength and confounded the Iewes whiche dwelte at Damascus affirming that this was verie Christ. Thus are al our translations without that addition which although it is not to be borne in the text yet is no hereticall addition excepte you counte it heresie to prooue a thing by conference of Scriptures MART. 3. Againe in the firste epistle of Saint Peter they translate thus The worde of the Lorde indureth euer and this is the word which by the gospel was preached vnto you where these wordes by the Gospel are added deceitfully and of il intent to make the reader thinke that there is no other word of God but the written word for the common reader hearing this word Gospel conceiueth nothing else But indeede al is the gospell whatsoeuer the Apostles taught either by writing or by tradition and word of mouth a◠S. Paul speaketh 2. Thess. 2. and S. Peter saith nothing else in the place alleadged but This
2 and p. 144. num 5 chap. 18. v. 17. p. 140 chap 19. v. 11 12. p. 314. nu 8 and p. 411. num 16 chap. 26. p. 429. S. Marke Chap. 10. v. 52. p. 352. num 9 chap. 14. p. 429 S. Luke Châ—p 1. v. 28. p. 56. numb 43. and p. 463. num 4 and v. 6. p. 252. p. 257. nu 4 chap. 3. v. 8. p. 355 chap. 1. v. 48. 50. p. 353. nu 9 chap. 18. v. 42. p. 353. numb 9 chap. 22. v. 20 p. 444. num 10 and p. 445 num 11 S. Iohn Chap. 1. v. 12. p. 300 chap. 9. v. 22. 23. p. 503. num 9 chap. 13. v. 16. p. 392. num 3 Acts. Chap. 1. v. 26. p. 396. num 5 chap. 2. v. 27. p. 200. nu 3 4. 5 chap. 3. v. 21. p. 439. num 7 chap. 4. v. 13. p. 392. num 3 chap. 9. v. 22. p. 4â—4 num 2 chap. 14. v. 22. p. 162. num 5 and v. 23. p. 398. num 7 chap. 15. v. 2. 4. 6. 22. 23. p. 161 num 4 chap. 16. v. 4. ibid. chap. 17. v. 23. p. 503. num 8 chap. 19. v. 24. p. 502. num 7 and v. 3. p. 382. num 3 chap. 20. ibid. and v. 28. p. 417. nu 21. and v. 17. p. 166. n. 8 Romanes Chap. 2. v. 26. p. 252 chap. 5. v. 6. pag. 323. numb 13 and v. 18. p. 328 chap. 8. v. 18. p. 263 and v. 38. p 346 num 3 chap. 9. v. 16. p. â—12 nu 7 chap. 11. v. 4. p. 116 num 19 1. Corinthians Chap. 1. v. 10. p. 135. num 3 chap. â— v. 11. p. 12. num 6 chap. 9. v. 5. p. 450 chap. 10. v. 21. p. 451. num 16. chap. 11. v. 2. p. 89. num 23 chap. 15. v. 5. p. 426. num 4 and v. 10. p. 301. num 2 and v. 55. p. 221. num 16 2. Corinthians Chap. 2. v. 10 p. 417. num 20 chap. 4. v. 17. p. 273 num 7 chap. 5. p. 336. num 6 chap. 6. v. 16. p. 90 num 3 and v. 1. p. 309 num 6 chap. 8. p 392. num 3 Galathians Chap. 5. v. 20. p. 135. num 3 Ephesians Chap. 1. v. 6. p. 338. num 7 and v. 22. p. 140. num 2. and v. 22. 23. p. 163. num 6 chap. 3. v. 12. p. 303. p. 349. n. 5 chap. 5. p. 424. num 2 and v. 5. p. 6. num 5. pa. 88 num 1 and v. 32. p 133. num 2 and v. 25. 32. p. 140. num 2 Philippians Chap. 2. v. 15. p. 395. num 4 chap. 4. v. 5. p. 407. num 13 Colossians Chap. 1. v. 23. p 491. num 8 and v. 12 p. 284. num 17 chap 2. v. 20. p. 13. num 8 chap. 3. v. 5. p. 6. num 5 pa. 87. num 9. p. 103. numb 12 2. Thessalonians Chap. 1. v. 4. p. 258. num 5 and v. 11. p. 282. nu 15 chap. 2. v. 15. p. 76. num 2 chap. 3. v. 6. ibid. 1. Timothee Chap. 3. v. 6. p. 392. num 3 and v. 8. p. 390. and v. 15. p. 140. num 2 chap. 4. v. 14 p. 166. num 8. p. 399. num 8 chap. 5. v. 17. 18. p. 166. numb 8. p. 198 2. Timothee Chap. 1. v. 6. p. 402. num 10 chap. 4. v. 8. p. 258. num 5 Titus Chap. 3. v. 8. p. 378. and v. 10. p. 17. num 13. p. 135. num 3 Hebrewes Chap. 2. v. 9. p. 270. numb 6 chap. 5. v. 7. p. 58. num 45. pa. 243. num 37. chap. 6. v. 10. p. 258. num 5 chap. 10. v. 29. p. 280. num 13. and v. 22. p. 328. num 2. and v. 20. p. 242. num 36 chap. 11. v. 21. p. 474. chap. 12. v. 23. p. 140. num 2 chap. 13. p. 408. num 14. and v. 5 p. 56. num 44 S. Iames. Chap. 1. v. 13. p. 495. num 2 chap. 4. v. 6. p. 488. num 6 1. Peter Chap. 1. v. 18. p. 83. num 6. v. 25. p. 485. num 3 chap. 2. v. 3. p. 419. num 22. p. 421. num 24 chap. 5. v. 1. p. 168. num 9 2. Peter Chap. 3. v. 16. p. 493 1. Iohn Chap. 5. v. 3. p. 325. num 14 and v. 21. p. 105. num 13 Apocalipse Chap. 19. v. 8. p. 256. num 3 BEZAES CORruptions Psalmes Psal. 51. v. 6. p. 27. num 26 S. Matthew Chap. 23. p. 504. num 10 Acts. Chap. 1. v. 14. p. 405. num 12 chap. 2. v. 23. p. 33. num 31. pa. â—97 num 3. and v. 24. p. 33 num 32. 