against your doctrines then the latine translation Which though M. Rainolds here closelie denieth yet in examples euerie where maie be seene and some I will sett downe partlie for M. Rainolds sake and partlie to shew I haue no neede of his excuse from a lie In the 14. Chapter of S. Iohns gospell ver 26. where our sauiour Christ telleth his Apostles The holie ghost shall bring into your remembrance whatsoeuer I haue said to you the Remish translators haue made him thus to speake shall suggest vnto you all things whatsoeuer I shall saie to you according to the latine vulgare that it might be more easilie supposed whatsoeuer the Church should afterwardes determine is from inspiration of the holie ghost Ephesians Chapter 2. vers 10. the Apostle in the Greeke writeth that we are created in Christ vnto good workes you translate after your latine in good workes This corruption is aduantage to your doctrine of good workes In the same epistle Chapter 5. vers 32. you translate this is a great sacrament to make men think that the scriptures affirme mariage to be a sacrament of the Church whereas if you had truelie translated it according to the Greeke This is a great mysterie the occasion of that surmise had bene remoued In the epist to the Pihl. Chap. 1. v. 27. the greeke word which signifieth a signe or token or proofe is in your latine vulgare translated a cause and this translation do you keepe the rather thereby to induce your readers to beleeue that as the malitious dealing of wicked aduersaries against the godlie maie truelie be said to be the cause of their perdition so likewise the patience of the godlie is a cause of their saluation whereas the Apostle onelie saieth in this place that the raging of the enemies against the Church is a manifest argument of their condemnation and the constant suffering of the godly is a certaine signe and testimony of their saluation who seeth not herein what cause you had to like better of the latine translation then of the originall text Luke Chap. 10. v. 35. the words are in the Greeke whatsoeuer thou spendest more which you translate whatsoeuer thou shalt supererogate This corruption maketh some shewe for your workes of supererogation Luke Chap. 1. v. 48. the blessed virgine saith God hath looked on the lowe estate of his handmaid you translate the humilitie of his handmaid This corruption helpeth your doctrine of merites So an other corruption in the same Chapter v. 28. tending to the same purpose where you haue translated Haile full of grace the Greeke and originall texte hath onelie Haile thou freelie beloued In the Epistle to the Hebrewes chap. 13. v. 16. you translate with such hostes god is promerited which is both a fonde and false translation the Greeke words being with such sacrifices God is delighted meaning almes and distribution In the second Ep. of S. Peter Chap. 1. v. 15. you haue strangely translated the Apostles words I will doe my diligence you to haue often after my decease also that you may keepe a memorie of these thinges and vpon this disordered translation you haue made a long note of Peters care and protection of the Church after his death whereas the Apostle in his owne wordes saith no more but that he would endeuour dailie that they also might haue remembrance of those things after his departure A pretie sleight in translating for aduantage where the Apostle saieth he would endeuour that they might remember those thinges after his decease to make him saie that he would haue them in remembrance after his decease and then of this false translation to note what a pastorall care S. Peter hath for the Church after he was deceased In the epistle of S. Paule to the Romanes chap. 11. v. 6. the common translator hath left out this whol sentence together But if it be of workes it is no more grace or els were worke no more worke and these wordes haue you also in your English translation cleane omitted as though they were no parte of scripture being the Apostles vndouted words no lesse then the other that went before What cause was there of this dealing but onelie to smother that cleere opposition between merite and grace which the Apostle hath in his owne words declared if he might be suffered to speake all A number such places could I alledge where the vulgar translation differing and swaruing from the vndoubted originall text is by you followed because it carieth some sound and shewe of your opinions and errors Manie excuses may you make for your selues your translatours haue in their preface handsomely laid out their excuses which I doubt not shal be weied and examined throughlie but soone may anie man perceiue what cause indeede moued you to be so friendlie to the translation and soe harde to the text because the texte doth plainlie discouer your nakednes the translation bringeth some small ragges to hide it Before you answere my arguments alledged for defense of the Hebrewe and Greeke texte pag. 285. you set downe certaine words of mine wherein I seeme you say to auouch that onelie to be the worde of God which is written in the language wherein first the holie ghost by the Prophets and Apostles vttered it No cauill so simple which M.R. will not vse My words are plaine Master Rainolds my meaning cannot seeme ambiguous you seeke not for truth but for a cauill The word of God I know maie be vttered in other languages then wherein first it was by writing deliuered to the Church and translations agreeing with the originall texte are the word of God For Gods worde is not the language but the doctrine Howbeit translations set forthe by sundrie persons are so farre forth onelie the word of God as they faithfully expresse the meaning of the Authenticall text the which being written by the Prophets and Apostles chosen instruments for that purpose is wholly and vndoubtedlie the worde of God Then it may worthelie be wondered at in you whoe taking vpon you to translate the new testament into englishe haue not translated the text of the Apostles and Euangelists but the translation of S. Ierome or some other you know not whome which translation in verie manie places is corrupte and therefore in those places cannot be the word of God Religion and reason would haue required that in translating the scriptures you should haue followed the originall fountaines Absurd to translate a translation of Scriptures rather then the fountaines yea although the latine translation hadde bene much perfecter and purer then it is how much more ought you to haue soe done seing it be wrayeth soe manifest and manifold corruptions as it doeth But your reasons pag. 287. whereby you labour to iustifie your doing in this behalfe must be examined M.R. reasons why they might translate according to a translation answered Our Sauiour the Euangilists Apostles you say cited places of the old testament
conscience tolde you that if you opposed your selfe against this trueth therein should you offer iniurie to your Pope and Pope-catholike brethren whome the same so specially doth concerne You saie I know not what Antichrist is Contrae Sander pa. 6. in principio against whome I write and that sometime I make Antichrist to be the wholl Catholike and vniuersall Church wherof the Pope is head which to be a pregnant vntrueth he that looketh one the place may see Haue I saied the Pope is head of the Chatholike vniuersall Church or the Catholike vniuersall Church is Antichrist what will you be ashamed hereafter to write that in the first entrance write thus vntruelie without shame and yet hauing your selfe auouched so notorious an vntruth you dare make mention of Lucians true historie which booke as may seeme you haue not onelie read ouer with diligence and delight but also translated into English propounded vnto your selfe as worthie of your imitaion For to giue you that praise that of due belongeth vnto you Lucian if he liued could hardlie coyne more passing vntruthes or scoffe more kindelie at Christ and his gospell then you haue done A greater reason was he saith for that he abhorred to deale with heretiks pag. 5. who passe al other in pride and ignorance and of all heretikes he maketh vs of England to be the worst Indeede true it is that heretikes for the most part are obstinate past amendment therefore a great wearines vexation of minde is it to maintaine contentions and disputes with them whereof in the end small profit doth redound But this complaint of hereticall wilfulnes nothing toucheth vs who by Gods grace are far from al kinde of heresie and hold no other doctrine then that which the Prophets and Apostles and Iesus Christ him selfe haue taught vs which is plainly contained in the bookes of canonicall scripture from which if labouring to disswade vs you cannot preuaile no maruell is it And in defending the same we are content to be esteemed of you contentious proude ignorant and as you list We are not so much in loue of your society nor seeke your fauour and commendation so greatlie that we will ioine in vnitie with you against the Lord his trueth and Church If you thinke we are proud tell vs wherein our pride consisteth If in that we will not yeald vnto you nor giue ouer maintenance of the Gospell pardon vs Master Rainolds modestie in the Lord is an excellent vertue but the modestie that betraieth the trueth of God is accursed Other pride I doubt not we are as cleare from as your selfe or anie of your fellowes And for ignorance we may thinke it was some spice of pride in you to obiect it vnto vs who for anie thing that appeereth haue no cause to brag of such knowledge or to chalenge more to your selfe then you may safely graunt to an other For tell vs what learning is wherein it consisteth and howe it maie be gotten Vnles you haue some speciall meanes and as it were some secret waie to attaine vnto it which others haue not I see not why we should thinke that you haue gotten a greater measure of learning and wisdome then others who haue vsed as great indeauour as your selfe And what the matter should be I know not that you are sodenlie become so learned and that we haue lost all learning But were you as learned as euer anie was or could be your learning shall not be hable to hurte the cause that we defend your learning shall in the end deceiue you and you that now boaste of your knowledge shall then be ashamed of your ignorance To knowe Christ out of his worde is true knowledge sound learning and perfect wisdome Certaine examples you rehearse of our ignorant assertions onelie thereby to make our cause seeme odious to the simple but the reasons of our assertions you pretermit which is your common sleight continuallie to tell your readers that such and such opinions we holde and not to shew the maner nor to remember or answere our reasons Wherein I desire the reader to consider how vntruelie Master Rainolds hath charged me with a wicked heresie that in this man he maie beholde the conscience of a Papist He setteth downe for one of my sayings that Christ is not begotten of the substance of his father a slaunder moste manifest in a matter of greatest moment I haue not writen thus no I neuer thought thus I abhorre with my hart all such blasphemy against the Person of our sauiour Christ But in the meane time what hath this slaunderer deserued Let the reader equallie iudge betweene him and me and by triall hereof esteeme more indifferentlie of the rest of his malice Now the greatest cause of all that made him so loth pag. 7. was he saith because he found in our doctrine no staie or certentie which yet if it were true should haue ministred vnto him greater will and courage forsomuch as the doctrine that standeth vpon no certaine staie is easilie disprooued and ouerthrowen But in trueth Master Rainolds perceiuing our doctrine to be grounded vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles which maie not be remooued and knowing we will not yeald to mens doctrines and inuentions whatsoeuer differing from the holie scriptures but rest our selues whollie vpon the written word of God I thinke he was indeede somewhat discouraged as great cause was he should being sure his engines could not preuaile against the same And what greater steadfastnes in religion can be required then to holde Gods word which we professe to be the ground whereon we build our faith If you can shewe wherein we swarue from it we will not refuse your instruction But saie not nowe we are vnstaied when as you knowe we relie our selues whollie vpon the worde vnles you will denie Gods word to be a certaine rule and staie of doctrine We plant not our religion in mans iudgement vncertentie of Traditions in vaine ceremonies and deuises as you doe but in matters of faith and religion we depend vpon God whoe in the scriptures of the olde and new Testament hath deliuered to his Church one certaine vniforme and perfect doctrine to which we adde nothing from which we take nothing awaie in which we settle and ground our selues But let vs heare how Master Rainolds can prooue that the Protestants haue no certaine faith For this he hath propounded to himselfe to declare especiallie in this preface And I desire the godlie readers to marke his proofes which shall be I trust to their comfort and confirmation in the truth First he obiecteth diuersitie of iudgement amongst vs Pag. 9. concerning the Princes supremacie in matters Ecclesiasticall wherein is no such difference as he pretendeth if he listed rightlie to vnderstand the case The title of supreme head of the Church hath bene misliked by diuerse godlie and learned men and of right and properlie it onelie belongeth
vnlearned soeuer you thinke we are but by the grace of God and light of his word can easilie discouer the falsehood and corruptions of your Religion Let vs now consider vpon what points you were bolde to vtter so fondlie your iudgement of me and thereby make triall of that profound learning which you take to your selfe with out cause as shall here and euerie where appeere First you charge me Pag. 98. that I vnderstand not M. Martins meaning which though it were true yet were it I trust a veniall offense But I perceiued his meaning well inough framed mine answere directlie to the same The question was whether to attribute to our sufferings the vertue of satisfying for our sins be not iniurious to the passion satisfaction of Christ I said it was and so I saie still Master Martin alleadgeth against me the words of the Apostle Saint Pauls who saieth we shal be heires with God Rom. 8.17 and follow heires with Christ if we suffer with him that we may be glorified with him Mine answere was that our suffrings are required not as causes of our saluation and eternall glorie yet to be borne of necessitie vnles we wil fall awaie from his grace and glorie Wherein now haue I swarued from M. Martins purpose His argument was you saie to prooue that good workes are not iniurious to saluation because the scripture requireth them as necessarie to saluation But why tell you not how M. Martin meant they are required as necessarie then had you disclosed your owne folly For we graunt they are necessarilie required in that sense that the Apostle teacheth and are not in that respect anie waies iniurious or derogatory to the sacrifice of Christ But this prooueth not that they satisfie for our sinnes for then should they be efficient causes of our saluation as you would haue them to be thought and then should they derogate greatlie from the merites of Christ Were you so astonied that you could not make mine answere agree to M. Martins argument or had you a pleasure thus to cauill Secondlie you say pag. 99. c. I vnderstand not S. Paule alleaged by M. Martin your selfe setting downe such an exposition of his wordes as both is contrarie to his wholl doctrine disprooued by the verie words themselues For where you saie this place of the Apostle prooueth inuinciblie that workes are the efficient causes of our saluation it shall easilie appeare that herein you doe not onelie misconstrue the Apostle but vtter blasphemie against the blood of Christ such a notable expositor are you become of the holie scriptures S. Paule saith we are ioint heyres with Christ Rom. 8.15 if so be we suffer with him that we may also be glorified with him Doth this prooue our workes or sufferings to be causes efficient of our saluation By what diuinitie by what Logick by what sophistrie wherein lieth the inuincible necessitie of this consequence doth not the Apostle himselfe conclude the contrary in the wordes immediatlie following when he saith Rom. 8.18 I account that the sufferings of this present time are not worthie of the glorie that shal be reueiled vnto vs Our sufferings are not worthie the glorie of heauen and therfore deserue it not If then there be not anie proportion at all betweene our sufferings and eternall glorie as the Apostle plainlie affirmeth how can our sufferings be causes efficient of that moste excellent glorie saluation which Christ hath purchased for vs doth he not cal it our inheritance when he saith we are the heires of god fellow heires with Christ then doth it follow most inuincibly that it is not obtained by our workes but doth belong vnto vs by the right of our adoption whereby we are made the sonnes of God Neuertheles as the father requireth obedience of his sonne to whome he leaueth his inheritance so the Lord most iustly may exact of his children to whome he hath prepared a kingdome Eternall life belongeth vnto vs by right of our adoption and is not purchased of vs by our workes all duties of seruice and obedience And as the obedience of the childe is not the cause efficient of the earthlie inheritance no more are the workes of godlines wherein the faithfull are occupied causes efficient of immortalitie and saluation When the earthlie father saith to his naturall sonne and heire thou shalt inherit my landes and goodes if so be thou wilt obeie my will can your wisdome hereof gather an inuincible argument that this obedience in the heire is the proper and efficient cause of that inheritance so when the Lord speaketh to his children in like manner I wil giue vnto you eternall life if you can be content patientlie to waite for the time of your ful deliuerance and to suffer afflictions in this life as it is necessarie for you to do who but a blinde papist wil argue hereof that these afflictions endured in the meane time are causes of eternal life which is the free gift and grace of God and yet is this M. Rainolds inuincible argument or rather inuincible sollie and ignorance Now where he maketh a comparison betweene Christes sufferings ours pag. 100. and because Christes sufferings merite eternal life No comparison betwene the merites of Christ and our good workes reasoneth that ours therfore do the same he deserueth that all the boies in the schoole should clap their hands against him as not onely disputing moste absurdlie but dishonouring our sauiour Christ intollerablie Will you match your selues with Christ your workes and your sufferings with his you make a verie vnequall moste vnreasonable comparison For is there in you that perfection of vertue and excellencie of grace that was in Christ wherby he fullie satisfied the law of God and therfore deserued worthelie the Kingdome of heauen All our righteousnes is vnperfect all our obedience is full of infirmitie whatsoeuer we can do or suffer is stained with some pollution of sinne and therfore of due can merite nothing at the hands of God much lesse the Kingdome of heauen and life euerlasting Thus your summe was not rightlie gathered as you maie see Pag. 102 Rom. 6.23 Eternall life is a free gift and therefore is not obtained by merite of good workes Thirdlie M. Rainolds saith I vnderstand not S. Paul alleadged by my selfe that eternal life is the gift of god Whereupon I gather that seing it is the free gift of God our workes are not the causes therof For if our workes were causes efficient of eternal life the Apostle would not saie that eternal life is giuen freely vnto vs by God seeing to giue freelie and to giue vpon desert cannot be verified of one thing But eternall life is a free gift 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Apostle doth affirme expressly and therefore is not purchased by merit of our good works where is to be noted the opposition betweene eternall death and life touching
