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
is often taken or constitutions as Beza calleth them which before God and the worlde are not of suche difference that you shoulde charge him with wilfull corruption for translating that word constitutions which you confesse signifieth very often commaundements Wherefore here appeareth no hereticall purpose except you will say that iustification by faith which S. Paule so often so diligently and so purposedly doth teach is an heresie MART. 51. Againe when he had reiected this translation Act. 2. verse 27. Non derelinques animam meam in inferno Thou shalt not leaue my soule in Hel because as he sayth herevpon grewe the errours of Christes descending into Hell of Limbus and of Purgatorie atlength he concludeth thus Whereas the doubtfull interpretation of one or two wordes hath brought forth so many mōsters I chose rather simply for soule to say carkasse for hel graue than to foster these foule errours FVLK 51. Beza sheweth that because the doubtfull interpretation of the Hebrew worde Sheol into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which doth not properly signifie hell but a darke place such as the pit is wherein the deade are put and of the Poets is taken for hell had bredde such monsters as Limbus patrum Purgatorie and Christes descending into them therefore he did plainly translate that verse as it is ment of the raysing vp of Christes bodie out of the graue which if he had translated out of Hebrew as he did out of Greeke had not bene offensiue nor vntrue as I haue shewed in aunswere to your Preface sect 46. and of this chapter sect 32. But seeing Beza him selfe hath altered that translation and it was neuer followed of our English translators what demonstration is this that we are wilfull corrupters of the holy Scriptures MART. 52. Againe when he had translated for Whome heauen must receiue thus who must be contayned in heauen he sayth whereas we haue vsed the passiue kinde of speech rather than the actiue which is in the Greeke we did it to auoyd all ambiguitie For it is very expedient that there should be in the Church of God this perspicuous testimonie against them that for ascending by faith into heauen so to be ioyned to our head obstinately maintaine that Christ must be called againe out of heauen vnto vs. Meaning his presence in the ◠Sacrament and inueying no lesse against the Lutherans than the Catholikes as the Lutherans doe here against him for this wilfull interpretation and that by Caluines owne iudgement who thinketh it a forced translation FVLK 52. True it is that he meant concerning the maner of Christes presence in the blessed sacrament and that so he translated to exclude the carnall maner of presence which the Papistes haue inuented but all this while the translation is true and warranted by Gregorie Nazianzene as I haue shewed before sect 36. of this chapter For he that sayth Heauen must receiue Christ as you doe can not deny except he be mad but that Christ must be receiued of heauen So that Beza doth none otherwise translate than you doe Qui daemonia habebant which is actiuely thus to be translated those who had deuils and you saye which were possest of diuels that is were had of diuels That the Lutherans finde fault with Bezaes translation it proueth it not to be false he hath iustified it sufficiently in his answere to Selneccerus and the Diuines of Iena Neither doth Caluine as you saye vntruly thinke it a forced translation but not weying the sentence sufficiently supposeth that the wordes are placed ambiguously for that it seemeth to be doubtfull whether we shoulde save that heauen must receiue Christ or that Christ must receiue heauen But if it be once graunted as it is of you that heauen must receiue Christ there is neyther Caluine nor Illyricus nor any man that beareth the face but of a young Grammarian yea of a reasonable man which can deny that conuersion by the passiue Christe muste be receiued of heauen Therefore if you had any respect of your credite with men of vnderstanding you would not for shame rehearse this quarrell so often which hath not so muche as any colour or shewe of reason to maintayne it but that you abuse the names of Illyricus and Caluine as mislykinge it whose argumentes by no meanes will serue your turne because that which is denied by them or doubtfull to them is plaine and confessed by you MART. 53. But Beza goeth forwarde still in this kinde Rom. 5. verse 18. whereas Erasmus had put propagatum est indifferently both of Adams sinne which made vs truely sinners and of Christes iustice which maketh vs truly iust he reiecting it amonge other causes why it displeased him sayth That olde errour of the Sophists meaning Catholikes which for imputatiue iustice put an inherent qualitie in the place is so great so execrable to all good men that I thinke nothing is so much to be auoided as it FVLK 53. A manifest ecclipsis or want of wordes being in that verse for which Erasmus hath put propagatum est which word is ambiguous and may giue occasion of error for men to thinke that the righteousnes of Christ commeth by propagation as the guiltines of Adam doth Beza thought good to supply the lacke rather by such wordes as are warranted by the text verse 12. 15. and 16. and can giue no occasion of errour And therefore thus he rendreth that verse Nempe igitur sicut per vnam offensam reatus venit in omnes homines ad condemnationem ita per vnam iustificationem beneficium redimdauit in omnes homines ad iustificationem vitae Nowe therefore as by one offence guiltinesse came vpon all men vnto condemnation so by one iustification the benefite abounded toward all men vnto iustification of life In this verse these words guiltinesse came and the benefite abounded are added for explication sake and are taken out of the verses going before in which the Apostle speaketh of the same matter Therefore Beza to auoyde occasion of the heresie of the Papistes of iustice inherent among other causes which he rehearseth refuseth that worde by which Erasmus supplyed the text and vseth suche wordes for that purpose as the Apostle him self in the verses precedent doth offer for this necessarye supplye which seeing it must be made that there may be a sense and vnderstanding who can mislike that it should be made by the Apostles owne wordes or who cā suppose that the Apostle would leaue any other words to be vnderstood than such as he him selfe had before expressed And as for the heresie of inherent iustice can haue no hold in this verse except some suche worde be added for supplie as the Apostle neuer vsed in this case That Christes iustice doth make vs as truly iust as Adams sinne made vs truly sinners there is no question but by what meanes we are made iust wee say as the Scripture teacheth vs to speake that iustice is imputed to
bene destroyed out of the world but are and haue bene in Christian countries with honour and reuerence euen since Christes time Mary in the idols of the Gentiles we see it verified which are destroyed in all the world so farre as Gentilitie is conuerted to Christ. FVLK 6. Verily the commaundement of God being a cōmaundement of the first table vnto which what soeuer is said in the Scriptures of images or the worship of them forbidden must be referred speaketh generally of all maner of images made by the deuise of man for any vse of religion whether they be of Iewes Pagans or false Christians But we are offred a demonstration that our owne conscience condemneth vs herein and that we applie all translation to our heresie And that is this In Esai 31. and Zacha. 13. with one consente all translate Idols because God speaketh of the time of the newe Testament where if they had translated Images they had made the prophecie false because Images in Christian countries are with honour but Idols of the Gentiles are destroyed out of the worlde so farre as gentilitie is conuerted to Christe A goodly demonstration I promise you That the translators had no such respect it is plaine for that they do not vnderstād the 31. of Esay of the time of Christe but of the reformation made by Ezechias But in Esay 44. whiche is a manifest prophesie of the Church of Christ they all vse the worde Image also Micheas the 5. and in diuerse other places where the destruction of Idolatrie is prophesied by the religion of Christ which is verified onely in true Christians for otherwise both the Idolatrie of Pagans and of false Christians hath remained in many places and yet remaineth to this day MART. 7. And what were the Pagans idols or their idolatrie S. Paule telleth vs saying They changed the glorie of the incorruptible God into the similitude of the image of a corruptible man of birdes and beasts and creeping thinges and they serued or worshipped the creature more than the creator Doth he charge them for making the image of man or beast Your selues haue hangings and clothes full of such paintings and embroderings of imagirie Wherewith then are they charged with giuing the glorie of God to such creatures which was to make them idols and them selues idolaters FVLK 7. That the Paganes changed the glory of God into the similitude of the Image of man c. it was the extremitie of their madnesse but that they made Images of man or beaste If you will not confesse that Iupiter Mars c. were men and Isis a cowe or beast yet remember that they made Images of their Emperours and committed Idolatrie to them otherwise to make Images out of religiō was not the offence of Idolatrie in them nor vs that haue them in hangings and paintings and other lawfull Images MART. 8. The case being thus why do you make it two distinct things in S. Paul calling the Pagans idolaters and the Christians doing the same worshippers of images and that in one sentence whereas the Apostle vseth but one and the selfe same Greeke worde in speaking both of Pagans and Christians It is a maruelous and wilfull corruption and well to be marked and therefore I will put downe the whole sentence as it is in your English translation I wrote to you that you shoulde not companie with fornicators and I meant not at all of the fornificators of this world either of the couetous or extortioners either the idolaters c. but that ye cōpanie not togither if any that is called a brother be a fornicator or couetous or A WORSHIPPER OF IMAGES or an extortioner In the first speaking of Pagans your translator nameth idolater according to the text but in the later part speaking of Christians you translate the very self same Greeke word worshipper of images Why so forsooth to make the reader thinke that S. Paule speaketh here not only of Pagan idolaters but also of Catholike Christians that reuerently kneele in praier before the Crosse the holy Roode the images of our Sauiour Christ and his Saincts as though the Apostle had commaunded such to be auoided FVLK 8. The reason is because we compt Idolaters and worshippers of Images to be all one But it is a maruelous wilfull corruption that in one sentence 1. Cor 5. we call the Paganes Idolaters and the Christians worshippers of Images and yet the same Greeke worde in both If this were a faulte it were but of one translation of the three for the Geneua Bible hath Idolater in both the other worshipper of Idolls in the later place And wee thinke the later to be vnderstoode of Idolatrous Papists which worship Idols made with handes of men as Crosses Roodes and other Images to as great dishonor of God and daunger of their soules as Pagans did So that if it had bene worshippers of Images in both the translation had not bene amisse MART. 9. Where if you haue yet the face to denie this your malitious and heretical intent tell vs why all these other wordes are translated and repeated alike in both places couetous fornicators extortioners both Pagans and Christians and only this word idolaters not so but Pagans idolaters and Christians worshippers of images At the least you can not denie but it was of purpose done to make both seeme all one yea and to signifie that the Christians doing the foresaid reuerence before sacred images which you call worshipping of images are more to be auoided than the Pagan idolaters Whereas the Apostle speaking of Pagans and Christians that committed one and the selfe same heynous sinne what soeuer commaundeth the Christian in that case to be auoyded for his amendement leauing the Pagan to him selfe and to God as hauing not to doe to iudge of him FVLK 9. I thinke the cause was that Christians might vnderstand who was an Idolater what the word Idolater signifieth which was vsed in the former parte of the sentence And if the translators purpose was by this explication to dissuade the readers from worshipping of popish Images I see not what cause he hath to be ashamed thereof seeing the Greeke word signifieth as much as he saith not as though Idols were proper onely to the Gentiles and Images to Christians for in other places he vseth the name of Images speaking both of the Pagans and the Christians 1. Cor. 8. Although for my parte I could wishe he had vsed one worde in both places either called them both Idolaters or both worshippers of Images MART. 10. But to this the answere belike will be made as one of them hath already answered in the like case that in the English Bible appointed to be read in their Churches it is otherwise and euen as we would haue it corrected and therfore saith he it had bene good before we entred into such hainous accusations to haue examined our grounds that they had bene true As
Latine Churche there to follow the other sense not so generally receiued and approoued as in Saint Iames epistle where the common reading is Deus intentator malorum est God is no tempter to euil they translate Gad cannot be tempted with euil which is so impertinent to the Apostles speach there as nothing more But why wil they not say God is no tempter to euill as wel as the other is it because of the Greeke word which is a passiue Let them see their Lexicon and it will tell them that it is both an actiue and passiue so say other learned Grecians Interpreters of this place so sayth the very circumstance of the words next going before Let no man say that he is tempted of God Why so Because God is not tempted with euill say they is this a good reason nothing lesse howe then Because God is no tempter to euill therefore let no man say that he is tempted of God FVLK 2. You haue a fashion common to you with many of your fellowes to snatch all occasions that you can get to make a shew for your hainous slauÌ„ders wherwith you seeke to ouerwhelme the Saincts of God and especially those whose labors haue bene most fruitful to his Church Whereof you giue vs an euident example in this translation which you follow with such egernes in three large sections that the ignorant Reader which can not examine the matter might thinke you had great and vrgent cause so to doe The Greeke of S. Iames 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we translated passiuely as the word signifieth as words of that forme doe signifie God is not or can not be tempted with euill But against this translation you oppose the Lexicon which following the iudgement of the vulgar Interpretor that hath translated it actiuely doth in deede make it indifferent to both significatioÌ„s but exaÌ„ple giueth none thereof but this now in controuersie You alleage further learned Grecians interpretors of this place namely Gagneius a late writer to whom I may oppose Hentenius who translating Oecumenius vpoÌ„ S. Iames turneth this place of Scripture thus Deus enim malis tentari nequit And Oecumenius in his coÌ„mentarie is plaine of the same iudgement for repeting the text as before he saith Iuxta eum qui dixit quanquaÌ„ externus sit à nobis à fide aliemis diuina beataque natura neque molestias sustinet neque alijs praebet God cannot be tempted with euil according to him which said although he be a foriner from vs a straunger from the faith the diuine and blessed nature neither suffereth griefes nor offereth to other And this iudgement of Oecumenius is collected out of a great nuÌ„ber of Greeke doctors But the very circuÌ„stance of the wordes next before say you doth require it should be taken actiuely A good interpretor will consider the circuÌ„stances of the words following as wel as of the wordes going before For the wordes following declare that it must be taken passiuely or els the Apostle speaketh one thing twise togither without any cause why Wheras the passiue taking of that word agreeth to the circuÌ„stance as well going before as following after The whole context is this Let no man say wheÌ„ he is tempted I am tempted of God for God cannot bee tempted of euilles neither doth he tempt any man The meaning is plain god is so far froÌ„ tempting vnto euil as his diuine nature is vncapable of any temptation of euil For teÌ„ptation to euil could not come froÌ„ God except it were first in God but seing it caÌ„not be in God it cannot procede froÌ„ him so doth Oecum interprete the place MART. 3. This reason is so coherent and so necessary in this place that if the greke word were only a passiue as it is not yet it might beseme Beza to translate it actiuely who hath turned the actiue into a passiue without scrupulositie as him selfe confesseth and is before noted against the real presence Much more in this place might he bee bolde to translate that actiuely whych is both an actiue and a passiue specially hauing such an exaÌ„ple and so great authoritie as is al the ancient Latin church til this day But why would he not surely because he would fauor his and their heresie which saith clean contrarie to these wordes of the Apostle to wit that God is a tempter to euil Is that possible to be proued yea it is possible and plain Bezaes words be these Inducit Dominus in tentationeÌ„ eos quos Satanae arbitrio permittit aut in quos potius Satanam ipsum indueit vt cor eorum impleat vt loquitur Petrus Act. 5. v. 3. that is The Lorde leadeth into tentation those whome hee permitteth to Satans arbitrement or into whom rather he leadeth or bringeth in Satan himself to fil their heart as Peter speaketh Marke that he saith God bringeth Satan into a man to fill his heart as Peter said to Ananias Why hath satan filled thy heart to lie vnto the holie Ghost So then by this mans opinion God brought Sathan into that mans heart to make him lie vnto the holy Ghost and so led him into tentation being authour and causer of that hainous sinne FVLK 3. How necessarie the coherens is with the former wordes that it maketh an absurde repetition in the wordes following I haue noted beefore And therefore there is no cause that shoulde driue Beza to translate a worde of passiue signification actiuely as you slaunder him to haue translated an actiue passiuely against the reall presence for that you meane of Act. 3. he translateth not passiuely so as the passiue is opposite to the actiue but as the one may be resolued into the other the same sense remaining which euery childe in the Grammar schoole knoweth Ego amo â—e â—â— amaris à me I loue thee thou art loued of me and not as they may disagree I loue thee but I am not loued of thee But Beza you say would not followe the vulgar Interpretor whose antiquitie I haue shewed for vniuersall receauing not to haue bene aboue fiue hundreth yeares seeing Bernard which liued a thousand and one hundred yeares after Christ vseth it not alwayes And why did Beza leaue the vulgar translation in this place surely in fauour of our heresie that God is a tempter to euill The Lord him selfe be iudge whether we abhorre not that heresie Yet you say it is both possible and plaine to be proued by Bezaes owne wordes In his later edition an 1565. his wordes are these vpon that petition of the Lordes prayer Leade vs not into temptation Iâ—ducit autem Dominus in tentationem eos quos Satanae arbitrio permistit vt cor eorum impleat sicut loquitur Petrus Act. 5. The Lord leadeth into temptation them whom he permitteth to the will of Satan that he may fill their hart as Peter speaketh These wordes declare that God leadeth some men into temptation and howe he leadeth them
Greeke text of the Psalmes which nowe we haue is none of the Seuenties translation as euen Lindanus might teach you de opt gen l 3. ◠6. MART. 25. And to this purpose perhaps it is for other cause I can not gesse that you make such a maruelous transposition of wordes in your translation Mat. 19. saying thus When the sonne of man shall sit in the throne of his maiestie ye that haue followed me in the regeneration shal sit also vpon twelue scates Whereas the order of these wordes both in Greeke and Latine is this You that haue followed me in the regeneration when the Sonne of man shall sit in his maiestie you also shall sit vpon twelue seates To follow Christ in the regeneration is not easily vnderstood what it should meane but to sit with Christ in the regeneration that is in the resurrection vpon twelue seates that is familiar and euery mans interpretation and concerneth she great reward that they shall then haue which here followe Christ as the Apostles did FVLK 25. You looke for faultes very narrowly that can espye but a comma wanting although it be no impious sense to follow Christ in the regeneration for the worlde by Christ was after a sort renewed when the cause of the restauration thereof was performed as for the reward of which you haue such a seruile care is expressed in sitting vpon twelue seates to iudge the tribes of Israell Wherefore there was no neede that you shoulde feare the losse of your rewarde by this transposition MART. 26. The like transposition of wordes is in some of your Bibles Heb. 2. v. 9. thus We see IESVS crowned with glorie and honour which was a litle inferior to the Angels through the suffering of death Whereas both in Greeke and Latine the order of the wordes is thus Him that was made a litle inferior to Angels we see IESVS through the passion of death crowned with honour and glorie In this later the Apostle sayth that Christ was crowned for his suffering death and so by his death merited his glorie But by your translation he saith that Christ was made inferiour to Angels by his suffering death that is saith Beza For to suffer death and taking it so that he was made inferiour to Angels that he might die then the other sense is cleane excluded that for suffering death he was crowned with glorie and this is one place among other whereby it may very well be gathered that some of you thinke that Christ him selfe did not merite his owne glorie and exaltation So obstinatly are you set against merites and meritorious workes To the which purpose also you take away mans free will as hauing no habilitie to worke toward his owne saluation FVLK 26. Whether we say Christ was crowned for his suffering or Christ was made inferiour to the Angels through his suffering the sense of either of both is good and godly and may stande with the place neither doth the one of them exclude the other although but one only can be the sense of the place And if this be the place by which you may gather that some of vs thinke that Christ merited not his owne glorie it is not worth a straw We hold that Christ for him selfe needed not to merite because he was the Lorde of glorie but that he merited for vs to be exalted in our nature for our saluation it is so farre off that we deny that our whole comfort resteth in his merites and in his glorie which he hath deserued for vs we hope to be glorified for euer When you make your transition to the next chapter you say we take away mans free wil as hauing none abilitie to worke by which it seemeth that you doe not onely allowe to man the freedome of his will but also power to worke whatsoeuer he will so that he shall not only haue a free will but also a strength by the same to worke towardes his owne saluation CHAP. X. Hereticall translation against FREE VVILL Martin AGAINST free will your corruptions be these Ioh. 1. 12. where it is said As many as receiued him he gaue them power to be made the sonnes of God some of your translations say he gaue them prerogatiue to be the sonnes of God Beza dignitie Who protesteth that whereas in other places often he translated this Greke word power and authoritie here he refused both in deede against free will which he sayeth the Sophistes would proue out of this place reprehending Erasmus for following them in his translation But whereas the Greeke word is indifferent to signifie dignitie or libertie he that will translate either of these restraineth the sense of the holy Ghost and determineth it it to his owne fansie If you may translate dignitie may not we as well translate it libertie Yes surely For you know it signifieth the one as well as the other both in profane and Diuine writers And you can well call to minde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence they are deriued and that the Apostle calleth a mans libertie of his owne will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now then if potestas in Latine and power in Englishe be wordes also indifferent to signifie both dignitie and libertie translate so in the name of God and leaue the text of the Scripture indifferent as we doe and for the sense whether of the two it doth here rather signifie or whether it doth not signifie both as no doubt it doth the fathers so expounde it let that be examined otherwise It is a common fauls with you and intolerable by your translation to abridge the sense of the holy Ghost to one particular vnderstanding to defeate the exposition of so many fathers that expounde it in another sense and signification As is plaine in this example also folowing Fulke SEeing you confesse that the Greeke worde signifieth not onely power but also dignitie and that in this place it signifieth both it can be no corruptiō but the best and truest interpretation to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dignitie for that includeth power whereas power may be seuered from dignitie Where you woulde haue vs vse a word that is ambiguous whē the sense is cleare by your owne confession you bewray your owne corrupt affection which desire to haue the Scriptures so ambiguously or doubtfully translated that the ignorant might receiue no benefite of certaine vnderstanding by them When a worde hath diuerse significations a wise translater must weigh which of them agreeth with the text in hand that to vse but not to seeke ambiguous words that may bring the matter in doubt when the meaning to him is certaine As here you say there is no doubt but it signifieth both and yet you quarrell at our translation which comprehendeth both and vrge the word of power from which dignity may be seuered whereas frō dignity power or ability or licence can not be
the soule by the same instrument of faith onely which by other places may be more directly prooued and here also in some sorte is insinuated MAR. 10. This then you see is a fallacie wheÌ„ faith only is required to the helth of the body as in many such places thogh not in all there by translation to make it sounde a iustifying faith as thogh faith only were required to the helth of the soule Wheras that faith was of Christes omnipotencie onely and power which Beza confesseth may be in the diuels themselues and is farre from the faith that iustifieth If you saye the Greeke signifieth as you translate it doth so in deede but it signifieth also very commonly to bee healed corporally as by your owne translation in these places Marc. 5. v. 28. Marc. 6. v. 36. Luc. 8. v. 36. v. 51. Where you translate I shal be whole They were healed Hee was healed She shal bee made whole And why do you here translate so because you know to be saued importeth rather an other thing to wit saluation of the soule and therefore when faith is ioyned withall you translate rather saued than healed though the place be meant of bodilie health onely to insinuate by all meanes your iustification by only faith FVLK 10. It is no fallacie from the health of the bodie to ascende higher to the health of the soule but that direct and plaine way by whiche Christe himselfe would be knowne to be sauiour of the worlde not of the bodie onely but of the bodie and soule togither And commonly his bodily cures were ioyned with forgiuenesse of sinnes whych are causes of al maladies and with health of their soules whose bodies were made safe As for iustification by faith only we meane none otherwise to insinuate it in this place than Christ him self doth by doing miracles in giuing health of the bodie to testifie that he is the onely authour of the saluation of mens soules CHAP. XIII Heretical translation against PENANCE and SATISFACTION Martin VPon the heresie of onely faith iustifying and sauing a man followeth the deniall of all penance and satisfaction for sinnes Which Beza so abhorreth Annot. in Mat. 3. v. 2 that he maketh protestation that he auoydeth these termes Poenitentia and Poenitentiam agere of purpose and that he will alwayes vse for them in translating the Greeke wordes resipiscentia and resipiscere Which he doth obserue perhaps but that sometimes he is worse than his promise translating most falsely and heretically for resipiscentia resipiscentes so that your English Bezites them selues are ashamed to translate after him Who otherwise followe his rule for the most part translating resipiscentia amendement of life and resipiscite amende your liues and the other English Bibles when they translate best say repentance and repent but none of them all once haue the wordes penance and doe penance Which in most places is the very true translation according to the verye circumstance of the text and vse of the Greeke word in the Greeke Church and the auncient Latine translation thereof and all the fathers reading thereof and their expositions of the same Which foure pointes I thinke not amisse briefly to proue that the Reader may see the vse and signification of these wordes which they of purpose will not expresse to auoyd the termes of penance and doing penance Fulke IF by penance you meane satisfaction for sinnes by any suffering of ours we abhorre your penance as an horrible blasphemy against the bloud of Christ. And for that cause Beza as hath bene shewed before vseth the worde resipiscentia rather than poenitentia because the Greeke word signifieth not onely a sorow for sinne but also a purpose of amendment of life We in English vse the worde repentance or amendment of life which worde of repentance you vse also sometimes when it pleaseth you or when you can not for shame vse your popish terme of doing penance The cause why we neuer vse that word penance is for that you meane not thereby that which the Scripture calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but a certaine punishment taken vpon men for satisfaction of their sinnes vnto God which is abhominable for all Christian eares to heare which acknowledge that the bloud of Christ onely purgeth vs from all sinne But in foure pointes you will proue if you can that we should translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to do penance MART. 2. First that the circumstance of the text doth giue it so to signifie we reade in S. Mathew cap. 11. v. 21. If in Tyre and Sidon had bene wrought the miracles that haue bene wrought in you they had done penance in hairecloth or sackecloth and ashes long agoe And in S. Luke cap. 10. v. 13. they had done penance fitting in sackcloth and ashes I beseech you these circumstances of sackecloth and ashes adioyned doe they signifie penance and affliction of the bodye or onely amendement of life as you would haue the word to signifie S. Basil sayth in Psal. 29. Sackcloth maketh for penance For the fathers in olde time sitting in sackcloth and ashes did penance Vnlesse you will translate S. Basil also after your fashion whome you can not any way translate but the sense must needes be penance and doing penance Againe S. Paule sayth You were made sorie to penance or to repentance say which you will and The sorowe which is according to God worketh penance or repentance vnto saluation Is not sorow and bitter mourning and affliction partes of penance Did the incestuous man whome Saint Paule excommunicated and afterward absolued him because of his exceeding sorow and teares for feare lest he might be ouerwhelmed with sorow did he I say change his mind onely or amend his life as you translate the Greeke worde and interprete repentance did he not penance also for his fault enioyned of the Apostle when Saint Iohn the Baptist sayth and Saint Paule exhorteth the like Doe fruites worthy of penance or as you translate meete for repentance Doe they not plainly signifie penitentiall workes or the workes of penance which is the very cause why Beza rather translated in those places Doe the fruites meete for them that amend their liues or giue vs some other good cause Oye Bezites why your maister doth so foâ—ly falsifie his translation FVLK 2. Such is your malicious frowardnes that you will not vnderstande resipiscentia repentance or amendement of life a sorow or griefe of mind for the life past which is testified sometimes by outward signes of sackcloth and ashes fasting and humbling of mens bodies as in the texts of Math. 11. and Luc. 10. and diuerse other is expressed But shew vs that the wearing of sackcloth and ashes is a satisfaction for the life past or any part of amends to Gods iustice or else you do but trifle and waste the time But S. Basil sayth that sackcloth maketh for penance c.