34. and v. 27. p. 33 num 31. p. 198. num 2. chap. 3. v. 21. p. 35. num 36 chap. 13. v. 39. p. 330. num 2 chap. 26. v. 20. p. 58. num 45 pa. 355. num 1 Romanes Chap. 4. v. 11. p. 380. num 2 1. Corinthians Chap. 12. v. 31. p. 352. numb â— chap. 13. v. 2. p. 350. num 6 chap. 15. v. 10. num 27 2. Thessalonians Chap. 2. v 3. p. 78. num 3 Titus Cha. 3. v. 5. p. 385. and v. 6. pa. 46. num 46 Hebrewes Chap. 5. p. 32. num 29 FINIS A BRIEFE CONFVTATION OF SVNDRY CAVILS AND QVARELS vttered by diuerse Papistes in their seuerall bookes pamphlets against the writings of William Fulke I Were verie much to blame if I would not confesse with S. Augustine that as in my maners so in my writings manie things may be iustly reprehended at which I ought not to be offended no not although I were reproued by mine aduersaries But when the enimies of Gods holie religion of the quiet state of this realme seeke by wounding of mee to hurt the trueth and if it were possible through my sides to wound her to death I ought not to be silent in this case but by shewing mine honest defence as it were by holding vp my buckler to beare off their blowes as wel as I can to maintaine the credit of that cause which I haue taken in hande lest whilest I forbeare to defende my selfe the truth might seeme to haue takeÌ„ a foyle And yet I meane not so to confound my case with the state of truth that wheresoeuer I may be iustly conuinced trueth should be thought to haue lost the victorie For I am but one poore souldiour among manie thousand captaines that fight vnder the banner of truth which if I haue not in euery respect perfourmed al dueties of an expert warrior it is reason the reproche of my defaultes should rest and stay onely in mine owne ignorance or rashnesse which haue not so happily executed that which of good will to fight in truthes cause I haue attempted within these fiue or sixe yeares I haue set abroad sundrie treatises in confutation of popish bookes written in English which purpose if God giue me strength to aunswere as manie as within twentie yeares of her maiesties reigne had beene set foorth by the Papistes and are not yet confuted by any other This purpose of mine the Papistes haue not greatly hindered by replyes
of the lawe did neuer erre For proofe of this saide I more like a blocke than a man he bringeth such places of Scripture as either shewe what the priestes duetie should be but affirme not what their knowledge was or else prophecie a reformation of the corrupt state of the clergie from ignorance to knowledge Last of all I say what drunken flemming of Doway would reason thus as Stapleton doeth The Scribes and the Pharisees sate in Moses chaire therfore the Synagogue did neuer or not then erre Whereas the false doctrine of the Scribes and Pharisees concerning adulterie murther swearing the worship of God not onely the person but also the qualitie of Messias his kingdome our Sauiour Christ him selfe so often and so sharply doeth reproue Thus haue I set downe the occasions of as many of these speaches as I could finde except I should haue read ouer the whole bookes that the indifferent reader may see when they be in their proper places they sound not so hardly to prooue mee a rayler as they seeme for the most part by extreme malice impudence ignorance vngodlines disdainfulnes of the aduersaries to haue beene rather wrested from mee than of any vncharitable affection vttered by mee But in common ciuilitie as our stately Censurer iudgeth I should haue forborne these learned and reuerend men which in manie respects to say the least may be counted my equals seeing these or the like termes were not vsed amongst the Gentiles nor of any honest or Christian writer since I answere ciuilitie is to be vsed with citizens but