the blood of the new testament and this blood is the new testament in my blood If it may be lawfull for you to alter and expound the words at your pleasure then can you help your selfes wel enough but your exposition must be squared according to the wordes not the words framed to your exposition Againe pag. 240. you say where Beza correcteth Saint Luke in the latter part of the sentence I raile at the first so that betweene Beza and me S. Luke hath neuer a word right wisely considered doubties The words are right your exposition is fond and wicked The cupp you make to be the blood of Christ whoe as yet was not crucified nor his blood shed If your doctrine be true Christes blood was shed alreadie and that reallie els it could not be in the cup reallie The papists teache that Christs blood was reallie in the cup before his passion But if Christs blood was shed sitting at the table whoe was he M.R. that shed it whoe made the wound whoe opened his side who thrust his weapon in his heart whoe pearced his hands and feete This must you tell if you maintaine that his blood was then reallie shed and powred forth into the cuppe But by the cuppe M.R. is ment the wine in the cuppe which is the newe testament that is a sacrament of the newe testament in Christs blood shed for vs on the crosse This is a true and plaine sense agreeable to all analogie of faith standing with the words themselues followed of the auncient fathers When at length will you make an end of this railing it is to vnseemelie to lothsome pag. 241. to odious Indeed M.R. it must needes appeare a great absurditie to all learned godly Christians whoe know rightlie esteeme the price of our redemption that to be shed for our sinnes which was in the cup. Christs blood was shed for our sinnes which neuer came in the cup but remained in his bodie vntil the time of his death And if Christs blood was in the cuppe when he gaue the cuppe to his Apostles then must it follow necessarilie that his bodie then was without blood it being shedde already and contained in the cup. In the cuppe was onelie wine a sacrament of his blood which he gaue in the same to his Apostles to drincke whereof he drancke him selfe and so the scriptures expressely call it wine If this were the thing that was shedde for your sinnes then was true and naturall wine the price of your redemption then are you saued by wine then haue you no part in Christs blood But the true Church beleeueth her sinnes to be washed away not by that which was really contained in the cuppe but by the true blood of Christ which issued out of his body nailed on the crosse and wounded with a speare Your absurditie therefore needeth not to be further discouered it is so openlie blasphemous against the blood of Iesus Christ which was shed once not in the cup but on the crosse for our redemption If you vrge S. Lukes words as they stand in grammaticall construction I answere that as the cup is called Christs blood Christs testament that is by a figure the sacrament of his blood and testament so is it also said to be shed for vs by a figure sacramentallie But all men of skill and iudgement maie soone see that in these wordes there is some change of grammaticall disposition vsuall in the writings of the Apostles and Euangelists Your discourse about Tautologies in the scriptures is altogether vaine and friuolous To S. Basils testimonie you aunswere much in words and nothing in matter pag. 244. For what cause haue you thus to reproch Beza for his translation of these words seing you cannot denie but S. Basil hath reported that text of S. Luke euen as Beza hath translated the same and you confesse that Saint Basil hath truelie deliuered the sense thereof so all that you haue said or can say spitefullie against Beza must appertaine to Saint Basil no lesse Basil in Ethic. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whome yet you will not seeme to touch But the thing truelie and indifferentlie considered Beza is no more to be accused then S. Basil you tell vs of heretikes a long tale which is no better then waste paper Vse it your selfe or bestowe it at your pleasure Of such badde stuffe base account is to be made Whereas I spake a fewe words concerning figuratiue speaches pag. 251. which the aduersaries cannot abide to heare of in the sacrament I haue as it were opened at vnawares a flood-gate to M. Rainolds flowing vtterance Quâ data porta ruit The streame is so strong and runneth so violentlie carying all manner of baggage with it that vaine it were to resist it Let it therefore passe downe and doe what mischiefe it can great harme I trust it shall not doe Thus much you must confesse that in the sacrament figures are found and yet when we oppose against your monster of reall presence a most true and euident answere that the wordes were figuratiuelie spoken and must figuratiuelie be expounded you rage aboue all measure But quiet your selfe Master Rainolds and somewhat staie your intemperate affection neuer shall you prooue while papistrie hath a man liuing to speake in defense of it either by scripture or auncient writer that these words must figuratiuelie be vnderstoode This is my blood this cuppe is the new Testament in my blood more then these This cup is shed for you Leaue your babling Figuratiue speaches in the verie words of the supper by the Aduersaries confession and speake to purpose prooue this if you can Wherefore finding in the Euangelistes wordes such manifest figures what reason haue you to condemne vs for vsing the same being a moste common and familiar kinde of speach Because it standeth not with your reall presence Let your reall presence hardlie shift for it selfe we are not bound for cause and respect thereof to wrest the scriptures to forge monstrous interpretations to change the sacrament into a reall sacrifice of Christ which heathenish kinde of doctrine neuer anie but Antichrist and his ministers maintained The scriptures the olde fathers the auncient Church of Christ taught and beleeued otherwise as hath bene shewed and prooued inuinciblie to your faces Your pages following filled with rouing testimonies I pretermitt your contumelies being no lawfull arguments require no answere CHAP. 11. Concerning the translation of the English Bibles MAster Martins boke of Discouerie is aunswered long since from head to foote in euerie part pag. 262. you haue the answere amongst you saie to it what you can with truth and learning To bragge of your fellowes booke which being throughlie and soundlie disprooued you cannot with all your skill maintaine is a childish vanitie to acknowledge no Replie which you cannot but knowe or to make light account of it whereunto you cannot truelie reioine is wilfulnes and
and two with Pe. Wherefore you see how litle proofe of corruption this reason maketh whatsoeuer you in your ignorance esteeme of it That which Master Rainolds hetherto hath saide as though it were greatly to purpose Pag. 333. and worthie to be remembred he gathereth now into certaine conclusions and as the smith he beateth stil vpon the same anuill I haue alreadie answered enoughe to the wholl If any thing further be offered in this repetition it shal be hand led First it is neither Iudaical nor iniurious to the Church to thinke more reuerentlie of the Hebrew fountaines then the latine translation as hath beene shewed Yea absurde and vnlearned is it to preferre the translation before the text vpon certaine I know not what blinde surmises Secondlie if the heresie of the Arrians corrupted the Latine Bibles as you imagine whereupon they needed such correction and reformation by Saint Ierome how came it to passe that the Greeke translation of the seuentie and the Greeke of the new testament was not by that meanes much more corrupted for so much as that heresie preuailed much more in the Greeke then in the latine Churches why notwithstanding this heresie doe the fathers appeale to the Greeke fountaines of the new testamēt by them amend their translations The Arrians would haue corrupted the spring rather then a streame and Saint Ierome had more cause in respect of them to suspecte the Greeke then the latine Whereby it is plaine that your geasse of the latine translations being troubled and corrupted by the Arrians is vaine and nothing but a geasse at all aduenture That you say the Canon of the scripture in those daies was not by generall authoritie confirmed and receiued though it be greate vntrueth yet for as much as it pertaineth not directly to the matter I will not stand vpon it Two authorities M. R. alleadgeth out of the commentaries of S. Hierome vpon the epistle to the Galathians The Apostle in the 3. Chap. citeth two testimonies out of Deuteronomie not altogether according to euerie word in the Hebrewe text Saint Ierome among other reasons hereof vseth that for one that the Iewes perhaps haue changed something in their originals If the Apostle had alwaies bound him-selfe to the wordes in rehearsing authorities out of the olde testament this reason had beene of waight but seeing the Apostle Saint Paul and other Apostles vse not preciselie to recite the words of the text but the sence Saint Ierome had no cause to suspecte such a matter in these places For compare the 〈…〉 Prophets and Apostles wordes together and no difference in sense shall ye finde Deuteronomie Chap. 27. v. 26. the words stand thus in the Hebrewe Accursed is whosoeuer performeth not the wordes of this lawe to doe them The Apostle to the Galat. chap. 3. v. 10. alledgeth them thus Accursed is euerie one that abideth not in all things that are written in the booke of the lawe to doe them Here you haue moe words I graunt but what diuersitie is there in the sense againe Deuter. Chap. 21. v. 23. the wordes are these Accursed of God is he that is hanged Saint Paul Galat. Chap. 3. v. 13. alledgeth the words thus Accursed is euery one that is hanged on a tree in wordes a litle alteration in matter meaning none at all That the Hebrewe was corrupted either before S. Ierome or since Pag. 336. in such manner as you pretend when wil you prooue vnto vs M. R hetherto nothing haue you done as plainlie appeareth now are you spent almoste so that litle more maie be looked for at your hands Concerning points prickes distinctions resemblance of letters malice of the Rabbines and such like coniectures I haue before answered And lastlie touching the confession of some Protestants hath bene declared it maketh litle to your purpose Here M.R. answereth a question which reasonablie is demaunded Pag. 339. namelie when these corruptions came into the Hebrewe Bibles that is whether before Christs time or betweene that and S. Ieromes time or since He answereth as one nothing affraid that the Hebrewe was corrupted before Christ more after Christ vntill S. Ieromes age and moste from S. Ierome since These parts are handled by Master R. seuerallie First that the Bible was corrupted before the time of our sauiour Christ what cause haue we to thinke especiallie seeing our sauiour Christ neuer once chargeth the Iewes with any such corruption M. Rainolds saith it might be that Christ obiected the same vnto them although not recorded in the Testament Remember then that this be put amonge the traditions vnwritten of your Church and so you neede not to seeke for other answere as you doe Yet our sauiour Christ when he saith ye haue hearde it saide thou shalt loue thy neighboure Mat. 5.43 and hate thine enemie accuseth not the Scribes and Pharisies for corrupting the letter of the text by adding therunto the second member but for gathering out of the text wicked doctrine that for so much as we are commaunded to loue our neighbour that is as they expounded it our friende therefore we are licensed to hate our enemie This false exposition of the scripture not corruption of the text doth Christ correct For that in wicked Manasses daies diuerse books were loste I haue before answered If Christ reprooue not the Iewes therefore no maruell seeing that losse was not through their negligence but many hundred yeares before yet maintenance of open corruption in the text had deserued in them sharpe reproofe although them selues had not bene the first authores of that corruption S. Augustine in manie places by occasion speaketh of difference betweene the Hebrewe text and the translation of the 70. interpreters which he much esteemed euen as you do now your latine translation Yet in this diuersity doth he not at anytime accuse the Hebrew of corruption but rather imagineth some mysterie in the Septuagints translation Which plainlie prooueth that the Church beleeued not the Hebrew to be corrupted then Yea S. Augustine maketh it a matter not onelie of great absurditie August de Ciuit lib. 15. c. 13. but also notable impietie to say that the Iewes could conspire together in such sorte as that they might though neuer so peeuishlie and malitiouslie bent corrupt the bookes of Scripture being so manie and so generallie spred abroad That more corruption crept into the Bibles after Christ Pag. 340 you prooue by testimonie of Iustinus Martyr in his disputation with Tryphon wherein he alledgeth three examples of notable corruption committed by the Iewes A place of Iustinus Martyr answered A short answere may serue Iustinus spake of suspicion more then knowledge as being not verie skilful in the Hebrewe brewe tongue if we diligentlie examine the places it wil sone appeere that no such matter can be proued The first is out of Esdras Ch. 6 The words are these Esdras spake vnto the people this pascha is our sauiour
you haue alreadie had and shal hereafter haue most euident demonstration The fault no dout is verie hainous wherupon he frameth so sore an inditement or els he a malitious enemie that for no cause accuseth so bitterlie If I haue not set downe euerie word of Doctor Saunders booke doth it therfore follow that I did it of an irreligious or vnconscionable intent What man pretenâ—ing conscience or religion would thus surmise seing for his life he can not shew that I haue concealed or omitted the least moment of anie one argument that I haue taken to answere in his booke If then I haue cut of in one or two Chapters some parte of his words being long and tedious for no other cause in the world but onely to auoide prolixitie what blame I haue therein deserued I put it to the verdite of all indifferent religious and conscionable men to pronounce These men in pretending to answere our bookes maie deale as they lift maie omit anie thing at their pleasure maie sert downe no more then shall like them best maie reporte things that were not written and all this shall escape in them without reproofe If we leaue out a few wordes being nothing els but wordes for cumbring out bookes and readers with multitude of vnnecessarie talke this must be made a great crime here is want of Religion and conscience and this must suffice to discredite all the rest with those that will beleeue such subtill and slaunderous persuasions The same practise he obiecteth also to Master Doctor Iewell pag. 75. the late worthie Bishop of Sarisburie of blessed memorie whoe yet I am persuaded hath dealt as faithfullie and sincerelie with Doctor Harding as anie aduersarie hath euer done with another In his Replie he hath printed D. Hardings wholl booke omitting nothing from the beginning to the end and made to all that he alledged for maintenance of his seuerall causes a moste learned and perfect answere the which as yet was neuer refelled nor neuer can be I am sure Now consider the dealing of Doctor Harding in his Reioynder which besides it is made but to one onelie article of seauen and twentie it hath in a hundred places omitted much so as in truth not halfe the Replie is intirely repeated and answered In the defense of the Apologie he hath indeede abridged Doctor Hardings Confutation being of such length and bignes as was not conuenient wholly to be printed with the defense But let them if they can shew some argument dissembled or passed ouer in silence in all that which in the impression is omitted Which forsomuch as they cannot it is no matter though manie legions of such idle words as he hath filled that booke withal were suppressed and drowned And I praie you how hath D. Harding behaued him-selfe in his detection Hath he done as you accufe M. Iewel for not doeing Nothing les Then why should M. Iewell be accounted more worthie of blame then D. Harding hauing made no other fault then that wherin D. Harding hath much more offended then he That I haue in those places omitted some wordes I graunt Master Rainolds pag. 77. c. and the cause thereof I haue trulie declared But tell me where is any part or proofe of Saunders demonstrations vnanswered If you will examine what I haue answered to euerie one in order you shall finde I haue not dealt any waies vntrulie or craftilie as you would haue men think I did but soundlie and sufficientlie disprooued whatsoeuer he hath disputed in any Chapter of those fourty demonstrations short or long If you be angrie with me for not reciting all his wordes and answering them particularlie this vnderstand that I for my parte would rather grinde in a mill all the daies of my life then be bound to answere such infinite loquacitie and garrulitie as Doctor Saunders and your selfe and other your companions vse in your writings You poure forth such floodes or rather seas of words that it is a moste intollerable wearines to wade therein although daunger of drowning or taking great harme there can be none But as to answere your wordes is a thing most tedious besides it is vnnecessarie so your reasons againe are answeared with as great delight comforte and facilitie And if you thinke I haue not thoroughlie answeared euerie demonstration of Doctor Saunders it is free for you to resume or prosecute the controuersie which no doubt at this time you would haue done being thereto so specially by your superiors appointed but that you mistrusted somewhat in your cause and in your selfe And although you promise some thing shall follow hereafter yet considering both the practize of Papists and a prouisoe which here you make I thinke we are to looke for litle more at your handes in defense of Saunders demonstrations Their practise is lest they might be thought vnhable to answere our bookes to set forth some answere to a part and then so dainlie to breake of with pretense of necessarie reason and promise of proceading further at a more conuenient season and yet neuer to performe anie such matter So the defender of the Censure in the middes of his answere picketh a quarrell to make an end for that present as though he meant at better leasure to finish the whol But it rester has he left it then and so is like to doe still So Master Rainolds purposing perhaps some such matter hath yet prouided aforehand that if he faile in further answere it shall not be taken in euill parte seeing he hath restrained his promise with that exception if he be not letted by those that haue the regiment of his life and studies It may be that they being discreet men will suffer Master Rainolds to proceed no further lest as of that which he hath written alreadie no great profit hath redounded to their cause so in that which is to follow concerning Antichrist he rather hurt them much then helpe them anie thing at all Master Rainolds concludeth his preface with a certaine Aduertisement to the Reader pag. 84. wherein first he noteth what kind of printes and editions he vseth of such bookes as commonlie he alledgeth not of the auncient fathers for of them he alledgeth verie fewe but of the late writers with whose testimonies and sentences he hath fraughted his booke from one end to another If anie man haue pleasure or purpose to peruse his authorities therein he may be something holpen by this direction which M. R. hath so carefully though not much needfullie gathered and prefixed before his booke Albeit I thinke that not many Readers of what iudgement soeuer they are in religion considering how litle waight of matter is in those allegations wil greatlie cumber themselues with seeking the impressions turning the volumes and perusing the quotations the labour being far greater then the profit Secondlie he talketh much and dispureth to and fro by what name he maie call vs Christians pa. 86. or Catholikes or heretikes