of Christe But where you tell vs of S. Hieromes translation it were somewhat worth if you could shewe it The vulgare Latine text wee may not graunte you to bee S. Hieromes as for his commentarie teacheth not the worde of redeeming which is the principall worde in controuersie And indeede it is a very absurde kinde of speach to say redeeme thy sinnes or deliuer thy sinnes for pherak signifieth none otherwise to redeme than to deliuer whereas if he had meant as you think hee shoulde haue saide rather redeeme thy soule from sinnes Christ himselfe the author of our redemption is not saide to haue redeemed our sinnes with his bloud but to haue redeemed vs from oure synnes by hys bloude MART. 19. And what a miserable humour is it in these cases to slie as far as they can from the auntient receiued speach of holie Scripture that hath so many yeres sounded in all faithful eares and to inuent newe termes and phrases when the original text both Greke and Hebrue fauoreth the one as much or more than the other as that they choose to say in the Epistle to Titus where the Apostle excedingly exhorteth to good works maintaine good workes and shewe foorth good works rather than according to the auncient Latine translation bonis operibus praeesse to be chiefe and principall in doing good workes which is the very true and vsual signification of the greeke worde and implieth a vertuous emulation among good men who shal doe moste good workes or excel in that kinde But they that looke to be saued by faith onely no maruell if neither their doings nor trāslatiōs tēd to any such excellēcie FVLK 19. What a miserable humour is it when the truth is plainly reuealed by knowledge of the tongs which was hidden from many of the auntient fathers to delight rather in error which is old than in truth which is newly discouered The worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the epistle to Titus we translate also to excell and it may signifie either to shew forth to maintaine or to excell And therfore your wrangling is vaine and without reason For that Christian men ought with all diligent labour to excell in good workes it is alwaies acknowledged of vs although they muste not looke to bee saued by their workes no nor by their faith onely if their faith be not fruitefull of good workes Such collections as these and much better it were no hard matter to make a great number against you to proue that you are enimies to faith to repentance to good workes to God him self CHAP. XIIII Hereticall translation against the holy SACRAMENTS namely BAPTISME and CONFESSION Martin AN other sequele of their onely faith is that the Sacraments also helpe nothing towarde our saluation and therefore they partely take them cleane away partly depriue them of all grace vertue and efficacie making thē poore and beggarly elements either worse or no better than those of the old law Fulke THat the Sacraments helpe nothing toward our saluation is an other of Martins slaunders no assertion of ours For seeing wee holde that the Sacramentes are seales of Gods promises to confirme our faith by which we are iustified before him how can we affirme that they help nothing to saluation But this is the propertie of hers and slaunderers when they haue nothing of truth to charge their aduersaries then they eyther inuent that which was neuer saide or done by them or else they violently drawe out of their sayings or doings by deprauing them some colour of matter to serue for a shewe of their slaunders So dothe our wrangler in this place after a flatte lie solemnely aduouched against vs of that wee say the Sacramentes giue no grace Ex opere operato of the worke wrought he frameth his spiders webbe first that wee depriue them of all grace vertue and efficacie Because wee doe not include grace vertue and efficacie within the externall Elementes or the ministerie of man aboute them but ascribe the same to the mighty working of Gods spirite in his chosen children which worketh all his giftes in all men according to the good pleasure of his owne will Secondly that we make the Sacraments poore and beggerly Elements And thirdly eyther worse or no better than those of the olde lawe The spirituall matter in deede of the Sacramentes of both the Testaments wee confesse to bee Iesus Christe of equall power vnto saluation of his people liuing vnder both the states but the more abundant grace and truth according to the reuelation of Christ in the flesh we acknowledge to be testified and exhibited in our Sacraments than was in theirs that liued vnder the law MART. 2. For this purpose Beza is not content to speake as the Apostle doth Ro. 4. v. 11. that circumcision was a seale of the iustice of faith but because he thinketh that to small a terme for the dignitie of circumcision as him self confesseth he gladly auoideth it I vse his owne wordes and for the Nowne putteth the Verbe so dissolutely presumptuously that the English Bezites themselues here also dare not folow him in translation though in opinion they agree The cause of his wilful translation he declareth in his Annotations vpon the same place to wit the dignitie of circumcision equall with any Sacrament of the new Testament His wordes be these What saith he could be spoken more magnifical of any Sacrament therfore they that put a real difference betweene the Sacraments of the old Testament and ours neuer seeme to haue knowen how far Christs office extendeth Which he saith not to magnifie the old but to disgrace the newe FVLK 2. There was neuer man that had suche an artificiall coniecture of mens purposes as you pretende your selfe to haue which not only where there is likelihood to fasten a coniecture vpon but also when all likelyhoods are against you yet can so confidently pronounce of euery mans purpose Well let the purpose goe whiche is knowen best to God and nexte to them that will iudge of the man according to charitie and good reason You say Beza is not content to speake as the Apostle doth that circumcision was a seale of the iustice of faith Yes verily his desire is to expresse that which the Apostle saith to the full The name of seale therefore he auoydeth not as you falsely slaunder him but for want of a conuenient Latine worde to expresse the Apostles Greeke worde hee is content to vse circumloquution by the verbe and sayth Abraham receyued the signe of circumcision whiche should seale vp or by seale confirme the iustice of faith c. yet are not you ashamed moste impudently to say hee refused the terme of Seale sigillum and for sigillum hath vsed quod obsignaret Whereas the worde that he saith hee refused is Signaculum Signaculi nomen quod vetus interpres Erasmus vsurpauit libens refugi partim quod non sit admodum vsitatum partim quod
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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
sundrie places againe if one be restrained from the larger signification peculiarly applyed signifie the Sacramentes of the Church the other also As the Sacrament of the bodie and bloud of Christ or the Mysterie of the bodie and bloud of Christ and the Caluinists in their Latine and Greeke Catechisme say two Sacramentes or two Mysteries FVLK 2. The English worde secret signifieth fully as much as the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which we must seeke no holinesse as papistes doe in vaine sounde of wordes but in the matter annexed which plainely expresseth that it is a great secret of great holines whereof the Apostle speaketh And it is verie false that you say that the Latine worde sacramentum is equiualent to the Greeke for both it signifieth an oth which y e Greke word doth not and also it includeth holinesse which the Greeke worde doth not Or else why sayth not your vulgar translator and you the sacrament of iniquitie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore signifieth euerie secrete sacramentum onely an holy sacrament as when you say Apoc. 17. the sacrament of the woman the meaning is the secret to be reuealed concerning her is an holy thing else in the same chapter you haue not a sacrament written in her forheade but a mysterie or secret Babylon the mother of abhominations That the sacramentes are called mysteries we confesse but that whatsoeuer is called a mysterie may also be called a sacrament that doe we vtterly denie MART. 3. This being so what is the fault of their translation in the place aforesaide this that they translate neither Sacrament nor Mysterie As for the worde Sacrament they are excused because they translate not the Latine but translating the Greeke why sayde they not Mysterie which is the Greeke worde heere in the Apostle I meane why sayde they not of matrimonie This is a great Mysterie No doubt there can be no other cause but to auoide both those wordes which are vsed in the Latin and Greeke Church to signifie the Sacramentâ—s For in the Greeke Church the Sacrament of thâ— bodie bloud it self is called but a mystery or mysteries which yet the ProtestaÌ„ts themselues call a true Sacrament Therfore if they shold haue called Matrimonie also by that name it might easily haue sounded to be a Sacrament also But in saying it is a great secret they put it out of doubt that it shall not be so taken FVLK 3. Seeing the word secrete y t we vse signifieth wholy as much as mysterie we hope all reasonable men wil allow y e same also Sacrament without preiudice to y e trueth we could not translate and mysterie for the better vnderstanding of the people we haue expressed in the English worde secrete Out of which if it haue any force of argument in it you may proue matrimonie to be a sacrament as well as out of the Greeke worde mysterie But it is the sounde of an vnknowen worde that you had rather play vpon in the eares of the ignorants then by any sound argument out of y e scripture to bring them to the knowledge of the trueth MART. 4. They will say vnto mee Is not euerie sacrament mysterie in english a secrete Yes as Angel is a messenger Apostle one that is sent But when the holy Scripture vseth these words to signifie more excelleÌ„t diuine things then those of the common sort doth it become translators to vse baser termes in steede therof so to disgrace the writing meaning of the holy Ghost I appeale to themselues when they translatâ— this word in other places whether they say not thus And wtout doubt great was y t MYSTERIE of godlines God was shewed manifestly in y e flesh c. againe The MYSTERIE which haue bin hid since y e world began but now is opened to his saincts againe I shew you a MYSTERIE we shal not al sleep but we shal all be changed And the like Where if they should traÌ„slate secret in steed of mysterie as the Bezites do in one of these places saying I wil shew you a secret thing what a disgracing debasing were it to those high mysteries there signified And if it were so in these is it not so in matrimonie which the Apostle maketh such a mysterie that it representeth no lesse mater then Christ his Church whatsoeuer is most excellent in that coniunctioÌ„ Noâ—then if in all other places of high mysterie they translate it also mysterie as it is in the Greeke only in Matrimonie do not so but say rather This is a great secret vsing so base a terme in so high excellent a mysterie must we not needs thinke at no dout it is that they do it because of their heretical opinioÌ„ against the SacrameÌ„t of Matrimony for their base estimation therofâ— FVLK 4. Nowe you flie to your old shift of y e ecclesiastiall vse of termes which you cannot proue to be like of this English word mysterie which is coÌ„moÌ„ly as prophanely secularly vsed as any other word For what is more coÌ„mon among artificers thaÌ„ their science or mystery of weauing of dying such like And yet the word may be vsed of the highest secrets of Christian ReligioÌ„ as it is of our translators And wheresoeuer they haue said a mysterie they might as truely haue saide a secret where they say a secrete they might haue said a mysterie But wher you say y t in al other places of high mystery they translate y e word mysterie it is false For Mat. 13. Mark the 4. Luk. the 8. where all y e mysteries of the kingdome of God are spokeÌ„ of they translate mysteria the secrets of y e kingdome of heauen 1. cor 4. where the sacraments al other secrets of Christian Religion are spokeÌ„ of they translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stewards of y e mysteries of God Wherefore it is a shamefull and senselesse slander that heere only we vse this word secret to shew our base estimation of matrimonie MART. 5. But they wil yet reply againe aske vs what we gaine by translating it either Sacrament or mysterie Doth that make it one of the Sacramentes properly so called to wit such a Sacrament as Baptisme is no surely but howsoeuer wee gaine otherwise at least we gaine the coÌ„mendation of true translators whether it make with vs or against vs. For otherwise it is not the name that maketh it such a peculiar Sacrament For as is said before Sacrament is a generall name in Scripture to other thinges Neither do we therefore so translate it as though it were foorthwith one of the seuen Sacraments because of the name but as in other places wheresoeuer we finde this word in the Latine we translate it Sacrament as in the Apocalipse the sacrament of the woman so finding it heere we doe heere also so translate it and as for the diuerse taking of it heere and else where that
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
saye it is examined and tryed by the Scriptures And the Scriptures them selues where they are so obscure that neither by cōmon sense knowledge of the original tongue Grammer Rhetorike Logike storye nor any other humane knowledge nor iudgement of any writers olde or new the certaine vnderstanding can be found out they are either expounded by conference of other plainer textes of Scripture according to the analogie of faith or els they remaine stil in obscuritie vntill it shall please God to reueile a more cleere knowledge of thē But none so like the familie of loue as you Papists are which reiect councels fathers interpretation of the most auncient Catholike Church yea manifest Scripture it self except it be agreable to the iudgement of your P. M. Pontifex Max. the Pope as those familiar diuels submit all things to the sentence authoritie of their H. N. Shame you nothing therefore to quote Whitaker pag. 17. 120. as though he affirmed that we our selues will be iudges both of Councels Fathers whether they expound the Scriptures well or no because he writeth percase that we ought to examine al mens writings by the word of god Doth the Apostle make euery man iudge of all thinges when he willeth euery man to examine all things and to hold that which is good If any youth vpon confidence of his wit or knowledge presume too much in diuine matters we count it rashnesse But that any youth among vs vpon confidence of his spirit will saucily controwle all the fathers cōsenting togither against his fantasie except it be some Schismatike or Heretike that is cast out from amongest vs I doe vtterly denye neither are you able to proue it of any that is allowed among vs. MART. 15. Wherevpon it riseth that one of them defendeth this as very wel said of Luther That he esteemed not the worth of a rushe a thousande Augustines Cyprians Churches against him selfe And an other very finely figuratiuely as he thought against the holy Doctor Martyr S. Cyprian affirming that the Church of Rome can not erre in faith saith thus Pardon me Cyprian I woulde gladly beleue thee but that beleeuing thee I should not beleeue the Gospell This is that which S. Augustine saith of the like men dulcissimè vanos esse non peritos sed perituros nec tam disertos in errore quà m desertos à veritate And I thinke verily that not onely we but the wiser men among them selues smile at such eloquence or pitie it saying this or the like most truly Prodierunt oratores noui stulti adolescentuli FVLK 15. Why shoulde you not at your pleasure vpon your false assumption generall inferre one or two slaunders particular M. Whitaker defendeth that it was well said of Luther That he esteemed not the worth of a rush a thousand Augustines Cyprians Churches against himselfe Woulde God that euery Papist would reade his owne words in the place by you quoted that he might see your impudent forgerie For I hope there is no Christian that will imagine that either Luther would so speake or any man of honestie defend him so speaking For Luther was not so senselesse to oppose his owne person but the truth of his cause grounded vpon the holy Scriptures not only against one thousand of men holding the contrary but euen against tenne thousand of Angels if they should oppose them selues against the truth of God But I am too blame to deale so much in M. Whitakers cause who ere it be long will displaye the falshoode of Gregorie Martin in a Latine writing to his great ignominie The next cauil is vpon M. Rainoldes words in his preface to his sixe positions disputed vpon at Oxford where against Cyprian affirming that the Church of Rome can not erre in faith he sayth Pardon me Cyprian I would gladly beleeue thee but that in beleeuing thee I shoulde not beleeue the Gospel These wordes you confesse that he spake figuratiuely and finely as he thought but that he vsed the figures of Ironve and concession you will not acknowledge but all other men may easily see For first he no where graunteth that S. Cyprian affirmeth that the Churche of Rome can not erie in fayth But immediatly before the wordes by you translated after he had proued out of the eleuēth to the Romans that the particular Church of Rome may be cut of as well as the Church of the Israelites which were the naturall braunches he asketh the question Quid Cypriano secus est visum What And did it seeme otherwise to Cyprian Pardon me Cyprian c. His meaning is plaine that Cyprian thought not otherwise than S. Paule hath written or if he did it was lawfull to dissent from Cyprian As a litle after he sayth Quare si Romanam Ecclesiam errare non posse c. Wherefore if Cyprian thought that the Church of Rome could not erre in that point by the sentence of the Papistes he him selfe is to be condemned of errour for diuerse Papistes whome he nameth confesse that euery particular Church may erre and Verratus one of them affirmeth that the Church of Rome is a particular Church which the rest can not deny And in deede that which Cyprian writeth is about certaine runneagate Heretikes that flying out of the Church of Carthage sought to be receiued of the particular Church of Rome All this while here is no graunt that Cyprian affirmeth that the Church of Rome cannot erre in faith And if Cyprian had so affirmed contrary to the scripture it might haue bene iustly replied vnto him which S. Augustine saith when he was pressed with his authoritie Contra Crescon lib. 2. cap. 31. Nos nullam Cypriano facimus iniuriam We do Cyprian no wrong when we distinguish any writings of his from the Canonical authoritie of the diuine Scriptures And in truth the wordes which M. Rainolds before cited out of S. Cyprian lib. 1. ep 3. ad Cornel. are spoken of no matter of faith but in a matter of discipline Neither doth Cyprian say that the Church of Rome can not erre in faith but that those Heretikes which brought letters from schismatikes profane persons did not consider that they are Romans whose faith is praised by the cōmendation or preaching of the Apostle to whom perfidia falshood or false dealing can haue none accesse Meaning that the Romans so long as they cōtinue in that faith which was praised by the Apostle cā not ioyne with Heretikes and Schismatikes that are cast out of other Catholike Churches For that he could not meane that the Pope or Church of Rome cannot erre in faith as the Papistes affirme it is manifest for that in a question of religion he dissented both from the Bishop and Church of Rome as all learned men knowe he did which he would neuer haue done if he had beleeued they could not erre And that his meaning was not that the Bishop of Rome could not erre in matters of
wilful needlesse or hereticall aâ—oyding For although the mariage of ecclesiasticall ministers generally is proued by that Scripture yet the mariage of votaries specially is nothing confirmed And for the mariage of Bishops Priestes and Deacons your owne translation of 1. Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. both Latine and English will warrant them to be the husbandes of one wife so that euery childe may see that he needed not for that purpose to corrupt the texte 1. Cor. 9. And as for the other texts 2. Pet. 1. although this worde by good workes is not expressed in the moste Greeke copies yet the whole circumstance of the place giueth it necessarily to be vnderstoode and yet it maketh nothing agaynst iustification by fayth only For our election which is most certaine immutable in Gods determinatioÌ„ is made certainly knowen vnto vs by good workes the fruites of iustifying faith euen as the effectes doe necessarily proue the cause gone before And so dothe Thomas Mathewes Bible note likewise the Bishops Bible and the Geneua Bible for so I had rather call them than by the yeares in whiche they were once printed whiche haue bene often printed and perhaps all in some one yeare Couerdales Bible also addeth these wordes by good workes whiche is redde in some Greeke copies So true it is that you say wee leaue it out because wee holde the selfe same heresie As likewise that you slaunder vs to hold that good workes are not necessarie to saluation whereas we beleeue that good workes are as necessarie to saluation as fayth in all them that are iustified by faith onely But because you are not able to withstand the truth which we beleeue you faine odious Monsters as Dragons Centaures Hydraes to fight withall before the people that you might gette the prayse of glorious conquerours like S. George on horsebacke that in a pageant vanquisheth an hideous dragon made of paper or painted clothes MART. 37. So do they in infinite places alter the olde text which pleased them well before they were Heretikes and they do it with brasen faces and playne protestation hauing no shame nor remorse at all in fleeing from that which all antiquitie with one consent allowed and embraced vntill their vnhappie daies Which though it be an euident condemnation of their nouelties in the sight of any reasonable man that hath any grace yet as I began to admonish thee gentle Reader we will not charge them for altering the auncient approued Latin translation because they pretend to folowe the Hebrue and Greeke and our purpose is not here to proue that they should not folowe the Hebrue and Greeke that now is before the auncient approued Latine text which is done briefly already in the preface to the new Testament FVLK 37. You were afrayde belike to be ouermatched in rayling and therefore you thought to beare vs downe at once with a whole floud of reprochfull slaunders and that you vtter euen with the same face with which you affirme that al antiquitie with one consente allowed and embraced your vulgar Latine texte for what else you shoulde meane I cannot coniecture seing you say afterwarde you will not charge vs for altering the auncient approued Latine translation What say you Martin doth all antiquitie with one consent allowe and imbrace your vulgar Latine translation What is the cause then that the most of all antiquitie of the Latine Church vsed not your vulgar Latine text or dare you ioyne issue with me that all the Latine doctors for 400 yeares after Christe vsed none other Latine translation but that or that they all knewe your vulgar Latine translation you are neuer able to proue it The 70. translation in deede was greatly esteemed and almost generally receyued in the Greeke and Latine Churches and out of it were innumerable Latine versions as S. Augustine affirmeth But your vulgar Latine followeth it not in many places as it were easie to shewe if time and occasion serued and I suppose you will not denie As for the reasons you bring in the Preface to the newe Testament to proue that we should not followe the Hebrue and Greeke that now is before that auncient approued text when they come to be considered it shall appeare how vayne and friuolous they are But as for the Hebrue and Greeke that now is may easilie be proued to be the same that alwaies hath bene neither is their any diuersitie in sentence how soeuer some copies eyther through negligence of the writer or by any other occasion do varie from that which is commonly and most generally receyued in some letters syllables or wordes MART. 38. Neither will we burden them for not folowing the vulgar Latine texte when the same agreeth with most auncient Greeke copies which notwithstanding is great partialitie in them must needes be of an heretical wilful humor that among the Greeke copies themselues they reiect that which moste agreeth with the vulgar Latine text in places of controuersies Yet will wee not I say neither in this case lay falsehood and corruption to their charge because they pretend to translate the common Greeke text of the newe Testament that is one certaine copie But here at the least lette them shewe their fidelitie and that they be true and exact translatours For here onely shall they be examined and called to account FVLK 38. In translation we follow the common vsuall and printed coppies as you doe in your translation and yet you know there be as many yea ten times as many diuerse readings in the Latine as are in the Greeke witnesse hereof the Bible printed at Antwerpe by Christopher Plantine 1567. of Hentenius castigation where the margents almost of euerie leafe be full of diuerse readings obeliskes asterisks stigmates signifying the variety that is in many copies by adding detracting chaunging The same is confessed by Arias Montanus Lindanus likewise acknowledgeth as much Of that which you say we reiect that which best agreeth with the vulgar Latine in places of controuersie you bring none example But that among your diuerse readings you reiect that which agreeth best with the Hebrue and with the Greeke in places of controuersie I will giue you an example Gen. 3 v. â—5 where the Hebrue truth teacheth that the seede of the woman shall breake the serpentes heade and the Greeke translateth the pronoune in the masculine gender he meaning Christ and some auncient copies of your vulgar Latine haue ipse you neuerthelesse followe that blasphemous corruption that in these later times hath bene receiued in your vulgar Latine Bibles and reade still in your texte ipsa she which though you would wrest blasphemously to the virgin Marie which is proper to Christ can not by the circumstance of the place be aptly referred to any but to Eue. MART. 39. And if they followe sincerely their Greeke and Hebrue text which they professe to followe and which they esteeme the onely authenticall texte so farre we accuse them not of hereticall