not with traytors learning and other good qualities to be respected in Christian Catholikes or at the leastwise in them that are no professed enimies of Christian Catholike religion not in malicious heretikes For equalitie in learning I will not contende with them but for superioritie in trueth And yet as vnlearned as I am let the proudest of them all or this Censurer whome in pride and disdainfulnes I thinke to passe them all attaint mee of such ignorance as I conuince these learned principall pillers of Poperie in their seuerall printed bookes in so manie books as I haue written against them and then let mee iustly beare the reproche that I shall be proued to deserue Where he saith these termes were not vsed among the Gentiles I will adde with approbation of Christians nor of any honest or Christian writer since his penne runneth before his memorie if he haue read or before his wit and modestie if he haue not read what both Gentiles against traytours and Christians against heretikes and traytours haue written And if this issue might bee tryed in presence I would not doubt but make his blushing countenance bewray his guiltie conscience But of this ministers scurrilitie against manie men he saith he might repeate a great deale more I would hee might come foorth and shewe what bull hee hath to rayle and vse scurrilitie against all men and yet condemne whome it pleaseth him of rayling scurrilitie But because this minister answereth many men forsooth one saide well of him that he is the common posthorse of the Protestants to passe you any answere without a baite against any Catholike booke which commeth in his way This is euen as good as because this Censurer slaundereth manie men another might say of him he is the cōmon packhorse of the Papistes to carrie any fardell of lyes deuised against any Christian man or booke that commeth in his way and the rather because he weareth a paire of winkers ouer his eyes like a milhorse being ashamed to shewe either his face or his name And more truely than of mee for with what speede soeuer I passe no mans answere but mine owne where as hee taketh vp the bundell of slanders deuised by Staphylus Eccius Cocleus Lindanus Bolsec and a number of other beside But mine answeres are not passed in such hast as the replyes are returned with laisure it seemeth the beastes that should bring them are afraide of stumbling Yet Martials epithetes remaine to be examined who being a person so vile and absurde to rayle so vnmeasurably and continually against that godly learned man M. doctor Calfhil of learned and Christian memorie I was bolde in my Reioynder against him to handle in part according to his vertues In the beginning which is page 121. of the volume in consideration of his intollerable ignorance arrogancie impudencie which appeareth throughout all his booke I say that whereas he termeth himselfe to bee a bachiler of the lawe he is more like a wrangling pettifogger in the lawe than a sober student in diuinitie which also he professeth to be for he doth in a manner nothing else but cauil quarel and scolde Likewise in the verie ende of my booke exhorting the Papistes for their credits sake to make out a better champion hereafter I tell them as the trueth is that in this his replie he doth nothing in a maner but either construe like an Vsher as he was sometimes of Winchester schoole or quarell like a dogbolt lawyer To the same purpose page 128. where master Calfehil said If an Angel from heauen teache otherwise than the Apostles haue preached vnto vs be he accursed Martiall the quarelling lawyer findeth fault with his translation because Euangelizamus may be referred as well to the disciples as to the Apostles so that the disciples preaching are to bee credited as well as the Apostles No doubt say I if they preach the doctrine of the Apostles of which the controuersie is and not of the persons that preached But these quarels sir Bachiler are more meete for the bumcourts where perhaps you