fathers and Doctors as you report Luth. cont Regem Angl. fol. 342. vnius maiestatis aeter nae verbum Euangelium Dei verbū est super omnia c. but that he setteth against the sayings of fathers of men of Angels of Diuells the word of the onely eternall maiesty the Gospell And againe immediatly he saith The word of God is aboue all the maiesty of God maketh with me that I care not though a thousand Augustines and Cyprians stood agaynst me Gods word is of more authoritie then all men or Angels Is this to set his priuate iudgement against all the fathers is this pride is this presumption must Gods word and maiestie and Gospell yeald to the iudgement of fathers be they neuer so manie This forsooth is your modestie that though the Lord hath spoken it yet if the fathers saie anie thing against it you will not prefere your iudgement grounded on the scriptures before the auncient fathers Accursed be such modestie that doth soe great iniurie and dishonour vnto god This ciuilitie towards men is treason and blasphemie towards the lord Remember what Elihu saith Iob. 32. v. 21.22 I will not now accept the person of man neither wil I give titles to man For I may not giue titles lest my maker should take me away suddenlie If this affection was in Luther as it was what fault can you finde therin You aske of me the reason why I so busilie defend Luther I aske of you the reason why you so continuallie accuse Luther If you seeke for some reasons to accuse him I cannot want better reasons to defend him your accusations being so vntrue That you say we aduance him into the place of Christe or at least among his Apostles belike you imagine that Luther is to vs as your Pope is to you whome you more esteeme and honour then Christe and all his Apostles For saie they what they will their saying hath litle force or authoritie if it like not your holie father but his saying must preuaile whatsoeuer they saie to the contrarie You thinke it good reason I should giue ouer all defense of Luther seing he bare extreame hatred as you say against the Sacramentaries here you bring in much to that purpose which yet you know is not the matter you tooke in hand But it is alwaies the propertie of such discreet and worthie writers whatsoeuer they finde though from the cause to hale it in by some meanes in one place or other I answere in a word Luther dissented bitterlie from Zuinglius and O Ecolampadius in the matter of the sacrament as it falleth out often times that sharpe contentions may arise amongst Godlie and learned men yet it is no cause why we should not answere in Luthers behalfe when he is wrongfullie charged by you Therefore you come to scanne my defense of Luther particularlie pag. 48. and finde your selfe occupied in deuising diuers senses of Luthers words and then disputing against them First if all the fathers teach one thing and bring scriptures for them Luther the contrarie bring scriptures for him whether in this case Luther may preferre his iudgement before all the fathers This is not the case M. R. that Luther ment you must therefore proceade further yet in your suppose Next then you put case If a thousand Augustines Churches teache some doctrine citing no text for it and Luther bring some text of scripture after his sense against the same the matter is not in citing textes but in deliuering the doctrine that is approoued by the text Then leaue your childish trifling and take Luther as he meant If Augustine or Cyprian or any other father maintaine any thing against Gods word Luther or any other minister of Christ may in such case preferre his iudgement warranted by the word of God before theirs If you denie this you are not worthie to be called a Christian and yet closelie you doe denie it in that you reprooue Luther and condemne him for saying the same And where you saie I can bring no instance that euer the auncient fathers did so haue you forgotten what fell out in the Councell of Nice Socrat. l. 1. c. 11. when the fathers agreeing to dissolue the marriage of ministers were withstood by Paphnutius One man maintaining the trueth of Gods word may lawfully dissent from others although neuer so many August cont petil l. 3. c. 6. and yealded in the ende Here one Paphnutius iudgment was preferred before al the other three hundred fathers And so often times the iudgement of many hath beene corrected by one S. Aug. saith whether of Christe or of his Church or of any other thing that appertayneth to our faith and life I will not say we not to be compared to him that sayd though we but as he added If an Angell from heauen shall preach any thing besides that ye haue receiued in the legall and Euangelicall scriptures lette him be accursed If we maie accurse them how many and whosoeuer they be that teach contrary to the Propheticall and Apostolicall scriptures then may we preferre our iudgement in such cases before them Saint Augustines words you see are very sharpe but he learned thus to speake of the Apostle him selfe August epi. 19. In an other place Saint Augustine saith For all these fathers yea aboue all these the Apostle Paul offereth himselfe I flee to him I appeale to him from all writers that thinke otherwise This was S. Augustine bolde to write euen to S. Ierome and feared not any suspicion either of arrogancie or heresie for the same such accoumpte then must be made of the trueth that we must stand with it against al the world and not for reuerence of mens persons giue it ouer or betraie it or be afraid to defend it If this be so as you will not I am sure for shame or feare denie openlie then haue you nothing to burthen Luther in this behalfe When you say Though the fathers in the Councells of Nice Ephesus Chalcedon had alleadged no direct and euident place against Arius Nestorius Eutyches yet the Christian people were bound to beleeue them grounding them selues onelie vpon the catholike and vniuersall faith of the Churches before them it is boldly and bluntlie spoken These godly and catholike fathers assembled in Councel against those heritikes confuted them by the authoritie of Gods word and as it were cut the throte of their heresies with the sworde of the spirit This was onelie the weapon then vsed and with this they preuayled The councels and fathers confuted all Heretikes by the scriptures as likwise haue all other godlie councels euer done against all heretikes and enemies of the trueth For in Religion there is no trueth but grounded vppon scriptures no errour or heresie but repugnant to scriptures no heretikes but refuted by scriptures They dealt not against the heretikes as you imagine omitting scriptures and grounding vpon the faith of Churches
the cause of either which the Apostle doth so plainlie propound vnto vs. The proper working cause of death is sin so the Apostle saith The wages of sinne is death Rom. 6.23 so that no mans labour is more trulie the cause of his reward then sinne is the cause of death and condemnation Why did not S. Paul on the other side saie likewise the wages of good workes is eternall life Nay why said he the clean contrarie that eternall life is the free gift of God Can you tell vs anie cause but onelly to exclude from our works all merite of eternal life And where the Apostle admonisheth vs Phil 2 12. to finish our saluation in feare and trembling his meaning is nothing lesse then to ascribe the finishing of our saluation to good workes as though the Lord began and left the rest for vs to finish but to teach that we must runne our race in careful obedience to Gods commaundements vntil we come to the end of our course receiue our reward Nether may you beare vs in hand here because the kingdome of god is called in the scriptures a reward of our weldoing therfore it dependeth vpon the worthines and merit of our good deedes For it is a free reward of onely grace not of desert or merite as the father rewardeth his sonne of loue and fauour not of debt seeing he oweth him nothing at all This you haue bin answered a thousand times though you can saie nothing to purpose against it yet you will not submit your heartes to the trueth of God but seeke occasions of wrangling without ende Fourthly you say I vnderstand not the state of the question pag. 103. c. wherof I write and then you make a long discourse of grace and workes of mercy and iustice to prooue that in the regenerate there is not any contrariety betweene these but that they maie stand wel together A man would think your selfe were not altogether ignorant of the matter whereof you speake taking vpon you to reforme the iudgement of an other yet haue you herein bewraied more want of skill then I would haue thought hadde bene in you vnlesse perhaps you dissemble your knowledge which I do not easilie beleeue For although grace is not contrarie to workes because the cause cannot be contrarie to the thing whereof it is the cause yet whoe seeth not that grace may haue an other effect besides good workes where of it selfe alone is the cause and must not in that respect be ioined with good works but discerned and distinguished from them By grace in this controuersie I vnderstand not those graces of Gods spirit which are infused into vs when we are regenerate as our aduersaries doe making grace and workes all one but the loue and mercie of God as the scriptures haue taught vs to take the same as when the faithfull seruants of God are said to haue found grace in the eyes of the Lord and when the Apostle writeth 2. Tim. 1.6 that grace was giuen vnto vs in Iesus Christ before all worlds And so likewise in this question must it be taken when we are said to be elected called iustified saued by grace that is by the loue of God where with he embraced vs freelie vnles you will saie we had grace and good workes inherent in vs before we were create◠yea before the world it selfe was framed From this grace procede both good workes and our saluation yet so as saluation is to be imputed not to our workes but onelie to grace and although these two are not contrarie the one to the other yet in the matter of saluatiō there is not the least cooperation between good workes grace but works are whollie excluded from all societie or fellowship in that busines Rom. 11.6 So the Apostle hath plainlie taught If by grace not of workes Againe If righteousnes be by the law Gal. 2.21 Rom 4.2 then hath Christ died in vaine Againe If Abraham were iustifyed by workes he hath whereof to boast Gal. 3.11.18 but not with God Againe the iust shall liue by his faith but the lawe is not of faith Againe f the inheritance were of the lawe then were it not of promise wherefore in effecting our iustice and saluation good workes may not drawe in the same yoke with grace notwithstanding otherwise they agree well together Thus haue I brieflie answered all your friuolous discourse and shewed that you obiecting ignorance of the question to me in trueth neuer vnderstood it rightlie your selfe The scriptures you bring for your purpose to prooue that eternal life is of works as well as of grace are but wrested and shamfullie abused by you When S. Paule saieth Rom. 2.6 that God shall render to euerie man according to his workes we confesse and alwaies haue that God not onelie doth recompence the wickednes of the sinner with deserued punishment A rewarde we confes merit we deny but also rewardeth the vertues of the godlie with life and felicitie euerlasting And when Christ shall sit on his iudgement seate euerie man shal be tried by his workes which in the wicked doe deserue condemnation of themselues and in the children of God are signes and fruites of their faith whereby they haue laide holde vpon Iesus Christ their onelie Sauiour and iustifier But make your argument good if you canne which you gather of these words God shal render to cuerie man after his workes therefore good workes are efficient causes of our saluation or as you moste vntrulie and wickedlie doe sette downe good workes and euill are laide in indifferent balance so that one is the cause of heauen as the other is the cause of hell This diuinitie M. Rainolds you neuer learned of Saint Paule Pa 2.105 M.R. saith that good workes and euil are laid in indifferent balance that good workes are the cause of heauen as euil are the cause of hel but haue drawne it out of the stinking puddle of poperie and it smelleth so lothsomelie in the noses of the godlie that if your senses were not by custome of such filthie doctrine altogether stuffed you coulde not abide the sauour thereof Doe good workes deserue heauen as euill doe hell what Prophet or Apostle euer saide so sinne is indeede the cause of death and deserueth euerlasting paine because it is a transgression of Gods lawe but good workes are not the cause of heauen nor can deserue eternall life because they doe not perfectlie answere the iustice of Gods lawe which pronounceth them accursed Deut. 27.26 Gal. 3.10 that abide not in all things written in the law to doe them Are your good workes so absolute and entire in euerie respect that being examined by the lawe of God laid in the balance of perfect iustice they are found in nothing too lighte if you say so you are past all shame you forget your selues you know not God if otherwise how can you escape the curse but
faith If you doe not you are to blame to charge me with ignorance of that which your selfe do not vnderstand Iustification by faith onely excludeth not necessary dueties of Christian obedience if you doe then can you not but plainlie perceiue that the doctrine of necessarie suffering with Christ is not anie waie contrary to the Doctrine of our iustifying by faith onelie Although we trulie teach that onelie faith doth iustifie because it is the onlie instrument by which we take holde vpon Iesus Christ and so are iustified yet we teach that iustifiing faith can neuer lacke good workes and hereof it followeth that whosoeuer hath faith must also bring forth the fruites of faith which are good workes that necessarilie therby to declare and testifie his faith as the Apostle Saint Iames doth fullie prooue This necessarie coniunction of workes and faith the effect and the cause doth not disprooue but that our apprehension of Christ is to be attributed to onelie faith Faithe although it neuer be alone yet it apprehendeth Christ iustifieth alone as the beholding of the light is the onely proper function of the eie although the facultie of seeing cannot be deuided from the sense of feeling Yet no man will saie that we perceiue the brightnes of the sunne by our feeling but by our seeing onelie So though our faith can neuer be alone but is alwaies fruitfull of good workes yet it onelie doth iustifye and not good workes in that it onelie laieth holde vpon Christ our righteousnes You haue a weake head Master Rainolds if you stagger at this But blessed be God that striketh his enimies thus with giddines To like purpose serueth that you alledge out of Illyricus and others concerning the controuersy whether good workes are necessarie to saluation There is none so ignorant but knoweth the iudgement and resolution of the Church And although Illyricus be earnest How good workes are necessary not as causes of saluation but as effectes of a iustifiyng faith saieth they are no way necessarie to saluation yet he confesseth a faithfull man must needs doe them as duties necessarilie required by the Lord not that they are anie waies the cause or merite of saluation If you vnderstand the proposition thus then in this sense they are not necessarie for then should they derogate from the merites of Christ But as effectes of faith and iustification so are they necessarie and this doctrine as it is true so is it far from all papistrie For papistes teach that workes are efficient causes of their saluation and that is moste false and iniurious to the blood of Christ Christians holde that good workes are necessarie fruites of faith and that those who are iustified and reconciled with God must walke before him in new obedience and serue him in righteousnes and holines all their daies You wish I were a Papist for mine owne sake and for your sake againe I wish that you were none Which of these wishes is better the day of the Lord shall make manifest In the meane time