Hebrue Bible into Greeke Is not their credit I say in determining and defining the signification of the Hebrue worde farre greater than yours No. Is not the authoritie of all the auncient fathers both Greeke and Latine that followed them equiualent in this case to your iudgement No say they but because we finde some ambiguitie in the Hebrue we will take the aduantage and we will determine and limit it to our purpose FVLK 45. S. Hieronym aboundantly aunswereth this cauill denying that supposed inspiration and deâ—iding the fable of their 70. celles which yet pleased Augustine greately yea calling in question whether anye more were translated by them than the fiue bookes of Moses because Aristaeus a writer in Ptolomees time and after him Iosephus make mention of no more The same cause therfore that moued S. Hierome to translate out of the Hebrewe mooueth vs whose translation if we had it sounde ande perfect might much further vs for the same purpose Althoughe for the signification of the Hebrewe wordes we require no more credite than that which al they that be learned in the Hebrewe tongue must be forced to yeelde vnto vs. And seeing your vulgare Latine departeth from the Septuagintaes interpretation euen in the bookes of Moses whiche if anie bee theirs may most rightly be accounted theirs because it is certaine they translated them although it be not certaine whether they translated the rest with what equity do you require vs to credite them which your owne vulgare translation affirmeth to haue translated amisse as I haue shewed before in the example of Canans generation An other example you haue in the 4 of Genesis Nonne si bene egeris recipies c. If thou shalt do wel shalt thou not receiue but if thou shalt doe euill straighte-way thy sinnes shall be present in the doores The greke texte hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. not if thou haste rightly offered but thou hast not rightly diuided hast thou sinned be stil. Where your translation commeth muche nearer to the Hebrue as might be shewed in verie many examples As for the auncient fathers credit of the greeke Church and the Latine that folowed them if our iudgement alone be not aequiualent vnto them yet let these auncient fathers Origene and Hierome that thought them not sufficient to be followed and therefore gathered or framed other interpretations let theyr iudgement I say ioining with ours discharge vs of this fonde and enuious accusation MART. 46. Againe we condiscend to their wilfulnes and say what if the Hebrewe be not ambiguous but so plaine and certaine to signifie one thing that it can not bee plainer As Thou shalt not leaue my soule in Hel whiche prooueth for vs that Christ in soule descended into Hell Is not the one Hebrewe worde as proper for soule as anima in Latine the other as proper and vsual for hel as infernus in Latine Heere then at the least wil you yeeld No say they not here neither for Beza telleth vs that the word which commonly and vsually signifieth soule yet for a purpose if a man wil straine it may signifie not onely bodie but also carcase and so he translateth it But Beza say we being admonished by his friendes corrected it in his later edition Yea say they he was content to change his translation but not his opinion concerning the Hebrewe worde as himselfe protesteth FVLK 46. You haue chosen a text for example wherein is least colour except it bee with the vnlearned of an hundred For whereas you aske whether Nephesh be no not as proper for soule as anima in Latin Sheol for Hel as infernus in Latine I vtterly deny both the one and the other For nephesh is properly the life and Sheol the graue or pit though it may sometimes be taken for Hel which is a consequent of the death of the vngodly as nephesh is taken for person or ones selfe or as it is sometimes for a dead carcase Yea there be that hold that it is neuer taken for the reasonable immortall soule of a man as anima is specially of Ecclesiasticall writers That Beza translated the Greeke of the newe Testament after the signification of the Hebrewe wordes althoughe it was true in sense yet in mine opinion it was not proper in wordes and therefore he himselfe hath corrected it in his latter editions as you confesse hee hathe not chaunged hys opinion concerning the Hebrewe the reason is because it is grounded vppon manifest textes of Scripture whiche hee citeth Leuit. 19. verse 27. cap. 21. verse 1. and 11. Num. 5. verse 2. and 9. verse 10. In the firste place your owne vulgare Latine translation for la nephesh turneth mortuo you shall not cut your flesh for one that is dead In the second place your vulgare Latine hathe Ne non contaminetur sacerdos in mortibus and Ad omnem mortuum non ingredietur omnino Lette not the Priest bee defiled with the deathes of his countreymen and The highe Priest shall not enter into any dead bodie at all where the Hebrue is lenephesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the thirde place your vulgare Latine readeth polluiusque est super mortuo they shall caste out him that is polluted by touching a dead carcase where the Hebrewe is lanephesh In the first place your vulgare Latine hathe indede anima but in the same sense that it had before mortuo for the text is of him that is vncleane by touching any dead bodie which in Hebrue is nephesh How say you nowe is the Hebrewe worde as proper for soule as anima in Latine except you wil say the Latine worde anima dothe properly signifie a dead bodie hathe not Beza good reason to retaine his opinion concerning the Hebrewe worde when hee hathe the authoritie of youre owne vulgare translation You that note such iumps and shiftes in vs whether wil you leape to saue your honestie will you saye the Hebrewe texte is corrupted since your translation was drawen out of it The seauentie interpretours then will crie out againste you for they with one mouth in all these places for the Hebrewe worde nephesh render the vsuall signification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adding in the 21. of Leuit. v. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which either you muste translate a deade bodie or you shall call it absurdly a dead soule Woulde any man think to haue founde in you eyther suche grosse ignoraunce or shamefull negligence or intollerable malice against the trueth that Beza sending you to the places eyther you woulde not or you coulde not examine them or if you dydde examine them that you woulde notwythstanding thus malitiouslye agaynste youre owne knowledge and conscience raile against him you make vs to saye if a manne will straine the worde it may signifie not onely bodie but also carcase What saye you did Moses straine the worde to that signification You saide beefore that wee were at the iumps and turnings of
say we you can not so answer the matter for in other places you translate it duely and truely tradition and why more in one place than in another They are ashamed to tell why but they must tell and shame both thom selues and the deuill if euer they thinke it good to answer this treatise as also why they changed congregation which was alwaies in their first translation into Church in their later translations and did not change likewise ordinances into traditions Elder◠into Priestes FVLK 51. That the Thessalonians had some parte of Christian doctrine deliuered by word of mouth that is by the Apostles preaching at such time as he did write vnto them and some part by his Epistles the text enforceth vs to graunt and we neuer purposed to denye But that the Church at this daye or euer since the newe Testament was written had any tradition by worde of mouth of any matter necessary to saluation which was not contayned in the olde or newe Testament we will neuer graunt neither shall you euer be able out of this text or any text in the Bible to proue Make your Syllogismes when you dare and you shall be aunswered But we knowe you saye that the Greeke word signifieth tradition as plaine as possibly but here and in like places we rather translate it ordinances instructions and what else soeuer We knowe that it signifieth tradition constitution instruction precept also mancipation treatise treason For al these the Greeke Dictionaries do teach that it signifieth Therefore if in any place we haue translated it ordinaunces or instructions or institutions we haue not gone from the true signification of the worde neither can you euer proue that the worde signifieth such a doctrine onely as is taught by worde of mouth and is not or may not be put in writing But in other places you can tell vs that we translate it duely and truly tradition and you will know why more in one place than in another affirming that we are shamed to tell why For my part I was neuer of counsaile with any that translated the Scriptures into English and therefore it is possible I can not sufficiently expresse what reason moued the translators so to varie in the exposition of one and the same worde Yet can I yeelde sufficient reason that might leade them so to doe which I thinke they followed The Papistes doe commonly so abuse the name of tradition which signifieth properly a deliuerie or a thinge deliuered for such a matter as is deliuered onely by worde of mouth and so receaued from hande to hande that it is neuer put in writing but hath his credite without the holye Scriptures of God as the Iewe had their Cabala and the Scribes Pharisees had their traditions beside the lawe of God and the Valentinian Heretikes accused the Scriptures as insufficient of authoritie and ambiguously written and that the truth could not be found in them by those that knewe not the tradition which was not deliuered by writing but by worde of mouth iumpe as the Papists doe This abusing of the word tradition might be a sufficient cause for the translators to render the Greeke worde where it is taken for such doctrine as is beside the commaundement of God by the name of tradition as the worde is commonly taken But where the Greeke worde is taken in the good parte for that doctrine which is agreeable with the holy Scriptures they might with good reason auoide it as you your selfe doe not alwayes translate tradere to betray but sometimes to deliuer So did the translators giue these words ordinances instructions institutions or doctrine deliuered which doe generally signifie the same that tradition but haue not the preiudice of that partiall signification in which the Papistes vse it who wheresoeuer they find tradition straight way imagine they haue found a sufficient argument against the perfection and sufficiencie of the holy Scripture and to bring in all riffe raffe and trishe trashe of mans doctrine not onely beside but also contrarye to the manifest worde of God conteined in his most holy and perfect Scriptures To the shame of the deuill therefore and of all popish maintainers of traditions vncommaunded by God this reason may be yelded Nowe to aunswer you why Ecclesia was first translated congregation and afterward Church the reason that moued the firste translators I thinke was this the worde Churche of the common people at that tyme was vsed ambiguously both for the assemblie of the faythfull and for the place in which they assembled for auoyding of which ambiguitie they translated Ecclesia the congregation and yet in their Creede and in the notes of their Bibles in preaching writing they vsed the word Church for the same the later translators seing the people better instructed able to discerne when they read in the Scriptures the people from the place of their meeting vsed the worde Church in their translations as they did in their preaching These are weightie matters that wee muste giue accompt of them Why we chaunge not ordinances into traditions and Elders into Priests wee will answere when we come to the proper places of them In the meane season wee thinke there is as good cause for vs in translating sometime to auoide the termes of traditions and prieste as for you to auoid the names of Elders calling them auncients and the wise men sages as though you had rather speake French than English as we do Like as you translate Conside haue a good hart after the french phrase rather than you would say as we do be of good comforte MART. 52. The cause is that the name of Church was at the first odious vnto thē because of the Catholike Church which stoode against them but afterward this name grewe into more favour with them because of their English Church so at length called and termed But their hatred of Priests and traditions continueth still as it first began and therefore their translation also remaineth as before suppressing the names both of the one and of the other But of all these their dealings they shal be told in their seuerall chapiters and places FVLK 52. I pray you who translated first the creed into the English tongue and taught it to the people for that cause were accounted heretikes of the Antichristian Romish rable If the name of Churche were odious vnto them why didde they not suppresse that name in the creede whyche they taught to yong and olde and in steede of Catholike Church call it the vniuersal congregation or assembly Wel Dauus these things be not aptely diuided according to their times The firste translation of the Bible that was printed in the english tong in very many places of the notes vseth the name Church most notoriously in the song of Salomon where before euery other verse almost it telleth which is the voice of the Church to Christ her spous◠which no reasonable man would thinke the translators would
say A pagan idolater and a Christian idolater by one and the same Greeke woorde in one and the same meaning and they translate A pagan idolater and a Christian worshipper of images by two distinct words and diuerse meanings it must needes be done wilfully to the foresaid purpose See chap. 3. num 8. 9. FVLKE 6. We translate not only pagane Idolaters but also Iewes Idolaters nor Christians only worshippers of Images but Paganes also wherefore this is a foolish obseruation And if we do any where explicate who is an Idolater by translating him a worshipper of images both the word beareth it and it is not contrarie to the sense of the Scriptures in which we find the worshipping of images alwaies forbidden but neuer commaunded or allowed MART. 7. If they translate one and the same Greeke word Tradition whensoeuer the Scripture speaketh of euill traditions and neuer translate it so whensoeuer it speaketh of good and Apostolicall traditions their intention is euident against the authoritie of Traditions See chap. 2 numb 1. 2 3. FVLKE 7. This is aunswered sufficiently in confutation of the Preface Sect. 51. The English word Tradition sounding in the euill parte and taken by the Papistes for matter vnwritten yet as true and as necessarie as that which is contained in the holie Scriptures we haue vpon iust cause auoided in such places as the Greeke worde signifieth good and necessarie doctrine deliuered by the Apostles which is all contained in the Scriptures and yet haue vsed such English wordes as sufficiently expresse the Greeke word vsed in the originall text Doe not you your selues translate Tradere sometimes to betray and sometimes to deliuer MART. 8. Yea if they translate Tradition taken in ill parte where it is not in the Greeke and translate it not so where it is in the Greeke taken in good parte it is more euidence of the foresaid wicked intention See chap. 2. numb 5. 6. FVLK 8. Our intention can be no worse than your vulgar Latine Interpreters was who where the Greeke hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translateth it Traditions Act. 6. And the right vnderstanding of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Apostles meaning wil yeeld traditions as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place before mentioned MARTINE 9. If they make this a good rule to translate according to the vsuall signification and not the originall deriuation of wordes as Beza and Maister Whitakers doe and if they translate contrarie to this rule what is it but wilfull corruption So they doe in translating Idolum an Image Presbyter an Elder and the like See chap. 4. chap. 6. numb 6. 7. 8. c. numb 13. c. FVLKE 9. Neither Beza nor Maister Whitaker make it a perpetuall rule to translate according to the vsuall signification for sometimes a worde is not taken in the vsuall signification as Foenerator vsed by your vulgar Latine Interpreter Luke 7. vsuallye signifieth an Vserer yet doe you translate it a Creditor Likewise Stabulum vsed Luke 10. vsually signifieth a Stable yet you translate it an Inne So Nauis which vsually signifieth a Shippe you call it a Boate. Marke 8. and Nauicula which vsuallye signifieth a Boate you call a Shippe Luke 5. And yet I thinke you meant no wilfull corruption No more surelye did they whiche translated Idolum an Image and Presbyter an Elder whiche you can not deny But they followe the originall deriuation of the wordes whereas some of yours both goe from the vsuall signification and also from the originall deriuation MARTINE 10. If Presbyter by Ecclesiasticall vse bee appropriated to signifie a Priest no lesse than Episcopus to signifie a Bishoppe or Diaconus a Deacon and if they translate these two later accordingly and the first neuer in all the Newe Testament what can it be but wilfull corruption in fauour of this heresie That there are no Priestes of the Newe Testament See chap. 6. numb 12. FVLKE 10. The worde Priest by Popishe abuse is commonly taken for a Sacrificer the same that Sacerdos in Latine But the Holie Ghost neuer calleth the Ministers of the worde and Sacramentes of the Newe Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Sacerdotes Therefore the translatours to make a difference betwene the Ministers of the Olde Testament and them of the Newe calleth the one according to the vsuall acception Priestes and the other according to the originall deriuation Elders Which distinction seeing the vulgar Latine texte doth alwaies rightly obserue it is in fauour of your hereticall Sacrificing Priesthoode that you corruptly translate Sacerdos and Presbyter alwayes as though they were all one a Priest as though the Holie Ghost had made that distinction in vayne or that there were no difference betwene the Priesthoode of the Newe Testament and the Olde The name of Priest according to the originall deriuation from Presbyter wee doe not refuse but according to the common acception for a Sacrificer wee can not take it when it is spoken of the Ministerie of the Newe Testament And although many of the auncient Fathers haue abusiuelye confounded the termes of Sacerdos and Presbyter yet that is no warrant for vs to translate the Scripture and to confounde that which we see manifestly the spirit of God hath distinguished For this cause we haue translated the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Elder euen as your vulgar Latine translater doeth diuerse times as Actes 15. and 20. 1. Pet. 5. and else where calleth them Seniores or Maiores natu Which you commonly call the Auncientes or Seniors because you dare not speake Englishe and say the Elders Neither is Presbyter by Ecclesiasticall vse so approprietated to signifie a Priest that you woulde alwayes translate it so in the Olde Testament where your vulgar translatour vseth it for a name of Office and Gouernment and not for Priests at any time Neither do we alwayes translate the Greeke worde Episcopus and Diaconus for a Bishoppe and a Deacon but sometimes for an ouerseer as Act. 20. and a minister generally oftentimes The word Baptisma by Ecclesiasticall vse signifieth the holy Sacrament of Baptisme yet are you enforced Marke 7. to translate Baptismata washings Euen so doe we to obserue that distinction which the Apostles and Euangelistes alwaies doe keepe when we call Sacerdotes Priestes for difference we call Presbyteros Elders and not least the name of Priestes shoulde enforce the Popishe sacrifice of the Masse For this worde Presbyter will neuer cōprehend a sacrificer or a sacrificing Priesthoode MART. 11. If for Gods altar they translate Temple for Bels idololatrical table they translate altar iudge whether it bee not of purpose against our altars and in fauour of their communion table See chap. 17. numb 15. 16. FVLK 11. If there be any suche mistaking of one word for an other I thinke it was the fault of the Printer rather than of the Translator for the name of altar is more
it if in this case they will adde only to the very text is it not most horrible and diuelish corruption So did Luther whom our English ProtestaÌ„ts honor as their father in this heresie of only faith are his owne childreÌ„ See ch 12. FVLK 24. In the question of iustification by faith only where S. Iames saieth no we say no also neyther can it be proued that we adde this word only to the text in any translation of oures If Luther did in his translation adde the worde only to the texte it can not be excused of wrong translation in worde although the sense might well beare it But seing Luther doth him selfe confesse it he may be excused of frawde though not of lacke of iudgement But why should our translation be charged with Luthers corruption Because our English Protestants honour him as their father A very lewde slaunder for we call no man father vpon earth though you do call the Pope your father albeit in another sense Luther was a reuerende father of the Churche for his time But as touching the doctrine of only faith iustifying it hath more patrones of the fathers of the auncient primitiue Church than Martine can beare their bookes though he would breake his backe who in the same plaine wordes do affirme it as Luther doth that only faith doth iustifie And the Apostle which saieth that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law speaketh more plainely for iustification by faith only as we do teach it than if he had sayed a man is iustified by faith only Which text of Rom. 3. and many other are as expresse scripture to proue that we teach and beleeue as that S. Iames sayeth against iustification by faith only where he speaketh of an other faith and of an other iustification than S. Paule speaketh of and we vnderstand when we holde that a man is iustified by faith only or without workes of the law which is all one MART. 25. If these that account themselues the great Grecians and Hebricians of the world will so translate for the aduauntage of their cause as though they had no skill in the world and as though they knew neither the significatioÌ„ of words nor proprietie of phrases in the saide languages is it not to be esteemed shamelesse corruption FVLK 25. Yes but if it can not be proued that so they translate then is this an impudent slaunder as al the rest are and so it will proue when it coÌ„meth to be tried MART. 26. I will not speake of the German Heretikes who to mainteine this heresie that all our workes be they neuer so good are sinne translated for Tibi soli peccaui to thee only haue I sinned thus Tibi solùm peccaui that is I haue nothing else but sinned whatsoeuer I do I sinne whereas neither the Greeke nor the Hebrewe will possibly admit that sense Let these passe as Lutherans yet wilfull corrupters and acknowledged of our English Protestants for their good brethren But if Beza translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when we were yet of no strength as the Geneua English Bible also doth interprete it whereas euery young Grecian knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither without strength is not this of purpose to take away mans free will altogither See chap. 10. nu 13. FVLK 26. I knowe not what German heretikes those be which maintaine that heresie that al our works be they neuer so good are sinne except they be the Libertines with whom we haue nothing to do For we neuer say that good workes are sinne for that were al one to say that good were euill But that al our good workes are short of that perfection which the law of God requireth we do humbly confesse against our selues Or else what soeuer seemeth to be a good worke and is done of meÌ„ voyde of true faith is sinne For these assertions we haue the scripture to warraÌ„t vs. And if to proue the later any man hath translated those words of Dauid in the 51. Psalme Lecha Lebadecha Tibi solum or tantuÌ„modo tibi peccaui c. To the only or altogither to thee I haue sinned in respect of his naturall corruption which he doth expresse in the next verse he hath not departed one whitte from the Hebrewe wordes nor from the sense which the wordes may very wel beare which he that denieth rather sheweth him selfe ignorant in the Hebrew tongue than he that so translateth For what doth Lebad signifie but Solum or Tantum and therefore it may as well be translated Solum tibi as Soli â—ibi And the Apostle Rom. 3. prouing by the later end of that verse all men to be vniust that God only may be true and euery man a lier as it is written that thou mayest be iustified in thy wordes c. fauoreth that interpretation of Bucer or who soeuer it is beside But if Beza translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when wee were yet of no strength as the Geneua Englishe Bible doth also interprete it whereas euerye young Grecian knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither withoute strengthe is not this of purpose to take awaye mannes free wyll altogither Chapter tenth Number 13. Naye it is to shewe as the Apostles purpose is that wee haue no strength to fulfill the lawe of God without the grace of Christ euen as Christ him selfe sayth without me you can do nothing Ioan. 15. v. 5. But euery young Grecian saye you knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither with out strength And is there then any old Grecian that will proue that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alway signifieth him that is weake but not voide of strength Doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alwayes signifie him that hath some streÌ„gth Certaine it is that the Apostle speaketh here of those that were voide of strength for the same he calleth in the same verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vngodly or voide of religion for whom Christ died Howe say you then had vngodly persons any strength to be saued except Christ had died for them Therefore he that in this place translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 weake feeble infirme must needes vnderstand men so weake feeble and infirme as they haue no strength For how might it else be truely sayed what hast thou which thou hast not receiued 1. Cor. 4. v. 7. Yes say you we haue some peece of freewil at least some strength to clime to heauen euen without the grace of God without the death redemption of Christ. If you say no why cauill you at Bezaes translation and ours The Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as great a Grecian as you would make your selfe signifieth weake or infirme sometime that which yet hath some strength sometime that which hath no strength at all as I will giue you a plaine example out of S.