are a prating proctor than for the schooles of diuinitie In this saying if the terme of bumcourts seeme too light I yeeld vnto the censure of graue and godly men Page 138. where Martiall citeth Constantinus for the commendation of his crosse I say he sheweth him selfe an egregious ignorant person For the signe which the Emperour commended to be a healthfull signe and true token of vertue was the name of Christ expressed in the Charecter which he sawe And page 154. where he maketh this syllogisme to prooue that in time of the Eliberin Councell pictures were worshipped which he sayeth followeth necessarily vpon the words of the Canon thus That was worshipped that was forbidden to be painted on the walles but pictures were forbidden to be painted on the walles ergo pictures were worshipped Answere master Calfe Hereunto I reioyne Who would haue thought that an vsher of Winchester and student in Louaine that teacheth vs as he said an olde lawyers point would also teach vs a newe Logike point to conclude affirmatiuely in the second figure that all vpon particulars Answere master Calfe quod Martiall Nay aunswere goose to such an argument And reason who will with such an asse any longer about this matter for I will hearken to his law seeing his Logike is no better If sir Censurer will defende this syllogisme
of the Apostles Among so many argumentes and authorities cited for proofe you can finde nothing but Fulke faith bluntly Ierome vntruely ascribeth that tradition to the Apostles Sed perge mentiri S. Chrysostome is alleâ—ged saying that the Apostles decreed that in the sacrifice of the â—â—â—tar there should be made prayer for the departed Fulke where he sayth it was decreed by the Apostles c. he must pardon vs for crediting him because he cannot shewe it out of the actes and writinges of the Apostles If I had added none other argument this had beene sufficient for vs to for beare crediting any thing of the Apostles whereof we haue not the holy ghost in their writinges to be witnesse But you shall heare what I oppose against Chrysostome beside this Against pag. 303. it followeth immediatlie vpon these wordes noted by M. Censurer And wee will be bolde to charge him with his owne saying Hom. de Adam Heus Sâ—â—is sufficere c. Wee thinke it suffiseth ynough what soeuer the writinges of the Apostles haue taught vs according to the foresay de rules insomuch that we count it not at all catholike whatsoeuer shall appeare contrarie to the rules appointed And againe in Gen. H. 58. Vides in quantam c. Thou seest into howe great absurditie they fall which will not followe the canon of holy scripture but permitte all thinges to their owne cogitations But if we be further vrged we will alleadge that which hee sayeth in Euang. Ioan. H. 58. Quisacra c. he that vseth not the holy scripture but clymeth another way that is by a way not allowed is a theefe We may be as bolde with Chrysostome as hee sayd he would be with Paule himselfe in 2. ad Tim. Hom. 2. Plus aliquid dicam c. I will say somewhat more we must not be ruled by Paule himselfe if he speake anie thing that is his owne and any thing that is humane but we must obey the Apostle when he carrieth Christ speaking in him Wherefore seeing it is certaine that by testimonie of Iustinus Martyr that there was no mention of the dead in the celebration of the Lordes supper for more than an hundred yeares after Christ we must not beleeue Chrysostome without scripture affirming that it was ordeyned so by the Apostles As though this place had not beene sufficient to conuince your impudent lying you goe forwarde and say that page 362. and 363. of the same booke I aunswere to diwerse fathers alleaged together beside Chrysostome for the same purpose Who is witnesse that this is the tradition of the Apostles you will say Tertullian Cyprian Austen Ierome and a great many more But I would learne why the Lorde would not haue this set forth by Matthew Marke Luke and Paule Why they were not chosen scribes