enioye that happines which you haue purchased by your falling from vs or rather from Christ I will be no companion of your Apostasie CHAP. 6. Of reproouing the auncient fathers for their doctrine touching good workes IF wrangling were anie waies to be commended in these great and waightie controuersies of Religion Pag. 114. c. then had Master Rainolds deserued praise and thanks for his paines in this behalfe But as in all debating and triall of truth it is acounted an vnhonest part to deuise false shifts for maintenance of vntrueth The fathers in their writings haue sundry weeds growing with the good corne so in matters of Gods worship and Religion to vse craftie cauillation is a most wicked and damnable practise The auncient fathers holding the ground and foundation of doctrine did oftentimes builde thereon stubble and strawe partlie by some superstitious opinions which themselues conceiued of such inuentions and partlie by the sway and violence of custome whereby they were caried to a liking of those things which they saw commended and practised by others And yet God forbid that because of some errours which they held we should raze their names out of the Calender of Gods Saintes or thinke otherwise then reuerentlie of them Among other infections that raigned in the fathers daies this was not the leaste that they hoped in some sort to make some parte of amendes to God for their sinnes by voluntarie punishments which they sustained in this life Whereof although by a consequent it followeth that they did iniurie to the satisfaction of Christes death yet they meant not directlie to take anie thing from it but trusted by it onelie to be iustified and saued Neuertheles being ledd by a likelie and probable persuasion of mans witt that God would spare them if they punished them selues they trusted by this meanes to make some recompense for their offenses and therefore suffered much hardnes trauaile and penaltie in the course of their life which if they had done simplie with desire and purpose thereby to make themselues fitter for the seruice of God it had bene a godly and profitable endeuour And this no Protestāt misliketh seeing the Apostie hath taught that it is expedient for all Christians to beat downe and subdue their owne bodies 1. Cor. 9.26 But to put anie confidence of appeasing Gods wrath in these actions deuised by them selues cannot be excused in anie whosoeuer Howbeit I would not any should thinke that when the Fathers speake so often of Satisfaction and Penance Satisfactions not alwaies meant in respect of God they meane allwaies a satisfaction vnto God for sinne as the Papists doe For those satisfactions were nothing els for the most parte but penalties appointed by the Church for such to endure as had by some open falling into greater transgression giuen a publike offense to the Church of Christ Such were brought vnder penance by the censure discipline of the Church which when they had accrodinglie performed in token of their vnfained repentance then were they receiued againe into the companie of the faithfull and then was satisfaction made namelie in respect of the Church Of these Ecclesiasticall satisfactions we reade often in the fathers and councels but hereby is not meant that by these they purchased remission of their sinnes at the hands of God And yet I denie not but manie did put too great superstition in these outward exercises trusting something thereby to finde fauour with God the rather for their harde vsage of themselues Which though it be an error yet were they notwithstanding good men and holie fathers as I called them In which respect when you labour and spend much of your oyle to prooue me contrarie to my selfe you may see what a trifler you are and how vnworthie of answere Were not the Apostles holie men Holy mē may haue had their errors and that in weighty
as I can possiblie The wordes are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in latine worde for worde quem oportet quidem coelum recipere the wordes both in Greeke and latine are ambiguous as any man may see in which respecte Beza thought better to translate them thus quem oporter quidem coe locapi which in effect and true meaning is al one with the other but yet some thing plainer This worthie matter you handle by seuerall pointes as becommeth a man of such discretion First you say it is saucy and malapert for any man of purpose to restraine that pag. 172. which the holy ghost hath left at large If this be so then hath your vulgare interpreter bene ouer saucy and malapert often times Examples of such saucines I might alledge many in his translation if cause required I graunt a man cannot be too precise and religious in translating the wordes of holy scripture and that it ought to be the especiall care of a godly translator neither to restraine nor enlarge any thing as farre forth as he may performe by skill and diligence for so much as the text may afford a doctrine sometime in his original and naturall wordes which by altering in the translation is soone marred But these admitt no other sense then one therefore no matter whether a man say that heauen must receiue Christ or Christ must be receiued in heauen the meaning is all one For as for the conceite of some which you affirme may perhappes be true that Christ should receiue heauen it passeth al compasse of reason or diuinitie Howe I pray you doth Christ receiue heauen by his diuine power but the Apostle speaketh of Christs ascension as in the text appeareth and all interpreters vnderstande the wordes how then doth Christ receiue heauen in his humanitie wherein he ascended and whereof the Apostle speaketh tell vs if you can Againe why saith the Apostle vntill the time that all things are restored if he meane that Christs diuinitie receiued heauen which then receiued it no otherwise then it hath euer and shall euer receiue it for that by taking heauen should be meant the rule and gouerment of heauen which Christ at his ascension receiued this interpretation I know seemeth but absurd to your selfe and therefore you may leaue it for others to defend whome for this matter Beza hath fully answered Your second third points where in you vrge and prosecute M. Martins reprehension I omit as vn worthie of answere Beza transtated the place trulie in sense as your selfe cannot deny the cause that mooued him a litle to alter the wordes was to auoide doubtfull and ambiguous construction That Illyricus is not contented with this translation what maruel seeing he wil haue Christs body contayned in no place If you be of his iudgement you may vse his authoritie against Beza herein But where hath Caluine reprooued Bezaes translation of these wordes why haue neither you nor Gregorie Martine noted the place or set downe the reprehension you haue good cause to be ashamed of such egregious trifling pag. 175. Beza hath sufficientlie cleared his translation from charge of corruption in sense by S. Nazianzens authoritie Nazianz. de filio Conc. 2. whoe reporteth in Greeke these wordes of S. Peter euen altogether in such sorte as Beza hath expressed them in his latine translation So all you haue to say against Beza or me in this matter is for rendering a verbe deponent by a verbe passiue keeping threrein the sense moste trulie and exactly Your friuolus inuectiue against our translations and translatours I passe ouer pag. 176. M. Martine hath written of this matter so much already as your wholl Colledge of Rhemes could vtter vnto whose vnlearned and weake discourse which he calleth a discouerie a learned Doctor hath made answere long agoe Martins discouerie The answere you haue amongst you confute it if you can Otherwise in this behalfe thinke your selues fullie satisfied Here are we entred into a large treatise of Reall presence pag. 178. c. for which M. Rainolds seemeth to be verie zealous and carefull lest it should receiue some discountenaunce by the former words of S. Peter as needes it must translate them how you list so you translate them trulie For Saint Peter speaking of Christs humanitie saith that heauen must receiue him vntill the time that all things are restored Hereof it followeth Act. 3.21 that Christ as touching his humanity is not receiued or contained in the sacrament or els in any other place then heauen This is a plaine a certaine Christ ascending in his humanity into heauen hath left no place for Reall presence in the sacrament an inuincible trueth so not we haue taken from you Christs Reall presence but Christ in carying vp his bodie out of this world into heauen hath himselfe actuallie ouerthrowne your fantasticall imaginations of his bodelie and carnall presence on the earth Before you come to answere this argument according to your olde wont you speake and spend much idle talke wherein nothing asketh answere but that by conference of other places you would weaken the force of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Sainct Luke vseth in reporting S. Peters wordes For you saie that this prooueth Christs bodie to be contained in heauen no more then Saint Luke writing that Samaria receiued the word of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 8.14 affirmeth the word of God was contained in Samaria An obiection doubtles that came from a deepe vnderstanding to make the word of God which was to be preached ouer the wholl world of like nature with a bodie which must be contained in one place If you can see anie thing you may soone see that the word receiue is otherwise taken here as also in the two other places which you alledge of receiuing children and Apostles in Christs name Saint Peter speaketh of locall receiuing or containing the other places vnderstand a receiuing of reliefe or entertainement Your reproches as they well become your person so being vsuall require no answere but are to be contemned Being come to the matter in hand pag. 183. you shewe your selfe more hotte and hastie in words then discrete or pithie in your arguments For that I said it is a contradiction to maintaine that one and the same bodie should together both be visible inuisible circumscriptible and incircumscriptible as you do moste fondlie imagine and teach of Christs body you charge me with infidelitie for denying gods omnipotency which euerie Christian professeth in the first article of the Creede Of Atheisme and infidelitie take heede your selfe M. R you haue alreadie made a dangerous step The papists to prooue their Reall presence are faine to flee to Gods omnipotencie and thus to argue god is able to make his body Reallie present in the sacrament therefore so he doth God forbid I should be guiltie of that sin wherof you do without all conscience or
much rather against it For of this it plainlie appeareth at the first to euerie one that in S. Ieromes daies the vulgar translations were greatlie corrupted and that S. Ierome reformed the same by the Hebrew and Greeke text In S. Ieromes daies the Hebrewe and Greeke text acknowledged more sincere then all translations which argueth that the text was in those daies generallie without contradiction acknowledged to be purer then all translations whatsoeuer Then if such corruption crept into the Hebrewe and Greeke texte as you affirme it was after S. Ieromes daies but when in what manner you cannot tell Againe that you saie this edition of S. Ierome was by Damasus supreame authoritie commended to the Church maie easilie be disprooued or if he laboured to haue it in the Latine Churches receiued yet could he not bring it to passe Ieromes translation not especiallie vsed in the Roman Church for two hundred yeares after Ierome Greg. in epist ad Leand. For both other Churches vsed it not and in the Church of Rome it was not in anie singular estimation for the space of two hundred yeares after S. Ierome and Damasus as we may vnderstand by S. Gregorie whoe writeth that in his daies the Romane Church vsed two translations an old and a new This newe is the same which now is called the olde The name of High Priest if you thinke it maketh anie thing for the Popes supreame authoritie you are abused through your owne ignorance It was a name belonging as well to euerie Bishop especiallie of the chiefe Churches as to Damasus But of such speaches you can be content to take aduantage to the abusing of the simple Foure thinges doe you propound to your selfe to prooue concerning your vulgar translation First that I haue saide nothing to purpose against it Second that it is purer then the fountaines Third that although it hath some small faults yet absolutelie it hath no errour touching either doctrine or manners Last that to refuse it and appeale to the Greeke and Hebrewe is the highe waie to deniall of all faith to Apostasie and Atheisme These thinges Master Rainolds hath thus deuided not amisse now let vs examine his proofes of these points for performance of his promise First you saie that in commending the fountaines so much pag. 297. I have spoken nothing against you but rather much and all against my selfe If you can make your saying good herein we shall haue cause much to commend your witt and learning The reason that you haue brought is by you vttered in these words following For if the fountaines were so pure in the times of S. Ierome and S. Ambrose and the Church then troubled with great diuersitie of their Latine Bibles reformed one to the puritie of the fountaines and originals and we now finde those fountaines and originals differing from that reformed bible whie shall we not conclude that the fountaines haue in the meane season bene corrupted And what cause haue you thus to conclude where haue you learned to make such conclusions thinke you that this conclusion is ought worth Let vs waie it a litle together Master Rainolds and then shall we better esteeme the value of it First you graunt the fountains were pure in S. Ierome and S. Ambrose daies the translations corrupt Doubtles it greeueth you to confesse thus much but the necessitie of confessing the same enforced you Then foure hundred yeares after Christ by M. Rainolds confession the fountaines of the Hebrewe and Greeke texte were pure The fountaines of the Hebrew and Greeke text pure for the space of four hundred yeares after Christ by the aduersaries confession and all translations were reformed by them Now let vs knowe some certentie of the great alteration that followed What cause was there that the fountaines and originals remained pure so long and then after began to be so shamefullie and vniuersallie corrupted Againe what was the cause that the latine translations were so greatly corrupted for so long a space and neuer since could be corrupted Tell vs some truth shewe some reason alledge your authorities speake to purpose and leaue these vntoward presumptions The same meanes that kept the text pure all that while whie might it not continew in times following if you laie the fault of corrupting the fountaines vpon the Iewes as you doe were there no Iewes in the world for the space of foure hundred yeares after Christ or were they either vnwilling or vnable to attempt such a matter it cannot be denied but that within the compasse of those yeares the Iewes had as great opportunities and greater to haue performed so wicked an enterprise then since that time can be deuised Their malice against Christian religion was no lesse then the number of their learned Rabbines was as great then the troubles of the Church of Christ by reason of the great and general persecutions gaue better occasion to them then therefore if this corruption hath thus mightilie preuailed in the text may it please you to enforme vs how and when it began which request ought not in anie wise seeme vnreasonable vnto you For if you maie demaund of vs the time wherein corruption beganne to enter into the Church and otherwise wil not beleeue vs that there is anie in the Church may not we likewise require of you by as good reason what time this foule corruption wherof you speake first began to sease vpon the texte of scripture and if you cannot tell how may you looke to be herein beleeued The Iewes must be charged for all and the hatred which the Iewes beare to our religion must be an argument that now all is corrupted in the Hebrew Saint Ierome saide he was ashamed to see the Christians thus vnworthily and vntrulie charge the Hebrew veritie with corruption Hâ—eron in c. 17. Ierem. And so may we also trulie saie that it is a shame for these men to slaunder the Hebrew texte and to accuse the Iewes of that fault whereof they are not guiltie for ought that can be prooued in this behalfe against them August de civit Dei lib. 15. cap. 13. And S. Augustine entreating at large of a place read otherwise in the Greeke and Latine translations then in the Hebrew text not onelie dischargeth the Iewes from all suspicion of corrupting their bookes but giueth this rule that whensoeuer there is found any variety or difference in the texts we should geue greatest credit to that tongue out of which the interpreters haue made their translation Vpon which place Lewes Viues writeth thus Ludou Viues ibid. This same doth Ierome auouch and this reason it selfe teacheth there is none of sound iudgement that thinketh otherwise But in vaine doth the consent of good witts thus thinke For stout senslesnes as it were an hil is opposed against it not because these men are ignorant of those tongues for Augustine knew not the Hebrew the Greeke but meanlie but there is not in