〈◊〉 which the vulgar Latine and Erasmus translate Agite poenitentiam Repent or Doe penance This interpretation sayth he I refuse for many causes but for this especially that many ignorant persons haue taken hereby an occasion of the false opinions of SATISFACTION wherewith the Church is troubled at this day Loe of purpose against satisfaction he will not translate the Greeke worde as it ought to be and as it is proued to signifie both in this booke and in the annotations vpon the newe Testament A litle after speaking of the same worde he sayth why I haue changed the name poenitentia I haue tolde a litle before protesting that he will neuer vse those wordes but resipiscere and resipiscentia that is amendment of life because of their heresie that repentance is nothing else but a meere amendment of former life without recompense or satisfaction or penance for the sinnes before committed See chap. 13. FVLK 49. Of purpose against the heresie of satisfaction Beza will not translate the Greeke worde as the vulgar Latine translator dothe but yet as the Greeke worde ought to be translated Erasmus finding the vulgar Latine vnsufficient hath added Vitae prioris that is repent yee of your former life Neither dothe Beza finde faulte with the English worde repent but with the Latine Agite paenitentiam when you translate it do penaunce meaning thereby paine or satisfaction for sinnes passed to be a necessarie parte of true repentance which is not conteyned in the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth changing of the mind that is not onely a sorrow for the sinne past but also a purpose of amendment which is beste expressed by the Latine worde Resipiscere which is alwaies taken in the good parte as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in the Scripture where as the Latine wordes paenitere and Paenitentia are vsed in Latine of sorrowe or repentance that is too late As paenitere and paenitentia may be saide of Iudas grief of minde which caused him to hang him selfe but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or resipiscere and resipisscentia and therefore the Holye Ghoste speakinge of his sorrowe vseth an other worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this is the cause why Beza refused the worde Paenitentia hauing a Latine worde that more properlye doeth expresse the Greeke worde as wee might lawefullye doe in Englishe if wee had an other Englishe worde proper to that repentaunce whiche is alwayes ioyned with faith and purpose of amendmente for wante whereof wee are constrayned to vse the wordes repente and repentaunce whiche maye bee taken in good parte or in euill For wee saye repentaunce too late and Iudas repented too late but there is no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that can bee called too late But where you saye that resipiscere and resipiscentia is nothing but amendement of life and that repentaunce in our heresie is nothing else but a meere amendment of former life you speake vntruly for those words do signifie not only amendment of life but also sorrow for the sinnes past although without recompēce or satisfactiō which you call penance for the sinnes before cōmitted for we know no recompence or satisfactiō made to God for our sinnes but the death of Christ who is the propitiation for our sinnes 1. Iohn 1. Neither hath your blasphemous satisfaction any grounde in the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but onely a foolish colour by the Latine translation Agite poenitentiam which it is like your Latine interpreter did neuer dreame of and therefore he vseth the worde Resipiscere 2. Tim. 2. Of them to whom God should giue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repentaunce to the acknowledging of the truth Et resipiscant and so they may repent or as you translate it recouer themselues from the snare of the Diuell Seyng therefore repentance is the gifte of God it is no recompence or satisfaction made by vs to God to answere his iustice but an earnest and true griefe of minde for our transgression of Gods lawe and offending against his maiestie with a certaine purpose and determination of amendment so neere as God shall giue vs grace Hetherto therefore we haue no demonstration of any wilfull corruption but a declaration of the cause that moued Beza to vse a more exact translation and such as commeth nearer to the originall worde than that which the vulgar translation hath vsed vpon which occasion of a great blasphemie hath bene taken and is yet mainteyned MART. 50. Againe concerning the worde Iustifications which in the Scripture very often signifie the commaundements he saith thus The Greeke interpreters of the Bible meaning the Septuaginta applieth this worde to signifie the whole Lawe of God and therefore commonly it is wont to be translated worde for worde Iustificationes which interpretation therefore only I reiected that I might take away this occasion also of cauilling against iustification by faith and so for iustificationes he putteth constituta Tullies worde forsooth as he saith Can you haue a more playne tèstimonie of his heretic all purpose FVLK 50. Concerning the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Beza translateth Constitutionibus constitutions and you confesse that in Scripture it doth very often signifie the commaundements He sayth first that as the whole Lawe of God is diuided into three partes Morall Ceremoniall and Iudiciall so the Hebrewes haue three seuerall words to expresse the seueral precepts of those lawes For the Hebrew word which signifieth the Ceremoniall precepts the Greekes vse to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the sense is that Zacharie and Elisabeth were iust walking in all the Morall commaundements and obseruing the holy rites and ceremonies as much as concerned them but the thirde worde which signifieth Iudgements S. Luke doth not adde because the exercise of Iudiciall cases did not belong vnto them being priuate persons After this he saith that the Greeke Interpreters of the Bible transferred this worde vnto the whole lawe of God and especially to the holy ceremonies so verily exceedingly commending the law that it is a certaine rule of all iustice And therefore men are wont commonly in respect of the worde to turne it Iustifications And this worde in this place Beza in deede confesseth that he refused to vse for auoyding of cauillations against iustification by fayth seeing he hath none other worde neither woulde he for offence seeke any newe worde to expresse iustification by faith whereas the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this text Luc. 1. verse 6. signifieth not that by which they were made iust but the commaundements or precepts of God by walking in which they were declared to be iust For by the workes of the lawe such as Saint Luke here speaketh of no fleshe shall be iustified before God Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place must haue an other sense than iustifications namely commaundements as you saye it
vs through faith Rom. 4. The Papistes say it is a qualitie inherent within vs for which wordes and matter they haue no warrant in the holy Scripture MART. 54. These few examples proue vnto vs that the Scriptures translated verbatim exactly and according to the proper vse and signification of the wordes do by the Heretikes confession make for the Catholikes and therefore Beza saith he altereth the wordes into other and I thinke it may suffice any indifferent reader to iudge of his purpose and meaning in other places of his translation and consequently of theirs that either allow him or follow him which are our English Caluinists and Bezites Many other waies there are to make mosta certaine proofe of their Wilfulnesse as when the translation is framed according to their false and hereticall commentarie and When they will auouch their translations out of prophane writers Homer Plutarch Plinie Tullie Virgil and Terence and reiect the Ecclesiastical vse of wordes in the Scriptures and Fathers which Beza doth for the most part alwaies But it were infinite to note all the markes and by these the wise reader may conceiue the rest FVLK 54 These examples proue nothing lesse For to runne ouer them all briefly the first two we translate verbatim A man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law and repent and repētance we say for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What make these for Poperie If Luc 1. v. 6. we should call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustifications what should Poperie gaine but a vaine cauill when you your selues cōfesse that those iustifications are often vsed for commandements Act. 2. v. 27. all our English translations are as you would haue them Thou shalt not leaue my soule in hell nor suffer thy holy one to see corruption by which verse no descent into Limbus but the resurrection from death can be proued If wee translate as you do Act. 3. v. 21. whome heauen must receaue wee will easily conuince that Christe muste be receaued of heauen In the laste example the question is not howe the worde is to be translated but by what worde the want of the texte is to be supplied whiche wee supplie not with wordes of our owne but with the Apostles owne wordes Haue you not gayned greatly by translating verbatim exactly and according to the proper vse and signification of the wordes I lyke well that euery indifferent Reader may iudge by these examples of Bezaes purpose in other places of his translation But you haue two other wayes to make certaine proofe of their wilfulnesse The firste is when the translation is framed according to their hereticall commentarie A reasonable man would thinke rather that the commentarie were framed according to the texte than the texte to the commentarie But to iustifie the truth of those translations for the firste texte you quote it is handled sect 26. of this chapter and so consequently Cap. 7. The seconde is answered sect 46. the other two concerning tradition sect 23. of the preface and in the chapiter following The second waye of proofe is when they will auouch their translations out of prophane writers I thinke there is no better waye to know the proper or diuerse signification of wordes than out of auncient writers though they be neuer so prophane who vsed the wordes most indifferently in respect of our controuersies of which they were altogither ignorant As for the ecclesiasticall vse of wordes in the Scripture and the Fathers which Beza you say doth for the most part reiect it is vntrue except there be good and sufficient cause why he should so do warranted by the Scripture it selfe or necessarie circumstances of the places which he doth translate For if the Scripture haue vsed a worde in one signification sometimes it is not necessarie that it should alwaies vse it in the same signification when it is proued by auncient writers that the worde hath other significations more proper to the place and agreeable to the rule of fayth which perhaps the vsuall signification is not As for example the Scripture vseth very often this worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a boy or seruaunt but when the same worde is applied to our Sauiour Christ in the prayer of the Apostles Act. 4. 27. Who woulde not rather translate it childe or sonne as the worde doth sometime but more seldome signifie Howe the Fathers of the Churche haue vsed wordes it is no rule for translators of the Scripture to followe who oftentimes vsed wordes as the people did then take them and not as they signified in the Apostles tyme. As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a publicke testification of repentaunce which wee call penaunce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for imposition of handes and suche like in whiche sense these wordes were neuer vsed before the Apostles times and therefore it is not lyke that they woulde beginne a newe vse of them without some manifest explication of their meaning without the whiche no man could haue vnderstoode them as they haue done in the vse of these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and such like It is not a faulte therefore prudently to seeke euen out of prophane writers what is the proper signification of wordes and howe many significations a woorde may haue and reuerently to iudge which is moste apte for the place to be translated and moste agreeable with the holy ghostes meaning in that texte and not alwaies to bee tyed to the vsuall signification of wordes as they are sometimes taken in Scripture and much lesse as they are vsed of the auncient Fathers MART. 55. But would you thinke that these men could notwithstanding speake very grauely and honestly against voluntarie and wilfull translations of Scripture that so notoriously offend therein them selues Harken what Beza saith against Castaleo and the like The matter saith he is now come to this point that the translatours of Scripture out of the Greeke into Latin or into any other tōgue think that they may lawfully doe any thing in translating Whom if a man reprehend he shall be answered by and by that they do the office of a translatour not that translateth worde for worde but that expresseth the sense So it commeth to passe that whiles euery man will rather freely folow his own iudgement than be a religious interpreter of the Holy Ghost he doth rather peruert many things than translate them Is not this well said if he had done accordingly but doing the cleane contrarie as hath ben◠proued he is a dissembling hypocrite in so saying and a wilfull Heretike in so doing and condemned by his owne iudgement FVLK 55. No wise man doubteth but they could both speake very grauely and auoyde most religiously al voluntarie wilful translations of scripture that might tende to maintaine any errour And the rather they will be perswaded that Beza hath auoyded that lewde kinde of translatiō for which he reproueth Castaleo when they shall see that
on your parte that should exactly folow the Greeke falsely translated when you translate in S. Peters Epistle thus You were not redeemed with corruptible things froÌ„ your vaine conuersation receiued by the tradition of the fathers Where the Greeke is thus rather to be translated froÌ„ your vaine conuersation deliuered by the fathers But your fingers itched to fâ—â—st in the word tradition and for deliuered to say receiued because it is the phrase of the Catholike Church that it hath receiued many things by tradition which you woulde here controll by likenesse of wordes in this false translation FVLK 6. I maruaile why you should compte it an heretical humor to vse the worde traditions in the euill part which the holy ghost so vseth and your owne vulgar translator also but that you are more partial in allowing the traditions of meÌ„ than we in auoiding the terme somtimes only for doubt lest traditioÌ„s of meÌ„ should creepe into the place of Gods coÌ„mandemeÌ„ts But how is it falsly translated on our part that professe to folow the Greke which is truly translated in your vulgar Latin text which professeth to translate the Greeke as well as we belike because we say receiued by the tradition of the fathers which according to the Greeke should be deliuered by the fathers but that our fingers itched to foyst in the word tradition What I pray you hath your vulgar traÌ„slator foisted in that word did his fingers itch against such catholike phrases that he would coÌ„trol theÌ„ by a false traÌ„slation do you not perceiue that while you raile vpoÌ„ vs you reuile your owne vulgar Latin translatioÌ„ which hath the same word traditioÌ„ for which you storme against vs But for deliuered we haue said receiued See whether frowardnes driueth you the Apostle saith they were deliuered froÌ„ the vaine coÌ„uersation of their fathers traditioÌ„ Do you then vnderstaÌ„d that it was deliuered by the fathers but not receiued by their sonnes Certainely they were deliuered from that vaine conuersation which they had receyued For receyuing doth necessarily importe deliuering And because you called for a Lexicon in the next section before Scapula will teach you that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie as indifferently A patre traditus as à patre acceptus deliuered by the father and receyued by the father What wrangling then is this about the moone shine in the water to crie out false translation foysting itching fingers and I know not what MART. 7. But concerning the worde tradition you will say perhaps the sense thereof is included in the Greeke worde deliuered We graunt But would you be content if we should alwayes expresly adde tradition where it is so included then should we say 1. Cor. 11. 2. I praise you that as I haue deliuered you by tradition you keepe my precepts or traditions And againe v. 23. For I receiued of our Lord which also I deliuered vnto you by tradition c. And Luc. 1. v. 2. As they by tradition deliuered vnto vs which from the beginning sawe c. and suche lyke by your example wee should translate in this sorte But we vse not this licentious maner in translating holy Scriptures neither is it a translators parte but an interpreters and his that maketh a commentarie neither doth a good cause neede other translation than the expresse text of the Scripture giueth FVLK 7. We will say it is contained in the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth receaued by tradition or deliuerie froÌ„ the Fathers not in the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth otherwise many times thaÌ„ simply to deliuer when it signifieth to deliuer it doth not alway signifie to deliuer by word of mouth without writing as you vnderstand tradition but as well by writing as by preaching As when S. Paule saith I receaued of the Lord that which I deliuered vnto vou speaking of the institution of the supper he meaneth that which the Euangelists had written he him selfe doth write So 2. Thess. 2. when he willeth theÌ„ to hold the traditioÌ„s which they had learned of him he speaketh not only of such as they learned by his preaching but such also as they learned by his Epistle Wherefore if you should expresly adde the worde tradition in your partiall signification wheresoeuer you finde the word deliuered you shoulde not onely translate ridiculously but also heretically and falsly Wordes in deriuation and composition doe not alwaies signifie according to their primitiue MART. 8. And if you will yet say that our vulgar Latine translation hath here the worde tradition we graunt it hath so and therefore we also translate accordingly But you professe to translate the Greeke and not the vulgar Latine which you in England condemne as Papisticall and say it is the worst of all though Beza your maister pronounce it to be the very best and will you notwithstanding followe the sayde vulgar Latine rather than the Greeke to make traditions odious Yea such is your partialitie one way and inconstancie an other way that for your hereticall purpose you are content to followe the olde Latine translation though it differ from the Greeke and againe another time you will not follow it though it be all one with the Greeke most exactly as in the place before alledged where the vulgar Latine translation hath nothing of traditions but Quid decernitis as it is in the Greeke you translate Why are ye burdened with traditions FVLK 8. You may be sure we will saye that we know to be true and sufficient to discharge our translation from your foolish and malicious quarrelling But we professe you saye to translate the Greeke and not the vulgar Latine And I pray you what doth your vulgar Latine Interpreter professe to translate but the Greeke if he then translating out of Greeke could finde tradition in the Greeke worde why shoulde not we finde the same especially being admonished by him who if he translated truly why are we blamed for doing as he did if his translation be false why is it allowed as the onely authenticall text We follow not therefore the Latine translation but ioyne with it wheresoeuer it followeth the Greeke as we doe in ten thousand places more than this and willingly depart not from it but where it departeth from the Greeke or else vseth such wordes as would be offensiue if they were translated into English or occasion of errour as you doe likewise when you depart from the proper and vsuall signification of wordes which your Latine translator vseth as when you call foenerator a creditor which signifieth an vsurer Luc. 7. Stabulum an Inne and stabularius an host Luc. 10. Vna Sabathi the first of the Sabaoth Iohn 2. Ecclesia the assembly Act. 7. Baptismata washings Marc. 7. and such like But we in England you say condemne the Latine translation as papisticall We accuse it as not true in many places we saye it is the worst of all though
the publike seruice of God suche thinges are not lawefull for daunger of idolatrie nor in priuate places to be abused as they are of Papistes but rather though they were as auncient and as goodly monuments as the brasen serpent was which no images at this daye can be it is to the great honour of God that they shoulde be despised defaced burned and stamped to powder as that was which sometyme was erected by the commaundement of God by which not onely great miracles were wrought but the wonderfull mysterie of our saluation through faith in Christ was prefigured MART. 12. And as concerning the Bible that at this daye is redde in their Churches if it be that of the yeare 1577. it is worse sometyme in this matter of images than the other For where the other readeth Couetousnes which is worshipping of idolls there this later where vnto they appeale readeth thus Couetousnes which is worshipping of images and Ephes. 5. it readeth as absurdly as the other A couetous man which is a worshipper of images Loe this is the English Bible which they referre vs vnto as better translated and as correcting the fault of the former But because it is euident by these places that this also is partly worse and partly as ill as the other therefore this great confuter of Maister Iohn Houlet fleeth once more to the Geneua English Bible saying Thus we reade and so we translate to wit A couetous person which is an Idolater Where shall we haue these good fellowes and howe shall we be sure that they will stande to any of their translations from the first redde in their Churches they flee to that that is nowe redde and from this againe to the later Geneua English Bibles neither redde in their Churches as we suppose nor of greatest authoritie among them and we doubt not but they will as fast flee from this to the former againe when this shall be proued in some places more false and absurd than the other FVLK 12. It pleaseth you worse perhaps that lesse fauoureth your pelting distinction of images and idols but it is neuer the worse to be liked of them that be wise and learned which know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greeke doe signifie the same thing which you can not deny And where you say in your scornefull moode loe this is the Bible which they referre vs vnto as better trāslated and as correcting the fault of the former you follow your accustomed vaine of lying For I acknowledge no fault of the former in this point of images but confute the frowardnes of that foolish reason which accuseth our seruice of reading the Bible in shamelesse translations in that text 1. Iohn 5. whereas in the Bible appointed for the seruice it is not as he sayth but euen as he would haue vs to saye I flye not therefore as it pleaseth your wisedom to say from that translation also to the Geneua Bible neither doe I alledge the Geneua trāslation for that cause you pretend but to shew that albeit we translate in such words as you can not mislike yet your venemous slaundering pennes and tongues can neuer giue ouer your peeuish quarrelling In the place by you quoted I defend both as true and answerable to the Greeke and of one sense and meaning where the sound of words onely is diuers the signification of matter one and the same And yet you must haue your foolish florish in roperipe termes Where shall we haue these good fellowes c You shall haue vs by the grace of God ready to iustifie all our translation from shamelesse falsification and hereticall corruptions which is your impudent charge against vs. And if in matter of lesser moment you can descry the least errour in any or in all of our translations we shall be willing to confesse the same and ready to reforme it For truth is deerer to vs than credit although we thinke it better credit to reforme a fault than being admonished wilfully to cōtinue it or defend it MART. 13. But what matter is it howe they reade in their churches or how they correct their former translations by the later when the olde corruption remaineth still being set of purpose in the top of euery dore within their churches in these wordes Babes keepe your selues from images Why remaineth that written so often and so conspicuously in the wals of their churches which in their Bibles they correst as a fault their later Bibles say Keepe your selues from idols their church walles say Keepe your selues from images S. Iohn speaking to the lately conuerted Gentiles biddeth them beware of the idols from whence they were conuerted they speaking to the olde instructed Christians bid them beware of the sacred image of Christ our Sauiour of the holy Crucifixe of the Crosse of euerie such representation and monument of Christes passion and our redemption And therefore in the verie same place where these holy monumentes were wont to stande in Catholike times to witte in the roode loft and partition of the Church and chauncell there nowe standes these wordes as confronting and condemning the foresayd holy monumentes Babes keepe your selues from images Which wordes whosoeuer esteemeth as the wordes of Scripture and the wordes of Sainct Iohn spoken against Christes image is made a verie babe in deede and sottishly abused by their scribled doores and false translations to count that idolatrie which is in deede to no other purpose than to the great honour of him whose image and picture it is FVLK 13. Still you harpe on the olde vntuneable string that the former is a corruption which saith Babes kepe your selues from images which sentence sore grieueth you to be written in the toppe of church dores or in place where the Roode loft stoode And you aske why it remaineth on the wals which we correct as a fault in the Bibles But who tolde you that they correct it as a fault in the Bibles Is euery alteration with you a correction The one explicateth the other that idols of which S. Iohn speaketh be images abused in religion Not that all images be idols as the worde idoll in the Englishe speach is taken nor that al idols be images but as images that are worshipped But S. Iohn you say speaking to the conuerted Gentiles biddeth them beware of the idols from whence they were conuerted That is true but not onely from them but from all other idols Except perhappes you thinke that Christians by that texte shoulde not abhorre the images of Simon Magus and Selene and the images of the Valentinians and Gnostikes and other heretikes which worshipped the image of Christ and of Sainct Paule as Irenaeus and Epiphanius doe testifie And it seemeth you so thinke in deede For you say soone after whosoeuer esteemeth those wordes as the wordes of Scripture if images be put for idolls spoken against Christes image is made a verie babe Suchs babes were Irenaeus
as properly as of the second MART. 21. This being a thing so plaine as nothing more in al the holy Scriptures yet your itching humour of deceite falfehood for the most part doth translate still images images when the Latine and Greeke and Hebrue haue diuers other wordes and very seldome that which answereth to image For when it is image in the Latin or Greeke or Hebrue textes your translation is not reprehended for we also translate sometimes images when the text of the holy Scripture requireth it And we are not ignorant that there were images which the Pagans adored for their gods we know that some idols are images but not al images idols But when the holy Scriptures call thē by so many names rather than images because they were not onely images but made idols why do your translations like cuckoes birds sound continually images images more than idols or other wordes equiualent to idols which are there meant FVLK 21. In deede there is nothing more plaine in all the holy Scriptures thā that the worshipping of Images of al sortes is forbidden but that our itching humor of deceit and falshood as it pleaseth you to speake hath corrupted the text to establish any false opinion of the vse of Images it is not yet proued But now you set vpon vs with 13. Hebrue wordes and 9. Greeke words at ones which we for the most parte doe translate still Images Images and you say we sounde with Cuckowes birdes continually Images Images more than Idols or other wordes equiualent to Idols How many times the word Image is sounded I neuer had care to seeke and now I haue no leysure to number but I am sure Idols and Idolatrie in that translation in which least are named aboue fortie or fiftie times But to a conscience guiltie of worshipping of Images contrary to the expresse commaundement of God the very name of Images must needes sounde vnpleasantly That wee haue no greater chaunge of wordes to answere so many of the Hebrue tongue it is of the riches of that tongue and the pouertie of our mother language which hath but two wordes Image and Idoll and them both borowed of the Latine and Greeke As for other wordes equiualent wee know not any and we are loth to make any new wordes of that signification excepte the multitude of Hebrue words of the same sense cōming togither do sometimes perhaps seeme to require it Therfore as the Greeke hath fewer wordes to expresse this thing than the Hebrue so hath the Latine fewer than the Greeke and the English fewest of all as will appeare if you would vndertake to giue vs English wordes for the 13. Hebrue wordes Except you would coyne such ridiculous inkhorne termes as you do in the new Testement Azymes Prepuce Neophyte Scandale Parasceue and such like MART. 22. Two places onely wee will at this time aske you the reason of first why you translate the Hebrue and Greeke that answeareth to Statua image so often as you doe Whereas this word in the said tongues is taken also in the better part as when Iacob set vp a stone and erected it for a title powring oile vpon it and the Prophet saith Our Lordes altar shal be in Aegipt and his title beside it So that the word doth signifie generally a signe erected of good or euill and therefore might very well if it pleased you haue some other English than image Vnlesse you will say that Iacob also set vp an image Our Lords image shall be in AEgipt which you will not say though you might with more reason than in other places FVLK 22. Seeing you aske why we translate the Hebrue word Matsebah so often an image It had bene reason you shoulde haue tolde vs howe often we doe so or at least noted some place where it can not signifie an image We knowe the word being deriued of the verbe Iatsab that signifieth to stande may be taken for some thing erected that is no image but a pillour or as your Latine text calleth it a title in both the places by you noted Gen. 28. Esai 19. and else where Gen. 25. 2. Sam. 18. But when soeuer we translate it an image the circumstaunce of the place so requireth as 2. Reg. 10. where it is sayed that Baals images were taken out of his temple broken and burnt For they were images of Baal that were worshipped in his temple and not titles or pillours Likewise 2. Reg. 17. where it is sayd that the Ismaelites made vnto them selues Statuas images and groues vnder euerie high hil and vnder euery thicke tree as appeareth by Ezechiel 6. where they be called Gillulim idols which had the similitude of men as Baalim and suche other MART. 23. Secondly we demaund why your verie last Englishe Bible hath Esa. 30. 22. For two Hebrue wordes which are in Latine Sculptilia and Conflatilia twise images images neither worde being Hebrue for an image no more than if a man would aske what is Latine for an image and you would tell him Sculptile Whereuppon he seeing a faire painted image in a table might happily say Ecce egregium sculptile Which euerie boy in the Grammar schoole woulde laugh at Which therefore we tell you because we perceiue your translations endeuour and as it were affectate to make Sculptile and image all one Which is most euidently false and to your great confusion appeareth Abac. 2. v. 13. Where for these wordes Quid prodest sculptile quia sculpsit illud fictor suus conflatile imaginem falsam Which is according to the Hebrue and Greeke your later English translation hath What profiteth the image for the maker thereof hath made it an image and a teacher of lies FVLK 23. If it had said the grauen images of siluer and the molten or cast images of gold I know not what aduauntage it had bene to you or losse to vs. But neither word you say is Hebrue for an image Alacke this is poore sophistrie when all the worlde of Hebricians know they are Hebrue for nothing else but for grauen or cast images and by the figure Synecdoche are taken generally for images of what making or matter soeuer they be And the question is not by what art images are made but to what vse and howe they be vsed that they may be condemned for vnlawefull This I take to be the cause why the interpretour neglected the difference of the Hebrue words which sometimes is not obserued in English vnpossible alwaies vnprofitable to be kept As for your owne conceite whereat you thinke boyes might laugh I leaue it to your selfe For if we were asked what is Latine for an image we coulde aunswere somewhat else than Sculptile But if a boy shoulde aske Pesilim or Massecath in this place of Esay doth signifie we woulde not aunswere a grauen thing or a molten thing