hereof rather then Tertullian Cyprian Ierome Austen and other such as you nâ—me But this is a counterfaite institution and fained tradition Heere you note in the margent a proude question which is not so right as if I should note against it a proude censure For it is a question that may be demaunded in humilitie why the Lord if it were his pleasure that the dead should be prayed for at the communion as a thing necessarie for them and dutifull for vs would not reueale so much by those witnesses that are aboue all exception rather than by such as are all manifestly conuicted of errors as you Papistes cannot denie But because neuera Papist of you all is able to answere this question to the satisfaction of any mans doubtfull conscience you thinke best to reiect it and say it is a proude question As though it were pride for any man to seeke confirmation of his faith against so iust a cause of doubt But in truth my wordes are more full than you alleage them against the pretended institution If it be lawfull for me once to pose the Papists as you doe often the protestantes I woulde learne why the Lorde would not haue this doubtlesse institution and as you take it the most necessarie vse of the sacrament plainely or at the leastwise obscurely set foorth by Matthewe Marke Luke or Paule which all haue set foorth the storie of the action of Christ the institution of the sacrament and the ende or vse of the same If it were not meete at all to be put in writing why was it disclosed by Tertullian Cyprian Augustine c If it were meete to be put in writing why were not those chosen scribes Matthew Marke Luke and Paul worthy of all credite rather appointed for it than Tertullian Cyprian Augustine and such as you name But against this counter faite institution and fayned tradition S. Paule cryeth with open mouth vnto the Corinthians 1. Cor. 11. That which I deliuered to you I receiued of the Lorde c. which wrote to that effect Last of all you say that being vrged by the like I discredite all antiquitie saying It is a common thing with the ancient writers to defende euerie ceremonie which was vsed in their time by tradition of the Apostles In deede the wordes are mine the occasion as of all â—he rest frandulently and falsely omitted For vpon occasion of Chrysostome alleaged to proue that mention of the dead was made at the coÌ„munion by tradition of the Apostles for which I remit him to mine answere of Allen lib. 2. ca. 5. I ad moreouer these wordes If we should admit all thinges to be ordeyned of the Apostles which some of the olde writers doe ascribe to their traditions we should receiue many thinges which euen the Papistes themselues do not obserue As that it is a wicked thing to fast on sunday or to pray kneeling that oblations are to be made for mens birth dayes c. Which with diuerse other superstitions Tertullian fathereth vppon the tradition of the Apostles as well as oblations for the dead De cor Mil. Hearing therefore such manifest vnthruthes are fathered vpon the Apostles tradition by most ancient writers what certainety can we haue of their tradition without their writing By this the reader may see howe honestly and truely you say there are set before you a payre of balances with Charke and Fulke in one ende and Cyprian Origen Tertullian Basill c. in an other ende And Fulke opposeth himselfe against them all Wheâ—â—as in euerie place by you noted hee opposeth either the holy scriptures or other auncient writers or the same writers themselues or euident and manifest reason to proue that such thinges are vntruly fathered vpon the Apostles tradition Last of all for your farewell you charge D. Fulke to affirme that the booke of the Maccabees was written with a prophane and Ambitious spirite Against purg pag. 209. In deede in that place among many other reasons which I bring to prooue that storie not to bee the Canon of the scriptures I say that hee maketh a verie prophane preface ambitiously commending his trauels and shewing