had recourse to the Greeke copies and haue prescribed the same rule to be followed continuallie and Saint Hierome himselfe reformed the latin translations according to the Greeke then extant read in the Greeke Churches Thus then you maie perceaue that to be constant in the profession of Gods trueth and to be carefull to keepe the text of scripture from corruption are two diuerse things which you might haue soone considered if you had but looked backe to that your selfe haue written before For these are euen the same Grecians whose exemplars Saint Ierome followed in correcting the Euangelists and which he calleth waters of the moste pure fountaine and sundrie wise commendeth Hieron Marcellae For proofe that the Hebrew fountaines are by the Iewes corrupted pag. 303. c. you bring vs forth a place out of the prophet Esaie Chap. 9. First in that I say the Iewes haue not corrupted the hebrew text I say no other thing then that which the moste learned Papists of all times haue affirmed M.R. in this controuersie hath his master papists aduersaries to him namelie Isaac Clarius Valla Andradius Montanus Lucas Bellarmine and manie moe and that by the same argument which my selfe vsed that then this corruption moste certainelie would haue appeared in those places that directlie concerne our Sauiour Christ amongst the which this that you mention here is notable And although I wil not deny but that the Iewes might haue some purpose to wrest it from the sense that it might be aplied to any rather then to Christ yet the corruption is not so greate as you would haue it seeme consisting not in change of any letter but only of the pointes The letters remaining without alteration whatsoeuer is amisse in the pointes may easilie be corrected Furthermore if we reade the word with the same pointes which now it commonly hath in the Hebrew Bibles whereby the verbópassiue is turned into an actiue yet the place notwithstanding prooueth inuinciblie the Diuinitie of our Sauiour Christ For as well doth it confirme this doctrine if we read Vajikrae vocabit that is God the father shall call his name wonderfull c as if we read Vajikkare vocabitur his name shall be called wonderfull Although you that take vpon you such profound knowledge and cunning in the Hebrew language should not haue beene ignorant that this is the phrase of that tongue That the Iewes refer the last name onely which is the Prince of peace Sar-shaelom to the Childe borne all the rest going before to God him selfe this I graunt to be a malitious construction of the wordes but no corruption of the text One thing is it to expound the wordes in a wronge sense an other to falsifie the wordes You hoped no doubte to haue gained much more by this place then will any waies be yelded vnto you for that you adde of the Churches authoritie which you call the supreame grounde and stay is nothing worth being an olde worne and wasted sentence brought in rashelie without credite or countenaunce The wordes are plaine of them-selues and haue in them authoritie and stay sufficient to prooue the trueth of Christs diuinitie and to confute the enemies thereof An other such place you obiecte out of the Prophet Ieremie pag. 306. Chap. 23. v. 6. wherein that some corruption hath bene committed either in letter or poynt may be imagined but cannot by euident demonstration be prooued ijcro What mooued S. Ierome to translate thus vocabunt eum They shall call him I will not dispute The reason might be in the variety and incertentie of poynts or in the ambiguous acception of the word But because M. Rainolds chargeth the Iewes with so foule a corruption of this place only to discredite the diuinitie of our Sauiour Christ he must remember that the Seuentie interpreters translated it in the singular number according to the Hebrewe now extant In comment ad Hier. ca. 23. as S. Ierom also maketh mention yet were they neuer chalenged for partial interpretation of the scriptures being as many write wonderfullie assisted gouerned in that work and not smallie had of auncient time in regard And this was long before our sauiour Christ was come in the flesh and therefore vndoubtedlie the place was not corrupted by the Iewes for such a cause as you imagine vnlesse you will saie the Iewes in hatred of Christ corrupted the Bible diuerse hundred yeares before Christ was borne and before they had cause to conceiue any malice or displeasure against our sauiour Christ And so your Lyranes surmise is plainelie disprooued in which you rest your selfe as in a certaine veritie and vpon his worde are boulde to pronounce sentence against the poore Iewes for committing a crime which by cleare euidence of greater authoritie they are not guilty of Neither maketh it lesse for Christs diuinitie to read it vocabit He shall cal him that is God the father or euerie faithful man shal call him The Lord our righteousnes then if we reade vocabunt They shall call him the Lord our righteousnes And Saint Hierome as you might haue seene had you looked on the place your selfe translateth the text after this manner Et hoc est nomen quo vocabunt eum sine vocabit eum Dominus iustus noster wherein he sheweth plainelie there is no substance of matter more in the one then the other If this be so shameful so notable a corruption as you in countenaunce and shew pretende S. Hierome was greatly ouerseene that not onelie gaue no warning thereof in his Commentarie but vsed the same also in the text it selfe But what wil you say to those learned men whoe hauing more skill in the Hebrew tongue then you Master Rainolds or els your Lyra thoug a Iewe borne haue translated the word as it is now read in the hebrew Bibles no otherwise then your selues would haue it to be translated I meane Arias Montanus and Vatablus as in their translations you may finde whoe if they haue rightelie and well translated the worde then may you see that no such wickednesse hath bene practized in this place as you haue fathered vpō the Iewes And furthermore compare an other like place in the same Prophet Chap. 33. v. 15. Where this worde is vsed in the singular number without controuersie the Prophet speaking againe of the same matter and almoste whollie in the same wordes Thus you may vnderstand that the integritie of this place may be auouched and the Iewes deliuered from your vniust accusation many waies One example more you giue mean an other kinde Pag. 310. wherein no kinde of corruption appeereth at all In the Prophet Esay chap. 53. vers 8. the old latine translation standeth thus propter scelus populi mei percussi eum For the sinne of my people haue I smitten him The Hebrew text is something otherwise Miphshahh 〈◊〉 mi negahh lamo propter defectionem populi
in the verie conclusion Eccle. 12.14 God will bring euerie worke into iudgement with euerie hidden thing whether it be good or euill your translation goeth something wide from this true sense and telleth vs that God will bring into iudgement all thinges that are done for euerie error Pro omni errato Cant. 1.2 4.10 Cant. 2.17 be it good or euill In the booke of Canticles by mistaking an hebrew word your translator hath put thy pâ—ppes for thy Loue diuerse times In the 2. Chapter for Bether is put Bethel and so still is it standing in your text and of long hath stood as appeereth by Gregory S. Bernard yet is it a plaine corruption in the iudgement of al that can iudge anie thing insomuch as Genebrard hath not feared to make a chaunge of the wordes euen in the text it selfe which he hath printed with his annotations In the 4. Chapter in steede of these wordes betweene thy looks Cant. 4.1 your translation hath farre otherwise absque eo quod intrinsecus latet torque crine besides that which lieth hidde inwardlie and afterward for one chaine of thy neck it hath one heare of thy neck All this perhaps in your iudgement seemeth little who haue learned more highlie to esteeme the word of your Pope then of God and therfore so your Pope may gaine something or loose nothing you care not how corruptlie or sincerelie Gods word be red and set forth amongst you But they that consider how holie and precious a thing the word of God is and what charge the Lord hath giuen to keepe it faithfullie must needes confesse that these are indeed grosse corruptions and ought with all diligence to be searched and remooued out of the Scriptures The bookes of the holie Prophets allthough they are not so generallie and foulie defaced as some other Scriptures by this corrupt kinde of translating and by such faultes as haue since the translation growen by sundrie meanes yet are they not in your vulgar edition so incorrupt and sincere as they ought to be seeing they maie by the authenticall text easilie be amended I might set downe sundrie proofes and testimonies of such imperfections as I haue now done in other books And it were a thing greatlie to be wished that some man of learning and iudgement would throughlie and perfectlie discouer the corruptions of this wholl translation whereby it would fullie appeere what shame or trueth there is in the Church of Rome to prefer it before the faithfull originall bookes of holie scripture as it doth now in parte appeere by this that hath bene before alledged I verelie am afraid lest I haue alreadie wearied the reader with multitude of examples and the thing which I tooke in hand to prooue I haue not onelie in this treatise sufficientlie but also moste plentifullie performed The translation of the new testament is something more tolerable in respect then of the old Yet he that will looke narrowly into the same shall finde cause and matter enough of complaint against either the ignorance or negligence or malice of some by whose fault it hath bene noe better preserued in that holie purenes and integritie which the word of God doth require and especiallie this so singular a parte of his word Wherein alreadie both Valla and Faber and Erasmus and Beza and Camerarius and many mo haue laboured to shew the errors of that translation for which their paines as they haue deserued great thankes of all the godlie soe haue they receaued much hatred and discurtesie at the aduersaries hands For auoiding tedious length more then were in this answere conuenient I referr the readers for the new testament to those learned writers by perusing of whome and of that which I haue gathered here together and thus particularlie noted he shal manifestlie perceiue that in the Romish vulgar translation are manifold and almoste infinite faults of all sortes by adding by omitting by mistaking of letters pointes syllables and wordes by wronge interpreting the originall texte Which faultes they shal neuer be hable to approoue or iustifie though they weary themselues neuer so much with traueling and toyling and seeking some defense When they haue saide what they can say for maintenance of these corruptions it shall for all that still appeere by all learning and true euidence of reason that they haue neither the olde nor newe Testament in the entire and originall trueth thereof CHAp 13. Of the new Testament in latine and a comparison of the vulgar translator with all other of this age NOw M. R. beginneth to declame against pag. 361. the newe Testament in Greeke as he hath in the former Chapter done against the old Testament in Hebrew Wherein how vnlearnedlie and vnworthelie he hath behaued him-selfe the wise reader may perceiue by that which hath beene answered to his particular reprehensions And as no cause can be alledged to preferre the latine translation of the old Testament before the Hebrew fountaine so no lesse absurd and vnreasonable is it to leaue the Greeke and follow the vulgare translation in the new testament Their chiefest reason of greatest shew and likelyhood against the Hebrew text is the malice and impietie of the Iewes whoe being enimies of Christian religion may therefore be thought to haue in many places corrupted their bibles of purpose to disgrace and discredite the Gospell of Christ But as this is prooued moste vntrue so being graunted for true it can be no reason against the Greeke testament which euer since the writing and first publishing thereof remained in the custodie and handling of most godlie fathers Churches and Countries who had as great skill and care to preserue it from corruption as had the latins to kepe their translations pure and sincere Then what reason can you bring or what colour of reason can you pretend in the new testament to cleaue onelie to the latine and to reiecte the Greeke The latine you saie is purer then the Greeke So haue your fellowes of Rhemes indeede tolde vs and this they make their principall ground whereupon they haue bene bolde to followe the latine and not the Greeke in translating the new testament But what aduantage soeuer you thinke to make of this or any other such reason true it is and by triall so shall be found and hath heretofore by diuerse sufficientlie bene prooued that the latine translation of the new testament is more generallie notoriously corrupted then you shall euer be hable to auouch of the Greeke originall text That Beza writeth against Erasmus in commendation defense of the latine translation it is euident he meaneth not whollie to excuse it from corruption in all places but onelie in certaine which Erasmus found fault withall For otherwise Beza sheweth the vulgare translation to be full of corruptions as if you reade his annotations you may perceiue Wherefore this testimony of Beza serued your Remists to litle purpose but that they haue a sleight to
make such things as are spoken in some respecte seeme to be vttered without exception as in this place and many others may be seene Your assertions are now to be examined by which you labour to strengthen the Remish slaunder of corruption against the Greeke testament Pag. 363. Three in number haue you brought of no importaunce as shall appeere so that we may easilie thinke they are indeed your owne The first is the difference of our Greeke copies now M. Rai argumēts against the newe testamente in Greeke confuted from the olde It may perhaps I graunt be prooued that in the Greeke copies of the new testament some diuersitie may be founde So was there much greater difference in the latine translations as your selfe cannot deny Then what maketh this for the latine translation against the Greeke fountaine if you say the latine was corrected I answere it was indede corrected but according to the Greeke and the Greeke nowe remaineth still which maie be prooued to be not onelie as pure as the latine but purer by many degrees For what reason haue you to saie that the latine translation euer since the correction hath bene preserued faithfullie without corruption but the Greeke text it selfe after which it was corrected became forthwith distayned and replenished with grosse corruptions Our Greeke testament for the moste parte and in a manner euerie where agreeth fullie with that copie which the auncient Greeke Church vsed and which therefore vndoubtedlie was the true originall Greeke text of the newe testament And as the olde latine Church reformed her translations according to the copies vsed in the Greek Churches so shall it neuer be prooued but that the same Greeke copies haue continued still as free from corruption as the latine translations haue wherefore the difference of our Greeke copies nowe from some olde maketh nothing against the puritie and authoritie of our Greeke Testament vnles you can shewe by euident proofe that the Greeke Testament nowe extant differeth from that which the Greeke Churches in times past generallie vsed Some difference there might be I denie not in such infinite multitude of copies But what then is no copie now therefore to be alowed Maie we not also shewe the like difference betwene these latter editions of your latine translation and some other of elder time you knowe we can and it is by your owne writers confessed acknowledged Is this then a learned obseruation is this a good conclusion is this a sound reason against the greek testament such arguments runne for currant at Rhemes where popish blindnes raigneth but being a litle opened and laid forth in the light are by and by espied to be naught Of this difference twoe examples you alledge the former is the story of the adulterous woman in the eight of S. Iohn which although some Greeke copies haue wanted as apeereth by the Syriake interpreter by Chrysostom by Nonnus by Ierome yet others of as great authoritie had it So this difference is not through later corruption nor prooueth no more that the Greeke testament nowe is to be reiected then it was in S. Chrysostomes daies And furthermore this storie being in your vulgare translation what can you deuise against the Greeke more then the latine The Greeke and latine agreeing how is the Greeke more corrupt then the Latine The other is in the Epistle to the Ephesians Chap. 3. verse 14. Wherein Saint Ierome saith certaine wordes were added in the latine Domini nostri Iesu Christi not being in the Greeke But that herein Saint Ierome was deceiued appeereth by S. Chrystome who readeth the wordes in the Greeke as you may see in his Greeke commentaries And by this one example we may further note what diligence Saint Ierome vsed some time in correcting the latine according to the Greeke that denieth wordes to be in the Greeke which yet are found in Saint Chrysostomes copies and manie moe Your second obseruation is of rashe additions which haue bene made in the Greeke text Pag. 365. If this be an argument of anie force against the testament in Greeke it must haue much more weight against your common translation which is so full of additions both in the old testament as I haue shewed and also in the new as hath bene faithfullie declared by others Your examples are but twoe the one in Saint Iohns Gospell Chap. 8. vers 59. It may indeede appeere that those last words of the verse passing through the midst of them and so departed haue bene added But this corruption may be espied and corrected by auncient copies and so in this respecte no cause to reiecte or disallowe the wholl text in Greeke The other is the conclusion of the Lordes prayer For thine is the kingdome the power and the glorie for euer and euer Amen This peece as you call it your latine hath not our Greeke copies haue That some had it not in times past I confesse that others had it is plaine by the Syriake translator if you suspecte our copy of corruption why may not weas probably suspecte the same of yours and we haue as iust cause to be offended with you for omitting this as you with vs for so glorious singing and saying of it The third obseruation is pa 3. 67. that the Greeke testaments oftentimes omit that which they should not Examples in Luc. Chap. 1. v. 35. and Chapter 17. v. 36. For the first you might haue found that in many greeke copies now extant and vsed the wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of thee are not omitted and that hath Beza noted and therefore supplyed those wordes in the greeke of the last Geneuian edition Your reproche of Anabaptisme is ridiculous The same maie be answered of the second For that 3 6. verse of Luc. 17. is extant in sundrie greeke editions as well as in your latine translation But what maketh all this to purpose Conclude hereof an argument if you can that therfore the greeke testament is more corrupted then the latine What a pitifull syllogisme will this be that must seuerallie of these places be concluded that therfore the greeke testament is more corrupt then the latine vulgar edition because the latine is in some places not so faulty as some Greeke copies either are or haue bene supposed to be Your last and principall reason pag. 371. c. why your Latine translator ought to be preferred before all other toucheth not the cause in hand as your owne wordes doe witnesse The controuesie is not which translation is best and moste to be preferred but whether this latine edition of your translator whosoeuer he were be worthely of your Church preferred before the originall fountaine Admit he was indued with such qualities as are moste requisite in faithfull translators of scripture in respect thereof deserueth greater creditte then the rest doth it therefore followe Master Rainolds that we must preferre him before the writers of holie scripture themselues was he of sounder religion