qui efficia◠omnia in omnibus reuera nedum vt suppleatur à quoquam nisi quatenus pro immensasua bonitate Ecclesiam dignatur sibi quasi corporis instar adiungere This the Apostle hath added altogither for this end that we may know that Christ of him selfe hath no neede of this supplye as he which worketh in truth all things in al so far it is that he should be supplied by any body but that of his infinite goodnes he vouchsafeth to adioine his Church vnto him selfe as his body Who but the deuil would finde fault with this godly Catholike saying wherein it is affirmed that Christ which according to the perfection of his diuine nature needeth no supply yet of his infinite mercie vouchsafeth to become head of his Church as of his body so that he wil not be counted perfect without it Is this to say Christ may be a head without a bodie or is it for his benefite or the benefite of his Church that he is the head thereof But the more to laye open this malicious slaunder and impudent falsifying of Bezaes wordes and meaning I will set downe his saying going immediatly before vpon the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he calleth complementum siue supplementum a fulfilling or supplying Is enim est Christi in Ecclesiam amor c. For such is the loue of Christ toward his Church that whereas he performeth all thinges to all men vnto the full yet he esteemeth him selfe as an vnperfect head maymed of the members vnlesse he haue his Church adioyned to him as his bodye Hereof it commeth that Christ is taken sometime collectiuely for the whole Church adioyned to her heade as 1. Cor. 12. v. 12. 13. and Gal. 3. 16. Hereof commeth also that phrase in Christ so often repeated which signifieth something more expresly than with Christ or by Christ. Hereof that voice of Christ Saul Saul why doest thou persecute me whether also pertaineth that which is written Col. 1. v. 24. Finally hereof proceedeth all our hope and consolation How thinke you is not this man willing to separate the Church from Christ the head frō the body O mōstrous malices of godlesse Papists His exposition of the place being such as you see let vs nowe examine what can be sayde against his translation For a man must not translate falsly to make a true sense It is alledged against him that Chrysostome and all the Greeke and Latine fathers take the participle passiuely Beza confesseth it of Chrysostome whome the later Greeke writers commonly doe followe But the participle being deriued of the meane verbe may haue either passiue or actiue signification But why doth Beza say that the exposition of Chrysostom is forced which taketh it passiuely he saith not in respect of Chrysostomes sense which he him selfe followeth and it is contained in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in respect of the grammar that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be put absolutely without any word to gouerne it seeing the participle of the meane verbe may be taken actiuely and gouerne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being the accusatiue case MART. 7. Marke his Doctors whom he opposeth to the fathers both Greeke Latine Because Xenophon sayth he in such a place Plato in such a place vse the sayd Greeke word actiuely I omit this miserable match and vnworthy names of Xenophon and Plato in triall of S. Paules wordes against all the glorious Doctors this is his common custome I aske him rather of these his owne Doctors how they vse the Greeke word in other places of their workes how vse they it most commonly yea how doe all other Greeke writers either profane or sacred vse it What say the Greeke readers of all Vniuersities Surely not onely they but their scholers for the most part can not be ignorant that the vse of this word the like is passiue though sometime it may also signifie actiuely but that is so rare in comparison of the other that no man lightly will vse it I am well assured it would be counted a fault some lacke of skill if one now in his writings that would expresse this in Greeke God filleth all thinges with his blessing shoulde saye 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and The wine filleth the cuppe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aske them that haue skill and controule me Contrariwise if one would saye passiuely All thinges are filled with Gods blessing The cuppe is filled with wine Such a prophecie is fulfilled What meane Grecian would not say as S. Chrysostome here expoundeth this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsing it possiuely FVLK 7. Marke howe malice carieth this man almost into madnesse For who but a madde man woulde thinke that Beza opposeth prophane writers to Ecclesiasticall doctours for vnderstanding of the Scripture The meane verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the meanest Grammarian in the world knoweth to be taken both actiuely passiuely by the Grammar rule De verbo medio Beza proueth out of Xenophon and Plato that it is and may be vsed actiuely Why not therfore in this place of S. Paule where bothe the sense requireth it that one thing be not repeated twise without necessary cause and the construction of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 calleth for it which otherwise is lefte at randon without any gouernment Seeing therefore we haue the common rule of Grammar and the example of eloquent writers for vse I maruaile what M. Martine meaneth to waste so many wordes about so cleare a matter No man that knoweth any thing doubteth but that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be and is often taken passiuely But seing it is also found to be a verbe meane who neede to be afraide to vse it actiuely hauing Xenophon and Plato for his warrant yea euen in those examples you put of Gods blessing filling all things or the wine filling the cuppe if any man would speake so But if because the worde is more vsually taken passiuely men would refraine so to speake yet why should we thinke that S. Paule did not vse it actiuely when the actiue signification is more agreeable both with his wordes and with his meaning But least you shoulde thinke Beza is alone which taketh it actiuely what say you to Philippus Montanus one of your owne profession which in his animaduersions vpon Theophlyactes translation by him corrected sayth vpon this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui adimplet vel adimpletur verbum enim est medium passiuè autem videtur accipere Theophylactus Which filleth or which is filled for it is a verbe of indifferent signification actiue or passiue but Theophylact seemeth to take it passiuely What say you to Isidorus Clarius who although in his text he readeth passiuely yet in his note cōfesseth it may be takē either passiuely or actiuely For this is his note Plenitudo eius\ per omnia enim membra adimpletur corpus Christi quia omnia in omnibus implet dum
phrase of Scripture this thirtie yeare but it must needes be verie straunge that this making of Elders hath not all this while bene practised and knowen no not among them selues in any of their Churches within the realme of Englande To Titus they make the Apostle say thus For this cause left I thee in Creta that thou shouldest ordaine ELDERS in euerie citie c. Againe of Paule and Barnabas When they had ordained Elders by Election in euerie congregration Act. 14. If they had sayed plainely as it is in the Greeke and as our forefathers were wont to speake and the truth is Titus was leâ—t in Creta to ordaine Priestes in euerie citie and Paule and Barnabas made Priestes in euerie Church then the people would haue vnderstoode them they know such speaches of old it had bene their ioy comfort to heare it specified in holy Scriptures Now they are tolde an other thing in suche newnesse of speaches and wordes of Elders to be made in euery citie congregation and yet not one citie nor congregation to haue any Elders in all Englande that we know not what is prophane noueltie of wordes which the Apostle willeth to be auoided if this be not an exceeding profane noueltie FVLK 5. When you haue gotteÌ„ a bable you make more of it than of the towre of London for you haue neuer done playing with it It must needes be a clarkely argument that is drawne from the vulgar speaches of making Priests and making Ministers Those Priests or Ministers that are made among vs are the same Elders that the Scripture in Greeke calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Bishops letters of orders testifying of their ordination call them by none other name but by the name of Presbyteri which the Scripture vseth which terme though in English you sounde it Priests Elders Auncients Seniors or Ministers which is the common peoples worde it is the same office which is described by the holy ghost Tit. 1. and in other places of Scripture As for the prophane noueltie wherewith this worde Elder is changed we will consider of it in the next section MART. 6. That it is noueltie to all English Christian eares it is euident And it is also profane because they do so English the Greeke worde of ordaining for of the worde Presbyter we will speake more anone as if they should translate Demosthenes or the lawes of Athens concerning their choosing of Magistrates which was by giuing voices with lifting vp their handes So do they force this worde here to induce the peoples election and yet in their Churches in England the people elect not ministers but their Bishop Whereas the holy Scripture saith they ordained to the people and what soeuer force the word hath it is here spoken of the Apostles and pertaineth not to the people and therefore in the place to Titus it is another worde which cannot be forced further than to ordaine and appoint And they might know if malice and Heresic would suffer them to see and confesse it that the holy Scriptures and fathers and Ecclesiasticall custome hath drawen this and the like words from their profane and common signification to a more peculiar and Ecclesiasticall speach as Episcopus an ouerseer in Tulite is a Bishop in the new Testament FVLK 6. The name Elders vsed in our translation is neither more nouell to English eares nor more prophane to godly eares than the name Auncients which your translation vseth And yet I thinke the Apostle 1. Tim. 6. spake not of noueltie to English eares but of that which was newe to the eares of the Churche of God But the worde Elders I weene muste be prophane because we English the Greeke worde of ordeining as if wee should translate Demosthenes or the Lawes of Athens concerning the choosing of Magistrates Doth not this cauill redounde more against the holy Ghost to accuse his stile of prophanenesse which vseth the same wordes for the ordeining of Priestes that Demosthenes or the lawes of AtheÌ„s might vse for choosing of their Magistrates But this worde we enforce you say to enduce the peoples election and yet the Bishop not the people elect our ministers We meane not to enforce any other election than the worde doth signifie Neyther doth our Bishops if they doe well ordeine any Ministers or Priestes without the Testimonie of the people or at leastwise of such as be of moste credite where they are knowne Where you vrge the pronowne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to them as though the people gaue no consent nor testimonie it is more than ridiculous and beside that contrarie to the practise of the primitiue Churche for many hundreth yeares after the Apostles as also that you would inforce vpon the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsed by S. Paule Tit. 1. as though that worde of constitution did exclude election That the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Fathers of the Church since the Apostles hath bene drawne to other signification than it had before it is no reason to teach vs howe it was vsed by the Apostles Election is an indifferent thing the election of Bishops Elders or Priestes is an holy thing the holynesse whereof is not included in the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in the holy institution of Christ and authoritie by appointment deliuered by imposition of the handes of the Eldership MART. 7. And coÌ„cerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we now speake of S. Hierom telleth them in c. 58. Esai that it signifieth Clericorum ordinationem that is giuing of holy orders whiche is done not onely by praier of the voice but by imposition of the hande according to S. Paul vnto Timothee Manus citò nemini imposueris Impose or put hands quickly on no man That is be not hastie or easie to giue holy orders Where these great etymologistes that so straine the originall nature of this worde to profane stretching forth the hand in elections may learne an other Ecclesiasticall erymologie thereof as proper and as well deduced of the worde as the other to wit putting forth the hand to giue orders and so they shall finde it is all one with that which the Apostle calleth imposition of hands 1. Tim. 4 2. Tim 1 and consequently for ordaining Elders by election they should haue sayd ordaining or making Priests by imposition of handes as else where S. Paule 1. Tim. 5. and the Actes of the Apostles Act. 6. and 13. do speake in the ordaining of the seuen Deacons and of S. Paul and Barnabas FVLK 7. The testimonie of S. Hierome whom you cite you vnderstand not for speaking there of the extension of the finger which the septuaginta translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and God requireth to be taken away he saith Many of our interpreters do vnderstande it of the ordination of Clerkes which is performed not onely at the imprecation of voice but also at the imposition of
Presbyter Doeth not Priest come of Presbyter as certainly and as agreeably as Deacon of Diaconus Doth not also the French and Italian word for Priest come directly from the same Will you alwaies followe fansie and not reason doe what you list translate as you list and not as the truth is and that in the holy Scriptures which you boast and vaunt so much of Because your selues haue theÌ„ whom you call Bishops the name Bishops is in your Englishe Bibles which otherwise by your owne rule of translation should be called an Ouerseer or Superintendent likewise Deacon you are content to vse as an Ecclesiasticall word so vsed in antiquitie because you also haue those whom you call Deacons Only Priests must be turned contemptuously out of the text of the holy Scriptures Elders put in their place because you haue no Priestes nor will none of them and because that is in controuersie betwene vs. And as for Elders you haue none permitted in EnglaÌ„d for feare of ouerthrowing your Bishops office and the Queenes supreame gouernment in all spiritual things and causes Is not this to followe the humour of your heresie by Machiauels politike rules without any feare of God FVLK 12. Here I must aunswere you that we haue no degree of Ministers distinct from Deacons but by vulgar and popular vse of speaking which we are not curious to controule Otherwise in truth we account Bishops Elders and Deacons all Ministers of the Church It is no more therefore but the common speache of men which vseth that worde which is common to all Ecclesiasticall persons as peculiar to the Elders or Priestes Why we keepe the name of Deacons in translating Diaconus rather than of Priestes in translating Presbyter I haue tolde you often before The name Priest being by long abuse of speache applied to signifie Sacrificers of the olde Testament called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we could not giue the same name to the Ministers of the new Testament except we had some other name whereby to call the Ministers of the olde Testament wherein we followe reason and not fansie for it is great reason we should retaine that difference in names of the Ministers of both the Testamentes which the holy Ghost doth alwaies obserue But you follow fansie altogither imagining that Priestes onely are put out of the text because we haue no Priestes Whereas we haue Priestes as well as we haue Bishops and Deacons and so are they called in our booke of common prayer indifferently Priestes or Ministers And where you say we haue no Elders permitted in Englande it is false for those that are commonly called Bishoppes Ministers or Priestes among vs be suche Elders as the Scripture commendeth vnto vs. And although we haue not suche a consistorie of Elders of gouernemente as in the Primitiue Churche they had and many Churches at this daye haue yet haue wee also Elders of gouernement to exercise discipline as Archbishoppes and Bishoppes with their Chauncellours Archedeacons Commissaries Officialles in whome if any defecte bee we wishe it may be reformed according to the worde of God MART. 13. Apostles you say for the most parte in your translations not alwayes as we doe and Prophetes and Euangelistes and Angels and such like wheresoeuer there is no matter of controuersie betwene you and vs there you can pleade verie grauely for keeping the auncient Ecclesiasticall wordes as your maister Beza for example beside many other places where he bitterly rebuketh his fellow Castalâ—ons translation in one place writeth thus I can not in this place dissemble the boldnesse of certaine men which would God it rested within the compasse of words only These men therefore concerning the worde Baptizing though vsed of sacred writers in the mystery or Sacrament of the new Testament and for so many yeares after by the secrete consent of all Churches consecrated to this one Sacrament so that it is now growen into the vulgar speaches almost of all nations yet they dare presume rashly to chaunge it and in place thereof to vse the word washing Delicate men forsooth which neither are moued with the perpetual authority of so many ages nor by the daily custom of the vulgar speach can be brought to thinke that lawfull for Diuines which all men graunt to other Maisters and professors of artes that is to retaine and holde that as their owne which by long vse and in good faith they haue truly possessed Neither may they preteÌ„d the authoritie of some auncient writers as that Cyprian sayeth TINGENTES for BAâ—PTIZANTES and Tertullian in a certaine place calleth SEQVESTREM for MEDIATOREM For that which was to those auncientes as it were newe to vs is olde and euen then that the selfe same words which we now vse were familiar to the Church it is euident because it is very seldome that they speake otherwise But these men by this noueltie seeke after vaine glorie c. FVLK 13. If in any place we vse not the name of the Apostles Prophetes Euangelists Angels and such like wee are able to giue as sufficient a reason why we translate those wordes according to their Generall signification as you for translating somtime Baptismata washings and not baptismes Ecclesia the assembly and not the Church with such like Therefore as Castaleo such other Heretikes are iustly reprehended by Beza for leauing without cause the vsuall Ecclesiasticall termes so when good cause or necessitie requireth not to vse them it were superstition yea and almost madnes sometimes in translating to vse them as to call the Pharisees washings Baptismes or the assembly of the EphesiaÌ„ Idolaters the Churche yet both in Greeke and Latine the wordes are Baptismata ecclesia MART. 14. He speaketh against Castaleon who in his newe Latine translation of the Bible changed all Ecclesiasticall wordes into profane and Heathenish as Angelos into genios Prophetas into Fatidicos Templum into fanum and so foorth But that which he did for foolish affectation of finenesse and stile do not our English Caluinistes the very same when they list for furthering their Heresies When the holy Scripture saith idols according as Christians haue alwayes vnderstood it for false goddes they come and tell vs out of Homer and the Lexicons that it may signifie an image and therfore so they translate it Do they not the like in the Greeke worde that by Ecclesiasticall vse signifieth penaunce and doing penaunce when they argue out of Plutarch and by the profane sense therof that it is nothing else but chaunging of the minde or amendment of life Whereas in the Greeke Church Poenitentes that is they that were in the course of penance and excluded from the Church as Catechumeni and Energumeni till they had accomplished their penance the very same are called in the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 FVLK 14. That Castaleo did for foolish affectatioÌ„ of finenesse you slauÌ„der vs to do for furthering of heresie
alleageth it thus the holy Euangelist S. Luke in the Acts of the Apostles cap. 2. recordeth it and for this S. Augustine calleth him an infidel that denyeth it yet all this would not suffise to make Beza translate it so because of certaine errours as he heretically termeth them which he would full gladly auoide hereby namely the Catholike true doctrine of limbus patrum and Purgatorie What neede we say more he translateth animam a Carcase so calling our Sauiour Christes bodie irreuerently and wickedly he translateth infernum graue FVLK 2. That many of the Christian fathers helde this error that the godly of the old Testament were not in heauen before Christes death it is no cause why we should be afraid to confesse the truth reuealed to vs out of the holy Scriptures to the glorie of God And if the wrong or ambiguous translation of one Hebrue word Sheol deceiued them that were for the most parte ignoraunt of the Hebrue tongue what reason were it that we shoulde not in translation reforme that errour But as for Bezaes first translation of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deade bodie and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 graue I haue aunswered at large Cap. 1. sect 31. where also it is shewed howe vainely you take hold of the English worde carcase to charge Beza with vnreuerent calling of our Sauiour Christes bodie when it was deade because he calleth it in Latine Cadauer MART. 3. Neede we take any great labour to proue this to be a foule corruption or that it is done purposely whē he confesseth that he thus translateth because else it woulde serue the Papistes Which is as much to say as the word of God if it be truly and sincerely translated maketh in deede for them For the first part we will not stand vpon it partly because it is of it selfe most absurd and they are ashamed of it partly because it shall susfise to confute Beza that two other as famous heretikes as he Castalio and Flaccus Illyricus write against him in this point and confute him partly also because we speake not here vniuersally of all hereticall translations but of the English corruptions specially therfore we may only note here how gladly they also would say somwhat else for soule euen in the text if they durst for shame for in the margent of that English trāslation they say or life or person thereby aduertising the Reader that he may reade thus if it please him Thou shalt not leaue my life in the graue or Thou shalt not leaue my person As though either mans soule or life were in the graue or anima might be translated person which the selfe same Englishe Bible doeth not no not in those places where it is euident that it signifieth the whole person For though this worde soule by a figure is sometime taken for the whole man yet euen there they doe not nor must not translate it otherwise than soule beause our tongue beareth that figure as well as Latine Greeke or Hebrue but here where it can not signifie the whole person it is wicked to translate it so FVLK 3. If you take more labour than you are wel able to beare yet shall you proue it no hereticall corruption As Castaleo and Illyricus the one an heretike the other a schismatike haue inueyed against Beza so hath he sufficiently confuted them But to our English translation where in the margent they say life or person when in the text they say soule what doeth this offende you They render the vsuall English word for the Greke word but they admonish the reader that the word soule in this place signifieth not the soule separated from the bodie but either the life or the whole person Because that although the bodie onely be layed in the graue yet according to vulgar speache and sense the whole man is sayed to be buried and his life seemeth to be inclosed in the graue according to which popular and humane conceyt the Prophet in that Psalme speaketh as appeareth in the later parte of that verse which is all one in sense with the former Neither wilt thou giue thy holy one to see corruption where corruption which is proper onely to the bodie is there spoken generally of the whole man If this expositiō please you not yet you haue no cause to finde fault with the translation which in that place is according to the cōmon and ordinarie signification of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 soule Which as it is somtime taken for the whole person as you note Act. 7. 14. So is it here as the later parte of the verse doth most plainly declare MART. 4. But as for the worde graue that they put boldly in the text to signifie that howsoeuer you interprete soule or whatsoeuer you put for it it is not meant according to S. Augustine and the faith of the whole Catholike Church that his soule descended into Hell whiles his bodie was in the graue but that his soule also was in the graue howsoeuer that is to be vnderstoode So making it a certaine and resolute conclusion that the holy Scripture in this place speaketh not of Christs being in Hell but in the graue and that according to his soule or life or person or as Beza will haue it His carcase or bodie and so his soule in Hell as the holy Scripture speaketh shall be his bodie in the graue as Beza plainly speaketh the Bezites couertly insinuate white shall be blacke and chaulke shall be cheese and euery thing shall be any thing that they will haue it And all this their euident false translation must be to our miserable deceiued poore soules the holy Scripture and Gods word FVLK 4. The Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wel beareth to be translated in some places a graue here the later part of the verse speaketh of corruption which can not be vnderstoode to be but in the graue so doth S. Peter vnderstand it saying that Dauid the Patriarch died and was buried and his sepulchre remayneth with vs vnto this day and S. Paule vpon the same verse of the Psalme saith he saw corruption Both the Apostles therfore interpreting this verse of the resurrection of Christ we thinke it in deede a resolute conclusion that the Scripture in this place speaketh not of Christs being in hell which we acknowledge in the article of our Creede but of his buriall and resurrection Your trifling of white and blacke chaulke and cheese may seeme pleasaunt Rhetorike to grosse eares whom you seeke to fill with such vanities But the wiser sort that are acquainted with figuratiue speaches wil thinke it nothing straunge if words be not alwaies taken in their vsual proper signification That the Hebrue worde Nephesh which the Prophet in that verse of the Psalme vseth is taken diuerse times in the Scripture for a deade bodie I haue before proued more plainly than euer you shall
not complaine of the singularitie of this exaÌ„ple although you require but one I wil adde out of the Psalme 141. where the Prophet saith our bones are scattered at the very brinke or mouth of sheol the graue Howe can you vnderstand him to speake of hel For the graue and not hell is a place for dead mens bones as he speaketh of the faithfull by the wicked compted as good as dead rotten consumed to the bones By these and many other examples it is manifest that the proper signification of sheol in English is a graue and not hell MART. 22. And therefore Beza doth strangely abuse his Reader more than in one place saying that the Hebrue word doth properly signifie graue beyng deduced of a verbe that signifieth to craue or aske because it craueth alwayes newe coarses As though the graue craued moe than Hel doth or swallowed moe or were more hardly satisfied and filled than Hell for in all such places they translate graue And in one such place they say The graue and destructioÌ„ can neuer be ful Whereas them selues a litle before translate the very same wordes Hel destructioÌ„ and therefore it might haue pleased them to haue said also Hel and destructioÌ„ can neuer be ful as their powfellowes do in their translation and againe We shal swalow them vp like Hel. The Diuel we reade goeth about continually like a roaring lion seeking whom he may deâ—ouâ— Who is called in the Apocalypse Abaddon that is destruction And so very aptly Hel and destruction are ioyned togither and are truly said neuer to be filled What madnesse and impudencie is it then for Beza to write thus Who is ignorant that by the Hebrue worde rather is signified a graue for that it seemeth after a sorte to craue alwaies new câ—rcasses FVLK 22. Beza doth not abuse his reader to tel him that sheol is deriued of a verbe that signifieth crauing or asking but you doe vnhonestly abuse Beza as you doe euery man when you take in hand to affirme that he standeth onely vpon the etymologie of sheol to proue that it signifieth the graue MART. 23. And againe coÌ„cerning our Sauiour Christs descending into hell and deliuering the fathers from thence it is maruel fâ—iâ—lr Beâ—a that the most parte of the auncient fathers were in this errour whereas with the Hebrues the word SHEOL signifieth nothing else but GRAVE Before he pleaded vpon the etymologie or nature of the worde now also he pleadeth vpon the authoritie of the Hebrues themselues If he were not knowen to be very impudent and obstinate wee woulde easily mistrust his skill in the Hebrue saying that among the Hebrues the worde signifieth nothing else but graue FVLK 23. Beza sayth that the worde Sheol properly signifieth nothing but the graue neuerthelesse hee saith it is taken figuratiuely for tribulation whiche is neere to extreeme destruction yea and sometime for the bottomlesse pitte of hell MART. 24. I would gladly knowe what are those Hebrues doth not the Hebrue text of the holy Scripture best tell vs the vse of this word Do not themselues translate it Hel very often do not the Septuaginta alwaies If any Hebrue in the world were asked how he would turne these wordes into Hebrue Similes estis sepulchris dealbatis you are like to whited graues And Sepulchrum eius apud vos est His graue is among you would any Hebrue I say translate it by this Hebrue worde which Beza saith among the Hebrues signifieth nothing else but graue Aske your Hebrue Readers in this case and see what they will answere FVLK 24. The best of the Hebrues that either interpreted Scriptures or made Dictionaries Iewes or Christians do acknowledge that sheol doth properly signifie the graue That the Septuaginta do alwaies traÌ„slate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it proueth not that it alwaies signifieth hel for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not alwaies hell as in the place of NuÌ„b. 16. As for the turning of Latin into Hebrue is not our coÌ„trouersie but of translating Hebrue into English sheol may signifie the graue the hole the pit as Fâ—â—ea though it be not all one with the Latine worde Sepulchrum And yet Rabbi Salomon whome you boldly cite in the 27. Section saith plainely that the true and proper interpretation of Sheol is Keber whiche you say is as proper for graue as Lac is for milke MART. 25. What are those Hebrues then that Beza speaketh of forsooth certaine Iewes or later Rabbines which as they doe falsely interprete all the holy Scriptures agaynst our Sauiour Christ in other points of our beleefe as against his Incarnation Death and Resurrection so do they also falsely interprete the holy scriptures against his descending into Hell which those Iewish Rabbines deny because they looke for another Messias that shal not die at al and consequeÌ„tly shal not after his death go downe into Hel deliuer the fathers expecting his comming as our sauiour Christ did And therfore those Iewish Rabbines hold as the heretikes do that the fathers of the old Testament were in heauen before our sauiour Christs Incarnation these Rabbines are they which also peruert the Hebrue word to the significatioÌ„ of graue in such places of the holy scriptures as speake either of our Sauiour Christes descending into hel or of the fathers going downe into Hell euen in like maner as they peruert other Hebrew wordes of the holy scripture as namely alma to signifie a young woman not a virgin against our Sauiours birth of the B. Virgin Marie FVLK 25. Beza speaketh of the holy men of God which did write the Scriptures and so vse that word Sheol as it can not be taken to signifie any thing properly but the graue or pit And as for the Iewish RabbiÌ„s what reason is there why we should not credite them in the interpretatiou of wordes of their owne tongue rather than any auncient Christians ignorant of the Hebrewe tongue And although they doe sometimes frowardly contend about the significatioÌ„ of a word or two against the truth of the Gospell that is no sufficient cause why they should be discredited in all words But beside them Beza hath also the best Hebritians that haue bene in this laste age among the Christians not onely Protestants but Papistes also namely Pagninus and Masius in their Dictionaries MART. 26. And if these later Rabbines be the Hebrewes that Beza meaneth and which these gay English translators followe we lament that they ioyne themselues with such companions being the sworne enemies of our Sauiour Christ. Surely the Christian Hebrewes in Rome and elsewhere which of great Rabbines are become zealous Doctors of Christianitiâ— and therefore honour euery mysterie and article of our Christian faith concerning our Sauiour Christ they dispute as vehemently against those other Rabbines as we doe against the Heretikes and among other things they tell them thus Saul sayd Raise me vp Samuel
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
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
as the cause shall require More examples might I bring but for tediousnesse to conuince the bolde rashnesse of this quarreller but these may suffice all indifferent Readers and aunswere sufficiently for vs within the newe Testament we translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordinaunces or statuts seeing it is proued both by the Septuaginta which calleth the same Hebrewe worde not onely iustifications but often commaundements statuts precepts iudgements by the vulgar Latine Interpretor which commonly calleth it ceremonies or precepts MART. 2. But be it that you may controll them in the Hebrew which none but fooles will graunt vnto you in the newe Testament what pretense haue you doe you there also translate the Hebrew worde or rather the Greeke the Greeke vndoubtedly you should translate What reason then can you haue why you doe not none other surely than that which Beza giueth for him selfe saying that he reiected the word iustifications notwithstanding it expressed the Greeke worde for worde notwithstanding the seuentie Greeke Interpreters vsed it to signifie the whole lawe and in Latine it be commonly translated iustificationes notwithstanding all this for this onely cause sayth he did I reiect it to auoide the cauillations that might be made by this word against iustification by faith As if he should say This word truly translated according to the Greeke might minister great occasion to proue by so many places of scripture that mans iustification is not by faith only but also by keeping the law and obseruing the commaundements which therefore are called according to the Greeke and Latine iustifications because they concurre to iustification and make a man iust as by S. Lukes wordes also is well signified which haue this allusion that they were both iuste because they walked in all the iustifications of our Lord. Which they of purpose suppresse by other wordes FVLK 2. None but fooles considering what I haue brought of the vsage of that worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wil iudge that it signifieth onely iustifications and all wise men may see that we haue good warrant to translate it otherwise in the Greeke Testament where it must needes haue an other signification The concurrence of workes with faith to iustificatioÌ„ before God which the Apostle doth exclude Rom. 3. we may not admit But iustification by workes as Saint Iames teacheth we doe acknoweledge I hope you will not saye that your Latine translator against iustification by workes translated the worde so often ceremonies or that ceremonies of the lawe doe concurre to iustification by faith The commaundements in deede are called iustifications because the workes of the lawe if a man keepe it wholy are able to iustifie Not that euery ceremonie or obseruation of any peece of the law is a iustification â—or maketh a man iust which you may better say vpon the etymologie of the worde than that euery particular obseruation of the lawe or good worke doth concurre with faith vnto iustification MART. 3. And hereof also it riseth that when he can not possibly auoyd the word in his translation as Apoc. 19. 8. Bissinum enim iustificationes sunt sanctorum The silke is the iustifications of Sainctes there he helpeth the matter with this coÌ„mentarie That iustifications are those good workes which be the testimonies of a liuely faith But our English translatours haue an other way to auoyd the worde euen in their translation For they say here the righteöusnes of Sainctes because they coulde not saye ordinances of Saincts and they would not say iustifications of Saincts knowing very well by Bezaes owne commentarie that this word includeth the good workes of saincts which workes if they should in translating call their iustifications it would goe sore against iustification by onely faith Therefore doe they translate in steede thereof ordinances and statutes where they can which are termes furthest of from iustification and where they can not there they say righteousnesse making it also the plurall number whereas the more proper Greeke worde for rightuousnesse is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dan. 6 22. which there some of them translate vngiltinesse because they wil not translate exactly if you would hire them FVLK 3. When 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoc. 19. are translated iustificationes they signifie iuste works as I haue already proued the significatioÌ„ of the word to beare beside that it is so vsed by Aristotle in his Ethicks who of iustificatioÌ„ before God whereof wee speake vnderstoode neuer a whit Therefore if in steede of rightuousnesse which is the singular number it were translated rightuous or iust workes it were not amisse in mine opinion Although by rightuousnesse in that place is nothing meant but good or rightuous workes as Bezaes note doth tel you MART. 4. And therefore as for iustice and iustifications they say righteousnesse so for iuste they translate righteous and by this meanes Ioseph was a righteous maÌ„ rather than a iust man and Zacharie and Elisabeth were both righteous before God rather than iust because when a man is called iust it soundeth that he is so in deede and not by imputation onely as a wise man is vnderstoode to be wise in deede and not only so imputed Therefore doe they more gladly and more often say righteous men rather than iust men when they doe say iust men as sometime they doe least they might sâ—eme wilfull inexcusably there they vnderstande iust by imputation not in deede as is to be seene in Bezaes Annotations vpon the Epistle to the Romanes Note also that they put the word iust when faith is ioyned withall as Rom. 1. The iust shal liue by faith to signifie that iustification is by faith But if workes be ioyned withall and keeping the commaundementes as in the place alleaged Luc. 1. there they say righteous to suppresse iustification by workes FVLK 4. This is a maruelous difference neuer heard of I thinke in the English toÌ„gue before betwene iust righteous iustice righteousnes I am sure there is none of our translatours no nor any professer of iustification by faith onely that esteemeth it the worth of one haire whether you say in any place of Scripture iust or righteous iustice or righteousnesse and therefore freely they haue vsed sometimes the one worde sometimes the other Therefore it is a monstrous falshoode that you fain them to obserue this distinction that they ioyne iust with faith and righteous with workes Doe they not translate Rom. 2. ver 13. the hearers of the lawe are not righteous before God but the doers of the lawe shall bee iustified Haue you not again the righteousnesse of God is made manifest without the law c. by the faith of Iesus Christ. And where you reade the iust shall liue by faith haue you not immediatly the righteousnesse of God is reuealed from faith to faith as it is written the iust shall liue by faith Who then but the Diuell which hath his name of sclaundering woulde here inuent
lesse account to be made of his authoritie being also ignoraunt in the Hebrue tongue and not regarding the Greeke relatiue to be also of the masculine gender Hierome also in that place interpreteth not appetite but societie and fantasie ththat chataoth is the masculine gender and not the foeminine Whereas it is neuer read but in the foeminine gender out of this place of controuersie But the text it selfe you say is sufficient to conuince this absurditie because in this speache of God to Cain there is no word of Abel It is somwhat that you say if this that Moises reporteth were all that God sayd to Cain but seeing it is certaine that God at large discoursed wyth him of the cause of his enuie againste his brother wee may easily vnderstande in this speach two arguments to reproue Caines enuie the one of the person of God the other of the person of Abel For God doth reprooue his enuie by his owne iustice and by Abels innocencie Which latter argumēt your false translation doth vtterly suppresse But that a Relatiue is referred to an Antecedent whiche in the same verse is not expressed it is no strange thing to them that reade the scripture Examples I will giue you Iob 26. v. 6. 11. 12. and cap. 27. v. 9. 10. yea it is verye vsuall when the antecedent maye bee easily vnderstoode as heere both by the gender and also by manner of speache whiche beeing the same that was spoken of Eues infirmitie subiection to hir husband must needes here haue the same sense of Abel towarde Caine his elder brother MART. 10. Now if against the coherence of the texte and exposition of the holy Doctours and of the whole Churche of God you pretend the Hebrewe grammar forsooth as not bearing such construction not to trouble the common reader that cannot iudge of these things and yet fully to satisfie euerye man euen of common vnderstanding we request here the Aduersaries themselues to tel vs truely according to their knowledge skill whether the Hebrewe construction or point of grammar be not al one in these wordes Sinne LYETH at the doore and in these the desire THEREOF shall be subiect to thee and thou shalt rule ouer IT If they say as they must nedes that the Hebrewe construction or Syntaxis is al one then wil it folow that the Hebrewe beareth the one as wel as the other and therefore when the selfe same translation of theirs maketh no scruple of Grammar in the former but trāslate as we do Sinne lieth at the doore a blinde man may see that in the latter wordes also the Hebrue is but a foolishe pretence and that the true cause of translating them otherwise proceedeth of an hereticall humour to obscure and deface this so plaine and euident Scripture for mans free wil. FVLK 10. I haue shewed before the cause of the change of the gender in the worde robets to be for that by sinne is meant here the punishment of sinne Sanctes Pagninus taketh the worde sinne for an oblation for sinne And for the punishment of sinne it is taken Zach. 14 19. The Septuaginta also doe plainly referre these relatiues vnto Abel and therefore they are in the masculine gender 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the cōuersion of him pertaineth to thee and thou shalt rule ouer him MART. 11. And as for the Hebrewe grammar in this point were it not for troubling the Reader we could tell thē that the word sinne in Hebrew is not here of the foeminine gender as they suppose but of the masculine so sayth S. Hieror expresly vpon this place who had as much knowledge in the Hebrew tongue as all these new Doctors Aben Ezra also the great Rabbine in his Hebrew commentaries vpon this text sayth it is a meere forgerie and fiction to referre the masculine relatiue otherwise than to the word sinne which though elsewhere it be the feminine gender yet here it is a masculine according to that rule of the Grammarians that the doubtfull gender must be discerned by the verbe adiectiue pronoune or participle ioyned with the same as the sayd Hebrew Doctor doth in the word paradise Gen. 2. which there by the pronounes he pronounceth to be a feminine though elsewhere a masculine Lastly if the worde sinne were here and alwayes only a feminine and neuer a masculine yet they haue litle skill in the Hebrue tongue that thinke it straunge to matche masculines and feminines togither in very good and grammaticall construction Whereof they may see a whole chapter in Sanctes Pagninus with this title Foeminea masculeis iuncta that is Feminines ioyned with masculines FVLK 11. Not only the Hebrue Grammar but the same phrase vsed before maketh plainely for our translation That S. Hierome saith the Hebrue is of the masculine gender as great an Hebritian as he was he may not carrie the matter away with his authoritie except he bring an instance where it is of the masculine gender The Iewish Rabbins patrones of free will as ignorant of the grace of God erre in this place as they doe in a thousand more and are forced to inuent straunge applications of the worde appetite to make their sense probable How the gender of Hebrew wordes may be found out we are not now to learne which because you haue but lately learned you thinke all men ignorant thereof but your selfe By the chapter of Pagninus where he sheweth that feminines are ioyned to masculines you might learne that chataoth is the feminine gender although it be ioyned with a participle of the masculine gēder Who also might haue taught you the difference of nounes ending in he praecedente camets to be this that feminines haue the accent in the last syllable masculines in the last saue one and therefore chataoth in this place hauing the accent in the last syllable notwithstanding the participle which is masculine must needes be of the feminine gender MART. 12. Now for the last refuge if they will say all this needed not because in other their Bibles it is as we woulde haue it we tell them they must iustifie and make good all their translations because the people readeth all and is abused by all and al come forth with priuiledge printed by the Queenes Printer c. If they will not let them confesse the faultes and call them in and tell vs which translation or translations they will stand vnto In the meane time they must be content to heare of all indifferently as there shall be cause and occasion to touch them FVLK 12. We tel you that wee may not iustifie any fault committed in our translations but we haue reformed them if any were espied in the later Neuerthelesse those faults are not so great that we neede call in al the Bibles in which is any fault it is sufficiēt that we admonish the reader in our later editions of such faults as are escaped in the former especially when the faults
it but the verbe substantiue And the meaning is plaine It shal be sinne in thee for sinne is indeede inherent as perfecte iustice also shoulde bee if wee coulde obserue all the commaundements of God as Moses sayeth Deut. 6. and we shoulde be iustified thereby But by one iuste acte whereof Moses speaketh Deut. 24. thoughe it proceede of iustice that is in vs the scripture neuer saith that wee shall be iustified To conclude wee confesse that bothe sinne and iustice are in the children of God but not that iustice whereby they are reputed iuste or iustified or made iuste beefore God but an effecte or fruite thereof MART. 4. Againe the Greeke fathers make it plaine that to be reputed vnto iustice is to be true iustice in deede interpreating S. Paules worde in Greeke thus Abraham obtained iustice Abraham was iustified For that is say they It was reputed him to iustice Doth not S. Iames say the like cap. 2. verse 23. testifying that in that Abraham was iustified by faith and workes the Scripture was fulfilled that saith it was reputed him to iustice Gen. Cap. 15. verse 6. In whiche wordes of Genesis where these wordes were firste written by Moyses in the Hebrewe there is not for iustice or in steede of iustice whiche Beza pleadeth vppon by the Hebrewe phrase but thus He God reputed it vnto him iustice though heere also the Englishe Bibles adde for Whiche precisely translating the Hebrewe they shoulde not do specially when they meane it was so counted or reputed for iustice that it was not iustice indeede FVLK 4. I knowe not against whome you fight but against your owne shadow For we say that to be iustified and be reputed iust and to obtaine iustice is all one in this case But where S. Iames sayth that Abraham was iustified by workes he meaneth that he was declared iust before men euen as he sayth shewe me thy faith by thy workes for Abraham was not iustified by a dead faith but by a working faith and yet he was not iustified before God by workes but the Scripture was fulfilled which sayd Abraham beleued God and it was reputed to him for iustice which is as S. Paule expoundeth it Abraham was iustified before God by faith and not by workes But in Gen. 15. v. 6. there is not the preposition for or in steede but simply iustice therefore it should be translated he reputed it to him iustice And will you then controule both the Apostles Paule and Iames for adding the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth vnto or for Or will not common sense inforce the same vnderstanding that both the Apostles doe giue it He reputed it to him as iustice or for iustice Must not such particles in translation be alwayes expressed to make the sense plaine which in English without the particle hath no sense or vnderstanding To translate precisely out of the Hebrew is not to obserue the number of wordes but the perfect sense and meaning of them in fewer or more wordes as the phrase of our tongue will serue to be vnderstood or else 2. Cor. 8. qui multum why do you translate he that had much and qui modicum non minorauit he that had litle wanted not you should haue said which much which little not lessed if you would haue giuen word for word and not added any word for explication Againe 2. Cor. 1. Supra virtutem aboue our power why adde you our which is not in the text and in deede not necessarie to be added in the translation Againe 1. Cor. 13. Euacuaui quae erant paruuli I did away the things that belonged to a litle one Here for foure Latine wordes you haue giuen tenne or eleuen English wordes which no reasonable man can greatly mislike if you were not such a quarreller at other mens doing without all cause or wise colour but onely to bleare the eyes of the ignorant MART. 5. But as for either the Hebrew or Greeke word that is here vsed to repute or account they are then vsed wheÌ„ it must needes signifie that the thing is so in deed and not onely so reputed as Psal. 118. octonario SAMEC I haue reputed or accounted all the sinners of the earth preuaricators or transgressors praeuaricantes reputaui So did the Septuaginta take the Hebrew word and read it And S. Paule So let a man repute or account vs as the Ministers of Christ. Let them goe now and say that neyther they were sinnâ—rs in deede nor these Christes ministers in deede because they were reputed for such let them saye the children of the promise were not the seede of Abraham because the Apostle sayth Rom. 9. v. 8. they are reputed for the seede But howsoeuer it be the Protestants will haue it so to be taken at the least in the matter of iustification FVLK 5. Silence were the beste aunswer to these tedious repetitions It were sufficient once to saye among reasonable men When faith is reputed by God or accounted for iustice faith is truely and in deede the instrumentall cause of iustification or apprehending the iustice of Christ by which we are accounted and made iust in the sight of God It is therefore a most ridiculous cauill of the difference betwene reputing iust and being iust in deede For God when he iustifieth the vngodly doth both repute him and make him iust in deede by the iustice of Christ of his owne meere mercye and not of the mans merits or by iustice inherent For what iustice can be in an vâ—godly man and such is euery one of vs whome God doth iustifie and then giue vs his holy spirit to sanctifie vs in newnesse of life to set forth his glorie in our holye and blamelesse conuersation MART. 6. Againe where Saint Paule sayth 2. Cor. 5. That wee mighte bee made the iustice of God in him they in their firste translations intolerably corrupte iâ— thus That wee by his meanes should bee that righteousnesse which BEFORE GOD IS ALLOWED Who â—aught them to translate so dissolutely Iustitia Dei the righteousnesse which before God is allowed did not their errour and heresie which is that God reputeth and accounteth vs for iuste though wee bee in deede moste foule sinners and that our iustice beyng none at all in vs yet is allowed and accepted before him for iustice and righteousnesse FVLK 6. There is no texte in all the Bible more cleare against iustification by iustice inhaeâ—ent than this 2. Corinth 5. wherein not altogither causelesse you reproue our firste interpreters to translate dissolutely There it is certaine they had no suche purpose as you ascribe vnto them For their translation dothe rather obscure than sette out our iustification by the iustice which is not in vs but in Christ. The texte is therefore playne him that knewe no sinne he made sinne for vs that wee might become the iustice of God in him that is in Christ and not in our selâ—es For though
owne saluation Whereas the Greeke fathers expound it of the full and assured faith that euery faithfull man must haue of al such things in heauen as he seeth not namely that Christ is ascended thither c. adding further and prouing out of the Apostles wordes next folowing that the Protestants* only faith is not sufficient be it neuer so speciall or assured FVLK 2. Hauing nothing to impugne this cleare interpretatioÌ„ of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the vnperfect translatioÌ„ of your vulgar Latine interpreter who was both an vnperfect grecian a very barbarous Latinist you are not ashamed to say we force the Greeke to make it signifie assurance whiche all men that are but meanly learned in the Greeke tongue may know that it signifieth assuraÌ„ce or ful certaine persuasioÌ„ Although for the question in controuersie the fulnesse of faith wil proue the certeintie as much in a maÌ„ner as the assuraÌ„ce But that the Greeke signifieth a full and certaine persuasion I report me not only to the best Greeke Dictionaries of this time but also to Budeus who citeth Isocrates out of Trapezuntius for proofe that it is so vsed also interpreteth that of S. Paule Rom. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let euery man be certaine of his owne minde But you haue a doughty argument that it is not onely ioyned with faith but also with hope knowledge and vnderstanding as though there could not be a certaine persuasion and assurance of hope knowledge and vnderstanding yea the assurance of hope dependeth vpon the assuraunce of faith and the assuraunce of faith vpon the certaine persuasion of knowledge and vnderstanding Yea your vulgar interpretor translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 4. v. 21. Plenissimè sciens knowing most fully may teach you that it signifieth more than fulnesse for else he should haue saide being fulfilled And better doth Beza expresse the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Tim. 4. than some of our English interpreters whiche say fulfil thy ministry wheras the Apostles meaning is that he should approue the credite and dignitie of his ministerie vnto other men But the Greeke fathers you say find none other interpretation of it and for proofe you cite Ignatius ep ad Smyr which although it be not authenticall yet I see no cause why we may not interprete 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being certainly persuaded in faith loue and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the assurance of faith And so is it translated in Bibliotheca sacra Margarini de la Bigne Plenè instructae in fide charitate cognoui vos absolutè perfectos in fule stabili fully instructed in faith and charitie and I haue knowen you absolutely perfect in a stedfaste faith Chrysostome and Theodoret because you vouch at large I know not what you would shew out of them In Theophylact I finde that he speaketh against all hesitation doubtfulnesse of faith but against the certaine persuasion thereof neuer a worde Ne aliquam inducas in animum tuum haesitationem neque pendeas animi dubij quiddam cogitans Bring not into thy minde any staggering neither be incertaine of thy mind thinking any doubtfull thing But for the signification of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Basil may bee a sufficient witnesse who commonly vseth it for assured and certaine persuasion â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 26. Euery worde and deede must be proued byâ—â—â— testimonie of the holy Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the full and certaine persuasion of the goâ—â—â— to the shame of the wicked Againe desin 80. what is the propertie of a faithfull man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. By such assured persuasioÌ„ to be disposed c. EueÌ„ so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the certaine persuasioÌ„ of godlinesse c. and so in other places And you your selfe confesse as much where you say the Greeke fathers expound it of the full assured faith c. which is enough to iustifie our traÌ„slation Now if the fathers vnderstood this full assured faith only of an historicall faith as you say not of trust and confidence in God it is an other controuersie Our translation is not false although we had a false meaning if it be answereable to the words Neither doth Chrysostome speake of an historicall faith only by certaintie whereof we haue accesse vnto God but also of coÌ„fidence which remissioÌ„ of our sinnes doth cause and that we are made coheires with Christ that we enioy so great loue neither doth he proue that the ProtestaÌ„ts only faith is not sufficient to iustisie But the Apostle sheweth saith he that not faith alone but also a vertuous life is required that a man be not guiltie to him self of malitiousnes For these holy places doe not receiue those men with certaine assuraÌ„ce which are not made such This iudgmeÌ„t of Chrysostome the Protestants do allow of better thaÌ„ the Papists for we know that a godly life is necessarie in them that beleeue to iustification without which they can haue no assurance of faith no nor faith in deede but that which is by aequiuocation called faith such saith as the Deuil and the reprobate may haue MART. 3. Yet do these termes please them exceedingly in so much that for the chosen gift of faith Sap. 3. 14. they translate THE SPECIAL gift of faith and Rom. 8. 38. â—â—ni sure that nothing can separate vs from the loue of God 〈◊〉 though the Apostle were certaine and assured not onely of h 〈…〉 wne saluation but of other mens For to this sense they doe 〈◊〉 translate here whereas in other places out of controuersie they translate the same worde as they should doe I am persuaded they are persuaded c. For who knoweth not that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth onely a probable persuasion They will say that I am sure and I am perswaded is al one Beeing well meant they may indeede signifie alike as the vulgare Latine interpreter doth commonly translate it but in this place of controuersie whether the Apostle were sure of his saluation or no whiche you saye he was yea without reuelation we say he was not here why woulde you translate I am sure and not as in other places I am perswaded but in fauour of your errour by insinuating the termes of sure and assurance and such like as elsewhere you neglect the termes of iuste and iustification In which your secrete things of dishonesties craftinesse as the Apostle calleth it we caÌ„not alwaies vse demonstratioÌ„s to conuince you but yet euen in these things we talke with your coÌ„science and leaue the consideration thereof to the wise reader FVLK 3. Seeing they accompt the booke of Wisdome to be of no authoritie to establish the certaintie of doctrine it is not like they coulde haue any such respecte as you malitiously surmise And yet the translation good and true For what is the choice gifte of faith but a speciall
because it apeareth by the effects that he speaketh of faith as it was a speciall gift of working of myracles of which effectes he nameth one remouing of mountaines And that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so taken namely for the perfection of one kynde not the vniuersall comprehension of al kindes he bringeth you example Ro. 7. v. 8. and elsewhere oftentimes But if it shoulde be taken as you say all knowledge all mysteries is generally to be taken yet he telleth you this separation is but vppon an impossible supposition for iustifying faith can neuer bee separated from charitie but if it might be separated it shoulde not profite to iustifie The Angels of heauen can not preach an other gospel but if they did preach an other gospel they should be accursed A great argument I promise you against iustification by faith onely that a solitarie dead or barraine faith doth not iustifie MART. 7. And I woulde haue anye of the Bezites giue me a sufficient reason why hee translated totam fidem and not also totam scientiam vndoubtedly there is no cause but the heresie of speciall and onely faith And againe why he translateth Iaco. 2. 22. Thou seest that faith was administra a helper of his workes and expoundeth it thus Faith was an efficient cause and fruitful of good workes Wheras the Apostles wordes be plaine that faith wrought togither with his workes yea and that his fayth was by workes made perfecte This is impudent handling of Scripture to make workes the fruite onely and effecte of fayth which is your heresie FVLK 7. If you dare draw foorth your pen against Beza and demande an answere of himselfe although he hath already giuen you a sufficiēt reason to induce that the Apostle speaketh not of faith as generally as of knowledge because by an example of remouing mountaines he restraineth it to one kinde of faith As for the other question why he translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iam. 2. v. 22. was an helper me thinke you should make best answere your selfe who not long since by force of that word woulde needes prooue that men were helpers of God chap. 10. sect 6. Haue you so soone forgotten your own voice and is this impudent handling of the scripture to translate as you your selfe in an other case thoughe impertinently did contend the word to signifie But works you wil not haue to be the fruit only and effect of faith because the Apostle saieth that faith wrought togither with his workes and by workes his faith was made perfite as thoughe apples are not the fruite of the tree because the tree doth beare them and by them if they be good the tree is made a good tree MART. 8. Which heresie also must needes be the cause that to suppresse the excellencie of charitie which the Apostle giueth it aboue faith or any other gift whatsoeuer in these wordes And yet I shew you a more excellent way 1. Cor. 12. v. 31. he in one edition of the new Testament in the yeare 1556. translateth thus Behold moreouer also I shew you a way most diligently What cold stuffe is this howe impertinent In an other edition an 1565. he mended it thus And besides I shew you a way to excellencie In neither of both expressing the comparison of preeminence excellencie that charitie hath in the Apostles words and in all the chapter following Wherein you did well for your credite not to followe him no not your Bezites them selues but to translate after our vulgar Latine interpreter as it hath alwayes bene read vnderstoode in the Church FVLK 8. The rarenesse of the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. as al indifferēt men wil iudge rather than any mind to suppresse the excellencie of charitie caused Beza to giue dyuerse interpretations of that place of whiche yet the latter more commendeth the excellencie of charitie than the vulgar Latin or our Eaglishe translation whiche expoundeth it as the Latine doth for if charitie be the way to excellencie it is a greater commendation thereof than to saye it is a more excellent waye than other giftes whereof he spake last as of healing of tongues of interpretations c. MART. 9. Luther was so impudent in this case that because the Apostle spake not plà inely ynough for onely faith he thrust only into the text of his translation as himself witnesseth you durst not hitherto presume so farre in this question of onely faith though in other controuersies you haue done the like as is shewed in their places But I wil aske you a smaller matter which in words shew you may perhaps easily answer but in your conscience there wil remaine a gnawing worme In so many places of the Gospell where our Sauiour requireth the peoples faith when he healed them of corporall diseases only why do you so gladly translate thus Thy faith hath saued thee rather than thus thy faith hath healed thee or made thee whole is it not by ioyning these wordes togither to make it sound in English eares that faith saueth or iustifieth a man in so much that Beza noteth in the margent thus fides saluat that is faith saueth your Geneua Bibles in that place where it can not be taken for faith that iustifieth because it is not the parties faith but her fathers that Christ required there also trāslate thus Beleeue only she shall be saued Which translation though very false and impertinent for iustifying faith as you seeme to acknowledge by translating it otherwise in your other Bibles yet in deede you must needes mainteine and hold it for good whiles you alleage this place for onely faith as is euident in your writings FVLK 9. That which Luther might wel do as an interpretor or expounder it was much boldnesse for him to doe as a translator but seeing he him selfe hath redressed his owne offence wee haue lesse to say for him and you against him For our additions except suche as the necessitie of our English phrase dothe require for vnderstanding you slaunder vs to say that wee haue in any controuersies done the like The question you aske is not worthy any answere why wee translate thy faith hath saued thee c. seing wee vse all these wordes indifferently healing making safe and making whole as in S. Iames we say Can faith saue him And it is al one to say thy faith hath saued thee and thy fayth hath made thee whole But you say wee alledge this place for onely faith iustifying citing the answeres of Maister Gough M. Tomson against Feckenham I thinke you lie as in other places very commonly And yet an argument though not a plaine testimonie may be taken out of these places for only faith iustifying Seing Christ was not a phisition for the body but to teach mē that he was a Physition for the soule and as he healed the diseased in bodie onely by faith so hee cureth the sickuesse of