to leaue the ordinarie translation of the Bible and to appeale to the Hebrew Greeke and such new diuerse translations as the Protestans haue made THis absurd Chapter M. R. pag. 406. c. beginneth with Castalion translating long sentences out of the preface of his Bible to King Edwarde the Sixt wherein how vntrulie it is obiected vnto him that he thinketh the Messias promised in the law not to be come as yet and that he would haue euery man left to his owne priuate iudgement I will not loose time to declare Let Castalion say and write what he list and let M. R. alledge at his pleasure store of testimonies out of such authors whoe can denie him libertie so to do or who can thinke him worthie answere therein when he hath so done As Saint Ierome being vrged with Tertullians opinion answered De Tertulliano nihilamplius dico quà m Ecclesia hominem non fuisse That he was not a man of the Church so will answere no more about Castalion but that he was a man not sound in some points of the Catholike faith and religion of Christ as by his dealings and writings hath appeered and therefore we make no greate account of him nor haue regard what assertions he held what counsell he gaue what can be rehearsed out of his workes Al this was vainely brought in and no lesse vaine is it that you talke of neglecting all antiquity suspending our religion vpon the onelie testament translated after the new guise where you saie is found more varietie then there are conlours in the rainebowe Doe we neglect antiquitie or you rather For which is more auncient Master Rainolds the Hebrewe and Greeke or the Latine and doe not you suspend your religion vpon the testament translated that haue noe scripture in your Church but onelie a translation of which I maie trulie saie that greater imperfections and moe corruptions are found therein then in all our English translations together can be espied we depend not vpon anie translation English or Latine or of other language no otherwise then the same agreeth with the originall text but your wholl Church indeed is hanged vpon the latine translation onelie which how bad it is hath partlie bene shewed alreadie and if need require shall much more be discouered That you aske which Hebrewe which Greeke I meane are you so ignorant not to knowe the Hebrewe Bible and greeke testament How manie Hebrews how manie greeks haue you vnles you meane certaine editions of the greeke testament wherein is found small varietie of anie moment pag. 411. To prooue that the departing from the latine translation is the verie introduction to Apostasie you propound one example of the heretikes in Germanie called Antinomi whoe holde M. Rai chargeth vs with the heresie of the Antinomies most vntruelie as Sleidan writeth that how wickedlie soeuer a man liueth yet if he beleeue the gospell he shall be iustified and this you saie is the verie conclusion of the Protestants common doctrine of iustification by faith What need you M. Rainolds in this place thus falselie and malitiouslie to slaunder vs Doe we teach any such doctrine as this in our Church doe we giue libertie of licentious life to the professors of the gospel doth iustification by faith inferre this wicked and detestable conclusion your conscience can tell you that you speake vntrulie If hope of repentance be left for such slaunderers and blaspehmers God giue you repentance otherwise I doubt not the Lord will auenge in time such reproches against his holie religion Let vs now consider your proceeding against these men First pag 411. fathers and councells are by them you saie not regarded which I graunt may well be that such wicked men will regard neither fathers nor Councells but this can not be vnderstood of vs who haue the fathers and the Councells in such reuerence and regard as meet is we should Then Saint Iames is also by them reiected as contrarie to Saint Paull They that reiecte Saint Iames be they Antinomi or whoesoeuer let them answere for it them selues this appertaineth not vnto vs but hereof hath bene saide enough before Thirdelie the epistle to the Hebrews is denyed by Beza and Caluine to be Saint Paule What then is it denyed therefore to be holy scripture And for Illyricus he is fo far from denying this Epistle to be Canonicall scripture that he thinketh the same to be written by Saint Paul himselfe and to be amonst excellent and necessarie part of the Scripture as you maie reade in his preface vpon that epistle Fourthlie Saint Peters place is brought in which helpeth litle 2. pet 1.20 whether we read the wordes by good workes according to the latine translation or leaue them out according to the greeke veritie That our calling election is confirmed by good workes maketh nothing against iustification by faith Will you saie we are elected and called by our workes that is grosse herefie worsse then Pelagianisme But Saint Peter biddeth vs to make our vocation and election sure by good workes and yet you know your selues and graunt that our vocation and election is wrought without anie meanes of good workes because we are elected before the world and before our vocation our workes were onelie wicked what maketh all this then for merite of good workes that they are testimonies and arguments of our election and effectuall vocation 1 Pet. 1 2◠Fiftlie an other pregnant place is brought out of the first of Saint Peter against which no exception can be made whereby you say is prooued first that we haue free wil which I graunt we haue after we are regenerate Secondlie that we purifie our selues from sinne as though we denied that after grace receaued we ought and in some measure might labour against the sinnes and corruptions of our soule Thirdlie that good workes are necessarily required of Christian men this indede confuteth those heretikes of whome you speake but maketh nothing against vs who thinke teach and continuallie preach that good workes are necessarie for al Christians otherwise they shall neuer see the kingdome of god so that we are as far from that damnable heresie of the Anabaptists and Antinomies as heauen is from earth Further you proceede to a place of Saint Paul Phil. 1. v. 28 where anie man of knowledge maie soone perceaue that your translator was deceaued fouly when he translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cause the word signifying not a cause but a plaine declaration or proofe And this is the manifest meaning of Saint Paul in that place that as the malice and rage of the wicked enemies of the Church is an argument of their condemnation so the patience of the godly in suffering such afflictions is an euident proofe that they are the children of god and therefore shal inherit eternal life Not Beza therfore but you and your translator haue altered the text and peruerted the sense of this scripture As for
your other argument our of Luke 7. v. 47. of the woman to whom many sinnes were remitted it hath bene answered so fullie and truelie by sundry learned writers that I might whollie passe it ouer A chieâ—â— place of the papistes for merite of workes answere and expounded Onelie this in briefe I saie to stoppe your rayling mouth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because is often times vsed for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore that so in this place it must be of necessitie expounded may appeere by an inuincible reason which your selues cannot denie For that woman being so deeplie drowned in deadly sinne how could her loue deserue the grace of God and remission of her sins doth your scholasticall Theologie maintaine that a sinnefull creature lying in state of condemnation can by loue merit pardon of his sins Tel vs plainly if this be your doctrine your religion your diuinity If then this be moste false and impossible confesse that the loue of that sinnfull and miserable woman was not be cause of forgiuenes of her sinnes but the effecte following and not going before the same This doctrine is true and Catholike the contrarie wicked and hereticall and therefore no cause had you to raile so mightely at Beza and vs for translating expounding this word as we do as the proportion of faith circumstance of the place moste vndoubtedlie and necessarilie requireth For our sauiour Christ sheweth the cause of hir so great loue to be the forgiuenes of the great and manie sinnes They to whome litle is forgiuen loue a litle they to whome much is forgiuen loue much She had much forgiuen therefore she loued much And this the Fathers also acknowledge to be the true and naturall seuse of the place although you abuse their names to the contrarie S. Gregorie as he is also by Thomas alledged Grâ—g 〈◊〉 83. â—â— Luangell writeth thus The debt being forgiuen to both the Pharisie is demaunded who should more loue him that forgaue the debt You see that Gregorie expoundeth this of the loue that followed the forgiuenes of the dâ—bt And so likewise Saint Ambrose vpon this place Ambros is Luc. 7. Because saith he there is nothing which we can worthelie render vnto God woe be vnto me if I loue not I dare saie Peter rendered not and therefore he loued more c. Let vs therefore render loue for debt charitie for reward thankes for the prise of his bloode Thus Saint Ambrose planlie she weth that this loue in that woman did spring from remission of her sinnes Câ—nus l. 12. c. 12. as it must in vs also proceed from the same fountaine I could also put you in minde what Canus a schooleman of yours hath written of this place cleane ouerthrowing your opinion as if he had of purpose deuised a shift for you Notwithstanding that the fathers sometime write our sinnes are washed a waie by teares of repentaunce I graunte wherebie they meane no other thing but that by our earnest sorowe and repentance we receiue a sure testimonie to our soules of the remission of our sinnes Your discourse about Musculus exposition I pretermit with al your monstrous reproches blaspemies of Lucianical onely faith c. except the deuil him selfe stood by them and suggested to them such construction c. fitter for you to vtter then me to rehearse or answere pag. 428. This wholl matter againe M.R. laieth out in particular distinctions wherunto hath bene answered enough alreadle and more then nedd but onelie in respect of that intolerable and outragious Importunity which this cauiller hath vsed If this be an vnlawfull shift in expounding of scripture to trie and correct the translation according to the Hebrew and Greeke fountaines then haue all the auncient fathers of the Church exercized continuallie wicked shifts whoe both appeall them selues to the authenticall fountaines and counsell all others to doe the same far otherwise then your fathers of Treâ— haue done or will suffer others to doe whotie their faith wholly to a bare translation and giue no creditt to the Canonicall fountaines wherin they haue not only vse de damnable and miserable shift but at once haue rased out the wholl scriptures from beginning toending Grat. dist 9. vt veter S. Augustine saith the bookes of the olde Testament must be examined by the Hebrew and the new by the Greeke veritie Saint Ambrose saith Ambrosade incarn cap. 8. The authoritie of the Greeke bookes of the new Testament is greater S. Ierome is euery where of the same minde In the new Testament saith he if there arise anie question among the Latines Hier. ad sonn Fret and there be difference in the copies we repaire to the fountaines of the Greeke tongue wherein the new Testament was written and so likewise in the olde In his preface vpon the fiue bokes of Moses he esteemeth it an absurde and impossible thing that the latine copies should be purer then the Greeke and the Greeke then the Hebrew Againe in a nother place he saith if trueth is to be sought in a Euang. ad Damas whie reiurne we not to the Greeke orignal speaking of the new Testament And such sayings hath he manie alwaies preferring the Hebrew Greeke before al translations in the world But all this by M.R. simple verdite was but a shift in him and al the auncient learned godlie fathers For it is the high waie to Atheisme in his opinion to do as they did and as they haue also taught vs to doe Zuinglius exposition of loue for faith pag. 429. I will not maintaine It may seeme more curious then necessarie In the text is no difficultie if the simplicitie of truth maie be receiued As for Tertullians complaint of certaine heretickes that either refused or mangled or corrupted the scriptures it toucheth vs no whit at al who acknoweledge the wholl bodie of scriptures and are so far of from wilfull corruption thereof that of purpose we would not alter one letter in the Bible to winne the wholl worlde Therefore we litle regard your furious and senseles railing against vs where with you haue stuffed all partes of your booke that neuer was scorpion fuller of poison then it is of venemous and stinging reproches Leauing the Greek you returne againe to the Hebrew Pag. 431. against which you haue deuised pretie reasons to prooue there is no holde in it against contentious heretikes The blasphemie of which assertion M. Rain saith that in the Hebrew text of scripture there is no holde I dout not euerie reasonable man at the first will espie and abhorre For seeing it pleased the Lord of all tongues of men vnder heauen to chuse that tongue wherein to write his word oracles that his Church might haue a most perfecte and certaine rule of religion shall this Papist come and controll the wisdome of God for so doing and say that of the Hebrew litle holde can be
taken to binde a contentious heretike Thus it appeereth that although we had the verie same Autographall and authenticall copies which Moses and the other Prophets did write with their owne handes yet would this Seminary papist and his fellowes make lesse account of them then of their translation as being lesse hable to binde heretikes then it The reason is first the diuerse significations of euerie worde almoste which may seeme perhapes to some simple bodie to make for their translation against the Hebrew Whereunto I answere first that although the Hebrew were so vncertaine in respect of the manifold and diuerse significations of wordes as they would haue it yet were there noe cause whie the latine translation should more be allowed for the vndoubted word of God then the Greek or any other in the world They are all noe better then translations and what warrrant is there for one more then an oother but onelie in commendation of greater sinceritie and that in respecte of faithfully expressing the Hebrew Secondlie this variety of significations is not latelie begonne but was alwaies from the beginning which notwithstanding the Hebrewes could speake and write their mindes as plainlie and certainlie as anie other people and the scriptures were read and expounded in that language manie hundred yeares before anie parte of them was translated into Latine So that this reason maketh them now no lesse hable to binde heretikes then they haue euermore bene from the beginning And what tongue I praie you were the scriptures written in which the Apostle exhorteth Timothie to read that he might stoppe the mouthes of heretikes and which he saith are profitable to conuince the Aduersaries but in the Hebrewe and Greeke your latine translator was then vnborne when yet the scriptures in their original tongues were able to binde and confute all heretikes Your example out of the Psalme 55. ver 21. sheweth a plaine corruption in your translation For that Hebrew worde with these letters and prickes cannot signifie to reward as your translation hath but vpon those that haue peace with him as our translations for the moste haue according to the Hebrewe The second reason is pag. 433. that manie substantiues maie haue diuerse deriuations from diuerse verbes and one example is brought out of the 60. Psalme v. 6. To this maie be answered as to the former that if this diuersitie of deriuation cause a diuersitie of expositions it maketh no more against the Hebrew text now then euer since the hebrew was first written Thirdlie pag. 434. touching the literal sense of the hebrew words you demaund what masters we shall followe If a controuersie be about the signification of a word whome should we followe rather then the moste learned masters of that tongue they can best resolue vs that know the tongue best and as this for wordes in all other languages is the onelie waie so likewise if we doubt of some worde in hebrewe what meanes maie we vse to be instructed and satisfied but to learne of those that are moste skilful in the tongue and best know the naturall force of the words Who can denie that this is much better then as your translator oftentimes doth to call blacke white and to giue a signification of a worde which all Hebricians can tell is cleane amisse Examples hereof are in your translation plentifull as if before you knew not now by that which I haue alreadie alledged you maie vnderstand That which followeth of Caluine Beza and the rest hath nothing but a poore bragge not worth the mentioning To your question pag. 437. whether I thinke it flat Atheisme and Turkery to denie that Christ was borne of a virgine I answere no Christian can thinke otherwise but that it is indeed plaine Atheisme to denie this so principall an article of our faith Then you require what scripture I haue to prooue this veritie I answere I prooue this veritie by a plaine text of scripture in Matt. 1. v. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beholde a virgine shall conceaue c. But this you saie prooueth nothing by mine owne rule by Bezaes common kinde of scanning such citations and by the protestants interpretation of this place What rule what scanning what interpretation of ours can you alledge against this moste sufficient and euident proofe Did euer Beza or I or anie other protestant speake anie thing against this trueth If you can charge anie of vs we desire no fauour at your hands But what cause or reason haue you thus to saie Because this texte is not according to the Hebrewe but the seauentie as you affirme Which to be a foule vntrueth and tending to Atheisme and Turcisme whoe seeth not For if the Angels wordes rehearsed in Saint Matthew be not agreeable to the veritie of the Prophets wordes then may Turkes Iewes Atheists and wicked heretikes indede at their pleasure not onelie dispute against this article of our faith but also condemne it and we shall not be hable to conuince them This aduantage giueth M. Rainolds vnto them when he saieth Saint Matthewes text is not framed according to the Hebrwe but the Greeke translation M. R. denieth the text of S. Matthewe touching Christ borne of a virgine to be according to the Hebrewe Thus while you labour to prooue that we in cleauing to the Hebrewe text doe open a gappe to Atheisme your selfe in denying S. Matthewes text to be fully agreeable to the Hebrewe haue opened a broade gate to all Atheists and Turkes in the world God forbidde that we should euer vtter word so much seruing for defense of Atheisme as you haue here done or els set downe in word or writing that S. Matthewes place is not according to the Hebrew If you take part with the Iewes and openlie maintaine that the Hebrew worde signifieth not a virgine but a young wench then will I answere you as the godlie fathers haue answered those wicked enemies of Christ that 〈◊〉 signifieth a young wench indeed but one that is a virgine being deriued of the roote that signifieth to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Saint Ieâ—â—â—â— writeth that this worde not onelie signifieth a young maide or virgine but more also a virgine kept hidâ— and secret by greate diligence of hee parents and further also a young virginus of tender age not an olde virgine as some be And although the word in Hebrew had signified onelie a wench yet the Angell and Euangelists expounding it of such a wench as was a virgine also this maie suffice all Christians to beleeue and holde that our sauiour Christ was borne of a true virgine let Iewes Turkes Atheists and heretikes say what they can to the contrarie Master R. is affraid lest men should thinke he studied to disgrace the Greeke Hebrew tongues pag. 435. c. which he confesseth to be great helps to the attaining of the true sense in sundrie places of scripture and sheweth what paines the Catholikes haue taken in
then to edifie the Church of Christ The Rhemish English translation moste foolishe and new fangled For whoe hath euer heard or read such wordes and phrases as they haue vsed and affected in their translation whereas they might haue retained as well the common and knowen manner of speaking that their translation set forth in English might haue bene vnderstood of English men But they of purpose haue so framed the same that the English is in many places as obscure in wordes as the latine which thing is in all translations a foule fault but in translating of scripture moste intollerable And what reason should be hereof but that men either should contemne or not vnderstand the scripture which yet they will seeme to translate for the benefite of the Church Vnaccustomed nouelties of words and phrases in the Rhemish translation if you require examples take but the booke and reade a litle and soone shall you see strange affectation of nouelties in wordes and speaches throughout their whol translation There shal you finde The a Matt. 1.17 transmigration of Babylon b Mat. 13.28 The enemie man c Luc. 13.3 vnles you haue penance d Mat. 6.11 Giue vs to daie our supersubstantiall breade e Luc. 10.35 whatsoeuer thou shalt supererogat f Rom 13.13 Not in chamberings and impudicities g Gal. 1.14.24 an emulator of the traditions of my fathers I expugned the faith h Gal. 4. â—7 They emulate you not well that you might emulate them i 1. Pet. 2.5 Be ye also your selues superedified k phil 4.10 Once at length you haue reflorished to care for me l Iud 4. Denying the onelie dominator and our Lord m Ephe. 1 14. to the redemption of acquisition n Ephes 6.12 against the spirituals of wickednes in the celestials o Marc. 5.22 the Archisynagogue p Gal. 5.21 Ebrieties commessations q Apoc. 1.10 the dominicall daie r 1. Cor. 10.11 But they are written to our correption Å¿ phil 2.20 That in the name of Iesus euerr kneebowe of the celestials terrestrials and infernals t Phil. 2.7 But he exinanited himselfe u Hebr. 13.16 For with such hostes God is promerited x Heb. 13.1 Let the charitie of the fraternitie abide in you y 1. Tim. 6.20 O Timothie keepe the depositum z Hebr. 2.17 that he might repropitiate the sinnes of the people a Matt. 27.59 wrapt it in sindon and laid it in a monument b Ioan. 6.45 All shall be docible of God c Ioan. 5.2 Vpon probatica a pond d Ioan. 8 46. which of you shall argue me of sinne e Ioan. 15.25 they hated me gratis f Ioan. 18.1 beyond the Torrent Cedron g Ioan. 19.14 It was the parasceue of pasche These and such like are the goodlie flowers of their translation besides the obscuritie and ambiguitie of sentences by reason of leuing out the verbs and other wordes in the English translation which maie in latine more easily be vnderstood Yet haue they dealt something reasonablie in adding a Dictionarie to their translation if it had bene somewhat larger Hereby the reader maie iudge but better by reading the translation it selfe whether I haue not truelie said of it that it is a strange translation indeed and such a one as hard it were to finde the like But Master Rainolds answereth that we rather delight in such noueltie then they seing they retaine the ancient words Masse Priest c. and we refuse them hereof hath bene spoken before And as for certaine names of persons and places which some of our interpreters doe reduce to the Hebrewe sound they cannot much trouble the reader and they are rather vsed in bookes then speach Your accusation Master Rainolds of greater noueltie in articles of faith amongst vs is false and concerning the bookes of Iudith Machabees and the rest of that sorte we haue spoken sufficient before your other railing I omitt What cause haue we to be affraide of your translation pag. 459. c. If you translate the word of God that is it which we haue translated and printed and published so often I wish indeed for my part that your translation might be printed alone and all men suffered to haue and read it that so by comparing it with ours and with the originall text and by considering the wholl shape of it they might the more abhorre your irreligious and profane handling the Testament of Christ Your Annotations ioyned with your translation are deuilish indeede and daungerous for all Christians to read and therefore the godlie wisdome of magistrates cannot suffer such bookes openly to be solde You speake your pleasure of Master Iewells dealing with Hardinges bookes but falselie all men knowing the contrarie and so further you proceede in blasphemous railing against the truth of Christs gospell which now in England is professed calling it an Atheisticall gospell Such new termes of blasphemie haue you deuised and vsed manie so as we maie perceiue that you haue profited wel in your schoole of Apostasie and are nowe come to the highest forme and chaire of scorners Pag. 464. c. Where the Rhemish translators woulde seeme so preciselie to translate the latine translation as making the same account of it that we doe of the Greeke I thought to admonish the reader that this thing is not by them so truelie and exactlie performed euerie where as it is constanlie pretended but that these translators sometime leaue their translation which they translate and follow the greeke rather then it Two examples hereof I noted of which Master Rainolds speaketh much and more then enough amplifying that in ten pages which might haue bene comprised in as manie lines such leasure and pleasure hath he to runne at large as a wanton whelpe that can not be kept from ranging abroad nor brought to follow the marke I purpose not to runne after him for then should I be as ill occupied as he but keeping my purpose and manner I will come to the matter in question The first example is in the 12. Chapter of Saint Paules epistle to the Romans the 19. verse where the Apostle forbiddeth vs to reuenge our selues 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for so much as vengeance belongeth to the Lord. Non vosmet ipsos defendeâ—tes The common translator hath expressed it otherwise as though the Apostle would not haue vs to defend our selues making defense â—f our selues and reuengement all one which yet are two diuerse things in them selues Our Rhemists in this place followe not their olde translator but the Apostles Greeke text and thus they haue translated it not reuenging your selues my dearest Whoe seeth not that here they haue left the latine worde and followed the Greeke which differeth from the latine Now Master Rainolds to prooue himselfe a notable Grammarian telleth vs the latine agreeth with the Greeke and
the English with the latine and all is right For he affirmeth and by some vnfitt examples would prooue that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to defend and Defendo signifieth to reuenge alledging also some Dictionaries for his opinion But to make a short replie let M. R. bring vs foorth any one example out of good author Greeke or Latine wherein the wordes are so vsed as he teacheth then shal we easilie yeald in this case By implication and consequence I graunt the one word maie perhaps be vsed sometime for the other but I appeale to all learned Grecians and Latinists in the worlde whether it be not true that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properlie signifieth onelie to reuenge and not to defend and so likewise Defendo to defend and not to reuenge Therefore to translate the one for the other as it is altogether vnproper so is it moste daungerous in the scriptures because thereof may followe errors in iudgement and practise of life And it appeereth that Thomas of Aquine tooke the word Defendentes in the proper signification expounding it by Christs precept that if we be striken on the one cheeke we must be so farre of from defending our selues that we must be willing rather to turne the other also to him that smote vs and by Christs example who being buffeted on the face defended not him selfe Yet after he sheweth that some defense is lawfull by example of Saint Paule who procured him selfe to be defended from the Iewes that laie in waite for him Thus we maie see that your Saint Thomas vsed the worde simplie and properlie and thereby was faine to seeke some newe exposition which he nedd not to haue done had he bene as good a grammarian as you Master Rainolds are The other example is in S. Matthewe pag. 470. c. the 4. Chapter 16. verse wherein you haue also followed the Greeke rather then the latine translating not according to moste of your latine Testaments which I haue seene the people that walked in darknes but after the Greeke the people that sat in darknes A small matter in it felfe I graunt yet great enough to shew that you haue not so preciselie followed the latine translation as you would seeme which also in other places appeereth by comparing your translation with that For in the verie first Chapter of S. Matthew the 19. ver you haue omitted these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vir cius Her husband which your latine bookes haue truelie translated according to the greeke Wherof reason it were that you should be accountable for what cause you haue remooued those wordes cleane out of the text if they were not rather left out by ouersight For I trust you are not ashamed that Ioseph should be called the husband of the blessed virgine Marie Againe in the 13. to the Rom. v. 9. instauratur you translate is comprised by no grammar I am sure nor dictionary I think The sense I graunt is true and well agreeth with the Greeke but the latine worde is left If you listed not to translate is renewed or repared as the word signifieth you might haue kept the worde and according to your new found manner of translating and speaking haue translated instaurated Such examples are there in your translation manie moe if we should peruse the wholl which is not necessarie Neither haue I much blamed your translation in this respect Master Rainolds for not iumping alwaies with your latine as you haue vntruelie tould your reader but for leauing the Greeke and following the latine translating onely a bare I wil not speake as you doe a bald translation and for translating it after such a fashion as neuer scripture was translated nor any other booke I suppose and for applying the text moste absurdlie and violentlie to some colourable maintenance of your Antichristian Church and religion CHAP. 16. Of the faults found in the Annotations of the new testament FRom the translation which how vaine and childish it is hath bene declared now let vs proceed with you to the Annotations which are meet handmaides for such a maistres But before you come to speake of the particular faults that were found therein you discourse of many matters according to your common custome idlely and railingly whereunto it booteth not to make answere and therefore passing ouer what you haue written of M. Iewell M. Horne c. of Tower and Tiburne disputation of the Churches stabilitie of M. Foxes monuments of Luthers iudgement concerning the sacramentaries I will come to examine your defense of those faults that were noted and that as brieflie as I can reserning these causes to the large confutation of those Annotations which in conuenient time through Gods goodnes wil be I hope performed to Gods glorie defense of the trueth and disproofe of popishlies and heresies Three kindes of faults were obserued the first of errours in matters historicall the second of false conclusions and arguments the third of certaine blaspemies against the holie Apostle In the first order were reckened certaine traditions pag. 484. c. which hauing no ground in Gods word nor much differing from mere fables are in your Rhemish Annotations notwithstanding gloriouslie auouched as behouefull for all Christians to beleeue And first of the wisemen that came from the East to visite our sauiour Christ three things are affirmed first that they were kings secondlie that they were three Popish traditions full of fables and vanities and lastlie that their names were Gaspar Melchior and Baltasar as now commonlie they are called For the first Master R. demaundeth a reason why I should thinke they were no kinges himselfe not hable to shew any why he should saie they were kings But if reason may rule him for which he calleth as though he would yeelde vnto it if it were giuen him three reasons will I propounde wherebie I am mooued not to beleeue that these men were kings First because the Euangelist calleth them by noe such names The wise me that came to worshippe Christ said to be kinges against reason which yet he would not haue omitted if the truth had bene according to your tradition considering how this would haue made for the honour of Christ that so soone as he was borne kings should haue sought him far and done vnto him homage and worship And when you maintaine your opinion by this argument for that it is honorable to the person of our sauiour Christ that so we should thinke of them you charge therein the holy Euangelist for omitting somewhat that might haue greatlie aduanced the honor of Christ if he had truelie and fullie reported the same Secondlie it is not credible that Herods would haue admitted into his kingdome and chiefe Citie three Kings with their troupes especiallie there being enemity betwixt him and the kinges of Persia neither could they haue so secretlie come to our sauiour Christ and escaped out of the countrie againe but that being kings and therefore
Saint Lukes preface before his gospell cannot by anie meanes excuse the second booke of Machabees from being Apocryphall wherein the Author craueth pardon for his so slender writing of that historie There is no likenes of comparison at all betweene the Euangelists endeauour to learne and write the certaine truth and that authors confession of his infirmitie and imperfection in writing his booke One thing it is to enquire the truth with all diligence and so hauing found the same to set it forth in writing moste exactlie an other hauing written a booke to desire the readers fauour and forgiuenes in respect of the writers simplicitie and vnskillfulnes The first detracteth nothing from the wisdome maiesty of Gods spirit to search the truâ—h by all such meanes as by which the same maie be learned the other argueth a conscience acknowledgement of wants in writing which cannot be applied to the holie Ghost whoe whatsoeuer he taketh in hand moste wiselie and excellentlie performeth the same Doth Saint Luke anie where excuse his want of vtterance his rude slender and vnlearned manner of writing Nothing lesse nay he protesteth in the same preface that he hath attained to the exacte knowledge of euerie thing and that he writeth a moste certaine and vndoubted trueth so farre of is he from crauing pardon of anie man which the simple writer of that booke of Machabees in regard of his owne weaknes and vnhabilitie thought it expedient for him to doe Your places out of the Apostle are friuolous bewraying your grosse ignorance S. Paul saith that in some part he had written boldelie to the Romanes 〈…〉 15. What then did he therefore craue pardon for his so bolde writing vnto them Doth he not shew immediatlie the cause of this boldnes to be for that he was a minister of Iesus Christ among the gentiles That he faith he was conuersant among the Corinthians in weakenes in feare and trembling 1. Cor. 2.3 what concerneth this the writings that he published to the Church The greatnes of the Lords worke in hand made him to tremble but for his writings he feared not the iudgement of man nor euer submitted them to mans discretion That he desireth them to beare with his follie c. 2. Co. 11.1.17 he speaketh not to excuse anie follie in him selfe who had alwaies moste wiselie and grauelie behaued himselfe towards the Corinthians but to reprooue rather the singular arrogancie and follie of the false Apostles whoe being in no respecte comparable to the Apostle yet bragged immoderatlie and preferred themselues before him This is another case Master Rainolds vnlike to that whereof we spake Men of good will pag. 505. Luc. 2.14 to whome the Angell wisheth well are by our newe diuines of Rhemes expounded for men indued with free will And thus saith Master Rainolds was it taught in the old gospell But what gospell he meaneth it were a good thing to vnderstand For S. Lukes gospell teacheth no such thing which yet sure I am is the olde and true gospell of Christ E ' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which worde S. Luke in that place hath vsed neuer signifieth free will but fauour and good wil which one beareth towards another S. Augustine was by ignorance of the Greeke tongue deceiued and anie man maie soone perceiue that the Angell speaketh of Gods loue towards mankind which then moste notablie appeered when the Sonne of God was borne of a woman For our papists to gather hereof mans free will is too childish and absurde abuse of holie scripture Christ preached out of Peters shippe Luc. 5.3 and therefore our Rhemists make an argument that the wholl Church is Peters shipp If such allegories may goe for sound proofes then will it be easie not onlie for the Pope to prooue his primacie but for all other heretikes that euer were to iustifie their detestable opinions what-soeuer That by Peters ship the fathers haue taught the Church of Christ to be resembled no man denieth but they conclude not nor applie their allegorie so far as you doe to prooue that as Peter was owner of that ship so he and his successors are gouernours of the wholl Church Such allegories as this of yours may please fooles in their merie conceits but wise men will esteeme them no better then they deserue Barnabas laid downe the price of his land at the Apostles feete pag. 510. Act 4.37 where upon our Rhemists make a long annotation of reuerence due to sacred persons either Prophets Apostles or Popes Whoe can otherwise thinke but that hereof they meant to make an argumente for kissing of the Popes feet least anie thing concerning the Pope should want due confirmation yet Master Rainolds calleth this and the rest merie conclusions and complaineth of mockers Indeed such merie conclusions haue you deuised manie in your Annotations fitter a great deal to bring your wholl Religion into derision then to edifie in true faith Thus haue you long and yet still would you mocke the world but your mockeries are well espied the Lord be praised for it The Queenes Eunuch of Aethiopia came to Ierusalem to worshipp ergo pilgremages to holie places are acceptable to God pag. 512. Act. 8.27 This reason why it should not be allowed Master R. saieth he cannot gesse and desiereth me if I haue anie hid imagination to impart it vnto him which I am verie well content to doe The cause that mooued this noble man of Aethiopia to trauaile so farre was for that in Iudea onelie was the visible Church of God and in Ierusalem stood the Temple wherein onelie sacrifices might be offered to God Which being so necessarie was it for him to repaire thither for the exercise of his religion in the Church of God and place particularlie thereunto appointed by the Lord. This can you not applie to Rome or Ierusalem now or anie other place in the world and therefore manifest dissimilitude and inequality is there betweene this Eunuches iourneying to Ierusalem for so godlie and necessarie causes and popish pilgremages to places abroade for noe cause but onelie for idle and wandering superstition Concerning putting of our cappes pag. 515. Phil. 2.10 and making curtesie at the name of Iesus Master Rainolds is verie earnest and concludeth in the end that I am an Atheist and make no account of Christ for denying that seeing we yeald this honour of capp and curtesie to the letters name seale and seat of the Prince If this be a true argument Master Rainolds as you in your vehemencie would haue it seeme how commeth it to passe that Gods name amongst you is not honoured with like reuerence of capp and knee whensoeuer it is heard will you put of your capp when the Prince is named and wil you make curtesie at the Popes name at his triple crowne or crosse and will you neuer once stirre your cappes or bowe your knees when God is named Is this your Religion is