farre more than walking humbly and which is wholy suppressed by so translating See the Psalme 34. v. 14. Ps. 37. v. 7. Ps. 41. v. 10. Where the Prophet vseth many wordes and speeches to expresse sorowfull penance and for that which in Latine is alwayes contristatus in Greeke a word more significant in Hebrew it is the same kind of worde that they translate humbly Whereas in deede this word hath no signification of humilitie properly no not of that humilitie I meane which is rather to be called humiliation or affliction as the Greeke wordes implye But it signifieth properly the very maner countenance gesture habite of a pensiue or sorlorne man if they will say that they so translate it in other places the more is their fault that knowing the nature of the worde they wil notwithstanding suppresse the force and signification thereof in any one place and so translate it that the reader must needes take it in an other sense and can not possibly conceiue that which the worde importeth for to walke humbly soundeth in all English eares the vertue of humilitie whyche thys worde doth neuer signifie and not humilitie or humiliation by affliction which it may signifie though secondarily and by deduction onely FVLK 17. What a many of vaine words are here spent to make a vaine cauil seeme to be of some value what the etymologie of the Hebrewe word is the translatours knewe beefore you were borne But what the worde signifieth heere Pagnine is sufficient to teache bothe you and them who thus interpreateth it in obscuro id est obscurè id est humiliter In the darke that is darkly that is humbly Your vulgare Latine translatour calleth it tristes whiche is as farre from your pretended penaunce as humilitie The Septuaginta translate the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whyche signifieth seruile or seruauntes Benedict Arias expoundeth it supplices humble And to put al out of quarrelling the Antithesis or opposition of the proud and arrogant in the next verse following proueth that in this verse they speake of humilitie whych is contrarie to pride and not of the tokens of repentaunce which are mourning apparell and such like MART. 18. Againe what is it else but against penance and satisfaction that they deface these vsual and known words of Daniel to the king Redime eleemosynis peccata tua Redeeme thy sinnes with almes altering and translating it thus Breake off thy sinnes by righteousnesse Firste the Greeke is against them whiche is worde for worde according to the vulgare and common reading Secondly the Chaldee worde whiche they translate Breake off by Munsters owne iudgement in lexico Chald. signifieth rather and more principally to redeeme Thirdely the other worde whiche they translate righteousnesse in the Scriptures signifieth also eleemosynam as the Greke interpreaters translate it Dent. 6. 24 it is most plaine in S. Mathew where our Sauiour saith Mat. 6. v. 1. Beware you do not your iustice before men Which is in other Greke copies your almes And S. Augustine prooueth it by the very text For saith he as though a maÌ„ might aske what iustice he addeth WHEN THOVDOST AN ALMES DEEDS He signified therefore that almes are the works of iustice And in the Psalme they are made one He distributed he gaue to the poore his iustice remayneth for euer and euer Which Beza translateth his beneficence or liberalitie remaineth c. Againe S. Hierome a sufficient Doctour to tel the signification of the Hebrue or Chaldee words both translateth iâ—so and expoundeth it so in his coÌ„mentarie Moreouer the wordes that immediatly folow in Daniel interprete it so vnto vs And thy iniquities with mercies to the pore Lastly Beza himself saith that by the name of iustice with the Hebrues is also signified beneficence or beneficialnes to the pore yea and that in this place of Daniel it is specially taken for almes So that wee see there is no impediment neither in the Chaldee nor Greeke why they might not haue saide as the Church of God alwayes hath saide Redeeme thy sinnes with almes and thy iniquities with mercies to the poore but their heresie wil not suffer them to speake after the Catholike maner that almes mercifull deeds are a redemption ransome and satisfaction for sinnes FVLK 18. Againste popishe penaunce and satisfaction there is no doubte but the translatours were vehemently affected yet in this translation they haue vsed no preiudice againste repentaunce and the true fruites thereof but rather more straightly haue vrged the same For firste whereas in the vulgare Latine texte there is no worde of repenting from sinnes or forsaking of sinnes our translatour vsing the terme of breaking off his sinnes signifieth that all almes and other apparant good deedes without repentaunce and breaking off the cause of the former sinfull lyfe are in vaine and vnprofitable Secondly where the vulgare translatour vseth the worde of redeeming or buying out whiche mighte bring the King into vaine securitie to thinke he might satisfie for his sinnes without repentance by giuing of almes whiche is a small penaunce for a King our translatours tell him that he must break off his sinnes before any thing that he doth be acceptable to God Thirdly whereas the vulgare interpretour requireth of him nothing but almes and mercie to the poore whiche was a verie easie thing for him to performe our translators enioine him righteousnesse which comprehendeth all vertues and is a thousande folde harder penaunce for suche a mightie monarch than giuing of almes and that to poore folks which he shoulde neuer feele Fourthly the wordes are plaine for our translation for pherak the Chaldee verb signifieth as properly and as principally to dissolue or breake off as to deliuer or redeeme Neither is Munsters iudgement otherwise although hee giue the other signification firste whyche is a miserable argument to proue that it signifieth rather and more principallye to redeme But if any signification were more principall than other it were more reason to saye that pherak signifieth rather more principally to breake or dissolue because the word signifieth so in the Hebrewe tongue from whence the Chaldee is deriued And indeede delyuering is a kinde of dissoluing or breaking from him to whome hee was beefore addicte or bounde So that the verbe helpeth you nothing but rather maketh more against you The other worde although verye seldome by synecdoche it be taken for almes yet euerie boy almoste in Cambridge knoweth that it signifieth properly and principally vniuersall iustice or all righteousnesse therefore the Chaldee texte is plaine for our translation and enforced for yours of almes Being agaynste all reason that the Prophete shoulde exhorte the Kyng to gyuing almes before hee hadde exhorted hym to repentaunce and forsakyng of hys sinnes Beside that it is contrarie to the whole scope of the scriptures to teache any other satisfaction or redemption from sinne than the death and passion
non satis videatur illam vim obsignationis declarare The terme signaculum which the old interpretor and Erasmus hath vsed I haue willingly refused partely because it is no very vsuall worde partely because it seemeth not sufficiently to declare that vertue or efficacie of sealing You see therefore what word he auoydeth for what cause that vour eies were not matches or else they were daseled with a mist of malice whē you redde that he auoided Sigillum and placed quod obsignaret for sigillum The worde sigillum as he vseth not so doth he make no mention of it I thinke because it being a diminutiue of signum and taken sometimes for a litle image vnde sigillares c. it is not proper nor ful to expresse the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That he maketh circumcision equall vnto the Sacramentes of the newe Testament I haue shewed before that it is in matter substaunce and ende whiche hee that confesseth not as Beza saith seemeth neuer to haue knowen howe farre the office of Christe extendeth but that hee hath any purpose to disgrace the Sacraments of the new Testament instituted by Christ him selfe in a more cleare dispensation of grace and truth you affirme with the same credite by whiche you saide he put quod obsignaret for sigillum MART. 3. Which is also the cause why not only he but the English Bibles for commonly they ioyne handes and agree togither to make no difference betweene Iohns Baptisme and Christs translate thus concerning certaine that had not yet receiued the holy Ghost Vnto what then were ye baptized And they said vnto Iohns Baptisme Which Beza in a long discourse proueth to be spoken of Iohns doctrine and not of his baptisme in water As though it were said what doctrine then doe ye professe and they sayd Iohns Whereas in deede the question is this and ought thus to be translated In what then or wherein were you Baptized And they said in Iohns Baptisme As who should say wee haue receiued Iohns Baptisme but not the holy Ghost as yet And therefore it foloweth immediatly then they were baptized in the name of Iesus and after imposition of hands the Holy Ghost came vpō thē Wherby is plainely gathered that being baptized with Iohns baptisme before yet of necessitie baptized afterward with Christs baptisme also there must needes be a great difference betweene the one baptisme the other Iohns being insufficient And that this is the deduction which troubleth these Bezites and maketh them translate accordingly Beza as commonly still he vttereth his griefe telleth vs in plaine wordes thus It is not necessarie that wheresoeuer there is mention of Iohns Baptisme we should thinke it to be the very ceremonie of Baptisme Therefore they that gather Iohns Baptisme to haue bene diuers from Christs because these a litle after are said to be baptized in the name of Iesus Christ haue no sure foundation Lo how of purpose he translateth expoundeth it Iohns doctrine not Iohns Baptisme to take away the foundation of this Catholike conclusion that his Baptisme differeth and is farre inferior to Christs FVLK 3. And is Iohns Baptisme now made a Sacrament of the old lawe was Iohn the Baptist a minister of the law or of the Gospel Our Sauiour Christ is sufficient to teach vs that the lawe and the Prophetes prophecied vntill Iohn but frō the daies of Iohn the kingdome of heauen suffereth violence But if you will make Iohns Baptisme a Sacrament of the new Testament and yet differing frō the Baptisme of Christ then you make two Baptismes of the newe Testament contrarie to the Nicene Creede and Christ him selfe who was baptised for vs baptised with the worse But concerning that place Actes the 19. which hath troubled so many interpreters with the obscuritie thereof or rather with a preiudicate opinion of a difference in the Baptisme of Iohn and of Christ I am neither of Bezaes opinion nor yet of our translators for the vnderstanding and translation of that place Neither doe I thinke that mention is made of any second baptisme the auoyding whereof hath bred diuerse forced interpretations but that S. Paule enstructeth those Disciples that knew not the grace of the holy Ghost that they which heard Iohns preaching to the people that they should beleeue in Christ Iesus which was comming after him were also baptised in the name of Iesus Christ who had graunted those visible graces of his holy spirite to be bestowed vpon them that beleued by imposition of the Apostles handes Thus therefore I am perswaded those verses are to be translated But Paule sayde Iohn truely baptised with the baptisme of repentance saying to the people that they should beleue in him that commeth after him that is in Iesus they which heard him were baptised into y e name of our Lord Iesus And after Paule had layd his handes vpon c. The argumēt of difference thereof grounded vpō this place is nothing worth where the baptisme of Iohn is confirmed by imposition of handes rather than disgraced by reiteration which giueth strength to the errour of the Donatists and Anabaptistes for rebaptization Whereas it can not be proued that any which were once baptised by Iohn were euer baptised againe But the contrary may easily be gathered for seeing our Sauiour Christ baptised none him selfe it shall follow that the Apostles were either not baptised at all or els baptised onely with Iohns baptisme And where there is expresse mention of Iohns Disciples that came vnto Christ to become his Disciples there is no mention of any other baptisme than they had already receaued MART. 4. But doth the Greeke leade him or force him to this translation In quid vnto what First him selfe confesseth in the very same place the contrary that the Greeke phrase is often vsed in the other sense wherein or wherewith as it is in the vulgar Latine and Erasmus but that in his iudgement it doth not so signifie here and therefore he refuseth it Yet in the very next verse almoste where it is saide by the same Greeke phrase that they were baptized in the name of Iesus Christe there both he and his so translate is as wee doe and not vnto the name of Christe Is it not playne that all is voluntarie and at their pleasure For I beseeche them if it be a right translation baptized in the name of Iesus why is it not right baptized in the baptisme of Iohn Is there any difference in the Greeke none Where then in their commentaries and imaginations onely against which wee oppose and set both the texte and the commentaries of all the fathers FVLK 4. The Greeke dothe allow him so to translate and to be Baptised in the name of Iesus and into the name of Iesus is all one as in the name of the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost or into the name of the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost is
calleth meritorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the encrease and augmenting of Iohns merites or priuiledges that in Malachie he is called an Angell and Saint Gregoriâ— sayth he which came to bring tidings of Christ him selfe was worthily called an Angell that in his very name there might be a dignitie and all the fathers and all witte and reason conceiue a greate excellencye in this name onely our profane Protestants that thinke of all diuine things and persons most basely translate accordingly euen in the foresayd Gospell also making our Sauiour to say that Iohn was more than a Prophet because he was a Messenger Yea where our Sauiour him selfe is called Angelus Testamenti the Angell of the Testament there they translate the messenger of the couenant FVLK 18. It is not safe to translate alwayes the messenger of God by the name of an Angell which is commonly taken to signifie a spirite not a bodily creature therefore our translators thought good to expresse the signification of the Hebrew and Greeke worde in English and to vse the terme of Messenger as the worde doth signifie nothing derogating from the dignitie of the persons or office of them of whome it is vttered which consisteth in the addition following of God of the Lorde of the Church For the name of Angell of it selfe is no name of dignitie seeing there be Angells of the deuill and of darkenes as well as of God of light And Isidorus Clarius interpreteth the word in this place of Malachie Legatus the Ambassador or Messenger It is not therefore of any profane minde that for Angell we say Messenger Your owne vulgar Interpretor Agg. 1. v. 13. translateth Maleach Iehouah nuncius domini the Lords Messenger and so diuerse times where mention is made of Gods Messengers This is therefore a vayne contention about termes when the matter is not in question That the name of Angels soundeth more honorably as Hierom and other thinke it is no rule to binde translators but expounders may as occasion is offered obserue it MART. 19. If S. Hierome in all these places had translated nuntium then the English were messenger but translating it angelum and the Church al antiquitie so reading and expounding it as a terme of more dignitie and excellencie what meane these base coÌ„panions to disgrace the very eloqueÌ„ce of the Scripture which by such termes of amplification would speake more significantly and emphatically what meane they I say that so inuey against Castaleo for his profanenesse them selues to say for Angell Messenger for Apostle Legate or Embassadour and the like Are they afraid lest by calling meÌ„ Angels it would be mistaken as though they were Angells in deede by nature then S. Paule spake daungerously when he sayd to the Galathians As Gods Angel you receiued me as Christ Iesus But to proceede FVLK 19. The verye eloquence of the Scripture is best expressed when the wordes are translated as they signifie in the originall tongue And although some words be appropried to certaine callings which it is not conuenient to turne into the generall signification yet is neither the Hebrew nor the Greeke word that signifieth Messengers in the Scripture so restrayned but that it is vsed for all Messengers indifferently of God and men yea of God and the deuill Wherefore there is no cause why we should vse the Greeke worde Angell rather than the English worde Messenger And where you aske whether we be afrayd lest by calling men Angels it would be mistaken as though they were Angels in nature we may well feare lest the ignorant vnlearned might so be deceiued when Bristow so great a Doctor writer among you is so fondly disguised that he mistaketh the Angell of the Church of Philadelphia for an Angell by nature and alledgeth that which God promiseth that his enimies the Iewes shall worship before his feete to proue the inuocation and worship of heauenly Angels Neither spake Paule daungerously when he said the GalathiaÌ„s receiued him as an Angel of God as Christe Iesus For the worde Angell in the Greeke tongue signifieth a messenger it was easie to vnderstand that the messenger or embassadour of a Prince is receiued as the Prince him selfe without confounding the persons of the Prince and his messenger MART. 20. It is much for the authoritie and dignitie of Gods Priests that they do bind and loose and execute al Ecclesiasticall functioÌ„â—â— in the person and power of Christ whose ministers they are So Saint Paule saieth 2. Cor. 2. v. 10. that when hee pardoned or released the penaunce of the incestuous Corinthian he did it in the person of Christe That is as Saint Ambrose expoundeth it in the name of Christe in his steede as his Vicar and deputie But they translate it In the sight of Christ. Where it is euident they can not pretende the Greeke and if there be ambiguitie in the Greeke the Apostle him selfe taketh it away interpreting himselfe in the very same case when he excommunicateth the said incestuous person saying that he doth it in the name and with the vertue of our Lord Iesus Christe so expounding what he meaneth also in this place FVL. 20. That the Bishops Elders or Priests of gods Church do bind and lose as in the person and power of Christ in his name by his authority is acknowledged by vs But when we translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the sight of Christ we respect what the Greeke phrase doth more properly require yea what the Hebrewe phrase mipenei doth signifie wherevnto it is like that the Apostle doth allude Otherwise Beza in his annotations vpoÌ„ the place doth not mislike the sense and interpretation of Ambrose whereof he maketh mention but preferreth the other as more simple and agreeable to the meaning of the Apostle in that place and to the nature of the Greke and Hebrew phrase MART. 21. And it may bee that for some suche purpose they change the antient and accustomed reading in these words of S. Mathew Ex te enim exiet dux qui regat populuÌ„ meum Israel translating thus Out of thee shal come the gouemour that shall feede my people Israel for that shall rule my people Israel This is certaine that it is a false translation because the Prophets wordes Mich. 5. cited by Saint Mathew both in Hebrewe and Greeke signifie onely a ruler or Gouernour and not a Pastor or feeder Therefore it is either a great ouer sight which iâ— a smal matter in coÌ„parison of the least corruption or rather because they do the like Act. 20. v. 28. it is done to suppres the signification of ecclesiastical power gouernement that concurreth with feeding first in Christ and from him in his Apostles and Pastâ—rs of the Church both which are here signified in this one Greeke word to wit that Christ our Sauiour shall rule and feede Ps. 2. Apoc. 2. v. 27. yea he
shal rule in a rod of yron and from him Peter and the rest by his coÌ„mission giuen in the same word feede rule my sheepe Io. 21. yea and that in a rod of yron as when he stroke Ananias and Sapphîra to corporal death as his successors do the like offenders to spiritual destruction vnlesse they repent by the terrible rod of excoÌ„munication This is imported in the double significatioÌ„ of the Greeke word which they to diminish Ecclesiasticall authoritie they translate feede rather than rule or gouerne FVLK 21. That wee shoulde not meane any thing against the gouernement of Christe whome we wishe desire from our hearts that he alone mighte raigne and his seruants vnder him he himselfe is iudge to whome in this case we do boldely appeale But let vs see how we may be charged with false translation The Hebrewe and greek say you do signifie only a ruler or gouernor Mich. 5. And do not we translate a gouernor or captain which may answere there the Hebrew of the Prophet or the Greeke of the Septuaginta or of the Euangelist The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we translate sometime to gouerne sometime to feede is not in the Prophete but in the Euangelist and signifieth properly to feede as a sheepeheard and metaphorically to gouerne What cause haue you here to crie out false translation and to oppose the Hebrewe worde of the Prophet which is fully satisfied in the worde gouernour And the Greeke word which the Euangelist vseth hath his proper signification in some translations in other that which is figuratiue neither doth the one exclude the other But feeding doth import gouerning But it seemeth you would haue rule without feeding that you are so zealous for gouernement The worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 20. in some translations is rendred to rule in other to feede The more proper is to feede yet the greek word wil beare the other also But feeding as a sheephearde doeth his sheepe comprehendeth both The same word Ioan. 21. our Sauiour Christ limiteth rather to feeding as y e Euangelist reporteth his words vsing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 twise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 once For by lording ruling Peter shuld not so wel testifie his loue towards Christ as by painefull feeding And there your owne vulgar interpreter translateth Pasce and your selues feede though in the margent you woulde faine pray aide of the Greeke to establish your popes tyrannicall rule Yea you will giue him a rodde of yron which is the scepter of Christ yea an armie of souldiers to subdue Irelande and to wrest it out of the Queene of Englandes dominion that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 feed and rule my sheepe in your secret meaning and for that purpose you bring in the miraculous striking of Ananias and Sapheira for their hypocrisie pretending that you meane but spirituall destruction by the rodde of excommunication which howe terrible it is when it is duely exercised by theÌ„ that haue authoritie we neede not learne of you The other text Psalme the 2. Apoc. 2. v. 27. we translate alwaies rule And your vulgar interpretor Pet. 5. translateth the same worde pascite feede you the church of God c. and else where diuerse times Doth he so diminish ecclesiasticall authoritie c. MART. 22. To the diminishing of this Ecclesiasticall authoritie in the later ende of the reigne of king Henrie the â—ight and during the reigne of king Edwarde the sixt the onely translation of their English Bibles was submit your selues vnto all manner ordinance of man whether it be VNTO THE KING AS TO THE CHIEFE HEAD 1. Pet. 2. Where in this Queenes time the later translatours can not finde those wordes nowe in the Greeke but doe translate thus To the king as hauing preeminence or to the king as the Superiour Why so because then the King had first taken vpon him this name of Supreme heade of the Church and therefore they flattered both him and his sonne till their heresie was planted making the holie Scripture to say that the king was the chiefe head which is all one with supreme head but now being better aduised in that point by Caluine I suppose and the Lutherans of Magdeburge who doâ— ioyntly inueigh against such title and Caluine against that by name which was first giuen to king Henry the eight because they may be bolder with a Queene than with a king and because now they thinke their kingdome is well established therfore they suppresse this title in their later traÌ„slations would take it froÌ„ her altogether if they could to aduance their owne Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction whithout any dependence of the Queenes supreme gouernement of their church which in their conscience if they be true Caluinistes or Lutherans or mixâ— of both they doe and must mislike FVLK 22. Touching this text 1. Pet. 2. I haue answered before y t the word signifieth him that excelleth and therfore it is no corruption to translate it y e chiefe For the name of supreme heade in y e sense which Caluine other abroade did mislike it it was neuer allowed nor by authoritie graunted to the kings Henrie and Edward but in the same sense it is now graunted to Queene Elizabeth whom we acknowledge to haue the same authoritie in causes ecclesiasticall which her father and brother kinges before her had exercised to Gods glorie But as Steâ—en Gardiner vnderstoode y e title in conference with Bucer at Ratisbone we doe vtterly abhorre it and so did all godly men alwaies that a king should haue absolute power to do in religion what he will In what sense the popish clergie of England being cast in the premunire did first of all ascribe it to the king in their submission looke you vnto it we thinke it was rather of flatterie than of dutie wisedome or religion As for the ecclesiasticall gouernement which the scripture prescribeth may well stande which craueth the aide of a christian Prince which is y e Queenes authoritie in causes ecclesiasticall MART. 23. But howsoeuer that he let them iustifie their translation or confesse their fault And as for the kinges supremacie ouer the Church if they make any doubt let theÌ„ read S. Ignatius wordes who was in the Apostles time â—uen when S. Peter gaue the foresaide admonition of subiection to the king and knewe very wel how farre his preeminence extended and therefore saith plainely in notorious wordes that we must first honour God then the Bishop and then the king Because in all thinges nothing is comparable to God in the Chuch nothing greater then y e Bishop who is consecrated to God for the saluation of the whole worlde and among magistrates tempâ—rall rulers none is like the king See his other wordes immediatly folowing where he preferreth the Bishops office before the kings al other thinges of price among men FVLK 23. Howsoeuer those Epistles bee truely or vntruely
is the word which is preached among you as the Geneua Bibles translate or more significātly which is Euangelized amōg you as we translate for though there be greater significancie in the Greeke worde than is expressed by bare preaching or telling a thing as hauing a goodly relation allusion to the word Euangeliū Gospel yet neither do they in any other place neither can they translate it to preach by the gospel but simply to preach to tel to shewe as preaching peace by Iesus Christe Act. 10. vers 39. so themselues translate it Psalm 95 or 96. v. 2. Be telling of his saluation from daye to daye Whiche in other places is spoken by other Greeke wordes that haue no signification at all of Gospell as immediately in the said Psalme 95 or 96. v. 3 and Psalme 104. or 105. v. 1. and Act. 13. v. 5. and c. 17. v. 23. and Io. 1. v. 3. FVLK 3. The other before is not a more lewde slaunder than this is a foolishe cauill The Greeke word signifieth not simply to preach the gospel or good tydings whych both may and ought to bee expressed where the phrase of our tongue wyll abide it And therfore the Geneua translation is imperfect in this place rather than the other When you say Euangelized you do not translate but faine a newe worde which is not vnderstoode of meere Englishe eares as you do in an hundreth places beside to make the scripture darke and vnprofitable to the ignorant readers And if the word signifieth no more but to preach to tell to shewe as you would seeme to proue by a nūber of quotations why do you vse that newe word Euangelize which if it were vnderstoode and in vse is more than simply to preache to tell to shewe But of all other your madde surmises this is the most monstrous that this is added to make the reader thinke that there is no other worde of God but the written worde Doth Gospel I praye you signifie the written worde The common hearer you saye hearing this worde Gospell conceiueth nothing else I am persuaded there is no such reader in England except it bee some of your viperous broode that thinketh the Gospell to bee nothing but the storie written by the foure Euangelistes whereas all true Christians knowe the Gospel to be contained not onely in those stories but also in other writings of the Apostles and that the Gospel is preached whensoeuer a good sermon teaching the way vnto saluation is preached Howsoeuer the Septuaginta vsed the worde Euangelizo in the olde Testament we are not to learne the signification thereof out of their translation but out of the Scribes of the holie ghost in the newe Testament MART. 4. All which wordes signifie only to tell to shew to declare and are vsed indifferently for and with the other worde which they here only translate to preach by the Gospel Whereas in all others places when they will translate it most significantly they expresse it by bringing glad tidings and in some places where it should be expressed most significantly in respect of euangelizing or preaching the Gospel there they translate it barely preachers and preaching Only S. Peters place aforesaid must be stretched to signifie The word preached by the Gospel to insinuate and vphold their heresie of the written Gospel only or only written worde against Apostolicall traditions not written If this be not their meaning let them giue vs a good reason why they translate it so in this one place only FVLK 4. When we varie about the signification of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or in deede when we varie not in substāce though you must brabble about it for a countenance what meane you to teach vs the significatiō of other words except you would make folke beleeue that we know nothing but what we learn of you I say again if in the new Testament we haue not fully expressed the significatiō of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 either it is because our English phrase could not expresse it or else it is a fault of negligēce But in the old Testamēt where we haue not that worde because we translate out of Hebrue what reason is there that you should exact the significancie of that word when we do not translate it The insenslesse insinuation that you dreame of I am sure was farre from the translators mindes seeing we haue manifest and ineuitable Scriptures to confound your hereticall blasphemie of the imperfection and insufficiencie of the word Gospel of God written vnto eternall saluation And if the worde Gospell when it is added to the text out of the verbe of Euangelizing do insinuate the heresie of the written Gospell only why do you Math. 11. v. 5. translate Pauperes Euangelizantur to the poore the Gospell is preached Would you thinke it were an honest surmise of me to say you auoyde the name of the Gospell so often as you expresse it not in translating that worde for hatred you beare the Gospell And yet it hath more likelihood than many that you haue inuented and prosecuted against vs. MART. 5. It is written of Luther that he for the selfe same heresie in his first translation into the Germane tongue left out these wordes of S. Peter altogither This is the worde which is euangelized or preached to you Why so because S. Peter doth here define what is the word of God saying that which is preached to you and not that only which is written which false dealing of Luther is no small presumptiō against the like hereticall meaning of our English Protestants who I am sure in this point of controuersie of the worde written and vnwritten will not denie that they agree with the Lutherans FVLK 5. That any such sentence was vpō any purpose leste out by Luther in his translation for my part I beleeue it not neither vpon your report nor vpon your author Lindanus credite If the Printer did omit a line yet what reason were it to thinke that Luther did it vpon such a cause which were to no purpose for him except he should haue left out all those textes of Scripture where preaching of the Gospel or word of God is mentioned What you haue left out I haue noted before and yet I haue not pronounced the cause why so confidently as you do of that omission which you know not whether it be so or no. MART. 6. Againe in the epistle of S. Iames they adde the word Scripture into the text saying But the Scripture offereth more grace Where the Apostle may say as wel and indifferently The Spirit or holy Ghost giueth more grace and it is much more probable and is so expounded of many Let the good reader see the circumstance of the place and abhorre their saucinesse in the text of holy Scripture FVL. 6. The nominatiue case in the Greeke is wanting which is expressed in the verse before and in this
auncient and graue personage in respecte of ciuilitie and not of superstition may be well vsed without transgression of our Sauiour Christs commaundement Math. 23. MART. 11. Contrarywise as they are diligent to put some wordes odiously where they shoulde not so they are as circumspect not to put other wordes and termes where they should In their first Bible printed againe An. 1562. not once the name of Church in the same for charitie loue for altar temple for heretike an author of sectes for heresie sectâ—â— because in those beginnings al these words sounded exceâ—dingly against them The Church they had then forsaken Christian charitie they had broken by schisine altars they digged downe here sie and heretike they knewe in their conscience more like in the peoples eares to agree vnto them rather than to the olde Catholike faith and professors of the same Againe in all their Bibles indifferently both former and later they had rather say righteous than iust righteousnesse than iustice gift than grace specially in the sacrament of holy orders secrete rather than mysterie specially in matrimonie dissension than schisme and these wordes not at all Priest to wit of the new Testament Sacrament Catholike hymnes coÌ„fessioÌ„ penance iustifications traditions in the good part but in steede therof Elders secrete general praiseâ— acknowledging amendment of life ordinaÌ„ces instructions And which is somewhat worse carcas for soule and graue for hel We may say vnto you as Demosthenes said to Aeschines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—hat are these wordes or wonders certainly they are wonders and very wonderfull in Catholike mens eares and whether it be sincere and not hereticall dealing I appeale to the wise and indifferent reader of any sorte FVLK II. For all the termes quarrelled at in this Section wee haue answered before except perhaps for the terme of loue which is vsed in steede of charitie expressing what charitie is in deede and not as it is commonly taken of the common people for an effect of charitie when they call almesse charitie No man that patiently could abide the people to be instructed would cauill at the explication of the worde charitie by loue when in the English tongue the worde charitie of the common people is eyther not vnderstood or taken for an other thing than the Latine worde Charitas do the signifie As for the wonders of wordes that Demosthenes spake of I knowe not where more properly they shal be found than in your affected nouelties of termes such as neither English nor Christian eares euer heard in the English tongue Scandall prepuce neophyte â—â—â—osium gratis parasceue paraclete exinanite repropitiate and a hundred such like inkehorne termes Yea I woulde gladly know why among so many Greckish and Latine-like terms Gazophylacâ—â— is not a Gazophilace but a treasurie enâ—aenia the dedication and not the encaenes as wel as pasce Pentecost azymes parasceue belike the Church must haue treasure and the feast of dedication must not â—e hidde in a new found terme Why shoulde Aduentus be sometime the comming and sometime the aduent except it were for the sounde of the time of aduent beefore the feast of the natiuitie of Christ Why should Latine words be translated in Greekish termes as scissuras into selismes aemulatores zelators and such like These and suche other be wonders of wordes that wise menne can giue no good reason why they should be vsed CHAP. XXII Other faults Iudaeical prophane meere vanities follies and nouelties Martin NOW leauing matters of controuersie lette vs talke a little with you familiarly and learne of you the reason of other pointes in your translation which to vs seeme faults and sauour not of that spirite whyche shoulde bee in Christian Catholike translatours Fulke OVR translations as neare as the translators could see the truth are euen and iuste with the originall texte the sense whereof if it doe not alwaies containe suche excellent matter as the Septuaginta or vulgar Latin translation haue supposed there is no cause why our translators shoulde be blamed whose office is to regarde what the originall truth is and not to drawe it for any respecte to an other meaning thaÌ„ the spirit of god expresseth in those words MART. 2. First you are so profane that you say The ballet of ballets of Salomon so terming that diuine booke Canticum canticoruÌ„ contayning the high mysterie of Christ and his Church as if it were a ballet of leue betweene Salomon and his concubine as Castaleo wantonly translateth it But you say more profanely thus we haue conceiued we haue born in paine as thoughe wee shoulde haue brought â—ooâ—â—â—â— wind I am ashamed to tel the literall commentarie of this your translation why might you not haue said we haue conceiued and as it were traueled to bring forth and haue brought forth the spirite is there any thing in the Hebrewe to hinder you thus far Why woulde you say winde rather than spirite knowing that the Septuagintain Greeke and the auncient fathers and S. Hierome himselfe who translateth according to the Hebrew yet for sense of the place al expound it both according to Hebrew and Greeke of the spirite of God which is first conceiued in vs beginneth by feare which the scripture calleth the beginning of wisdome in so muche that in the Greeke there are these goodly words famous in al antiquitie Through the feare of thee ô lord we conceiued and haue trauailed with paine and haue brought forth the spirite of thy saluation which thou hast made vpon the earth Which doth excellently set before our cies the degrees of a faithful mans increase and proceeding in the spirite of God which beginneth by the feare of his iudgements and is a good feare though seruile and not sufficient and it may be that you condemning wyth Luther this seruile feare as euil and hurtfull meane also some such thing by your traÌ„slatioÌ„ But indede the place may be vnder stode of the other fear also which hath his degrees more or lesse FVLK 2. I meruaile why this word ballet should seme to you to be profane more than this word song or canticle songs and caÌ„ticles be many as il as any ballets But the other matter is of greate waight Esay 26. where for the spirite we translate winde whych is suche an absurditie that you are ashamed to tel the literall coÌ„mentarie of this our translation Belike you are afraide of suche a faulte as S. Lambert in your legend is reported to haue committed But excepte you hadde a prophane minde you would neuer haue imagined any such matter thereof which you are ashamed to vtter The circumstaÌ„ce of the place requireth that we should translate the word in this place for wind and not the spirit for the pro phets pur pose was to shew that people wer in desperat case without hope of help til God did raise them eueÌ„ as it were froÌ„ death The similitude is taken of a trauailing woman
whose womb if it be ful of wind she is in great tormentes But you aske vs whether there be anie thing in the Hebrue that hindreth vs to say we haue coÌ„ceiued and as it were traueled and haue brought forth the spirit Yea verily the coÌ„text of the Hebrue words wil not beare that translation for the worde chemo quasi as it were is placed before the word ialadhenu which signifieth bringing foorth and not before chalnu which signifieth trauailing in paine Therfore the text is worde for word as wee haue translated it And the word following wee coulde make no helpe to the lande or there was no help in the earth declareth a continuance of their miserie and cannot agree with that sense whiche you woulde haue because they which haue receiued the holy Ghost haue founde helpe and are able to helpe Beside that it is a monstrous phrase that the godly shoulde saye they haue conceiued trauailed and brought foorthe the holie Ghost by which they are borne againe to bee the children of God rather than that they haue conceiued or brought forth Gods spirite And therfore howsoeuer Hierom like your interpretation it agreeth neither with the words of the Hebrue nor with the circuÌ„stance of the place it is scarce tollerable to make such a conceptioÌ„ and generation of Gods spirite in men That seruile feare is to be reprooued in the children of God whych shoulde feare him as sonnes and not as slaues wee are content to acknowledge with Luther But what place is this for vs to meane any thing against seruile feare whâ— there is no mention of feare in the Hebrewe texte and the Greeke hathe suche licentious additions that Hierome is faine to strike them through with a spitte and note them to be wiped out MART. 3. But to saye wee haue broughte foorthe winde can admit no suche interpretation but euen as if a meere Iew should translate or vnderstand it who hath no sense of Gods spirite so haue you excluded the true sense which concerneth the holie Ghost and not the colde terme of winde and whatsoeuer naked interpretation thereof And it is your fashion in al such cases where the richer sense is of Gods holie spirite there to translate winde as Psal. 147. v. 1â— as you number the psalmes FVLK 3. We must say in english as the prophet hath said before vs in Hebrue and so truly translate the scripture that neuer a Iewe in the world may haue iust cause to accuse our falshode or partialitie And how cold soeuer the terme of winde seeme to your crooked minde and how naked soeuer the interpretation be thought of your cloaked hypocrisie it is the worde of the euerliuing God and the true sense thereof as it is expressed by the Prophet Likewise Psalme 147. the Prophet sheweth who doth execute the commandement of God in thawing dissoluing the frost namely the wind which being southerly wee see the effect of it what neede wee here to cause the holie ghost to be sent to melt the ice MART. 4. And it is not vnlike to this that you wil not translate for the Aungels honor that carried Abacuâ— He sette him into Babilon ouer the lake by the force of his spirite but thus through a mightie winde so attributing it to the winde not to the Aungels power and omitting cleane the Greeke pronoune 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his which sheweth euidently that it was the Angels spirite force and power FVLK 4 That we haue translated in the storie of Abacuks taking vp that it was through a mighty winde it hath good probabilitie by the circumstance of the place and the signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a force with with a noise is more apt to the winde than to the spirite And in other writers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for the vehement noise of windes but the pronoune I confesse should not haue bene omitted and then it may be referred either to the winde or spirite of God whose Angell this is sayd to be rather than to the Angel For the Angell being nothing but a spirite it is not so conuenient to saye by his spirite as by his owne force againe the pronoune is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof you made great difference as in deede there is difference in another case MART. 5. Againe where the Prophets speake most manifestly of Christ there you translate cleane an other thing as Esa. 30. v. 20. When S. Hierom translateth thus the church hath alwayes redde accordingly Non faciet auolare à te vltra Doctorem tuum erunt oculi tui videntes praeceptorem tuum that is And our Lord shall not cause thy Doctors to flie from thee any more and thine eyes shall see thy Maister Which is all one in effect with that which Christ sayth I will be with you vnto the eâ—de of the word there you translate thus Thy raine shall be no more kept back but thine eyes shall see thy raine So likewise Ioel 2. v. 23. where the holy Church readeth Reioyce you children of Sion in the Lord your God because he hath giuen you the Doctor of iustice there you translate the raine of righteousnesse Doth the Hebrue word force you to this you Iewes theÌ„selues partly vnderstaÌ„d it of Esdras partly of Christs Diuinitie Why are you more profane I will not say more Iudaicalâ— than the Iewes themselues why might not S. Hierom a Christian Doctor and lacking no skill in the Hebrue as you well know satisfie you who maketh no doubt but the Hebrue in these places is Doctor Maister Teacher Who also in Psal. 84. 7. translateth thus With blessings shall the Doctor be araied meaning Christ. Where you with the later Rabbines the enemies of Christ translate The raine coâ—ereth the pooles What cold stuffe is this in respect of that other translation so clearly pointing to Christ out Maister doctor FVLK 5. I haue told you in the beginning of this chapter we must not neither is it safe for the strengthening of our faith to drawe places of Scripture vnto Christ which by the holy Ghost had an other meaning so shall the Iewes laugh vs to scorne and the faith of the ignorant which is grounded vpon such translation if it shall be opened vnto them that it is vntrue shall be mightily shaken and brought in doubt of all other places of Scripture applyed to the like ende God be thanked there be plaine and euident testimonies of Christ in the Scripture which no malice of Iewish or Heathenish enemies can wrest out of our handes which are sufficient for instruction and confirmation of our faith Now concerning those places where you would haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie a Doctour Teacher or Maister first it seemeth you haue your Hebrew but from hande to mouth for chapter 3. sect 25. whereas we translate moreh shaker a teacher of lyes Abacuc 2. you saye wee
you to proue Forsooth that his aduersaries do confesse all the olde fathers to be on their side and to haue erred with them as Fulke doth of S. Ambrose Austen Tertullian Origen Chrysostom Gregorie and Bede by name with most reprochefull and contemptuous words against them This is spoken generally as though we confesse all the doctors to bee on their side in euery controuersie which we doe not acknowledge to be true in any one although many of the later sort do in some part fauour one or two errours of theirs among an hundreth But let vs examine his prooues which seeme to be verie plentifull yet of nine quotations I must needes strike out two page 306. and 279. because in them is not one syllable of my writing but all of Allens In the pages 315. 316. is nothing more contained touching this matter than I haue alreadie declared There remaineth nowe page 349. where I say touching a rule of S. Augustine which hee giueth to trie faith and doctrine of the Church onely by the scripture that if he had as diligently followed it in examining the common error of his time of prayer for the dead as he did in beating downe the schisme of the Donatistes or the heresie of the Pelagians hee woulde not so blindly haue defended that which by holy scripture he was not able to maintaine as he doeth in that booke De Cura pro mortuis agenda and else where What most reprochefull or contemptuous wordes are here against S. Augustine Seeing the holie scripture is a light shining in a darke place as S. Peter sayeth who so goeth without it must walke blindly which I say in commendation of the light of the scripture not in contempt of Augustines reason whome as I may not honour with contempt of the trueth so when he is a patrone maintainer of the truth I honour him from my heart Likewise page 78. Saint Ambrose is named but nothing acknowledged to fauour any popish errour Augustine is againe noted speaking of the amending fire whereof he hath no ground but in the common errour of his time and whereof he affirmeth sometimes that it is a matter that may bee doubted of sometimes that there is no third place at all Wherefore this place hath neither reprochful wordes nor confession of any constant opinion of Augustine inclining to your errours Then let vs passe to the next place which is page 435. where concerning this matter I haue written thus I denie that any of the auncient fathers in Christs time or scholers to his Apostles or within one or two hundreth yeares after Christ except one that had it of Montanus the heretike as he had more things beside in any one word maintained your cause for purgatorie or prayers for the dead Secondly of them that maintained prayers for the dead the most confessed they had it not out of the scriptures but of tradition of the Apostles and custome of the church therefore they are not to be compared vnto vs in better vnderstanding of the scriptures for that point which they denyed to be receiued of the scriptures Thirdly those of the auncient fathers that agreed with you in any part of your assertion for none within 400. yeares was wholly of your errour notwithstanding manie excellent gifts that they had yet maintained other errors beside that and about that diffented one from another and sometime the same man from himselfe and that is worst of all from manifest truth of the holy scriptures Therefore neither is their erronious interpretation in this matter to be receiued nor M. Allens wise iudgement of vs to bee regarded Here also I appeale to the iudgement of indifferent readers what confession I haue made of the fathers to be on their side or what reprochefull or contemptuous wordes I haue vsed against them for dissenting from vs. The next place is quoted page 247. where I say against Allen boasting of auncient testimonies for prayer for the dead I will not denie but you haue much drosse and dregges of the later sort of doctors the later the fuller of drosse But bring me any worde out of Iustinus Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Alexandrinus or any that did write within one hundreth yeares after Christ that aloweth prayer or almes for the dead I will say you are as good as your word Here except he will cauil that I acknowledge much drosse and dregs to be in the later sort of doctors I knowe not what hee findeth that hath any shadowe of his slander But the trueth must be confessed that the pure waters of life are to be founde onely in the worde of God and beside that the best and purest liquors that are to bee seene are not cleare from all dregges and drosse of humane error and frailtie In the next page Origen deliuered from the shamefull mangling of Allens allegation is shewed plainly to be an enimie of purgatorie prayer for the dead in that he affirmeth the day of a Christian mans death to be the ende of all sorrowe and the beginning of all felicitie There remaineth nowe the last place quoted page 194. where I acknowledge that Gregorie Bernard Bede vpon the text Matth. 12. are of opinion that sinnes not remitted in this world may be remitted in the world to come But how happeneth it say I that Chrysostome Ieronyme which both interpreted that place could gather no such matter although they otherwise allowed prayer for the dead The reason must needes be because the errour of purgatorie growing so much the stronger as it was neerer to the full reuelation of Antichrist Gregorie and Bede sought not the true meaning of Christ in this scripture but the confirmation of their plausible error Here is all the confessions most reprochefull contemptuous wordes that are conteined in so manie of those places as he hath quoted in which I will not tarrie to rehearse how manie vntruthes he hath vttered against mee but wish the indifferent reader to consider that if he be so bolde to slander mee concerning a booke printed in English by which he may be conuinced of euerie simple reader what dare he not aduouch of matters done and past at Rome whither none may trauell to trie out his tretcherie but he is in manifest danger neuer to returne the answere of his message From this Popish Parson whatsoeuer his name be I must passe to another gentleman namelesse in deede but not blamelesse yea much more blame worthie than the other who among so manie and so great flanders as it is wonder howe they could bee conueyed into so small a booke against our prince her lawes her councellors her iudges her officers the nobilitie the comminaltie the church the gouernors the pastors the people thereof against all states persons of the land in whome there is religion towardes God ioyned with dutie towarde their prince and countrie hath founde yet some emptie corners where he might place me in particular And
first of all page 46. of his Latine Epistle after he hath described the manner of quartering vsed in the execution of traytors and most impudently flandered the officers of Iustice to make such haste in cutting downe the Papistes which are hanged as they vse not in punishment of other traytours to the ende they might satisfie their cruel minds in their torments which is proued false by manie thousand eye witnesses that haue not lightly seene any of them reuiue with any sense of their paynes except one Storie who also did hang so long before he was cut downe that it was great wondering to manie to see him so soone recouered not onely in life but also in strength At length he commeth in his tragical manner to inueigh against the crueltie of their aduersaries whome this cruell sight doth nothing at all moue to pitie but they laugh and make sport at it and insult against them that are a dying But especially saieth hee if any ouercome with paine hath giuen foorth any groning which yet happeneth most seldome so one of them no meane preacher in a certeine imprinted booke doeth gather that ours are not true martyrs because one of them as he himselfe affirmeth gaue foorth a certaine howling as of an helhound that I may vse his owne wordes O sentence worthie of a preacher O new charitie of the new gospel What ruffinaly theefe at any time hath not blushed to vtter such a voice What murtherer did euer shewe a minde so cruell and barbarous This froth of wordes I might easily match with like rhetoricall exclamations O impudent lyer O shamelesse slanderer O trayterous backbyter c. But I had rather beat it downe with trueth of matter Bristowe in his booke of Motiues maketh Martyrs his 15. Motiue Among whome hee commendeth as well for the goodnes of their cause as also for their patient suffering The good Earle of Northumberland I vse his owne traiterous wordes Storie Felton Nortons Woodhouse Plomtree and so manie hundreths of the Northeren men whome approued by miracles vndoubted he opposeth against Foxes martyrs as he calleth them Against this traiterous commendation of open rebels and traitors among other things thus I haue written Retent page 59. Seeing not the paine but the cause maketh a martyr whosoeuer haue suffered for treason and rebellion may well be accounted Martyrs of the popish church but the church of Christ condemneth such for enimies of Christes kingdome and inheritours of eternall destruction except they repent and obteine mercie for their horrible wickednesse And seeing patient suffering is by Bristowes owne confession a gift of God vnto all true martyrs such as were manifestly voyde of patience can be no true martyrs as were most of these rebels and traitors and Storie by name who for all his glorious tale in the time of his most deserued execution by quartering was so impatient that he did not onely roare and crye like an helhound but also strake the executioner doing his office and resisted as long as strength did serue him being kept downe by three or foure men vntill he was dead O patient martyr of the popish church What cause had this slaunderous spirite vppon these my wordes to make such hydeous outcryes what theefe what ruffian what murderer or what matter is ministred in this my saying to accuse all the aduersaries of Papistes in England of such barbarous crueltie We are not so voide of humanitie but we lament y e miserie euen of our greatest most graceles enimies but yet wee are not so voide of vnderstanding to acknowledge impatient suffering to bee true martyrdome no not if the cause were neuer so good Not that wee thinke true martyrs to be voide of sense and feeling of their torments or that they may not testifie their paines euen with teares and strong crying sometimes but that there is a great difference between the crying of patient martyrs vnto God for strength comfort and the brutish roaring of impatient sufferers expressed only with paine and torment as was this of Storie who vttered no voice of prayer in all that time of his crying as I heard of the verie executioner himselfe beside them that stoode by but onely roared and cryed as one ouercome with the sharpnes of the paine as no martyr is whome God is faithfull to deliuer out of temptation so that although they haue neuer so great sense of their torment yet are they neuer ouercome thereby But peraduenture this orator for the popish traytors wil take me vp for concluding against Storie that he did not pray because no voice of prayer was heard to come from him as though I could not consider that he was immediatly before strangled so that the passage of his voice might be stopped that albeit that roaring were his prayer yet it might not bee vnderstood by them which heard it In deede if there had beene no other signe of his impatiencie but his crying I would not haue beene bolde to haue iudged therof and made him an example of impatiencie as I did But what patient martyr euer strake his tormentor Who praying for his persecutors would striue to buffet and beat them What man submitting himselfe to the will of God in his suffering would resist the executioners that he might not suffer yea when there was no remedie but he must suffer except God for his crueltie shewed against his patient saints had not onely giuen him a taste of such torments as he procured to others but also made him an open spectacle of the impatient vncomfortable state of them that suffer not in a good cause and with a good conscience By this it is manifest how honestly this proctor of the persecuted Papistes reporteth that vpon a litle groning I gather that hee was no true martyr and further rayleth as his facultie well serueth him The like honest dealing and trueth is shewed in the English translation of this pamphlet toward the latter ende where hee speaketh of certaine imprisoned pyned with famine at Yorke There in the margent Fulke is placed as though he had beene author or executer of some persecution at Yorke neere to which citie he neuer came by 40. miles But this will be excused perhaps by the printers fault because it is not mentioned in the Latine Howsoeuer it be it argueth a lying and a slaunderous stomack of the setters foorth of this treatise that would suffer so open and so apparent a slander to passe vncorrected being in such a place where it could not escape their sight and knowledge But the storie of the conference at Wisbich is a worthie matter wherein not onely this rhetoritian but also the confuter of M. Charke if they be not both one Parson as I gesse they be haue thought good to exercise their stile The trueth whereof is this as it is easie to be prooued in euery respect by sufficient testimonies It pleased the Lordes and other of her maiesties councell after those obstinate recusantes
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
the difference betweene a storie at large and an abridgement c. If you be able to defende that booke to be Canonicall answere my reasons prepare your selfe to answere as many â—â—re as may bee alledged to conuince the vanitie and falshod of that stories and so I leaue you to a better minde if it be Gods will to giue it you I finde also that in the Popish annotations vpon the new Testament printed at Rhemes my writings are carped at in two places the former vpoÌ„ 2. Thes. 2. where my wordes against Saunders Rocke page 248. page 278. are rehearsed In which I say that Leo Gregorie bishops of Rome although they were not come to the full pride of Antichrist yet the mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that seate neere fiue or sixe hundred yeares before them and then greatly increased they were so deceiued with the long continuance of errour that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellowe Apostles than the holy scriptures of God against which no continuance of errour can prescribe doeth either allowe or bearâ— withall Againe the testimonies of Leo Gregorie bishops of Rome as alwayes so nowe I deeme to bee vnmeete to be heard in their owne cause though otherwise they were not the worst men yet great furtherers of the authoritie of Antichrist which soone after their dayes tooke possession of the chayre which they had helped to prepare for him For this I am called a malepeart scholer of Bezaes impudent schoole But by what reason For placing the mysterie of Antichrist as woorking in the see of Rome euen in S. Peters time That the mysterie of Antichrist did worke in S. Peters time the text of S. Paul is plaine That it did worke in Rome where Antichrist should be openly shewed S. Iohn is plaine in the Reuelation Ca. 17. ver 9. 18. yea the Papists confessing that S. Peter called Rome Babylon must needes grant as much this onely then remaineth in controuersie whether in the sea or church of Rome the mysterie of iniquitie did worke from the Apostles time vntill Antichrist was openly shewed Seeing it wrought at Rome it wrought either in the church or altogether out of the church but it wrought not altogether out of the church therefore it wrought in the church That the mysterie of iniquitie preparing for that Antichrist wrought not altogether out of the church it is manifest because the seat of Antichrist is prophesied to bee in the Temple and Church of God Without the Church was not the mysterie of iniquitie against Christ but open wickednesse and persecution of Christes Church Therefore within the Church that mysterie did worke By what meanes first it is not certaine because it was a secrete not reuealed by the Apostle Some coniecture that it was by preferring one bishop before all the clergie of elders or priests which at the first were equall Some thinke that such factions began at Rome as afterwarde were at Corinth one holding of Cephas that is Peter another of some other How euer it was the challenge made to Peters chayre and from the dayes of Victor diuerse bishops of Rome creeping vp by litle and litle pretending authoritie ouer other Churches other churches reuerencing that see for many good respects were abused by Satan to set forwarde his purpose in aduauncing the throne of Antichrist And where I saide that Leo Gregorie were great furtherers of the authoritie of Antichrist my meaning was not that they did wittingly willingly prepare a seat for Antichrist but that the dâ—uel by Gods permission because he was to send the efficacie of error into the world tooke hold in the time appointed of that authoritie which the bishops for the dignitie of their see and as they thought for the benefite of the church did labour so greatly to maintaine encrease Neither write I any thing contrarie to the challenge of that reuerend father the bishop of Sarum as they charge mee who saide at Paules crosse O Gregorie O Leo if we be deceiued you haue deceiued vs For his meaning was not thereby to allow whatsoeuer they had done or written but that in some such matters as are in controuersie betweene the Papistes and vs euen Gregorie and Leo are witnesses against them A great accusation is in the note vpon Heb. 5. ver 6. in these wordes You must beware of the wicked heresie of the Arrians and Caluines except in these latter it be rather an error proceding of ignorance that stick not to say that Christ was a priest or did sacrifice according to his godhead which is to make Christ God the fathers priest and not his sonne and to do sacrifice and homage to him as his lorde and not as his equall in dignitie and nature Therefore S. Augustine sayeth in Psal. 109. That as he was man he was priest as God he was not priest And Theodoret in Psal. 109. As man he did offer sacrifice but as God he receiued sacrifice And againe Christ touching his humanitie was called a priest and hee offered none other host but his owne bodie c. Dâ—m 1. circa med Some of our newe masters not knowing so much did let fall out of their pennes the contrarie and being admonished of the error and that it was verie Arrianisme yet they persist in it of meere ignorance in the grounds of diuinitie First note the intollerable pride of these Popish interpreters that challenge to themselues all learning and knowledge in diuinitie condemning all other men of ignorance meere ignorance in the groundes of diuinitie So playeth Bristowe with the bishop of Sarum whome in the place by them quoted I reproued in these words The like impudent cauil he bringeth against M. Iewel whoÌ„ no man I thinke without laughter can read to be charged with ignorance by blundering Bristowe for affirming Christ to be a priest according to his deitie whom the Apostle expressely sayeth by his eternall spirite to haue offered himselfe Heb. 9. ver 14. But that you may the better vnderstand this controuersie betweene vs we denie not that Christ was a priest according to his humanitie but wee affirme that whole Christ is a priest as he is both God and man For in the office of priesthood two things must be considered a ministerie and an authoritie In respect of the ministeriall part our Sauiour Christ perfourmed that office as man but in respect of authoritie of entring into the holiest place reconciling vs to God presenting vs vnto God which was the principall part of his priesthood hee did perfourme it as the sonne of God as Lorde and maker of the house and not as a seruant but as God which hath created all things Heb. 3. vers 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Against this sound doctrine let vs examine what the heretikes alledge First they charge it most odiously with Arrianisme but without all â—parke of reason seeing wee distinguish plainly