but proude blaspemie to saie as the Rhemists saie that as death is the stipend of sinne so life euerlasting is the stipend of iustice seing the one stipend is of meere due and desert the other onelie of grace and mercie so that if God would enter into iudgement with vs according to the rigour of his iustice we could not chalenge euerlasting life for any iustice that we had wrought as all the scriptures doe moste aboundantlie and plainelie teach Their onelie excuse hangeth vpon Saint Augustine whoe in a certaine epistle writeth Epist 105. 〈◊〉 Sixtura that euerlasting life is repayed to our merites going before and yet may it well be called grace because our merites are wrought in vs by grace not gotten by our owne habilitie to like effecte he writeth in diuerse other places of his workes and treatises as euerie one knoweth that hath bene conuersant in reading his bookes What then shal we graunt Saint Augustine to be an author of this Popish and Sorbonicall doctrine of iustification by merite of workes Nothing lesse The answere is easie and no more easie then true that by merites Saint Augustine vnderstandeth good workes after the manner of speach in latine and by stipend or reward he meaneth that benefite or gifte which God repaieth to good workes to the workers of iustice What difference then is there betweene our Sorbonists and Saint Augustine with whome we also consent In wordes may seeme no difference at all in substance and truth of doctrine as great difference as is betweene heauen and earth life and death God and man We know and confesse with Saint Augustine according to the doctrine of holie scripture that life eternall is a reward of iustice and good workes but not as death is a stipend of sinne according to the Sorbonists and Rhemists religion And howsoeuer Saint Augustine pleaseth them in his exposition of this place the which notwithstanding being rightlie vnderstood maketh nothing for them yet other fathers haue obserued of the Apostles wordes set downe in this manner that eternall life is onelie a gift not deserued but freelie bestowed and that this was the cause whie the Apostle applied not the name of stipend to life euerlasting as he had done before to death Looke vpon Origen in his commentaries vpon the fourth of the Romans and the latter end of the sixt And this as it is sound and sincere doctrine so must it also of all Christians necessarilie be confessed For he that sinneth hath deserued death worthilie in respect of the sinne committed which is a transgression of Gods will and commaundement and for which without remission there is no hope to escape eternall condemnation But can he that worketh well for one or two or moe good workes claime vnto himself as a due debt the kingdome of heauen for the same For what if the Lord will examine our workes straitlie according to his lawe in euerie circumstance our inward zeale loue intention desire of Gods glorie continuance and perseuerance in well doing conformitie of our will with the rule of Gods word and shall finde in the worke and in the worker great infirmitie manie wants much imperfection manifold sins in the meane time both in thought in worde and deed shall the good workes notwithstanding being thus tried found in them-selues insufficient vnanswerable to gods iustice and also hauing manie sinnes inherent together with them in the same person stand vp before the Lorde and chalenge of right the reward of life euerlasting in his kingdome Neuer durste yet anie childe of God vpon trust and confidence of his owne iustice chalenge such debt at the handes of God or yet appeare at all in his presence The Prophet Dauid although he were a holie man and had not onelie repented hartelie for his wicked deedes but also brought forth manifold fruites of repentance and regeneration yet desireth moste humblie of the Lord that he would not enter into iudgement with him psal 143.2 for so much as if he woulde so doe neither he nor anie man liuing could escape condemnation And againe If thou saith he wilt marke our iniquities O Lorde whoe can stand before thee psal 130. â— Wherein he plainlie teacheth that for a man to trust in his workes how good or glorious soeuer they are or seeme to be and vpon this confidence of his merites to looke for heauen as a due reward at gods handes is not onelie to deceiue himselfe but to incurre that iudgemente and condemnation which the Lord for his sinnes and vnworthines that by examination he findeth in him might iustlie cast vpon him Therefore he saith in another Psalme that they are happie not which haue good workes wherein to trust psal 32. â— but whose sinnes are forgiuen and whose iniquities are couered And this haue also all the godlie fathers of Christes Church euermore confessed that their workes of due and debt deserued nothing of the Lord but punishment and therefore disclaiming all their merites and acknowledging their owne manifolde transgressions and imperfections they flie to the Lordes mercie onlie and trust to be saued by grace and remission of their sins not by desert or merite of their righteousnes that they haue wrought Yea the Romane Church it selfe which moste of all magnifieth the merites of workes yet being secretlie and as it were vnwittingly caried away with sway of this trueth hath sometimes made open confession thereof and taught all hir children to sing an other song then that which now so commonly is heard amongst them of iustification and saluation through merite of their workes For in the seruice that is prescribed for the dead this praier is set forth to be vsed of all and is oftentimes repeated Domine quando veneris iudicare terram vbi me abscondam á vultu irae tuae Quia peccaui nimis in vita mea In officis defunctoruns Commissa mea pauesco ante te erubesco dum veneris iudicare noli me condemnare Quia peccaui nimis in vitamea that is O Lord when thou shalt come to iudge the earth where shal I hide my selfe from the presence of thy wrath Because I haue siâ—ned exceading lie in my life My misdedes I am afraid of and I blush before thee when thou shalt come to iudge condemne me not For I haue sinned exceadingly in my life Thus is euerie one taught to praie and this you confesse to be a good praier and necessarie for all to vse as at other times so especially when death approcheth And verelie howsoeuer it is now for a fashion with great countenaunce and vehement disputation auouched by some that we merite heauen by our good workes yet I am perswaded that no aduersarie of conscience can otherwise thinke or dare in perill of death otherwise saie but that he hath deserued for his sinnes punishment and death euerlasting and cannot auoide the same if God will render to his workes the reward that of due belongeth vnto them and therefore casting awaie all trust in his workes will aske pardon and mercy not claime any debt or due reward of the Lord. So though in their life time many of them be obstinatlie bent and haue in their mouth nothing so much as good workes merite rewarde due debt recompense for their wel doing yet the time drawing neer when they must holde vp their handes at the barâ—e of the Lords iudgement seat and there must make answere for themselues and their workes must be tried by the lawe of God they giue ouer their former confidence they haue no ioie in them-selues yea they distrust their owne workes they tremble and quake inwardly they are in fearfull heauines and perplexitie of minde they knowe not whither to turne them-selues and if God giue such grace vnto them then they see and forsake their error of deseruing heauen then they confesse they are sinners and therfore guiltie of death and then learne that lesson in their end which afore in their life time they would not vnderstand Yet doth euerie faithfull Christian keeping as much as in him lieth the commandements of God hope for the kingdome of heauen aske eternall life yea and also in some sorte promise to his workes the crowne of glorie not for merite and worthines of his works but in respect of Gods meere mercy whoe hath promised to bestowe vpon vs and our workes greater reward then we can possiblie deserue This is the difference betweene the doctrine of Christ of the Prophets of the Apostles and of the fathers which we follow and the doctrine of the Sorbonistes and Rhemists and all Papists which whoe so holdeth shall be sure neuer to be saued Thus appeereth how vaine and childish it is that you intitle your schoole of Sorbone with the names of Salomon Dauid Esaie Ieremy Peter Paule Augustine as though they had euer bene entred into that Colledge and taken degree in your schoole whereas whosoeuer marketh the point of difference betweene their doctrine and that of Sorbone shall plainlie perceiue they were no Sorbonists nor euer alowed the Sorbonicall and pharisaicall iustice of merites How ignorantlie you obiect shamefull ignorance to me maie appeere by that which now and before hath bene aunswered it being indeed manifest that your selfe either know not the true state of the controuersie or els haue replied neuer a word aptlie to purpose Soli Deo sit gloria ERRATA Pa 37. lin 17. strange p. 86 15 there p. 143.1 meaning p. 144.17 renegates P 294 21 as well p 334.5 is as corrupt pag. 351 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in certaine copies p. 159. the last line and pag. 160. the first line read it thus before Valentinian to haue a Councell that a Councell by the Emperour c. Other errors perhaps haue escaped but the reader I trust will easilie espie correct and pardon them Imprinted by THOMAS THOMAS Printer to the Vniuersitie of Cambridge 1585.
causes of religiō when they dreamed of an earthlie kingdome in this world yet this opinion is contrarie to a principal article of our faith were they void of holines when they beleeued that the gospell was to be preached to the Iewes onelie which is greatlie derogatorie to the grace of God and saluation of his people Then euerie error doth not ouerthrowe all holines in the seruants of God In the primitiue Church manie holie fathers were infected with the error of Christes raigning a thousand yeares on earth who notwithstanding are worthelie accounted Saints of God Cyprian and manie godlie Byshops with him erred about the baptisme ministred by heretikes yet lost they not for all that the opinion and name of holie fathers Thus the vanitie of your chalenge appeareth in finding fault with me for calling the fathers holie whome I charged with error it being such as in them did not raze the foundation of the gospell Your argument of the Church is friuolous True it is that he that maketh a schisme in the Church and cutteth himselfe from the same cannot be saued But to erre in this point as the fathers did is neither schisme nor so dangerous to saluation as schisme Nether is it like to the errour of the Galatians altogeather For it was in the fathers only an ouersight of infirmitie by leaning somewhat too much to their owne reason and not considering the matter so deepely as they ought and yet they held not that works are to be ioined with Christ as necessary causes of our iustification and saluation but ascribing the wholl work of our redemption vnto Christ they erred a litle in applying this redemption vnto them-selues Your case is the same that was of the Galatians For as they thought to be iustified by the workes of the Law so do you as they were warned of their error so are you as they without repentance lost the benefit of Christs sacrifice so shall you Yf the fathers had bene as often plainlie admonished as you haue bene they would being holy and sincere men haue reformed their iudgement and keeping the head though they erred in some part the Lord will not impute that error vnto them for condemnation All that you alledge here out of that worthy seruant of Christ M. Luther Pag. 120. c I acknowledge for true seeing it is the verie same that the Scriptures them-selues haue taught For this is the voice and doctrine of the gospell that by faith onelie in the mediator who by his sacrifice once offered vpon the crosse hath reconciled the father vnto vs we are iustified and saued Then to liue straitlie and to do good workes with this purpose and persuasion that thereby we shall obtaine iustice or saluation is contrary to the trueth of Christs gospell and may not in anie be allowed although otherwise moste learned and godly Will you reason hereby against Luther and me because we charge the fathers with some ouersight in the trueth of this doctrine in that they thought somewhat too well of their owne deedes we must therefore repute them for wicked men and make them no better then Papists They erred not somuch as you they erred not so wilfully as you and therefore though there besome likenes betweene their error yours yet we account not of them as of you who besides that you erre in this point of iustification most damnablie haue also multiplied your errours in other articles almost left no one ground of pure religion vnshaken And therefore you greatlie deceiue your owne heart M. Rainolds when you thinke your selfe to be in the same case that the fathers were in because sometime the fathers gaue more to their works then they should haue done you trusting to be iustified and saued by the worthines and merits of your workes which the fathers did not So betwene you and them there is a great space of distance although I graunt that some things which they haue written of this matter and practized in their liues tendeth somewhat to your heresie of iustification by workes For the mysterie of iniquitie which in papistry is fullie finished began to worke in the Apostles age so continued still forward in the fathers daies vntil it came to his height and perfection in the kingdome of popery They slipt a litle you are fallen headlong into the pit they were ouerseene through infirmitie you are blinde of malice they scattered some darnell in the Lords field you haue plucked vp by the roots the good corne They haue suffred losse of this building being not agreeable to the foundation yet are saued you ouerthrow the foundation it selfe and therefore cannot in this opinion be saued The contradiction which you haue found in my wordes Pag. 124. is a knott in a rush your head is crazie I perceiue by your wandring and friuolous talke or els your wit is often verie fugitiue Although the fathers sometime doe require satisfaction by workes not onelie in respect of the Church but of God as appeareth by Saint Cyprian plainlie in sundry places and therein haue obscured the doctrine of repentance and Iustification yet they neuer meant so groslie Satisfactions in respect of God taught and practised in the primitiue time what they were as you doe that this satisfaction of theirs should be a worthie and sufficient recompense to god for their sinnes committed against his moste holie maiestie but that they ought to craue humblie for pardon at gods hands by humbling themselues be fore him in fasting and praying and punishing their bodies in this life This appeareth by the 55. epistle of Saint Cyprian as I noted Ne exoretur precib satisfactionibus who speaking of Christians committing Idolatrie saith They make intercession that Christ may not be intreated by praiers and satisfactions This godlie father ascribeth remission of sinnes to the pardon of Christ being intreated by praiers and satisfactions If remission be of pardon then is it not of satisfaction as you meane if it be obtained by praiers then is it not giuen to the worthines of our workes Againe he saieth I imbrace with readie and perfecte loue such as returne with repentance confessing their sinnes with humble and simple satisfafaction Satisfactione humili simplice What els doth he meane by this humble satisfaction but humble and earnest supplication for pardon in his booke against Demetrian he saith speaking to the heathen we exhort while there is leaue that you satisfie God And can the workes of such men make a full satisfaction vnto God No But Saint Cyprian expoundeth himselfe by by in these words Thou euen at thy howre of death and end of this temporall life intreate God for thy sinnes who is one true pardon is giuen to him that confesseth and to him that beleeueth gratious remission is graunted of Gods mercie Thus with this godlie father to satisfie God is to make humble sute and request to God for our sinnes Salutaris